In recent days “my” Senator Ashley Moody (FL) has been posting on “X” expressing support both for “The Save America Act” and for the Senate to skip its scheduled August recess to do so.

This is incompatible with her past actions, as she’s been aligned with Senator Thune and his blocking of Trump recess appointments by gaveling-in pro forma sessions.

According to Grok (July 28, 2026 at 5:48 p.m. EST), Bill Hagerty (TN) and Darline Graham Nordone (SC) have posted similarly (“Save America” and “cancel recess”).

As for Senators expressing support on X for “The Save America Act,” but without mentioning the scheduled recess, Grok lists Tom Cotton (AR); Jim Risch (ID); Roger Marshall (KS); Cindy Hyde-Smith (MS) and Pete Ricketts (NE).

A relative pittance, given that 22 Republican Senators are up for reelection in 2026. I suspect that in coming days, pro-Save America Act “X-warrior Senators” will increase in number, for reasons that will become clear.

There is a plausible theory that the Vichy Republican leadership wants to tank “The Save America Act” or, if it can’t, only enact it once it’s too late to implement before the 2026 midterms.

Quite possibly to intentionally throw the midterms, so that the House and/or Senate flips to the Democrats, paving the way for the neutering of the Trump administration, if not the removal of President Trump via impeachment.

In other words, the same repeating the playbook that appears to have been played by Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan in 2018.

Such inaction-to-too-late action for “The Save America Act” would also help fully maintain the current election fraud infrastructure, which appears to enjoy “bipartisan support” (a/k/a it’s a UniParty operation).

For if the Republicans functioned as a genuine opposition party, attacking this Democrat-tilted election fraud would be the #1 priority of Congressional Republicans. Instead … planning the next recess is “Job 1.”

In any case, while certain Senators may be sincere in their expressed support for “The Save America Act,” certainly many (most?) are not sincere. X posts can be throwaway election-year virtue signaling, what some refer to as bulls**ting.

Absent a recorded floor vote, we have no idea on whose side any Senator actually falls.

Back in April this Substack wrote about how they were hiding behind John Thune’s skirt, as he is preventing them having to go on the record in the only way that counts.

Thune is protecting Democrats too, as they don’t have to publicly vote against, e.g., voter ID to help prevent non-citizens and the dead from voting. No doubt Chuck Schumer has personally expressed his gratitude to Thune.

We can only speculate about what lucre may have been promised within Congress for killing “The Save America Act” … to whom, and by whom.

It’s an open secret in Washington that party leaders allow certain of their members to vote “the right way” on bills, so as to allow them to portray to the folks back home that they’re really representing them … albeit only after the whip has determined that leadership still has enough remaining votes to get their desired outcome.

Consider that a similar dynamic is at play here. That Thune is permitting “Republican” Senators to post on X that they support “The Save America Act” and/or cancelling the August recess to work on it.

Such X-posts are nothing but election-year kabuki theater.

Unless we scrap the filibuster and get a recorded floor vote, we have no idea which Senators are actually allied with election integrity, much less President Trump and our “America First” agenda.

Actions speak louder than X posts.

I’m all done with UniParty election-year kabuki theater!

Unless we get “The Save America Act” enacted in time to implement prior to the upcoming midterms, I plan on voting against Senator Moody in the upcoming primary.

And should she make it through that, in the general election I will leave that race blank, rather than vote for her (if I vote at all, given the uselessness that Republicans overall have displayed).

You each have to make your own decisions.

But whatever you decide, don’t be swayed by “BS” posts on X.

“… the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them, inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.” – Thomas Jefferson

The EU, particularly the UK – as well as Canada – are rapidly descending a slope that bottoms-out at information and communication totalitarianism.

In the UK, there is the “Online Safety Act,” and there are efforts (likely with imminent imposition) to be able to monitor everyone’s cell phone texts (and other data?) in real time.

If present trends continue – and the Globalists certainly intend to continue – EU citizens will soon be under total communications surveillance, and censorship and speech suppression. “Free speech” will be as hollow a phrase as “safe and effective” was regarding the Covid gene shots a/k/a “vaccines.”

Globalist-Tech forces are already manipulating “news” information distribution across the globe; and be assured that it won’t stop with “news.” Orwellian-named endeavors such as NewsGuard and Google News Initiative and Journalism Trust Initiative and Trusted News Initiative are steering content in search engines (and elsewhere, such as Apple News) to emphasize only Globalist-approved “news,” information and opinion sources.

Per the TNI (which, ironically-to-laughably, brands itself “Beyond Fake News”):

The Trusted News Initiative is a partnership, founded by the BBC, that includes organisations from around the globe including; AP, AFP, BBC, CBC/Radio-Canada, European Broadcasting Union (EBU), Financial Times, Information Futures Lab, Google/YouTube, The Hindu, The Nation Media Group, Meta, Microsoft, Thomson Reuters, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Twitter, The Washington Post, Kompas – Indonesia, Dawn – Pakistan, Indian Express, NDTV – India, ABC – Australia, SBS – Australia, NHK – Japan.

(More about the Trusted News Initiative here and here.)

The BBC started the Trusted News Initiative, and YouTube is listed as a member. Recently, it was revealed that the UK has been leaning on YouTube to rig its algorithms to favor content from the BBC (which could rightly be called the “Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation”).

P.S. This algorithmic power-grab is not just targeting YouTube.

The Google search engine has, for years now, been notorious for biasing its search engine results to bury Globalist-unapproved content, whether news or otherwise (the Freespoke and Tusk search engines allow one to screen to “right” results; Brave appears to provide relatively neutral search results).

Given that Google has the same parent company as YouTube, one suspects that the UK will find a friendly reception, at least behind closed doors, for the requested BBC rigging.

This all to fight “disinformation,” don’t you know. It’s for our own, collective good, you see. It’s for our “safety” … especially that of “the children.”

To conclude that this is all reminiscent of Orwell’s 1984 and its Ministry of Truth is, well, a debunked conspiracy theory. Oh, and 2+2 = 5.

The UK – back to the future? Pirate radio?

The UK may well be heading into a civil war. Yes, you read that right.

That “free” nation frog now being slow-boiled will likely then find that by then – if not before – all sources declared “disinformation” will be banned entirely. “You can have any free speech you’d like, so long as it is government approved.”

Radio transmitters and receivers remain a form of communication that is not Internet or cell phone dependent, and so not nearly as controllable by an authoritarian EU, or anyone else. There is no server tracking who is sending* and, more importantly, who is receiving.

*Of course, radio transmissions can be subject to triangulation and so location pinpointing. But history shows that workarounds include broadcasting from outside of territorial reach, or moving the transmitting antenna around if within territorial reach (even easier with handheld units). They can be subject to jamming, but I suspect that there are workarounds for that – including the plethora of radio transmitting device types and available frequencies.

Back in the more innocent and freedom-recognizing times of the 1960’s UK, there were “pirate” radio stations operating off of the coast, just out of territorial waters. They would play music banned by (yes) the BBC. This all before the Internet and cell phones; just plain old analog radio.

Such “old tech” radio may well be the solution against the emerging information totalitarianism.

At present – and certainly should civil war breakout – communications with a community of like-minded, patriotic citizens using short distance walkie-talkies through medium-distance walkie-talkies and/or CB’s – to handheld HAM radio units that could potentially provide international communication – could be, well, handy. If not essential.

One can imagine, at some point, that at some point some freedom-seeking individuals start running “pirate” transmitters (licensed and unlicensed operators), using one or more types of radio frequencies. Relatedly, on a more granular level, one can imagine “phone tree” like networks emerging, by which people sequentially share information through short-range walkie talkies.

Even if one isn’t inclined to transmit – whether by inclination, or fear of being caught – a receiver enabling one to listen to multiple bands could well prove the only viable way to receive truthful news and information – without detection. There are portable receivers on the market today that will receive all of AM, FM, weather band, HAM (SSB) and shortwave for broadcasts from around the world. Scanners could also be an option (or additional form of receiver).

Perhaps some tech-savvy “pirates” could also develop Internet radio for distribution through, e.g., StarLink.

Speaking of extra-territorial broadcasts … those of us who remember the “Cold War” will remember Radio Free Europe, which broadcast radio shows into the Soviet Socialist occupied countries of Eastern Europe – including by shortwave.

Of course, listening to such “disinformation” was banned by the Communist authorities … which folks routinely ignored, surreptitiously listening at low volume behind closed curtains. (For an entertaining description of a VHS counterpart, do watch the documentary Chuck Norris vs. Communism, about “pirate” movies in Communist Romania. It’s hard to find online, but is worth it!)

It may soon be time to bring back something like Radio Free Europe – but this time, not necessarily run by a governmental or quasi-governmental agency – and for WESTERN European audiences hungry for non-fake news!

We might call it “Radio Free EU.”

In other words, a workaround for the “EU Iron Curtain.”

Given the above, folks in the EU and Canada may want to purchase shortwave / HAM and other “alternative” receivers (and transmitters?) while they’re still legal.

Oh, and consider paying with cash, while you still can, so as to not leave a digital trail – de facto registration – that may someday may be used to confiscate said devices (in the name of fighting terrorism, or crime, or other pretexts for “public safety”). Remember what happened to your registered firearms.

Even if not used now, but stored away, you’ll have them when/if they become the only lifeline to accurate news and information.

Come to think of it, this isn’t bad advice for citizens of the USA and everywhere else.

This is written the morning after President Trump’s address to the nation regarding (among other things) declassified intelligence regarding foreign intrusion(s) into our election system, and our own intelligence agencies conspiring to withhold that information from our Commander in Chief.

By all accounts, that address and the declassified information released is but an introduction and initial installment of more to come.

In the practice of law, there is a phrase – an objection that can be raised during the questioning of a witness – “asked and answered.” In short, it means that the questioning attorney cannot keep asking the same (already answered) question so as to either badger the witness, or fish for a materially different answer so as to impeach the witness’ credibility.

Here in the court of public opinion, we have more leeway. More importantly for the subject(s) at hand, we are now confronting an “intelligence community,” media and several other groups and individuals whose credibility is now impeached by this first tranche of documents. So, while questions may have been “asked and answered” in the past by those entities, reengaging with those (and similar) questions warranted.

Last evening we learned of Chinese (i.e., Chinese Communist Party) interference with our election system, especially around the 2020 election, and “our” intelligence community de facto covering it up.

What if that is just the tip of the iceberg??? What if that was but one piece of a larger operation???

Following are some questions – some with accompanying comments – that in sum support an inference, if not a compelling case, that what was discussed last evening is but one element of a far larger scheme.

This writer has long referred to The Globalist-CCP Axis. That term refers to a joint effort by Globalist interests (including central bankers, the U.N., the WEF), and the CCP with its global-power aspirations, to impose a neo-feudal ruling regime that controls the entire globe. (The Muslim Brotherhood is, at a minimum, affiliated. Presumably, Russia, too – note that Putin is a “graduate” of the WEF’s “Young Leaders” program.)

Nation states, to the extent they remain at all, would be hollowed-out vassals perhaps retained to maintain they illusion of citizens / voters having a voice. The EU could be considered a dress rehearsal for this model.

The sole potential power that could prevent consummation of this scheme is The United States of America remaining as a Constitutional Republic. Hence, the Axis and its shared interests in taking us down; neutering if not destroying our Divinely-inspired nation.

[I suspect that unspoken among them is that they each believe that after the USA is out of the way, they’ll then seize control as the “top dog” of the Axis. Further, it may well be that there are puppet-master(s) behind even the Axis curtain, perhaps stretching decades, if not centuries back. In any case, Satan is their ultimate leader.]

With that in mind, especially as declassifications / disclosures keep coming, consider the following questions (with some reverse-chronology to “follow some bread crumbs”):

Q: “Our” intelligence community (including the FBI) de facto ran cover for the CCP by covering up the extent of its known interference with our election system. Why? Does mere politics (preventing President Trump’s reelection) suffice as an explanation … or was (is) there ideological alignment and/or capture of the “intelligence community?” Does its loyalty lie not with our country and Constitution, but with the CCP and/or the aforementioned Axis?

Q: The intelligence community knew, or should have known, that “J6” was not a spontaneous “insurrection,” much less a pre-planned, organized one. Yet it collaborated with the rollout of that particular “Big Lie,” and in the persecution of innocent patriots. How does one justify the intelligence community operating against its fellow (innocent) citizens, unless its loyalties lay elsewhere?

Q: Would such non-loyalty explain why (as we now know) the intelligence community also withheld the fact that the Covid virus originated with the Wuhan, China bioweapons lab?

Q: That CCP bioweapons lab they knew (and we now know) was at least in part by U.S. taxpayer dollars, laundered by Anthony Fauci (et als.) through the EcoHealth Alliance. This too was covered-up by the intelligence community. Can it really be explained just by protecting Anthony Fauci, particularly since (presumably) the intelligence community was aware of that funding as it was occurring, and allowed (enabled) it to continue, unimpeded?

Q: Thanks to Tulsi Gabbard, we also know that we were (directly and/or indirectly) operating bioweapons facilities in Ukraine. Funny that?

Q: The Wuhan / Covid virus created havoc going into the 2020 election season, and provided the excuse for, e.g., mass mail-in ballots (and so enabled the accompanying fraud). Where was the intelligence community? Guilty by inaction, or guilty as knowing accomplices?

Q: Event 201 – mere months before – presaged what was about to occur, accurate to an extent that strains any conclusion of mere coincidence. Certainly, the intelligence community was aware of Event 201, and presumably was one of its sponsors (behind the scenes, at least). Funny that?

Q: So, was the “pandemic” part of (at least) a “Chinese” operation to interfere with our election under its doctrine of “unrestricted warfare?” Or was it (also?) part of a Globalist-CCP Axis scheme to destabilize the entire world in preparation for “The Great Reset” intended to be consummated by 2030? What did the intelligence community know, and when did it know it? Did it work to oppose, or to facilitate?

Q: Speaking of Ukraine, let us not forget the (attempted) impeachment of President Trump regarding his “phone call.” Which effort involved numerous “intelligence community” affiliated officials. Why are those perpetrators still walking around as free persons, often with lucrative “contributor” gigs on “news” outlets?

Q: Russiagate and it fabricated charges against President Trump. Would a loyal intelligence community, one bound by its oath to our Constitution, execute such?

There are many more questions that could be asked, but I think you get the point: what we’re seeing with “Chinese interference” and “Venezuelan-derived election machines” may well be just single elements of a much larger, and long-standing conspiracy against our country (and indeed, against the entire world).

One that includes treasonous enemies within – not just in the intelligence community – and not just the relatively open-about-it Marxist useful idiots of the “Democratic Socialists of America” – but CCP / Axis “unrestricted warfare” compromised politicians, judges, media figures and academics.

July 3, 2026

This is written shortly after (Red-Green Axis superstar) “Mayor” Zohran Mamdani gave an address from City Hall in New York City “commemorating” America’s 250^th anniversary.

It is safe to say that the “usual suspect” media and “influencers” will be lauding it, and regurgitating excerpts of this “rising star” of the Democrat Party (today, neo-Communist Party).

If someone asked AI to craft a speech using Frankfurt School “critical theory” to denigrate the United States of America and its founding principles while dog-whistling Marxist revolutionary messaging – yet appearing to the feeble-minded and superficial to be praising America – the result would look like Mamdani’s speech.

Beyond critical theory, what also comes to mind is the propaganda technique called “turnspeak,” which is to accuse your adversary of doing / committing what in fact your side is actually doing. This to foster both confusion and to manufacture moral-equivalency for your side.

“The tenth rule of the ethics of means and ends is that you do what you can do with what you have and cloth it with moral garments …

“All effective actions require the passport of morality.” — Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals

In this case, the “turnspeak” was accusatory – but in this case, accusing America of not living up to its own founding principles, and then euphemistically wrapping Marxist goals as the way for America to redeem itself, to adhere to its own founding principles.

It should go without saying that Marxism – and Collectivism overall – are antithetical to our founding principles; theirs entail Godless totalitarianism and its inherent subjugation of people, not our Creator-endowed unalienable rights as expressed in our Declaration of Independence.

Desecrating George Washington’s desk, and our country

Mamdani gave the speech from behind the “George Washington desk” at NYC City Hall (it was a desk actually used by The Father of Our Country – a once-common phrase that has (deliberately) disappeared from our lexicon).

For optics, he was flanked by women in Muslim garb, then men of Hispanic or Middle Eastern appearance, and then what appeared to be token Whites (one male, one female) at the rear. Yes, they did hold small American flags … as props.

This was not a display of “diversity” or “inclusion,” but of (intended) CONQUEST.

Hillary Clinton and B. Hussein Obama – cleverly – were more guarded regarding their Red-Green Axis affiliations.

This new generation of Democrats is feeling their oats, and coming out.

Which means that we have no excuse to not recognize – and begin meaningfully counter – this threat to our nation’s continued existence as premised on our founding principles.

Postscript: some excerpts from Mamdani’s critical theory speech (bolding added):

When those passengers lifted their heads to glimpse what lies just beyond the waves, what did they see? They saw land, lush and teeming with life. They saw men waiting at the docks to take them into bondage. They saw tenements rife with squalor. They saw industry rumbling with activity, steam and smoke rising, a city on the move. They saw a towering monument to freedom, her torch glowing world-wide welcome. They saw New York City. They saw America.

…

And yet the irony is that the story of America has so often been written by those who were told by others with power and influence and wealth that they were anything but exceptional.

We are told that America is exceptional because we are richer, stronger, more powerful than everyone else.

…

The truth, my friends, is that America is exceptional because here, nothing is fixed into place. The frontier may be closed, we may have walked on the moon, but the work of fulfilling the values first enshrined in the Declaration of Independence — that work endures, my friends, and it belongs to us all.

…

The powerful have always known their answer. America, in their view, is an arena of supremacy, where only a select few are allowed freedom, where not all are created equal. America, if you ask them, becomes less the more people it welcomes. America, they will tell you, belongs only to those with the right accent or the right shade of skin. The rest of us, they insist, should be grateful for merely being allowed to visit.

How small they are, how weak, how unoriginal. At every moment in our past, those who led through exclusion and isolation have tried to win power and enrich themselves by turning us against one another. Division is the oldest trick in politics, and the cheapest.

…

And yet today, too many of our leaders do not believe in a vision of this nation as an asylum for the persecuted — but rather as one that persecutes those seeking asylum. As we mark 250 years, what do we see?

…

We see America each time neighbors link arms with neighbors — without asking how long they have lived here, or what papers they have — as ICE invades our neighborhoods.

Et tu, John?

Yesterday I wrote a Substack decrying the just-issued U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding “birthright citizenship” (“The US Supreme Court and Sovereignty Nullification”). In that I stated:

“No, as some have opined, this is the result of ‘outcome-based’ judges, i.e., decided their desired result, and then engaging in rhetorical pretzel-making to arrive at the “dispassionate, objective decision.”

In response, a friend emailed (quoting in pertinent part):

What the Supreme Court did was predictable because it followed the Constitution …

Unfortunately that IS the way the Constitution is currently written. If we do not want activist judges deciding the 2nd amendment really doesn’t give Americans the right to have firearms, then we can’t have the Supreme court decide that the 14th amendment doesn’t really mean what IT says …

I spent my career drafting contract language and arbitrating disputes about the meaning and application of contract language. Sometimes you’re stuck with poorly written language.

It must be said, I viscerally disagreed that the 14^th Amendment was as clear and unambiguous as he maintains – for if it was, there likely would not have been litigation to begin with, and the decision would not have been a split one, but unanimous, or nearly so. (Keep “ambiguous” and “unambiguous” in mind as we proceed.)

But, I respect him and his opinion and so, as a recovering lawyer, a gauntlet was thrown – so before responding to his email, last evening I read the majority opinion (written by Chief John Roberts) and the dissent by Justice Clarence Thomas (link here).

But it was time to perform some “due diligence.” What I found horrified me to the point of feeling compelled to publicly respond via this Substack; if for no other reason than that his take is likely shared by others.

In this piece I’m going to present some legal analysis tempered with a layperson’s perspective, such that I ask you to check behind me, and draw your own conclusions.

The language of the 14^th Amendment, particularly “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” suffers from what lawyers and judges would call a “latent ambiguity.” I used Grok for a definition of same, and how such ambiguities have traditionally been addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court (so you can independently check behind me):

Latent ambiguity, as understood by the U.S. Supreme Court (and in broader U.S. legal tradition), refers to an ambiguity that is not apparent on the face of a written document (such as a will, contract, or statute) but emerges when the clear language is applied to external facts, circumstances, or extrinsic evidence.

Statutory or constitutional interpretation: The Supreme Court does not heavily rely on the classic “latent vs. patent” framework. Instead, it uses textualism, context, canons of construction, and (historically) deference doctrines (now limited post-Loper Bright). Ambiguity in statutes is resolved via tools like plain meaning, structure, history, and avoidance of constitutional issues—without a strict extrinsic-evidence bar like in older common-law contract/wills rules.

In summary, the Supreme Court treats latent ambiguity flexibly by admitting extrinsic evidence to clarify application to facts, correct misdescriptions, and honor underlying intent—particularly to prevent absurd or ineffective outcomes—while staying within the document’s language. This contrasts with a more text-bound approach to obvious (patent) ambiguities.

Again, I would argue that to anyone reading the 14th Amendment, “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is a “latent ambiguity.” So, to actually understand what that Amendment is supposed to mean and so properly applied – rather than how some might wish it should mean and/or be applied – we need to look at the “extrinsic evidence,” i.e., what those who actually drafted it had to say about it, and how it was applied from its adoption.

A quick word about “checking behind” me: the primary purpose of this piece is to encourage you to in fact read the Roberts / Thomas portions of the decision. BUT JUST SKIM THEM. Do not be dissuaded by the legalese (dry language), nor the innumerable citations to prior documents (i.e., the “extrinsic evidence”). That is how judicial decisions are written. Just skim-read them, and you’ll more than enough of the gist. As you do, I believe that you’ll benefit from my takes, as offered below.

Reading the Roberts-authored decision – as it is now the one that has the force of law – my immediate reactions were that it was coming across as a rat-a-tat of (pre-ordained) conclusions – rather than explanations and intellectual arguments – buttressed by cites and short quotations. (Including a bizarrely expansive concept of jus soli stretching back to the time of kings. Did we not have a revolution to free us from a monarchy?) This was raising red flags in my mind; my “gut” was that this was that “outcome-based” judicial activism I’d mentioned the previous day.

That said, I was also having doubts about my own conclusions, as it came across with such certainty and (I say this by analogy) unambiguity, that I was wondering if unlimited birthright citizenship was the proper reading and application of the 14^th Amendment.

Then I read the dissent by Justice Clarence Thomas. (He’s a national treasure!)

It not just confirms my “gut” about the majority decision, it obliterates it.

Thomas was not just arguing better, but exposing (in so many words) that the majority decision is not just misleading, but that it intentionally mischaracterizes, indeed falsified, at least some the “extrinsic evidence” in its pursuit of its desired result (rather than legally-sound result), i.e., unlimited, unrestricted “birthright citizenship.”

To be clear, I’m not representing that he “black and white” said that. rather, in my mind’s eye I was imagining that Justice Thomas wrote with not just righteous indignation, but outrage … struggling mightily to convey the points, while tempering his verbiage in the interest of maintaining “judicial decorum.”

If you at least skim-read the dissent, you’ll completely understand what I’m saying.

Which then raises the issue: did Justice Roberts (and the majority) cross not just the ethical line(s) of partisanship or bias – of “outcome-based” judging – into unambiguous (pun intended) judicial malfeasance?

That is, deliberately (if effect) doctoring the decision’s presentation of the “extrinsic evidence” – by mischaracterization and omission of relevant context – so as to knowingly issue a legally-invalid decision?

While claiming no expertise here – whether there was “judicial malfeasance” – I note that the Supreme Court’s “Code of Conduct for Justices” includes:

CANON 2: A JUSTICE SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL ACTIVITIES.

A. RESPECT FOR LAW. A Justice should respect and comply with the law and act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

and …

CANON 3: A JUSTICE SHOULD PERFORM THE DUTIES OF OFFICE FAIRLY, IMPARTIALLY, AND DILIGENTLY.

A. RESPONSIBILITIES. A Justice should not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism …

While the “Code of Conduct for United States Judges” covering all other federal judges includes a Canon 2 and Canon 3, compare and contrast this from its Canon 2 and Canon 3 with the Supreme Court’s iteration [bolding added]:

Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all Activities

(A) Respect for Law. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

Canon 3: A Judge Should Perform the Duties of the Office Fairly, Impartially and Diligently

The duties of judicial office take precedence over all other activities. The judge should perform those duties with respect for others, and should not engage in behavior that is harassing, abusive, prejudiced, or biased. The judge should adhere to the following standards:

(A) Adjudicative Responsibilities.

(1) A judge should be faithful to, and maintain professional competence in, the law and should not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism.

It should be noted that for the “lesser” federal judges, there are also federal statutes and a mechanism for filing complaints.

Now, ponder this [bolding added]:

Judicial Misconduct: Definition, Types and Examples

There are certain ways in which a judge may abuse the law they are supposed to uphold. This may include if a judge ignores the law in court.

It may also include if a judge:

· Lies under oath: It is important to note that a judge is always under oath in the courtroom.

· Cites invalid laws or precedents: This may be hard to catch if an individual is not prepared to discuss these topics.

· Ignores certain laws or precedents: This is uncommon because a judge typically cannot ignore a law without explaining their reasoning. In this case, the judge would have to break two rules

As previously encouraged, please at least skim the Roberts-majority opinion, and Justice Thomas’ dissent, and decide for yourself if you believe that:

a) the case was rightly decided (a case which literally holds existential import for the sovereignty, or decimation thereof, of our Constitutional Republic), and

b) whether Justice Roberts and the majority conducted themselves in accord with their own Code of Conduct, much less that applying to all other federal judges.

To repeat: “The “Birthright Citizenship” Case: It May Be Even Worse Than We Thought”

Et tu, John?

We won’t here regurgitate what is sure to be a flood of (valid) legal criticism of the reasoning (or deficiency thereof) underlying the Supreme Court decision in Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al., Petitioners v. Barbara, et al., i.e., the “birthright citizenship” case issued on June 30, 2026 (another day that “will live in infamy”).

Suffice it to say: on what planet, by what legal reasoning, can one support the premise that any woman, from anywhere in the world, of any citizenship, can unilaterally grant her baby U.S. citizenship merely be travelling into the U.S. – legally or illegally – and birthing her anchor baby on American soil? And that this is required under our Constitution?

No, as some have opined, this is the result of “outcome-based” judges, i.e., decided their desired result, and then engaging in rhetorical pretzel-making to arrive at the “dispassionate, objective decision.”

For a long time, it was a dirty little secret in the legal field is that many judges do this all of the time. The recent flood of “nationwide injunctions” (lawfare) by federal district court judges attempting to nullify the Trump administration has (largely) let that cat out of the bag.

Further, it has long been said that Chief Justice John Roberts (apparent) timidity in decision-making is due to wanting to preserve the Court’s reputation, rather than injecting it into political decisions and/or matters properly within the realm of the other branches of government. Bulloney. His track record demonstrates that he’s aligned with the Deep State / Globalism.

“Aligned.” For you see, “outcome based” judging also explains why there are huge battles over Supreme Court nominees. If Supreme Court judges were true to their role – to uphold and defend our Constitution, and to interpret questions consistent with original intent (which are standard contract interpretation principles under law), the nominees from any President would result in the decisions.

BUT the Democrats, the Progressives, have long inserted “activists” – Left-aligned outcome-based Justices into the Court. Globalist aligned “Republican” Presidents, like George W. Bush, give them fellow-travelers like John Roberts.

This also explains why the Democrats are plotting to “pack” the Supreme Court if/when the regain Congress. That way, they can insert a working majority of Leftist “outcome-based” Justices.

So, you see, respect for the Supreme Court is, shall we say, way over-rated. It’s been “fundamentally transformed” into a political institution.

What happens when the U.S. Supreme Court commits treason? What is the remedy?

We’ve all heard of “jury nullification.” That is, where a jury decides go rogue, deliberately deciding a case notwithstanding the law or evidence presented. We might also call this “outcome-based.”

What the Supreme Court has done here is sovereignty nullification … and so by extension, Constitutional nullification.

This is beyond “fundamentally transforming” the institution into a political one, but into a treasonous one.

With full knowledge of CCP-sponsored “birth tourism,” and Globalist entities executing “replacement migration,” the U.S. Supreme Court has nullified our sovereignty in order to aid those hostile forces. Forces which, ultimately, intend to “fundamentally transform” our Constitutional Republic into a nullity.

What is the remedy?

There’s no magic bullet. It will be a process. So what are the remedies?

First, to call this decision out for what it is. And to callout the U.S. Supreme Court for what it has become. As this piece is attempting to do.

But that alone is insufficient.

In the short run, President Trump needs to conduct rear-guard actions as best as possible, with the law enforcement and regulatory tools available to him. I have no doubt that he’s already on this.

Secondly, we need “The Save America Act” and more Trump supporting members of Congress following the midterms … Trump needs a posse!

With that, we can add rear-guard actions via legislation, such as the repeal of the Hart-Cellar Act.

Also, mandatory patriotic historical and civic instruction in K-12 (i.e., not the current “1619 Project” / Howard Zinn Marxist crap). If we’re doomed to having a lot of anchor babies, let’s at least try to assimilate them into loyal Americans. Making this a requirement of receiving federal education aid could achieve this notwithstanding the opposition that will come from state and local Democrats, education bureaucrats and teachers’ unions – who see the K-12 system as a manufacturing operation for future Democrats and Marxists (but I repeat myself).

Eventually, sending a new case to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to overturn this decision. A new, more Trump-friendly (and so American-friendly) Congress – here’s looking at you, U.S. Senate – would help appoint a better-quality judiciary (especially at the Supreme Court).

Speaking of … it could well be time for the DNI to investigate, and declassify, evidence of any compromise of U.S. Supreme Court justices (directly, or through their families). Whether by threat, blackmail or bribery. Whether by domestic intelligence community, political, banking or business interests – or whether by foreign counterparts of the same. If this has occurred – which many of us suspect – exposing the tainted Justices would create Supreme Court vacancies that President Trump could then fill.

Our side doesn’t need to “pack” the court, we just need honest Justices adhering to the original intent of our Constitution.

Isn’t it sad – no, disgusting! – that the U.S. Supreme Court dropped this treasonous bomb right on the cusp of our 250^th Anniversary!

Agitprop: is political propaganda, especially in the form of art or literature, which is used to advance a political stance. A portmanteau of “agitation” and “propaganda,” the term refers to political strategy in which communication tools such as literature, plays, posters, or other visual or auditory materials are utilized to disseminate a particular ideological stance or to mobilize the public towards a specified political action.

Zietgeist: The general intellectual, moral, and cultural climate of an era … Scholars have long maintained that each era has a unique spirit, a nature or climate that sets it apart from all others. In German, such a spirit is known as Zeitgeist, from the German words Zeit, meaning "time," and Geist, meaning "spirit" or "ghost." (This same Geist, when combined with poltern, meaning "to knock," led to the English word poltergeist referring to a noisy ghost.) It is common nowadays to read about something "tapping into" or "capturing" the zeitgeist, as doing so often entails popularity or profitability in appealing to a great many people, though sometimes the zeitgeist of a particular time and place is only recognized in hindsight, either due to nostalgia or with the benefit of (one hopes) greater wisdom.

It goes without saying that the (budget movie) Citizen Vigilante has not just gone viral, but is on its way to becoming a cultural phenomenon – if it has not already achieved that status.

All of the right people hate it!

That includes it having been (de facto) banned in Germany and the UK (Elon Musk end-ran that by providing a free link on his X account). Critics hate it (‘natch), while audience scores hover around 95% positive.

In some ways, Citizen Vigilante is reminiscent of the 1970’s movie franchises Dirty Harry and (in particular) Death Wish. Those too reflected an “officially” suppressed zeitgeist of that time – folks weren’t supposed to notice the cultural decline, and in particular, the rising crime (and a “criminal justice system” increasingly seen as coddling criminals).

But outside of the elites and their mockingbird media, average citizens could not help but notice – they were being victimized by it. The usual hand-wringing suspects were afraid that those movies effectively validating the concerns of regular people might well … stir them to action.

Citizen Vigilante is STRONGER than those past movies.

One could consider it agitprop (which the hand-wringers would label “fascist” or “far-right agitprop”). In a traditional sense, it is not a well-made movie, there’s no denying that.

BUT as agitprop – in this case in the service of good – it is masterful.

It is an in-your-face, gut-punch exposé not just the pedestrian street-crime depicted in Dirty Harry and Death Wish, but the existential – civilizational – threat of replacement migration. Existential because the “criminal justice system” is not just coddling street thugs, its political and judicial overlords – working with and through national and multi-national bodies – are executing the replacement migration against entire nations and their citizens.

INCLUDING targeting the “criminal justice system(s)” against citizens who justifiably seek to defend themselves, their families and their nations – even if that defense is merely peacefully expressing opinions online questioning replacement migration. This being what is now commonly referred to as a “two-tiered justice system.”

It is fitting – and I suspect, not coincidental – that the first word in the title of the movie is “Citizen.”

The movie itself is based upon actual incidents, particularly a notorious gang-rape that occurred in Germany. Too, it comes shortly after Rupert Lowe’s Restore Britain issued its damning report about decades of organized rape and torture in the UK – victimizing at least 250,000 citizen girls and women – which was aided and abetting by the British authorities (again, against their own citizens).

One might ponder if there was some Providential involvement with the timing of the report and this movie’s release?

The Globalist hand-wringers and their lackeys are “concerned” that the movie will “inspire” real-life citizens to also take matters into their own hands.

Crocodile tears.

In the now decades of replacement migration, they’ve ignored the valid cries of the citizens that they (supposedly) represent. Indeed, only monsters – demonic monsters – could knowingly allow, e.g., the mass rape and sexual torture that occurred in the UK.

If those monsters really wish to head-off the specter of “citizen vigilantism,” they have it in their power to do so. Right now.

It’s called REMIGRATION.

Other than that, it is not just predictable – but probably inevitable – that at some point, some citizens not suffering from “low T” – in collective self-defense – will take “kinetic” steps to defend themselves, their daughters, their entire families and their nations. Self-defense against not just the “migrant” perpetrators, but also the elected and appointed perpetrators, the traitors responsible for the presence and subsidization of the “migrant” perpetrators.

Thus, Citizen Vigilante is actually performing a “public service.” It is a cinematic warning-shot to those responsible for replacement migration about what is likely to come, and providing them a short period within which to reverse course, and to diligently proceed with remigration.

POSTSCRIPT:

On June 28, 2026, the Director of Citizen Vigilante (Uwe Boll) teased on X that a sequel could be forthcoming: “The End of the Somali Scams” (screenshot below). In the background one spies imagery of an American flag, and the NYC skyline.

Given that our vigilante is an American citizen, he could “Walz right into” Minnesota on his mission to remedy Somali fraud (pun intended).

Perhaps some more Providential intervention will assure that this sequel is made, and that it hits streaming / theaters in the summer of 2028, shortly before the next U.S. election. :-)

While the mind’s eye might find the concept of “Mamdani’s Mini-Marts” to be humorous – and his “rent freeze” perhaps less so – what it portends is of existential importance for the future survival of our Constitutional Republic. Determining, perhaps, whether it will survive another 250 years … or merely another 2.5 or so.

This is not hyperbole. As we’ll see …

Winston Churchill once opined: The further back I look, the further forward I can see.

In that spirit, sometimes revisiting (somewhat aged) books provides invaluable context for current events, and facilitates anticipating what may be coming. For present purposes, let us briefly revisit two books:

2007’s “The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party” by David Horowitz and Richard Poe, and …

2010’s “Radical in Chief – Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism” by Stanley Kurtz.

In the interest of brevity, in this piece we won’t delve too much into “Shadow Party,” other than to point out that: the title explains much, given that George Soros is still one of the most major forces of evil among us, while Hillary Clinton has historical ties to Saul Alinsky (of “Rules for Radicals” infamy); and that if one reads “Shadow Party,” one will recognize that today’s tussle within the Democrat Party – as Mamdani’s cadre of “Democrat Socialists of America” is defeating incumbent Democrats from within the party primary process – is not new or spontaneous, but marks the approaching consummation stage of a treasonous, revolutionary plot commenced decades ago.

For present purposes, we will devote more time to “Radical in Chief.” For within it we find the “why” behind “Mamdani’s Mini-Marts,” his new “rent freeze,” and what else may be coming … if he is not stopped.

For you see, Mamdani isn’t original, he’s a successor – especially (I would argue) of B. Hussein Obama. Mamdani is the current “elected” quarterback of the Red-Green Axis, for which Obama previously advanced the ball into the “red zone.”

“Radical in Chief” delves back into the machinations of the Collectivist-Marxist revolutionaries prior to Obama … and in so doing, provides great insight into the subworld that cultivated Hillary Clinton, B. Hussein Obama and Zohran Mamdani (and the “Democratic Socialists of America” et als.).

There are names that occur and reoccur in the lives of Hillary Clinton, B. Hussein Obama – and, spiritually if not directly – with Zohran Mamdani. Names such as Heather Booth and her “Midwest Academy,” Wade Rathke and “ACORN,” Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorhn (the “just a guy from my neighborhood” yet who were invited guests to the opening of B. Hussein Obama’s Presidential Library cum flak tower).

There are also concepts aimed at gradually overthrowing our Constitutional Republic and replacing it with a Socialist state (presumably as an interim, until full-blown Communism can be imposed, as it the progression outlined by Karl Marx).

A key concept (or tactic) is “non-reformist reforms.” Here, a quote from “Radical in Chief” will introduce the underlying scheme:

So the President [Obama] is carrying out the ideals of his community-organizer past from a new position. The socialist organizers who taught and inspired Obama favored plans to quietly transform America’s economic system with “non-reformist reforms” – programs that appear as minor adjustments to capitalism but in fact undermine the system itself. This strategy was favored by Obama’s socialist mentors and associates at New York’s Socialist Scholars Conferences, the Midwest Academy, and ACORN.

More from “Radical in Chief”:

Originally President Obama pushed hard to include a ‘public option’ in the health-care [Obamacare] bill. A government-run health-care plan designed to “compete” with private insurers parallels proposals by the Citizen/Labor Energy Coalition to create a government-owned energy corporation. The term “competition” in this context is a misnomer, since entities backed by the taxing, law-making and regulatory power of the federal government can easily drive private companies out of business. That is exactly what the socialist sponsors of the Citizen/Labor Energy Coalition were hoping for.

Apply that template to grocery stores and – voilà – you have “Mamdani’s Mini-Marts.”

The same dynamic, albeit with some differences in execution, applies to the (non-reformist reform) “rent freeze.” As some have pointed out – such as NYC Councilwoman Vickie Paladino – the freeze on top-line revenue while allowing underlying costs to increase will result in private-sector landlords being eliminated.

So, in NYC, eventually there will be solely government-controlled access to food and shelter. If you want totalitarian control over a population, controlling the availability of food and shelter do the trick. Some might call that Communism.

FOR MAMDANI AND HIS ILK, FAILURE IS AN OPTION

Some have opined that Mamdani’s programs will fail, particularly as he’s driving-out the NYC tax base. And that the residents – citizens and illegal aliens – will turn on him and the DSA.

Don’t think that failure isn’t necessarily part of the plan.

The Socialist schemes described in “Radical in Chief” seek economic collapse as a prerequisite to consummating their revolution.

This includes – but is not limited to – “The Cloward-Piven Strategy.”

So, to believe that Mamdani and his DSA policies will inevitably collapse the NYC economy, turning people against him, and so anticipating that we don’t have to worry about him because “people will learn the lesson of Socialism the hard way” … could be catastrophically naïve.

No, better to confront the Collectivist threat head-on. Including educating the public about their revolutionary goals, their tactics (“non-reformist reforms”) – and their foreign backers (e.g., the CCP). And, I would argue, their Satanic roots.

Thankfully, President Trump seems to get it (though we can’t rely upon him alone):

The opprobrium directed at John Thune – and to a lesser extend his visible posse of Lisa Murkowski, Thom Tillis, etc. – for (so far) both throttling “The Save America Act” and remaining in session to prevent recess appointments, is unquestionably well-deserved.

But Thune – presumably for lucre (whether money or title or blackmail, or some combination thereof) – is providing a valuable service for: a) the Democrat wing of the UniParty division of The Globalist-CCP Axis, and b) that Axis itself.

If the talking filibuster was undertaken, Democrats would be hard-pressed to offer plausible public explanations as to why they (in effect) want mass election fraud.

Their present (public) unity in opposition to “The Save America Act” would fracture, as (at least) vulnerable Democrat Senators would be forced to flip.

So, at present, Thune and his posse are actually protecting the Democrats even more than the “Republicans.”

Meanwhile, “Republican” Senators would be hard-pressed to publicly vote against it.

So, in reality, “The Save America Act” actually has a good chance of being enacted. notwithstanding the “bipartisan” desire to bury it.

To try to bury it, Thune is playing spear-catcher, while the entirety of the Senate is hiding behind his skirt.

He and his posse (perhaps) risk losing their seats over this, notwithstanding an RNC firewall of money, and election fraud infrastructure employed on their behalf. But, in return for what may be a political kamikaze mission, they have probably been offered golden-parachutes / lucre in case this happens.

Similar to what I believe happened with Paul Ryan in 2018 and what appears to be a prior UniParty / Axis plot to throw the midterms — Mr. Ryan landed with a $$$ Fox board seat, and business dealings with Mitt Romney’s sone.

You see, the plaints from our side about the GOP losing its majority matter not to them. It’s all kabuki theater – the business model is for the GOP to always have a “minority” position in Congress – whether in actual numbers, or de facto as we’re seeing practiced at present by Thune et als.

The game is to keep gaslighting the electorate so that they believe that there are actually two political parties, offering competing visions for “political solutions,” and that voting gives them a voice — but to control who’s actually in, and what actually comes out of Congress.

That’s why the UniParty division of the Globalist-CCP Axis wants and needs to protect and preserve the existing election fraud infrastructure. Republicans who play along with the Axis generally need not worry about reelection, for some Republicans in office are necessary for the aforementioned kabuki theater.

Starting with the Tea Party – suppression of which was a collaborative effort on the part of the UniParty – and now with President Trump / MAGA – the grassroots have mustered to actually build a two-party system, with citizens actually having a political voice.

This presents an existential threat to the UniParty division. Hence the effort to maintain election fraud and, it appears, to throw the midterms to the Democrats so post-2018 midterm impeachments can begin anew (while maintaining the superficial pretext that the GOP isn’t also behind the impeachment efforts).

We’re seeing multiple “Republican” Senators expressing support for “The Save America Act” – at least through throwaway posts on X.

But we’re not seeing them calling-out Thune for protecting the Democrats, or actually moving to force him to pursue a talking filibuster to finally enact “The Save America Act.”

They’re trying to have their cake and eat it too, by posting on X while simultaneously concentrating the base’s ire on the voluntary spear-catchers Thune, Murkowski, et als.

We need to let every Republican in the Senate know that we recognize the game that their playing, and we demand both “The Save America Act” and recess appointments.

Absent that, every single one of them is culpable for, and owns the failure.

The farther backward you can look, the farther forward you can see. – Sir Winston Churchill

If not all Red-Green Axis roads lead back to B. Hussein Obama, he’s certainly a main intersection.

As we head toward the midterms, the Progressive-Democrat pre-programming has begun. Toward this endeavor, the current Pope Leo (hereafter “Leo”) is providing not just his blessings, but his assistance.

And, apparently, invoking a “whole of Church” approach – see, e.g., the 60 Minutes “interview” with multiple Cardinals and Archbishops on April 12, 2026.

What would explain this (supposed) “shepherd of souls” injecting himself and the Catholic Church overall into a secular, and often tawdry, avocation of politics?

Well, if we look “farther backward” into the Obama reign, and even to Peru decades before, “the farther forward” we can see.

Space doesn’t permit a detailed examination of the known background of B. Hussein Obama (back in the day, Stanley Kurtz performed yeoman’s work with his book Radical in Chief). Suffice it to say that there are numerous breadcrumbs – many still only partially in view – that point to frightening possibilities concerning his actual motivating drivers and intentions.

Was his actual father Frank Marshall Davis? Is that birth certificate genuine? What of his Muslim upbringing in Indonesia? Did he enroll at Occidental and/or Columbia as a foreign student? What about his extended trip to Pakistan? Who greased the skids for his admittance to Harvard Law School? Why, after law school, did he choose moving to Chicago to become a “community organizer” (an “occupation” developed by Saul Alinsky); and why was his political career launched in Bill Ayers’ Chicago living room? Did Chicago originate because of his teenage time with Frank Marshall Davis in Hawaii? Why the “apology tour” to the Mideast when he was President? Why did his “Arab Spring” actually result in the overthrow of relatively friendly governments, and their displacement by Muslim Brotherhood-aligned governments? Why the pallets of cash to Iran, and the “Iran Deal” overall?

And that’s all just scratching the surface of the questionable B. Hussein Obama.

Speaking of Chicago, that’s where the current Pope Leo hails from. As a rising star in the Catholic Church firmament, it would not surprise if he was routinely rubbing elbows with the Democrat power brokers of Chicago – including its rising stars like Obama – and those power brokers may well have identified “Leo” as a potential rising star for other purposes.

Leo’s career included stints in Rome, Chicago but, primarily, Peru. Why is Peru significant? As Chicago was Frank Marshall Davis’ and Saul Alinsky’s home turf, Peru was the home turf of Gustavo Gutierrez – the “recognized” originator of “Liberation Theology” (“recognized” is in quotes, as there is evidence that “Liberation Theology” was originally spawned by the KGB).

Whether Leo’s original assignment to Peru was motivated by a desire to immerse in “Liberation Theology,” or the immersion came during the course of his years in Peru, it is implausible to believe that immersion didn’t take place. Immersion followed — based upon his record as Pope — of Leo’s embrace of same.

“Liberation Theology” is a Marxist-tinged bastardization of Christianity. In living memory, it was recognized as such within the Catholic Church. As Breitbart News reported in 2024:

In 1984 the Vatican doctrinal congregation headed up by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, under the auspices of Pope John Paul II, published an instruction titled Libertatis Nuntius, which was sharply critical of liberation theology — or “theologies” as some prefer to call it, given its numerous and varied expressions.

…

Pope John Paul II, who lived for years under communist rule in his native Poland and was instrumental in the eventual collapse of the Soviet system, had no illusions about Marxism and its errors and went to great lengths to keep it from penetrating the fabric of the Church under the guise of Liberation Theology.

In his role as doctrinal watchdog, Cardinal Ratzinger referred to Liberation Theology as a “singular heresy” and a “fundamental threat” to the Church.

In 2005, after the death of Pope John Paul II – who was part of what we might call a trinity that defeated (or so we thought) Communism, i.e., Pope John Paul II, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher – Cardinal Ratzinger was selected as Pope, and chose the name Benedict.

A coup d’etat in the Catholic Church

Infiltration and subversion from within is a classic Communist tactic – whether doctrinal (“Liberation Theology”) or “personnel is policy.” Or both.

Under what even at the time were recognized as mysterious circumstances, Pope Benedict announced his “resignation,” effective February 28, 2013 (this being early in the second Obama term). Claiming health reasons, he was the first Pope to “resign” in nearly 600 years (and yet lived until December, 2022).

There is credible speculation that Obama et als. were involved, including with the replacement / ascension to Pope by a “Liberation Theology” sympathizer (at a minimum) – from South America, birthplace of “Liberation Theology” – Pope Francis. (See here, here and here)

In 2018, Pope Francis inked a deal with the CCP – the terms of which are still secret. There has been speculation that monetary support to the Vatican was involved; as the deal (and/or any related side-agreements) have been held to secrecy, that cannot be verified (or refuted).

What is known that it allows the CCP to select bishops, and that it continues to suppress practicing Catholics (who have had to go underground). Notwithstanding this, Pope Francis renewed the deal. Multiple times. Meanwhile, Leo has largely avoided taking a position on the agreement so, so far, is tacitly endorsing it.

Pope Francis was notorious for embracing the Globalist agenda – “climate change” – and fealty to Leftist positions.

Once Francis passed away in April, 2025, he was replaced by – lo and behold – Leo from Chicago, by way of Peru. At the time, some opined that this “first American Pope” was selected specifically to confront the recently reelected President Trump.

Several have noted that the Catholic hierarchy would be motivated to want the cessation of a Trump Presidency – which would de facto end two years sooner if the Democrats prevail in the 2026 midterms – because Trump has ended the (hundreds of millions of dollars?) gravy train that Catholic Charities enjoyed by collaborating with the “O-Biden” administration’s mass-human trafficking operation.

It was beyond lucre-ative for Catholic Charities.

So, to quote a crime-movie line, the Catholic hierarchy “has motive and opportunity” to work with those trying to swing Congress to the Democrats in the 2026 midterms … “by any means necessary.”

It has been reported that on April 9, 2026, Pope Leo had an extended meeting with Obama consigliere – and long-time Chicagoan – David Axelrod. It’s safe to assume this wasn’t for Bible study.

Before and (especially) since that meeting we’ve seen a ramping up of (anti-Trump) political commentary from Leo. Including about ICE enforcement / deportation (the bane of Catholic Charities), and criticism of the military action in Iran (which action is pleasing to the underground church in Iran, but not to the “Green” side of the Red-Green Axis).

Speaking of which, Leo has been very (shall we say) accommodating toward Islam overall – e.g., only tepid statements about the massacres of Christians in Nigeria, and that “we can get along” with Islam.

And, as we see with the April 12, 2026 60 Minutes broadcast, additional troops from the Catholic adjunct of the Red-Green Axis are being deployed.

Look for Catholic collaboration with the Red-Green Axis to increase between now and the midterms, with the implicit message that “one can’t be a good Catholic and support Trump or the Republicans.”

For those of us who consider the Communist/ Marxist form of Collectivism to be a Satanic evil (as are all forms of Collectivism), the question then becomes:

“Are the current leaders of the Catholic Church actually ‘wolves in sheep’s clothing,’ installed by operatives of the Red-Green Axis to subvert it from within, and lead the flock astray?”

The farther back we look, the farther forward advances a conclusion of “YES.”

Ever since the oral arguments before the Supreme Court regarding “birthright citizenship,” we’ve encountered a cascade of opinions informing us of the near-certainty of an adverse ruling; which in turn could provide THE nail, i.e., the final nail for the coffin of our national sovereignty.

This has led some, such as Professor Jonathan Turley, to start discussing the need for a Constitutional Amendment after the adverse ruling.

While I believe that Professor Turley is an honest broker, I smell a rat.

That is, are we being Psy-Op’d so as to help pave-the-way for an adverse decision?

If a significant portion of the public comes to believe that an adverse result is baked-in, they’ll move on to other things: RELIEVING THE PRESSURE ON THE SUPREME COURT TO RULE PROPERLY, RATHER THAN EXPEDIENTLY ON BEHALF OF GLOBALIST INTERESTS.

A later Constitutional Amendment is a placebo – even if one were to be adopted someday, by the time that process completes, it’ll be way too late. The advocates of destroying our sovereignty know that full well, and so could be jumping on that bandwagon as a ruse.

The legal arguments against “birthright citizenship” for birth tourists, illegal aliens and anchor babies, and so on, is beyond compelling. Nowhere in our galaxy is it conceivable that such an interpretation was an intended result of the drafters of the 14^thAmendment.

The argument that because unrestricted “birthright citizenship” has been practiced for some time, it must now be accepted as “the law of the land” is laughable.

If a practice such as this violates our Constitution, the duty of the Supreme Court is affirmatively declare such — not to invoke a fabricated “never mind” clause of our Constitution.

This is not to say that the Supreme Court as currently constituted (pun intended) is not weak and malleable. The John Roberts court is notorious for finding “penumbras and emanations” that rationalize a politically expedient outcome, or dodge or punt ruling on controversial matters of Constitutional import.

What is being said is that the enemies of our sovereignty recognize that too, and may be trying to play us to NOT pressure the Supreme Court as the decision sausage-making is now underway behind closed doors.

For if we keep public opinion and public pressure up, that could well stiffen the spines of enough Justices to produce a Constitutionally-sound decision against “birthright citizenship” as currently practiced.

We won’t know if we don’t try!

Well, that is true. But not solely Israel’s war, as they would have us believe. It’s also Israel’s war, to be sure – how could it not be when a perennial chant by the Mullah’s is “death to Israel.”

But let us not forget:

The Mullahs’ chant “death to Israel” because (to them) it’s “the Little Satan.”

We, the US of A, are also the targets of “death to” chants – as “the Great Satan.”

One of their first acts in power was to seize the American embassy, and hold over 50 of our people hostage from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981– 444 days (released, not coincidentally, on the day Ronald Reagan was sworn into office, succeeding Jimmy Carter, under whose watch the Mullahs seized power).

During that period, an April, 1980 attempt by the Carter administration to rescue the hostages – Operation Eagle Claw – was an unmitigated disaster, resulting not in a rescue, but the sacrifice of eight service members.

During that period (1979) the English group The Kinks released a song titled “Catch Me Now I’m Falling.” It was a plaintive song describing how “Captain America” had always come to the aid of other countries, but was now in trouble, and seemingly alone, unappreciated, left to his fate:

Now I’m calling on citizens from all over the world

This is Captain America calling

I bailed you out when you were down on your knees

So will you catch me now I’m falling

It continued:

I remember

When you were down

You would always come running to me

I never denied you

And I would guide your through all of your difficulties

Toward the song’s conclusion, it declares:

I never thought that you would let me down

But next time you’re in trouble, baby

Do not come running to me

Those of us who lived through the 1970’s, especially the Jimmy Carter malaise years, well-remember the sentiment expressed by that song – that the USA was a “has been.” That perpetual decline was now our collective fate. That malaise was the new normal.

[P.S., I remain immensely grateful to The Kinks for showing appreciation for our country, at that time in the world, and bravely, given that music is an industry in which such expressions can result in banishment.]

Then, a year after the Kinks’ release, a miracle happened. One on ice. Our U.S. hockey team, underdogs, beat the Russians, and then went on to win the gold in the 1980 Olympics. This was the birthplace of crowds chanting USA! USA! USA! [Do see the movie Miracle about this, it well captures what occurred.]

“The Miracle on Ice” arguably prophesied the coming Reagan victory, and its accompanying “morning in America.” Captain America had been down, but was not out.

Not that this derailed the Mullahs’ war against us: on October 23, 1983 an Iranian-backed bombing in Beirut, Lebanon killed 241 U.S. Marines.

B. Hussein Obama’s collaboration with the Mullahs – pallets of cash delivered, his faux “nuclear deal” with the Mullahs – does not erase the fact that they have been at war with us since 1979 (it merely highlights Obama’s treachery).

Captain America has now come full circle …

In 2026, our U.S. Olympic hockey team – for the first time since 1980 – as underdogs, also brought home the gold. Forty-six years to the day since the 1980 victory (I don’t know about you, but I place some Providential significance to that “coincidence”).

This time (I would argue) not as a precursor to a new President coming, and a new morning in America, but as further validation – e.g., after Butler, PA – that our current President Trump is here as a tool of our God, who has heard our prayers for restoration of our Constitutional Republic, and America’s place as that “shining city on a hill,” offering hope for the rest of the world.

That Captain America has come full circle – from being down and asking for help (and denied same) – to handling matters notwithstanding the duplicity of folks like Keir Starmer. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s press remarks on March 2, 2026, well convey that renewed and reinvigorated Captain America spirit.

This in not just “an Israeli” war. It’s not just an Israeli and American war. It’s a war of Western Civilization against medieval Islam, which intends to conquest the West.

The videos of joyful Persians across the world, waving pre-Islamic Iranian flags, joined by joyful Jews waving Israeli flags, and all joyfully waving American flags attests to this!

FAFO

For 47 years the Mullahs have Fatwah’d Around. Now they’re Finding Out.

Captain America is back, and kicking ass!

USA! USA! USA!

The Democrats and Antifa – alongside other Marxist groups, utilizing funding both domestic and foreign – are fellow revolutionaries pursuing a “Pressure from Above, Pressure from Below” strategy in Minneapolis (to start).

Earlier today Tony Seruga on X posted language from Antifa looking to catalyze this into civil war:

While one might dismiss that on the grounds that Antifa (etc.) are just fringe groups that don’t have the support of anywhere near a majority of the public, students of history will recall that the Bolsheviks were likewise fringe. And managed to take control of Russia and form the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Other posters on X have (h/t Cam Higby) have penetrated Antifa Signal chats. Among other things, this has found that elected officials in Minnesota appear to be involved.

One might be tempted to dismiss this as confined to Minnesota. Ponder the likelihood (I would say inevitability) that it is not so confined, but instead emblematic of today’s Democrat Party. More on this in a moment.

The critical concept mentioned about is a technique the Communists used to assume control of Czechoslovakia by hijacking the democratic process, including the use of a recognized “mainstream” political party. They accomplished a coup d’etat without tanks or guns. They wrote what in effect was an after-action report / guidebook for the future which, in the West, came to be published under the title And Not a Shot is Fired.

You needn’t read the whole thing. BUT – an Introduction to it, dated 1999, by Thomas R. Eddlem for The John Birch Society – is short, and is a MUST READ (link below).

Recognizing when it was written, and keeping in mind what we’ve been seeing in this country since (at least) President Trump unexpectedly won in 2016, and I guarantee you that you will immediately recognize the pattern. That of a slow, methodical “Pressure from Above, Pressure from Below” Communist revolution.

You will also immediately recognize that Democrat Party officials’ actions over the last decade (at least) are not inexplicable, but now blatantly obvious. Including their de facto collaboration with Antifa and other Marxist organizations.

“Ponder the likelihood (I would say inevitability) that it is not so confined, but instead emblematic of today’s Democrat Party. More on this in a moment.”

As one glaring example … given the current revelations re: Antifa’s funding and sophisticated “command and control” structure, ponder then-FBI Director Chris Wray’s 2020 testimony before Congress that Antifa is just an ideology, not an orgization. He had to know better. But I would submit that as a functionary of the “Pressure from Above” party (and its allies), he was dutifully protecting a vital arm of the “Pressure from Below” revolutionary cadre.

Link to: Introduction to And Not a Shot is Fired (1999)

In recent days a video with an AI-generated young English lady – notable for her purple hair – has “gone viral.” Why?

It encourages the English – in particular, young men – to liberate their country from the Keir Starmer-led Globalist and Islamic takeover - which has already fundamentally transformed that “democratic” nation into an authoritarian state, one on the way to full-blown Globalist totalitarianism (with a side of caliphate-status).

For example, in the video Amelia declares:

These dragons that threaten our England won’t go away unless brave knights rise up to slay them.

English men – it’s your country and it’s being taken from you.

Your ancestors beat the Spanish Armada, Napoleon and the Nazis; surely you can handle welfare tourists.

History will record what you do, or don’t do. Get cracking lads! Love, Amelia.

Amelia is a wee bit unequivocal, eh chaps?

The Beautiful Irony of Amelia

The Amelia character is a parody – or rebuttal, if you will – or maybe, better yet, a correction of – a character in a British government issued online game called “Pathways: Navigating the Internet and Extremism”:

The “Prevent” program listed on that home page is controversial; ostensibly it is intended to help prevent (terrorism feeding) radicalization of youth.

In a beautiful irony, the now-viral patriotic Amelia character was created in response.

Someone on X, presumably having the latest free-speech suppressing actions in Great Britain in mind, even posted a tremendous adaptation of a Normal Rockwell painting (hence the title of this piece, “Amelia Rockwell”):

Why is this significant?

Let us harken back to (revolutionary) Saul Alinsky and his Rules for Radicals. You know, the revolutionaries’ guide whose Introduction includes a hat-tip to Lucifer (no clue there).

[Whenever I mention Alinsky I feel obligated to remind that Hillary Rodham-Clinton was an acolyte of Alinsky – he even offered her a position – and Alinsky invented the “occupation” of “community organizer.” Which, not coincidentally, was the pre-political office “occupation” admitted-to by one B. Hussein Obama. But I digress …]

Alinsky developed the “Rules” (as much techniques or tactics as rules) because they are effective. And if the evildoers have developed effective tactics, should we not “repurpose” them on the side of good?

Two of the “Rules” are applicable to the Amelia phenomenon:

RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)

RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different than any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)

Knowingly or not, whoever created the patriotic Amelia effectively repurposed those two “Rules” – ridiculing the government and in an enjoyable way (at least for us patriots on both sides of the pond).

Today’s British government under Fuhrer Starmer, err, Comrade Starmer, err, Prime Minister Starmer is much like the authoritarian government depicted in the (fictional) movie V for Vendetta. And getting worse by the day.

Speaking of Rules 5 and 6, it’s fun to imagine Amelia becoming the catalyst for patriotic Britons to begin resisting.

Including through, e.g., images of Amelia as graffiti, and ridiculing purple-haired wigs depicted on Starmer and his Globalist posse. And, perhaps, some fun demonstrations by folks wishing to take their country back.

After which, God willing – as in the movie – the authoritarian regime will be deposed, and Great Britain restored!

There is an increasing drumbeat for President Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act to quell the Democrat – Red-Green Axis uprising in Minnesota.

Such an invocation would be legitimate. This piece is not to argue about that, but to offer suggestions for how and when the trigger should be pulled (no pun intended).

The Democrat – Red-Green Axis is baiting, trying to set a trap. An invocation of the Insurrection Act would be misrepresented to feed their manufactured narrative of President Trump being a (pick your preferred lie) King, Hitler, Dictator. In turn, it would be cited as grounds for impeaching him (ideally, from there standpoint, a year from now, should they succeed in (once again) stealing the midterms and gaining control of Congress).

So how do we avoid that trap, while also derailing what is (apparently) intended as “Summer of Love II” leading into the 2026 midterms – Minnesota being a beta-test / dress-rehearsal?

INDICT FIRST

We don’t need comprehensive indictments (e.g., the long-awaited bringing the 2020 election coup d’etat plotters to justice). We just need something related to the Somali welfare fraud and the leadership behind that (e.g., Tim Walz, Keith Ellison). Ideally, something that then at least points to, if not also indicting, the leadership and funding of the D.C.-based collaboration with same.

Alongside that, concurrent evidence that funding and “command and control” of the current <ahem> unrest in Minnesota was/is coordinated (at least in part) to divert attention from said fraud. One would hope (expect!) that such evidence is being collected in real-time.

(At one point it occurred to me to mention FISA warrants to aid in this evidence collection. But then I remembered that the FISA “Court” has functioned as a de facto rubber-stamp for the Deep State – and judges in the D.C. Circuit are servants of same – so resort to FISA might not be prudent when you’re trying to save our Constitutional Republic.)

The Somali fraud has been shaping up as a game-changing element that holds the promise of even getting normies to swallow some red-pills. This will prove-out even more so, as the national scope of same becomes exposed – not just involving “Somalian refugees,” but across all sorts of “social” programs encompassing all sorts of “constituencies.”

Once the links are shown to a Democrat / Red-Green Axis erected infrastructure of fraud, and its use of a significant portion of the proceeds to fund foreign terrorists, left-wing organizations (NGO’s) and kickbacks to Democrat officeholders (especially through their families, e.g., the Hunter Biden model) – being a Democrat politician could soon be toxic, both going into the 2026 midterms and the 2028 general election.

Some Minnesota indictments first, and the evidence that would be concurrently forthcoming, would, in turn, show even the normies why invocation of the Insurrection Act was and is warranted, and are not the acts of a “dictator.”

Walz and Ellison are low-hanging fruit, and indictments should be able to be processed quickly, while more comprehensive efforts at building indictments against those higher up the food chain can be given some more time.

Some Minnesota-focused indictments would at least cut-off one head of the Red-Green Axis’ snake, and set us on the righteous path for killing that demonic beast

.

Why are citizens of the USA subsidizing our own unemployment through the tax code?

That is a compelling question to ask.

The federal income tax was <ahem> imposed upon us thanks to the first “Progressive” President, Woodrow Wilson. Ever since it’s been employed as part of the Progressives’ long-term project intended to “fundamentally transform” us away from being a constitutional republic.

But since we’re stuck with it – at least for now – why not “fundamentally transform” (at least elements of it) for MAGA purposes?

Here’s a common sense proposal:

At present, employers are allowed to fully deduct the entire cost of employees’ wages and benefits from their federal income tax liability. That includes H1-B visa holders and non-citizen employees (whether legally present in this country, or here as illegal aliens a/k/a “migrants”).

So, in effect, the American taxpayer is subsidizing their own unemployment! “Replacement migration” in the workforce is fully deductible!

So instead, should not the American federal tax code limit wage and benefit deductibility to the employment of American citizens?

Employers all the way from Silicon Valley to local landscapers would no longer be able deduct the cost of employing foreigners instead of Americans. And those that continued to employ foreigners, and continue to deduct expenses related to same, would be subject to IRS audits and criminal penalties.

Innumerable employers would decide that it’s time to once again start employing American citizens.

In turn, this step alone would largely eliminate one of the two primary magnets for illegal immigrants (the other being the current anchor baby loophole). No longer employable, millions would self-deport, without us incurring the time and expense of federal district court injunctions and (years from now) “immigration hearings.”

Such a common-sense change to our tax code would also discourage American corporations from establishing (or expanding) operations overseas, as the deductibility of wages and benefits paid to those foreigners working in foreign countries would no longer be deductible from federal income taxes. (Note to American taxpayers: through “our” tax code you’ve been subsidizing the employment of foreign nationals in foreign lands, such as at the ubiquitous “call centers.”)

It is unclear whether President Trump can accomplish this through executive order – at least as an interim step – or through changes current IRS regulations. But if so, immediate action is called for!

If it would require legislative action, enacting such should be a no-brainer for Republicans (at least, for the non-UniParty “Republicans”). A sufficient outcry from the American electorate could indeed overwhelm the lobbyists from the corporate “cheap labor” crowd.

For the public, the motto should be: “Stop subsidizing the employment of foreigners! Make American Employees Great Again!”

The following may be committing treason in the eyes of “Deadheads”– but then again, there’s a lot of treason about these days, isn’t there?

With apologies to “Deadheads” who may take umbrage at any tinkering with Grateful Dead lyrics – or anyone who believes that the song is besmirched by references to B. Hussein Obama, John Brennan and James Comey (a sentiment with which I can sympathize) – below I offer a parody version of the Grateful Dead classic “Truckin.’” [It resembles a word-processing “track changes” format so you can see the original lyrics as well.]

Now, sing-along with me!

Truck Obamin' got my chips cashed in
Keep truck Obamin' like the doodah man
Together, more or less in line
Just keep truck Obamin' on

Arrows of neon and flashing marquees out on Penn Ave Main Street
Chicago, Hawaii, Kogeto New York, Detroit and its all the same street
Your typical city involved in a typical sedition daydream
Hang it up and see what tomorrow brings

Dallas CIA got a soft subversive machine
Houston FBI too close to New Gestapo Orleans
New York House of Reps got impeachment the ways and means
But We just won't wouldn’t let you Trump be

Most of the cats Democrats that you meet on the street speak “democracy” of true love
Most of the time they're sitting and scheming overthrow crying at home
One of these days they know they gotta get going
Out of the door and into the street all alone with their Antifa bro’s

Truck Obamin' like the doodah man
Once told me "Gotta play your hand
Sometimes the cards Fabricated ICA’s ain't worth a dime
If you don't lay them down"

Sometimes the lights Tulsi’s declassifications all shining on me
Other times I Brennan can barely see
Lately it occurs Comey says to me
What a long strange trip coup it's been

What in the world ever became of Hillary sweet Jane? She lost her election sparkle you know she isn't the same
Living on graft, Foundation funds and downers reds and vitamin C and cocaine
All her friends can say is ain't it a shame

Truckin' soon up to Gitmo cell Buffalo
Been thinking you got to mellow plea deal slow
Takes time, you they pick the place you to go
Just keep truck Obamin' on

Sitting and staring out of the hotel my mansion’s window
Got a tip they're gonna kick the door in again
Like to get some sleep before I’m handcuffed travel
But if you got a warrant I guess you're gonna come in

Busted down on Martha’s Vin Bourbon Street
Set up like a bowling pin
Knocked down, it gets to wearing orange thin
They MAGA just won't let you be

You're sick of hanging around, you'd like to treason travel
Get tired of treasoning travelling you want to settle down
I guess they can't can revoke your soul passport for trying
Get out of the door, light out and look find law enforcement all around

Sometimes the lights Tulsi’s declassifications all shining on me
Other times I Brennan can barely see
Lately it occurs Comey says to me
What a long strange coup trip it's been

Truck Obamin' I'm a going Gitmo soon home
Whoa, whoa, baby, back it’s where I belong
Back in solitary home, sit down and patch my “write” ’nother autobio bones
And get back truck Obamin' on

Speaking of not alone, that “replacement migration” example of treason under O-Biden is but one a many potential examples – and, in turn, numerous individuals and organizations beyond O-Biden are likewise culpable (e.g., numerous NGO’s residing amongst culpable).

But for the present discussion, let’s just focus on the example of the illegal alien invasion. This because, since President Trump assumed office, stopping his efforts toward undoing the damage of that invasion has probably been the single greatest target of Democrat / Left lawfare (albeit, with their lawfare targeting DOGE and the efforts at “right-sizing” the federal government coming close behind).

Well, if the underlying commission of the invasion constitutes treason, then must that not also be said of organized and coordinated efforts to “protect and preserve” the results of those treasonous acts? And so those working toward same becoming themselves (at a minimum) traitors after-the-fact … accessories to treason?

And what of the coordination by and amongst folks such as Norm Eisen and Democracy Defenders Action and the ACLU? Does the phrase “RICO” not come to mind?

From O-Biden on down through the NGO’s and litigants, they might attempt to mask their actions as “protecting due process” or “civil rights.” But this falls apart when we consider the intended result(s) of the invasion – which in essence was a coupling of “The Cloward-Piven Strategy” with the U.N.’s schemes for “replacement migration.”

That is, importing a “critical mass” of people with no historical or cultural ties to the targeted nation state, thus culturally and electorally displacing a country’s native population and setting the stage for subsuming the targeted nation state under a “global governance” regime.

In other words, overthrowing the United States of America as a free and sovereign nation.

If that doesn’t constitute treason, then what does?

And if working to preserve and protect existing advances of treason – i.e., coordinating and executing a blanket lawfare operation against a MAGA President and his administration, which is trying to remove the replacement migrants from our shores – doesn’t constitute treason, then what does?

“The lady doth protest too much, methinks.” – William Shakespeare (Hamlet)

“The line is spoken by Queen Gertrude in Act 3, Scene 2 of the classic play by William Shakespeare. Prince Hamlet and Queen Gertrude view a play themselves when he asks the Queen how she likes the performance. In this reply to her son, she references a character in the play who is also a queen. Queen Gertrude communicates to her son that she feels that the queen in the stage show lacks credibility.” – Reference.com

“… lacks credibility.”

We might say the same about Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, John Roberts.

After following a de facto gag order regarding “President” Joe Biden’s openly declaring defiance of the judicial branch – and acting upon same – (re: student loan forgiveness), Chief Justice Roberts has of late taken to openly criticizing President Trump’s (and others’) criticism of the judicial jihad (a/k/a lawfare or “courts’ coup”) now underway.

Chief Justice Roberts would have us believe that the federal judiciary (as it exists today) is an apolitical dispenser of justice – and so, as such, warrants its insulation from any examination of motivations, activities and, especially, it’s very legitimacy.

This technique of (attempted) insulation by title – or insulation behind title – is not unlike what we endured through Covid, and before that (and continuing to this day) related to the “climate change” grift, i.e., “we’re scientists” and “[you must therefore] trust the science” because “the science is settled.”

Similarly, Roberts mirrors what we’ve been hearing in recent years from “journalists” attempting to deflect recognition that they’ve devolved from the “Fourth Estate” into credibility bereft regime mouthpieces. With all the drama of a southern belle fanning herself as she gets “the vapors,” we witness media figures exclaiming (in effect): “How dare you question our credibility? We are inherently credible because we are journalists!”

Back in 2016 this author flagged this phenomenon – or should I say, “technique” – and the root-cause of same:

The so-called “mainstream media” is anything but. Journalism is a noble profession, when practiced as such. Alas, Progressivism seriously erodes, if not eliminates the integrity of its adherents, no matter their occupation – journalists, educators, politicians, judges, whatever – bending all into the service of protecting and advancing the agenda, rather than adhering to what is right and doing what is proper. – Communiqués From The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy (2016)

Contrary to what Chief Justice Roberts would have us believe, the federal judiciary long ago became “Progressivized” and so, politicized.

If it had not, today’s lawfare would not be feasible. For if the federal judiciary still maintained fealty to our Constitution – to the impartial dispensation of justice and to judicial restraint – the litigious circus now percolating from district court to district court across the land would “never have achieved liftoff.” For the vast majority of District Court judges would have summarily dismissed most, if not all of the lawfare cases currently targeting the Trump administration and its policies.

Contrast, e.g., with how virtually every case opposing the stolen election of 2020 was summarily dismissed for “lack of standing.”

Here, let us ponder a Christian-premised analogy. All of us are sinners. Precious few of us will ever be saints. But for believers, there are the polestar(s) of the Bible and the teachings of Jesus Christ, and the example of the saints for what a human can be capable of. The polestars provide ideals to strive for, and a measurement against which to gauge our progress (or lack thereof) toward the ideal.

Conversely, those who don’t make a sincere effort to embrace those polestars – much less the ones that deny their existence – are the ones most susceptible to sin, much less descent into outright evil.

In our political system – our Republic (not “our democracy”) – our Constitution is our polestar. And within it, the establishment of a Supreme Court (and lower courts as determined by Congress). It contemplates an independent judiciary – that is the intended purpose of the lifetime appointments – but not an unaccountable, political one. As the above quote from Communiqués highlights though, Progressivism (and its first cousin, Cultural Marxism) have upended this.

In Communiqués a section titled “The Constitution of the United States as a Contract” goes into some detail concerning this; an abridged version is available (free) here.

From Cultural Marxists in law schools, to Democrats during the appointment process, ideologues have been inserted throughout the federal judiciary. That is why so many appointments – especially to the Supreme Court – are so politically charged.

For IF the law schools were producing people trained to embrace the polestar of our Constitution (“as a contract”), with loyalty to its original intent, and the principles of “blind justice” and “equal application of the law,” judicial nominations would be relatively routine affairs, focused solely on competence and degree of “judicial temperament.”

Instead, at the hands of Progressives and their political party the Democrats, we have “Borking.”

Such people not only don’t embrace our Constitutional polestar(s), they are on an avowed mission to displace the Constitution itself.

As will be seen, Collectivism-Progressivism has been intentionally polluting and altering our cultural and economic ecosystems – ultimately putting our nation as founded on the “endangered” list and ultimately intending to render it spiritually and functionally extinct. – Communiqués From The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy (2016)

Many have opined that Chief Justice Roberts is an “institutionalist” whose reticence to act (as one would expect a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to act) is explainable by some sort of motivation to maintain the (perceived) independence of, and respect for the federal judiciary.

Whether this explanation originates with him, or from others attempting to provide cover for him, it doesn’t pass muster (it would IF it was motivated by intent to restore the federal judiciary to its foundational design and intended operation; but not when the motivation is to “insulate it by title”).

Thus – if Roberts was a genuine “institutionalist” – he would first acknowledge the politicization problem, and then work to restore and then enforce adherence to the requisite judicial polestar(s).

As of yet, that has not occurred. Quite the opposite. So, President Trump and others are acting appropriately in calling-out the politicized federal judiciary.

Yes, concerning that criticism, Justice Roberts doth protest too much, methinks.

The clock is ticking, yet there is still a window of opportunity …

It’s not (yet) too late. The current lawfare / courts’ coup provides an opportunity to right the wrongs of recent decades.

Chief Justice Roberts will be judged by history. If today was his final chapter, I dare say that future historians will consign his record to that of the weak, the timid – if not the compromised.

More importantly for Chief Justice Roberts – what should be the most important to him – is that he will ultimately be judged by eternity, i.e., by our Maker.

Present circumstances afford him the opportunity to grasp both Constitutional and (perhaps) eternal redemption. He need “merely” to “repent” by exercising his existing power to restore the federal judiciary to its proper role – to un-“Progressivize” it – litigation decisions issued, and administrative orders promulgated, can do it.

If Chief Justice Roberts really is an institutionalist, then this is the course he will – he must – follow for it to survive as more than just a discredited shell of its former self. He holds it within his hands to “fundamentally transform” from weak and timid, to one of the greatest Chief Justices of the Supreme Court. Ever.

Let us hope that Chief Justice Roberts, facing both a current, growing recognition of the federal judiciary’s polluted function and reputation — and an imminent “Constitutional crisis” — begins undertaking earnest prayer both for Divine guidance and the strength to act in accord with it.

And let us all pray that Chief Justice Roberts so engages in prayer — and pray that, overall, God will still find our nation worthy of His blessings.

Born circa 500 B.C., Sun Tzu was a Chinese military strategist and philosopher whose thinking was distilled into THE book The Art of War.

Some 2500 years later, that book is a staple text not only in military war colleges across the globe, but the business world as well. That says much.

Many observers have opined that President Trump has an uncanny ability to see ahead, and remain one step ahead of his adversaries. Whether a result of having read Sun Tzu, or some innate ability to analyze and strategize similarly, or both – one finds Art of War parallels with Trump’s navigation of the political (and now judicial) battlefield.

Even before the 2024 election, there were reports that the Progressive Left (but I repeat myself) was preparing a lawfare campaign for immediate deployment if Donald Trump was successful in his re-election bid. The intent was (and remains) to hobble the newly elected Administration. (So much for respecting “our Democracy.”)

We need not here recount in detail the lawfare that is now rampant, with “judge shopped” federal district court judges across the country issuing an unprecedented, off-the-scale tsunami of nationwide injunctions blocking near everything coming from the Trump administration.

And (so far) a Supreme Court engaged in collusive inaction regarding same.

(The massive degradation of standards and ethics within the law schools, the bar, and more critically, the judiciary – i.e., its Cultural Marxist “fundamental transformation” into political activists instead of impartial jurists – being an apt topic for another day.)

Here we begin incorporating selected quotes from Sun Tzu, accompanied by comments that illustrate how those same principles are being employed by President Trump and the MAGA coalition …

Victory comes from finding opportunities in problems. – Sun Tzu

Up until now, the Trump response to the deluge of lawfare, through the Bondi DOJ, has been a seemingly workmanlike, yet defensive-posture conventional response through that (seemingly ever more) compromised federal judicial system.

This is fighting on the bad guys’ chosen turf. Yet this “conventional” response, Sun Tzu-like, may be by design. Keep reading …

The Progressive Left still controls the legacy “news” media, academia, the entertainment industry and seemingly innumerable “non-profit” foundations and NGO’s – and those still possess massive power and influence (albeit weakening, thank God).

They have a lawfare infrastructure that has been built up for decades, from the Stalinist-rooted ACLU to Norm Eisen’s latest operation, “State Democracy Defenders” (that is, when he’s not cavorting with Chief Justice Roberts). And, of course, Marc Elias is still out there.

Those lawfare groups are currently enjoying tremendous success roadblocking the Trump administration, courtesy of rogue federal judges. So, what might Sun Tzu recommend now?

Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him. – Sun Tzu

Disrupt their comfort in their success, their confidence in victory — successes that you’ve allowed to play out, enticing them to reveal their forces (e.g., within the federal judiciary) and expend their ammunition (so to speak) — only then responding with the unconventional.

Such as an offensive maneuver from an oblique angle; one which the adversaries did not expect, and for which they were not prepared.

In conflict, straightforward actions generally lead to engagement, surprising actions generally lead to victory. – Sun Tzu

Which brings us to last week’s arrest of two state court judges (DOJ press release here).

By oblique attack, the Trump DOJ has arrested not one, but two rogue state court judges.

This has prompted joy within MAGA nation, and concurrent outrage by the usual suspects in Progressive-land: Democrat politicians, MSNBC and so on. They’re all suffering from the vapors, even as they attempt to countermove with declarations of Trump being “above the law” and “threatening our Democracy” and flinging the word “Fascism” about like anti-aircraft chaff.

They’re scared, but trying to hide it with false bravado. The “Q” phrase “the hunters [will] become the hunted” comes to mind.

Those state judges are, in the great scheme of things, small fish.

BUT, THOSE ARRESTS ARE MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN GENERALLY RECOGNIZED.

The height of strategy, is to attack your opponent's strategy. – Sun Tzu

For the Trump DOJ just signaled that there’s no longer de facto immunity for judges who themselves don’t abide by federal law. Are the lawfare hunters becoming the hunted?

If you are a federal judge who, say, has been engaged in ex parte communication, much less coordination, with the forces of lawfare – if not directly, through using family members as intermediaries – suddenly, you’re probably not sleeping so well.

And, finding yourself in a hole, you likely are not going to be inclined to keep digging.

Similarly, if you’re on the lawfare plaintiffs’ side of the bar, now appearing before (shall we say) no longer enthusiastic judges, you may not be sleeping so well either. I

ndeed, you might start having nightmares about some of those federal judges negotiating plea deals to, e.g., resign with their pensions intact, in return for agreeing to testify against you.

That all might destroy the willingness to continue engaging in lawfare, no?

One need not destroy one's enemy. One need only destroy his willingness to engage. – Sun Tzu

There has been much angst in MAGA Nation regarding, e.g., the (as yet) non-occurrence of criminal prosecutions for those responsible for RussiaGate; the stolen election of 2020; J6 and the fabricated “insurrection” (and accompanying abuse of legal process, and outright persecution, of J6’ers); Covid and the so-called vaccines; non-meritorious impeachments. And so much more.

Such as the intentional invasion of our border, and distribution of illegal aliens (and criminals and terrorists) throughout the nation.

Similarly, the (as yet) “failure” to release the Epstein client list, and prosecutions of same.

Hence that general is skillful in attack whose opponent does not know what to defend; and he is skillful in defense whose opponent does not know what to attack. – Sun Tzu

The Trump administration has signaled that it will “go there” with judges. But not necessarily in the ways anticipated, such as the expected move to pursue impeachment proceedings in Congress (which would just be spun as “retribution” and “anti-democratic” and “Fascist”).

Similarly, the totality of incriminating evidence obtained by Elon Musk and DOGE (even just so far) is not public, but presumably in the possession of the Bondi DOJ and its Patel FBI subsidiary.

It is safe to say that the bad guys probably never saw DOGE coming. Another “oblique” maneuver.

Suddenly, several categories of Deep Staters and others within D.C. – Democrat and Republican politicians; the bowels of the infrastructure (NGO’s, etc.) – don’t know what to defend, or where the attacks (prosecutions) will first strike. Epstein related 2020 related? And so on.

At the same time, many have closeted skeletons in multiple of those categories.

So, the so-far “lack of action” or “lack of prosecutions” or “lack of releases” may well be intentional – and tactical.

For at present, all of the bad guys have to sweat.

Inevitably, some of them will start folding (and turning on each other) by, e.g., proactively approaching the Bondi DOJ seeking plea deals in return for producing evidence, and testimony.

Thus, God willing, the Deep State dominoes will begin to fall.

We can’t know if President Trump and his folks consult The Art of War. BUT we can glean that their actions certainly rhyme.

Perhaps, 2500 years from now, folks will be reading about how President Trump out-strategized a superior force of evil, and — despite being in a desperate position, multiple times — saved our Constitutional Republic.

In desperate position, you must fight. – Sun Tzu

Or is that: “In a desperate position, you must FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!”