Never has “Democracy Dies in Darkness” been more sadly ironic than it is at this moment in time, particularly in light of the insanely incendiary piece it published yesterday.

Universities have long been known for being little more than Marxist indoctrination centers since the 1960s. However, apparently university professors are no longer satisfied with keeping their extremist views limited to their highly impressionable millennial students.

Now, they are given an effective carte blanche to use the fake news media as their microphone to promote paranoia and sedition, as evidenced by a recent piece of “news” from the ultra-liberal, ultra-divisive, Bezos-owned Washington Post.

Georgetown University law professor, Rosa Brooks, recently “detailed” (i.e., invented) four potential outcomes of the 2020 election, including a large Biden win, a narrow Biden win, a narrow Trump win, or a large Trump win.

Needless to say, according to the “wisdom” of Ms. Brooks, Trump not only needs to lose, according to Brooks, but Trump also needs to lose by a landslide. Unsurprisingly, Brooks had nothing to predict but terror and violence if Trump were to win.

In the piece titled, “What’s the worst that could happen?” Georgetown University law professor Rosa Brooks, who co-founded the Transition Integrity Project that was established in 2019 to trace potential “disruptions” to the transitional period following the 2020 election, explained the group “built a series of war games, sought out some of the most accomplished Republicans, Democrats, civil servants, media experts, pollsters and strategists around, and asked them to imagine what they’d do in a range of election and transition scenarios.”

“A landslide for Joe Biden resulted in a relatively orderly transfer of power. Every other scenario we looked at involved street-level violence and political crisis,” Brooks determined. [Source: Fox News]

Ah. So nothing short of a “landslide” for Biden will prevent “street-level violence and political crisis.” Care to elaborate more, Ms. Brooks?

Unfortunately, Ms. Brooks does elaborate, and just like the snowflakes she “teaches,” the outcome just becomes worse and worse and worse, in particular the dearth of factual evidence.

Oh, sorry, she does give some “evidence” by liberal standards:

“President Trump has broken countless norms and ignored countless laws during his time in office.” [Source: Breitbart]

Which norms? Which laws? None are provided. Then, she proceeds to detail her dream of violence.

“With the exception of the ‘big Biden win’ scenario, each of our exercises reached the brink of catastrophe, with massive disinformation campaigns, violence in the streets and a constitutional impasse,” Brooks wrote. “In two scenarios (‘Trump win’ and ‘extended uncertainty’) there was still no agreement on the winner by Inauguration Day, and no consensus on which candidate should be assumed to have the ability to issue binding commands to the military or receive the nuclear codes. In the ‘narrow Biden win’ scenario, Trump refused to leave office and was ultimately escorted out by the Secret Service — but only after pardoning himself and his family and burning incriminating documents.” [Source: Fox News]

Needless to say, Ms. Brooks does not exactly detail how the “catastrophe” would become even worse than it is now. She also conveniently ignores the fact that the “violence in the streets” appears to be restricted to almost entirely liberal-run cities, as indicated in the factual image below (facts are your friend, Ms. Brooks … unless you have other objectives).

Ms. Brooks provides absolutely zero evidence whatsoever for these theoretical conflicts over who controls “the nuclear codes,” and since Biden apparently cannot remember which state he is in half the time, perhaps it is not the greatest idea in the world for him to “receive” these nuclear codes. At least until he has a better handle of American geography, never mind international geography.

As astonishingly irresponsible as this piece is, which is really little more than the wishful thinking of a completely checked out academic, undoubtedly with vested interest in a socialist dictatorship wherein they can serve as chief spokesperson, it is critical to remember the source of this total nonsense: The Washington Post.

This would be the same Washington Post that just settled with Nick Sandman earlier this year for flagrantly smearing him when he was just a minor, resulting in the young man facing death threats and an unprecedented barrage of hatred from the press, both domestically and internationally.

This would also be the same Washington Post that called the violent rioters, arsonists, looters, and in some cases, murderers, in Portland “peaceful protestors.”

This would also be the same Washington Post that suggested Trump is “racist” for banning flights from China before COVID-19 was taken seriously, only to be called the “Europe virus” by clueless Cuomo months later.

Most ironically of all, the Washington Post claims that “Democracy Dies in Darkness.” Under the “stewardship” of Bezos, it most certainly does.

Ad Blocker Detected!

Advertisements fund this website. Please disable your adblocking software or whitelist our website.
Thank You!