![]()
With the federal government not only failing to do its job but being complicit in the war on national sovereignty, why then should we suffer the internal tyranny it is imposing upon us? At this point, isn’t the federal government all pain and no gain?
Our founders never envisioned the federal government would have so many policing entities with the technology, resources, and manpower it has today. Because the police power was left to the states, Madison actually feared the states would be the more likely culprit in usurpations than the federal government, which is why he originally wanted to give Congress veto power over state legislatures. Now, we not only have the DHS, FBI, ATF, and DEA, which are larger than the standing army the founders envisioned, but even the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Labor, and Department of Education have tactical response teams.
According to a 2015 CRS report, out of the (only) 13 agencies that responded to their questionnaire, there were a total of 271 federal tactical teams across the different offices and departments. There are now 200,000 federal employees (outside the Department of Defense) with firearms along with their badges, larger than the size of the U.S. Marines.
Almost none of it is used upon enemies of the country and to protect our liberties. It is all used to monitor, record, surveil, and now apprehend political dissidents. Thus, if we have given up our freedom to such a behemoth, what have we gotten in return?
At its core, the most important job of the federal government is to protect us against external enemies. That begins at our border. There have now been a total of 4.9 million known border incursions since Biden took office, nearly the population of Ireland. These comprise roughly 3.9 million apprehensions and close to a million gotaways (which is probably lowballing it). Our government has not only abrogated its most important responsibility to the states – protecting against invasion – but it has been complicit in the smuggling and criminal conspiracy that has brought over sex trafficking, drugs, and dangerous criminals.
Our founders didn’t fear this degree of federal government not only because it was not supposed to have all these federal police agencies, statutes, and executive authority over every aspect of our lives (including breathing without masks!), but because it was supposed to be busy working on external affairs. In one of the most important descriptions of the federalist arrangement, Madison laid out the design in Federalist #45 as follows:
The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negociation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will for the most part be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people; and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.
The operations of the Federal Government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State Governments, in times of peace and security. As the former periods will probably bear a small proportion to the latter, the State Governments will here enjoy another advantage over the Federal Government.
So why did he not fear federal tyranny so long as his design was followed?
The more adequate indeed the federal powers may be rendered to the national defence, the less frequent will be those scenes of danger which might favour their ascendency over the governments of the particular States.
Well, given that we now have record numbers of DHS and DOJ law enforcement agents with zero regard for protecting our national border, they have all the resources imaginable to focus on you and me.
Perhaps we need the federal government for the military, you might say. Really? A woke and broke military that only exists for critical race theory, transgenderism, and nation-building for every other border but our own? Again, once a federal force is no longer used for its proper purpose, it can only serve as a menace to our liberties in the long run.
So now that we have uniform weights, measures, and currency, why exactly do we need a federal government to abrogate its core defense responsibilities just to prevent the states from securing the border? All other activities were supposed to be done by the states. Founder Tench Coxe, a Pennsylvania delegate to the Continental Congress, listed in a 1788 essay the following as off-limits to the federal government:
They cannot interfere with the opening of rivers and canals; the making or regulation of roads, except post roads; building bridges; erecting ferries; establishment of state seminaries of learning; libraries; literary, religious, trading or manufacturing societies; erecting or regulating the police of cities, towns or boroughs; creating new state offices; building light houses, public wharves, county gaols, markets, or other public buildings; making sale of state lands, and other state property; receiving or appropriating the incomes of state buildings and property; executing the state laws; altering the criminal law; nor can they do any other matter or thing appertaining to the internal affairs of any state, whether legislative, executive or judicial, civil or ecclesiastical.
Rather than just railing against the FBI and making this all about Trump, conservatives must compel a broader discussion in red-state legislatures and among the governors about how we return to this original design. They need to cut off the spigot of federal funding for all of the aforementioned functions, along with its accompanying officious litany of regulations, and with it, the police power to capriciously enforce nebulous (or even phantom) laws against political opponents.
Contrary to Mike Pence’s sentiments, dismantling these agencies is not akin to abolishing the police. Our founders envisioned state and local police and a national military – not dozens of national police forces larger than a military. Police power is the bluntest instrument of government, and it needs the scrutiny of local politics inherent in elections for sheriff, mayor, and county legislative and executive positions. When Madison warned during the Constitutional Convention, “A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty,” he certainly never envisioned this degree of an executive branch with this number of paramilitary organizations.
The purpose of forming a federal union was to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” for things that states were inherently incapable of doing. Yet what we have today is a government that engages in the antithesis of justice by fanning and fomenting true violence and framing its opponents, gutting our military, empowering the cartels to control our border, and creating monopolies for transhumanist World Economic Forum types at the expense of the general welfare and liberties of the people.
Rather than protecting the ideals spelled out in the preamble of the Constitution, the federal government abrogates every one of them and prevents others from upholding them. Nowhere is this more evident than at the border. If you simply abolished the federal government, then the states could have a fighting chance to secure the border. Yet now, Fox’s Bill Melugin is reporting that while the Texas Guardsmen close the gates to illegal aliens, Border Patrol comes and opens them!
\u201cThis was the moment Border Patrol arrived with the key and let the migrants in. The landowner allows both TX DPS/National Guard and Border Patrol to work here. The gate has always been left open in the past. TX is now closing it, & migrants have to wait for BP to be let in.\u201d
— Bill Melugin (@Bill Melugin) 1660758167
Which leads us back to the original question: At this juncture in time, if our desideratum as a civilization is justice, tranquility, the common defense, general welfare, and securing the blessings of liberty, why even have a federal government? I can sure think of a lot of revolting activities of the federal government we can live without. Now, can you think of one we must live with?
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com
Was Trump shooter GROOMED? Suspended FBI agent Kyle Seraphin weighs in
FBI whistleblower Kyle Seraphin joins Sara Gonzales on “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered” to shed light on the possibility of Thomas Matthew Crooks, Trump’s would-be assassin, being groomed.
It’s a hypothetical people can’t help but ponder, considering we’re being repeatedly told that Crooks had “no criminal history.”
And when you add in the Heritage Foundation’s research that found that “someone who regularly visits or visited Crooks’ home and work also visited a building in Washington, D.C., located in the Gallery Place, which is in the same vicinity of an FBI office,” suspicion really starts to mount.
Investigative journalist and Blaze Media correspondent Steve Baker isn’t totally convinced that this information points to any motive.
“That's a huge facility,” he says of the Gallery Place. “It's right next to an arena, it’s got a movie theater, shopping, restaurants, all of these other things.”
But Steve also isn’t willing to rule out the possibility of Crooks visiting an FBI office either.
“We are using our resources to do a much more accurate pinpointing of it. With the resources we're using, we can get it down to about three meters and see which floor they're on,” he says.
Seraphin, like Steve, also looks at these kinds of situations through a lens of skepticism.
Suspended FBI Agent Kyle Seraphin Breaks Down Trump Shooter Possibly Being GROOMED?youtu.be
“I am a skeptic,” he says. “Even the things that I want to believe, the things that I think are probably true, I always try to disprove them. That's how you become a good investigator.”
“Who regularly visits your house?” he asks Sara.
“My parents, babysitter, the mailman, Amazon,” she lists.
“UPS, your neighbors’ gardeners … the people that check your water meter,” Seraphin adds, noting that “the problem is that you could have people that are regular visitors to your home on the ad ID of their phone that have nothing to do with you, that you've never even met.”
“They visited home and work [of Crooks],” Sara reminds.
Even still, Seraphin maintains his skepticism, stating that “it's very possible if you live in a small town that the same Amazon driver or UPS or postal service” might visit your home and place of employment.
Further, he looks at what many are calling a phony excuse – “it was too hot on the roof” – as a normal occurrence.
As someone who worked in the FBI and attended many presidential events, he says it’s “very reasonable” for an agent to seek comfort if given the option.
“If you get the choice, though – do you want to stand outside with this crowd and be cold and it's starting to rain on you, or would you like to go sit inside that car that's 50 yards away and you can keep an eye on them? I'm in the car every time,” he says.
As for the “blue-on-blue” situation – the justification that it took so long for someone to shoot Crooks because the snipers were afraid of killing an ally – Seraphim says this is likely true.
“No law enforcement officer, no federal agent, no cop wants to take a shot when there's the possibility that you're shooting another cop.”
“The blue-on-blue reality of somebody who's inside of an area where someone is supposed to have a gun but it's not the guy that you thought –that would be the worst-case scenario,” he tells Sara and Steve.
But there’s one more element of Crooks’ case that has Seraphim the most skeptical. To hear it, watch the clip above.
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.