Nathan: I’ve held off on commenting on this story while hoping to find some verification from other sources, especially the claim about facing arrest.  I’ve found that this is a fresh revival of a bogus story from 2010, apparently created by someone very nearly out of whole cloth.  Still, the ideas are important enough to comment on.

National security letters warn fourteen governors?
(Before Its News) Barack Hussein Obama had served 14-State Governors in the United States, National Security Letters (NSLs) warning that the Governor’s actions in attempting to form “State Defense Forces” needs to be halted “immediately” or they will face arrest for the crime of treason. The employment of NSLs was authorized by the Patriot Act introduced by George W. Bush. Contained within the section related to these letters, it is forbidden for anyone receiving a NSL warning to even acknowledge the existence of said communication. Obama is angered by the several State Governors who have reestablished “State Defense Forces.” These forces are described as: “State Defense Forces (also known as State Guards, State Military Reserves, State Militias) in the United States are military units that operate under the sole authority of a state government; they are not regulated by the National Guard Bureau nor are they part of the Army National Guard of the United States. State Defense Forces are authorized by state and federal law and are under the command of the governor of each state.

Nathan: First, let’s deal with the bogus nature of the story.  The earliest date I can find for it is an Examiner story dated 26 May 2010, by Ken Larive quoting a Dr.Lyle J. Rapacki.  He is, at least, apparently a real person.  Then I can find nothing until the 6th of May, this year: almost three years later.  Several websites suddenly picked up the story, acting as though it were new. (Example: “Before Its News” itself.  Maybe they should call it “after its news.”)  Snopes denounced it (though with poor fact checking on their own) within four days; by that time it was on dozens of sites.  A few more (EU Times, RT) also seem to have denounced it – although some trace it (incorrectly, in all likelihood) to some known fabricator of bogus stories.

It IS a compelling storyline, to those who already despise and even hate the current administration and its leadership.  But there are significant internal inconsistencies to it, and it ignores a good deal of factual evidence.  Finally, the actions attributed to the administration just do not ring true.

As Wendy and Claire have already commented, the empire is breaking up. Although not true, the way this story is being received and spreading is a strong indicator.  Fourteen states is more than a quarter of the Union: more than seceded in 1861.  People believe/want to believe that this administration is both this stupid and this vindictive.  It probably gained new life because it dovetails so well with the IRS and DOJ-AP and Benghazi scandals.

But there is NO external evidence that these NSLs even exist (and there are some serious questions about whether the venue for such a threat would be an NSL anyway).  Given the pride and political stance of the named governors, and the sending of these to fourteen, it is hard to believe that not ONE of them would have published the letters and DARED the White House to press charges of treason, let alone charges of a mere felony for revealing the NSL.

Secondly, State Guards or State Defense Forces have existed for a long time, precisely because of the risk of having National Guard units federalized and deployed overseas during a disaster or other emergency at home.  These have depended largely on (often) unpaid volunteers and very low budgets.  Third, many of the states with well-organized SDF are the most Tranzi of states: California comes to mind.  If the White House was wanting to trigger a new war between the states, this would be a singularly stupid way to do so: by arresting the likes of Moonbeam Brown and charging him with treason.

I realize I sound like a stuck record, but once more we have an example of those who are seeking to defend against the real and dangerous power and abusiveness of the administration haring off to a bogus event, damaging their credibility by repeating fairy tales with no basis in fact and not a shred of evidence.  By doing so, they damage their influence and ability to win others to their cause.  Is it not time that those who claim to love liberty and hate tyranny could ALSO learn to love (or at least practice) a modicum of skepticism and ability to research and inquire and publish the truth?