Now we have the real, unvarnished thinking of Transition Integrity Project co-founder Nils Gilman. Gilman likes execution by firing squad. (Image source: iStock)
It seems that criticizing the Transition Integrity Project (TIP) and their plan to disrupt and steal the 2020 presidential election can be dangerous. Michael Anton, a former Trump administration official and now of the Claremont Institute, published an article titled, "The Coming Coup" that seems to have caught the attention of TIP co-founder Nils Gilman. According to the journalist Natalie Winters:
"Gilman, who serves as Vice President of Programs at the Chinese Communist Party-linked Berggruen Institute, took to Twitter to express his desire that Anton be executed in the same fashion as Robert Brasillach.
"Specifically, he insisted 'Michael Anton is the Robert Brasillach of our times and deserves the same fate.'"
I'll save you the effort of searching for Brasillach -- he was a French author and journalist who advocated for the fascists and was executed by firing squad in 1945. So -- the leadership of TIP has spoken. Now you know their thinking, their motives and their true objectives. It seems Gilman wants Anton executed.
Gilman's tweet is a refreshingly frank declaration. All the usual pretense and guile are set aside. No virtue signaling, no coded language, no projection, no dog whistles to the party faithful and the stenographers at WaPo, CNN, et al.
The brutality and viciousness of Marxism and its adherents is on display. Those that may have held reservations or harbored some doubt on my analysis of what TIP really had in store for the election now have their answers. I would rather have been wrong.
Oh, to have been "backstage" at the June "war games" of TIP! One can only guess at the fevered imaginings that had to be cooled and edited into the 22-page report. What sort of Bolshevik fantasies floated about the Zoom-connected strategy sessions? If Gilman advocates executing someone by firing squad for daring to question TIP, what other penalties and extraordinary measures were discussed by the supposed bipartisan arbiters of the electoral process?
How is this "normal?" Where is the 24/7 news media reporting on Gilman's conduct? Go ahead and do a news search on Gilman and this tweet. It won't take long -- there is virtually no reporting, other than the Twitterverse. What does that tell you? Are you disturbed by how your news information is "curated?"
What about questions and comments to other leaders of the TIP operation? One is always left wondering about the proverbial shoe being on the other foot. What would the reporting look like if a Trump advocate or leader of a similarly situated group on the other side of the political spectrum had tweeted the same thing about an opposite number? I think you already know the reactions and the answers.
More broadly -- how long does the American public put up with this sort of unchecked lethality? What about the not-so-thinly veiled calls for execution by firing squad of one's political opponents? When does the favored elite stop getting a pass for unlawful, unethical conduct? When does the reaction stop being, "Oh, well!"? Is there a gag level? A breaking point? Do Gilman's fantasies have to be acted upon before people understand the dangers of this sort of vicious thinking and communication?
I am a strong supporter of the First Amendment, even on occasions when people get out on thin ice or test the limits of what is "acceptable." Gilman's tweet is something else. There is the tweet itself -- which is a repulsive and dangerous smear against Anton and a call to violence -- but there is also what it means against the backdrop of what TIP is all about, how it is organized, funded, promoted in the media, and used as a rallying point by the Left for disruption of a presidential election.
You already know what TIP plans to do in the coming election. You can read Anton's analysis. Now you have the real, unvarnished thinking of TIP co-founder Gilman. Gilman likes execution by firing squad. Election Day is coming. TIP wants it to be Election Season. Beware of how much else they want that comes to fruition. It could be dangerous.
Chris Farrell is a former counterintelligence case officer. For the past 20 years, he has served as the Director of Investigations & Research for Judicial Watch. The views expressed are the author's alone, and not necessarily those of Judicial Watch.