Kamala Harris accepts with honor the Support of ‘Hanoi Jane’ and as a Vietnam Vet I find that repulsive! No veteran should support the Harris Biden t Ticket!


The hypocrisy of Harris on respect for fallen soldiers and war vets is jaw-dropping

Kamala Harris To Join ‘Hanoi Jane’ Fonda In ‘Yell Room’ Campaign Event

Judi McLeod image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 25, 2020

Kamala Harris To Join ‘Hanoi Jane’ Fonda In ‘Yell Room’ Campaign Event

Hanoi Jane Fonda will, in effect, ride her anti-aircraft gun photo straight through the Democrat presidential campaign tomorrow.

“Democratic vice-presidential candidate Kamala Harris is set to join Fonda at a Saturday virtual event held by progressive advocacy group Supermajority. The event—titled “Supercharge: Women All In”—will “bring together thousands of women to laugh, sing, dance, and celebrate women’s political power,” according to the group’s website.” (Washington Free Beacon, Sept. 23, 2020)

Included in this anti-vet, anti-American event celebrating “women’s political power” is a “yelling room where participants are encouraged to scream out their emotions,” according to event organizers.

Screaming out their emotions is what innumerable leftist women are prone to do, as witnessed in many Tweets and YouTubes since mob rule took over city streets. (See Below)

Imagine the one and the same Biden campaign, which has smeared President Donald Trump with false accusations about his lack of respect for U.S. soldiers, will be out there campaigning this weekend with Jane Fonda—a celebrity best known for fraternizing with enemy troops during the Vietnam War!

“Fonda traveled to North Vietnam in 1972 as part of an anti-war protest that saw her pose for photos with enemy troops on an anti-aircraft gun. The photo sparked outrage among Vietnam veterans, earning her the nickname “Hanoi Jane.” Fonda’s public appearances remain subject to controversy—a group of Ohio veterans called on the actress to donate her $83,000 speaking fee to the families of fallen soldiers ahead of a May appearance at Kent State University. (Washington Free Beacon)

“Harris and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden have criticized President Donald Trump on veterans’ issues in recent weeks. During a September “veterans roundtable,” Biden criticized Trump for ignoring “the bounty on the heads of Americans in Afghanistan,” referencing a slew of June reports that claimed Russia bribed the Taliban to kill U.S. servicemen. One day before the roundtable, Marine Corps general Frank McKenzie—who oversees military operations in the region—told NBC News that a review of U.S. intelligence failed to corroborate the alleged bounties.

Fonda’s financial help to Sen. Harris speaks much louder than Harris’ signature Clintonesque giggle:

“Fonda has long supported Harris financially, contributing nearly $6,000 to the Democrat’s Senate campaign since 2016. The actress also gave $1,000 to the Biden Victory Fund in June after donating a combined $10,300 to Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) and Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.), Democratic governors Steve Bullock (Mont.) and Jay Inslee (Wash.), and billionaire Tom Steyer during the presidential primary. (Washington Free Beacon)

“Saturday’s event will also be attended by Warren, twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.), and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.). Supermajority was launched in 2019 by a group of progressive activists, including former Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards and Black Lives Matter cofounder Alicia Garza. The group has raised $2.5 million in 2020, with $2 million coming from liberal billionaire George Soros’s Democracy PAC.

“Supermajority aims to train and mobilize “a community of all ages, races, and backgrounds to fight for gender equality together,” according to its website.

“Fonda in 2017 said she does not regret her trip to Hanoi during the Vietnam War but does regret the infamous photo with North Vietnamese troops. She added that while she is not “proud of America today,” she is “proud of the resistance.”

“I’m proud of the people who are turning out in unprecedented numbers and continue over and over again to protest what Trump is doing. I’m very proud of them, that core,” Fonda said.

In her promotion of the roundtable in a tweet, the hypocrisy of Harris on respect for fallen soldiers and war vets is jaw-dropping:

“American veterans sacrifice so much for our nation and deserve our respect and gratitude, both while on active duty and after.”

Maybe she’ll wear her Timberland boots in her ‘yell room’ screech with Jane Fonda tomorrow.

How Cultural Marxism is Grinding Down America’s Public Schools


Public-funded education is advancing communism in America one little Marxist at a time

John Eidson image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 25, 2020

How Cultural Marxism is Grinding Down America's Public SchoolsCultural Marxism is the gradual process of grinding down western democracies by subverting the pillars of their culture, the structures and institutions of family, religion, education, politics, law, the arts and the media, as they provide the social cohesion necessary to a functioning society. Undermine the principles these structural institutions embody, and a capitalist society can be overthrown from within without firing a shot. Like termites eating away at the foundation of a house, cultural Marxists in our midst have plotted since the 1960s to radically transform every cultural institution in America, including its secondary education system.

Those who think the threat of communism ended when the Soviet Union collapsed would be shocked to know what’s being taught decades later in many of America’s schools. In “Bill Ayers, the Critical Pedagogy Movement and Cultural Marxism,” author Geoffrey Brittain wrote this:

In many of our public schools, young, impressionable children are no longer being taught to feel good about being Americans. Their school teachers, who traditionally embody socially approved values, are teaching them to be ashamed of being Americans. Spreading out from the schools that teach our teachers, this ideology is being inculcated into our nation’s K-12 schools and is anti-American in the most profound meaning of the term. It is a movement that is teaching future generations that capitalism and traditional American values are intrinsically evil. Critical pedagogy and its advocates, in their vehement antipathy toward capitalism, private property and traditional American values, is a classic fifth subversive column, no less dangerous to freedom than communism. Its advocates are seeking to radically transform our society by covertly indoctrinating the young through an essentially clandestine and subversive transformation of its culture.  

What follows are examples of how cultural Marxists in our schools are indoctrinating the young.

Caught on tape: Union teachers discuss pushing communism in the classroom

During a meeting of the Left Forum, two public school teachers were caught on video discussing how to slip communist dogma into classrooms. Wearing a “Tax the Rich” shirt, Sarah Knopp, a Los Angeles high school teacher and teachers union activist who contributes to “The Socialist Review,” and Megan Behrent, a New York City public school teacher affiliated with the International Socialist Organization, participated in a panel discussion about injecting Marxism into classroom instruction.

6th grade lesson plan: Design a flag for a new socialist nation

Across America, activist teachers, nearly all of whom vote Democrat, are pushing communist doctrine on captive young minds, often with the tacit approval of Democrat school administers, Democrat-controlled school boards and the modern Democratic Party.

A progressive-designed lesson plan for 6th graders in Texas public schools read as follows:

Note that socialist/communist nations use symbolism on their flags representing various aspects of their economic system.  Imagine a new socialist nation is creating a flag and you have been put in charge. Use symbolism to represent aspects of socialism/communism on your flag. What kind of symbolism/colors would you use?

If this type of thing is taught in a red state like Texas, the odds are off the charts that communist-themed lesson plans are also being used in other states.

6th grade teacher: “Republicans don’t care about anyone but the rich.”

After telling her 6th grade class that Republicans are stupid, Virginia public school teacher Kristin Martin went on to say that Republicans “don’t care about anyone but wealthy people and businesses,” an absurd claim designed to infect her students with Marxist class resentment.  Martin made her comments on Mar. 6, 2012 as Republicans filed into Powell Elementary School in Fairfax to vote on Super Tuesday.

Virginia 3rd graders required to perform Occupy Wall Street song

During an official event at an elementary school in Virginia, 3rd grade students were required to perform “Part of the 99%,’ a song with an unmistakable political overtone: support of the anti-capitalist Occupy Wall Street protests. In response to an outburst of criticism, school board officials defended the song, saying the district’s schools don’t censor songs children write or try to influence the subjects children write songs about. “It all came out of the kids’ own mouths and the kids’ own words,” said Albemarle County school board chair, Steve Koleszar. Does it appear the song was written by 3rd graders? You decide:

Part of the 99%

Some people have it all
But they still don’t think they have enough
They want more money, a faster ride
They’re not content, never satisfied
Yes, they’re the 1%
I used to be one of the 1%
I worked all the time, never saw my family
Couldn’t make life rhyme, then the bubble burst
It really, really hurt
I lost my money, lost my pride, lost my home
Now I’m one of the 99%

The song accomplished its decidedly anti-American purpose: planting the seeds of Marxist class hatred in the minds of 8-year-olds.

Using Legos to teach communism

Two teachers at a Seattle school banned Legos from the classroom to teach kindergarteners about the alleged evils of private property. Anxious to have the toys returned to the classroom, the children agreed to a new set of guidelines set by their teachers, including these: All structures must be public structures and all structures must be standard size.  Later, the teachers proudly quoted their newly indoctrinated students:

• “A house is good because it is a community house.”

• “We should all have equal houses.”

• “It’s important to have the same power over your building as other people.”

What the 5-year-olds were taught is explained in this Karl Marx quote: “The theory of Communism can be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property.”

Students at Florida college show signs of prior Marxist indoctrination

Valencia College economics professor Jack Chambliss asked his sophomore class two questions on an essay assignment: what does the American Dream look like to you, and how much do you expect the federal government to help you achieve that vision? Eighty percent of his students expect government to provide one or more of the following:

  • Free college education
  • Free health care
  • Guarantee of a good-paying job
  • Money for down-payment on a home
  • Money for retirement

 

The Candace Owens Show: Heather Mac Donald


Police officers have become the targets of violent activists who are seeking to upend America as we know it. Heather Mac Donald, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of The War on Cops, is in the studio this week to break down the myths behind “systemic racism” and “police brutality.” Subscribe so you never miss a new episode! 👉 https://www.prageru.com/series/candace/

Netflix’s Leftist Cuties


Like the Clintons, the Obamas have amassed a considerable fortune from politics. Also like the Clintons, they’re not going away. They continue to have an influence over politics and American culture. By becoming Netflix producers, the Obamas made sure their leftist propaganda gets attention.

Neither Michelle nor Barack have said anything about the Netflix program titled “Cuties,” in which young girls are shown in sexually charged poses on a glitzy stage. Susan Rice, a former Obama advisor, is on the Netflix board. She has also been reticent about what many are calling ‘pedophilia.’ Some say their silence is complicity. I agree.

Under Obama’s administration, the ‘trans’ mania began. Boys at high schools could pretend they were girls and win awards in athletic events. Restrooms suddenly became a problem. Then came the claim that there were dozens of genders and various sexual identifications. Anyone who objected got labeled as haters. Eventually, people became fearful. If they used the wrong pronoun or offended an easily offended trans-whatever, they could be fired, banned, or expelled.

I don’t know if Michelle Obama is a transgender or not. The matter is a long-running internet meme. That meme was reinforced when Joan Rivers casually said Michelle was a ‘tranny’ and that it was ‘okay.’ Days later she was dead. Maybe it was okay to her, but not to other powerful people who wanted to keep it under wraps. Even Barack himself has referred to Michelle as “Michael” on several occasions. There have been many who have said Barack Obama is gay. It’s plausible, but such speculation can also easily lead to social media bans.

Now the lying mass media are denouncing Q and his followers. They ridicule those who think there is such as thing as child trafficking and pedophilia occurring among the elite and powerful. Anyone who claims there are plenty of pedophiles pulling top levers of power must obviously be a conspiracy theorist, according to CNN, MSNBC, and all the rest. Yet a lot of evidence does exist. Epstein’s “Orgy Island,” for example.

The fact that the Obamas did not exert influence to stop a show containing obvious pedophilia can only mean they are complicit. Perhaps they want pedophilia to be normalized just as they wanted sexual dysphoria normalized. Meanwhile, they and their colleagues are doing their best to shut down Christians who object.

—Ben Garrison

Who pays for the damage brought by Black Lives Matter/Antifa?


Question: What American political entity has that relationship to BLM/Antifa? 
Answer: The Democrat National Committee, et. al.  And you might as well sue Mao.

Lee Cary image

Re-Posted from the Conservative Tree house By  —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 20, 2020

 

Who pays for the damage brought by Black Lives Matter/Antifa?

Three posts from July 23-August 8, from this author, compare China’s Cultural Revolution to Black Lives Matter/Antifa.  The series began with:

“The Chinese Communist Party’s Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) was the precursor to today’s urban protests involving Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifa. As America’s Cancel Culture spread into several Big Blue Cities, largely governed by Democrat politicians for decades, city officials stood back and let it happen.” (Links to parts 12, and 3.)

China: During the winter of 1978-79, many victims of the Red Guards’ violence against people and property led to “a spate of highly personalized appeals for redress of grievances written by (or on behalf of) ordinary citizens who had suffered abuse at the hands of Leftists during the Cultural Revolution.’’ (”Burying Mao, Chinese politics in the Age of Deng Xiaoping,” Richard Baum, Princeton University Press, ©1994, p. 76)

Frustrated by long delays in receiving any response from Beijing, “thousands descended upon Beijing personally to press their grievances.  With official channels clogged and response times painfully slow, many petitioners took to the streets, posting handwritten appeals (known as xiaozibao, or ‘small character posters’) at Xidan, Tiananmen, and elsewhere…Most of the petitioners who descended on Beijing were poor, many were in dire straits. Some had traveled long distances on foot, carrying their possessions in knotted bundles; others had hitched rides into the cities on freight trains or trucks…In all, more than 100,000 out-of-towners descended upon Beijing and Shanghai in 1979, hoping to have their cases reopened…Despite government pledges to review all appeals objectively and impartially, many petitioners complained of receiving unfair treatment.” (Baum, p.76)

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP), led by Chairman Mao Zedong, planned and launched the Cultural Revolution.

America: In the wake of the 2007-08 financial failure in America the saying that applied to the big banking institutions was: “Too big to fail.”
In the wake of the damage done by China’s Cultural Revolution, it was: “Too big to blame.”

What will we say when BLM/Antifa is over?

In the wake of the on-going damage to people and private property brought upon many of America’s Big Blue Cities (BBC) at the hands of (1) BLM street posters involving many white, both male and female, virtue-signalers between 17-27 years old, march through residential neighborhoods late at night, stall daytime traffic in downtown areas, and verbally intimidate evening diners in outdoor restaurants, paired up with (2) Antifa thugs dressed in all black who excel at destroying property and beating-up weaker people, we wonder: What will be America’s version of “The Petitioners’ Movement” in post-Cultural Revolution China?  

China: The Petitioner’s Movement happened when Chinese victims of the Red Guard sought redress for damages done to them and their property.  They eventually went to Beijing for redress, because they knew that’s where it all started.

The unspoken mantra for China’s Petitioners’ Movement was, essentially: “We can’t blame any one person, because that would mean blaming Chairman Mao. And he lives above blame.”

America: Can we count on the U.S. Department of Justice to prosecute and, when guilt is proven, punish those in the BLM/Antifa movement who injured persons and damaged private property?

Can we expect the Democrat-elected prosecutors in the BBCs to indict and try those who injured persons, and destroyed property? Perhaps a few—those not elected with Soros money.

So, who will hold those accountable for the carnage that continues to mount-up in the run-up to the General Election, and may escalate after November 3?

China: The CCP led by Mao Zedong gave the green-light to China’s Cultural Revolution.  Then stood back, and watched it unfold assuming a life of its own, free of any one person’s control.

It was to the CCP that many of the Cultural Revolution’s victims petitioned for redress for the physical and material damages they sustained. They knew the source, but prudence meant not saying it out loud.

America: Who will Americans petition for redress for the damages that BLM/Antifa brought into their communities?

Shall claims be directed at the big corporations, foundations, and wealthy individuals who seek to buy virtue by donating big money to the BLM/Antifa Movement? (Operationally, the organizations are two heads of the same snake.)

Should victims of the BLM/Antifa movement petition the U.S. Government for damages?  That would be like suing the United States Postal Service if one of their trucks hits your new car.

Perhaps those insurance companies that pay out tens-of-millions in damages to looted chain stores will consider recouping part of their loss by suits aimed at BLM’s growing financial assets?  But, no, that would tarnish their corporate image by putting the patina of white supremacists on their brand.

That leaves those small, independent businesses that sustained damage to seek redress at the local level. The same local level that let it happen.

Those physically and materially injured by BLM/Antifa may sue their local Blue government for not dispatching their tax-funded Police Departments to bring order to the chaos when it first began, instead of letting it get out of control. Perhaps some of the defunded police money could go to the destroyed small businesses. Or not.

Problem is, more than a few of those municipalities run perilously close to bankruptcy.  (See Chicago and NYC.)

To restate the question: How will America’s version of China’s “Petitioners’ Movement” seek to redress the damages done to persons and property by BLM/Antifa

In short, who pays?

In China, little was done for the victims of the Cultural Revolution. It was born a child of the one-and-only political party, and conceived in the mind of its near deity, Chairman Mao.

Question: What American political entity has that relationship to BLM/Antifa? 

Answer: The Democrat National Committee, et. al.  And you might as well sue Mao.

Why the Left loathes Tucker Carlson


Fox News host reports that Nashville’s Democrat mayor was caught red-handed intentionally obstructing economic recovery

John Eidson image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 20, 2020

Why the Left loathes Tucker Carlson

Using absurd claims that Tucker Carlson is a racist, white supremacist, bigot, etc., etc., etc., the Left has furiously attempted to have his prime-time Fox News show taken off the air. The opening segment of the September 17 edition of Tucker Carlson Tonight is a perfect example of why the left hates his guts.

Citing a breaking report by a local TV station, Carlson revealed that, acting in concert with other high level members of his administration, Nashville’s Democrat mayor intentionally withheld from the public encouraging Covid-19 data that showed an unexpectedly low infection rate at the city’s bars and restaurants. By concealing that information, Mayor John Cooper was able to justify keeping Nashville’s restaurant industry under a virtual lockdown, thus suppressing the city’s economic recovery until after the election. Please watch Tucker’s explosive report, and consider sharing it with your friends. (See Below)

From coast to coast and border to border, Democrat governors and Democrat mayors are making coronavirus decisions that have next to nothing to do with public health, and everything to do with using their official powers to rig the election against President Trump.

When the June jobs report showed the economy was undergoing a brisk recovery, with 4.8 million new jobs added, Democrats panicked. Since then, Democrat mayors and governors have surreptitiously done what Nashville’s mayor did: cook the coronavirus books in ways that retard local economic recovery between now and the election. Much to the delight of Democrats, by August the number of new jobs had fallen from 4.8 million in June to 1.4 million, a drop of 64%. Mission accomplished.

The same kind of disgraceful tactics are being used to delay school openings. Acting in concert with Democrat-controlled school boards, blue city health officials are blocking pre-election school openings to tamp down rising employment numbers by making it difficult for parents with school-aged children to go back to work. No better example of that can be found than in California, where Los Angeles County Health Director, Dr. Barbara Ferrer recently told the press that it’s “not realistic” to open the county’s schools “until after the election.”

Of things that matter to Democrats, public health and economic recovery take a distant back seat to their insatiable desire for ironclad political power.

Leaked files Expose $2.7 trillion Money Laundering by Big Banks


The leaked files have revealed that about $US2.7 trillion in suspected dirty money moving through the global financial system. Because bankers are never prosecuted individually, they will do whatever they can without worry that they will ever be prosecuted and in the meantime, they get huge personal bonuses. If they get caught, the bank pays a fine not them personally. Here the records show that the five main global banks, JPMorgan, HSBC, Standard Chartered Bank, Deutsche Bank, and Bank of New York Mellon, have continued to engage in these practices despite US authorities have previously fined these financial institutions for previous similar dealings in dirty money. As long as the shareholders pay fines and there is never any responsibility for the bankers personally, we should not be surprised by the continued dealings in money laundering.

As long as the New York Department of Justice and the Southern District of New York continue to protect the bankers personally, we will NEVER see and end to this practice. Why should we when the bankers keep their bonuses and the shareholders are the ones who have to pay the fines? Why do the prosecutors and judges allow this to go on?

The government is corrupt for prosecuting the bankers personally does not produce huge fines. It’s all about the money.

Judge Amy Coney Barrett on the Short-List


Appellate Judge Amy Coney Barrett is at the top of the list for replacements for Justice Ginsberg. Like hydroxychloroquine, simply because Trump nominates her she will be vilified. She is a Catholic and already the Democrats are preparing to tear her apart based on her religions. After graduating from the University of Notre Dame’s law school at the very top of her class. In fact, in 1997, she graduated first in her class, which earned her the Hoynes Prize, the Law School’s highest honor which was very impressive with respect to her thinking process.

Amy then worked as a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia who was a strict constructionist. It was Scalia who pushed for reform in the way the courts were treating those charged. The jury was not determining every fact, and Scalia saw this as unconstitutional and argued this position until the rest of the court saw his constitutional argument. Finally, in APPRENDI v. NEW JERSEY No. 99—478. Argued March 28, 2000–Decided June 26, 2000, Scalia defended the citizen’s right to a jury trial which had been eroded by the procedure.

In the Spirit Justice Ginsberg, Amy was the only female law clerk in the Supreme Court at that time. Besides being sitting on the court of appeals, she was also a University of Notre Dame law professor. Ironically, because she has been a dedicated mother of seven, her Catholic faith was turned against her by California Sen. Dianne Feinstein who questioned whether or not she could separate her religious faith from her duty as a judge. “The dogma lives loudly within you,” Feinstein said during the confirmation hearing for the Court of Appeals hearing. Barrett insisted that her professional beliefs and her religious beliefs would be kept separate. Ironically, the right to an abortion is deeply entangled with the right to privacy. In the recent case involving the anti-abortion law in Louisiana(1), even conservative Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. struck it down saying that respect for precedent compelled him to do so.

Roe vWade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects a pregnant woman’s liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction. To understand the foundation of Roe v Wade and why it cannot be overturned without jeopardizing our right to privacy in the face of this contrived pandemic is critical. In 1965, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a law banning the distribution of birth control to married couples, ruling that the law violated their implied right to privacy under the U.S. Constitution, GRISWOLD v. CONNECTICUT, 381 U.S. 479 (1965). How do you enforce that a married couple illegally used a condom during sex? Does an FBI agency have to watch? And in 1972, the Supreme Court struck down a law prohibiting the distribution of contraceptives to unmarried adults. Again, there is no way to enforce such laws without a government agent observing every sexual act.

To overturn Roe v Wade, would mean that the government can order you to take vaccines that violate your religion that even alter your DNA. While I would never condone an abortion personally, my personal belief cannot blind me to support overturning Roe v Wade opening the door to absolute tyranny. To do so would allow someone like Bill Gates to bribe politicians to pass laws to compel women to have Chips inserted to prevent pregnancy. It would be just one tiny step to then compel you to obtain permission from the government to have a child. They could just as easily impose an IQ test and determine you are not qualified to have children. Gates has already funded remote control birth-control by implanting chips into women. He is obsessed with population control.

The US Supreme Court actually upheld the eugenics views of the in Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), where the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., actually ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, “for the protection and health of the state” did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The Supreme Court actually wrote: “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” The Supreme Court has never expressly overturned Buck v. Bell,  274 U.S. 200 (1927). This case has not been overturned, but if it were challenged, then the same right to privacy from which Roe v Wade stands would come into play. Overturn that case, and a lot more tyranny will follow. The only possible way to overturn Roe v Wade must involve the Due Process Right to life and liberty without somehow overturning the right to privacy. That can be a real Pandora’s Box.

Suspension and Delegation Amy Coney Barrett

After reading some of her decisions and this article she wrote regarding the Suspension Clause, I believe she would NOT overturn Roe v Wade simply because of her religion. Here she clearly states that she believes that the statutes involved, which have never been activated since the Civil War domestically, delegate too much discretion to the President. Her reasoning falls in line with Strict Construction championed by Scalia, and therefore I would support her.  I believe the far more important question turns on her view of the power of government. She is not a rubber stamp and that is vital to our liberty in the future. I will note, for those who will say I support here only because she is a conservative nominated by Trump, I reviewed the decisions of Brett Kavanaugh and stated on this blog that I would have voted against his nomination.

POLITICO, the leftist view, as usual, states: “Barrett has stated that “life begins at conception,” according to a 2013 Notre Dame Magazine article. She also said that justices should not be strictly bound by Supreme Court precedents, a deference known as stare decisis, leaving open the possibility that she could vote to overturn Roe v. Wade if seated on the court.” Their view is to hell with every other issue, it’s all about abortion exclusively.

Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi who is in the House, not the Senate which decides appointments to the Supreme Court, has bluntly stated that she doesn’t rule out impeachment to delay Trump’s picks for the Supreme Court. She is so out of her mind and is clearly engaging in the Obstruction of Justice. She is in the House – not the Senate. The House does not preside of these appointments. As a matter of law, she or any senator is not allowed to ask a judge how they would vote on abortion. The Senate is not permitted to nominate a person based upon a prearranged vote. Chief Justice Roberts, a conservative appointed by President Bush, upheld Obamacare. It is often a matter of constitutional law and trying to guess how Barrett will vote exclusively on abortion is impermissible constitutionally. This assumption is discrimination based upon the fact that she is Catholic and has 7 children, two of whom are adopted from Hati.

Diane Feinstein is running again and she 87 while Nancy Pelosi is 80. These two women liberationists from the 60s no longer represent women today. They are traditionally anti-religion and Feinstein’s question of Barrett before illustrates her hatred of not just religion, but the fact that Barrett even has 7 children which she finds obviously disgusting.


  1. JUNE MEDICAL SERVICES L. L. C. ET AL. v. RUSSO

Sunday Talks – Jim Jordan Discusses Potential SCOTUS Replacements for Justice Ginsburg and Other Issues With Durham Probe of FBI/DOJ Conduct…


Representative Jim Jordan gives his perspective and analysis on the passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and his thoughts on her replacement.  Additionally, Jordan discusses the ongoing material in the background of the Durham probe and the potential for investigative findings to surface prior to the election.

.

The SCOTUS pick will be important not just for long-term legal direction, but also for anticipated legal challenges likely to surround ballots, dates, votes and the 2020 election.

Challenges to recent ballot decisions in Pennsylvania and Michigan will likely fast-track to the Supreme Court.  Any 4-4 tie vote in SCOTUS means the lower court ruling will stand.  As expected this is shaping up to be a very interesting election year…

 

.

IMPORTANT – Catherine Engelbrecht of True The Vote Outlines an Election Warning…


Catherine Engelbrecht is a subject matter expert on election issues and potential for fraud.  CTH anticipated the 2020 efforts of Democrats would include wide-scale voter fraud and back in May strongly suggested the Trump campaign begin working closely with True The Vote.

“True the Vote is out with a 30-minute documentary-style national media buy – and complimentary microsite https://truethevote2020.org – to raise awareness of the vast security gaps in election laws and processes all across the country, particularly as it relates to the expansion of vote by mail. The program will air in front of a national audience ahead of Election Day to drive citizens to deter election fraud by personally engaging in the election process, whether it’s through working at the polls, on committees that verify mail-in ballots, or other critical election needs.”

.

Right now those who wish to “fundamentally change” our nation are waging a full frontal assault against our constitutional republic. The bombardment seems overwhelming.

 

As the country’s largest voters’ rights and election integrity organization, True the Vote has been on the front lines of election fraud prevention since its founding in 2009. For more information on all of True the Vote’s efforts, visit truethevote.org.

In order to support the most important political objectives of the DNC writ large in the 2020 election, COVID-19 hype is essential:

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats cannot easily achieve ‘mail-in’ voting; which they desperately need in key battleground states in order to control the outcome.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats cannot shut down rallies and political campaigning efforts of President Trump; which they desperately need to do in key battleground states.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats cannot block the campaign contrast between an energetic President Trump and a physically tenuous, mentally compromised, challenger.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats do not have a mechanism to keep voters isolated from each-other; limiting communication and national debate adverse to their interests. COVID-19 panic pushes the national conversation into the digital space where Big Tech controls every element of the conversation.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats cannot keep their Blue state economies easily shut-down and continue to block U.S. economic growth. All thriving economies are against the political interests of Democrats.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats cannot easily keep club candidate Joe Biden heavily controlled and sealed inside the bubble; where the electorate is not exposed to visible signs of his dementia.

♦Without COVID-19 panic it becomes more difficult for Big Tech to censor voices that would outline the fraud and scheme. With COVID-19 panic they have a better method and an excuse.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats cannot advance, influence, or organize their preferred presidential debate format, a ‘virtual presidential debate’ series.

♦Without COVID-19 panic the economy would rebound quickly and people would go back to work. This is against the interests of Democrats.

All of these, and more, strategic outcomes are based on the manufactured weaponization of the COVID-19 virus to achieve a larger political objective. There is ZERO benefit to anyone other than Democrats for the overwhelming hype surrounding COVID-19.

It is not coincidental that all corporate media are all-in to facilitate the demanded fear that Democrats need in order to achieve their objectives. Thus there is an alignment of all big government institutions and multinationals to support the same.

Nothing is coincidental.

Everything is political.