You’re either for the Constitution and 2nd Amendment or you’re not: Globalist power-elites getting exactly what they want with both 'sides' in right-left paradigm playing right into their hands

Tyranny knocking at the door: FBI director Kash Patel gives false statement to Fox News about the rights of Americans to keep and bear arms in certain places.

NOTE: I need your financial support. If you appreciate these updates and independent analysis from a constitutional perspective, please consider becoming a paid subscriber, or making a one-time donation of any size at my GiveSendGo page.

I’ve been writing for at least the last three years that the globalists are in their end-game scenario for the final takedown of America, and that their plan involves getting America simultaneously embroiled in both a world war and a civil war.

Add in the potential collapse of the U.S. dollar, and we can all wave goodbye to the Republic.

What is going to shock many Americans is that Donald Trump is going to be the closer for the globalists’ plan. Biden was the set-up man, opening the borders and ignoring laws, but Trump is the closer, cracking down in a way that increases already palpable divisions and is willing to meet violence with even greater violence. This will catch many Americans by surprise because Trump ran as an anti-globalist and almost nobody expected him to be doing the globalists’ bidding on key issues like gun control and increasing federal power.

Attorney and Washington activist Robert Barnes said on the record in an interview earlier this month with The Duran that Attorney General Pam Bondi is tightly connected to the global deep state and is their strongest ally within the Trump administration. He said it was Bondi who talked Trump into not releasing the Epstein files and Bondi is also no friend of the Second Amendment, having been a strong supporter of anti-gun “red flag” laws while serving as Florida’s attorney general.

Trump himself has never been rock solid on the Second Amendment, so he won’t need much cajoling from Bondi to attack it in the wake of the Minnesota incidents. Just pay attention to the rhetoric and you can see where it’s heading.

And it’s not just Bondi coming for our guns. FBI Director Kash Patel said over the weekend in an interview with Fox News’s Maria Bartiromo that anyone who shows up to a protest anywhere in America with a weapon on their person, as Alex Pretti did in Minneapolis, they will be arrested.

Patel said:

“You cannot bring a firearm, loaded, with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want. It’s that simple. You don’t have a right to break the law, inciting violence.” (Pretti was carrying a gun legally and responsibly in a public place, in fact he never drew the gun from his holster.)

Patel shows a shocking ignorance of the Constitution, state and federal law in the above statement. That, or he knows the law but is outright lying in order to push an anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment narrative. My guess is it’s the latter.

Under the Second Amendment and Minnesota Statute 624.714, permit holders may legally carry firearms in public, including during protests. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that public carry is a constitutional right. Carrying a firearm does not legally constitute “inciting violence.”

Patel’s statement was a shocking indication of just how far down the road to neutralizing the Second Amendment we have gone. When a high-ranking federal official like the FBI director claims a perfectly legal behavior long practiced by Americans is suddenly illegal in the eyes of America’s largest federal police force, that’s a lawless act of aggression against the Constitution.

Judging by the numbers of emotionally charged back-and-forths we are seeing on social media, it’s clear both left and right are primed for a fight.

But who benefits from a meltdown at home and war all over the world as Trump serves as the catalyst for both?

Both sides in the finely honed left-right divide continue to escalate the situation in Minnesota.

Right now, the only thing holding the protests back is the weather. It’s brutally cold across much of the nation.

Come spring, things are likely to heat up, and it could result in Trump invoking the Insurrection Act and martial law.

Under this scenario, we all lose our rights as Americans under the First Amendment and Second Amendment.

Trump’s team is already claiming that Americans don’t have the right to go armed to a protest, which is antithetical to the Second Amendment.

Protests are inherently dangerous and might be the very type of place you don’t want to go unarmed.

But once our rights to freely assemble and to keep and “bear” arms (bear means you can carry a weapon on your person in public spaces) are gone, they won’t come back.

This is playing out in lockstep with the Illuminati playbook: “Out of chaos, order.” And the new order will be much more authoritarian and totally unlike the one we are used to in America.

What we end up with will be unchecked state power, centralized out of a single office, operating with complete immunity and without accountability.

In fact, the Guardian, in a Jan. 21 article, reported that last year a left-leaning think tank ran a tabletop exercise simulating the lead-up to a Second Civil War in America.

It was eerily similar to what we see going on in Minnesota.

The Guardian reports:

“Developments in Minnesota closely mirror a scenario explored in a 2024 exercise conducted at the Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law at the University of Pennsylvania.”

Below is an excerpt from the article:

🔶️ Governor Walz has placed the Minnesota national guard on standby to support local law enforcement, while Trump has threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act – an extraordinary move that would grant him sweeping domestic military powers and potentially sidestep recent Supreme Court limits on the use of federal troops in law enforcement. One thousand additional ICE agents have been sent to Minnesota, suggesting that Trump is essentially using ICE as a specialized paramilitary force to target protesters and suppress dissent. And the Pentagon has readied the Army’s 11th Airborne Division – roughly 1,500 active-duty soldiers – to back up the president’s threat.

🔶️ This scenario closely mirrors one explored in an October 2024 tabletop exercise conducted by the Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law (CERL). In that exercise, a president carried out a highly unpopular law-enforcement operation in Philadelphia and attempted to federalize Pennsylvania’s national guard. When the governor resisted and the guard remained loyal to the state, the president deployed active-duty troops, resulting in an armed conflict between state and federal forces. The core danger we identified is now emerging: a violent confrontation between state and federal military forces in a major American city.

🔶️ While the hypothetical scenario picked a different city and a slightly different sequence of events, the conclusions we reached about the possibility of green-on-green violence are directly applicable to the current situation. First, none of the participants – many of them senior former military and government officials – considered the scenario unrealistic, especially after the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v United States, which granted the president criminal immunity for official acts.

🔶️ Second, the study concluded that in a fast-moving emergency of this magnitude, courts would probably be unable or unwilling to intervene in time, leaving state officials without meaningful judicial relief. State officials might file emergency motions to enjoin the use of federal troops, but judges would either fail to respond quickly enough or decline to rule on what they view as a “political question,” leaving the conflict unresolved.

🔶️ Third, the think tank at University of Pennsylvania warned that senior military leaders could face orders to use force not only against state national guard units, but against unarmed civilians – and that they must be prepared to assess the legality of such orders. Any domestic deployment of federal troops must comply with the Department of Defense’s Rules for the Use of Force and with the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. Even under the Insurrection Act, federal troops may not lawfully shoot protesters unless they are literally defending their lives against an imminent threat.

🔶️ For members of the 11th Airborne Division, this may soon cease to be a theoretical question. Minnesota may be the first test of whether constitutional limits on domestic military force still hold – or whether the United States is about to cross a line from which it cannot easily return.

BOTTOM LINE: It doesn’t matter which “side” you come down on in the Minnesota crisis, because regardless of which side prevails, a crisis like this leads to greater authoritarian control over our lives. You may see it as simply a black-and-white case involving immigration enforcement, but there is much more involved here. Please read my Jan. 19 article in which I dive into the less talked about dark side of this operation.

Escalation is not what we want. It plays into the hands of the globalists who are itching to finish off what remains of our once-great Republic and replace it with a totalitarian digital slave state based on digital IDs for all and digital tokenization of all assets. Now is the time to stand up for our constitutional rights, even if it’s people we don’t like who are being deprived of them. Once you lose rights, you don’t get them back and America will never be the same. Our Republic is already hanging by a thread, and this could finish it off.

It’s also coming into clearer focus how Civil War 2.0 will be fought. It won’t be fought between states lining up along geographical lines. The second American civil war will be fought nationwide in pockets, mostly in larger cities, but potentially in other places as well. We will slaughter each other in the streets with factions of professional military assets along with police fighting on each side.

That fateful end can still be stopped and I hope cooler heads prevail.

The First Amendment and the Second Amendment were not included front and center in our Constitution to be weaponized by a corrupt politicians within a vicious two-party system that seeks above all to get revenge on the other team. This corrupt system is being funded by statist bankers and globalists hoping to destroy our country. From what I’ve seen so far, they are playing both sides like a fiddle.