The Democrat-Fomented “Color Revolution”

Written by Laurie Higgins

Since the burning, looting, assaults, and statue-toppling began, every conservative, every right-of-center, and every left-of-center American has been asking themselves, “What the heck is happening?”

Sane people know America is not a racist country. They know that oppressed people all around the world long to come to America for the opportunity to be free of oppression. Sane people look around and see interracial families; racially and ethnically diverse neighborhoods, churches and social groups; and persons of color succeeding at the highest levels in government, academia, sports, the media, and the arts. Sane people know that truly unjust killings of completely innocent blacks by police are rare.

So, sane people intuitively understand that the anarchy in our streets is not organic. It’s manufactured by people with money and power who at the moment lack the one thing their dark hearts desire: total governmental power. This means they need the presidency, the U.S. Senate, and the U.S. Supreme Court.

Anyone who still believes the empty deceitful words of leftists who claim to value diversity, tolerance, free speech, and religious liberty is dangerously gullible.

For several months now voices have been crying in the virtual wilderness that we are in the midst of a de facto “Color Revolution.” Their voices need to be amplified exponentially and immediately.

But first, a quick look at a recent, well-publicized news story about the “Transition Integrity Project,” which illuminates elements of our ongoing Color Revolution.

Transition Integrity Project

In June the findings of the laughably misnamed Transition Integrity Project (TIP) were released. TIP was created to engage in “election crisis scenario planning exercises.” Not surprisingly, in the fertile imaginations of the TIP members, all the crises they anticipate happening will be caused by Trump.

TIP’s founders are leftwing Georgetown University professor and activist Rosa Brooks, a close and long-time associate of George Soros, and Nils Gilman, a good buddy to the Chinese Communist government. George Soros has deep connections to Color Revolutions, most notably the Orange Revolution in Ukraine (More on Color Revolutions shortly).

With a straight face and a long wooden nose, Rosa Brooks claims TIP is a bipartisan project. She’s technically accurate; there were some Republicans involved. They were all seething Never-Trumpers. Maybe there were some Trump supporters, but since of the “over 100” people involved, only about a dozen names are publicly available, we really don’t know.

Gilman—friend of the Chinese Communists and member of the party that created the Russia collusion hoax and impeachment farce—pretended that TIP was created out of concern that if Trump loses, his outgoing administration “could potentially get up to a lot of mischief.”

Ironically, given the fact that Democrats have spent four years and millions of taxpayer dollars trying to unseat a duly elected president, Gilman claims TIP members are afraid Trump will “do things using the executive power, the power of the executive branch, to basically stop the full resolution of a close election.”

According to the TIP findings, the bipartisan TIP members “of all backgrounds and ideologies believed that Trump would prioritize personal gain and self-protection over ensuring an orderly administrative handoff to his successor.” It’s both weird and amazing that all the members with all those different ideologies would believe the same thing!

The TIP executive summary asserts that,

It is incumbent upon elected officials, civil society leaders, and the press to challenge authoritarian actions in the courts, in the media, and in the streets through peaceful protest. … Plan for a contested election. … Address the two biggest threats head on: lies about “voter fraud” and escalating violence. … Voting fraud is virtually non-existent, but Trump lies about it to create a narrative designed to politically mobilize his base and to create the basis for contesting the results should he lose. The potential for violent conflict is high, particularly since Trump encourages his supporters to take up arms. (emphasis added)

While fomenting a de facto Color Revolution, these leftists and Trump-haters engage in rhetorical “jujitsu” to impute to Trump their own revolutionary tactics.

American Mind writer Dr. Darren Beattie, who has a Ph.D. in political theory from Duke University, defines a “Color Revolution” as a,

specific type of coordinated attack that the United States government has been known to deploy against foreign regimes, particularly in Eastern Europe deemed to be “authoritarian” and hostile to American interests. Rather than using a direct military intervention to effect regime change as in Iraq, Color Revolutions attack a foreign regime by contesting its electoral legitimacy, organizing mass protests and acts of civil disobedience, and leveraging media contacts to ensure favorable coverage to their agenda in the Western press.

Back in June 2020, Stacey Lennox outlined the color revolutionary forest that our focus on the burning trees has concealed. She cites a 2005 article by “architect” of Obama’s Russian reset policy, Michael McFaul, in which McFaul identifies seven factors necessary for a successful political revolution:

1. a semi-autocratic rather than fully autocratic regime
2. an unpopular incumbent
3. a united and organized opposition
4. an ability quickly to drive home the point that voting results were falsified
5. enough independent media to inform citizens about the falsified vote
6. a political opposition capable of mobilizing tens of thousands or more demonstrators to protest electoral fraud
7. divisions among the regime’s [i.e., Trump administration] coercive forces [e.g., military]

According to Dr. Beattie, McFaul was a “key player agitating for Trump’s impeachment.”

Let’s see if the revolutionary jackboot fits our current crisis:

1.) Democrats began labeling Trump a racist, tyrant, fascist, Nazi, and totalitarian before he had even taken office and absent any evidence. More recently, Democrats began circulating the wild story that Trump would contest the election because, ya know, he’s an autocrat. Ironically, it’s Democrats who have hired an army of shysters to contest the election.

2.) Partly because of Trump’s unpalatable personality and off-putting tweets; partly because of the virulent hatred of the GOP establishment who can’t control him; and partly because of the control by leftist elites over our mainstream press, academia, and the arts, Trump is—to put it gently—unpopular.

3.) Big Tech, the legacy press, academia, BLM, Antifa, the Democrat Party, leftist government bureaucrats, and leftist NGOs have created a semi-organized opposition, aided and abetted by Never-Trumpers blinded by rage. For example, a recently leaked document from the Department of Homeland Security says this about the Portland riots:

We can’t say any longer that this violent situation is opportunistic. … A core set of Threat actors are organized and show up night after night, and share common TTPs (Tactics, Techniques and Procedures).

4.) Democrats have long spread the disinformation that Republicans are engaged in voter suppression and seek to sabotage the 2020 election. Democrats falsely claimed that Trump was removing mailboxes and that he opposes mail-in voting and ballot-harvesting for no reason other than preventing Democrats from voting. In reality, it’s Democrats who seek to engage in voter fraud by opposing any minimal standards for protecting election integrity.

5.) There exist media outlets ready, waiting, and eager to inform citizens of alleged voter fraud, but they aren’t independent and they won’t be reporting on voter fraud. The mainstream press—i.e., the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party—will portray all efforts to protect the election from the fraudulent acts that Democrats engage in via mail-in voting, opposition to identification verification, and ballot-harvesting as attempts to “steal the election.”

6.) The Democrat Party has already warned that its hordes of mostly violent rioters will be in the streets doing what they do best unless Harris and her cellar-dweller sidekick win.

7.) Through disinformation in the media, particularly the New York Times, leftists have fomented division between Trump and the military and within the military itself. Lennox discusses the retired generals, including Jim Mattis, who publicly oppose Trump as well as the “CIA, FBI, DOJ” who “are at odds internally and with the administration.”

In a series of articles on the news website Revolver, Beattie fleshes out the intensifying Color Revolution in progress in America with information about some of the contemporary architects who are hiding in plain sight, one of whom is Norm Eisen.

Norm Eisen

According to Jacqueline Thomsen, Eisen admitted he was planning legal wars against Trump since before he took office:

Eisen writes … that, before Trump was even inaugurated, a group of lawyers he labels the “legal Resistance” held weekly calls on Fridays about how to counter the administration in court.

Beattie writes this alarming description of Eisen:

As the man who implemented the David Brock blueprint for suing the President into paralysis and his allies into bankruptcy, who helped mainstream and amplify the Russia Hoax, who drafted 10 articles of impeachment for the Democrats a full month before President Trump ever called the Ukraine President in 2018 … there is perhaps no man alive with a more decorated resume for plots against President Trump. …

There is no purer embodiment of Revolver’s thesis that the very same regime change professionals who run Color Revolutions on behalf of the US Government in order to undermine or overthrow alleged “authoritarian” governments overseas, are running the very same playbook to overturn Trump’s 2016 victory and to pre-empt a repeat in 2020. To put it simply, what you see is not just the same Color Revolution playbook run against Trump, but the same people using it against Trump who have employed it in a professional capacity against targets overseas—same people same playbook.

Eisen wrote “The Democracy Playbook” in which he recommends these actions:

• Form networks between other opposition groups, local electoral activists, civil society groups

• Increase election monitoring capacity and be prepared to use electoral abuse evidence as the basis for reform advocacy

• [S]low or obstruct illiberal reforms

• [W]ork to obstruct the passage of an executive’s anti-democratic agenda

• [P]ursue more extreme institutional measures … such as impeachment processes, votes of no confidence, and recall referenda

• [U]tilize extra-institutional tools—engaging in or encouraging, for example, a protest

Eisen is practiced at the strategic and tactical arts of creating the very kind of revolution about which Beattie, Lennox, and others are warning is already here in America.

Gene Sharp

Prior to Eisen and his collaborators, prior even to McFaul, was the “father of the whole field of the study of strategic nonviolent action,” Gene Sharp, who is admired and “praised by progressive heavyweights like Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky.”

Marcie Smith writing for the website NONsite, describes Sharp’s book published in 1973, The Politics of Nonviolent Action:

In Part One … Sharp argues a state’s power is always fundamentally based on the voluntary consent, obedience, and cooperation of the governed. If one wants to “control” or collapse a regime, one must figure out how to withdraw these things en masse. The most strategic way to do this, Sharp says, is for protest movements to attack the sources of a government’s political power with “nonviolent action.” In later work, he would urge protesters and their handlers to focus their moral incursions on the “pillars” of a regime’s power, institutions like the media, universities, and the military.

In Part Two, Sharp details 198 nonviolent “actions.” … this list of protest tactics includes: use of symbolic colors, parades, vigils, use of banners … forms of economic non-cooperation like boycotts, divestment campaigns, and … political non-cooperation, like refusing to assist law enforcement.

In the second part of her profile of Sharp, Marcie Smith traces the development of his ideas to today’s activist training organization Momentum, which began in 2015:

[T]he popular activist “training institute and movement incubator.”… Momentum’s focus is on “training movements” that will … “wake millions of people up to our power” and transform “our entire government to reflect the will of the people for the first time in U.S. history.” Momentum seeks to build “decentralized” movements in the tradition of “international civil resistance,” and so bring about “structural change” — a type of change, Momentum says, that “won’t come from within the political system.”

Momentum has trained 1,500 activists in at least 30 states, many of whom “have gone on to be at the center of protests that have ricocheted throughout the nation.” Some of the activist organizations Momentum has coached include … Black Lives Matter. (emphasis added)

Smith is not the only leftist who sees the influence of Sharp in today’s leftist movements. Two years ago, NBC News executive producer and Sharp documentarian, the leftist Ruaridh Arrow wrote this for Politico:

Through Occupy Wall Street, the Dakota Access Pipeline protests, the new women’s movement and, increasingly, constitutional defenses against Trump administration policies, Gene’s work has been a rich resource.

The mayhem we’re seeing today is not the work of an organic, grassroots movement of oppressed people. It is organized, subsidized, and promoted by dogmatic leftwing activists working in the government, academia, think tanks, the mainstream press, and “empowerment” NGOs. No matter how you feel about Donald Trump, his election is critical. It is the only thing standing between revolutionary rule by radicals and freedom.

Consider yourselves warned. Now warn your family, friends, neighbors, and colleagues.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

Our get-out-the-vote campaign is up and running.
We are distributing the IFI Voter Guide to hundreds of churches, civic groups and tea party organizations.

Will you support our endeavor to educate Illinois voters and promote family values?