Authored by Sundance via The Last Refuge,

During the rushed debate over the Patriot Act, was when I first heard political officials talking about the importance of “continuity of government.”

I immediately recognized what all these DC voices were describing was a construct of a post-911 government that would exist and maintain itself without the elected representatives of WeThe People.

The intelligence gathering and homeland security system put into place after the Patriot Act was passed, is a bureaucratic administrative state without the presence of elected officials controlling the apparatus. That leads to the following question:

How can a constitutional republic function without elected officials in control of it?

That question is at the heart of our current situation.

That question is at the epicenter of this “new American democracy” that no one seems to understand.

The simple answer is it cannot.

We have been fighting this three-headed IC monster (DHS, DNI, DOJ-NSD) ever since.

This reality the underlying predicate behind why Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the Special Counsel charges against Trump. This reality is also the underlying framework behind why the Supreme Court recently reaffirmed the plenary power of the President with control over the executive.

In the post-9/11 system that was created by the Patriot Act, our Constitutional Republic was inextricably fractured, placing systems and silos in charge of government under the auspices of “continuity of government.”

From that moment forth, elected representatives no longer held authority or oversight *over* the national security apparatus. Instead, the Patriot Act flipped the actual system of democratically elected representative government.

The RESULT: Our elected officials became subservient to the institutional interests of unelected agency officials. As Senator Schumer calls them “the six ways from Sunday” coalition.

This reality empirically surfaces with people like former AG Bill Barr saying the President does not have unilateral authority over the DOJ. Also, the Lawfare approach and narrative that a President is not the arbiter of governing power. Both statements are constitutionally false, as affirmed by SCOTUS – Thank God.

Understand this. This is the root of the cancer that was always present, silent and lurking in the background institutions prior to 9/11. After the Patriot Act passed, that cancer fully metastasized and entered the bloodstream of American governance.

What was previously a slimy bag of institutional snakes, kept in place by a tenuously worn nylon bag – sewn from the remaining fabric of our constitution, was released by the Patriot Act.

Everything thereafter, including the constant bites we suffer from the unleashed weaponization, is a consequence of that moment.

That’s the root of our modern political reality.

This is the “new American democracy,” where the unelected officials and administrators within institutions hold power.

Under this Patriot Act framework, representative government [executive branch, legislative branch and even the judicial branch] are subservient to those who use the shield of national security. This outcome is the direct consequence of creating a system for the “continuity of government.”

LEARN IT!

Then, suddenly, everything about the domestic enemy we confront gets really clear.

Thankfully, the Supreme Court has now given indications that they understand what has taken place.

The Supreme Court has recently affirmed that only the President of the United States has the authority to control the Executive Branch.  As a direct and consequential outcome, only the President of the United States can remove the core issue that has corrupted our constitutional intent.

Every element vested in the “continuity of government” as a manipulation of the constitution are now aligned to eliminate the threat President Donald Trump represents.

We have one chance.

Vote like your freedom depends on it, because it does.

Read the SCOTUS opinion, not from a point of view of President Trump, but from the point of view of what does this allow him to do in his second term, and what invisible straightjackets did it remove that were a threat during his first term?

While impeachment is a political process within the Legislative Branch, and the Supreme Court is extremely hesitant to overstep their role therein, the High Court did put this sentiment clearly into the opinion about immunity: …“The President is not above the law. But Congress may not criminalize the President’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the Executive Branch under the Constitution.”…

Congress may not criminalize the conduct of the President simply for carrying out his core executive branch duties.

Removal of Executive Branch officials is a core duty, an official act, carrying absolute immunity.

That affirmed reality is exactly why the Deep State and Lawfare crowd are very alarmed.

Jeff Bezos’ decision for The Washington Post not to endorse a presidential candidate this year has resulted in a total shitshow for the progressive newspaper, with staffing members having epic meltdowns and editor-at-large Robert Kagan (husband of Victoria Nuland) walking off the job on Friday. Even more troubling for the paper is the mass exodus of liberal subscribers being reported by NPR News on Monday afternoon. 

According to two sources within the paper and familiar with the subscriber exodus, over 200,000 digital subscription cancellations had occurred by Monday afternoon. 

Not all cancellations take effect immediately. Still, the figure represents about 8% of the paper’s paid circulation of 2.5 million subscribers, which includes print as well. The number of cancellations continued to grow Monday afternoon. -NPR

Former Post Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli told NPR, “The problem is, people don’t know why the decision was made. We basically know the decision was made, but we don’t know what led to it.”

The editorial page editor, David Shipley, told colleagues that WaPo’s publisher, Will Lewis, said the reason for the lack of a Harris-Walz endorsement was to create an “independent space” where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.

WaPo has mostly endorsed Democrats for nearly a century (with only 3 Republicans since 1928): 

• 1932 to 1944: Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democrat)

• 1948: Thomas Dewey (Republican)

• 1952 & 1956: Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican)

• 1960: John F. Kennedy (Democrat)

• 1964: Lyndon B. Johnson (Democrat)

• 1968: Hubert Humphrey (Democrat)

• 1972: George McGovern (Democrat)

• 1976 & 1980: Jimmy Carter (Democrat)

• 1984: Walter Mondale (Democrat)

• 1988: Michael Dukakis (Democrat)

• 1992 & 1996: Bill Clinton (Democrat)

• 2000: Al Gore (Democrat)

• 2004: John Kerry (Democrat)

• 2008: Barack Obama (Democrat)

• 2012: Barack Obama (Democrat)

• 2016: Hillary Clinton (Democrat)

• 2020: Joe Biden (Democrat)

• 2024: Neutral 

Back to WaPo’s mass exodus of subs, Google search data shows “cancel Washington Post subscription” has gone parabolic nationwide since the weekend. Most cancelations are based in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia. 

And Amazon cancellations, too?

The move comes after the Los Angeles Times declined to endorse Kamala Harris. And perhaps the rationale given the timing – just days before the presidential election –  comes as the race is neck-and-neck with former President Trump.