This Is A Reminder

This is another reminder that Section 702 needs to be unauthorized instead of approved by April 19.

On Monday, Just the News posted the following:

Conservative lawmakers are calling for an end to warrantless surveillance of Americans ahead of a House floor vote on Wednesday to reauthorize the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

The bill, titled the “Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act,” would extend section 702 of FISA, which “authorizes the targeted collection of foreign intelligence information from non-U.S. persons located abroad,” according to the FBI.

Conservative Republicans and some Democrats such as Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, have teamed up to push for a warrant requirement as a condition for reauthorizing FISA. However, the legislation up for a vote on Wednesday does not include a warrant requirement in its current form. 

“No matter how hard the deep state cries, Congress must NOT reauthorize FISA 702 without requiring a warrant to search U.S. citizens,” wrote Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, on X.

“The SAFE Act contains a warrant requirement, the Lee-Leahy reforms, language ensuring that our Fourth Amendment rights can’t be bought and sold, and a handful of other protections necessary to protect Americans’ privacy,” he also wrote.

The article concludes:

The Brennan Center for Justice and other organizations wrote a letter on April 5 urging lawmakers to vote in favor of amendments to the bill up for a vote that will require a warrant.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner, R-Ohio, a proponent of the legislation up for a vote on Wednesday, predicted the bill will pass.

“I think it will,” Turner said Sunday on CNN. “I think that those who mischaracterize this are small compared to those who understand that this goes to the heart of our ability to get intelligence. It allows us to be able to keep Americans safe. This is not a warrantless surveillance of Americans.”

Biggs argued that the bill Turner supports is “very modest, very incremental” and does not contain significant reforms to Section 702.

“Quite frankly, it’s going to be who’s watching the henhouse. It’s going to be the FBI still watching the henhouse,” he said. 

It has become obvious that the people in charge cannot be trusted with warrantless surveillance. Let’s not give them the right to do warrantless surveillance.

I Know Things Are Getting Strange When I Agree With The ACLU

The following statement is posted at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) website:

Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the U.S. government engages in mass, warrantless surveillance of Americans’ and foreigners’ phone calls, text messages, emails, and other electronic communications. Information collected under the law without a warrant can be used to prosecute and imprison people, even for crimes that have nothing to do with national security. Given our nation’s history of abusing its surveillance authorities, and the secrecy surrounding the program, we should be concerned that Section 702 is and will be used to disproportionately target disfavored groups, whether minority communities, political activists, or even journalists.

Section 702 is set to expire at the end of 2023. We call on Congress to significantly reform the law, or allow it to sunset.

The phone number of the Congressional switchboard is (202) 224-3121.

Congress Needs To Say “No”

Congress has until April 19th to reauthorize  Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This is the law that allows warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens. It was passed after 9/11 in the hope that it would make America more secure from terrorist attacks. Instead it has been used as a political weapon to move America toward Banana Republic status.

On Monday, The Conservative Review posted an article about Section 702.

The article notes:

The FBI is attempting to rehabilitate the public image of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act as Congress has until April 19 to reauthorize it. The bureau recently posted a video to X that features FBI Director Christopher Wray attempting to put a gloss on Section 702 as part of this monthslong campaign.

The bureau’s timely propaganda did not escape the attention of critics on X, where the post received a community note that read, “The FBI violated American citizens’ 4A rights 278,000 times with illegal, unauthorized FISA 702 searches.”

Among the critics was Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who wrote, “FBI just got called out in a community note on X. Congress — take note. FISA 702 has been used for warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of times. Yet FBI demands 702 be reauthorized by April 19 WITHOUT a warrant requirement for searches of U.S. citizens.”

“Many in Congress will want to reauthorize FISA 702 — which is set to expire April 19th — either without modification or (more likely) with fake reforms that fail to impose a warrant requirement for searches directed at Americans,” added the senator.

The article notes:

In his March 11 testimony, Wray stated, “The FISA Court itself most recently found 98% compliance and commented on the reforms working. The most recent Justice Department report found the reforms working, 99% compliance. And so, I think legislation that ensures those reforms stay in place but also preserves the agility and the utility of the tools, what we need to be able to protect the American people.”

The FBI’s March 25 social post containing an excerpt from Wray’s testimony was not well-received.

Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) wrote, “The FBI was correctly called out in a community note for lying about its unconstitutional, warrantless surveillance of Americans. Congress must eliminate FISA abuse and protect the American people’s privacy.”

Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R) tweeted, “The FBI has been corrected in community notes and rightfully so.”

FBI whistlelower Steve Friend reiterated that the FBI “violated constitutional rights and abused FISA Section 702 over 278,000 times in a single year.”

The article concludes:

“While only foreigners overseas may be targeted, the program sweeps in massive amounts of Americans’ communications, which may be searched without a warrant. Even after implementing compliance measures, the FBI still conducted more than 200,000 warrantless searches of Americans’ communications in just one year — more than 500 warrantless searches per day,” said Durbin.

Durbin figured this legislation would make reauthorizing Section 702 palatable.

Section 702 needs to go away. We have seen that there is too much temptation for those in power to misuse the law to target their political opponents.

The Stealing Begins

There are a lot of ways to steal an election–you can do it electronically, you can do it with mail-in ballots, you can do it with basic voter fraud, or you can be subtle and do it by going in to places that you know will vote the way you want them to and paying people to register those voters and get them to the polls. Right now, that is the preferred method.

On Saturday, The Federalist reported:

With a little over seven months until Election Day, “Bidenbucks” are ramping up where Team Biden’s sweeping taxpayer-funded get-out-the-vote order is most needed. Meanwhile, a federal judge has stopped a Bidenbucks complaint described as “the MOST important election integrity lawsuit in the country.”

The Michigan Department of State recently announced a signed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the U.S. Small Business Administration “to promote civic engagement and voter registration in Michigan.” The agreement, according to Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and SBA Administrator Isabel Casillas Guzman is a “first-of-its-kind collaboration” for the federal agency. It is expected to run through Jan. 1, 2036. That is, if legal challenges can’t stop the apparently unconstitutional “understanding.” 

“Small businesses are the lifeblood of our economy. Like voting, they play a direct role in improving people’s lives,” the swing state’s leftist secretary of state, who fancies herself as a defender of democracy, said in a press release. “I’m proud we are working with the Small Business Administration for this first-in-the-nation effort connecting Michigan’s small business community with the tools and information they need to play an even greater active role in our democracy.” 

First of all, we are a representative republic–not a democracy.

The article concludes:

“…Plaintiffs have alleged only an institutional injury resulting from ‘a general loss of legislative power,’” the judge wrote in her decision. “A vague, generalized allegation that elections, generally, will be undermined, is not the type of case or controversy that this court may rule on under Article III.” 

But there’s nothing vague or generalized about the effects of Biden’s voter registration executive order that serves as a federal government-funded GOTV campaign for Democrats. 

As the lawsuit notes, the executive fiat requires all federal agencies to “identify and partner with specified partisan third party organizations,” “distribute voter registration and vote-by-mail ballot application forms,” “assist applicants in completing voter registration and vote-by-mail ballot application forms,” and “solicit third-party organizations.” It also “directs state officials to provide voter registration services on agency premises.” 

All of it is being done without congressional approval or appropriation. Meanwhile, the Biden administration refuses to release records on the initiative, raising the question: What does Team Biden have to hide? 

There will be more of this activity as November approaches.

 

Waiting For The Constitutional Challenge

On Wednesday, The Federalist posted an article about the new red flag law the Biden administration recently announced. The article notes that this law is unconstitutional. We all want to limit gun violence, but we need to find a way to do it without infringing on peoples’ constitutional rights.

The article reports:

On Saturday, Vice President Kamala Harris touted the administration’s new National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center, which will “support the effective implementation of state red flag laws” and “keep guns out of the hands of people who pose a threat to themselves or others.” But there is a problem: Congress never authorized the U.S. Department of Justice to create this resource center. The administration confuses “grants … to implement state … mental health courts, drug courts, veterans’ courts, and extreme risk protection order programs” with creating an entirely new center for one of these areas.

This isn’t the first time the Biden administration has gone beyond what the law allows and done more harm than good.

The Department of Justice press release claims that Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs, also known as red flag laws) will “reduce firearm homicides and suicides.” Surveys show likely voters support laws that “allow guns to be temporarily confiscated by a judge from people considered by a judge to be a danger to themselves or others” by at least 2-1 margins.

If we truly want to curb gun violence, let’s work toward building stronger families with two parents who live together and raise their children together. Let’s make a decision to value life in all its stages–neither killing the unborn or advising euthanasia for the elderly or infirm. The guns are not the problem–mental illness and the devaluing of life are the problem.

Following The Science?

On Friday, Just the News posted an article about some recent comments by Representative. Cori Bush, D-Mo, about the causes of recent problems with the American electric grid.

The article reports:

A House Oversight and Accountability subcommittee hearing Tuesday examined threats to the security and reliability of the U.S. electricity grid, which can lead to more blackouts.

While reliability assessments regularly find that increased reliance on wind and solar, increased demand from electrification, an underbuilt electrical delivery network, and rapid retirements of on-demand generators are creating an increased risk of blackouts, Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo., ranking member of the subcommittee, instead blamed other sources of the problem, namely, white supremacy. She also threw in “climate change” for good measure.

The article notes:

Fallon (Pat Fallon, R-Texas, chairman of the Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Energy Policy and Regulatory Affairs) also talked about threats from cyberattacks by “foreign adversaries” meant to cripple the grid. “It’s critically important for Congress to engage in serious discussions to identify the risks to this reliability and safeguard our grid against threats,” Fallon said.

He said many of these risks are caused by the federal government, including the attempts to get rid of all fossil fuels, which he said are needed for providing consistent power generations. He also pointed to regulations that are increasing demands on the grid, including more electrification of appliances and heat, as well as electric vehicle mandates.

Bush, in her opening statement, argued that the problems of electricity reliability were unrelated to wind and solar. Fossil fuels, Bush said, were the problem, and they were especially harming non-white people.

“Decades of pollution and overuse and over reliance on fossil fuels have disproportionately harmed black and brown communities in St. Louis, and throughout the world,” Bush said.

If we truly want to know what the problem is with our electric grid, we only have to look to Germany and Spain–both countries attempted to build an energy infrastructure based solely on green energy, and both countries discovered that was not possible. The sun does not shine all of the time, and the wind does not blow all of the time. Reliable back-up sources of energy are needed. It is time to take an honest look at natural gas and nuclear energy as the path forward to lowering pollution. It is also time to acknowledge that although America needs to make an effort in the direction of cleaner energy, until China and India stop building coal plants, our efforts are insignificant.

Shades Of The Patriot Act

On Thursday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article about HR7521, the proverbial “TikToK Ban Law.” The article notes that the justification Congress is giving for supporting this law is very similar to the justification for passing the Patriot Act. We see how that has turned out.

The article reports:

First, the context that should matter (it doesn’t because the USIC are in charge here) is that every element that preceded the passage of the Patriot Act is being duplicated in the passage of the TikTok ban.  Which is to say, everyone is deferring to this ridiculous need to support USA National Security.

We The People have been burned by this approach before, yet so many refuse to see the similarity.

Second, the essential shield for those who support the bill [READ HR7521] comes down to the term “Foreign Adversary”, which is defined in the bill as Russia, China, North Korea and Iran.  As they make the case, TikTok ban advocates cite the content or platform of the issue must originate from, and/or be controlled by, a foreign adversary…. so quit worrying.

However, the legislative language cites Foreign Adversary Controlled Application (FACA), which applies to content providers, apps, websites, social media and hosting platforms.  This is where things get sketchy, because “under the direction of” is language that is included in the legislation, and the determinations of “at the direction of” are made by the Attorney General.

If the content, platform, website, or social media app generates content that is considered a national security threat, and providing information therein that is deemed to be under the control of a “foreign adversary,” it is the content within, not necessarily the platform ownership itself, that transfers compliance inquiry to the U.S government (DOJ Attorney General) for definitions.

If, for example, a U.S. company (think Twitter or CTH) is deemed to be providing information that is controlled by Russia, or actors who participate in the platform content on behalf of Russia (expand your FARA thinking here), then the U.S. or non-Foreign Adversary designation, may result in review subject to the terms of service as created and defined by the DOJ. In this example, the “Foreign Adversary” designation is simply a nose under the tent.

The DOJ, through this act, essentially becomes the overarching determination of terms of service (TOS) that can supersede the TOS of the platform or website.  Want to fight the definition or determination… prepare to spend big money fighting a battle exclusively in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, as that’s the only place you can appeal the determination of the govt.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Remember When Patriots Ran Congress?

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about a recent vote taken in the Senate.

The article reports:

None of Democrats’ witnesses in a congressional hearing Tuesday could say resolutely that they believe only citizens should be able to vote in a federal election.

During a Senate Judiciary Hearing on the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee asked the witnesses to provide a basic “yes” or “no” answer to a series of questions about non-citizens voting.

“Do you believe that only citizens of the United States should be able to vote in federal elections?” Lee asked each of the witnesses.

“We don’t have a position about non-citizens voting in federal elections, we believe that’s what the current laws are, and so we’re certainly fighting for everyone who is eligible under current law to vote,” Executive Director of The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Damon T. Hewitt said.

“That’s a decision of the state law but I want to emphasize –” President of Southwest Voter Registration Education Project Lydia Camarillo said.

“It’s a decision of state law as to who should vote in federal elections?” Lee interjected.

“States decide who gets to vote in various elections, and in federal elections I believe that we should be encouraging people to naturalize and then vote,” Camarillo said.

“Okay but you’re saying that the federal government should have no say in who votes in a federal election?” Lee pressed.

“I don’t have a position on that,” Camarillo responded.

The article concludes:

The John Lewis Voting Rights Act seeks to federalize all elections by stripping states and local jurisdictions from making changes to their elections without approval from federal bureaucrats. If the legislation is passed, the U.S. Justice Department could essentially take over an election if its left-wing allies claim minority voters are being harmed by something as simple as requiring an ID or proving citizenship to vote.

A federal judge recently ruled Arizona’s law requiring individuals to prove U.S. citizenship in order to vote in a statewide election is not discriminatory and could proceed after leftists lodged a series of suits.

“Arizona’s interests in preventing non-citizens from voting and promoting public confidence in Arizona’s elections outweighs the limited burden voters might encounter when required to provide” proof of citizenship, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled.

The potential for mischief under the John Lewis Voting Rights Act is endless. Just for the record, there is no reason for non-citizens to vote in American elections–they have no skin in the game. If things go bad in America, they can simply go home.

When The Numbers Just Don’t Add Up

Issues & Insights posted an article Monday about President Biden’s claims in his State of the Union address about the taxes the wealthy pay versus the taxes he thinks the wealthy should pay. The bottom line is ‘simply hang on to your wallet no matter how much you make,’ but the article refutes some of his claims.

The article reports:

First, consider his claim that the tax rate paid by billionaires is 8.2%. That plays well with soak-the-rich leftists. But where did he get this number?

Not from the IRS. It calculates the actual tax rate that various income groups pay, including the ultra-rich. Its data show that the 400 people with the biggest incomes in America were paying an average tax rate of more than 23%. Congress’ Joint Committee on Taxation figures that the tax rate on the top 0.4% of families is 26%.

So where does Biden come up with an 8.2% tax rate? He changes the definition of taxable income to include all unrealized gains from investments.

If you have money in the stock market, any gains in the value of those stocks would count as income to Biden, even if you don’t sell the stock. Presumably so would any gains in the value of your home. Or the value of any other assets you possess.

By artificially inflating income, Biden can make their tax burden seem tiny. 

The idea of taxing unrealized gains — in other words, extending the income tax to things that aren’t income — could very well be unconstitutional in addition to being economically reckless.

Just for the record, Americans are already taxed on unrealized gains–every year we pay a real estate tax on what the city or county assesses is the value of our house. We haven’t sold our house. The only actual gain from our house is having a place to live, yet every year we pay taxes on it.

The article concludes:

What about his claim that taxing the wealth — not the income — of billionaires would raise $500 billion?

Sounds like a lot, doesn’t it? Except Biden is hoping nobody notices the caveat — that it’s $500 billion over 10 years. In other words, $50 billion a year.

Even that might sound like a lot … until you put it in context.

That $50 billion wouldn’t even cover one month’s worth of interest payments on the national debt, which was $69.2 billion in January.

It wouldn’t even pay half of the increase in the deficit in the first five months of this year compared with last year. (The deficit from October through February was $830 billion, which is up $108 billion from the same months the year before.)

The idea that an extra $50 billion could finance a new childcare entitlement, paid leave, and home care isn’t just ludicrous, it’s insane.

We don’t expect Biden to know or understand what he’s reading on the teleprompter, but shame on anyone else for believing the lies he’s spewing.

Someone needs to explain the Laffer Curve to the Biden administration.

The Unmentioned Impact Of Illegal Immigration

In February, I posted an article explaining how an Executive Order signed by President Biden in January 2021 allowed non-citizens to be counted in the census. Allowing non-citizens to be counted changes the number of representatives in Congress and the Electoral College in states that have large illegal alien populations. This distorts the representation of American citizens by giving people who are here illegally equal representation in Congress. If they are here illegally, they are not entitled to representation, and when they are given representation, it skews the representation of American citizens.

Some in Congress are attempting to fix this problem.

On March 8, Senator Bill Hagerty posted the following statement:

United States Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN) today released the following statement after the vote on his amendment barring illegal immigrants from being counted on the census:

“Today I forced Chuck Schumer to hold a vote on whether illegal aliens should be counted for determining the number of congressional seats and electoral votes each state gets. Democrats’ unanimous opposition to this commonsense measure confirms that they’re using illegal aliens and sanctuary cities to increase their political power. With this vote, Senate Democrats chose to trample on the rights of each American’s voice. I will continue to fight and press this issue in the Senate.”

Senate Democrats unanimously voted against the measure.

Who’s Idea Was This?

On Mondays, Newsweek posted the following headline:

US to Sell Off Entire Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve

The article reports:

The sale of the Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve is among the provisions intended to raise funds in one of six bills setting out appropriations for some federal departments this year after Congress narrowly avoided another shutdown last week.

Under a bill providing funding for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for the fiscal year, a million barrels of the government’s strategic reserve of petroleum would be sold off—the same amount as in the NGSR, which is located in New York Harbor, Boston, Massachusetts and South Portland, Maine.

“Upon the complete of such sale, the Secretary [of Energy] shall carry out the closure of the Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve,” the bill states, and “may not establish any new regional petroleum product reserve unless funding of the proposed regional petroleum product reserve is explicitly requested in advance in an annual budget.”

…Congress is expected to pass the package, which is the result of cross-party negotiations, with votes set to take place this week. Negotiations on a further six spending bills continue.

This is reckless. What part of ‘Gasoline Supply Reserve’ does Congress not understand? This is not to be used to fund America, this is supposed to be used in case of emergency. If the government truly wants to reduce the deficit, they need to look at the amount of land the government controls that could easily be sold without endangering national security.

Government Intrusion Into The Election Process

On Tuesday, The Daily Signal posted an article about the collaboration between the federal government and left-leaning get-out-the-vote organizations.

The article reports:

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is working with a left-wing advocacy group to boost voter turnout as part of President Joe Biden’s executive order directing federal agencies to get involved in elections.

The USDA worked directly with Demos, a New York-based group that helped draft Biden’s Executive Order 14019, according to records obtained by The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project. (The Daily Signal is Heritage’s news outlet.) 

Biden signed his order on agencies and voter registration in March 2021. On Aug. 9, 2021, Demos’ Adam Lioz emailed USDA officials, many in the office of Secretary Tom Vilsack, under the subject line: “Demos Meeting on Voting Rights EO.”

“Team USDA, with apologies for the delay, I wanted to follow up and thank you all for all your time and a productive conversation,” wrote Lioz, who was Demos’ senior counsel and political director before departing in September 2021. “As we noted, we’ll have our ‘best practices’ slides ready in the next 1-2 weeks and in the meantime, y’all had asked for data on voter registration at the state level, which I’ve pasted below.” 

Just for the record, the Hatch Act of 1939 prohibits civil servants in the Executive Branch of government (except the President and Vice-President) from engaging in some forms of political activity. The goal of the law is to stop the federal government from affecting elections or going about its activities in a partisan manner.

The article concludes:

Biden’s initiative includes the Department of Homeland Security’s registration of voters during naturalization ceremonies, the Department of Education’s promotion of voting at high schools and colleges, and agencies’ work with private, nonprofit organizations to increase voter turnout. 

Many congressional Republicans have joined government watchdog groups in expressing concern about agencies’ engaging in partisan political activity under Biden’s executive order, in violation of laws such as the Hatch Act. 

The records obtained by Heritage’s Oversight Project include the USDA’s directions to employees on how to avoid violating the Hatch Act. 

Neither the Department of Agriculture nor Demos responded to inquiries from The Daily Signal before publication of this report. 

The effort to steal the 2024 election has already begun.

An Executive Order That Will Impact The 2024 Election

Under American law, non-citizens are not allowed to vote in federal elections. In some areas, non-citizens are allowed to vote in local elections, but that is somewhat limited. Unfortunately, due to an Executive Order signed by President Biden in January 2021, non-citizens and illegal immigrants will have an influence on our presidential and Congressional elections.

On Thursday, Fox News reported the following:

Immigration experts are raising the alarm about how the increasing flow of migrants illegally crossing into the U.S. may significantly impact states’ representation in the House of Representatives and Electoral College.

Shortly after taking office in January 2021, President Biden signed an executive order requiring that the U.S. Census Bureau factor in all residents, including noncitizens, as part of its decennial calculation of the U.S. population. As a result, the apportionment of House seats and, therefore, electoral votes for presidential elections, could be swayed as migrants continue to pour over the southern border.

“Illegal immigration has all kinds of effects and among them is that it distorts the mechanics of democratic government,” Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, told Fox News Digital in an interview. “Illegal immigrants aren’t even supposed to be here, so their inclusion in the census count for purposes of apportionment really is outrageous.”

“There are a lot of close votes in Congress, more than there used to be. So, it can, in fact, make a difference,” Krikorian said. “It shouldn’t be a question of: Does this give you personally more influence in Washington? The question should be: Is it right? Is it healthy for our democratic process to be distorted this way? The answer is no.”

The next President can overturn this order if he chooses to. Vote carefully.

Congress Actually Listened To The People!

The text of the border bill crafted by the Senate was released Sunday night. People who read the bill quickly pointed out that the bill did not secure the border and it provided more money for Ukraine than the annual budget of the Marine Corps. The Speaker of the House Mike Johnson declared the bill dead on arrival (as it should have been).

This was Stephen Miller’s Twitter post:

Well, the uproar has had an impact on Congress.

On Monday, Breitbart reported:

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) made the shocking decision to recommend Republicans block the advancement of the Senate pro-migration border bill.

That first procedural vote was set for Wednesday. It is unknown if Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) will forge ahead, although that is likely.

McConnell cited the overwhelming number of Senate Republicans planning to vote against the measure either on substance or because they wanted more time, according to Punchbowl News.

The longtime Republican leader has spoken in favor of the deal and did not express any personal hesitations about the legislation to his colleagues.

According to Punchbowl, McConnell said the political mood in the country has changed since negotiations began months ago. At that time, McConnell and Democrat leaders agreed to pair foreign aid to Ukraine, of which McConnell is the Senate’s greatest champion, with a border compromise.

If you believe McConnell’s explanation, I have a bridge to sell you. The real reason McConnell changed his mind is that it is February of an election year and McConnell is afraid that the voters might remember his support for this awful bill. The sole purpose of this bill is to legalize as many illegal aliens as possible before November so that they can be Democrat voters. Why McConnell was willing to go along with that, I don’t know.

What Is The Penalty For A U.S. Citizen?

An American who is arrested for Driving Under the Influence faces jail time, losing his license, and heavy fines. What should the penalty be for a person who is here illegally who is arrested for Driving Under the Influence?

On Thursday, The Conservative Review reported that 150 Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives voted against a measure to state that aliens who drive “while intoxicated or impaired” are inadmissible and, if convicted of such an offense, deportable. How in the world would voting against the measure keep Americans safe?

The article reports:

In a bipartisan 274-150 vote, the House of Representatives passed a measure on Thursday that would declare that aliens who drive “while intoxicated or impaired” are inadmissible and, if convicted of such an offense, deportable.

The 150 lawmakers who voted against the measure were all Democrats. But 59 other Democrats joined 215 Republicans in voting to approve the measure.

“Any alien who has been convicted of an offense for driving while intoxicated or impaired, as those terms are defined under the law of the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred (including a conviction for driving while under the influence of or impaired by alcohol or drugs), without regard to whether the conviction is classified as a misdemeanor or felony under Federal, State, tribal, or local law, is deportable,” the measure reads.

There is currently on the books a law making an illegal deportable if he is guilty of moral turpitude. This law simply clarifies the current law. At any rate, isn’t entering a country illegally breaking the law? Shouldn’t that be subject to deportation?

The U.S. Senate Does Not Want Patriots Or Critical Thinkers!

Recently a news story broke about Arizona Senate candidate Kari Lake being asked to step down from politics for two years. She was pretty much offered anything she wanted. She recorded the conversation, fearing it would be a threat, and has recently released the tape.

On Wednesday, The Hill reported:

The chair of the Arizona Republican Party announced he will resign Wednesday after leaked audio appeared to show him attempting to pay Senate candidate Kari Lake not to run for office in 2024.

Jeff DeWit said that the audio was “selectively edited.” He explained, however, that he chose to resign because he was threatened by members of Lake’s team that more tapes would be released if he did not step down. Lake’s campaign has denied the allegation.

Lake publicly demanded DeWit resign over the audio Tuesday, calling him “corrupt” and “compromised.”

The audio recording was first reported by The Daily Mail.

“There are very powerful people who want to keep you out,” DeWit reportedly told the Senate hopeful in the recording, saying only that these figures were from the “east.”

I do not doubt that the tape is real and unedited. I also suspect that any well-informed American can make an educated guess as to who the person who put Mr. DeWitt up to this. Unfortunately this is where we are. The deep state uni-party in Washington is trying to protect their turf. President Trump is a threat, but a Congress that supports him would make him an even bigger threat to the status quo. Many Americans believe that the status quo needs to be gone.

 

I Guess Everyone Doesn’t Want Transparency

On Monday, Just the News reported the following:

Forensic investigators hired by a Republican-led committee recovered more than 100 encrypted files that the Democratic-led House Jan. 6 Select Committee deleted days before the GOP took over the House majority, according to a new report released Monday.

House Administration Oversight Subcommittee Chair Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., sent a letter to former Select Committee Chair Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., demanding he provide answers and passwords for the data, which was deleted against House rules, according to Fox News Digital

The Oversight Subcommittee, which is investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and the former select committee, should have received four terabytes of archived data from the select committee after Republicans entered the majority in January 2023, but it obtained less than three terabytes of data.

The subcommittee hired a digital forensics team to determine what information was not handed over, and the team discovered 117 files that were encrypted and deleted on Jan. 1, 2023, two days before Republicans were sworn into the majority, according to the report. 

Loudermilk said in his letter to Thompson that the Mississippi Democrat acknowledged over the summer that the select committee “did not archive all Committee records as required by House Rules” and had “sent specific transcribed interviews and depositions to the White House and Department of Homeland Security but did not archive them with the Clerk of the House.”

One recovered file detailed an individual whose testimony was not archived, but “most of the recovered files are password-protected, preventing us from determining what they contain,” Loudermilk also said. 

It is (remotely) possible that this is totally innocent; however, people generally delete things for a reason. The fact that the deletions took place two days before the Republicans took control of the House really does not inspire confidence in the work of the January 6th Committee.

The article concludes:

“It’s obvious that Pelosi’s Select Committee went to great lengths to prevent Americans from seeing certain documents produced in their investigation,” Loudermilk (House Administration Oversight Subcommittee Chair Barry Loudermilk) told the news network. “It also appears that Bennie Thompson and Liz Cheney intended to obstruct our Subcommittee by failing to preserve critical information and videos as required by House rules.”

This is not the first report of missing data from the Jan. 6 select committee. Loudermilk told the Just the News, No Noise” TV show last year that all videotapes from select committee depositions are missing. 

The Impact Of Changing The Voting Laws

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about what happened in Arizona when the voting laws were changed so that let voters who failed to provide proof of U.S. citizenship on their state voter application forms vote in federal elections anyway,

The article reports:

Twenty years ago, Arizona voters approved Proposition 200, also known as the “Arizona Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act.” At its core, the election integrity initiative required proof of U.S. citizenship to vote and photo identification at polling places. Prop 200 has come under constant assault from leftists fighting against the Arizona Constitution’s key qualification to vote in elections: U.S. citizenship. 

The challenge went all the way to U.S. Supreme Court, where in 2013 the justices ruled 7-2 that states could not add documentary proof of citizenship requirements to federal election registration forms. States must “accept and use” the standardized federal voter registration form for national elections under the 1993 National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). The NVRA form, developed by the federal Election Assistance Commission, does not require proof of citizenship. It only asks that an applicant “aver, under penalty of perjury, that he is a citizen.”

…According to Mussi (Scot Mussi, president of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, a nonprofit committed to advancing a pro-growth, limited government agenda in the Grand Canyon State), the pause in the proof of citizenship provision saw an “explosion of federal only voters” — voters who used the federal honor system instead of showing actual proof of citizenship. 

According to the secretary of state’s office, about 1,700 people in Arizona voted in the 2018 midterm elections with a federal-only ballot. Two years later, in the absence of the documentation safeguard, the number grew to 11,600 individuals, according to AZ Free News. President Joe Biden claimed victory in Arizona by just 10,457 votes, or about 0.3 percent. 

It’s time for all Americans to work together to secure our elections. Voter ID should be required, and paper ballots (to be hand counted). Otherwise, we are on a slippery slope to becoming a Banana Republic.

 

At Least One Committee Is Moving In The Right Direction

On Sunday, Townhall reported that the House Budget Committee passed three bills out of committee with bi-partisan support. That is good news. Now if we could just close the border, we would have it made.

The article reports:

The Fiscal State of the Nation Act (H.R. 6952) was passed with strong bipartisan support on a voice vote and without amendments. That bill will require the Comptroller General of the United States, a position I held from 1998-2008, to provide an in-person annual report on the country’s financial condition and fiscal outlook of the country to a joint session of Congress. 

The Debt to GDP Transparency and Stabilization Act (HR 6957) passed without amendment with a 22-12 bipartisan vote. That bill will require the President’s annual budget submission to provide information on the current state and projected outlook of federal debt/GDP based on the President’s proposed budget.

The Fiscal Commission Act (H.R. 5779) was the most important piece of legislation and was the subject of a vast majority of the markup session. It would establish a sixteen-person statutory commission that would, among other things, educate and engage the American people on our nation’s financial and fiscal challenges. Twelve of the commission members would be sitting members of Congress equally divided between the House and Senate and each major party. These twelve would be the voting members. Four of the commission members would be fiscal experts who would not have a vote. After receiving input and deliberating various options, the commission would make a package of fiscal reform recommendations designed to stabilize debt/GDP at no more than 100% within ten years and ensure the long-term solvency of various trust funds. Everything would be on the table – discretionary, mandatory, and revenues. If a majority of the commission’s voting members recommend a package of reforms with bipartisan support, it would receive an expedited vote in both houses of Congress and only require a simple majority vote in both houses for passage. The commission would issue its report in December 2024 or, depending on the final passage of the Fiscal Commission Act, no later than May 2025. 

Fiscal responsibility should be a bi-partisan effort. The inflation cased by our bloated federal spending impacts all of us either directly or indirectly. The plan proposed years ago to take one penny away from every dollar spent by the federal government still has validity. Someone simply has to have the courage to stand up and demand budget cuts.

The Politicization Of Justice In America

Welcome to the Banana Republic America has become. As many of you may remember, one of the people telling the crowds to go into the Capitol during the January 6th protest was Ray Epps. After the events of that day, he was placed on the FBI’s Most Wanted List, but disappeared from that list rather quickly. It was only after social media asked a lot of questions that he was finally charged for his actions that day.

On Tuesday, The Gateway Pundit reported:

J6 Operative Ray Epps was sentenced on Tuesday to NO JAIL TIME!

Ray Epps, the only January 6 protester who actually told people to go into the Capitol, has been officially sentenced to one year probation, $500 restitution, and 100 hours community service.

Epps did not have to show up for court today – he called in via Zoom.

Little old grandmothers who did nothing more than peacefully walk through the Capitol after the police opened the door for them are spending time in jail, and this piece of work gets probation! There is something seriously wrong with justice (or the lack thereof) in America.

The article notes:

As reported by the Gateway Pundit, Epps was just sued by J6 defendant Eric Clark for “Conspiracy to Violate Civil Rights.” The case was filed in a Utah Federal Court.

Here’s where it gets shady.

The Gateway Pundit had a tip that Ray Epps was going to be served with the lawsuit at the courthouse during his sentencing. Process servers were hired by the Plaintiff and our reporters were scheduled to be there to capture the moment Epps was served on video. This was all discussed yesterday in private phone calls.

Then like magic, Ray Epps’ Fairy Godmother changed his PUBLIC IN-PERSON sentencing hearing to a REMOTE TELEPHONIC sentencing hearing.

Why isn’t Congress screaming about the violations of the civil rights of the January 6th dependents every day? Where is the outrage about the lack of accountability in the sentencing of Ray Epps?

Recognizing The Procedure Put In Place By The U.S. Constitution

On Sunday, The Gateway Pundit posted an article about the the Defend The Guard Act recently passed in the New Hampshire State House.

The article reports:

The New Hampshire State House passed the Defend The Guard Act in a 187-182 vote on Thursday, which, if passed in the Senate and signed by the Governor, “would prohibit the deployment of the New Hampshire National Guard into overseas combat unless Congress first votes to declare war.”

This is much-needed legislation as the Biden Regime plunges the U.S. into foreign wars left and right, all while leaving American national security vulnerable and our borders wide open.

Defend The Guard has been introduced in other states, including Arizona.

Arizona State Senator Wendy Rogers’ SB1367 “Defend the Guard” would have “Prohibit[ed] the National Guard of Arizona from being released into active duty combat unless the U.S. Congress has passed an official declaration of war, or has taken another official constitutional action as outlined.” After Senate Republicans passed this bill with zero Democrat support, Toma stonewalled it in the House, according to a Capitol insider and Bring our Troops Home founder Dan McKnight.

According to Cornell Law School:

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to declare war. The President, meanwhile, derives the power to direct the military after a Congressional declaration of war from Article II, Section 2, which names the President Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. These provisions require cooperation between the President and Congress regarding military affairs, with Congress funding or declaring the operation and the President directing it. Nevertheless, throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, Presidents have often engaged in military operations without express Congressional consent. These operations include the Korean War, the Vietnam War, Operation Desert Storm, the Afghanistan War of 2001 and the Iraq War of 2002.

If passed, this new law will force the federal government to abide by the U. S. Constitution–at least as far as the New Hampshire National Guard is concerned.

About That Fourteenth Amendment Thing…

I am not a lawyer, nor do I claim to be one. However, I am concerned about the lawfare being conducted against President Trump.

In the January 2024 issue of Newsmax Magazine, Hans von Spakovsky wrote a commentary about the use of the 14th Amendment to keep President Trump off of the primary ballot in several states.

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment states:

Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Note that Congress may remove such disability.

The article in Newsmax notes:

In 1872, Congress passed an Amnesty Act providing that the “political disabilities” imposed by Section 3 “are hereby removed from all persons whomsoever” except for members of Congress who had served just before and during the Civil War, as well as a limited number of other officials.

In 1898, Congress passed a second Amnesty Act getting rid of these remaining exceptions, providing that the “disability imposed by section 3…heretofore incurred is hereby removed.”

That sounds to me like using the 14th Amendment to keep President Trump off of the ballot does not agree with the laws Congress has passed since the 14th Amendment.

Also, doesn’t there have to be a trial and a conviction?

It should also be noted that the removal of President Trump from the ballot represents taking away the right of the American people to vote for whoever they choose. This sounds like something that happens in dictatorships. The only reason to remove someone from the ballot is if they do not have enough support to run for election. Obviously that is not the problem with President Trump.

 

These Are NOT Families

On Wednesday, The Gateway Pundit posted an article about the continuing flow of illegal immigrants coming into America via our southern border. They are NOT families.

The article reports:

Thousands of military-age men from India, Africa, Latin America and the Middle East invaded Eagle Pass and Lukeville on Wednesday.

December is on track to be a record month for illegal border crossings. According to Customs and Border Protection, more than 300,000 illegals will likely pour into the US in December on Joe Biden’s open border invitation.

Video posted to X by NewsNation correspondent Jorge Ventura showed thousands of illegals – mainly military-age males – at the Eagle Pass, Texas port of entry waiting to be processed.

Border Patrol agents are overwhelmed and thousands more are on the way.
The article includes a video that can be found here:  https://x.com/BillMelugin_/status/1737489620298776633?s=20
These are not families seeking asylum–they are military-age men. What is going to happen when these military-age men cannot find jobs or cannot find jobs that pay enough to support them? Do you suppose they might follow in the path of the groups that are looting and committing crimes in cities that are not holding criminals accountable? This is a Trojan Horse that is entering our country with the knowledge of the Congress and President who swore an oath to defend us.

The Importance Of Primary Elections

On Thursday, The Liberty Daily posted an article about primary elections.

The article cites a recent illustration of the importance of primary elections”

Another day, another betrayal by the Republican wing of the UniParty Swamp. The House overwhelmingly passed the NDAA and failed to strip out the extension of FISA domestic spying. Oddly, Senate Republicans actually did a better job of attempting to stop it than their House partners. Both still failed to do the will of their constituents and defend the Constitution.

Rather than write up a long rant about what needs to be done to reform the party or to hold our elected officials accountable, I’m going to cut to the chase. The primaries are EVERYTHING. Another election in which we’re forced to choose between the lesser of two evils in legislative races could be the end of our nation. We need America First constitutional conservatives. Having the letter (R) next to the name is not enough.

Fortunately, this is a presidential election year so the vast majority of attention by media, donors, and voters will be spent on the top of the ticket. This is an opportunity for patriots to have a greater impact on down ballot races during the primaries. Less money and effort will be spent propping up RINO legislative candidates so if we’re selective with our support and we loudly voice our opinions, we have a chance of putting fellow patriots on the general election ballots.

If we want to protect the rights that are guaranteed by our Constitution, we need to pay very close attention during the primary elections.

Please follow the link to see how conservatives can make a difference this primary season.