Some Sanity From The Federal Bench

With all the cries from hysterical Democrats that President Trump would be a dictator if he is elected, why don’t the Democrats look in the mirror? The student loan forgiveness has continued despite being ruled unconstitutional, domestic oil production has pretty much been shut down despite the fact that Congress passed no laws shutting it down, the border has been left open despite laws that would control the flow of illegal immigrants, and liquid natural gas exports have been shut down despite the fact that Congress never passed a law shutting it down (more on that in a moment). So who is the dictator?

On Friday, Hot Air posted an article about a recent decision by Judge James Cain of the Western District of Louisiana putting the Biden’s pause on LNG exports on hold.

The article quotes Politico:

A federal judge in Louisiana on Monday put the Energy Department’s pause on natural gas export permits on hold, dealing another legal blow to the Biden administration’s climate agenda.

Judge James Cain of the Western District of Louisiana, a Trump appointee, granted a request for a stay from 16 red states that had challenged the pause, arguing it will harm their economies.

The decision to stay the LNG pause upends one of Joe Biden’s major policy nods to climate-focused activists who have accused the president of not doing enough to mitigate planet-warming emissions despite Democrats passing the largest investment in climate in history via the Inflation Reduction Act.

The article also quotes The Wall Street Journal (behind the pay wall):

The Sierra Club, a vociferous and enthusiastic proponent of the January pause, is one of the more strident voices now encouraging our mush-brained hero to do an end-run around SCOTUS.

KEEP DOIN’ THAT VOODOO THAT YOU DO SO WELL

Who cares what a court says? Not the Sierra Club, which says the judge’s ruling doesn’t compel the Administration “to issue any specific decisions.” In other words, the Administration can continue to slow-walk reviews, as it has been doing.

…Democrats fret that Donald Trump will ignore court rulings, but the Biden Administration defies them left and right. A federal judge in June 2021 ordered the Administration to resume quarterly oil and gas lease sales as required under federal law. It didn’t hold its first auction until June 2022 and waited another year to hold a second.

Progressives have no credibility when they warn about an imperial Trump Presidency after encouraging a lawless Biden Administration.

Laws only apply to Republicans.

The Real Answer

This is a portion of the Mayflower Compact:

In the name of God, Amen.
We whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread sovereign Lord, King James, by the grace of God, of Great Britain, France and Ireland king, defender of the faith, etc., having undertaken, for the glory of God, and
advancement of the Christian faith, and honor of our king and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the Northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politic, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the
general good of the colony, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.

They came to find a place where they could freely practice their religion. Many of the principles in that short document can be found in America’s Constitution–equal laws, ordinances, a covenant executed in the presence of God, combining themselves into a civil body politic. When Connecticut was settled, you couldn’t establish a town unless you had a Pastor among the settlers. That’s what all of the  churches in the center of New England towns are about–you didn’t have to be a specific religion–you just had to worship God. We have lost that.

On June 5th, Doug Clay, General Superintendent, The General Council of the Assemblies of God, put out a prayer guide on how to pray for America. This is the link.

These are his five guidelines for praying for America:

1.  Pray for our country.

2.  Pray for righteousness in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of our government.

3.  Pray for wisdom.

4.  Pray for the integrity of democracy.

5.  Ask the Lord to give us the fruit of the Spirit as we exercise our rights in speech and as citizens who participate in our democracy.

That is the outline. Please follow the link to the article for further details. And yes, I know that we are a Representative Republic–not a Democracy, but unfortunately it is acceptable in public discourse to refer to America as a Democracy, even though it is not.

Prayer is the only thing that is going to save America.

 

About That Supreme Court Decision…

This is a rant. If you don’t read rants, that’s fine. Please feel free to ignore this article.

A wise lawyer once said, “If the facts are on your side, pound the facts. If the law is on your side, pound the law. If neither is on your side, pound the table!” That’s what the Democrats are currently doing in reacting to the Supreme Court’s decision on Presidential Immunity. This decision might limit them in their pursuit of the political enemies.

I listened to President Biden’s speech last night about the decision. He used the decision as justification for the argument that if President Trump is re-elected, he will be a dictator. You mean like someone who issues and Executive Order forgiving student loans and when the court says this is unconstitutional and the President can’t do it, the President does it anyway? You mean like someone who consistently violates the Constitution and the Civil Rights of his political opponents and of people who peacefully walked through the Capitol on January 6th? Not the rioters who were destructive–those who followed the crowd in when the police opened the doors and waved them in.

Just to refresh your memory, on July 6, 2017, NBC News reported:

Federal prosecutors on Friday moved to drop charges against the last 39 people accused of participating in a violent protest on the day of President Donald Trump’s inauguration.

The motion to dismiss charges by the U.S. attorney’s office seemingly ends an 18-month saga that started with the Justice Department attempting to convict more than 190 people.

That effort saw the government facing off against an intensely coordinated grassroots political opposition network that made Washington the focus of a nationwide support campaign — offering free lodging for defendants, legal coordination and other support.

Members of that activist network were declaring victory on Friday.

“This is huge news,” said Dylan Petrohilos, a Washington-based activist who was one of the original defendants, but had his charges dropped earlier this year. “The solidarity we showed as defendants won out.”

More than 200 people were arrested after the protest, during which several store windows were broken and a parked limo set ablaze. Two group trials ended in defeats for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, which was hindered by the fact that most protesters wore similar black clothing and covered their faces.

Contrast this with the handling of the January 6th protestors who had their civil rights violated for doing much less. Where was the Republican unity to help them?

The Democrats are very good at messaging. Their message for this election cycle will concentrate on the words convicted felon, January 6th, insurrection, lying, and dictator. None of these words actually apply, but the truth is not a consideration in Democrat messaging.

When Radical Isn’t Radical–It’s Original

I am not an economist, but I am an observer of the obvious.

In a recent speech, President Trump talked about ending the Income Tax and restructuring the Federal Reserve. Either or both of those things would be good for all Americans and for the American economy.

Before 1913, the United State had neither the Federal Reserve nor the Income Tax. Both measures were passed in 1913. On February 25, 1913, the 16th Amendment (Income Tax) was certified as part of the U.S. Constitution. On December 23, 1913, the Federal Reserve Act created the Federal Reserve.

The men who met at Jekyll Island to create the Federal Reserve represented 25 percent of the wealth of the entire world. They met in secret, and their identities were concealed for many years afterward. Their goal was to keep that 25 percent of wealth in their hands. They created the system for the purpose of keeping New York City banks as the center of America’s wealth. The federal reserve created a system where money could be created out of nothing and loaned out through a leverage system to create interest. For example, over a 30-year mortgage, a bank can earn more from the sale of a house than any contractor who worked on the house.

The Income Tax was supposed to only impact the top 1 percent of Americans. Before 1913, the government’s expenses had been handled through tariffs.

To end the Income Tax, you would have to end the Welfare State. One way to do that would be to tax welfare benefits but not wages. When it becomes more lucrative to work than to collect welfare, it is possible that the work ethic that used to be part of American culture might be revived. You would also have to slash the bloated bureaucracy. The economic boom created by ending the Income Tax would give those who lose their jobs in government a great job market in which to search for new jobs. We need to get rid of any government department that is not successful–has education improved since the Department of Education was created? What has Housing and Urban Development accomplished? How many people in the Justice Department would have to be fired to end the corruption? You no longer need the Internal Revenue Service. You see where I am going with this.

The opposition to this plan would come from federal workers (fear of losing their jobs). Opposition would also come from Washington swamp creatures who would see it as a threat to their power (in Washington controlling money is power). It would also come from welfare recipients.

The other issue would be Social Security and its related taxes. That could be worked out easily by balancing payments to people who have paid into the program for more than forty years with alternatives for younger workers. With a retirement age of 70, most Americans pay the most into Social Security from about the age of 30.

This is all possible if Americans are willing to elect a businessman who has the economic knowledge to put it all together.

Imagine a world where you get to keep all of what you earn and the government cannot intimidate you about your taxes.

America, Pay Attention!

On Wednesday, The Geller Report reported the following:

Germany: Muslim party DAVA wins 41 per cent in Duisburg in the European Parliament elections

The fact that Germany no longer looks like Germany in certain areas is evident after the EU elections in voting districts in the highly Islamised city of Duisburg, where Erdogan’s hardcore Muslim party, DAVA, was able to collect 41.10 per cent of the vote.

Voting district 1001 in the city of Duisburg – like many districts in Germany – has already been lost to Islam. There, the Muslim party founded in January, which operates under the bogus name ‘Democratic Alliance for Diversity and Awakening’ (DAVA), was able to mobilise its Islamic voters and achieve a shocking election result. With 41.10 per cent of the vote, the Muslim party did best by far. In second place was the AfD with 14.16 per cent, followed by the SPD with 10.96 per cent. The CDU achieved 8.68 per cent.

So exactly what is this about? The goal of Islam is create a caliphate (the Ottoman Empire was the most recent caliphate which ended in 1922) ruled by Sharia Law that will dominate the world, eventually conquering the entire world. It this seems farfetched to you, please examine the government exhibits from the Holy Land Foundation Trial. One of those exhibits is “An Explanatory Memorandum: From the Archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.” This exhibit explains the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan to use the American legal system to introduce Sharia Law into America.  We already have courts in America using Sharia Law. If the Islamists can do in America what they did in the German elections, we will have more courts using Sharia Law.

Sharia Law is not compatible with the U.S. Constitution. We have already had a number of ‘honor killings’ in America, which are acceptable in Sharia Law but not acceptable under the U.S. Constitution. (for further information on honor killings in America, go here). Honor killings are justified under Sharia Law if a person converts from Islam to another religion or in the case of a daughter who refuses to marry the person her parents have chosen for her or becomes too “westernized.” We already have ‘no go’ zones in certain areas of America where the police are hesitant to go or to enforce the law. Be aware that the same people who have managed a 41% election victory in German have the same plans for America–one city at a time.

Let’s Even The Playing Field

On Saturday, PJ Media posted an article titled, “Time To Fight Dirty.” Frankly, I was put off by the title, but when I read the article, I realized that there were some good ideas there.

The article notes:

After witnessing the banana republic court spectacle in New York City this week, I ask our elected Republicans… have you seen enough? Are you going to continue lobbing limpwristed slaps at your enemy’s shoulder as they continue to kick you below the belt? Are you still hiding behind the whole “civility” façade, which the Left abandoned decades ago? Or are you ready to actually man up and fight like our lives, our loved ones, and our liberties depend on it?

We need to start fighting dirty, like they do. If we don’t, what remains of our constitutional order will continue to dissipate until all that remains is the totalitarian state they’ve been working for generations to achieve, complete with state censorship, show trials, and political prisoners.

And when I say we need to fight dirty, let me clarify what I am not saying. I am not saying that we should persecute innocent people, like the Left does. I am saying that we need to go full-throttle, no-holds-barred lawfare against those who do break the law and smugly get away with it.

The article lists a number of times Democrats have broken laws and suffered no consequences. The author of the article believes that there need to be consequences for anyone who breaks the law. I agree.

The article concludes:

The fiercely abolitionist Quakers contributed absolutely nothing towards winning the Civil War, nor was slavery ended by peaceful legislative process. It was ended by the soldiers who slashed and burned their way through Mississippi and Georgia, backed by a Republican president who suspended habeas corpus, who emancipated slaves with a constitutionally-tenuous executive fiat, and who secured the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment via corruption and bribery. And they were right to do so. America is a better place because Larry Hogan’s forefather wasn’t president in 1860.

They all get away with it. They always get away with it. If we win in November, our leaders must ensure that they don’t get away with it, no matter how dirty the fight gets. We need to do to them what they’ve been doing to us, and we need the moral courage to do so. Fighting is dirty only if just one side is doing it.

Holding EVERYONE accountable for their misdeeds is the only way American can move forward. Our laws need to apply to everyone.

A Report From Someone Who Was There

On Tuesday, The New York Post posted an article by Alan Dershowitz about the actions of New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan during the trial of President Trump.

The article reports:

Many experienced lawyers raised their eyebrows when the judge excluded obviously relevant evidence when offered by the defense, while including irrelevant evidence offered by the prosecution.

But when the defense’s only substantive witness, the experienced attorney Robert Costello, raised his eyebrows at one of New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan’s rulings, the court went berserk.

Losing his cool and showing his thin skin, the judge cleared the courtroom of everyone including the media.

For some reason, I was allowed to stay, and I observed one of the most remarkable wrong-headed biases I have ever seen. The judge actually threatened to strike all of Costello’s testimony if he raised his eyebrows again.

That of course would have been unconstitutional because it would have denied the defendant his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses and to raise a defense.

…Even if what Costello did was wrong, and it was not, it would be utterly improper and unlawful to strike his testimony — testimony that undercut and contradicted the government’s star witness.

The judge’s threat was absolutely outrageous, unethical, unlawful and petty.

Moreover, his affect while issuing that unconstitutional threat revealed his utter contempt for the defense and anyone who testified for the defendant.

The public should have been able to see the judge in action, but because the case is not being televised, the public has to rely on the biased reporting of partisan journalists.

Attorney Dershowitz shared a story in the article about seeing a former student at the trial and chatting with him. Unfortunately the media did not even report that accurately.

The article notes:

But NBC, the Daily Beast and other media decided to make up a story about the event. They claimed that I had a spat with my nemesis, rather than a friendly conversation with a former student.

Their account was made up, yet it was circulated through the media.

To his credit, Eisen (the former student) wrote to the media to correct the account, saying that the person sitting next to him would confirm the media’s false reporting. I doubt we will see a retraction.

This minor incident is simply the tip of a very large and deep iceberg of false reporting about the trial that can only occur because the proceedings are not being televised.

There are television cameras in the courtroom, and they record and transmit every word, but not to the public; only select reporters in the overflow room see what the cameras transmit.

There is absolutely no good reason why a trial of this importance, or any trial, should not be televised live and in real time.

Allowing the public to see their courts in action is the best guarantee of fairness.

This trial is not supposed to be fair. It’s purpose is to convince American voters that President Trump is a felon and that no one should vote for him. The gymnastics they had to to through to bring the case to trial (overlooking the statute of limitations, elevating a misdemeanor to a felony, bringing in a witness that had already been convicted of perjury, etc.) should be an indication that this whole exercise has no substance.

The Court Got It Right

The Covid lockdown resulted in one of the largest transfers of wealth from small business owners to large corporations. In many cases, that was the result of the fact that the small business owners could not comply with the myriad regulations in a cost-effective way. Many small restaurants are gone forever, and many boutique dress shops are closed. One business that refused to shut down (and frequently made the news) was the Atilis Gym in Bellmawr, New Jersey. The co-owner, Ian Smith, was charged with 80 charges stemming from keeping his gym open despite Democrat Governor Phil Murphy’s tyrannical COVID-19 lockdown orders.

On Sunday, The Gateway Pundit posted an update on the case.

The article reports:

Ian Smith, co-owner of Atilis Gym in Bellmawr, New Jersey, has achieved a monumental victory. A New Jersey court has dismissed all 80 charges against him, charges that stemmed from his bold decision to reopen his gym in direct defiance of Democrat Governor Phil Murphy’s tyrannical COVID-19 lockdown orders.

The saga began in May 2020, when Smith reopened Atilis Gym, challenging the Murphy administration’s mandates, which he and his supporters argue are unconstitutional and detrimental to small businesses.

The confrontation escalated in July 2020 when police officers forcefully arrested Smith after he continually violated the state’s shutdown orders.

A swarm of police officers burst through the door of Atilis Gym in Bellmawr, New Jersey arrested the owners for violating Governor Murphy’s authoritarian shutdown order.

The article reminds us of the extreme actions of the Governor:

The state’s aggressive response did not end with the arrest. In a controversial move, Governor Murphy and his administration seized $165,000 from the gym’s accounts—funds that Smith claims were amassed through donations and apparel sales to support the gym’s legal battles. This act was a punitive strike meant to cripple the gym financially and serve as a stern warning to others who might consider similar defiance.

“Governor Phil Murphy seized 100% of our assets today – $165k, all of which came from donations and apparel sales. This is done in the middle of ongoing litigation defending ourselves against these fines, our 80 charges, the revocation of our business license, and the unconstitutional health department shutdown.⁣ This was never about protection, it was always about control,” said Smith in a video statement in January 2021.

The article concludes:

Special thanks to our fearless attorneys – John McCann and Giancarlo Ghione. Some of the most high profile attorneys around the country ran from our case – knowing it would be a long, hard road and would make them a target of the stare. These two gentlemen stood with us through the darkest days of the storm, have not flinched, and never once cared about being in front of cameras to gain notoriety from their work.

More updates later.

Nobody is coming to save you, save yourself. Spit on your hands and hoist the black flag. No quarter.

We win by standing strong and calling out unconstitutional laws.

The Basic Goals Have Been Met

On May 14th, Newsmax posted an article about the true purpose of the trial of President Trump that is currently taking place in New York City.

The article notes the three purposes:

“The purpose of this trial is three-fold,” Dershowitz, professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, said on “National Report.” “No. 1, to convict him down and dirty before the election, although it will get reversed after the election. No. 2, to have a gag order on him, and No. 3, to keep them locked up in the courtroom, so he can’t campaign, and those goals may very well be accomplished.

“This is election interference at its most obvious, and every American, no matter whether you’re for Trump or against them … I voted for [President Joe] Biden … whatever your political affiliation is … I’m a Democrat … you should be equally concerned about how this legal system is being weaponized and abused for partisan purposes.”

It is becoming obvious that if President Biden remains as the Democrat candidate in 2024, he is going to have a problem being re-elected. His approval ratings are very low, and any public event he holds has an attendance problem–no one wants to come. There is definitely an enthusiasm gap. It’s going to take an awful lot of computer manipulations and mail-in ballots to steal the upcoming election, and the only way the Democrats can win it is to steal it. I don’t think the American people would believe a President Biden victory.

There is also the question of the precedents being set. Do we really want to live in a country where a political party freely uses the justice system to go after its opponents? This is an awkward question because if the Republicans take Congress and the White House, there are going to have to be some people held accountable for the weaponization of the justice system. I hope that there are some Republicans who care enough about equal justice to hold people accountable. Based on the lack of outrage over the unconstitutional treatment of the January 6th political prisoners, I am not sure Republicans are any more concerned about our Constitution than Democrats.

Has Anything Been Done To Correct This?

On Tuesday, The Gateway Pundit posted the following headline:

BOOM! Georgia Election Board: Investigator Joseph Rossi Details How Georgia 2020 Hand Count Audit and Machine Count Audit Found to Be in Violation of Law – ENOUGH VOTES TO ALTER ELECTION!

This is an amazing headline considering that there were people indicted because they challenged the results of the 2020 vote in Georgia.

The article reports:

Emerald Robinson at The Absolute Truth on Frank Speech reported late in early April that the long-awaited report from an investigation (SEB2023-025) into errors found in both the hand count and a machine count from the 2020 presidential election in Fulton County is officially on the agenda for a May 7th State Election Board meeting.

The investigation found violations in both the hand audit and machine count, according to citizen investigator Joe Rossi.

Earlier today Joseph Rossi testified in front of the State Election Board meeting.

Joseph Rossi:  Now, I’d like to speak directly to those who have fought factually, respectfully, and relentlessly for the truth over the last three years. As a 410.24, I got another one of these certified letters from the state election board. Every time I get one of those letters, my wife sets it on my desk, and she says, You got another one of those certified letters? I hope you’re not being indicted this time. But anyways, as of that letter, it has now been factually proven that both the hand audit—this is really, really important— and the certified machine count—yes, the certified count—have both been found to be in violation of Georgia election law. Based on these findings, to those that have fought factually, respectfully, and relentlessly, I’ll close with one word, vindicated.

It is becoming very obvious that the 2020 election was not ‘the most secure election in American history.’ I have three questions–how do we keep this from happening again, what is the Constitutional remedy for a stolen election, and when are the people responsible going to be held accountable.

Isn’t Congress Supposed To Be The One Making Laws?

On April 21, American Greatness posted an article about some new regulations the Biden administration is planning for Title IV.

The article reports:

On April 19, 2024, the Biden administration finalized regulations it proposed in July 2022. Likely to avoid backlash at the polls this November, the administration recently indicated it is postponing finalizing the proposed sports-related Title IX regulations it published in April 2023. In each case, the regulations do something that not only the Executive Branch does not have authority to do but also what Congress has specifically declined to do.

They declare that “sex” in Title IX actually means sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

The Executive Branch has no authority to make such a radical change in the meaning of a statute. But this is no ordinary Executive Branch. This is the one whose chief executive recently boasted that although the Supreme Court ruled that he does not have the authority to forgive student loans, he is doing it anyway,[ii][ii]1 requiring truckers and plumbers to absorb the cost of strangers’ ineffectual college degrees. And although the President is required to administer and enforce the laws Congress has passed, this President has steadfastly refused to enforce our nation’s immigration laws.

Our government of, by, and for the people has bit by bit become a government of forced mandates to which we do not consent. Mandatory school, business, and church closures during 2020, along with required COVID-19 shots, were but the most visible recent manifestation of this trend.

The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act, commonly known as the DREAM Act, was first introduced in Congress in 2001 and reintroduced numerous times thereafter. Each time, members of Congress, mindful of the opposition of their constituents, refused to pass it. Nonetheless, in 2012, without even relying on his phone and his pen as he had threatened, but merely with a memorandum from the head of his Department of Homeland Security, President Obama implemented DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) and DAPA (Deferred Action for Parents of Americans), a similar program for their parents, in effect implementing provisions of the law—the DREAM Act—which Congress repeatedly refused to pass.

Where is Congress? Hasn’t anyone in Congress figured out that this is not the government of our Founding Fathers? The checks and balances our Constitution put there are there for a reason. Congress needs to stand up and take back the power our Founding Fathers gave it.

Disrespecting the Constitution

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D

I think we would all agree that the Constitution has served as the basis of the success we have had in making America the longest lasting and most successful representative republic in history. The Founding Fathers got it right. Unfortunately, many members of the Marxist-leaning Democrat Party are doing their best to undermine the Constitution; led, of course, by the Biden regime. The Constitution, like any other guiding document, can only set forth examples of essential principles that must be followed. It cannot specify every possible way in which those basic principles can be violated. For a constitutional republic to survive, citizens must believe and agree to follow the basic principles. Here are some ways in which the leaders of the Democrat party are showing their contempt for the Constitution and its basic principles.

Let’s start with free speech. It is clear that the Founding Fathers considered the ability to express one’s thoughts without government control to be the essence of a free society. The efforts of the Biden regime to block free speech on social media platforms by influencing what they define as “misinformation,” violates the very principle of free speech. The CCTA radio show experienced this recently when the safety of vaccinations was discussed and the show was canceled on You Tube. Labelling free speech as “hate” speech and or “misinformation” is another attack on the principle of free speech.

Another example is the Biden regime’s continuing attacks on the right of citizens to bear arms as guaranteed in the second amendment. Defining semi- automatic rifles as “assault weapons,” as well as limiting the capacity of gun magazines and buying ammunition, are examples of their lack of belief and support for the principle behind the second amendment.

The Founding Fathers were extremely concerned about the power of big government to restrict the freedom of citizens, which is the reason they severely limited the role of the federal government and supported the role of the state governments. The Biden regime is showing distain for this essential principle of our Constitution. They have grown the federal government to an unprecedented 25% of our overall GDP; including 85,000 additional IRS agents to come after you the taxpayer. Recently, Biden has instructed all federal agencies to begin registering people to vote. This includes paying college students with federal funds to register fellow students, as well as nonstudents, in the local communities. This is clearly a violation of the constitutional principle that the federal government will not use its power to influence elections.

And lastly, the Biden regime is ignoring the Supreme Court decision that the President does not have the power under the Constitution to forgive students loans. This terminology is typical of the lies of the Biden regime in that this is not “forgiving loans” but actually making other people pay for these student loans. The separation of government powers into three branches is the most critical control mechanism in the Constitution. Biden is showing his complete disregard of the Supreme Court.

The irony of course is the Biden regime’s claim that Donald Trump represents a threat to our democracy; whereas, it is they who are the greatest threat to our constitutional republic since its founding. Add this to the list of things to consider when deciding who to vote for in November.

Who Does Student Loan Forgiveness Benefit?

On Sunday, The American Thinker posted an article about President Biden’s plan to forgive approximately $5 billion more in student debt. The article reminds us that forgiving student debt is simply transferring wealth from those who could not afford to go to college to those who took out loans to go to college.

The article reports:

In a desperate attempt to win votes in the upcoming presidential election in November, President Biden has transferred $153 billion in wealth from middle and lower income-earners to the rich.  How has he done that? Student loan forgiveness is the answer.

In January 2022, Forbes conducted a study that found that a significant portion of student debt belongs to high-wealth households.  Additionally, an article from Brookings emphasizes that student loan forgiveness tends to be regressive, which benefits higher-income individuals more than lower-income ones.  Some studies indicate that students from high-wealth families owe at least 60% of the total student debt.

Students from wealthy or affluent families can qualify for student loans more easily than those from less affluent families.  In the past few years, Biden has forgiven $153 billion in student loans, mainly benefiting high-wealth households.

The article concludes:

So long as we have an authoritarian, Constitution-ignoring dictatorship running this country, we will have no control over our financial well-being.  The Constitution provides that our elected officials rule with the consent of the people.  I didn’t give my consent, nor did my representative in Congress, nor did anyone’s representative in Congress.  This is an authoritarian act solely by President Biden without the consent of the Legislative or Judicial Branch of government.  So much for checks and balances.

This administration continues to add more debt for us to pay and spends our money without limitation, increasing inflation and the national debt with every dollar spent.  Remember, the government has no money of its own.  What it spends is money it collects from the American taxpayer in the form of taxes.  It just spent $153 million without consulting Congress, which the Supreme Court has ruled is unconstitutional.

In pre-Revolutionary times, the people declared that taxation without representation was tyranny.  Will America wake up?

The Real Threat to Our Democracy

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D

As usual, the Democrat left is lying to the American people. Truth is not something that they believe in. This has been the case with every communist/Marxist government in world history. The latest of many examples is the Biden regime’s claim that Donald Trump is the biggest threat to our democracy. As usual, they do not even recognize that we are a constitutional Republic–not a democracy. Let’s see where the real threat is coming from.

In a very revealing interview on CNN, Robert Kennedy, Jr., a third party candidate for the presidency (and an extreme leftist himself, especially on the environment), was asked who was the greatest threat to democracy, Donald Trump or Joe Biden. To the shock and chagrin of the CNN interviewer, Kennedy answered that it was Joe Biden. He went on to explain how his free speech was taken away by the Biden regime through social media banning which he has had to fight in court. He has also been denied Secret Service protection which under previous administrations, would have been routinely granted. Especially in his case where both his father (Robert) and his uncle (John) were both assassinated. Leaving him at risk would be one way of Biden eliminating an opponent.

Inviting illegal aliens into our country and granting them free support including airfares directly into our country are the biggest threat to our country at this time. Not only does the Biden regime invite them in, they make every effort to block Texas from sealing their border, including court actions. A country without borders cannot long exist. Free speech is an essential part of any free country. The first thing Hitler did when taking over the government of Germany was to forbid speech in opposition to his regime. He then constituted a federal police force (the SS) to arrest and incarcerate anyone who voiced opposition to his regime. Sound familiar? Look how the Biden regime is misusing the FBI and the Department of (In)Justice to go after Trump supporters, branding them as MAGA terrorists. Sending fully armed squads of FBI agents to arrest your political opponents and their supporters has never been seen in this country before the Biden regime took over. How about the coordinated campaign of bringing bogus charges and court cases against your political opponent, as Biden has done to Donald Trump? Also, the Democrat Marxists efforts to steal elections by the wholesale use of mail-in ballots and ballot harvesting. No free country can exist without free and fair elections and citizen’s confidence in the election process. The final example is Biden’s continuing effort to grant forgiveness of student loans, which he hopes will buy him votes, in spite of the fact that the courts have declared that he has no constitutional authority to do so. He just ignores the courts.

Well, you get the point. If Biden and the Marxist Democrats succeed in winning this coming election, our country is doomed to follow other communist regimes that have destroyed the freedoms and liberty of their people. We must not let this happen. If we do, we will have not only failed ourselves but our children and grandchildren. Get out and resist before it is too late!

America Is Slowly Waking Up

On Tuesday, The Postmillennial posted an article about an article on the ballot in Tuesday’s Wisconsin election.

The article reports:

Wisconsin voters have approved a constitutional amendment banning private money for elections. The constitutional amendment passed on Tuesday after it was proposed by Republicans who were fed up with the money funneled into elections by Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, dubbed Zuckerbucks.

“Wisconsin has spoken and the message is clear: elections belong to voters, not out-of-state billionaires,” GOP Chairman Brian Schimming said. Joe Biden won Wisconsin in 2020 after $8.8 million went into the state’s largest five cities.

…A second question offered by Republicans amended the state constitution to say that elections could only be administered by actual election officials. Though this was already state law, enshrining it in the constitution firms up the practice against legislative change.
 
President of the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty Rick Esenberg said “Voters sent a clear message that they want to keep private money out of election administration,” per ABC.

“Whether you identify with the left or the right, ensuring the fairness and integrity of our elections should be a shared priority,” he said.

In 2020, Wisconsin saw an influx of funds from the Center for Tech and Civil Life, which had in turn received $300 million from Zuckerberg and his wife. The purpose of the leftist group is to fight for voter access. The funds were used to “help election officials buy supplies and run elections at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic before vaccines were available.”

There were a lot of anomalies in battleground states in 2020. There are a lot of things that can be done now to make sure that the 2024 election is fair and that the votes tallied reflect the choice of the voters.

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.

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.

Essential Citizenship

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D

History has clearly shown that in order for a country to survive, especially a republic, it must retain its essential cultural integrity. The Founding Fathers recognized this fact when they emphasized the importance of educating each generation about the values expressed in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson referred to this as patriotic knowledge, beliefs and duties as citizens.

A question we are faced with now, is how well are doing developing and ensuring that we have patriotic citizens who appreciate America’s uniqueness. It is obvious to me that love and respect for America has been declining, primarily due to the influence of the Left on our public education system. Instead of learning about the freedoms and opportunities that we have in America, they are taught that America is a flawed country and needs to be “fundamentally transformed” as Barack Obama stated. Indoctrination through Critical Race Theory (CRT), Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI), the 1619 Project, and transgender instruction is not producing freedom loving patriotic citizens. No wonder so many parents are choosing to take their children out of the public school system. Obviously, no country is without flaws. America went through a period where slavery was tolerated, as it was in many other countries. Ridding our country of slavery was not easy, but was accomplished by dedicated patriots who realized that the Declaration of Independence emphasized the rights of all people regardless of race and were willing to fight for that principle. The Left, instead of accepting equal opportunity regardless of race, now wants to use a system of racial quotas through the DEI agenda. This will only divide our country; something we cannot allow.

No clear thinking person wants race or gender as a determining factor in the selection of people for positions in our society. When you go to a surgeon, you want to be assured that that person has the requisite skills to perform successful surgery; similarly, with other professions and positions of responsibility. Knowing that race or gender is being used in the selection process, creates doubt that should not exist in the minds of the public. We deserve better than that. Our children should be taught that success depends on their motivation and hard work and that the American Dream still exists in American for all those willing to work to achieve it. Not as the Left would have it that the government is there to take care of you.

Look at the message that the Biden regime is sending to the rest of the world with its open border policies: break our immigration laws, lie about needing asylum and we will give you free food, shelter, cell phones and healthcare all paid for by the hard working citizens of America. These illegal invaders do not have the values to make good citizens as the Democrat run sanctuary cities are finding out. These illegals need to be deported before it is too late. This election will determine the fate of our country. No question. A blind man could see what is coming. You must get out an vote!

What Is A Bill Of Attainder And Why Is It Important?

Our Founding Fathers understood what it was like to live under a king. They also understood what it was like to live under a government that not only did not represent you, but could target you at any time. They wanted the new government they founded to represent the people and protect the people from the government.

On Tuesday, The American Spectator posted an article that points out that the continued lawfare against President Trump violates the law against a bill of attainder.

The article reports:

Yet so common was the bill of attainder in British history in pre-modern times that it was a fairly normal way of dealing with the rebellious — or, indeed, just those whom the authorities found uncongenial. And so much did the Founding Fathers dislike its use that they deemed it important enough to have its own mention in the Constitution, which expressly forbids it under Article I, Section 9, Clause 3: “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.”

But what is this strange creature?

The word “attainder” derives from the adjective “attainted,” which was used to define individuals whose legal rights had been removed. All of them. They lost the right to own property and bear titles; they could not enter into legal agreements, nor could their heirs inherit from them. They were often summarily executed, and they forfeited all their possessions to the state, in this case the Crown, or as much of it as the rulers could get their hands on. What makes bills of attainder unique in legislation — and insupportable — is that they imposed draconian penalties on specific individuals without the need to find them guilty in a court, for they had lost their right to a jury trial or, indeed, any trial at all.

Now, if this sounds hauntingly familiar in modern America, that’s because it should. Bills of attainder may be unconstitutional, but acting in ways essentially equivalent apparently is not.

Consider the lawfare being directed at Trump. Only the naïve or the prejudiced could seriously believe that the indictments leveled at him would be directed at anyone else. They’re aimed at one man, and his first name is Donald, his last name Trump.

Enter Judge Arthur Engoron, and the indictment for fraud brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

This case is astonishing on so many levels. First, no one is claiming injury here: Banks loaned money to Trump based on the value of his assets. Trump repaid the loan, with interest. The banks had not the least inclination to sue him, since they had suffered no injury.

The article notes:

If one were of a suspicious mind, one might surmise that Engoron imposed the most massive fines he could in order to make it as hard as possible for Trump to appeal his ruling.

Surely not!

Now consider how similar this is to a bill of attainder. First, such a bill removes the legal rights of the target. Engoron has made an appeal against his ruling as difficult as possible. Further, draconian penalties have been imposed on Trump without the need to find him guilty of anything in court. As with a bill of attainder, the target’s ability to hold offices and function is withdrawn. His property is seized and removed from his control. Finally, since there is no aggrieved party claiming redress, the Crown — the state, in this case — takes the wealth forfeited. His heirs are punished — not for what they did but because they are his sons.

This is a bill of attainder in fact, if not in name. It differs only in that it comes from a court rather than a legislature.

Obviously the wrong people are on trial.

So What Do We Do Now?

The courts seem to move slowly. Most of the time that’s not an issue, but we have a court case right now where the timing matters. It will be interesting to see what the next step is. Also, at what point is Congress required to follow the U.S. Constitution and what are the consequences when they don’t?

On Tuesday, Just the News reported:

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Tuesday secured a major victory in his challenge to the $1.7 trillion omnibus spending package passed in 2022, with a court declaring that the bill was approved unconstitutionally.

President Joe Biden signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 in December of the prior year. The measure effectively set the federal budget for the year by wrapping the 12 annual appropriations bills into a single piece of legislation. Paxton, however, had argued that the House’s passage of the measure was unconstitutional as less than half of the lower chamber’s members were physically present to vote on it. Many lawmakers who were not present voted by proxy. Paxton had specifically challenged stipulations in the bill that affect his state.

“Like many constitutional challenges, Texas asserts that this provision is unenforceable against it because Congress violated the Constitution in passing the law. In response, the defendants claim, among other things, that this Court has no power to address the issue because it cannot look to extrinsic evidence to question whether a bill became law,” the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Lubbock Division wrote. “But because the Court is interpreting and enforcing the Constitution—rather than second-guessing a vote count—the Court disagrees. The Court concludes that, by including members who were indisputably absent in the quorum count, the Act at issue passed in violation of the Constitution’s Quorum Clause.”

So what happens now? Does this matter?

The article concludes:

The Texas Public Policy Foundation served as co-counsel in the case.

“The Court correctly concluded that the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 violated the Quorum Clause of the U.S. Constitution because a majority of House members was not physically present when the $1.7 trillion spending bill was passed. Proxy voting is unconstitutional,” TPPF senior attorney Matt Miller said.

Why Should They Listen To The Voters?

On Saturday, John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog about one possible outcome of the 2024 election. It is becoming very obvious that as the powers that be work harder and harder to make sure that President Trump does not get a second term, more and more voters are deciding to support him–just to have their voices heard. This is going to make for a very interesting year.

The article reports:

In 2001, 2005 and 2017, some Democrat House members objected to the certification of electoral votes for the winning Republican presidential candidate. Those objections, while “denialist,” were only symbolic. But Democrat leaders in the House are now suggesting that if they control that body following November’s election–as they well might–they may refuse to allow a victorious Donald Trump to take office.

Notice that the objects to the electoral votes were not allowed in 2020–they were pre-empted by the events outside the Capitol and a parliamentary procedure was used to block them when the House reconvened.

The article concludes:

The Democrats have become so insane on the subject of Donald Trump that it is hard to know which of their mutterings to take seriously. But if Trump wins the election and a Democrat-controlled House refuses to certify his election on the ground that he is an “insurrectionist” under the 14th Amendment, we will be past the point of a constitutional crisis. If that happens, the only realistic path forward will be disunion, possibly accompanied by civil war, but preferably not.

This is one reason why the Supreme Court should put the 14th Amendment theory out of its misery, once and for all. It is obvious that the drafters of that amendment meant the just-concluded Civil War, in which 600,000 Americans lost their lives, when they referred to “insurrection or rebellion” against the United States. In contrast, the January 6 protest was not one of the 50 most destructive riots of the last few years, and the only person killed was Ashli Babbitt. Not a single participant in the protest was arrested in possession of a firearm. Some insurrection!

In the interest of preserving the Republic, the Supreme Court should rule definitively that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not apply to Donald Trump.

Stay tuned.

When WOKE Takes Over

On Monday, Hot Air posted an article about a change in the information collected by the government from broadcasters.

The article reports:

The Biden Administration is so concerned about preserving democracy and the norms that underlie it that they are, once again, ignoring Supreme Court precedents in order to do the right thing no matter how many Constitutional limits they have to blow through. 

…This time the issue is collecting DEI information from broadcasters, which has been tried before and found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court–twice.

We have this story via an FCC commissioner who dissented from the decision. He was previously the General Counsel of the FCC, so he knows of what he speaks better than almost anybody. 

…There is one and only one reason for the FCC to require broadcasters to publish their DEI-related employment stats, and it has everything to do with making broadcasters vulnerable to pressure from activist groups pushing them to change the racial and gender balance of their employees. 

The point is to outsource what the government can’t do to pressure groups: impose de facto quotas.

The Court has twice rejected similar attempts by the FCC, but they seem to believe that in this case, the third time is the charm. 

The FCC claims that there is no evidence that forcing broadcasters to disclose this presumptively private information will have any impact. 

The article concludes:

Government grants go to nonprofits with Left-wing agendas, pushing for things the government cannot. It is the outsourcing of the cultural revolution in the way that post-9/11 intelligence and even military operations were outsourced to private contractors. 

It’s legally dubious, morally wrong, and over the long term it has been pretty damn effective. 

There is no plausible reason for forcing companies to release private employment data legally protected under privacy provisions except to give ammunition to outside pressure groups. 

Unfortunately, it’s no surprise that our benevolent betters are fine with tearing up the Constitution. They have been working at it for years now. 

I remember what happened in California when names of donors to a conservative cause were released–their homes were picketed and some were put out of business. The requesting of this information by the FCC is illegal and needs to end immediately.

That Ship Already Sailed

On Monday, The Daily Caller posted an article about some concerns in the intelligence community.

The article reports:

The intelligence community is warning that key agencies may be politicized under a second Trump administration as the 2024 election approaches after it tried to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop story and pushed a now-debunked dossier about the former president, Politico reported on Monday.

Former President Donald Trump could politicize the intelligence community through who he appoints and removes as well as demanding adherence to his agenda, the 18 former Trump officials and analysts claimed to Politico. The FBI welcomed the now-discredited Steele Dossier alleging Trump had ties to Russia and 51 former intelligence officials signed onto a letter saying Hunter Biden’s now-authenticated laptop was Russian disinformation shortly before the 2020 presidential election.

I think a more accurate story would be that the intelligence community is concerned that a second term of President Trump might force them to be neutral and obey the Constitution. He might also hold them accountable for the times they broke the law. I suspect he might even change the personnel to make the agencies politically neutral. Oh horrors.

The article concludes:

However, Trump’s campaign cited the examples of the Steele Dossier and Hunter Biden laptop letter among examples of intelligence community weaponization against the former president.

“President Trump has been under assault ever since he announced his campaign in 2016,” Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung told the DCNF. “From spying on his campaign, Russiagate, the Russia collusion hoax, the debunked Steele dossier, and the 51 intelligence officials wrongly ignoring Hunter Biden’s laptop from Hell, the establishment has been trying to meddle in elections because they simply can’t stand voters choosing a candidate who puts America First.”

Trump is currently leading Biden by 2.1 points in a RealClearPolitics national average of polls.

The FBI insisted that the intelligence community incorporate the Steele Dossier in a report of foreign meddling in the 2016 election, according to Politico.

Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio hinted Wednesday that the Department of Justice is operating under a double standard after it indicted an FBI informant who allegedly provided false evidence of corruption involving Biden, while letting Christopher Steele, a former operative of the Secret Intelligence Service, off the hook for his dossier that was used to try and remove Trump from office.

The FBI “dug their own grave” by promoting the Steele Dossier, one former intelligence official told Politico.

I pray for an honest election without interference from the intelligence community or the deep state.

Do We Really Want To Give Away American Sovereignty?

On February 19th, American Greatness posted an article about the pandemic treaty the World Health Organization (WHO) is negotiating.

The article reports:

Despite the immense influence wielded by the United Nations, attention to its rumblings is typically rare outside the international crisis du jour. Breaking from this trend, the ongoing negotiation of a pandemic treaty at the World Health Organization has captured the global spotlight long before reaching its anticipated conclusion. Yet, despite this heightened attention, the public debate on how to head off future pandemic threats has largely overlooked the potential impact of the WHO Pandemic Agreement on fundamental freedoms, notably freedom of expression.

Underway since March 2023, the pandemic accord negotiations seek to establish legally binding rules to enhance international cooperation and to strengthen the role of the WHO in preventing, preparing for, and responding to future pandemics.

To purportedly achieve these objectives, the draft text currently under consideration would commit parties to “tackle” such things as misleading information, misinformation, or disinformation, without offering a definition for these terms or specifying how this would be done. It would also require the “management” of so-called “infodemics,” defined as “too much information, false or misleading information, in digital and physical environments during a disease outbreak” causing “confusion” as well as “mistrust” in health authorities. These provisions cast a looming shadow of censorship that should alarm anyone who values open discourse and transparent governance.

America is blessed in that our Founding Fathers gave the power to sort out misinformation and truth to the citizens of our country. That sorting was not to be left to the government. We saw during the Covid pandemic that a disease could be used as a weapon to trample the rights supposedly guaranteed by our Constitution. Understand that these rights were not given by our Constitution–they were supposed to be protected by our Constitution. Also understand that the American Constitution was put in place to limit the power of the government–not the rights of the people. I am not willing to surrender those rights again.

Who Wrote Her Script?

The death of any American military is sad. It should be solemnly addressed by the administration in power. Condolences should be offered. Unfortunately, the Biden administration’s response to the recent deaths of three American soldiers was not exactly what was called for.

On Monday, The Conservative Review reported:

During an interview on MSNBC, Jean-Pierre spoke about the fallen soldiers — but appeared nearly unable to piece together a coherent statement.

What I will say, our deepest, uh, obviously, our deepest condolences go out and our heartfelt condolences go out to the families, uh, who lost, uh, three, three brave, uh, three brave, uh, three brave — three folks who are military folks who are brave, who are always fighting, who are fighting on behalf of this administration, of the American people, obviously, more so, more importantly.

Uh, we lost those souls as the president said yesterday when he was in South Carolina. Our hearts go out to their families and friends. And let’s not forget: there are wounded, also wounded soldier, military forces as well, and our hearts go out to them, and so I want to make sure that we offer up those deep, uh, deep thoughtful condolences to them.

The article includes a video of Karine Jean-Pierre’s remarks.

First of all, the oath these soldiers took was to the U.S. Constitution–not to the Biden administration. Second, I found it demeaning to call these brave soldiers ‘folks.’ They were trained military personnel who swore an oath to defend their Constitution. They were not just folks.