06/28/22

More Legal Cases Still to Come Over the SCOTUS Roe Ruling

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

There is no denying that the federal government has overt abortion activists including beyond the White House, even at the Department of Justice and sadly even at the Department of Defense.

Wasting no time, Merrick Garland, the U.S. Attorney General took to Twitter to expose his advocacy for abortion.

“The Supreme Court has eliminated an established right that has been an essential component of women’s liberty for half a century – a right that has safeguarded women’s ability to participate fully and equally in society. And in renouncing this fundamental right, which it had repeatedly recognized and reaffirmed, the Court has upended the doctrine of stare decisis, a key pillar of the rule of law." AG Garland “The Justice Department strongly disagrees with the Court’s decision. This decision deals a devastating blow to reproductive freedom in the United States. It will have an immediate and irreversible impact on the lives of people across the country. And it will be greatly disproportionate in its effect – with the greatest burdens felt by people of color and those of limited financial means." Attorney General Garland

His full published statement is found here.

Garland, like a few Justices on the Supreme Court… just needs to read aloud the text of the U.S. Constitution where it refers to a Constitutional right… we’re waiting.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/companies-offering-abortion-travel-benefits-us-workers-2022-06-24/

Meanwhile…there is General Lloyd Austin, the Secretary of Defense… yeesh… but read on.

Axios reported –>

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Friday that the Pentagon is working to ensure that members of the military, their families and its civilian employees will still have access to “reproductive health care” after the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Why it matters: The Defense Department currently does not have a policy to accommodate service members or employees who are seeking an abortion but are stationed in a state that has outlawed abortion, Politico reports.

  • Federal law currently allows military medical facilities to provide abortions only in cases of rape, incest or if a woman’s life is in danger, while the military’s health program is allowed to cover abortions at private facilities for those same reasons only.

What they’re saying: “Nothing is more important to me or to this Department than the health and well-being of our Service members, the civilian workforce and DOD families,” Austin said in a statement on Friday.

  • “I am committed to taking care of our people and ensuring the readiness and resilience of our Force. The Department is examining this decision closely and evaluating our policies to ensure we continue to provide seamless access to reproductive health care as permitted by federal law,” he added.

The big picture: The court’s decision may further strain the military’s recruitment efforts — already hampered by low employment and other factors — as potential recruits may fear being stationed in states that have banned abortions, according to Bloomberg.

  • Women make up around 20% of the military’s 1.3 million-member active-duty force, and 95% of them are of reproductive age, according to Stars and Stripes citing department statistics.

Then..one of the first messages I received was a headline article from Associated Press predicting the stockpiling of abortion pills…imagine the looming black market on those. Then VOX weighed in –> Medication abortion, or taking a combination of the drugs mifepristone and misoprostol, is an increasingly common method for ending pregnancies in the United States. Reasons vary and overlap: Some women lack access to in-person abortion clinics; others prefer to end pregnancies in the comfort of their own home. Others seek out the pills because they cost far less than surgical abortion. (…)

small but growing number of reproductive experts have been encouraging discussion of an idea called “advance provision” — or, more colloquially, stocking up on abortion pills in case one needs them later.

It’s an idea that has merit: Mifepristone has a shelf life of about five years, misoprostol about two, and both drugs work better the earlier in a pregnancy you take them. In states that are ramping up abortion restrictions, there’s often a race against the clock to access care. In Texas, for example, if you don’t realize until eight weeks in that you’re pregnant — which could be only a couple of weeks after a missed period — you would have already passed the state’s new legal deadline for obtaining abortion pills. But if you had already stored them in your home, or your friend or neighbor had, then you’d be able to take them.

Now…let’s take a look at corporations that have made pledges to pay for abortion expenses…then consider when the lawsuits begin for corporations paying in kind for wanted pregnancies and full term, real birth for planned and wanted babies…will that be considered? Ah…but read on. It is still going to be ugly going forward.

Company
Benefit(s) Offered
JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N)
The company told employees it would pay for their travel to states that allow legal abortions, according to a memo seen by Reuters. read more
Citigroup Inc (C.N)
The bank has started covering travel expenses for employees who go out of state for abortions because of newly enacted restrictions in Texas and other states, becoming the first major U.S. bank to make that commitment. read more
Goldman Sachs Group Inc (GS.N)
Goldman Sachs Group Inc will cover travel expenses for its U.S.-based employees who need to go out of state to receive abortion or gender-affirming medical care starting July 1. read more
Meta Platforms Inc. (META.O)
Meta said in statement it intends to offer travel expense reimbursements, to the extent permitted by law, for employees who will need access to out-of-state healthcare and reproductive services.
Yelp Inc (YELP.N)
The crowd-sourced review platform will extend its abortion coverage to cover expenses for its employees and their dependents who need to travel to another state for abortion services. read more
Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O)
The second-largest U.S. private employer told employees it will pay up to $4,000 in travel expenses yearly for non-life threatening medical treatments, among them elective abortions. read more
Levi Strauss & CO
The apparel company will reimburse travel expenses for its full- and part-time employees who need to travel to another state for healthcare services, including abortions. read more
United Talent Agency
The private Hollywood talent agency said it would reimburse travel expenses related to women’s reproductive health services that are not accessible in an employee’s state of residence. read more
Tesla Inc (TSLA.O)
Tesla’s Safety Net program and health insurance includes travel and lodging support for its employees who may need to seek healthcare services that are unavailable in their home state, according to the company’s 2021 impact report. (https://bit.ly/3beSOOQ)
Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O)
Microsoft said it would extend its abortion and gender affirming care services for employees in the United States to include travel expense assistance. read more
Starbucks Corp (SBUX.O)
Starbucks said it will reimburse U.S. employees and their dependents if they must travel more than 100 miles from their homes to obtain an abortion. read more
Netflix Inc (NFLX.O)
Netflix said it will offer travel reimbursement for U.S. employees and dependents who travel for cancer treatment, transplants, abortion and gender-affirming care through its U.S. health plans.
Mastercard Inc (MA.N)
Mastercard said it will fund travel and lodging for employees seeking abortions outside their home states from June, according to an internal memo seen by Reuters. read more
Kroger Co
Kroger said it will provide travel benefits up to $4,000 to facilitate access to several categories of medical treatments and a full range of reproductive health care services, including abortion.
Uber Technologies Inc
Uber said its insurance plans in the United States cover a range of reproductive health benefits, including pregnancy termination and travel expenses to access healthcare.
DoorDash Inc
DoorDash said it will cover certain travel-related expenses for employees who face new barriers to access and need to travel out of state for abortion-related care.
Lyft Inc (LYFT.O)
Lyft said its U.S. medical benefits plan includes coverage for elective abortion and reimbursement for travel costs if an employee must travel more than 100 miles for an in-network provider.
Bank of America Corp
The bank said it will reimburse employees and their dependents for the cost of traveling to receive reproductive healthcare, including abortions.
Deutsche Bank AG
The bank said it is updating its U.S. healthcare policy to cover travel costs for any medical procedure, including abortion, that is not offered within 100 miles of an employees’ home, according to a source familiar.
American Express Co
American Express said it will cover travel and other related expenses for employees and their dependents if they need abortion or gender-affirming treatment that is not available where they live.
Block (SQ.N)
The payments company said it will cover expenses for U.S. employees who must travel more than 100 miles for abortions starting July 1, a source familiar with the matter said.
Macy’s Inc
Macy’s said it made the decision to expand its benefits program to provide travel reimbursement for colleagues to receive the medical care needed and will abide by existing laws and legal standards.
Walt Disney Co
Disney said the company’s benefits will cover the cost of employees who need to travel to another location to access care, including to obtain an abortion, it said. read more
Gucci
Gucci said in May it will cover travel expenses of U.S. employees who need access to health care not available in their home state. The company also has said it will match employee donations to Planned Parenthood.
Bank of Nova Scotia
Scotiabank, Canada’s third-largest bank, said it will pay for travel costs for U.S. employees in states that restrict access for abortions. Its U.S. employees have access to abortion coverage under its medical plan.

And they called Vietnam veterans baby killers….

05/2/22

Dark Money – Not the Grassroots – Is Behind the Convention of States Organizations

By: Judi Caler

Patriots are rightly concerned that Mark Meckler, lobbyist and President of the Convention of States organizations (COS), has spent tens of millions of dollars spreading misinformation and cajoling State Legislatures into passing applications asking Congress to call a convention under Article V of the U.S. Constitution. Thirty-four States are needed to pass such applications to trigger a constitutional convention, where a new Constitution would likely be proposed, along with an easier mode of ratification. So, who is behind COS?

Meckler tells state legislators that COS is a grassroots movement, funded by thousands of ordinary citizens. In fact, since December, 2017, the COS homepage boasted:

WHO’S BEHIND THIS THING?

The American people. We thought you’d never ask! The Convention of States Project is first and foremost a movement of grassroots citizens who are fed up with business as usual in D.C. We’re funded by thousands of everyday patriots who have committed their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to protecting liberty for future generations.

But Andy Schlafly, attorney and son of conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly, testified at a Pennsylvania hearing on Oct. 22, 2019 against COS’s Article V convention application (@ 11:55):

Schlafly: “…[W]ho’s funding them? Where’s the money coming from? There’s a lot of money behind this. And they’re not disclosing where the money behind this push to change the Constitution is coming from. That should scare everybody in this room. Who are these people who are pushing to rewrite the Constitution? I suspect some of them are globalists, but ask them…it’s not disclosed. And I’m certainly not in favor of allowing billionaires who don’t disclose their identity…[or] their real agenda…to rewrite our Constitution. That’s not a good idea.”

Meckler, at the same hearing, feigning outrage, fumed (@ 46:11):

Meckler: “…[W]ho’s funding this? Any of you at any time are welcome to visit our very fancy corporate offices in my house in Texas. In my personal home office off the kitchen, where all the billionaires apparently come visit me. It’s an outrage and a slander. And this kind of slanderous politics takes this discussion to some place it should not go, which is frankly, it’s just slander, and innuendo. It’s gutter politics. And I don’t believe in it…

“I can tell you who my donors are. See, because the person that raises the money for…this organization is my wife of 26 years who works in the office next to mine, who has raised money from over 80,000 individual grassroots patriots all over this country. So, if those are the millionaires and billionaires that Mr. Schlafly is afraid of, well, he might want to talk to the grandmas who send me checks and say, ‘it’s five bucks a month out of my fixed income, and I’m sorry I can’t afford any more.’ Again, an outrageous slander on the tens of thousands of people supporting this movement.”

Notice that in one fell swoop, Meckler masterfully deflects attention from the source of his funding, while playing the victim and accusing his opponents of slander.

So, what’s the truth? Let’s go straight to the tax-exempt returns that Meckler is required to file with the IRS every year. These returns, also known as 990s, are public information and filed by all nonprofits.

The most recent 990s available for Meckler’s organizations are for the years 2020, 2019, and 2018. The Meckler organizations appear to include Convention of States Action (COSA); Citizens for Self-Governance (CSG); Citizens for Self-Governance Action (CSG Action); and Defending Liberty, Inc. (DLI). Each year, Meckler filed a 990 return for each entity, as required by law, and signed them under penalty of perjury.

Nonprofits are not required to disclose the identity of their contributors—so all contributors are anonymous, unless the organization chooses to disclose them. That’s why the accompanying Schedule B doesn’t include the names & addresses of the donors—only the total amount of all donations totaling $5,000 or more from each numbered donor during the year. Still, those figures are revealing.

Donations of $5,000 or more to each entity are summarized by year on the accompanying Chart. The source documentation for figures on the Chart can be found mostly on Schedule B of the linked 990s.

Here’s the short version:

Between 2018 and 2020, contributions ranging from $5,000 to $2,000,000 per donor, to the four entities totaled $16,751,011, or 63% of the $26.7 million in contributions reported on Meckler’s combined 990s for the 3-year period. And that $16.7 million was from at most 168 unique anonymous persons; thus, their average contribution was almost $100,000 [$16,751,011 ÷ 168 = $99,708].

But likely, Meckler has fewer than 168 major donors, as repeat donors over the 3-year period are to be expected. So, depending upon how many major donors gave in one, two, or three years and/or gave to multiple Meckler entities, the average donation per major donor over the three-year period amounts to at least $99,708, and may be more than $200,000 or $300,000! So, COS isn’t a grassroots organization funded from the bottom up by small donors. Schedule B provides proof that COS’s agenda to replace our Constitution is coming mostly from major donors.

Meckler frequently sends out emails asking for money, to his list of unsuspecting patriots. Unsurprisingly, most of his requests are accompanied by an offer from a “generous donor” to match each contribution. The patriots on Meckler’s email list probably have no idea that Meckler has been receiving almost two-thirds of his contributions from multi-millionaires and/or billionaires while drawing salaries for himself and his wife totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars annually.

We can only conclude that Meckler is disingenuous when he ridicules the suggestion that his organizations are funded by undisclosed multi-millionaires and billionaires. And while his organizations may well receive some small donations, he denies that the bulk of his money comes from the superrich. And all the while, he yells “slander” with a straight face, and shamelessly conjures up Grandma wishing she could give him more of her paltry income, when asked about the millions in dark money he’s amassing!

We know why the liquor, drug, and tobacco industries invest millions in lobbyists to influence state legislation. But why would major donors invest millions in COS to bring about a convention to rewrite the U.S. Constitution?

The total amount of money spent over the years by the Meckler organizations to trigger a constitutional convention is astonishing.  Meckler needs to be confronted everywhere he goes by opponents, supporters, & legislators alike—and asked why he is hiding the fact that he’s working for the superrich.  We have a right to know; it’s our Constitution they’re after!  You can download the 990 forms from the accompanying Chart and copy Schedule B, so you’ll have ammo to push back with, the next time Meckler plays the Grandma card.

Meckler Entities Anonymous Major Contributions (≥ $5,000) For Years 2018 Through 2020
Meckler Organizations’ Forms 990 (A)
# of Major Donors (Sched. B)
(B)
Total $ from Major Donors (Sched. B)
(C)
Total of all Contributions: Form 990 p.1, line 8
B ÷ C
Major Contributions’ % of Total
B ÷ A
Average Major Donation
COSA 2020
47-2245708
55 $4,112,370 $7,159,560 57% $74,770
COSA 2019 45        3,884,001          6,777,645 57%          86,311
COSA 2018 26        2,239,125          4,872,216 46%          86,120
CSG 2020
27-1657203
8        1,016,800          1,622,566 63%        127,100
CSG 2019 13           633,100             961,914 66%          48,700
CSG 2018 13        1,844,815          2,319,810 80%        141,909
CSG Action 2020
27-4648506
1        2,000,000          2,000,000 100%     2,000,000
CSG Action 2019 2           305,800             305,800 100%        152,900
CSG Action 2018 2           535,000             581,000 92%        267,500

DLI 2018: 812320022
[no revenue 2019-20]
3           180,000             180,000 100%          60,000
TOTALS 168 $16,751,011 $26,780,511 % of total contributions ≥ $5,000* Avg. $ per Major Donor –at the very least*
*See note below 63% $99,708
*Note: $16,751,011 in major contributions [≥ $5,000] out of $26,780,511 total contributions [63%] were reported, from 168 Major Donors giving $5,000 or more to the above Meckler entities from 2018-2020. Thus, the Average contribution given by a Major Donor was at the very least $99,708 [$16,751,011 ÷ 168] and may be over $200,000 or $300,000—if the same Major Donors contributed in multiple years and/or to multiple Meckler entities.

___________

[1] Dark money is money donated to politically active nonprofit organizations or anonymous corporate entities, which spend this money to influence political campaigns or other special interests but are not required to reveal their donors.
___________

Judi Caler is a citizen activist working to defend our Constitution from those who would risk it at an Article V constitutional convention. She serves as Article V Issues Director for Eagle Forum of California.

12/14/21

Mark Meckler’s “COS” Board Member has drafted a new Constitution which imposes gun control

By: Publius Huldah (Joanna Martin, J.D.)

Our Framers understood that a free State cannot exist without an armed and trained populace (the Militia).  Accordingly, they wrote a Constitution which prohibits the federal and State governments from infringing the natural right of the People to keep and bear arms.

Under our Constitution, the federal government has no authority to make any laws whatsoever over the Country at Large restricting the rights of the People to keep and bear arms.  Gun control is not an enumerated power.  Furthermore, the Second Amendment expressly forbids the federal government from infringing the right of the People (the Militia) to keep and bear arms.

The States are also prohibited from infringing the right of the People to keep and bear arms by Article I, Sec. 8, clauses 15 & 16, US Constitution.  Those two clauses provide for the Militia of the Several States, and implicitly prohibit the States from making any laws which would interfere with the arming and training of the Militiamen in their States. 1

Applications for Congress to call a convention under Article V, US Constitution

Various groups, such as Mark Meckler’s Convention of “States” (COS) organizations, have been lobbying State Legislators to pass applications asking Congress to call an Article V Convention.

Whether or not State Legislatures should ask Congress to call an Article V Convention is one of the most important – and contentious – issues of our time. The Delegates to such a convention, as Sovereign Representatives of the People, have the power to throw off the Constitution we have and propose a new Constitution, with a new and easier mode of ratification, which would create a new government. 2

The Pennsylvania Senators Roundtable Discussion

On November 8, 2021, several Pennsylvania Senators conducted a roundtable discussion about whether they should pass Mark Meckler’s “COS” application (SR 152) for Congress to call an Article V convention.  In addition to Mark Meckler and his allies, two large gun rights organizations, Gun Owners of America and Firearms Owners Against Crime 3 were present at the roundtable.

Much of what Meckler said at the roundtable is not true.  But this paper focuses on his comments ridiculing his opponents’ concerns that, if there is an Article V convention, we could lose our existing Right to keep and bear arms.

Continue reading

10/23/21

Jeff Cooper: The Forgotten History of Lt. Col. Cooper and his Impact on Combat Readiness

By: Sam Jacobs | Ammo.com

history of jeff cooperThe United States Marines have a saying: “Every Marine a rifleman.” That being said, some of them are pretty handy with a pistol, too.

Lt. Col. Jeff Cooper literally wrote the book on modern handguns in combat. In fact, you’re probably already acquainted with a number of concepts he introduced to the world of pistols, even though you might not know his name. Some of them are so common sense and simple that it’s hard to believe anyone had to invent them.

This was the genius of Jeff Cooper.

Jeff Cooper’s Marine Corps Career

It’s impossible to tell the story of Jeff Cooper without talking about the United States Marine Corps. Indeed, Cooper enrolled in the Junior ROTC program when he was still studying at Los Angeles High School. He then attended Stanford, earning a degree in political science before receiving his commission in the United States Marine Corps.

During World War II he served in the Pacific Theater, earning the rank of major. In 1949, he resigned his commission, but duty called during the Korean War and so, Cooper returned. He served in irregular warfare and earned a promotion to Lieutenant Colonel. After the war, he applied to remain on active duty but was rejected.

From there, Cooper earned a master’s degree in history and taught part-time at a high school and a community college. Here he remained until the early 1970s when he applied his passion for teaching to his passion for weapons.

It was in 1976 that Cooper founded the American Pistol Institute, now known as the Gunsite Academy. While he primarily taught rifles and shotguns to law enforcement, the concepts developed by Cooper during his time running the American Pistol Institute for pistols and long arms alike are used by every intelligent and responsible gun owner to this day.

jeff cooper and his wife

Jeff Cooper’s Combat Readiness

It was at the American Pistol Institute that Cooper developed the modern technique of the pistol. This was his system for pistol combat. Without knowing what it’s called or who invented it, much of it will seem familiar to you:

  • Large caliber, semi-automatic pistol: Cooper was an early advocate of the 1911 and a big caliber to go in it. At a time when most men favored wheel guns, Cooper believed there was simply no substitute for a semi-automatic with a big round like a .45 ACP.
  • The Weaver stance: Opinions vary on the best stance for combat, but Cooper was a strong supporter of the Weaver stance, developed by Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff Jack Weaver through his experiences in competitive shooting.
  • The draw stroke: Cooper preached the importance of the draw stroke. A holstered weapon doesn’t do anyone any good. So Cooper drilled his students to consistently practice drawing their weapon with perfect form to be combat-ready.
  • The flash sight picture: Just as a holstered weapon is useless until drawn, so too is a weapon useless if not pointed in the right direction. The flash sight picture is a method of quickly targeting an attacker with sufficient accuracy. It is essential in life-or-death situations.
  • The compressed surprise trigger break: Considered the “secret” of quick and accurate shooting, the compressed surprise trigger break, which is a somewhat more sophisticated version of the “double-tap.” While Cooper did not invent the double-tap, he systematized the training for such.

All of the above are basic combat training for civilians, military, and law enforcement alike. While Cooper didn’t “invent” any of it, per se, he synthesized previously existing methods into a cohesive program of combat readiness just about anyone could learn.

Continue reading

10/7/21

DOJ Considering Parents vs. School Boards as Terrorists

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

The National School Boards Association wrote a 6-page letter to President Biden. The full letter is here. In part:

As these threats and acts of violence have become more prevalent – during public school board meetings, via documented threats transmitted through the U.S. Postal Service, through
social media and other online platforms, and around personal properties – NSBA respectfully asks that a joint collaboration among federal law enforcement agencies, state and local law enforcement, and with public school officials be undertaken to focus on these threats. NSBA specifically solicits the expertise and resources of the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Secret Service, and its National Threat Assessment Center regarding the level of risk to public schoolchildren, educators, board members, and facilities/campuses. We also request the assistance of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service to intervene against threatening letters and cyberbullying attacks that have been transmitted to students, school board members, district administrators, and other educators.

As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes. As such, NSBA requests a joint expedited review by the U.S. Departments of Justice, Education, and Homeland Security, along with the appropriate training, coordination, investigations, and enforcement mechanisms from the FBI, including any technical assistance necessary from, and state and local coordination with, its National Security Branch and Counterterrorism Division, as well as any other federal agency with relevant jurisdictional authority and oversight. Additionally, NSBA requests that such review examine appropriate enforceable actions against these crimes and acts of violence under the Gun–Free School Zones Act, the PATRIOT Act in regards to domestic terrorism, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, the Violent Interference with Federally Protected Rights statute, the Conspiracy Against Rights statute, an Executive Order to enforce all applicable federal laws for the(…)

UPDATE: Cape school board meeting ends in protest | Cape Gazette

Continue reading

08/17/21

Defeat “COVID” Mandates by Restoring the Genuine Meaning of the “Privileges and Immunities” and “Due Process” Clauses

By: Publius Huldah

Our Constitution of 1787 is a glorious Document.  But we didn’t read it, we didn’t adhere to its genuine meaning, and we permitted judges to redefine its terms.  We must put a stop to that.  The following draft 1 Resolution for State and local governments shows how, by restoring the genuine meanings of the “privileges and immunities” and “due process” clauses, we can defeat “COVID” tyranny.

Right to Freedom from “COVID” mandates – Model Resolution for State and local governments

I. The Law

WHEREAS, our Declaration of Independence is the Fundamental Act of our Founding and part of the Organic Law of our Land, and recognizes that our Rights come from the Creator God; that among these Rights are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness; and further, that the purpose of government is to secure the Rights God gave us; and

WHEREAS, the Constitution of the United States is one of enumerated powers only; and We The People did not grant to the federal government power over the Country at Large to interfere in medical or health matters;  to dictate that injections be administered to The People; to impose quarantines or “lock-downs” for real or pretended diseases; to establish internment (concentration) camps for the purpose of confining whomsoever the federal government wishes to confine; to require that The People wear devices such as face masks, or to obtain and carry internal passports; or to exercise any other such control over the sanctity of our persons; and

WHEREAS, the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States provides,

“Congress shall make no law … abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble…”; and

WHEREAS, the privileges and immunities clauses of the Constitution of the United States provide:

“The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.” (Article IV, § 2)

“…No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States…” (§1 of the Fourteenth Amendment); and

WHEREAS, the due process clauses of the Constitution of the United States provide:

At the Fifth Amendment, that “No person shall…be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…”; and

Continue reading

06/22/21

The FBI is the KGB

By: Cliff Kincaid | America’s Survival

Pro-family activist Arthur Schaper discusses his encounter with FBI agents who showed up at his door to grill him about the events of January 6. He wasn’t there when military veteran Ashli Babbitt was murdered by the Capitol Police, but they wanted to question him anyway. It’s another indication that the FBI has become an enforcement arm of the Biden regime’s imposition of Cultural Marxism on the nation. Schaper was apparently monitored by the FBI because his group rescues young people from the clutches of sexual militants and seeks to restore Christian traditions of morality to America. Both Schaper and ASI TV host Cliff Kincaid discuss the abolition of the FBI.

01/4/21

What the Constitution REQUIRES Congress to do on January 6, 2021

By: Publius Huldah

  1. The Rule of Law is being erased in our Land

Several years ago, I saw a movie on TV.  The setting was Berlin, Germany just after WWII at the time the Soviets were laying rolls of barbed wire on the ground to mark the border between East and West Berlin.  The main characters were a young American woman and a young German man. He had gotten a law degree while Hitler was taking over Germany, but he never practiced law.  She asked him why and he said, “The Law disappeared”.

And that’s what’s going on in our Country:  The Law – as the standard which those in government must obey – has disappeared and is being replaced by the age-old system where those with the power do what they want, and the cowards go along with it.

Just as the cowards in Germany went along with Hitler; cowards in America are going along with the Left’s brazen theft of the recent election.  Countries are destroyed by such cowards; and that may be the reason Revelation 21:8 lists cowards as the first to be thrown into the Lake of Fire:  Tyrants couldn’t get to first base without the acquiescence of cowards.

So this paper calls upon each Member of Congress to rise up and restore the Rule of Law to our Land.Knowledge of Truth – and the Love of Truth – makes us strong.  So, learn the Truth, embrace it, and restore the Rule of Law.

  1. We must read each Part of the Constitution in the Light cast by the other Parts

It is impossible to understand any part of the Constitution without understanding how that Part fits into the Whole; and how each individual Part is affected by the other Parts addressing the same subject. Accordingly, it is an ancient rule of construction that constitutional provisions or statutes that are on the same subject (in pari materia) must be construed together [link].

So it is a serious misconstruction of the 12th Amendment to assert that Congress’s role on January 6 is the passive one of merely counting numbers; or that the Presiding Officer has the discretion to do whatever he wants.

As shown below, specific provisions of the Constitution impose on Congress the Duty to determine whether the Electors were lawfully chosen; and whether the putative President-elect and Vice-President-elect are qualified for office.

  1. When it meets on January 6, Congress must enforce these Constitutional provisions respecting the Appointment of Electors

Article I, §4, clause 1; Article II, §1, clause 2; and Article II, §1, clause 4

Art. I, §4, cl. 1 says that only state and federal legislatures have the power to make laws addressing the Times, Places, and Manner of conducting federal elections.  So Judges and State executive officials have no lawful authority to change the election laws made by the Legislatures!

Art. II, §1, cl. 2 says that the Electors for President and Vice-President are to be appointed in such manner as the State Legislatures shall direct.  So Judges and State executive officials have no lawful authority to change the election laws respecting how the Electors are to be chosen!

So Electors who were appointed in violation of these two provisions were unlawfully appointed and hence are not legally competent to cast votes for President and Vice President.

Art. II, §1, cl. 4 provides that Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors.  At 3 USC §1, Congress set the time for chusing Electors for November 3.  So Electors who were appointed after November 3 by means of late ballots (which was made possible by unconstitutional changes to state election laws which unlawfully extended the deadlines for receiving ballots past Nov. 3) were unlawfully appointed and hence are not legally competent to cast votes for President and Vice President. 2

  1. Congress must also enforce these Constitutional provisions respecting the qualifications for the Offices of President and Vice-President

Article II, §1, clause 5

Art. II, §1, cl. 5 sets forth qualifications for the Office of President.  After our first generation of Presidents [who were all born as subjects of the King of England] had passed away; the qualifications for President are that he must be a “natural born citizen”, at least 35 years of age, and have been for at least 14 Years a Resident within the United States.

The last sentence of the 12th Amendment shows that no person who is ineligible to be President is eligible to be Vice-President. 3

The 22nd Amendment

The 22nd Amendment imposes term limits on the office of the President.  So any person who has already served two terms is constitutionally ineligible to be President.

The 20th Amendment, §3

§3 of the 20th Amendment addresses what happens when the President-elect and/or Vice-President-elect “fail to qualify”. So §3 underlines Art. II, §1, cl. 5; the last sentence of the 12th Amendment; and the 22nd Amendment: If the President-elect or the Vice-President-elect “fail to qualify”, they are to be passed over.

So!  The Constitutional scheme is that the Electors’ choice is subject to Congress’ determinations of:

  • whether the requirements of Art. I, §4, cl. 1; Art. II, §1, cl.2; and Art. II, §1, cl. 4 were obeyed when the Electors were selected; and
  • whether the persons whom the Electors chose meet the requirements of Art. II, §1, cl. 5; the last sentence of the 12th Amendment, and the term limits provision of the 22nd

If not, Congress must disqualify the persons.

  1. Congress is also bound by these Constitutional provisions

The Guaranty clause at Article IV, §4

Art. IV, § 4 says:

“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government…” [emphasis added]

Since the essence of a “Republic” is that power is exercised by representatives elected by The People; 4 the violations of Art. I, §4, cl. 1; Art. II, §1, cl. 2; and Art. II, §1, cl.4  (which made massive election fraud possible) strike at the heart of our Constitutional Republic.

When Electors are selected in violation of our Constitution by means of last minutes changes unlawfully made to state election laws; and/or an election is stolen by means of fraud, the Right of The People to choose their Representatives is taken away from them – and the Republic is destroyed.

Art. IV, §4 imposes on Congress the Duty to guarantee lawful and honest federal elections.  Congress can do this by enforcing Art. I, §4, cl. 1; Art. II, §1, cl.2; and Art. II, §1, cl. 4 by disqualifying the Electors chosen in contravention of those provisions.

Congress may (and should) also disqualify Biden and Harris on the additional ground that their pretended election was procured by cheating.  They must be stripped of their sham “win”. 5

The Supremacy clause at Article VI, cl. 2

Art. VI, cl. 2 says:     

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof…shall be the supreme Law of the Land…” [italics added]

Only those Acts of Congress which are consistent with the Constitution are part of the supreme Law of the Land. 6

Accordingly, Sections 5 and 15 of the Electoral Count Act (3 USC §§1-21), are unconstitutional to the extent they purport to:

  • require Congress to accept slates of Electors who were appointed in violation of Art. I, §4, cl.1; Art. II, §1, cl. 2; and Art. II, §1, cl. 4;
  • require Congress, in the case of dueling slates of Electors, to choose the slate signed by the Governor of the State and reject the slate approved by the State Legislature; 7 and
  • eliminate the 12th Amendment’s dispute resolution procedures under which the House of Representatives chooses the President, and the Senate chooses the Vice-President. 8  

But, contrary to what some have asserted, the 12th Amendment most manifestly does NOT vest exclusive authority and sole discretion in the President of the Senate (Vice-President Mike Pence) to determine which slates of Electors for a State are to be counted and which slates are to be rejected!

As President of the Senate, the Vice-President has certain Parliamentary powers at his disposal; but he has no “discretion” in deciding whether he will adhere to the Constitutional framework governing the Election.  He – and every other Member of Congress – must adhere to and enforce each Constitutional provision.

The Oath of Office at Article VI, cl. 3

Every Member of Congress is bound by Oath or Affirmation to support our Constitution.  On January 6, you must lay aside all personal considerations.  Do your DUTY as set forth in the Constitution.  And remember:  This isn’t about Trump – this is about whether our Republic is to survive.  If you permit violations of the Constitution and the resulting fraud to prevail; you will destroy our Republic.

  1. Our Constitution sets up an elegant system of checks and balances

One of the benefits of the “separation of powers” principle is that it provides a mechanism for one power to correct violations made by another power. Within the federal and state governments, powers are divided into three Branches: Legislative, Executive, and Judicial.  Each Branch has the duty to “check” the violations of the other Branches.

Likewise, the power of the State governments is separated from the power of the federal government.  When people within State governments violate the Constitution – as was done in the recent election – it is the Duty of the federal government to “check” the violation.  Since Electors were chosen in violation of the Constitution; Congress has the Duty to check the violations and reject those Electors.

Endnotes:

1 The term, “rule of law”, is defined here at Point 7.

2 The same Principle applies to Electors who were chosen before Nov. 3 pursuant to [unconstitutional] state election laws which permit early voting for selection of Electors.

3 It appears that at the time Kamala Harris was born, her parents were not US Citizens.  If so, she is constitutionally ineligible to be President or Vice-President [link].  Congress has the duty to inquire into this matter; and if they find that she is not a “natural born citizen” within the original intent of Art. II, §1, cl.5, it is Congress’ Duty to disqualify her.  Congress is the body that is charged with determining the eligibility of the President and Vice-President [link].

4 Federalist No. 10 (J. Madison): “A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, … *** … The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; …”

5 If you win a medal at the Olympics, and it’s later discovered that you cheated by taking performance-enhancing drugs, you will be stripped of “win” and medal – and both will be awarded to your runner-up. The same principle applies to stolen elections.

6 Federalist No. 78, 10th para (A. Hamilton): “…every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; ….” [emphasis mine]

7 Art. II, §1, cl. 2 provides that the State Legislatures have the power to direct how the Electors are to be appointed!  The State Governor has no constitutional power whatsoever in the selection of Presidential Electors!

8 To the same effect, see the Complaint recently filed by US Representative Louie Gohmert [link].

12/30/20

Article IV, §4, US Constitution REQUIRES Congress, the Supreme Court, and the President to Stop the Steal!

By: Publius Huldah

Here is the interview Alex Newman of The New American Magazine and I did on December 23.

  1. The Supreme Court’s Dereliction of Duty

The Pennsylvania Lawsuit

As pointed out in the interview [and previously here], Art. I, §4, cl. 1, US Constitution, delegates to state and federal legislatures alone the power to make the laws addressing the “times, places and manner” of conducting federal elections.  In addition, Art. II, §1, cl. 2 provides that the State Legislatures are to decide how the Presidential Electors for their State are to be appointed.

But in Pennsylvania (and other States), Judges and State Executive Branch officials changed the laws made by their State Legislature in order to permit fraud of such a massive scale as would enable the theft of the election for the Biden/Harris ticket.  Accordingly, during late September, the Republican Party of Pennsylvania filed a lawsuit challenging the unconstitutional changes to the State election laws. They lost in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and asked the US Supreme Court to review it.

But the Supreme Court dragged its feet.  So on October 28, Justice Alito (who is the “go-to” Justice for the US Circuit in which Pennsylvania is located), issued a statement [link] where he identified violations of Art. I, §4, cl. 1 and Art. II, §1, cl. 2 as an issue of “national importance” which “calls out for review” by the Supreme Court; and that the Court should decide this issue BEFORE the election.  He warned that the Supreme Court’s inaction on the “important constitutional issue” raised in the lawsuit has created conditions that could lead to “serious post-election problems.”

Justices Thomas and Gorsuch joined Justice Alito in his Statement – but nobody else.

The Supreme Court still hasn’t announced whether they will review the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. They set this case for conference (among themselves) on January 8 [link] – which is two days after Congress meets to count the votes.

The Texas Lawsuit

The Supreme Court’s handling of the Texas lawsuit was equally egregious.  The Texas case alleged that using COVID-19 as an excuse, state government officials in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin usurped their State Legislature’s authority and unconstitutionally revised their State’s election statutes.  These changes made massive election fraud possible.  The Complaint sets forth compelling facts alleging the massive and coordinated fraud used to steal the November 3 election.

But the Supreme Court refused to hear the case, claiming that Texas “lacked standing” to bring the action.  They were dead wrong.  Here’s why:

Article IV, §4, US Constitution, says:

“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government…”

The essence of a “Republic” is that sovereign power is exercised by representatives elected by The People.1   Accordingly, the violations of Art. I, §4, cl. 1 and Art. II, §1, cl. 2 – which made the massive election fraud possible – strike at the heart of our Constitutional Republic.

Obviously, when an election is stolen by corrupt politicians and political parties – with the connivance of Judges and State election officials – the Right of The People to choose their Representatives is taken away from them.

And this is why the State of Texas has “standing” to bring the lawsuit: Art. IV, §4, is for the benefit of the States who comprise this Union. The States created the federal government when they ratified the Constitution.  The Supreme Court is merely the “creature” of that Constitution, and they may not lawfully act in contravention of the Document under which they hold their existence.

The US Supreme Court is required to act so as to preserve the Republican Form of Government for Texas and all other States.   They shirked their Duty.  Shame on the Supreme Court!

  1. Attorney General William Barr’s Dereliction of Duty

Article IV, §4 also imposes on the US Attorney General – as part of the Executive Branch of the federal government – the Duty “to guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government…”

Accordingly, the Attorney General has the Duty to prosecute persons engaged in federal election fraud; and he has the Duty to file civil actions addressing the election fraud – such as suggested by constitutional litigators William J. Olson & Patrick M. McSweeney in their Christmas Eve article here.

But not only did Barr not lift a finger to fight the fraud – he denied there was any fraud. He too shirked his constitutional Duty.  Shame on William Barr!

  1. Will Congress also shirk their Constitutional Duty?

Article IV, §4 also imposes on Congress the Duty to guarantee to the States a Republican Form of Government.

Section 3 of the 20th Amendment imposes on Congress the additional Duty of determining whether the President-Elect and Vice President-Elect have “qualified” for office [respecting that, this short post will help you].

Congress has the ability to perform its sacred Duty under Art. IV, §4, by disqualifying Biden and Harris on the basis that their election was procured by changes to State election laws made in violation of Art. I, §4, cl. 1 and Art. II, §1, cl. 2, which made possible the brazen fraud which resulted in the theft of the election for Biden and Harris.

Kamala Harris should be disqualified on the additional ground that she is not a “natural born citizen” as required by Art. II, §1, cl. 5 and the 12th Amendment [link].

But shockingly, it appears that some Republicans in Congress intend to go along with the fraud, and will use as an excuse the silly claim that presidential elections are up to the States and Congress shouldn’t bully the States!

But that would constitute aiding and abetting of election fraud, and a shirking of Constitutional Duties.  Congress!  Do not strip The American People of their right to honest federal elections!

  1. The Fraudulent Election is an Act of War against the People of the United States

This was not just another election.  This was a planned and coordinated attack on the People of the United States. If we don’t defeat the fraud, the People of the United States will have been stripped of their sovereign power to choose their own Representatives. 2

This is an Insurrection against the sovereign power of WE THE PEOPLE. Traitors within our local, state, and federal governments have conspired with one another – and apparently foreign agents – to take our sovereign power away from us.  And cowards are going along with it.

  1. President Trump has constitutional and statutory authority to carry out the duty imposed on him by Art. IV, §4

If, when it meets on January 6, Congress too shirks its constitutional Duty to guarantee honest federal elections and refuses to disqualify Biden & Harris; then the President is our last hope (within the purview of the Constitution). 3 Not only does Art. IV, §4 impose this duty on the President; he is also bound by his Oath of Office to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” (Art. II, §1, last clause); and, by Art. II, §3, to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”.  These three provisions impose upon him the duty to act so as to preserve the Federal Constitutional Republic created by our Constitution of 1787.

And he has the constitutional and statutory authority to carry out his Duty:

Call up the Militia!

Article I, §8, cl. 15 authorizes Congress

…“to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;” [italics added]

Congress “provided for” calling forth the Militia by delegating to the President the authority to use his own judgment respecting whether to send the Militia into any State:

  • To enforce the Laws of the United States [10 USC §252];
  • To suppress uprisings which deprive the people of the rights, privileges, and immunities, and protections recognized in the Constitution and secured by law, and the State government isn’t protecting those rights [10 USC §253]; and
  • To suppress uprisings that oppose or obstruct the execution of the laws of the United States or impede the course of justice under those laws [10 USC §253].

So the Militia may be called forth:

  • To enforce I, §4, cl.1 (which requires that only state and federal Legislatures may make laws respecting the times, places, and manner of holding federal elections);
  • To enforce II, §1, cl.2 (which provides that the State Legislatures are to decide how the Presidential Electors for their State are to be appointed);
  • To enforce IV, §4 (which requires the United States to guarantee to the States a Republican Form of Government); and
  • To suppress the Insurrection which is right now going on in our Country.

A Brief History of the Militia

The term, “Militia”, refers to the armed and trained male Citizens.  The Militia Act of 1792 provided for the arming and training of these male Citizens [link]. Our Framers did not want a standing professional Army – that’s why appropriations for the regular Army were limited to two years (Art. I, §8, cl. 12).  Enforcement of federal laws, suppression of Insurrections, and much of the national defense were to be the responsibility of the MilitiaWhen the federal gov’t needs to enforce its laws, it is to call forth the Militia – the armed and trained Citizens – to do the enforcing!   During the Washington Administration, the federal gov’t called forth the Militia to enforce the federal excise tax on whiskey. Federal law enforcement is thus the province of the Citizens – the Militia! 4

But with the Dick Act of 1903, the organized Militia was converted into the National Guard – which is an adjunct of the federal military.  And with 10 USC § 246, Congress redefined “Militia” to consist of two classes:

“(b) The classes of the militia are—

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.”

Earlier this year, in response to the violent Insurrections in the cities, Edwin Vieira, JD., Ph.D. (our Country’s foremost authority on the Militia) showed here how President Trump has the authority to send the Militia into the cities to suppress the Insurrections.  But as discussed here [at endnote 11], President Trump’s two previous Secretaries of Defense apparently indicated that they would not obey orders to send the National Guard into the cities.  Will Chris Miller, the present acting Secretary of Defense, be any better?

But if President Trump calls up “the unorganized militia” – which remains in existence as recognized by 10 USC §246 and which has his back – to enforce Art. I, §4, cl.1; Art. II, §1, cl.2, and Art. IV, §4 – he doesn’t need the cooperation of any deep state Secretaries of Defense.

  1. Calling up the Militia is not equivalent to imposing “martial law”!

I implore Patriots to become precise in their use of terminology.  Calling up the Militia for the purposes at Art. I, §8, cl. 15 is not “imposing martial law” [and it’s not “Marshall law”]!  Martial Law is typically imposed during wartime when invading military forces disband civilian governments [including the courts] in the occupied country and replace the civilian government with direct military control of civilian populations.

  1. What is “the rule of law”?

The “rule of law” is a term which politicians and Attorneys General, who have no idea what it means, love to sling around:  In his recent address to students at Hillsdale College, former Attorney General Barr said the “rule of law” means “treating everyone the same”. That’s not even close.

Law comes from a higher source than the civil authorities. The “Rule of Law” prevails when the civil authorities obey that higher Law – be it God’s Law or our Constitution.  The Bible shows that Kings governed justly only when they governed in accordance with the Law of God.  In our country, the civil authorities govern justly only when they obey our Constitution.  See: Lex, Rex, by Rev. Samuel Rutherford (1644) and here under the subheading, “1. The Civil Authorities are under the Law.”

  1. This isn’t about Trump – it’s about defending our Constitutional Republic from enemy attack

It doesn’t matter what you or I think of President Trump: there is much to criticize about his policies.  This fight is about whether our Republican Form of Government, with honest & verifiable elections, is to be restored; or whether our Right to choose our Representatives is to be stripped from us forever.

Endnotes:

1 Federalist No. 10 (J. Madison) [link]: “A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, … *** … The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; …”

2 “…The fabric of American empire ought to rest on the solid basis of THE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE. The streams of national power ought to flow immediately from that pure, original fountain of all legitimate authority.”  Federalist No. 22, last para (A. Hamilton).  This is what we will lose if Congress and the President permit the cheats and subversives to get away with the election fraud.

3 If Congress and the President both shirk their Constitutional duties and “betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense …” Federalist No. 28 (A. Hamilton).  Much blood will be on the hands of those who acquiesced in the fraud.

4 Not armed thugs from federal executive agencies such as the FBI, BATF, etc., etc., etc.!

12/12/20

A Republic If We Can Keep It

By: T.F. Stern | Self-Educated American

(Image of Ben Franklin courtesy of factfile.org)

This past month has been a roller coaster ride for anyone trying to figure out which candidate actually won the election. I was tempted to use the term ‘earned’ rather than won; but that would give away my feelings about cheaters, swindlers, liars, and the rest of the Democrat Party.

Ben Franklin has been quoted when asked if we had a monarchy or a republic, “A Republic if you can keep it.” He may or may not have actually said those words exactly as history has claimed. Rather than share without having done my homework, I looked it up. The first reference that came up on Google was from the Washington Post’s coverage of last year’s phony impeachment hearings, a treasonous coup attempt to remove President Donald Trump.

The inclusion of Ben Franklin’s quote in that particular article is… interesting, well, actually far beyond interesting; but I can’t print my actual thought as it violates decency in many ways.

There was a coup attempt, masquerading as an impeachment hearing by the Democrat Party to remove the sitting President of our Constitutional Republic and they’re quoting Ben Franklin… un-bye-god-believable!

I can say it was a phony impeachment hearing because evidence has since come to light; the entire investigation into Trump’s dealings with Russia was in fact a creation, a fabrication, or a scheme cooked up by Hillary Clinton to take her out of the spotlight for her illegal private server, a felony.

An article by Steve Nelson in the New York Post dated October 6, 2020, explained the timing. That story didn’t make the rounds of the major news networks, gee-whiz; is anyone surprised?

“Ratcliffe’s initial disclosure said that, according to Brennan’s notes, Clinton allegedly approved the scheme on July 26. The minor inaccuracy shortens the window of time between Clinton’s alleged approval of the plot and the FBI opening its investigation of possible Trump-Russia collusion on July 31, 2016.”

Amazingly, the FBI and DOJ didn’t see any wrongdoing and Hillary Clinton walked away, free to continue as if nothing ever happened. I haven’t done the research; but somewhere down the line, the folks who didn’t see anything wrong with Hillary Clinton’s criminal behavior must have ties to the deaf, dumb and blind Justices on our Supreme Court.

This past week the Supreme Court of the United States declined to hear a lawsuit contesting corrupt and fraudulent elections that affect all other states. Only two of the sitting Justices were willing to hear the evidence while the others did absolutely nothing to uphold the integrity of the election process which determines who will be President.

Saddened would be a mild description of how many American citizens feel at this time.

Here’s Allen West’s statement dated December 11, 2020, as Chairman of the Texas Republican Party’s official response:

“The Supreme Court, in tossing the Texas lawsuit that was joined by seventeen states and 106 US congressman, has decreed that a state can take unconstitutional actions and violate its own election law. Resulting in damaging effects on other states that abide by the law, while the guilty state suffers no consequences. This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable. This decision will have far-reaching ramifications for the future of our constitutional republic. Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution.”

Where does that leave us?

Some have suggested forming a new nation, one that actually follows the Constitution while the remaining nation of criminals, liars, and thieves go on doing business as usual.  Perhaps that would work, but a nation divided cannot stand.

My thoughts turned to Captain Moroni, the last prophet in the Book of Mormon in charge of the sacred plates around 400 AD (you’ll notice I refuse to refer to it as CE for Common Era). He was instructed by the Lord to bury the sacred records in the Hill Cumorah near Palmyra, New York, so they could come forth in our day. Moroni witnessed the destruction of his people because of their iniquity and their refusal to repent, to follow the commandments, and come unto the Lord, Jesus Christ… and yet, he remained faithful, even joyful in his mortal life.

The honest hard-working individuals who try to do their best each day… have had the rug pulled out from under them, but will eventually understand what has happened. It is my hope we will endure in spite of the corruption that’s taken over, the attacks to destroy liberties that God has provided. Do we have the courage to be as Captain Moroni, to have hope, faith, and charity in spite of all that is going on around us? Ahhh, that’s a true test that we’ve been given.

With all that is happening, it makes me admire the wisdom of our founders, individuals like Ben Franklin who recognized the wondrous miracle of our newly formed Republic; that and his warning… if we can keep it.


t-f-stern-1Self-Educated American, Senior Edi­tor, T.F. Stern is both a retired City of Hous­ton police offi­cer and, most recently, a retired self-employed lock­smith (after serving that industry for 40 plus years). He is also a gifted polit­i­cal and social com­men­ta­tor. His pop­u­lar and insight­ful blog, T.F. Sterns Rant­i­ngs, has been up and at it since January of 2005.