Declarations of Truth

New Hampshire unmasks Nikki Haley By Terry A. Hurlbut President Donald J. Trump won New Hampshire last night, thus winning Iowa and New Hampshire back-to-back. No non-incumbent since Reagan has done that, which means Republican voters are treating Trump as they would treat an incumbent. But that’s not the most important result. The most important result is that Nikki Haley finished higher than she had any right to finish. Crossover voters helped her, and that proves what CNAV said last week. Namely that she is a Trojan mare, for the Democratic Party and a desperate Republican establishment. New Hampshire results Decision Desk called the New Hampshire Republican Primary promptly at 8:00 p.m. EST, the hour the last polls closed. https://twitter.com/DecisionDeskHQ/status/1749960229511446955 The Desk had full results as of 8:33 a.m. EST today. With about 95 percent of precincts reporting, Trump finished with 54.6% to Nikki Haley’s 43.4%. Ron DeSantis (0.7%) and a smattering of “others” (1.3%) rounded out the remaining 2% of the vote. Trump picked up 12 delegates, and Haley picked up the other 10. (New Hampshire awards delegates proportionally, but a candidate must have at least 10% of the vote to get any delegates.) The Associated Press called the primary two minutes later; Nicholas Ballasy of Just the News reported that at 8:11 p.m. AP explained their reasoning here. Briefly, they relied on the returns received at the time, and “a survey of Republican primary voters,” to conclude that Trump was running too far ahead of Haley to catch up. Trump did well in northern New Hampshire, and in southern New Hampshire outside Manchester and its immediate surroundings. He did less well in the Connecticut River valley. In fact, Nikki Haley shellacked him, with 85% of the vote, in Hanover Township – where sits Dartmouth College. Laura Loomer, understandably, was ecstatic. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749968857844887835 She also noted that Trump is now the only candidate in history to win three New Hampshire primaries. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749988986855063911 But she also noticed this post, from CBS News Correspondent Caitlin Huey-Burns, at 7:41 p.m. EST: https://twitter.com/CHueyBurns/status/1749955518712406072 Instinctively she said: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749964064623673617 What about Nikki Haley? John Solomon, who noticed that Trump won back-to-back Iowa Caucuses and New Hampshire primary, called Nikki Haley’s performance a mirage. Though she finished with over two-fifths of the vote, she actually commanded the loyalty of one quarter of registered Republicans. So where did the other less-than-one-fifth come from? From two kinds of voters. Some are Democrats – and CNN ran an interview with one, which Charlie Kirk shared. https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1749958365764337836 And the only kind of candidate who could get 85% of the vote in a college town, is a Democrat running as a Republican. Tellingly, Nikki Haley vows to fight on, according to Reuters. But only her donors believe she has any path to victory now. The reason for that is that Trump won in New Hampshire despite massive crossover voting. Exit polls showed the majority of voters in the Republican primary were Democrats. https://twitter.com/DailyNoahNews/status/1749970924105830458 To complicate matters further, Joe Biden didn’t even appear on his own primary ballot. He had supported the idea of “the first primary” being in South Carolina. But someone set up a machine for a write-in campaign, so Biden “won” anyway. Even that doesn’t matter – because New Hampshire won’t even send a delegation to the Democratic National Convention. Small wonder that many Democrats felt “free” to cross over and vote for Nikki Haley, according to The Daily Caller (as quoted in American Update). Nevada will award delegates in caucuses scheduled for February 6 – but Haley will not take part. (Source: The Daily Caller.) More ugly details Vivek Ramaswamy directly accused Nikki Haley of taking money from the same people trying to exclude Trump from the ballot. https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1749977704810582502 https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1750026942282076551 https://twitter.com/RealAmVoice/status/1749889610400846300 At 1:49 a.m. EST today, Laura Loomer followed up on her “Nikki is a Democrat” remark the night before. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1750048153330434351 The photo she embedded is from this article in Breitbart, saying 70% of voters in the New Hampshire primary were not registered Republicans. Breitbart in turn cited CNN. Apparently those voters were unaffiliated – but Democrats could have disaffiliated shortly before yesterday. This morning Breitbart was citing more voices calling for Nikki Haley to drop out of the race. Ronna McDaniel, chair of the RNC, is no friend of Trump. But according to Citizen Free Press, she told Haley to drop out, in an interview on Fox. https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1750015374639390818 Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) is a friend of Trump – and she also told Haley to drop out. https://twitter.com/EliseStefanik/status/1749955011717570730 So did Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.): https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1749979341117632997 As did Sean Davis, CEO of The Federalist. https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1749963798818001059 And Ryan Fournier: https://twitter.com/RyanAFournier/status/1749970620073316490 President Trump, for his part, took note of New Hampshire’s quirky crossover-facilitating rules. He was right, of course. Rich Baris, “The People’s Pundit,” shared more: https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1749988168319844793 https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1750000857343528986 And later: https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1750018805680525518 https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1750025707781067091 Baris also had more insight on “The Dartmouth Vote”: https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1750017949987922090 Trump knows all this, of course. See here and here. Lessons from New Hampshire So what did we learn from New Hampshire? That is, other than that Donald Trump will win the nomination, and it’s all over but the balloon drop? Just this: Nikki Haley has based her campaign on a vicious fraud. This fraud goes beyond her not satisfying the Vattel Criteria, and knowing that she didn’t. In fact, Dr. Steve Turley clearly stated the nature of her fraud this morning: https://rumble.com/embed/v46f2jx/?pub=4teej Briefly, Nikki Haley and her apologists repeatedly said that only she could rally the moderates to the Republican banner. Her campaign still says so, on ads that run on YouTube, as your editor can attest. But the New Hampshire results totally give the lie to this premise. Again: 70% of all those voting for her, considered themselves Democrats or called themselves independents. In CNAV’s experience, “independent” means “Democrat, but not wanting to own it.” Not only that, but Democrat donors have financed her campaign, and are still financing it. Among them: Reid Hoffman, cofounder of LinkedIn. That platform has a censorship regime worse than Facebook’s – another thing of which CNAV has direct and bitter experience. This is why CNAV calls Nikki Haley a Democratic Trojan mare. (In fact, someone created a meme on her last name – in all caps, but with the capital H featuring Hillary Clinton’s trademark bright red arrow forming the crossbar.) How much longer is this mare manure going to continue? She will stay in the race as long as her donors think they can play the Trojan Mare gambit. They don’t care about humiliation, because they think they’ll have the last laugh after their tame American National SWAT, or whatever they wish to call the new American paramilitary police force they wish to build, batters down everyone’s doors and hauls them off to reeducation camps. If they think they can throw logs onto the tracks of the Trump Train, they will. The more reason, of course, to insist on the Vattel Criteria. With regard to this last: to the commenter on CNAV’s affiliated Rumble channel who said Vivek Ramaswamy admitted his parents were not both citizens when he was born, CNAV can confirm that. Reports are available from NBC News, The Washington Examiner, and The Daily Mail (through Microsoft Network). So is this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bM4UpgZ6sQA All tell the same story. The elder Ramaswamy never took the citizenship test and never got himself naturalized. Vivek’s mother did – after he was born. So he does not satisfy the Vattel Criteria and is not eligible to the office of President. CNAV applauds his position that even citizens-by-birth ought to take the citizenship test as a precondition of voting. But talk of having him as a Vice-Presidential running mate is totally inappropriate. He can better serve the country as, perhaps, an Undersecretary of State for naturalization and civics educational policy. Moving forward CNAV urges everyone not to let Nikki Haley fool them. Her fraudulent candidacy, again, proves the necessity of the Vattel Criteria. Vivek Ramaswamy’s example shows that a proper upbringing can produce a citizen-by-birth seemingly more loyal to America than are some natural born Americans CNAV could name – starting with Joseph Robinette Biden and Hillary Rodham Clinton. (Kamala Harris might not count; her natural born citizen status rates investigation also.) But Nikki Haley has shown a deliberate attempt to deceive, and that alone is a disqualifier, Vattel or no. Sadly, the Republican Presidential primary process will continue with a lot of noise about Trump’s legal troubles. We need care no more about that than about Nikki Haley’s alarms about Trump’s unelectability. Trump himself showed those to be false alarms – and Nikki Haley has shown herself not qualified to sound any sort of alarm. As difficult as it might prove, the only course, moving forward, is to ignore her. New Hampshire proved the necessity, and the feasibility, of that course beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/24/news/new-hampshire-unmasks-nikki-haley/ Decision Desk calls the race (with link to the results): https://twitter.com/DecisionDeskHQ/status/1749960229511446955 Laura Loomer’s posts and reposts: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749968857844887835 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749988986855063911 https://twitter.com/CHueyBurns/status/1749955518712406072 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749964064623673617 Charlie Kirk shares an interview with a Democratic crossover voter: https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1749958365764337836 “Noah” shares that most Haley voters were Democrats: https://twitter.com/DailyNoahNews/status/1749970924105830458 Vivek Ramaswamy’s accusations about Haley’s donors: https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1749977704810582502 https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1750026942282076551 https://twitter.com/RealAmVoice/status/1749889610400846300 Laura Loomer shares photo from Breitbart article: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1750048153330434351 The Breitbart article in question: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/01/23/seventy-percent-of-nikki-haley-voters-not-registered-republicans-cnn-exit-poll-says/ Voices on X telling Haley to get out of the race: https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1750015374639390818 https://twitter.com/EliseStefanik/status/1749955011717570730 https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1749979341117632997 https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1749963798818001059 https://twitter.com/RyanAFournier/status/1749970620073316490 Trump’s Truth about the crossover rules: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111807781422495790 The People’s Pundit’s threads and insight into the Dartmouth Vote: https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1749988168319844793 https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1750000857343528986 https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1750018805680525518 https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1750025707781067091 https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1750017949987922090 Trump’s two Truths after the counting was nearly finished: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111809360722271439 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111809491101543964 Dr. Steve Turley’s perspective on Haley’s fraud about being electable: https://rumble.com/v490dy9-trump-makes-history-in-new-hampshire-as-another-dem-seat-flips-red.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Stories about Vivek Ramaswamy’s citizenship: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/vivek-ramaswamy-shares-familys-citizenship-story-shaped-two-hardline-p-rcna107981 https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2437150/ramaswamy-confirms-father-is-not-a-us-citizen-as-he-reveals-immigration-policy/ https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/vivek-ramaswamy-reveals-his-indian-father-is-not-a-us-citizen/ss-AA1h418f https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bM4UpgZ6sQA 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 and defiance By Terry A. Hurlbut The Texas border dispute now has led to open defiance by Texas officials against the federal government. At issue is whether the Department of Homeland Security, and its agents the Border Patrol, may freely admit migrants and make no effort to stop them, while Texas may do nothing to stop them on its own. The Texas border dispute reached the Supreme Court, which yesterday vacated such injunctive relief as Texas had lately won. In response, Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas) told the Court something akin to what President Andrew Jackson famously said. The Texas Nationalist Movement is paying close attention – so the Texas border dispute couldn’t have happened at a worse time. How the Texas border dispute came to this pass Recall that Texas has sought in three ways to shore up its border with Mexico, along the Rio Grande. Texas has taken these measures to deal with a steady stream of migrants who are crossing into Texas without rest. So Texas is doing three things: • Placing physical barriers within the Rio Grande. They’ve placed a string of ballards, or buoys, along the river’s centerline. • Stringing concertina wire along riparian property lines, with the consent of the property owners. Those owners, in any case, welcome any effort to keep migrants off their land. These migrants kill livestock, leave litter, and sometimes threaten the lives of the owners and/or their farm or ranch hands. • Defining unlawful entry into or presence in Texas as misdemeanor criminal trespass, thus empowering State and local police to arrest these migrants. The current flash point concerns the concertina wire. From the beginning, elements of the Border Patrol have cut the wires, on the pretext of aiding migrants in distress. Texas has sued the Department of Homeland Security, the parent department of the Border Patrol, in District Court. Texas v. DHS, case no. 2:23-cv-00055. Texas asked for a preliminary injunction from the District Court. Judge Alia Moses granted the order on October 30. She extended it twice – but on November 29, she denied any further injunction. She reasoned that she was not sure Texas was likely to prevail on the merits, from the evidence then available. The appeal So Texas appealed the case. (Case no. 23-50869.) On December 19, 2023, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals voted 2-1 to grant an Injunction Pending Appeal to Texas, to stop the wire cutting. Judges Kyle Duncan and Don Willett, both Trump appointees, voted in favor. Judge Catharina Haynes, a Bush Junior appointee, noted simply that she would have preferred instead to expedite the appeal. She did not file a formal dissent. Early this year, the federal government appealed to the Supreme Court. (Application no. 23A607.) From supplemental federal briefs one can deduce that the following things happened. On January 10, the Texas National Guard took over Shelby Park, near Eagle Pass, Texas. They proceeded to string more concertina wire, and to forbid access to the park by federal agents. (First supplemental brief, filed January 12.) Then on January 12 – according to the government – Mexican authorities “advised Border Patrol of two migrants in distress on the U.S. side of the river” near the Shelby Park boat ramp. They also asserted that a woman and two children had drowned in that area. The Texas National Guard refused to let the Border Patrol investigate – but the staff sergeant dispatched two Guardsmen to investigate. Officials later learned that the two migrants had swum back across, and a Mexican official boat fished them out. Nevertheless, on January 15, the government filed a second supplemental brief essentially complaining that the National Guard had cost three lives and could have cost two more. The vacatur One week later – yesterday, January 22 – the Court issued a terse order vacating the injunction – without comment. Unusually, the order notes exactly who voted against it: Justices Samuel A. Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Clarence Thomas. Therefore, we know that Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor voted in favor. https://twitter.com/BillMelugin_/status/1749524698537582997 Activist Lauren Witzke, on her Telegram channel, speculated that Justice Barrett voted to vacate out of misplaced compassion. Witzke cited this as an example of why young women do not belong in positions of authority at that level. Chief Justice Roberts, observing tradition, always votes last, so he would have known that his was the deciding vote. He voted to vacate, perhaps for the same reason he voted for Obamacare – whatever that reason was. Gov. Abbott is apoplectic, unrepentant, and defiant. At 5:50 p.m. Central Time, the governor issued this statement: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1749580358583038371 The X account Leading Report posted, at 6:45 p.m. Central Time, that Abbott said the following: https://twitter.com/LeadingReport/status/1749594138092216321 At 9:26 p.m. Central last night, Lt. Chris Olivarez of the Texas Department of Public Safety issued this statement: https://twitter.com/LtChrisOlivarez/status/1749634664145322061 Four minutes after midnight Eastern, Leading Report quoted Elon Musk as making this accusation: https://twitter.com/LeadingReport/status/1749659221908435058 Today at 12:27 p.m. Central, Gov. Abbott issued this statement on his account: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1749861371074744520 At 2:41 p.m. Central Time, came this from Leading Report: https://twitter.com/LeadingReport/status/1749895091143991665 Earlier, The Post Millennial shared video of the Texas National Guard installing more concertina wire: https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1749870348328214715 John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it. President Andrew Jackson, in response to an obiter dictum in Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. 515 (1832). Texas border dispute could explode into secession But that’s not all. The Texas Nationalist Movement already has weighed in on the Texas border dispute. Immediately after the order came down, TNM said this: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749499740524363878 As an aside, they noted that all those migrants put on buses are not all the migrants that have crossed into Texas – not even the bulk of them. https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749514801812758863 The TNM explicitly called for Texas secession as the only solution to the Texas border dispute. https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749568885265727937 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749570725235851643 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749571027678773608 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749587318216986679 Apparently they have the support of a similar movement in New Hampshire, among others: https://twitter.com/IndependenceNH/status/1749553323764543845 https://twitter.com/RubinReport/status/1749593373743235235 This user said the Supreme Court just gave Texas justification for a national divorce! https://twitter.com/MQSullivan/status/1749561524291514436 TNM even sent a letter to Gov. Abbott. In it they called on the Governor to intervene in a dispute they have with the Republican Party of Texas. The RPT disallowed TNM’s petition to have the question of Texas independence appear on the Republican Primary ballot this springtime. https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749587319596912661 TNM published two podcasts last night, one on their dispute with the RPT and the other on the Texas border dispute: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749625627165286415 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749630259870466529 When Tucker Carlson explicitly called on “the men of Texas” to take border defense into their own hands, https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1749621444856664475 TNM asked Carlson to have their head, Dan Miller, on his program. https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749634931024904446 Today Newsweek made the Texas border dispute the subject of their cover story. Naturally, TNM took notice: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749912644977619123 Analysis Thus far Gov. Abbott’s approach to the Texas border dispute has been to avail himself of the minutiae of the law. Right now, no authority stops the Border Patrol from cutting the concertina wire the Texas National Guard has strung up. But: no authority stops the Texas National Guard from stringing more concertina wire. In fact, for the moment, nothing compels Texas to remove those ballards from along the Rio Grande, either. The next escalation will come when, as, and if the Border Patrol decides to confront the Texas National Guard directly. Such a scenario might play out this way. A squad of Border Patrol cuts through the concertina wire. Another squad, or platoon, of National Guardsmen move in later and re-strings the wire. But as they are doing that, Border Patrol elements approach, draw their weapons, and cry, “Halt, or we’ll shoot!” The Guardsmen do not halt – and the feds shoot. Or: the Adjutant General dispatches a team – say, a platoon – to walk, on the private property side, toward a breach in the fence that the Border Patrol just cut. Their orders: interdict a stream of migrants entering through the breach. The Lieutenant says: You have committed criminal trespass on private property. You are all under arrest. If you wish not to be under arrest, you will turn back immediately and go back the way you came. The migrants start to turn back – and then they hear another command: ¡No se muevan! That command, being in Spanish, is addressed to the migrants, not to the National Guardsmen. In response to this interference, the Lieutenant approaches the Border Patrol leader, and says: We are here, at the behest of the owner of this land, to defend that land against these migrants. By commanding them not to move, you are interfering with a law-enforcement action of the State of Texas. You may leave. Fatal escalation And when they don’t leave, the Lieutenant orders his men to remove them. That might play out once or twice. But sooner or later, someone is going to draw his service weapon and fire it in anger. Result: a combat death or deaths. That could start a Fort Sumter-like battle – or perhaps not. But at a minimum, TNM’s Dan Miller will be on the phone to Gov. Abbott, asking in so many words, whether the governor will listen now to the obvious suggestion: “Texit.” Whereupon the governor, faced with having to write Deeply Regret letters to Texas National Guard Gold Star families, calls the Legislature into special session for the purpose of passing a Texit Referendum Bill. Passage would be virtually certain, and a vote would take place September 1. If it passes – and it could scarcely fail! – then the Texit Study Committee would immediately sit and hold hearings. What happens next depends on whom the Decision Desk declares the victor in the Presidential Election of 2024. If it’s Trump, standoff supervenes until Trump takes office. Whereupon he reverses the Biden administration policies that occasioned the breach. Hence, no more wire cutting, and Trump even seeks to reimburse Texas for the concertina wire and the ballards. But if it’s Biden – then Attorney General Paxton again sues a “swing State” (Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, or Arizona). When that fails, the Texit Study Committee commissions a deputation to Washington, D.C. Its mission: to demand satisfaction of Texas’ grievances, or present a declaration of secession of Texas from the Union. What happens after that, one might as well ask the un-worthies at the Transition Integrity Project. Their Scenario 3, with a slight modification, would then play out. As readers will remember, that scenario, had it played out, might have escalated to civil war. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/23/news/texas-border-dispute-defiance/ Texas v. DHS: District Court docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67909144/state-of-texas-v-us-department-of-homeland-security/ District Court TRO: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172761480/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172761480.9.0.pdf District Court denies injunction: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172761480/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172761480.57.0_2.pdf Appeals Court docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68058529/state-of-texas-v-dhs/ Appeals Court grants injunction: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.216848/gov.uscourts.ca5.216848.49.2.pdf Application by DHS to Supreme Court: Docket: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23a607.html Application brief:s https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23A607/294669/20240102145055112_23A%20DHS%20v.%20Texas%20app.pdf First supplemental brief: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23A607/295564/20240112012220571_23a607%20DHS%20v%20TX%20supplement.pdf Second supplemental brief: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23A607/295753/20240115213955445_DHS%20v%20TX%20Second%20supplemental.pdf The order: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/012224zr_fd9g.pdf Bill Melugin’s X post reporting the order: https://twitter.com/BillMelugin_/status/1749524698537582997 Governor Abbott’s response, rejoinder, and supporting posts: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1749580358583038371 https://twitter.com/LeadingReport/status/1749594138092216321 https://twitter.com/LtChrisOlivarez/status/1749634664145322061 https://twitter.com/LeadingReport/status/1749659221908435058 https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1749861371074744520 https://twitter.com/LeadingReport/status/1749895091143991665 https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1749870348328214715 Texas Nationalist Movement series: https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749499740524363878 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749514801812758863 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749568885265727937 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749570725235851643 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749571027678773608 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749587318216986679 https://twitter.com/IndependenceNH/status/1749553323764543845 https://twitter.com/RubinReport/status/1749593373743235235 https://twitter.com/MQSullivan/status/1749561524291514436 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749587319596912661 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749625627165286415 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749630259870466529 https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1749621444856664475 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749634931024904446 https://twitter.com/TexasNatMov/status/1749912644977619123 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 and the way forward By Terry A. Hurlbut Yesterday’s dramatic, sudden, and barely hinted-at withdrawal of Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) from the Republican Presidential nomination race has changed the game. Not everyone sees that, and that’s one thing that makes the game interesting. For another thing, the moderates and the Never-Trumpers are trying to cloud the issue by calling Donald Trump unelectable. “He lost in 2020 and he’ll lose again, if he doesn’t toe the moderate line!” goes the common refrain. Nothing can be further from the truth. In fact, those arguing against Trump miss many key points that could ensure his victory, if the right people move into the right places to make these things happen. How the DeSantis withdrawal surprised everyone Ron DeSantis should have surprised no one with his withdrawal – yet he clearly did. His campaign had been falling apart for months. It reached the height of absurdity when the head of the campaign’s Iowa office spread out a thousand-piece jigsaw puzzle on a table in front of the whole staff, and worked on it while everyone else was hunched over laptops trying to make the impossible happen. All this was part of what NBC News called “a total failure to launch.” https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1749069832908152954 Yet even after Trump trounced the field in Iowa, everyone else still pretended that DeSantis was still in the race, and could still win. News flash! This year’s Iowa Caucuses were not the typical inconclusive three- or four-way wash of past election cycles. Donald Trump won a simple majority of the vote, and left all the rest of the field in his dust. That makes them decisive as they never have been before. The only excuse for people missing its significance is the Law of Inertia: A body in motion remains in motion, at the same speed and in the same direction, until a force acts on it. Gov. DeSantis finally recognized the nature of that force – Trump the Force of Nature. That’s why he canceled his Sunday morning media appearances. People should have gotten a clue then but they didn’t. But the rumors started flying at about noon yesterday. Then at three minutes of three, DeSantis made it official. https://twitter.com/RonDeSantis/status/1749159384112845285 How Trump and his followers reacted The Gateway Pundit has a treasure trove of articles showing various reactions. For other reactions, one turns directly to X. Donald Trump, and the son who shares his name, surprised more people with their magnanimity in victory. As Jim Hoft reported, Trump Senior considered himself “very honored” to have the governor’s endorsement. The campaign then issued this official statement: With only a few days left until President Donald J. Trump’s victory in New Hampshire, we are honored by the endorsement from Governor Ron DeSantis and so many other former presidential candidates. It is now time for all Republicans to rally behind President Trump to defeat Crooked Joe Biden and end his disastrous presidency. Nikki Haley is the candidate of the globalists and Democrats who will do everything to stop the America First movement. From higher taxes, to decimating Social Security and Medicare, and to open borders, she represents the views of Democrats more than the views of Republicans. It’s time to choose wisely. Hoft followed up with another report quoting Trump as saying he would no longer use the nickname “DeSanctimonious” for the Florida governor. https://twitter.com/margommartin/status/1749183820186652696 Everyone understood what he meant: Ron DeSantis was no longer a competitor, therefore no longer threat or even significant factor. When you win one objective, you plan immediately to take the next one. Donald Trump Jr. posted his own announcement in a similar vein: https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1749178550668701853 Last night Trump held a rally in Rochester, New Hampshire. People lined up hours ahead of time to get in, in freezing cold weather. https://twitter.com/TaylorPopielarz/status/1749139763070665164 Contrast that with Nikki Haley’s very poorly attended speech in the same town: https://twitter.com/FergusCullen/status/1747791937661181976 Neither snow, nor rain, nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds. Herodotus To be sure, not all his followers were as gracious as he. Laura Loomer vowed that the Trump campaign should hire none of DeSantis’ workers. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749165484916818224 No doubt she remembers all the times the governor or his staff excluded her from their events. Even before he entered the race, DeSantis called the police on Loomer outside a bookstore – and she definitely remembers that. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749208093836079368 But after she published this post, https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749244515024568426 she stopped talking about Ron DeSantis. Trouble for Laura Loomer Nikki Haley now occupies the bulk of her attention. We say bulk because she gave every indication that she did not know about the problem of search results not listing her true account, which CNAV reported yesterday, and of which we advised her by direct message. She definitely knows it now, and also about more troubling signs of a concerted attack on her account. Here is one such sign: https://twitter.com/SwampHorses/status/1749228276109701631 This morning she protested to Elon Musk, the new owner of X: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749414232884379888 For the record, Laura Loomer has 799,300 followers this morning, and has now surpassed 800,000: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749541566614573130 But CNAV can attest directly to the other thing she noticed about her account not resolving in search bars. Now turn to matters concerning Donald Trump on one hand, and Nikki Haley on the other. Donald Trump Donald Trump did hold that rally in Rochester, as he promised. https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/1749229056011203067 David Greyson quoted Trump as boasting of “the highest level of enthusiasm that anybody has ever seen ever.” He then cited the reasons for it: open borders, and elections of questionable integrity. Of course he promised to “terminate every open border policy” of this administration. Well he might fear dishonest elections – for real. The case of Curling v. Raffensperger is still proceeding before Judge Amy Totenberg of the Federal District Court in Atlanta. Early yesterday morning, Jim Hoft reported an electrifying event in court. Prof. J. Alex Halderman, who famously showed that Georgia’s voting machines – from Dominion Voting Services – are eminently hackable, demonstrated how easy one could hack them in open court. He set up a Ballot Marking Device, one of two kinds of electronic voting machine. (The other is a scanner-tabulator that actually records the votes.) Then he borrowed a pen from the lead defense counsel, to heighten the humiliation. Using the back of the pen, he held the Power button down for five to seven seconds. This put the BMD into safe mode. Do that with a BMD, and you can cause it to generate a Quick Read code to vote for a candidate different from that of the voter’s choosing. Do that with a scanner-tabulator, and you can change the vote totals that the Chief Officer of Election (OOE) reports up the chain. https://twitter.com/JohnBasham/status/1748842087888441782 https://rumble.com/v48dca6-local-reporter-describes-election-expert-halderman-breaking-into-dominion-v.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 An assassination threat? Trump might also have fresh reason to fear for his life. Laura Loomer revealed something else, in addition to her problems with the X Trust and Safety Team. An X account purportedly belonging to Alex Soros (son of George) shared a link and a featured image from an article in The Atlantic, talking about “normalization” of increased crime and inflation. https://twitter.com/AlexanderSoros/status/1749234395192414308 The absurd prose in The Atlantic need not concern us – but the image does. One side of the image showed a bullet hole in a car window. The other showed a hand holding some U.S. currency: a twenty, two tens, a five, and two ones. Total value: $47. Note also the prominent placement of the digits 4 and 5 in the first two bills. It may or may not be significant that the holder didn’t bother to sort them. The reaction he got was electric. General Mike Flynn seized upon it and asked what message he was trying to send. https://twitter.com/GenFlynn/status/1749415509001474348 Three users immediately denounced the post as an assassination threat. https://twitter.com/Arkypatriot/status/1749283355000967326 https://twitter.com/freejan6pows/status/1749258396719563096 https://twitter.com/docmurdock/status/1749264390120177709 Laura Loomer quote-posted it as well: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749276822364103122 She then followed it up with this analysis: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749296605256126743 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749410814178545678 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749426196356477221 Indeed, why would a photographer at The Atlantic publish a picture of someone holding two silver certificates among otherwise ordinary U.S. cash bills? Other bills even have the words “will pay to the bearer on demand.” Bills like that have been obsolete since after the Kennedy assassination. Laura Loomer has quote-posted her analysis and mentioned Elon Musk. Kennedy for Vice-President? Aside from that, why is Patriot Clash actively pushing a ticket with Donald Trump and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.? This can only be more “Trump is unelectable” narrative. CNAV has said before why we cannot endorse Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. for President. Nor have we seen any showing that the sense of the American public would agree with his platform of gun control. And to answer another question Patriot Clash raised: Bobby Kennedy, you’re no Andrew Johnson. To make it even more difficult to imagine Trump needing to appoint a “conciliatory” running mate, he is already polling more than 60 percent in tomorrow’s New Hampshire primary. Nikki Haley RealClearPolitics’ columnist Philip Wegmann seems to have pivoted from the DeSantis campaign to the Haley campaign. Before the withdrawal, he noted that Haley launched an ad featuring the familyh of Otto Warmbier. This American was unlawfully detained in North Korea for more than a year. Though someone won him his release, he didn’t live very long to enjoy it. President Obama told the family to “be quiet” about their son’s captivity. President Trump did win his releases in June of 2017 – though he lived only six days after that. Nikki Haley’s point is that Trump continues to praise North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, despite Warmbier’s death. After the DeSantis withdrawal, Wegmann did a profile on the Nikki Haley campaign. But he seemed to spend more time giving reasons for DeSantis’ failure than for Nikki Haley’s likelihood of success. He also reveals that the essence of her campaign is that she is “not Trump.” That also seems to be the theme of her advertising, most prominently on YouTube. She insists that she outpolls Biden while Trump loses to Biden; even Philip Wegmann would dispute that. She also says the Biden-Harris campaign and the legacy media want a Trump-Biden rematch because Biden can beat Trump but not Haley. The alleged reason: Trump would be tied up in court, if a judge doesn’t convict him. (Does anyone care about that? Philip Wegmann might think so, but Interactive Polls says otherwise.) https://twitter.com/TheCharlesDowns/status/1749493467774955751 What problems will Trump have, and what do some say he will have? Erick-Woods Erickson has had to make a similar pivot. This morning he wrote of the “Haley Mary Pass in New Hampshire.” He admits that Haley will likely not win. But he also insists that most Americans are not up for a rematch between Trump and Biden. Erickson makes at least three easily refutable points: The voters who voted in 2020 are most likely to vote in 2024, and even now, they have a preference for Joe Biden. Who says? He will not even admit that a critical number of those “81 million voters” never existed. That’s why they didn’t populate any of his rallies. Of course he, a Georgian, won’t admit that Georgia elections, and Georgia politics, have been dirty for thirteen years. Recall J. Alex Halderman’s demonstration of how dirty Georgia elections really are. In 2022, Kari Lake, three days before the election, publicly said she did not want McCain voters supporting her. They took her at her word. She lost. 2024 cannot afford such hubris. Kari Lake did not lose. Maricopa County’s Recorder of Elections stole it from her. That election was an embarrassment to Officers of Election everywhere. A big question on the right will be about authentic evangelicals who regularly go to church, not the self-described ones who never darken the door of a church. If they do conclude this nation has become a nation full of moral degeneracy, they may decide choosing between two moral degenerates will not actually advance the kingdom and stay home. Why didn’t they stay home in 2020? Trump, in 2020, outperformed his own vote total in 2016. Furthermore, we evangelicals know the difference between a serial monogamist (one who has many wives, but one at a time) and a cradle-robber (consider how Biden met Jill while his first wife was alive), a fetishist, and a pedophile. Speaking of that last: Trump fought the worldwide pedophile network, while Biden stood down. Nikki Haley’s donors Finally, Nikki Haley’s big base of support is a set of globalist donors. As Laura Loomer revealed on January 4: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1743025484806471868 We shall see whether that meeting even comes off after tomorrow. Which it might not. Today Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) endorsed Trump. https://twitter.com/NancyMace/status/1749449081842245688 Not only does that represent a considerable change for Rep. Mace, but it also supports Laura Loomer’s contention that Trump has the support of every Republican Member of the South Carolina delegation to the House of Representatives. Conclusion Donald Trump needs to see to his own security. If a retired general takes seriously the implied threat in an online composite image, not only can we forgive Laura Loomer for taking it equally seriously, but we should take it seriously as well. That aside, Trump continues to excel, while Nikki Haley is running a campaign based on falsehoods. Of higher concern is the continued insecurity of elections, especially in Georgia. “Riff Raff” Raffensperger doesn’t plan even to update the machines for the upcoming election. Patriotic Americans can trust neither him nor Governor Kemp. Particularly when they have a corrupt District Attorney in Fulton County – and refuse to investigate. So the security of elections is in the hands of Republican volunteers – accredited challengers (poll watchers) and Officers of Election (poll workers). On the other hand, Biden has lost the “cheater’s baseline.” Any attempt to reverse the election, as happened in 2020, might not be worth the risk of exposure. Judges in certain isolated cases have in fact called for new elections, if not reversed them entirely. Exposure would bring not only judicial intervention, but also prison sentences. Democrats, and their WEF masters, know this. Hence Alex Soros’ cryptic post of a bullet hole and a collection of currency in a suggestive amount and with equally suggestive check numbers. The primary schedule continues, after tomorrow’s primary, with the South Carolina Republican Primary, and then “Super Tuesday.” How much longer will Nikki Haley last? Time will tell. https://rumble.com/v4763gr-survivor-eye-of-the-tiger.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/22/foundation/constitution/trump-way-forward/ Failure to launch post: https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1749069832908152954 Ron DeSantis withdraws: https://twitter.com/RonDeSantis/status/1749159384112845285 Retiring the nickname: https://twitter.com/margommartin/status/1749183820186652696 Don Jr.’s announcement: https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1749178550668701853 Trump people line up in freezing cold: https://twitter.com/TaylorPopielarz/status/1749139763070665164 Nikki Haley’s poorly attended event: https://twitter.com/FergusCullen/status/1747791937661181976 Laura Loomer urges Trump not to hire DeSantis people: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749165484916818224 Post saying how great the day was: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749208093836079368 One last post about the DeSantis as a governor: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749244515024568426 Signs of trouble on Laura Loomer’s account: https://twitter.com/SwampHorses/status/1749228276109701631 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749414232884379888 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749541566614573130 Trump rally in Rochester: https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/1749229056011203067 Post about Halderman demo of hacking a machine: https://twitter.com/JohnBasham/status/1748842087888441782 Video: interview with an election integrity expert: https://rumble.com/v48dca6-local-reporter-describes-election-expert-halderman-breaking-into-dominion-v.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Alex Soros’ post: https://twitter.com/AlexanderSoros/status/1749234395192414308 Reaction to Alex Soros’ post: https://twitter.com/GenFlynn/status/1749415509001474348 https://twitter.com/Arkypatriot/status/1749283355000967326 https://twitter.com/freejan6pows/status/1749258396719563096 https://twitter.com/docmurdock/status/1749264390120177709 Laura Loomer’s detailed analysis: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749276822364103122 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749296605256126743 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749410814178545678 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749426196356477221 Interactive Polls: people don’t seem to care if Trump gets convicted: https://twitter.com/TheCharlesDowns/status/1749493467774955751 Laura Loomer lists Haley’s rich donors: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1743025484806471868 Nancy Mace endorses Trump: https://twitter.com/NancyMace/status/1749449081842245688 “Eye of the Tiger” video: https://rumble.com/v4763gr-survivor-eye-of-the-tiger.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/

Ron DeSantis drops out of race By Terry A. Hurlbut Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) dropped out of the Republican Presidential nomination race today. Now the race really is the two-person race Ambassador Nikki Haley said it was. The other – or rather, first – person in the race is Donald J. Trump. In fact his campaign gave hints of his withdrawal last night. On his way out, he fired a telling Parthian volley at Ambassador Haley and endorsed Trump wholeheartedly. Ron DeSantis drops the first hints Video and X influencer Benny Johnson, shortly after noon today, dropped the first hints that Ron DeSantis might be withdrawing. https://rumble.com/embed/v45sjj3/?pub=4teej Johnson noted that DeSantis canceled appearances on NBC-TV’s Meet the Press and CNN’s Sunday morning equivalent. He quoted this post by Election Wizard: https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1748841669489721493 Johnson also carried footage of Vivek Ramaswamy calling on Gov. DeSantis and Amb. Haley both to drop out. https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1749118208227909853 Some who replied to Election Wizard suggested then that he intended to “help Nikki’s numbers” – an interesting turn of phrase. Why didn’t that user speculate that DeSantis would endorse Ambassador Haley? https://twitter.com/The_Weed_Shop/status/1748842838207377665 Then this morning, Election Wizard published a two-post thread quoting NBC as calling the Ron DeSantis campaign “a total failure to launch.” https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1749069832908152954 Note the embedded photo in the second post. It shows the governor’s Iowa campaign office chief solving a jigsaw puzzle in the campaign office for several hours. Jim Hoft of The Gateway Pundit had more on that jigsaw-puzzle faux pas. Apparently it happened a week before the Iowa Caucuses. Hoft also found this post by Jeff Roe as he abruptly left the campaign last month: https://twitter.com/jeffroe/status/1736229026895695889 X influencer ALX took a screencap of Ron DeSantis’ upcoming-events page. Note: “No events.” https://twitter.com/alx/status/1748949031512879474 And then the announcement Then at 2:57 p.m. EST today, Ron DeSantis made it official: https://twitter.com/RonDeSantis/status/1749159384112845285 Note: that Winston Churchill quote is not authentic. The site CheckYourFact confirmed: the Daily Caller News Foundation investigated the quote and found no record of Churchill saying that. So did the International Churchill Society. This inauthentic quote has been floating around for four years – but why did Ron DeSantis use it? Nevertheless, DeSantis made his point. He castigated the open border, out-of-control spending, and indoctrination of children. He acknowledged the reality that he does not have the votes to get the nomination. Apparently his distant second-place finish in Iowa forced him to pause and reflect. Then, after announcing the suspension of his campaign, he fired the Parthian volley: … we can’t go back to the Old Republican Guard of yesteryear – a repackaged form of warmed-over corporatism – that Nikki Haley represents. The reaction to his announcement on X concurred in only one thing: yes, he needed to drop out. Some responders, including some fairly prominent names, were somewhat less than gracious. But one – Jack Posobiec – wanted more: https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1749163799679046139 Laura Loomer pledged to blackball any member of the Ron DeSantis campaign who applied for a job with the Trump campaign: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749165484916818224 Then at 5:43 p.m. EST she actually offered to take over the Ron DeSantis account and three others. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749201047136956465 One of them is DeSantisWarRoom. She had already noted that the entire staff running that account was on layoff. Loomer also noted something else: Amb. Haley refuses to drop out. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749181513432748262 Then at 6:11 p.m. EST, she posted this: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749208093836079368 Disclaimer At this point CNAV must issue a disclaimer and a warning. Searching for the name Laura Loomer on X retrieves a large number of accounts, some of which have Laura Loomer’s profile and cover image and other profile information, but does not retrieve the authentic Laura Loomer account. Only one account exists that Laura Loomer owns and controls. That account is @LauraLoomer. DO NOT – we repeat, DO NOT – mention or reply to any other account having numbers or letters appended to it. All are inauthentic. CNAV has already alerted her to the problem, though she probably knows it already. This wouldn’t be such a problem by itself, except that the real Laura Loomer account name does not appear in search results. For that, blame the X Trust and Safety Team, because no one else would be capable of producing that non-result. Whither Ron DeSantis – and what happens next? Presumably Ron DeSantis will return to Florida and go back to governing full-time. Florida, unfortunately, has felt its absence. Not only has it dealt with a natural disaster, but a special election recently flipped a legislative seat to a Democrat. Local pundits blamed the governor’s absence for this. More to the point, now the race is a two-person race, again as Nikki Haley said. But again, patriotic Americans have no reason to support her. She is a Trojan mare for the Democratic Party – and possibly for the World Economic Forum. Her public statements support no other inference. New Hampshire holds its primary in two days. After that, South Carolina holds its primary – and Trump can show that Nikki Haley is no one’s “favorite daughter.” Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/21/foundation/constitution/ron-desantis-drops-out-race/ Benny Johnson’s video with first hints of Ron DeSantis’ exit: https://rumble.com/v48duzx-did-ron-desantis-just-secretly-drop-out-of-2024-presidential-race-overnight.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Six signs of DeSantis’ impending withdrawal: https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1748841669489721493 https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1749118208227909853 https://twitter.com/The_Weed_Shop/status/1748842838207377665 https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1749069832908152954 https://twitter.com/jeffroe/status/1736229026895695889 https://twitter.com/alx/status/1748949031512879474 The withdrawal announcement: https://twitter.com/RonDeSantis/status/1749159384112845285 Jack Posobiec wanting names named: https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1749163799679046139 Laura Loomer’s reactions: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749165484916818224 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749201047136956465 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749181513432748262 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1749208093836079368 Laura Loomer’s actual profile: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Woke politics interferes with science By Terry A. Hurlbut Atheistic scientists who thought the woke movement would benefit them now have reason to regret their facile assumption. Beginning with Charles Lyell and especially Charles Darwin, scientists embraced atheism. Even today they will not “allow a Divine foot in the door,” especially in the disciplines of paleontology and paleobiology. But the woke movement went off the rails somewhere. Woke was never explicitly about modernism; it was about anti-Christianity, anti-Caucasian-ism, and otherwise countering Western civilization. Now comes evidence that woke politics – and perhaps something worse – interfered with, even scuttled, a scientific mission to the Moon. That should cause everyone to reevaluate fanatical compassion that demands literally suicidal devotion. The latest incident involving woke sentiment Toward the end of last year, a company called Astrobotics built a lunar lander, which it called Peregrine, which was the first private mission to the surface of the Moon. Astrobotics contracted with a large number of payload-specialty companies. Two – Celestis and Elysium Space – offered to carry human remains and DNA to the Moon as a literal out-of-this-world burial. The Navajo Tribal Council wrote an angry letter to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, demanding they scrub the mission. Their quarrel: the Moon is sacred to Navajo beliefs. Any deposition of human remains on it would be “profoundly” sacrilegious. The White House actually gave them a hearing on January 5. In the end, cooler heads prevailed – somewhat. Scrubbing the mission to remove the Celestis and Elysium Space payloads was out of the question. Loading a spacecraft is orders-of-magnitude more complex than loading a cargo ship or air freighter. But the Navajo won this concession: that NASA would in future consult them about any future mission to the Moon. On January 8, Peregrine took off, aboard a Vulcan Centaur rocket from the United Launch Alliance. By all accounts, the Vulcan Centaur performed flawlessly. Peregrine, however, was not so fortunate. A malfunctioning valve assembly caused its hypergolic fuel system to leak. Peregrine ultimately would not be able to land, In fact, it couldn’t even point its solar panels at the Sun for power. Relief, alarm, and more relief Navajo President Buu Nygren expressed relief. After all, if Peregrine was lost, the “sacrilegious” cargo was lost with it. Except that Astrobotics were able to gain control of their stricken lander, to orient it and give it power. Now they talked hopefully of placing Peregrine into orbit around the Moon. A soft landing on the Moon was now impossible, given the fuel leak. But they talked of crash-landing it on the moon. In fact, a YouTube influencer posted a livestream anticipating a lunar crash. But that, too, was not to be. Instead, Peregrine returned to Earth – and executed a controlled re-entry that destroyed it completely. But so complete was that control that it entered the atmosphere along a precise course (or “trajectory”) to avoid hitting Australia, New Zealand, or New Guinea. “Whew!” said the Navajo Tribal Council. “Our sacred Moon is safe!” But Celestis has vowed to try again. But the story did not end there. This morning, Jordan “The Angry Astronaut” Wright posted an “Angry Bulletin” containing the kind of scoop one typically got with Watergate. Peregrine crashed on orders? Wright released this video at 11:00 a.m. EST, as a “YouTube Premiere.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWcNdofrwkY According to him, a source close to, or within, Astrobotics informed him that NASA had let Astrobotics know that they would take it very kindly if Peregrine were to burn up in the atmosphere. When Astrobotics succeeded in regaining control of their probe, NASA said, in effect, “Crash it – NOT on the Moon – or risk losing funding.” They crashed it, or rather burned it up, on re-entry, in obedience to that order. Wright is apoplectic, for two reasons: 1. Peregrine was a private mission. Technically NASA had no legal authority to tell Peregrine’s controllers what to do. 2. The Moon does not belong to the Navajo, nor to any other nation-state or ethnic group. Yet now they have a veto over every mission to the Moon. What we see here – though Wright didn’t see fit to mention it – is a woke administration at work. Recall: woke is not about respecting modernity. It is about destroying any modern achievement – but respecting only non-Western ancient traditions. It is the most hypocritical position one can take. Leave it to Jordan Wright, stone-cold atheist, to raise this objection first. He believes in extraterrestrial civilizations, and even suggests we are in the spot of the Polynesians when British Captains like James Cook and William Bligh came to call. But he, unlike the woke denizens of our government, is consistent. Did woke go even further? Worth asking is whether that hypergolic valve malfunction was really an accident. Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, and the third time it’s enemy action. Ian Fleming Recall: the Navajo raised their objections, but to little avail – or so they thought. And at first, so shocking was the malfunction that no outside observer expected Astrobotics to regain any measure of control. Early in the Industrial Revolution, textile workers, in one of the first recorded job actions, literally threw their wooden shoes into the looms. Because this happened in France, the French gave us a new word. The word in French for a wooden shoe is sabot. To wreck something, deliberately or carelessly, by this or any other means, goes by the verb saboter (SAAH-boh-tay). And, following another French language convention, the noun describing this action is: sabotage. Did a Navajo workman, or a sympathetic woke technician not necessarily of that tribe, throw a moccasin into the rocket? The world will likely never know. The United Launch Alliance probably never thought of security. NASA will never investigate that possibility. (But Elon Musk, who intends lofting another private lunar lander, ought to establish his own security force, and fast!) Clearly this “anomaly” needs a forensic and law-enforcement-oriented investigation, not merely the sort of investigation appropriate to, say, an airliner crash. If some fanatical warrior-wannabe did throw a proverbial moccasin into that rocket, we need to know about it. If a Navajo wouldn’t, a “paleface” woke warrior might – and could very well have. For the future Jordan Wright spoke correctly today: the United States government set a very bad precedent. In the name of woke, they granted a Beringian tribe the same rights that a nation-state would have. And that – let the world confront this reality head-on – over an idolatrous belief system. No doubt the woke apologists will assert that the Navajo are entitled to this concession in the name of “freedom of religion.” Lay aside what the atheists will likely say. The Judeo-Christian tradition does not idolize the Earth itself, or anything on Earth or in the sky. Christian and Jew alike worship a Creator, not the Creation. But that doesn’t matter to the present government. They want votes – if not those of the Navajo, then those of their white liberal constituents, which are their only political reality today. Now we see that their politics has directly scuttled a mission of scientific importance. (Those payloads don’t matter. Plenty of woke groups actually call for human extinction.) Bill O’Reilly is correct: those who value human liberty and material progress must vote out all Democrats his fall. We simply cannot trust them. Equally importantly, this country needs to come to grips with truth or falsehood of belief. For we have just seen a real-world consequence of idolatry. Perhaps now one can understand why God forbade it. This is not to call for any form of punishment or discrimination for holding such belief. But it is to say that such beliefs should not dictate public policy. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/20/editorial/talk/woke-politics-interferes-science/ Jordan Wright’s bulletin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWcNdofrwkY 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/ Direct mail: mailto:info@conservativenewsandviews.com

Nikki Haley – not a natural born citizen By Terry A. Hurlbut Two days ago CNAV treated the (lack of) sincerity of Ambassador Nikki Haley as a patriot, as opposed to a globalist. (One can be patriot or globalist, but not both; anyone who suggests one can be both, is lying, or naive.) Now comes an article by a contemporary Constitutional scholar, who has the ear of the President (the real President, not that doddering old fool who presently resides in the White House), who also supports using the Vattel Criteria to decide who is, and who is not, a natural born citizen within the meaning of Article II Section 1 Clause 5 of the Constitution. By those criteria, the eligibility of Nikki Haley even to be Vice-President is in serious doubt. Who is eligible to the offices of President and Vice-President? Article II Section 1 Clause 5 of the Constitution reads: No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. In 1804, Amendment XII provided for the first time for separating, on the ballot, the elections of President and Vice-President. That Amendment reads in relevant part: [N]o person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. Therefore, Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates must all satisfy the same criteria. But what is a natural born citizen? For that, turn to Emmerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations, Book XIX, Paragraph 212, which reads: The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. Notice that Vattel, in order, defines the word citizen, then defines natural born citizen, then sets forth his reasoning. As an aside, Vattel speaks of fathers to reflect the tendency to treat women as second-class citizens even in Roman law. Today every serious Constitutional scholar refers to both fathers and mothers, with equal station and standing for each. On September 20, 2019, Mr. Paul Engel treated the question of whether Vattel was a go-to reference by the Framers. He disclaimed any ability to find written or other evidence that the Framers referred regularly to Vattel. So, to define a natural born citizen, he applied one criterion only. But he did not apply the English common-law principle of jus soli (Law of the Soil). Instead he applied the Roman legal principle of jus sanguinis. But he applied it somewhat loosely, holding that either parent can confer natural born citizenship on his or her children. (See this article for a complete treatment of these two principles.) Jus sanguinis only? Not so fast! This would vindicate the claims of Presidents Chester A. Arthur and Barack H. Obama to natural born citizenship. Each man had one citizen parent at the time of his birth. But what about Thomas Jefferson? By the criteria Engel applies, Thomas Jefferson was a natural born citizen, though he was born in France. Both his parents were American colonials at the time. (Independence conferred American citizenship upon all American colonials, retroactive to their births.) So why did the Framers see fit to include the phrase or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, as an optional criterion of Presidential eligibility? Are we really to conclude that no such person as a natural born citizen existed prior to July 4, 1776? Absolutely no principle of natural law so provides. Therefore the Framers included that provision in order not to declare Thomas Jefferson ineligible to an office he might seek. And yes, that still means Chester A. Arthur and Barack H. Obama skated on this eligibility criterion. This also leaves out Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). Though his mother was a citizen, his father was a Cuban natural who never bothered to get himself naturalized. Furthermore, in another violation of the Vattel Criteria, he was born in Edmonton, Alberta Province, Canada. (But some have proposed the admission of Alberta as a State within the United States. Such action would then confer citizenship-by-birth on all its present and former residents. This would count as a “privilege” within the meaning of Article IV Section 2.) The (in)eligibility of Nikki Haley Does Nikki Haley satisfy the Vattel Crtieria for natural born citizenship? Paul Ingrassia, the contemporary Constitutional scholar, says: NO. He sets forth his concerns on his Substack page, the site American Greatness, and at The Gateway Pundit. First, who is Paul Ingrassia? Let him speak for himself: Paul Ingrassia is a Constitutional Scholar; a two-time Claremont Fellow, and is on the Board of Advisors of the New York Young Republican Club and the Italian American Civil Rights League. He writes a widely read Substack that is regularly re-truthed by President Trump. Follow him on X @PaulIngrassia, Substack, , Instagram, and Rumble. CNAV accepts his credentials. Turning now to whether the Republican nomination race is “a two-person race” as Nikki Haley insisted, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBUv8Hk990Q https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1747117107974688914 Mr. Ingrassia would seem to agree. Though Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) finished ahead of her in the Iowa Caucuses, he didn’t finish very far ahead. Moreover, Laura Loomer reports confidently that DeSantis has dissolved the staff that were running his War Room account on X. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1747985520167104625 Therefore, Ingrassia considers DeSantis out of the race, awaiting only his admission of that fact. So does Donald Trump meet the Vattel Criteria? Yes: • Birthplace: Queens, New York City, New York, in 1946. • Father: a citizen by birth. • Mother: a naturalized citizen, who achieved naturalization comfortably before Trump’s birth. Now examine the case of Nikki Haley. She was born in Bamberg, South Carolina, 1972. But Laura Loomer, the Queen of Receipts, strikes again! On Christmas Eve of last year, she published this investigative report, which, as ever, has the receipts! Nikki Haley ran for President in 2015, and people questioned her eligibility then. This quote comes from her office: Haley’s parents were Indian immigrants who did not become U.S. citizens until after her birth in 1972. Her father, Ajit Randhawa, became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 1978, Haley’s office said. Her mother, Raj Randhawa, became a U.S. citizen in 2003, a year before Haley won a seat in the S.C. House. Full context The link is to a Wayback Machine rival that has an archive of an article in The State, that contains the quote. The context is even more important. Several other Presidential candidates had questioned her eligibility to the office, because clearly neither parent was a citizen at the time of her birth. This might explain her recent statement about illegal immigrants somehow commanding respect. https://twitter.com/MAGAIncWarRoom/status/1746239286389727379 https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1745173866157137948 More to the point, this article treated the birthright citizenship controversy. Eight candidates had questioned the concept – including then-candidate Trump and Senator Cruz. (And Bobby Jindal, who did not satisfy the Vattel Criteria, either, and on the same grounds.) Nikki Haley, at the time, waffled on birthright citizenship. Her then Press Secretary, Chaney Adams, released this statement: The Governor believes the nearly 150-year old constitutional guarantee of citizenship to children born in America has served our country very well and should continue for those who enter our country legally. While she appreciates discussion of the issue of birthright citizenship, she believes it’s one that distracts from the serious problem Washington politicians, including members of Congress and presidents, have for years failed to address, and that’s illegal immigration. Once we get illegal immigration under control, the citizenship question will be a non-issue, as it was for most of the last 150 years. That Amendment is Amendment XIV, which begins: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. And on that Amendment, Nikki Haley explicitly stands. As far as she’s concerned, to be born in the United States is to be a natural born citizen of the United States. Vattel? Who’s he? More support for Vattel Remarkably, Laura Loomer’s article shows a quality of Constitutional scholarship at least equal to that of Ingrassia. She, too, quotes Vattel. In addition, she cites Supreme Court precedents, of which she found many. This Georgetown Law Center review article cites them: • Hassen v. Colorado, holding that Amendment XIV did not treat natural born citizenship within the meaning of Article II. • Minor v. Happersett (1874), holding that a child born in-country to two citizen parents was a natural born citizen. (That case also explicitly said that “resort must be had elsewhere” than Amendment XIV.) • U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), holding that a person born in-country to non-citizens who nevertheless were lawful residents, is a citizen by birth within the meaning of Amendment XIV. • Perkins v. Elg (1939), holding that a child born in-country to naturalized citizens, is a natural born citizen. Such a citizen retains the privilege even if his parents return to their home country. Beyond that, she cites at least two other articles, all making the same point: the natural born citizenship requirement was a check against foreign influence over America’s leadership. Given that maxim, surely the criteria would be the strictest within common understanding at the time. If the Constitution did not define the phrase natural born citizen, then that definition went without saying. Don’t give the globalists a foot in the door One of the authors she cites, Jay Weller, makes a further point: The forces towards globalism and weakened State sovereignty, more than perhaps any time in the history of the United States, require that Natural Born Citizen be defined in its most restrictive manner. To weaken the requirements for a person to qualify as a Natural Born Citizen, because of the modern goals of globalism, and vanishing borders favored by some, is directly treasonous to the principles promulgated by the United States Constitution and the United States Constitution itself. Such a conception is an affront to the United States Constitution, the principles held by Emmerich de Vattel, of the sovereignty of States, natural law, and the intentions of the founding fathers. A Natural Born Citizen can only be a person who is born in the United States, or its Territories, and is born to two parents, both of whom were Citizens of the United States at the time of the birth of the party in question. Equipped with this definition, the determination of the eligibility of numerous persons to the Presidency is quite simple. That’s exactly what Vattel said – except that Vattel also considered a person born: • Aboard a ship of the country’s navy or merchant marine while in international waters (Paragraph 216), or • On any military station or in an embassy, consulate, or other diplomatic station (Paragraph 217) to have been born in-country. Aircraft, military or of civilian registry, would also qualify. The point is that Nikki Haley might have been born in-country – but she was not born to two citizen parents. Accordingly, Loomer and Ingrassia both call on her to drop out of the race. Nor is this the only reason to vote against her. Grant Stinchfield describes her as “transactional.” Which means she’ll say what she has to say at any given time. He also called her a “globalist profiteer” in disguise. Stinchfield described her in greater detail in this podcast: https://rumble.com/v47kz8o-tricky-nikki-haley...-exposed-as-a-globalist-flip-flopper.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Given that, Jay Weller’s cautionary statement becomes even more important. Paul Ingrassia brought up another point. John Marshal Harlan the Elder, dissenting in Wong Kim Ark, said this about Presidential eligibility: I submit that it is unreasonable to conclude that ‘natural born citizen’ applied to everybody born within the geographical tract known as the United States, irrespective of circumstances; and that the children of foreigners, happening to be born to them while passing through the country, whether of royal parentage or not, or whether of the Mongolian, Malay, or other race, were eligible to the presidency, while children of our citizens, born abroad, were not. Before anyone accuses Justice Harlan of racism, remember that he also dissented in the infamous Plessy v. Ferguson decision. In sum: Nikki Haley does not qualify For all the above reasons, Nikki Haley does not qualify as a natural born citizen for Presidential eligibility. Donald Trump would be triply foolish to dub her his running mate: 1. Nikki Haley, as shown, is not eligible to that office, per Amendment XII. 2. Neither does she have that good a following. (She won one Iowa county, and then only by encouraging Democrats in that “university county” to cross over.) But more direly still: 3. Whoever is financing her, might engineer Trump’s assassination to install her as a “Manchurian Candidate.” (CNAV would encourage Frank Sinatra, Laurence Harvey, James Gregory, Angela Lansbury, and Khigh Dhiegh to call their agents. Sadly, all these actors have died.) Who else qualifies – or does not? Vivek Ramaswamy must settle the question of his parents’ naturalization before anyone could properly consider him eligible to the office of Vice-President. Thus far he has demonstrated unfailing loyalty to the United States of America and its ideals. This speaks to his upbringing and the lessons he drew from it. He was definitely born in-country, and no one has alleged that his parents were not lawful residents. But they must have been citizens at the time of his birth. Until we know definitively whether they were or not, he is not eligible. (But someday, perhaps, his son could be.) But yesterday afternoon, Mike LaChance quoted an NBC News report that Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) has Donald Trump’s active attention. Which is to say, he is considering naming her as his running mate. After she famously shellacked the Three University Presidents, President Trump would have great difficulty finding a better candidate. But he definitely should not pick Nikki Haley, no matter what anyone says. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/19/foundation/constitution/nikki-haley-not-natural-born-citizen/ The Constitution, annotated (from the Congress site): https://constitution.congress.gov/ Vattel, The Law of Nations, Book XIX: https://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-law-of-nations/vatt-119/ Earlier article about citizenship and constitutional reform: https://cnav.news/2023/06/26/editorial/talk/citizenship-constitutional-reform/ Posts showing Nikki Haley insisting that the race is a two-person race: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBUv8Hk990Q https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1747117107974688914 Laura Loomer’s report about the dissolution of DeSantis War Room: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1747985520167104625 Laura Loomer’s report on Haley’s ineligibility: https://loomered.com/2023/12/24/nikki-haley-is-an-anchor-baby-who-is-unqualified-to-be-us-president/#:~:text=“Haley’s%20parents%20were,S.C.%20House.” Archive of story detailing Haley’s parentage and alienage: http://archive.today/2023.02.15-144121/https://amp.thestate.com/article36701484.html Posts quoting Haley talking about respect for illegal immigrants: https://twitter.com/MAGAIncWarRoom/status/1746239286389727379 https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1745173866157137948 Archived statement from Haley’s press secretary about birthright citizenship: http://archive.today/2023.02.15-144121/https://amp.thestate.com/article36701484.html Supreme Court precedents touching natural born citizenship: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1846&context=facpub https://casetext.com/case/hassan-v-colorado https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/88/162/ https://www.oyez.org/cases/1850-1900/169us649 https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/307/325/#329 Video: Tricky Nikki Haley exposed as a globalist: https://rumble.com/v47kz8o-tricky-nikki-haley...-exposed-as-a-globalist-flip-flopper.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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Electric vehicle test drive FAILS By Terry A. Hurlbut The Great American Electric Vehicle Test Drive has now concluded – and electric vehicles have failed the test. These vehicles started with great promise, both primary and secondary. For that reason, those who took part in this Grand Test Drive, did so of their own free will. Furthermore, they were forgiving customers, willing to “trade off” any perceived inconveniences for the sake of those promises. Now those same customers – except a merciful few who lost their lives – are returning electric vehicles. The internal combustion engine (ICE) continues to reign supreme. No doubt the environmental movement will bewail this development and accuse “Big Oil” of sabotage. But they cannot deny the results of what is surely the fairest road test the electric vehicle concept could have had. The great electric vehicle promise Electric vehicles had one each major primary and secondary promise, which one may name for a type of gain. Any medical student on “core clinical clerkship in psychiatry” soon learns about primary and secondary gain. Primary gain is the immediate satisfaction or value a person receives, and secondary gain is any collateral satisfaction or value. An electric vehicle was supposed to offer the primary gain of lower total cost of ownership and operation. This would result from lower costs of servicing a system with many fewer moving parts, and a lower energy budget. Energy budget is the total cost of energy added – and if a system wastes less, it needs less. So said the promise, and the theory. Such a vehicle would also offer the secondary gain of community accolades for “doing one’s part” to “save the planet.” That particular gain depends on a narrative that holds, among other things: 1. The supply of hydrocarbon fuels or “fossil fuels” (so named because they are supposed to derive from fossils) is finite. That which is finite, is exhaustible. 2. Burning fossil fuels always emits certain substances that have a bad effect on the environment, human health, or both. 3. Carbon dioxide, the most copious by-product of such burning, is in critical excess in our atmosphere, to the extent that the earth will experience runaway warming if human society does not move at once to reduce that excess. This obviously involves emitting less, and could even involve sequestering it. Four kinds of vehicle in the Great Electric Vehicle Test Drive By “electric vehicle” CNAV means a vehicle having only a battery to power it. So the Great Electric Vehicle Test Drive pitted electric vehicles against three other vehicle types: 1. Conventional vehicles, having internal combustion engines only, and a battery powerful enough only to start the car, 2. Hybrid vehicles, having slightly larger batteries that can move the car (on one or more electric motors) for short distances, and 3. Plug-in hybrids having significantly larger batteries and a receptacle for recharging them with house current. Plug-in hybrids have very small engines good only for recharging or perhaps for providing cabin heat. One can judge any vehicle by its efficiency – how much of the energy one puts into it, does useful work. For conventional cars, that figure is a disappointing twenty percent – or thirty-five percent for the rare conventional car with a Diesel engine. Battery-powered electric vehicles are rated at 80 to 85 percent efficiency. Hybrids achieve efficiencies midway between these two. Why are conventional vehicles so inefficient? Part of it is that their engines are inherently inefficient machines – though Diesel engines are more efficient than gasoline engines. But conventional vehicles also typically waste energy at idle in all but (non-jammed) superhighway traffic. They also waste energy with braking. Hybrid and battery-powered vehicles recover all the energy from idling – because they don’t idle. In addition, they carry dynamic or regenerative brakes that recharge the battery as they slow the car. The most recent bad results The most striking report of bad electric vehicle results comes from “Fox32 Chicago” (WFLD-TV. Channel 32, Fox Broadcasting, Chicago, Ill.). As it happened, the report came on Iowa Caucus Day. Temperatures throughout “Chicagoland” had fallen to eleven degrees Fahrenheit below zero after six inches of snow had fallen. (Zero Fahrenheit is the freezing point of saturated ammonium chloride brine – so when it drops below zero, salting won’t help!) In Oak Brook, Illinois, according to “Fox32 Chicago,” a Tesla public charging station was taking anywhere from three hours to literally forever to recharge electric cars. Fox32 reporter Dane Placko said frankly, “Public charging stations have turned into car graveyards over the past couple of days.” One motorist’s car registered “charge zero” after two periods of three hours each. Another motorist said, “We’ve got a bunch of dead robots here.” Robots referred to the most sought-after “extra feature” of a Tesla – its autopilot system, that achieves SAE Level Two or Three autonomy. CBS News reported similar results in Evergreen Park, Illinois. Several Tesla owners formed a queue in the early morning. But cold weather can drain a battery even when the car is not in use. That’s what happened to those hapless motorists, at least ten of whom called for tow-away service. Tesla said they had pushed several updates to their cars’ charging systems. But the reports out of Oak Brook and Evergreen Park would indicate that those updates did not work. Excuses, excuses Warner Todd Huston of The Western Journal reported on one attempt to excuse these experiences. He quoted Mark Bilek of the Chicago Auto Trade Association as saying drivers needed to remember to “precondition” their batteries in such cold weather. (Ultimate source: “Fox32 Chicago.”) Preconditioning means warming the battery – not possible if the battery is totally dead. Obviously any electric vehicle owner fortunate enough to own a house with a garage (attached or detached) has less worry. Such a person can have a qualified electrician install a clothes-dryer-rated circuit to support a Level Two charge device. That, plus keeping the door closed, solves the preconditioning issue. But that doesn’t apply in Chicago and most of its suburbs. People must park outside, in the open air. Worse, apartment complex owners everywhere have “dropped the ball” as regards electric vehicle adoption. They have failed to install anything more than a charging station or two – if that. Of course, an intersection near two or more complexes is an excellent place to locate a public charge station. But the open-air weather problem remains. Furthermore, electric vehicle proponents cannot excuse such mishaps by pleading a rarity of cold weather. Motorists willingly “signed up,” effectively, to test these vehicles in a wide variety of real-world conditions. Cold weather is one of them. Extreme cold presents a challenge to any car – but by definition, gasoline engines can start in the cold better than Diesel engines, or batteries. Fire hazard Electric vehicles also have a fire hazard, and this has caused more than a few horrible deaths. Lithium-ion batteries tend to form “dendrites” that literally bridge the gap between their electrodes. That is the very definition of a short circuit and has caused explosions and fires. Cellphones have blown up in users’ hands that way, usually from overheating. But when it happens to an electric vehicle, the result is tragically fatal more often than not. Electric vehicles have caught fire and burned while in motion, or even parked. The site Autoinsurance EZ reports that gasoline and hybrid vehicles have their fire hazards, too – and those are usually worse. Generally, batteries that suffer damage are far more likely to catch fire. Unfortunately, such damage is more likely, because the battery rides low in the chassis. When the car passes over a loose object, that presents a damage hazard. Other failing grades Fire, whether in transit or parked in a garage, is probably the worst that can happen. That aside, electric vehicles failed their Great Road Test for other reasons: They have less driving range than even the heaviest conventional or hybrid vehicles (by gross vehicle weight). An EV battery stays the same weight no matter how much (or little) energy it has. Worse, such a battery degrades over time, and thus can hold less charge. Tesla and other automakers quote a range under the best road and weather conditions. Cold weather especially will drain the battery directly. And unlike an engine, which furnishes its own excess heat to keep you warm, a battery needs a heating element, or a heat pump, to serve that purpose. An electric vehicle might have fewer service calls – but when it needs service, that can be expensive. Replacing the battery can be almost expensive as buying a new car. Conventional vehicles very often run out of gas in a traffic jam, especially during an evacuation. Electric vehicles might make it – but if they don’t, recharging them will require a special-purpose road-service vehicle that, at present, doesn’t exist. Hybrid vehicles can last longer, and refueling them is just as easy. Furthermore, conventional vehicles are getting more efficient! Auto Stop/Start systems will stop the engine while at idle, if the battery and cabin climate can spare that. To quote the proverb, every little bit helps. How much energy to build or charge an electric vehicle? Thus far almost no electric vehicle advocate addresses the energy to build one, much less to charge one. Building one requires resource extraction, plus power to run an assembly line. No one thought to develop battery-powered heavy equipment to assist in resource extraction. Elon Musk, founder of Tesla, has the grand dream of powering his factories with the sun. But he’s run into another problem: solar panels degrade, too. No one has reliably estimated whether the energy to make a solar panel equals or exceeds the energy one can get out of a solar panel. Keeping an electric vehicle charged, even in mild weather, presents another problem. In the United States today, two areas of the country might be suitable for electric vehicle use. They are the Southeast and the Southwest. (Texas is out; the Arctic Flying Wedge will chill Texas as badly as the current cold snap is chilling Chicago.) Unfortunately, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) has shut down much of the generating capacity of his State. Now officials tell motorists not to recharge their cars or even operate their refrigerators or air conditioners! It’s going to be the law! Unfortunately, the United States – and California, the largest car market – are under an ideology that emphasizes the environment over human life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The Biden administration tried to push electric vehicle sales with tax credits. Of course the automakers hiked prices even more than the tax credit. Also in 2022, California announced its intention to forbid the sale of any gasoline-powered vehicles, including hybrids, by 2035. Then-Gov. Ralph Northam (D-Va.) pushed through a law to mirror California’s ban. His successor, Republican Glenn Youngkin, has vowed to negate that. But New York State will follow California’s lead. Federal subsidies involve more than tax credits for individual purchases. They include $900 million to build government charging stations, and $1 billion to build electric school buses. More recently they include $12 billion for retooling factories to build electric vehicles. All this is part of a larger package of subsidies for “green energy.” By one estimate this will cost more, in inflation-adjusted dollars, than Franklin D. Roosevelt’s make-work programs during the Great Depression. By another, electric vehicle owners would have to pay the equivalent of $17.33 per gallon if they had to shoulder the full burden their cars impose on the economy. This includes Corporate Average Fuel Economy and Green-House Gas credits, extra generating capacity, fuel taxes they don’t pay, and more wear-and-tear on the roads by reason of an electric vehicle’s greater weight. The people talk back! Now the general public is reacting, and were reacting even before the Chicago Deep Freeze episode. The next wave of motorists aren’t buying electric vehicles as fast as the first wave did. (And some people are even bringing them back!) Lack of charging stations turned out to be the weak link, as guest contributor John Murawski predicted. Even in communist China, electric vehicles are gathering dust in used-car lots – or turning into expensive planters in junk yards. President Biden talked about electrifying the White House vehicle fleet. Someone pointed out to him that an electric version of the Presidential armored limousine (“The Beast”) would need an even more massive battery. (Which brings up another range problem: the heavier the car, the less the range. A bigger battery would weigh significantly more. Someone needs to develop an Electric Vehicle Equation, a counterpart to Konstantin Tsiolkovsky’s Rocket Equation!) Mark P. Mills yesterday quoted the International Energy Agency as admitting a key weakness in any proposal to electrify the world’s vehicle fleets. Substituting electric vehicles for half the cars on the road today would reduce oil use by a mere ten percent. The vaunted efficiencies simply do not exist. All this will no doubt become an election issue in the 2024 campaign. President Donald Trump was talking about electric vehicles and their problems last fall. The leftists who mocked him, should repeat their jibes to those Chicago motorists. And to anyone else who won’t buy an electric vehicle today. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/18/editorial/talk/electric-vehicle-test-drive-fails/ 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Nikki Haley, Democrat Trojan mare By Terry A. Hurlbut The Iowa Caucuses are behind us. As CNAV said yesterday, Donald Trump won the most decisive victory any Republican ever won there against an open field. But the Iowa Caucuses, together with other recent developments, told us something else. Ambassador Nikki Haley is not a Republican, not anymore (if she ever really was). Democratic donors – and possibly whoever is pulling their strings – are running her as a Trojan mare in the Republican primaries. (Or perhaps a Trojan jenny donkey.) This follows not only from her policy statements but also from her support – that extends even to Democratic Party rank-and-file. Nikki Haley finishes third in the Iowa Caucuses Recall the results from Monday night’s Iowa Caucuses, courtesy of The Associated Press: Candidate Votes Percent share Donald Trump 56250 51 Ron DeSantis 23420 21.2 Nikki Haley 21085 19.1 Vivek Ramaswamy 8,449 7.7 Ryan Binkley 774 0.7 Asa Hutchinson 191 0.2 All others 84 0.08 Chris Christie 35 0.03 Total 110288 100.01 Despite her third-place finish, Nikki Haley actually claimed that the race was “a two-person race.” https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1747117107974688914 In fact, as late as 5:30 p.m. EST yesterday, she was texting that to smartphones on Republican text lists. (Including the one your editor carries.) RealClearPolitics regular columnist Philip Wegmann expressed shock that she didn’t have the presence of mind to “rewrite the speech.” The Johnson Crossovers In fact she won only one of Iowa’s 99 counties – Johnson County. And the reason for that became readily apparent to anyone on the ground there. Jim Hoft of The Gateway Pundit put together a snippet from CBS News, and a damning screencap attributed to Mark Cuban, famous for his hypocritical support of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (but not in putting together his Dallas Mavericks basketball team). In a probably since-deleted post, Mark Cuban suggested that Democrats cross over, take part in Republican caucuses, and vote for Haley. https://twitter.com/AACap2003/status/1747370566024118573 And in Johnson County, at least seventy-five Democrats did just that. CBS News Correspondent Tony Dokoupil reported that Johnson County caucus officers had fifty crossover and same-day registration forms on hand. They used all these up and had to scrounge printer paper from several private homes to print more. The team printed about twenty-five more such forms, and used them, too. Those seventy-five Democratic crossovers are the reason Nikki Haley carried that county. What happened in Johnson County is perfectly within the rules, as the Iowa Capital Dispatch reported them. Less clear is why those rules obtain, and whether it is a matter of Republican Party rules – or state law. Her supporters would vote for Biden if she doesn’t win Cassandra MacDonald reports that Laura Ingraham is telling Haley and Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) to drop out of the race. https://twitter.com/IngrahamAngle/status/1747454753087357394 Bob Unruh at WorldNetDaily said the same yesterday afternoon. Quoting John Solomon at Just the News – who had just hosted Scott Rasmussen of the eponymous Rasmussen Reports on his podcast – he said two words: it’s and over. But Amb. Haley refuses to listen. In fact, ABC News canceled a primary debate in New Hampshire – after the ambassador said she wouldn’t play if Donald Trump didn’t. In point of fact Nikki Haley espouses none of the MAGA positions – as Trump reminded everyone on Caucus Day. Furthermore, NBC News reported that most of her supporters would vote Biden over Trump if the Republicans won’t nominate her. But recall: CNN once had similar results – but when they followed up on them shortly before the Caucuses took up, the sentiments of their sample had changed – radically. So at least some of those Democratic supporters weren’t so sure about staying with that Party anymore. (Recall also that the former deputy captain of Team McCain told Haley last year to skip Iowa and go straight to New Hampshire. She didn’t listen then, either.) What does Nikki Haley support? From her own X posts, and other sources, we know that Nikki Haley supports: • The mass vaccination campaigns of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. https://twitter.com/NikkiHaley/status/1247185910896173062 • Unrestricted immigration. https://twitter.com/MAGAIncWarRoom/status/1746239286389727379 https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1745173866157137948 • The climate change panic. https://twitter.com/JeffClarkUS/status/1746478724260762015 And the endless U.S. proxy war in Ukraine. In another indication of authoritarian bent, she once suggested a law requiring every social-media user to be a verified user. The immediate backlash forced her to take it back. Tucker Carlson covered her positions in detail: https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1747274232093110614 He also mentioned she gets much of her money from Reed Hoffman, founder of LinkedIn and a major Democratic donor. In blunt fact, Nikki Haley must still wish she were serving on the United Nations Security Council. No doubt she regards it as the Senate of Earth – with the General Assembly being its House of Representatives. This recalls Yuval Noah Harari complaining of a “false dichotomy” between patriotism and globalism. https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746944415787106724 Her reliance on a Democratic donor and Democratic crossover voters clearly indicates that she is not a Republican. Without question she is a Trojan mare, with men like Reed Hoffman and Mark Cuban standing in for Odysseus. Voters in New Hampshire should remember that next Tuesday, when they go to vote. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/17/foundation/constitution/nikki-haley-democrat-trojan-mare/ Associated Press results page: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-iowa-election-2024-results Post about Nikki Haley calling it a two-person race: https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1747117107974688914 Post with screencap of Mark Cuban’s post: https://twitter.com/AACap2003/status/1747370566024118573 Laura Ingraham’s video: https://twitter.com/IngrahamAngle/status/1747454753087357394 Trump’s Truth about Nikki Haley: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111761145916934631 Nikki Haley thanking Bill Gates for his vaccines: https://twitter.com/NikkiHaley/status/1247185910896173062 Two posts about Haley’s position on immigration: https://twitter.com/MAGAIncWarRoom/status/1746239286389727379 https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1745173866157137948 Post showing her support for the climate change panic: https://twitter.com/JeffClarkUS/status/1746478724260762015 Tucker Carlson’s latest episode: https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1747274232093110614 Vigilant Fox quoting Yuval Noah Harari: https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746944415787106724 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Iowa Caucuses fall to Trump By Terry A. Hurlbut President Donald J. Trump handily won last night’s Iowa Caucuses, a feat he did not achieve in 2016. In fact, Trump took the Caucuses with a majority vote, which no one came close to accomplishing in 2016. For that reason alone, Trump’s victory in Iowa will carry a rare significance in Iowa Caucuses history. How the Iowa Caucuses run Caucuses, by definition, are closed meetings. Only Party members may attend, and only Party members run them. The next more open type of voting meeting is an unassembled caucus, in which voters report in, cast their ballots, and leave. But unlike a conventional primary, even the Officers of Election (OOEs, “poll workers”) are Party faithful. Some people call this kind of caucus a “firehouse primary.” The Iowa Caucuses are not “firehouse primaries.” Party members report in person to assigned locations, and caucus chairs call meetings to order, perhaps call for readings and approval of minutes from the last caucus (or regular Party meeting), entertain motions for old and new business, and then call for candidates, or more likely their representatives, to “pitch” to the members present. Then the members take votes, and the chair makes a list of all candidates, and the number of votes for each. The chair then calls that list up the chain. Eventually the lists come to the State Republican Party, which awards delegates in proportion to votes cast for each candidate. (Source: National Public Radio.) Iowa has generally not been predictive of the eventual nominee. That was especially true in 2016. Iowa receives forty delegates to the Republican National Convention, and in 2016 the Party split them almost evenly. (See Reuters.) Winning such a bare plurality has only even chances of correlating with eventual nomination. But lopsided victories – actual majorities instead of pluralities – are far more predictive. Factors influencing last night’s Iowa Caucuses Advertising spends in Des Moines (Iowa’s largest city), Cedar Rapids, and Sioux City are always the highest. So are campaign functions and rallies. Trump found time from his court schedule to hold at least one rally – which more people attended than anyone else’s campaign functions. Advance polling showed Trump consistently winning pluralities but not always winning majorities. Trump won the Real Clear Politics Average with 52.5 percent of the vote, with majorities in every poll except one: the NBC News/Des Moines Register poll, in which he won 48 percent. By far the biggest effect on the Iowa Caucuses was the weather. Bitter cold, snow, and especially ice made travel hazardous, so that only the most fanatically devoted Party members attended. (In addition, of course, to Party officers, who always find a way.) And the most fanatically devoted Caucus attendees were Trump supporters. Results CNN projected Trump the eventual winner when the night was only thirty minutes old. https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1747071559347601734 The Associated Press has final results. With 99 percent of Caucus votes reported, the Associated Press reports: Candidate Votes Percent share Donald Trump 0 0 Ron DeSantis 0 21.2 Nikki Haley 0 19.1 Vivek Ramaswamy 8,449 7.7 Ryan Binkley 774 0 Asa Hutchinson 191 0 All others 84 0 Chris Christie 35 0 Total 0 0 The excess above 99 percent is likely due to rounding error. These results closely mirror the RCP Average, though they show Trump doing only slightly less well than predicted. The Associated Press also broke the votes down demographically – and those results showed that Trump has broad appeal. Among men and women both, Trump won at least half, with no significant gender gap. He won clear majorities in the 18-29 and 45-64 age brackets – and that should surprise many doubters. Only among white college graduates did DeSantis and Haley tie Trump. Of course Trump won a clear majority of conservatives – and a respectable 45 percent of moderates. Suburban voters split evenly – but city and rural folk went decisively for Trump. In all other demographic areas he won. On the abortion issue, Trump won 55 percent of those who want to see abortion banned after six weeks – and 43 percent of those who do;n’t. The New York Times has a precinct map showing Trump strong almost all over Iowa, and his rivals showing strength only in cities (not in Sioux City). Aftermath CNN had a delegate count as of 1:52 a.m. EST. They projected the State Republicans would award twenty delegates to Trump, eight to DeSantis, seven to Nikki Haley, and three to Vivek Ramaswamy, with two unassigned. More remarkably, CNN asked Republicans going to their caucuses whether they felt Joe Biden won the Election of 2020 legitimately. Sixty-eight percent said no, more than Trump’s eventual vote portion. Furthermore, seventy-eight percent feel the charges against Trump are political attacks. https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1747063152271872486 Roger Stone noted that Trump set a new record for margin of victory: https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/1747076936143192184 Trump made a brief victory speech at about 9:00 p.m. CST. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYL3gjp9FC8 At 9:15 p.m. CST, he issued this brief statement on Truth Social: <iframe src="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111763449892183173/embed" class="truthsocial-embed" style="max-width: 100%; border: 0" width="600" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe><script src="https://truthsocial.com/embed.js" async="async"></script> Vivek Ramaswamy dropped out of the race last night, at 10:15 p.m. CST, and endorsed Trump. Benny Johnson had video of his announcement: https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1747117169979076844 Former Gov. Asa Hutchinson (RINO-Ark.) dropped out this morning – but evidently he wasn’t happy to do it. Today, I am suspending my campaign for President and driving back to Arkansas. My message of being a principled Republican with experience and telling the truth about the current front runner did not sell in Iowa. Asa Hutchinson Trump made another, longer victory speech shortly before 10:00 p.m. CST: https://rumble.com/v479oen-trump-takes-center-stage-at-iowa-victory-party-following-caucus-landslide-w.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) and Amb. And former Gov. Nikki Haley (R-S.C.) refuse to leave the race. Gov. Haley in fact said it was a “two-person race,” though she finished third behind Trump and DeSantis. https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1747117107974688914 Reaction to this was equal parts scathing rebuke and rolling-on-the-floor laughter: https://twitter.com/Jillie_Alexis/status/1747125303070081488 https://twitter.com/TheRightsWriter/status/1747117697945461042 https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1747125086304575942 https://twitter.com/AbouAmara/status/1747117243387781393 To the knacker – go! At noon today, Wayne Allen Root compared Trump to Secretariat, winner of the 1973 Triple Crown of Racing. (Secretariat won the Belmont Stakes, last leg in the Crown, in two minutes and twenty-four seconds – a record that stands to this day – and beat the second-place finisher by thirty-one lengths, or one-sixteenth of a mile.) As for DeSantis and Haley, Root said they were “headed for the glue factory.” Root might have good reason to conclude that. CNN ran a follow-up survey of supporters of Nikki Haley who once said they’d sooner vote for Biden than Trump. That’s no longer true. Whether they think Trump can win or not, Biden has soured them thoroughly with his policies. To be sure, not all the reaction to Trump’s win in the Iowa Caucuses was positive. At 11:20 p.m. EST, President Biden, on his personal X account, said this: https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1747111676761997607 The reaction of an MSNBC panel, at 9:30 p.m. EST after CNN had called the race, was worse. Perennial scold Rachel Maddow spoke of a coming of “authoritarian” or even “fascist” government. Yet her statement about the direction of the Republican Party lapsed into inconsistency toward the end. https://rumble.com/v479616-msnbc-cranks-lose-it-after-trumps-landslide-victory-rant-about-fascism-in-e.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 But there is an authoritarian movement inside republican politics that isn’t being bamboozled by Trump. They are pushing Trump to get more and more extreme. What? Then we saw Joy Reid. https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1747064159504621589 These are white Christians. This is a state that is overrepresented by white Christians that are going to participate tonight. This is a hyper-evangelical, white state. https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1747091228858978417 Reid’s problem: Trump won more non-whites than whites – and more women than men!. So Trump can’t be a white man’s candidate. Analysis This could be the most predictive Iowa Caucuses ever held for an open field. This beats Trump’s 97 percent showing in 2020, because he was the only serious candidate in the running. Commentators everywhere are declaring the race over and advising DeSantis and Haley to quit, as Ramaswamy and Hutchinson did. Vivek Ramaswamy has successfully redeemed himself after a silly stunt he pulled over the weekend. Several members of his crew wore T shirts reading, “Save Trump; Vote Vivek.” That frosted Trump’s supporters, and Trump himself. https://twitter.com/MichaelDuncan/status/1746889102375485531 But his withdrawal statement managed to lay all that aside. Indeed, to paraphrase Shakespeare: Nothing in his [campaign] / became him like the leaving it. MacBeth I.iv.8-9, paraphrase Laura Loomer seemed to agree. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1747299627957715065 Well she might. Ramaswamy’s staff never expelled her from any of his functions, as DeSantis’ and Haley’s staff both did. More to the point, Trump won the Iowa Caucuses, not only with a clear majority of votes cast (scoring half the delegates), but also with the largest margin of victory ever recorded in an open contest – 29.8 percent, up from the record of 12 percent. Tellingly, the Democrats won’t even hold caucuses, except to debate Party business only. Instead they will award their delegates by mail-in ballots only. That’s a clear signal of how they intend to win – or cheat. But for Republicans, the path is clear. Donald Trump has won the day. DeSantis and Haley should accept the situation gracefully, and bow out. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/16/news/iowa-caucuses-fall-trump/ Post announcing the early call: https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1747071559347601734 Caucus results from AP: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-iowa-election-2024-results Post with survey results showing attitudes toward Trump’s cases: https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1747063152271872486 Roger Stone’s post about victory margins: https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/1747076936143192184 Trump’s first victory speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYL3gjp9FC8 Benny Johnson’s post embedding Vivek Ramaswamy’s dropping-out speech: https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1747117169979076844 Trump’s later victory speech: https://rumble.com/v479oen-trump-takes-center-stage-at-iowa-victory-party-following-caucus-landslide-w.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Trump’s Truth Social statement: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111763449892183173 Post from The Blaze about Nikki Haley calling it a two-person race: https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1747117107974688914 Reaction to Nikki Haley’s statement: https://twitter.com/Jillie_Alexis/status/1747125303070081488 https://twitter.com/TheRightsWriter/status/1747117697945461042 https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1747125086304575942 https://twitter.com/AbouAmara/status/1747117243387781393 Biden’s reaction: https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1747111676761997607 The MSNBC panel: https://rumble.com/v479616-msnbc-cranks-lose-it-after-trumps-landslide-victory-rant-about-fascism-in-e.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Joy Reid’s statements: https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1747064159504621589 https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1747091228858978417 Trump’s reaction to Vivek’s stunt: https://twitter.com/MichaelDuncan/status/1746889102375485531 Laura Loomer’s reaction to Vivek’s withdrawal: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1747299627957715065 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Military, civilian control, and Trump By Terry A. Hurlbut Ugly rumors began to surface after NBC News released a provocative story yesterday morning. These rumors had the left plotting a military coup against President Trump should he win reelection this fall. In actual fact NBC News reported that people on the left were afraid that Trump would use the military to expand his power. Lay aside that the President couldn’t do that, short of issuing orders that, as likely as not, would be unlawful. In fact, NBC News engaged in a puerile sort of projection – literally, throwing off on the President. Worse yet, the remedies NBC reported that people were considering, would pave the way for a military coup to take over and abolish civilian government. Even Saul Alinsky, Projector Extraordinaire, never thought of this one. How the left fears Trump’s relationship with the military Credit Jim Hoft of The Gateway Pundit for gathering the best “intelligence.” The NBC report spoke of a perfect storm of paranoid ideas from many on the left, and RINO “Never Trumpers.” Storm element number one: the Presidential Immunity theory that Trump is now using to fight Jack Smith’s cases against him. Lately his lawyers argued that before the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Apparently, Judge Florence Pan asked a question absurd enough to make one wonder whether she wants a reprimand from the U.S. Supreme Court’s Originalist Bloc. She asked whether a President could order military units to assassinate political rivals. Trump’s lead counsel said that of course the Congress would have to impeach and convict him, presumably of the “high crime” of murder under color of authority, in violation of a U.S. citizen’s privileges and immunities. CNAV challenges anyone to suggest that Trump could find any officer, or even any enlisted, who would obey such orders. Officers take the same oath of office that Senators and Representatives do: [to] support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, [to] bear true faith and allegiance to the same, [to] take [that] oath freely, without mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and … well and faithfully discharge the powers and duties of the office on which [they] … enter. Enlisted service members swear instead to obey the lawful orders of the President of the United States and of those superior to them in authority. Note that word carefully: lawful orders. Let the President give an unlawful order, and he could not expect any officer to obey or pass it down. A real-life example of an unlawful military order At this juncture CNAV must offer a disclaimer. In 1986, Pfc. William Alvarado, USMC, wrote several letters to at least one of his Senators, his Representative, his mother, and several others too numerous to name, that he felt the Marines were treating him poorly. He also alleged that his fellow marines, at the U.S. Naval base in Guantánamo Bay, often fired illegal shots across the fenceline. Ten of his fellow Marines executed a “Code Red” on him, also known as a “blanket party.” In that assault upon him, he nearly died. The Marine Military Police arrested The Ten. One of them, David Cox, decided to fight the charges. A young Navy JAG officer named Don Marcari defended him on this theory: the Ten had orders to do what they did. Those orders apparently came from Capt. David Robb USMC, Alvarado’s company commander. Alvarado had seriously miffed him by writing directly to the Naval Investigative Service about illegal fenceline shootings without coming to him first. Firing at the enemy without cause is a serious matter – but breaking the chain of command is even more serious. Even more embarrassing, Col. Sam Adams USMC, the Marine commandant, did not immediately transfer Alvarado off base. Instead he hinted that if something untoward happened to him by accident, that would not displease him. Something did, and the matter came to trial by court-martial. (Sources: The New York Times and Collider.) The dramatizations If that story sounds familiar, it should. It’s the plot of Aaron Sorkin’s play, A Few Good Men, and the motion picture (dir. Rob Reiner; with Tom Cruise, Demi Moore, Kevin Bacon, Kiefer Sutherland, Kevin Pollak, Wolfgang Bodison – and the incomparable Jack Nicholson; Columbia Pictures, 1992). Sorkin, and Reiner after him, sought to show that blind loyalty to an institution might lead members of it even to obey unlawful orders – and, depending on their seniority in rank, to give them. These lines by Cruise (as Lt. (jg) Daniel A. Kaffee) and Pollak (as Lt. (jg) Sam Weinberg) illustrate the problem: Kaffee: They were given an order, Sam. Weinberg: An unlawful order. K: They’re not allowed to question orders. W: All right then, what’s the Magic Word? I give orders all the time, and I could never expect to be obeyed… K: We have baseball diamonds and marching bands! They work in a place where you have to wear camouflage or you might get shot! In other words, anything that convinces someone that the institution is under threat, might weaken the imperative to distinguish lawful from unlawful orders. So would that apply in the case of a President – any President – who issued an order to kill a rival? That’s extremely doubtful. Then again, some of these same people complaining about Trump issuing such an unlawful order, would probably not object if Biden were to issue an order to kill or threaten large numbers of American civilians. To confiscate firearms or even gasoline-powered automobiles, for example. Weakening civilian control over the military The United States has always maintained civilian control over the military – and never allowed the military to escape that control. George Washington set the precedent when he resigned his commission as Commander of the Continental Army before a session of the Congress as it then existed. But now these leftist organizations are promising (threatening?) to “take steps” if Trump wins this fall. NBC wrote of legal action, and letters to Trump’s appointees to remind them of their Constitutional obligations. They took those steps in his first term. But Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) is drafting a bill to clarify further the Insurrection Act, to curtail a President’s powers to order the military into action to quell domestic violence. Mollie Hemingway of The Federalist was apoplectic. https://twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/1746636048052986007 Tellingly, that post did not receive a Community Note, nor has anyone (so far) disputed her interpretation. Without exception, users replying to the Hemingway post accused the Democrats of plotting a military coup of their own. And that no one objected to it, strongly suggests that the left is so plotting, and is keeping quiet so as not to risk Saying The Quiet Part Out Loud. Clearly NBC News, and the organizations to which it is clearly sympathetic, have brought this suspicion on themselves. Saul Alinsky – a creature of the left, who dedicated his signature work to Lucifer – wrote their playbook. And that playbook includes projection. They are projecting their own wishes, desires, and power fantasies onto their one principled opponent. Civilian control defined The site War on the Rocks carried an open letter on civilian control of the military on September 6, 2022. Eight former Secretaries of Defense and five former Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff signed it. In sixteen paragraphs these men laid out the principles for how civilian control works. Hoft (see above) quoted Paragraph 1: Civilian control of the military is part of the bedrock foundation of American democracy. The democratic project is not threatened by the existence of a powerful standing military so long as civilian and military leaders — and the rank-and-file they lead — embrace and implement effective civilian control. But Sen. Blumenthal and his allies might do well to read Paragraph 10: Elected (and appointed) civilians have the right to be wrong, meaning they have the right to insist on a policy or direction that proves, in hindsight, to have been a mistake. This right obtains even if other voices warn in advance that the proposed action is a mistake. And Paragraph 13: Mutual trust — trust upward that civilian leaders will rigorously explore alternatives that are best for the country regardless of the implications for partisan politics and trust downward that the military will faithfully implement directives that run counter to their professional military preference — helps overcome the friction built into this process. Civil-military teams build up that reservoir of trust in their day-to-day interactions and draw upon it during times of crisis. Ms. Hemingway no doubt feels that Sen. Blumenthal and company propose to weaken, or even destroy, that mutual trust. And not, perhaps, without good reason. Those same people who worry about a return of Trump, support globalism. This afternoon, Yuval Noah Harari, a frequent speaker at the World Economic Forum, expressed fear of a Donald Trump return. Fear, that is, for the ideology he supports. I think it’s very likely. And if it happens [Trump is elected], it is likely to be the kind of like the death blow to what remains of the global order. The Vigilant Fox quoted Harari on his site, and on a 15-post thread on X: https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746943625131438468 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746943983564022000 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746944316906279180 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746944520745284016 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746944987801977167 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746945146560635104 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746945379449307243 A “false dichotomy to the world”? This from the same man who believes the Earth doesn’t need as many humans on it as it now has. Is this the sort of regime with which Sen. Blumenthal and company expect a President to ally? How far, indeed, will these people go? Herewith the full interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzOJiqN_DpM Worth noting is that the War on the Rocks letter came out one week after That Speech Biden made on September 2, 2022. Analysis One possible event that would give Trump a legitimate reason to use the military to quell an insurrection, would be a repeat of the Long Hot Summer of 2020. That series of riots almost had a prequel, immediately after the Election of 2016. Riots broke out in a number of places, even on Interstate Highway 95 in Richmond, Virginia. Nothing happened that the State Police couldn’t handle – but still. So do those leftists intend to support a repeat of the “Summer of Love” after the Election of 2024? Why else would they contemplate a weakening of Presidential authority under the Insurrection Act? Ironically, a leftist screenwriter (and television producer) once wrote fearfully of a military coup against a President promoting an unpopular treaty aimed at ending the (then-raging) Cold War. This project – and the novel that formed its basis – were direct slams on General Edwin Walker, whom then-President John F. Kennedy had recently fired. Kennedy read the novel (Seven Days in May, by Fletcher Knebel and Charles W. Bailey II) and really believed it could happen. So he offered unprecedented – and never-repeated – access to Pennsylvania Avenuee to the producers of the film version. Compounding the irony, Gen. Mark Milley USA might actually have attempted such a coup when Donald Trump was President. His communications with Chinese “People’s Liberation Army” staff bordered on the treasonous. His successor, Gen. Charles Brown USAF, has not held the command long enough to signal what he will do when, as, and if Trump wins reelection. The long game More to the point, as Contributor MacKenzie Bettle recently observed, Democrats are playing the long game. This certainly looks like part of it. They continue to insist that Donald J. Trump attempted an insurrection against lawful authority on January 6, 2021. Again as Bettle observes, “every rebellion throughout history had weapons.” At least 100,000 people – the strength of ten divisions of infantry – rallied on the National Mall before the Capitol event. Had even half of them been armed, the rubber-bullet ammunition the Capitol Police provocatively fired at them would never have stopped them. Accusing half the country of being insurrectionists and rebels, compounds Democrats’ disrespect for their fellow citizens. The kind of throwing-off to which the NBC News report admits, further demands that “the Democratic Party [be] destroyed next November,” to quote Bill O’Reilly. He was talking about the bad effects of Democratic Party policies. CNAV is talking about their attempts to subvert the military to their will. In closing, CNAV would like to remind every officer and enlisted that the rule against unlawful orders, cuts both ways. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/15/foundation/constitution/military-civilian-control-trump/ The NBC report: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-military-fears-rcna129159 Mollie Hemmingway’s post: https://twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/1746636048052986007 War on the Rocks open letter: https://warontherocks.com/2022/09/to-support-and-defend-principles-of-civilian-control-and-best-practices-of-civil-military-relations/#:~:text=Ultimately%2C%20civilian%20control%20is%20wielded,defense%20to%20the%20combatant%20commanders. Vigilant Fox thread: https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746943625131438468 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746943983564022000 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746944316906279180 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746944520745284016 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746944987801977167 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746945146560635104 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1746945379449307243 Full interview with WEF wheel Yuval Noah Harari: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzOJiqN_DpM 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Georgia election cases take a sharp turn By Terry A. Hurlbut The Election of 2020 saw the most important questions in Georgia, including the infamous Fulton County Suitcase Scandal. Perhaps because Fulton County saw the greatest questions, District Attorney Fani Willis, who won her own election on the same day, vowed to punish anyone who dared question the award of Georgia’s Electoral College delegation to Joe Biden. But now she herself has come under investigation. And so has Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who refused to investigate irregularities in that election when a citizen election integrity advocate pointed them out to him. This is the most serious instance yet of the hunters becoming the hunted. Georgia case 1: Fani Willis Recall that Fulton Co. D.A. Willis obtained indictments against President Donald Trump and 18 current and former associates. She alleged that their contest of the Election of 2020 was a racket, within the meaning of Georgia’s Racketeer-influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute. The essence of her case is that: 1. Trump lost, 2. Trump knew he had lost, 3. No dirty work took place at any crossroads, 4. Any allegation of such dirty work at the crossroads was and is a lie, and therefore 5. Trump and his allies conspired criminally to defraud the people of Georgia, who had spoken in favor of Biden. In fact she asked for and got a Special Purpose Grand Jury (SPGJ) nearly two years ago for this very purpose. Shortly after the indictment came down, Trump said he would release “irrefutable and overwhelming evidence” that fraud decided the Election of 2020. He didn’t do it then, on the advice of counsel. But on January 2, he abruptly changed his mind and released a 32-page report on irregularities in five States. The States are Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona. Back in August, the House Judiciary Committee started investigating Willis, questioning the timing, the obvious partisanship, and the possible encroachment on federal interests that her case represents. Willis on the hot seat A week later, Michael Roman, one of the Trump Eighteen, filed an electrifying motion. He alleged an improper – indeed romantic – relationship between Willis and the lawyer (Nathan J. Wade) she hired in November 2021 as a “special prosecutor” against Trump. But what made the case even more egregious was that Wade met with White House Counsel’s associates. He then billed the State for it. Roman’s motion seeks dismissal of the charges against him – and disqualification of Willis, Wade, and the entire Fulton D.A.’s office. On Wednesday, Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit reported (citing The Wall Street Journal) that lawyers for Wade’s wife subpoenaed Willis to testify in their divorce case. The game did not end there. Judge Scott McAfee, the trial judge in Georgia v. Trump et al. held a “motions hearing” on Friday (January 12). According to The Epoch Times, Judge McAfee scheduled a full hearing devoted to Roman’s motion in mid-February. Steve Sadow, attorney for Trump, asked for the “option” to “adopt” the motion at a later date. Mr. Sadow would do so if he developed evidence independent of Mr. Roman’s attorney, to support the allegations against Willis and Wade. The judge has allowed that option. Jim Jordan expands his investigation to include Wade More than that, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has clearly widened his investigation of Willis. Also on Friday, he sent a letter to Mr. Wade demanding documentation of Wade’s communications with the: • Department of Justice and its employees, including Special Counsel Jack Smith, the: • Executive Office of the President, including the White House Counsel’s Office, and the: • House January 6 Committee. Jordan also demanded all “notes, memoranda, documents, or other material in [Wade’s] possession” relating to the above. Furthermore, he demanded copies of Wade’s invoices, contracts, financial arrangements, and financial transactions with the Fulton Co. D.A.’s office. The five-page letter is available at this link. That letter includes the infamous Invoice 14, with line items referring to meetings with the White House and the January 6 Committee. What rankles with Jordan the most is that the January 6 Committee shared information with Wade and not House Judiciary. The letter gives Wade until Friday, January 26 to comply. Georgia case 2: Brad Raffensperger, Secretary of State Recall again the 32-page report Trump released on January 2. That report devotes seven pages to election irregularities in Georgia alone, including: • 315,000 early votes cast without the Chief OOE and at least two colleagues signing them, as Georgia law requires. • Failure of the Chief OOE or any of his colleagues to sign scanner-tabulator tapes. • Incompleteness of those tapes, i.e., failure to include some of the ballots. • Counting absentee ballots six months or more ahead of the election. Furthermore, elections in Georgia have been problematic for years. A lawsuit filed from the left led to the first finding of vulnerability of the voting machines. These include scanner-tabulators and Ballot Marking Devices, the output of which is not even human-readable. Brad Raffensperger is the long-serving Secretary of State in Georgia, elected independently of the Governor. The integrity and security of elections are his responsibility, as senior elections officer. (He also is currently a member ex officio of the State Board of Elections, though he has no vote.) Investigation of Raffensperger Yesterday, William Quinn of The Georgia Record reported that T. Matthew Mashburn, Acting Chairman of the Georgia Board of Elections, sent a letter to Rep. Jon Burns (R-Effingham), Speaker of the Georgia House, and Lt. Gov. Burt Jones (in his role as President of the Georgia Senate), asking whether the Board had jurisdiction to investigate Raffensperger for violations of election law. Apparently the Board has been receiving complaints about Raffensperger ever since the Election of 2020. Joseph Rossi, private citizen, testified before the Board of finding serious “errors” in 2020 election reporting. Those errors had to do with the conduct of Raffensperger’s office. Rossi then said that then Assistant Attorney General Charlene McGowan and several Board members tried to block his investigation. But Rossi got to Gov. Brian Kemp – and he seems to have thrown Raffensperger under the bus. He issued a written statement saying Rossi’s findings were factual. In response to that letter, several Georgia Senators have introduced a bill (SB 358) to remove Raffensperger from the Election Board and confirm the Board’s authority to investigate Raffensperger. This bill has twelve sponsors at time of review of this article. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyTOYNEjCTg At 3:44 p.m. EST yesterday, George Behizy dropped a three-post thread on this news: https://twitter.com/BehizyTweets/status/1746272152112779750 https://twitter.com/BehizyTweets/status/1746272156688732338 Reaction to that thread is overwhelmingly positive. Most users feel the events vindicate their low opinion of Raffensperger, and their charge that he gave away the election. Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit reported on this. Analysis This same Brad Raffensperger refused to testify under oath in the earlier case alleging civil-rights violations arising from insecurity of voting machines. More to the point, these two cases reveal two things. First, Trump was right all along that Democrats – and Republicans In Name Only (RINOs) – defrauded him of victory. (And not him alone, but the American people.) Second, Georgia is a political cesspool. Brad Raffensperger, like Brian Kemp before him, seem to run selections, not elections, at least whenever they see fit. No one, up- or down-ticket, can be confident of having a fair shake in running for State-wide or Congressional office. Not in Georgia – not until someone makes some serious changes. At a minimum, the Georgia House needs to bring Articles of Impeachment against Raffensperger. The various investigations already in train should yield more than sufficient evidence to convict him and remove him from office. Ideally, Acting Chairman Mashburn should then run an election to replace Raffensperger. Other things that need to happen in Georgia: 1. Judge McAfee should deliver a directed verdict of acquittal in Georgia v. Trump et al. 2. Fani Willis rates removal from office and possible prosecution for the public-service equivalent of embezzlement. 3. All Georgia counties and other units should get rid of “The Machines” and vote on paper. They can run elections as the French run them – and that can be a fit example for all American elections. These parallel investigations could be steps in that direction. But the people must press for it – hard. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/14/news/georgia-election-cases-take-sharp-turn/ Trump’s 32-page report of evidence of election fraud in Georgia and elsewhere: https://cdn.nucleusfiles.com/e0/e04e630c-63ff-4bdb-9652-e0be3598b5d4/summary20of20election20fraud20in20the20swing20states.pdf The Roman Motion: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24352568/roman-motion-to-dimiss-010824.pdf Jim Jordan’s letter to Nathan Wade: https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/2024-01-12-jdj-to-wade-re-fulton-da-1.pdf SB 358: https://www.georgiarecord.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/20232024-221230.pdf “Underdog v. Riff Raff the Fox”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyTOYNEjCTg George Behizy’s thread: https://twitter.com/BehizyTweets/status/1746272152112779750 https://twitter.com/BehizyTweets/status/1746272156688732338 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Absentee voting – how NOT to facilitate it By Terry A. Hurlbut 2024 could be the year of straightening out voting rules, if Republicans continue to fight for good rules in court. On Monday (January 8), the Circuit Court of Racine, Wisconsin ruled against a novel form to facilitate absentee voting. Specifically, the court held that mobile voting precincts were not legally authorized, and that if any county or city wanted to use them, the Wisconsin legislature must specifically legislate them. CNAV proposed a mobile voting precinct to handle the “hard cases” of voters who could not vote in person. But the tale in Racine involves abuses that made it no more secure than an unattended drop box. Herewith the details on how the Racine, Wisconsin City Clerk’s office actually used a mobile voting precinct, differs drastically from how a county or municipal clerk or board of elections should use it. Absentee voting – what’s the problem? Absentee voting means any way to cast a ballot on behalf of a voter who cannot – or would rather not – appear in person, on the appointed Election Day, to cast a ballot. Unfortunately, in the United States today the usual absentee voting method is to let a voter mail his ballot in. This is an open invitation to fraud – for how is even a good-hearted Officer of Election to know whether the person filling out, signing, and returning an absentee ballot, the same as the person lawfully registered to vote? Signatures are notoriously subject to forgery. Processing large numbers of absentee ballots can delay an election for days, or else must proceed without effective signature verification. This has caused many activists, concerned for election integrity, to abolish absentee voting altogether. But this creates another problem. Voters find themselves unable to vote in person on Election Day for various reasons. Persons in military service might be deployed elsewhere on Election Day. Business conferences often do not suspend in Election Season. OOEs assigned out-of-precinct either vote early or not at all. And, of course, people fall ill. Unfortunately, some activists’ reply to such hard cases is, “How often does that happen?” Which means “Tough [fornicating] luck!” But “Tough [fornicating] luck” will never stand up in court. Among other reasons for this, the French, which have their own unique method of handling absentee voting, report that seven percent of votes cast use that method. Disenfranchising seven percent of voters can never be acceptable. The Mobile Voting Precinct CNAV proposed the Mobile Voting Precinct two years ago. CNAV intended this to address the hard cases without allowing the bedlam that is early or mail-in absentee voting today. To review: The Mobile Voting Precinct, as CNAV proposed it, was to have the following staff: • Driver and driver’s mate, who would have charge of the physical safety of all other staff on the road. • Security officer, in charge of physical security at any stop. • Sanitation officer, to sanitize equipment against infectious agents. • Chief Officer of Election (or Election Judge), who makes final decisions on balloting, provisional ballots, and so on. • Assistant Chief Officer of Election (or Election Inspector): an Officer of Election from the opposite Party to the Chief. • A number of Officers of Election sufficient to carry out the functions of a precinct. Some of these could function as Security and Sanitation officers. Chief and Assistant Chief could function as driver and driver’s mate. All personnel for the mobile voting precinct would take an oath of office as Officers of Election. The total staff might be less than the number of positions listed above. The MVP would carry all the equipment a conventional precinct carries, including voting booths, ballots, scanners, signs, etc. Dispatching the mobile voting precinct This vehicle would not dispatch regularly, but only upon specific voter request. It might also dispatch to any institution or installation where one would expect to find many transportation-impaired voters in one place. The obvious candidates include: • Long-term care homes. These go by names like “nursing home,” “assisted living community,” and the like. • Hospitals. Hospital staff would have one of the priorities for in-person early voting. Hospital patients, however, can’t always plan such things ahead of time. The mobile voting precinct exists to serve them. • In-patient physical medicine and rehabilitation centers. The same considerations apply. In addition, a much smaller version (say, a crossover vehicle), perhaps with driver and driver’s mate (of opposite Parties), could visit a shut-in voter at home. A “mid-sized” version could visit any apartment complex where several voters need the mobile voting precinct to visit them. Voters would pre-apply for this service, instead of applying for mail-in absentee ballots as they do today. Poll watchers and reporting Accredited poll watchers would have two choices, depending on the type of dispatch. They could either: • Meet the mobile voting precinct at its destination (typically the long-term care home, hospital, rehab, or apartment complex), or • Ride around in it, especially if the registrar dispatches it to go door-to-door to voters’ single-family houses. Today Chief Officers of Election report vote totals after closing. Chief Officers of Election for mobile voting precincts would do the same, and on the same channel: their personal cellphone. Poll watchers would of course stand by, with a copy of the scanner tape. (One other necessary reform might involve including the poll watcher on the reporting call, in conference-call mode.) How Racine, Wisconsin actually handled absentee voting But that is not how Racine, Wisconsin used its mobile voting precinct for absentee balloting, according to the challenging lawsuit. According to the Associated Press (via WXIN-TV, Channel 59, Fox Broadcasting Network, Indianapolis, Ind.), Racine officials abused the MVP. Specifically: The Racine City Clerk sent the MVP to Democratic neighborhoods only, as a regular service. What’s more, they used it to collect ballots, and to take all comers, not those who pre-applied for the service. According to Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit, the MVP never dealt with any Party-accredited poll watchers. That puts the process out of the view of parties interested in the election outcome. Republicans grew suspicious when they found that the city of Racine ordered a custom-built panel van as an MVP. They paid for it with a $222,045 grant from the Center for Technology and Civic Life. Which is Mark Zuckerberg’s operation – Zuckerbucks! https://twitter.com/GadgetCan2/status/1422021615257362438 Ground News gave more information on the improper use of this concept: The vehicle could be used as an early voting location or voter registration booth in different predetermined locations throughout the year. The purchase for the vehicle was approved in August 2020 for up to $250,000. It is being paid for through the city’s grant from the Center for Tech and Civic Life. CTCL is the nonprofit that received more than $300 million donation from Facebook Founder Mark Zuckerberg. Again: the Clerk of Elections should dispatch a Mobile Voting Precinct only upon request, to a voter’s home, long-term care home, hospital, or PM&R center. Instead the city was dispatching it to prearranged locations – and not even offering to coordinate with poll watchers. The court says, no more Racine County Circuit Judge Eugene Gasiorkiewicz (gah-SYOHR-key-witch) permanently enjoined the use of Racine’s MVP. In his ruling, he said: Nowhere can this Court find or has been provided any authority allowing the use of a van or vehicle as an alternate absentee voting vehicle. Just because the law did not specifically disallow an MVP, did not automatically allow it. If Racine or any other Wisconsin city wants to use a Mobile Voting Precinct, let the legislature pass a law. Until then, no. The Wisconsin Elections Commission and Wisconsin Department of Justice won’t say whether they will appeal. This case came to national attention because Elon Musk, new owner of X, had reason to weigh in on it. A liberal journalist named Judd Legum dropped an angry thread about some of Musk’s recent posts about elections. Specifically, Musk charged that non-citizens were permitted to vote. Judd Legum disputed that: https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1745443611401932916 https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1745444313612562697 https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1745444881739186586 https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1745445678678257738 https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1745446525139054600 https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1745447029860708781 More accurately, perhaps, the enforcement against non-citizen voting in federal elections is lax. That’s because current case law does not permit a State to demand proof of citizenship for voting in federal elections. So Arizona is issuing “federal-only” ballots. Musk did not mention, but perhaps should have, that this violates the Elections Clause of the Constitution. It is taking “time, place and manner” of electing Senators and Representatives out of State legislative hands. Professor Yann LeCun of New York University scornfully suggested that a “properly-run site” would censor election information. https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1745632754371350769 Given Elon Musk’s struggle to fight against the “stakeholder capitalism” of advertisers, that remark was like hanging a red flag in front of a bull. Elon Musk responded thus: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1745921308943069202 How else to handle absentee voting? Needless to say, more than half the replies to Elon Musk’s post above mentioned: • The irregularities in the Election of 2020 and how the Democrats profited from them (even if not down-ticket), and • Facebook’s complicity therein. In any event, this exchange has called more attention to the absentee voting problem. Clearly the government of Racine, wishing to stay Democratic, acted in bad faith. How they used their MVP, is equivalent to not running a voting precinct in a Republican area at all. But Republicans must argue in good faith, too. Telling people they get only one shot at voting, and if circumstances do not permit them to vote, “tough [fornicating] luck,” will likely persuade a court to rule for the opposite extreme. The French, as mentioned, have another solution. Any voter, anticipating a problem with showing up on Election Day, may pre-register, together with someone they trust to vote on their behalf, with a local law-enforcement precinct or municipal court. If a voter is too homebound or bedridden even for that, an LEO or court officer can come to them. A proxy can vote for one other voter. Officers of Election by definition rate special consideration. Any Clerk of Elections should be able to design a system to accommodate OOEs assigned to “foreign” precincts. In theory, the Clerk “knows” the OOEs better than any other voters. Absentee voting in the military The military today relies on federal Voting Assistance Officers – who are not always in the military! This is not secure. The best outfits to handle military absentee voting would be the respective uniformed law-enforcement arms of the different services. The only other way to handle military absentee voting is to abolish it altogether. But that evokes memories of the allegations against President Abraham Lincoln about his conduct of the Election of 1864. The [Lincoln] Administration … had made a doubtful play for the soldier vote, allowing voting only in units where Republican sentiment was strong. Voting by voice made it difficult for soldiers in the field to oppose the general will. On the home front, military units were stationed in areas of strong peace sentiment to discourage Democrats from voting. Blum JM, Morgan ES, Rose WL, Schlesinger AM, Stampp KM, and Woodward CV. The National Experience: A History of the United States, 3rd ed. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1973, p. 353. Of course modern Democrats dare not complain about that, because Democrats in that election voted as they did from racism. But those interested in election integrity must avoid even the appearance of such manipulation. Republicans in Wisconsin have two choices in the likely appeal. They can oppose Mobile Voting Precincts altogether, or propose the kind of policies listed here. Or they can examine the French proxy registration system. Present systems operate with no chain of custody – and when 17 percent of voters surveyed admit to fraudulent activities, that becomes unacceptable. Furthermore the sensitivity of the left to Elon Musk’s criticisms of lax election policies signals a clear intent to cheat. Republicans have an imperative to take all necessary measures to prevent this. That demonstrably requires getting control of absentee voting. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/13/foundation/constitution/absentee-voting-facilitate/ Original Mobile Voting Precinct proposal: https://cnav.news/2022/01/03/accountability/executive/mobile-voting-precinct-election-reform/ X post detailing the Zuckerbucks role: https://twitter.com/GadgetCan2/status/1422021615257362438 The Judd Legum thread: https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1745443611401932916 https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1745444313612562697 https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1745444881739186586 https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1745445678678257738 https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1745446525139054600 https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1745447029860708781 Yann LeCun’s post: https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1745632754371350769 Elon Musk’s post: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1745921308943069202 French paper voting outline: https://cnav.news/2023/06/24/editorial/talk/france-votes-paper/ 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Bill O’Reilly rebukes leftism like never before By Terry A. Hurlbut Bill O’Reilly, once host of The O’Reilly Factor on Fox News and now host of his own domain and podcast, yesterday burned every bridge he ever had with anyone on the left. Until recently – and certainly while he was at Fox – he prided himself on political neutrality. “Caution: you are about to enter a no-spin zone,” he’d say, and would cut no slack to the right, either. And never did he deliver an unqualified rebuke of either side – until yesterday. His was the most breathtaking criticism he’d ever dished out – and one the left richly deserves. What Bill O’Reilly said The latest rant by Bill O’Reilly appeared on X at 12:08 p.m. EST on January 11. A user who goes by “Big Fish” or “Big Fish 3000” posted it, with a brutally simple text: https://twitter.com/BigFish3000/status/1745492923020448181 He appears on the set of his No Spin News podcast, wearing a white shirt and cobalt-blue tie. Telling how recent the podcast is, is impossible – because he has not worn that costume in the last twenty-four regular videos that appear on his Rumble channel. The segment runs for a minute and twenty seconds and is an obvious excerpt. But no one can mistake the meaning of his words: … these other progressive things, we’ve got to stop this now! I’m telling you, I don’t have any progressive friends anymore. They’re gone, because I can’t stomach them. Criminals running wild, murdering people, because progressive D.A.’s, funded by George Soros, don’t want to punish these violent criminals? That’s what you’re giving me? You support that? Get out of my house. Out! I’ve had it! [President Joe] Biden is not going to get any better – and the Democratic Party has got to get destroyed next November. I don’t care whether you like [President Donald J.] Trump or not. Trump governed this nation in a responsible way, where everybody prospered. And if you don’t believe that, you’re a moron. Every single thing, every single indicator, was on positive territory. All the working people, no matter what color they were, were making more money, and there were more jobs. We didn’t have inflation, we didn’t have supply problems, we didn’t have any of it. Now we’ve got all of it, in addition to an open border…. Citizen Free Press picked up the segment at 12:30 p.m., with a nod to “Big Fish.” https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1745498470377472378 Allison Anton at The Western Journal posted about the segment on that site. At 9:00 p.m., Mike LaChance at The Gateway Pundit picked it up from there. He also shared several other X posts quoting the Big Fish post: https://twitter.com/ericmmatheny/status/1745501992087077330 https://twitter.com/QueenMother1976/status/1745520491987620048 https://twitter.com/MatthewPezzone/status/1745497704522817687 Another user, replying to Citizen Free Press, embedded a video of a segment Bill O’Reilly did during the 2020 campaign. https://twitter.com/Rapidsloth_/status/1745499664521060715 Biden, appearing in Michigan, apparently mixed up Michigan and military COVID-19 incidence and mortality statistics. O’Reilly concluded that the then-candidate literally did not know what he was saying. Sadly, not everyone, replying to or quote-posting the two copies of the segment, appreciated O’Reilly’s point. Then again, no one ever ran for public office without getting a single vote. That applies to Biden, too. Backing it up Of course, no one can dish out harsh criticism the way Bill O’Reilly does. But every honest person knows he’s right. George Soros did fund the campaigns of several public prosecutors who won’t prosecute. The message is always the same: the law belongs to the white man, and exists only to persecute the non-white. Elect me, or my opponent will arrest you next, just to be mean and racist. (Oh, yes: according to critical theory, racist ≡ white.) That works, right up to the point at which crime accelerates out of control. Because most crime, even today as Democrats deliberately stoke racial tension, is still opportunistic. And the opportunities to commit crime involve being part of the neighborhood, and often knowing the targets. So the people in the neighborhood voted in a new D.A. who wouldn’t arrest them. And no, nobody arrested them. But the criminal perpetrators know that this D.A. is a soft touch. So the voter who didn’t want to get arrested for the “crime” of non-white-ness, is now dead. That’s what Bill O’Reilly meant by “criminals running wild, murdering people.” And true, Joe Biden will not get any better. In fact he made a Second Speech, a sequel to That Speech of September 2, 2022. Then again, Biden might not be running for reelection. Michelle Obama might – a fact Bill O’Reilly knows. https://rumble.com/v463o9k-no-spin-news-january-9-2024.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 https://rumble.com/v37m8bu-no-spin-news-august-14-2023.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 It’s as easy to show that the economy was better under Trump than it has ever been under Biden. A failure of civility Allison Anton took extra time to contrast the comparative civility of the last century with the marked incivility of today. Whereas, even at the beginning of O’Reilly’s journalistic career back in the 70s and 80s, people on both sides of the aisle could have cordial discussions and disagreements about their political beliefs. But now, many conservatives never speak about their politics in public or at the workplace for fear of reprisal from our elite institutions. Or even at church, the one place where conservatives need to start talking about politics. Because if we don’t, we soon won’t have any churches to go to. Is it lawful for you to [examine by] scourg[ing] a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned? Acts 22:25 (KJV) And worse: And, by contrast, many progressives feel emboldened to display their sexual deviancy or call for violence against their political enemies in public forums. And let a conservative do either – which CNAV does not recommend – and the censors come. Your ordinary American and average progressive operate in completely different, and directly opposed, belief systems. The Democrats and Republicans of the 60s, the 70s and 80s could happily coexist with each other, having at least a decent amount of beliefs in common. But today’s conservatives and progressives have almost none. Former Rep. Scot Klug (R-Wisc.) knows what Ms. Anton is talking about. He wants to institute an American National Civility Award. Sadly, that award is likely to be one-sided, if anyone qualifies for it at all. In any case, an Israeli has observed that sometimes one cannot resolve a conflict, short of “just winning.” True, he said it in the context of the Fourth Arab-Israeli War. The American political divide isn’t that dangerous. Yet. Almost five years ago, George Khalaf suggested building bridges, by reminding people of the good things conservative policies bring about for everyone. The problem is that progressives don’t want these good outcomes, though sometimes they say they do. They are like the angry Fabian who swats a dime out of the hand of someone offering it to a beggar. “Don’t delay the revolution!” he snarls. Bill O’Reilly clearly understands that, too. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/12/editorial/talk/bill-oreilly-rebukes-leftism/ The two posts with Bill O’Reilly’s segment: https://twitter.com/BigFish3000/status/1745492923020448181 https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1745498470377472378 Bill O’Reilly’s channel on Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/BillOReilly Reactions to the posts: https://twitter.com/ericmmatheny/status/1745501992087077330 https://twitter.com/QueenMother1976/status/1745520491987620048 https://twitter.com/MatthewPezzone/status/1745497704522817687 https://twitter.com/Rapidsloth_/status/1745499664521060715 Bill O’Reilly on Michelle Obama: https://rumble.com/v463o9k-no-spin-news-january-9-2024.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 https://rumble.com/v37m8bu-no-spin-news-august-14-2023.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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Michelle Obama plotting for nomination? By Terry A. Hurlbut Rumors are surfacing that Michelle Obama is about to replace Joe Biden for the 2024 Democratic Presidential nomination. Chatter that began ten months ago has now given way to a definite prediction of a “hostile takeover.” Obviously all questions about the health or mental fitness of Joe Biden would become moot. But policy questions would not, because Michelle Obama advocates the same theory of government as Joe Biden himself. Current Michelle Obama chatter Two events have happened this week to lend credence to a rumor about Michelle Obama replacing Joe Biden. Most Americans know about Michelle Obama herself expressing “terror” about President Donald J. Trump winning reelection this fall. (Trump would then become the second President to return to office for a non-consecutive second term since Grover Cleveland.) The Blaze had a brief prose story, and an X post: https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1744421185520087544 Headline USA also carried a transcript of Mrs. Obama’s remarks, which she made on a podcast hosted by Jay Shetty. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2vNGwMCw-M Apparently she believes people on the left have lost interest in voting. Then she expressed this fear: There’s such a thing as knowing too much and when you’ve been married to the president of the United States, who knows everything about everything in the world — sometimes you just wanna turn it off. What keeps me up are the things that I know. … Those are the things that keep me up because you don’t have control over them and you wonder where are we in this, where are our hearts? What’s gonna happen in this next election? I am terrified about what could possibly happen because our leaders matter, who we select, who speaks for us, who holds that bully pulpit. It affects us in ways that I think sometimes people take for granted. … You know, the fact that people think that government — “Eh, does it really even do anything?” — And I'm like, “Oh my God, does government do everything for us, and we cannot take this democracy for granted.” And sometimes, I worry that we do. Those are the things that keep me up. Lay aside whether she believes in God or not. (Her actions and attitudes suggest not.) Concentrate instead on that statement about “government do[ing] everything for us.” That was never the intention of the Framers. Then again, her husband Barack famously lamented that the Constitution was, as he put it, “a charter of negative liberties.” The substitution plan But what people might not realize is that Barack Obama has lately been intervening – or interfering – in the Biden campaign. Juliana Frieman of The Daily Caller reported that Barack Obama had a secret lunch meeting, apparently with Biden. She cited The Washington Post and this X post from The Daily Mail: https://twitter.com/MailOnline/status/1743760359855362359 Meetings like this have been happening at least since August of 2023, again according to The Daily Caller. This time, Obama told his former Vice-President to hire more people to concentrate on defeating Trump. Obama did not make any specific recommendations. Then came Michelle Obama’s podcast interview on Monday. That very day, Jesse Watters said flatly that the Obamas intended a “hostile takeover” of the campaign. In sum, if they can’t sink Donald Trump’s poll numbers by (Democratic) convention time, Michelle Obama will offer herself to replace Biden. https://rumble.com/embed/v43bvl3/?pub=4teej Bill O’Reilly offered his own perspective: that Michelle Obama would not have appeared on Jay Shetty’s podcast “without a reason.” He also reminded viewers he had warned them in August to “keep an eye on” her. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFNXPveXTP4 In fact, Merrill Matthews of The Hill said in March 2023 that Michelle Obama would be the Democrats’ best candidate. Moreover, Roger Stone predicted in August that Michelle, not Biden, would be the candidate. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AnCI9dAxeU This stands in stark contrast to Michelle’s attitude in the summer of 2020. Then, she told The Daily Mail’s women’s section she considered herself clinically depressed. Other shrill, “terrified” voices Mrs. Obama is not the only prominent Democratic or Democratic-aligned female voice to say desperately that they can’t afford to see Trump come back. In November of last year, Hillary Clinton said the same, according to influencer Deep Blue Crypto: https://twitter.com/DeepBlueCrypto/status/1722605938819916258 More recently, Charlie Kirk (Turning Point USA) shared video of Whoopi Goldberg, member of the View panel, expressing similar sentiments. She even tried to persuade former Rep. Liz Cheney (RINO-Wyo.) to run for President as an independent. https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1745143070407164353 Lay aside that not only did Liz Cheney lose her primary by a lopsided margin, but she also faces a lawsuit over her handling of her job as Vice-Chairman of the House January 6 Committee. Liz Cheney did indeed position herself as a third 2024 candidate – in August of 2022. But since Republicans flipped the House at Midterms, the country has not heard from her again. More recently, Whoopi Goldberg wasn’t finished. https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1745500216470724882 In using such language, Mrs. Clinton and Ms. Goldberg make clear they would support “any means necessary” to stop Trump. What are they afraid of? What must they really fear? Have either of them done something that would cause anyone to with them “put away”? Hillary Clinton certainly has. Apart from recent revelations in the Jeffrey Epstein files, she has a reputation for embezzlement and influence peddling. Whoopi Goldberg shouldn’t have to fear paying penalties for anything that severe. More likely she’s afraid that all the things she wants government to do for her and her fellow ethnics, and to whites (especially white males), would be non-starters in a Trump administration. Michelle Obama, on the other hand, is not so much expressing fears, as playing to them. That Barack Obama has been the shadow President since January 20, 2021, should be no secret to anyone. “Private luncheons” with Biden himself are strictly for show. Surely Barack Obama knows better than anyone that Joe Biden couldn’t organize a group bathroom trip, much less a campaign. (Well, perhaps the White House Physician knows that better even than the Obamas.) In fact, Barack Obama must be fed up with his proxy being the butt of so many old-fogey jokes. The Constitution – thus far – will not allow him to run for President for a third term. Joe Biden was his third term. Michelle Obama is to be his fourth and fifth. And she (he?) is more than willing. But can Michelle Obama pull it off? Or so they think. In August of 2023, Bill O’Reilly expressed concern Michelle Obama could stitch together a leftist female/minority coalition none could beat. That was then; this is now. Now the Democrats are losing the support of the very people who would be part of that coalition. Those people want practical results, and those results have not been forthcoming. Lately some have looked to Donald Trump to deliver those practical, tangible results. And he could deliver them – without stealing from other people. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/11/news/michelle-obama-plotting-nomination/ The Blaze video of Michelle expressing her terror: https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1744421185520087544 The Jay Shetty program: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2vNGwMCw-M The Daily Mail report on Obama’s lunch with Biden: https://twitter.com/MailOnline/status/1743760359855362359 Jesse Watters’ segment: https://rumble.com/v45x7ou-jesse-watters-reveals-who-he-thinks-dems-will-replace-biden-with-in-2024.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Bill O’Reilly segment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFNXPveXTP4 Roger Stone segment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AnCI9dAxeU Hillary Clinton’s fear: https://twitter.com/DeepBlueCrypto/status/1722605938819916258 Whoopi Goldberg’s fears: https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1745143070407164353 https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1745500216470724882 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

The transgender distortion of medicine By Terry A. Hurlbut This afternoon the Ohio State House of Representatives overrode the veto by Gov. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) of House Bill 68. This bill, should the Ohio Senate support the House, will, among other things, forbid doctors to mutilate surgically, or poison hormonally, any child under the age of 18 (officially a “minor individual,” or simply “minor”). These “medical interventions” are two of the three broad categories of transgender medicine. (The third consists of mental-health counseling to accept as valid the notion that someone was born into the wrong sex.) Transgender medicine is one of the worst distortions of medicine anyone calling himself a physician has ever invented. But the transgender distortion goes beyond medicine – because other distortions of the good in our society allow it. HB 68 is a noble attempt to straighten out the distortion. But society must do much more, and re-awaken some proper, God-given sensibilities. Elements of transgender medicine and jurisprudence the bill addresses One can read the full text of HB 68 here. HB 68 addresses not only transgender medicine but also transgender jurisprudence, even before its obligatory definition section. Transgender jurisprudence refers to that body of case law, precedent, and judicial practice in the family courts of a society (including ours) that favors opting a child in for transgender medicine. In the very first paragraph, this bill forbids judges to prejudice themselves against parents who opt out of transgender: 1. Child-rearing, 2. Medicine (including puberty blockers, other hormonal treatments, and surgery), and/or: 3. Mental-health counseling. Then, after laboriously defining certain terms (including “minor”), the bill forbids doctors to perform transgender medicine on a minor. The bill then forbids a doctor to “engage in conduct that aids or abets [such] practices.” This obviously means referring the minor patient to an out-of-state doctor who will practice such medicine. Obviously to avoid federal First Amendment action, the bill does not forbid a doctor to advocate such medicine generally. Furthermore, no mental-health professional may offer transgender counseling without: 1. The consent of at least one adult responsible for the child’s well-being, and: 2. First screening the child for: 1. Conditions that might cause “gender dysphoria,” including “depression, anxiety, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, [and] autism spectrum disorder,” and 2. Physical, mental, sexual, or emotional abuse, or any event (called trauma, the Greek word for a wound) that might have similar effect. Exceptions HB 68 offers all the exceptions a doctor of good heart could ask for. (Your editor, having had medical training, can tell the difference.) The bill says any physician who has begun such treatment before the bill takes effect, may continue it if, in his judgment, stopping it would cause more harm than good. Any patient suffering from an infection from prior treatment along this line may get treatment for that infection. Other than that, such treatment is still available for cases of: • Ambiguous genitalia in which no one can genuinely tell a boy from a girl, • Chromosomal abnormalities or sex-steroid non-production or insensitivity. Any doctor learns the classic sex-chromosomal abnormalities, including the Turner (XO) and Klinefelter (XXY) Syndromes, in medical school. In addition, doctors learn about testicular feminization. These are chromosomal males in whom testosterone has no effect. The body then turns testosterone into estrogen, producing an outwardly female form. Sadly, nothing will avail except removing the gonads before they turn cancerous. And sometimes a baby presents with an organ having both testicular and ovarian tissue. Sensibly, nothing in HB 68 forbids a doctor to offer the classic treatment for any of these conditions. It merely forbids subjecting a genotypical and phenotypical male or female – a normal child – to such treatment. Penalties and other prohibitions The law deems any professional who breaks it, guilty of unprofessional conduct, with which the proper licensing board must deal. Such professionals would be subject to private malpractice or other legal actions, or State legal action. Medicaid will not cover such surgical mutilation or hormonal poisoning as this law forbids. Males shall not compete against females in female-only sports divisions. If a girl thinks she can “cut it” against male athletes, she may. (Notice, however, that they never do, because whenever they try it, the biological males always outclass them.) Schools may maintain separate men’s and women’s (or boys’ and girls’) divisions in any sport, without anyone suing for discrimination. And: any athlete “blowing the whistle,” or any school trying to do the right thing, may sue for injunctive relief against anyone who retaliates against him, her, it, or them. Section 2 of HB 68 summarizes a plethora of legislative findings, all of which any doctor of good heart would accept as valid. To summarize, such surgical mutilation and hormonal poisoning has complications. This section also acknowledges that patients wanting transgender transforms “often” have something else wrong going on with their minds. This medical degree holder would replace often with always. Why did the governor side with transgender medicine? As mentioned, Gov. DeWine vetoed HB 68 on Friday, December 29, 2023. He waited until the last minute – the “eleventh hour” – so to act. Before the day was out, reports surfaced that Gov. DeWine has received more than $40,000 in political donations from children’s hospitals that support transgender medicine. These donations, over more than five years, all went to the Mike DeWine and John Husted Transition Fund. A transition fund, according to Ohio’s campaign finance handbook, may pay “transition team” salaries and expenses, and for inaugural festivities. An influencer named Parker Thayer dropped this thread expressing his outrage – and giving the sordid details. https://twitter.com/ParkerThayer/status/1740783161909350865 https://twitter.com/ParkerThayer/status/1740786686747906212 https://twitter.com/ParkerThayer/status/1740807524297613410 Mr. Thayer also dropped a “mention” to Riley Gaines. https://twitter.com/ParkerThayer/status/1740796279075254615 An obviously left-leaning physician sarcastically asked: https://twitter.com/RyanMarino/status/1740818172322693513 Well, maybe Hillsdale College should “go for” university status and establish a school of medicine! That sort of “parallel medical academy” would be more than appropriate. Perhaps they could graduate their students with Medical Baccalaureate services, at which the graduates swear the Oath of St. Luke. In any case, the governor, a week later, thought better of what he had done. He signed an Executive Order banning the surgical mutilation but not the hormonal poisoning. His order also proposed that anyone seeking any kind of transgender medicine first see a team comprising, at least, an endocrinologist, a bioethicist, and a psychiatrist. Ohio’s legislature passed HB 68 initially on December 13, with lopsided margins: 24-8 in the Senate and 61-27 in the House. Today’s override vote in the House was 65-28. https://twitter.com/VoteJenaPowell/status/1745191175663837576 https://twitter.com/clickforohio/status/1745191396280058165 What is wrong with our society? The text of HB 68, and Gov. DeWine’s actions on it, clearly show something very wrong with the laws, morals, and mores of our society today. (Mores are customs, of thought or action. The word derives from the Roman mos, moris a body of customs – the mos majorum, or “customs of the majority.”) Why does any part of our jurisprudence even countenance transgender medicine as appropriate? Does anyone truly believe that a person can have been “born into the wrong gender”? CNAV disputes that. So why does any hospital offer such regimens? Money. Follow the money. Money talks. And sometimes money tells lies. That explains those hospitals paying $40,000 in bribes to Gov. DeWine. What shall we say of any governor who takes stands of this kind? As a former physician, your editor finds transgender medicine in violation of the Oath of Hippocrates. It does a patient no good – and even does harm – to sympathize with such an erroneous notion as “having been born into the wrong gender.” It is a lie, agreed-upon, either for money, or to serve a twisted end. This could be the end of a parent who wanted a child of a different gender. It is definitely the end of certain transnational organizations who want a lower population. The funder of the Georgia Guidestones called for a population of half a billion people, down from seven billion. A few days ago someone started raising funds to rebuild them – after lightning struck them. https://twitter.com/Mary00088/status/1744176552609190229 How to repair society Aside from that monument to one-world-ism, our society clearly needs a spiritual reawakening. To begin with, transgender jurisprudence generally appears in the context of divorce. A family-law reform like covenant marriage would go far to solve the basic problem. HB 68 took one good step toward curtailing transgender counseling. It requires screening for things that lead to “gender dysphoria,” the usual prerequisite for transgender transformation. Actually those screening procedures should detect an adverse “soul-wound” event in all cases. The bill’s sponsors would do well to consider making that a legislative finding, not simply a screening requirement. Particularly when “mental-health professionals,” having signed on to the transgender ideology, would simply “look the other way.” They wouldn’t want to find depression, anxiety, hyperactivity, autism, or an abuse history. More to the point, transgender medicine is bad medicine. But only an already distorted society would allow it. Indeed the two distortions each make the other worse. Whether an adult has the right to fund his own transgender transform – or some of the other more ridiculous transforms one hears about today – is debatable. What should never be debatable is whether to allow anyone to so transform a child. The answer is NO. N-O, NO. Mary Shelley warned against such distortions and perversions of medicine – but gave an incomplete warning. How she would shudder, or even shriek, to behold what modern medicine has now become! Perhaps if her novel were required reading in medical school, our society would not be in its present absurd position. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/10/news/transgender-distortion-medicine/ The bill: https://search-prod.lis.state.oh.us/solarapi/v1/general_assembly_135/bills/hb68/EN/05/hb68_05_EN?format=pdf Ohio campaign finance handbook: https://www.ohiosos.gov/globalassets/candidates/cfguide/2022/campaign-finance-handbook-chapter4.pdf Parker Thayer’s thread: https://twitter.com/ParkerThayer/status/1740783161909350865 https://twitter.com/ParkerThayer/status/1740786686747906212 https://twitter.com/ParkerThayer/status/1740807524297613410 Mention to Riley Gaines: https://twitter.com/ParkerThayer/status/1740796279075254615 Sarcastic question: https://twitter.com/RyanMarino/status/1740818172322693513 Posts reporting the override vote: https://twitter.com/VoteJenaPowell/status/1745191175663837576 https://twitter.com/clickforohio/status/1745191396280058165 Post reporting Georgia Guidestones rebuilding effort: https://twitter.com/Mary00088/status/1744176552609190229 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Trump Georgia case connects to Biden admin By Terry A. Hurlbut The case of Georgia v. Trump et al. has erupted in scandal. It started with a sordid tale of the hiring of an adulterous lover to a sensitive prosecutorial position. But in the twenty-four hours since that story broke, another story broke – that the Fulton County District Attorney has been coordinating her prosecution of Trump and his eighteen co-defendants with the Biden administration. Whether this will lead to an official sanction against that office is an open question. But it will definitely energize the Trump voter base. It might even cost Biden the votes of traditional Democratic Party constituencies who will now wonder why this administration seems to be wasting time it should be spending to make their lives better, as he promised during the campaign. The relevant part of the Trump Georgia case In August of 2023, Fani Willis, the Fulton County District Attorney, obtained an indictment against Trump and 18 other people. One of them was Mike Roman, an official with the former President’s campaign. Willis charged these people under Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute, for conspiring to overturn an election they “knew” was fair. The 41-count indictment charges Roman, among others, with recruiting an alternate set of Presidential electors. The indictment charges seven counts against him, including conspiracy to impersonate a public officer, forgery, and “false statements and writings.” As anyone should know, elections in Georgia (and Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona) had legitimate questions. In fact, on January 2, 2024, Trump released a 32-page summary of all the evidence he had that elections in those States were highly irregular. Seven of the thirty-two pages covered irregularities in Georgia alone. Yesterday afternoon, according to NBC News, Trump filed a motion in the Fulton County Superior Court to dismiss the charges. He argued essentially that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over acts a President committed while President. In addition, he filed motions-to-dismiss on the grounds of lack of due process, and trying him twice (or more often) for the same offense. (Technically, the Fifth Amendment forbids “double jeopardy” only in capital cases. But by tradition, the rule against “double jeopardy” applies to all criminal matters tried in the United States.) But before the day was out, Michael Roman filed his own motion to dismiss. The Roman Motion The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has the details. Apparently Ashleigh Merchant, Roman’s lawyer, had occasion to review the file in a divorce case involving Nathan Wade. Wade is a private attorney whom Willis hired as a “special prosecutor.” Merchant discovered that Willis was the “co-respondent” in that divorce action. That case is now under seal – without a hearing, contrary to Georgia law. Merchant has moved to dismiss all charges against Mr. Roman, and to disqualify Willis, Wade, and the entire Fulton County DA’s office from any further prosecution of the case. The AJC further said that Nathan Wade’s appointment lacked the approval of the Fulton County Board of Commissioners. Wade began serving as special prosecutor on November 1, 2021. One day later he filed for divorce in Cobb County. And why did Fani Willis hire him? So that she could put him on an expense account and they could take lavish vacations together. The motion has all the details, including names of luxury destinations and cruise lines. In fact, since January of 2022, Wade has received nearly $654,000 in legal fees. Most of them have to do with Special Purpose Grand Jury (SPGJ) activity. The Daily Caller filed its own report on this finding last night. Trump responded to the sensational allegations in six Truths. (Intro, and pages one, two, three, four, five.) In most of these Truths, Trump rehashed the AJC article. But in the last, he made this statement: <iframe src="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111723318322334956/embed" class="truthsocial-embed" style="max-width: 100%; border: 0" width="600" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe><script src="https://truthsocial.com/embed.js" async="async"></script> Worse revelations But the revelations did not stop there. An influencer named Marco Polo reviewed the motion in its entirety. In the course of his review, he discovered this invoice: Note the sixth itemized charge: Interview with DC/White House, 11/18/22, 8 hrs @$250, $2,000,00 Marco Polo published his own screencap of the invoice while quote-posting Greg Price’ post about the impropriety of the relationship. https://twitter.com/MarcoPolo501c3/status/1744505965326553356 Christine Laila at The Gateway Pundit shared the post and her own copy of that invoice, and one other invoice. Note the sixth charge: Travel to Athens, Conf. with White House Counsel; 5/23/22; 8 hours @$250; $2,000.00 Steve Bannon discussed all this today with Mike Davis of the Article III Project on his War Room podcast. https://rumble.com/embed/v43fum9/?pub=4teej Jim Hoft has a partial transcript here. Commenting on these two invoices, Mike Davis said: Wade is stupid enough to put in his billing, that’s publicly disclosed, that he met with the White House counsel related to President Trump’s prosecution. So Nathan Wade has two meetings with someone from the White House Counsel’s office, in May and November of 2022. He blocks out eight hours for each meeting. The indictment against Trump comes down in August. This, according to Davis, establishes clear coordination between the White House Counsel’s office and the Fulton County District Attorney’s office. Even if such coordination with a Federal Special Counsel is proper, coordinating with a county prosecuting attorney cannot be. Fox News Correspondent Jesse Watters covered the story late this morning. https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1744531747562258541 Analysis: coordination against Trump This goes directly to the investigation of Willis by the House Judiciary Committee, shortly after the indictment came down. Recall that she began her investigation of Trump in February of 2021. (And hired Mr. Wade in November of that year.) Only when the election season was in full swing did she move for the indictment. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Chairman of the Committee, had wondered officially about State-Federal coordination against Trump. Now he would appear to have evidence of what he suspected. In sum: the Fulton County District Attorney seeks to make a name for herself, take ideological revenge, or both. Accordingly, she begins an investigation of Trump and his associates for “election interference” in February of 2021. Note that her targets did nothing more serious than Stacey Abrams did – or, for that matter, Donna Curling. She sued the State after her favorite candidate lost a special election. And in contrast to Abrams, her claim makes sense. We see no District Attorney prosecuting either of these two election challengers. But then Ms. Willis puts her illicit (and married to someone else at the time) lover on the county payroll. And he, as it turns out, invoices the State for expenses relating to coordinating with the White House! Mike Davis said Wade acted stupidly. CNAV says, on the contrary, that he acted brazenly. The “brass” that the Biden White House and its allies have shown, should stun any observer. Trump should file his own motion, like Roman’s, apart from Presidential immunity. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/09/foundation/constitution/trump-georgia-case-connects-biden-admin/ The Roman Motion: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24352568/roman-motion-to-dimiss-010824.pdf Trump’s response: https://truthsocial.com/users/realDonaldTrump/statuses/111723374434310844 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111723348798852142 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111723325764679792 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111723323567845398 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111723320408461664 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111723318322334956 Invoice 14: https://cnav.news/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Wade-Invoice-14-screencap.jpeg Invoice 8: https://cnav.news/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Wade-Invoice-8-screencap.jpeg Marco Polo’s post: https://twitter.com/MarcoPolo501c3/status/1744505965326553356 Steve Bannon’s War Room clip, and Jim Hoft’s transcript: https://rumble.com/v4616q0-mike-davis-obliterates-fani-willis-and-buffoon-lover-boy-for-exposing-biden.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/update-fani-willis-buffoon-lover-boy-met-white/ Jesse Watters’ post: https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1744531747562258541 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

War on the next generation By Terry A. Hurlbut CNAV has said before that population has become a theater of war. The United Nations, the World Economic Forum, and other elite-controlled organizations repeatedly say this Earth is not big enough for all the people on it. Accordingly, they – or some agent(s) acting on their behalf – are engineering a population collapse. In contrast, Elon Musk warns that a population collapse would be a problem, and threatens to become one. And our own Linda Goudsmit, who has been fighting this war for years, has a new book preparing for release. People like Goudsmit and Musk are afraid for the next generation. The elites are afraid of the next generation. Strategies of the war on the next generation Linda Goudsmit has made a career of discussing one strategy in the elite war of extinction of everyone but themselves. These elites seek to influence all adults to think and behave like children, with a narrow timespan – what’s happening now. So they gave us a virus they could convince everyone would drop people like flies. Then they gave us a vaccine that dropped our elders like flies – and many people of childbearing or child-siring age as well. Those this preparation did not kill, it sterilized. In the meantime these medical maniacs warn of a need for “meat wagons” that didn’t roll the last time. And if they roll this time, they’ll roll for a cause of their own making. But much more than this concerns Goudsmit, as it should. The elites have corrupted the education establishment in a way that should make Horace Mann and John Dewey green with envy. The dumbing-down of “free public schools” was bad enough. Worse is the introduction of the concept “gender fluidity” to make parents willingly send their children to the Frankenstein’s clinics our hospitals have become. Surgical mutilation and hormonal poisoning are now the prescription of the day. This can have only one object: sterilization of all but the children of the elite. Would James G. Blaine turn green with envy? Or would the unintended consequences of his campaign horrify him and make him run to the nearest not-necessarily-Catholic pastor, screaming, “Bless me, Minister, for I have sinned!”? We might never know. Don’t believe this promise…! Incredibly, the medical profession preens with reports like this one – of “successful” uterine transplants into women lacking a uterus. Now the LGBTQIA+ lobby demands trials with biological males as well as genetic females. But the fine print tells us this cannot work at scale. More than 42 [uterine transplant] procedures have now been performed globally, and at least 12 live births have been reported. A ratio of two live births for every seven uterine transplants is not promising. Nor should anyone expect even that degree of success in biological males. Being male or female involves more than gross anatomy; one must also consider endocrine function. (Endocrine derives from two Greek words meaning to judge the internal environment.) And, of course, the production of eggs and seed. In any case, this is a distraction. Sterilization is the object. Any promises of producing fertile transgender subjects, are utterly empty. Perhaps some particular modern Doctor Frankenstein might actually believe (s)he can succeed at this aim. But the donors know better. They appeal to the vanity of these Doctors Frankenstein as well as the twisted hopes of millions of psychologically child-abused subjects who present with LGBTQIA+ psychiatric syndromes. (And those of the occasional parent who wanted a child of a different gender and will stop at nothing to turn the child they have into the child they wanted.) And they are lying. These donors want the planet to themselves, and are holding out a promise they never intend to fulfill. This also shows that Marcus Porcius Festus was accusing the wrong person of going crazy with book-learning. (Acts 26:24.) Dangerous fanaticism Recently an episode took place in New Hampshire that shows how a twisted sense of justice has driven more than a few legislators over the edge. House Bill 619 will forbid doctors to mutilate surgically or poison hormonally any minor child. It will also forbid them to refer such child to an out-of-state doctor who would do the same. Republicans in the New Hampshire House of Representatives introduced this bill last year, only to see it die in committee. But they re-introduced the bill this year, as a “carry-forward.” This time, it passed the State House, 199-175, with nine abstentions and thirteen absences. (Four seats in this 400-person body are currently vacant.) Twenty other States have already passed such laws, according to US News and World Report. Incredibly, the debate on this bill centered on which set of doctors to believe. The contest was between Doctors Frankenstein maniacally eager to press forward, and their colleagues who said, “Moment mal!” The “wait-a-minute” sayers won out. Twelve Democrats and two independents joined all Republicans present to pass the bill, according to NH Journal. One Democrat (Rep. Jonah Wheeler of Peterborough) delivered a speech to announce his vote. Perhaps his vote swayed others, and it might even have been critical to success. (Had all fourteen voted Nay instead of Aye, the bill would have died.) But the rest of the Democratic Caucus behaved like deadly fanatics. He had to change seats! Mr. Wheeler, upon entering the anteroom, found several Democrats confronting him angrily. “An old-fashioned struggle session,” said one anonymous Republican. (This refers to a mass shaming common in Communist China.) Another Republican – Rep. Tom Mannion of Pelham – did speak for attribution: It was the bravest thing I’ve seen from a Democrat; it was powerful stuff.… When Jonah went to the anteroom, a bunch of Democrats were aggressively confronting him, saying he owed an apology to [transgender] members. He didn’t back down. I heard him say, “This is called ‘legislating.’” And they said he should go in the other room and hang out with Republicans if he wasn’t going to toe the line. Said Wheeler himself: I was told in the anteroom that I “didn’t belong.” I responded by saying that I was elected by my constituents and I have just as much a right to be here as anyone else. I did say this is legislating, and I have to give credit where credit is due: it was Rep. Michael O’Brien (D-Nashua) who came in and calmed everyone down. But the game didn’t end there. The Democratic Caucus Leader, Rep. Matt Wilhelm of Manchester, called a meeting of the caucus. Witnesses say it degenerated rapidly into the utterance, by members, of threats against Wheeler’s life. Several House Sergeants-at-arms, overhearing the threats, called the police. Elements of the State House Security Unit arrived, took information, and told Wheeler that some of his fellow members had threatened him. They did not elaborate. But then the Clerk of the House actually moved him to a back-row seat for the rest of the day. What can explain such fanatical devotion to depopulation? Does anyone actually believe that “aspiration,” when it runs contrary to anatomy or physiology, is an imperative that doctors (and laypeople) must respect at all costs? More likely, the elite has conditioned many people to believe that. Such conditioning vindicates Goudsmit’s theory – for if her theory were incorrect, such conditioning could never “take” nor hold. Other States making war on the next generation In contrast, Gov. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) vetoed a bill that would have had similar import, plus forbidding biological men to compete against biological women. Within days, reports surfaced that he has accepted $40,000 from children’s hospitals that allow such mutilating and poisonous procedures. (If hospitals can afford that kind of campaign donations, what must their “generous communities” think of that? Or: who among members of those communities are willing to finance this kind of activity, and why?) Likewise, the State of California now extends surgical mutilation and hormonal poisoning to illegal immigrants – to adults, anyway. Actually that runs counter to the Great Replacement – for they now offer to sterilize the very “replacements” that have come. Last month Florida’s teacher’s union sued the State to block a new law curtailing their discretion in speaking of their pupils using their “preferred” third-person singular pronouns. Notice how this debate happens only in America and other countries that speak English. That’s because English reintroduced the neuter gender after different conquering armies assigned different genders to certain classes of inanimate objects. When the Angles and Saxons declared the sea male, and the Danes declared it female, the common folk said, “Screw it! It’s an ‘it’!” Now they want to abolish gender, not only for inanimate objects, but also for humans and lower animals. Without recognition of biological gender, the next generation will not come to be. Conclusion All the above shows that a war is raging against the next generation, to make sure it never comes to be – at least, not a fertile one. Only the worst sort of misanthrope would want such an outcome. Recognizing the motive is the first step in plotting and mounting a counterattack. The second step is to outline changes in the law to rein in these Doctors Frankenstein. “Aspiration” must have a limit, and when someone “aspires” to change biological gender, then that someone has reached the limit. Therefore “affirmation” of “identified” or “aspired” gender is never appropriate. What is appropriate is finding out, and correcting, the bad influences that would lead anyone to so “aspire.” In turn this requires forbidding any lesson plans that treat any such “aspiration” as anything more than a life-altering mistake. Laws like those now in force in Florida are a good start. But proper instruction in moral philosophy must become part of any high-school curriculum. That, in turn, requires setting a standard of value that follows logically from the premises that: 1. Our bodies have a design, and 2. That design comes from an Architect Who left us a Manual of Instructions to follow. We would do well to follow it. And – spoiler alert – that Manual does not allow anyone to arrogate to himself the title of Chief Executive Officer, or Chairman of any Board of Directors, for a human State to rule the world. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/08/editorial/talk/next-generation-war/ “Scientific” articles treating the idea of equipping biological males with female reproductive organs: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6492192/ https://www.futurity.org/transgender-women-uterus-transplant-2536292-2/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-a-transgender-woman-could-get-pregnant/ HB 619: https://legiscan.com/NH/bill/HB619/2023 https://legiscan.com/NH/bill/HB619/2024 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Washington Post might fail completely By Terry A. Hurlbut The Washington Post, slightly more than 145 years old, might be ready to die. Not even one of the left’s richest men can save this paper now, it seems. The Post has come back from bankruptcy before – but times are different today. Washington, D.C.’s premier broadsheet has offended half the country – and can’t rely on the other half to carry it. Latest crazy doings at The Washington Post Readers will remember that The Washington Post actually excused, even defended, the atrocities with which the Fourth Arab-Israeli War began. They took down this cartoon depicting the hypocrisy of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Arabic Harakah al-Muqāwamah al-Islāmiyyah, abbreviated HAMAS). https://twitter.com/Ramireztoons/status/1723425345037009363 They then ran a report on people who “have lost their jobs, or faced criticism or backlash, for their criticism of Israel.” https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1712549470003442029 But the Post neglected to report that this criticism extended to supporting HAMAS and blaming Israel for the war. Fox News pointed this out. Their worst gaffe was accusing the Israeli Defense Forces of firing on a Doctors Without Borders (French Médecins sans frontières, abbreviated MSF) evacuating premature babies from an unidentified hospital. Compare this original version (via the Wayback Machine) to the corrected version. Any news organ can make a mistake – but The Washington Post never admitted to the mistake. On or about January 3, 2024, the Post accused The Gateway Pundit of lying about election fraud in Michigan during the Election of 2020. The report (through Microsoft Start) accused Jim Hoft’s organ of making this allegation without proof. Hoft, yesterday, served up that proof, which the Post’s Sarah Ellison failed to mention. He cited the original report (from August 23, 2023) that had its basis in a report from a Michigan State Police officer. (See also here.) Losing subscribers, engagement and money More recently came a report that the Post is in serious – perhaps terminal – financial straits. In fact it has been in trouble since August of 2022, according to The New York Times and Fox News. After Donald Trump left the White House, the Post lost half a million subscribers in the ensuing two years. Other news organs expressed shock that the paper would lose money, after Jeff Bezos returned it to profitability in 2016. Last month 750 members of its in-house guild went on strike, according to Politico. Writer Jack Shafer observed that all newspapers would eventually die. Politico had already noted that the paper was charging an astronomical sum – $700 a year – for home delivery. Politico blithely assumed that loyal readers would cover the paper’s costs. But now RedState reports that the Post will lose $100 million for 2023 – as it predicted last summer. The paper also lost half its online engagement, from 139 million visitors per month to 60 million. Josh Kraushaar, editor-in-chief of Jewish Insider, dropped this thread with quotes from Puck News: https://twitter.com/JoshKraushaar/status/1743429303604547770 https://twitter.com/JoshKraushaar/status/1743429610426237268 Mike LaChance at The Gateway Pundit linked to the RedState report and also gathered several other pithy X posts: https://twitter.com/EdMorrissey/status/1743631562887799236 https://twitter.com/Me3535429145181/status/1743637602517864904 https://twitter.com/RealLillyWilson/status/1743634370127171699 In reply to Lilly Wilson’s post, another user offered this criticism of Woodward and Bernstein (see below): https://twitter.com/freetotem/status/1743760048151830534 History of the Post The Washington Post began on December 6, 1877 when Stilson Hutchins, Democrat and Southern sympathizer, founded it. The irony of the founding history of this paper is especially rich. Hutchins thoroughly imbibed the racism of the Democratic Party in those days and promoted it shamelessly throughout his tenure. But eventually he lost his mental faculties, and sold the paper in 1889. Though before he did, he bought out the capital city’s only Republican paper, The Republican National. The new owners, former Postmaster General Frank Hatton and former Rep. Beriah Wilkins (D-Ohio), actually commissioned a John Philip Sousa march to headline an essay contest. Anyone who listens to a United States Marine Band concert, or watches the Frank Sinatra movie The Manchurian Candidate, will surely recognize it. https://rumble.com/vnrd5z-u.s.-military-march-instrumental-washington-post-march.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 In 1893 the Post moved to the headquarters it would use until 1950. A year later, Hatton died, and Wilkins acquired Hatton’s share. The Washington Post is no stranger to “yellow journalism.” It even gave William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer a run for their money. For in 1898 it ran Clifford K. Berryman’s famous “Remember the Maine” cartoon. The McLean, Meyer and Graham eras In 1903, Wilkins died. Two years later his sons sold it to John Roll McLean, who owned The Cincinnati Enquirer. He ran the paper for eleven years, and when he died he put the paper into a trust. His son Edward “Ned” McLean broke the trust and ran the paper into the ground. (Some say McLean self-dealt with company funds to support his lavish lifestyle.) But soon after he gained control, he ran a story – the veracity of which CNAV cannot independently verify – of an interracial sex crime. That started the 1919 Washington Race Riots. The Washington Post would finally acknowledge its role in that affair a century later. In 1929, Eugene Meyer offered McLean $5 million for the Post. McLean refused. But four years later, The Washington Post was bankrupt. Meyer bought the paper at auction for $825,000. Only under his tenure has The Washington Post been anything other than a Democratic rag. Meyer restored the paper to health, but in 1946 he received an appointment to head the World Bank. So he turned the paper over to his son-in-law, Philip Graham. The Grahams returned the Post to the Democratic fold. Katherine Graham, Meyer’s daughter, was a personal friend of Saul (Rules for Radicals) Alinsky, and paid tribute to him in the pages of the Post. The Washington Post Company and its successor Jeff Bezos The Washington Post Company went public in 1971 at the height of the Pentagon Papers affair. Ben Bradlee, Executive Editor since 1968, gave carte blanche to the famous reporting duo, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. The wrecking of Richard M. Nixon’s career culminated a campaign of Communist sympathy that began with the paper’s initial opposition to the investigation by Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-Wisc.) and with Katherine Graham’s repeatedly having British spy Donald Maclean as a guest. Indeed The Washington Post gained a new nickname: Pravda on the Potomac. The Post has a mixed record on Operation Enduring Freedom, the Bush (Junior) administration’s adventure in Iraq. Why the Post wrote 27 editorials in support of a hypothetical invasion of Iraq, no one will say. In 2013, Jeff Bezos bought the Post for $250 million. He left behind the WaPo company’s other assets, including Kaplan Test Prep and Admissions. That company took the name Graham Holdings afterward. Under Bezos’ leadership, the Post has become an exclusively liberal paper. In 2017 it put on its masthead what had been an unofficial motto: Democracy dies in darkness. But the Bezos history also includes the Nick Sandmann controversy and lawsuit. And, of course, shadings of fact about everything from the January 6 event to the Fourth Arab-Israeli War. Now, subscribers and online visitors seem to be abandoning the paper. Analysis Anyone would think The Washington Post would have learned from its earlier history. But it seems rather to follow the law of inertia. A body in motion remains in motion, along the same vector (course and speed), until compelled to change. From misrepresenting the destruction of USS Maine ACR-1 to apparently helping America get into the Second Iraq War; from the 1919 Washington Race Riots to the Fourth Arab-Israeli War; the observation must remain the same. The Post did not learn from its earlier institutional mistakes. Or if it did, it learned exactly the wrong lesson. Mike LaChance closed his article with this observation: People are tired of their same old leftist spin on everything. In the internet age, there are so many more interesting choices for media. The Washington Post is a dinosaur. And so it is, not only in form (how many people read print editions anymore?) but also in substance. In fact the form criticism isn’t entirely just; The Epoch Times publishes a weekly print edition and does quite well. But the substance criticism remains. Except perhaps during the Meyer years, The Washington Post never seems to have learned the first rule of journalism: never lie to your readers. Julius Caesar, inventor of the first Western newspaper (Acta Diurna Senatus Romani), could have told the current editorial board. Sadly, they might not have listened. Even now, they’ll make excuses – and the American people are as tired of those as they are of the lies. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/07/editorial/talk/washington-post-fail-completely/ The Ramirez cartoon: https://twitter.com/Ramireztoons/status/1723425345037009363 Story about criticism of Israel costing people their jobs: https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1712549470003442029 Two versions of the Doctors Without Borders story: https://web.archive.org/web/20231119234312/https:/www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/11/19/gaza-babies-shifa-hospital-who/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/11/19/gaza-babies-shifa-hospital-who/ Josh Kraushaar’s thread: https://twitter.com/JoshKraushaar/status/1743429303604547770 https://twitter.com/JoshKraushaar/status/1743429610426237268 Other criticisms of the Post: https://twitter.com/EdMorrissey/status/1743631562887799236 https://twitter.com/Me3535429145181/status/1743637602517864904 https://twitter.com/RealLillyWilson/status/1743634370127171699 https://twitter.com/freetotem/status/1743760048151830534 Video: the Washington Post March (United States Marine Band): https://rumble.com/vnrd5z-u.s.-military-march-instrumental-washington-post-march.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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

What can a President do? By Terry A. Hurlbut Today, of course, is the third anniversary of an event that currently divides America between critics and worshipers of government. In fact it was a false-flag pseudo-operation to excuse persecuting half the country, in the eyes of the other half. Last night the installed President made a speech at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, to “commemorate” that event. He sounded many of the same themes he sounded on September 2, 2022. Of the particular content of last night’s speech, the less said the better. What does need saying is what the Constitution lets a President do, for the edification of those who constantly cry out to a President to “do something” about a dire situation. Powers and duties of a President Article II of the Constitution sets forth the powers and duties of a President of the United States. Article IV sets forth the duties of the federal government to the States. No other part of the Constitution treats Presidential powers and duties. Amendment XII treats Presidential elections in detail, and Amendments XX and XXV treat Presidential regular and emergency secession, respectively. Amendment XXII sets a limit on Presidential terms of service. Further, Amendments XIV, XXIII and XXIV indirectly treat Presidential elections. But no other Amendment, or section of an Amendment, specifically begins, “The President shall have power…” Specific statements The specific enumerated powers and duties of a President are these: • Commander-in-chief of the armed forces (and of any State militia called into federal service). But, only Congress may declare war or call up the militia. • “Require” written reports from Cabinet members. • Grant reprieves and pardons for federal offenses, except in cases of impeachment. • Make treaties, with the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senators “present.” • Nominate and, with Senate approval, appoint: ◦ Ambassadors, other “public ministers,” and consuls, ◦ Judges of the Supreme Court, and ◦ Any other officer whose appointment is established either in the Constitution or by law. (A Cabinet officer may appoint his inferior directly, if Congress grants him that authority.) • Make recess appointments. • Summon Congress into emergency session. • Adjourn Congress on his own authority if the two chambers cannot agree on adjournment. • Receive foreign diplomats. • “Take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” • “Commission all … Officers of the United States.” Federal duties to the States The Article IV duties are the most controversial today, given the inattention to many of them by this President. Section Two has two clauses relevant today: • The Privileges and Immunities Clause, which predates Amendment XIV. Amendment XIV Section 1 reinforces Article IV Section 2 Clause 1; it does not supersede it. • The Extradition Clause. Section 2 had a third clause providing for the extradition of runaway slaves. Amendment XIII, of course, supersedes that. Section 4 sets forth a duty of the federal government to “guarantee to every State in this union a republican form of government.” In addition the federal government must protect each State from: • Invasion of any kind, and: • Domestic violence, if the State legislature (or its governor if the legislature cannot convene) asks for such intervention. The duties of a President to the States derive from Article IV Section 4. Therefore a President may not send troops into an American city (other than in a non-State territory) whenever he pleases. A President may so act only to: • Eject a foreign invasion force, however constituted, or: • Quell or prevent riots, if the legislature (or the governor if the legislature cannot convene) so requests. Note that the word emergency never appears in the Constitution. The most it contains are definitions, like “in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.” When a President exceeds his authority Custom – and sloppy thinking – have, sometimes, extended the powers of the President beyond those which the Constitution enumerates. The existence of the Federal Emergency Management Agency has given many the impression that a President may indeed send troops to American cities (within States) whenever he pleases. Furthermore, legacy media have often criticized a President for failure to act, even when no State legislature or government has authorized him to act. The landfall of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 is a case in point. When George W. Bush did not send federal troops or other first responders at once, entertainer Kanye West famously said, “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” In fact, Gov. Kathleen Blanco (D-La.) didn’t ask until several days after the event. Not only that, but she actively hampered the federal response when it came. She did not seek re-election when her term ended. More to the point: never once did Louisiana’s legislature pass any joint resolution asking for federal aid. A federal response to a great storm, flood, or other such event, might find justification in the Domestic Violence clause. Looting and rioting are almost predictable consequences of a disaster that hampers, or severely strains, local police and other response. But a sloppy custom has arisen that a governormay “declare an emergency” without even trying to convene the legislature. Yet George W. Bush came in for criticism, essentially for staying within the limits of Presidential authority. Applicability to recent events President Donald J. Trump has had many accuse him of acting, or wishing he could act, like a dictator. Specifically that would mean exceeding his lawful authority in domestic-violence contexts. Yet never once did he send troops into American cities to quell riots during the “Long Hot Summer of 2020.” He didn’t send them because neither governor nor legislature in the States involved, asked. (Federal buildings are on federal land by definition, so any protection of those assets would be within Presidential authority. See Article I Section 8 Clause 17b.) The Congress shall have power … To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, … over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings. “Federal buildings” house federal courts, which the Constitution permits. (Article III.) But other than that, the Legislatures and Governors of Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, and Wisconsin never “applied” for “protection … against domestic violence.” Riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin drew a militia response, including some militia effectives from out-of-State. One such effective, Kyle Rittenhouse, faced prosecution after he killed two rioters in self-defense. (A jury eventually acquitted him, when testimony established that he did not “start the fight.”) Domestic violence is often the perfect excuse for dictators to “dictate.” The Framers understood that, and therefore enjoined the federal government from acting against it except whenever a legislature or governor asks. No President can do that which the government itself may not. Dereliction of Presidential duty on the other side On the Democratic side, we see dereliction of Presidential duty. Part of the problem is that the Constitution does not define invasion. It says a State may “engage in war [if] actually invaded,” and obligates the federal government to protect against “invasion.” But it never says what constitutes an invasion. The American Heritage Dictionary defines invasion thus: 1. The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer. 2. The entry into bodily tissue and subsequent proliferation of an injurious entity, such as a pathogen or tumor. 3. An intrusion or encroachment. 4. In phytogeography, the phenomenon of the movement of plants from an area of one character into one of a different character, and their colonization in the latter. 5. The act of invading a country or territory as an enemy; hostile entrance or intrusion. 6. A harmful incursion of any kind; an onset or attack, as of disease. 7. Infringement by intrusion; encroachment by entering into or taking away what belongs to another: as, an invasion of one's retirement or rights. 8. The act of invading; the act of encroaching upon the rights or possessions of another; encroachment; trespass. 9. A warlike or hostile entrance into the possessions or domains of another; the incursion of an army for conquest or plunder. Likewise it defines the verb to invade thus: 1. To enter by force in order to conquer or pillage. 2. To enter as if by invading; overrun or crowd. 3. To enter and proliferate in bodily tissue, as a pathogen. By those definitions, when migrants swarm into a country without doing its officers any of the courtesies one expects of an invited guest, that constitutes invasion. An invasion does not require an “armed force.” It does not even require such a force, if present, to wear a uniform. Given the mendicancy of these migrants, and their desire for handouts, their entry constitutes an “infringement by intrusion.” But not only has President Biden failed to “protect against invasion,” but he is actively forbidding and otherwise hampering the efforts of some States to repel this invasion. He has sued the State of Texas to enjoin it: • From maintaining a riparian barrier to entry along the Rio Grande, and • To allow federal agents to degrade a physical barrier which the State has erected along riverfront property lines – with the consent of the landowners. And now that Texas’ legislature has authorized all law-enforcement officers to arrest these migrants, the federal government threatens to sue to enjoin them from that as well. A former President responds President Trump held President Biden’s Valley Forge speech up to ridicule, according to Cassandra McDonald at The Gateway Pundit. https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1743378973671710877 https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1743460475172515922 https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1743405503030624762 He would do better to point out that he never exceeded his lawful authority. Biden, on the other hand, has abused his discretion as to his authority. (Also that “democracy” is two wolves and a lamb voting on what’s for dinner. And now “democracy” would appear to be two wolves stopping the lamb from voting, then voting on what’s for dinner.) If the American people are to remain free, they must insist that their President respect the limits of his authority – and also exercise his duty and responsibility. Biden has exceeded the one and failed at the other; Trump has done neither. The choice for voters is therefore crystal clear. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/06/foundation/constitution/president-do/ The Constitution: https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/ Embeds of Biden’s speech and of Trump’s response: https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1743378973671710877 https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1743460475172515922 https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1743405503030624762 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Epstein documents – and the real story By Terry A. Hurlbut Yesterday afternoon, the second tranche of documents came out in the case of Giuffre v. Maxwell. These consists of exhibits, including trial transcripts, describing the activities and associations of Jeffrey Epstein. But although the court released the second tranche, already it has ordered striking and refiling of five documents from the first. The refiled documents display redactions of contact and other “personally identifiable information.” But all this could be a distraction – because the real story is that Jeffrey Epstein was never the prime mover. Someone else was, and that someone ordered his death. The latest Epstein tranche To review, Virginia Roberts Giuffre sued Ghislaine Maxwell, girlfriend and chief procuress for Jeffrey Epstein, in 2015. She sued after the sex offender and purveyor to the powerful all but skated on his activities. These involved minor girls transported for immoral purposes, in violation of the Mann Act. But no one ever charged him with this, and in fact he received “kid gloves” treatment in his first criminal case. Accordingly, several of his victims, including Giuffre, sued to recover at least some damages. CourtListener.com is still having difficulty processing all the requests for information. This is adversely affecting some of their services. (For example, a RECAP Archive search is not always available; attempts to do so sometimes produce a technical-difficulty page.) But CNAV has docket page, complaint, motion-to-unseal, order, and notice-of-documents links. The following documents appear in the case docket, after the first tranche (Document 1320): 1321: letter asking for unsealing of Document 1026-3, which remains under seal. 1322: notice and refiling of Attachment 40 from Document 1320. 1323: letter from Alan Dershowitz’ attorney also asking to unseal Doc. 1026-3. 1324: order to strike Attachments 13, 14, 15, 39, and 40 and refile them. 1325: notice for the latest tranche, and attachments 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19. (See also this article by Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit.) 1326: notice and refiling of Attachments 13, 14, 15 and 39. Latest reaction Yesterday afternoon, Christina Laila of The Gateway Pundit reported a spotting of former President Bill Clinton – in Mexico. The Mayor of San Miguel de Allende (SAAHN mih-GELL deh ah-YEN-day) saluted him in this X post. https://twitter.com/MauricioTrejoP/status/1742559306401116374 Shortly after the release of Document 1325, Ms. Laila reported some fresh insights. From her review, she says: • A “Jane Doe 3,” underage, complained that Epstein trafficked her to “prominent American politicians.” He did this for blackmail purposes and to “ingratiate himself” to advance his other business interests. • The second set contained more damaging information against HRH Prince Andrew Duke of York. • Epstein and Maxwell forced another minor teen to recruit for them. https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743051558433223150 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743059464909898025 In addition, Cullen Linebarger revealed that Bill Clinton once “stormed” into the offices of Vanity Fair to demand their silence. (See Attachment 2.) This, according to The Daily Mail. I have reports here about you, your husband – I have everything under the sun that was sent to me by people who want to be helpful. Bill Clinton, to Vicky Ward, journalist for Vanity Fair But Anthony Scott produced the strangest report of all. He quotes Megyn Kelly as saying the world would hear from Jeffrey Epstein again. We’re not done with Jeffrey Epstein. I can tell you that for a fact. Can’t tell you how I know, but I can tell you for a fact…. We’re gonna hear a lot more about Jeffrey Epstein in the coming year… and you may even be hearing from him directly. More on that, as I’m allowed to tell it. Megyn Kelly https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1743085644065185828 https://twitter.com/braydimonika/status/1743089386009317664 https://twitter.com/TheCalvinCooli1/status/1743087770527059982 Does that mean a voice recording of Epstein giving a deposition now exists, waiting for someone to find it? Or did the warden of the New York Metropolitan Correction Center, on orders from Attorney General Barr, have someone murder a look-alike inmate, substitute him for Epstein in his cell, and secretly remove Epstein to a Deep Underground Military Bunker or something of that kind? Stay tuned! A break-in at an Epstein fixer’s office At 11:20 a.m. EST, Christine Laila made another report, this one quoting Los Angeles magazine. Sitrick and Company handles “crisis public relations” for many elite clients, Jeffrey Epstein among them. In short, they are “fixers,” as the magazine’s headline calls them. A team of professional burglars – or special intelligence operatives – broke into the offices of Sitrick and Company, and stole several client and server computers. (In information parlance, a server stores information for an entire office suite. A client sits on a user’s desk and handles actual creation of letters, presentations, and other documents.) The problem: this break-in occurred hours before the release of Document 1320 and its forty attachments. Michael Sitrick, head of the firm, gave an interview to the magazine. He cagily denied that the break-in was anything but coincidental. Then, perhaps more to assure his firm’s clients than for any other purpose, he said: His San Vicente Boulevard offices had no information on Jeffrey Epstein, nor “any compromising information about any of his clients.” The office building had several other business offices, all of which also suffered breaking-and-entering and theft that night. Every lost computer carried protection with passwords and two-factor authentication. (Anyone who has had to have an online firm text him an access code in addition to requiring his password, knows what two-factor authentication is.) The firm also has encrypted all files. The Fleming Test Any regular reader will expect this statement: that account doesn’t pass the Fleming Test. Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, and the third time it’s enemy action. Ian Fleming Several points will suffice: 1. Michael Sitrick is a “fixer.” So he’s had plenty of practice in delivering comforting “spin.” As Bill O’Reilly (or the YouTube influencer Diktor van Doomcock) would say: treat anything Michael Sitrick says as an unverified personal defense, and take it with a grain of salt. 2. We have only his word that his office had “no information on Jeffrey Epstein.” 3. Furthermore, we have only his word that neighboring offices in the building also suffered burglaries. The Los Angeles Police Department won’t say. And even if anyone else did suffer a burglary: if the burglars are who CNAV suspects they are, they would certainly burglarize other offices – as cover. 4. Any off-the-shelf computer system has a “back door.” Sitrick didn’t even say anything about having “white-boxed” his information systems (that is, built his own servers). And again: if the thieves are who CNAV suspects they are, don’t assume any information system is safe from them. 5. This is a scene straight out of a Hollywood movie. The Purveyor to the Powerful dies nastily in a prison cell – in a prison one step below Maximum Security. (And with malfunctioning surveillance cameras, to boot.) Every time a court releases sensitive records about him or his clients, something untoward happens. Add to it: this break-in recalls the Watergate break-in, or the break-in at the office of Daniel Ellsberg’s psychiatrist. The real conspiracy So who are the real conspirators, who probably murdered Jeffrey Epstein, covered up his manner of death, had him arrested to begin with, and just possibly broke into the offices of the premier Hollywood “fixer” and made off with physical servers? (And unauthorized access to data might not even be the objective. Even if it is, the thieves would have a secondary objective: malicious destruction of data. This is a real 18 U.S.C. § 1512 case.) Many influencers, like “Jeremy at The Quartering,” suspect the Bill Clinton machine, or perhaps His Majesty’s Secret Service. But remember: Michael Cernovich, who fought so long for the unsealing, knows that Epstein was an FBI asset. https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1742768924213854519 He actually is an asset of something bigger than the FBI, because now it includes the FBI. (Maybe it always did.) It’s also bigger than Bill Clinton. It is an interlocking elite bent on capturing all of humanity into one State to rule the world. And like Bill Clinton, Jeffrey Epstein was a tool. He “got dirt” on the enemies of the One-world State – and what he couldn’t find, he created. The Oldest Profession has always been a blackmail factory, and that goes double when the “professionals” are underage. Then when he became a liability, the One-world State gave orders for his summary execution. Josef Stalin did the same to his rival, Leon Trotsky. Not that the two didn’t deserve each other – but still. And…? The most important lesson of the Epstein Files isn’t the incrimination of Bill Clinton, or the exoneration of Donald Trump. It is the reaction to their release. Possibly the most important news to break in the last twenty-four hours was the break-in and burglary at the offices of Sitrick and Company. Or, it was: at time of preparation, Judge Loretta Peska has released Document 1328 – the third tranche – with forty-four attachments. The influencer Techno-Fog revealed that this third tranche reveals the removal of computers from Epstein’s mansion in Palm Beach, Florida, before the FBI could search it. https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743352207758487985 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743355738972438936 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743358636921876862 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743364779375235322 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743366748085059620 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743373134181351882 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743373986958909791 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743384395367456849 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743393663856615773 This last thread drops several more celebrated names. Donald Trump curiously turns up as having come to Epstein’s Palm Beach mansion and taken meals, not with honored guests, but with household staff. That’s the only mention he bears. More seriously, Virginia Roberts Giuffre alleges that Epstein trafficked her to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. (He was “former” even before that encounter.) All of which to say: these revelations are “small potatoes.” Furthermore, redactions appear everywhere, and we don’t know how important the blacked-out names might be. Again, the removal of the computers is the important part. Someone, even then, was protecting highly sensitive information, and no doubt still is. (Michael Cernovich mentioned a missing house safe.) The Donald Trump mentions are red herrings. Perhaps the One-world State knew even then that Trump would be a threat to them. As ever, stay tuned. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/05/news/epstein-documents-real-story/ Giuffre v. Maxwell docket page: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4355835/giuffre-v-maxwell/ Mexican Mayor’s post: https://twitter.com/MauricioTrejoP/status/1742559306401116374 Techno-Fog’s posts about minors forced to recruit other minors: https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743051558433223150 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743059464909898025 Quotes and comments about Megyn Kelly’s prediction: https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1743085644065185828 https://twitter.com/braydimonika/status/1743089386009317664 https://twitter.com/TheCalvinCooli1/status/1743087770527059982 Mike Cernovich’s long-form post: https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1742768924213854519 Techno-Fog’s thread today: https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743352207758487985 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743355738972438936 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743358636921876862 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743364779375235322 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743366748085059620 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743373134181351882 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743373986958909791 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743384395367456849 https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1743393663856615773 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Epstein List released By Terry A. Hurlbut Yesterday a federal judge in New York unsealed many court documents in a case against an associate of Jeffrey Epstein. That associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, is in prison herself, but the case has gone on for eight years. Jeffrey Epstein, of course, is notorious for sexually abusing many women, most of them underage, and trafficking these women to high-profile male clients that read like a Who’s Who in politics, geopolitics, and the law. (And to this day no one believes that Jeffrey Epstein killed himself in his prison cell.) The release of that list promises to change many political – and geopolitical – games. Previous history of Jeffrey Epstein Jeffrey Epstein was in and out of court for the last eighteen years of his life, beginning in 2005. In that year the mother of a minor girl made the first of many complaints against him. The details of these complaints are not important. What is important is that Epstein received special treatment that made his “confinement” strictly pro forma. But beginning in 2008, many, many women filed lawsuits against Epstein, and against Ghislaine Maxwell. That includes the case at issue today: Giuffre v. Maxwell, 1:15-cv-07433, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; The Hon. Loretta A. Preska presiding. CourtListener has this docket page on that case. (The reason for the near-impossibility of visiting CourtListener’s home page at this time will become apparent later.) Virginia Giuffre, then known as Virginia Roberts, was one of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, according to her twelve-page complaint. Giuffre sued in the federal courts to protect her rights, which authorities ignored as part of Epstein’s special treatment. That treatment included a Non-Prosecution Agreement that meant she would not have her own day in court. Giuffre sued Epstein initially – and then sued Maxwell after the latter undertook to “fix” Giuffre with a campaign of lies. The entire case proceeded under seal, it seems, and in 2017 Giuffre reached a settlement, also under seal. But the matter didn’t end there. Motion to intervene and unseal Michael Cernovich, independent investigator and journalist, moved in January 2017 to intervene in the case, and unseal its files. Cernovich explained his involvement in a long-form post on X. (Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit alerted his readers to the post.) https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1742768924213854519 Following that post, Cernovich left this post embedding part of an interview he did with Candace Owens. https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1742773663165038923 Note that Cernovich charges that Jeffrey Epstein was an FBI asset. Cernovich also asked, after Epstein’s 2019 arrest, several pointed questions about failure to prosecute Epstein under the Mann Act. Whether Cernovich had read the complaint and knew about the Non-Prosecution Agreement, is not clear. On August 10, 2019, of course, authorities “found” Jeffrey Epstein dead in his cell. Suspicion has centered largely on former President Bill Clinton, because: • Many people knew or suspected Bill Clinton of visiting one of Epstein’s two private islands as far back as 2016. Furthermore he made those visits without his Secret Service detail. • “The Clinton Body Count” is proverbial. Former CNAV contributor Ariel Natan Pasko dropped this dark hint about anti-Semites citing Jeffrey Epstein as typical of Jews. This, of course, was twelve days after Epstein’s arrest. The next day, Darrell L. Castle commented on the implications of the Epstein case for American legal and judicial corruption. The day after Jeffrey Epstein died, Linda Goudsmit became one of the first to suggest that he did not kill himself. Two weeks later, Darrell Castle was sure of it. From 2019 to the present As Ghislaine Maxwell now prepared to stand criminal trial, rumors began spreading about just who, in addition to the Clintons, maintained an association with Jeffrey Epstein. Media attention focused on Bill Clinton, but also centered on HRH Prince Andrew, Duke of York. (Ghislaine Maxwell later would say she felt sorry for the Duke.) Melinda Gates accused Epstein of helping break up her marriage to Bill Gates. His private islands went up for sale for $125 million. A jury ultimately convicted Maxwell on five of six criminal counts. The court sentenced her to 20 years – after the prosecution asked for 30 years. Authorities also placed her on suicide watch. A year later, her former lawyers sued her to recover $878,000 in unpaid legal fees. But the taint of Jeffrey Epstein seems spread far and wide. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, one of three judges involved in the Mar-A-Lago Raid, once represented one of Epstein’s “Lolita Express” pilots. A former Epstein business associate, Steven Hoffenberg, turned up dead in his home in August of 2022. Former victims have sued Deutsche Bank and J. P. Morgan Chase for having profited from Epstein’s trafficking activities. Jeffrey Epstein also had apparent connections to Les Wexner, founder of Victoria’s Secret. Wexner’s foundation recently severed ties with the Harvard Kennedy School over unpunished harassment of Jewish students at Harvard. Alan Dershowitz apparently represented Epstein. Virginia Giuffre initially accused him of abusing her – but dropped that charge fourteen months ago. Release of the Jeffrey Epstein list That last is important today because Alan Dershowitz appears on flight manifests on flights to and from one of Epstein’s private islands. Today Dershowitz repeats his denial of any involvement with Epstein’s nefarious activities. Judge Preska issued an order on December 18, 2023, setting forth her intention to unseal documents in the Giuffre case. Upon the release of that order, the new lawyer for a “Doe 107” sent a letter to the judge asking for more time to keep his client’s name out of public mention. The judge granted the extension of time, leading to widespread speculation that she had canceled the unsealing. The grant read as follows: Doe 107's request for a 30-day extension is approved. Doe 107 shall, by January 22, 2024, submit to the Court for in camera review an affidavit (1) supporting her assertion that she faces a risk of physical harm in her country of residence and (2) providing detail concerning the hate mail she has received. Doe 107's counsel may also provide by this date any additional factual support for Doe 107's contention that unsealing the relevant records would put her at risk of physical harm. But the judge did not hold up the release of documents unrelated to Doe 107 – or Does 105 and 110. (Doe 110 also asked for special consideration.) Yesterday she issued this order. (See also this article from Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit.) List of links Pursuant to that order, she released forty documents, as Attachments to Docket Entry 1320. (See also this article by Christina Laila at The Gateway Pundit.) Almost immediately thereafter, so many people sought downloads of those documents, that CourtListener’s servers crashed. Even today, CourtListener’s home page will not load, not for any browser. But any other page will load. Herewith a list of forty-one direct links to the released documents. (The first link is to a cover letter explaining the “rolling release” process.) The Gateway Pundit managed to download thirty-seven of them before their connection became hopeless. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.0_1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.1_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.2_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.3_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.4_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.5_1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.6_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.7_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.8_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.9_1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.10_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.11_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.12_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.13_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.14_4.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.15_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.16_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.17_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.18_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.19_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.20_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.21_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.22_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.23_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.24_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.25_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.26_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.27_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.28_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.29_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.30_4.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.31_1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.32_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.33_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.34_5.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.35_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.36_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.37_1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.38_4.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.39_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.40_2.pdf Today lawyers for The Miami Herald sent another letter to Judge Preska, asking for unsealing of another document. This involves Document 1026, Attachment 3 (Exhibit C). To anyone asking why CNAV did not mention any of this activity earlier, CNAV offers this disclaimer. CNAV has watched as judges have, in the past, ordered release of information – then canceled it. When the December 18 order came down, CNAV decided we would believe it when we saw it. Now we see it. Notably, CourtListener is still having trouble processing requests for information on its home page and even from some “push-buttons.” CNAV therefore urges caution and patience in trying to read or download these files. Various insights on the Jeffrey Epstein list The Gateway Pundit has a plethora of reports on the release of the Jeffrey Epstein list. In chronological order: • Sarah Kellen, once a personal assistant to Epstein, might have additional evidence she could use to bargain for early release. • The Duke of York is definitely involved! Attachment 26 describes some very un-princely behavior by The Duke. • Donald J. Trump is not involved in nefarious activity. One witness cleared him completely, along with Alan Dershowitz (see above) and George Lucas. (Attachment 12.) Other reports reveal that Donald Trump ended his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein years before his notoriety. He knew what Epstein was – and did not like it. https://twitter.com/TheCharlesDowns/status/1742907056066118028 • At least one attachment reveals a “kissing game” Maxwell invented to condition underage girls to “pleasure” Epstein. • Bill Clinton was not only involved but had definite pedophile tastes. “He likes them young,” said Epstein, according to one witness. https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1742696660969586759 • NBC News sullied its own coverage of the release. They tried to defend Bill Clinton even in the face of the above revelation. • Thomas Pritzker, of the Pritzkers of Hyatt Hotels fame, was also a client. Jim Hoft captured two posts by Kanekoa the Great on this point: https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1742711108597911581 https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1742728607284494512 • Jeffrey Epstein would call Leonardo di Caprio, Bruce Willis, and other Hollywood celebrities. See Attachment 12. This may or may not be significant. No witness mentions having met any of those Hollywood types. https://twitter.com/Daily_Express/status/1742906750116802959 • Former FBI Director Louis Freeh might have tried to cover for Clinton. Other revelations In those documents, Virginia Giuffre revealed that Jeffrey Epstein trafficked her to at least one foreign President. https://twitter.com/patel_patriot/status/1742726419329798307 She did not name him, but could only describe him. In related news, Tucker Carlson, in today’s show, suggested that Jeffrey Epstein was murdered – and the Attorney General covered it up. That Attorney General would be none other than William Barr, who betrayed Donald Trump over the Election of 2020. This insight comes from Epstein’s brother Mark. https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1743044638125310124 Laura Loomer published another link to all 943 pages of documents, on Document Cloud. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1742711465306398856 She has also teased out some other questionable associations. Among them: Tony Lyons, of Skyhorse Publishing – and a known associate of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1742939928307322977 She mentioned how quiet several Members of Congress, government officials, and foreign dignitaries have been lately. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1742943209972506858 Analysis The documents Judge Preska released thus far do not constitute an entire “client list.” They tell us little that we didn’t know before – except that Donald Trump was not involved in nefarious activities. Alan Dershowitz’ involvement seems to be nothing more serious than representing Jeffrey Epstein. Though in 1997 he did plump for lowering the age of consent from 18 to 15. He said so in The Los Angeles Times, and people took notice. https://twitter.com/RWPUSA/status/1155949595324588032 In response, Dershowitz dropped this mini-thread: https://twitter.com/AlanDersh/status/1155962389776351238 https://twitter.com/AlanDersh/status/1155962393148579840 Of course, he wrote those posts nearly three years before Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. In any event, he distinguished the constitutional case from the moral case. This release confirms Bill Clinton’s involvement, and that of the Duke of York. But Tucker Carlson’s interview with Mark Epstein suggests that someone else had a motive for murdering Jeffrey Epstein. In fact, if Epstein was a tool of the Deep State, the list of suspects goes beyond Clinton. And now it includes former Attorney General Bill Barr. Did Barr know of plans by Trump for a general crackdown on child sex traffickers and molesters? Would that explain his cooperation with a campaign to defeat Trump at all costs? In any event, the court has promised many more revelations. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/04/news/epstein-list-released/ Giuffre v. Maxwell: Docket page: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4355835/giuffre-v-maxwell/ Complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1.0_8.pdf Motion to intervene and unseal: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.550.0.pdf Order for unsealing: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1315.0_3.pdf Letter re Doe 107: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1315.0_3.pdf Memo endorsement: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1318.0_2.pdf Final order: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1319.0.pdf Main document and attachments: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.0_1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.1_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.2_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.3_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.4_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.5_1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.6_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.7_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.8_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.9_1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.10_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.11_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.12_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.13_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.14_4.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.15_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.16_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.17_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.18_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.19_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.20_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.21_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.22_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.23_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.24_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.25_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.26_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.27_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.28_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.29_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.30_4.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.31_1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.32_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.33_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.34_5.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.35_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.36_2.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.37_1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.38_4.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.39_3.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.40_2.pdf Gateway Pundit partial list of attachments: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/breaking-here-are-epstein-documents-released-tonight/ Mike Cernovich’s posts: https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1742768924213854519 https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1742773663165038923 Post about Trump banning Epstein from Mar-A-Lago in 1999: https://twitter.com/TheCharlesDowns/status/1742907056066118028 Post quoting Epstein: “Clinton likes them young” https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1742696660969586759 Posts about Thomas Pritzker’s involvement: https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1742711108597911581 https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1742728607284494512 Daily Express post about Epstein calling Hollywood celebs: https://twitter.com/Daily_Express/status/1742906750116802959 Post about Giuffre being trafficked to a foreign president: https://twitter.com/patel_patriot/status/1742726419329798307 Tucker Carlson’s interview with Mark Epstein: https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1743044638125310124 Laura Loomer’s posts: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1742711465306398856 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1742939928307322977 https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1742943209972506858 Post protesting Alan Dershowitz’ stance on age of consent, and Dershowitz’ response: https://twitter.com/RWPUSA/status/1155949595324588032 https://twitter.com/AlanDersh/status/1155962389776351238 https://twitter.com/AlanDersh/status/1155962393148579840 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Claudine Gay departure in perspective By Terry A. Hurlbut Yesterday, as CNAV reported, Claudine Gay, the 33rd President of Harvard University, resigned. Today her resignation has provoked both cheers and jeers. The cheers one can understand, but the jeers reveal much about the character of those doing the jeering. Apparently being a member of a critical-theoretically favored group is more important than either academic integrity or consistent and non-selective application of university community discipline. Considering the poor work output in support of “diversity, equity and inclusion,” this should surprise no one. It stands as yet another reason to reevaluate either going to college, or to which colleges one might apply. Why did Claudine Gay resign? Claudine Gay became a target after she made a God-awful appearance before the House Education and Workforce Committee. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), incidentally the Chair of the House Republican Conference, asked a simple question of three university presidents: Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate [your university’s] code of conduct or rules regarding bullying or harassment? Recall Claudine Gay’s answer: It can be [violative], depending on the context. An answer she repeated, finally prompting an exasperated Rep. Stefanik to call on her to resign. Which, again, she did. But that is not why she resigned. The Harvard Corporation stood by her, despite her appearance before the Ed. Committee and despite other allegations against her. Bill Ackman of Pershing Square, who has started a Donors’ Revolution, knew it. https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1734394682413588949 https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1734401275142291640 But those other allegations ultimately brought her down. They were of plagiarism, the worst sin an academic or writer can commit – the theft of another person’s work. According to The Washington Free Beacon, over half her published work carries this taint. Even her doctoral dissertation carries the taint – though whether it started with her dissertation is an open question. (Probably it doesn’t. Plagiarism is a bad habit one usually acquires when one first receives composition assignments in middle or even elementary school.) Though no one at the Harvard Corporation wants to admit it, the embarrassment finally became too great. In her letter of resignation, she played the race card. Laura Loomer, who embedded it in photographs, was not impressed. https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1742260546118795546 Disclaimer CNAV has decided not to refer to or address Claudine Gay with the title of Doctor. In the late Seventies, a professor of economics at Yale University told your editor that Ivy League professors did not usually address one another as “Doctor.” “A kind of self-imposed snobbery,” he called it. But he went on to explain that, in the Ivy League, everyone was a “Doctor” of something – generally Philosophy. To avoid confusion, they reserved the title Doctor for Doctors of Medicine (or Osteopathy or Dental Surgery). Such at least was the custom then, and it seemed a good custom. But that’s not why Claudine Gay doesn’t rate that title. Quite simply, she stands accused of at least fifty instances of plagiarism during her career – beginning with her doctoral dissertation. And because she wrote and defended that dissertation at Harvard, her violation of academic integrity is doubly serious. Not only did she regularly violate academic standards that Harvard itself upholds, but she violated them while they applied to her as a student at that very institution. For the reasons enumerated above, CNAV refuses to dignify Claudine Gay with any academic title and recommends that Harvard revoke her Ph.D. diploma and terminate her employment. Sadly, the Harvard Corporation won’t do that. Instead they will retain her as a member of the faculty – with an annual salary of $900,000, no less. (And she is definitely not “worth her salt.”) Reaction Several conservative influencers, among them Dr. Steve Turley, gave their cheers in video: https://rumble.com/embed/v42b3zx/?pub=4teej https://rumble.com/embed/v4264du/?pub=4teej But the jeers have also begun. The Gateway Pundit reported many of the jeers on the night after the resignation. Mike LaChance reported that Ibram X. Kendi gave everyone an eyeful. LaChance collected these X posts from Kendi and other “woke activists”: https://twitter.com/ibramxk/status/1742261273520198080 https://twitter.com/marclamonthill/status/1742259954940076385 https://twitter.com/jemelehill/status/1742295674031591780 https://twitter.com/WajahatAli/status/1742248328220549267 Observe that Ibram Kendi’s post drew a Community Note reminding readers of the plagiarism charge. Among the works cited: Race Redistricting and Representation: the Unintended Consequences of Black Majority Districts, by David Cannon. (1999.) LaChance also reported that a CNN reporter tried to excuse what Gay did as mere sloppiness. But according to Harvard’s own rules, even a sloppy scholar is just as guilty as a willful intellectual thief. As several outraged observers promptly reminded their followers on X: https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1742252559543193991 https://twitter.com/damintoell/status/1742264265208102913 https://twitter.com/capeandcowell/status/1742258770619609135 https://twitter.com/kylenabecker/status/1742292919170576497 This morning, Kristinn Taylor reported that The Rev. Al Sharpton will lead a protest at Bill Ackman’s New York offices. She also collected a few more whining posts on X: https://twitter.com/JamaalBowmanNY/status/1742334850953101385 https://twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1742282193697648695 https://twitter.com/pronounced_ing/status/1742260263456235685 https://twitter.com/Deggans/status/1742257227916796231 https://twitter.com/JNelsonLDF/status/1742257053077270836 But Dr. Carol M. Swain, the first identified “victim” of Claudine Gay’s plagiarism, also weighed in on the controversy: https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1742373622591754407 Claudine Gay and selective community discipline But Claudine Gay did earn the wrath of concerned people everywhere with her initial reaction to the Fourth Arab-Israeli War. Bill Ackman definitely weighed in. He hasn’t forgotten the Harvard Corporation’s initial decision to stand by Gay. Nor has he forgotten those student groups who blamed Israel for everything. Now he wants all the Fellows of the Corporation to resign, including its chair, Penny Pritzker. Margaret Flavin has the details. Ackman began with a condemnation of Gay for her initial statement – but went on to condemn the very concept of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1742441534627184760 In that post Ackman linked to the site Penn Forward, which proposes a new constitution for the University of Pennsylvania. That constitution sets forth six guiding principles: 1. Intellectual diversity, not merely diversity of ethnic or political heritage, 2. Civil discourse and an expectation of civility, 3. Political neutrality from the administration, 4. Institutional neutrality (meaning, no favoritism among schools of thought), 5. Scientific neutrality, and 6. Mutual respect for and tolerance of community members from all origins. Ackman urges all universities to embrace these principles, plus an admissions policy that emphasizes fair treatment of applicants as individuals. Incidentally, Bill Ackman announced his intention to target Sally Kornbluth, president of MIT, next. Though a Jew herself, she has been grossly negligent in policing antisemitism on her own campus. As was Liz Magill at UPenn, until she finally had to resign. Jeers on the conservative side? Regrettably, at least one conservative commentator (or pretender) actually defended Claudine Gay. Nicholas J. Fuentes has gained a reputation for denying that Adolf Hitler’s war machine murdered six million Jews. When Claudine Gay resigned, he left his incredible defense, in three Telegram posts. (One, two, three.) The Israel Lobby has finally succeeded in ousting Harvard President Claudine Gay after she was accused of insufficiently condemning Hamas in the wake of the al-Aqsa Flood attack. For 3 months Harvard has been subjected to a donor revolt and series of digital billboard guerrilla protests, both sponsored by Jewish billionaire Bill Ackman. Gay was also hauled before a congressional hearing and interrogated, alongside presidents of UPenn and MIT. It just so happens that Gay was one of only three non-Jewish presidents of the eight Ivy League universities. She has been replaced by a left-wing Jew named Alan Garber, who criticized her response to the October 7th attack. He also supports DEI and was a signatory on Harvard’s letter protesting the SCOTUS decision on affirmative action earlier this year. This development underscores the power that organized Jewry wields in the United States. Two Ivy League presidents have been sacked in under three months, and not for any ambiguous reason: because their support for Israel was not absolute and unconditional. To that end, Organized Jewry orchestrated a sustained, multi-faceted, high pressure campaign from their perch on Wall Street, Congress, conservative advocacy, and the media to overthrow the top provosts of two of the most prestigious and rich universities in the world. At UPenn’s Chair and Harvard’s President have both been replaced by liberal, DEI, Zionist Jews. Much has been said in the last three months about how Whites may benefit from the rightward shift of World Jewry or from the infiltration of nationalistic Zionist Jews in the wake of the October 7th attack. People said that we could instrumentalize Zionist power to attack the left wing universities or deport Muslim refugees or use BLM’s affinity for Hamas to crack down on them. But despite all the talk about mass deportations or the common struggle of Whites and Jews as “oppressors”— Whites have accrued no benefit from this supposed awakening. Rather, predictably, Jews have been the exclusive beneficiaries of this crisis, and have used it to demand unconditional US support for Israel, sack “antisemitic” provosts and replace them with Zionists, and censor pro-Palestinian content and rallies. As long as Zionists are in the drivers seat, any arrangement with them will not have a mutual benefit. Five points should suffice to refute this statement. First, Claudine Gay not only let those thirty-odd student organizations blame Israel for everything. She inspired them to do this by her own statements. In so doing she actually justified atrocious acts. A combatant that launches an atrocious sneak attack deserves no quarter, and nothing but annihilation will serve. This is not a penalty, but a recognition that the combatant is at war with all the rest of humanity. But Claudine Gay didn’t recognize that – because the Jews were her enemy. Second, if Claudine Gay was one of three Gentile Ivy League university presidents, the remaining Gentile President was a better community disciplinarian than she. Business Insider carried this synoptic treatment of the reactions of all eight Ivy League Presidents to antisemitism on their campuses. The article fails to mention that Gay and Magill let antisemitism get totally out-of-hand on their campuses. None of the other Ivy League presidents committed any such negligence. So even that “other Gentile,” whichever it is, either jumped on the problem – or never let it develop. Those other Presidents distinguished themselves from Gay and Magill, not by words alone – but by deeds. Other points Third, Sally Kornbluth is Jewish herself – but she let antisemitism reach the point of creating no-go zones for Jews. That’s why Bill Ackman has made her his next target. Fourth, Claudine Gay was no more friendly to the principles of respect for the individual than her interim successor, Provost Alan Garber, is likely to be. Garber was probably obeying her orders when he signed on to the statement protesting the Supreme Court’s anti-DEI decision. SFFA v. Harvard/UNC. Fifth, Fuentes compounds his logical errors with actual defenses of and excuses for the Islamic Resistance Movement (Arabic Harakah al-Muqāwamah al-Islāmiyyah, abbreviated HAMAS). That HAMAS gets a free ride from the political left is bad enough. Anyone on the right who does the same, stains the honor of the political right. However, the distinction of the other Ivy League schools is a small one at best. If any of those schools were to adopt the Penn Forward Constitution, that school might return to the reputation these schools once held. Unfortunately, Marxist infiltration of those schools might be too deep for that, so concerned parents should probably shop elsewhere. In short, “Zionist infiltration” isn’t the problem at Harvard or anywhere else. Cultural Marxism is, together with a lack of academic integrity. For those things – plus inconsistent application of community discipline – these universities must apologize. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/03/editorial/talk/claudine-gay-departure-perspective/ Bill Ackman’s reaction to Harvard Corporation standing by Gay: https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1734394682413588949 https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1734401275142291640 Laura Loomer carries the resignation letter: https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1742260546118795546 Videos: cheers for the resignation: https://rumble.com/v44wgd9-harvard-humiliated-as-woke-president-implodes.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 https://rumble.com/v44rgs0-harvard-fires-woke-clown-president-claudine-gay-after-massive-plagiarism-bu.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 First batch of outraged posts: https://twitter.com/ibramxk/status/1742261273520198080 https://twitter.com/marclamonthill/status/1742259954940076385 https://twitter.com/jemelehill/status/1742295674031591780 https://twitter.com/WajahatAli/status/1742248328220549267 Posts expressing outrage at changing the definition of plagiarism: https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1742252559543193991 https://twitter.com/damintoell/status/1742264265208102913 https://twitter.com/capeandcowell/status/1742258770619609135 https://twitter.com/kylenabecker/status/1742292919170576497 Second batch of outraged posts: https://twitter.com/JamaalBowmanNY/status/1742334850953101385 https://twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1742282193697648695 https://twitter.com/pronounced_ing/status/1742260263456235685 https://twitter.com/Deggans/status/1742257227916796231 https://twitter.com/JNelsonLDF/status/1742257053077270836 Dr. Swain’s post: https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1742373622591754407 Bill Ackman’s post: https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1742441534627184760 Penn Foward home: https://pennforward.com/ Nicholas J. Fuentes’ defense of Gay: https://t.me/nickjfuentes/12235 https://t.me/nickjfuentes/12236 https://t.me/nickjfuentes/12237 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Trump renews call to dismiss January 6 case By Terry A. Hurlbut In the New Year, President Donald J. Trump renewed his call from five months back, to dismiss the case against him arising from allegations he orchestrated, incited, and provoked the “attack” on the Capitol on January 6, 2021. At issue are the activities of the show tribunal that was the House January 6 Committee. In August of 2023, Fox News reported that this Committee destroyed much of the evidence behind their conclusion. Last night Trump charged that much of this evidence could have been exculpatory of him. Accordingly he now demands publicly that a court dismiss his case, as well he should. But the people have a grievance, too. In the hours since the release of his statement, other evidence has come forward. That evidence shows that he actually won the Election of 2020 – and his own staff betrayed him. Trump posts again about January 6 On January 1, 2024, at 6:31 p.m. EST, President Trump left this post: In it he accused then-Rep. Liz Cheney (RINO-Wyo.), then Vice-Chair of the January 6 Committee, of destroying the evidence. Thus for the first time he has named a single individual as responsible for the loss of evidence. Earlier he simply accused the entire seven-member Committee, which included five Democrats and two Republicans. Neither Republican Member sits in the House anymore. Rep. Harriet Hageman, R-Wyo., “primaried” Cheney, and the Democratic-controlled Illinois legislature drew Rep. Adam Kinzinger, RINO-Ill., out of his District when that State lost a District in the census. Kinzinger also had the tacky temerity to raise funds by selling $100 autographed copies of the committee’s final report. But Liz Cheney has been the more vocal of the two, ever since she lost her primary. She even launched an attack ad against Trump to air while he was doing his on-air CNN town hall interview. In his post, Trump went on to detail the specific evidence that would exculpate him, including Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), then Speaker of the House, turning down Trump’s offer of 10,000 National Guardsmen to guard the Capitol that day. Trump concluded by saying he considered the entire case compromised, and a court should dismiss it. The case is now before the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, on appeal from Trump on a question of Presidential immunity. The Supreme Court refused to review the case before Appeals Court judgment. Earlier history of the January 6 Committee In August of 2023, it became clear that the January 6 Committee destroyed evidence. CNAV covered it at the time. Cheney and Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the Chairman, did not even believe they had an obligation to preserve it. Trump discussed this in two successive posts: The essence of his charge is that, as a defendant in a federal case, he has subpoena power. So to avoid having to respond to any subpoena from him, the Committee destroyed evidence. The story, as The Gateway Pundit reported on it at the time (see here and here), is as follows. Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), after Midterms, wrote to Rep. Thompson demanding preservation of evidence. Conveniently, the original link to the letter “broke,” but not before the Wayback Machine archived it. https://twitter.com/FarnoushAmiri/status/1598078908007559168 https://twitter.com/ryanobles/status/1598098087343697920 For the record, the Committee’s final report and other supporting documents are available at GovInfo.gov. But on August 8, Fox News reported that the Committee did in fact destroy records. Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), Chairman of the Oversight Subcommittee of the Committee on House Administration, made the charge in December 2022. At issue were missing records of communications between the Committee and the Biden White House. In addition, records of a team tasked to investigate deficiencies in Capitol security are all missing. An exchange of letters Thompson and Cheney sent this moderately redacted letter to the White House Counsel’s office a week after issuing their final report. In it Thompson and Cheney mention turning over certain records to the White House. On June 26, 2023, Rep. Loudermilk sent this letter to Rep. Thompson, asking his “assistance” in locating the missing records. Thompson shot this letter back to Loudermilk, denying any responsibility to preserve more than is available at GovInfo. This morning Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit quoted the brazen denial of obligation. To clarify Hoft’s reportage, he was quoting from a lengthy footnote on the first page of the letter: Guidance from the Office of the Clerk states that a permanent record is “[m]aterial created or received by a person, family, or a public or private organization that is preserved because of its enduring value. The value stems from the information it contains or the evidence it provides of the functions and responsibilities of the creator.” See “Records Management Manual for Committees,” Office of Art and Archives, Office of the Clerk of the House of Representatives (Aug. 2021), p. 8. Consistent with guidance from the Office of the Clerk and other authorities, the Select Committee did not archive temporary committee records that were not elevated by the Committee’s actions, such as use in hearings or official publications, or those that did not further its investigative activities. Accordingly, and contrary to your letter’s implication, the Select Committee was not obligated to archive all video recordings of transcribed interviews or depositions. Based on guidance from House authorities, the Select Committee determined that the written transcripts provided by nonpartisan, professional official reporters, which the witnesses and Select Committee staff had the opportunity to review for errata, were the official, permanent records of transcribed interviews and depositions for the purposes of rule VII. First, no one knows whether the “temporary committee records” included, or did not include, raw surveillance footage of the Capitol, the West Portico, or the West Lawn from that day. Second, if the Committee really thought they could convict Trump of engaging in insurrection or rebellion, that one intent obliged them to preserve all records, and to consider all records, however trivial, permanent. If that was not according to House Rules as they then should, it should have been. On August 8, 2023, Loudermilk wrote to the Special Counsel to the President asking for the return of the records. There the case rests, until President Trump saw fit to mention it again last night. Preliminary analysis President Trump is correct: that case should be dismissed. Loss of allegedly incriminating evidence, either accidental or through deliberate and malicious destruction, is almost always grounds for directed acquittal. This holds especially in the absence of further incriminating evidence. But this Committee obviously had reason to destroy evidence, deliberately and maliciously. The evidence of other observers clearly indicates that the January 6 event was not an insurrection or a rebellion. First, a crowd a large as the estimated crowd for the rally on Constitution avenue would have had the strength of at least ten divisions of infantry, and possibly twenty. Such a force, if trained and even if unarmed, could have made short work of the Capitol Police. Even a single division of National Guardsmen, which Trump requested, couldn’t have handled them. And anyone planning insurrection would certainly have run in enough guns to achieve the objective. An armed force of even two divisions would have sufficed. Second, the evidence actually indicates a false-flag pseudo-operation. Then-Speaker Pelosi’s refusal to station a division of National Guardsmen on the day of the rally, clearly indicates her collusion. Ray “Into the Capitol!” Epps cannot explain his intemperate proposals as anything other than provocation. Finally we have the spectacle of Capitol Police firing rubber bullets at people – to get a rise out of them. If they were not trying to provoke them, their use of such munitions constituted gross negligence. More evidence to support Trump emerges This morning, at 10:32 a.m. EST, Trump shared a link to a new PDF file hosted here. The domain redirects to this campaign service center, offering “Software as a Service” for political or marketing campaigns. Why a file-sharing domain should redirect there, is not clear. The authorship of this report is less clear, because the document does not state authorship. As a precaution, CNAV has submitted it to the Wayback Machine for permanent archiving. The document appears well-sourced, with traceable references, many of which are hyperlinks. The sources include the Rumble channel “Georgia Ballots,” the site UncoverDC, and several legislative offices. This thirty-two-page document does make clear that: Procedures in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Michigan were highly irregular, to say the least. In many cases, chains of custody broke, something no Division of Elections should permit. All five States produced abrupt gains for Biden that violated any concept of the Law of Averages. In Georgia especially, several undervoted ballots made it into a “second machine count.” This kind of finding explains why Democrats did not pad their majority in the House, nor flip the Senate immediately. Dinesh D’Souza anticipated this very finding in his 2000 Mules documentary. CNAV repeats what it said then: One can well imagine that Nancy Pelosi wanted to strangle whoever organized such an effort and neglected to allow enough time for down-ticket voting. Gross negligence – and betrayal of Trump This paragraph especially excites the curiosity – and the ire – of your correspondent, giving his direct experience as an Officer of Election: None of the 315,000 votes cast during early voting in Fulton County were witnessed to and signed by the poll manager and two poll workers, as required by state election rules. The closing tapes for these votes are all unsigned, showed more tabulated votes than the tabulators had recorded as scanning in their protective counters, and recorded improbably low percentages for President Trump. For example, President Trump received only 0.9 percent, 2.4 percent, 3.7 percent from some of the tabulators, as if he was a third party candidate, or in a third world country. The anomalies indicate ballots were not scanned on the tabulators that printed the closing tapes, making the closing tapes fraudulent. What Chief Officer of Election ever closes a scanner-tabulator without running the tape and asking every member of his team to sign it? Your editor has worked elections in three precincts, and never once has any Chief been so negligent. And for this to happen at the Central Voting Precinct is unthinkable – and indeed inexcusable. But that wasn’t the only rule that election officials broke. That document refers to absentee ballots accepted and counted more than six months ahead of time. It also refers to absentee ballots sent to well-known cities located out-of-State, but with Georgia listed as the State. The ZIP Codes resolved out-of-State, though the document provided no specific examples. Worse yet, the report reveals that Attorney General Bill Barr ordered relevant United States Attorneys to stand down from investigating voter fraud in their States. This applied to Pennsylvania and Michigan. Finally, the report mentions donations that Mark Zuckerberg made to election officials in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan. Trump announced the release of this file in three Truths (one, two, three): Final analysis The evidence revealed today, and rediscovered yesterday, clearly supports the notion that Trump won the Election of 2020. At a minimum, the House of Representatives should not have accepted any Electoral College votes from the five Swing States. Instead the House of Representatives should have chosen the President by bloc vote, and Trump would surely have won. This report also shows that certain law-enforcement officers close to the President betrayed him. They took affirmative steps to hide the fraud others were discovering in at least two States. Brad “Riff Raff” Raffensperger had Georgia “covered,” though this report doesn’t mention that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyTOYNEjCTg RINO officials in Maricopa County, Arizona’s most populous, had Arizona similarly “covered.” And still do. One can readily see why Trump saw fit to accuse former Rep. Cheney of orchestrating the destruction of evidence. She has more likely conspired to do this with Chairman Thompson and all other members of the Committee. But Trump was concentrating on chicanery by RINOs, not Democrats. The most common thing any tyrant does is to throw off on his opposition. That’s what Democrats and RINOs alike did to President Trump. By extension they did this to the American people, too – calling more than half of us National Socialists. (Another flaw in leftists is their lack of irony.) Ideally this next election needs to use paper ballots, with paired-off Officers of Election hand-counting them. If this does not happen, vigilance will be the order of the day. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/02/foundation/constitution/trump-renews-call-dismiss-january-6-case/ Trump recalls the destruction of evidence: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111683296409531201 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/110857162338915853 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/110857555815063677 Letter demanding preservation of documents, courtesy of the Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20221130215255/https://republicanleader.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rep-Lead-Sharp-MFP_20221130_124326.pdf Two posts reporting on the letter: https://twitter.com/FarnoushAmiri/status/1598078908007559168 https://twitter.com/ryanobles/status/1598098087343697920 Collection at GovInfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/collection/january-6th-committee-final-report?path=/GPO/January%206th%20Committee%20Final%20Report%20and%20Supporting%20Materials%20Collection Swing State election fraud summary, direct and archived: https://cdn.nucleusfiles.com/e0/e04e630c-63ff-4bdb-9652-e0be3598b5d4/summary20of20election20fraud20in20the20swing20states.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20240102175411/https://cdn.nucleusfiles.com/e0/e04e630c-63ff-4bdb-9652-e0be3598b5d4/summary20of20election20fraud20in20the20swing20states.pdf Trump summarizes the summary article: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111687076142669367 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111687074741876048 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111687072771506848 Theme: “Underdog” v. “Riff-Raff the Fox”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyTOYNEjCTg 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

2024 – objectives for liberty By Terry A. Hurlbut Another year begins, and with it another assessment of the standing of human liberty, especially in America. This year is obviously the do-or-die year: the Presidential Election of 2024. The enemies of liberty know its importance; hence their efforts to disqualify President Donald J. Trump from reelection. But beyond that, CNAV has identified three more objectives that those who value their liberty must capture. If we do not, then we lose our liberties – for these objectives are the source of most of the attacks against ourselves, including our lives, liberty and property. Objectives begin with January 6 The January 6 Event began the most serious attacks – the ones resulting in wrongful arrests and imprisonments. Thankfully, a key January 6 case has already gone to the Supreme Court. Fischer v. United States, Docket No. 23-5572 (December 13, 2023). Joseph W. Fischer stands convicted of obstructing a Congressional proceeding, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 1512. So do many of his co-defendants. The particulars of his case seem very badly flawed. (For example, he gained entry into the Capitol after Congress had already recessed. What proceeding, then, was under way for him to obstruct?) But the “question presented” in that case is: does that statute apply when no criminal investigation, nor the gathering or preservation of evidence, was active or happening at the time? That question is directly relevant to one of Donald Trump’s cases – and to many others. If the Supreme Court rules in Fischer’s favor, this could empty out a few cellblocks and open the door to many wrongful-conviction or false-imprisonment lawsuits. That, in addition to destroying at least half of one of Trump’s cases. Evidence that could exonerate everyone This morning, the site Open Ink released an hour-long video, J6: A True Timeline. It contains information directly relevant to any January 6 prosecution. Its producer: A. J. Fischer, who might or might not be a relative of Joe Fischer. He heads an organization called Investigate J6 and also faces January 6 related charges. Nearly four months ago he shared a “less lethal timeline” with UncoverDC. It covers many allegations CNAV has covered before, including: 1. Removal of “snow fencing” that was allegedly supposed to demarcate a restricted area, and 2. The firing of rubber bullets at the heads of those who were still protesting peaceably. The first part constitutes entrapment; the second, provocation. Not only that, but the rubber bullets and other weapons could have been lethal, besides being provocative. Furthermore, at least one U.S. House member is tracking reports of two “ghost buses” that delivered people to Union Station, with instructions to blend into the crowd. All this to say: authorities have deliberately misled the public. Of course, many Biden supporters likely welcomed the misleading versions of events. Perhaps they know instinctively – but will never admit – that they need a story to justify their “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” and it is always better to quote others. The worst tendency of die-hard leftist rank-and-file, apart from special pleading, is offering, and standing by, hearsay evidence. Election interference Attempting to bar President Trump from the ballot is the most insultingly direct form of election interference. This has come, thus far, from Colorado and Maine. Last night, Victor Davis Hansen dropped a long-form post on X in protest. https://twitter.com/VDHanson/status/1741663468728799534 Hansen warned that Republicans could retaliate just as easily: We can see where the ultimate trajectory of this usurpation is going—once a single official decides to remove the leading primary and general election candidate of the opposition from the ballot by fiat. Tit-for-tat will likely follow and would unwind the republic. This morning Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit called on Hansen to admit that Republicans haven’t retaliated in the past. This despite far more extensive and obvious provocation. For evidence, Hoft cited, among other things: • Spying on Trump and his family by FBI and Justice Department operatives – with no accountability. • Divisions of election in seven States abruptly suspending their ballot counts during the Election of 2020. They then produced hundreds of thousands of votes for Biden. This resulted in the infamous “stairstep curve” of votes for Biden, against a smooth curve for Trump. • The denial by the Supreme Court to take up the case of Texas v. Pennsylvania. • Locking out Republican accredited challengers during the count in several major cities. • The Atlanta Suitcase Scandal. Here the real scandal is in scanning ballots more than once. The real problem in Georgia is that its election system has been corrupt since long before the Election of 2020. And this corruption is likely to continue for the foreseeable future. Georgia voters have their own set of problems. But their solution – and the likely solution nationwide – lies in voting on paper, and counting the paper ballots. Highest of the objectives: the concept of public health But by far the most important of the objectives – the one that probably set up the other two – is the very concept of “public health.” Yesterday afternoon, Jack Davis at The Western Journal covered an obscure interview that took place between Francis Collins, M.D., former Director of the National Institutes of Health, and activist “Wilk” Wilkinson. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1eAvh1sWiw Dr. Collins was the nominal superior of Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID). In this role Dr. Fauci behaved as if he were Capo di tutti i capi di stato maggiore di tutti gli ospedali americani. (Translation: Chief of All Chiefs of Staff of American Hospitals.) More to the point, Fauci recommended lockdown as the strategy to combat the 2019 Corona Virus Disease (COVID-19). But this summer, Dr. Collins confessed that lockdowns were a mistake. And how did the medical establishment come to make that mistake? By “putting public health bureaucrats in charge,” to quote Davis paraphrasing Collins. The most important confession: the public-health bureaucrats were thinking only of preventing large numbers of death in a city. Cities concentrate people, and, in theory, viruses can spread like wildfire – or fire in any building. So you attach infinite value to stopping the disease and saving a life. You attach zero value to whether this actually totally disrupts people’s lives, ruins the economy, and has many kids kept out of school in a way that they never quite recover from. So, yeah, collateral damage. No meat wagons Add to it that never did COVID-19 produce the kind of nightmare scenario Dr. Collins said he and his colleagues sought to prevent. This did not happen even in the big cities. Does anyone remember seeing “meat wagons” rolling slowly down residential streets or apartment-complex or “Project” driveways? Does anyone remember voices on bullhorns blaring, “Brrrrinnnng ouuuuttt you’re deadddddd!”? Of course we don’t remember that – because no such thing ever happened. But for at least two years, beginning with the year of the election, we heard, “Either lock down, or see the meat wagons! Your choice!” Yes, like Chief Justice John Roberts angrily pointing toward a conference-room window everyone knew overlooked First Avenue Southeast, though it was probably draped, and haranguing his colleagues: “If you want to see riots on that street, take this Texas case! If not, not! Simple as!” And we know what Justice Clarence Thomas wistfully said in reply: “Then that’s the end of democracy, John.” But what we didn’t hear was Justice Samuel A. Alito saying, “Let it be riots, then! John, you’re asking us to lay aside our judicial robes and pretend to be a Commission of Public Safety doing something expedient. We are the Morality Corps of our society, and our mission is justice, not expediency!” Sadly, Justice Alito didn’t say that at a critical moment – though he said something like it in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, more than a year later. How to prevent a recurrence Jack Davis quoted plenty of others who had a few choice words for Dr. Collins. Jay Bhattacharya (incidentally a named plaintiff in Missouri v. Biden) offered this: https://twitter.com/DrJBhattacharya/status/1741260686234415121 The Wall Street Journal’s editors reminded everyone of the Great Barrington Declaration, which called for a targeted response, sheltering the elderly and most vulnerable while letting society go on. This is how the Swedes weathered what everyone said was a storm, but was no more than a fresh breeze. And Rich Lowry at The National Review reminded everyone that Dr. Collins is saying now what would have gotten people punished two years earlier. Not too long ago, anyone who said that epidemiologists might be overly focused on disease prevention to the exclusion of other concerns — you know, like jobs, mental health, and schooling — were dismissed as reckless nihilists who didn’t care if their fellow citizens died en masse. In short, the bullies conjured up visions of the meat wagons – and yet never did any meat wagons roll. But in truth only one thing can stop this from happening again. And that is to encourage every individual to fortify himself against infection – and stop assuming that no defense other than lockdowns will suffice against any new pathogen. In fact, as free people we need to prepare to take our chances even with a recurrence of Yersinia pestis. (And “fortification” does not include artificial active acquired immunity – vaccination. It means encouraging the development of a robust immune system that can handle any challenge.) In short, the very concept of “public health” is now suspect. It has become yet another excuse to curtail human liberty. Positive objectives – encourage self-reliance and individual strength Not all objectives in the war to reclaim liberty must be – or even can be – negative. The positive objectives all concern building up one’s own strength. In the context of criminality (and, to a lesser extent, foreign attack), this leads to the recognition of self-defense. That includes recognizing the right to keep and bear arms, and encouraging individuals to keep and bear arms. And to use them responsibly. But now we see another context: the public-health context, in this case involving infectious disease. Some diseases we can defeat through responsible practices involving direct – especially intimate – contact. Others we have defeated before through cleanliness, applied on either an individual scale or a grand scale. For a handful of others, individuals can fortify their immune systems, through several ways, all easy to discover. (And again: this does not include vaccination. Tellingly, 231 current and former service members want to see some courts-martial over forced vaccination in the military.) https://twitter.com/BradMiller1010/status/1741748064883282387 Why are these positive objectives important? Because the same architects of January 6, election interference, and the COVID-19 “public health” debacle, rely on people being weak. They prefer a population of wimps. Wimps cannot be free in any case; their “wimpiness” is their chain. Psychological chains can also exist – and are the excuse for censorship. So the achievement of these objectives for freedom amount to a New Year’s Resolution for Liberty: I resolve to strengthen and harden myself as a target, whether of criminals, invaders, infectious agents, or the puerile barbs of my fellow dwellers on this Earth. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2024/01/01/foundation/constitution/2024-objectives-liberty/ Fischer v. United States, docket: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-5572.html J6 True Timeline video: https://open.ink/collections/j6 Victor Davis Hanson’s post: https://twitter.com/VDHanson/status/1741663468728799534 Interview between Francis Collins, M.D., and “Wilk” Wilkinson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1eAvh1sWiw Jay Bhattacharya’s indignant response: https://twitter.com/DrJBhattacharya/status/1741260686234415121 The Wall Street Journal editorial: https://www.wsj.com/articles/francis-collins-covid-lockdowns-braver-angels-anthony-fauci-great-barrington-declaration-f08a4fcf The National Review editorial: https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/12/francis-collinss-covid-confession/ Post about the Declaration of Military Accountability: https://twitter.com/BradMiller1010/status/1741748064883282387 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

2023 – year of war By Terry A. Hurlbut As 2023 draws to a close, war continues in Ukraine, and has broken out in the Middle East. Whether civil war will break out in the United States, will depend on the 2024 Presidential election – and not only who wins it, but how. War in Ukraine The war in Ukraine is winding down. The Ukraine government is conscripting men who in any other context would be considered over-age. Russian forces continue to tighten their hold on the Donbas and the Crimea – regions filled with ethnic Russians. These people want reunion with Russia, and nothing is going to stop that. The only remaining question is, how much of the rest of Ukraine will Russia take back? (And, how much does Russia want back?) For patriotic Americans, the worst consequences of the Russia-Ukraine War are these: • American forces are running out of ammunition – because our government has shipped it to Ukraine, in a futile gesture. • Volodymyr Zelensky presumes to say Americans will fight and die in central Europe if he goes down. • One of the “small fry” Republican candidates for President would like to send Americans to fight and die in Europe. And it’s not Ron DeSantis. Who it actually is, likely proves why, perhaps, a woman might not make a suitable President. Israel at war all over again On October 7, 2023, the Islamic Resistance Movement (Arabic Harakah al-Muqāwamah al-Islāmiyyah, abbreviated HAMAS), together with some willing irregulars, started the Fourth Arab-Israeli War with an incredible series of atrocities. The Israel Defense Forces have responded by carefully digging HAMAS out, one tunnel at a time. (And one weapons cache at a time, usually associated with hospitals and schools.) But this conflict has split American political coalitions, on both the left and the right. American Jews have always taken the side of the political left – right up to the time Gentile leftists turned against them and actually denied – or else, incredibly, excused – the HAMAS atrocities. On the right, the Dispensational-Covenantal Dispute has escalated to a fresh level of vitriol. The conflict seemed to spread even to the iconic Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade. Antisemitism has broken out in many American universities, almost all of them among the elite. This has caused many “boosters” to stop “boosting” the universities where this is happening. That’s only one of the consequences such antisemitism is now having – at least one university president has already resigned. (Another one hasn’t resigned – yet – but the “corporation” that decided to support her is facing its own pressures as faculty members call on “corporation fellows” to resign also.) President Joe Biden seems able to please no one. Jews dismiss his support for Israel as tepid at best – and Arabs resent any degree of support for Israel. Civil conflict in America? America has seen many actions the like of which one sees only in banana republics. Federal authorities have formally arrested a former President three times. At least one State Supreme Court and one other Secretary of State refused to list him on primary ballots. This suggests that the Democrats know they cannot win in 2024 as they won in 2020 – by whatever means. Joe Biden is polling lower than Donald Trump – something he never did in 2020. (Neither did Hillary Clinton do it in 2016.) Commentators are offering no shortage of reasons for Biden’s numbers being in the tank. Evidence is now accumulating that Joe Biden did not win his election honestly. At least 17 percent of voters surveyed admitted taking part in activities some might consider fraudulent. One possible culprit in that election is not the Biden campaign, but a (nominally) Republican Secretary of State. Georgia politics turns out to be thoroughly compromised by a corrupt “RINO” establishment. That compromise has extended to Georgia elections – and Secretary of State Brad “Riff Raff” Raffensperger turns out to be an equal-opportunity offender. (Now he demands millions of dollars to fix a problem he refuses to fix until after the 2024 elections.) In the Supreme Court The United States Supreme Court finished its 2022 term with more decisions generally favorable to human liberty. It also illustrated the division of the Court into three blocs – originalists, moderate conservatives, and liberals. Each member of the Liberal Bloc broke Court decorum at least once: • Jackson in SFFA v. Harvard/UNC (discriminatory Diversity, Equity and Inclusion admissions to college), • Sotomayor in 303 Creative v. Elenis (religious conscience in artistic expression in contracted services), and • Kagan in Biden v. Nebraska (forgiveness of student loans). Which is not to say that every decision of the Supreme Court was 6-3 for originalism. One decision, reining in an out-of-control quasi-legislative, quasi-judicial executive agency, was effectively unanimous. Another went the Liberal way after the petitioner “blew” his case. None of the decisions in the 2022 Term touched on gun control. But the weight of the Bruen decision from the 2021 Term, and the number of other conservative-favorable decisions in the term completed this summer, prompted a gun-grabbing State governor to take a drastic step. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) wants an Article V Constitutional Convention to achieve virtual repeal of the Second Amendment. Current Supreme Court jurisprudence In the current Supreme Court term, freedom of speech is on the line. The case of Missouri v. Biden, which hasn’t even come to trial, is now before the Supreme Court. At issue are the multiple decisions by social-media platforms to “play ball” with the Deep State. Did the government leave them no choice? Or rather: do users have recourse when their platform, willingly or unwillingly, cooperates with the government to shut them up? The Court is also examining the abortifacient compound, mifepristone (formerly “Roussel-UCLAF Lot 486”). This compound threatens to render meaningless the distinction between “abortion tourist traps” and the safe havens for unborn children that several “red States” have lately chosen to become. Abortions are occurring less frequently but not that less frequently. This confirms CNAV’s initial impression after Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Which is: the country needs a Second Great Awakening. The Court proved that when it declined a case giving it a chance to declare a fundamental right to life. Gun control will also come before the Court, in the form of several cases from States who seem bent on defying the Court openly. But by far the most striking case the Court has taken, involves a January 6 defendant. It involves the most common charge leveled against those defendants, other than insurrection, which the prosecution seems to know it could never prove. If the Court decides this case for the petitioner, it could lead to a lot of instant releases – and malicious-prosecution lawsuits. Looking ahead A group calling itself the Transition Integrity Project played out four scenarios, including one that could have provoked civil war. Or so they seemed to say, though whether they fully thought the matter through is far from clear. What is clear is that Democrats seem bent on provoking civil war in America. Moves to deny Trump ballot access – and even refuse to count write-in votes for him – have some leftists already hemming, hawing, and demurring. That hasn’t stopped them all, however – and that might prove an even more important Supreme Court case. In any case, the left and right have drawn several clear battle lines. One can hope that those on the right have the imagination Trump didn’t have in 2020. For they must be twice as smart as the political left – anticipate their moves, and plan how to defeat them. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/31/editorial/talk/war-year-2023/ 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/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/