Have nothing to do with the [evil] things that people do, things that belong to the darkness. Instead, bring them out to the light... [For] when all things are brought out into the light, then their true nature is clearly revealed...

-Ephesians 5:11-13

Category Archives: Politics

Protests Growing Against De Blasio’s Vaccine “Passport” Mandate

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, September 20, 2021:  

Crowds estimated to be in the thousands protested on Saturday against New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s “passport” mandates he issued earlier this month. When he rolled out what he called “The Key to NYC,” he said his executive order “is going to motivate a lot of people to get vaccinated. It’s going to be a reason for people to get vaccinated.”

What his new mandate has done is motivate people to protest against it. On Monday, September 13, the day of the announcement, hundreds of current and former teachers — Teachers for Choice — gathered in Foley Square to condemn the mandate.

Said one retired teacher, Amy Carroll: “I have lived and worked in this city as a civil servant for 28 years of my life. I should be able to make my own health decisions and make a decision that doesn’t affect my employment, that doesn’t affect my right to go to a restaurant, or a Broadway play … or a museum.”

The Key to NYC requires the following establishments to confirm that their customers and visitors are vaccinated, or face fines starting at $1,000 and increasing to $5,000 for repeat offenders:

• Movie theaters

• Live music and concert venues

• Museums and galleries

• Aquariums and zoos

• Professional sports stadiums and arenas

• Convention centers

• Exhibition halls

• Performing arts theaters

• Bowling alleys

• Recreational game center, arcades, and pool and billiard halls

• Casinos and adult entertainment venues

• Restaurants and bars

• Catering halls and event spaces

• Hotel banquet rooms

• Cabarets and nightclubs

• Cafeterias

• Grocery stores with indoor dining

• Bakeries and coffee shops

• Fast food and quick service eateries with indoor dining

• Gyms and fitness centers, and fitness class venues

• Pools

• Dance studios and sports classes

In other words, “The Key to NYC” locks up tight virtually every conceivable business open to the public to anyone who isn’t vaccinated.

On Wednesday, another protest took place at the mayor’s mansion, which was followed up by another one on Saturday, organized by the New York City Freedom Rally. It’s a chapter of the Worldwide Demonstration campaign and was organized by Eric Grassi.

Said Grassi:

We’re banding together to stop this. This movement is growing rapidly because the fire departments, the teachers’ unions, our troops, the hospital workers — none of these people want this injection.

 

They know what’s in it. It’s causing tremendous death and devastation across the world.

 

The injection of children is an absolute criminal act — a capital crime.

 

Plus, the vaccination programs are driving new forms … driving and developing new forms of the disease.

Vaccine mandates are violating medical ethics and individual rights, said Grassi:

We must stop and end all vaccine mandates. They are overthrowing medical ethics, which allows the individual to decide if they want medical treatment.

 

This is an absolute violation of our fundamental rights.

And the impact on businesses in New York has been massive:

They shut down and devastated New York for no reason. They just wrecked the city. They drove thousands of businesses out of business … they just ruined hundreds of thousands of jobs.

 

They closed whole sectors of the city’s economy permanently. They close half the bars and restaurants in New York permanently. The economy of New York is a shadow of its former self.

So far, these protests are directed at de Blasio’s “The Key to NYC” mandate and have involved a few thousand people. But from such beginnings large movements often grow. The Worldwide Demonstration website claims there were protests in India and France and elsewhere, all protesting vaccine mandates.

As de Blasio’s “The Key to NYC” mandate is enforced, the pushback against it is likely to grow. Finally, it appears people are getting tired of being pushed around and dictated to.

Federal Judge Denies DOJ Demand to Halt Texas’ Heartbeat Law

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, September 17, 2021: 

Federal District Court Judge Robert Pitman on Thursday denied the federal government’s demand for a restraining order against Texas’s Heartbeat Law. He wrote that “this case presents complex, important questions of law that merit a full opportunity for the parties to present their positions to the court.”

Texas has until September 29 to present its case. The Department of Justice will have until October 1, two days later, to respond.

The demand from the DOJ was presented on Tuesday, claiming that the Texas law, which became effective on September 1, “prevent[s] women from exercising their constitutional rights,” and that the temporary injunction against that law is “necessary to protect the constitutional rights of women in Texas.”

Nothing was mentioned about the “constitutional rights” of the unborn and defenseless child whose life is at stake. The way the law stands now is untenable: 30 seconds before giving birth a mother may choose to have an abortionist kill her child. She will be deemed to be a hero, exercising her “constitutional rights.”

If she kills the child after birth, she is a murderer.

It’s not the life of the child that motivates the DOJ and the Attorney General of the United States, Merrick Garland, but politics. He said:

This kind of scheme to nullify the Constitution of the United States is one that all Americans, whatever their politics or party, should fear.

 

If it prevails, if may become a model for action in other areas, by other states and with respect to other constitutional rights and judicial precedents.

That’s already happening. The Texas Heartbeat Law follows similar “heartbeat laws” passed by more than a dozen states. But it is the first one that liberal courts haven’t been able to quash.

By October 1 Texas’ Heartbeat Law will have been in effect for a month. That means it is already saving the lives of unborn children who otherwise would have been murdered in their mothers’ wombs. As the Texas Tribune noted, Texas abortion clinics “stopped offering abortions that were still allowed under the law for fear of being sued.”

However the judge rules, there is sure to be an appeal to the Supreme Court. As The New American noted, “Roe didn’t uncover a right of a woman to kill her unborn child. The court created the right out of whole cloth — and political ideology.”

That is the dirty little secret behind Roe v. Wade and its sister case decided years later, Planned Parenthood v. Casey: The emperor has no clothes. There is no such “right” anywhere in the Constitution. As one of abortion’s most liberal supporters, legal scholar Laurence Tribe, noted: “One of the most curious things about Roe is that, behind its own verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgment on which [the decision] rests is nowhere to be found.”

There is an increasing chance that the entire effort to quash the Texas law before it goes national will backfire. The high court could take the appeal under review, and decide that it made a horrendous error in Roe back in 1973, and compounded it in Casey in 1992. The high court has overturned previous decisions more than 300 times. Those who believe that life, a gift from God, begins at conception, would celebrate such a reversal. It would be one more step towards that joyful day when all courts, state and federal, rule that abortion, at any time, is murder.

Prior to 1973, abortion was murder. It still is.

Latest Survey Reveals Women Now Nearly Half of all New Gun Buyers

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, September 16, 2021:  

According to the most recent 2021 National Firearms Survey, almost half of all new gun buyers in the last two and a half years have been women. There were 7.5 million brand new gun owners since January 2019, and 3.4 million of them were female. Among those women, more than a quarter of them were black.

The survey also noted that among those new gun owners 55 percent were white, 21 percent were black, and 19 percent were Hispanic.

A previous survey issued in July provided even more details about gun ownership in the United States. That survey found that nearly a third of all American adults owned at least one firearm. That translates into more than 81 million Americans who are armed. And that number keeps growing. In 2020, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, there were more than 21 million background checks completed on people purchasing firearms, up an astonishing 40 percent from the previous year.

That same survey revealed that more than half of those gun owners carry a firearm on their persons for self-defense purposes, with an estimated 21 million of them carrying concealed.

The survey further revealed that about a third of those gun owners have used a firearm to protect themselves or their property. It estimates “that guns are used defensively by firearms owners in approximately 1.67 million incidents each year.”

In sum, 58 percent of gun owners are male, 42 percent are female. And approximately a quarter of blacks own at least one firearm while 28 percent of Hispanics own firearms, nearly 20 percent of Asians own firearms, and 34 percent of whites own firearms.

Those new gun owners are taking their purchases seriously as nearly a quarter of them have subsequently taken at least one gun class, and many have become proficient in the handling of their firearms.

Much of this surge in private gun ownership may be ascribed to the breakdown of law and order by BLM and Antifa groups, the defunding of local police, and the threat of additional gun regulations emanating from the present administration.

This makes the job of turning the United States into a “gun-free zone” — necessary for those working to turn the country into a communist dictatorship — ever more difficult. There are an estimated 100 million U.S. households where a firearm is present, and the task of disarming them would be incomprehensibly difficult.

The reason? Whether each new gun owner realizes it or not, he or she is taking advantage of the freedom to own a firearm guaranteed by the Second Amendment. This peculiar, and vital, freedom is what distinguishes the U.S. from every other nation on the planet. And as long as that freedom is recognized, and enjoyed, it presents a nearly insurmountable stumbling block to those who would disarm the populace in preparation for their New World Order.

Nevertheless the war against the private ownership of firearms in America continues. Earlier this month William Malzahn — with the imposing title of Acting Deputy Director of Office of Conventional Arms Threat Reduction, Bureau of International Security & Nonproliferation at United States Department of State — told the 7th Conference of States Parties to the Arms Trade Treaty:

I have come from Washington, D.C., this week to take the floor on the agenda item Treaty Universalization to underscore the continuing commitment of the United States to responsible international trade in conventional arms … the Arms Trade Treaty is an important [tool] for promoting those controls internationally.

This treaty is the one that President Donald Trump “unsigned” at the National Rifle Association’s 2019 annual meeting.

As long as the present administration presses forward in its efforts to disarm the American people, the ownership of private firearms by those people is likely to continue and even accelerate, making the task of tyrants ever more difficult.

Democrat Strategist Declares His Party Will Suffer “Blowout Defeat” in 2022

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, September 15, 2021:  

Political analyst and consultant to A-list Democrats Douglas Schoen self-identifies as a Democrat and sees his party losing massively in November 2022. In The Hill he wrote:

The marked decline in support for President [sic] Biden and his administration nationally and in key states indicates that the Democratic Party could endure a blowout defeat in the 2022 midterm elections.

Comparing where Biden is with where Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were at the same time in their administrations “suggests,” wrote Schoen, “that Democrats could suffer even more substantial losses in 2022 than the party did in 1994 and 2010.”

In 1994, with Clinton’s disapproval rate at 42%, Democrats lost 52 House seats and eight Senate seats.

In 2010, with Obama’s disapproval rate at 41%, Democrats lost 64 House seats and six Senate seats.

According to the latest poll from Civiqs, taken from Biden’s inauguration in January through September 13 and capturing responses from more than 100,000 registered voters, Biden’s national disapproval rate is 50% and climbing.

Drilling down into the data from the Civiqs poll Schoen laments that in five key swing states – Georgia, Florida, Arizona, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania – registered voters disapprove of Biden’s job performance by ten full percentage points or more. In reliably Democratic Michigan and Wisconsin voters there disapprove of Biden’s performance by margins of 7 and 8 points, respectively.

He concludes that “the current outlook for Democrats is grim – and it could be even worse,” adding:

If the Biden administration continues to push unnecessarily big government spending initiatives and tax increases, along with weak immigration policies and an incoherent foreign policy strategy, Democrats could suffer the most substantial midterm loss of any party in recent history.

Schoen’s analysis confirms what The New American wrote a week ago, that Biden’s falling approval numbers are putting Congress into play for Republicans next November.

But The New American asked: will it make any difference? Will those campaigning on Trump’s platform of “Make America Great Again” keep their promises and begin the long, arduous path to restoring the Republic?

C. Mitchell Shaw, writing for The New American magazine last March, answered those questions:

Too many Americans seem to believe that the right president will solve our country’s problems. The past four years — with a good, but imperfect, president who fought to “Make America Great Again” by resisting the Deep State and putting America first — shows that that is short-term thinking.

 

After four years of doing what he did, the establishment moved heaven and earth to burn him to the ground (as has now been confirmed by a Time magazine article, which tells about the actions of some of those involved), steal the election from him, and impeach him a second time under bogus charges. And the establishment succeeded in all of that.

 

The takeaway is this: Patriotic Americans need to stop looking for a hero to save America and be the heroes that save her. Real resistance requires an informed electorate.

Shaw, a member of The John Birch Society, writing for The New American which is sponsored by The John Birch Society, declared that “without the effective work of the JBS over past decades, full-blown, dystopian tyranny would already cover the globe.”

It will take more than just showing up once every couple of years to vote to “throw the rascals out” and replace them with other rascals making false promises. The awakening of the electorate as measured by numerous polls is heartening. The real work of restoring the republic begins, not ends, after the election by making sure the new crop of representatives keeps their promises and their oaths of office to preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States. Only citizens who understand their history and their present peril will be up to the job.

Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt Holds Ceremonial Bill Signing to Celebrate Nine Pro-life Bills

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, September 13, 2021: 

Last Thursday, 10 days after Texas’ “heartbeat law” became effective on September 1, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt held a ceremonial bill signing for one just like it, HB 2441, as well as eight other pro-life bills. All nine bills were signed into law earlier in the year. HB 2441, which prohibits abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, becomes effective on November 1, 2021.

The other pro-life bills that were part of last week’s ceremonial bill signing, which served to underscore Oklahoma’s enactment of the bills and their importance, included:

• SB 918, which would restore Oklahoma’s prohibition of abortion if/when Roe v. Wade is overturned by the Supreme Court and the power to regulate it is properly returned to the states;

• HB 1102, which declares that the performance of an abortion represents “unprofessional conduct” and results in the abortion provider’s medical license being suspended for at least one year;

• HB 1904, which requires abortionists to be board certified in obstetrics and gynecology;

• SB 778 and SB 779, which safeguard women and girls from dangerous chemical abortion drugs;

• SB 960, which extends the time relinquished children can be given to rescuers from seven to 30 days;

• SB 647, – “Lily’s Law” – which requires birthing centers to keep a written policy to allow for the family to direct the disposition of the remains of a child who was stillborn or miscarried; and

• SB 584, which prohibits fetal trafficking.

 

During the ceremony Stitt said:

 

I promised Oklahomans I would sign every piece of pro-life legislation that came across my desk, and I am proud to keep that promise.

As a father of six, it’s an honor to be the most pro-life governor in the country, and I will always step up to protect the lives of unborn children.

 

That same day Governor Stitt pushed back against the uncivil and tyrannical commands from the Oval Office over vax mandates. Declared the President Joe Biden: “It they’ll not help — if these governors won’t help us beat the pandemic, I’ll use my power as President to get them out of the way.”

Responded Stitt:

It is not the [federal] government’s role to dictate to private businesses what to do.

 

Once again President [sic] Biden is demonstrating his complete disregard for individual freedoms and states’ rights.

 

As long as I’m governor, there will be no government vaccine mandates in Oklahoma.

 

My administration will continue to defend Oklahoma values and fight back against the Biden administration’s federal overreach.

The governor was backed up by his state’s Attorney General John O’Connor:

We respect the right of Oklahoma businesses and individuals to make healthcare decisions for themselves and their families.

 

My office will vigorously oppos any attempt by the federal government to mandate vaccines.

 

We are preparing litigation to stand up for our rights and defend the rule of law against the overreach of the federal government.

Oklahoma House Speaker Charles McCall added,

President [sic] Biden is about to see the U.S. Constitution still matters in Oklahoma.

 

This isn’t the only unconstitutional Biden administration action Oklahoma needs to challenge. Our country is a republic … and the president does not have the constitutional authority to issue these types of edicts.

The passage of these laws and the statements against federal overreach didn’t happen in a vacuum, but are the result of decades of grassroots education and action by Oklahomans. Through the educational campaigns of members of The John Birch Society (the society has a strong presence in Oklahoma) and other groups, informed pressure resulted in strengthening the state’s pro-life resolve.

The celebration of life at the ceremonial bill signing included statements such as these:

“Governor Stitt has kept his promise to sign every piece of pro-life legislation that reaches his desk. He is at the forefront of nationwide momentum to challenge the status quo and modernize our extreme abortion laws. Across the nation, pro-life governors are taking bold action to ensure that state laws reflect the will of their constituents and the clear science showing humanity of unborn children.” — Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser

 

“All life is precious and a gift from God.  The pro-life measures we passed this year seek to ensure each life is protected at every single stage in Oklahoma.  My life and my public service will continue to be dedicated to making sure that we recognize the dignity of every human being.  Thank you to my colleagues who shepherded these important bills through the process and to the Governor for standing strong for life.” — Senate President Pro Tempore Greg Treat (R-Oklahoma City)

 

“The Oklahoma House will continue passing strong pro-life legislation for as long as it is necessary to protect the unborn in this country. Securing life who cannot secure it themselves is a solemn duty expected by Oklahomans of the conservatives they have elected. We take that duty seriously and uphold it at every turn.” — Speaker of the House Rep. Charles McCall (R)

 

I’m grateful to the governor and the majority of my fellow legislators for helping to ensure that the day Roe v. Wade is overturned by the Supreme Court, Oklahoma statutes regulating abortions likewise will be reversed. This will end the practice of abortion in our state and protect our precious, innocent children. — House Majority Floor Leader Rep. Jon Echols (R)

 

There is no issue more critical in our time than the defense of the lives of innocent unborn babies. The greatest crime of our nation has been the murder of 60 million unborn babies. House bill 1102 takes the approach of removing the license of any physician who performs an abortion. We thank the Lord for the team of people that worked together to help make this happen, and the multitudes who have prayed for years about this. [Emphasis added.] We also thank the Lord for answered prayer. To God be the glory! — Representative Jim Olsen (R)

 

I consider all lives to be sacred, no matter the age. However, I am honored to be able to stand up for the lives that cannot advocate for themselves. It has been a privilege to work with faith leaders from around the state (emphasis added) on HB2441 the “Heartbeat Bill”, which protects the life of the unborn, by making it clear, that a heartbeat is the indicator of life, and we are called to protect life, no matter what. — Representative Todd Russ (R)

As the war on life and liberty intensifies, it will take educated citizens’ actions such as those being taken in Oklahoma to reverse the tide and excise the cancer of collectivism being injected (literally and figuratively) from the body politic.

Biden’s Falling Approval Numbers Are Putting Congress Into Play for Republicans in 2022

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, September 8, 2021: 

Remington Research Group, a reputable GOP-aligned polling outfit with a “B” rating from FiveThirtyEight, discovered in its latest survey of seven “middle-of-the-road” congressional districts that “the left’s ‘Build Back Better’ agenda is toxic.” This downturn in approval will likely cost the seven Democrats presently representing those districts their jobs next November.

In every district polled, Joe Biden’s approval rating is underwater, averaging 46%. When matched against a “generic” Republican candidate, they are expected to lose by an average of six percentage points.

This is a microcosm of Biden’s approval rating nationally. The eight most recent polls recorded at RealClear Politics show Biden’s approval between 43 and 47 percent, the lowest of his administration so far. FiveThirtyEight’s poll averages similarly have his deficit at 4.1 points as of Sept. 8.

Most vulnerable is the razor-thin eight-seat Democrat majority in the House of Representatives. A loss of just five seats next November would turn control back to the Republicans.

According to Sean Trende, a political analyst at RealClear Politics, the party in power typically loses around 30 seats in the House and two to four seats in the Senate. But, says Trende, “the most important predictor of a party’s performance in a midterm is the president’s job approval rating … abysmal elections for parties in power have occurred when the president was generally unpopular.”

As Biden’s approval rating continues to drop, the likelihood of losses for Democrats in the midterms increases. At 50% approval, Democrats in the Senate would expect to break even. “At 46%,” wrote Trende, “Democrats … only retain control about four percent of the time.”

In the House, Biden’s continuing dismal performance would, per Trende, cost the Democrats upwards of 25 seats. “If he declines much further, however, it could turn into an ugly rout.”

In the Senate, there are five Republican senators with targets on their backs: Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.). They painted those targets themselves either by voting to impeach President Trump or supporting the “bipartisan” infrastructure spending bill. Each is taking the easy way out by retiring.

The vacuum in each case is being filled by what Politico calls “Trump acolytes”: those “who have made loyalty to the former president a cornerstone of their campaigns.” For example, former Republican Missouri state Senator John Lamping said that Senator Roy Blunt “is a super-super insider and that’s not what the base wants. No one is running to be a Roy Blunt senator. They’re running to be a Donald Trump senator.”

Three other Republican senators are in jeopardy as well: John Thune (R-S.D.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). They have not yet formally announced their candidacies and could be replaced by Trump “acolytes,” turning the Senate an even darker red.

Biden’s approval ratings are dropping due to his Afghanistan withdrawal disaster, a southern border inundated with illegal immigration, and inflation. Add to that rampant crime in big cities and the economy struggling to find workers, and it’s not at all difficult to see why Biden’s numbers are flagging.

The GOP has other advantages going into the November 2022 midterms: the party controls the redistricting process for 187 House seats, with the Democrats controlling just 75. Biden is unlikely to be an asset on the campaign trail, and his hapless Vice President Kamala Harris is too toxic to put in front of a microphone.

Assuming the Republicans regain control of both houses of Congress in 2022, the next questions must be: will it make any difference? Will those campaigning on the Trump platform of “Make America Great Again” keep their promises and begin the long, arduous path to restoring the Republic? Will they hew to their oaths of office to support and defend the Constitution? Will they make serious efforts to reverse the damage being done by the Democrats? Or will they become invisible in the freedom fight currently raging across the land?

That’s the role of the John Birch Society: creating an informed electorate who will not only select statesmen who promise to keep their oaths but hold them to those promises when they fall away. For more information on how to get involved in the freedom fight, go to JBS.org.

California, LA County Pay $800K to Grace Community Church Over COVID Lawsuit

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, September 2, 2021:  

The statement from Los Angeles County’s attorneys announcing its settlement with Pastor John MacArthur’s Grace Community Church said nothing about the underlying issues. It only said it was withdrawing from the field of battle and paying MacArthur’s church $800,000 to please go away:

After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled [in February] that some public health safety measures could not apply to houses of worship, resolving this litigation is the responsible and appropriate thing to do.

When elders of Grace decided in July 2020 to reopen their church for indoor worship, they knew it would rouse the ire of LA County health officials who had banned such worship, using COVID as cover for their illegal and unconstitutional mandates. They prepared for the battle, issuing a statement that said:

While civil government is invested with divine authority to rule the state [no authority exists which] grants civic rulers jurisdiction over the church.

 

God has established three institutions within human society: the family, the state, and the church.

 

Each institution has a sphere of authority with jurisdictional limits that must be respected….

 

Government is specifically tasked with the oversight and protection of civic peace and well-being within the boundaries or a nation….

 

God has not granted civic rules authority oved the doctrine, practice, or polity of the Church….

 

Government officials have no right to interfere in ecclesiastical matters in a way that undermines or disregards the God-given authority of pastors and elders.

Those government officials demanded under penalty of fines and imprisonment that church officials stop indoor services immediately.

The church ignored the demands and instead filed suit against those officials, claiming they were violating the church’s rights to free speech and free exercise of religion under the First Amendment. The church also claimed it was being discriminated against, as those mandates weren’t being applied equally to secular institutions and organizations.

Sure enough, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge ruled in favor of those government officials. The church refused to follow that ruling, and in November, the county went to court.

The church’s attorneys made the persuasive case to Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff that the lower court’s ruling couldn’t be enforced until the constitutionality of those mandates had been decided.

And there matters stood until February, when the Supreme Court ruled that most (not all) of those mandates were indeed unconstitutional.

Jenna Ellis, the lead attorney helping Pastor MacArthur’s church fight against the state, rejoiced:

We are very pleased to see Pastor MacArthur and Grace Community Church’s First Amendment protections fully vindicated in this case.

 

It has been a hard-fought battle to preserve religious liberty and we hope that this result will encourage Californians, and all Americans, to continue to stand firm that church is essential.

Lacking further evidence in this case, Ellis’ rejoicing appears to be premature. There was no ruling by a court that the state’s officials were out of bounds constitutionally. There was no admission of guilt by those officials. There appears to be nothing in the record that resolves the conflict between church and state.

Both parties, given the ruling by the Supreme Court (half-hearted that it was), decided to withdraw from the contest, leaving the underlying issue unresolved.

Republicans’ Trust in Establishment Media Cut in Half in Five Years

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, August 31, 2021:  

Barely a third of Republicans polled by Pew Research Center in June said that they trust the establishment media (ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, CNN, Fox News, etc.) to provide them with unbiased, “fair and balanced” news. Five years ago, more than two thirds of them trusted the media as their primary news source.

Overall, fewer than three out of five Americans of all political persuasions have “some trust” in the mainstream media, down from 65 percent in 2016. There’s even been some substantial credibility slippage among Democrats as well, according to Pew. “This is,” wrote the group, “the smallest share over the past five years.”

Not surprisingly, Pew also reported that the percentage of those who don’t trust the media “at all” jumped from six percent five years ago to 14 percent currently.

This confirms what Statista.com reported on Monday: “The credibility of almost all the news media sources in [our] ranking was considerably lower in 2021 than in previous years, highlighting consumers’ growing concerns about reliability, bias, and trustworthiness in the news business.”

The media’s credibility has been slipping for years. In 2019, for example, ABC enjoyed a rating of 63 percent among those polled. Today it’s at 58 percent.

Similar declines are reported at CBS and NBC. The New York Times’ credibility has slipped from 53 percent two years ago to 50 percent at present, along with CNN. Fox News has slipped from 52 percent to 44 percent over the same period, while Huffington Post suffered the most grievous drop, from just 38 percent two years ago to 31 percent now.

Hugh Hewitt, a radio talk show host, law professor, and conservative political commentator, writes from inside the establishment media. He is a regular on NBC News and MSNBC and writes frequently for the Washington Post.

In May he declared in an article published by the Post that “the media has a big credibility problem”, adding, “Media bias has grown worse in recent years. From story selection to story framing, bias leaps off the page or screen and cannot be escaped. The hazard of this vast tilt left is the belief among millions — perhaps a majority — of Americans that [the] media cannot be trusted.”

That leaves those searching for reliable sources for their news in a quandary: where to go? Many are turning to The Epoch Times, which is enjoying a surge in popularity. So are Newsmax, OneAmerica News, and American Thinker.

The New American magazine and its website, TheNewAmerican.com, makes every effort to “tell the story behind the story.”

Missing from the conservation about media bias is the long and deep influence of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Established in 1921 as a private organization whose purpose was to “awaken America to its worldwide responsibilities,” it has insinuated itself into every major part of the culture since its founding.

Richard Harwood, a former Washington Post senior editor, described the CFR as “the nearest thing we have to a ruling establishment in the United States”, adding that many members have enormous influence in the media:

The membership of these journalists in the Council, however they may think of themselves, is an acknowledgment of their active and important role in public affairs and of their ascension into the American ruling class.

 

They do not merely analyze and interpret foreign policy for the United States; they help make it. They are part of that establishment … sharing most of its values and world views.

Media personalities constitute only about five percent of the overall CFR network. Key members of the organization have included:

Several US Presidents and Vice Presidents of both parties;

 

Almost all Secretaries of State, Defense, and the Treasury;

 

Many high-ranking commanders of the U.S. military and NATO;

 

Some of the most influential Members of Congress (notably in foreign and security policy);

 

Almost all National Security Advisors, CIA Directors, Ambassadors to the U.N., Chairs of the Federal Reserve, Presidents of the World Bank, and Directors of the National Economic Council;

 

Many prominent academics, especially in key fields such as Economics and Political Science; and

 

Many top executives of Wall Street, policy think tanks, universities, and NGOs.

CFR insiders, including political journalist Richard Rovere, have revealed the influence of the CFR across the political, economic, educational, and cultural spectrum:

The directors of the CFR make up a sort of Presidium for that part of the Establishment that guides our destiny as a nation. [I]t rarely fails to get one of its members, or at least one of its allies, into the White House. In fact, it generally is able to see to it that both nominees are men acceptable to it.

This is what makes The New American unique: it reveals “the rest of the story” — that is, little happens domestically or internationally (e.g., Afghanistan) without CFR influence and direction.

In the instant case Pew Research merely reveals the awakening of the American consumer to the extensive bias toward collectivism but without explaining that it is a deliberate part of an agenda to lessen America’s influence in the world, preparing it for its role as a part of a world run by CFR elites and its friends in the media, the culture, government, education, and in Hollywood.

Biden, Harris to Campaign for Newsom; Death Knell for California Governor?

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, August 26, 2021:  

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki on Wednesday confirmed that Joe Biden will travel to California in the near future to campaign for Governor Gavin Newsom. The governor is locked in a tight contest to keep his job thanks to a recall election to be held on September 14.

The announcement comes just two days before Kamala Harris is due to arrive in the Bay Area to campaign for the besieged governor.

Pressure to remove the governor before the end of his term has been steadily building for months, thanks partly to his policies on immigration and his prolonged restrictions on the state’s economy using the COVID-19 pandemic as cover. Hundreds of businesses have failed as a result.

But Newsom hasn’t helped his cause with his outrageous hypocrisy over those restrictions, which appear to apply to everyone except himself. Last November the governor was caught attending a maskless dinner with 11 others at an exclusive restaurant after telling Californians to avoid gatherings of more than three households.

It didn’t help that he is sending his children to a private school while most public-school students were forced to stay home under his mandates.

It’s unclear just how Biden and Harris will “help” Newsom keep his office. Biden’s credibility has been badly damaged by the rolling catastrophe in Afghanistan and his policies that have allowed illegals to pour across the U.S. southern border, including California’s.

And Harris suffers from such low public esteem that she ended her campaign for president even before the first primary. In recent polling, she rates just ahead of Wyoming Representative Liz Cheney in popularity.

Newsom’s leading contender in the recall effort — popular conservative radio show host Larry Elder — is rejoicing at the prospect of having both Democrat politicos coming to help salvage Newsom. In an exclusive interview with Breitbart, Elder said,

I’ll believe it when I see Joe Biden come here. I’m not sure he’s going to.

 

I understand he’s supposedly going to come here to campaign on behalf of Gavin Newsom. His popularity now is in the low forties — I think I saw 41%.

 

Most Americans don’t even believe he’s home — that somebody else is in charge. So it’s going to backfire.

 

But let him bring it in. Let him have him come in, and try to defend Gavin Newsom’s record on crime, and on homelessness, and on the outrageous cost of living, and on the way he ignored science and shut down the state to the point where a third of small businesses are gone forever.

 

Let Joe Biden make that case for him. I want him to come here. Let him do it….

 

Out of all the major political figures in America, Gavin Newsom’s one of the few who’s praised the way he handled the Afghan crisis. And it has been a disaster after a disaster, one of the worst foreign policy mistakes America has ever made.

 

So if Joe Biden wants to come here and lend his presence to California, I welcome that opportunity. But I don’t believe he’s going to do it.

At the moment, Elder leads the pack of some 46 candidates running for governor in the event that Californians boot Newsom in September. His lead ensures that he would replace Newsom if a majority of voters say “yes” to the ballot question: “Shall GAVIN NEWSOM be recalled (removed) from the office of Governor?” on September 14.

Angry and Organized Voters Set to Recall California Governor Gavin Newsom

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, August 25, 2021:  

With just 24 percent of California’s voters registered as Republicans, one would assume that Governor Gavin Newsom will easily survive the recall election set for September 14.

Maybe not.

Nearly eight out of 10 of those Republicans are galvanized into action, while Democrats are remaining complacent. After all, California is the bluest of blue states. Why worry?

Katie Merrill, a Berkeley-based Democrat strategist, is worried: “I think, right now, if the election were held today, we’d probably have [just] a 30 percent turnout. That’s problematic.” She added, “Every poll has shown that the voters that are most engaged in the race right now are the ones who want to recall Gavin Newsom.”

Newsom’s shutdown of the state, bankrupting millions of small businesses, is just one reason why it’s likely that it will only take a third of those voting in the recall election to determine his future. It’s a case of organization versus complacency.

Said pollster Adam Probolsky, “It may sound silly to some people, but there is probably a large portion of the electorate that is quite uninterested in this election. They’ve heard something about a recall, something about Republicans being angry. But they’re not really engaged at all.”

It’s also a case of organization. Those angry voters — Republican, Democrat and Independent — have for months focused on a single theme: Remove Newsom from office. That is why more than 1.7 million of them were able to put Newsom’s future on the ballot — far more than the number needed.

Panic has set in, and the attacks on Newsom’s leading Republican opponent, talk-show host Larry Elder, have ramped up.

The incumbent governor has warned:

[Elder is] to the right of Donald Trump. To the right of Donald Trump. That’s what’s at stake in this election and don’t think for a second you can’t do damage in that role.

 

Think about the judges he could appoint. Who would he have appointed to replace Kamala Harris in the Senate? How would that impact the trajectory of this country?

 

What would that mean for the future of the Democratic Party in our efforts to keep the House of Representatives?

Newsom’s message is simple: “Just vote no. You don’t even have to touch the other part [of the ballot]. Don’t even touch it. Simple no. This is about the easiest ballot you ever had to fill out. Just vote no. No on the recall.”

So far his message isn’t getting through. A recent poll from SurveyUSA showed that 51 percent of likely voters would instead vote “yes” to remove him, while just 40 percent would keep him in office.

So, the establishment media has entered the fray. Los Angeles Times columnist Erika Smith wrote an article headlined, “Larry Elder is the Black face of white supremacy. You’ve been warned!”

In it she decries Elder’s facility for “cherry-picking” the facts he’s using to make the case for recall. One of those inconvenient facts was a rhetorical question asked by Elder:

Do we still have the phenomenon where a young Black man is eight times more likely to be killed by another Black man than a young white man?

Smith enlisted the help of BLM leader Melina Abdullah, who said that Elder “is a danger — a clear and present danger,” adding,

Anytime you put a Black face on white supremacy, which is what Larry Elder is, there are people who will utilize that as an opportunity to deny white supremacy….

 

But everything he’s pushing, everything that he stands for, he is advancing white supremacy.

Black Lives Matter (BLM) is the Marxist group of street thugs working in conjunction with the mainstream media to change America’s culture from individual responsibility under law to rampant mobocracy. From there it’s a short step to a dictatorship to be installed when the violence exceeds local efforts to quell it.

The Sacramento Bee has joined the chorus of Elder naysayers. Quoting from his writings dating back 20 years ago the Bee claims they “make him wholly unfit to be California’s governor. Elder must drop out of the race immediately.”

Those attacks aren’t getting traction, according to Dan Walters. Writing for Cal Matters, he said they “are making an Elder governorship more likely.… If Newsom, the media and [other liberals] are ganging up on Elder, perhaps he’s just the man to lead the revolt against the political status quo.”

What’s causing Democrat panic is this: In a state with nearly 40 million people, fewer than two million of them have forced Newsom to face recall. They are small in number, but highly organized. A small, well-informed, and highly organized group of people can have an influence far beyond their numbers. That fact is being borne out in California.

In the same vein, this is the principle upon which The John Birch Society has operated since 1958, and explains why the influence of the JBS has never been greater as more and more concerned citizens are seeking ways to restore the Republic to its original intent as dreamed of by the Founders.

For more information, go to JBS.org.

Biden’s Approval Numbers Continue Slipping in Polls

This article was published by TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, August 23, 2021:  

The results of three separate polls taken last week show the public’s approval rating of Joe Biden continuing to fall. In at least one poll, the fall is astounding.

Hart Research Associates asked 1,000 adults last Sunday through last Tuesday, “In general, do you approve or disapprove of the job Joe Biden is doing as president?” Forty-nine percent approved, down from 53 percent in April. The percentage of those who disapproved leapt nine full percentage points, from 39 percent in April to 48 percent last week.

His approval rating was dragged down by the public’s perception of how poorly the economy is performing, and his disastrous botched withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan. The public’s disapproval of his handling of the economy jumped from 43 percent in April to 52 percent last week.

But the catastrophe in Kabul was key to Biden’s fall in the polls: Sixty percent of those polled by Hart disapproved of his handling of the situation in Afghanistan, compared to just 25 percent of those who approved.

CBS News Poll taken later last week was nothing short of astounding. When 2,142 adults were asked, “Which of these [traits] do you feel describe or do not describe Joe Biden’s actions as President so far?” they responded:

Unifying? Only 43% said yes

Effective? Only 47% said yes

Distracted? Only 49% said yes

Focused? Only 48% said yes

Incompetent? 44% said yes

When they were asked, “Do you approve or disapprove of the way Joe Biden is handling the removal of troops from Afghanistan?” 53 percent disapproved. Similar responses were recorded when asked about how Biden is handling “issues with Russia” and “issues with China.”

Further proof of the public’s disenchantment with the performance of the man sitting in the Oval Office came from Civiqs.com in its Poll Project USA. Since January 20, it has been asking registered voters how Biden is doing. Since May, his approval rating has dropped continuously and now shows just 42 percent of those voters approving, while 50 percent now disapprove.

On a state-by-state basis, Biden’s performance is even worse. Just seven of the 50 states — California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont — show voters giving Biden a 50 percent approval rating or higher. Thirty-seven states’ voters give Biden a failing grade, and Colorado — a former red state now turned blue — rated Biden even, with 46 percent approving to 46 percent disapproving.

Ronny Jackson, M.D., the former White House physician under both Presidents Obama and Trump and now a Republican representative from Texas, has been warning of Biden’s growing incompetency for months. In an interview with Fox News last week, he declared that it’s now time for Biden to leave the Oval Office:

We’re looking horrible right now on the world stage; this is an absolute national embarrassment. And instead of being out in front of this and talking about what’s going on, and what went wrong, and what the plan was, and what we’re going to do next, Biden’s just been in hiding again, as he always has.

 

Biden, once again, has failed us. He’s embarrassed us internationally. And, you know, honestly, it is time for him to leave.

 

I’ve been saying this for a long time. I’ve been saying that he’s not cognitively prepared to be our president. And this is just another example of his failure. And I think a lot of this is relevant to his cognitive ability.

 

But he’s created a national security disaster for this country right now. And it’s time for him to move on, and somebody else needs to do this job. He is not fit to be our commander-in-chief. It’s time for him to resign….

 

People have cut him slack because they know he’s got these cognitive issues, and he’s older…. There’s just too much liability with this man. They can’t cover for him anymore.

Vice President Kamala Harris isn’t doing any better than Biden in the polls. According to Hart Research, her ratings among voters have fallen as well. In January, just 41 percent of those polled rated her either “somewhat positive” or “very positive,” with an equal percentage viewing her as either “somewhat negative” or “very negative.”

Last week, just 37 percent of voters rate her “somewhat” or “very” positive, while her negative ratings jumped five points, to 46 percent.

Speaker of the House (third in line for the presidency under the Constitution) Nancy Pelosi fares equally poorly, with just 37 percent of voters rating her either “very positive” or “somewhat positive,” and her negatives coming in at 46 percent, up five points since January.

If Biden leaves, or is forced to vacate, the Oval Office, his replacement(s) don’t look any better. Voters seeking true leadership out of the swamp of collectivism will have to look elsewhere.

Newsom Continues to Lose Ground in Polling

This article appeared online at  TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, August 9, 2021:  

California Governor Gavin Newsom’s popularity continues its downward slide according to the latest poll from Survey USA/San Diego Union Tribune. Quizzing 1,100 Californians last week, it found that a majority now want to recall him, while only 40 percent want to keep him in office.

What is remarkable is that an Emerson College poll taken just two weeks earlier showed Californians saying that, despite his many faults, they wanted to keep him in office. In that poll, 48 percent said they supported Newsom, while 43 percent said they wanted him out. That is a staggering decline in just two weeks.

Newsom is fighting against the results of his own policies, some of which have just been ruled unconstitutional. On July 23, the Ninth Circuit Court ruled against Newsom by declaring that his order to prohibit private schools from holding in-person classes was unconstitutional.

His “get out of jail free” rulings for convicted felons and his unilateral declaration suspending the execution of murderers haven’t helped, either. According to Jane Holland of State Crime Watch, Newsom is directly responsible for the state’s “brand new wave of crime.”

Newsom has other baggage dragging down his campaign, such as California’s homelessness crisis, the lockdowns that have either shut down or dreadfully damaged 70 percent of the state’s small businesses, the wave of former residents fleeing the state’s mismanagement of wildfires and drought, high taxes and gasoline prices, the decline in quality of public schools, the rise in land and housing costs, and the spike in suicide rates and depression. Under his watch, California remains one of the most locked-down states in the union.

All of this is fodder for the Republican opponent most likely to win the recall vote on September 14: the “Sage from South Central,” author and talk-show host Larry Elder. Since his announcement that he was joining the fray in early July, Elder’s campaign has raised more than $4.5 million and continues to widen his advantage over his Republican rivals in the polls.

The first poll, taken just days after his announcement, showed him with a 10-percentage point advantage over his nearest rival. More recent polls show him with a 23-percentage point advantage.

Part of his momentum must be attributed to the Democrat Secretary of State Shirley Weber. She deliberately and intentionally kept him off the recall ballot, claiming the weakest of reasons that were shortly laughed out of court.

Now she is using something called the “Remote Accessible Ballots for Eligible Voters,” a method by which voters can download ballots “in the comfort of their own home,” mark them, sign them, and mail them back.

But, as Monica Showalter noted at American Thinker, “When the numbers are big enough, they can’t cheat.” With the recall election just a month away, and Elder’s commanding lead over his opponents while Newsom is losing ground, the response to the first question on the ballot — “Should Gavin Newsom be recalled as Governor?” — is increasingly likely to be bad news for Newsom. Then, voters will answer the second question — whom do you want to replace him? — with the increasing likelihood that it will be Elder.

Chip Roy: Biden Should Be Impeached Over Immigration Crisis

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, August 3, 2021:  

Representative Chip Roy (R-Texas) essentially gave 200,000 reasons why he believes President Joe Biden should be impeached and removed from office. After noting that more than 200,000 illegals were taken into custody in July, Roy told the Daily Wire:

Over the past several months President Biden and [DHS Secretary] Mayorkas have blatantly and consistently refused to do their constitutional duty to take care that the immigration laws be faithfully executed, as required by Article II [of the U.S. Constitution], endangering countless American and foreign lives in the process.

An average of 6,779 illegals crossing the southern border of the United States every day in July. That’s more than 200,000 for the month and, if left unchecked, would approach two and a half million for the year.

Chip Roy’s reasons for impeachment add to those outlined by Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) in her impeachment filing the day after Joe Biden entered the Oval Office:

President Joe Biden is unfit to hold the office of the presidency. His pattern of abuse of power as President Obama’s Vice President is lengthy and disturbing.

 

President Biden has demonstrated that he will do whatever it takes to bail out his son, Hunter, and line his family’s pockets with cash from corrupt foreign energy companies.

 

President Biden is even on tape admitting to a quid pro quo with the Ukrainian government threatening to withhold $1,000,000,000 in foreign aid if they did not do his bidding. President Biden residing in the White House is a threat to national security and he must be immediately impeached….

 

Joe Biden abused the power of the Office of the Vice President, enabling bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors, by allowing his son to influence the domestic policy of a foreign nation and accept various benefits — including financial compensation — from foreign nationals in exchange for certain favors.

After detailing Hunter’s efforts to sell his father’s influence to officials of foreign governments, Greene concluded in her articles of impeachment:

President Biden gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of government. Through blatant nepotism, he enabled his son to influence foreign policy and financially benefit as a result of his role as Vice President.

 

He supported his son engaging in collusion with Chinese Communist party-linked officials. He allowed his son to trade appointments with his father and other high-ranking administration officials in exchange for financial compensation. He permitted his son to take money from Russian oligarchs, including Elena Baturina, the wife of the former mayor of Moscow.

By enabling the flow of illegals to become a flood, some say Biden and his DHS secretary are threatening the very foundations of the Republic. This is the same Republic that Biden swore to uphold and defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Instead, he is allowing those enemies, both foreign and domestic, including his son Hunter, to run wild, without restraint.

The 200,000 who just entered the U.S. illegally last month merely add to the lengthening list of reasons why many say Biden should be impeached. Of course, since there is a Democrat majority in both houses of Congress, the possibility of this happening are basically zero.

Mike Lindell Pulls My Pillow Ads From Fox

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, July 30, 2021: 

Fox News declined to run an ad by My Pillow’s Mike Lindell promoting a cyber symposium on the November 2020 presidential election. In retaliation, on Thursday, Lindell pulled all of his ads promoting his My Pillow company from Fox News.

That decision by Fox News cost them $50 million, the amount Lindell spent last year promoting his company. In the eyes of many viewers, it also cost Fox News any remaining credibility as a conservative, dependable outlet for news the liberal mainstream media is unwilling to cover.

Fox News said Lindell’s decision was only a “pause,” while Lindell made it clear that he’s pulling his My Pillow ads “immediately and indefinitely.”

The symposium in South Dakota from August 10-13 is by invitation only, but will be live-streamed by Lindell’s own network, Frank. Lindell said the ad he planned to run on Fox News didn’t make the case for election fraud, but only alerted viewers to the 72-hour marathon attempting to expose voter fraud in the November 2020 presidential election.

This was more than Fox News could handle, as the ad challenged its — and the mainstream media’s — narrative that there was no fraud. It violated the diktat from on high: See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, and let no one question the evil.

There is plenty of evidence of election fraud for those with eyes to see. One hour and 36 minutes into Lindell’s “Absolute Proof” video production one can see evidence of Chinese intervention into the election. For additional support, Peter Navarro has narrated a three-part series, The Navarro Report, that provides additional evidence that the November election was stolen from Donald Trump.

So confident is Lindell about his claims that he is offering to his symposium attendees $5 million if anyone in the audience can prove him wrong. He will reveal the “packet captures” from the November election, which he says will show deliberate and intentional Chinese intervention into election computers in nearly all of the more than 3,000 counties in the United States that conducted the election.

On his Frank website, Lindell wrote:

Despite the mockery [of the mainstream media], it doesn’t hide this simple truth. Regardless of political affiliation, a corrupt election system is disastrous for all of us.

 

That is why everyone should be fighting to find out the truth.

 

And this 72-hour event has been put together to do just that. Our voting system should not be second-guessed, and when it is, Americans need to stand up.

AAPS Pushes Back Against AMA’s “Demand” that Everyone Get Vaccinated

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, July 29, 2021: 

Days after the American Medical Association (AMA) issued its “Joint Statement in Support of COVID-19 Mandates for All Workers in Health and Long-Term Care,” the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) issued a rebuttal: Those workers have “the right to decline.”

In its statement, the AMA listed some 58 healthcare organizations (from the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy to the Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses Society) that all signed on to the demand that all workers get the jab.

The AMA statement made it clear that no personal choice is to be considered. No religious exemptions are to be allowed. Everyone — everyone — in the healthcare industry must get vaccinated:

Our health care organizations and societies advocate that all health care and long-term care employers require their workers to receive the COVID-19 vaccine….

 

All health care workers should get vaccinated….

 

Many health care and long-term care organizations already require vaccinations for influenza, hepatitis B, and pertussis….

 

We stand with the growing number of experts and institutions that support the requirement for universal vaccination of health workers….

 

The health care community leads the way in requiring vaccines for our employees….

The statement acknowledged that some remain unconvinced: “We recognize the historical mistrust of health care institutions, including many in our own health care workforce.”

One of which includes the AAPS, which responded to the AMA:

[We] declare that all human beings have the right to liberty, which they do not forfeit when they serve the sick or the disabled.

 

The ethical commitment to protect others does not require workers to surrender their bodily integrity and self-determination and accept “the” intervention dictated by a governmental or quasi-governmental authority.

Regarding the vaccination itself, the AAPS said that merely “achieving a premature stamp of approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) — premature because studies are not scheduled to be complete until the end of 2022 — does not confer safety or effectiveness. FDA-approved products have frequently been withdrawn in the past.”

As a result, “long-term effects of these novel, genetically engineered products cannot possibly be known at this point” in time. These include “autoimmune disorders, antibody-enhanced disease, infertility, cancer, or birth defects.”

The AAPS statement added:

The benefit to the public … is purely hypothetical.… Vaccinated persons can still infect others….

 

[We favor] insistence on fully informed, truly voluntary consent for all medical interventions.

Said the AAPS: “Workers are being conscripted into a mass experiment, one which would not be approved [for these reasons]:

No consent;

 

No disclosure of the experimenters’ conflicts of interest;

 

No control group;

 

No follow-up of subjects for COVID status, immune parameters, or adverse effects;

 

No provision for medical care of the subjects; and

 

No criteria for stopping the experiment if subjects are being harmed.

There is prophylactic and proactive early treatment, which is generally not being provided by the medical establishment. AAPS has produced a guide for home-based care: “A Guide to Home-Based COVID Treatment – Step-by-Step Doctors’ Plan That Could Save Your Life.” The guide provides detailed instructions for the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCL) or ivermectin, along with zinc sulfate and supplemental vitamin D.

Jane Orient, M.D., executive director of AAPS, asked whom the medical profession serves: the state, or their patients?

That is the question we will increasingly face as government forces its power into every nook and cranny of our professional lives.

 

I once belonged to all the standard societies — my specialty, my state and local medical society and — dare I admit this? — even the AMA.

 

But I discovered that none of these societies stood on the principle I hold dear: individual liberty, personal responsibility, limited government, and the ability to freely practice medicine according to time honored Hippocratic principles.

 

The AAPS has a record of exposing the lies, canards, and frauds being perpetrated by establishment medicine. For example, the AMA recently claimed that 96 percent of all doctors are vaccinated. The AAPS uncovered the fact that the AMA only quizzed 301 of its members and so it decided to conduct a survey of its own.

Wrote Orient:

The AAPS decided to check out the AMA’s 96 percent claim….

 

It turns out that the AMA’s 300 survey respondents were not inclusive of all doctors. In [our] survey, nearly 60% of some 700 respondents said they were not fully vaccinated.

 

Of these, 80% said “I believe risk of shots outweighs risk of disease.”

The AAPS stands for the same principles as the John Birch Society, which has, and continues to, explore and expose the lies behind the COVID-19 scare.

Appeals Court: Colorado Can Both Compel and Prohibit Speech

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, July 28, 2021:  

A three-member panel of Colorado’s 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 on Monday that Lorie Smith, a Denver website developer, cannot refuse to create websites celebrating same-sex marriages. The panel also ruled that she cannot express her religious beliefs in explaining why she won’t.

Smith is being assisted by the public-interest law firm Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), and ADF’s Senior Counsel John Bursch, summed up the case:

The government should never force creative professionals to promote a message or cause with which they disagree. That is quintessential free speech and artistic freedom.

 

Colorado cake artist Jack Phillips has been harassed for years; Washington floral artist Barronelle Stutzman stands to lose nearly everything she owns; and now Lorie Smith is being told that she must speak views she opposes and can’t post about her beliefs on her own business website.

 

How many more creative professionals will have to suffer before they receive recognition of their constitutionally protected freedoms — the rights they have always had in this country? Lorie is happy to design websites for all people; she simply objects to being forced to pour her heart, imagination, and talents into messages that violate her conscience.

The dispute dates back to 2016, when Smith first filed suit claiming that Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) would, if enforced, violate her First Amendment-protected right to free speech and free exercise of religion. This is the same law that Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission used to harass Phillips — a case that went to the Supreme Court, which narrowly ruled in Phillips’ favor.

The court ruled on Monday that the commission could force Smith to create messages celebrating same-sex weddings, but issued a “gag” order preventing her from publishing her dissenting reasons on her business website, 303Creative.com. This is what she wanted to publish:

These same religious convictions that motivate me also prevent me from creating websites promoting and celebrating ideas or messages that violate my beliefs.

 

So I will not be able to create websites for same-sex marriages or any other marriage that is not between one man and one woman. Doing that would compromise my Christian witness and tell a story about marriage that contradicts God’s true story of marriage — the very story He is calling me to promote.

The two-judge majority on the panel put Colorado’s law ahead of the U.S. Constitution:

We agree with [Smith] that “the protection of minority viewpoints is not only essential to protecting free speech and self-governance but also good in and of itself.”

 

Yet, we must also consider the grave harms caused when public accommodations [such as Smith’s] discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation. Combatting such discrimination is … “essential” to our democratic ideals.

 

And we agree with [Smith] that a diversity of faiths and religious exercise … “enriches” our society. Yet, a faith that enriches society in one way might also damage society in another, particularly when that faith would exclude others from unique goods or services.

 

In short, [Smith’s] Free Speech and Free Exercise rights are, of course, compelling. But so too is Colorado’s interest in protecting its citizens from the harms of discrimination.

Chief Justice Timothy Tymkovich dissented, calling this ruling “remarkable” and “novel”:

The majority takes the remarkable — and novel — stance that the government may force Ms. Smith to produce messages that violate her conscience.… [It] concludes … that Colorado has a compelling interest in forcing Ms. Smith to speak a government-approved message against her religious beliefs.

 

No case has ever gone so far.

The majority’s ruling, wrote Tymkovich, ushers in “a brave new world”:

The Constitution is a shield against CADA’s discriminatory treatment of Ms. Smith’s sincerely held religious beliefs … [but] the majority ushers forth a brave new world when it acknowledges both speech and silence — yet finds this intrusion constitutionally permissible.

 

CADA [according to the panel’s ruling] forces Ms. Smith to violate her faith on pain of sanction both by prohibiting religious-based business practices and by penalizing her if she does speak out on these matters in ways Colorado finds “unwelcome” or “undesirable.”

ADF intends on filing an appeal to the Supreme Court. Wrote ADF’s Maureen Collins: “No one should be banished from the marketplace simply for living and working consistently with their religious beliefs. Not a cake artist. Not a floral artist. Not a web designer. That’s why ADF will appeal this decision to the U. S. Supreme Court on Lorie’s behalf.”

Conservative Republican Senators Urge SCOTUS to Overturn Roe v. Wade

This article was published at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, July 27, 2021:  

Republican Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri, Mike Lee of Utah, and Ted Cruz of Texas filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court on Monday urging the high court to overturn Roe v. Wade and its follow-up decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (which affirmed Roe). The trio made the case that the original decision was flawed and the follow-up decision just made things worse. The whole issue, said the senators, is best resolved by following the Constitution and returning the power to make legislation regarding abortion back to the states.

The senators wrote that the high court’s initial decision in Roe was “controversial and conceptually flawed from the outset.” The court used the term “viability” in determining when abortion may be allowed, a waffle term that may occur sometime during the 24th week of pregnancy.

In Casey, wrote the senators, the high court just made things worse by using the term “undue burden” on the mother. They called it “ambiguous,” “too subjective,” “unworkable and unpredictable.”

Instead of wading into political waters not specifically prescribed by the Constitution — “this status quo is untenable” they said — the court “engenders unpredictable consequences” as well as “usurping the constitutional prerogatives of the [states].”

This opportunity arose when the Supreme Court agreed back in April to take on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. In 2018, Mississippi passed a law banning abortions after 15 weeks of gestation. The Jackson Women’s Health Organization (JWHO) immediately sued, found an Obama-appointed judge to agree, and the law was blocked.

The brief filed by the Republican senators said that just because Roe is nearly 50 years old, and Casey 20 years old, doesn’t mean the issue was decided correctly:

Stare Decisis [to stand by things decided in the past] considerations may be important to the judicial process, but they are not absolute. Where prior precedents are demonstrably unworkable, it is appropriate for the Court to reconsider them.

The high court’s previous decisions are, wrote the senators, demonstrably unworkable:

A precedent can prove unworkable in several ways. A history of confusion in the lower courts, an unstable pattern of Supreme Court decisions, and a persistent lack of judicially manageable standards all suggest that a precedent is or has become unworkable.

For example, wrote the senators, consider the “undue burden” standard the court used in Casey to replace the “viability” standard in Roe:

Casey has forced the Court to distort other generally applicable standards that are themselves unworkable.

 

Casey does not represent long-settled doctrine, rests on a foundation of flawed judicial reasoning, and boasts no traditional reliance interests.

They concluded:

Stare Decisis is not an absolute shield that protects failed precedents from subsequent review….

 

As the Court has repeatedly explained over the course of many decades, decisions that have proven unworkable … are prime candidates for reversal.

 

This is particularly true where, as here, the underlying decision [Roe] is egregiously wrong.

The three conservative Republican senators are not alone in filing such briefs. One written by Jacob Weaver, a graduate of the University of Michigan School of Law, has gained the support of 22 pro-life groups and signatures from more than 300 lawmakers in 35 states.

Wrote Weaver: “The power to regulate abortion falls squarely into States’ police powers” just as it did for 150 years prior to the flawed decision in Roe.

He added: “We argue that [overturning Roe and Casey would] depoliticize the court and … return states to their rightful place in the constitutional scheme.”

Constitutional scholar and law professor Rob Natelson was more pointed:

Judicially, Roe v. Wade was … a “rogue decision,” because it violated accepted judicial standards. Courts normally respect precedent, but Roe reversed hundreds of years of Anglo-American law.… Roe effectively voided statutes in all 50 states. Roe converted democratic resolution into Supreme Court diktats….

 

Roe v. Wade pretends to be constitutional law, but it’s not. It’s an absurd ruling stemming from arrogant decision-making and misuse of history.

A core issue regarding Roe and Casey is the high court’s overreach in those decisions. As Walter Weber, senior legal counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), wrote:

One of the problems we face is that the Supreme Court has acted as if it is the Constitution [itself] — that whatever it says becomes part of the text [of the Constitution].

 

That is not what the Constitution says.… When the Supreme Court says we have a decision that we know is wrong but we are going to follow it anyway … what they are saying is that our rulings take a higher priority than the Constitution itself.

At bottom the issue is about the right to life. As former Chaplain Colonel Wes Smith noted:

If you end a life — that is killing. Whatever the justification is, it is killing.

 

We need to call it for what it is.

 

What the people who are pro-abortion [are calling for] is state sanctioned killing.

The high court will hear arguments in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in early October, with a ruling due next spring. If it overturns Roe and Casey in its ruling, it will change everything. It would signal the end of the abortion holocaust and take a huge step toward repairing the culture that has been so badly damaged by those decisions. While the millions of lives that have been lost since 1973 cannot be restored, the lives of millions more can be saved from state-sanctioned killing in the future.

Latest Poll Shows Newsom in Trouble Ahead of Recall Election

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, July 26, 2021:  

The latest Emerson College poll shows support for California Governor Gavin Newsom shrinking. Two months ago, voters — by double digit margins — wanted him to remain as their governor ahead of the upcoming recall vote in September. Now his support has shrunk to just a five-point margin.

In that poll, when voters were asked “to recall or keep Gov. Newsom,” 43 percent said to recall him while 48 percent said they’d keep him, with nine percent undecided.

It gets worse. When asked, “Regardless of the recall effort, would you vote to re-elect Gov. Newsom in 2022, or do you think it is time for someone new?” nearly six out of 10 said it was time for Newsom to go.

It gets even worse. When asked about how he is handling California’s horrendous homeless crisis, more than half rated him “poor.”

And still worse. When asked about how Newsom handled the COVID-19 pandemic, a third rated him “poor” and another 19 percent rated him “fair.” When asked about how he handled the wildfires, more than half rated his response as “poor” or “fair.”

A third rated his response to the current drought as “poor” and another quarter rated it only “fair.”

On Friday, the Ninth Circuit Court ruled against Newsom by declaring that his move to prohibit private schools from holding in-person classes was unconstitutional. “California’s forced closure of their private schools [violates] a right that has long been considered fundamental under the applicable state law: the right of parents to control their children’s education and to choose their children’s educational forum.”

The surge in crime that is directly related to Newsom’s “get out of jail free” rulings for convicted felons and his unilateral announcement suspending the execution of murderers isn’t helping, either. According to Jane Holland, writing for State Crime Watch, voters moving to recall Newsom “joined crime sufferers at the state Capitol on Tuesday to accuse the governor of being too lenient on lawbreakers [resulting in] the state’s … brand new wave of crime.”

Perhaps the death knell was rung when it was announced that Vice President Kamala Harris is supporting Newsom. Wrote Monica Showalter at American Thinker:

Harris is miserably unpopular … with voters, with polls showing that her ratings are underwater….

 

A normal pol in trouble gets a more popular pol to do some endorsing for him. Not Newsom. He chooses the least-liked politician in America, one who won’t do her job, either on the border or on voting rights, to vouch for him….

 

[Does it] sound like that will work?

Perhaps the best measure of Newsom’s unpopularity is this: to put a recall measure on the ballot, California required 600,000 signers on the petition. Newsom’s recall got 2.1 million. Add in job losses from business closures and wallet-draining taxes, and his prospects for survival in September are increasingly dim.

In that same poll voters were asked “which candidate would you vote for to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom?” Conservative author and radio show host Larry Elder, initially denied a position on the ballot, leapt into first place, at 16 percent, a full 10 points ahead of his nearest rivals. With 53% undecided, and Newsom’s popularity dropping, Elder could very well be Newsom’s replacement come September.

ABC News’ “One Nation Under Fire” Will Promote the Lie About Gun Violence in the U.S.

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, July 23, 2021: 

ABC News is launching another attack on gun rights, starting Sunday. Its project, called “One Nation Under Fire”, will join with ABC affiliates across the country as well as with Good Morning America and GMA3Variety, which made the announcement, breathlessly rejoiced that “various ABC-owned stations may also contribute their own reports on findings in their area of coverage.”

So, what will ABC News be using as its source to back up the attack? False data from the Gun Violence Archive, long considered to be biased in favor of more gun regulations and controls.

Said Pierre Thomas, ABC News’ chief justice correspondent, “We hope this is going to give us a better sense of who, what, where and why and that people will walk away from this with a much better sense of what’s happening.” That would include, of course, according to Variety, “solutions that might help reduce gun violence.”

Those watching to the end will no doubt have their opinions formed in the cauldron of canards, misinformation, and distortions served up by Gun Violence Archive.

For one example, according to the FBI, the media’s portrayal of “mass shootings” is more than 10 times higher than reality. The FBI reported that in 2016 there were 20 mass shootings, while GVA reported that there were 382. In 2017, the FBI reported 31, while GVA reported 346.

In 2018, the FBI reported 30 mass shootings, but GVA reported that there were 337. In 2019, the last year for which comparisons are available, the FBI reported there were 30 mass shootings, while the GVA reported that there were 417.

Why the great discrepancy? The GVA explains: “GVA uses a purely statistical threshold to define mass shooting based ONLY on the numeric value of 4 or more shot or killed, not including the shooter.” It adds:

GVA does not … exclude … victims based upon the circumstances in which they were shot.

That means the GVA includes any and all incidents, including gang- or drug-related shootings. It includes self-defense shootings, domestic disputes, shootings that include crossfire as a byproduct of another criminal act, and accidents (“actions that appeared not to have put other people in peril”).

The media, including ABC News, fails to mention the huge chasm between what the FBI reports and what GVA reports.

John Lott, president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, complained that the focus on guns, both by the media and the White House, ignores this basic fact: More than 90 percent of violent crimes in American do not involve firearms at all.

Lott explains that, in attempting to rein in violence, many other relevant factors are ignored: unrest over the George Floyd murder; the impact of the COVID restrictions, including mass layoffs and youths being kept out of schools; the early release of many convicts from prison; softening of bail rules that allow those accused of crimes to remain on the streets; police ordered to stand down; police departments having their funding reduced; and liberal prosecutors in many major urban areas refusing to prosecute violent criminals.

Lott also points out facts that are conveniently missing from the mainstream media’s (and likely ABC News’ “One Nation Under Fire”) including: More than half of all murders in the country take place in just 60 of the nation’s 3,140 counties, most of them occurring within a 10-block area. Gun violence there is overwhelmingly gang related.

For those intending to watch ABC News’ “One Nation Under Fire,” they would do well to remember that what is being presented is propaganda, not reality. It will be another part of the effort to separate gun owners from their firearms, turn local police departments into mere appendages of a national police force, and prepare the nation for the imposition of the left-wing Marxist agenda.

Michigan Legislators Repeal Law Governor Whitmer Abused During Pandemic

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, July 22, 2021:  

Members of the Michigan House of Representatives voted 60-48 on Wednesday to end permanently the odious and unconstitutional 76-year-old law that Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer used and abused to inflict untold damage on her citizens during and after the COVID pandemic.

The Senate had already passed the measure ending the law — the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act, or EPGA — which dates back to 1945. The Michigan Supreme Court had previously ruled that the law was unconstitutional:

The Governor did not possess the authority to exercise emergency powers under the EPGA because the act unlawfully delegates legislative power to the executive branch in violation of the Michigan Constitution.

Whitmer unconstitutionally implemented draconian measures on her citizenry, including applying criminal charges for operating a motorboat, visiting a secondary home, and banning stores from selling gardening supplies. Pushback was almost immediate, with lawsuits being filed and public protests arising over those measures.

Her mandates resulted in the creation of Unlock Michigan, a citizen campaign that forced the issue when it gathered more than 540,000 signatures on a petition to repeal the law. It wasn’t sufficient for the state’s high court to declare it unconstitutional; citizens wanted to repeal the law entirely to keep it from being resurrected some time in the future. As one state legislator said, “Bad ideas never die in Lansing, they just take naps. And this one could wake back up.”

Whitmer is powerless to veto the measure, as it was a citizen petition rather than a bill offered by the state legislature. Previous attempts to repeal the unconstitutional law were passed but then vetoed by Whitmer and her veto couldn’t be overridden. This way she is powerless to keep the law in place.

State Representative Andrew Fink, a Republican, said that the law “is discordant with the principles of American government, which are designed to prevent a single part of the government from acting unilaterally.”

Said House Speaker Jason Wentworth: “Hundreds of thousands of our families, friends and neighbors changed Michigan forever when they decided they had enough and stood up to make a difference.”

State Representative Matt Hall added:

Our action today helps reestablish needed balance between the executive and legislative branches during an emergency, something that has been so desperately missing during this pandemic.

This is the essence of the unique American experiment: that citizens are sovereign over their government, and not the other way around. The lesson from history is that governments, given the opportunity, will shortly become oppressive and destructive of citizens’ liberties. Unless bound down from such mischief by the chains of a constitution, governments will become tyrannical.

Another lesson from the victory in Michigan is that it is repeatable. California Governor Gavin Newsom is shortly to face a recall election by unhappy citizens over the same excessive use of government force, using COVID as the excuse.

Unlock Michigan is far from done. It shortly will begin circulating petitions to revise another law that Whitmer’s executive branch abused, which allowed the state health department to continue to promulgate and enforce Whitmer’s directives even after the Supreme Court ruled the 1945 law unconstitutional. If successful, the new petition will rein in the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, making its orders such as masking and capacity restrictions unenforceable after 28 days unless extended by the legislature.

Tyrants can have their wings clipped and their overreach reined in only if an aroused citizenry takes action. As Thomas Jefferson said, “they are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.”

Many of the articles on Light from the Right first appeared on either The New American or the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor.
Copyright © 2021 Bob Adelmann