My newsletter is the #1 conservative blog on Substack — recommended by over 299 other Substack authors.

Get 24% off now to celebrate the 2024 election!

Get 24% off for 1 year

May 29th, 2025: Colonel Rob Maness joins me to discuss the recent election in South Korea where the opposition leader claims that massive voter fraud has taken place. What’s going on there? Has China used the voting machines to install a friendly party in power?

Support The Last Fearless Journalist!

“Emerald Robinson is one of the most fearless and accurate reporters in America today.” — Gateway Pundit

“She’s got balls made of titanium.” — Steve Bannon

“The best journalist in America, I think.” — Patrick Byrne

“There are a handful of heroes and heroines right now in history — and Emerald Robinson is one of them.” — Dr. Naomi Wolf

“Emerald is truly one of the great conservative writers of our times. As funny as Mark Twain and as astute as Steve Bannon.” — Viktor K.

“Some journalists write with pens, she writes with knives.” — Vicchus

“You are the female version of Tucker Carlson. You have been prescient about so many things it's almost scary.” — F. Lawrence Coleman

“You and Glenn Greenwald are the best in terms of current journalism. You and Lara Logan in terms of fearlessness!” — Mac T.

“When all is said and done, Emerald is going to be hailed as this century's Edward R. Murrow.” — Don Reed

Get 24% off for 1 year

via Emerald Robinson

The Right Way is the #1 conservative blog on Substack that’s now recommended by over 299 other Substack authors!

Get 24% off for 1 year

Last week, Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) discussed the official government cover-up of the COVID-19 vaccines at a Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations hearing in the Senate. Johnson explained that he was stonewalled for four years by the Biden regime but that he was finally able to release HHS records that he had subpoenaed. Those records, crucially, did not contain the usual FOIA redactions regarding the risks of myocarditis.

Here’s some of his testimony: On February 28th, 2021, Israeli health officials notified CDC, quote, of large reports of myocarditis, particularly in young people following the administration of the Pfizer vaccine. Again, that's February 28th, 2021, two and a half months after the emergency use authorization. On April 12th, over a month later, a DOD consultant raises concerns to CDC and FDA officials about their ability to monitor and track cardiac related adverse events. The consultant notes, quote, if you do not ask, you will not see it, but does that mean it does not exist? Unquote.

Around the same time in mid-April 2021, CDC officials discussed safety signals for myocarditis, quote, for myocarditis with mRNA vaccines based on DOD and Israeli data, but do not take immediate steps to warn the public. By the end of April 2021, just four months into COVID injection, VAERS was already reporting 2,926 deaths worldwide within 30 days of injection, with 46% of those deaths occurring on day zero, one, or two following injection.

That chart is showing at that time, a couple months later, 4,812 deaths, 1,736, or 36% of those deaths occurring within the day of the injection or within one or two days. Now I was raising that issue.

I was going on media. I was showing this chart and I got censored. Radio talk show hosts, when I talked about this, they were deplatformed.

So when I finally had a meeting with Francis Collins, head of NIH, with a group of other senators, I asked him, are you watching VAERS? I gave him those stats. He did admit that six deaths were associated with the J&J vaccine, but for the other, over a few thousand deaths, he said, Senator, people die.

That was his callous reaction. That was the head of the NIH completely blowing off the VAERS system that they had touted before they got the emergency use authorization. I'll continue.

So Senator Ron Johnson is telling the American people several ominous facts in his testimony: CDC and FDA officials were deliberately ignoring warnings about the vaccines as early as 2021; more than 1,700 people died within 48 hours of getting their first shot; and the head of NIH did not care that a few thousand people died almost immediately after getting the shots.

Do you still think the shots are all about your health and safety?

Clearly, the government health agencies did not care whether the COVID vaccines were safe or not. They ignored their own data. They ignored the warnings of health agencies in other countries.

They were on a mission to get the American people injected no matter what.

These troubling facts lead to a larger question: what do the COVID vaccines actually do?

Watch: Dr. Michael Yeadon explains the vaccinated fertility issue to you.

We know from a Pfizer biodistribution study in Japan (conducted with rats) that lipid nanoparticles are over-accumulating in female ovaries.

We know from a Turkish study that COVID vaccines decreased the number of primordial follicles in female rats by up to 60%.

According to a Children’s Health Defense article, a team of European researchers has discovered that women in the Czech Republic who got the COVID vaccine “had 33% fewer successful pregnancies compared to unvaccinated women.” That huge study included more than a million Czech women. One more terrifying fact: “The total fertility rate in the Czech Republic declined by 21% during the period studied.”

You don’t have to be Nostradamus to foresee that the COVID vaccine campaign (2021-2025) may be the largest mass sterilization event in the history of mankind.

The Deagel Population Report

This brings us to the Deagel report. What’s that — you ask?

Deagel is an intelligence think-tank of the US government (much like RAND) which predicted a massive 50-80% global depopulation by 2025. Very few people are familiar with Deagel and its website — and much of the original information was wiped from the Internet in 2021.

Luckily for us, the Internet has been archived.

The Deagel report cannot be easily dismissed either. Many people consider Deagel to be the brainchild of Edwin A Deagle, a national security expert during the Carter Administration and, later, the Director of International Relations at the Rockefeller Foundation who died in 2020. We are talking about a man with CIA and CFR and Rockefeller Foundation and Trilateral Commission connections on his resume.

The Deagel forecast predicts a cataclysmic global depopulation event. Deagel’s numbers were also very precise: it calculated massive population reductions for most Western democracies.

For example, the UK’s population was suddenly reduced by 78%. The USA lost 70%. Germany lost 65%. France was reduced by 41%. Meanwhile, China, Brazil, Turkey, Argentina, Colombia, Iran and India showed population growth.

What was going on? Why the discrepancies between countries?

How could the USA lose more than 64 million people while China’s population increased and its GDP increased? How could Russia lose 5 million people while it doubled its GDP at the same time?

My conclusion: the Deagel forecast is not the result of a global nuclear war.

But is the Deagel forecast the result of a mass vaccination campaign? One that would be conducted mostly in advanced Western countries?

There are number of troubling symmetries that should be noted: the Deagel report was pulled from the Internet in 2021 — which was the same year that the COVID vaccines were introduced. The forecasts for population loss seem to mirror the percentage of the population that took the vaccines: 70% of America got at least one shot and the Deagel report (published in 2016) predicts that America will lose 70% of its population.

That’s odd — and scary.

Dr. David Martin has put together the long history of the weaponization of the coronavirus by American bioweapons researchers. For example, the CDC filed a patent application on the genome of SARS CoV in 2003. The CIA’s advanced technology wing DARPA hosted a conference in 2005 where discussions on biological warfare using “synthetic coronaviruses” were presented.

The Right Way is the #1 conservative blog on Substack — and now is recommended by over 299 other Substack authors!

Get 24% off for 1 year

Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you and good evening. The sponsor has been identified, but unlike most television programs, the performer hasn't been provided with a script. As a matter of fact, I have been permitted to choose my own words and discuss my own ideas regarding the choice that we face in the next few weeks.

I have spent most of my life as a Democrat. I recently have seen fit to follow another course. I believe that the issues confronting us cross party lines. Now, one side in this campaign has been telling us that the issues of this election are the maintenance of peace and prosperity. The line has been used, “We've never had it so good.”

Watch this famous speech on YouTube.

But I have an uncomfortable feeling that this prosperity isn't something on which we can base our hopes for the future. No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income. Today, 37 cents out of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector's share, and yet our government continues to spend 17 million dollars a day more than the government takes in. We haven't balanced our budget 28 out of the last 34 years. We've raised our debt limit three times in the last twelve months, and now our national debt is one and a half times bigger than all the combined debts of all the nations of the world. We have 15 billion dollars in gold in our treasury; we don't own an ounce. Foreign dollar claims are 27.3 billion dollars. And we've just had announced that the dollar of 1939 will now purchase 45 cents in its total value.

As for the peace that we would preserve, I wonder who among us would like to approach the wife or mother whose husband or son has died in South Vietnam and ask them if they think this is a peace that should be maintained indefinitely. Do they mean peace, or do they mean we just want to be left in peace? There can be no real peace while one American is dying some place in the world for the rest of us. We're at war with the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars, and it's been said if we lose that war, and in so doing lose this way of freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening. Well I think it's time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers.

Not too long ago, two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, “We don't know how lucky we are.” And the Cuban stopped and said, “How lucky you are? I had someplace to escape to.” And in that sentence he told us the entire story. If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth.

And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except the sovereign people, is still the newest and the most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man.

This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down - [up] man's old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.

In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the “Great Society,” or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a greater government activity in the affairs of the people. But they've been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves; and all of the things I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations. For example, they have voices that say, “The cold war will end through our acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism.” Another voice says, “The profit motive has become outmoded. It must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state.” Or, “Our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century.” Senator Fullbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the President as “our moral teacher and our leader,” and he says he is “hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document.” He must “be freed,” so that he “can do for us” what he knows “is best.” And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as “meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government.”

Well, I, for one, resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me, the free men and women of this country, as “the masses.” This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, “the full power of centralized government” this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.

Now, we have no better example of this than government's involvement in the farm economy over the last 30 years. Since 1955, the cost of this program has nearly doubled. One-fourth of farming in America is responsible for 85 percent of the farm surplus. Three-fourths of farming is out on the free market and has known a 21 percent increase in the per capita consumption of all its produce. You see, that one-fourth of farming that's regulated and controlled by the federal government. In the last three years we've spent 43 dollars in the feed grain program for every dollar bushel of corn we don't grow.

Senator Humphrey last week charged that Barry Goldwater, as President, would seek to eliminate farmers. He should do his homework a little better, because he'll find out that we've had a decline of 5 million in the farm population under these government programs. He'll also find that the Democratic administration has sought to get from Congress an extension of the farm program to include that three-fourths that is now free. He'll find that they've also asked for the right to imprison farmers who wouldn't keep books as prescribed by the federal government. The Secretary of Agriculture asked for the right to seize farms through condemnation and resell them to other individuals. And contained in that same program was a provision that would have allowed the federal government to remove 2 million farmers from the soil.

At the same time, there's been an increase in the Department of Agriculture employees. There's now one for every 30 farms in the United States, and still they can't tell us how 66 shiploads of grain headed for Austria disappeared without a trace and Billie Sol Estes never left shore.

Every responsible farmer and farm organization has repeatedly asked the government to free the farm economy, but how — who are farmers to know what's best for them? The wheat farmers voted against a wheat program. The government passed it anyway. Now the price of bread goes up; the price of wheat to the farmer goes down.

Meanwhile, back in the city, under urban renewal the assault on freedom carries on. Private property rights are so diluted that public interest is almost anything a few government planners decide it should be. In a program that takes from the needy and gives to the greedy, we see such spectacles as in Cleveland, Ohio, a million-and-a-half-dollar building completed only three years ago must be destroyed to make way for what government officials call a “more compatible use of the land.” The President tells us he's now going to start building public housing units in the thousands, where heretofore we've only built them in the hundreds. But FHA [Federal Housing Authority] and the Veterans Administration tell us they have 120,000 housing units they've taken back through mortgage foreclosure. For three decades, we've sought to solve the problems of unemployment through government planning, and the more the plans fail, the more the planners plan. The latest is the Area Redevelopment Agency.

They've just declared Rice County, Kansas, a depressed area. Rice County, Kansas, has two hundred oil wells, and the 14,000 people there have over 30 million dollars on deposit in personal savings in their banks. And when the government tells you you're depressed, lie down and be depressed.

We have so many people who can't see a fat man standing beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one. So they're going to solve all the problems of human misery through government and government planning. Well, now, if government planning and welfare had the answer — and they've had almost 30 years of it — shouldn't we expect government to read the score to us once in a while? Shouldn't they be telling us about the decline each year in the number of people needing help? The reduction in the need for public housing?

But the reverse is true. Each year the need grows greater; the program grows greater. We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry each night. Well that was probably true. They were all on a diet. But now we're told that 9.3 million families in this country are poverty-stricken on the basis of earning less than 3,000 dollars a year. Welfare spending is 10 times greater than in the dark depths of the Depression. We're spending 45 billion dollars on welfare. Now do a little arithmetic, and you'll find that if we divided the 45 billion dollars up equally among those 9 million poor families, we'd be able to give each family 4,600 dollars a year. And this added to their present income should eliminate poverty. Direct aid to the poor, however, is only running only about 600 dollars per family. It would seem that someplace there must be some overhead.

So now we declare “war on poverty,” or “You, too, can be a Bobby Baker.” Now do they honestly expect us to believe that if we add 1 billion dollars to the 45 billion we're spending, one more program to the 30-odd we have — and remember, this new program doesn't replace any, it just duplicates existing programs — do they believe that poverty is suddenly going to disappear by magic? Well, in all fairness I should explain there is one part of the new program that isn't duplicated. This is the youth feature. We're now going to solve the dropout problem, juvenile delinquency, by reinstituting something like the old CCC camps [Civilian Conservation Corps], and we're going to put our young people in these camps. But again we do some arithmetic, and we find that we're going to spend each year just on room and board for each young person we help 4,700 dollars a year. We can send them to Harvard for 2,700! Course, don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting Harvard is the answer to juvenile delinquency.

But seriously, what are we doing to those we seek to help? Not too long ago, a judge called me here in Los Angeles. He told me of a young woman who'd come before him for a divorce. She had six children, was pregnant with her seventh. Under his questioning, she revealed her husband was a laborer earning 250 dollars a month. She wanted a divorce to get an 80 dollar raise. She's eligible for 330 dollars a month in the Aid to Dependent Children Program. She got the idea from two women in her neighborhood who'd already done that very thing.

Yet anytime you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we're denounced as being against their humanitarian goals. They say we're always “against” things — we're never “for” anything.

Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.

Now, we're for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we've accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem.

But we're against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments to those people who depend on them for a livelihood. They've called it “insurance” to us in a hundred million pieces of literature. But then they appeared before the Supreme Court and they testified it was a welfare program. They only use the term “insurance” to sell it to the people. And they said Social Security dues are a tax for the general use of the government, and the government has used that tax. There is no fund, because Robert Byers, the actuarial head, appeared before a congressional committee and admitted that Social Security as of this moment is 298 billion dollars in the hole. But he said there should be no cause for worry because as long as they have the power to tax, they could always take away from the people whatever they needed to bail them out of trouble. And they're doing just that.

A young man, 21 years of age, working at an average salary — his Social Security contribution would, in the open market, buy him an insurance policy that would guarantee 220 dollars a month at age 65. The government promises 127. He could live it up until he's 31 and then take out a policy that would pay more than Social Security. Now are we so lacking in business sense that we can't put this program on a sound basis, so that people who do require those payments will find they can get them when they're due, that the cupboard isn't bare?

Barry Goldwater thinks we can.

At the same time, can't we introduce voluntary features that would permit a citizen who can do better on his own to be excused upon presentation of evidence that he had made provision for the non-earning years? Should we not allow a widow with children to work, and not lose the benefits supposedly paid for by her deceased husband? Shouldn't you and I be allowed to declare who our beneficiaries will be under this program, which we cannot do? I think we're for telling our senior citizens that no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds. But I think we're against forcing all citizens, regardless of need, into a compulsory government program, especially when we have such examples, as was announced last week, when France admitted that their Medicare program is now bankrupt. They've come to the end of the road.

In addition, was Barry Goldwater so irresponsible when he suggested that our government give up its program of deliberate, planned inflation, so that when you do get your Social Security pension, a dollar will buy a dollar's worth, and not 45 cents worth?

I think we're for an international organization, where the nations of the world can seek peace. But I think we're against subordinating American interests to an organization that has become so structurally unsound that today you can muster a two-thirds vote on the floor of the General Assembly among nations that represent less than 10 percent of the world's population. I think we're against the hypocrisy of assailing our allies because here and there they cling to a colony, while we engage in a conspiracy of silence and never open our mouths about the millions of people enslaved in the Soviet colonies in the satellite nations.

I think we're for aiding our allies by sharing of our material blessings with those nations which share in our fundamental beliefs, but we're against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world. We set out to help 19 countries. We're helping 107. We've spent 146 billion dollars. With that money, we bought a 2 million dollar yacht for Haile Selassie. We bought dress suits for Greek undertakers, extra wives for Kenyan government officials. We bought a thousand TV sets for a place where they have no electricity. In the last six years, 52 nations have bought 7 billion dollars worth of our gold, and all 52 are receiving foreign aid from this country.

No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So governments' programs, once launched, never disappear.

Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth.

Federal employees — federal employees number two and a half million; and federal, state, and local, one out of six of the nation's work force employed by government. These proliferating bureaus with their thousands of regulations have cost us many of our constitutional safeguards. How many of us realize that today federal agents can invade a man's property without a warrant? They can impose a fine without a formal hearing, let alone a trial by jury? And they can seize and sell his property at auction to enforce the payment of that fine. In Chic

via Emerald Robinson

The Right Way is the #1 conservative blog on Substack — recommended by over 299 other Substack authors!

Get 24% off for 1 year

Editor’s note: This is one of Abraham Lincoln's earliest published speeches, when he was only 28 years old. It describes a terrible event in St. Louis in 1836 when a mob (numbering in the hundreds) broke into the local jail to take a black man named Francis McIntosh — who had killed a police officer and injured another — and chained him to a tree and burned him to death. Nobody was ever arrested for McIntosh’s killing. Lincoln took this event as an example that was “common to the whole country” at the time to warn his fellow citizens that such lawless actions could ultimately lead to an utter disregard for the laws of the United States and the ruin of the nation itself.

In the great journal of things happening under the sun, we, the American People, find our account running, under date of the nineteenth century of the Christian era. We find ourselves in the peaceful possession, of the fairest portion of the earth, as regards extent of territory, fertility of soil, and salubrity of climate. We find ourselves under the government of a system of political institutions, conducing more essentially to the ends of civil and religious liberty, than any of which the history of former times tells us. We, when mounting the stage of existence, found ourselves the legal inheritors of these fundamental blessings. We toiled not in the acquirement or establishment of them — they are a legacy bequeathed us, by a once hardy, brave, and patriotic, but now lamented and departed race of ancestors. Theirs was the task (and nobly they performed it) to possess themselves, and through themselves, us, of this goodly land; and to uprear upon its hills and its valleys, a political edifice of liberty and equal rights; 'tis ours only, to transmit these, the former, unprofaned by the foot of an invader; the latter, undecayed by the lapse of time and untorn by usurpation, to the latest generation that fate shall permit the world to know. This task of gratitude to our fathers, justice to ourselves, duty to posterity, and love for our species in general, all imperatively require us faithfully to perform.

How then shall we perform it? At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it? Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years.

At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.

I hope I am over wary; but if I am not, there is, even now, something of ill-omen, amongst us. I mean the increasing disregard for law which pervades the country; the growing disposition to substitute the wild and furious passions, in lieu of the sober judgment of Courts; and the worse than savage mobs, for the executive ministers of justice. This disposition is awfully fearful in any community; and that it now exists in ours, though grating to our feelings to admit, it would be a violation of truth, and an insult to our intelligence, to deny. Accounts of outrages committed by mobs, form the every-day news of the times. They have pervaded the country, from New England to Louisiana; — they are neither peculiar to the eternal snows of the former, nor the burning suns of the latter; — they are not the creature of climate — neither are they confined to the slave-holding, or the non-slave-holding States. Alike, they spring up among the pleasure hunting masters of Southern slaves, and the order loving citizens of the land of steady habits.—Whatever, then, their cause may be, it is common to the whole country.

It would be tedious, as well as useless, to recount the horrors of all of them. Those happening in the State of Mississippi, and at St. Louis, are, perhaps, the most dangerous in example and revolting to humanity. In the Mississippi case, they first commenced by hanging the regular gamblers; a set of men, certainly not following for a livelihood, a very useful, or very honest occupation; but one which, so far from being forbidden by the laws, was actually licensed by an act of the Legislature, passed but a single year before. Next, negroes, suspected of conspiring to raise an insurrection, were caught up and hanged in all parts of the State: then, white men, supposed to be leagued with the negroes; and finally, strangers, from neighboring States, going thither on business, were, in many instances subjected to the same fate. Thus went on this process of hanging, from gamblers to negroes, from negroes to white citizens, and from these to strangers; till, dead men were seen literally dangling from the boughs of trees upon every road side; and in numbers almost sufficient, to rival the native Spanish moss of the country, as a drapery of the forest.

Turn, then, to that horror-striking scene at St. Louis. A single victim was only sacrificed there. His story is very short; and is, perhaps, the most highly tragic, if anything of its length, that has ever been witnessed in real life. A mulatto man, by the name of McIntosh, was seized in the street, dragged to the suburbs of the city, chained to a tree, and actually burned to death; and all within a single hour from the time he had been a freeman, attending to his own business, and at peace with the world.

Such are the effects of mob law; and such as the scenes, becoming more and more frequent in this land so lately famed for love of law and order; and the stories of which, have even now grown too familiar, to attract any thing more, than an idle remark.

“At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.”

But you are, perhaps, ready to ask, "What has this to do with the perpetuation of our political institutions?" I answer, it has much to do with it. Its direct consequences are, comparatively speaking, but a small evil; and much of its danger consists, in the proneness of our minds, to regard its direct, as its only consequences. Abstractly considered, the hanging of the gamblers at Vicksburg, was of but little consequence. They constitute a portion of population, that is worse than useless in any community; and their death, if no pernicious example be set by it, is never matter of reasonable regret with any one. If they were annually swept, from the stage of existence, by the plague or small pox, honest men would, perhaps, be much profited, by the operation. Similar too, is the correct reasoning, in regard to the burning of the negro at St. Louis. He had forfeited his life, by the perpetration of an outrageous murder, upon one of the most worthy and respectable citizens of the city; and had not he died as he did, he must have died by the sentence of the law, in a very short time afterwards. As to him alone, it was as well the way it was, as it could otherwise have been. But the example in either case, was fearful. When men take it in their heads to day, to hang gamblers, or burn murderers, they should recollect, that, in the confusion usually attending such transactions, they will be as likely to hang or burn some one who is neither a gambler nor a murderer as one who is; and that, acting upon the example they set, the mob of to-morrow, may, and probably will, hang or burn some of them by the very same mistake. And not only so; the innocent, those who have ever set their faces against violations of law in every shape, alike with the guilty, fall victims to the ravages of mob law; and thus it goes on, step by step, till all the walls erected for the defense of the persons and property of individuals, are trodden down, and disregarded. But all this even, is not the full extent of the evil. By such examples, by instances of the perpetrators of such acts going unpunished, the lawless in spirit, are encouraged to become lawless in practice; and having been used to no restraint, but dread of punishment, they thus become, absolutely unrestrained. Having ever regarded Government as their deadliest bane, they make a jubilee of the suspension of its operations; and pray for nothing so much, as its total annihilation. While, on the other hand, good men, men who love tranquility, who desire to abide by the laws, and enjoy their benefits, who would gladly spill their blood in the defense of their country; seeing their property destroyed; their families insulted, and their lives endangered; their persons injured; and seeing nothing in prospect that forebodes a change for the better; become tired of, and disgusted with, a Government that offers them no protection; and are not much averse to a change in which they imagine they have nothing to lose. Thus, then, by the operation of this mobocractic spirit, which all must admit, is now abroad in the land, the strongest bulwark of any Government, and particularly of those constituted like ours, may effectually be broken down and destroyed — I mean the attachment of the People. Whenever this effect shall be produced among us; whenever the vicious portion of population shall be permitted to gather in bands of hundreds and thousands, and burn churches, ravage and rob provision-stores, throw printing presses into rivers, shoot editors, and hang and burn obnoxious persons at pleasure, and with impunity; depend on it, this Government cannot last. By such things, the feelings of the best citizens will become more or less alienated from it; and thus it will be left without friends, or with too few, and those few too weak, to make their friendship effectual. At such a time and under such circumstances, men of sufficient talent and ambition will not be wanting to seize the opportunity, strike the blow, and overturn that fair fabric, which for the last half century, has been the fondest hope, of the lovers of freedom, throughout the world.

I know the American People are much attached to their Government; I know they would suffer much for its sake; I know they would endure evils long and patiently, before they would ever think of exchanging it for another. Yet, notwithstanding all this, if the laws be continually despised and disregarded, if their rights to be secure in their persons and property, are held by no better tenure than the caprice of a mob, the alienation of their affections from the Government is the natural consequence; and to that, sooner or later, it must come.

Here then, is one point at which danger may be expected.

The question recurs, “how shall we fortify against it?” The answer is simple. Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the Revolution, never to violate in the least particular, the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their violation by others. As the patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor; let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the character of his own, and his children's liberty. Let reverence for the laws, be breathed by every American mother, to the lisping babe, that prattles on her lap — let it be taught in schools, in seminaries, and in colleges; let it be written in Primers, spelling books, and in Almanacs; let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative halls, and enforced in courts of justice. And, in short, let it become the political religion of the nation; and let the old and the young, the rich and the poor, the grave and the gay, of all sexes and tongues, and colors and conditions, sacrifice unceasingly upon its altars.

While ever a state of feeling, such as this, shall universally, or even, very generally prevail throughout the nation, vain will be every effort, and fruitless every attempt, to subvert our national freedom.

When I so pressingly urge a strict observance of all the laws, let me not be understood as saying there are no bad laws, nor that grievances may not arise, for the redress of which, no legal provisions have been made. I mean to say no such thing. But I do mean to say, that, although bad laws, if they exist, should be repealed as soon as possible, still while they continue in force, for the sake of example, they should be religiously observed. So also in unprovided cases. If such arise, let proper legal provisions be made for them with the least possible delay; but, till then, let them, if not too intolerable, be borne with.

There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law. In any case that arises, as for instance, the promulgation of abolitionism, one of two positions is necessarily true; that is, the thing is right within itself, and therefore deserves the protection of all law and all good citizens; or, it is wrong, and therefore proper to be prohibited by legal enactments; and in neither case, is the interposition of mob law, either necessary, justifiable, or excusable.

But, it may be asked, why suppose danger to our political institutions? Have we not preserved them for more than fifty years? And why may we not for fifty times as long?

We hope there is no sufficient reason. We hope all dangers may be overcome; but to conclude that no danger may ever arise, would itself be extremely dangerous. There are now, and will hereafter be, many causes, dangerous in their tendency, which have not existed heretofore; and which are not too insignificant to merit attention. That our government should have been maintained in its original form from its establishment until now, is not much to be wondered at. It had many props to support it through that period, which now are decayed, and crumbled away. Through that period, it was felt by all, to be an undecided experiment; now, it is understood to be a successful one. Then, all that sought celebrity and fame, and distinction, expected to find them in the success of that experiment. Their all was staked upon it: their destiny was inseparably linked with it. Their ambition aspired to display before an admiring world, a practical demonstration of the truth of a proposition, which had hitherto been considered, at best no better, than problematical; namely, the capability of a people to govern themselves. If they succeeded, they were to be immortalized; their names were to be transferred to counties and cities, and rivers and mountains; and to be revered and sung, and toasted through all time. If they failed, they were to be called knaves and fools, and fanatics for a fleeting hour; then to sink and be forgotten. They succeeded. The experiment is successful; and thousands have won their deathless names in making it so. But the game is caught; and I believe it is true, that with the catching, end the pleasures of the chase. This field of glory is harvested, and the crop is already appropriated. But new reapers will arise, and they, too, will seek a field. It is to deny, what the history of the world tells us is true, to suppose that men of ambition and talents will not continue to spring up amongst us. And, when they do, they will as naturally seek the gratification of their ruling passion, as others have so done before them. The question then, is, can that gratification be found in supporting and maintaining an edifice that has been erected by others? Most certainly it cannot. Many great and good men sufficiently qualified for any task they should undertake, may ever be found, whose ambition would inspire to nothing beyond a seat in Congress, a gubernatorial or a presidential chair; but such belong not to the family of the lion, or the tribe of the eagle. What! think you these places would satisfy an Alexander, a Caesar, or a Napoleon? Never! Towering genius disdains a beaten path. It seeks regions hitherto unexplored. It sees no distinction in adding story to story, upon the monuments of

via Emerald Robinson

The Right Way is the #1 conservative blog on Substack that’s now recommended by over 299 other Substack authors!

Get 24% off for 1 year

Scott Adams, the famous creator the Dilbert cartoon series, recently announced that he has prostate cancer that’s spread to his bones. He has only a few months to live.

Apparently, Scott didn’t want to share his diagnosis because people would assume he developed cancer after getting the COVID shots. He said on his show “Coffee With Scott Adams” that: “There’s no indication that makes a difference.”

But is that really true?

Now Scott is one of those rare individuals who can admit when he was wrong, and do so publicly. Back in 2023, he went on his show to admit that “the anti-vaxxers have won” and that “he did not end up in the right place.”

Read more

via Emerald Robinson

It’s Time to Join: Project Sentinel

I’ve teamed up with a group of extraordinary national security experts. We’re talking about CIA, DIA, Green Berets, Delta Force, SEAL Team 6. They call themselves: Project Sentinel. Don’t miss the weekly intelligence summaries, the monthly INTSUMs, and the special member-only podcasts that explain how the U.S. government has been weaponized against its own citizens. These are intelligence products of the highest caliber, produced by the best of the best.

Click here for a step-by-step guide to upgrading your membership.

Get 5% off forever

PROJECT SENTINEL is staffed by former DoD and Intelligence Community operators and analysts who understand the history and tactics of the International Communist Movement, Maoist political warfare operations, color revolutions, ideological subversion, and other tactics of our enemy — as well as leading political philosophers on the American founding and constitutional scholars.

PROJECT SENTINEL is the synthesis of the professional concerns and conclusions of a diverse team of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) on American founding principles, government and politics, military and constitutional law, state craft, spy craft, military affairs, strategies, tactics and vulnerabilities, Information Operations (IO) in realms of political warfare, ideological subversion, espionage, counter-intelligence, counter-terrorism, communist strategies and tactics, Active Measures in military and intelligence operations, Hybrid/Fifth Generation/Unrestricted Warfare, cyber warfare, law enforcement, science, technology, critical infrastructure protection, and post-failure consequence management.

On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued a new EO called Memorandum to Resolve the Backlog of Security Clearances for Executive Office of the President Personnel — but it’s only a Band-Aid, not a remedy.

As we wrote in Sentinel #25 (Trump Now Faces an Active Insurrection), the US Government is basically a hotbed of Marxist traitors pretending to protect the Constitution. That means our government is penetrated with thousands of myrmidons in key positions, ready to violate their oath of office to prevent the American people from reclaiming the republic.

A recent example is DOD Branch Chief Nicholas Turza, who was captured in a video by O’Keefe Media Group calling President Trump “illegitimate” and vowing to “resist him and everything he does.” It sounds like Turza needs to be investigated for 18 USC 2384 Seditious Conspiracy.

Read more

via Emerald Robinson

The Right Way is the #1 conservative blog on Substack — recommended by over 299 other Substack authors!

Get 24% off for 1 year

President Donald Trump arrived in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and immediately sat down with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to sign a $600 billion dollar economic deal.

Trump did not arrive alone. He brought with him half of Silicon Valley for a “Saudi-U.S. Investment Forum” which started today. Not only did Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick show up, but they brought along White House advisor Elon Musk, Palantir’s Alex Karp, Blackstone’s Stephen Schwarzman, BlackRock’s Larry Fink, and a bunch of other business leaders.

This official visit has also created panic among members of the pro-Israel and Jewish community. You could sense the anxiety and outrage growing when the government of Qatar gave President Trump a new Boeing 747-8 plane as a $400 million gift last week. There was significant criticism from certain quarters, which President Trump brushed back publicly.

“It’s a great gesture from Qatar,” Trump told the press yesterday. “I would never be one to turn down that kind of an offer. I mean, I could be a stupid person and say, ‘No, we don’t want a free, very expensive airplane.’”

The whispers around Washington is that some sort of serious break-up has happened between President Trump and Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. There are rumors that Trump might allow Saudi Arabia to develop a civilian nuclear program without requiring them to recognize Israel.

Meanwhile the release of Edan Alexander, the last American hostage held by Hamas, was the occasion for a public rebuke from Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff: “We want to bring the hostages home, but Israel is not willing to end the war. Israel is prolonging it — despite the fact that we don’t see where else we can go and that an agreement must be reached.”

Suddenly the Trump Administration no longer supported Israel’s war against Hamas to the hilt. So what happened?

Apparently, the removal of National Security Advisor Mike Waltz was done partly because Waltz was engaged in “intense coordination” with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over launching military strikes against Iran — to the point that Waltz was seen by the White House ultimately as working for Israel rather than the United States. This would help explain the curious inclusion of Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg in Trump cabinet text chats by Waltz’s staff.

The second part of SignalGate that most people don’t understand is that the scandal was used by pro-Israel media to attack and possibly remove Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. These sustained media attacks against Hegseth — who is self-declared pro-Israel Christian — continue to the present day. First it was his make-room in the Pentagon. Then it was about the possible plagiarism of some of his senior thesis at college. Trump drew a line in the sand recently by publicly defending Hegseth: “I think he’s gonna get it together.”

Ultimately, the White House believes that Waltz’s betrayal along with Hegseth’s troubles in the media come from the same source. Trump’s lack of interest in bombing Iran in the near future seems to have enraged Netanyahu, and the public relations melee which has followed finally forced Trump to give Israel the cold shoulder.

That’s probably why the U.S. suddenly reached a ceasefire agreement with the Houthi militants. (The truce was arranged without Israel.) That’s probably why President Trump recently said that he might allow Iran to enrich uranium under a new nuclear deal that his administration would manage — without Israel of course. (Netanyahu was so upset by that possibility that he sent Ron Dermer to complain to Steve Witkoff personally.) And that’s probably why President Trump flew to Saudi Arabia with all the tech bros in his retinue this week.

It looks like President Trump is breaking up with Netanyahu — and he might be ready to alter America’s foreign policy in the Middle East to prove the point.

Support The Last Fearless Journalist!

“Emerald Robinson is one of the most fearless and accurate reporters in America today.” — Gateway Pundit

“She’s got balls made of titanium.” — Steve Bannon

“The best journalist in America, I think.” — Patrick Byrne

“There are a handful of heroes and heroines right now in history — and Emerald Robinson is one of them.” — Dr. Naomi Wolf

“Emerald is truly one of the great conservative writers of our times. As funny as Mark Twain and as astute as Steve Bannon.” — Viktor K.

“Some journalists write with pens, she writes with knives.” — Vicchus

“You are the female version of Tucker Carlson. You have been prescient about so many things it's almost scary.” — F. Lawrence Coleman

“You and Glenn Greenwald are the best in terms of current journalism. You and Lara Logan in terms of fearlessness!” — Mac T.

“When all is said and done, Emerald is going to be hailed as this century's Edward R. Murrow.” — Don Reed

Get 24% off for 1 year

via Emerald Robinson

It’s Time to Join: Project Sentinel

I’ve teamed up with a group of extraordinary national security experts. We’re talking about CIA, DIA, Green Berets, Delta Force, SEAL Team 6. They call themselves: Project Sentinel. Don’t miss the weekly intelligence summaries, the monthly INTSUMs, and the special member-only podcasts that explain how the U.S. government has been weaponized against its own citizens. These are intelligence products of the highest caliber, produced by the best of the best.

Click here for a step-by-step guide to upgrading your membership.

Get 5% off forever

PROJECT SENTINEL is staffed by former DoD and Intelligence Community operators and analysts who understand the history and tactics of the International Communist Movement, Maoist political warfare operations, color revolutions, ideological subversion, and other tactics of our enemy — as well as leading political philosophers on the American founding and constitutional scholars.

PROJECT SENTINEL is the synthesis of the professional concerns and conclusions of a diverse team of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) on American founding principles, government and politics, military and constitutional law, state craft, spy craft, military affairs, strategies, tactics and vulnerabilities, Information Operations (IO) in realms of political warfare, ideological subversion, espionage, counter-intelligence, counter-terrorism, communist strategies and tactics, Active Measures in military and intelligence operations, Hybrid/Fifth Generation/Unrestricted Warfare, cyber warfare, law enforcement, science, technology, critical infrastructure protection, and post-failure consequence management.

Political warfare (noun): a style of modern war that uses tactics such as propaganda, influence operations, lawfare, public corruption, targeted assassinations, extra-judicial killings, election fraud, and other nefarious activities to subvert the foundational institutions of enemy nations.

On November 11, 2020, a Project Sentinel member (a cyber-security expert with active TS/SCI clearances, assisting on Project Foot Patrol and other aspects of analysis of the 2020 color revolution) wrote the following note to White House chief-of-staff Mark Meadows. It was sent to Meadows via Signal by another colleague who had a professional relationship with Meadows. This other colleague was on the ground in battleground states reporting back to the White House on election integrity issues.

Read more

via Emerald Robinson

It’s Time to Join: Project Sentinel

I’ve teamed up with a group of extraordinary national security experts. We’re talking about CIA, DIA, Green Berets, Delta Force, SEAL Team 6. They call themselves: Project Sentinel. Don’t miss the weekly intelligence summaries, the monthly INTSUMs, and the special member-only podcasts that explain how the U.S. government has been weaponized against its own citizens. These are intelligence products of the highest caliber, produced by the best of the best.

Click here for a step-by-step guide to upgrading your membership.

Get 5% off forever

PROJECT SENTINEL is staffed by former DoD and Intelligence Community operators and analysts who understand the history and tactics of the International Communist Movement, Maoist political warfare operations, color revolutions, ideological subversion, and other tactics of our enemy — as well as leading political philosophers on the American founding and constitutional scholars.

PROJECT SENTINEL is the synthesis of the professional concerns and conclusions of a diverse team of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) on American founding principles, government and politics, military and constitutional law, state craft, spy craft, military affairs, strategies, tactics and vulnerabilities, Information Operations (IO) in realms of political warfare, ideological subversion, espionage, counter-intelligence, counter-terrorism, communist strategies and tactics, Active Measures in military and intelligence operations, Hybrid/Fifth Generation/Unrestricted Warfare, cyber warfare, law enforcement, science, technology, critical infrastructure protection, and post-failure consequence management.

In the past several weeks, the White House has expressed concerns about election fraud, Chris Krebs, and the true origins of COVID-19.

Project Sentinel shares those concerns, and then some. Beyond the obvious concerns the White House stated, we are concerned because these are examples of not just suspected criminal behavior, but examples of suspected hostile political warfare operations, conducted by enemies foreign and domestic.

That’s a much more serious concern.

The duty to defend the Constitution from all enemies includes: the duty to know all tactics employed by the enemy. For example, imagine that, in the early stages of WWII in 1942, the admiral tasked with protecting the North Atlantic convoys did not know what a submarine was, or that the general tasked to drive General Rommel out of North Africa didn’t know what a tank was.

Unthinkable. Right?

Unfortunately, that is not the case in 2025.

Decades ago, our enemies figured out that America’s national security establishment does not understand the tactics, application, and occurrence of political warfare being waged against the Constitution — even when it gets pointed out to them.

In 1984, KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov characterized it as: “We call it either Ideological subversion or Active Measures, or Psychological Warfare. What it basically means is to change the perception of reality of every American to such an extent that despite the abundance of information, no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.”

In 1999, Colonel Qiao Liang and Colonel Wang Xiangsui wrote a thesis for the Chinese War College — which was published in English in 2002 as Unrestricted Warfare: China’s Master Plan to Destroy America — that spells this out as America’s strategic vulnerability: “Whether it be the intrusion of hackers, a major explosion at the World Trade Center, of a bombing attack by bin Laden, all of these greatly exceed the frequency bandwidths understood by the American military . . . This is because they have never taken into consideration and have even refused to consider means that are contrary to tradition and to select measures of operation other than military means.”

As Stephen Coughlin, one of America’s few truly astute experts on political warfare, wrote in 2019’s Re-Remembering the Mis-Remembered Left: The Left’s Strategy and Tactics to Transform America: “Our national aversion to recognizing threats beyond the strictly military, especially our aversion to ideological threats in the political warfare arena, has for some time been recognized as a strategic vulnerability by America’s enemies. Our lack of situational awareness of this vulnerability, by itself, constitutes a threat to our national security.”

Last week, the White House published Lab Leak: The True Origins of COVID-19. Now it’s great that, in 2025, the administration is pointing out that SARS-CoV-2 and the government’s handling of it looks suspect. It would have been even better if they had identified it as suspected enemy political warfare operations because that was obvious in 2020.

By March of 2020, political warfare experts noticed and were advising the Trump-45 Administration that while SARS-CoV-2 was a real pathogen, and COVID-19 was a real disease, it was obvious that a seditious counter state, entrenched in government, was rolling out a hostile COVID mass line narrative (that not supported by science or logic!) which needed to be addressed as possible enemy political warfare operations:

• Narrative Dominance in COVID19 Reporting

• Formation of a COVID19 Red Team

By May of 2020, scientific experts were advising Trump-45 Administration to question the science and logic being employed by the same government “experts” identified by political warfare experts as being suspect:

Trump Needs to Recruit a Medical ‘Red Team’ To Challenge Lockdown-Manic Governors

These national security experts both published their political warfare concerns as well as communicated them directly to the NSC. They were ignored.

The scientific experts both published their scientific concerns as well as communicated them directly to the White House, in person.

We learned at the time from one of the scientists present that White House chief of staff Mark Meadows said they didn't want to replace Fauci, Brix and others in an election year because they didn't want to look political!

So, instead of bringing in a couple of dozen top scientists who were apolitical, they left in place the hyper-politicized hacks like Fauci, Brix, and company who were seditiously gas lighting President Trump. In August of 2020, the brilliant Dr. Scott Atlas was brought in as a token, only to be beaten up by the hyper-political crew on the Task Force — leading to Atlas’ October 2020 ban on Twitter and eventual departure from the Task Force.

Just like Bezmenov said about Americans, and Colonels Liang and Xiangsui re-affirmed, “despite the abundance of information, no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.”

How Can You Join Project Sentinel?

There are three tiers: Founding Members with complete access, Paid Subscribers with partial access, and Free Subscribers with no access to Project Sentinel.

Founding Members ($210 annual membership)

• The experts at Project Sentinel will provide intelligence summaries on a regular basis only to Founding Members at Emerald Robinsons’ The Right Way. These are intelligence products of the highest caliber, produced by some of the most well informed military analysts in the world.

• Founding Members will also have total access to all information reports provided by Project Sentinel.

• The experts at Project Sentinel will also host closed door sessions by phone or chat for Founding Members only — to answer timely questions and provide detailed advice on national security issues.

Paid Subscribers ($70 annual membership)

• Paid subscribers will receive only a few information reports provided by Project Sentinel.

• Paid subscribers will have to upgrade to Founding Members to have access to all of the information reports, and any of the intelligence summaries, and any of the closed door sessions.

Free Subscribers

• Free Subscribers will have no access to Project Sentinel.

• If you know a national security expert, or LEO, or military service member who is not currently a Founding Member and who would like to have access to Project Sentinel, a subscription discount is available for them.

• Please email: [email protected] for more information.

via Emerald Robinson

My newsletter is the #1 conservative blog on Substack — recommended by over 299 other Substack authors.

Get 24% off now to celebrate the 2024 election!

Get 24% off for 1 year

May 6th, 2025: Patrick Byrne joined me to discuss Tina Peters, the communist Maduro regime in Venezuela, and the second Trump Administration.

Support The Last Fearless Journalist!

“Emerald Robinson is one of the most fearless and accurate reporters in America today.” — Gateway Pundit

“She’s got balls made of titanium.” — Steve Bannon

“The best journalist in America, I think.” — Patrick Byrne

“There are a handful of heroes and heroines right now in history — and Emerald Robinson is one of them.” — Dr. Naomi Wolf

“Emerald is truly one of the great conservative writers of our times. As funny as Mark Twain and as astute as Steve Bannon.” — Viktor K.

“Some journalists write with pens, she writes with knives.” — Vicchus

“You are the female version of Tucker Carlson. You have been prescient about so many things it's almost scary.” — F. Lawrence Coleman

“You and Glenn Greenwald are the best in terms of current journalism. You and Lara Logan in terms of fearlessness!” — Mac T.

“When all is said and done, Emerald is going to be hailed as this century's Edward R. Murrow.” — Don Reed

Get 24% off for 1 year

via Emerald Robinson