Declarations of Truth

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

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

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

Government strenuously defending censorship By Terry A. Hurlbut Government officials at many levels are filing a slew of alarming friend-of-the-court briefs in support of continued social media censorship. All these briefs amount to special pleading for privileged positions, by virtue either of the offices some of these “friends” hold, or the particular concerns of the issues at hand. Jonathan Turley, a commentator on constitutional law, alerted readers to one of the briefs. But friends of free speech should also take alarm at two of the others. The government doesn’t trust you anymore, if it ever did The United States government – or elements of it that outsiders call The Deep State – clearly fear the people. For that reason, it does not want the people to speak freely about political issues of the day. And they certainly do not want anyone casting suspicion on their activities. So we saw social media turning into State actors – and willingly, too. Evidently the heads of these media needed no persuasion, as Andrew Torba at Gab Social has pointed out. The Attorneys General of Missouri and Louisiana, together with a handful of alternative-media platform directors and medical practitioners that had run afoul of this “thought police,” filed their landmark lawsuit, Missouri v. Biden. They filed their case in Monroe, Louisiana, but the government has appealed it twice. They have appealed to the Fifth Circuit, and lately to the Supreme Court. These appeals come after Judge Terry A. Doughty issued a massive preliminary injunction against all social media censorship activities. (See CourtListener’s docket listings at the District Court and Appeals Court levels. See also two Supreme Court docket listings, for the application for stay, and for a petition for review.) The Supreme Court has stayed the Big Injunction in its entirety and is now receiving friend-of-the-court briefs. (Technically, courts call these “briefs amicus curiae,” from a Latin phrase literally meaning “friend of the curia.” The Latin curia, once standing for a meeting place of the Senate of Rome, today stands for a court.) Nature of the briefs At time of posting, the Supreme Court has received fifteen such briefs. Many of these are “in support of neither party.” These briefs fall into the following broad categories: • Excusing the conduct of the social media platforms themselves, because “the government made them do it.” • Asserting that the courts lack jurisdiction over the private conduct of private moderators, curators, and editors. • Saying government censorship is right and proper, because the respondents demand the freedom to commit actionable fraud. Not only is this fraud actionable, but it also poses a clear and present threat to public health. This is the official position of the American Academy of Pediatrics. • Seeking to preserve the “editorial freedom” of social media platforms in their role as elements of the press. • Asserting that State and local governments have reason to censor as well. • Complaining about “election mis- and disinformation.” • Suggesting that to enjoin the government from communicating with social-media companies might impair “independent technology research.” These briefs come from parties, other than actual government officials, trying to carve out special protections for their own interests. In addition, Stanford University, the parent of several projects at the heart of the Missouri controversy, filed its own friend-of-the-court brief. They held that the respondents had lied about them, and about the “independent research” they were doing. In short their brief defends the Election Integrity Partnership, the Virality Project, and the Stanford Internet Observatory. (America First Legal is also suing EIP and VP.) Government actors filing briefs In contrast, the briefs that concern us today come from actual government officials trying to preserve an authority to censor. In this context, Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) rates a “dishonorable mention.” He briefed the Court to sound Chicken Little-like alarms about “foreign malign influence over social media.” in other words, to paraphrase a famous Sixties-era motion-picture title: The Russians Are Coming! The Russians Are Coming! In fact Sen. Warner specifically cited Robert Mueller’s indictment against a Russian-affiliated company, and several Russia Bogeyman “reports.” But Jonathan Turley took alarm at a different brief: the New York Brief. The State of New York held that States have a power and duty to prevent the “spread of harmful content.” Twenty-one other States, and the District of Columbia, signed on to this brief. The brief defines “harmful content” far too broadly. In its Interests section, it directly conflates: • Protection of minors “against online predators, inappropriate conduct, and cyberbullying” and institution of parental controls, with: • Sharing of raw footage from mass-shooting events, every one of which becomes an excuse for more gun control. As Amici States’ experience confirms, maintaining open lines of communication between the government and social-media companies on topics such as extremist violence, child safety, and consumer protection is mutually beneficial, furthers the public interest, and fully comports with the First Amendment. Mutually beneficial, that is, to the government (apart from the people) and social media moderators acting like bullies. Distinctions without differences The New York Brief makes two distinctions without differences. First, it tries to distinguish between persuasion and coercion. In fact, “persuasion” is a euphemism for “coercion.” “It would be a shame if such-a-dire-thing happened to this person/project whom/that you love” sounds persuasive but is actually coercive. (In fact, counsel for the Missouri plaintiff/respondents have used that precise metaphor in their own briefs, from time to time.) Likewise, “you wouldn’t want such-a-thing to happen to such-a-type-of-person, would you?” is another coercive trope masquerading as persuasion. It assigns moral responsibility where none actually exists, or it precedes a policy solution that will not actually address any problem that might exist. Second, the brief tries to distinguish between the existence of governmental authority, and its actual exercise. That distinction is never important. The mere display of a weapon is often sufficient to deter a criminal act – or to command obedience to a law-enforcement officer in the lawful exercise of his duty and authority. Any LEO knows this – and so does any lawyer. “Brandishing” is also a way a criminal commonly compels his target to cooperate with him. When any authority exists, a court must ask whether the exercise of that authority, in any context, is lawful. The mere existence of an authority is equivalent to an LEO brandishing his service gun or other weapon. How to address actual harms To address the harm-to-minors problem, why permit minors to use social media? If it’s that dangerous, make the medium for adults only, and have done with it! Furthermore, certain kinds of communication are unlawful on their face anyway. Telephone directories, regrettably obsolete today, once had the most helpful advice possible for anyone receiving malicious, annoying, or threatening communications. “Just hang up,” they advised anyone receiving “annoyance calls.” If that didn’t work or if the caller issued threats (credible or not), the recipient could call the police. Teachers, pastors, and any other persons who counsel minors in dealing with social challenges need to teach a practical philosophy. Those who bully others with mere words (apart from violent acts or threats) rely on their targets caring what others think. One who doesn’t care, is not subject to verbal bullying – it simply does not work. Teaching minors not to care, and how not to care, would eliminate cyberbullying as a problem. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33R85hgxVdM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d30xJnL1hUI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VB-W8g1nGdY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLOB6hj3M_Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63mKyppqgWo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSAGq_RA2yQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05mVvWpo5pQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KahiLDtE-rA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0V_Pso2HM10 Existing law already covers such harms as “revenge pornography” and anything else that involves the sharing of information, the owner of which had a reasonable expectation of privacy. But that law also relies on some time-honored advice few parents seem willing to give anymore. “Don’t talk to strangers” had a sound basis, and that basis still holds. Furthermore, many adolescents tend to share too much, thus making themselves vulnerable. Aside from making social media participation adults-only, parents (and teachers) should teach responsible use of social media. New York denies the exercise of authority The New York brief, from the beginning, proposes to excuse all government communication as a mere sharing of information. Nowhere, the brief argues, did anyone give a direct order. CNAV has already explained why that’s a distinction without a difference. New York compounds its problem by referring to its own “broad regulatory and law-enforcement authority.” Maybe the breadth of this authority, is the problem. The brief refers repeatedly to “nonbinding guidance.” But when does guidance from an entity that can shut you down, not bind you to do as they say? “A government entity has the right to ‘speak for itself,’” they say. Fine – so if the government has anything to say, let the government post it publicly. Posts for public consumption were never at issue, and still aren’t. Not one plaintiff has ever said the government may not have a channel of communication with the public. (CNAV has not read any suggestion to discontinue the Emergency Alert System, for example.) But the government telling certain companies that some of their accountholders are trying to defraud the public, is at issue. If actionable fraud is an actual threat, let the government prosecute. They don’t prosecute because they know they’d lose. Not only is “truth… a complete defense,” but even lies require actual malice or deceptive intent to be prosecutable. An example A post saying, “See how vaccines have saved countless lives” would always be appropriate. It would also give the people a chance to check the government’s facts. Then, if necessary, they could reply to the post, saying things like: 1. Can you answer such-a-person’s concern that, we feel, you have not adequately addressed? Or: 2. We challenge you to a debate of such-a-resolution. CNAV is sure that Contributors John Anthony, Bradlee Dean, and others would welcome the opportunity to engage directly with, say, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy (the named Supreme Court petitioner), former “Doctors’ Doctor” Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., or the head of the American Academy of Pediatrics on the question of vaccine safety and effectiveness. So why didn’t Dr. Fauci ever make himself available for such discourse while he held public office? Why won’t Dr. Murthy do the same now? Why won’t the American Academy of Pediatrics send a representative to address issues that properly concern every parent today? What do they actually fear? They say they fear the public harm from people not taking their advice. But maybe they actually fear exposure of themselves, for telling, or merely repeating, a pack of lies. One does not win a debate by restraining another, a priori, from offering an opposing argument. To those who insist, “Vaccine safety and effectiveness are not debatable,” CNAV says: Get off your high horse and debate, or we will take our business elsewhere! That, is what they fear. Open disclosure? Not! The New York Brief also speaks of “open disclosure.” Again, if the government wants to disclose anything, let the government post it. But the government is not interested in open disclosure. They are interested in preventing the disclosure of information contrary to their narratives. When the New York brief discusses assistance to social media companies in enforcing their own policies, they tell two lies. First they conveniently fail to mention that some of the conduct at issue, brought about changes in moderation policies. Those changes would not have occurred, absent the government’s “significant encouragement.” Second, to the extent that any moderation team needed no persuasion, the New York brief has just given the customers of the company in question, another reason to decamp from that medium. They’ll go to Gab Social, or Rumble, or maybe to X, if Elon Musk roots out the troublemakers. As a specific example, the New York brief cites the Buffalo Shooting. The shooter (since L-WOPPed) said he wanted to kill those of a different race than himself. He then “streamed” his act with video shot from his point of view, and offered a “manifesto.” First, New York is still a may-issue State (in defiance of New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen). Had those Buffalo store patrons been armed, we’d be having a different conversation. Second, the “content” need not “harm,” if viewers don’t care. (See above.) Some of that content might provide vital clues. But that’s not good enough for “Nanny State.” Other government briefs Twenty-one other States, and the District of Columbia, signed onto the New York brief. Jonathan Turley listed them all: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and District of Columbia. The Supreme Court has received two other briefs along this same line. Secretaries of State of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Maine, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon and Vermont submitted one – the SoS Brief. The Court also received an Election Officials Brief from a smattering of current and former Secretaries of State and county or municipal election clerks and commissioners. They represent the States of Pennsylvania, Virginia, California, Kentucky, New Jersey, and Michigan, or governmental subunits of those States. Those two briefs addressed alleged election fraud consisting of outlandish rumors about how elections actually run. Some of the rumors defy common sense, so people should easily recognize them as false. Beyond that, the government can easily post its own information, and share with the public the addresses of “official accounts.” Again, direct communication with the public was never at issue. Restraining others from communicating with the public, was and is. Ronald Reagan famously said, The nine most terrifying words in the English language are “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” He might – or might not – have been paraphrasing Sen. Edmund S. Muskie (D-Maine). But the sentiment is still valid. So is this one: Among the most terrifying words in the English language are these: I’m from the government, and I don’t think you should listen to this. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/30/foundation/constitution/government-strenuously-defending-censorship/ Missouri v. Biden: Docket pages: District Court: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63290154/missouri-v-biden/ Appeals Court: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67563473/state-of-missouri-v-biden/ Application for Stay: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23a243.html Cert Petition: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-411.html Briefs: American Academy of Pediatrics: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-411/294091/20231222102540387_FINAL%20Murthy%20Amicus%20for%20filing.pdf Stanford University: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-411/294255/20231226143930837_Murthy%20v.%20Missouri%20--%20SCOTUS%20Amicus%20FINAL.pdf Senator Warner: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-411/294259/20231226144150391_2023.12.26%20FOR%20PRINTER%20Senator%20Warner%20Amicus%20Brief%20-%20Murthy%20v%20Missouri.pdf New York Brief: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-411/294283/20231226181233355_23-411_Amicus%20Brief%20for%20NY%20et%20al%20in%20Support%20of%20Petitioners.pdf SoS Brief: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-411/294256/20231226143954514_SoS%20Amicus%20Brief%20v12.26.23%20FINAL.pdf Election Officials Brief: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-411/294238/20231226164724890_Election%20Officials%20Amicus%20Brief%20Missouri%20v.%20Murthy%20No%2023%20411.pdf Nine Stoic videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33R85hgxVdM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d30xJnL1hUI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VB-W8g1nGdY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLOB6hj3M_Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63mKyppqgWo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSAGq_RA2yQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05mVvWpo5pQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KahiLDtE-rA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0V_Pso2HM10 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Texas immigration war escalates By Terry A. Hurlbut The State of Texas raised the stakes last week in its continuing struggle to stop the flood of illegal immigrants. On Monday December 18, Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas) signed a new law granting Texas law-enforcement officers the authority to arrest illegal immigrants which they find within the State. In response, the federal government threatens to sue the State if it enforces that law. If it does, this will be the third such legal battle between the State and federal governments. These battles clearly arise out of the federal government’s failure to protect against what Texas calls an invasion. Furthermore, some elected officials have made statements suggesting the federal government is using that illegal immigrant flow for its own political ends. The latest between Texas and the federals On December 18, Gov. Abbott signed Senate Bill 4, a measure allowing Texas law-enforcement agencies to arrest illegal immigrants. Usually, such arrests are a federal function, not a State function. But what is a State to do if the federals refuse to arrest illegal immigrants? Arrest them themselves. https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1736869211052417168 NBC News had the full particulars on the signing ceremony, and the new law. This law makes it a misdemeanor – criminal trespass – to cross the border into Texas at any place other than a lawful point of entry. But this X post, from five days earlier, highlights the real issue. https://twitter.com/GriffJenkins/status/1735043118691438935 That video describes a freight train, with illegal migrants clinging to it, that was already headed to the U.S.-Mexican border. On Christmas Eve, Reuters reported on another massive illegal migrant caravan headed for the U.S. (Jim Hoft at TGP noted it as well.) Gov. Abbott has previously tried to stop illegal immigrants in two ways: 1. Placing physical barriers, specifically concertina wire and the recent string of buoys along the Rio Grande, and 2. Transporting migrants to any place other than Texas where they might want to settle, including New York and Washington. The second part has engendered the most controversy to date. Bradlee Dean has accused Abbott (and Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla.) of “importing, not deporting,” and doing what President Joe Biden wants. Lately, Mayor Brandon Johnson of Chicago has started to impound buses bringing migrants into his city. Abbott responded in part – by airlifting migrants instead. The barriers The transportation program has already borne a curious fruit. Mayor Johnson – and Mayor Eric Adams of New York – are complaining about the migrant load. And they are calling on Joe Biden to stop it. The Biden administration responds by insisting that Govs. Abbott and DeSantis ought to take care of the migrants in their own States. (And presumably register them to vote, thus sacrificing their jobs.) But the physical barriers has provoked the legal controversy. Abbott strung concertina wire along property lines fronting the Northern Rio Grande Valley. Border patrol agents have, on several occasions, cut the wires. Lately Texas has won injunctive relief against the wire cutting. When Abbott placed a floating buoy barrier along the Rio Grande, the government sued to have it removed. The government said that the barrier was a menace to navigation, in violation of the Rivers and Harbors Act. Texas has petitioned the full Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to re-hear the case en banc. And now, the arrests But recently the governor, by his own avowal, raised the stakes. By declaring illegal immigrants guilty of a misdemeanor, he has empowered Texas State and local law-enforcement personnel to arrest them. He first announced this on Sunday, December 3. He must have been talking about SB 4 then. On December 18, he actually signed it into law. https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1736869211052417168 The law takes full force and effect on March 5, 2024. In response, Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, sent Gov. Abbott a letter. The message is plain: either Texas declines to enforce this law, or the federal government will sue to enjoin it. Boynton says the new Texas law exceeds the lawful authority of the States. It does this, says Boynton, by asserting a power the Constitution delegates to the federal government alone. That power is the power to secure the border and decide who stays in the United States – and who goes. He cites Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387, 394 (2012). https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1740476033495617701 (Note: this CBS picture shows the floating barrier and the concertina wire – the physical barriers Abbot has already tried using.) Boynton suggested that if Gov. Abbott could cite facts or law to support SB 4, he should share. This is what Gov. Abbott shared in reply: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1740491497357893853 Reaction to the Texas law, and the threats When CBS News released its X post about the threatening letter, that post got some pointed reaction. Most of it was negative – toward the Biden administration, and perhaps toward CBS. https://twitter.com/Throttle_This/status/1740481789687451720 https://twitter.com/FrankDeScushin/status/1740486159619227822 https://twitter.com/GHHILL1911/status/1740487515818348651 https://twitter.com/My_tucker_acct/status/1740494756646703144 https://twitter.com/StevePender/status/1740532912091472052 This user cited Amendment X as the source of Texas’ authority. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. https://twitter.com/EmTeaVe/status/1740482382640357867 Perhaps that user should have cited Article I, Section 10, Clause 3: No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, … engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay. But in reaction to Gov. Abbott’s quote of the CBS post, one user suggested Texas LEOs might arrest federal agents. https://twitter.com/albert1776/status/1740495064789574031 In fact the most arrogant federal response to the Texas position comes, not from the Justice Department, but from a Member of Congress. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) openly decried all talk of an invasion from Mexico (or anywhere else). https://twitter.com/DonaldTNews/status/1740168062513631635 So often people wanna (sic) say, “Why are you talking about the border crisis?” (Or, “why are you talking about it in this way?”) Well, we’re talking about it; they just don’t like how we’re talking about it. Because it’s not a border crisis. It’s an imperialism crisis, it’s a climate crisis; it’s a trade crisis. Because these … this is not a “surge.” These are children. And they are not insurgents, and we are not being invaded. Which, by the way, is a white-supremacist idea, philosophy,… Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) That didn’t go over very well, either. Analysis Throughout this process, Texas has merely sought to try to protect the border when the federal government would not. Does the government wish to leave the border unprotected? Cullen Linebarger of TGP says yes, and suggests why. Three weeks ago he recalled Vivek Ramaswamy’s statement that the Democratic Party wants to replace those who vote against it, with others more likely to vote for them – and the handouts they offer. https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1732585805128892673 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1732736633223483676 Ramaswamy has a point – because more than a year ago, Sen. Charles M. Schumer (D-N.Y.) gave it to him. https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1592928904112922625 When he said that, Schumer vindicated Tucker Carlson, who said the same six months earlier: https://twitter.com/jasonrantz/status/1526754013437255680 The Biden administration might be vindicating both men, through their reckless disregard not only of the truth but of the clear public knowledge of it. In any case, the threatened lawsuit against Texas makes no legal sense, apart from a motive to go on importing indigent – and mendicant – people. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/29/foundation/constitution/texas-immigration-war-escalates/ Gov. Abbott signs SB 4 into law: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1736869211052417168 Portrait of a migrant caravan: https://twitter.com/GriffJenkins/status/1735043118691438935 CBS report of the lawsuit: https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1740476033495617701 Text of the DOJ letter: https://www.scribd.com/document/695371577/Department-of-Justice-Letter-to-Governor-Abbott-Re-SB-4 Abbott’s response: https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1740491497357893853 Reaction to CBS Report: https://twitter.com/Throttle_This/status/1740481789687451720 https://twitter.com/FrankDeScushin/status/1740486159619227822 https://twitter.com/GHHILL1911/status/1740487515818348651 https://twitter.com/My_tucker_acct/status/1740494756646703144 https://twitter.com/StevePender/status/1740532912091472052 https://twitter.com/EmTeaVe/status/1740482382640357867 Post suggesting arrests of federal agents: https://twitter.com/albert1776/status/1740495064789574031 Post embedding AOC’s statement: https://twitter.com/DonaldTNews/status/1740168062513631635 Discussion of Great Replacement: https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1732585805128892673 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1732736633223483676 https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1592928904112922625 https://twitter.com/jasonrantz/status/1526754013437255680 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Georgia elections insecure statewide? By Terry A. Hurlbut The election integrity issue in Georgia now has gone State-wide and involves more than Fulton County alone. In fact it involves elections with “sore losers” from both ends of the traditional ideological spectrum. The corruption reaches as high as the Secretary of State himself – the chief election officer. And we know that because this officer is asking a federal appellate court to quash a bench order that he testify under oath about how well – or how poorly – he has been doing his job for lo, these many years. He must testify – and explain why he refuses to fix the problem until after the Election of 2024. Georgia elections – problems from both sides After the Election of 2020, all attention focused on the result of the Presidential election, and after that the Senate Runoffs of January 5, 2021. In fact, President Donald J. Trump is facing criminal charges for trying to urge Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find more votes” so that he, not Joe Biden, could carry the State. Raffensperger definitely, even indignantly, refused even to investigate whether anything untoward happened in Fulton County, the State’s most populous. (Fulton is the county where lies the city of Atlanta, which hires temporary workers as Officers of Election.) Raffensperger certified Joe Biden has having carried the State. Two months later he would similarly certify the elections of two Democratic Senators, thus handing the Senate to the Democrats. (Technically the Senate was tied – but Vice-President Kamala Harris became the Queen of Tiebreakers in the 117th Congress.) But no one thought of a sleepy sore-loser case from the political left. Donna Curling, of the Coalition for Good Governance, sued the State after Democrats narrowly lost a special election in Georgia’s Sixth District in 2017. Brian Kemp – now the Governor – was Secretary of State at the time. When Kemp ran for Governor in 2018, Brad Raffensperger ran for Secretary of State and won. Interestingly, then-Rep. Karen Handel (R-6th), winner of that special election, lost to incumbent Rep. Lucy McBath (D-6th). But that was after Donna Curling, her Coalition, and several other Democratic voters sued the State. Leftist voters raised questions about voting machines six years ago Handel won that special-election runoff in June 2017 with 51.87 percent of the vote. The New York Times called her victory “demoralizing for Democrats,” but that doesn’t half say it. The Coalition for Good Governance bitterly resented the results and looked for any reason to contest them. And they found one. The case now called Curling v. Raffensperger (1:17-cv-02989) began in the Superior Court of Fulton County, State of Georgia. It is now in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (Atlanta Division). That’s because then-Secretary of State Kemp filed a Notice of Removal one month after Ms. Curling and her fellow plaintiffs sued in the Fulton County court. The original State court complaint names the key issues: 1. Direct Recording (DRE) devices that produce ballots the voter cannot even read, and 2. Software vulnerabilities that a Georgia computer expert discovered, affecting the entire State election infrastructure. The Logan Lamb investigation Logan Lamb, a private citizen, began his investigation on August 23, 2016. His affidavit appears as Exhibit A of the original complaint. At the time, Georgia’s election infrastructure was in the hands of the Center for Election Services at Kennesaw State University. From the beginning Lamb knew something was wrong. He first discovered voter-registration information in a cache at the Google search engine. Then he accessed a download address at CES/KSU and found a treasure trove that should never have been publicly available. This included voter-registration databases, Election Management System databases, and Microsoft Windows executable and Dynamic Link Library (DLL) files. But most damning of all, he found a PDF file with election supervisor passwords. Worse yet, the server was running a content management system called Drupal – in an obsolete version. That version had a known vulnerability to a Drupal exploit called “Drupageddon.” This article in Linux Journal describes it in detail. More to the point, the Drupal community knew about the vulnerability in 2014. Linux Journal recommended patches and “defense in depth” in 2015. Mr. Lamb’s findings clearly show that no one at CES/KSU bothered to address this issue. Georgia refuses to act – and other vulnerabilities surface Lamb advised Merle King, his contact at CES/KSU, of the problem. Mr. King told him verbally that the Center would work on it. But in February of 2017 Lamb found out that the system was just as vulnerable as he originally found it. Lamb ended his affidavit with his discovery of training videos that instruct Chief Officers of Election (OOEs) to download files from the CES/KSU website, load them onto memory cards, then insert those cards into local voting machines. In short, he found how easily a hacker could spread malware throughout the entire Georgia election system. Lamb’s investigation, and that of his colleague Chris Grayson, began a process that continued with the FBI taking physical possession of the server. The complaint refers to the Russia Hack rumors, thus confusing the issue. Why the Russians would be interested in a down-ticket special election in Georgia, the plaintiffs have never made clear. But far easier to believe, is that Georgia politics has been corrupt for years. That corruption is the source of the negligence (at least) at CES/KSU, and the refusal to address key security vulnerabilities. But that’s not all. Apparently on April 15, 2017, an OOE in Cobb County was transporting Electronic Poll Books in his truck while shopping. Some person(s) unknown, stole the poll books. A special election with its own problems The Special Election itself was a “jungle primary,” and was fraught with such issues as: 1. EPB software issues prompting OOEs to send voters to different precincts – then send them back. 2. The “uploading of improper and unauthorized memory cards,” resulting in delays in results reporting. Shades of the Arizona Midterms! Despite that, Kemp insisted on using the same system for the June runoff. The issues detailed thus far were bad enough – but ballot marking devices that produce ballots voters can’t read, compounded the problems. Furthermore, other experts knew how vulnerable those DREs could be since 2006. The plaintiffs wanted a system of paper ballots – and Georgia election officials refused. Defendants commonly “remove” cases to federal court hoping to dismiss them. But that did not happen in this case. When the defendants filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a federally actionable claim, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. Judge Amy Totenberg denied the Motion to Dismiss as moot. More complaints, a trial date – and Raffensperger refuses to testify The docket now runs to eleven pages covering six years of motions and countermotions – and more amended complaints. Donna Curling and two other individuals filed their Third Amended Complaint on October 15, 2019. The Coalition for Good Governance and the remaining individuals filed a Supplemental Amended Complaint the same day. On January 9, 2023, the State of Georgia filed two Motions for Summary Judgment (here and here) against these complaints. This took place after many hearings and other actions, including action by the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Judicial Circuit. On June 7, 2023, at the request of Donna Curling, the court unsealed the infamous Halderman Report. That Report indicates how vulnerable Dominion Voting Systems’ Ballot Marking Devices can be. Judge Totenberg’s order denying summary judgment reveals that the original Direct Recording Electronic system, with its known issues, is no longer in use. The present Ballot Marking Device system by Dominion Voting Systems replaced it in 2020. Accordingly, the court granted summary judgment as to the original systems but denied it as to the current system. That case will go to trial on January 9, 2024. But yesterday morning, Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit reported that Brad Raffensperger doesn’t want to testify under oath about the use of electronic voting machines! https://twitter.com/Crimsontider/status/1739645776005874108 James Magazine Online has further details: Last month U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg ruled that a lawsuit against Georgia’s use of electronic voting machines must go to a non-jury trial in January. She ordered Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to defend the state’s utilization of electronic voting prior to the upcoming presidential primary election because the lawsuit questions whether Georgia’s current system of computerized voting is safe or whether it is vulnerable to potential hacking. However, the state (spending taxpayer money) is now appealing to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to keep Raffensperger from testifying. Says one lawyer to James Magazine Online familiar with the case: “Raffensperger selected the system, repeatedly defends the system as secure, but now can’t take an hour or so in federal court to defend it.” At time of writing, the Notice of Appeal hasn’t made it onto CourtListener’s docket listing. Furthermore, Erick-Woods Erickson, who runs a radio program in Georgia, has never discussed this case. Analysis The Curling v. Raffensperger case reveals one thing above all: Georgia politics is dirtier than any outsider could have imagined. Erick-Woods Erickson thinks – or would have his listeners and subscribers believe – he knows Georgia politics. He either doesn’t, or he’s lying to his listeners and subscribers to cover up. Erickson is not a government official; Brad Raffensperger is. But this case clearly demonstrates that the Secretary of State’s office has been corrupt for years. Brian Kemp either corrupted the process or inherited an already corrupt process. When he ran for governor, Brad Raffensperger ran for SOS to replace him. That officer has been running a corrupt system ever since, and is in a perfect position to dictate election results as he sees fit. That would include making sure that: • Joe Biden, not Donald Trump, would carry Georgia in 2020, • Rafael Warnock and Jon Ossoff, Democrats both, would enter the Senate, if only to spite the Republican rank and file, • He (Raffensperger) and his friend Brian Kemp can assure themselves of endless reelections, and • Madison Cawthorn would lose reelection after revealing the sexual shenanigans into which senior Members of the House invited him. (Recent events have vindicated Cawthorn in that sensational revelation.) In short, Democratic and Republican rank and file alike have reason to suspect that Georgia elections are selections. The role of Stacey Abrams becomes less clear. Nowhere in the docket of Curling v. Raffensperger does her name appear. Why not? What Georgia voters and legislators must do about it Nevertheless, two things are readily apparent. First, no one can be sure, anymore, of any elections in Georgia. Second, Brian Kemp and Brad Raffensperger are equally guilty of corrupting Georgia elections, or maintaining existing corruption. Brad Raffensperger is not doing his job. Georgia voters need to vote him out as Secretary of State. If the legislature has enough collective character, they can and should remove him on impeachment. How easy any of the above will be, will depend on the upcoming trial. The Secretary of State’s attempt to avoid testifying is a sign of guilt and fear. A judgment for the plaintiffs is not likely to result in a mandate for paper ballots. Judge Totenberg, in her order, disclaimed the authority to issue such an order. She hinted at reforms that might make the system more open. She could, for example, order Georgia to switch to a BMD that produces voter-readable ballots. That would solve one problem, at least, but leave the scanner-tabulators in place. So voters need to make a consistent issue that electronic voting machines are inherently unsafe. All jurisdictions should move back to paper ballots. Spalding County in Georgia has already taken a step in that direction. Other counties can do the same, and maybe force the issue State-wide. The listing of all races on one ballot would have to end, so that large teams of OOEs can count them all at once. The French do it. Americans should do the same. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/28/editorial/talk/georgia-elections-insecure-statewide/ Curling v. Raffensperger: Docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6139924/curling-v-raffensperger/ Original complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.240678/gov.uscourts.gand.240678.1.2_1.pdf Notice of Removal: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.240678/gov.uscourts.gand.240678.1.0.pdf First Amended Complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.240678/gov.uscourts.gand.240678.15.0.pdf Third Amended Complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.240678/gov.uscourts.gand.240678.627.0_2.pdf Coalition Supplemental Complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.240678/gov.uscourts.gand.240678.628.0.pdf Motions for Summary Judgment: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.240678/gov.uscourts.gand.240678.1567.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.240678/gov.uscourts.gand.240678.1568.0.pdf Order denying summary judgment: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.240678/gov.uscourts.gand.240678.1705.0_1.pdf Article in Linux Journal describing Drupageddon: https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/drupageddon-sql-injection-database-abstraction-and-hundreds-thousands-web-sites X post reporting Raffensperger’s refusal to testify: https://twitter.com/Crimsontider/status/1739645776005874108 Previous article describing the French voting system: https://cnav.news/2023/06/24/editorial/talk/france-votes-paper/ Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Disney must sink or swim By Terry A. Hurlbut The Walt Disney Company just lost a major institutional investor. The State of South Carolina, which holds $105 million in Disney “commercial paper,” will not renew any of it. Furthermore, State Treasurer Curtis Loftis told the public, through Fox Business Digital, what it already knows. Which is that The Walt Disney Company is firmly in the hands of the Council of Woke. We know that the public knows this, because they have withdrawn their patronage and told everyone who will listen, why. An experienced troubleshooter offers to help Disney get back to business – and current management refuses to cooperate or listen. If they don’t listen, they will die as a company – but they already have their rainbow-colored parachutes. Where does Disney stand? Disney (NYSE:DIS) opened at $90.44 per share this morning, already down from $90.95 at yesterday’s close. This puts it slightly less than midway in its fifty-two-week range ($78.48 to $117.80). Yesterday, South Carolina Treasurer Curtis Loftis announced the divestment from Disney for all of South Carolina’s funds. Moneywise carried the story. I think it's clear to anybody paying attention that there's a structural rot inside of Disney. It's deep, it’s pervasive, and I suspect Bob Iger, since his return as the CEO, now realizes it can't be fixed. Curtis Loftis Mr. Loftis went further, saying that all the top talents that built Disney are now gone. In their place is “the gender studies crowd” who clearly want to send a cultural-Marxist, critical-theoretical message to Disney’s customers. Mr. Loftis offered few details, but we all know the details. A litany of bad – and ideological – decisions After buying Twentieth Century-Fox (at a premium), Disney shelved Sound of Freedom. Its producers had to fight to get their rights back. Then Angel Studios distributed the film and made at least $250 million worldwide. This, on a film that cost only $14.5 million to produce and $5.5 million to market by word-of-mouth alone! At the same time, Disney has destroyed at least two major franchises it acquired with Fox. It did this by changing the motives of its characters and selling a version of male-female relations that none but an LGBTQIA+ ideologue could appreciate. We have seen a “Mary Sue” female lead take the place of a beloved male lead who was only a shadow of his former self. (Worse, she serves a rebel force with an all-female high command of dubious military competence.) In the other franchise, a new female lead humiliates the old male lead as he tries to pretend he is still his younger self. (The initial plan was worse: she was to supplant him in time.) And in the ultimate humiliation, Sound of Freedom eclipsed Indiana Jones Five in domestic box-office take. Add to it that Disney’s rides, apart from their “Woke” themes, are unsafe. Several accidents have happened that would have gotten ride crews fired at any other theme park. Consequences Small wonder, then, that former Disney customers are not attending Disney movies or parks, nor buying Disney toys (nor any of their traditionally overpriced souvenirs), nor streaming on Disney channels. The toymaker Hasbro has laid off 20 percent of its workforce and closed an office by reason of lost sales. Why? Because they sell Disney toys, and those toys are not moving. Recently Disney’s management had to admit how “Broke” they’re going after getting “Woke.” Every year, every publicly traded company has to answer to one agency that will make no allowances for political messaging. That agency is the Securities and Exchange Commission. So far, that agency has not adopted “stakeholder capitalism” to measure attention to fiduciary duty. Disney’s SEC report for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2023 says it all. Jonathan Turley, on November 27, quoted from that report, which tells some hard truths: We face risks relating to misalignment with public and consumer tastes and preferences for entertainment, travel and consumer products. The success of our businesses depends on our ability to consistently create compelling content. Generally, our revenues and profitability are adversely impacted when our entertainment offerings and products, as well as our methods to make our offerings and products available to consumers, do not achieve sufficient consumer acceptance. Further, consumers’ perceptions of our position on matters of public interest, including our efforts to achieve certain of our environmental and social goals, often differ widely and present risks to our reputation and brands. Translation: “We haven’t given the public what they want. We are in the compelling content business. But the public no longer wants what we have to sell. To make it worse, we can’t please everybody with our stands on the environment and society.” Anyone could have told them that from the beginning. But they would not listen – until it started to hurt their bottom line. And even then they blame the public for not wanting their message. Why is Disney in this fix? Julian Adorney, writing in The Washington Examiner, identifies a litany of excuse-making across the entertainment industry. Whenever a movie gets criticized for “going woke” and then bombs at the box office, some cultural commentators on the Left insist that America is just too bigoted to appreciate diversity. When The Little Mermaid was remade into a live-action movie starring Halle Bailey, the Guardian chalked up its poor performance to a “racist backlash.” When the gay rom-com Bros flopped, director Nicholas Stoller blamed the failure on straight people . “Gay men are the only people who saw the movie,” he complained. Adorney guesses the real problem is that “Woke” scriptwriters opt for “simplistic stories and heavy-handed moralizing.” That’s certainly part of the problem, and reflects a general lack of talent in the industry today. To illustrate the problem, consider three movies from the early Sixties that struck a decisive (and leftist) moral tone: • The Manchurian Candidate, • Seven Days in May, and • Fail-Safe. All three sent a definite message: better to risk conquest by the Soviet Union, than mutual nuclear annihilation. But none of the three featured the kind of cardboard-character leads typical of films today. The villains were incredibly complex characters that made thwarting them the more challenging. Likewise, the heroes often made choices of which many would not approve. (Doctor Strangelove was the exception – but Stanley Kubrick wrote it for laughs, and his cast played it for laughs.) Contrast that with the “Disney Star Wars Sequel Trilogy” or with Indy Five as originally conceived. The messages there were insultingly plain. All men, especially heterosexual men, are incompetent oafs. Only homosexual men are safe for women to be around. Even better, let’s kill all the men and let the women make love to one another. (The next generation? The attitude varies from “our scientists are working on a fix” to “who cares?” Except that the scientists are not working on a fix! They say they are – but they’re lying.) The messages are the problem But CNAV disagrees with Adorney. The messages themselves, are the problem. Sidney Lumet, John Frankenheimer, Rod Serling, and George Axelrod – some of the director-producers and writers of those three Sixties-era films – could get away with their own high-handed leftist moralizing for the same reason Lyndon Baines Johnson won election as President in 1964 with the “Daisy” campaign advertisement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riDypP1KfOU That reason is: the American people were still ambivalent at best about whether to fear the Soviet Union. The programs of Sen. Joseph McCarthy (R-Wisc.) and Gen. Edwin Walker made people think maybe “the Russians” were right! Ronald Reagan would have to wait a decade and a half before the people would receive his pro-America message well. Today it’s different. Whether Joe Biden won the Presidency legitimately or not, everyone now knows that leftism is a public-policy disaster. Movies, books, and other entertainment projects that reflect leftism will not sell well today. But Disney – obeying the commands of Larry Fink (what an apt name!) of BlackRock – is still pushing The Message. Nelson Peltz would like to help One major investor would like to set things right. Nelson Peltz of Trian Management makes his money by buying troubled firms cheap, then turning them around. He has been offering to do the same for Disney for nearly a year. And Disney is having none of it. Like Twitter when Elon Musk came calling, they are putting in poison-pill rules changes. Meanwhile, Ike Perlmutter, former chairman of Marvel Entertainment, recently gave Peltz his proxy. Yet the fight continues, and now Nelson Peltz has issued an ultimatum. Business Wire quotes him: Since we gave Disney the opportunity to prove it could ‘right the ship’ last February, up to our re-engagement weeks ago, shareholders lost ~$70 billion of value. Disney's share price has underperformed proxy peers and the broader market over every relevant period during the last decade and over the tenure of each incumbent director. Investor confidence is low, key strategic questions loom, and even Disney's CEO is acknowledging that the Company's challenges are greater than previously believed. While James Gorman and Sir Jeremy Darroch represent an improvement from the status quo, the addition of these directors will not, in our view, restore investor confidence or address the root cause behind the significant value destruction and missteps that this Board has overseen. Trian intends to take our case for change directly to shareholders. And what is that root cause? Going woke, that’s what. And according to Brandon Morse at RedState, they are stubbornly continuing to go woke. Bob Iger, now serving his second non-consecutive term as head of Disney, knows what the problem is. He says he intends to correct it – but he does not. Iger probably has a deeper commitment to the Woke Ideology even than his master, Fink of BlackRock. The skeptic in me sees a lot of what Iger is saying and doing as a way to put shareholders at ease and make them think Disney is righting the ship on its own without the guidance of Peltz and Trian. It makes me wonder if this is all an act meant to get shareholders to vote for Disney's choice of board members and not for Trian's so that they continue doing wrong by the American people once power is secured again, and the message pushing can continue unabated. Brandon Morse CNAV doesn’t wonder; we know. This is “all an act” for the dubious benefit of shareholders. Iger is in the proxy fight of his life, and he’s fighting to win. Woke warriors are often bigger liars than Muslim clerics have been on recent occasion. Disney has rivals In the meantime, rivals are rising, or consolidating their own power, every day. The American Heartland park will rise near Vinita, Oklahoma – after poaching Disney’s talent, apparently with Disney’s complete “cooperation.” The Six Flags and Cedar Fair empires announced a merger that will take full effect next season. Meanwhile, alternative movie studios are springing up and releasing uplifting content – the kind that built Disney. So the House of Mouse has a choice: return to its roots, or die. The next question is: do that company’s managers even care? Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/27/editorial/talk/disney-sink-swim/ The SEC Report: https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/0001744489/000174448923000216/dis-20230930.htm The Daily Ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riDypP1KfOU Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Washington did the impossible By Terry A. Hurlbut Two hundred forty-seven years ago this morning, the Continental Army, General George Washington commanding, ambushed a large force of Hessian mercenaries in the Battle of Trenton. Not only did the Continental Army win a stunning victory, but morale, which had suffered greatly in the half-year following the Declaration of Independence, climbed high enough to sustain the war effort at a crucial time. But to bring this about, Washington had to do two things no one, friend or foe, would have suspected. He attacked in the middle of winter – and in those days, armies did not fight in winter. But before then, he and his army had to cross an ice-cold river – the Delaware. His advisers told him he couldn’t do it – because no one could – but he did it anyway. That one act made the difference between victory and defeat. What Washington faced The Continental Army probably never had any of the advantages an army guarding an established society enjoys. “Not worth a Continental” was a common saying then, and it referred to the new country’s currency. So pay in the Continental Army was hit or miss. British forces under General William Howe had chased Washington out of New York that summer and fall, taking many prisoners. Those that escaped – going as far as Pennsylvania – were already demoralized. Many of their mates had deserted or simply “not re-upped” when their enlistments expired. Worse, two of his generals – Horatio Gates and Charles Lee – evidently preferred to argue with and disobey him. (Even one bad general can defeat two or more good generals who argue.) But on December 19 can an event that demonstrates the value of propaganda in boosting troop morale. Thomas Paine (Common Sense) published his American Crisis pamphlet. This pamphlet begins with this salient quote: These are the times that try men’s souls: the summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly. Apart from the universal truth of that statement, Paine, in those words, gave Washington what he needed most: a moral-philosophical doctrine to remind his troops of what victory would require. He ordered his officers to read that to his troops – and they took the hint. The troops gather Washington had made his camp near McConkey’s Ferry, across and slightly upriver from Trenton. On December 20, General Charles Lee’s division arrived. That arrival is interesting in itself, because it had come about from a change of command. Charles Lee had ventured beyond the protection of his troops, and the British had captured him. General John Sullivan took command and followed Washington’s original order to join him. General Gates’ division was not so large – only 600, net of enlisted who didn’t “re-up.”But 1000 militiamen soon joined the gathering force. With so many forces now available to him, Washington decided to attack. He sent his Adjutant General, Joseph Reed, to cross the river alone and meet with militiamen stationed near Mount Holly, New Jersey. Reed found a force of troops in poor condition, and signaled that an assault at Mount Holly would likely fail. So Washington decided to attack the Trenton garrison directly. But those Mount Holly militiamen did create a crucial diversion – the Battle of Iron Works Hill, on December 23. That battle drew some Hessians away from Trenton – and the rest never expected any further action. The crossing and the attack That’s because the Hessians (and the British) never expected any general to try to cross a major river, and bring artillery and cavalry as well as infantry, unless the river were frozen over first. In fact, Washington’s spies reported the suspicion that the British would try to cross when the river was frozen over. So on the night of Christmas Day, Washington took his army across – or at least part of it. (Of the other two parts, one didn’t cross at all. The other cross, but after the battle was over and Washington had already recrossed into Pennsylvania.) But Washington made it across with his largest contingent of troops, including cavalry horses and artillery pieces. Here the famous Marblehead Rowers earned their fame: all night long they rowed, to ferry Washington’s troops and materiel across. The last of the artillery pieces made it across at 3:00 a.m. At 4:00 a.m. the army was ready to march. Once they were ready, Washington split his army into two columns and thus attacked Trenton from two directions. To add to the complete surprise, the postmaster of Trenton, Abraham Hunt, who had pretended to be a Loyalist, entertained the British commander and some of his officers at his house. Likewise, the Trenton garrison were celebrating Christmas – and Washington caught them completely unaware and unprepared. The Continentals suffered very light casualties: three killed and six wounded. They took a far heavier toll on the enemy: 22 killed, 98 wounded, and nearly 1000 captured. Washington goes back across – and then back for more Now Washington had to bring his troops – and those prisoners, and the large quantity of supplies they had also captured – back across to Pennsylvania. To make things more difficult, his troops had captured several casks of rum during the battle. Instead of destroying them, many of the troops drank it up – with predictable results during the recrossing. Still, Washington succeeded in the recrossing. The next day he heard that the British and Hessians had retreated to Princeton. So he took his entire force back across the Delaware, though he couldn’t complete the crossing until New Year’s Eve. The enemy attacked him at Assunpink Creek on January 2, 1777, but without success. The next day he attacked Princeton and chased the British away. So the Continental Army wintered in Morristown, New Jersey that year. This time the losses struck a little closer to home: Washington’s personal friend Hugh Mercer died in that operation. To this day the State of New Jersey remembers him: the country that includes Trenton is called Mercer County. Incredibly, Abraham Hunt created such confusion that he stood trial for Loyalist sentiment! The court acquitted him on the testimony of several Patriots who attested to the crucial role he played at Trenton. Lessons learned The American people can take several lessons from the campaign that began with Washington crossing the Delaware. First, of course, is Thomas Paine’s lesson, which the Continental Army put into practice. Second is the importance of follow-up. Whoever wins a victory and then fails to follow up on it, wastes it. Third is the importance of unity of command – and understanding that, when the commanding general cuts an order, he’s thought about it, and it’s best to obey it. But the most important lesson is never to assume that anything is impossible – either for yourself or for your adversary. The British learned that the hard way – and the Americans learned it, again, by practicing the lesson. Sadly, Thomas Paine’s other lesson also applies. “What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly,” he said – and that goes double for a legacy. The day might indeed come when Americans have to pay as high a price for liberty as Washington and his troops paid. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/26/foundation/constitution/washington-did-impossible/ Thomas Paine’s The American Crisis: https://americainclass.org/sources/makingrevolution/war/text2/painecrisis1776.pdf Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Oumuamua catches the collective eye – again By Terry A. Hurlbut Comet Oumuamua, the longest-period comet ever observed, has long since departed our solar system. But questions remain – because no one, looking at this object, can make up his mind what it is or was. Recently another scientist released a paper saying only that one theory to explain its behavior, won’t wash. Immediately a popular YouTube influencer jumped on that finding to say, “There! You see! It’s not a comet, and not an asteroid! It’s an alien probe!” The scientist he quoted would probably not be happy to hear such an “un-nuanced” speculation. But even he can never grasp what Oumuamua really represents, without discarding a bedrock assumption of conventional science. Which, sadly, is that we are lucky (or unlucky) products of a cosmic roulette cast billions of years ago. As we prepare to celebrate the birth of our Lord and Savior, we ought to make some effort to understand that the evidence, far from disproving the Account of His Birth and Mission, actually supports it. Observations about Oumuamua, and the problems they create Oumuamua (Ooh-MOO-wah-MOO-wah) (Hawaiian: “scout”) likely began entering (or reentering) our solar system early in 2015. Astronomers at the Haleakalā Observatory didn’t notice it until October 19, 2017 – when it was already heading back out. It follows an apparently hyperbolic path, which would make it the first-ever suspected interstellar object. It must have passed perihelion (closest approach to the Sun) on September 9, 2017. By now it’s long gone, far too dim to observe. By the time anyone had seen it, it was too late even to plan a mission to send a probe to fly in formation with it. Oumuamua is supposed to have started into our system from the Galactic Standard of Rest. This is a frame of reference equivalent to the Galaxy itself as it spins about its core. But the source of the most fevered speculation about it is its “non-gravitational acceleration.” It traveled faster by 17 meters per second than it had before – without passing any bodies that could have accelerated it by gravity. The speed difference works out to 38 miles per hour, or 33 knots. No one can yet explain what accelerated that object, if it didn’t pass close enough to a planet. But that hasn’t stopped astronomers from trying. Three competing theories Abraham “Avi” Loeb insists that Oumuamua is a light-sail craft. Late in 2018 he published his paper explaining his thesis. It’s either a lighe-sail craft, or a broken piece of a Dyson Sphere. Most of his scientific colleagues heap scorn on him even for believing that extraterrestrial aliens exist. On Wednesday March 22, Jennifer Bergner and Darryl Seligman published their theory in the journal Nature. They conclude that Oumuamua is a comet – specifically a water-ice comet that underwent thermolysis to form molecular hydrogen and oxygen. This thermolysis allegedly occurred in interstellar space. As Oumuamua passed incredibly close to the Sun, it released its hydrogen load. That release propelled it on its outbound leg, when the Hawaii astronomers first saw it. Loeb discounted that theory from its first appearance – and now, perhaps, he can claim some small measure of vindication. Niels Ligterink of the University of Bern, in reply to Bergner and Seligman, says hydrogen outgassing is very difficult to reconcile with observations. On November 30, he sat for an interview with Brigit Bucher, also of the University of Bern. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkLeaglvtbM Ligterink knew at once that the observed acceleration would require an enormous amount of hydrogen. He and his team tried to simulate hydrogen formation in interstellar space. This would require an age of at least a billion years, and an icy surface with methanol and ammonia, not water ice alone. Astronomers have never seen any object with such composition among the Mavericks of the Solar System. But is it a space probe? Not so fast! Ligterink is willing to speculate that Oumuamua is an active space probe – he even says the possibility excites him. But he does not consider that likely. Furthermore: Unfortunately, some astronomers have hijacked this debate for personal gain with un-nuanced scientific work. He didn’t name any names, but he might well be talking about Avi Loeb. Ligterink’s work is in trying to understand the “icy moons” of the solar system, particularly Europa (Jupiter) and Enceladus (Saturn). The physical characteristics of Oumuamua make it even less likely to be a spacecraft. It measures 120 meters (nearly 400 feet) in length – or diameter. The full set of physical dimensions make it a disk, not a “cigar.” But apparently it tumbles, instead of spinning like a top. Furthermore, radio telescopes designed to listen for alien signals have detected no such signals from this object. Nevertheless, Jordan “The Angry Astronaut” Wright seized upon the Ligterink paper to shout, “See? I told you so!” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig_9oiUr0pU Wright included an artist’s concept of Oumuamua as a metal probe tied with shrouds to a gigantic light “spinnaker.” (As sailors know, a spinnaker is a sail strongly resembling a parachute, that one deploys when running before the wind.) He also said flatly, “It’s official! Oumuamua is neither comet nor asteroid!” That is not what Ligterink said. He said an object producing enough hydrogen to accelerate it as proposed, would have an composition radically unlike any asteroid or comet thus far observed. So what is Oumuamua? CNAV returns to its original theory – that Oumuamua is a long-period comet, now returned to Earth. Fifty-four hundred years ago (give or take a century) came the most violent event Earth has ever known: the Flood. That event was violent enough to eject four percent of the Earth’s substance into space. That substance, consisting of water, rock and mud, formed the Mavericks of the Solar System. It also formed: • The moons of Mars, Jupiter (except the Galileans), Saturn (except Titan), Uranus, and Neptune, • Dwarf planets Pluto and Charon and their four known co-orbiting satellites, • Dwarf planet Eris and its one known satellite, and • All meteoroids, comets, asteroids, and trans-Neptunian objects. The oldest candidate date for the Global Flood is 3344 BC. If Oumuamua formed from material launched in that year, then in 663 BC it would have reached aphelion (the farthest-away point from the Sun). Aphelion, for a long-period comet, would be at or close to the Galactic Standard of Rest. Then it would start to fall back, to arrive in 2017. On its way in, it would leave behind several other objects that originally slowed it to an elliptical orbit. This explains the hyperbolic orbit astronomers observed. And the acceleration would be due, not to hydrogen outgassing but to water outgassing. This theory would not depend on thermolysis or radiolysis of hydrogen-bearing compounds like methanol or ammonia. Conclusion Jordan Wright, with all the respect due him, is in a spiritually dark place. Refusing to believe in a beneficent God, he actually prefers to believe in a maleficent, or else negligent, alien civilization. A civilization that, for whatever reason, stationed a buoy outside our solar system. Yet it could build gigantic and powerful radio lighthouses that, he says, are the pulsars we see today. So that “buoy” was no navigational aid, but an automatic spy station that sent a spy balloon to reconnoiter Earth six years ago. (Oh, those Chinese must be pea-green with envy! Their spy balloon didn’t get away!) Christmas is coming. It might not be the exact anniversary of the birth of Christ, but it will do for our purpose. Which is to wish everyone a truly Merry Christmas, in the full confidence that an Infinite God created us – and loves us, despite our failings. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/23/civilization/christianity-today/creation/oumuamua-catches-collective-eye-again/ Scientific articles: Abraham “Avi” Loeb: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2515-5172/acc10d Bergner and Seligman: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05687-w Ligterink: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06697-y Interview with Niels Ligterink: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkLeaglvtbM Presentation by Jordan Wright: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig_9oiUr0pU Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Trump Colorado ballot case backfiring By Terry A. Hurlbut The case of Anderson v. Griswold, or the Trump Colorado ballot case, is still in the news today. But this does not please those who brought the case or wanted someone to bring similar cases. True enough, many of the principals still believe they are doing justice, however illogical and spiteful that might sound. But the rest of the country is reacting in anger, and already the proponents begin to know it. A consensus is now setting in, that the Colorado Supreme Court jumped the gun (or the shark), and that the principals have done nothing except to ensure the nomination, and eventual reelection, of President Donald J. Trump. Legal eagles excoriate the Colorado Supremes I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve. Actor Sō Yamamura, as Vice-Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto IJN, in Tora! Tora! Tora! (1970) Many lawyers have weighed in after the opinion in Anderson came out. Almost all of them have said the Colorado Supreme Court judged the case incorrectly. Lanny Davis, an adviser to two Presidents, agreed with Chief Justice Brian Boatright’s dissent in the case. He might as well have agreed with all three dissents, for they all said the same thing. Namely that none of the Colorado courts even tried to have a trial of Trump on a charge of insurrection. Instead they accepted, uncritically, the report of the House January 6 Committee – or a dictionary definition of the word insurrection. The process, says Davis, denied Trump due process of law. Alan Dershowitz furiously condemned the decision as “anti-democratic,” “unconstitutional,” and “absurd.” (Prime source: Tim Haines at RealClearPolitics.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6-lZtJl_kI He maintained that disqualifying a President from running for office again requires impeachment, not a court trial. (Trump has faced impeachment – twice – and gained acquittal each time.) Furthermore, Amendment XIV Section 5 gives to Congress – and only Congress – the power to enforce any other section. Finally, this decision effectively deprives Coloradans the right to vote for him if they so choose. (Actually, it’s stayed until January 4 – or until the Supreme Court acts, if anyone asks it to act.) Former administration lawyers weigh in Former U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr told CNN (according to Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit) that the court was wrong to find facts that had not been tried by a jury. In fact he called the proceedings a “procedural Frankenstein.” But his greatest fear was how the people would react to it, and how Trump could play it. I think this kind of action of stretching the law, taking these hyper-aggressive positions to try to knock Trump out of the race, are counterproductive. They backfire. As you know, he feeds on grievance just like a fire feeds on oxygen, and this is going to end up as a grievance that helps him. The federal government, said Barr, should have set up the procedure. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiiyPek8Pbs Of course, no one thus far has commented on the effects of the Amnesty Acts of 1872 and 1898. Those Acts, especially the 1898 Act, should apply in perpetuity, as CNAV has said here and here. Jonathan Turley made an even stronger statement. This country is a powder keg and this court is just throwing matches at it. https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1737317930679804043 Furthermore, Ty Cobb, a former White House lawyer, told The Hill he expected the U.S. Supreme Court to vote 9-0 to reverse, on the theory that a President is not an “officer” within the meaning of Amendment XIV Section 3. Retaliation, by Trump and his friends Officer or no, Trump has friends, and those friends are already preparing to retaliate. Colorado’s Republican Party has threatened to cancel the primary and run caucuses, with which the State could not interfere. https://twitter.com/cologop/status/1737292783835103476 Grant Stinchfield suggested on his streaming show that Trump hold a rally in Colorado to show the strength of his support. https://rumble.com/embed/v3zrfbb/?pub=4teej Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R-Texas) suggested Texas might exclude Joe Biden from the general election ballot by reason of his failure to protect Texans from the 8 million migrants who have illegally crossed the U.S.-Mexican border. (Source: The Hill.) https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1737528070599319621 Wayne Allen Root suggested three ways Republicans could retaliate: 1. Remove President Joe Biden from the ballot in every State under Republican control. They could charge him with failure to protect against invasion, as Article IV Section 4 requires. 2. Have State Attorneys General indict Biden, Vice-President Kamala Harris, and SecHomeSec Alexander Mayorkas on treason charges. 3. Hold a Trump rally in Colorado, as Grant Stinchfield suggested. Jim Hoft reported this morning that one Republican State Representative each from Pennsylvania, Georgia and Arizona are introducing legislation to exclude Biden from the ballot in their respective States. (Prime source: Breitbart.) One of them (Cory McGarr of Arizona) released a joint statement: https://twitter.com/CoryMcGarr/status/1738192949153022319 Popular reaction But even without such retaliation, the people seem to be lining up on Trump’s side. Jim Hoft, this morning, reported poll results showing Trump leading among voters between the ages of 18 and 34 inclusive. https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1738155954506535302 https://twitter.com/AureliusStoic1/status/1737934146469576956 Fox News Host Greg Gutfeld laughed at Democrats for “opening Pandora’s box.” So thankfully, much like Joe without his rubber soled shoes, this almost certainly won't stand. But what's sad and amazing is if Donald Trump had not swung the Supreme Court, it could have. That's tragic and scary because as the Colorado Supreme Court accuses Trump of insurrection and election interference, today's Democratic Party should hold that thought. You opened a Pandora's Box that would make the Unabomber sue you for plagiarism. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2cnORWz8Pk Other news related to Trump and ballot access Yesterday Cullen Linebarger listed sixteen States where Democrats are trying to keep Trump off the ballot. Working from this map by Lawfare Media, he came up with these names: 1. Alaska 2. Arizona 3. Maine 4. Michigan 5. Nevada 6. New Jersey 7. New Mexico 8. New York 9. Oregon 10. South Carolina 11. Texas 12. Vermont 13. Virginia 14. West Virginia 15. Wisconsin 16. Wyoming Scratch West Virginia; Jim Hoft reported today that Judge Irene Berger of the West Virginia District Court dismissed that lawsuit. The lawsuit came from a Texas resident and write-in candidate for President. Judge Berger flatly accused him of running in bad faith. https://twitter.com/realJohnACastro/status/1737974190597116269 Courts in Minnesota, Florida, New Hampshire and Rhode Island have also dismissed attempts to remove Trump from the ballot. Mr. Castro withdrew his suit in California, but Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis (D-Calif.) asked California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, in writing, whether California could still keep Trump off its ballot. On the other hand, the Democratic Parties of Florida, Tennessee, North Carolina and Massachusetts will have Joe Biden’s name only on their primary ballot. Challenger Marianne Williamson protested. https://twitter.com/marwilliamson/status/1737524664560185831 https://twitter.com/marwilliamson/status/1737524690011193454 Summary In sum, the Trump Colorado case has done nothing but turn a sleepy story into an active one. Admiral Yamamoto might – or might not – have said what that movie actor portrayed him as saying. But he could have been speaking of the Democratic Party today, as well as the Imperial Japanese Navy. Democrats have indeed awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/22/foundation/constitution/trump-colorado-ballot-case-backfiring/ The ruling: https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/Supreme_Court/Opinions/2023/23SA300.pdf Informal legal opinions: Lanny Davis: https://cnav.news/2023/12/22/editorial/guest/trump-colorado-case-right-analysis-wrong-outcome/ Alan Dershowitz (video): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6-lZtJl_kI Bill Barr: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiiyPek8Pbs Jonathan Turley: https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1737317930679804043 Retaliation suggestions: Colorado GOP: https://twitter.com/cologop/status/1737292783835103476 Grant Stinchfield: https://rumble.com/v42csgz-president-trump-needs-to-hold-a-rally-in-co-asap.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R-Texas): https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1737528070599319621 State Rep. Cory McGarr (R-Ariz.) https://twitter.com/CoryMcGarr/status/1738192949153022319 Popular reaction: https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1738155954506535302 https://twitter.com/AureliusStoic1/status/1737934146469576956 Greg Gutfeld’s take: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2cnORWz8Pk The Lawfare Map: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/current-projects/the-trump-trials/section-3-litigation-tracker Plaintiff reacts to West Virginia dismissal: https://twitter.com/realJohnACastro/status/1737974190597116269 Marianne Williamson protests exclusion from Massachusetts ballot: https://twitter.com/marwilliamson/status/1737524664560185831 https://twitter.com/marwilliamson/status/1737524690011193454 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Great Sortation continues By Terry A. Hurlbut The Great Sortation is definitely continuing, with people moving out of Democrat-controlled (“blue”) States and into Republican-controlled (“red”) States. Recent Census Bureau data now confirm the trend – and show the South gaining more population than any other region. The population shift, if it continues at present rates, could flip 13 Congressional seats from blue States to red States. This might not necessarily translate to Republican gains in the House. But it will definitely affect the Electoral College, and inspire louder screams for abolition of that body. Latest population trends The U.S. Census Bureau released new population snapshots and trends two days ago (December 19). According to the Bureau, the United States as a whole gained 1.6 million people, a 0.5% increase. That increase results from immigration, fewer deaths, and possibly new births. But the South and West (other than the West Coast) gained the most, while the Northeast lost people. Of the ten most populous States, California, New York Pennsylvania, and Illinois continued to lose people. Ohio and Michigan reversed their losses from earlier in the decade, to gain people last year. Texas, Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina all continued to gain people. Politico reported yesterday that domestic migration, not international immigration or new birth, drove population gains in the South. The American Redistricting Project has a map that tells what this means for the House of Representatives. If these trends continue, California and New York will lose four and three seats, respectively. Texas and Florida will pick up four and three seats. Illinois will lose two, and Oregon, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island will lose one each. Idaho, Utah, Arizona, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Georgia will pick up one seat each. Likely effects on representation Of the States standing to lose seats, New York, Illinois, Oregon, and Rhode Island are under full Democratic control. California’s districts are in the hands of an independent commission. Minnesota and Pennsylvania have split legislatures. Of the gainers, Idaho and Arizona have independent commissions; the rest are under full Republican control. Just as happened after the 2020 Census, the “blue States” (except maybe California) will insist that Republicans lose every seat each State loses. Then again, the red States will likely see Republicans gaining all the new seats. (Arizona is “purple.”) So the worst-case scenario will see 13 Republican seats transfer from blue States to red States. Membership of the House Party Conferences will not change. (Exception: Oregon’s legislature will be hard-pressed to take away the one remaining Republican seat. That seat now represents Oregon East of the Cascades, whose people are pressing to join with Idaho.) But the Republicans likely to succeed the ousted Republicans in “blue” States will more likely be “real” or “Trump” Republicans. Republicans in “blue” States are more likely to be RINOs, inclined to “go along to get along.” More to the point, this will shift thirteen electoral votes from blue States to red States. That one fact will likely alarm the Democrats and the globalists. Donald J. Trump will not, of course, be re-eligible by then (if he lives that long). But other Republicans who share his philosophy are more likely to be elected President. What that means for the Great Sortation Texas and California both have active secession movements, though the Texas Nationalist Movement is more active than “Calexit.” Texas will likely have an active secession question on the Republican primary ballot next year. California’s international secession movement has been silent of late. But the “New California” movement is still active, trying to create a “New California” east of the San Andreas Fault. North of California, Oregon East of the Cascades has been trying to move the Idaho border west of the Snake River, to encompass it within a “Greater Idaho.” The prospect of more conservative control of the United States will probably dampen the Texas Independence movement. Conservative Texans might reason: why secede and throw away a greater say in Presidential elections? Greater Idaho might be more likely to get Congressional consent, because the feared shift in Congressional and Electoral College representation will likely happen with or without a shift in the border. But interstate secession movements might spring up elsewhere. People in “blue” States, if they’re not moving out-of-State entirely,l are moving into “red” counties in those States. People moving into “red” States are not moving into those States’ big cities. They are instead moving into “red” counties, mostly rural. This rural-urban divide will see increased tensions in the “blue” States. If they can’t secede, the people of those counties might elect more “Constitutional sheriffs” likely to nullify gun-control and similarly obstreperous laws. The Great Sortation moving forward These changes are continuing the trend CNAV noted at the beginning of the year. Back then, CNAV predicted that blue States would lose House representation and Presidential electoral votes. The latest Census data vindicate that prediction. Ironically, the Democrats will only accelerate the trend by their policy prescriptions. Their insistence on gun-control and LGBTQIA+-friendly policies will accelerate domestic migration. (The latter will also negatively affect the natural-change difference between births and deaths.) And their promotion of abortion on demand for any reason or no reason will ensure net negative natural change. CNAV predicted that, too, and again the Census data vindicate this. The only red-to-blue migration will be of women 18-29 who want their “right” to abortion. And they won’t reproduce, because they don’t want to. Of course the Democrats came up with a plan: ensure international immigration, preferentially by panhandlers. But now their own mayors and governors are abandoning that plan. (One who is not – the Mayor of Chicago – is hearing from his own people, and it is not pleasant.) Result: the “blue” States will continue to lose people. The women who do not move out, will have fewer than the 2.1 children per woman needed to replace people who die. In a generation or two, those States might flip – permanently. The conservatives who remain, will have most of the children. And eventually, they will vote – and will be around to vote. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/21/editorial/talk/great-sortation-continues/ The Census Bureau data: https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2023/population-trends-return-to-pre-pandemic-norms.html American Redistricting Project map: https://thearp.org/blog/apportionment/2030-asof121923/ Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Trump off the Colorado ballot? Not so fast! By Terry A. Hurlbut Yesterday afternoon the Colorado Supreme Court broke the Internet with the announcement of a decision. On appeal from a lower court, the high court disqualified President Donald J. Trump from a Republican Presidential primary ballot. But they stayed their ruling until January 4, 2024 – one day before the deadline to print the ballots. Furthermore, if the U.S. Supreme Court grants review of the matter, then the stay lasts until the Supreme Court acts. This has led one influencer to suggest the Colorado Supreme Court acted to provoke unlawful behavior by conservatives. CNAV would agree and strongly urges its readers: let President Trump handle this. He has already announced his intention to petition the Supreme Court for review. Furthermore, those jurists have embarrassed not only themselves but also every RINO in all fifty States. The Colorado ruling Christina Laila of The Gateway Pundit provided the reportage yesterday (December 19). The Colorado Supreme Court issued a 213-page opinion. Anderson v. Griswold, case 23SA300. Six Colorado voters, both Republican and unaffiliated, sued to keep Trump off the primary ballot. (A separate challenge seeks to keep Trump off the general election ballot in November 2024. That case will come before the Colorado Supreme Court later.) Earlier this year, Judge Sarah Wallace of the Denver District Court rejected the idea of keeping Trump off the ballot. She said the State courts lacked jurisdiction. But the State Supreme Court disagreed, apparently relying on a friend-of-the-court brief from a law professor. Gerard N. Magliocca, Amnesty and Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment, 36 Const. Comment. 87, 91-92 (2021). Magliocca apparently rejects the notion that the Amnesty Act of 1898 applies in perpetuity. (See also here.) More than that, the Colorado court asserted that Colorado’s own legislature had created a process to determine someone’s disqualifications for “participating in insurrection or rebellion.” Key to the court’s action is their determination that Amendment XIV Section 3 is self-executing. Merriam-Webster defines self-executing as requiring no further legislative or judicial action to take immediate force and effect. Furthermore, the court asserts, each State may make its own rules as to what constitutes insurrection, rebellion, and participation therein. Congress need not be the sole actor. This, the jurists say, flows from the directive to each State to appoint Presidential electors in such manner as the[ir] legislatures … direct. How they arrived at Trump participating in insurrection and rebellion Justices Richard L. Gabriel, Melissa Hart, Monica Márquez, and William W. Hood jointly signed a per curiam opinion. Which means that no one Justice actually “rode point” on this opinion. Chief Justice Brian Boatright and Justices Carlos Samour and Maria Berkenkotter dissented. https://twitter.com/zerohedge/status/1737264288471904299 The jurists essentially rely on Trump’s posts on his X (formerly Twitter) account- to say that he called on his supporters to “fight.” When they do that, they essentially have tried Trump for making rebellion. CNAV is not aware that any State Supreme Court has original trial jurisdiction in any matter. Furthermore their evidence includes “anonymous tips” from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Regular readers already recognize that the FBI is compromised, and has become an enforcement arm of the Democratic National Committee. The opinion reeks with lurid accounts of how January 6 rally attendees responded to his exhortation to walk (quietly) to the Capitol. CNAV has not heard from one witness that can corroborate the Court or its sources as to someone shouting “storm the Capitol” or anything else of the kind, on the day of the rally. Ray Epps’ recorded statement that “Tomorrow … we need to go into the Capitol!” doesn’t count. Apart from his being an agent provocateur, he said that the night before, not the day of. Furthermore the opinion omits completely the recent evidence that the Capitol Police provoked the crowd deliberately. They fired rubber bullets and/or tear gas in three separate volleys before anyone made one single response in kind. Delayed effect In short, this Court has acted as judges, jury, prosecutors – and now executioners. According to their ruling, not only does Trump not appear on the ballot, but neither may anyone write him in. But they stayed their ruling. But we stay our ruling until January 4, 2024 (the day before the Secretary’s deadline to certify the content of the presidential primary ballot). If review is sought in the Supreme Court before the stay expires, it shall remain in place, and the Secretary will continue to be required to include President Trump’s name on the 2024 presidential primary ballot until the receipt of any order or mandate from the Supreme Court. President Trump has already sought review, as he explicitly said he would. Though all seven Justices are Democrat appointees, three dissented. Chief Justice Boatright said flatly that the Election Code statute does not empower any court to determine whether a candidate “participated in insurrection or rebellion.” Similarly, Justice Samour excoriated the District Court, which evidently found positively that Trump had made insurrection. Samour said that court had no business trying such a case – and denied due process of law while so doing. Thus, based on its interpretation of Section Three, our court sanctions these makeshift proceedings employed by the district court below—which lacked basic discovery, the ability to subpoena documents and compel witnesses, workable timeframes to adequately investigate and develop defenses, and the opportunity for a fair trial—to adjudicate a federal constitutional claim (a complicated one at that) masquerading as a run-of-the-mill state Election Code claim. And because most other states don’t have the Election Code provisions we do, they won’t be able to enforce Section Three. That, in turn, will inevitably lead to the disqualification of President Trump from the presidential primary ballot in less than all fifty states, thereby risking chaos in our country. This can’t possibly be the outcome the framers intended. Samour also disputes the self-executing nature of Amendment XIV, given its Section 5 – the Enforcement Section. This, and Amendments XV, XVIII, XIX, XXIV, and XXVI all have nearly identical Enforcement Sections: Congress shall have the power to enforce this Article through appropriate legislation. To date Congress has passed no legislation to enforce Amendment XIV Section 3. That’s not even to count the two Amnesty Acts that make Section 3 moot today. Justice Berkenkotter, reasoning similarly to Justice Samour, said the Colorado Supreme Court exceeded its Constitutional and lawful authority. Colorado’s solons, she concluded, did not authorize any court to do what the district court tried to do. From Colorado to… President Trump’s campaign announced their intention to petition the U.S. Supreme Court for review that evening. https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1737258567554502990 Unsurprisingly, the all-Democrat-appointed Colorado Supreme Court has ruled against President Trump, supporting a Soros-funded, left-wing group’s scheme to interfere in an election on behalf of Crooked Joe Biden by removing President Trump’s name from the ballot and eliminating the rights of Colorado voters to vote for the candidate of their choice. We have full confidence that the U.S. Supreme Court will quickly rule in our favor and finally put an end to these un-American lawsuits. They might have reason for their confidence. Ty Cobb, a frequent Trump critic, told CNN, as quoted in The Hill, that SCOTUS might rule 9-0 for Trump. At issue: whether Trump is “an officer of the United States” within the meaning of the Constitution. Cobb cited several cases to suggest that the President is not such an officer. The Trump campaign also said they would ask SCOTUS to stay the decision themselves. But that might be a moot point. The minute Trump’s team files a petition, the stay continues until SCOTUS denies the petition or issues a mandate. Different States have taken different attitudes. Last month, the Minnesota Supreme Court refused to issue any such disqualification order. But this afternoon, Jim Hoft reported that Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis (D-Calif.) asked California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, in writing, whether California could also keep Trump off its ballot. https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1737546261308330122 https://twitter.com/ccadelago/status/1737538069505745356 In that letter, the lieutenant governor referred to a decision by then-Judge Neil Gorsuch, that States had a duty to determine ballot eligibility according to Constitutional restrictions. In Hassan v. Colorado, Gorsuch held that the: state’s legitimate interest in protecting the integrity and practical functioning of the political process permits it to exclude from the ballot candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office. That case involved a naturalized citizen trying to run for President. As no one would dispute, he was not a natural born citizen. However, that case turned directly on Article II Section 1 of the Constitution – which treats appointment of Presidential electors. Other legal eagles weigh in Prof. Orin Kerr of the law school at the University of California at Berkeley, doubted that the courts could bar Trump from running. https://twitter.com/OrinKerr/status/1737297113611133155 Late that evening (Berkeley time), Prof. Kerr scorned an article in The Washington Post talking about how “momentous” the decision was. https://twitter.com/OrinKerr/status/1737364462884294942 Trump condemned the decision in a speech to his supporters in Iowa: https://twitter.com/TheCharlesDowns/status/1737247066819101007 Candidate Vivek Ramaswamy withdrew his name from the Colorado Primary until Trump regains his ballot access. He challenged the other candidates – Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.), former Gov. Chris Christie (R-N.J.), and former Gov. Nikki Haley (R-S.C.) to do likewise. If they do not, he suggested, they would then be accessories to an unconstitutional act. https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1737290316527370495 Furthermore, the Colorado Republican Party suggested they might cancel their primary and hold caucuses instead. https://twitter.com/cologop/status/1737292783835103476 But Gov. DeSantis put forward an interesting conspiracy theory. He suggested that the Democrats pulled a “stunt” to make Trump’s nomination more likely, rather than less. The Democrats would then be more likely to beat Trump than, say, DeSantis in the general election, his theory states. https://twitter.com/_johnnymaga/status/1737492717104398430 The President of El Salvador became the first foreign head-of-state to heap scorn on the ruling. https://twitter.com/nayibbukele/status/1737267137155088520 https://twitter.com/RichardGrenell/status/1737273300316020772 A psy-op? Influencer Viva Frei pointed to the stay of the ruling and accused the Colorado Supremes of running a psy-op. Do not, he warned his listeners, do anything “stupid” – meaning rash. Let Trump handle it. https://rumble.com/embed/v3zm6he/?pub=4teej Influencer Legal Mindset, for nearly an hour, tore the decision apart. He suggested SCOTUS should vacate the judgment and remand the case with instruction to dismiss it – for lack of standing. Presidential eligibility, he said, was a federal issue, for federal, not State, courts. https://rumble.com/embed/v3zng5e/?pub=4teej Those two influencers are correct. The Colorado Supreme Court cleverly hid the stay of their own ruling – so cleverly that at least one legacy media organ (The Washington Post) trumpeted the triumph of the left over the right. They did this without regard to the stay, or what it meant. Furthermore, several legal experts have already said the Colorado Supreme Court made several reversible errors. Dick Morris suggested that Justice Gorsuch, as Supervising Justice of the Tenth Circuit, could dispense with the case himself. To do that he would likely issue a stay, or an injunction, on his own authority. The late Justice Sandra Day O’Connor once wrote: Today, the Circuit Justices (that is, Supreme Court justices who are assigned to supervise a certain circuit) “no longer sit as judges on appellate panels…[instead], acting alone, [they] have the power to grant stays or injunctions in both civil and criminal cases, to arrange bail before and after conviction, and to provide other ancillary relief, such as extensions of time for various filings and other procedural variances.” Whether Justice Gorsuch really has that power in a State case is unclear. Almost certainly the full U.S. Supreme Court will grant review and reverse the judgment. In the meantime, by reason of the stay, nothing happens. So if those four Colorado Justices – or anyone else – really were bating Trump supporters, they should not rise to it. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/20/news/colorado-trump-ballot/ The ruling: https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/Supreme_Court/Opinions/2023/23SA300.pdf ZeroHedge post listing Justices signing onto the opinion: https://twitter.com/zerohedge/status/1737264288471904299 Citizen Free Press’ post embedding Trump campaign statement: https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1737258567554502990 Posts discussing letter to California SOS about that State’s “legal” options: https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1737546261308330122 https://twitter.com/ccadelago/status/1737538069505745356 Prof. Kerr’s posts: https://twitter.com/OrinKerr/status/1737297113611133155 https://twitter.com/OrinKerr/status/1737364462884294942 Vivek’s withdrawal and Colorado GOP threat to go caucus: https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1737290316527370495 https://twitter.com/cologop/status/1737292783835103476 Quote of Gov. DeSantis’ conspiracy theory: https://twitter.com/_johnnymaga/status/1737492717104398430 El Salvador’s President weighs in: https://twitter.com/nayibbukele/status/1737267137155088520 https://twitter.com/RichardGrenell/status/1737273300316020772 Video: Viva Frei says don’t fall for the psy-op: https://rumble.com/v427job-breaking-colorado-supreme-court-bars-trump-from-ballot-dont-fall-for-the-ps.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Video: LegalMindset suggests SCOTUS will vacate case for lack of standing: https://rumble.com/v428tb2-trump-disqualified-by-colorado-chaos-incoming-live.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Abortion – need for a great awakening By Terry A. Hurlbut Abortion is in the news once again, affecting elections and judicial process alike. Now a new piece in The New York Times, and at least one of its supporting documents, illustrate the serious problem with the abortion debate today. Once again, courts, political consultants, and commentators have forgotten the most important person in the debate: the unborn child. Until someone in authority reminds them of the unborn child, more unborn children will die. And each of those deaths brings our society closer in temperament to Germany under the Nationalistich Sozialistich Deutsche Arbeiters Partei. Current state of abortion law The Supreme Court, in 2022, removed the “penumbras” and “emanations” that protected abortion at any stage at the federal level. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022). Since then, the States within the United States have divided themselves between pro-abortion and pro-life; any middle ground is vanishing. NBC News’ interactive abortion map tells us the current state of the law in each State. Fourteen States either ban it or have seen the last clinic close. Eight more restrict it at least after fifteen weeks. The rest – a majority – make it legal, and protect it. The off-year Election of 2023 turned into “The Abortion Election,” in part by reason of the failure of the Republican National Committee to support candidates who might have argued forcefully for the protection of human life at all stages. Ohio has constitutionalized abortion on demand, at any stage, for any reason or no reason. Virginia, already an abortion tourist trap, now has its General Assembly fully in Democratic hands. Democratic Senate and House of Delegates Leadership plan to pass on first reading a similar constitutionalization of abortion on demand. The Texas abortion ban and its challenge Texas has a near-total ban on abortion, and is in a unique spot. The only neighboring abortion tourist trap State to it is New Mexico. But most of Texas’ population lives across the State from it, in the Texas Triangle. That is no small consideration, because Texas has the largest land area of the forty-eight contiguous States. (In fact it has more than half again as much area as its next runner-up, California.) Moreover Texas is spread out, so that overland travel distances are great. So women have a choice: 1. Abandon the Nineteen Sixties retrograde “Swinging Singles” lifestyle, or: 2. Have the children that result from that lifestyle. Texas has its “Baby Moses Law” that lets women bring babies to hospitals, fire stations, or paramedical stations. Staff will ask no questions beyond a family or medical history. But that, evidently, isn’t good enough for women who – married or not – wish to decouple intimacy from reproduction. So Meidas Touch Network reported Friday (December 15) that 51 Texas businesses signed on to a friend-of-the-court brief by an online dating site, supporting a lawsuit by 22 women to overturn Texas’ ban on abortion. Texas v. Zurawski, Docket No. 23-0629, argued November 28, 2023 before the Texas Supreme Court. Bumble, the dating site, says that abortion bans harm business recruitment and cramp women’s lifestyles. Evidence in the Zurawski case: As evidence they have a study from Ms. Magazine saying the debate affects their moving preferences. The report reads in salient part: The Supreme Court overturning of Roe v. Wade has already made a dramatic impact on young women voters in battleground states as they plan for the future. Over half (53%) of young women voters have had their plans affected in some way: they have either considered moving to a state where abortion is protected (28%) or they’re making plans to move to a state where abortion is protected (16%); they have declined a job in a state where abortions are banned (10%) or have looked for jobs in states where abortion is protected (10%) as a result of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade. And apparently, Party affiliation – or the lack of it – makes little or no difference. But the study talks about battleground States, which it neither lists nor defines. Texas isn’t a battleground State, regardless of the wishful thinking of ultra-death-cult publications like Ms. The chief “battle” in Texas concerns whether Texas will secede from the Union and reclaim its original sovereign national identity. More to the point: if 53 percent of women in these “battleground States” are that obsessed with protecting their right to destroy the products of their self-prostitution, 47 percent won’t. Meidas Touch also mentions an Institute for Women’s Policy Research estimate that the abortion ban has cost Texas $15 million. This represents taxes uncollected from women who either don’t work outside the home or move out-of-State (or don’t move in). The mifepristone case In the middle of this drama, the case of Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine et al. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Danco Laboratories is now before the Supreme Court. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a ruling by Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Amarillo Division) that the FDA erred in placing this abortifacient on the market, and should take it off. So the Supreme Court will now hear an argument that those doctors lack standing. To be sure, the doctors claimed only their own emotional distress in treating women who had taken the abortion pill and regretted it. No one is claiming to act or speak for those unborn children who lost their lives when their mothers decided to poison themselves. While those 51 businesses were signing on to that sloppy, weakly supported friend-of-the-court brief, The New York Times published a report claiming inside knowledge of how Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s came to be argued, then decided, as it was. The Times piece The Times begins with the passage of the Mississippi Gestational Age Act of 2018. That law made it unlawful to perform an abortion after 15 weeks. Mississippi’s solons reasoned that, after that time, ending a pregnancy is a gruesome, risky business for the mother. The Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the last of Mississippi’s abortion clinics, immediately sued. Jackson Women’s Health Organization v. Currier, 3:18-cv-00171-CWR-FKB.) In his order granting summary judgment, Judge Carlton W. Reeves of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi said: The State chose to pass a law it knew was unconstitutional to endorse a decades-long campaign, fueled by national interest groups, to ask the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade. This Court follows the commands of the Supreme Court and the dictates of the United States Constitution, rather than the disingenuous calculations of the Mississippi Legislature. Judge Reeves is an Obama appointee, and that likely explains his not exactly judicial tone. Mary Currier, the original defendant, was Thomas Dobbs’ predecessor as Director of the Mississippi Department of Health. The State appealed in Dobbs’ name to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Jackson Women’s Health Organization v. Dobbs, 18-60868. The published opinion, by Judges Patrick Higginbotham, James L. Dennis, and James C. Ho, opened: This case concerns a Mississippi law that prohibits abortions, with limited exceptions, after 15 weeks’ gestational age. The central question before us is whether this law is an unconstitutional ban on pre-viability abortions. In an unbroken line dating to Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court’s abortion cases have established (and affirmed, and re-affirmed) a woman’s right to choose an abortion before viability. States may regulate abortion procedures prior to viability so long as they do not impose an undue burden on the woman’s right, but they may not ban abortions. The law at issue is a ban. Thus, we affirm the district court’s invalidation of the law, as well as its discovery rulings and its award of permanent injunctive relief. The vote was 3-0, with Higginbotham (a Reagan appointee) writing the lead opinion. (Dennis was a Clinton appointee.) Judge James Ho, a Trump appointee, wrote a concurrence in judgment. He opened: Nothing in the text or original understanding of the Constitution establishes a right to an abortion. Rather, what distinguishes abortion from other matters of health care policy in America—and uniquely removes abortion policy from the democratic process established by our Founders—is Supreme Court precedent. The parties and amici therefore draw our attention not to what the Constitution says, but to what the Supreme Court has held. He then grudgingly acknowledged the weight of that precedent that required the court to affirm. Then he added this scathing indictment of Judge Reeves: I am nevertheless deeply troubled by how the district court handled this case. The opinion issued by the district court displays an alarming disrespect for the millions of Americans who believe that babies deserve legal protection during pregnancy as well as after birth, and that abortion is the immoral, tragic, and violent taking of innocent human life… Instead of respecting all sides, the district court opinion disparages the Mississippi legislation as “pure gaslighting.” It equates a belief in the sanctity of life with sexism, disregarding the millions of women who strongly oppose abortion. And, without a hint of irony, it smears Mississippi legislators by linking House Bill 1510 to the state’s tragic history of race relations, while ignoring abortion’s own checkered racial past. The judge hints at the next challenge to abortion That last is a powerful indictment of abortion – for it refers directly to Margaret Sanger’s real reasons for founding the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Sanger didn’t merely seek to preserve the right of “Flappers” to “Flap,” though that in itself would be bad enough. She also sought to eliminate “undesirable” people – meaning non-whites and the “deformed.” (CNAV cannot leave this subject without condemning Langdon Down, first describer of Trisomy 21, for calling it “Mongolian idiocy.” Future generations of doctors redeemed Down’s mistake by renaming the syndrome after him. And today, Down’s Syndrome remains the most common excuse, other than the woman’s convenience, for abortion.) More to the point, when he referred to the “right to an abortion” as a Supreme Court right, he was practically begging the appellees to petition for a review by the Supreme Court. Jodi Kantor and Adam Liptak, writing for the Times, utterly missed this point. So what points do they try to make, and how do they support them? They claim: internal documents, contemporaneous notes and interviews with more than a dozen people from the court — both conservative and liberal — who had real-time knowledge of the proceedings. Bear in mind, when assessing the probable truth or falsity of that statement, that the Times has its own checkered history of problems with the truth. This is the paper of Walter Duranty, and the paper that accepted the Steele dossier as fact, permitting no question. The actual history of the Dobbs case First, some actual history. The Supreme Court docketed the case (19-1932) on June 18, 2020. Five months earlier, the Fifth Circuit had denied panel rehearing. (No losing counsel lightly petitions for an en banc rehearing, if they know what’s good for their clients. Not in the Fifth Circuit, they don’t – except in extraordinary, once-in-a-million circumstances.) The losing party had ninety days to petition for review – so in March they moved for extension of time. Justice Samuel A. Alito, supervising Justice for the Fifth Circuit, put the motion before the full Court – which granted it. Dobbs filed the petition on June 15. Briefs came in almost at once, mostly friend-of-the-court briefs supporting the Dobbs position. The respondents filed their brief on August 19, 2020. Notably they stood on the Roe precedent, and that of Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. They essentially told the Court that the law was “settled” and the Court had “no reason” to revisit it. On September 2, 2020, the Court distributed the case for conference on September 29. Death of an abortion advocating Justice Then Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died. https://twitter.com/business/status/1307101594463465473 Four days after her death, the Court rescheduled the conference. And re-re-scheduled it. And re-re-re-scheduled it. Dobbs filed a supplemental brief referring to two more cases indicating a split between the Fifth and Sixth Circuits. The Court accepted that, and afterward accepted two supplemental briefs from Jackson Women’s. After this, the docket records six reschedulings, and then thirteen distributions for conference, almost one a week! Finally, on May 17, 2021, the Court granted the petition, on one question only: whether all pre-viability prohibitions of elective abortions were unconstitutional. A long list of friend-of-the-court briefs continued after that. The docket also lists a brief by Mr. Dobbs, dated July 22, 2021. That brief does go further than the original petition, which declared only that “viability” was not an appropriate standard. In the new brief, Dobbs directly stated that the Constitution does not protect a woman’s right to abortion. He then suggested the Court should “overrule its precedents subjecting abortion restrictions to heightened scrutiny.” Why did the Court allow that brief? Perhaps because – as CNAV theorized later – Justice Alito interpreted respondents’ brief as an ultimatum. “Leave our precedents alone!” it seemed to say. “Oh, yeah? This Court will see about that!” Alito effectively said in return, by allowing the new petitioner’s brief. A decision Finally, on December 1, 2021, the case came to oral argument. It may or may not be significant that Sarah Weddington, original petitioner’s counsel in Roe, died the day after Christmas in that month. The next filing is a letter from the administration of Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R-Va.) changing Virginia’s position on the matter. That filing came on January 21, 2022. On February 10, 2022, Justice Alito circulated his opinion. Then on May 2, 2022, some person(s) still unknown, leaked it. CNAV analyzed it in detail on May 14. Then on June 24, 2022, the Court issued its final judgment overruling Roe and Casey. Except for a few colorful turns of phrase that Alito struck from the final draft, the leaked draft survived intact. What does the Times piece say? The Times piece seeks to confuse the reader by jumping back and forth in time. Its authors refer to the July 2021 brief by Dobbs “a bait-and-switch” of the type “that has prompted dismissals of other cases.” (They cite no examples.) They also cite Prof. Richard M. Re of the University of Virginia as saying the Court compromised its own deliberative process and prevented the public from adequately preparing for an avulsive shift in the law. Prof. Re did say that. But he also said: The joint dissent’s treatment of precedent was, if anything, even less persuasive. The dissent’s own uses of precedent demonstrate how readily case law is thrown overboard – not just in the past few years, but throughout many decades. And new personnel can offer a uniquely compelling basis for revisiting case law. So, if the majority had reason to moderate, the dissenters did, too – by joining a gradualist opinion like the Chief’s. The Times authors did not see fit to mention one word of that second quote. Of course, the Liberal Bloc (now of Jackson, Kagan and Sotomayor, with Jackson replacing the retired Stephen C. Breyer) has a nasty habit of treating the Supreme Court as if it were a Court of social justice and equity, not of appellate jurisdiction and law. And the professor is right about the dissent. Had they chosen to join Roberts, the effect would have been to move the viability line back to 15 weeks. But, like Jackson Women’s Health, they were having none of that. (And since then, their dissents have often turned downright nasty – in fact drawing written reprimand in majority opinions. See Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard/UNC and 303 Creative v. Elenis.) But CNAV condemns Re for that quip about an “avulsive shift in the law.” How was Roe v. Wade itself not an “avulsive shift in the law”? And not only avulsive but revulsive. Other less-than-persuasive points The Times piece lays great stress on the health of Justice Ginsburg – who, they now assert, received privileges any other observer would call unprecedented. “Transforming her home into a makeshift office, taking turns there, and quarantining beforehand” – amazement doesn’t do justice to those events. They also speak of the death of Justice Antonin Scalia – but fail to mention the circumstances surrounding his death. CNAV considers his death an unsolved murder. Replacing one originalist by another is almost certainly a Divine miracle. Furthermore, the Times case accuses Justice Alito of arranging all those reschedulings. His motive: to enable the new Justice Amy Coney Barrett to vote on it. But they had earlier said the Court sought to distance the Dobbs matter from Ginsburg’s death. Which is it? They suggest that Justice Barrett suggested “this was not the time.” But that meant only to argue the matter in the next or 2021 Term, not the 2020 Term. So the authors undercut their own argument that Barrett didn’t want the Court to hear the matter at all. So what are we to make of the Times piece? It tells the public nothing it couldn’t learn from the public record, and tries to hide part of that record. Abortion still a divisive debate that shouldn’t be But the Times piece illustrates yet again the tragic divide of the country on the subject of abortion. The protection of unborn life should be inarguable and incontrovertible. Yet the Court now has before it a case arguing standing – while every day, someone is murdering another unborn life. As Justice Clarence Thomas pointed out, the last time the Court denied standing to a person almost as egregiously aggrieved, civil war broke out to decide the issue. Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857). Furthermore, the Court overlooked another chance to recognize pre-born life as protected under the law. Doe v. McKee, in the Supreme Court of Rhode Island. The U.S. Supreme Court denied that petition for lack of standing of the unborn. Another generation might have to grow up and replace existing judges to bring about true justice on this issue. Perhaps only then will a court recognize that the unborn have a right to life. That will require a Second Great Awakening in a country already in a spiritual, if not a shooting, civil war. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/18/foundation/constitution/abortion-need-great-awakening/ The interactive abortion map: https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/abortion-state-tracking-trigger-laws-bans-restrictions-rcna36199 Texas’ description of its Baby Moses Law: https://www.dfps.texas.gov/Child_Protection/Child_Safety/Resources/baby_moses.asp The Times piece: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/15/us/supreme-court-dobbs-roe-abortion.html Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and previous cases: Jackson Women’s v. Currier, at District Court: Docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6338340/jackson-womens-health-organization-v-dobbs/ Opinion: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mssd.98904/gov.uscourts.mssd.98904.89.0.pdf Jackson Women’s v. Dobbs at Fifth Circuit: Docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7771/jackson-womens-health-v-dobbs/ Opinion: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.186010/gov.uscourts.ca5.186010.505236528.1.pdf Case at Supreme Court: Docket: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/19-1392.html Petition: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/145658/20200615170733513_FINAL%20Petition.pdf Response: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/150668/20200819155412230_39883%20pdf%20Scott.pdf Supplemental Brief: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/158482/20201022120939370_19-1392Petitioners%20SupplementalBrief.pdf New Brief: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/184703/20210722161332385_19-1392BriefForPetitioners.pdf Decision: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s obituary: https://twitter.com/business/status/1307101594463465473 Prof. Re’s commentary: https://www.law.virginia.edu/scholarship/publication/richard-m-re/1823491 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Bill Maher gets real By Terry A. Hurlbut Home Box Office’ Bill Maher has been a thorn in conservatives’ sides since his program began. But he has no real agenda, other than to be funny. And because he has no real agenda, he can see his way clear to calling out absurdity on the left. He has done so several times since the Fourth Arab-Israeli War began. He did it again yesterday (December 15). Margaret Flavin of The Gateway Pundit released a partial transcript this afternoon. But even she failed to notice that he shamed certain antisemitic voices on the right as well as the left. And those voices needed shaming, for not having thought the matter through before they spoke. Bill Maher makes a new rule In his last segment of the day, Bill Maher spoke of a new rule. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP-CRXROorw He didn’t say exactly what the new rule was. But he seemed to say he would follow a new rule – to be brutally honest about what some people demand. Bill Maher began with a summary of the history of the region (ancient and recent), and compared it with histories of other regions. Those were histories of the displacement of other peoples. He gave several examples: In the early fourth century, Constantine moved the Roman capital to Byzantium, and changed its name to Constantinople. More than a millennium later, the Turks conquered that city and named it Istanbul – a Turkish mangling of the original Greco-Latinate name. No Greek or Italian has tried to reclaim the city since. The English started fighting the Irish as far back as Elizabeth I. Eventually Ireland was a British viceroyalty – until the Irish fought for their independence. The new Republic of Ireland took back all its territory – except for one ancient petty kingdom, called Ulster. That became Northern Ireland, and has that name today. For thirty years British and Irish fought over that land – and eventually stopped, and made peace. Besides that, war has displaced many other people. Twelve million Germans from Russia and Poland and Czechoslovakia after World War II, a million Ghanians from Nigeria in 1983, nearly a million French from Algeria in 1962 – and those are the most memorable examples. About the Middle East Recall that Eric Levitz of The Intelligencer recently said, Virtually all land is “stolen land” if one rolls the tape back far enough. Bill Maher actually rolled back the tape, when talking about the forced migration of the Jews. Even he didn’t roll it all the way back, but perhaps he would understand the principle. Emperor Hadrian, after Simon bar Khokhva foolishly declared himself Messiah and tried to be a military Messiah, scattered the Jews throughout his empire. That happened in 135 A.D. Bar Khokhva would have done better to consult the wisdom of Jesus Christ, as Saints Matthew and Luke set it down. Satan offered Jesus rulership of the world. Aside from whether Satan had that to offer, Jesus turned him down. Bar Khokhva didn’t, and it didn’t end well for him. So Hadrian renamed the land Palaestina, which is Latin for “Philistia.” That is the real source of the name Palestine today. Still, the land has had a Jewish presence in it even since that event – and a Christian presence since the Resurrection and Ascension. The Muslim conquest Nothing really changed until Umar ibn Al-Kkattab, the second Rashidun Caliph, conquered Jerusalem in 638 A.D. About a century later, Caliph Abd al-Malik built a monument on a site he knew was sacred to Jews, in direct imitation of an apostate Hebrew king (Jeroboam I). By then, Western Europe was mostly Christian – except for Moorish southern Spain and certain areas of France where leaders like Charles Martel (“The Hammer”) fought regularly against Muslim invasion. Then came the desecration of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre – and the declaration of war by Pope Urban IX. The ensuing wars – known as the Crusades – lasted for two centuries, until the Mamelukes displaced the last Crusader Kingdoms. But the Mamelukes didn’t last; the Ottomans displaced them. This happened shortly after Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castile forged an alliance – which they sealed with their own marriage – and, with the help of the famous general known as El Cid, expelled the Moors. But Ferdinand and Isabella made their own mistake: the Spanish Inquisition. After that, the Ottoman Sultan invited Jews fleeing Spain to resettle in the land still called “Palestine.” Before the Israel War for Independence, the United Nations offered a considerable portion of land to the Arabs. The Arabs wanted it all – and if anything, have less today than the UN offered them. And here is another thing that Bill Maher overlooks. No one forced any Arabs to relocate. They did that themselves, especially from Yafo (Jaffa). Bill Maher gets one thing right: the Jews aren’t going anywhere Returning to the present moment, Bill Maher takes apart the common “Palestinian” chant: From the river to the sea / Palestine shall be free! Maher scorns that as a myth, and says the Palestinian “leaders, and the useful idiots on college campuses,” cannot succeed. But CNAV must say the same of those on the right who insist that Christians don’t owe the Jews any support. What, we ask, would you have the people of Israel do? Surrender unconditionally and evacuate the land? Lay aside for a moment that unconditional surrender, to the Arabs, would mean that the Jews surrender for summary execution. (Those same leaders have called for the killing of Jews everywhere.) Lay aside even that the Jews didn’t start this war. And as for a cease-fire, one was actually in effect when the Arab enemy attacked. Instead, answer one question: how shall they evacuate? Bill Maher was only half joking when he mangled the U-Haul trademark to illustrate the absurdity of the proposition. (Rush Limbaugh actually first coined the phrase “to illustrate absurdity by being absurd.”) Maher calls for negotiation, which is how most wars end. But at least he means good-faith negotiation. To quote him directly, “it’s hard to negotiate when the other side’s bargaining position is you all die and disappear.” The more reason to dismiss all descriptions of “massacre” in Gaza as projection, anyway. What they accuse Israel of planning, they are planning. As long as Arabs feel that way about it, negotiation is impossible. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/16/editorial/talk/bill-maher-gets-real/ Video of the segment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP-CRXROorw The partial transcript: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/12/bill-maher-s-new-rule-genocidal-river-sea/ Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

January 6 could blow wide-open By Terry A. Hurlbut The past sixty hours have seen several rapid-fire – and astonishing – developments concerning the January 6 Event. A U.S. congressman, who has been investigating this event on his own since it happened, has identified two buses that, apparently, the FBI used to transport some of its agents into the crowd that day. More to the point, the Supreme Court has agreed to review the conviction of a January 6 defendant on a charge of obstructing an official proceeding. As it happens, President Donald J. Trump is facing a charge under the same statute at issue in this review. If the court finds in that other defendant’s favor, this could force dismissal of half the charges in Trump’s case. It could also have the even more salutary effect of exposing who set the event up. A January 6 case comes up for review On Wednesday (December 13) the Supreme Court issued a very short Order List, which it called a Miscellaneous Order. Here is the most salient part of that order: 23-5572 FISCHER, JOSEPH W. V. UNITED STATES The motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. A party proceeding in forma pauperis may proceed without paying any court fees. Joseph W. Fischer is one of many persons who entered the “restricted area” around the Capitol on January 6, 2021. He must have done so after Ray Epps’ buddies removed fences and signs saying AREA CLOSED. (In fact, he gained entry into the Capitol after Congress had already recessed.) Mr. Fischer cannot even afford his own attorneys, so the Federal Public Defender’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania is handling his case. His petition, which runs to thirty-nine pages, asks: Did the D.C. Circuit err in construing 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c) (“Witness, Victim, or Informant Tampering”), which prohibits obstruction of congressional inquiries and investigations, to include acts unrelated to investigations and evidence? Attorney (and candidate for Missouri Attorney General) Will Scharf announced the review grant soon after seeing the short order list: https://twitter.com/willscharf/status/1734955975113580694 Katelynn Richardson of The Daily Caller also reported on the review grant, and included this post: https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1734944495991484426 Argument for the government Scharf then explained the problem to Ivory Hecker, hostess of Gateway: Beyond the Headlines, yesterday (December 14). Jim Hoft of The Gateway Pundit has the details. 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c) is part of the Sarbanes-Oxley law, which Congress passed after the Enron scandal. The government charged Mr. Fischer (and about 300 others) with obstructing an official proceeding, under that section. The problem: Section 1512 has to do with criminal prosecution of financial wrongdoing, like fraud or embezzlement. But the proceeding at issue on January 6 was a joint session of Congress to certify a Presidential election. No evidence gathering was ever at issue. (Or if it were, it would have been in a cause Mr. Fischer supported, not opposed.) The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a 120-page opinion. A three-judge panel voted 2-1 against Fischer and two co-defendants (Edward Lang and Garrett Miller). The District Court had dismissed all the 1512 counts – so the Court of Appeals reinstated them. (Judge Florence Pan, a Biden appointee, wrote the lead opinion. Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee, wrote a concurring opinion.) The dissent Judge Gregory Katsas (a Trump appointee) strenuously disagreed. He suggested his colleagues went out of their way to construe Section 1512 as damning in the cases at hand. Never before had any court interpreted that section as having to do with anything other than preserving evidence and preventing the intimidation of complaining, informing, or other witnesses. In a manner recalling the famous deposition of President Bill Clinton, this case depends on what one’s definition of the word otherwise is. Usually it means “not quite the same, but similar to examples that have come before.” In this case, otherwise means other than: alter[ing], destroy[ing], mutilat[ing], or conceal[ing] a record, document or other object, or attempt[ing] to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding. The only written records at issue on January 6 are the lists of electoral votes cast from the several States. Not one witness has alleged that Fischer or anyone else tried to lay hands on those votes. But Judge Pan insisted that otherwise means “anything different from the examples, but having the same effect.” By that reading, otherwise could mean anything at all. If the government thought they could change Fischer and the others with “tampering” with Members of Congress, they would have. They haven’t. So Judge Pan had to twist the definition of otherwise to create guilt. Further consequences for January 6 cases Judge Katsas hinted at one other principle: judges must resolve ambiguity in favor of a defendant. That goes double in a criminal case, like these cases. But Judge Pan would appear to have decided to act as a “hanging judge” from Old West lore. (Why Judge Walker concurred in the judgment, is less clear – except that his prior associations with men like SecDef Donald Rumsfeld make him a “swampy” Republican. Judge Katsas is a member of the Federalist Society.) Add this to it: when Mr. Fischer was in the Capitol, Congress had already recessed. So no proceeding which he could possibly have obstructed, was even taking place. The Supreme Court, having only now granted review, has issued no orders to expedite that review. So they will likely release their opinion by the end of June, as usual. And what happens to Donald Trump’s case? Already that case is under stay, because Trump has argued “Presidential immunity” in his own case. That is also before the Supreme Court, which has ordered Trump’s attorneys to brief the Court next week. But since Section 1512 is part of the government’s case against Trump, the stay might remain until June 2024. Even without it, if the Supreme Court reverses the Court of Appeals in this matter, the District Court would then have to dismiss those charges – or vacate them. The January 6 buses The next matter goes more broadly to the ideological corruption of the federal government, now in stark relief. Some of the eyewitness accounts indicate that the FBI has gone rogue. Furthermore, it must be on a tight budget, given the apparent sloppiness of its attempt at disguise. At issue are two buses, each the size of a regular “city bus” or chartered bus. Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.), drawing on his experiences as a police captain, has been investigating January 6 personally. In November of last year, Higgins cross-examined FBI Director Christopher Wray on the presence of “confidential human sources,” dressed as supporters of Donald Trump, at the January 6 rally. https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1592546346866823168 (Jim Hoft covered the story then – and released two stories this week, yesterday and today.) Last month Higgins cross-examined Wray again – in a much more powerful position, now that Republicans control the House. This time he brought a photograph showing those two buses – and those FBI plants boarding them at Union Station. Another X influencer has more video proof: https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/1724923442959405457 Higgins granted an interview to investigative journalist Lara Logan yesterday, in which he described the buses in detail. Not according to the usual charter bus routine Your editor has ridden several chartered buses, in connection with: • The big rally on September 12, 2009, in which 1.5 million people descended on Washington and gathered on the Capitol’s West Lawn, and • Marches for Life in subsequent years. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgTCLv0f800 From his experience, chartered buses always bear the names of the charter company that owns them, and also bear serial and telephone numbers (in case a passing motorist wants to report a driver behaving badly) The law requires this. Furthermore, drivers of buses operating as a convoy always get off and talk to one another at every stop. According to Rep. Higgins, those two buses were painted an unrelieved white, obscuring all markings. In fact, he said someone simply spray-painted them – “a cheap, fast overspray.” This is not according to protocol – nor up to the usual competitive standard of appearance. Another charter bus driver arrived at Union Station on the morning of January 6, at 5:20 a.m. EST. He had expected to be first to arrive – but those two white buses were already there. And the drivers never got off the bus to talk to one another. As the other driver watched, 40 or 50 men, all wearing Trump regalia, got off the buses and received a military-style briefing. These men then went up the escalators to blend into the crowd at Union Station. Nailed! Higgins then made this explosive claim: his team has identified one of the buses. Now that they have identified it, they can trace it. Lastly, Higgins told Logan his belief that all those men were actual FBI agents – meaning agents provocateurs. https://twitter.com/Truth_InMedia/status/1735328799288348931 All this stands as evidence of entrapment – as Candidate Vivek Ramaswamy asserted on a CNN broadcast in Des Moines, Iowa Wednesday night. He forcefully asserted that many witnesses have attested to FBI “assets” being present in the crowd. He also mentioned Capitol Police actions – like firing rubber bullets and tear gas into the crowd – that provoked that crowd to violence. https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1735126791142904074 https://rumble.com/embed/v3ynkvr/?pub=4teej The Gateway Pundit X account, in reply, dropped this thread saying the Washington FBI Field Office confirmed the presence of agents salting the crowds that day. https://twitter.com/gatewaypundit/status/1735132880324489270 Add to it, this story by Bob Unruh of WorldNetDaily. He quotes Lt. Tarik Johnson, U.S. Capitol Police (retired), as denying that any “insurrection” took place. https://twitter.com/elleonCEOTK/status/1735293623279759548 The country has in fact known this for seven months, as Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) shared then: https://twitter.com/RepMattGaetz/status/1659209091435331584 This could be a turning point in the January 6 story – in which conspiracy becomes more than hypothesis. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/15/news/january-6-blow-open/ SCOTUS short order list: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/121323zr_f204.pdf Fischer v. United States: SCOTUS Docket: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-5572.html Cert. Petition: http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-5572/279307/20230911135230273_Fischer%20cert%20petition%20Final.pdf Appendix: opinion of Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-5572/279307/20230911135240111_Cert%20Pet%20Appx.pdf Posts reporting on the grant of review: https://twitter.com/willscharf/status/1734955975113580694 https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1734944495991484426 Post about Clay Higgins’ November 2022 confrontation with Chris Wray: https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1592546346866823168 Post about Higgins confronting Wray with a photograph: https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/1724923442959405457 Video from 9-12-2009 rally: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgTCLv0f800 Post with Lara Logan interview with Higgins: https://twitter.com/Truth_InMedia/status/1735328799288348931 Vivek Ramaswamy’s confrontation: https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1735126791142904074 https://rumble.com/v418ygf-vivek-ramaswamy-owns-hostile-cnn-deep-state-mockingbird-abby-phillip-on-j6-.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Reaction to Vivek’s post: https://twitter.com/gatewaypundit/status/1735132880324489270 https://twitter.com/elleonCEOTK/status/1735293623279759548 Rep. Gaetz’ post: https://twitter.com/RepMattGaetz/status/1659209091435331584 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Gaza war update – surrender, and evidence By Terry A. Hurlbut The past several days might have seen a turning point in the Fourth Arab-Israeli War. One week ago today (December 7), the Israel Defense Forces captured “dozens” of enemy soldiers near Jabaliya in Gaza. But that was only the beginning. As antisemitic commentators (left and right) continue to trumpet the narrative of “disproportionate response” and a “massacre of civilians,” more enemy soldiers continue to surrender. More tellingly, the IDF continues to find evidence that many who called themselves civilians, were not civilians. (At best they were sympathetic militia.) Even more tellingly, Gaza is losing civilian support as its government verges on collapse. Timeline of surrender and evidence gathering in Gaza As mentioned, soldiers of the Islamic Islamic Resistance Movement (Arabic Harakah al-Muqāwamah al-Islāmiyyah, abbreviated HAMAS) turned out not to be ready to die, weapons in hand, rather than surrender. Elements of the Shejaya Battalion surrendered to IDF elements near Jabaliya in Gaza. The Israelis stripped the men to their boxer-like shorts and confiscated their weapons, but did not execute them. (Source: Cullen Linebarger, The Gateway Pundit, quoting The Times of Israel.) https://twitter.com/BaruchYedid/status/1732770910946353163 Mary McAuliffe, who calls herself a freelance journalist, dropped this thread. Her sympathies obviously lie with Gaza. But her photographs and video clips are likely authentic, even if her interpretation of them is suspect. https://twitter.com/mcauliffe_marym/status/1732806015366685001 https://twitter.com/mcauliffe_marym/status/1732867783413612721 https://twitter.com/mcauliffe_marym/status/1732868583934329212 CNAV would remind Ms. McAuliffe: HAMAS would have killed IDF prisoners under similar circumstances. Nor did any IDF soldiers abuse those prisoners, sexually or otherwise. Ynet News carried more pictures from the mass surrender last Sunday (December 10). Enemy-sympathetic media and commentators continued to insist that the men in those photos and videos were all civilians. But Ynet reported that at least one of them carried a Kalashnikov rifle. Russian small arms have been the weapons of choice for Arab armies since the 1967 Six-day War. The former Soviet Union supplied most of them. Nor was this the most telling evidence. That actually began to come out the next day. Evidence from a university campus Richard Abelson, also of The Gateway Pundit, shared photographic evidence from the reconnaissance of the Al-Azhar University in Gaza. The lead photograph shows the cache the IDF found there. In the foreground one can see at least fourteen “banana clips,” which are typical Kalashnikov rifle magazines. The Israeli National News outlet Arutz-7 (pronounced “Arutz Sheva”) gives a more complete inventory: Within the university campus, IDF troops located terror infrastructure, including an underground tunnel that ran from the university's yard and continued to a school one kilometer away. Furthermore, numerous weapons, including explosive devices, rocket parts, launchers, explosive device detonation systems, and several technological assets were located and taken for an intelligence analysis and investigation. This morning, Mr. Abelson shared more pictures, and another interesting report. Ismail Haniyeh, the putative head of HAMAS, suddenly is calling for negotiations. He is doing it from his luxury hotel in Qatar, as his troops continue to surrender. The IDF released video of their latest capture this morning: https://twitter.com/IDF/status/1735276855156932748 In addition, the comedy show Eretz Nehederet (“Wonderful Land”) released this Saturday Night Live-like skit lampooning the HAMAS leadership: https://twitter.com/Eretz_Nehederet/status/1734945981651673297 But there’s more. Government in Gaza is collapsing – and with it the usual enforcement of morale typical of totalitarian societies. At noon today, Abelson released this story telling of “looting and chaos” in Gaza. He quotes the Jewish Press as describing the situation as “anarchy” and saying Gazans aren’t afraid of HAMAS as they once were. Police and first-response agencies are not functioning, and residents are fending for themselves. (Jewish Press also suggests that the surrendering HAMAS elements were actually deserters. That would explain the boasts that those fighters were supposed to be elite forces who would rather die than quit.) Criticism of HAMAS by Gaza civilians One civilian openly criticized HAMAS, in an unprecedented diatribe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYAucy7yBSI I want to convey my message to the Hamas government. May Allah take revenge on you and curse your forefathers. May Allah curse you, (Hamas leader Yahya) Al-Sinwar, you son of a dog. May Allah take revenge on you; you’ve destroyed us. We migrated from Gaza City to Khan Yunis and from Khan Yunis to Rafah. We were scattered, us and our family, our wives, our children. Give the Israeli hostages back, these dogs who are in your possession. Al-Sinwar is hiding underground with (Hamas terror leader Muhammad) Deif and all the disgusting ones like him. The other reports coming out of Gaza might explain his attitude. HAMAS operatives would appear to be stealing humanitarian aid packages for themselves. https://twitter.com/MOSSADil/status/1734248601407156333 https://twitter.com/HananyaNaftali/status/1734921247383859553 This 26-minute segment also shows more IDF operations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjT3uiL6obc Incredibly, HAMAS continues to enjoy majority support, both in Gaza and in Judea and Samaria (“The West Bank”). Arutz-7 has the details. A “Palestinian” pollster, Khalil Shikaki, took the survey: A total 57% of Gazans and 82% of Judea & Samaria residents believe that Hamas was justified when it launched the October 7th terrorist attack. Only 10% believe that Hamas committed war crimes, and the large majority said that they had not watched the videos of the terrorists’ atrocities. At the same time, 44% of Palestinian residents expressed support for Hamas, compared to only 12% in September. Only recently has public criticism of HAMAS within the territory they govern even been thinkable. Much depends on when Mr. Shikaki actually took his survey. (Arutz-7 won’t say.) Commentator Caroline Glick accused the Biden administration of “declar[ing] war on the Netanyahu government.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9nmbE3-zqc Netanyahu now presides over a wartime unity government with elements of his pre-war ruling coalition and also elements from parties outside that coalition. Mr. Abelson also points out that almost no one, among those who fled en masse out of Yafo in 1948, remains alive. The “refugees” of today are their descendants. The United Nations Relief Works Agency (UNRWA) ostensibly takes care of them. In fact HAMAS has been using UNRWA facilities – a fact the IDF learned when they moved in. Recently, Switzerland cut off all its funding of UNRWA – which the Biden administration has not done. Antisemitism at home and abroad Seemingly oblivious to this evidence, antisemitic demonstrators in America and abroad continue their propaganda offensive against Israel – and Jews everywhere. Two days ago, a Polish parliamentarian grabbed a CO2 fire extinguisher and snuffed out the candles on the chanukiah that stood in the lobby. (Source: Kristinn Taylor, The Gateway Pundit.) https://twitter.com/sebastiantvn24/status/1734603768451444741 https://twitter.com/patrykmichalski/status/1734600323015037135 https://twitter.com/MartaAnnaCzech/status/1734609978126930170 https://twitter.com/KoronaSzczecin/status/1734616042884739443 Apparently this member is “pro-Russia.” That might become relevant if, say, Ezekiel’s War (cf. Ezekiel chh. 38-39) breaks out soon. Similarly, early Wednesday (December 13) some person(s) unknown destroyed a chanukiah in a park in Oakland, California. Ms. Taylor had the details of that story also. They left a threatening message at the scene – using unprintable language. https://twitter.com/SFJCRC/status/1735025729736429812 https://twitter.com/SFJCRC/status/1735031045739962610 https://twitter.com/TyeGregory/status/1735022277350281451 https://twitter.com/ChabadLubavitch/status/1735064092203753550 https://twitter.com/DarwinBondGraha/status/1735018551684255977 https://twitter.com/MayorShengThao/status/1735024040757317900 https://twitter.com/JanaKTVU/status/1735149128953598172 https://twitter.com/DarwinBondGraha/status/1735113886544842894 Note: the term menorah properly applies to the seven-member candelabrum that was part of the original Tabernacle and Temple furnishings. The correct term for the nine-member candelabrum of Hanukkah is chanukiah. (Source: Susan Marcus, Israeli Ministry of Tourism.) Ms. Taylor also shared a story of a pro-HAMAS crowd that heckled guests of a Hanukkah ceremony at the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C. One can hear a female voice screaming, “We will kill you all! Occupiers!” https://twitter.com/IsraelWarRoom/status/1734750885148770542 https://twitter.com/Daroff/status/1734760869077127587 https://twitter.com/jonathanallen44/status/1734773221608599613 But inside the ceremony, White House spokesman John Kirby – a Gentile – was asked to light the Hanukkah candle for the day. No Gentile has ever had such an honor before. https://twitter.com/GSDeutch/status/1734719472076759094 He fooled around and found out! Cullen Linebarger shared two stories, one two days ago and the other today, about an incident with possible supernatural implications. Turkish parliamentarian Hasan Bitmez launched into an impassioned diatribe against Israel, according to Yeshiva World. We can perhaps hide from our conscience but not from history. They will not be silent, even if history remains silent. The truth will not be silent. If only you could be saved from the torment of history. You cannot be saved from the wrath of Allah. Salutations to you all. His voice trailed off – and he collapsed where he stood. Medical staff applied cardiac massage, the usual method of Advanced Cardiac Life Support – and took him to hospital. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/embed/video/3080371.html He remained in critical condition – and died today, according to The Daily Mail. The Holy Bible is full of “fool around and find out” moments like this. Consider the abrupt outbreak of leprosy that struck King Uzziah when he dared burn incense in the Temple. (II Chron. 26:16-21.) Or the deaths of Ananias and Sapphira when they, having promised to bestow everything they had to a common believers’ treasury, held some of it back. (Acts 5:1-9.) CNAV expects no better of leftists – but expects much better of those who profess the Christian faith. This incident should serve to remind people that God is not “through with national Israel.” Harold Camping said that, and had his own fool-around-and-find-out moment. After he predicted Judgment Day in 2011, and the day came and went with nothing happening, he suffered a stroke. He died, and his Family Radio empire died with him. The evidence is accruing on the Israeli side, as if the atrocious nature of HAMAS’ acts wasn’t damning enough. People ignore it at their peril – along with the usual Muslim war cry: “First Saturday, then Sunday!” Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/14/news/gaza-war-update-surrender-evidence/ First video of HAMAS soldiers surrendering: https://twitter.com/BaruchYedid/status/1732770910946353163 Mary McAuliffe’s thread: https://twitter.com/mcauliffe_marym/status/1732806015366685001 https://twitter.com/mcauliffe_marym/status/1732867783413612721 https://twitter.com/mcauliffe_marym/status/1732868583934329212 The IDF shows off their latest mass capture: https://twitter.com/IDF/status/1735276855156932748 The lampoon: https://twitter.com/Eretz_Nehederet/status/1734945981651673297 Gaza civilian denounces HAMAS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYAucy7yBSI HAMAS stealing humanitarian aid: https://twitter.com/MOSSADil/status/1734248601407156333 https://twitter.com/HananyaNaftali/status/1734921247383859553 Extensive IDF operations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjT3uiL6obc War on Netanyahu government: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9nmbE3-zqc Four posts on the Polish MP fire-extinguishing the Hanukkah candles: https://twitter.com/sebastiantvn24/status/1734603768451444741 https://twitter.com/patrykmichalski/status/1734600323015037135 https://twitter.com/MartaAnnaCzech/status/1734609978126930170 https://twitter.com/KoronaSzczecin/status/1734616042884739443 Eight posts covering the vandalism in Oakland: https://twitter.com/SFJCRC/status/1735025729736429812 https://twitter.com/SFJCRC/status/1735031045739962610 https://twitter.com/TyeGregory/status/1735022277350281451 https://twitter.com/ChabadLubavitch/status/1735064092203753550 https://twitter.com/DarwinBondGraha/status/1735018551684255977 https://twitter.com/MayorShengThao/status/1735024040757317900 https://twitter.com/JanaKTVU/status/1735149128953598172 https://twitter.com/DarwinBondGraha/status/1735113886544842894 Threatening voices outside the Israeli Embassy: https://twitter.com/IsraelWarRoom/status/1734750885148770542 https://twitter.com/Daroff/status/1734760869077127587 https://twitter.com/jonathanallen44/status/1734773221608599613 John Kirby lights the candle: https://twitter.com/GSDeutch/status/1734719472076759094 Article in The Daily Mail containing video of Hasan Bitmez’ heart attack: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12863493/Turkish-lawmaker-dies-two-days-collapsing-giving-speech-saying-Israel-suffer-wrath-Allah-invading-Gaza.html#v-7713885951606175555 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Election fraud in 2020 now acknowledged? By Terry A. Hurlbut The past thirty-six hours have seen some astonishing developments in accepted attitudes toward the Election of 2020. Since that election, most voters who voted for Donald J. Trump have felt that fraud decided that election – and that various officials, including many of Trump’s own appointees, accepted it as the price of getting rid of him. They even put large numbers of people in prison, without a trial (or after a sham trial), to atone for what more and more people now acknowledge was a false-flag pseudo-operation. Now evidence for widespread election fraud is rapidly becoming undeniable. Four separate revelations – or confessions – all “broke” yesterday (December 12). How this will affect the various prosecutions of Trump (other than the New York real-estate case) is anyone’s guess. Election fraud revelation 1: West Virginia The Gateway Pundit reported all four of the revelations CNAV will now share. The first came at 7:30 a.m. EST, from Jim Hoft. West Virginia Secretary of State Mac Warner (Republican), contending for his State’s governorship, shocked everyone at a recent gubernatorial debate. He said: The election was stolen, and it was stolen by the CIA. Many conservatives, including CNAV contributors, have long suspected the Central Intelligence Agency of running a shadow government. Or if they’re not doing it themselves, then they are part of a cabal of intelligence agencies and their career officers who are running it. Bradlee Dean has alleged repeatedly that Operation Mockingbird, a CIA operation involving control of the press during the Cold War, is still running. Seven years ago, Dean accused the CIA of engineering the assassination of John F. Kennedy. They did this after Kennedy vowed, I will splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the wind! Nearly one year ago, as the Twitter Files came out, someone shared a thread saying Facebook hired its own share of intelligence types, or “spooks.” Out of 115 “spook” hires, 17 came from the CIA. But Mac Warner was talking about more recent evidence: the testimony of Mike Morrell, former Deputy Director of Central Intelligence. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) haled him before his Judiciary Committee. Morrell revealed a conversation with Anthony Blinken (now U.S. SecState) about a statement by 51 former “spooks” that the Hunter Biden Laptop was part of a Russian disinformation campaign. That statement was a lie, and Blinken and Morrell knew it. When Mike Morell testified under oath to Jim Jordan that, yes, he colluded with Antony Blinken to sell a lie to the American people two weeks before the election for the very purpose of throwing the presidential election. How does it not get stolen if the FBI covers it up and Mark Zuckerberg pays $400 million to put his thumb on the scale? That’s not fair. This is a psy-op – and Warner knows all about psy-ops. But next…! Revelation 2: the Suitcase Scandal At 8:00 a.m. EST Jim Hoft dropped his second bombshell. Actually this was a continuation of a story he first shared the day before. This story concerns the infamous Atlanta Suitcase Scandal. Hoft embedded part of this video from One America News Network, naming two Officers of Election who took part: https://rumble.com/embed/v9ifhb/?pub=4teej The two OOEs that OANN named were Wandrea Shae Moss, Chief OOE, and her mother, OOE Ruby Freeman. (Two other OOEs, Yolanda Sims and Keisha Dixson, were also involved, as was a higher chief, Ralph Jones.) This segment describes them pulling “briefcases” (called “suitcases” in OOE lingo) from beneath black tablecloth-draped tables, extracting ballots from them, and scanning them – more than once. That’s flatly illegal, at least in Georgia. (Your correspondent is a three-year veteran OOE in south central Virginia. His now-retired registrar told him flatly that such a procedure was disgraceful. No one does that in our jurisdiction.) The Epoch Times shared more footage at the time. https://twitter.com/EpochTimes/status/1334590947250868225 So did YouTube, but they took it down – but not before The Wayback Machine captured it. This Suitcase Scandal last received attention three months ago. “Shae” Moss and Ruby Freeman both sued Attorney (and former NYC Mayor) Rudy Giuliani, and Jim and Joe Hoft, after they reported what they all saw on the surveillance footage. Freeman and Moss alleged that the reports caused others to threaten them in an unspecified manner. Giuliani will shortly stand trial for defamation – in Washington, D.C. The FBI releases a report In June 2023, the FBI released a report of an investigation of the events of that night. This report does not mention Rudy Giuliani’s name at all. It does say where those ballots came from, if one can believe the report. In the middle of a process of opening and processing absentee ballots, someone called out an order to stop counting. The staff ordered all media representatives, and accredited poll watchers, to leave the building at 10:30 p.m. So the OOEs boxed the ballots still waiting to process, sealed them, and stacked them in a last-in first-out order under the tables. The only reason the poll watchers left, was that the OOEs were imperiously ordering them to get out – “now.” Human beings sometimes tend to obey such peremptory orders, especially if those giving them scream them out, on the theory that they somehow missed something during training. But then Ralph Jones received an order to resume the count. The Chiefs called back several OOEs but did not summon the poll watchers. Four employees, including Freeman and Moss, stayed behind, pulled out the stacked boxes, and started scanning. Fake boasts of election fraud – or were they really fake? In the ensuing weeks, someone – the FBI blotted out his name – created a phony Instagram account in Ruby Freeman’s name. Someone else – the FBI never tried to establish who – wrote false posts in Freeman’s name, admitting election fraud. Those are the reason Ruby Freeman received hundreds of emails and even unsolicited pizza deliveries – two of the kinds of harassment to which people subjected her. Now either: 1. That man with the blotted-out name was an FBI agent provocateur, or: 2. Ruby Freeman herself made the boasts, is lying about them, and the FBI is backing her in her lie. Either way, none of what has happened to Ruby Freeman or Shae Moss is Rudy Giuliani’s fault. The Gateway Pundit knew about the Instagram posts (since deleted) but found them too over-the-top to be believable. But the worst part of the report is what it omits. It says nothing about the OOEs shoving ballots through the scanner more than once. The Drop and Roll Hypothesis Hoft’s second report is almost a repeat of his first, except for some red highlighting, and his conclusion that he and his team have caught the FBI (and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, and the Georgia Secretary of State’s office) in a cover-up. But Hoft does provide a link to this three-year-old video detailing allegations of a “drop and roll” method of gimmicking the counts. The “drop” refers to a dump of tens of thousands of ballots in key precincts in key States. Then the “roll” refers to adjustments of the count in other precincts to create an illusion of consistency. https://rumble.com/embed/v8melz/?pub=4teej The Drop and Roll hypothesis relies on ratios of Trump to Biden voters that, frankly, violate the Law of Averages. Simply put, the Election of 2020 violated every rule of statistical analysis, and broke every previously observed pattern. The Law of Averages is normally an iron law. Break it, and the croupier knows that you have cheated at the baccarat table. Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, and the third time it’s enemy action. Ian Fleming Revelation 3: Settlement of a lawsuit about alternative electors Hoft released his third bombshell at 8:30 a.m. EST yesterday – actually a reprint of this article in Wisconsin Right Now. This concerns a lawsuit by Democratic officials in Wisconsin against members of a slate of alternative Republican electors. These alternative electors went through the motions of creating a paper record of voting for the Trump-Pence ticket. They did this for one reason only: to have a record they could submit to Congress if Donald Trump prevailed either in Congress or in court to disallow the certified results. The Democratic Party accused the group of trying to overturn a legitimate election by fraud. Now they have settled their lawsuit. The only concession they wrung from the group is that none of its members will accept nomination as Electors in: • The Election of 2024, or • Any future election in which Donald J. Trump, for any reason, appears on a ticket. They also agreed to cooperate with any Justice Department investigation. But they do not have to pay any remuneration to the plaintiffs, nor admit to any malicious mischief. But the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel and Channel 3000 tried to suggest the alternative electors had admitting wrongdoing. They changed their headlines when WRN confronted them with their error – or their lie. Revelation 4: mail-in ballot recipients admit to election fraud At 7:00 p.m. EST last night, Gateway Pundit reporter Brian Lupo broke the last story. This concerns a poll by The Heartland Institute and Rasmussen Reports, of persons who voted by mail. Forty-three percent of voters in 2020 voted by mail, per The Associated Press. And CNAV has done a Chi-Square assessment to show that mail-in balloting skews Democratic. Now we know why mail-in ballots skew Democrat. Of 1,085 voters surveyed in 2020, thirty percent voted absentee. Of those 310 (give or take one) voters: • 17 percent admitted to voting where they once lived, but don’t live anymore. • 17 percent admitted forging a friend or family member’s signature on a ballot or ballot envelope. This applied “with or without his or her permission.” • 8 percent admitted that someone offered to pay them to vote or otherwise reward them for voting. And – perhaps of the entire sample – 10 percent knew someone who admitted filling out a ballot for someone else. That last is not necessarily fraudulent, if the other person is in the room while the filling-out is happening. If not, that is fraud by anyone’s definition. Donald Trump had plenty to say about those findings: THIS IS THE BIGGEST STORY OF THE YEAR, AND REPUBLICANS MUST DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. DON’T BE MITCH MCCONNELL AND HIS GANG OF RINOS. HAVE TO MAKE A MOVE NOW. GET TOUGH, GET SMART. OUR COUNTRY IS BEING STOLEN! Rasmussen Reports noted something else: machines for processing so many mail-order ballots required pre-ordering – at a cost of millions of dollars and with considerable lag time. This indicates knowledge of the need for the machines in advance of the COVID-19 pandemic. That in turn suggests that the pandemic itself was part of the plan. https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/status/1733902080861933664 Analysis All the above go to show that outright election fraud played the largest role in deciding the Election of 2020. But manipulation of public opinion – another kind of fraud, but less actionable – also played a role. In any case, the American people can lay the blame, not only with judges who refused to hear Trump’s evidence on specious technical grounds, but also on certain of his appointees who flat-out betrayed him. And not only him but everything that Republicanism stands for. Then again, that was a lesson Trump had to learn, and hopefully has learned. Which is: the Republican establishment had made its own Quisling-like peace with the Democrats long ago. Trump called on them to fight for Republican principles, and these were as foreign to them as to the Democrats. Nevertheless, all those officials owe the American people an apology. They could have gathered the evidence for the very things that, today, so many voters now confess. They didn’t. And as Trump said, they let the Democrats steal our country. Looking forward Public opinion will be considerably more difficult to manipulate. The disastrous results of Joe Biden’s policies should make enough voters simply not care about any accusations against Trump. (And maybe not against Biden and his family, either.) The main difficulty that outright election fraud will have in 2024 is the apparent loss of “baseline.” Anyone trying to win by fraud must have a baseline of support, not quite enough to win by itself, but certainly enough to support swaying the election by manipulating a relative handful of votes. That will not be possible this time, without being blatantly obvious – which election fraud practitioners never care to be. Nevertheless, a future “fix” for elections is required to prevent even the appearance of election fraud. For that, we can take inspiration from the French, who: 1. Count all ballots by hand – on paper, with no scanner-tabulators. This also requires ballots that are easy to mark. And: 2. Allow people to register in advance – at their local police precinct or courthouse – to vote on behalf of another. And furthermore: 3. Disallow mail-in balloting and same-day registration. This kind of system would make impossible all the kinds of fraud anyone has shown or suspected. Conscientious OOEs, and their chiefs, area supervisors, and registrars, should embrace them. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/13/foundation/constitution/election-fraud-2020-acknowledged/ Video of Ruby Freeman and daughter scanning ballots multiple times: https://rumble.com/vc4lnz-poll-worker-in-fulton-county-ga.-caught-on-camera-scanning-same-stack-of-ba.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Video: Drop and Roll: https://rumble.com/vb8ksn-drop-and-roll-how-the-2020-election-was-stolen-from-donald-trump.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 FBI report: https://cnav.news/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/GBI-and-FBI-report-on-State-Farm-Workers-SEB2020-059-ROI-redacted.pdf Article in Wisconsin Right Now about the alternative-elector settlement: https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/fake-electors-lawsuit/?=1 Heartland-Rasmussen poll: https://heartland.org/opinion/heartland-rasmussen-poll-one-in-five-mail-in-voters-admit-to-committing-at-least-one-kind-of-voter-fraud-during-2020-election/ Donald Trump’s “Truth” about the Heartland-Rasmussen findings: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111569300833712246 Rasmussen’s post about knowing in advance: https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/status/1733902080861933664 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Plagiarism shown – and worse By Terry A. Hurlbut Yesterday CNAV shared the latest accusations against Claudine Gay, President of Harvard University. This included the sensational revelations by Christopher F. Rufo and Christopher Brunet that Dr. Gay had gotten her Ph.D. dishonestly. To wit: she committed plagiarism in her doctoral dissertation. Another investigator found evidence of plagiarism by her in three other papers – out of 11 total. Yet the Harvard Corporation doesn’t care. Nor did they care about her disgraceful December 5 testimony before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce. And the reason they don’t care, is that they share her dark vision of creating a new society none of us would care to live in. This makes her guilty of fraud, not only against her fellow scholars, but also against students. And it shows why the “parallel society” needs its own institutions and methods of higher education. What is plagiarism? Plagiarism – as every higher and secondary educational institution must define in no uncertain terms for its students – is the passing-off as one’s own of another person’s work. As such it violates every concept of integrity and honor. It is also a common moral hazard for academic careerists. “Publish or perish” is a common proverb – and the victim in the case at hand, Dr. Carol M. Swain, explicitly said that academics receive rewards commensurate with the citations they generate. In that sense, plagiarism is a double theft – of the work itself and of the citation the original author earned. Rarely does anyone brazenly substitute his own by-line for another’s. Instead, the typical intellectual thief: 1. Quotes verbatim text without indicating a quotation (through quotation marks, indentation, or distinctive formatting), and/or: 2. Changes a few words, without changing the basic expression of the idea, and calls the changes a paraphrase. Every student must learn how to avoid even the appearance of both kinds of plagiarism when he first receives composition assignments of any kind. Good schools teach that in lower middle school, at least. In the context of works offered for sale or otherwise subject to royalties, plagiarism is illegal and prosecutable. That’s what copyright – and patent – is all about. The case of Claudine Gay Yesterday, CNAV suggested that some person(s) unknown might have shared with Mr. Rufo (and also with Bill Ackman of the Pershing Square Fund) a large tranche of damaging information against Dr. Gay. That might or might not be the case. But investigative leads, from wherever they come, are as valuable as the other evidence an investigator finds after following them. So it is with Claudine Gay, and so it often is when investigating plagiarism. The reason: one who gets away with plagiarism once is likely to do it again. Christopher Rufo and his colleagues shared extensive evidence that Dr. Gay had cobbled together quotes without citations, and paraphrases that were actually quotes, to produce a doctoral dissertation. Why the Dissertation Committee before whom she defended her dissertation did not detect this, is a further mystery. Yesterday Rufo shared a formal statement by the National Association of Scholars, calling on the Harvard Corporation to remove Gay. https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1734329121885626606 The NAS cited more than plagiarism. They accused her of racism – and of “vindictive and arbitrary” application of administrative discipline, especially of faculty. Another user reminded the community of one such case: https://twitter.com/AdventuresOTM/status/1734353213359259922 Also beginning yesterday, another investigator shared evidence of plagiarism going far beyond the dissertation. Aaron Sibarium shared this evidence at The Washington Free Beacon and also as a thread on X: https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734336207528525868 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734336834316972125 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734337611865428159 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734337819865125370 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734338061297930340 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734338733128953913 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734339114638758159 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734339323166953822 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734340100656710127 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734340744977199534 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734341118274474243 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734341932879610111 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734342469750546917 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734343052695834998 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734343230832116013 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734344287842906272 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734344530974117957 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734345617814716757 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734346042139922724 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734346410294992980 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734346882548457956 Reaction In fact, the Harvard Corporation definitely refused to fire Dr. Gay. Mr. Ackman took note of that last night: https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1734394682413588949 https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1734401275142291640 So did Dr. Swain, who is furious. As Fox News reported, the Harvard Corporation issued a statement of support for Dr. Gay this morning. Dr. Swain reacted thus: https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734560151242240406 Swain had earlier called on Gay to resign. In the same post, she said the same to Ronna McDaniel, Chair of the Republican National Committee. https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734428109737169317 She also gave an interview to Rufo at City Journal. At that interview, for the first time, she laid the blame on “white progressives” promoting an agenda. She traced this to the lowering of academic standards and the promotion of what elite opinion then called “affirmative action.” Today they call it Diversity, Equity and Inclusion – that is, including everyone but white males. Like Bill Ackman before her, she said Dr. Gay benefited from DEI considerations. In addition, she hinted that the Dissertation Committee winked and nodded at Claudine Gay’s plagiarism in order to advance yet another person who “supported their ideas.” This morning she shared similar insights with Neil McCabe at Redstate. More than that, she returned to the plagiarism theme and raised another concern: If she was doing work on minority representation and publishing articles, if she didn't cite my work at all, but she was clearly using my work, that's more serious. Did she cite my work at all? Because my work won the highest prize political scientists can win, and my work was the one cited in the voting rights cases about majority-minority districts. Then in this post she shared the consideration that frosted her more than anything else: https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734599131715309725 More than plagiarism Which leads to one other issue in summing up. Claudine Gay is part of a larger movement having the goal of spreading ideological corruption throughout higher education. This long-form post quotes a lengthy memo by Dr. Gay, while she was Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard and under active consideration to become President. https://twitter.com/CBradleyThomps1/status/1733529080828502141 That memo is a blueprint for the ideological destruction of a society. Plagiarism by Dr. Gay becomes a secondary consideration in this light – because even without it, that memo should disqualify: 1. Dr. Gay from being president of anything, much less America’s oldest and most prestigious institution of higher education, and 2. Harvard itself – and similar institutions – as places to get a good education. CNAV has already asked whether anyone needs college anymore. More recently CNAV noted that college fails to prepare the student to go to work and do a job. The recent evidence suggests that college now exists to warp young minds and recruit them for Communist revolution. (Though whether college prepares students actually to take control of, and manage, a revolutionary conquest, is yet another riddle.) In computer hardware parlance, a “white box” is a machine without a big brand name – or even a machine one designs and builds oneself. Conservatives might now need to invent “white box education.” The case of Claudine Gay is the worst case thus far – but not the only case. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/12/news/plagiarism-shown-worse/ Chris Rufo shares the NAS statement calling on Gay to resign: https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1734329121885626606 https://www.nas.org/blogs/article/claudine-gay-should-go Post telling the story of a vindictive punishment of a professor: https://twitter.com/AdventuresOTM/status/1734353213359259922 Aaron Sibarium’s thread and article: https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734336207528525868 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734336834316972125 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734337611865428159 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734337819865125370 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734338061297930340 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734338733128953913 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734339114638758159 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734339323166953822 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734340100656710127 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734340744977199534 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734341118274474243 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734341932879610111 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734342469750546917 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734343052695834998 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734343230832116013 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734344287842906272 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734344530974117957 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734345617814716757 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734346042139922724 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734346410294992980 https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1734346882548457956 https://freebeacon.com/campus/this-is-definitely-plagiarism-harvard-university-president-claudine-gay-copied-entire-paragraphs-from-others-academic-work-and-claimed-them-as-her-own/ Bill Ackman shares why Harvard won’t fire Dr. Gay: https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1734394682413588949 https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1734401275142291640 Dr. Swain’s posts and interview: https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734560151242240406 https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734428109737169317 https://www.city-journal.org/article/white-male-would-probably-already-be-gone https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734599131715309725 Post copying Dr. Gay’s memo: https://twitter.com/CBradleyThomps1/status/1733529080828502141 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Claudine Gay – next target By Terry A. Hurlbut Claudine Gay, PhD, President of Harvard University, seems to have made herself a target with her December 5 testimony. The same was true of Liz Magill of the University of Pennsylvania, until she resigned over the weekend. Now that Magill has resigned, Claudine Gay is receiving unwanted attention from several quarters. This actually creates a mystery – because Sally Kornbluth, President of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), has not come in for such attention, this although she used the same weasel words that Gay and Magill used. Nevertheless, certain allegations against Dr. Gay, if true, cast doubt on her qualifications to be President of anything. Latest allegations against Claudine Gay Recall that Sally Kornbluth, Liz Magill, and Claudine Gay all gave disastrous testimony to the House Education and Workforce Committee. That evening, Bill Ackman, co-trustee of the Pershing Square Fund, shared three and a half minutes of embedded video of the questioning of the three by Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), and his own scathing critique of all three. https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1732179418787783089 In sum, he said all three should resign in disgrace. But on Thursday morning (December 7) he seemed to target Claudine Gay specifically. At 12:25 a.m. EST he shared this post, alleging that Claudine Gay became President of Harvard for one reason only. And that is: she’s a Diversity, Equity and Inclusion hire. https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1732632488227303784 He also suggested that was true for “other elite universities” looking for presidents, department heads, etc. at the same time. Dr. Gay became president of Harvard in January of 2023. But that’s hardly the worst allegation now. Christopher Rufo, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, yesterday afternoon accused Dr. Gay of the worst academic sin: plagiarism. https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1733976372450853222 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1733977789773345226 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1733978872620908971 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1733994887434133909 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1734035736947777745 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1734037857013252389 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1734053011385962766 This thread details the most flagrant violations in academic integrity imaginable – for which Harvard itself would expel any student. If these examples hold, then Claudine Gay is not qualified even to teach, much less to be a university president. Those reacting to Rufo’s thread know it, and have said so. https://twitter.com/jeremycarl4/status/1733994610223935751 https://twitter.com/feelsdesperate/status/1733980354938016091 https://twitter.com/DanFarfan/status/1734069189407854663 https://twitter.com/JeremyTate41/status/1734084422532522143 https://twitter.com/MikeyKnux883/status/1734203904324514083 https://twitter.com/jmasseypoet/status/1733979676773585217 https://twitter.com/lefthas0class/status/1734076989026246905 (CNAV has not been able to confirm that last allegation independently.) Dr. Carol M. Swain weighs in Benjamin Wetmore at The Gateway Pundit took time to reach, or at least find a post by, Dr. Carol Swain. In reply, she said: https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734019026085429394 https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734049564817064115 Dr. Swain has a point. Why didn’t the Harvard presidential search committee nor any reviewer or colleague catch this when it happened? Indeed Dr. Swain did have more to say about Claudine Gay – and not her alone. https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734006925354770652 Maybe because the politics of these other scholars is opposite hers. And more: https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734017671279063151 https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734048770269032498 Worth noting (as Dr. Swain herself noticed) is that some Harvard alumni are already calling on Dr. Gay to resign – and on Harvard’s Trustees to hire Dr. Swain in her place. https://twitter.com/michaelpleahy/status/1734029083292410256 Also worth noting is that Dr. Swain has begun her own investigation, this although, as a professor emerita, she no longer has the free-of-charge access to “social science databases” she once enjoyed. She has asked for help, https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734181211159801950 and help seems to be on its way. This is probably the best single thing Dr. Swain has said in the last eighteen hours: https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734191691593068937 Case in point: Ketanji Brown Jackson. Return of the billboard trucks Last night David Greyson at The Gateway Pundit reported that the infamous Billboard Trucks, probably the same ones who “doxxed” the members of the 31 student organizations at Harvard who signed a statement blaming Israel entirely for the Fourth Arab-Israeli War, now are featuring billboards calling on Claudine Gay to resign. Greyson cited Fox News, who also reported that an airplane would shortly tow a banner over Cambridge, Massachusetts, saying, “Harvard, stop Jew hatred!” Interestingly, Greyson said similar “billboard trucks” drove around the Penn campus before its President resigned. All of which raises more questions. The questions concern, not whether Claudine Gay deserves the opprobrium she is now receiving. Plagiarism is, quite simply, unpardonable in academic circles – and her answers to Rep. Stefanik’s questions last week were indeed disgraceful. But where is this attention coming from? Christopher Rufo said he and his colleague “obtained documents” suggesting the plagiarism charge. Where did they get them? Who is organizing the billboard trucks? Should the country expect Sally Kornbluth at MIT to come in for the same treatment? Oddly enough, Dr. Kornbluth is Jewish herself. That raises the question of why she has not been more forceful in dealing with antisemitic incidents on her own campus. Victor Davis Hanson described one case – at MIT – in which authorities told Jewish students to stay away from certain areas of campus. Contributor Darrell L. Castle called that the worst example to date of antisemitism on campus. Claudine Gay is not the only one So how could Dr. Kornbluth permit spectacles of this kind on her watch? And why has she not, thus far, come under the same attack as have Liz Magill and Claudine Gay? Or might the world expect her to come under such attack in the near future? If this does not happen, then someone is selectively applying outrage. Justice should apply to all offenders, and not be a respecter of persons. Bookmark this site, and watch for further developments. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/11/news/claudine-gay-next-target/ Video: https://rumble.com/v40svat-claudine-gay-next-target.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Bill Ackman’s two posts: https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1732179418787783089 https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1732632488227303784 Christopher Rufo’s thread: https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1733976372450853222 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1733977789773345226 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1733978872620908971 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1733994887434133909 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1734035736947777745 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1734037857013252389 https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1734053011385962766 Immediate reaction: https://twitter.com/jeremycarl4/status/1733994610223935751 https://twitter.com/feelsdesperate/status/1733980354938016091 https://twitter.com/DanFarfan/status/1734069189407854663 https://twitter.com/JeremyTate41/status/1734084422532522143 https://twitter.com/MikeyKnux883/status/1734203904324514083 https://twitter.com/jmasseypoet/status/1733979676773585217 https://twitter.com/lefthas0class/status/1734076989026246905 Reaction by Dr. Carol M. Swain (and friend):: https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734019026085429394 https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734049564817064115 https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734006925354770652 https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734017671279063151 https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734048770269032498 https://twitter.com/michaelpleahy/status/1734029083292410256 https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734181211159801950 https://twitter.com/carolmswain/status/1734191691593068937 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

COVID vaccines – Florida official wants answers By Terry A. Hurlbut Florida stays in the news, as Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) continues to pursue his Presidential primary campaign. But the governor seems to have appointed some conscientious officials. Case in point: Dr. Joseph Ladapo, Florida Surgeon General. Throughout the year Dr. Ladapo has resisted calls to reimpose COVID mask and vaccine mandates as COVID Scare 2.0 rolled out this year. But he turns out to be doing more than resist. He is actively investigating – and now seems to have found solid evidence that COVID mRNA vaccines can cause great harm. Accordingly he has demanded answers from relevant federal officials. The COVID vaccine question Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit shared a review of Dr. Ladapo’s investigation this morning. On May 10, 2023, Dr. Ladapo wrote a scathing letter to Dr. Robert M. Califf, Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and Dr. Rochelle Walensky, then-current Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). He opened his three-page letter by accusing them flatly of: 1. Ignoring the risks of adverse events from COVID mRNA vaccines (from Pfizer and Moderna), and 2. Trying to fool the public into accepting them as harmless. But their worst failing, according to his letter, was failing to require vaccine makers to run and report clinical trials. All COVID vaccines have existed under emergency use authorizations (except one that, so far, authorities have not made widely available). Thus, neither Pfizer nor Moderna has run any clinical trials. Dr. Ladapo cited the CDC’s own data, and those from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Those data show the worst reports of adverse events in the history of the database, to wit: 1. A seventeen-fold increase in overall reporting of adverse events, and 2. A forty-four-fold increase in reporting of life-threatening events. Dr. Ladapo also cited studies in the journals Lancet and Vaccine giving further evidence of adverse events. Specifically: 1. One-third of patients taking mRNA vaccines find themselves too sick to work or to perform “activities of daily living, and 2. An overall risk of “serious adverse events of special interest” of one in 550. Who is guilty of disinformation? Dr. Ladapo roundly criticized Drs. Califf and Walensky for saying such events are “rare.” In fact he used the word disinformation to characterize their behavior. The federal government loves to throw that word around – but Dr. Ladapo threw it right back at them. He continued by asking twelve specific questions regarding COVID vaccine casualties and the FDA and CDC’s handling of the statistics. Then he said their respective organizations (and not any conspiracy theorists, though Dr. Ladapo didn’t mention any) “are the main entities promoting vaccine hesitancy.” That letter still has not gotten a response. One can readily see now why, three months ago, Dr. Ladapo said COVID Scare 2.0 didn’t impress him. (Back in January, the governor announced plans to forbid any mask or vaccine mandates in Florida. The ban would even extend to forbidding private employers to use vaccination as a condition of employment.) Dr. Walensky resigned from the CDC effective June 30. On November 14, Florida’s Public Health Integrity Committee met to discuss the matter, and the broader concern about regulators being too quick to approve new drugs. Then last Wednesday (December 6), Dr. Ladapo wrote again to Dr. Califf and Dr. Mandy Cohen, Walensky’s successor as Director of the CDC. Now he had a more dire concern. DNA fragments in the mRNA vaccines On October 27, a team under Dr. David J. Speicher of the University of Guelph in Ontario, reported finding DNA fragments in several Pfizer and Moderna vaccine batches. Those fragments are left over from the manufacturing process, which uses a type of DNA loop called a plasmid, part of the genome of the common coliform bacterium Escherichia coli. This presents a serious problem, because – as Dr. Ladapo pointed out – the “integration” of DNA into a patient’s cells risks: • Induction and/or promotion of cancer, • Chromosomal instability, and • Bad effects in many vital organs, including the reproductive organs. Plasmids, furthermore, figure prominently in mutation of E. coli and other germs to make them resistant to antibiotics. They therefore have properties making them uniquely capable of inserting themselves into another organism’s genome. The FDA knows this – and in 2007 issued a Guidance for Industry addressing that very subject. Dr. Ladapo raised three additional questions about whether the FDA, CDC, and manufacturers have considered these risks. Then he demanded, by December 13, an answer to his May letter and to this last letter. Throughout his communications, he has mentioned the dismissal of concerns about COVID vaccines – and insults to those who raise them. In fact the CDC continue to present assurances that the vaccine cannot change a patient’s genome. Dr. Speicher and his colleagues would appear to have exposed them, if indirectly, as frauds – and Dr. Ladapo knows it. COVID vaccine legal news In other news, the American Freedom Law Center announced last Thursday (December 7) their filing of a petition for Supreme Court review of lower-court decisions dismissing a complaint by four Pennsylvania residents against that State’s then-current policy of COVID restrictions and contact tracing. (One can read their petition here.) Gov. Tom Wolf (D-Pa.) started the mask-mandate and contact-tracing program in 2020. Four Pennsylvania residents (Chad and Rebecca Parker and Mark and Donna Redman) sued the Governor, Attorney General, and Secretary of the Health Department of Pennsylvania. They sued on First Amendment grounds, specifically peaceable assembly. In June 2021, the State rescinded the mask mandate. Whereupon the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania dismissed the case: 1. As moot (as to the mask mandate, now rescinded), and 2. For lack of standing by the plaintiffs to challenge the contact-tracing program in the federal courts. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court. So now the Parkers and the Redmans want the Supreme Court to address: 1. Whether a State government can simply evade review by ceasing – however temporarily – the unlawful behavior subject to that review, and 2. Whether those asked to report their contacts have standing to challenge the program requiring this. Interestingly, the petitioners never seem to have raised the issue of whether masks prevent or slow the spread of disease – or not. Technically they should have thought to argue that at District Court level. (Appellate courts do not permit appellants to introduce new arguments.) Summary Federal and some State health authorities did not evaluate the COVID vaccines or the real COVID threat (or lack of it) adequately. Apart from whether they were part of any nefarious conspiracy, they weren’t doing their jobs. Some of them still aren’t. Surgeons General like Dr. Ladapo truly are the exception that proves the rule. The proof comes in his doing his job by questioning whether federal officials are doing theirs. But Dr. Ladapo proves something else: those mRNA COVID vaccines are a positive menace to everyone who takes them. Only now we’re finding out just how much of a menace they truly are. Scott Atlas, formerly of the Trump administration and now of Stanford’s Hoover Institution, last month outlined seven steps the next President ought to take to get people to trust health authorities again. The point here is to make those authorities trustworthy again. That might never happen – but if it does, it will happen only because men like Joseph Ladapo keep them honest. Inquiries like his are a good step – if he continues to follow up on it. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/10/news/covid-vaccines-florida-official-answers/ Dr. Ladapo’s letters: May 10: https://www.floridahealth.gov/_documents/newsroom/press-releases/2023/05/20230510-florida-department-of-health-letter-to-fda-and-cdc.pdf December 6: https://www.floridahealth.gov/about/_documents/12-06-2023-DOH-Letter-to-FDA-RFI-on-COVID-19-Vaccines.pdf Medical references: Lancet: https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S1473-3099%2822%2900054-8 Vaccine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36055877/ The Ontario study: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/mjc97 Guidance for Industry: https://www.fda.gov/media/73667/download Current CDC false assurances: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/facts.html Parker et al. v. Gov. Pennsylvania et al. (cert petition) https://www.americanfreedomlawcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Parker-Petition-Final.pdf Scott Atlas’ seven-step program: https://cnav.news/2023/11/01/editorial/guest/todays-public-health-emergency-restoring-trust-7-steps/ Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Penn president resigns By Terry A. Hurlbut The president of the University of Pennsylvania (Penn) announced her resignation today, according to The Daily Pennsylvanian, the university’s newspaper. Liz Magill obviously bowed to pressure from the trustees of one of Penn’s member schools, after her testimony before the House Education and Workforce Committee created a campus-wide, indeed a national, scandal. Penn drama – how it began The University of Pennsylvania, for what it’s worth, began with a motto that calls it to be a moral leader. Leges sine moribus vanae does not speak of “laws without dead bodies.” The object of that preposition sine is the ablative or “carrying-away” case of the noun mos, moris – whence “moral(s).” Originally it meant, literally, behavior – and in this case, it means behavior that follows a law. So this motto translates as: Laws without good behavior are in vain. Or: laws without the willingness to follow them are a waste of time. One could argue that Penn has failed for a long time to be a moral leader, or to teach moral precept. Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-S.C.), Chairman of the House Education Committee, said so in an interview after the rather disturbing hearing over which she presided. There, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) questioned three Ivy League university presidents on whether the raucous, threatening, and even outright violent behavior the country has witnessed on their campuses is in accord with their codes of conduct and their policies regarding bullying or harassment. Liz Magill, President of Penn, was one of them. Her testimony, and that of the other two, according to Bill Ackman of the Pershing Square fund, was weak. https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1732179418787783089 CNAV analyzed that testimony in depth the day after Magill and her colleagues gave it. The next day, Magill made this weak apology. https://twitter.com/Penn/status/1732549608230862999 But then came the fallout. The fallout builds Ross Stevens, head of Stone Ridge Asset Management, started it. Stevens had planned to finance a $100-million institute for teaching high business finance. He even signed a Limited Partnership Agreement to that effect. But after Magill’s performance before Congress on Tuesday, he withdrew his gift, saying Penn was not living up to its side of the agreement. https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1732869421914357836 In fact his attorneys said worse, in their letter to Magill and to Scott Bok, Chairman of Penn’s Board. They said no further discussion could happen until Penn had a new president! Mr. Stevens and Stone Ridge would welcome the opportunity to discuss this matter further and give the University a chance to remedy what Stone Ridge believes are likely violations of the Limited Partnership Agreement if, and when, there is a new University President in place. Until then, there can be no meaningful discussion about remedying the University's ongoing failure to honor its obligations. Neil Barr and Dana M. Sheshens, Attorneys at Law, Davis, Polk and Wardwell LLP, 450 Lexington Avenue, New York, N.Y. Shocked and furious, the Board of Advisers of Penn’s Wharton School of Business called an emergency meeting. As a result of that meeting, they demanded her resignation. https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1732941855338463738 In light of your testimony yesterday before Congress, we demand that the University clarify its position regarding any call for harm to any group of people immediately, change any policies that allow such conduct with immediate effect, and discipline all offenders expeditiously. Technically that would be ex post facto – but the offenders would be hard-pressed to defend their conduct if they requested judicial intervention. (The Constitution says neither the United States nor any State may pass bills of attainder or ex post facto laws. Whether that would apply to Penn, which is a public university though it is in the Ivy League, is unclear.) Even more insistent was this next paragraph: Further, as a result of the University leadership’s stated belief and collective failure to act, our Board respectfully suggests to you and the Board of Trustees that the University requires new leadership with immediate effect. In the next paragraph they demanded that the larger Board’s Executive Committee take these matters up at once. What the Advisers were talking about The Board of Advisers had every reason for concern, even outrage. They referred to a “select group of students and faculty” leading a “dangerous and toxic culture” on campus. Furthermore, the Advisers have held eight emergency meetings, in addition to the last one. They sent several resolutions to Magill calling for policy changes to enhance the safety of all students. And she failed to act on a single one. Her testimony before Congress was, quite simply, the straw that broke the camel’s back. One can certainly appreciate that. As Todd Starnes reported earlier this week, several Jewish students at Penn had to hide in their dorm rooms. This after a mob of students – and professors! – formed outside their dorms and shouted, “Death to Jews!” Starnes wasn’t reporting on any incidents that took place in Berlin on November 9, 1938. This happened this year, at a university that says it stands for the rule of law. What part of “Laws without the willingness to follow them are a waste of time” did those students not get? And what shall we say of professors who joined that disgraceful chant? The Penn X account had nothing to say. But The Daily Pennsylvanian cited (but did not link to) an email from Magill. She released that at 4:30 p.m. EST today – and said she would stay on as a law professor. Penn needs to clean house The Daily Pennsylvanian also reports that this resignation comes two months after Marc Rowan, Chairman of the Wharton Board of Advisers, started a donors’ revolt at the school. This was over the Palestinian Writes festival in September. He protested that event, but nothing came of that. Then the Fourth Arab-Israeli War began – and the behavior of certain people on campus prompted Rowan to demand that Magill and Bok both resign. Magill becaomes the first President of Penn to resign for reasons other than taking a government appointment. Her tenure will also be the shortest on record – a mere seventeen months, one week, and one day. But she should not remain as a law professor, tenure or no. She should resign from both and retire to private life. And every professor who took part in that chant should consider himself fired. Further to this, Scott Bok should resign also. His handling of earlier controversies was as enabling of the threatening behavior Todd Starnes’ radio guests described, as was anything Liz Magill did. Remember once again Penn’s motto: laws without the willingness to follow them are a waste of time. That applies equally to precepts and policies about how students and faculty treat one another on campus. Rep. Foxx was correct in saying, after that hearing, that colleges and universities no longer teach critical thinking or moral behavior. That’s enough to suggest that “higher education” itself is a waste of time – at least at some institutions. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/09/news/penn-president-resigns/ Bill Ackman’s post embedding the presidents’ testimony: https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1732179418787783089 Magill’s attempt to apologize: https://twitter.com/Penn/status/1732549608230862999 Greg Price’ report on Ross Stevens withdrawing his gift: https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1732869421914357836 Letter from Stevens’ attorneys to President Magill and Chairman Bok: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24199707/20231207davispolktoupenn.pdf Post copying letter from Wharton’s Board of Advisers to President Magill: https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1732941855338463738 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Antisemitism finally having consequences By Terry A. Hurlbut The spate of antisemitism, especially on campus, at last seems to be having some serious, at-the-top consequences. When three university presidents actually said that calls for killing all Jews needed a context to be actionable, they gave some the distinct impression that America was like Weimar Germany in its ambivalence toward enforcement of a rule of law. But now at least two of those presidents are suffering embarrassment as more people refuse to accept their platitudes. Not only that, but Members of Congress are starting to re-examine the proposition that higher education is sacrosanct and therefore is, and by right ought to be, exempt from taxation. Latest word on antisemitism Victor Davis Hanson, on Monday (December 4), openly wrote of “Weimar America.” He discussed several incidents, at university and in high school, some of which CNAV has mentioned before. They include: 1. A teacher barricading herself in her office after someone saw her social-media post supporting Israel, 2. Instructors at Stanford and the University of California at Davis singling out their Jewish students for ridicule, 3. A university professor committing manslaughter against a pro-Israel demonstrator, 4. Jewish students barricaded inside a library at Cooper Union University, and 5. Jewish students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) told to stay away from certain areas of campus. The next day, of course, came the antisemitism hearings before the House Education and Workforce Committee. As mentioned, the presidents of Harvard, MIT and the University of Pennsylvania all refused to condemn unequivocally the anti-Jewish riots on their own campuses. Worth mentioning, by the way, is that the Israel Defense Forces continue to turn up evidence that the Islamic Resistance Movement (Arabic Harakah al-Muqāwamah al-Islāmiyyah, abbreviated HAMAS) have turned Gaza into a staging area for a war of elimination against Israel. This extends to the Al-Azhar University in Gaza City – which had American and European Union funding. Al-Azhar University is the main training facility of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood in Gaza. It was funded with $10,000 by the US government in 2019, and with €5 million by the EU 2015-2020. Now IDF troops have reached the campus and found extensive military infrastructure and armaments. Said “infrastructure” includes tunnels leading off campus – and several rockets, explosives, and small arms, according to Arutz-7. This is why the Israeli Air Force had to blow it up. https://twitter.com/AlnaouqA/status/1720729872807440494 But of course the legacy media won’t report any of this. Now the consequences of antisemitism But actions have consequences, and so do weasel words. Margaret Flavin at The Gateway Pundit reports that Rabbi David Wolpe has resigned from Harvard’s antisemitism board. He cited as his reason the “painfully inadequate testimony” of President Claudine Gay before the Education Committee. He left a three-post thread on X, explaining his reasons. https://twitter.com/RabbiWolpe/status/1732847411175796747 https://twitter.com/RabbiWolpe/status/1732847415533637858 In reply, someone suggested that Harvard accepts Arab donations, and that could explain the weasel words. https://twitter.com/eyedefi/status/1732856751446241560 Meanwhile, UPenn President Liz Magill clearly thought better of her weasel words and tried to take them back. She made this post, and The Daily Pennsylvanian carried a partial transcript. https://twitter.com/Penn/status/1732549608230862999 But that might not be good enough. Jim Hoft reported that Ross Stevens, head of Stone Ridge Asset Management, canceled a $100 million donation to UPenn. https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1732869421914357836 Axios has more details, and a copy of a letter by Stevens’ attorneys not only announcing the withdrawal, but also appearing to demand that President Liz Magill resign. Late this morning, Hoft reported that the university’s Board of Trustees met in emergency session last night. They then passed a resolution asking for Magill’s resignation. https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1732941855338463738 Hoft cited the New York Post, which confirmed the report. They also quoted Bill Ackman, head of Pershing Square Fund, as reposing 95 percent confidence in her resigning. Even the Governor of Pennsylvania joined the chorus. Harvard’s President Gay also tried to apologize. She said so to The Harvard Crumson, as The Washington Examiner reported. But the Education Committee is still investigating antisemitism at Harvard. Donor’s revolt – and now a taxpayers’ revolt These episodes are the most striking examples to date of the Donors’ Revolt that CNAV has mentioned before. (In addition, two officials of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni called for that very thing last month.) Katie Pavlich at Town Hall sent in a rather confused report, which speaks of a proposal to tax university endowments. But Rep. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) said he proposed to defund any university having an endowment greater than $5 billion. That’s actually more to the point and would be easier to defend. Rep. Crane has chosen to eliminate certain direct subsidies that universities presently enjoy. https://twitter.com/RepEliCrane/status/1732517466817909152 Rep. Mike Waltz (R-Fla.), on the morning before the contentious Education Department hearing, did propose an actual tax. https://twitter.com/michaelgwaltz/status/1732058802818621642 Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) announced his support for that idea. https://twitter.com/chiproytx/status/1732426558319821248 A week ago, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) had mentioned some legislation of his own. https://twitter.com/SenRickScott/status/1730707081198543099 Sen. Scott was talking about his Changing Our Learning, Loans, Endowments and Graduation Expectations (COLLEGE) Act. Its main thrust is to require any college or university, taking part in federal financial aid programs, to pay a per-student tax, the size of said tax to depend on its endowment. That bill died last year – but Sen. Scott reintroduced it last month. In his announcement he criticized colleges for taking taxpayers’ money for scholarships while sitting on massive endowments & doing nothing to combat disgusting anti-Semitism on their campuses. Summary Antisemitism has now become an embarrassment to university administrations and an outrage to Members of Congress. Sadly, it does not limit itself to the left, though Darrell L. Castle predicted it would start from there. Some voices on the right seem to think the Education and Workforce Committee treated those three university presidents unfairly. One can correctly say that their platitudes about respecting freedom of speech ring totally hollow, since they don’t respect freedom of speech in any other context. The spectacle of university faculty joining in inflammatory rhetoric – and even violent acts – is yet more shame to their pride. If this episode will also make us reexamine the tangled relationship between university and government, that’s all to the good. But many other relationships need reexamination, and already those that have supported the university community begin to know it. And act upon it. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/08/news/antisemitism-finally-having-consequences/ Video of Al-Azbar U. getting blown up: https://twitter.com/AlnaouqA/status/1720729872807440494 Rabbi Wolpe’s thread: https://twitter.com/RabbiWolpe/status/1732847411175796747 https://twitter.com/RabbiWolpe/status/1732847415533637858 Post listing Arab donations: https://twitter.com/eyedefi/status/1732856751446241560 Liz Magill’s apology: https://twitter.com/Penn/status/1732549608230862999 Report of Ross Stevens withdrawing his gift: https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1732869421914357836 Letter from Ross Stevens’ attorneys demanding Magill’s resignation: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24199707/20231207davispolktoupenn.pdf Post reporting a board meeting demanding Magill’s resignation: https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1732941855338463738 Posts about defunding or even taxing well-endowed universities: https://twitter.com/RepEliCrane/status/1732517466817909152 https://twitter.com/michaelgwaltz/status/1732058802818621642 https://twitter.com/chiproytx/status/1732426558319821248 https://twitter.com/SenRickScott/status/1730707081198543099 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Judge dismisses Texas buoy case? By Terry A. Hurlbut An astonishing development took place yesterday in the Texas buoy case – that is, if Newsweek got it right. According to correspondent Giulia Carbonaro, a visiting judge in Austin, Texas yesterday dismissed the government’s amended complaint in that case. If this story is correct, then Texas will be free to continue work on its riparian floating barrier in the Rio Grande. The federal government might appeal, but their burden would be significantly higher than ever before. But the story is likely incorrect – and Newsweek has made a most embarrassing journalistic mistake. History of the case To review: Judge David Alan Ezra, on loan from the District of Hawaii, is (or was) trying the case. U.S.. v. Abbott, 1:23-cv-00853, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (Austin Division). (See the docket page, complaint, amended complaint, and preliminary injunction.) The government filed its complaint in July, and almost immediately moved for a preliminary injunction. This action concerns a floating barrier that Texas is placing along the Rio Grande. It consists of ballards, or buoys, strung on a cable running originally along the center of the river. (In August the State shifted the barrier toward the Texas side to stop it drifting into Mexican waters.) Metal disks with serrated edges alternate with the buoys, and nets underneath them prevent swimming. Gov. Abbott acted after the first time that Border Patrol agents have cut concertina wire the State has placed on property lines running along the river. When the Department of Justice peremptorily ordered the State to remove the barrier, Abbott defiantly said, “So sue us.” The Feds sued them, alleging violation of the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act. In addition, Mexican authorities have complained about the barrier and demanded its complete removal. Judge Ezra’s injunction tells Texas to stop all work on the barrier and move it toward the Texas riverbank. But Gov. Abbott appealed immediately to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. That court affirmed Judge Ezra’s ruling and reinstated the injunction. Other developments Developments in the case, in rough order, are as follows. The Mexican Foreign Ministry lodged its complaint on August 2, after a dead body turned up floating among the buoys. Mexico’s government said they considered the buoys a violation of their sovereignty – and of the human rights of illegal migrants. On August 15, the first of two surveys by the federal government took place. On September 7, shortly after Texas filed its appeal, the Fifth Circuit administratively stayed the preliminary injunction. Twelve days later, the federal government service notice of a second survey. At the end of September, the federals asked leave to file an amended complaint. The judge granted that leave, and the government filed the amended complaint on October 23. While these things were happening, the Fifth Circuit received briefs from Texas and the federals – and several friend-of-the-court briefs. The Immigration Reform Law Institute took Texas’ side, saying Texas was within its rights to repel an invasion. Fourteen States (with Kansas in the lead) also took Texas’ side, saying Texas had the right to defend itself. Those briefs all reached the Fifth Circuit in September. The federal government’s amended complaint mentions the Guadalupe-Hidalgo Treaty of 1848 ending the Mexican War; the original complaint does not. Thus Judge Ezra had before him a complaint alleging creation of a hazard to navigation, and a treaty violation. Specifically they alleged impeding navigation of the Rio Grande by Mexico without Mexican consent. What else the judge had before him On December 4, Texas filed a petition for an en banc rehearing. This is an inherently risky maneuver, because the Fifth Circuit has claimed full authority to sanction a party that files such a petition without sufficient grounds. But the panel that affirmed the injunction consisted of a Biden appointee, a Carter appointee (with “senior status”), and a Trump appointee. That last judge dissented sharply from the panel opinion and peppered his dissent with repeated references to judicial error. Thus one can well infer that he was urging Texas to file for an en banc rehearing. The Fifth Circuit docketed the petition on Monday (December 4). The next day they directed the federal government to file a response. But yesterday the State of Texas filed a Motion to Dismiss before Judge Ezra, alleging failure to state a claim. The motion summarizes Texas’ position thus: First, Plaintiff’s claim under the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899 fails for two reasons: (1) Section 12 of the Act authorizes actions only against “persons” and “corporations,” not against sovereign States or their officials; and (2) Plaintiff fails to adequately plead that the at-issue segment of the Rio Grande is “navigable” or that the buoy system is a prohibited “obstruction” or “structure[],” and therefore covered by Section 10 of the Act. Second, Plaintiff’s claim under Article VII of the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo similarly fails because: (1) text, case law, and history demonstrate that the Treaty, including Article VII, is not self-executing and thus cannot be enforced as domestic law; (2) the United States has identified no cause of action to enforce the Treaty; and (3) Article VII does not “preempt” Texas’s deployment of the buoy system. At time of writing, neither docket page says anything about an order concerning the Motion to Dismiss. The docket pages includes a Proposed Order, not an actual Order. Furthermore, that a judge would grant such a motion on the very day of filing, without giving the other party a chance to respond, let alone be heard, strains credulity. But that is precisely what Newsweek’s Giulia Carbonaro reported this morning. One reader called the article “egregiously inaccurate” in a comment. Abbott filed a motion to dismiss yesterday, and the court has taken no action on that motion. Did the judge dismiss the case or not? Nor can CNAV independently confirm any action by the judge. Indeed, neither Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas) nor Attorney General Ken Paxton said a word about the case in the last forty-eight hours. They haven’t even mentioned the Motion to Dismiss, much less any order granting it. The Attorney General did mention a new lawsuit Texas joined against the State Department. https://twitter.com/KenPaxtonTX/status/1732416739898450238 https://twitter.com/TXAG/status/1732414040385986743 https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1732403526683197687 https://twitter.com/alx/status/1732422340812615813 Margaret A. Little and Margot J. Cleveland, two lawyers for The Daily Wire and The Federalist in this lawsuit, explained their reasons here. More to the point, why would Ken Paxton mention this lawsuit but not winning dismissal of the Texas buoy lawsuit? So one of two things has happened in the last thirty-six hours. Either the State of Texas scored a significant victory for its right of self-defense – and then didn’t talk about it. Or, as seems far more likely, Newsweek’s reporter made one of the most egregious mistakes a reporter can make. CNAV cannot know what sources Newsweek might have inside the Texas Western District Court that the public does not have. But Newsweek cannot explain why Texas officials won’t even talk about it. For those reasons, CNAV has submitted the article link to the Wayback Machine, and reached out to Newsweek and Giulia Carbonaro for comment. CNAV will, of course, continue to monitor this case. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/07/news/judge-dismisses-texas-buoy-case-possibly/ Newsweek article, archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20231207205800/https://www.newsweek.com/greg-abbott-scores-huge-win-circular-saw-floating-barriers-1850329 U.S. v. Abbott: District Court: Docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67630985/united-states-v-abbott/ Complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172749163/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172749163.1.0_1.pdf Amended Complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172749163/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172749163.60.0.pdf Preliminary Injunction: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172749163/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172749163.50.0.pdf Motion to Dismiss: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172749163/gov.uscourts.txwd.1172749163.62.0.pdf Appeals Court: Docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67770228/united-states-v-abbott/ Order affirming District Court: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.215588/gov.uscourts.ca5.215588.98.0.pdf En Banc petition: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.215588/gov.uscourts.ca5.215588.105.0.pdf Complaint by the Mexican Foreign Ministry: https://www.gob.mx/sre/prensa/sre-informa-que-hallan-cuerpo-sin-vida-en-el-rio-bravo-en-la-zona-de-boyas-de-eagle-pass Posts by Gov. Abbott, AG Paxton, Margaret Cleveland, and ALX about censorship lawsuit: https://twitter.com/KenPaxtonTX/status/1732416739898450238 https://twitter.com/TXAG/status/1732414040385986743 https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1732403526683197687 https://twitter.com/alx/status/1732422340812615813 Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Antisemitism at university – worse than you think By Terry A. Hurlbut Yesterday the House Education and Workforce Committee held a hearing on antisemitism on campus. They invited the Presidents of Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and the University of Pennsylvania (UPenn) to testify. Incredibly, those university presidents answered Congress with weasel words – showing they do not want to condemn antisemitism on their campuses. When an educator shies away from such judgment, at least some of his (or her) sympathies lie with the bullies. This also means that Jews – and Gentiles of good heart – face a crisis of trust, and of the soul. Antisemitism “depends on context”? The Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network (C-SPAN) covers televised proceedings in the House of Representatives and all its committees. They carried the hearing, which ran for more than three and a half hours on the afternoon of December 5. https://www.c-span.org/video/standalone/?532147-1/harvard-upenn-mit-presidents-combating-antisemitism-part-1 Bill Ackman, co-trustee of the Pershing Square Fund, offered this scathing summary and critique of the university presidents’ testimony. https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1732179418787783089 The three presidents involved are Claudine Gay (Harvard), Sally Kornbluth (MIT), and Liz Magill (UPenn). Ackman embedded a three-and-a-half-minute clip from the hearing, in which Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) ask the three one simple question: Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate [your university’s] code of conduct or rules regarding bullying or harassment? Dr. Kornbluth answered that only the direct targeting of individual students would break this code. Mere public statements would not. When Rep. Stefanik pressed further, Kornbluth at first denied hearing any direct calls for killing Jews. But then she admitted to hearing “chants,” which, she said, could be antisemitic, depending on the context. She then said that such “chants” would bear investigation as to whether they constituted harassment of specific students. The other two repeat Dr. Kornbluth’s statements Likewise, Ms. Magill said that such speech would be actionable harassment if it turned into conduct. Again when the Congresswoman pressed her, she stood on “context.” She might want to check with certain guests of Todd Starnes’ radio program. They told of Jews at her university, hiding in their dormitory rooms, as their classmates – and some professors – chanted “Death to Jews!” https://rumble.com/embed/v3qh8c0/?pub=4teej Rep. Stefanik reacted in outrage: This is the easiest question to answer, “Yes”! Magill repeated her earlier statement about the speech becoming conduct. That only outraged the Congresswoman further, and she asked Magill whether she would wait until someone actually committed mass murder. All she got back was the statement that such speech could constitute harassment. Finally Rep. Stefanik turned to Dr. Gay – who proceeded to say, “It can be [violative], depending on the context.” Which is exactly what Liz Magill had got finished saying – and what Dr. Kornbluth had said earlier. When the Congresswoman pressed her, she said the context would be the targeting of “an individual.” In reply, Rep. Stefanik flatly accused her of making a dehumanizing statement. Then she asked, “One more time…!” and Dr. Gay repeated yet again her statement about dependence on context. Whereupon Rep. Stefanik called on her to resign as President of Harvard. What has university become? Rep. Stefanik was not the only one to subject the university presidents to a withering cross-examination. Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) asked Dr. Gay straight-out whether she could guarantee the safety of Jewish prospective students. And she would not give a single straight answer. Interestingly, Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), Chairwoman of the committee, asked each university president point-blank: Do you believe the State of Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state? Each answered, “Yes.” Afterward, Rep. Foxx granted an interview to Dagen McDowell and Sean Duffy, hosts of Fox Business Bottom Line. She accused the presidents of equivocating on the subject of antisemitism – and on the atrocities by the Islamic Resistance Movement (Arabic Harakah al-Muqāwamah al-Islāmiyyah, abbreviated HAMAS). They cannot condemn HAMAS; they cannot condemn the atrocities that occurred on October 7. They’ve had groups that want to meet with them, to show them what happened – and they woujld not admit to being willing to meet with those people. So, they equivocated a lot… We tried to push them into being moral leaders on their campuses… But we’re not sure that’s what they’re going to do. They need to teach the difference between right and wrong. And as I said to them: I don’t call it higher education anymore. I call it post-secondary education. Because I don’t think they’re teaching higher-order skills, or critical thinking skills. Actually, Harvard, on December 4, hosted a screening by the Maccabee Task Force of 45 minutes of raw footage from the October 7 attacks. The Task Force has previously shown this footage to selected Senators and Representatives. Task Force leadership report having two campuses expressing interest in showing the footage this month, and 8-10 more who might want to show it within a “few months.” They would not name the universities involved. Todd Starnes, in his coverage, mentioned an earlier hearing at which several Jewish students testified. One Harvard student told of walking to class past mobs chanting, From the river to the sea, / Palestine shall be free! He also mentioned that several schoolmates are afraid to go to class. Reaction to antisemitism at university Bill Ackman, in his long-form post, called on the three university presidents to “resign in disgrace.” He also gave kudos to the members of the Education Committee for holding the hearings and asking the right questions. Erick-Woods Erickson recommended that executives like Ackman go further. They should hire, not from the Ivy League, but from the Southeastern Conference. The University of Georgia, in Erickson’s home state, is a member. Thus far the National Collegiate Athletic Association has not commented on whether “football schools” might be a more fertile recruiting ground for executives not wanting to risk hiring antisemitic college graduates. Ackman already has put Harvard on a hiring blacklist but has thus far not expanded this to other schools. He has, however, talked of withholding money. The Southeastern Conference is only one of about 33 Division One multi-sport conferences that belong to the NCAA. Nor is the NCAA the only multi-conference umbrella organization for college sports. Erickson’s point is that “football schools” are, thus far, not known to host such antisemitic attitudes or demonstrations. Antisemitism at university has provoked much commentary, often scathing, ever since the Fourth Arab-Israeli War began. Here are some samples: https://cnav.news/2023/11/02/editorial/guest/antisemitism-virulent-rot-universities/ https://cnav.news/2023/11/10/editorial/guest/hatred-israel-all-jews/ https://cnav.news/2023/11/18/editorial/guest/donor-revolution-begin/ https://cnav.news/2023/11/20/editorial/guest/antisemitism-multiculturalism-barbarism/ https://cnav.news/2023/11/27/editorial/guest/campus-dysfunction-easy-recognize-difficult-cure/ The spectacle of three university presidents not wanting to condemn atrocious actors, or their students (and faculty!) who cheer them on, is final shame to the pride of American higher education. Then again, American higher education has precious little to be proud of, anyway. Link to article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/06/news/antisemitism-university-worse-think/ C-SPAN video of House Education hearing: https://www.c-span.org/video/?532147-1/harvard-upenn-mit-presidents-combating-antisemitism-part-1 Bill Ackman’s post: https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1732179418787783089 Todd Starnes’ show about Jews at Penn hiding in their rooms: https://rumble.com/v3t2m69-defund-any-university-that-wont-stop-jew-haters.html?mref=4teej&mc=88ce6 Southeastern Conference home: https://www.secsports.com/ Sampling of commentary on antisemitism: https://cnav.news/2023/11/02/editorial/guest/antisemitism-virulent-rot-universities/ https://cnav.news/2023/11/10/editorial/guest/hatred-israel-all-jews/ https://cnav.news/2023/11/18/editorial/guest/donor-revolution-begin/ https://cnav.news/2023/11/20/editorial/guest/antisemitism-multiculturalism-barbarism/ https://cnav.news/2023/11/27/editorial/guest/campus-dysfunction-easy-recognize-difficult-cure/ Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/

Vaccine science – time to reexamine By Terry A. Hurlbut Another stay-indoors, button-up-your-overcoat, not-enough-sun cold-weather season is upon us. With such seasons – without fail – rises the incidence of seasonal respiratory viral illnesses. Everyone knows their names: the common cold (choryza), the flu (influenza), and now, coronavirus. The only reason the common cold doesn’t have a vaccine is that too many people know that the common cold isn’t one virus, but many. The other two have vaccines. Now we’re hearing about how many people have died, not from coronavirus, but from its vaccine. But this isn’t the first time someone has charged that the treatment was worse than a disease. That happened more than a century ago with the disease that gave “vaccination” its name: smallpox. This, plus today’s findings, suggest that the entire concept vaccine requires reexamination. Where did the word vaccine come from? Edward Jenner gets the credit – which no one disputes – for suggesting the idea of inoculating people, not with the agent of human smallpox, but with the agent of cowpox (Variolae vacciniae). But few people know that he accepted an earlier inoculation with the human agent, and this affected him badly. They might not know another thing: his idea of inoculation against cowpox nearly died. Apparently those wanting to test his theory had to obtain cowpox samples from him. The online biography of Jenner suggests the samples were subject to contamination – with the human agent. In 1840 – forty-two years after Jenner published his work on smallpox – Parliament forbade treatment with the agent for human smallpox. But in 1853 Parliament made treatment with the cowpox agent – the first vaccine – compulsory. Thus compulsory medicine began with him. And so did the protests against compulsory medicine. Thirty-six years after the passage of that law, came the first comprehensive scientific protest of the idea. That protest came from a most unlikely source: Alfred Russel Wallace. Who was Alfred Russel Wallace? Alfred Russel Wallace was “The Other Guy” in the by-line of the first seminal work on evolution, Origin of Species. But few people know that he was the Joseph R. Mercola of his day. Like Mercola, he advocated for a holistic approach to human disease. According to holism (the Greek word holes is the direct source of the English word whole), one must consider the whole body of influences upon a person to understand why a person gets sick. Rarely does one thing make a person sick. Rarer still is the super-bug or super-poison that would make anybody, however hardy, sick – in any dose. The journal Emerging Infectious Disease carried this retrospective on Wallace in April of 2010 – shortly after Darwin’s bicentennial. Weber, T. P. (2010). Alfred Russel Wallace and the Antivaccination Movement in Victorian England. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 16(4), 664-668. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1604.090434. More to the point, Wallace, in 1889, published a monograph asserting that vaccination was useless and dangerous. After examining the records of forty-five years, he held that Jenner’s vaccine hadn’t saved anyone. The Wayback Machine has the monograph today. What did Wallace find? Wallace made four statements in his monograph that might sound familiar: 1. That during the forty-five years of the Registration of deaths and their causes, Small-pox mortality has very slightly diminished, while an exceedingly severe Small-pox epidemic occurred within the last twelve years of the period. 2. That there is no evidence to show that the slight decrease of Small-pox mortality is due to vaccination. 3. That the severity of Small-pox as a disease has not been mitigated by vaccination. 4. That several inoculable diseases have increased to an alarming extent coincidently with enforced vaccination. His monograph showcases the statistical measures he used – a method Weber called “actuarial” in his retrospective. Particularly instructive are two mortality graphs comparing smallpox, typhoid, and a small class of acute infections from 1838 to 1882. Wallace astutely used per capita mortality (as deaths per million person-years), not absolute mortality. Except for the epidemic of 1871, smallpox showed a slightly downward trend in mortality. Typhoid fevers declined much more sharply, as did the other acute infections. (The graph calls them “zymotic diseases,” in the mistaken belief, prevalent then, that yeasts were the causative agents. That belief is actually not so far wrong; consider Candida albicans, a most annoying yeast known to any modern woman!) What sort of influences acted on those other diseases? Not any vaccine – that didn’t exist then, except for smallpox. Rather, it was improvements in sanitation. The first mortality graph compares typhoid diseases to the other two categories – while the second, examining mortality in all of England and Wales, compares official vaccination to smallpox on one hand, and other acute infections on the other. Official vaccine rates actually declined, in lock-step with smallpox mortality itself. Vaccination increased with the epidemic – but in lock-step with smallpox mortality itself. No vaccine proponent (including Weber) has ever explained this totally counter-intuitive result. Nor the next result Wallace showed: the case-fatality rate of smallpox remained the same, even with the vaccine. Smallpox and vaccine mortality in the British Army and Royal Navy Wallace’s most interesting finding concerns smallpox and vaccine mortality in Her Majesty’s Armed Services. (Wallace studied a period during the reign of Queen Victoria, second of the Three Long-Reigning Queens.) He found total mortality, over the 23 years he examined, to be 83 deaths per million in the Army and 157 per million in the Navy. Why the discrepancy? Because “sick bay” aboard any Naval vessel less well-ventilated and less capable of isolation than any Army hospital. Yet general all-disease mortality was less in the Navy than in the Army. What was so special about smallpox in the Navy? Wallace never figured that out. But he also maintained that the civilian population, especially in cities, lived with overcrowding. He noticed something else about smallpox in the services. Each successive dose of the vaccine made the disease itself more likely to kill. (And so much for the vaccine being one hundred percent protective against infection!) Even so, soldiers and sailors tended to have lower all-cause and infectious-disease mortality than civilians. In that day, soldiers and sailors were the fittest physical specimens of humanity. In the second part of his monograph, Wallace tore apart the statistics used to claim lower mortality among the vaccinated. Simply put, proportions of the vaccinated were unreliable in those days. Furthermore, some died unvaccinated because they were too young or too sick to take the vaccine. (To say nothing of criminals and nomads who avoided the “vaccine officers.”) And what do we observe with the coronavirus vaccine? Followers of alternative media have known that the coronavirus vaccine has its own mortality. A few celebrities have in fact taken it, to signal their virtue and somehow prove safety. Those celebrities have died. BBC Presenter Lisa Shaw was only the first to die. Worse for the vaccine proponents, she came to autopsy. Final Anatomical Diagnosis: multiple micro-strokes. More recently, consider the case of Barry Young, a worker with the New Zealand Ministry of Health. Over last weekend, he broke the story that coronavirus vaccine mortality was not only excessive, but was batch-specific. Rumors have long held that Pfizer Pharmaceuticals prepared separate “kill shots,” “weak shots” and placebos for distribution to red, purple, and blue States of the United States. Then someone mixed up the batches, so that the intended effect – lowering the voting population of conservatives more than liberals – did not occur. Barry Young apparently found the “kill shot” batches and blew the whistle. For that the authorities arrested him. And what shall we make of the Army less-than-honorably discharging soldiers who refused the coronavirus vaccine? And now begging those soldiers to come back and re-up? We also have studies showing that those who complied with COVID restrictions are more likely to have mental-health issues. Whether the restrictions caused the issues, or whether compliance reflects the issues, is less clear. The spectacle of drivers wearing masks while driving – without passengers – suggests the second possibility. https://twitter.com/mcm_ct_usa/status/1717147122531790872 The seasonality of respiratory diseases Actress Ruth Etting made the saying famous: Button up your overcoat, / When the wind blows free; / Take good care of yourself! / You belong to me! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EN2DB0PCBRE The coronavirus experience lasted for two full years after 2020. Each time, incidence and prevalence declined over the summer and increased in the winter. Ultraviolet light – part of the solar spectrum – kills viruses on contact. It also causes formation of Vitamin D, which enhances immunity. But not one person in authority adjusted health policy to recognize these facts. Worse yet, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported zero incidence and prevalence of the ‘flu in 2020! Instead, patients with mild febrile illness carried a diagnosis of COVID! Worth mentioning in this regard is that Wallace charged the hospitals of his day with deliberate misreporting of incidence, prevalence, and mortality for smallpox. We now know that modern hospitals had an incentive to misreport in two ways. They reported deaths with coronavirus as deaths from it. (This extended even to deaths from motor-vehicle trauma!) And they reported patients as having coronavirus who didn’t have it. But what about polio? What about it? In fact, to his credit, Jonas Salk, who propounded the polio vaccine, felt the announcement of his invention was premature. He wanted trials – and apparently he got them. According to The Smithsonian, 1.8 million children took part in clinical trials of the Salk preparation. Today, independent statistics on polio vaccine morbidity and mortality seem impossible to come by. The establishment set up its Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) only grudgingly, and seem to disfavor any analysis of the reports. But at least one study does show that infants are more likely to die with every “shot” they get. The best source of information on any vaccine, and the disease against which it is supposed to protect, is Barbara Loe Fisher’s National Vaccine Information Center. They tell a story about polio only those who visit them will ever know. 95 percent of all infections with polio virus present no symptoms. But in less than one percent of patients, polio can paralyze. Even then, most people recover from it – but not all. Three paralytic “wild types” once existed; now only one remains. And now the kicker: Albert Sabin’s oral polio vaccine now gets much of the blame for paralytic polio. Worse, a Vaccine Derived Polio Virus is now known to circulate. What about the vaccine theory? To this day, children everywhere learn about Saints Edward (Jenner), Jonas (Salk), and Albert (Sabin.) (And Sir Gunnar Kasson, Knight of the Most Excellent Order of the Iditarod, credited with delivering diphtheria antitoxin to Nome, Alaska, by driving his dog sled along most of the Iditarod Trail.) New or once-buried evidence suggests that Saints Edward and Albert might not have been so saintly. The scientific community first lionized Alfred Russel Wallace for collaborating with Charles Darwin to discredit the Christian faith. But men turned to “spiritualism” when the atheistic utilitarianism of Darwin and Wallace proved unavailing. Wallace himself joined the spiritualist movement, and pioneered holistic medicine. That’s when the scientific establishment turned against him – even though he had the receipts. Those receipts showed that Edward Jenner’s vaccine was not the lifesaver the establishment marketed it to be. Vaccination is a huge delusion: …it has never saved a single life; but that it has been the cause of so much disease, so many deaths, such a vast amount of utterly needless and altogether undeserved suffering, that it will be classed by the coming generation among the greatest errors of an ignorant and prejudiced age, and its penal enforcement the foulest blot on the generally beneficent course of legislation. The coronavirus vaccine debacle has forced many to take a second look at the entire concept vaccine. And the establishment knows it, and it worries them. But so far they are offering only platitudes. A thorough reexamination of all vaccine introductions and practices is now warranted. Overloading children’s immune systems with several antigenic insults at once, is not making the human population any healthier. Maybe reexamining how people live, would. Furthermore: Alfred Russel Wallace suffered “cancellation” as severe as has Mercola, or anyone else who questions COVID vaccines today. (Especially Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.) Imagine how different our history would be, had Wallace’ contemporaries listened to him instead. Link to: The article: https://cnav.news/2023/12/05/editorial/talk/vaccine-science-time-reexamine/ Dr. Weber’s retrospective on Alfred R. Wallace: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1604.090434 The Wallace monograph, courtesy of the Wayback Machine: https://archive.org/details/b2136140x_201805 Post showing driver wearing mask: https://twitter.com/mcm_ct_usa/status/1717147122531790872 Ruth Etting sings Button Up Your Overcoat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EN2DB0PCBRE Smithsonian Magazine on polo vax trials: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/press-made-polio-vaccine-trials-public-spectacle-180977304/ NVIC Home: https://www.nvic.org/ Declarations of Truth X feed: https://twitter.com/DecTruth Declarations of Truth Locals Community: https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/ Conservative News and Views: https://cnav.news/ The CNAV Store: https://cnav.store/ Clixnet Media https://clixnet.com/