Declarations of Truth

Texas independence provoking reaction? By Terry A. Hurlbut The phrase Texas independence now can mean either of two things. Recently it began to stand for an overt secessionist movement, and the sentiment behind that movement. But it has always had a practical meaning of ways Texas really does act independent in certain contexts. For instance, Texas is the only State in the continental United States with its own electric grid. Recently a Texas Democrat collaborated with the infamous “Representativa AOC” to introduce a bill to abolish Texas independence in electricity. The leadership of the very real Texas Nationalist Movement called that par for the course. But Texas independence also found expression in Texas’ unilateral defense of its border with Mexico against migrant incursions. Now word comes of an Army Reserve JAG Corps drill that directly referenced current Texas leadership – as an evil junta. Texas independence assertion on the border Texas continues to assert its independence on the border, and has since the Supreme Court vacated an injunction against Border Patrol tampering with a physical barrier Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas) put into place. Gov. Abbott has, of course, reinforced that barrier, and deployed the Texas National Guard to back it up directly. Last Friday (February 16), Gov. Abbott announced that he is building forward barracks in Eagle Pass, Texas. The worst migrant inflows were taking place at Eagle Pass, and that’s where the Border Patrol started its barrier tampering. The National Guard slowed that to a relative trickle, but this required quartering troops in people’s houses, local hotels, and in tented camps. Now the Guard has reserved 80 acres of land for a “forward operations base.” The Texas Tribune reports this will accommodate 1800 National Guard troops immediately, and perhaps 2300 later. https://twitter.com/willdupreetv/status/1758568213669978253 Laura Wellington, author of the Western Journal piece describing the new barracks, suggested Gov. Abbott might be Trump Vice-Presidential material. Three things militate against that. First, Gov. Abbott is not at all sure that Trump will win, or the Deep State will let him win. Second, Trump might prefer to keep Gov. Abbott in place and give him logistical and financial support. A Texit study committee Third – which Ms. Wellington didn’t mention – is that the Texas Nationalist Movement has been pushing secession since the crisis began. They want the Governor to summon the legislature into special session and pass a referendum to create a Texas Independence Study Committee. Twice a sympathetic Texas House member has introduced a “Texit Bill” during regular session. Each time, unsympathetic Texas State Affairs Committee chairmen and House leaders “chubbed” it. (To chub, named after a local fish, is to delay a measure to death by whatever dilatory procedures are available.) But times are changing. Rep. Dade Phelan (RINO-Orange and Jasper Cos.), Speaker of the House, has been a bitter enemy of TNM. Recently he drew censure for: • Appointing Democrats as chairmen of key committees, and: • The impeachment of Attorney General Ken Paxton. According to The Texas Tribune, he is subject to primary challenge for the first time in his career. Every Texas government leader except Gov. Abbott has called for his retirement into private life. General Paxton, for his part, now says publicly that the Texas Annexation of 1845 would never have happened, had Sam Houston known that relations between Texas and the federal government would come to the present pass. Newsweek covered his remarks, and the vituperative retort from American Bridge 21st Century, a hard-left super-PAC. Abuse of office, election conspiracies, and now talk of secession—Ken Paxton is a dangerous manipulator of the law who is more focused on his personal and vengeful politics than he is on defending Texans. A search on recent posts on “immigration” at the American Bridge site indicates they prefer more immigration rather than less. Benefits of Texas independence Newsweek recently pointed out that Texas would have legal title to NASA’s Lyndon Baines Johnson Space Center in Houston. That’s only one of several NASA assets Texas could seize. Add the assets of SpaceX – which recently reincorporated in Texas – and Texas could have its own national space program. Dan Miller, head of TNM, knows this. Texas has its own electric grid, and already manages that independently. But it has problems. Three years ago, bad planning – and possibly some misguided federal subsidies – brought about the Texas Deep Freeze of 2021. After that, four members of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas – who did not even live in Texas – resigned. Now one company is building a natural gas power plant to replace – exactly – the coal-fired plant that shut down six years ago. The U.S. Army Reserve war-games Texas as the enemy But yesterday afternoon (February 18), at 1:00 p.m. EST, came a report from The Gateway Pundit about a legal-eagle exercise. This was no ordinary exercise – because it included a scenario involving JAG (Judge Advocate General’s Corps) officers and “legal office departments” (LODs) dealing directly with the Texas border issue. This exercise, an Internet simulation using Microsoft Teams groupware, took place on Saturday, February 3. Jim Hoft provided this transcript from an anonymous tipster who took part in the drill. It involved a “fact pattern” the specified nationalization of the Texas National Guard by the Biden administration. Furthermore, it named Gov. Abbott as the “bad guy” in the scenario, holding him personally responsible for: • Drowning of migrants in the Rio Grande (as alleged in Supreme Court briefs before they vacated that injunction), and • The spectacle of a Texas National Guard effective shooting migrants in the river while bellowing “America First!” The MOFWTS, or MEFWTS (Military Officer/Enlisted Familiar With the Situation), decried the violations of several rules in this scenario. Army drills, per training standards, are to be fictional, a-political scenarios involving fictional countries/enemies and people. American citizens are never mentioned in these scenarios. In this case all these rules were broken. Worse: Looking on-line at the Trump Campaign site, under the topic of the “MAGA Movement,” “America First” is clearly embedded as language used in Trump’s campaign materials. The fact that campaign material is inserted into a biased, derogatory fact pattern handed to Soldiers is a blatant and criminal Hatch Act violation. Under the Hatch Act and the DoD Directive on point, Soldiers and Pentagon personnel are absolutely prohibited from using campaign materials in official spaces in any way, shape or form. This scenario, sent down last minute by some un-hinged novice/lunatic in the Pentagon for training violated all the rules and was a criminal act as it violated Hatch Act prohibitions. It is probably worth mentioning that one of the five LODs participating apparently refused to participate and dropped off the Teams call as it progressed. That characterization is probably more accurate than that MOFWTS/MEFWTS knows. Here is the image of the scenario, as The Gateway Pundit received it: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/mock-up-exercise.jpg It is the image of a fictional sworn statement that a JAG officer might have to handle. Here is the transcript: I started my shift like any other day, not knowing the horrific terrors that were about to occur. It was the final day of working for the ICE Department, and I had recently just bought a boat and was daydreaming about the coming years of what new adventures I was going to embark on. I had a haunting suspension that my co-workers were going to be planning a surprise going away party for me. As I sat on my patrol car facing the hot Mexican vistas, I saw a family cresting the river’s edge. It consisted of a middle-aged man, woman, and girl (no older that ten years old). Then I saw an individual approach from behind the rear of my vehicle. It was a male and looked like he was in his twenties. He was carrying something with his left hand and near his side. I feared the worst. As I began calling in on my radio the situation, that’s when I my realization came to life. The man from the back yelled “America First” and a filthy expletive and then began firing on the family coming from Mexico. This wasn’t anything that I wanted to see, especially on the last day of work. I jumped out of my patrol car and yelled for him to stop. When he saw me with my handgun drawn, he dropped the weapon. I approached him and handcuffed him. But then when I heard the gentleman begin yelling for help. My teammates came as fast as they could and helped the family. I read the [suspect] his rights. Who writes a sworn statement like that, knowing it will form part of an official report? Your editor has filed several affidavits, and none lend themselves to the kind of histrionics this statement features. What does the Texas Nationalist Movement have to say? The TNM has not yet responded to this report. Perhaps Mr. Miller and his colleagues haven’t had time to digest it. But it strongly suggests that the federal government intends a show of force against Texas for its border-security measures. That’s worse than ironic – for as TNM does note, this country is under invasion from an army of Chinese irregulars. https://twitter.com/BillMelugin_/status/1759608356212490475 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1759611524858208331 So starting work on permanent barracks is the smartest thing Gov. Abbott has done so far. But he might want to consider calling that special session for a Texas Independence referendum bill. Whether he knows about this war game is far from clear. What is clear is that putting such a referendum on the ballot for this fall’s election is definitely in order. Furthermore, the people of Texas need to know about that JAC Corps/LOD Army Reserve exercise. On Saturday, TNM released a new Texas Independence campaign jingle. https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1759077532916400460 Winning Texas independence will take more than a jingle. But Newsweek is talking about what Texas independence could mean, as if it could happen. As they have been doing since the border crisis began: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750206156369486244 That’s an interesting sign in and of itself. Clearly all eyes are on Texas – for good or for ill. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/19/foundation/constitution/texas-independence-provoking-reaction/ Texas Nationalist Movement home: https://tnm.me/ Will Dupree’s report about the Texas Eagle Pass barracks project: https://twitter.com/willdupreetv/status/1758568213669978253 Report of the Army Reserve LOD/JAG exercise: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/exclusive-pentagon-forces-army-reserve-troops-midwest-conduct/ Image of the histrionic affidavit-equivalent: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/mock-up-exercise.jpg Posts about surge in Chinese apprehensions: https://twitter.com/BillMelugin_/status/1759608356212490475 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1759611524858208331 Texit Jingle: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1759077532916400460 Newsweek puts Texit on the cover: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750206156369486244 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Judge Engoron provokes contempt of his court By Terry A. Hurlbut On Friday (February 16), New York State Supreme (that is, Superior) Court Judge Arthur Engoron handed down his decision – in a bench trial – in the civil case of People v. Trump, which alleged multiple counts of real-estate fraud. Judge Engoron handed down a verdict that has many real-estate developers shaking their heads in wonderment – and fear. Trump and his two sons must pay more than $350 million in fines, in a fraud case with no victims. In response, several business journalists and anchor persons are already pouring contempt on the judge and his court. More than that, the judge might have provoked a truckers’ strike against New York City, the like of which it has not seen perhaps since the administration of Mayor John V. Lindsay. Judge Engoron put in the fix New York Attorney General Letitia “Tish” James brought the case two years ago. Christina Laila of The Gateway Pundit gives the details. Ms. James initially sought $250 million in “damages,” later raising that to $370 million. She also sought to ban him from the real-estate industry in New York for the rest of his life. On February 17, 2022, Judge Engoron ruled that Trump would have to give a deposition in the case. New York law forbids a prosecutor to compel testimony without granting immunity. Trump’s legal team argued that James was seeking to work around that law. Judge Engoron insisted that he testify. Trump appealed, and a four-judge appellate panel ruled against him. In the summer of 2022, Judge Engoron actually held Trump in contempt of court for failing to furnish tax and other documents. Trump paid a fine of $110,000, and the judge then formally vacated the contempt order. In November 2022, the judge appointed an “independent watchdog” to oversee the Trump Organization. In that same ruling, Judge Engoron said Ms. James’ claims were likely to succeed. The trial lasted for eleven weeks – and the judge tried the case himself, without benefit of a jury. On September 26, 2023, the court granted partial summary judgment to the State and ordered the dissolution of Trump’s businesses. The Appellate Division stayed that order. Details of the verdict Yesterday the judge handed down his final verdict, in a 92-page filing. In his Findings of Fact, he accused Trump, his sons, and the organizations he controls of inflating the value of several assets. Other commentators have shown that Judge Engoron applied standards which no bank would demand. For instance, he valued Trump’s Mar-A-Lago property as a private residence, not the social club it is. Thus a $100 million property received a valuation in Engoron’s court of – $18 million. In each case of alleged fraud, no individual or entity actually lost anything of value. Banks, for example, would grant loans after negotiation, and conducting their own investigations. Banks never take a borrower’s word on asset valuation, as many real-estate developers and other experts will attest. Nevertheless, Judge Engoron assessed fines totaling more than $355 million. Furthermore, he barred Trump from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation or other legal entity in New York for a period of three years. He imposed those fines under the heading of disgorgement of ill-gotten gains. Restitution is not in order – because no one is claiming or even could claim it. The ruling alleges wrongdoing “just because,” and explicitly seeks to claw back the profits Trump has made. That no other individual or entity needs any payment to make them whole, is of no moment. Appeals In a statement to NBC News, lead counsel Alina Habba vowed to appeal. Trump made even stronger statements on his Truth Social platform: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943310253470500 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943296577189590 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943296062603098 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943295181848700 Later that day he offered further details: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943561315338439 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943552547982200 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943549461938391 On Friday night he had a stronger reaction in a speech to supporters. https://rumble.com/embed/v4b9xyk/?pub=4teej We have a corrupt judge. He’s not a respected man, and again, I’ve said before, he’s been overturned on this case by the Appellate Division four times already. It’s a record. Nobody’s ever been overturned on one case four times. And I think, very importantly, and I think, ultimately, the most important, we’ve employed tens of thousands of people in New York, and we’ve paid taxes like few other people have ever paid in New York. They don’t care about that. It’s a state that’s going bust. It’s a state that’s going bust because everybody’s leaving. And it’s all headed up by Biden, who’s destroying our country. So, this is Russia, this is China, this is what you’ve been reading about all your lives, and it’s happening right here in our country. Thank you very much. We will stop it. We will make America great again. You have my word. Reaction: Judge Engoron provokes others to encourage Trump to appeal Jim Hoft, at 9:00 p.m., quoted Kevin O’Leary’s interview with the New York Post, calling the ruling into further question. I don’t understand where someone got hurt … What developer doesn’t ask for the highest price valued for any building they built? If this judgment sticks, every developer must be jailed. They must be found guilty. They must be put out of business. You can’t do this to one another. It’s not about Trump. At 9:45 a.m. Saturday morning, Hoft quoted Fox Business hostess Dagen McDowell making an even stronger statement: If you run a business, big or small in New York State, you have to know or assume somebody with a political axe to grind will come after you, too. You better get the hell out of here. Then at 11:00 a.m., Hoft quoted Steve Bannon as saying Judge Engoron is one of many Marxist activists who have now shown themselves for what they really are. https://rumble.com/embed/v4be6wl/?pub=4teej But at 5:20 p.m. yesterday afternoon, Patty McMurray dropped the thunderclap. Several long-haul truck drivers have signaled that they will refuse loads to New York City, presumably until some court vacates that verdict. The first such threat came Friday night from a trucker calling himself “Chicago Ray”: https://twitter.com/Chicago1Ray/status/1758674105446838535 Patty McMurray provided a transcript: I’ve been on the radio talking to drivers for the last hour and fifteen minutes, and I’ve talked to at least ten drivers going the other way. I’m heading down from South Wisconsin. And they’re [other truckers] gonna start refusing loads to New York City, starting on Monday for NYC. I talked to about three guys that I work with who texted the boss and told him they’re not going to New York City. I don’t know how far across the country this is or how many truckers are gonna start denying loads to go to New York City, but I’ll tell you what—you f**k around and find out!” Okay? We’re tired of you motherf**kin’ leftists f**king around with Donald Trump. You know, motherf**kers are starting to get tired of this shit—and our bosses don’t care if we’re denying the loads into New York; we’ll go somewhere else.” I don’t wish nothin’ on nobody, but what I’m hearing—this is real! Ya, know—we’ll see. Leave Trump the f**k alone with the bullshit! Alright? You know you ain’t got shit on Trump, so cut the bullshit! He’s gonna win this motherf**ker on appeal, but it’s still—you know how bullshit! It’s election interference. I hate to say it, but Truckers are for Trump. We’re like 95% – 96% out here—-all Trump. Ain’t no motherf**kers for Biden! Other posts followed yesterday: https://twitter.com/IanJaeger29/status/1758896837983862816 https://twitter.com/JackLombardi/status/1758971348578132325 That last post highlights a lesson the American left would like to ignore. Modern political maps commonly show islands of blue in a sea of red. These represent leftist urban strongholds and rightist rural expanses. But only truckers like Jack Lombard seem to understand what this means. No city is self-sufficient; all rely on deliveries from the countryside. Tellingly, Jack Lombard compared himself and his fellow truckers to European farmers already protesting plans to abandon farming and animal husbandry. And that was in his text! In his nine-minute-forty-six-second video he said much more. This morning, at 11:15 a.m. EST, Tyler Durden at ZeroHedge filed this update on a trucker’s strike, or trucker boycott. https://twitter.com/HillbillyTkR91/status/1759240991603937435 https://twitter.com/bigskyfit/status/1758961955430408673 https://twitter.com/bigskyfit/status/1759221198611976275 https://twitter.com/albert1776/status/1758677831561678917 https://twitter.com/TraceyOFlynn3/status/1758676695781957664 https://twitter.com/MagaNomuck/status/1758680992745984038 A last analysis Judge Engoron has brought this contempt and disrepute upon himself and his own court. Several times, cameras caught him affecting a silly grin from the bench. When he did that, he showed total lack of respect for himself, his court, the parties, and everyone else. In crafting his absurd Finding of Fact, the judge seems to have given little thought beyond a desire for ideological revenge against a defendant who was more than a real-estate mogul. Donald Trump represents an ideology Judge Engoron obviously hates. Trump might represent several such ideologies, depending on whether the judge, besides being an inveterate leftist, is an Alphabet Souper. But the judge absolutely cannot have imagined that long-haul truckers, who keep New York City supplied, would cite him as their reason for calling what amounts to a strike! A strike that might not limit itself to New York City, either. If it succeeds, it could show every city dweller how vulnerable cities are to supply interruption. Leftists have scoffed at earlier suggestions that the right would win any civil war because they control the countryside. They might soon be laughing out of the other side of their faces. Or not. The solution to this problem is absurdly simple. Judge Engoron’s verdict cannot possibly stand, for reasons other real-estate developers already know and have made plain. Donald Trump won’t even feel the expense – for the appeals will engender sympathy as no comparably expensive conventional campaign could ever have done. Stay tuned… Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/18/editorial/talk/judge-engoron-provokes-contempt-court/ The filing: https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=CJKA2EOIiTRatUAYz6FyeA==&system=prod Seven “Truths” from Trump: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943310253470500 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943296577189590 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943296062603098 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943295181848700 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943561315338439 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943552547982200 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111943549461938391 Video: Trump speaks to reporters https://rumble.com/v4dv7y2-trump-reacts-to-marxist-judges-verdict-in-ny-fraud-case.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Video: Bannon’s War Room https://rumble.com/v4dzgv9-steve-bannon-theyve-turned-over-their-face-cards-its-neo-marxist-globalist-.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Chicago 1 Ray’s post about a trucker’s strike/boycott: https://twitter.com/Chicago1Ray/status/1758674105446838535 Other truckers’ posts, first round: https://twitter.com/IanJaeger29/status/1758896837983862816 https://twitter.com/JackLombardi/status/1758971348578132325 Second round: https://twitter.com/HillbillyTkR91/status/1759240991603937435 https://twitter.com/bigskyfit/status/1758961955430408673 https://twitter.com/bigskyfit/status/1759221198611976275 https://twitter.com/albert1776/status/1758677831561678917 https://twitter.com/TraceyOFlynn3/status/1758676695781957664 https://twitter.com/MagaNomuck/status/1758680992745984038 ZeroHedge report: https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/fk-around-find-out-truckers-warn-loads-nyc-will-be-rejected-starting-monday Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

British intelligence, not Obama, spied on Trump By Terry A. Hurlbut The past forty-eight hours have seen some explosive confirmations of something Donald J. Trump always suspected. Which is, that someone was spying on him and his campaign, at least since 2016. Trump erred only in identifying the culprit – he blamed his predecessor, Barack H. Obama. New and updated evidence suggests that the true culprits were British intelligence, with help from sympathetic elements in the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Furthermore, any notion that Vladimir Putin, effective head of the Russian Federation, sought to influence U.S. voters to vote for Trump is the exact opposite of the truth. The truth is that Donald J. Trump is his own man, and Russian, Brit and American Deep-Stater alike fear him. That’s reason enough to vote in his favor, apart from the now-proved justice of his claims. British intelligence involvement in early spying on the Trump campaign Larry Johnson of The Gateway Pundit posted this update to a post he’d made two years ago. The occasion of this update is this post by Matt Taibbi on his Racket Substack. Taibbi substantiates Trump’s long-standing claims that someone spied on him. He also revealed that Russian feelings toward Trump were opposite to those Hillary Clinton and others claimed. This prompted Johnson to revisit evidence he first gathered and presented two years ago. On March 4, 2017, President Trump flatly accused the Obama White House of tapping his telephones, in these posts: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837989835818287106 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837993273679560704 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837994257566863360 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837996746236182529 For what it’s worth, Obama adviser Ben Rhodes shot back: https://twitter.com/brhodes/status/838032637990166531 Lay aside this variation on the Loaded Question logical fallacy, to say nothing of his throwing-off on Trump. Trump, as Larry Johnson said to Russia Today two days later, was only half correct in his accusations. Specifically he called the what right, but not the who. https://rumble.com/embed/v4bb6or/?pub=4teej Role of the General Communications Headquarters Mr. Johnson told RT that the orders came, not from the Obama White House, but from British intelligence! Specifically the order came from the General Communications Headquarters unit, or GCHQ. They shared their “take” with James Clapper and John Brennan (then Director of Central Intelligence, or DCI). Those two men wanted to derail the Trump campaign and support Hillary Clinton. Why did Trump posts something that didn’t nail the real culprits? According to Johnson, Trump sought to put the real culprits on notice that he had their number. Johnson also lamented that several “holdover” intelligence types were still on the job, and still undermining Trump. Media response to Johnson’s remarks consisted of: crickets. Even President Trump and his people ignored that – perhaps more evidence of Trump’s lack of imagination and situational awareness. Two weeks later, Judge Andrew P. Napolitano alleged on the air that Obama had asked GCHQ to spy on Trump. Obama did this, according to Napolitano, to keep “American fingerprints” off the spy operation. That claim got Napolitano suspended. Johnson again denied that Obama gave any such order. The initiative came from the highest echelons of British intelligence. Not to say that Obama wouldn’t have been a willing participant – he and the Deep State are allied. But the order didn’t start with him. This was a British operation, with coordination with American Deep State “spooks” outside of the White House. Johnson also appeared on Brian Stelter’s Reliable Sources program on CNN to make, and clarify, his case: https://rumble.com/embed/vsckds/?pub=4teej Motive for British intelligence Johnson provided a YouTube link to that interview, from an account calling itself “Very Dicey.” Sadly, Google erased the Very Dicey account – and furthermore, Very Dicey suffered de-hosting and deplatforming from “Old Twitter.” But the Wayback Machine has links to the first capture of the video, the Very Dicey site, and his Twitter account as they stood on March 19, 2017. Johnson also provided a link to a “hit piece” in The New York Times. Incredibly, they credited GCHQ with warning people about Russian hacking of Democratic National Committee emails. In this regard, Johnson almost laughs at British intelligence for leaving such a hole in their story: Here’s another one–if the Brits knew that the Russians were hacking the DNC emails then how did they completely miss the Russians passing that info to one Julian Assange, who happens to be holed up in London in the Ecuadorian Embassy? To this date the Brits have not provided one shred of evidence to prove that Assange got the DNC emails from the Russians. Why would British intelligence do this? Larry Johnson speculates that Trump, wanting to get out of endless wars, “direct[ly] threat[ened] British interests.” Recall that Trump insisted that NATO needed to pay some of the price America had been paying since NATO’s founding. Trump even questioned NATO’s very reason for existing. Finally, said Johnson, all this effort by British intelligence turned up – nothing. If they had, we would be having a far different conversation. If you spy on someone and produce actionable intelligence, the conversation turns to that intelligence, not to how you got it – even if your spies have to come in from the cold. But if you find nothing, then you’re always trying to deny looking for it to begin with. Which is what Obama and Hillary Clinton did, and British intelligence continues to do. Russia wants anybody but Trump But the more salient revelation from Messrs. Taibbi, Shellenberger and Gutentag is that Vladimir Putin never wanted Trump as President. In fact he still doesn’t. Reuters quotes him on that, saying Joe Biden is more predictable. This of course gives the lie to Fiona Hill’s accusation to The Guardian that Putin sees Trump as an asset. How can we know that’s a lie? Because the Racket Substack piece tells us that American intelligence told that same lie on another January 6. On January 6, 2017, James Clapper published this Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) saying Vladimir Putin had ordered an “influence campaign” against Hillary Clinton in the Election of 2016. That’s another lie. According to the Racket piece’ sources, Putin supported Hillary Clinton, not Trump. He considered Trump “mercurial,” meaning all over the place – and Hillary “manageable and reflecting continuity.” That we have from the House Intelligence Committee – or rather three anonymous tipsters close to that Committee and its investigation. This was back when then-Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) ran that Committee. In February of 2018, then-Chairman Nunes released a damning memo excoriating the FBI for malfeasance and cover-up in their obtaining warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to spy on Trump campaign figures in 2016. Efforts to suppress the story NBC also published a timeline, going clear back to 2015, of events leading up to that memo. That timeline shows that the FBI spying began at least on October 21, 2016. It further shows that Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), then the Ranking Member, undermined Nunes every chance he got. Despite specious House Ethics Committee complains, Devin Nunes doggedly continued his investigation. Democrats and their tame editors denounced the Nunes Memo on its release. But Inspector General Michael Horowitz vindicated it a year later. But the Racket team relies on more than the Nunes Memo. They cite several sources as saying the ICA had no evidence to substantiate it. They also cite John Brennan’s brazen boast, in his book Undaunted, that he personally overruled dissenting opinion about the ICA. Indeed, a few days before the election, the FBI backed off the Trump-Russia allegation, according to The New York Times. In December, the FBI and CIA both briefed the Senate. According to The Washington Post, they evidently couldn’t keep their stories straight. A week later, again from the Post, both agencies were toeing the same line. But when former FBI Director James Comey testified to the House in 2020, he nearly gave the game away. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7j0f6c-3x6s Analysis In short, the three-letter agencies allegedly behind the ICA didn’t get their stories straight until halfway through December. The single best “internal control” that tells us how Vladimir Putin really felt, is this week’s Reuters piece. If Vladimir Putin today would rather have Joe Biden than Donald Trump, then we can believe he wanted Hillary Clinton and not Trump. More tellingly, British intelligence has its fingerprints all over the Trump-Russia Hoax. Christopher Steele, author of the infamous eponymous Dossier, was an MI6 agent. We can now regard that association as typical and integral, not a one-off. Today the British repeatedly insist on more support for Ukraine in the Russia-Ukraine War. Joe Biden will sign new authorizations of military and financial aid to that money laundry almost as fast as he’ll sign “writs of assistance” over the January 6 Event. British intelligence knows this, and what they did in 2016, they’ll do again. James Madison, framer of the Bill of Rights (and especially Amendments II, III, and IV), could have told the American people not to trust the British. America learned that lesson during the War of 1812. Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, and the third time it’s enemy action. Ian Fleming With all due respect to Mr. Fleming’s memory, Americans must now wonder whether James Bond, had he existed, would have gotten orders to come to America on a mission inimical to, not protective of, human liberty. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/17/foundation/constitution/british-intelligence-obama-spied-trump/ The Larry Johnson piece: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/update-president-trump-was-victim-espionage-both-foreign/ The Racket piece: https://www.racket.news/p/wmd-part-ii-cia-cooked-the-intelligence Trump’s accusations against Obama: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837989835818287106 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837993273679560704 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837994257566863360 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837996746236182529 Ben Rhodes’ retort: https://twitter.com/brhodes/status/838032637990166531 Video: Larry Johnson tells Russia Today who gave the surveillance orders: https://rumble.com/v4dwgo9-dc-insiders-seek-to-defeat-donald-trump-even-in-aftermath-of-his-victory-ex.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Video: Larry Johnson v. Brian Stelter: https://rumble.com/vuyqga-larry-johnson-takes-on-brian-stelter-on-trump-spy-story.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Wayback Machine links from Very Dicey: https://web.archive.org/web/20170320005920/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uawwr74nSsA https://web.archive.org/web/20170320005920/https://www.verydicey.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20170320005920/https://twitter.com/VeryDicey Reuters: Putin wants Biden https://www.reuters.com/world/putin-says-he-prefers-more-predictable-biden-over-trump-2024-02-14/ The Guardian: Fiona Hill says Putin considers Trump an asset https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/20/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-us-elections-2024-moscow The Intelligence Community Assessment: https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/press-releases-2017/3035-odni-statement-on-declassified-intelligence-community-assessment-of-russian-activities-and-intentions-in-recent-u-s-elections The Nunes Memo and timeline: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/house-intelligence-committee-memo-read-full-transcript-gop-memo-n844116 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/timeline-here-s-how-nunes-memo-came-be-released-n844131 Articles in the Times and Post about the FBI’s ambivalent attitudes: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-and-cia-give-differing-accounts-to-lawmakers-on-russias-motives-in-2016-hacks/2016/12/10/c6dfadfa-bef0-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-blames-putins-personal-grudge-against-her-for-election-interference/2016/12/16/12f36250-c3be-11e6-8422-eac61c0ef74d_story.html Hearing with James Comey before the House: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7j0f6c-3x6s Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Electric grid – Federal excuse for interdependence By Terry A. Hurlbut The federal government, in its continued psychological and ideological war with Texas, knows it has a problem. Since the Texas Annexation of 1845, Texans have always considered themselves a nation-state apart, in federal union for convenience only. That convenience has been mainly for protection, beginning with the Mexican War or “Mr. Polk’s War.” (Any war is “Mr. President’s War” to those who oppose it, any President waging it, or both.) But now the federal government has reneged on the very premise of continued Texas union. Democratic Members of Congress know this, and have come up with a new excuse to entice Texas to stay in the Union. That excuse is the creation of a single, continent-wide electric grid. But doing so would be not only unconstitutional but the opposite of what electric infrastructure planners should be doing. Overview of the nation’s electric grid The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) maintains all electric grid interconnections in North America. Four big electric grid interconnections serve the continental United States, and Canada south of Inuit Nunaangat and Yukon. They are the Eastern, Western, Quebec, and Texas Interconnections. In 2009, various authorities laid plans to build a new Tres Amigas Superstation, in a triangular region with Roswell and Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Amarillo, Texas at its corners. It was to use superconductors that could carry 5 GW of electric power. But to date no one has started construction. The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) manages the Texas Interconnection, which covers 90 percent of the State of Texas. At present, the western tip of El Paso County lies within the Western Interconnection, and the northwestern half of the Texas Panhandle, plus two regions in eastern Texas, lie within the Eastern. The Western Interconnection also extends south of California for a short distance into Mexico (specifically, Baja California Del Norte). In 2021, the Texas electric grid famously shut down. An usually harsh winter froze wind turbine blades, covered solar panels, and cooled natural gas pumps to a non-functioning point. That incident struck fear into Texas hearts – Texas had suffered blackouts before, but none like this. The Texas Nationalist Movement blames federal subsidies that encouraged wind power at the expense of fossil-fueled power. Texas Democrats team up with The Squad Sandow Lakes Energy is planning to build a new natural-gas plant that will generate 1.2 GW of power. Interestingly, this plant will exactly replace the generating capacity of a 1.2 GW coal-fired plant that shut down in 2018. But Rep. Greg Casar (D-Austin/San Antonio) has another idea, reflecting his environmentalist leanings. He wants to compel ERCOT to join formally with the Eastern Interconnection at first, then the Western as well. Reportage on his proposal comes from The Hill, KPRC-TV Channel 2 (NBC) of Houston, and The Austin American-Statesman. The Connect the Grid Act would require ERCOT to come under the purview of the Federal Electricity Reliability Commission (FERC). Currently ERCOT is exempt from FERC regulation; this bill would strike that. It would also amend current law to require new transmission, but not generating, capacity as part of a reliability standard. Current law requires neither thing. Furthermore, the new law would require, as a “priority” in deciding on new transmission capacity, “outreach” to: • Tribal and indigenous communities and their government, and • “Environmental justice communities.” The Act defines an environmental justice community as: a community with significant representation of communities of color, low-income communities, or Tribal and Indigenous communities that experiences, or is at risk of experiencing, higher or more adverse human health or environmental effects. Timeline and sponsorships Channel 2 (Houston) teased out this timeline from the bill’s text: • No later than 6 months after enactment: FERC convenes a technical conference to explore ways to make the connection happen. • One year: ERCOT, the Southwest Power Pool, the Mid-continent Independent System Operator, and one or more neighboring balancing authorities submit a plan that designates entities to construct new transmission facilities, or modify existing transmission facilities. • January 1, 2035: all new transmission lines to be in place. Channel 2 failed to mention one other thing: studying the “benefits” of more connections with Mexico. These would go deeper than the northernmost portion of “Baja del Norte,” though the sponsors gave no details. Rep. Casar has sponsorships all over Texas – and outside of Texas. Sponsors in the House include Reps. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), Veronica Escobar (D-Texas), Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas), Al Green (D-Texas), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas). Beyond Texas, they include Reps. Troy Carter (D-La.), Emanuel Cleaver, II (D-Mo.), Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.), Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.). They also include Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) - charter members of The Squad. Finally, Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) has already introduced a Senate version. He and “AOC” routinely collaborate on environmentalist and similar bills. Rescuing the Texas electric grid – or making it more vulnerable? In a press release from Rep. Casar, he and several co-sponsors gave the rationale for the Connect the Grid Act. To start with, they presented this legislation as a rescue operation, on these two premises: • The Texas Deep Freeze of 2021 (Winter Storm Uri) could happen again, and • Only full ties between and among all electric grid interconnections, including the Texas grid, can prevent it. They also couched their proposal as a benefit to the rest of the country – from surplus solar and wind energy. But that ignores the intermittency of both these methods – which notoriously failed during the 2021 Deep Freeze. Last week, Houston Chronicle Columnist Bill King recommended enlarging generating capacity within Texas. He observed that wind power has heavy federal subsidies – but asserted that solar does not. King also admitted that solar and wind produce abundant cheap power – when the sun shines and the wind blows. Though he mentioned technologies to store electricity, the only such technology he mentioned was battery power. Other methods exist in addition (more below). But, unable to help themselves, Casar and his colleagues gave their real rationale. They blamed lack of federal regulation for the Deep Freeze and every ill they could invent that Texas is “suffering.” But they also mentioned shortchanging large industrial and commercial users, in the name of “environmental justice.” Terms like “equity” in its various forms peppered their press release. Texas Nationalist Movement: nothing doing! The Texas Nationalist Movement yesterday condemned, in no uncertain terms, any connection of the Texas electric grid with other grids. https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1758215300598947937 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1758227028669804796 TNM head Dan Miller said this, in the video embedded above: Well, if you love what’s happening at the Texas border, then you are absolutely going to love what the federal government wants to do to the Texas power grid. AOC and the poster children for mismanagement and dysfunction in the U.S. Congress want to take control of the Texas power grid. It wasn’t enough for them to push their green energy grift and plunge us into darkness in 2021. Now they want to connect our grid to other States, where rolling blackouts are a way of life. Imagine Snowpocalypse 2021, but every month! And not only that, but their proposal wants to force the Texas grid to connect with Mexico. The federal government can’t even manage the border or federal debt, and now they want to be in charge of your light switch. It’s time to tell the Feds that we wouldn’t trust them in an outhouse with a muzzle on, and we definitely don’t trust them with our power grid. It is well past time for us to Texit. Comments to the Channel 2 (Houston) article were almost universally negative. “AOC” especially got calls to stay on her side of the Texas state line and “out of Texas business.” One commenter left this insightful analysis: Those who think Texas being connected to the other grids in February 2021 [would have solved the problem] seem to forget that those other grids were stressed too. It was a national weather front impacting the entire country, those same people forget that importing energy from too far away involves such inefficiencies as to negate most of the benefit. Not to sound like a conspiracy buff either but looking at federal government "solutions" over the years doesn't exactly inspire confidence that they would handle the perception of grid problems any better. Perhaps if those liberal states spent more time improving their own lot, Texas wouldn't have to provide so much power to all their refugees even as their grids fail worse than ours (California, for example). If power generation reliability due to weather is so important, the feds can offer serious tax credits to upgrade all the components, not low cost loans the industry isn't interested in. If it is also so important to improve capacity issues, the feds can subsidize natural gas plants the way they do "renewables" and private enterprise will jump on the bandwagon like ducks on a June bug. Too many people are convinced connecting distant grids will save the day when there are practical limits to how far the power can travel, even if billions are spent upgrading transmission lines...we're not going to be "saved" by power from Canada/upper New York even if they happen to have excess capacity and far better weather conditions, which is unlikely in most scenarios. Most of the deaths attributed to the storm were in fact caused by people making bad decisions. Throwing huge sums of money under the pretense of reliability when their real goal is to force Texas to follow more federal regulations so we can mimic the failures of liberal states is silly. Mr. Miller and this Houston resident are correct. The larger an electric grid, the more bad decisions in one area affect all other areas. This applies especially to the Western Interconnection, after Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) has shut down much of California’s generating capacity. Now, of course, he must tell owners of those electric vehicles he asked them to buy, not to charge them. Whenever a “progressive” offers a problem they say is a rescue of you, run, don’t walk, away. Other regions of the country would derive no practical benefit from a broader interconnection. The proposal goes further than forcing Texas to accept interdependence. It would also visit upon the Eastern Interconnection the consequences of bad decisions in the Western. This proposal also violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the Constitution’s guarantee of “a republican form of government.” Taking over the Texas electric grid would amount to relegating Texas to a province, not a State. That’s totally antithetical to “a republican form of government,” and likely to infuriate rank-and-file Texans once they understand the implications. How Texas can protect and harden its own electric grid Texas would do well to protect its own electric grid by reversing some of the bad decisions by ERCOT. (That applies especially to those by former members of the Council who do not even live in Texas!) Texas must, as Bill King warned, repair its disastrously vulnerable fuel mix. Tellingly, it will build a natural gas plant to replace – exactly – a coal plant that shut down six years ago. Texas should also build a nuclear generator – the kind of thing even Elon Musk is on record as encouraging. The Texas electric grid could also become a demonstration project for storage of electricity. Battery farms, like the one Elon Musk is building near Angleton, Texas, are a good start. But Texas should explore other methods of storing energy – like gravity batteries. A firm called Energy Vault is building such a battery in Texas. It uses heavy bricks, and dynamic cranes that generate electricity while lowering them. That could be the cheapest solution, and the easiest to locate. Other gravity solutions include: • Raising and lowering a dead weight inside an abandoned mine shaft, and • Pumping water upstream of a dam to store power between reservoirs. But the “pumped hydro” system is very expensive, in parts, labor, and usable land. The mine-shaft idea suffers from the drawback that the supply of mine shafts is limited. Mind your own business! But any kind of storage solution is far preferable to interconnection. Texas is prepared to atone for its own bad decisions, including those leading to the Deep Freeze. Texas has no reason to make itself vulnerable to anyone else’s bad decisions. And Rep. AOC needs to hear one message she’s already getting from those Houston residents: MYOB. First attributed to the late advice columnist Ann Landers, it means: mind your own business. Texas is absolutely correct to attend to its own business, and tell AOC to mind hers. About the NERC map User Claude Boucher uploaded this map to Wikimedia Commons on May 11, 2009. He has licensed it under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-alike 3.0 Unported License. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/16/foundation/constitution/electric-grid-federal-excuse-interference/ Connect the Grid Act full text: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24428462/connect-the-grid-act.pdf Channel 2 report: https://www.click2houston.com/news/investigates/2024/02/15/houston-lawmakers-aoc-push-texas-ercot-to-join-other-power-grids/ Rep. Casar’s press release: https://casar.house.gov/media/press-releases/news-congressman-greg-casar-introduces-connect-grid-act Texas Nationalist Movement: Home: https://tnm.me/ Posts protesting the Connect the Grid Act: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1758215300598947937 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1758227028669804796 Report about Energy Vault’s projects: https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/two-massive-gravity-batteries-are-nearing-completion-in-the-us-and-china Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Disney leaders always were woke By Terry A. Hurlbut The Walt Disney Company has never been in the “civil war” many influencers thought was raging at its corporate offices. An investigative journalist – the same one who broke the Reimagine Tomorrow story in April of 2022 – has revealed that the one man everyone thought was a friend, was an enemy. In fact, thanks to Christopher F. Rufo, we now know that Disney steered hard left three days after Joe Biden took office. This might or might not have to do with Bob Iger’s Presidential ambitions. But it shows that even Bob Chapek suffered from the Woke Mind Virus that Elon Musk has repeatedly described. This revelation tells us all we need to know about Disney, which is that someone needs to take over that company, hold it up by its collective ankles, and shake it. Even then, the company might be beyond all help. Review of Disney history Herewith a review of company history, which CNAV has covered here and here. The Disney company began, of course, with Walt Disney (1901-66) and his brother Roy (1893-1971). In 1923 they founded the Disney Brothers Cartoon Studio, which later took Walt Disney’s name exclusively. The other name changes mean precious little; the big thing to remember is that the Walt Disney company stood for quality content that appealed to innocence. Disney is most famous for its cartoon characters, like Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, and all their friends. But they also produced original cartoons from children’s stories from a variety of courses. They of course included Wilhelm and Jakob Grimm (Snow White, Cinderella, et al.) and J. M. Barrie (Peter Pan). Eventually they branched out into live-action film. They paid well and thus produced some of the most memorable films in the Western world. In this they drew from sources like Jules Verne (20,000 Leagues Under the Sea) and P. L. Travers (Mary Poppins). But Walt Disney also planned to build an entire city that would prove concepts of futuristic living. He called it Experimental Prototype Community Of Tomorrow – EPCOT for short. At first he thought of taking over the site of the 1964 New York World’s Fair. Disney also considered sites in New Jersey, the Washington, D.C. area, St. Louis, even Palm Beach. Finally the company settled on central Florida. EPCOT and Reedy Creek And that’s when they bought all that land in Orange and Osceola Counties, and proposed the Reedy Creek Improvement District. That District was never supposed to exist merely for theme parks! The Walt Disney Company planned to build a city, in which no one would own anything but everyone would have a job, and the city would govern itself without regard to any authorities in Orange or Osceola Counties. To lobby then-Governor Haydon Burns, Disney produced a short film – the EPCOT film. https://youtu.be/sLCHg9mUBag Worth noting, incidentally, is that Arthur C. Clark featured the original EPCOT concept in his novel 2010: Odyssey Two. But this futuristic city would never happen. Walt Disney died even before Burns’ successor Charles Kirk signed the Reedy Creek Improvement Act into law. With no living person to advocate as effectively for it, the city concept died within two years. And for more than ten years after that, Walt Disney World consisted only of the Magic Kingdom Park and several themed hotels and at least one “residential hotel” facility: Disney Village. Eventually EPCOT did come into being, but not as a city. Instead the EPCOT Center opened as just another theme park, but more like a continuing world’s fair. It consists of: • Futureworld, with pavilions dedicated to a wide variety of technological visions including sea, land, energy, and medicine, and • The World Showcase, with no fewer than nine national pavilions featuring history and even food from each country. EPCOT center always was problematic Futureworld always had a problem. To the extent that it ever accurately predicted the future, the “future” would become the present. This happened in 1993, when NASA laid on a mission to repair the Hubble Space Telescope – in orbit. The AT&T Geosphere ride ended with a display of two astronauts repairing a satellite in orbit – and that was supposed to be in the future! Disney had to rip out all the pavilions to update them. The World Showcase had its own problems. Start with the overpriced novelties, foodstuffs, and other souvenirs. Add to it that the United States Pavilion had the beginnings of “woke” even in 1993. But all this reflected a deeper problem, one that other great creators noticed. Among them: J. R. R. Tolkien, who adamantly refused to let Disney adapt any of his work. Not for animated cartoons, or for any other kind of feature. Even before 1937’s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Tolkien sampled a few Mickey Mouse cartoons and other fairy-tale adaptations. At once he saw what was wrong: Walt Disney “dumbed everything down.” He took a patronizing attitude toward his children’s audience, assuming that they wouldn’t understand sophisticated concepts like decision-making and morality. Tolkien, by all accounts, was ready to vomit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwxHMWZBMSI To him, fairy tales were morality plays, and one should dramatize them as such. Tolkien himself wrote for audiences varying in age from “middle school” to high school. (Producer Peter Jackson adapted The Lord of the Rings at adult level.) When Disney decided to go woke Bob Iger took over as CEO of Disney in 2005, and salted the company with Alphabet Soup and other leftist “creatives” and engineers. When Bob Chapek took over in 2020, people might have thought changes would come. As Christopher F. Rufo now reveals, they were sadly mistaken. How Rufo obtained this conference-call video, he won’t say. The video he now has, dates from January 23, 2021 – three days after the Inauguration. Viewing the linked content requires a paid subscription.. But Rufo posted part of it to X: https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1757494954895815142 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1757829650909401088 Rufo provided a full transcript of his five minutes of footage. Here is the transcript of the part of the video he shared to X: I mean, Bob [Chapek] has talked about this eloquently since he’s become CEO. I’ll say a couple of things about it. We’ve tended to shy away from politics, and in doing so, I think we’ve shied away from talking about issues that aren’t political at all, like the issues that we’re talking about today, because we believe in doing so, maybe it looks like we’re taking a stand. Well, in that reality, we should be taking a stand. By the way, I take responsibility for this. I was CEO for 15 years, and so I manage the company’s public-facing processes and how we were portraying ourselves. And I think that we have to be less cautious as Bob, I think, was just alluding to about such things and not be concerned. Just commenting about what happened in Washington last week, that’s not political on our part at all. We know that what we saw was fundamentally wrong and that it was rooted in hatred and disrespect and contempt and intolerance, and we should feel free as a company to comment about that without retribution. Another thing I want to say that I’ve learned these last 9 to 12 months is I’m very proud of a lot of the work we’ve done in terms of diversity inclusion on screen. When we did Coco, for instance, at Pixar, a great example of that, or Tiana, or of course Black Panther is one of the great examples of that, I allowed those things to make me feel a bit complacent in a sense. It’s not that I wanted to be that way, but I thought, “Wow, we did Black Panther. How great are we?” And it caused me to not focus as much as I should have on the culture of the company and the environment and on the voices that were telling those stories as opposed to just how they were being portrayed on the screen. Bob Chapek then followed up with an announcement that the company would spend a lot of money on non-white “communities.” This would involve: • 50% of “charitable giving” to “underrepresented communities,” and • Spending as much as $1 billion a year buying from “diverse suppliers.” From that to Latoya Raveneau’s “not-at-all-secret [Alphabet Soup] agenda” was a much smaller step than anyone knew. https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1508912865293619202 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1508926408332034049 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1508934581092765700 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1508939718288936967 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1508937431520890888 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1509201394485583876 More to the point, Disney threw in completely with Democratic Party talking points about the January 6 Event. Had that company, with all its resources, bothered to investigate that event properly, it might have discovered that it was a false-flag pseudo-operation. They treated it as the explosion of a political movement more dangerous than German National Socialism in the last century. Further troubles That was only the beginning of Disney’s troubles. When a major entertainment company tells stories comparing half their audience to the kind of people who starved, baked, experimented on, and did other atrocious things to six million people because they followed the original religion unchanged since Abraham, and another four million because they thought them genetically inferior or something of the kind, they might as well tell that half of their audience that they are “unpersons,” as George Orwell might have said. Suddenly those “unpersons” won’t buy their products, or tickets to their parks – all of which are overpriced anyway. They’ll look for other sources of entertainment, and those sources are already arising. They include Daily Wire, Bentkey, and the coming American Heartland Park. In the meantime, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) has relentlessly legislated against them. This did not start with his Parental Rights in Education Act, regardless of what the company said afterward. https://twitter.com/WaltDisneyCo/status/1508494672817123330 The governor started with taking Reedy Creek away from Disney. Which should have happened sooner – who did Walt Disney think he would become, the Duke of Reedy Creek? It would have been unconstitutional to let that remain. Article I Section 10 Clause 1 clearly forbids States to grant titles of nobility. The company sued, claiming retaliation – and recently a court threw that lawsuit out. And the company continued to ruin every intellectual property it acquired. The latest Now, of course, Disney is in a proxy war with corporate troubleshooter Nelson Peltz. Peltz may, or may not, have taken the revelation that Disney shelved a movie titled Sound of Freedom – which went on to gross more than $250 million worldwide on a combined production and promotional budget of $20 million. In any case, the company refuses to abandon The Message, and as a result is now under attack from three different directions. Besides the proxy fight and the Reedy Creek debacle, Actress Gina Carano is suing the company over her unceremonious firing. Bad enough that they terminated her without the courtesy of a telephone call or any other communication. They defamed her in public, and certain leftist activists carried their activism to the point of stalking her. (And, indeed, threatening her with death!) So she alleges in her complaint; see the docket page here. Indeed that complaint speaks volumes about hypocrisy on Disney’s part, and the part of the government whose side they took in January 2021. From the complaint, we now learn that someone mistakenly copied Carano on an email predating that January conference by two weeks. Two days after the January 6 Event, the company was looking for a scapegoat “to deflect from [Chapek]’s failed leadership.” And that occasioned the post that finally led to her termination! In other words, Disney did more than fire her. They set her up, over a campaign that lasted a very long time. Disney to suffer its worst embarrassment CNAV appreciates the work of certain YouTube influencers in bringing the case of Carano v. Disney to its attention. But we wonder whether any of them read the complaint. It tells a story of a campaign against her lasting long before her termination, and also reveals that Disney and Lucasfilm “cast” (including Mark Hamill, who destroyed his iconic character in Star Wars Eight) had afflicted themselves with the Woke Mind Virus. That surely ought to concern anyone who mourns for a once-great franchise. But this case still promises the worst embarrassment the company has ever faced. Carano is asking for reinstatement – which probably would be useless – and damages that could amount to millions of dollars. (An earlier report of her seeking $75,000 is incomplete; that’s only the minimum damages a federal case requires.) She also demands trial by jury, which can only proceed under a welter of publicity. Pre-trial discovery will cause the worst embarrassment. Apart from the origins of that January 8 email, and the role of Lucasfilm President Kathleen Kennedy in trying to wreck Carano’s career, discovery will reveal how deep the rot goes. This, plus the Rufo Release this week, will infuriate investors and cause them to look for a new CEO. Where the case could go CNAV must give one cautionary note: Carano’s case is in the hands of Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett, a Biden appointee. The case also needs a magistrate judge, but the first one (Pat Donahue) has already ducked the case. And now Gina Carano has added another famous name to her legal team: Eugene Volokh, of Volokh Conspiracy fame. Volokh is an attorney with the same firm (Schaerr Jaffe LLP) that took her case. Apparently Carano added Volokh because Donald Falk, an earlier “local counsel,” was disqualified for not having an office in California’s Central District. Volokh talked about her case shortly after her firing, as did his colleague Robby Soave at Reason. All this is part of the public record. More to the point, Eugene Volokh is a First Amendment expert and will prove a formidable match for Judge Garnett. The revelations over the past two days cannot fail to substantiate the key allegations in Gina Carano’s complaint. (And also give some investors a cause of action against Iger, Chapek, and Kennedy for dereliction of fiduciary duty.) Obviously the machinations have already begun. Elon Musk himself hired Shaeer Jaffe to represent Carano, and he might involve himself in the proxy fight as well. But whether any of this is enough to repair the damage to Disney, is anyone’s guess. Perhaps what Disney really needs is some of the talent of the kind that have adapted Tolkien’s work earlier. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/15/editorial/talk/disney-leaders-always-woke/ The EPCOT Film: https://youtu.be/sLCHg9mUBag Why J. R. R. Tolkien refused to work with Disney: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwxHMWZBMSI Christopher Rufo’s latest revelation: https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1757494954895815142 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1757829650909401088 https://christopherrufo.com/p/the-moment-disney-went-political Christopher Rufo’s earlier series: https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1508912865293619202 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1508926408332034049 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1508934581092765700 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1508939718288936967 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1508937431520890888 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1509201394485583876 Disney statement on the anti-grooming bill: https://twitter.com/WaltDisneyCo/status/1508494672817123330 Carano v. Disney et al.: Docket page: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68228150/gina-carano-v-the-walt-disney-company/ Complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.913921/gov.uscourts.cacd.913921.1.0.pdf Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Border security – impeachment and secession By Terry A. Hurlbut The border security issue saw three developments yesterday that shows how “hot” it has become. In the morning, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) traded barbs over Cornyn’s vote on a foreign-aid bill for Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan (and Gaza, too!) that offered nothing for border security. Next, the Texas Nationalist Movement brought their petitions supporting secession to the Governor’s office, asking for a special legislative session. Finally, yesterday evening, the House of Representatives impeached SecHomeSec Alejandro Mayorkas by the margin of a single vote. More likely this will put Democrats and RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) on the spot during this election cycle. But it also represents the greatest pressure the Uniparty has ever faced. Foreign aid bill – border security out, impeachment trap in Late Sunday night, while the Kansas City Chiefs were successfully defending their Super Bowl title against the San Francisco Forty-niners, the Senate passed a $95 billion foreign aid package for Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and – even less credibly – Gaza. The vote was 70 to 29, with 22 Republicans and 48 Democrats voting “Aye.” The “Nay” votes included two Democrats (Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., and Peter Welch, D-Vt.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Those three, according to Cullen Linebarger at The Gateway Pundit, voted “Nay” over the Israel part of the package. The 22 Republicans voting “Aye” included Mitch McConnell (Ky.), John Boozman (Ark.), Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.), Susan Collins (Maine), Jerry Moran (Kansas), Mitt Romney (Utah), Thom Tillis (N.C.), Roger Wicker (Miss.), Todd Young (Ind.), and the entire Senate delegations of North and South Dakota, Louisiana, Idaho, Iowa, and Alaska. They also included Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). Attorney General Ken Paxton was furious. Cullen Linebarger found quite an exchange on X. (Warning. Some of these posts expressed disdain for Sen. Cornyn in very impolite language. Parental judgment and discretion are advised.) https://twitter.com/KenPaxtonTX/status/1757377123902201873 https://twitter.com/JohnCornyn/status/1757412800488407479 https://twitter.com/catturd2/status/1757420677139681530 https://twitter.com/BuzzPatterson/status/1757441233134465203 https://twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/1757417128737607702 https://twitter.com/SunshineSass2/status/1757422850925793480 https://twitter.com/RobManess/status/1757425563143381266 https://twitter.com/Gigi_Tx6/status/1757549796456370454 https://twitter.com/MQSullivan/status/1757420118059983083 Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.), Speaker of the House, refuses even to consider the Senate bill. https://twitter.com/SpeakerJohnson/status/1757210505570087039 Sen. Cornyn will not stand for reelection until 2026. Mr. Linebarger suggested that Cornyn should “bail like many establishment RINOs before him.” Several Republican House Members have resigned already or announced their intention not to seek reelection. The Texas Nationalist Movement sees an opportunity The Texas Nationalist Movement still had on hand the signatures, most of them electronic, they had gathered last year on petitions to place the question of Texas secession on the Republican and Democratic primary ballots. Yesterday afternoon they took all those signature documents to the office of Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas). https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1757437587558711579 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1757464576055292100 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1757468904140812737 https://twitter.com/DeanRoss34/status/1757518044396482623 Gov. Abbott has, thus far, not commented. The San Antonio Current, which has expressed disdain for the Movement and its goals, expressed that same disdain yesterday. They did quote Dan Miller, head of the TNM, in his address to supporters at the Texas Capitol: Today, we bring those same names, those same petition signatures, plus all the Democrats who signed the petition who wanted a vote as well, to show beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is an issue that transcends partisan divide and is, in fact, an issue of the people of Texas versus an entrenched political establishment. But they also cited a British study saying 67% of likely Texas voters would reject Texas Independence in any referendum. Still, 23% would support independence. The crosstabs show that Texas independence finds greater support among Trump voters than Biden voters. That same poll suggested that a plurality of the sample said the United States should allow any State to secede if a majority of its voters support that step. Redfield and Wilton Strategies reported that poll out on February 7, 2024 – a week ago. Many things have happened in the ensuing week, things that could change minds. Even without that consideration, Dan Miller insists that TNM enjoys greater support than have similar secession movements at the same or similar stage of the debate. At the end of the day, you're going to see polls like that… If you look at where support is for this issue right now, in this lifecycle of an independence movement, we're outperforming Brexit, we're outperforming Scottish independence and we're outperforming Catalan — and we're outperforming everyone at every stage of the process. More to the point, a February 10 Newsweek poll shows the border security issue has galvanized support for Texas independence. Alejandro Mayorkas impeached over border security But in the most electrifying story yet, the House of Representatives tried again to impeach Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security. Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) was back in the House to vote; he had been absent last week. The House voted 214-213 to impeach. https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1757562191459287530 Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit linked to and quoted President Joe Biden’s outraged reaction. In it Biden, of course, defended his Cabinet officer, and blamed Republicans for not passing “bipartisan” border security legislation. He neglected to mention that the legislation freely admits 5,000 migrants per day before any border shutdown can take place. He also failed to mention that the bill largely provides for an army of “immigration judges” bearing rubber stamps. Mayorkas becomes the first cabinet officer since William Belknap, President U.S. Grant’s War Secretary, to face impeachment. Mr. Belknap faced trial in 1876, not over any policy difference, but over self-dealing and a lifestyle too lavish even by the lax standards that then prevailed. He resigned minutes before the House voted, but they impeached him anyway. The Senate supported the five Impeachment Articles – but by simple majorities, not two-thirds. Thus, he walked – but he never held office of honor, trust or profit ever again. This time, Mayorkas’ supporters told NPR and Axios that his impeachment was over a policy difference, hence unworthy. NPR cited “experts” who seemed to find the immigration laws discretionary – and subject to Mayorkas’ sole discretion as SecHomeSec. Gov. Abbott paid due attention: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1757611031310852137 What next on the impeachment Reps. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), Ken Buck (R-Colo.), and Mike Gallagher (R-Wisc.) joined all voting Democrats to vote against impeachment. McClintock even went on record saying the impeachment would go nowhere. Sen. Charles M. Schumer (D-N.Y.), the Majority Leader, apparently has sole discretion on whether to try the case. Furthermore, no one expects Mayorkas to lose his job. But the Impeachment Articles do put the Senate and Schumer on the spot on border security. Schumer sees no reason to spare the Democrats any embarrassment, because in his view, people expect nothing else from Democrats than to open the border and let in millions of prospective Democrat voters to replace the voters whose mothers aborted them away during the Roe era. No doubt he himself sees that as their duty. But will he “take one for the team” to spare Republicans from embarrassment? Or does he think Republicans can embarrass themselves only by voting for impeachment? No one knows – so no one knows what he will do with those Articles once he receives them. What next on other questions The other two controversies illustrate that RINOs might again be in hunting season. Twenty-one other Republican Senators besides Sen. Cornyn showed that they want to admit cheap labor. They little know that the kind of mendicants showing up at the border will vote for socialism. (Or that the Chinese nationals of military age will likely await orders from Beijing to embark on campaigns of sabotage, or even mass murder, when a Sino-American War breaks out.) The Texas Nationalist Movement is certainly paying attention. When Dan Miller says other secession movements enjoyed less support at the current stage of their campaigns, several experts agree! Newsweek quoted Matt Qvortrup, author of an apparent primer on secession, thus: These are not bad polls. In fact, they suggest that those who want “Texit” are at the same level of support as those who supported Brexit in 2010—and, of course, that changed. In Catalonia, Quebec, and in Scotland, support for independence was in the twenties when the issue was first discussed. This has in all cases moved within touching distance of independence. The polls may seem disheartening to those who believe that Texit is imminent. But these percentages should worry those who—like Governor Abbott—who are against Texit. Gov. Abbott is pushing hard on border security, though he secured reelection two years ago, probably for two reasons. First, as Dr. Steve Turley suggests, because Ken Paxton showed him he can. And second – and more important – because he knows border security gives the TNM an entering wedge. He’s had eighteen hours to respond to the delivery of the Texit petitions to his office. If he doesn’t respond, he will have shown fear. Abbott did note one thing: his border security measures have forced the invading migrants to seek pathways of lesser resistance. https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1757435564175827276 Will the federal government file any more lawsuits against Texas? How will the Supreme Court handle them? Will Gov. Abbott call that special session anyway, just to clear a Texas throat and say, “Leave us alone, or else”? Stay tuned. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/14/news/border-security-impeachment-secession/ Ken Paxton, John Cornyn, and everyone’s reaction: https://twitter.com/KenPaxtonTX/status/1757377123902201873 https://twitter.com/JohnCornyn/status/1757412800488407479 https://twitter.com/catturd2/status/1757420677139681530 https://twitter.com/BuzzPatterson/status/1757441233134465203 https://twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/1757417128737607702 https://twitter.com/SunshineSass2/status/1757422850925793480 https://twitter.com/RobManess/status/1757425563143381266 https://twitter.com/Gigi_Tx6/status/1757549796456370454 https://twitter.com/MQSullivan/status/1757420118059983083 Mike Johnson’s statement: https://twitter.com/SpeakerJohnson/status/1757210505570087039 Texas Nationalist Movement: https://tnm.me/ TNM petition turn-in: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1757437587558711579 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1757464576055292100 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1757468904140812737 https://twitter.com/DeanRoss34/status/1757518044396482623 End Wokeness announces vote on Mayorkas impeachment: https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1757562191459287530 Greg Abbott’s reaction: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1757611031310852137 Gateston Institute link: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20388/china-infiltrators-us Greg Abbott notes that migrants are crossing elsewhere: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1757435564175827276 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

SpaceX – the game changer By Terry A. Hurlbut Twenty-two years ago this month, Elon Musk first conceived of a private company that would, on its own, design rocket ships to travel to Mars. That company, now known as Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, or SpaceX, has revolutionized the space launch industry. Next month it will test, for a third time, its proposed Mars colony ship, Starship. The first two Orbital Flight Tests have both ended in failure, but that poses no great hazard to SpaceX today. The real hazard Musk faces is that his vision of a Mars colony is incomplete, and risks bifurcating the human species into two mutually incompatible groups, with one unable ever to visit Earth. Unless he radically changes his proposed Mars city design, his vision will not create “species life insurance” for humanity. Instead it will lay the basis for a tense relationship, if not war. SpaceX begins with mockery The one constant in the history of SpaceX, indeed the influence that spawned the company, is mockery. Elon Musk is a co-founder of PayPal. Late in 2000, the other owners of PayPal threw him out of the company. Happily, he had Buy-Sell agreements with them, so if they wanted him gone, they had to buy him out. Buy him out they did – and left him with $180 million to spend. He started spending it in funding of various projects – including buying a board seat from the Mars Society for $100,000. This opened up contacts with other engineers, including several working on Project Mars Oasis. That project sought to acquire Martian regolith, transform it into arable soil, and grow a plant in it. To get Martian regolith, the project needed a cheap rocket. So Elon Musk and project engineer James Cantrell traveled to Russia, first in October 2001, then in February 2002. They sought to buy a decommissioned Dnepr ICBM to launch a sample-return probe. The Russians laughed at the pair, and quoted them a price of $8 million per missile. Musk knew they would gouge him and his friends unmercifully if they paid that price even once. Refusing, Musk and Cantrell departed Russia. On the flight out, Musk conceived of founding his own company to build rockets at far less expense per launch. SpaceX had its first meeting in a hotel at Los Angeles International Airport. Actual incorporation dates from March 14, 2002. The secret: reusability SpaceX solved the expense problem in a way only a geek/nerd could conceive – and only a genius could make real. How much more expensive would air travel be, he reasoned, if, every time Boeing Group or Airbus Industrie built an airliner, they scrapped it after one flight only! So, as much as possible, rockets must be reusable. For six years the company spent Elon Musk’s millions on development of new rocket engines, then of a booster stage that could actually return to Earth for a landing. SpaceX also developed a new capsule, the Dragon, that could fly several missions after nominal refurbishing. Starting in 2008, SpaceX and NASA each effectively saved the other. NASA provided critical funding for the eventual development of Falcon 9, the first rocket with a reusable booster. Then in 2010, SpaceX sent a Dragon into orbit and retrieved it after two orbits. It could only carry cargo, but that would prove vital – because the Space Shuttle fleet formally retired in 2011. In that same year, NASA paid SpaceX $75 million to redesign Dragon with a proper launch-escape system. SpaceX began launching “Cargo Dragons” in 2012, while continuing to work on the Dragon redesign. In 2020, its efforts paid off, when the first “Crew Dragon” successfully delivered astronauts to the International Space Station, and brought them back to Earth. With that mission, RosKosmos, the Russian space agency, lost its monopoly on launching and returning astronauts. Milestone after milestone Those achievements would be breathtaking enough. But reusable rockets have let SpaceX launch payloads – and crew – at far less cost than anyone else can manage. Today the company offers launches on two kinds of rocket. Falcon 9 takes up middle-weight payloads – or, through the company’s “Ride Share” program, collections of lightweight payloads. Falcon Heavy – with three boosters – take up heavier payloads. At first, every launch of a Falcon 9 had an element of suspense: would it, or would it not, land safely? To make such launches more interesting, the company started landing Falcon 9 boosters on robotic barges. Today, those safe landings are almost as routine as are landings of commercial airliners. At present only the second Falcon stage, or the central core stage of a Falcon Heavy, remains expendable. SpaceX even recovers the fairing – the conical shroud that forms a rocket ship’s nose and protects the payload before the ship leaves the atmosphere. Those parts cost money – big money – and SpaceX doesn’t like to waste them. As a side benefit, the company isn’t polluting or littering the ocean with discarded boosters and fairing halves. (Second stages generally are moving so fast that, if they fall back to Earth, they burn up. The same holds for Falcon Heavy core stages – though SpaceX has conceived of a method of recovering that, also.) SpaceX builds a mega-lifter But the company has never forgotten its real reason for being: to plant a sustainable colony on Mars. Elon Musk chose Mars because, of all the planets in the Solar system, it is the most hospitable – other than Earth itself. That doesn’t say much, but it is no less true. Mercury has no atmosphere, so its surface is subject to tremendous extremes of heat and cold. Venus has a crushing atmosphere. At least one engineer has proposed building a city for Venus – and suspending it in mid-air, with gas-filled balloons. At 30,000 feet, the atmosphere would almost be breathable – if not for its sulfur dioxide content. But that atmosphere has crushed every probe that has parachuted to the planet’s surface. But SpaceX proposes a space city on the surface, and Mars offers the best compromise. So from the beginning, Elon Musk has sought to develop a rocket to deliver crew, equipment and supplies to Mars, and return to Earth. That rocket is Starship. One can think of it as an interplanetary Conestoga wagon – especially since SpaceX plans sending fleets of Starships to Mars. Those fleets would be the wagon trains of our modern age. Starship will have everything one could want in a heavy lifter with minimal cost-to-mass. Literal tankers will refuel those rockets after they reach space, enabling them to get to Mars. And on Mars, crews will use components of the local atmosphere to make fuel for the return trip. Low gravity as boon – and bane But the SpaceX vision has one problem that they have not thought through. Mars is smaller than Earth – and the smaller a planet, the less its gravity. In fact, surface gravity varies directly as a body’s radius, and the mass density of its average substance. For the same reason, so does escape speed from the surface. For all those reasons, surface gravity on Mars, and escape speed from its surface, are 37% of their Earth values. The 63% weight savings makes the difference between success and failure of round trips to Mars. One does not build boosters on Mars – nor does one need them. But surface gravity is another matter. It’s all very well to observe that you can lift objects three times as heavy on Mars than on Earth. True – for the first generation. But crew staying on Mars long-term will start to lose muscle mass from the first day. Doctors have seen it happen to astronauts aboard the Space Station. Not even the station’s gymnasium, with its spring-loaded resistance exercisers, can forestall this. Astronauts lose not only muscle but bone also – and they don’t get it all back. Doctors know all this. They worry that a crew going to Mars and staying there, will eventually not be able to return to Earth. And that’s only the first generation! Succeeding generations will develop long, lean – and delicate – bodies. God designed humans for Earth-standard gravity, and that’s what they need. The civil engineering problem SpaceX offers little but an artist’s concept drawing of a city on Mars, but that drawing speaks volumes. It depicts humans, of typical proportions, watching Starships take off from the safety of transparent domes. If any of the company’s engineers has thought through the long-term health implications of living in little-more-than-one-third gravity, the company gives no sign. That human family, again, will be long, lean, brittle, and not even recognizable as human. Its members – especially the two children – will suffer from claustrophobia. Elon Musk has the right basic concept – that a city in space must be self-sustaining. But the planned execution is seriously flawed, if anyone at SpaceX has a plan at all. Again: successive generations of colonists would lose any ability of the original crew to “lift heavy things and bound around.” No doubt the colony would be self-sustaining, because Mars has abundances of the necessities for life – even ice. But the colonists would never be able to return safely to Earth. Robert A. Heinlein depicted this for an even lighter-gravity environment, namely the Moon – in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. Mars might not be a harsh mistress, but it would be a jealous one. And that would create a tremendous social problem. For the first time, humanity would exist as two populations, incompatible for procreation. The difference between Earthers and “Martians” would be worse than interracial – they would be interspecial. Loss of common bonds is one way to start wars. Ask the Russians and the Ukrainians. A nearly forgotten solution Long ago, another visionary conceived of an even more fanciful project: building a vessel similar to Star Trek’s iconic spacecraft. That site exists only on the Wayback Machine today, but that archive has all the original proposed design elements and mission profiles. Two of them involved missions to Mars: • To deliver massive numbers of rovers and specially designed aircraft, including even fixed-wing aircraft, and then: • To build a permanent base on Mars. This visionary knew that humans live and work best in Earth-standard gravity. So he proposed building the entire base as a gigantic beveled centrifuge. It would spin fast enough to simulate standard gravity. Furthermore, it would have an angle calculated so that anyone on board could orient himself to “up” and “down” easily. This solution is available for colonizing Mars or the Moon. One need only adjust the size, spin rate, and bevel angle. This solution affords Earth-standard gravity on any body smaller than Earth. So the ideal Martian city is either one beveled centrifuge, or several, with a transportation network to correct them. Then the colonists would spend most of their time aboard one of these centrifuges – and still “work out.” The larger the centrifuge, the slower it need spin – and the less one risks claustrophobia. The practical application So let the colonists save the low-gravity routine for: • Their spaceport (the most obvious application), • Their vegetable garden (for growing much larger vegetables than one can grow on Earth), and: • A hospital specializing in cardio-pulmonary and cardio-vascular medicine and surgery. The maternity hospital, and the physical medicine and rehabilitation center, must stay on the centrifuge. Gravity plays an integral role during pregnancy, labor-and-delivery, and healing of broken bones. Let SpaceX make this refinement, and their proposed Mars city will work. Mars is an ideal stage for asteroid mining, besides being the hypothetical refuge Elon Musk envisions. The company will make its third attempt to send its space-borne Conestoga wagon into orbit next month. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/13/editorial/talk/spacex-game-changer/ SpaceX history: https://history-computer.com/spacex-the-complete-history/ Description of Mars colonization effort: https://www.spacex.com/humanspaceflight/mars/ Medical references on musculo-skeletal atrophy in space: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9818606/ https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-13461-1 “Build the Enterprise” archives: Main page: https://web.archive.org/web/20200820230127/https://www.buildtheenterprise.org/ Moon and Mars base (description of the beveled centrifuge): https://web.archive.org/web/20201009154323/https://www.buildtheenterprise.org/mars-moon-bases/ Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Democrats divide over Biden By Terry A. Hurlbut The Democrats are already dividing into two camps over Joe Biden’s mental fitness to hold office. One camp is clearly circling the wagons against attacks on Biden and his policies. The other, just as clearly, wants him to get out of the way before he drags down the ticket. That division also affects the Cabinet, still the only body that can judge Presidential ability – other than the President himself. But it could set a trap for Republicans, who must campaign as much against Biden’s policies as against the man. Cause of the division: the Hur Report Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report, as CNAV noted yesterday, has put President Biden’s physical and mental condition into stark relief. Mr. Hur didn’t even try to justify Biden’s wrongful appropriation, possession, and (mis)handling of classified information. All he could do was excuse the man from punishment, and even then he could not excuse what Biden did. His excuse amounted to: mentally incompetent to stand trial. Tellingly, the White House continued to keep a full transcript of the report under wraps. But this much has leaked out: We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him – by then a former president well into his eighties – of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness. Biden has seen fit to contest the report. At least his handlers have, but he clearly needed no persuasion to try to contest it. But his performance Thursday evening (February 8) was a disaster on several levels. Eerily paralleling Bill Clinton’s denial of improper conduct, he railed at reporters suggesting he shared classified information. https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1755762530012508360 Plenty of evidence, including his ghostwriter caught deleting audio files – and the later recovery of said files showing Biden did share classified information – proves that Biden flat-out lied. Biden would have done better to shout, I don’t know what I’m doing here! Won’t these people leave me alone? Then one might in good conscious excuse him from punishment – so long as he told the world who has been handling him and why. But he’s totally down with The Program, so that will never happen. Democrats circling the wagons Naturally several Democrats want Biden to stay in office. Start with his wife, who doesn’t want to give up her First Lady trappings. Christina Laila at The Gateway Pundit covered a statement she posted to X. In it she tried to deflect from her husband’s misdeeds – and lack of capacity even to understand them. To do that, she mentioned their son Beau. She also flat-out lied about his capacity, trying to represent it as greater than it possibly could be. https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1756489370696081598 Ms. Laila released further evidence the next day that this is not true. Biden spent the weekend in Delaware – and photographers caught his shuffling gait as he left a clothing store. https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1756111376093729024 https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1756481161050685809 SecHomeSec Alejandro Mayorkas and Biden campaign co-chair Mitch Landrieu (no doubt part of the Landrieu Dynasty of Louisiana Democrats) actually called Biden “mentally sharp,” “tough,” “smart,” and “on his game.” They said that to a sympathetic outlet, Meet the (de)Press(ed). Landrieu also said the Hur Report contained “gratuitous, unnecessary and inaccurate personal remarks.” Furthermore he dismissed any sense that Biden was unfit for his job as a steaming, noisome quicksand field. That is to paraphrase him politely. Mayorkas, of course, has his own conduct as SecHomeSec to defend. In Nuremberg defendant fashion, he disclaimed all responsibility for the spectacle of an open U.S. border. He also expressed no regret at Biden’s termination of Donald Trump’s Remain in Mexico policy. For what it’s worth, Lanny Davis accused Robert Hur of speaking out of school – like James Comey. Other Democrats not so sure But other Democrats are not so sure. Hillary Clinton, for one, shared with MSNBC’s Alex Wagner her concern about his age. She went further – by revealing that it is a current whisper topic in the White House. https://twitter.com/WagnerTonight/status/1756153037163209120 Of course, she called Trump’s age “a legitimate issue” as well. But not only is Trump four years younger than Biden, but he is not showing his age. Biden is. The problem with a doddering old fool is never that he’s old, but that he’s doddering. So it is with Biden. Already at least some ideological fellow travelers – who are roughly the same age as he – begin to know it. Hanna Panreck of Fox News quoted The New York Times, one of whose reporters spoke to some of them over the weekend. It pained them to say it – with one saying this election would be between “grandpa and crazy.” A few of them tried to deny it – saying no one who can still ride a bicycle can be that bad. (They neglected to mention that Biden fell off his bicycle – after stopping.) They also raised a repeated issue of society shoving old people aside merely because they are old. But others did not deny it, and mentioned that the spectacle of Biden struggling, struck fear in their hearts. He scares me. Watch how he walks — he walks like a guy who doesn’t have it anymore. Dean Phillips, the one remaining primary challenger And then there’s Rep. Dean Phillips (D-Minn.), the only primary challenger with whom Biden still must deal. A week ago he told The Guardian that he’s staying in the race as “a mission of principle.” When the Hur Report came out, he told Fox News Digital that, in essence, this was “it.” “Another sad day for America and particularly for President Biden and his family,” he said. Then he said something a good deal less charitable: The Report simply affirms what most Americans already know, that the President cannot continue to serve as our Commander-in-Chief beyond his term ending January 20, 2025. Already facing the lowest approval numbers in modern history and losing in each of the key battleground states, this Report has all but handed the 2024 election to Donald Trump if Joe Biden is the Democratic nominee — and I invite fellow Democrats to face the truth. The next day, he was back on Fox to say more: Anybody who has their eyes open can see what's going on. I think it's a shame. I think it's embarrassing. And I think it's sad. And I think it's a shame for a president who could cement a legacy, pass the torch and do what's best for the country. It's not just about him. https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1756137735776092484 At least one other liberal, Bill Maher, has been sounding alarms about Biden for two years. The release of the Hur report allows him to claim vindication, according to Fox. Most recently, Maher compared Biden to the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Just as her death paved the way for Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Biden’s obvious lack of capacity will pave the way for Trump to come back. In fact, Maher said flatly the Democrats should “switch him out at the convention.” Analysis Those Democrats, in and out of office, trying to excuse Biden’s signs of incapacity, are largely self-serving. One other such Democrat bears mention: Ana Navarro of The View. Yesterday she posted a meme to Instagram showing a Margaret Atwood-style handmaid telling others that she voted against Biden because he was too old. https://www.instagram.com/p/C3ONJGGR6ss/ In a comment elaborating on the post, she said this: There are two older men running for President. (If you think R’s will nominate Haley or that Dems will replace Biden, you are smoking some good [hallucinogen]). Biden & Trump are 4 years apart. Biden mis-speaks. Trump says stupid, crazy, inaccurate and mean stuff DAILY. Only one of those men – Biden – is actively working to give Americans more rights – to vote, to love who they want, to make their own reproductive choices, to live free of institutionalized racism and bigotry, to read books, to learn history, to represent American diversity… I’ll say it again. Those are your two choices. That’s it. Anyone basing their choice on an age difference of 4 years needs their head examined. Even she couldn’t defend Biden as a good performer – but only, apparently, as her ideological champion. Lay aside for a moment the horror of those ideologies. The abortion regime alone recalls radio personality Arch Oboler’s “Laughing Man” sketch ending with a chem-bio warfare attack against children. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kusfi1KVdMA Again, the Democrats don’t want to abandon that ideology. But a significant number of them want to abandon the man before he drags them down. (Is Dean Phillips self-serving? Or, from a Democrat’s point of view, is he in the race to save the cause? You decide.) Republicans have a problem of their own, as Susan Crabtree hinted at. If Biden goes, all the old stumble-bum jokes go with him. They must, therefore, campaign on ideology. In that sense, with friends like Alejandro Mayorkas, the Democrats need no enemies. (Or else they are their own worst enemies.) That’s why Republicans must campaign as much on ideology as on the diminished capacity of the enemy’s (for now) chosen champion. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/12/foundation/constitution/democrats-divide-biden/ RNC Research post: “I did not share…!” https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1755762530012508360 Post containing Jill Biden’s statement: https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1756489370696081598 Two posts by RNC Research catching Biden exiting a clothing store: https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1756111376093729024 https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1756481161050685809 Alex Wagner interview with Hillary Clinton: https://twitter.com/WagnerTonight/status/1756153037163209120 Jesse Watters’ post with Dean Phillips’ statement: https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1756137735776092484 Ana Navarro’s Instagram post: https://www.instagram.com/p/C3ONJGGR6ss/ Arch Oboler – The Laughing Man https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kusfi1KVdMA Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Biden is no leader By Terry A. Hurlbut The end of last week saw revelations about Joe Biden’s ability – or lack thereof – to discharge the powers and duties of the Presidency, that none can deny any longer. His staff, and tame reporters and editors, have surely known of his failings since the 2020 campaign. Now a special counsel, originally tasked to investigate Biden’s own classified documents retention scandal, has issued a shocking report. Moreover, Biden’s subsequent efforts to dispute the report’s key finding, only made that finding more obvious. This goes beyond selective application of justice, though this drama includes that, too. It shows that a flawed electoral process placed a senile dotard in the White House. (And handed him the Nuclear Codes!) But no one wants to act against him – because his replacement would be worse. The Biden classified documents scandal For more than a year, the country has known that Joe Biden took classified documents from various terms of office. With the finding of a second, then a third, cache of documents, a disturbing picture emerged. In various places, including the garage of his son’s Delaware residence and at a university off-campus office, Joe Biden was storing documents left over from his days as a Senator from Delaware and as Vice-President during the Barack Obama administration. Ultimately, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed U.S. Attorney Robert Hur as Special Counsel, to investigate. As House Republicans started launching investigations, Democrats adopted a defensive posture – though it almost fell apart, but not quite. On Thursday, February 8, Special Counsel Hur filed his 345-page report. Hur found that Biden “willfully retained” these documents, which he smuggled out of at least one Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF). Biden retained these at four known locations: 1. The Penn Biden Center (University of Pennsylvania), 2. A garage in his Delaware residence, 3. Another residence in Virginia, and 4. The law office of his lawyer in Boston, Massachusetts. Not only that, but Biden was very careless in his storage and handling of the documents. Christina Laila of The Gateway Pundit has damning photographs. But the report did not recommend charging Biden with anything. Why not? Because: We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him – by then a former president well into his eighties – of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness. How poor was his memory? He couldn’t even remember the years he served as Vice-President, or when his son Beau died. Washington Post reporter Matt Viser shared this: https://twitter.com/mviser/status/1755682759874359308 Sharing of documents – and a disastrous press conference The special counsel’s office also knows Biden shared the contents of some of those documents with a ghostwriter. When a reporter asked him about that late Thursday night, he screamed a denial of it. https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1755762530012508360 That ghostwriter, Mark Zwonitzer, deleted the audio files of his recorded interviews with the President. He did so after learning of Robert Hur’s appointment. But he did not succeed; technicians recovered the deleted files anyway. He will not face charges, by reason of “insufficient evidence.” (Laila’s report shows that he did cooperate, at least to some extent.) As may be, Biden’s handlers made a major mistake. They scheduled a press conference and let him host it. They even scheduled it to compete with the release of Tucker Carlson’s interview with Russian leader Vladimir Putin. But this caused two problems. First, anyone switching back-and-forth between Biden’s address and Putin’s interview would see a stark contrast not flattering to Biden. The contrast was between the sharp, confident Putin and the obviously feeble Biden. The second problem was worse. Biden made a thorough mess of his appearance, by almost all accounts. A reporter asked him about his age and mental acuity, and the President blew his stack. https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1755760001161761021 https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1755759848094896186 https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1755760287913836907 In fact he had blown his stack before – in private, with several of his fellow partisans. But he evidently couldn’t control himself at the press conference. At first he tried to parry the questions with snark: I’m well-meaning and I’m an elderly man and I know what the hell I’m doing and I’m the president and I put this country back on its feet… My memory is so bad, I let you speak. Then he said this: That is YOUR JUDGMENT! That is YOUR JUDGMENT! That is NOT the judgment of the press! Confusing his heads of state Even if he hadn’t lost his temper, he still could never defend confusing the heads of state of Egypt and Mexico. https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1755761980529426566 He correctly named the President of Egypt, and correctly identified the hazard and a key border town in Gaza. But he misidentified the country. Later that night, CNN tried to defend Biden by saying he “just misspoke.” https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1755766047435612225 https://twitter.com/ChuckRossDC/status/1755762571141955716 https://twitter.com/NickFondacaro/status/1755758314518872259 The problem is that no one has ever given Donald Trump comparable consideration for misspeaking or misspelling. At MSNBC, a panel discussing Robert Hur’s report erupted in fury, accusing Hur of “derogatory, partisan cheap shots” at Biden. https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/1755777202887549212 https://twitter.com/KurtSchlichter/status/1755764031946621306 That night the first calls rang out, from Republican Representatives and conservative commentators, to invoke Amendment XXV, Section 4. https://twitter.com/claudiatenney/status/1755760594500653535 https://twitter.com/marklevinshow/status/1755726665404022952 https://twitter.com/BasedMikeLee/status/1755799098559484403 https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1755704101097160746 https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1755739927822668117 https://twitter.com/RepMaryMiller/status/1755712906983813489 https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1755716984229015676 https://twitter.com/SenRickScott/status/1755768785703682179 https://twitter.com/LeadingReport/status/1755768843752939846 The problem is, Vice-President Kamala Harris, who would become Acting President, is no better. Her own mental acuity is in doubt. Because now, what people perhaps had never seen before can be seen to know what’s possible. But the brilliance of this inaugural class and its leaders is the ability to see what can be unburdened by what has been, and then to make it. Kamala Harris This is only the latest example. Nevertheless, Joe Biden showed worse signs of mental decline on Friday (February 9), in an Oval Office meeting with the German Chancellor. https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1756053543348285577 Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-N.Y.) is not letting this matter rest, either. https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1756024349239246939 Newt Gingrich said it’s no longer safe to have Biden as President. https://rumble.com/embed/v49wp09/?pub=4teej Even Democrats worry about Biden Even Democrats worry that Biden not only can’t handle the office, but will bring the ticket down his fall. The Daily Mail reported a movement to substitute another candidate at the Democratic National Convention in August. Michelle Obama and Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) have borne mention as possible replacements. So has Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-Mich.). David Axelrod, formerly of the Obama administration, expressed similar concerns to CNN’s Anderson Cooper. And in the worst falling-out yet, CNN gave the lie to several statements Biden made about the security of those classified documents. https://twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/1756035947656032379 Sunny Hostin of The View also suggested substituting Newsom for Biden. https://twitter.com/NickFondacaro/status/1756001700177920034 No one is yet saying how to do it, only that the Democrats must do it. Yesterday afternoon, a report surfaced showing a falling-out between Biden and Attorney General Garland. The President has always been upset that his rival, Donald Trump, is not already in prison as a convict. https://twitter.com/CortesSteve/status/1756353660995490281 But now Biden resents Garland not “demanding edits” to the Hur report. If by some chance the President wins reelection, Merrick Garland might no longer be Attorney General. Apparently the President has one friend remaining on Capitol Hill: Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah). Romney evidently sees nothing wrong with Biden’s actions or his performance. That could be because the Senator has seen fit to blame recalcitrant fellow Republican Senators for not passing the McConnell-Schumer-Lankford Border Bill. Be careful what you wish for Susan Crabtree of RealClearPolitics tartly observed that the Democrats have brought this trouble on themselves. In Donald Trump’s final year, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) introduced a bill to establish a permanent Commission on Presidential Inability. Thus Congress would “by law provide” an alternative to the President’s Cabinet to sign off on a Vice-Presidential inability declaration. At the time, everyone suspected the Democrats of trying to get rid of Trump this way. Contributor Linda Goudsmit knew better. Pelosi is not talking about removing President Trump. This is the Pelosi Plan to sneak radical leftist Kamala Harris into the oval office. Artful dodger Nancy Pelosi’s deceitful Bypass Plan is to get demented Joe Biden over the finish line with the help of the colluding globalist mainstream media, and then swear in radical leftist Kamala Harris as president of the United States. Of course, Nancy Pelosi is no longer in House leadership – and everyone knows that Kamala Harris is even less composed. The falling-out with Merrick Garland could spread to other Cabinet officers. Even without that, Biden’s direct handlers would have him contest any such declaration. Congress would require two-thirds supermajorities in both chambers to sustain the declaration in that event. And everyone knows they would be trading in a senile dotard for a drug-addled – or just plain raving – maniac. Substituting another candidate at the Convention will be far easier. What might not be so easy is convincing the voters – now outraged after three years of disastrous policies – that a President Newsom or Whitmer or a President Mrs. Obama would be any better. None of those three has expressed any significant policy differences with this President (or the Censorship Industrial Complex). The real person waiting in the wings is Donald Trump. Who, now that his enemies are about to turn on one another, should sit back and watch. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/11/foundation/constitution/biden-no-leader/ Article with photographs of carelessly stored documents: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/here-are-photos-joe-bidens-classified-documents-scattered/ Matt Viser’s post: https://twitter.com/mviser/status/1755682759874359308 “I did not share classified documents with my ghostwriter!” https://twitter.com/mviser/status/1755682759874359308 Three more posts showing Biden getting angry about questions about his age and mental acuity: https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1755760001161761021 https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1755759848094896186 https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1755760287913836907 Benny Johnson on Biden confusing Egypt with Mexico: https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1755761980529426566 Three posts about CNN’s defense of Biden: https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1755766047435612225 https://twitter.com/ChuckRossDC/status/1755762571141955716 https://twitter.com/NickFondacaro/status/1755758314518872259 Posts from Town Hall about MSNBC panel blowing up: https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/1755777202887549212 https://twitter.com/KurtSchlichter/status/1755764031946621306 Calls for invoking the Twenty-fifth: https://twitter.com/claudiatenney/status/1755760594500653535 https://twitter.com/marklevinshow/status/1755726665404022952 https://twitter.com/BasedMikeLee/status/1755799098559484403 https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1755704101097160746 https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1755739927822668117 https://twitter.com/RepMaryMiller/status/1755712906983813489 https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1755716984229015676 https://twitter.com/SenRickScott/status/1755768785703682179 https://twitter.com/LeadingReport/status/1755768843752939846 RNC Research on the German Chancellor’s visit: https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1756053543348285577 Rep. Tenney’s post: https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1756024349239246939 Newt Gingrich’s video: “We can’t have him as CinC!” https://rumble.com/v4chzb0-newt-gingrich-this-is-not-about-politics-its-about-the-survival-of-this-nat.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 CNN turns on Biden, gives him the lie: https://twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/1756035947656032379 Video: Sunny Hostin suggests substituting Gavin Newsom: https://twitter.com/NickFondacaro/status/1756001700177920034 Frustration with Merrick Garland: https://twitter.com/CortesSteve/status/1756353660995490281 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Vladimir Putin – now that, is a leader By Terry A. Hurlbut This week, former Fox News host – now independent journalist – Tucker Carlson did something no one has seen done for years. He actually did journalism – which happens to be his job – and rocked several boats to the point of capsize. Specifically, he “scored” an interview with one of the last honest national executives left on this planet: Vladimir Putin. Vladimir Putin held up a mirror to the West and embarrassed it as the former Soviet Union never could have. It was a masterclass in leadership – and lessons to which Western electorates had better pay attention. Lead-up to the Vladimir Putin interview Tucker Carlson traveled to Russia without telling anyone. Earlier this week, several social-media influencers spotted him in Moscow and reported that fact. Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit carried one of the first reports, citing Newsweek. He also found this post, from Alexei Venediktov, formerly of the Echo of Moscow radio station: https://twitter.com/aavst20551/status/1754834771350577219 Translation: As far as I understand, Tucker Carlson got what he wanted. Official Washington, and the Interlocking Editorial Board of the Mainstream Media, alternately gasped and howled with outrage. In response – or rather, in anticipation – Tucker Carlson left his embedded-video post: https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1754939251257475555 Cullen Linebarger provided a partial transcript: Here’s why we’re doing it: First, it’s our job. We are in journalism. It is our duty to inform people. Two years into a war reshaping the entire world, most Americans are not informed…But they should know because they are paying much of it. That war is the Russia-Ukraine War, of course. Carlson went on: Most Americans have no idea why Putin invaded Ukraine and what his goals are now…Americans have a right to know all they can about a war they are implicated in, and we have a right to tell them about it because we are Americans too. CNAV knows why Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine – or rather, why someone had to invade Ukraine. Start with the biological weapons development laboratories in Ukraine, with American funding, and American direction, and American staffs. Vladimir Putin has the receipts, and his Foreign Office showed them nine months ago. Before that, the X account War Clandestine shed light on those laboratories. Twitter, under its old regime, suspended his account – and Elon Musk restored it after buying the company. Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) flatly accused Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) of having guilty knowledge of those labs. Then consider that Ukraine has a problem with the ideology of Adolf Hitler’s National Socialists, that goes beyond leftover symbolism. Tucker Carlson asks about Ukraine before Tucker Carlson has had serious questions about American support for Ukraine for nearly a year: 1. Is opposing Russia in Ukraine of vital strategic interest to America? 2. What is our objective in Ukraine, and how can we know when we have achieved it? 3. What is the limit on the amount of money and/or weapons you would be willing to send to President Zelenskyy? 4. Should the United States support regime change in Russia? 5. Have U.S. sanctions been effective? And: 6. Does the United States face a risk of nuclear war with Russia? The correct answers, in order, are: 1. No. In fact, the cleaning-out of biological weapons development laboratories in Ukraine serves the real vital public interest. Those laboratories have American funding, American direction, and American staffs. Or they had until Russia destroyed them. 2. The people can have no objective in Ukraine. This is not our fight and we ought to get out and stay out. 3. We exceeded those limits long ago – because the limit is zero. The war must stop. (And according to Darrell L. Castle, it will stop once the people turn off the money spigot.) 4. Absolutely not. As one particular candidate says, we need “regime change” in the United States. Happily, we can do that with something called an election. 5. No. Sanctions have been countereffective. Russia never needed international trade. 6. Yes. Russia could take out New York City, Washington, Boston, etc. with one Poseidon missile each. The Vladimir Putin interview with outline For everyone’s information, Poseidon is a class of intercontinental, nuclear-powered, nuclear-tipped autonomous – torpedo. Russia cannot deploy it at scale – yet. Well can one imagine the value – indeed the vital necessity – of interviewing the leader of a country that can develop, and prepare to deploy, that kind of weapon. But of course the Biden administration and the legacy media didn’t see it that way. They see Vladimir Putin as an enemy and warned people not to listen. Nevertheless Tucker Carlson released the Vladimir Putin interview promptly at 6:00 p.m. EST Thursday (February 8). Several YouTube channels streamed it live – and YouTube staff systematically tracked down every stream and shut it down. But Elon Musk pledged no interference on Platform X. Therefore one can play the interview here. https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682 Tucker Carlson provided a full transcript here to those willing to subscribe to his site. Members can also play his after-the-show monologue. (In it, as Jim Hoft reported, Tucker reminded people that Vladimir Putin would never give up another territory Ukraine thinks it can get back: Crimea.) https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1755765547965575436 But Carlson provided, free of charge, this outline of the interview: Timestamp Headline 00:00:00 Introduction 00:02:00 Putin gives a history of Russia & Ukraine 00:25:04 NATO Expansion 00:30:40 NATO & Bill Clinton 00:41:10 Ukraine 00:48:30 What triggered this conflict? 01:02:37 A peaceful solution? 01:11:33 Who blew up the Nord Stream pipelines? 01:24:13 Re-establishing communication with the US 01:36:33 How powerful is Zelensky? 01:48:36 Elon Musk & AI 01:51:07 Imprisoned American journalist Evan Gershkovich Points Vladimir Putin made In that history lesson, Putin made clear that “Ukraine” as a separate country was an artificial concept. The old Soviet Union invented it. Why, Putin refused to speculate. But Nikita S. Khrushchev “granted” Ukraine “independence” to score another vote in the United Nations General Assembly. Recall that Khrushchev, like Lenin and Trotsky before him, envisioned their Union of Socialist Soviet Republics to encompass the world. In other words, it would have an English Socialist Soviet Republic, a French Socialist Soviet Republic, and so on. In this light, “independence” for Ukraine was a symbolic gesture, “grift” for votes in the United Nations – and nothing else. Vladimir Putin likely knows it, would rather not dwell on it – but certainly disavows it. As far as he’s concerned, Ukraine is part of Russia and always has been. Evidently Putin said nothing of the Khazars, the legendary original rulers of Ukraine who disappeared from history. Regrettably, Tucker Carlson did not think to ask. Various Gateway Pundit commentators dissected some of these discussions. Anthony Scott reported that Vladimir Putin expressed concern about Elon Musk’s Neuralink company and its projects. Said he: I think there’s no stopping Elon Musk. He will do as he sees fit. Nevertheless, you need to find common ground with him and search for ways to persuade him. https://twitter.com/AnthonyScottTGP/status/1755734024343921075 Scott also reported that Putin knew of Tucker Carlson’s application to join the Central Intelligence Agency. Tucker did not deny this. https://twitter.com/DmitriyUngern/status/1755751515908698136 Jim Hoft reported that Putin flatly accused the United States of blowing up the Nord Stream Pipeline. Recall that Seymour Hersh knew that from the beginning. See here, here, here, and here. Weaponization of the dollar and other points Hoft also cited Viadimir Putin warning against the weaponization of the U.S. dollar. In short, the U.S. weakened itself by using its currency – the reserve currency of the world – as a weapon. One thing the world knows: it prompted the establishment of the Brazil, Russia, India, China and South African Union (BRICS). Hoft then dropped this report. Vladimir Putin asked, in so many words, WTF is America fighting to defend Ukraine’s border while opening its own? Do the United States need this? What for? Thousands of miles away from your national territory. You have issues on the border, issues with migration, issues with the national debt, more than 33 trillion dollars… You have nothing better to do so you should fight in Ukraine? Wouldn’t it be better to negotiate with Russia? Make an agreement. Realizing that Russia that will fight for it’s interest to the end. Return to common sense and look for solutions. Notice the translation of “the United States” as a plural noun. Then again, only in English, it seems, are collective nouns ever singular. So Putin might not be referring to the pre-War-Between-the-States usage of “United States” as an always plural entity. This morning, TGP commentator Larry Johnson offered more insights from the Vladimir Putin interview. First, none of the “cable” outlets mentioned anything from the interview, except Carlson asking Putin about Evan Gershkovich. (Jeremy at The Quartering called Tucker’s question an act of great courage. Actually it was only sensible. Pleading and begging does not impress Vladimir Putin, as one can tell by looking at him.) https://rumble.com/embed/v49tmui/?pub=4teej Reaction of two not-so-impressive personalities Second, the two legacy outlets that did cover the interview, did so only superficially. Among other things, Putin recalled President Bill Clinton reneging on a promise to support Russian entry into NATO. Third: of all the recent U.S. Presidents during his effective headship of Russia, Putin refused to mention one: Barack Obama. Translation: he blames Obama for the Maidan Revolution in Ukraine of 2014. And that event still rankles. So how does the Western world react? Again, YouTube tried to shut the interview down. (Rumble did not.) On Thursday morning, before the release, Hillary Clinton called Tucker Carlson a “useful idiot” and “puppy dog” for his efforts. https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1755369594934456820 That was part of a litany of statements: Russians always tell lies, and no one should believe anything they say. Tellingly, she drew hecklers at a conference against “conflict-related sexual violence” at Columbia University, where she has a teaching job. Those hecklers called her a “war criminal.” https://twitter.com/JosBtrigga/status/1756008393653780710 https://twitter.com/JosBtrigga/status/1716558460702118231 This morning, Jim Hoft reported that former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson called Carlson a traitor for taking the interview. https://twitter.com/CollinRugg/status/1756105931568599514 From the reaction to this post, Johnson impressed no one. Analysis Vladimir Putin is Donald Trump without the Alpha Male bombast. He will do a thing and then talk about it. He reminds one easily of one other You-Ess President: Speak softly and carry a big stick – you will go far. President Theodore Roosevelt More to the point, he has a deep, abiding sense of history. Vladimir Putin understands what few in his position do: that history is who you are and where you came from. His history lesson for Tucker Carlson was no filibuster. His entire casus belli in Ukraine is that he is recovering part of Russia. And he is starting with those lands where ethnic Russians live. Alaska was once part of the Russian Empire. Then Czar Aleksandr II sold it to the United States, negotiating with Secretary of State William H. Seward, in 1867. Vladimir Putin recently took a step toward “research and registration” of present and former Russian lands, and Russian-owned property beyond its present borders. https://twitter.com/ma000111/status/1749203670221074912 Someone interpreted that and/or other statements to mean Putin was contesting the sale of Alaska. https://twitter.com/GlobeEyeNews/status/1749444455571378246 That claim might or might not be accurate. But the day before the interview, Russian bombers tested American air defenses in the region. Only because we have a doddering old fool in command – to which Putin alluded in the interview – should this even concern Americans. But we have an election coming up, and perhaps this song – translated or dubbed into English – should tell us the kind of leader America needs. https://rumble.com/embed/v3kybxe/?pub=4teej Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/10/editorial/talk/vladimir-putin-leader/ Tucker Carlson got what he wanted: https://twitter.com/aavst20551/status/1754834771350577219 Tucker Carlson says why he sought the interview: https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1754939251257475555 The interview: https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682 Transcript available: https://tuckercarlson.com/the-vladimir-putin-interview/ After the interview: https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1755765547965575436 Snippet about Elon Musk: https://twitter.com/AnthonyScottTGP/status/1755734024343921075 Tucker Carlson applying to the CIA: https://twitter.com/DmitriyUngern/status/1755751515908698136 The Quartering video: Tucker Carlson asks what no one expected him to ask. https://rumble.com/v4cex5o-tucker-carlson-reveals-huge-bombshells-in-putin-interview-one-questions-nob.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Hillary Clinton calls Tucker Carlson a useful idiot: https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1755369594934456820 Hillary gets heckled at Columbia: https://twitter.com/JosBtrigga/status/1756008393653780710 https://twitter.com/JosBtrigga/status/1716558460702118231 Colin Rugg on Boris Johnson calling Tucker Carlson a traitor: https://twitter.com/CollinRugg/status/1756105931568599514 Putin’s decree about discovery and registration of Russian lands: https://twitter.com/ma000111/status/1749203670221074912 Accusation about Putin contesting the sale of Alaska: https://twitter.com/GlobeEyeNews/status/1749444455571378246 Report about Russian bombers testing American air defenses near Alaska: https://www.reuters.com/world/us-detects-russian-aircraft-operating-alaska-air-defense-identification-zone-2024-02-07/ Video: I want a man like Putin! https://rumble.com/v3njpw8-takogo-kak-putin-a-man-like-putin-english-rare-version.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Trump will likely stay on ballot By Terry A. Hurlbut The Colorado ballot disqualification case involving Donald Trump came to oral argument yesterday. In their questioning, the nine Justices all but signaled an intent to reverse the Colorado Supreme Court. If this holds, then Donald Trump will stay on the Colorado ballot. And for future reference, State disqualification of candidates for federal office will be far more difficult than ever. The Trump disqualification case The case is called Trump v. Anderson, case no. 23-719 before the United States Supreme Court. (See the docket.) Recall that, on December 19, 2023, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump cannot appear on the ballot for the Republican Primary in Colorado. But they stayed their own ruling until January 4 – or until the United States Supreme Court: • Refused review, or • Granted review, then issued a final judgment, one way or the other. The Supreme Court received a petition for review on January 3, so that immediately extended the “stay clock.” The Court granted review on January 5, on the specific question of whether the Colorado Supremes made a mistake. Thus the “stay clock” started running from that point forward, and will run until the Court makes a decision. The Court has received nearly a hundred friend-of-the-court briefs, in addition to briefs by: • President Trump, • Colorado citizen Norma Anderson, who initially sued to have the Courts keep Trump off the ballot, and • The Colorado Solicitor General, on behalf of the Colorado Secretary of State. Authorities cited in the briefs Section 3 of Amendment XIV reads: No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. President Trump’s attorneys relied on a plethora of authorities, two of which came up in the oral argument. First was In re Griffin, 11 F. Cas. 7 (C.C.D. Va. 1869), also known as “Griffin’s Case.” The Supreme Court held that disqualification from holding federal office required an Act of Congress. Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, writing for the Court, apparently relied on Section 5 of Amendment XIV, which reads: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Second was U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995). The Court held that: States cannot impose additional restrictions, such as term limits, on its representatives in the federal government beyond those provided by the Constitution. Essentially Mr. Jonathan F. Mitchell, attorney for Trump, argued that Term Limits also forbids States to impose qualifications for any federal office that the Constitution does not contain. Although President Trump would not be a representative, a Presidential Elector pledged to vote for him, would be. Argument by Jon Mitchell, attorney for Trump See the oral argument transcript here. Mr. Mitchell cited the Griffin case to show that Amendment XIV Section 3 is not self-executing. That means that Congress must first decide how to enforce it. (See Section 5). Beyond that, he offered two propositions before yielding to questions. First: Presidents are not “officers of the United States.” Such officers are appointed, not elected. Furthermore the Constitution says that the President “shall commission all the officers of the United States.” It does not say “all the other officers.” Second, even if Trump were an Officer of the United States, and in that role had engaged in insurrection, rebellion, or giving aid or comfort to an enemy, no State could disqualify him ahead of time. The reason: Congress may remove any such disability before a President takes office. The window of opportunity presumably begins after Congress, in joint session, opens and counts the Electoral College ballots. It then ends before noon on Inauguration Day. The Colorado Supreme Court, Mitchell said, did something equivalent to enacting a law that a candidate for the House or Senate must be a resident of the State for a fixed time before the election. But the Constitution says only that one must reside in the State “when elected.” So that would be an unconstitutional added qualification under Term Limits v. Thornton. Questions for Mr. Mitchell Justice Clarence Thomas began by asking Mitchell to address the lack of self-execution of Section 3. He said Congress must pass enforcing legislation for the State to have any role at all. Significantly, the Colorado respondents actually have asked the Court to overrule the Griffin case. Chief Justice Roberts asked for, and got, a clarification of Mitchell’s analogy with State residency requirements for Congressional candidates. Justice Sonia Sotomayor questioned Mitchell closely on his contention that Section 3 is not self-executing, nor may any State execute it in the absence of Congressional executing legislation. Justice Elena Kagan offered more questioning along that line. Then Justice Amy Coney Barrett suggested that Mitchell had an even broader argument to make – that Congress could not enable the States to take any action themselves. Justice Alito agreed – but Mitchell didn’t seem to want to go quite as far as that. Justice Brett Kavanaugh appeared to lend support to Mitchell’s use of the Griffin case. And remarkably, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson pointed out that nowhere, in the list of barred offices in Section 3, does the word President or the phrase Vice-President appear. That actually provoked a flurry of arguments from Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. Justice Neil Gorsuch, for his part, drew out clarification concerning who is, and who is not, a United States officer. Argument by Jason Murray, attorney for Norma Anderson Jason Murray fared far less well. He began with a dramatic argument, and probably ruined himself: We are here because, for the first time since the War of 1812, our nation's capitol came under violent assault. For the first time in history, the attack was incited by a sitting president of the United States to disrupt the peaceful transfer of presidential power. How anyone can compare a gathering that began peacefully – until Capitol Police officers provoked the crowd – to an assault by artillery and infantry against the city of Washington and its key buildings, is beyond CNAV’s comprehension. Nevertheless, that is how Murray set the stage. Beyond that, he said that Article II Section 1 Clause 2 (the Electors Clause), and Amendment X (Reserved powers), give States the power to do as they see fit. Justice Thomas – as Cullen Linebarger of The Gateway Pundit would point out – immediately began a crippling line of questioning. He asked Murray to provide examples of States disqualifying national candidates shortly after the adoption of Amendment XIV. Murray did not and could not provide any. With one exception: the disqualification of John Christy as a candidate for the House in 1868. Oddly, Murray cited the ballot practices of the period as his reason for not being able to cite further examples. (The Governor of Georgia refused to certify Christy’s election because Christy had served in the Confederate Armies. But ballots as we know them today did not then exist. As noted here, ballots then consisted of write-in slips or light cardboard “tickets” with all a Party’s candidates’ names.) Thomas, not satisfied, pressed further. Then he said he could not conceive of the federal government empowering States to disqualify candidates. Because what Northern States could do, Southern States could do also. Other questions for Mr. Murray Chief Justice Roberts agreed, saying that Amendment XIV would be the last place [to] look for authorization for the States, including Confederate States, to enforce … the Presidential election process. Murray disputed that, by saying the State power of disqualification derives from Article II. Not only was Roberts having none of that, but Justices Kavanaugh and Kagan both questioned Murray’s argument as well. Simply put, neither Kavanaugh, Kagan – nor Justice Barrett – would have one State unilaterally decide who was, and who was not, qualified to be President. Roberts went on to remind Murray that, if the Court allowed the disqualification, many other States would start disqualification proceedings. Ultimately Roberts foresaw “a handful of States” having contested elections of Presidential electors. Then came this exchange: MR. MURRAY: Well, certainly, Your Honor, the fact that there are potential frivolous applications of a constitutional provision isn't a reason that would -- CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Well, no, hold on. I mean, you might think they're frivolous, but the people who are bringing them may not think they're frivolous. Insurrection is a broad, broad term, and if there's some debate about it, I suppose that will go into the decision and then, eventually, what, we would be deciding whether it was an insurrection when one president did something as opposed to when somebody else did something else? And what do we do? Do we wait until near the time of counting the ballots and sort of go through which states are valid and which states aren't? Soon, Murray got seriously into the weeds, by mentioning the de facto officer doctrine. That doctrine vindicates someone who takes orders from an officer later found disqualified. Murray first mentioned it when Gorsuch challenged him with a key implication of his argument. Which is that everything President Trump did, from January 6, 2021 onwards, was ultra vires. Murray mentioned it again after Justice Alito asked him whether military officers were justified in refusing to obey Trump’s orders. That’s when Justice Gorsuch lost all patience: JUSTICE GORSUCH: So – so it operates – you say there's no – no legislation necessary – I thought that was the whole theory of your case – and no procedure necessary -- it happens automatically. MR. MURRAY: Well, certainly, you need a procedure in order to have any remedy to enforce the disqualification, which is different – JUSTICE GORSUCH: I – that's a whole separate question. That's the de facto – doesn't work here, okay? Put that aside. He's disqualified from the moment. Self-executing, done. And I would think that a person who would receive a direction from that person – president, former president in your view, would be free to act as he or she wishes without regard to that individual. MR. MURRAY: I don't think so because I think, again, the – JUSTICE GORSUCH: Why? MR. MURRAY: -- de facto officer doctrine would nevertheless come into play to say this is the – JUSTICE GORSUCH: No, de facto – that – that doesn't work, Mr. Murray, because de facto officer is to ratify the conduct that's done afterwards and – and – and insulate it from judicial review. Put that aside. I'm not going to say it again. Put it aside, okay? I think Justice Alito is asking a very different question, a more pointed one and more difficult one for you, I understand, but I think it deserves an answer. On your theory, would anything compel a lower official to obey an order from, in your view, the former president? Justice Kavanaugh’s questions Later, Justice Kavanaugh asked three pointed questions. First concerned the dissent by Justice Carlos Samour from the original Colorado ruling. Samour said he’d never seen anything like the District Court’s “proceeding” that “found” Trump guilty of insurrection. Concerning that, Murray insisted that Trump, in five days of trial, had the opportunity to call or cross-examine witnesses. Justice Samour would likely dispute that statement. In fact he decried the makeshift proceedings employed by the district court below—which lacked basic discovery, the ability to subpoena documents and compel witnesses, workable timeframes to adequately investigate and develop defenses, and the opportunity for a fair trial—to adjudicate a federal constitutional claim (a complicated one at that) masquerading as a run-of-the-mill state Election Code claim. Second, Kavanaugh reminded Murray that no one has charged President Trump in a federal court with insurrection – ever. Third, Kavanaugh asked Murray to think about how undemocratic it would be to enjoin a voter from a particular choice. In answer, Murray seemed to suggest that even the bare suspicion of insurrection ought to be sufficient to bar Trump. And once again, Justice Jackson asked Mr. Murray the same thing she’d asked Mr. Mitchell. Which is: why doesn’t Section 3 bar someone from serving as President or Vice-President who has “engaged in insurrection”? Murray tried to suggest that “any office” includes the office of President. That did not seem to satisfy Justice Jackson. Questions for Solicitor General Shannon Stevenson Finally, Shannon W. Stevenson, for the State of Colorado, tried to stand on the “far-reaching” powers of a State Secretary of State. Immediately Justice Thomas reminded her that Colorado law doesn’t even have an express definition of “qualified candidate.” Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito drew out an admission that, regardless of any provision for judicial review by the States of Colorado, other States don’t have such provisions. Several Justices questioned Stevenson closely on whether Trump was afforded due process of law. These even included Justices Kagan and Sotomayor. Mr. Mitchell came back for a brief rebuttal, and then Chief Justice Roberts intoned the time-honored phrase: The case is submitted. Why Trump will likely remain on the ballot The oral argument transcript, as one would probably expect, indicates that the Originalists want no part of disqualifying Trump. They certainly want no part of a State taking such disqualification upon themselves. Surprisingly, Mr. Murray and Ms. Stevenson got no solace from the Moderate Bloc or even the Liberal Bloc. Justice Jackson’s skepticism is especially salient. The lack of mention of Presidents or Vice-Presidents in Section 3 obviously leaped out at her from the Constitution’s text. Why Mr. Mitchell didn’t think to press that point, only he can say, and he didn’t really say. But Murray’s attempt to contest the point did not satisfy, and she let him know that. Unaccountably, even Mr. Mitchell left one thing out, which Justice Kavanaugh did not let rest. That is: no one has yet charged Trump with insurrection. Why Kavanaugh “took no position” on Justice Samour’s dissent, perhaps he will explain later. But that was a kangaroo court, and even Mr. Murray’s description of it cannot change that fact. As other commentators have said, this case will likely fall 9-0 for Trump. The greatest variations CNAV expects are one Majority Opinion and up to four Opinions Concurring in the Judgment. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/09/foundation/constitution/trump-likely-stay-ballot/ Trump v. Anderson: Docket page: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-719.html Petition: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/294892/20240104135300932_20240103_Trump_v_Anderson__Cert_Petition%20FINAL.pdf Argument Transcript: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2023/23-719_4d46.pdf Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Disney under attack from three directions By Terry A. Hurlbut The Walt Disney Company, facing a proxy fight for control of its Board of Directors, recently lost serious legal ground. A Florida judge dismissed their lawsuit against the State of Florida over the cancellation of their Grand Duchy, i.e., the Reedy Creek Improvement District. But that does not tell half the story of the company’s woes. An actress, summarily dismissed over a gross misinterpretation of a social-media post, is suing, ostensibly for her old gig back. Elon Musk, head of X (formerly Twitter, where the actress posted the “offending” message), has hired her attorney and is paying the expenses of her civil complaint. Now Musk has launched a direct attack on Disney’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policies. Furthermore, he is using inside information to make his point. Speculation is rife whether he will jump into the proxy fight himself. Where Disney stands On January 31, Judge Allen Winsor of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida (Talahassee Division), ruled that Disney lacked standing to sue the State for dismantling the Reedy Creek Improvement District and establishing the Central Florida Tourism Improvement District in its stead. The company alleged that Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) was retaliating against it after it opposed publicly an anti-grooming bill. (The full title is “Parental Rights in Education Act,” but critics call it the “Don’t Say ‘Gay’ Bill.” The reason: its thrust is to prevent the active recruitment of children into the Alphabet Soup constellation of lifestyles.) On February 1, Disney appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Judicial Circuit. There the case rests. (See docket page at District Court level. The docket page at the Eleventh Circuit is not yet available.) Then on Tuesday (February 6), Actress Gina Carano, whom Disney and its subsidiary Lucasfilm dismissed from a then-running streaming series (The Mandalorian), announced her filing of a lawsuit against Disney and Lucasfilm. She left this long-form post telling her story. https://twitter.com/ginacarano/status/1754952279646437655 Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit posted this article containing embedded photographs from some since-deleted posts on X (formerly Twitter). Carano also left this post on Instagram: Jews were beaten in the streets, not by Nazi soldiers but by their neighbors…even by children. Because history is edited, most people today don’t realize that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews. How is that any different from hating someone for their political views. In contrast, Pedro Pascal – who played the always helmeted title character – routinely compared Donald J. Trump’s supporters to National Socialists. Yet he got away with it. He has since deleted the posts in question, but Jim Hoft preserved screencaps and makes them available. Selective application Disney’s problem is obvious: selective application of work rules, the law, or whatever “law” leftist think should exist. At the time, Disney accused her of “denigrating people based on her cultural and religious identities.” That’s flatly false. What the “Woke Left” objected to, was saying that Republicans, especially Trump supporters, were coming in for the same treatment as the Jews did beginning with Kristallnacht. In other words, Carano compared the Woke Left to the National Socialists and their “willing executioners” of that day. Given the Woke Left’s reaction to the Fourth Arab-Israeli War, that comparison seems on-target. Ms. Carano didn’t bother suing then, because she couldn’t afford it. Instead she concentrated on rebuilding her career, making movies with Ben Shapiro’s Daily Wire Studios. But several things happened after that. First, Elon Musk bought Twitter, and subsequently renamed it X. Second, he released records of Twitter’s State actor activities to several journalists, once on the left but today … disavowed. Third, he relaxed the Twitter (now X) Rules. Fourth, he declared that if anyone could show that he or she suffered wrongful dismissal, rejection of higher-education application, or the like, over anything he or she posted to X, he, Musk, would pay for their expenses to sue any applicable defendants. Which is what Elon Musk is now doing in Gina Carano’s case. Many influencers gave loud cheers – including “Overlord DVD,” who speculated that the real threat of the lawsuit went beyond any judgment she sought. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgke_uP4T1k Elon Musk goes on further attack But Musk apparently is doing more. Later the same day Gina Carano announced her lawsuit against Disney, Musk released the company’s “General Entertainment Content Inclusion Standards.” He called it “mandatory, institutionalized racism and sexism.” As bad as that screencap was, he discovered more early this morning, thus turning the post into a thread: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1754999578619707658 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1755498004985868454 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1755499406760010168 Reaction was universally positive toward Musk’s message and negative toward Disney. Libs of Tik Tok started this thread: https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1755000677858754901 https://twitter.com/CalenArcher/status/1755007015032676589 Other threads appeared, making the same point: that Disney’s content is more like reeducation than entertainment. This thread began with the “Re-imagine Tomorrow” conference: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1755004625890197956 https://twitter.com/thetheoryofmeh/status/1755503896510738810 This began with a pointed cartoon making the direct comparison between reeducation and entertainment: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1755002544701706632 https://twitter.com/croce_dennis/status/1755522797676249499 https://twitter.com/JuanGomez955547/status/1755611149679399351 This thread pointed out that the U.S. Forest Service has similar plans to Disney regarding hiring: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1755001063311286274 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1755003832285925857 https://twitter.com/xcor057/status/1755010040837058598 https://twitter.com/xcor057/status/1755604984727749102 The point of this thread might or might not be accurate: https://twitter.com/projectethos5/status/1755001219519512972 https://twitter.com/AdamLowisz/status/1755502985835065548 What could happen to Disney? Elon Musk has been at war with Disney ever since they canceled all advertising on Platform X. In November, Musk addressed himself to Disney CEO Bob Iger, using very ungentlemanly language. Then in December 2023, Musk warned the company that they might lose subscribers if they “boycotted” X. In reply to a satirical piece about the company losing millions of subscribers overnight, Elon sent this post: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1731782236834304268 He meant his message to be plain: that the company would be cutting off its nose to spite its face. Now, by funding Gina Carano’s lawsuit (and finding her an attorney), Musk has opened up a new front against Disney. With regard to Libs of Tik Tok’s question: as others have pointed out, Elon need not buy all of Disney. (Not that he could afford it.) All he need do is buy a hefty share of the outstanding stock, then give Nelson Peltz his proxy. Peltz could take it from there. More to the point, his criticisms of Disney echoes those of many others – and his criticisms of other “Woke-ism” examples. He once called that mind-set a mind virus. What attitude the late Walt Disney might have taken is an open question. Nevertheless, Walt Disney emphasized quality and compelling content. Those things have lately been sorely lacking at the company and its subsidiaries. Perhaps Nelson Peltz can turn it around, if he can take control of the company’s Board of Directors. Elon Musk could help. Only time will tell. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/08/editorial/talk/disney-under-attack-3-directions/ Docket page for Disney v. DeSantis: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67271062/walt-disney-parks-and-resorts-us-inc-v-desantis/ Gina Carano’s post: https://twitter.com/ginacarano/status/1754952279646437655 Carano v. Disney – docket page https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68228150/gina-carano-v-the-walt-disney-company/ Jim Hoft’s article containing key quote and photos: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/canceled-hollywood-star-gina-carano-teams-up-elon/ Overlord DVD’s video saying where the real threat lies: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgke_uP4T1k Elon Musk’s thread about the DEI standards: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1754999578619707658 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1755498004985868454 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1755499406760010168 Other threads in reaction: https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1755000677858754901 https://twitter.com/CalenArcher/status/1755007015032676589 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1755004625890197956 https://twitter.com/thetheoryofmeh/status/1755503896510738810 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1755002544701706632 https://twitter.com/croce_dennis/status/1755522797676249499 https://twitter.com/JuanGomez955547/status/1755611149679399351 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1755001063311286274 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1755003832285925857 https://twitter.com/xcor057/status/1755010040837058598 https://twitter.com/xcor057/status/1755604984727749102 https://twitter.com/projectethos5/status/1755001219519512972 https://twitter.com/AdamLowisz/status/1755502985835065548 Elon Musk’s warning about losing subscsribers: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1731782236834304268 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Ronna McDaniel resigns By Terry A. Hurlbut Ronna McDaniel, the establishmentarian Chair of the Republican National Committee, will soon resign, after a tenure of about seven years. The sorry state of the Republican National Committee’s finances finally raised the pressure on her to the critical point. But that kind of pressure never comes from one event only. This pressure started building at least since Harmeet Dhillon’s challenge to her Chairmanship last year. After the 2023 Off-year Elections, it built faster than the pressure in the old boiler in the Overlook Hotel in Stephen King’s novel The Shining. And overnight, it finally blew. Ronna McDaniel and her checkered tenure CNAV talked about the troubled tenure of Ronna McDaniel before. She took over as Chairman of the RNC in 2017. The best testimonies about her record come from Vivek Ramaswamy (then still a candidate) and commentator Benny Johnson. On January 5, Ramaswamy posted this: https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1743391085810856016 After the 2023 Off-years – the Abortion Election – Ramaswamy said, during the third Presidential primary debate: Since Ronna McDaniel took over as Chairman of the RNC in 2017, we’ve lost 2018, 2020, 2022 – no Red Wave, that never came – we got trounced last night in 2023. And I think we have to have accountability in our Party. Ramaswamy, speaking to McDaniel directly, challenged her to take the stage and resign then and there. He then objected to the choice of moderators for that debate – a choice upon which she surely signed off. “We should have Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan, and Elon Musk,” he said, instead of the moderators they did have. https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1722421483698311468 Benny Johnson weighed in with more grim statistics: https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1722288258229404039 In fact, after the poor showing in 2022, McDaniel almost lost her Chairmanship in January of 2023. Harmeet Dhillon came close to unseating her as several large Republican donors moved away from McDaniel. Yet somehow she hung on – and went on to lead the disastrous strategy for the 2023 off-year elections. Elections that saw key losses and/or missed opportunities in Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Kentucky. Two kinds of donors How did she hang on? By appealing to the other kind of donor. The Republican Party has two classes of donors: those who love the status quo, and those who hate it. The “haters,” or those who genuinely want to change things in this country, did not support her last year. But enough of the “go along and get along” crowd remained for her to stave off Harmeet Dhillon’s challenge. Those donors don’t want change. They are even content with minority status in the House and Senate. To them, a Senator or Representative’s best contribution to the workings of American society is constituent service. Originally, “constituent service” consisted of writing letters of recommendation for admission to the United States Military and Naval Academies. Now it means helping a constituent navigate a dizzying variety of government assistance programs. And not one of those programs finds any justification among the enumerated powers of Congress. From 1933 onwards, successive Presidents and Congresses bastardized the phrase general welfare in the Preamble to the Constitution. (And also Article I Section 8 Clause 1.) Originally it meant “welfare of the several States as a collective.” Now it means “welfare of every individual, whether citizen, lawful resident, or unlawful resident.” Donors like those who have supported Ronna McDaniel until today have only themselves to blame for that. And maybe that’s what they wanted: roles in what would become a communist polity and economy. Or a province of the one-world government that the World Economic Forum proposes. Where did all the money go? But after that debate, and beginning even before Punxatawney Phil turned his head toward the sun last Friday, signaling an early spring, came the hollow crack of a broken promise. The Raw Story crowed that the Republican Party was in the worst financial shape in a decade. The Daily Caller reported the same. That riveted RNC members at their Winter Meeting in, of all places, Las Vegas, Nevada. Then came financial reports showing that Ronna McDaniel has been a shockingly poor steward of what funds she had available. We Love Trump shared this X post from Benny Johnson: https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1753089844912312586 In fact Charlie Kirk had shared an even more devastating report the day before: https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1752857568534556769 More devastating because it compares RNC expenditures to DNC expenditures. Ronna McDaniel placed a priority on fripperies, while her Democratic counterpart concentrated on maintaining a database of voters and getting out the vote. No wonder Republicans lost the 2023 Off-years! But the Elephant in the Room (pardon the pun) is that the money had stopped flowing. Donors big and small, who hate the status quo, stopped giving. CNAV hopes The Establishment is satisfied. They bought themselves a tame Chair, so that they could continue building their Constituent Service Machine. Now see what! Trump to Ronna McDaniel: you’re fired Then came a scene right out of Donald Trump’s old reality TV show, The Apprentice. Leading up to that scene, he appeared with Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures. There he acknowledged – candidly – Bartiromo’s statement that “The Democrats have all the money.” Maria Bartiromo: The RNC doesn’t seem to be so strong. I mean, the Democrats have all the money. Look at what we’re seeing, we’ve got the Democrats actually with the money and spending it. The RNC is seeking credit lines, the RNC reported its lowest bank balance at the point in any year [since] 2016. Comerica says Michigan GOP defaulted on a loan of half a million dollars. Trump: So, I have a lot of money, and the money that they get, people are not looking at the RNC. They want changes. You have to understand, I have nothing to do with the RNC, I don’t — I’m separate. MB: How is Ronna McDaniel doing? DJT: I think she did great when she ran Michigan for me. I think she did okay initially at the RNC. I would say right now, there’ll probably be some changes made. Then Trump summoned Ronna McDaniel to his Mar-A-Lago residence, resort, and headquarters for a head-to-head talk. Yesterday CNN reported that, within hours, Trump said he would seek some changes at the Committee. Then a series of reports came out yesterday that were all over the map. These reports came in from The Associated Press, ABC News, Fox News, and Headline News USA. The quality of these reports probably varies directly as the quality of their connections inside the RNC. The best consensus of these reports states: yes, Donald Trump did tell Ronna McDaniel that she should resign. She would do so after the South Carolina Republican Primary, which will take place Saturday, February 24. Then, Trump would support Michael Whatley, Chair of the North Carolina Republican Party, to replace her. But RNC spokesman Keith Schipper said officially, Nothing has changed. And about her continued tenure, This will be decided after South Carolina. Fox News reported in addition, that the RNC raised $12 million in January, to add to the $8 million it had on hand at year’s end. The Democrats already talk of her as if she’s gone. Ronna McDaniel is reportedly the latest American to lose their job under Donald Trump. Alex Floyd, spokesman, Democratic National Committee Analysis Trump’s worst failing has always been a lack of imagination. That’s why he picked Ronna McDaniel to begin with. Yes, she delivered Michigan in 2016 – but not in 2020. (And don’t tell CNAV that she didn’t know about The Steal, because it was her job to know!) She also lost in 2018, then again in 2022, and last – and most disastrously – in 2023. For that she can have no excuse, and Donald Trump knows it. The only pause CNAV takes is to the promotion of Mike Whatley as Interim Chairman. According to Fox, Whatley knows about The Steal. (What Fox has to say about that, doesn’t matter.) The Daily Caller reports that he, at least, has a better record than McDaniel has. Since becoming RPNC Chair in 2019, he delivered North Carolina to Trump in 2020 (by the skin of his teeth). According to a report The Daily Caller cited from C-SPAN, Whatley knew about The Steal ahead of time. And the reason we can know that, is that he stopped it cold in North Carolina. Ahead of the 2022 Midterms, according to The Charlotte News-Observer, Whatley built an Election Integrity Committee. That Committee recruited volunteers and polling-place challengers, and recommended some changes to election rules. Whatley also: 1. Protected North Carolina’s all-Republican Senate delegation, 2. Produced supermajorities in both chambers of the North Carolina legislature, and 3. “Flipped” the North Carolina Supreme Court. On the other hand… But Whatley has been too close to establishmentarians in the pre-Trump years. His stint on the 2000 Florida Recount Team probably let him anticipate The Steal and stop it in his State. But his stint in the Bush Younger administration is no recommendation today. Neither is his staff position with former Sen. Elizabeth K. Dole (R-N.C.), the lady who, as Secretary of Transportation, introduced the concept of a Third Brake Light (Dole Light, Liddy Light) on cars on the American road in 1986. (British motorists call this a Centre High-mount Stop Lamp. In 1998, the United Nations issued Regulation 48 requiring it everywhere.) These dubious distinctions give him a foot in the Establishment camp. While that might help him win the Special Election that will take place after Ronna McDaniel steps down, it should give everyone cause to watch him closely for signs of treachery. Trump would have done better to endorse Harmeet Dhillon, or Mike Lindell, both of whom ran for Chair in 2023. Or perhaps Vivek Ramaswamy. Nevertheless, almost anyone would be better than Ronna McDaniel. This will also remove all remaining influence by Sen. Mitt Romney (RINO-Utah), who at least knows when to quit. (She’s his niece.) Finally, this seems to be further evidence that 2024 will be the Year of Reckoning for the Republican Establishment. And, by extension, the Deep State. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ6nOmAiwqo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czOpDN8Knr4 Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/07/editorial/talk/ronna-mcdaniel-resigns/ Posts by Vivek Ramaswamy and Benny Johnson urging McDaniel to resign: https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1743391085810856016 https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1722421483698311468 https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1722288258229404039 Where did all the money go? https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1753089844912312586 https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1752857568534556769 Reports about Ronna McDaniel resigning: https://apnews.com/article/ronna-mcdaniel-rnc-chair-trump-979f357db73ca5505f12f91977f55b3b https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rnc-chair-ronna-mcdaniel-discussed-stepping-down-donald-trump-sources/story?id=107009390 https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rnc-chairwoman-ronna-mcdaniel-step-down-after-south-carolina-primaries-report https://headlineusa.com/mcdaniel-to-resign-as-rnc-chair-following-trumps-rebuke/ Videos: Donald Trump and Alec Baldwin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ6nOmAiwqo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czOpDN8Knr4 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

The Amazon Files By Terry A. Hurlbut While Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas) was stirring up excitement on the border with his pledge of expanded blocking measures, and the Senate was publicly disgracing itself with a bill that at least one commentator called “dead before it was hauled out for inspection,” the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee was making a little drama of his own. As regular readers know, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Chairman of that Committee, is on a crusade against censorship by proxy. Yesterday he dropped a thread naming one other censorship proxy: Amazon. And once again, the allegations raise the question: how much coercion did the government really need to apply? What is censorship by proxy? Censorship by proxy happens when one party, legally barred from doing censorship directly, threatens, coerces, or otherwise induces another party to “do the dirty work.” The usual “barred” party is the government. That applies to any government of and within the United States. The U.S. Constitution, and without exception all State constitutions, explicitly guarantee freedom of speech. (See also this University of Puget Sound Law Review article on the subject.) Even if one of them didn’t, the Privileges and Immunities Clauses of the U.S. Constitution would so guarantee. These clauses are Article IV Section 2 and Amendment XIV Section 1. But it has become fashionable in this century for the government to “lean on” certain news organs, publishers, and distributors to remove or otherwise fail to distribute content the government does not like. Those organs, publishers, or distributors who have “cornered the market” (or something close to that) typically feel this pressure. After all, why bother with some rinky-dink medium no one ever reads, or a bookseller no one seems to visit? Perhaps that’s why government allows the Big Boys to outsell, undersell, and otherwise crowd out the Little Boys. Such behavior was supposed to be illegal under the Sherman Antitrust Act, as amended. But clearly, it isn’t. Now we know why. Big Tech, Big Publishing, Big Literary Agency, and Big Media make excellent proxies for indirect censorship. And the government wants to keep it that way. The Amazon Files thread Rep. Jordan dropped his thread yesterday afternoon, beginning at 5:44 p.m. EST. Cullen Linebarger at The Gateway Pundit first reported on that this morning. https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637204146581783 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637207850086414 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637211469766809 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637215223746874 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637218688221458 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637221791940748 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637225357148353 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637229165515007 Rep. Jordan ends his thread with one more post reading “To be continued…” His last post before that, links to his earlier thread concerning similar government relationships with Facebook. In fact that was the first of four “Facebook Files” threads Chairman Jordan dropped. Follow links to Facebook Files Threads Two, Three and Four. Rep. Jordan names a former Obama and Biden administration official named Andy Slavitt. This man figures in the Facebook and Amazon censorship-by-proxy campaigns. Andy Slavitt also figured in this interaction with Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), former member of the House January 6 Committee. Raskin, more than a year ago, said a prosecution of Donald J. Trump “would not be that satisfying.” Why not? Because: [E]ven if he were to get his comeuppance in court finally in his late 70s or 80s, what would it really mean? What we need to do is to figure out how to stop all of the Donald Trumps in the future and these horrific movements and forces he’s unleashed against us as a democracy. All of which to say that the Deep State remains interested in stifling any dissent from its agenda. Those “movements and forces” that so “horrify” Rep. Raskin are really the raising of the consciousness of the American people. And Andy Slavitt is evidently tasked with opposing those movements – and therefore the actual, authentic will of the American people. Tyler O’Neil, Managing Editor of The Daily Signal, published his own thread along similar lines. https://twitter.com/Tyler2ONeil/status/1754619908925595687 https://twitter.com/Tyler2ONeil/status/1754620540126466276 https://twitter.com/Tyler2ONeil/status/1754621292572037552 https://twitter.com/Tyler2ONeil/status/1754621820542579070 Why didn’t Amazon simply refuse to publish certain material? Amazon didn’t simply “ban books” probably because their contracts with other entities wouldn’t allow it. The largest such entity is the Ingram Content Group. They make books directly available to booksellers everywhere, online and off-. Furthermore, they have started their own self-publishing operation, IngramSpark. With IngramSpark, an author can hire his own team of editors, cover designers, and whatnot, and “publish” a book instantly. As of this moment, that service is available free-of-charge. An author may, if he wishes, list exclusively with Amazon – or not. Marketing and promotion, of course, remain the author’s responsibility. Now imagine what Ingram would say if Amazon suddenly started de-listing titles on specious grounds. Ingram would very likely have a cause of action against Amazon for breach of contract. Ingram does have content standards, to be sure. But they relate to activities that would never be lawful in any sound society. Amazon is not even the only online bookseller. Barnes and Noble famously sells books, online and off-. (Perhaps Chairman Jordan needs to investigate them as well.) But Amazon is certainly the largest. And gimmicking of its search engine is a high art – one that Google, subsidiary of Alphabet, has perfected. So now any author knows: if you have a controversial message, don’t rely on Amazon for marketing or promotion. Reaction Many X users reacted in understandable outrage. The Vigilant Fox observed: https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1754696271267278993 User KimDotcom offered this pithy reminder: https://twitter.com/KimDotcom/status/1754647451661926433 He’s right, of course – and in fact, Germany under National Socialism began with burning books, and ended with burning people. Sandra Loftis reminded people of the hypocrisy of the government: https://twitter.com/Sandra_G_Loftis/status/1754651867617833082 Another user reminded people that Amazon is scarcely the only censorship proxy: https://twitter.com/_emergent_/status/1754640346254864587 Still another user offered this timely reminder: https://twitter.com/MemeNonLibs/status/1754647743941788115 But at least one user asked a more important question: https://twitter.com/TimConradB623/status/1754639373247578487 And then one user finally pointed out the real issue: Amazon was a willing proxy. https://twitter.com/MkayUokay/status/1754644905430028403 Someone else posted this “meme” listing several apocalyptic science-fiction titles that spring to mind: https://twitter.com/petejonesintx/status/1754678614015004975 This is indeed the point. Analysis Make Room, Make Room! (the novel behind Soylent Green), Nineteen Eighty-four, That Hideous Strength, Brave New World, and Fahrenheit Four Five One were not supposed to be instruction manuals. They were, and are, cautionary tales. But a dangerous ideological movement has arisen to make those titles work in real life. And that ideology does not limit itself to the councils of government, or even the halls of academe. Murthy v. Missouri comes to oral argument before the Supreme Court on March 18. The government will, as they have signaled, defend their position by saying the social-media platforms at issue are private entities and made their own decisions. But why has the government allowed these entities – and Amazon, and Barnes and Noble – to form monopolies and oligopolies? (Or monopsonies and oligopsonies, which are the expressions for “the only buyer” or “the few buyers”?) Having said that: Jeff Bezos, as User “Stop Woke Culture” points out, is not a victim, but instead an accomplice. So is Mark Zuckerburg, and the Three Monkeys at Alphabet. So were Jack Dorsey and Parag Agrawal at the old Twitter, before Elon Musk bought and renamed it. And so is the aptly-named Larry Fink at BlackRock. The “nationalist populist right” must form its own group of platforms, retail sellers, and the like. This is what the “parallel economy” is all about. Rep. Jordan has merely demonstrated that an incestuous relationship exists between the present administration and these Big Boys. For everyone else, the cue is: Divorce. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/06/editorial/talk/amazon-files/ Resources on freedom of speech: https://constitution.congress.gov/ https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/state-constitutional-provisions-on-expressive-rights/ https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1192&context=sulr The thread: https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637204146581783 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637207850086414 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637211469766809 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637215223746874 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637218688221458 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637221791940748 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637225357148353 https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1754637229165515007 Earlier Facebook Files articles: https://cnav.news/2023/07/28/news/facebook-jim-jordan-twitter-files/ https://cnav.news/2023/07/29/editorial/talk/facebook-files-2-vaccine-campaign/ https://cnav.news/2023/08/04/editorial/talk/facebook-files-3-winners-losers/ https://cnav.news/2023/08/08/editorial/talk/fbi-facebook-files/ Tyler O’Neil’s thread: https://twitter.com/Tyler2ONeil/status/1754619908925595687 https://twitter.com/Tyler2ONeil/status/1754620540126466276 https://twitter.com/Tyler2ONeil/status/1754621292572037552 https://twitter.com/Tyler2ONeil/status/1754621820542579070 Reaction to the Jordan thread: https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1754696271267278993 https://twitter.com/KimDotcom/status/1754647451661926433 https://twitter.com/Sandra_G_Loftis/status/1754651867617833082 https://twitter.com/_emergent_/status/1754640346254864587 https://twitter.com/MemeNonLibs/status/1754647743941788115 https://twitter.com/TimConradB623/status/1754639373247578487 https://twitter.com/MkayUokay/status/1754644905430028403 https://twitter.com/petejonesintx/status/1754678614015004975 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Greg Abbott defies federals even more By Terry A. Hurlbut Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas) made national headlines when he seized control of the worst breach in the U.S.-Mexican border. But his concentrated effort to block migrant crossings at Eagle Pass, Texas, turns out to be merely proof of concept. Yesterday he announced plans to extend his barrier and blockade operation further – and the Texas Nationalist Movement is paying attention. All this while Texas’ lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security is now remanded to the District Court. So all the action is on the ground on the northern bank of the Rio Grande. Greg Abbott is now playing a very high-stakes game, with two elections hanging in the balance. Status of the court cases The status of the case of Texas v. DHS continues to create confusion. To review, the case has docket listings at the: • United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (Austin Division), the • United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Judicial Circuit, and the • Supreme Court of the United States of America. Last year, District Judge Alia Moses, after first granting a temporary restraining order, denied a preliminary injunction. The Court of Appeals did grant an injunction pending appeal, forbidding the U.S. Border Patrol to cut the concertina wire the Texas National Guard has strung at the Eagle Pass crossing. Two weeks ago (January 22) the Supreme Court vacated the injunction, without comment. On Friday the week before last (January 26), the Appeals Court panel issued a three-page order: 1. Holding the appeal in abeyance, 2. Canceling the oral argument they’d originally scheduled for February 8, and 3. Remanding the case to the District Court for sixty days. The appellate panel instructed Judge Moses to “develop further the factual record.” They did so after noting that the two parties “strenuously dispute” the facts on the ground. Accordingly Judge Moses has scheduled a two-day evidentiary hearing for March 4-5, 2024. Judge Moses also ordered the parties to file a ten-page (maximum) brief identifying the key points in factual dispute. Greg Abbott did not wait But Gov. Greg Abbott did not wait for any evidentiary hearings to take place. Indeed, before the ink was dry on the vacatur, the Governor order the Texas Army National Guard to seize Shelby Park, which is near Eagle Pass and has a boat ramp leading into the river. He also ordered the Guard to string more concertina wire along the riverbank side of the park. Not a single legacy media outlet is properly interpreting the Supreme Court’s order. They all say the Court ordered the removal of the concertina wire. This is not correct. All the Court did was to cancel the Fifth Circuit’s order that the Border Patrol stop cutting the wire. That order said nothing to stop Greg Abbott and his troops from stringing more wire. Nor did the order say anything about requiring access to the wire by the Border Patrol. So the National Guard is in control, and they are stringing more wire. https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1749861371074744520 https://twitter.com/LeadingReport/status/1749895091143991665 https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1749870348328214715 They also are deploying in small boats to patrol the river directly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGvZvh-Ec-E More recently Gov. Abbott posted these ever-more defiant messages: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1753811834602410094 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1753927156990972088 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1754174489124860277 The reference to “America’s Governors” refers to a statement by 25 other State governors in support of the Texas position. This represents every other Republican governor except Gov. Phil Scott (R-Vt.). Most of these governors by now have sent their own National Guard contingents, or pledged to do so soon. Greg Abbott holds a press conference Yesterday afternoon (February 4), at 2:30 p.m. CST, Gov. Abbott held a press conference at Shelby Park. Thirteen of those Republican State governors flanked him. https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1754228500901613958 There he announced his intention to expand his border security efforts beyond Shelby Park. The Texas National Guard… (are) undertaking operations to expand this effort. We’re not going to contain ourselves just to this park. Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas) He posted these two announcements, one later that afternoon and the other close to Texas midnight: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1754284599956459607 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1754383873796911364 In the second statement, he noted that his forces had reduced the crossing rate to three per day, down from well over five thousand. Early this afternoon, Gov. Abbott disputed Joe Biden’s contention that he lacked the authority to secure the border. https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1754583061822382200 Last night, of course, the so-called Border Deal by Sens. Jim Lankford (R-Okla.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), and Charles M. Schumer (D-N.Y.), saw full publication. Laura Loomer, of course, said plenty about that at its release, and nothing good. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754290378444783837 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754290596397675004 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754293091635167696 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754295006515347636 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754296427532980392 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754298729127989654 A very angry Dan Miller, head of the Texas Nationalist Movement, put in his two cents today: https://twitter.com/TheTexianDM/status/1754568470019420615 So did the Texas Nationalist Movement: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1754319262297235764 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1754574500920709548 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1754595808299655617 Analysis Naturally Greg Abbott provided no details of his proposed expansion. But few can doubt that he will expand his border-security effort. He has gone too far to back down now. Thus far Gov. Abbott has said nothing about Texas independence. Normally someone must introduce a bill to study the issue – or call a referendum. But the governor can call a special session of the legislature any time, to ask it to consider such legislation. That he hasn’t done so, could mean that he hasn’t thought about it. But he cannot fail to have heard about the option, directly from the Texas Nationalist Movement and through other channels. So he is trying to solve the problem by means short of pursuing secession. Nor is he defying any court – because no court has specifically ordered that the barriers come down. The most that’s happening is an evidentiary hearing – in four weeks. The governor went to the courts for redress of grievances, and the Supreme Court – out of the misplaced compassion of one Member, and the desire of three other Members to “fundamentally transform” America, Obama-style – denied that redress. Nor are rank-and-file Border Patrol agents eager to start any altercations with Texas National Guardsmen. Their union has said flatly that its members will not interfere. The other governors But the most important lesson from the events of this weekend is that Texas has many friends among the States. This goes to one other thing that the Constitution permits States to do if they consider themselves invaded. They may form an interstate compact to repel that invasion – which is what they are now doing. These Governors are pledging to send their own National Guard contingents to secure the border. They are doing this because the federal government is reneging on their obligation, under Article IV Section 4, to protect the States against invasions. An invasion need not have a regular, uniformed, disciplined army to perpetrate it. These migrants, though they look like civilians, are irregulars – and irregulars can invade, the same as uniformed troops. Greg Abbott and his fellow governors understand this. Joe Biden – or rather, his staff – understand it, too, but won’t admit it. Several questions, running through that staff’s minds, must give them nightmares. Will anyone obey their orders? The Border Patrol will make a mutiny if they push too far. But suppose they can field a contingent who will obey orders to invade Texas as a disciplined army. What will those other States do? And what about the armed effectives who hail from Texas and those other States? These questions remain relevant even without an overt move toward secession. So Greg Abbott could achieve his aim without it. In any case, federal-State relations need to change. This confrontation could bring that change about. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/05/news/greg-abbott-defies-federals-even-more/ Docket pages for Texas v. DHS: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67909144/state-of-texas-v-us-department-of-homeland-security/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68058529/state-of-texas-v-dhs/ https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23a607.html Posts about Texas National Guard stringing more concertina wire: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1749861371074744520 https://twitter.com/LeadingReport/status/1749895091143991665 https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1749870348328214715 Video: Texas National Guard on small-boat patrol: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGvZvh-Ec-E Gov. Abbott’s more defiant posts: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1753811834602410094 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1753927156990972088 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1754174489124860277 Post announcing the press conference: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1754228500901613958 Posts after the press conference: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1754284599956459607 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1754383873796911364 Post disputing Biden’s contention that he may do nothing more: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1754583061822382200 Laura Loomer’s posts about the Border Deal: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754290378444783837 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754290596397675004 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754293091635167696 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754295006515347636 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754296427532980392 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754298729127989654 Dan Miller’s statement about the Border Deal: https://twitter.com/TheTexianDM/status/1754568470019420615 Texas Nationalist Movement’s posts: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1754319262297235764 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1754574500920709548 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1754595808299655617 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Speaker springs the secret about Biden By Terry A. Hurlbut Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.), Speaker of the House of Representatives, two days ago sprung what is actually an open secret. He specifically said President Joe Biden is not in charge of his own administration. The particular issue in view is illegal immigration, and the border dispute with Texas. That dispute has stirred significant secession sentiment, as Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas) has taken border security into his own hands. More to the point, Speaker Johnson notes that Joe Biden continually says he lacks the authority to secure the border as he ought to secure it. Not only does the Speaker dispute that statement, but he now says Biden is no longer in effective command. Conservatives predicted that a President Biden would be mentally disabled for Presidential command. What they did not predict is that another ranking officer of the government would say that out loud. What the Speaker said Speaker Johnson made his remarks in an interview with Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business last Friday (February 2). According to The Western Journal, he told Bartiromo that Joe Biden does not appear to be in charge. The speaker bases his conclusion on Biden’s consistent refusal to take appropriate action on the southern border. In fact, Biden, as recently as January 30, specifically said he lacked the authority to do more than he has. The White House site itself contains remarks he made before stepping aboard his “Marine One” VH-3D helicopter: Q: Mr. President, on the border. Have you done everything you can do with executive authority? Or is there more you could do absent (inaudible)? THE PRESIDENT: I’ve done all I can do. Just give me the power. I’ve asked from the very day I got into office. Give me the Border Patrol. Give me the people — give me the people, the judges. Give me the people who can stop this and make it work right. Notice that the President isn’t talking about interdiction, but about processing. He wants more immigration judges to hear the cases of all who present themselves at the border. Bill Maher criticized both sides on the border issue on a panel discussion on Fox. On one hand, he accused Republicans of not wanting a border deal because they’d rather campaign on the issue. (Maher failed to consider whether “as good a deal as you’re gonna get” is good enough.) But he also conceded a point Gov. Chris Sununu (R-N.H.) made, that Biden did have authority he won’t use. I was gonna say part two of the acting is Joe Biden saying “You know what? If you just give me a new law.” A new law?! The president can fix this and he already has an existing law. This is all so silly! “I need a piece of paper from Congress to deal with the border.” No you already have that. https://twitter.com/EricAbbenante/status/1753642867740819565 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1754060546570432790 Which is the precise point Speaker Johnson made to Maria Bartiromo. He said he’s “been trying for weeks” to convince Biden to: 1. Reinstate the Remain in Mexico policy, and 2. Resume building the border wall. What Biden has done and is doing Biden not only rescinded the Remain in Mexico policy, but also – on his first day in office – issued an Executive Order commanding wall-building contractors to down tools, go home, and leave everything as it was. Worse, he is selling off unused border wall segments so that no one can use them. https://twitter.com/Lara_maga47/status/1693290236313325863 Now he says he lacks the authority to rescind those two decisions. Johnson disputes that. I’ve read to him the law myself — to the president. Read him the provisions of the law and said, “Mr. President, please take action.” So why won’t he? Because, said the speaker, his staff won’t allow it. Separately, Elon Musk – who seems to be bingeing on Matrix-style “red pills” – gave his brutal assessment of Biden immigration policy. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753592431428186292 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753603987234812367 Here, separately, is the link to H.R. 1177 in the 117th Congress. A clearly angry Musk has been making further points lately: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753852898323132686 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1754053261190181003 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753894223831793844 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753853879282753981 This was Musk’s most significant post to date: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753853879282753981 Less significantly, but still important, Musk questions the census rule that one must count all “persons.” The Census does not limit itself to citizens of the United States, nor even to lawful residents! And as a former Census crew member, your editor can attest that the Census counts convicts in their prisons. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753813669945774393 Musk also recalled this summary of a floor speech by Johnson, listing 64 ways President Biden has undermined border security. https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1753202850023498016 What’s happening in the meantime? In the meantime, different parties are taking different kinds of action – or refusing to. Under Gov. Abbott’s authority and orders, the Texas Army National Guard has turned Shelby Park into a major border strong point and staging area. At The Gateway Pundit, Christina Laila reports that the Guard is building the border wall, using authentic-looking border wall segments. https://twitter.com/MattFinnFNC/status/1751649974645817810 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1753927156990972088 David Greyson reports that the TNG is using small boats to patrol the Rio Grande directly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGvZvh-Ec-E Two commentators credited Gov. Abbott directly with taking effective border-security measures. https://twitter.com/charlottecuthbo/status/1749865522596921697 https://twitter.com/BillMelugin_/status/1753175659332133039 The National Border Patrol Council agrees. https://twitter.com/BPUnion/status/1753559270610841959 Greyson also submitted another report. Rep. Morgan Luttrell (R-Texas) introduced a bill in Congress to authorize the National Guard to use force, if necessary, to stop armed illegal crossers. https://twitter.com/RepLuttrell/status/1753873825425416452 At the same time, most of the House Democratic Conference has voted against bills to deport illegals caught: • Driving under the influence of alcohol and/or other intoxicants, and: • Defrauding the Social Security System. According to these posts, the measures passed. https://twitter.com/StephenM/status/1752838626696728686 https://twitter.com/ilike4/status/1752842613105856678 https://twitter.com/GeorgeG13567824/status/1753047481485545641 https://twitter.com/mickitiki/status/1753038968709337382 https://twitter.com/JulieJo29162040/status/1752912837096386999 https://twitter.com/RepBarryMoore/status/1753081159192559693 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1753124078502785041 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1753126499866050927 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753125929147080766 Is the Speaker correct? The Speaker is definitely and incontrovertibly correct about one thing. This administration has done nothing to improve border security and in fact seems to be deliberately undermining it. Republicans in the House are passing good, proper bills – while the Senate just passed a totally inadequate measure. Laura Loomer has the details: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754290378444783837 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754290596397675004 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754293091635167696 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754295006515347636 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754296427532980392 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754298729127989654 The only ones doing anything about the border, are Texans, in Congress, in their legislature, and in the National Guard. As to whether Biden is in charge or not: the Speaker hasn’t spoken to this, but Biden seems to take vindictive pleasure in the effects of his policies. (Only recently has Biden even admitted that the border situation qualifies as a crisis.) Elon Musk is correct: an open-border policy makes self-consistent – and Machiavellian – electoral sense for Democrats, and for the globalistic elites. On the other hand, Biden has shown clear disorientation to time and even to place. So if he’s not simply ignoring every overture the Speaker makes, he cannot – or may not – even acknowledge them. So if Biden isn’t in charge, who is? Someone – maybe Ambassador Susan Rice – could be in charge of “handling” Biden. She puts papers in front of him, puts a pen into his hand, says, “Sign,” and he signs. He likely needs no persuasion to sign any of these things. And who’s in charge of Susan Rice? None other than Barack H. Obama. This is the “fundamental transformation of America” he has always sought. What next? The Senate border bill is not likely to meet Speaker Johnson’s standards, so he is unlikely to take it up. Immigration is already a campaign issue and will so remain. Indeed the Texas authorities have already become folk heroes, as members of the Texas Ranger Division once were. Anyone concerned about illegal immigration must also take heed of the secret cabal that now even the Speaker recognizes as the ones actually in charge in this White House. They must also take heed of the kinds of people coming across. Contrary to Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s apparent belief, most of these are males of military age. In military terms, they are irregulars, and as such present a clear and present danger. The Speaker knows that he has one other measure moving through the committee process: the impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Articles of Impeachment go to the House Rules Committee tomorrow. Those Articles are necessary, even if only to embarrass the Senate in an election year. But the situation is more serious than that. The American people either made a mistake, or let someone steal an election from them and just shrugged that off. American voters cannot “shrug this off” again. They must vote Biden and Harris out, and recognize that they and that secret cabal won’t go quietly. Turnout – and volunteering to be precinct challengers and Officers of Election – are essential. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/04/foundation/constitution/speaker-springs-secret-biden/ Transcript of Biden’s remarks: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2024/01/30/remarks-by-president-biden-before-marine-one-departure-43/ Posts about Bill Maher’s comments: https://twitter.com/EricAbbenante/status/1753642867740819565 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1754060546570432790 Report about Biden selling off the wall segments: https://twitter.com/Lara_maga47/status/1693290236313325863 Elon Musk on immigration: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753592431428186292 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753603987234812367 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753852898323132686 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1754053261190181003 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753894223831793844 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753853879282753981 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753853879282753981 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753813669945774393 Link to HR 1177 (117th Congress): https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1177/BILLS-117hr1177ih.pdf Posts about Texas building the wall: https://twitter.com/MattFinnFNC/status/1751649974645817810 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1753927156990972088 Video: small boats patrolling the Rio Grande: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGvZvh-Ec-E Posts about Texas measures: https://twitter.com/charlottecuthbo/status/1749865522596921697 https://twitter.com/BillMelugin_/status/1753175659332133039 https://twitter.com/BPUnion/status/1753559270610841959 Rep. Luttrell’s post: https://twitter.com/RepLuttrell/status/1753873825425416452 Posts about Democrats voting against border-security bills: https://twitter.com/StephenM/status/1752838626696728686 https://twitter.com/ilike4/status/1752842613105856678 https://twitter.com/GeorgeG13567824/status/1753047481485545641 https://twitter.com/mickitiki/status/1753038968709337382 https://twitter.com/JulieJo29162040/status/1752912837096386999 https://twitter.com/RepBarryMoore/status/1753081159192559693 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1753124078502785041 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1753126499866050927 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1753125929147080766 Laura Loomer on Senate border bill: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754290378444783837 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754290596397675004 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754293091635167696 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754295006515347636 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754296427532980392 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1754298729127989654 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Texas independence – how? By Terry A. Hurlbut Recently the Texas Nationalist Movement “warned” those who support Texas in its border dispute that Texas independence might happen “before you know it.” https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1752053769033187445 At least one Presidential candidate express skepticism – while still acknowledging that Texas has a right to declare independence! No doubt Ambassador Nikki Haley based her skepticism on the failure, thus far, of two “Texit Bills.” But Texas independence, however long it takes, benefits from trends that present leftist movements in America have set in motion. If those movements don’t reverse themselves, Texas will leave – and another wave of newcomers might push it. Sentiment for Texas independence within Texas The sentiment for Texas independence among current residents of Texas is difficult to measure. Again, the Texas House Committee on State Affairs has taken up two Texas Independence Referendum Acts, one in 2021 and the other in 2023. Political forces, seeking to maintain the status quo, have “chubbed” both. (To chub is Texas-speak for “to delay to death,” by pigeon-holing or filibustering, as appropriate. The name comes from a river fish peculiar to Texas, renowned for its big mouth, fat body – and voracious appetite. Or it could come from an early Renaissance word for a lazy person.) The fate of those two bills means only that powerful establishment forces are determined to kill any such talk. But the fate of some who did the chubbing the first time, suggests that Texas independence sentiment might be stronger than events would seem to indicate. Nevertheless, an entirely different kind of chubbing just happened to a petition to put the basic question of Texas independence on the Republican primary ballot. TNM gathered over a hundred thousand petition signatures, more than enough to satisfy the requirements. And the Texas Republican Party rejected the petition out-of-hand – and the reasons they gave are obviously specious. However, the Texas Supreme Court refuses to get involved. All that happened before the Texas Border Dispute blew up. A swing voter on the United States Supreme Court quailed at the thought of mothers with small children drowning in the Rio Grande. Her vote has brought Texas to its present pass. Political philosophy within Texas – and outside it This brings us to a consideration of basic political philosophy within and outside of Texas. To understand this is to understand the movement that will actually drive Texas independence. Dan Miller, head of the Texas Nationalist Movement, has spent nearly a quarter century dwelling on the grievances Texans have with the federal government. [O]ur relationship with the Federal Government is like having a Hurricane Harvey hit Texas every 9 months. Dan Miller But plenty of civilizational thinkers outside of Texas have their own grievances with certain elite forces presently in control of many of the councils – and courts – in the United States today. These thinkers know, from long and bitter experience, that the elites will not surrender control willingly. In fact they strongly suspect that those elites will steal the Election of 2024, just as, and for the same reasons and by the same methods that, they stole the Election of 2020. A close examination of those reasons also reveals why a critical mass of those conservatives might move to Texas. When they do, they’ll be ready not only to vote for Texas independence, but to fight for it as well. The elites and their program These elites include the current leadership of the World Economic Forum, and the United Nations and many subsidiary agencies. The World Health Organization is the booby-prize example today. Indeed the United States Senate is preparing to vote on a Pandemic Treaty that will cede crucial control over health-care decisions to that body. The Senate needs two-thirds of the members present to ratify a treaty. A last-minute vote in the middle of campaign season might be all that the treaty’s proponents need do. That, and arranging for simultaneous railroad and air-traffic-control strikes to make sure that a critical number of Senators would not be present – and proponents would command a supermajority of those that remain. (A simple majority of the Senate constitutes a quorum. Article I Section 5 Clause 1.) The specific and overarching aim of these elites is clear. They don’t consider this planet large enough for them on one hand, and the rest of us on the other. For that reason they promote a variety of explicitly non-procreative ideologies, including abortion and “The Alphabet Soup.” The latter ideology has prompted many school districts to adopt a policy of grooming the children in their charge to transition from their birth sex to the opposite sex, and keeping that a secret from the parents. One couple, having immigrated from India, ended up spiriting their children out of school, out of State – and back to their home country. (Source: The New York Post.) All the ways Texas would attract conservatives These ideologies are but two of the ways Texas today attracts conservatives who don’t want federal or State governments to: • Interfere with the way they run their families, or to: • Make them pay, through taxation, for other people to embrace the “abortion lifestyle” or Alphabet Soup lifestyles. The NBC News Abortion Map tells one side of the story. Texas is an Abortion Desert. No one can get an abortion in Texas unless she would literally die without it. And, since the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, no federal court will intervene. Not even a diagnosis of Trisomy 18 (Edwards Syndrome) will suffice. On the other hand, another case is pending to decide whether anyone can receive abortifacients in the mail, in violation of the Comstock Act. Texas is also one of eighteen States that ban surgical mutilation or hormonal poisoning of children for “gender affirmation.” https://twitter.com/TomOliverson/status/1665004226097958913 An all-American couple, facing what that Indian couple faced in Olympia, Washington State, could move to Texas. In addition to that new law, Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas) last summer signed several laws that create a “Parents’ Bill of Rights.” In addition, Texas ranks 29th in total tax burden, 27th in cost of living, and has no State income tax. Texas also has fairly robust self-defense laws, that also apply to protecting third parties. Several recent – and shocking – prosecutions of third-party protectors in other States would simply not happen in Texas. Economic viability of Texas independence Economist Martin Armstrong wrote, on January 30, of the economic viability and military defensibility of an independent Texas. He concluded that Texas could stand alone – if circumstances, and the federal government, allowed it. Armstrong’s analysis of the military strength of Texas is incomplete. Of the 115,000 active-duty military service members now based in Texas, 23,200 of these are part of the Texas Military Forces. The rest are United States Armed Service members. How many of these would make a mutiny and join the Texas ranks, Armstrong doesn’t say. Of the “15 military bases and installations distributed across the State,” perhaps all but one are federal. (The one exception is probably Camp Mabry, headquarters of the Texas Military Forces.) How the immigration crisis could provoke further action The Texas Border Dispute has caused people in and out of Texas to think about Texas independence as never before. At present, the Texas Army National Guard is the most effective fighting force now deterring illegal immigration to any degree. And this although the federal government is actively fighting Texas on this issue, though (so far) only in the courts. As of this moment, two cases are pending about the physical barriers Texas has lately erected along the Mexican border. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals will hear oral argument in one – the concertina wire case – next Thursday. The other case involves a string of buoys along the centerline of the Rio Grande near Eagle Pass, Texas. The Biden Administration issued at least one ultimatum telling the National Guard to stand down and let the Border Patrol remove the riverbank fence and concertina wire outside Eagle Pass. Those deadlines have passed with no action except a moratorium on Liquefied Natural Gas projects. But in addition, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) has already dispatched elements of the Florida Army National Guard to reinforce the Texas forces. Those forces are on the move – and other forces could follow. https://twitter.com/rawsalerts/status/1750931136723783841 https://twitter.com/GovernorLittle/status/1750970257240694961 A trucker protest convoy has already reached the border, after setting out from Virginia Beach, Virginia. https://twitter.com/Virginia_Allen5/status/1753629048083775913 https://twitter.com/Virginia_Allen5/status/1753605002520674374 https://twitter.com/Virginia_Allen5/status/1753804309198753858 https://twitter.com/realchasegeiser/status/1753652813547049356 The Biden administration doubtless knows that the first shot fired in anger, could start a war. They also know the National Border Patrol Council has taken Texas’ side: https://twitter.com/BPUnion/status/1750942606274797850 Two likely triggers Aside from any latter-day Battle of Lexington – or Fort Sumter – two other events could set secession in motion – or not. The next is the end of the current term of the United States Supreme Court. Several Big Cases are set for oral argument or are already into their Battles of Opinions. The one case that could have the largest impact is Murthy v. Missouri – the Internet censorship case. If – again – Justice Amy Coney Barrett “goes all wobbly” on the Constitution, her head full of lurid visions of panic in the streets, or meat wagons blaring out “Bring out your dead!” to passers-by, that would allegedly result from unbridled freedom of speech, then the First Amendment will take a significant blow. That’s exactly how conservatives would perceive it. They might also perceive that their own neighbors might “rat them out” just as surely as social-media users might. And they would be ripe to move to Texas – though not to Travis, Bexar, Harris, or Dallas Counties. Then in November would come the Election of 2024. If Trump wins, that might provide some steam control. But if Biden wins, conservatives would want to relieve themselves of as much “nanny State” stress as possible. That, in addition to despairing of equal treatment under the law in many of their States – for a Presidential election is actually fifty State elections. The perception of thorough ideological corruption of swing State governments will provoke conservatives to move out. Many – perhaps a critical mass – will move to Texas. The next Texas Independence Referendum Bill Count on someone introducing a “Texit Bill” yet again in 2025. Whether it passes or “gets chubbed” depends on who wins certain primaries. Dade Phelan, Speaker of the Texas House, as noted already, has a significant primary challenger. If that person wins, the Texas House must select another Speaker. A Biden victory could have emotions at a fever pitch, with or without an unfavorable decision in Murthy. That would be true among long-time Texas residents, to say nothing of newcomers fleeing from “blue States” (and swing States that gave away their electoral votes as they did in 2020). Visions of “Disease X lockdowns” and a new tee-up of the WHO Pandemic Treaty (if that is not already in force) will drive fervid letter-writing, email, and “Blast FAX” campaigns with one message: “We want Texas independence!” Under the circumstances, the Texas House might blast a “Texit Bill” out of the State Affairs Committee, chub or no chub. If the bill does not pass in the 2025 session, it will pass in the 2027 session, after more “primaryings.” Then, given the fresh influx of angry residents, the Texit Referendum would return a landslide “Yes” vote. Even a two-year delay will not dampen the secession sentiment. And afterward… Texas independence would not come immediately. Instead, a Study Committee would sit to determine how to make independence happen, and how the State would govern itself as a Republic. Then the Texas Nationalist Movement would have to produce detailed plans to transition people out of programs like: • Social Security (the Old Age, Survivorship, and Disability Insurance Program), • Railroad Retirement (if applicable), • Medicare and Medicaid, and • Any other program that comes under the general category of “Welfare.” They also would need plans for full State handling of functions like: • Highway planning, construction, and maintenance, • A new banking system with a unique Texas currency, • Air traffic control and aviation safety regulation, • International trade, and • Expansion of the Texas Military Forces to include armed effectives in the U.S. Armed Services ready to resign their enlistments/commissions and “re-up” as Texas Military effectives. The Texas Interconnection is already separate and apart. It would need extension into areas of Texas it does not already serve, and some definite power-source improvements. But one thing might happen immediately upon passage and success of the Texas Independence Referendum. The “snowflakes” would move out. Very few would be fanatical enough to “stay and fight” until they’d need a visa to travel out-of-State. They’d move while the moving was good, likely to New Mexico, the nearest Abortion Tourist Trap State – or perhaps California. And a second wave of fed-up conservative Californians would be ready to take their places. The Day of Reckoning The Day of Reckoning, for or against Texas independence, need not come immediately. The very presence of a Texit Study Committee might bring a federal delegation to negotiate redress of Texas grievances. Or it might not, depending on how fanatical the Democratic Party really is. But one thing they could not ignore, would be the 2030 Census. Texas might “steal” four House seats from “blue States” in that Census. It might even create eight new Senate seats by splitting five ways. Under that circumstance, Biden might be inclined to let Texas go. The problem – as CNAV speculated once before – is that Vice-President Harris might circulate an Amendment XXV Section 4 Declaration of Presidential Inability. Yes, that would fail – because Republicans would rather deal with a senile dotard than a raving maniac. But the problem with maniacs is that they might not shun murder. (Ask Jane Fonda.) But the left has a problem, too. The minute they take such a drastic step, half the States announce their intention to join Texas. As they have this time, though the action is short of secession. So Texas might finish with, if not exactly independence, then a completely renegotiated relationship with the other States. Thereafter we can go back to saying, “The United States are…” instead of “The United States is…” And the dream of “planetary unity” would die – at least until the Rapture of the Church… Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/03/foundation/constitution/texas-independence-how/ Texas Nationalist Movement home page: https://tnm.me/ “TEXIT will be here before you know it” post: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1752053769033187445 Definition and probably etymology of the verb to chub: https://www.texastribune.org/2011/02/02/texplainer-what-is-chubbing/ https://web.archive.org/web/20120301172434/http://www.acapitolblog.com/2009/05/art-and-etymology-of-chubbing.html The New York Post story about parents fleeing the country: https://nypost.com/2024/02/01/opinion/family-flees-us-after-teacher-spurs-hides-10-year-old-daughters-gender-transition/ NBC Abortion Map: https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/abortion-state-tracking-trigger-laws-bans-restrictions-rcna36199 Post describing ban on transitional hormonal and surgical treatments: https://twitter.com/TomOliverson/status/1665004226097958913 Two posts describing other States sending National Guard contingents to Texas: https://twitter.com/rawsalerts/status/1750931136723783841 https://twitter.com/GovernorLittle/status/1750970257240694961 Four posts from The Convoy: https://twitter.com/Virginia_Allen5/status/1753629048083775913 https://twitter.com/Virginia_Allen5/status/1753605002520674374 https://twitter.com/Virginia_Allen5/status/1753804309198753858 https://twitter.com/realchasegeiser/status/1753652813547049356 Post from National Border Patrol Console: “We will not obey unlawful orders.” https://twitter.com/BPUnion/status/1750942606274797850 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Censorship case – respondents’ brief By Terry A. Hurlbut The apparent lead plaintiffs – therefore lead respondents – in the great censorship case filed their response today before the Supreme Court. Murthy v. Missouri, docket no. 23-411. In their brief, they laid out all the harms the government has wrought on the body politic, and the user bases of various social-media platforms, at least since the start of the Biden administration. (Note that Donald J. Trump does not appear as a defendant.) In their brief, the respondents lay all the blame on the government for the censorship they have endured. Ironically the only defense the government has, is that any of these platforms had a perfect right to do the one thing the government evidently would never have tolerated. Which is to say, they could have said, “No!” As several platforms have done – and suffered for it. Full history of the censorship case This case began originally as Missouri v. Biden, case no. 3:22-cv-01213. The Attorneys General of Missouri and Louisiana filed it in Monroe, La., on May 5, 2022. (See CourtListener’s docket listings at the District Court and Appeals Court levels. See also two Supreme Court docket listings, for the application for stay, and for a petition for review.) Then-Attorneys General Eric Schmitt of Missouri (now Senator), and Jeff Landry of Louisiana (now Governor) filed the case originally. Since then, many private plaintiffs have joined the case, through amendment of the complaint and through consolidation. The most recent Amendment Complaint is the Third, filed May 5, 2023 – the anniversary of the original Complaint. Joining the two Attorneys General were: • Three physicians who had lost their posting privileges on Twitter (now X) over their statements contradicting the COVID-19 Narrative, and • The Editor-in-Chief of The Gateway Pundit, and one of his colleagues, over their coverage of those moderational actions. Since then, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Children’s Health Defense won consolidation of their own case with the Missouri case. The Gateway Pundit published its 62-page brief before the Supreme Court had a chance to publish it on their site. In order to guard against erasure, they uploaded it to the Wayback Machine, which accepts more than snapshot URLs. They are also hosting it on their own site and making it available for download. Emphasis of the respondents’ brief The respondents feel the need to emphasize the coercive nature of the government’s conduct. For that reason they repeatedly connect censorship decisions to threatening statements and cajolery from the following agencies: • The White House, the • Office of the Surgeon General, the • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the • Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the • Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). In each case, the respondents have the text of the orders that went to the platforms’ Trust and Safety Teams. Many of these orders had a rich detail that positively screams “long-term relationship.” Respondents also refer to a technique they call “switchboarding,” and accuse CISA of this. To switchboard means to gather or solicit complaints from other agencies and forward these to platform moderators for action. CISA especially represented targeted posts as indicating foreign influence. Respondents deny that flatly and say that “domestic speech” was the clear target. (The FBI allegedly does the same.) Topics that drew the government’s attention – and ire – include without limitation: • The Hunter Biden Laptop story, • Coronavirus incidence, prevalence, and case-fatality, • Coronavirus vaccine safety and efficacy, and • Election integrity, specifically as regards the Election of 2020. Censorship by coercion – or by conspiracy? The brief makes one statement suggesting that the platforms’ hands might be dirty: Defendants are also engaged in joint action with platforms. Even if platforms are not coerced, federal officials conspire with platforms through endless private meetings and communications reflecting extensive, direct federal involvement in specific decisions. Defendants are also pervasively entwined in platforms’ moderation policies and enforcement practices, as they have insinuated themselves to become deeply embedded in both the strategy and minutiae of silencing disfavored viewpoints. This goes to the long-term relationship mentioned above. But the defendant-petitioners will argue the difference between coercion and persuasion. Persuasion – even conspiracy – does not exactly satisfy the Knight Test that Justice Clarence Thomas outlined in April of 2021. To review: [A]lthough a “private entity is not ordinarily constrained by the First Amendment,” Halleck, 587 U.S., at ___, ___ (slip op., at 6, 9), it is if the government coerces or induces it to take action the government itself would not be permitted to do, such as censor expression of a lawful viewpoint. Ibid. Consider government threats. “People do not lightly disregard public officers’ thinly veiled threats to institute criminal proceedings against them if they do not come around.” Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58, 68 (1963). The government cannot accomplish through threats of adverse government action what the Constitution prohibits it from doing directly. See ibid.; Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. 991, 1004–1005 (1982). Under this doctrine, plaintiffs might have colorable claims against a digital platform if it took adverse action against them in response to government threats. In that light, allegations of conspiracy come close to a fact asserted for the first time at the review level. The Supreme Court doesn’t ordinarily consider evidence not adduced at trial or even at intermediate appeal. But the most salient weakness of this case thus far is the lack of any briefs from platforms that: • Refused any such orders from, or even any such relationships with, the government, and then: • Suffered significant and demonstrable economic consequences as a direct result. At least three platforms qualify here: Gab, Parler, and Rumble. Parler continued to offer a platform to President Trump, after Twitter (now X) banned him. Suddenly Amazon Web Services, their hosts, de-hosted them. Eventually they came back – but that was only temporary. Last April, a company called Starboard bought the platform – and shut it down forever. Gab and Rumble vowed to fight – and are still fighting Gab has a different story. Host after host de-hosted them, on one pretext or another. One host accused them of hosting pornography. Actually, off-color images of scantily clad women did appear on Gab. Your editor simply blocked the accounts involved. But that was only an excuse. (Since resolving their issues, Gab now expressly forbids pornography of any degree, because they have an ideological aversion to it.) Not only did hosts refuse to host them, but both major smartphone “app stores” disallowed their dedicated apps. Today the only way to access Gab on any hardware is through a browser, with or without a shortcut. But a user can do this – and your editor does it all the time. More to the point, Gab literally built its own server farm and sold one-time premium passes to finance this. Rumble has struggled mightily to achieve the reach of its major competitor, YouTube. But, like Gab, they have their own server farm. Both platforms have occasionally received orders to “take down” posts or videos. And both have definitely refused. They pride themselves not only in refusing but in putting themselves into a position to refuse. (The respective content standards of Gab and Rumble are each simplicity itself. YouTube’s Community Guidelines fill a book. Rumble’s and Gab’s could each fit on a single 8½ by 11 sheet. Shared ideology So why didn’t Meta (Facebook and Instagram), Twitter, or especially Alphabet (Google and YouTube) do the same? Did the platform owners simply not want to spend the money? Or did they in fact persuade themselves to cooperate with a government with whom they shared an ideology? Gab and Rumble most emphatically do not share the ideology of the Biden administration, the European Union, the World Economic Forum, or the United Nations and its subsidiary organizations. They have spent the money on their own infrastructure, so they refuse to obey their orders. Sometimes they have blocked direct access to their servers from the territories of foreign governments who gave censorship orders. They can do this because every “Internet libertarian” has heard of a wonderful new invention called a Virtual Private Network. This allows absolutely anyone to access any domain in any territory – by proxy. So the Supreme Court will have to ask itself whether the building of separate, independent infrastructure was a reasonable burden to assume, given that Gab and Rumble assumed that burden. That Gab and Rumble have never “briefed” any Court is a glaring weakness. Why haven’t they? Andrew Torba, head of Gab, has said up-front why: he wants to poach Meta’s, X’s, and Alphabet’s users. “Stop complaining to the courts and come to us!” he says in effect to those users. “We built our castles, and surrounded each with battlements and moat! We withstood the siege, we have consistently defied the censors, and we always will!” The government’s censorship case is weaker still The government’s case is perhaps weaker, because they have no excuse for what they did. If the factual allegations by respondents are accurate – and one has no reason to believe they lie – then the government suppressed truth, so often that one could no longer tell truth from falsehood in what the government itself said. Indeed the respondents emphasize truth in their complaint. Censorship presents two problems: • How dare the government restrict the dissemination of truth? And: • How does one know that what the government says is a lie, truly is a lie? The government can at any time charge someone directly with any of a number of “lying offenses.” Fraud – lying for a direct and dishonest gain – is the obvious such offense. So are libel (in print), slander (out of print), and defamation of character – categories of spiteful lying. This government has vilified the plaintiffs, or those whose rights the plaintiffs are tasked to guard, in many ways. Why did the government never charge anyone with fraud? Possibly because they knew such a charge would never “stick.” In contrast, no public official can charge the “spiteful lie” offenses. The First Amendment leaves “public figures” no recourse, unless someone accuses them of common garden-variety felonies they did not commit. That leaves the kind of pressure the government brought to bear. But again, unsympathetic social-platform moderators consistently refuse to stifle such criticism of public figures. We’re back to Gab and Rumble building their own infrastructure, and refusing to obey. The private-company defense Yet here again, the government now must assert, as a defense, that private companies are free to do that which the government would never have wanted. But what would have happened if Meta, Twitter, and Alphabet had taken the same attitude Gab and Rumble now take? Then Donald Trump would have known better than to commission the coronavirus vaccines. The expansion of mail-in ballots would never have occurred. And Trump would not only have had access to far better advice in the hiring of Attorneys General, Surgeons General, and similar officers, but also – and most important! – he could have undertaken his planned prosecution of the Deep State far earlier. But they didn’t, and he didn’t, and it did, and he didn’t, and he couldn’t – and here we are. Conclusion In 1962, Stanley Milgram, Ph.D., demonstrated that people will obey even the most outrageous orders, if they believe they do so in a good cause. That applies equally to social-media platform owners and moderators as to individuals taking part in experiments in “the effect of punishment on memory.” CNAV is not prepared to state positively whether Milgram’s Obedience study strengthens the case for the respondents – or the petitioners. Clarence Thomas wanted his test case against government censorship by proxy. He got it, though how it came to the Court is messier than he wished. (See his colleague Sam Alito’s dissent from the decision to stay the Big Injunction.) Count on Thomas, Alito, and their colleage Neil Gorsuch – the Originalist Bloc – to side with the respondents. But! Count on Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor to side with the petitioners. That leaves Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh. If Justice Barrett, out of misplaced concern for “panic in the streets” or “millions dead” votes with the petitioners, so will Roberts, as they did in the recent Texas border dispute case. Then Andrew Torba – and Dan Bongino at Rumble – will shout out, “There! You see?” And maybe we’ll see a Great Realignment of social media. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/02/news/censorship-case-respondents-brief/ Missouri v. Biden: Docket pages: District Court: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63290154/missouri-v-biden/ Appeals Court: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67563473/state-of-missouri-v-biden/ Application for Stay: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23a243.html Cert Petition: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-411.html Alito’s dissent from stay of the injunction: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23a243_7l48.pdf Respondents’ brief before SCOTUS: http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-411/299644/20240202144405984_2024-02-02%20-%20Murthy%20v.%20Missouri%20-%20Brief%20of%20Respondents%20-%20Final%20with%20Tables.pdf https://archive.org/details/2024-02-02-murthy-v.-missouri-brief-of-respondents-final-with-tables Biden v. Knight First Amendment Institute, Thomas J concurring: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-197_5ie6.pdf Disobedient social-media platforms: Gab: https://gab.com/home Rumble: https://rumble.com/ Previous article on Stanley Milgram’s Obedience experiment: https://cnav.news/2021/09/30/accountability/science/obedience-challenge-liberty/ Previous article about the Big Injunction: https://cnav.news/2023/07/06/editorial/talk/truth-cops-busted/ Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Is Texas independence realistic? By Terry A. Hurlbut Texas is almost at the top of the news, by reason of its unique active border security measures. Furthermore, Texas independence has become a mainstream subject, chiefly because the Texas Nationalist Movement has beaten that drum for years. Lately the TNM has raised the issue repeatedly on its official X account. But the TNM must now do more than talk about Texas independence. If they ever hope to get a Texas independence bill passed – and such bills have already failed twice – they must convince their fellow Texans that independence is not only feasible, but can happen with a minimum of inconvenience of transition. And to do that, they must have a transition program written and ready to go when anyone signs any treaties. Where the Texas border dispute stands The United States Supreme Court electrified Texas when they vacated an injunction by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals against the federal government. This vacatur said only that the U.S. Border Patrol may cut holes in the border fence, topped with concertina wire, that the Texas National Guard has erected. That fence, near Eagle Pass, Texas, is highly effective. A migration stream, with estimates at three thousand crossings a day, dwindled to a mere six. And thanks to another Texas law, Texas law-enforcement officers are arresting the few migrants who make it across. The Texas National Guard now occupies Shelby Park, near Eagle Pass, and won’t allow the Border Patrol near the fence. So the Biden administration threatens to federalize the Texas National Guard if they don’t make way. But the Border Patrol Union has already said their members will not arrest Texas National Guardsmen. As far as they’re concerned, if their governor gives them an order within the law, they must obey. Most people reading about the Texas border dispute miss one important distinction. The Supreme Court’s action only said the Border Patrol may cut the concertina wire – if they can get close enough. But the Court said nothing about making sure the Border Patrol could get that close. To do that, the Court would have had to grant a full review of the entire case. They haven’t, so as it stands, the Texas National Guard may repair the breaches and interdict the Border Patrol from creating any more. Texas Nationalist Movement comes close to proclaiming Texas independence Meanwhile, the Texas Nationalist Movement has not been idle. The past forty-eight hours has seen a flurry of activity on their X account, mainly in response to ignorant or arrogant pronouncements by at least one Presidential candidate, among others. For example: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1752881941190426707 https://twitter.com/WashTimes/status/1752840199195762756 Nikki Haley just made the most salient concession any federal official or candidate has ever made as regards secession. “Texas can secede but won’t” is not the same as “Texas can’t secede.” But yesterday evening, New Hampshire Rep. Jason Gerhard (R-Northfield-Franklin) wrote TNM to advise them of two bills now on the floor of the New Hampshire House of Representatives. One is a referendum on declaring State independence if the national debt rises above $40 trillion. The other is a New Hampshire independence study bill, similar to the Texas Independence Referendum Bills. That second bill would create an official Study Committee similar to the committee the Texas bills envision. Excited, TNM shared this on their account, and called on Gov. Chris Sununu (R-N.H.) to support that movement. More to the point, TNM spoke in terms of a Texas-New Hampshire alliance. https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1752847765485547852 See also: https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1752739861314801830 One self-described Texan charged that, if Texas secedes, the rest of the United States comes under a Democratic trifecta. But another user was not so sure about that. https://twitter.com/jsmith32514/status/1752184800205496360 The TNM has been regularly posting obvious primary endorsements on its account, of candidates supporting their position. But three days ago they also posted this warning: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1752053769033187445 What Texas independence will mean, and require That last post is a clarion call to Texas real-estate agents to prepare for a wave of residential turnover. But before that happens, Texas, and the TNM, must take stock. Texas independence partisans have two sources for information, mainly on how to make secession happen. They are the TNM home site, and the separate site that Dan Miller, head of TNM, keeps. Miller has written a book on the subject: Texit: Why and How Texas Will Leave the Union. In the landing page for selling this book, he shares six bullet points. The three most salient for this discussion are: • His contention that Texas’ “relationship with the Federal Government is like having a Hurricane Harvey hit Texas every 9 months,” • A discussion on the actual spread between Texas income taxes and federal grants, and • His bold prediction that the average Texan could “increase [his] take-home pay by 600%.” To his credit, Miller also says his book offers possible transitional solutions for: • Social Security, • Military and Defense, • Trade, • Travel, • Currency & Banking, and • The National Debt. Miller discussed other political undercurrents that, when he wrote the book, militated against Texas independence. Those considerations might not be current anymore – because the Texas border dispute supersedes them. To the extent that any of them are current, certain players are already making countermoves. The Texas Nationalist Movement, furthermore, is not the only such player. The immediate crisis American independence had its roots in a crisis. The “mother country” brought this on by trying to tax Americans to pay for the Seven Years’ (“French-Indian”) War. The Texas border dispute could easily provoke the final sweep-aside of all remaining obstacles to Texas independence. Already, Texas has allies in this crisis. Twenty-five State governors have pledged support of Texas in stopping the influx of mendicant and possibly hostile illegal immigrants. At least ten of these have already sent contingents of their own National Guards to assist toward this end. The trigger could come with an order to federalize the Texas National Guard. On Wednesday of last week, Robert “Beto” O’Rourke actually asked President Joe Biden, in effect, what he was waiting for. https://twitter.com/BetoORourke/status/1750283034799026532 The next day, Gov. Abbott said he was “prepared” for that, according to The Hill. https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1750943686567834008 The Governor has not said how he was prepared, except to hint at using other “armed state personnel” to replace the National Guard, if he must. In fact the Texas Military Department oversees a Texas State Guard – and Congress has never “provided” for federalizing that force. So the governor could simply discharge the Texas National Guard and enlist all its personnel in the State Guard. The Air National Guard would present a problem, because they lease their ground assets from the U.S. Air Force. Perhaps the three wings of the Air Guard could re-station at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, George Bush Intercontinental Airport (Houston), Dallas Love Field, Houston Hobby Airport, etc. Political personalities The key enemy of Texas independence among elected officials has always been Rep. Dade Phelan (R-Beaumont). He has been the Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives since 2021. Before then, he was Chair of the all-important House Committee on State Affairs. By every available account, he, more than any other Member, is responsible for “chubbing” the two Texas independence referendum bills. (“To chub a bill” means to delay it to death by whatever procedure is appropriate at any given time.) During the dramatic impeachment case against Attorney General Ken Paxton, Paxton and others called for Phelan’s resignation. Now Donald J. Trump has “messed in,” by endorsing a primary challenger to Phelan. NBC News reported this two days ago. The challenger, David Covey, already has the TNM’s endorsement, having signed the Texas First Pledge. That pledge specifically binds any signatory to work toward Texas independence. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has made several forceful pronouncements, mainly in support of Texas’ border dispute position. Any “Texit” Study Committee would include the Lieutenant Governor as a member ex officio. He hasn’t yet signed the Texas First Pledge, however. Gov. Abbott seems to be doing everything within his power to resolve the border dispute in a satisfactory manner. Already he has surprised many independence advocates for the courage he has shown. But if Joe Biden makes a satisfactory resolution impossible – and then wins reelection, honestly or not, he then will have a serious decision to make. What happens after Texas independence? But any Texan, reading campaign or fundraising mail, or a ballot question, mentioning Texas independence, will have one important question. Suppose Texas does replace “State” with “Republic” in its name. What then? What about… The Texas Nationalist Movement must prepare to answer that question when, as is inevitable, people ask it. What about Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, trade, travel, currency, and a banking system? And will Texas get “stuck” with $600 billion of the national debt? To its credit, the TNM has a landing page for essays treating at least some of those questions. Those essays make many factual assertions that, if true, make a strong case for either: 1. Full-on Texas independence, or 2. Using the threat of Texas secession to force badly-needed reforms. That threat could suffice to solve the border crisis, for example – or to force a repeal of Amendment XVI. In general, Dan Miller and his TNM assert that Texas could replace all existing federal programs through: 1. Laying and collecting its own taxes to replace Federal income and Social Security taxes, and 2. Administering such programs more honestly and efficiently. Still, these are generalizations. Generalizations will never suffice to appeal to Texans with real-world concerns. Nor can they persuade Americans now living outside of Texas to start calling real-estate selling agents and tasking them to look for houses to move into (or apartments to rent). Such people will need, and demand, specific solutions, ready to implement the moment the ink dries on any secession instrument. Hopeful signs for Texas strength Having said that, Texas already bids fair to get stronger – strong enough, one hopes, to gain independence, or wring reforms from Washington, without war. Texas has, in the past several years, gained at least some industries necessary to arm an independent military. Elon Musk’s Tesla company relocated its physical headquarters to Texas. Today he announced his intention to re-incorporate the company itself in Texas. He did so after a Delaware judge disallowed a multi-million-dollar compensation package for himself. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1752922071229722990 As a result, Texas will have its own automotive industry, independent of any other State. It already has its own space industry, the Space Exploration Technologies Company (SpaceX). This report shows all companies, from 2020 to the present, which have moved, physically and/or administratively, to Texas. CNAV covered other practical considerations for Texas independence three years ago. But these areas need work. The Electrical Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) badly needs reform, as two harsh winters have shown. TNM has directly addressed one key problem: ERCOT must abandon “renewable energy” projects that are unreliable in the cold. Texas is not likely to see many leftists moving in to try to change Texas culture. It hasn’t yet, and is less likely for one reason: abortion. Leftists will not leave their abortion tourist-trap States for the Texas Abortion Desert. (See the NBC Abortion Map.) Thus Texas might be stronger than people think. But it cannot realize its strength without the assurance of specific, ready-to-go solutions. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/02/01/editorial/talk/texas-independence-realistic/ Two posts covering Nikki Haley’s statement: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1752881941190426707 https://twitter.com/WashTimes/status/1752840199195762756 New Hampshire Independence group offering an alliance? https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1752847765485547852 Dan Miller says Texit getting closer: https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1752739861314801830 Debate on political consequences for the rest of the USA: https://twitter.com/jsmith32514/status/1752184800205496360 Better move here while you can! https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1752053769033187445 Texas Nationalist Movement home page and related sites: https://tnm.me/ https://danielomiller.com/ https://danielomiller.com/product/texit-why-and-how-texas-will-leave-the-union/ https://taketexasback.com/pledge/ Beto O’Rourke calls for federalization of the TNG: https://twitter.com/BetoORourke/status/1750283034799026532 Tucker Carlson’s interview with Governor Abbott: https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1750943686567834008 Elon Musk announces intent to reincorporate Tesla in Texas: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1752922071229722990 Report on companies that have moved to Texas over four years: https://buildremote.co/companies/companies-moving-to-texas/ Previous CNAV articles discussing Texas independence readiness issues: https://cnav.news/2021/01/31/news/texit-texas-regain-independence/ https://cnav.news/2021/02/18/accountability/executive/texas-the-cold-and-bad-planning/ https://cnav.news/2021/04/01/accountability/executive/texas-power-bad-money/ The NBC Abortion Map: https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/abortion-state-tracking-trigger-laws-bans-restrictions-rcna36199 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Has E. Jean Carroll given Trump the election? By Terry A. Hurlbut CNAV has refrained from covering the case of E. Jean Carroll v. Donald J. Trump, for a simple reason. The reason is: it’s a gossip case. Of course, only an “alpha male” like Trump could find himself involved in a lawsuit like this. Nevertheless, the world already had good reason to doubt the justice of the judgment in that case. Not only was the award absurd. ($83.3 million for nasty words? A special, private law to grant her standing? That’s ripe for overturn on Constitutional grounds alone.) But the judge did not try that case fairly, and Trump plans an immediate appeal. But now the plaintiff has reached the height of absurdity and obnoxious boasting. Now, only the most deeply ideologically driven people will believe she was even telling the truth. And Donald J. Trump will command even more votes, and even a murder conviction will not stop him. WTF is E. Jean Carroll? E. Jean Carroll is a writer of facile advice and sour, anti-male screeds. These include a 2019 book titled What Do We Need Men For? A Modest Proposal. In it she accused two prominent men of criminally assaulting her: former CBS President Leslie Moonves, and President Donald J. Trump. Anyone who would put Leslie Moonves in the same category as Donald J. Trump is obviously reaching. Mr. Moonves has plenty of witnesses that tell far more credible stories against him than she. But Donald J. Trump? She says he forced his attentions on her in a department-store fitting room. That alone is absurd on its face. A man like Donald J. Trump need never chase women; women come to him. And a fitting room is the last place a man of his prominence would try a thing like that. Too many potential witnesses could walk in at any moment. In fact, the jury in her case did not find that anything untoward had occurred. Furthermore, why did even “Tish” James neglect to charge him with forcible rape? The answer is: it didn’t happen. Trump should have ignored her But Donald J. Trump is far from perfect. Apart from lack of imagination – and a tendency to hire the first person who applies for a job, discovering only later that he’s hired a traitor to his country – Trump suffers from the Alpha Male Syndrome. He assigns entirely too much weight to the opinions of others toward him. When her fluffy book came out, with its outrageous accusations, he ought to have ignored it. Memo to any man facing a similar accusation: treat it with the contempt it deserves. Sadly, for him, he didn’t ignore it. He insisted on calling her non compos mentis – an accusation that might have been true, but was never relevant. He also said she was “not [his] type.” And this is what gratuitous insult really means: an insult that wastes the time of the one giving it. To get Trump Nevertheless, no one but those who bought her book gave that charge the slightest credence or attention. The only practical consequence is that her employers at Elle magazine discontinued her column. (And even they said Trump’s refutations had nothing to do with the discontinuance.) But then the Democratic National Committee, the World Economic Forum, and countless other enemies of America and humankind suddenly began to realize: they must not allow Donald Trump to run for reelection as President in 2024. If he runs, he wins. Joe Biden has squandered his Cheater’s Baseline – and vendors of electronic voting machines have seen their machines exposed for all their vulnerabilities. See Curling v. Raffensperger, in which a computer-science professor demonstrated in open court how vulnerable such machines can be. So in addition to four criminal indictments, E. Jean Carroll sued Trump for defamation of character. And Trump perhaps made another typical Alpha Male mistake – he treated the court itself with contempt. At one point he stalked out of the proceedings, something defendants simply do not do. From the stories coming out of that courtroom, Judge Lewis A. Kaplan of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York conducted this case in a contemptible fashion. Indeed the only reason the case was viable is a 2022 law that removed a statute of limitations on defamation. That law alone could qualify as both a bill of attainder and an ex post facto law. E. Jean Carroll wins the lottery In any case, a jury awarded Carroll a whopping total award of $83.3 million in compensatory and punitive damages. Trump, of course, was furious. “Both verdicts” refers to another award to Carroll by another judge, for a munificent $5 million. Victor Davis Hanson weighed in with some outrage of his own: https://twitter.com/VDHanson/status/1751087392218624474 But Carroll’s reaction to the award has created the latest issue. First, on Monday morning, she appeared on CNN’s morning show and also on CBS This Morning and Good Morning America. By way of background, she once joked that a woman might find it stimulating to have a man “take” her without her consent and by force. https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1750935272018121144 These posts have her interviews on CBS and ABC: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1751964369242538399 https://twitter.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1751967380979270140 Christina Laila at The Gateway Pundit summarized her statements. Of course she said she would help Joe Biden in the upcoming general election campaign. One assumes that means with a hefty donation; her words are not likely to sway any voters. On GMA she said, I’d like to give the money to something Donald Trump hates. That will cause him pain for something, to give money to certain things. Perhaps a fund for the women who have been sexually assaulted by Donald Trump. That money might wind up being unspent and piling up in a fine assortment of Swiss banks. Whom is she talking about? If half of what she alleges about Trump are true, one would expect to hear of women asking where they could get in line for such a dole. At time of writing this has not happened. To CNN, when someone asked whether she knew how she was going to spend the money, she said: No, but we’re inspired to not waste a penny of this,” Carroll said. “And we have some good ideas that we’re working on. An immodest proposal That night she dropped a further clue to how she would spend the money. And if her statement about supporting Biden’s candidacy is any indicator, she probably wishes she hadn’t. Certainly the person to whom she made the statement – none other than Rachel Maddow of MSNBC – wishes she hadn’t. Kristinn Taylor has this report. E. Jean Carroll appeared on Maddow’s show, with her attorneys – Roberta “Robbie” Kaplan (no relation) and Shawn Crowley – in tow. Video is available at these links: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYgHNHKuyx0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plaAkXDAfCg Taylor provided this transcript from the YouTube video segments: Maddow: You’ve talked about using some of Trump’s money that you’re about to get to helping shore up women’s rights. Do you know what that might be, what that might look like? Carroll: Yes, Rachel, yes! Maddow: Tell me. Carroll: I have such, such great ideas for all the good I’m going to do with this money. First thing, Rachel, you and I are going to go shopping. We’re going get completely new wardrobes, new shoes, motorcycle for Crowley, new fishing rod for Robbie. Rachel, what do you want? Penthouse? It’s yourself. Rachel. Maddow: (shaking her head) Nothing. Carroll: Penthouse in France? You want France? You want to go fishing in France? Maddow: (shaking her head “No” over and over) Carroll: No? All right, all right. Lawyer Shawn Crowley: That’s a joke. Maddow: Although, if me fishing in France could do something for women’s rights, I would take the hit, I would obviously take one for the team. That night Rachel Maddow had the bad sense to boast about that exchange on one of her X accounts: https://twitter.com/MaddowBlog/status/1752160295856861464 Greg Price left theses posts with some other reminders: https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1752166900379852803 Steve Krakauer left this brief summary: https://twitter.com/SteveKrak/status/1752160799139807536 Nick Arama on RedState and Mike LaChance on TGP filed their own reports. Between them they gathered these pithy commentaries: https://twitter.com/megynkelly/status/1752163846792392956 https://twitter.com/TheLeoTerrell/status/1752178658289258515 https://twitter.com/JoeConchaTV/status/1752407737495875995 Analysis First, E. Jean Carroll very likely made the whole thing up to sell a book. That has become fashionable with too many people of both sexes in modern times. Second, Trump’s cue was either to sue her for libel (after all, she accused him in print), or keep quiet. Under American common law, public figures have almost no recourse against a charge of libel, slander, or other “lying” offense. Had E. Jean Carroll made a similar accusation against His Royal Highness the Duke of York, she might have to fear having to appear before The Old Bailey. And perhaps even John Mortimer’s fictional barrister, Horace Rumpole, would not have been able to help her. Not even truth is an adequate defense against a libel or slander charge in His Majesty’s courts. But American public figures just have to take it, because: Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech. Since this was a Federal case, the First Amendment applies. Even in a State court, it still applies under the Privileges and Immunities Clauses of Article IV and Amendment XIV. Even laying that aside, the temptation to reply in kind is a prominent symptom of the Alpha Male Syndrome. A Beta Male wouldn’t dare – and a Sigma Male, or Stoic, wouldn’t bother. He would say to himself, “E. Jean Who?” Which is what Trump should have done, especially because he, as President of the United States, had considerable demands on, and better thing to do with, his time. E. Jean Carroll throws in with the Trump Deranged crowd Nevertheless, this case would not have seen the inside of a courtroom, did not Trump bid fair to become the second President to serve non-consecutive terms, and have an obvious campaign slogan: “Miss me yet?” But E. Jean Carroll has definitely blown the gaffe. Announcing her intention to become a big-time Democratic donor was bad enough, but excusable. But her giddy I’m-going-to-share-this-wealth performance on MSNBC is not. Why Rachel Maddow boasted about it later that evening is beyond CNAV’s comprehension. Clearly E. Jean Carroll made her uncomfortable. A penthouse in France? FYI, the French idiomatic expression for a pipe dream is un château en Espagne, or “a villa in Spain.” “You and I are going to go shopping”? Rachel Maddow wore the nervous look of someone receiving a proposition and not knowing how to answer it. Or maybe she was thinking, what kind of crazy woman have I invited onto my show? Joe Concha is correct. When you receive such a tremendous award to right a terrible wrong, you do not announce that you’re going to “blow it” on a shopping spree. You announce your intention to bestow it in charity, or perhaps to set up a foundation for the redress and prevention of such wrongs. Then again, one comes back to what Carroll said years ago: that the unlawful carnal knowledge of a woman by a man, without her consent and by force, is a sexually stimulating adventure! Very few women who have had that unfortunate experience would agree. What next? The legal drama is not over yet. Of course Trump must post a bond in the amount of that award. But he will appeal – and regrettably, the Supreme Court might have to rule on this. We deal here, in addition to an advice columnist past her prime and playing Baccarat with the courts, with bills of attainder and ex post facto laws. But on a personal level, the recommendation for men is clear. Learn not to care – the essence of the Stoic philosophy. Let such things roll off your back like water off a duck’s back. Had Trump literally said, “E. Jean Who?” when someone asked him about it, people would soon have forgotten her name. Unfortunately for all concerned, that name will become a by-word for attempted election interference. Attempted because her hilarious performance on the Rachel Maddow Show destroys her credibility. And with it, the credibility of all the rest of Donald J. Trump’s accusers. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/31/foundation/constitution/e-jean-carroll-give-trump-election/ Trump’s Truth protesting the award: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111824480073262515 Victor Davis Hanson’s long-form commentary: https://twitter.com/VDHanson/status/1751087392218624474 Post with video: E. Jean Carroll says r*pe is a sexy adventure. https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1750935272018121144 Posts with interviews post-award: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1751964369242538399 https://twitter.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1751967380979270140 YouTube videos: the Rachel Maddow Show https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYgHNHKuyx0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plaAkXDAfCg Rachel Maddow’s boast: https://twitter.com/MaddowBlog/status/1752160295856861464 Greg Price and Steve Krakauer’s posts: https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1752166900379852803 https://twitter.com/SteveKrak/status/1752160799139807536 Commentaries by three media personalities: https://twitter.com/megynkelly/status/1752163846792392956 https://twitter.com/TheLeoTerrell/status/1752178658289258515 https://twitter.com/JoeConchaTV/status/1752407737495875995 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Censorship case set for argument By Terry A. Hurlbut The great censorship case, now known as Murthy v. Missouri, has received an oral argument schedule. The United States Supreme Court, which granted review of the case over three months ago, will hear argument next month. At issue is the massive injunction that a Louisiana district court entered on July 4, 2023. The Court will decide – likely at the end of June – whether lower courts may now enjoin the government from turning social media into State actors. But so far, no Court is arguing the role of the social media companies themselves. That’s especially important given the long history of one social media company that has consistently refused to engage in censorship. History of the censorship case The Supreme Court has scheduled oral argument for March 18, 2024, in a morning session. https://twitter.com/SenEricSchmitt/status/1752044835983315238 This case began originally as Missouri v. Biden, case no. 3:22-cv-01213. The Attorneys General of Missouri and Louisiana filed it in Monroe, La., on May 5, 2022. (See CourtListener’s docket listings at the District Court and Appeals Court levels. See also two Supreme Court docket listings, for the application for stay, and for a petition for review.) Then-Attorneys General Eric Schmitt of Missouri (now Senator,), and Jeff Landry of Louisiana (now Governor) filed the case originally. Since then, many private plaintiffs have joined the case, through amendment of the complaint and through consolidation. The most recent Amendment Complaint is the Third, filed May 5, 2023 – the anniversary of the original Complaint. Joining the two Attorneys General were: • Three physicians who had lost their posting privileges on Twitter (now X) over their statements contradicting the COVID-19 Narrative, and • The Editor-in-Chief of The Gateway Pundit, and one of his colleagues, over their coverage of those moderational actions. Since then, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Children’s Health Defense won consolidation of their own case with the Missouri case. The underpinning of the Missouri case Paragraph 2 of the Complaint reads: A private entity violates the First Amendment “if the government coerces or induces it to take action the government itself would not be permitted to do, such as censor expression of a lawful viewpoint.” Biden v. Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia Univ., 141 S. Ct. 1220, 1226 (2021) (Thomas, J., concurring). “The government cannot accomplish through threats of adverse government action what the Constitution prohibits it from doing directly.” Id. The Knight case arose out of then-President Trump’s blocking of critics from his Twitter account. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled he may not do that, because his account was “a public forum.” Trump petitioned the Supreme Court for review. But several things happened after that, in rapid-fire order. First, Trump “lost” the Election of 2020. Second came the January 6 Event. Third, and in consequence, Twitter banned Trump completely. When the case came to the Supreme Court, the Biden administration was already in place. So on April 5, 2021, the Court granted review, vacated the Second Circuit’s judgment, and sent the case back “with instructions to dismiss the case as moot.” Separately, Justice Thomas wrote a twelve-page concurring opinion giving his best rationale for a comprehensive treatment of social-media platforms as common carriers or, alternatively, as places of public accommodation. Contrary to popular belief, such notions have been current for centuries, as part of English and American federal common law. Thus far, no complaint, response, or other brief has tried to allege that no such things as common carriers or places of public accommodation ought to be construed to exist. Instead they allege that social-media platforms are not common carriers or places of public accommodation. Sadly, Justice Thomas had to agree – because Congress has passed no law designated social-media platforms as such. Nevertheless, Thomas did identify a First Amendment issue: [A]lthough a “private entity is not ordinarily constrained by the First Amendment,” Halleck, 587 U.S., at ___, ___ (slip op., at 6, 9), it is if the government coerces or induces it to take action the government itself would not be permitted to do, such as censor expression of a lawful viewpoint. Ibid. Consider government threats. “People do not lightly disregard public officers’ thinly veiled threats to institute criminal proceedings against them if they do not come around.” Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58, 68 (1963). The government cannot accomplish through threats of adverse government action what the Constitution prohibits it from doing directly. See ibid.; Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. 991, 1004–1005 (1982). Under this doctrine, plaintiffs might have colorable claims against a digital platform if it took adverse action against them in response to government threats. That is the case the Missouri plaintiffs make. Questions before the Court The defendants (with Biden’s Surgeon General leading) present three questions to the Court in response. To recast the questions as assertions, the government is saying: 1. Plaintiffs have no standing before the Court. Court after court has found that they do have standing, but the government has never conceded that. 2. Even if plaintiffs do have standing, the government did not and perhaps could not threaten, coerce, or induce the social platforms to do anything they wouldn’t have done absent the “challenged conduct.” They also complain that the Big Injunction was too broad and would stop the government from disseminating its own viewpoint. The Supreme Court has received no further briefs after the December 26 Election Officials’ brief. CNAV analyzed most of those briefs here. But the Knight First Amendment Institute filed a brief early in the briefing period. Justice Thomas’ concurrence in their case against President Trump makes their brief more important than any other. Justice Thomas cited two specific cases to support his thesis: Bantam Books v. Sullivan and Blum v. Yaretsky. Both cases involve possible State action – Bantam regarding censorship in book publishing, and Blum regarding nursing-home transfers for purposes of government program economy. The Knight Institute wants Bantam to govern, in deciding whether the government’s “jawboning” of Twitter, Meta, Alphabet, et al. exceeded the government’s Constitutional authority. Then they added this: Finally, the Court should resolve this case narrowly, without expecting jawboning doctrine to address all of the challenges created by the centralization of private power over public discourse. The major social media platforms’ power to dictate what can be said and what will be heard online poses a serious threat to public discourse and, by extension, to our democracy. Jawboning doctrine can reduce the risk that the government will take advantage of this concentrated power by pressuring the platforms to suppress disfavored speech. But it would be a mistake for the Court to contort this doctrine to solve what is, in reality, a problem of excess concentration and lack of competition. As explained below, this problem should be addressed through legislative and judicial tools better suited to the task. In other words, Knight suggests the real issue with social-media platforms is that they have cornered the market. That might prove extremely difficult to solve. Is censorship permissible or not? Of all the arguments the government makes, the second argument is arguably the strongest. That is to say, that they have not coerced, but merely have persuaded. But two kinds of persuasion ought to be in view here. They are persuading the public to think as the government does, and persuading the platforms that certain speech is a harmfully disruptive influence. Miss Wheeler, you do not know your place here… I consider you a disruptive influence, and I can promise you this: you will be out of this hospital within twenty-four hours. From Coma, by Robin Cook, M.D. New York: Signet Books, 1977. No one disputes that the government may at any time seek to persuade its citizens or subjects to believe as it does. One may dispute the specific things the government says. But in a Constitutional republic with democratic elections, the usual remedies against government authorities who lie, include: • Judicial or impeachment proceedings against said officials on grounds of fraud, or • Voting them or their appointing or confirming superiors out in the next election. They do not include prior restraint on government speech. But the issue is whether Big Tech has banned users as “disruptive influences” because the government told it to. Interestingly, not one defendant in this case has ever said, “I/we never did such-a-thing.” Rather, defendants allege, “I/we had a perfect right to do what I/we did.” And why? Typically because they further allege that the targets of their censorship were and are: • Lying to the public about the harm of government measures, or the harmlessness of the target of those measures, or: • Telling a truth that would bring harm from irrational public reaction to that truth – or merely embarrass the authorities. When is panic a good excuse for censorship? “This mustn’t get out because it would cause a panic” has long been a staple of fiction involving impending disaster. See, for instance, Stephen King’s The Stand (New York: Doubleday and Co., 1978). Ironically, that novel begins with the accidental release of a biological weapon at least as devastating as COVID-19 was supposed to be (but wasn’t), and indeed worse. The government tries to deny the threat and suppress warnings about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7QRsx9lbBU Suddenly we’re back to Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes saying that the First Amendment does not allow someone to yell, “FIRE!” in a crowded theater and cause a panic. But most people understand Holmes to be objecting to the raising of a false fire alarm. The government’s defense of censorship turns Holmes on his head. They seem to be saying, “If you smell smoke, keep your trap shut, because it’s none of your business!” Suppressing true statements Benjamin Wetmore at The Gateway Pundit concentrates on the second part. No one was alleging that the government may not post. But the government was telling social media companies to delete the posts of others. Some of those posts shared information that turns out to be true. Among the topics in which the government has tried to suppress such embarrassing truths as: • COVID-19 was never as transmissible, or as deadly, as the government pretended. (We never saw meat wagons with rooftop bullhorns blaring, “Bring out your dead!”) • Coronavirus, the causative agent, originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which released it, accidentally – or on purpose. (Perhaps a purposeful release, intended to infect the Western world, got out of hand and infected Chinese civilians as well.) • The mRNA and indeed all other vaccines against coronavirus were far more deadly than the virus itself. • Joseph R. Biden and his campaign stole the Election of 2020. The only down-ticket elections they stole were the elections of Senators Rafael Warnock and Jon Ossoff in the Georgia Runoff on January 5, 2021. CNAV continues to maintain that Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), then Speaker of the House, must have wanted to strangle whoever designed a cheating system that did no favors for some of her staunchest allies in the House, like Florida’s Donna Shalala, who failed of reelection. Problems on both sides All this is in keeping with what the country has learned about the three- and four-letter agencies involved in censorship. These agencies even came up with definitions of the three influences they were fighting: • Misinformation – the passing on of information one believes is true, but is false. • Disinformation – the passing on of information one knows is false. • Malinformation – the passing on of truth that society is not ready to hear. James Madison, who wrote the First Amendment, would not have accepted any of those definitions as valid reasons to act as the government has done – and is still doing. Who decides what is true or false? Who decides what society is or is not ready to hear? Furthermore, the essence of a Constitutional republic is individual responsibility, in keeping with the authority that a vote represents. But the plaintiffs in Missouri v. Biden have a problem, and the Knight brief brings that problem into stark relief. The Knight brief’s authors recognize the hazards of a small group of large – and cooperative – companies dictating what is acceptable. But they see no solution from a court that would bring them comfort. They would prefer to limit the reach of various platforms, so that no single platform can “corner the market.” No doubt they remember the “solution” to the great Telephone Anti-trust Case: to break up that company. And even without that breakup, the “monopoly” problem solved itself with the development of new methods of telecommunication. Alternative: find a platform that doesn’t practice censorship no matter who so demands How a court – or the Congress – is supposed to “break up” social media is impossible to imagine. Nevertheless, the distinction between persuasion and coercion remains the sticking point. Furthermore, several social-media platforms have sprung up to receive those whom the Big Tech family has expelled. The greatest distinction any of these new platforms can make is to: • Receive direct, peremptory government orders to take down content contrary to “accepted” narrative, and in reply, to: • Refuse to obey such orders, and let the world know of their refusal. The Gab Empire has been refusing to obey for six years. They’ve literally built their own hosting infrastructure, after host after host expelled them. Likewise, Rumble has received orders to take down certain user videos – and have refused. Happily, their content standards are very simple. This might disappoint intellectual-property anarchist Lawrence Lessig, but they will not be accessories to copyright violation. Nor will they be accessories to the exploitation of children, or, for lack of a better term, to virtual prostitution. Beyond these, they forbid very little, and what they forbid might fill a modern screen. In contrast, YouTube’s Community Guidelines would fill an entire file folder drawer. Likely outcome The Supreme Court will not decide the case until the end of Term. How the Originalists (Alito, Gorsuch, and Thomas JJ), the Moderates (Roberts CJ and Barrett and Kavanaugh JJ), and the Progressives (Jackson, Kagan, and Sotomayor JJ) see fit to question the two legal teams, will provide the best clues to how the Court will eventually rule. (Do not expect another Great Leak! The Court is too smart to let that happen again.) Thomas is probably the key, for in Knight, he practically begged someone to file a test case like this one. But he’ll have to convince Kavanaugh and especially Barrett that “panic in the streets” is a risk worth taking for human liberty. If Thomas cannot convince those two Justices – and he must convince both of them, because Chief Justice Roberts will always break a tie in favor of the Progressives (as Thomas knows all too well!) – then Gab and Rumble will start the greatest advertising campaign any company has ever run. “Don’t wait for the Court to save you,” they’ll say. “Come and join us!” And they’ll be right. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/30/editorial/talk/censorship-case-argument/ Missouri v. Biden: Docket pages: District Court: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63290154/missouri-v-biden/ Appeals Court: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67563473/state-of-missouri-v-biden/ Application for Stay: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23a243.html Cert Petition: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-411.html Knight brief: http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-411/294120/20231222121422782_KFAI%20amicus%20brief%20in%20Murthy%20v.%20Missouri.pdf Biden v. Knight First Amendment Institute, Thomas J concurring: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-197_5ie6.pdf Senator Schmitt’s post about the oral argument schedule: https://twitter.com/SenEricSchmitt/status/1752044835983315238 Video: The Stand, ABC-TV miniseries, 1994 – opening scene and theme https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7QRsx9lbBU Disobedient social-media platforms: Gab: https://gab.com/home Rumble: https://rumble.com/ Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Whom do our representatives represent? By Terry A. Hurlbut Two incidents in recent Congressional working days highlight a fresh concern: just whom do our elected representatives represent? Several Senators are crafting a “deal” that still does not enforce the law as the law requires. And in another, unrelated case, one representative does not even pretend to represent Americans anymore. This flaw in our Constitutional republic has been festering ever since the Parties started handing out “tickets” to voters to remind Party faithful for whom they must vote. Only the people can reform this system – by demanding a respect our representatives have clearly lost. Representatives who don’t represent us anymore Kristinn Taylor of The Gateway Pundit has the article on the most brazenly disrespectful declaration from any Representative. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) came to this country from Somalia as a “refugee.” Over the weekend she spoke to several Somalis – in Somalian. Several English translations revealed that she brazenly told that audience that she represents Somalia and Somalians as opposed to Americans. As if that weren’t egregious enough, she evidently wants America to support Somalia’s efforts to acquire territory by force! Here are the various video and other social media assets Kristinn Taylor included in her article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAzv4bVr7E0 Excerpt, allegedly “lightly edited for formatting”: A lot of people call me asking: Ilhan You should talk to the US gov. What will the US gov do? My answer was the US gov will do what we tell it to do. We should have that confidence as Somalis. We live in this country We pay its taxes. It is the country where your own daughter is a congresswoman. As long as I am in the congress, others will not take Somalia’s territorial waters. The US gov will not support others to take what’s ours. So don’t worry about that dear Minnesota. You got your lady in the congress. She is well aware and feel what you’re feeling. As for President Hassan Sheikh (of Somalia) I’m saying: we are very happy because of you. Because of the great work you did. You have showed Somalis and others that no matter how much problems we have as Somalis, we are capable people. We are people who know their country. People that never in their history….(inaudible) people that their country can never be put in danger. So want to congratulate the people of Minnesota and Somalis everywhere for sticking together (like my uncle said). And also how all of you stood by our President Because he needs all of us to stand by him. Somalia is for Somali people. Somalia is one. We are all brothers and sisters. Our land cannot be divided. There are other lands that we are missing which we’ll seek insha allah one day. But for the land we got now it will not be divided. So thank you all for honoring me and welcoming me always. https://twitter.com/HAGGOOGANE/status/1751599660282552658 This was the most alarming version of the speech: https://twitter.com/haadka/status/1751550117575041408 This is an example of irredentism, an ideology that calls for the “redemption” of lands that co-ethnics happen to inhabit, outside of the nation-state normally associated with a given ethnic group. It takes its name from Italia irredenta, or “unredeemed Italy,” referring to, among other places: • Portions of the ancient Roman province of Illyricum, and • The island of Corsica. The seeking of those territories in 1919 propelled Benito Mussolini to power. Ever since, “irredentism” refers to any movement to acquire another country’s territory on any pretext. In any case, Rep. Omar’s pronouncement was so awful, even the Somali foreign ministry had to disavow it: https://twitter.com/AmbRhodaJElmi/status/1751669533171994655 Several Americans reacted in outrage: https://twitter.com/MarinaMedvin/status/1751751864167661750 https://twitter.com/ChayaRaichik10/status/1751753829245423687 https://twitter.com/alessabocchi/status/1751734899663393240 https://twitter.com/Bubblebathgirl/status/1751731659831930949 Both Libs of TikTok and Laura Loomer have called explicitly for her expulsion: https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1751783708506407242 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1751770447668969594 Trying to defend treason A New Zealand climate and vegan activist tried to excuse her words: https://twitter.com/ColinRobinsonNZ/status/1751691564051775997 Naturally, Rep. Omar seized on that, and expressed anger with the Somalis basically asking her WTF. https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1751719238316724330 But in the process, Ilhan Omar just dug herself deeper into trouble. The House of Representatives recognizes her as a Representative from Minneapolis and several surrounding counties and parts of counties. But she is acting like a delegate from Somalia – or a dangerous tyrannical movement with territorial designs on other countries. As such she is trying to drag the American people into a war to support a movement that cannot possibly benefit the American people. That is tantamount to treason, and she deserves expulsion on that ground. But the American people have a problem. The Democratic Party will not support the expulsion of any of its members on such a ground. Maybe they want to see Americans go to war to create a Greater Somalia. Or maybe no one in Democratic leadership has thought that matter through. Either way, they don’t care about representatives acting like delegates from foreign countries – and failing to register as foreign agents. They care about power, in support of a system that would increase their power. What that system would mean for Americans, doesn’t concern them. And evidently, if that means supporting military adventures on the side of hostile powers, that matters even less. Not representatives only, but Senators also Turn now to the infamous “border deal” now under negotiation in the United States Senate. Sen. Jim Lankford (R-Okla.) is part of that negotiation. This bill – which Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.), Speaker of the House, already refuses to bring to a vote if it passes the Senate – would provide a false sense of security about the southern U.S. border. Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit provided this quote that he sourced to Fox News Correspondent Bill Melugin: — Mandatory detention of all single adults. — Mandatory “shut down” of border once average daily migrant encounters hits 5,000. Importantly, this 5,000 number includes 1,400 CBP One app entries at ports of entry per day, and roughly 3,600 illegal crossings per day. — How is that enforced? Once the 5,000 threshold is hit, a new authority is codified into law that requires Border Patrol to immediately remove illegal immigrants they catch without processing. They would not get to request asylum, they would immediately be removed. This includes removals back to Mexico, and deportations to home countries. This would be a *massive* change from current policy, which is that once an illegal immigrant reaches US soil, they must be processed via Title 8 and allowed to claim asylum. Under this new authority – they are not processed, and they are mandatorily immediately removed once the “shut down” threshold is reached. — This “shut down” also takes effect is there are 8,500 migrant encounters in a single day. — The “shut down” would not lift the next day. It wouldn’t lift until daily encounters are reduced to under 75% of the 5,000 threshold for at least two weeks. This means the “shut down” authority would not lift until two weeks of an average of less than 3,750 migrant encounters per day. — Some family units will be released with ATD (Alternatives to Detention, ankle monitors etc). — New removal authority to immediately remove all migrants who do not have valid asylum claims, which will be determined within 6 months rather than the years long process we have right now. — Any migrant caught trying to cross twice during “shut down” phase would be banned from entering US for one year. — US will need agreement with Mexico for MX to take back non-Mexican illegal immigrants. This hasn’t been ironed out yet. It looks like an improvement. But Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) correctly observes that it would normalize a level of incursions of 5,000 per day. (Or to be precise, 4,999.) Fox News Sunday hostess Shannon Bream pressed him on the matter. The answers she got, should not satisfy any concerned American. https://rumble.com/embed/v47eni3/?pub=4teej On Saturday, the Oklahoma Republican Party passed a resolution of censure against Lankford. Jack Davis of The Western Journal has the details. This post has the text of the resolution: https://twitter.com/DustyDeevers/status/1751370101410902410 Saturday evening, Roger Stone suggested a possibility of blackmail: https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/1751408415031570575 The next morning he returned to that refrain: https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/1751621711621964251 But a former Oklahoma Republican Party chairman accused the present leadership of calling a censure vote without an official “call” to let people know the meeting was on. https://twitter.com/realAJFerate/status/1751438050607923658 Newsweek quoted the current Party Vice-Chairman as dismissing the now-former official as “a protector of the old guard of establishment Republicans.” Worse examples Even these two are not the worst examples of representatives who don’t want to represent Americans anymore. Recall Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) who famously answered someone’s call for resistance against gun confiscation with this dire retort: https://twitter.com/RepSwalwell/status/1063527635114852352 Before the day was out he would protest that people were treating him unfairly: https://twitter.com/RepSwalwell/status/1063543731431727104 A more modern example happened over the weekend. The account End Wokeness published a list of the ten States with the most gun ownership per capita. https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1750860194270089225 On Saturday afternoon, Rep. Gene Wu (D-Houston, Texas) answered with a screencap of End Wokeness’ post – and a picture of a drone deploying air-to-ground missiles. That was only the start of a sarcastic thread. https://twitter.com/GeneforTexas/status/1751363028623171813 https://twitter.com/GeneforTexas/status/1751421049315484019 https://twitter.com/GeneforTexas/status/1751796438265450860 Cullen Linebarger, who wrote about the anchor post in The Gateway Pundit, obviously missed the thread. That last post is worse, because it refers to a real-life bill of attainder. But in reply to that anchor post, someone directly addressed that air-to-ground missile thread: https://twitter.com/Tim_The_Sandman/status/1751435833410781608 Someone else shared some news that might or might not be true: https://twitter.com/2ndATexan/status/1751407953758830934 Then he added more to the notion that the government monopoly on heavy weapons is no more: https://twitter.com/2ndATexan/status/1751408560540402066 Analysis We have tales of three Representatives and a Senator who seem to believe that they do not represent those who elected them. One thinks she represents the people of a foreign country, people who happen to be her fellow ethnics and coreligionists. Another (the Senator) thinks he represents employers who want cheap labor, in the form of migrants of dubious loyalty. (He also hasn’t thought the matter through; these illegal migrants will likely vote for world socialism.) And two more have, each at a different time, threatened open war on their fellow Americans. Not since the Declaration of Independence has America seen such arrogance. He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. If those Representatives (and that Senator) don’t represent us, whom do they represent? We have an answer from Rep. Omar, and we can guess the answer from Sen. Lankford. From the other two, the guess is much more difficult – perhaps they represent only themselves. In any case, their behavior is tantamount to treason. Sadly, these are typical cases. The American people have brought this upon themselves, by giving in to irrational emotion in their choice of representatives. Some have voted out of complacency, some out of fear, some out of venal selfishness – others out of murderous spite. Behold the kinds of representatives for whom you have voted. Such representatives do not respect you, because you do not respect yourselves. Properly self-respecting voters must vote against any representatives who forget whom they are supposed to represent. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/29/foundation/constitution/representatives-represent/ Video of Rep. Omar talking about missing lands: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAzv4bVr7E0 Posts protesting her speech: https://twitter.com/HAGGOOGANE/status/1751599660282552658 https://twitter.com/haadka/status/1751550117575041408 Official Somali disavowal: https://twitter.com/AmbRhodaJElmi/status/1751669533171994655 American protests: https://twitter.com/MarinaMedvin/status/1751751864167661750 https://twitter.com/ChayaRaichik10/status/1751753829245423687 https://twitter.com/alessabocchi/status/1751734899663393240 https://twitter.com/Bubblebathgirl/status/1751731659831930949 https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1751783708506407242 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1751770447668969594 Excuses: https://twitter.com/ColinRobinsonNZ/status/1751691564051775997 https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1751719238316724330 Summary of Senate border bill: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/senator-lankford-defends-controversial-bill-allowing-entry-illegal/ Interview: Sen. Lankford and Shannon Bream: https://rumble.com/v49zyno-senator-lankford-defends-controversial-bill-allowing-entry-to-illegal-immig.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Resolution of censure: https://twitter.com/DustyDeevers/status/1751370101410902410 Roger Stone’s protest: https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/1751408415031570575 https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/1751621711621964251 Former OKGOP chairman protests: https://twitter.com/realAJFerate/status/1751438050607923658 Eric Swallwell threatening nuclear attack: https://twitter.com/RepSwalwell/status/1063527635114852352 https://twitter.com/RepSwalwell/status/1063543731431727104 List of States with most gun ownership per capita: https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1750860194270089225 Gene Wu’s thread: https://twitter.com/GeneforTexas/status/1751363028623171813 https://twitter.com/GeneforTexas/status/1751421049315484019 https://twitter.com/GeneforTexas/status/1751796438265450860 Replies to that thread: https://twitter.com/Tim_The_Sandman/status/1751435833410781608 https://twitter.com/2ndATexan/status/1751407953758830934 https://twitter.com/2ndATexan/status/1751408560540402066 Declaration of Independence: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Antisemitism and its required conspiracy theory By Terry A. Hurlbut The Fourth Arab-Israeli War has, as CNAV has noted before, brought out the worst in many groups of people. It has divided coalitions on the left and the right. To be specific, antisemitism has reared up as it hasn’t since Kristallnacht. America has seen that especially on university campuses – but it also has appeared off campus. Underpinning all antisemitic pronouncements, is a conspiracy theory of some kind. Lately a new theory found its way in to the comment space of CNAV’s sister channel, Declarations of Truth. CNAV will keep the curtain of charity drawn (with apologies to Samuel L. “Mark Twain” Clemens) and withhold the commenter’s name and Rumble handle. But the comments remain. CNAV understands what the Censorship Industrial Complex does not: that Internet archive services, that include more than just The Wayback Machine, ensure that comments remain forever. Therefore CNAV will answer them – directly. Antisemitism in and by the Roman Empire CNAV has covered the history of the Middle East before. The relevant part of that history begins with the Birth, Ministry, Passion and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. At that time, the Jews lived under Roman occupation, which they perceived, correctly, as a brutal form of antisemitism. They anticipated their Messiah, but wanted a political leader. Jesus Christ disappointed them. My Kingdom is not of this world. John 18:36, Authorised or “King James” Version His Passion and Resurrection occurred shortly thereafter. The Jews have assiduously denied that ever since. In fact some Gospel manuscripts suggested that the High Priest bribed Roman guards to say they had slept on watch so that Jesus’ disciples could steal His body out of the Garden Tomb. (That’s probably apocryphal; the penalty for sleeping on watch in the Roman Army was death.) In 70 A.D., General Titus Flavius, son of Emperor Vespasian, led an army to quell a Jewish revolt. He famously destroyed Herod’s Temple in Jerusalem. He also besieged the last of the Zealots, instigators of the revolt, who had encamped atop Mount Masada. All of them died, except Flavius Josephus and one other man whom Josephus persuaded to go on living with him. Simon Bar Khokhva’s Revolt, and the Diaspora But in 135 A.D., Simon Bar Khokhva, pretending to be that political Messiah the Jews wanted, led another revolt. Emperor Hadrian’s forces brutally quelled that – then scatted the Jews throughout the Roman Empire. To put that into perspective, the Roman Empire had achieved its greatest territorial extent by then, under Hadrian’s predecessor Trajan. Furthermore, many Jews fled to lands beyond the Roman world – or perhaps the Romans sentenced them to exile at a distance from the city of Rome beyond Imperial boundaries. This was the Diaspora, which saw the settlement of Jews as far away as India and Medina in Arabia. Hadrian then renamed Judea as Palaestina, which is Latin for Philistia, or Land of the Illegal Immigrants. Jerusalem then took the name Aelia Capitolina. Centuries later, a group of Jews calling themselves the Interpreters (Masoretes) crafted the Masoretic Text, which dates back to the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries. Key to understanding the relevance is that the Masoretes sought to adjust the chronologies of the most ancient Patriarchs. Their object: to make the dates come out so that Simon bar Khokhva would be recognizable as the Messiah. From Masoretes to Muslims The Masoretic Text remains the preferred Jewish translation of their Law, Prophets and Writings – which Christians call the Old Testament. It also formed the primary basis of Christian translations of that Old Testament, although Christian translators also used the Septuagint, or Interpretation According to the Seventy. This last is a Greek version that Ptolemy Philadelphus commissioned from seventy Jewish scribes for his Great Library of Alexandria. This is the version that the Apostles and the Evangelists had available to them, and from which they quoted. As everyone knows, the Roman Empire split into Greek-speaking (Eastern) and Latin-speaking (Western) halves, beginning with Constantine. The Western half fell in 454 A.D., and eventually the various kingdoms of Western Europe arose from its ashes. The Eastern half continued as the Byzantine Empire. That Empire would eventually fall to the armies of Islam – which Muhammad invented to rally his fellow Arabs to fight against the Byzantines, whom he detested. Muhammad also sought to recruit the Jews of Medina, by carefully modeling his rules for daily living after Jewish Kosher rules. But the Jews rejected him even more thoroughly than they did the Christians. Islam has been the bitterest – and deadliest – enemy of Judaism ever since, with the possible exception of German National Socialism. Muslim conquest, Crusaders, Mameluks, and Ottomans Muhammad and his successor generals swept the Byzantines out of the Arabian Peninsula. Then one successor, Abd al-Malik, conquered Jerusalem. He built the Dome of the Rock on the site of Herod’s Temple. That Dome was his equivalent of the Tel-Bethel and Tel-Dan Golden Calves of Jeroboam I, Solomon’s former Royal Chief Architect who rebelled and founded a rival Kingdom (the Northern). When Abd al-Malik’s successors desecrated the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Pope Urban IX called for the reclamation of Jerusalem. The Crusades were the result. Four such wars took place, beginning in the eleventh century. Then in the 13th century came the Mamelukes, from Muslim Egypt, who expelled the last Crusader Kingdoms from the region. Several Arab-speaking Muslims settled in the land – but so did many Jews from Spain, beginning late in the fourteenth century. In the fifteenth century, Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castile made a treaty, sealing it with their marriage. Their combined armies drove the Moors out of Spain in 1492 (the year of the Columbus expedition). In 1517 the Ottoman Empire defeated the Mamelukes – and the Sultan invited more Jews to settle in the land. The Sultan did this, probably to spite the Spanish, who at the time were running The Inquisition. The present population of the Gaza Strip descend largely from the Mamelukes, with perhaps some Ottoman Turkish blood mixed in. Worse example of antisemitism – the Holocaust Such is the true history of the Middle East, up until the beginnings of Zionism, the purchase of the present lands of Israel from Turkish absentee landlords, the “renovation” of Hebrew as an everyday language, and eventually Lawrence of Arabia’s War, the British and French Mandatories of Palestine and Lebanon, and the Israeli War for Independence in 1948-9. CNAV can attest to that history, for in 2011 your editor traveled to Israel – and took photographs. The ruins of Crusader and Mameluke fortresses, along with Roman-era ruins and others dating further back in time, are undeniably authentic. No Jewish Potemkin built these fortresses for the benefit of American and other Western tourists. Furthermore, Jews protect the antiquities they discover. Muslims destroy antiquities – or, as Abd al-Malik did, cynically build on top of them. At this time, the inclusion of insights from the Holocaust would be instructive. Most of the killings one associates with that event happened in Germany proper and Poland. Historian Jason Lantzer recently expounded on the orders and experience of General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Forces during the Second World War. “Ike,” almost alone among American generals, did not see Jews as inherently anti-American. Kristallnacht, when it happened, appalled him. So he received the assignment to command Allied troops in Europe with relish. Ike discovers what the Holocaust was all about In April 1945, “Ike” got his first glimpse of the Konzentrationlagern system. He visited Ohrdruf, a sub-camp of K.L. Buchenwald. This authenticated excerpt from a letter by him to General George C. Marshall says it all: On a recent tour of the forward areas in First and Third Armies, I stopped momentarily at the salt mines to take a look at the German treasure. There is a lot of it. But the most interesting – although horrible – sight that I encountered during the trip was a visit to a German internment camp near Gotha. The things I saw beggar description. While I was touring the camp I encountered three men who had been inmates and by one ruse or another had made their escape. I interviewed them through an interpreter. The visual evidence and the verbal testimony of starvation, cruelty and bestiality were so overpowering as to leave me a bit sick. In one room, where they were piled up twenty or thirty naked men, killed by starvation, George Patton would not even enter. He said he would get sick if he did so. I made the visit deliberately, in order to be in position to give first-hand evidence of these things if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to “propaganda.” One can read the letter at the Eisenhower Presidential Library. As further authentication, the letter mentions Ike’s personality clashes with Lt. Gen. George S. Patton – and his monumental disgust over the unfavorable coverage of Patton in the newspapers, coverage that took a negative tone Ike found impossible to justify. That was only his first visit, and it cut him to the quick. His visits to other camps would turn out to shake his equanimity even further. So he gave orders to: • Document everything found in the camps, and create a photographic and cinematographic record. • Care for – and interview – all survivors. • Have every soldier in the Allied Expeditionary Forces visit the camps as they moved forward. • Have local, mainly German, civilians assist directly in burying the dead and caring for survivors. • Arrange for British Parliamentary and American Congressional junkets, with press (including ranking editors) in attendance, to the camps. His orders might not include the apocryphal command to “get everything down … [because someday] some [blackguard] will … say this never happened.” The problem is: the blackguards are getting up and saying the Holocaust never happened. The comments at issue in the Declarations of Truth comment space are a booby-prize example. Antisemitism and conspiracy theory These comments give a radically different version of Jewish history, at considerable variance with historical fact. According to this theory, the Jews never left Judea/Palestine. With the coming of General Abd al-Malik, they converted to Islam – if they did not die. So from whom do the Jews of Israel descend? According to this particular commenter, they come largely from Russia and Poland. This is a slightly different, and less detailed, version of the Khazar Theory – that the present Jews are all that’s left of the Khazars who once ruled what is now Ukraine. And what about the Holocaust, and Eisenhower’s attestation of it? Here is one quote that gives a clue to the mendacity of the comments: You cannot believe anything Eisenhower said, he was one of the lügende Juden. That German phrase admittedly looks like “Leader’s Youth.” But it translates as “Lying Jews.” That phrase in turn goes back to Martin Luther – who sullied his reputation, in the latter stages of his career, with his overt antisemitism. In fact, an engine search on the phrase produces links to Martin Luther’s unfortunate treatise. It’s name: Von den Juden und ihren Lügen – or, On the Jews and their Lies. Absolutely no reliable historical record asserts that Dwight D. Eisenhower was Jewish. He and his family were Gentiles, and he himself was a Christian. Conclusion So now you see yet another conspiracy theory of the type that antisemitism absolutely requires. The essence of antisemitism is a belief that the Jews have established a shadow government that rules the West with an iron hand in velvet gloves. Add to it the theory that the Jews of today have nothing in common with the Jews of Roman Judea. Of course that theory leaves a great deal unexplained – chiefly, how could Russian, Polish, or Khazar people gain such a detailed knowledge of Jews and Judaism that they would seek to convert to it, or pretend to convert to it, to further a goal of establishing a shadow government over all the West. And how the Holocaust could have happened – but antisemites repair that deficiency by saying it didn’t happen. Exactly as “Ike” predicted – though not, perhaps, that anyone would seek to slander him in this connection. That commenter knows who he is. CNAV offers this as a refutation, and a reminder to be better researchers of history than he. Or any other antisemitic conspiracy theorist or hypothesizer. In closing, this has been a painful exercise for CNAV. An Army Air Forces veteran once told your editor personally of having overflown one of those camps. Your editor has no direct experience with Holocaust denial. But, just as truth is a complete defense against a charge of libel or slander, truth is also a complete antidote to the willful denial of unpleasant, but nevertheless established, historical fact. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/27/editorial/talk/antisemitism-required-conspiracy-theory/ Declarations of Truth Rumble channel: https://rumble.com/c/DecTruth Ike’s letter to General Marshall: https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/sites/default/files/research/online-documents/holocaust/1945-04-15-dde-to-marshall.pdf Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Texas border dispute spreads By Terry A. Hurlbut The Texas border dispute, which already has raised tensions between left and right in America, has spread to other States. Twenty-five State governors pledged their support of the Texas position. Now Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas) confirms that ten of those States have dispatched contingents of their own National Guards to help Texas fortify the Texas-Mexican border. Not only that, but Texas is actively recruiting for its State Guard, which can never be subject to Presidential orders. This is the strongest drama about States’ rights since the War Between the States, but with this difference: Texas is technically defending the entire country from an invasion of irregulars. And at least half the country is positively responding. Latest in the Texas border dispute The Texas border dispute flared up this summer, when Texas installed physical barriers to the largest migrant inflow in history. These included buoys along the Rio Grande, and concertina wire along its northern riverbank. Lately Texas has redefined unlawful entry into, and presence in, Texas as misdemeanor criminal trespass. That allows State and local police to arrest migrants directly. The Border Patrol took it upon itself to cut the concertina wire. Texas sued. The case is now active in the: • United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (Austin Division), • Court of Appeals for the Fifth Judicial Circuit, and the • Supreme Court of the United States. The Court of Appeals issued an injunction pending appeal, telling the Border Patrol to stop cutting the wire. On Monday morning (January 22), the Supreme Court tersely vacated the injunction. But the Supreme Court issued no further orders. The Court of Appeals has scheduled the case for oral argument on Thursday, February 8. They are already receiving friend-of-the-court briefs, two of which support the Texas position. No other court activity has taken place as of tonight. Texas argues two things: 1. The Border Patrol has no authority to destroy Texas state property, i.e. the concertina wire, and 2. Texas is “actually invaded” and thus has the Constitutional authority to “engage in war.” (Article I Section 10 Clause 3.) Widening of the dispute Actually, Texas might now be doing considerably more than “engaging in war” on its own. Twenty-five State governors – which is to say, every other Republican governor except Gov. Phil Scott (R-Vt.) – have signed a joint declaration of support for the Texas position in the Texas border dispute. Gov. Kristi Noem (R-S.D.) said, according to Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit and Fox News: If Greg Abbott needs more razor wire, I’ll load it into a pickup, myself! Gov. Abbott would appear to have the benefit of more than a promise of “war” materiel. He is now visiting India on a junket to promote direct trade with that country. But he told Tucker Carlson that ten States had sent contingents of their National Guards. Abbott expects other States to join that effort, and says he is “prepared” for a military conflict. https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1750943686567834008 At 6:07 p.m. EST today, Carlson posted this interview with the leader of a convoy of truckers now converging on Eagle Pass, Texas, which is where the inflows are the thickest. In this video he also had a conversation with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1751018969056616552 The Department of Homeland Security has at least twice – and maybe three times – sent letters to Attorney General Paxton: • Demanding immediate removal of all concertina wire by Texas personnel, and • Setting twenty-four-hour deadlines for compliance. To each such letter, Gov. Abbott and Attorney General Paxton have replied with definite refusals. The most recent deadline passed at noon Central Time today. Recruiting volunteers Now, according to Newsweek, Texas is actively recruiting volunteers for its State Guard. Such volunteers would receive lodging, up to $55 per day, and presumably rations, for service in direct interdiction of illegal immigrants. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R-Texas) today told Laura Ingraham of Fox News that the Biden administration would be making “the biggest mistake [they] could make” if they confronted Texas law-enforcement or military personnel. Texas also has the support of former officials of the FBI (according to Jim Hoft), and former officials of the Department of Homeland Security (according to Mike LaChance). These men warn that the migrants consist mainly, not of women and children, but of men of military age. These military-age men might be bent on sabotage, mass murder – or supporting a uniformed, disciplined, invading army. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) posted his copy of one of the letters: https://twitter.com/SenRonJohnson/status/1750604869910602022 As an aside, Dr. Antonio Graceffo, in a special to The Gateway Pundit, called for border closure and drug prohibition, not legalization, to reduce drug demand. And Wayne Allen Root, Assistant Editor of TGP, said the Texas border dispute was about the salvation of America itself. “We are all Texans now,” he warned. Opening the border, he charged, is the Democrats’ gambit to destroy the country, if they can’t cheat their way to a second Biden term. The Democrats have twelve months – and Texas is the key to stopping that plan. How will the Texas border dispute play out? If Wayne Allen Root is only halfway correct, the Biden administration – or rather, Barack H. Obama, the master puppeteer – made a major miscalculation. They clearly expected Texas to obey the implied order to allow the migration to continue unchecked. But it was only just that – an implied order. Thus far Gov. Abbott has said only that if the federal courts will not interdict the Border Patrol, Texas will. As Texas is now doing. Obama has a problem: no court has ordered Texas to dismantle any of its physical barriers completely. The one injunction ordering Texas to shift the buoys onto the Texas shore of the Rio Grande is now stayed. Indeed, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is now the only court properly considering the Constitutional issues involved. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, made this provocative statement this afternoon: https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1751032574871241206 Apparently the only consequence of Texas’ refusal to remove all barriers, is a moratorium on new Liquefied Natural Gas export terminal projects. https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1750977467148345399 The Texas Nationalist Movement took notice. https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750945233909784747 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750958336164700632 They also took note of those 25 State governors pledging support. https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1751032311745741057 TNM is also applying direct pressure on the Texas Republican Party to permit its non-binding referendum on the primary ballot. https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750961199825756601 What next? Texas need have no fear of the LNG permitting pause. Projects like that take longer than a year, and the next Inauguration will take place in less time than that. Of far greater concern would be any military confrontation. But the LNG permitting pause seems to indicate that this is the best Biden (or Obama) has got. Gov. Abbot’s cue is to make sure to deploy every asset he can scrape up, to stop the inflow. Even the federalization of the National Guard is less likely. The time to do that was noon Central Time today, and it didn’t happen. A regulatory moratorium – subject to obvious reversal in the next election – was the chosen response. But Gov. Abbott has two more cards that he hasn’t thought of playing: 1. Transfer all Texas Army and Air National Guard assets to the Texas State Guard, and 2. Call the legislature into special session to pass the Texit Bill. The very existence of a Texit Study Committee would hold the country’s full attention. It would also be the strongest warning Texas could give the Biden administration. With those two measures, Biden and Obama would be on notice. Either solve the Texas border dispute in a constitutional manner – meaning to enforce immigration law and repel this invasion – or watch Texas, as an independent Republic in all but name, or at least at the head of a Constitutionally allowed compact, enforce that law themselves. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/26/news/texas-border-dispute-spreads/ Docket pages for Texas v. DHS: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67909144/state-of-texas-v-us-department-of-homeland-security/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68058529/state-of-texas-v-dhs/ https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23a607.html Tucker Carlson’s two episodes: https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1750943686567834008 https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1751018969056616552 Senator Johnson’s post embedding a letter from former officials: https://twitter.com/SenRonJohnson/status/1750604869910602022 Chairman Jordan’s warning about no money for dismantling borders: https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1751032574871241206 Post announcing the LNG moratorium: https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1750977467148345399 Texas Nationalist Movement posts: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750945233909784747 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750958336164700632 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1751032311745741057 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750961199825756601 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Texas, Feds heading for shooting war? By Terry A. Hurlbut Texas and the federal government are sending disturbing signals to one another. After the Supreme Court vacated an injunction against the Border Patrol, the Texas National Guard adjusted their mission slightly. It now includes replacing any concertina wire the Border Patrol has cut – and interdicting the Border Patrol directly. In response, several Democratic Members of Congress now urge the President to ”call up” the Texas National Guard. This would place the Guard under the direct orders of the President, through the Department of Defense. At the same time, several Republican governors have signaled that they stand with Texas. This escalation, if it does not stop, might lead to the firing of shots in anger between State and federal agents – or troops. Background on the Texas border dispute Recall that Texas is defying the spirit, if not quite the letter, of the latest United States Supreme Court ruling. The court issued a terse order vacating an injunction from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. That injunction had said elements of the Border Patrol may not cut the concertina wire Texas has strung along the northern Rio Grand riverbank near Eagle Pass, without first asking permission. But the Court did not take any further action. Specifically, no Court has enjoined the Texas National Guard from stringing concertina wire, either new or to repair a breach. So the Guard has been restringing wire wherever the Border Patrol has cut it. But Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas) stands accused of escalating the matter further. His detractors accuse him of interdicting any further Border Patrol operations in Eagle Pass, site of the heaviest migrant inflows. In a post on X in September of last year he made his position clear: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1704640256429985863 The link is to a letter the Governor sent to President Biden more than fourteen months ago. So the President can’t say the Governor didn’t warn him. The letter refers to Article I Section 10 Clause 3 of the Constitution, which reads: No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay. Gov. Abbott escalates his defiance Yesterday, in deploying the Texas National Guard to the border, Gov. Abbott made these posts: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1750169762678620587 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1750217215163465746 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1750235544951349275 That last post embeds a statement outlining what the President has done, to bring Texas to this pass. Gov. Abbott invoked a number of authorities, including: • Article I Section 10 Clause 3 (already listed above), • Article IV Section 4, which reads in relevant part: “The United States shall … protect each of [the several States] against Invasion”, and • Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387, 419 (2012). That last authority includes a portion of the dissent by the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who: • Explicitly cited Article I Section 10 Clauses 2 and 3 as an example of remaining State sovereignty, • Exploded “the myth of an era of unrestricted immigration,” saying that has never been the case, and • Pointed to a history of State laws restricting international and intra-national immigration and providing penalties for violations. For further details, look up United States Court Reports, Volume 567. While the federal government has accused Texas of interfering with its operations, thus far it has sought injunctive relief in one area only. Specifically, it has sought an injunction against the stringing of buoys, with serrated disks interspersed among them, in the river. But thus far no court has enjoined Texas from refusing access to federal agents in Eagle Pass. Two Texas (!) Congress Members call for federal preemption But now two Texas Democratic Members of Congress are asking in effect what the federal government is waiting for. Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-San Antonio) called on Biden to federalize the TNG. https://twitter.com/JoaquinCastrotx/status/1749917713864982734 Rep. Greg Casar (D-Austin/San Antonio) chimed in: https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1749933615704650155 Then he dropped this angry thread: https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1750262334608597366 https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1750262337049632968 https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1750262339620721089 https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1750262341172597115 Notice that Rep. Casar is not only calling for commandeering the Guard. He is also specifically calling for unrestricted immigration. If he wanted to fuel conspiracy theories of a “Great Replacement” of Anglos with Latinos, he could not have made a more inflammatory statement calculated to that purpose. Unfortunately, as Newsweek makes clear, others are joining this chorus. https://twitter.com/AnthonyMKreis/status/1750264102264451212 The controversy has even spilled over into the pages of The Army Times. Their article reiterates what the TNG is now doing: restringing concertina wire, and interdicting Border Patrol access. They also refer (but do not link) to a post by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Austin) urging the Governor to defy the Court. Christina Laila at The Gateway Pundit carried her own report yesterday afternoon, and included this additional post from Ken Paxton: https://twitter.com/KenPaxtonTX/status/1749571877394379243 Victor Nieves, also of TGP, released this brief video commentary: https://rumble.com/embed/v46hokz/?pub=4teej Last night, Sarah Arnold at Town Hall reported that the Freedom Convoy organization has called on truckers to meet in Eagle Pass. On Monday, January 29, they plan a run from Eagle Pass to Yuma, Arizona, then on to San Ysidro, California. https://twitter.com/SelfForCongress/status/1749524289249009980 The Speaker and the governors Later, Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.), Speaker of the House, offered his support. Jim Hoft captured his post, and that of reporter Chuck Callesto. https://twitter.com/SpeakerJohnson/status/1750375316478931298 https://twitter.com/ChuckCallesto/status/1750383830362378683 Then this morning, Jim Hoft, Editor-in-chief of TGP, reported that several Republican governors had announced their support for Texas. They include Govs. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.), https://twitter.com/GovRonDeSantis/status/1750292966067851637 Kristi Noem (R-S.D.), https://twitter.com/KristiNoem/status/1750267433498161516 Glenn Youngkin (R-Va.), https://twitter.com/GlennYoungkin/status/1750347978596864175 Kevin Stitt (R-Okla.), https://twitter.com/GovStitt/status/1750251885783879831 Greg Gianforte (R-Mont.), https://twitter.com/GovGianforte/status/1749958694966640717 and, oddly enough, Brian Kemp (R-Ga.). https://twitter.com/BrianKempGA/status/1750361294274805831 Hoft also quoted a portion of Gov. Abbott’s running summary of Operation Lone Star activities in 2023: In August, Governor Abbott held a press conference in Eagle Pass with Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds, Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt, and South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem to provide an update on their joint efforts under Texas' Operation Lone Star to respond to President Biden's reckless open border policies. The border visit came after Governor Abbott sent letters to America's Governors in May requesting support for Texas’ border security mission following President Biden's decision to end Title 42. In total, 14 states—Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Idaho, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming—have stepped up to support Texas' efforts and deployed personnel and resources to secure the border in President Biden's absence. Incredibly, Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) accused Trump of not wanting to solve the border problem. He said Trump would rather blame the President. Manu Raju, CNN’s chief Capitol Hill correspondent, left this thread: https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1750549690221752806 https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1750581530806624440 The last post links to this article giving details. The Senate action in question appears to be the same “fake border bill” that Speaker Johnson has already denounced. They want you to believe that the deal they’re offering to the American people is a “compromise.” [Sen. Chuck] Schumer wants you to sign off on: 150,000 illegal immigrants entering the country uninhibited per month. (That’s nearly the population of my hometown in Louisiana) Work permits for EVERY illegal alien who’s been released into the country. And they want YOU to pay for their legal fees. My answer is NO. Absolutely not. Former Rep. (and Speaker) Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) gave further details, and signaled his agreement with Johnson. But Sharika Soal (TGP) reports that Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has taken up Mitt’s refrain. https://twitter.com/ReallyAmerican1/status/1750396426901741941 Then, beginning at 3:51 p.m. EST, President Donald Trump weighed in, with two Truths. The Texas Nationalist Movement has not been silent, either. https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750340126993998134 https://twitter.com/TheTexianDM/status/1750341328230138296 https://twitter.com/buckrebel/status/1750363569575670270 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750550311780151302 This is actually the most powerful statement they made: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750305322319954188 Not many realize that Texas has a State Guard, not subject to federalization. Analysis In addition to the commentaries above, two more commentators have weighed in on video. Dr. Steve Turley has issued two videos in as many days on this issue. One describes the reactivated Freedom Convoy, https://rumble.com/embed/v46gwbi/?pub=4teej and the other the informal interstate compact now forming to defend the Northern Rio Grande Valley against any further incursions. https://rumble.com/embed/v46ncab/?pub=4teej He counts 25 States whose governors have pledged support to Gov. Abbott. In addition, “Jeremy at The Quartering” weighed in, something he doesn’t normally do. He explicitly warned the President to refrain from federalizing the Texas National Guard – or see the situation become “scary.” https://rumble.com/embed/v46n8u6/?pub=4teej Jeremy is correct – except the situation is already “scary.” Two U.S. Congress members, each representing a slice of the “woke” part of the southwest corner of the Texas Triangle, have actually called on the President of the United States to call forth the Texas National Guard – for the purpose of using it against the State of Texas and to aid and abet an invasion. At the same time, another Member, representing a non-woke part of that corner, has called on the Governor to give the President Jackson answer to the Supreme Court. [The Chief Justice] has made his decision. Now let him enforce it. Andrew Jackson, paraphrase Congress is split to the point of deadlock. By what authority? “Calling forth the Militia” will raise another Constitutional critical issue. Article I Section 8 Clause 15 reads: The Congress shall have power … To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions. If President Biden federalizes the Guard over this issue, this would be equivalent to calling forth the Militia to aid and abet an invasion. In short, Gov. Abbott would order his Adjutant General to disregard such a call-up. And if any of those twenty-five other States deploy their National Guards along the Rio Grande, then Gov. Abbott will have troops sufficient to turn an ugly situation even uglier – and fast. To say nothing of illegal immigration already being a galvanic campaign issue, in both primary and general elections. In short, the governors have given Biden a chance to pull back from the brink. If he doesn’t, then perhaps this statement, which arguably translates itself, would be appropriate: Felicitationes, el jefe estupendo. Ahora tienes una guerra. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/25/news/texas-feds-heading-shooting-war/ Abbott’s declaration of invasion: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1704640256429985863 Abbott’s letter last year to the President: https://gov.texas.gov/uploads/files/press/BidenJoseph_11.16.22.pdf Abbott’s three latest posts: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1750169762678620587 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1750217215163465746 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1750235544951349275 Vol. 567 of U.S. court reports: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/boundvolumes/567BV.pdf Post from Joaquin Castro: https://twitter.com/JoaquinCastrotx/status/1749917713864982734 Rep. Casar’s post and thread: https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1749933615704650155 https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1750262334608597366 https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1750262337049632968 https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1750262339620721089 https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1750262341172597115 Anthony Kreis’ post urging federalization: https://twitter.com/AnthonyMKreis/status/1750264102264451212 Ken Paxton’s post: https://twitter.com/KenPaxtonTX/status/1749571877394379243 Victor Nieves’ video: https://rumble.com/v492zyw-victor-reacts-texas-wont-back-down-showdown-brews-at-the-border.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Rep. Keith Self’s post: https://twitter.com/SelfForCongress/status/1749524289249009980 Speaker Johnson and Chuck Callesto’s posts: https://twitter.com/SpeakerJohnson/status/1750375316478931298 https://twitter.com/ChuckCallesto/status/1750383830362378683 The Governors’ posts: https://twitter.com/GovRonDeSantis/status/1750292966067851637 https://twitter.com/KristiNoem/status/1750267433498161516 https://twitter.com/GlennYoungkin/status/1750347978596864175 https://twitter.com/GovStitt/status/1750251885783879831 https://twitter.com/GovGianforte/status/1749958694966640717 https://twitter.com/BrianKempGA/status/1750361294274805831 Operation Lone Star running summary: https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/operation-lone-star-bolsters-historic-border-security-mission-in-2023#:~:text=In%20total%2C%2014%20states—Arkansas,border%20in%20President%20Biden's%20absence. Manu Raju’s thread about Mitt Romney: https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1750549690221752806 https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1750581530806624440 The “Really American” post: https://twitter.com/ReallyAmerican1/status/1750396426901741941 Trump’s Truths: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111818563903625038 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111818563406841830 Posts by or supporting the Texas Nationalist Movement: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750340126993998134 https://twitter.com/TheTexianDM/status/1750341328230138296 https://twitter.com/buckrebel/status/1750363569575670270 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750550311780151302 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1750305322319954188 Dr. Steve Turley’s videos: https://rumble.com/v4927pf-trucker-convoy-joins-texas-border-control-in-defiance-of-supreme-court.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 https://rumble.com/v498nmk-red-states-rise-up-and-stand-with-texas.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Jeremy at The Quartering’s video: https://rumble.com/v498k6u-tim-pool-has-his-civil-war-the-texas-boarder-invasion-leads-joe-biden-to-ma.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/