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

Biden Unleashes Another Attack on the Second Amendment

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, March 15, 2023:  

While paying lip service to constitutional constraints, Joe Biden continued his administration’s attack on the Second Amendment. In his EO issued on Tuesday, he pushes the limits of power and he knows it: “It is the policy of my Administration,” said the White House press release, “[to] pursue every legally available … action to reduce gun violence.”

Even if his moves would provably reduce gun violence, they would still be unconstitutional under Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution: “The Executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America … he shall take care that the laws [passed by the legislative branch] be faithfully executed.” (Emphasis added.)

The occupant of the White House cannot, under the Constitution, create legislation. But that doesn’t deter Biden:

  1. He is asking the attorney general (AG), Merrick Garland, to “clarify [read: expand] the definition of who is engaged in the business of dealing in firearms, and thus required to become Federal firearms licensees (FFLs)….”;
  2. He is asking Garland and the secretaries of Defense(!), Homeland Security, Health and Human Services (including the surgeon general), and Education(!) to “encourage [read: expand] effective use of extreme risk protection orders (‘red flag’ laws)….”;
  3. He is asking his Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to determine “how gun manufacturers market firearms to minors [and] civilians, including through the use of military imagery”; and
  4. He is asking all major agencies in the executive branch to propose additional infringements of the Second Amendment “on how the Federal Government can better support the recovery, mental health, and other needs of survivors of gun violence, families of victims and survivors of gun violence, first responders to incidents of gun violence, and communities affected by gun violence.”

None of these moves will have any noticeable impact on “gun violence.” Expanding background checks wouldn’t have caught the 18-year-old shooter in Uvalde, Texas, because prior to the attack he had no criminal record and so wouldn’t have been flagged by the system.

The shooter who killed 11 people at a dance studio in Monterey Park, California, used a firearm that was banned in the state.

So-called red flag laws already infringe on the Fourth Amendment rights of citizens by denying them due process. And there’s precious little hard evidence to show that their enforcement has measurably reduced gun violence.

Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA), took Biden to task over his latest effort to infringe on precious rights enjoyed by law-abiding gun owners — Biden’s primary target:

Joe Biden is trying to sell this new gun control scheme the way he’s always done, by promising less violent crime and safer neighborhoods, but this plan isn’t going to accomplish either goal, and he knows it.


This sleight-of-hand maneuver simply makes it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to purchase firearms, while creating the impression gun dealers are crooks and the industry is unregulated.


This is just another chapter in Joe Biden’s war on gun rights. It is a diversion to the Democrat failure to keep Americans safe from violent criminals who are released without bail and are free to prey on us all.

He added:

So, Biden wants the Defense Department to buy more guns; he will blame crime on gun dealers and tell gun makers how to market their products. But he won’t tell the Justice Department to crack down on recidivist criminals; he’s not asking the courts to lock up armed felons; and he’s continuing to treat the Second Amendment as a second-class right.


Biden has always had an anti-gun agenda and on this important constitutional issue, he has never let the courts, public opinion or the Bill of Rights get in his way.

This is textbook Joe Biden. Talk tough, mak

e it appear he’s doing something about crime when he really isn’t, and ultimately just continue penalizing law-abiding gun owners for crimes they didn’t commit.


The only people who will be any safer are the criminals who ignore gun control laws already.

Do note that a careful reading of the entire EO issued Tuesday reveals nothing about a tactic that actually would reduce gun violence committed by violent criminals: pressure Soros-backed state and local attorneys general to enforce existing laws to keep convicted felons off the streets.

Biden’s true agenda is revealed once again. His target isn’t the criminals committing the violence, but the law-abiding gun owners whose ownership of firearms prevents the federal government from becoming totally tyrannical.

Second Amendment Foundation Doubles Down on Opposition to NY Gun Law

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, March 8, 2023:  

Ever since the Supreme Court ruled against New York in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen – aka “Bruen” – last summer, anti-gun, anti-freedom, anti-Second Amendment politicians in Albany have attempted to cast new and clever ways to work around that decision.

According to Gothamist, as of December 30, 2022, possession of firearms by private citizens in the Empire State is prohibited in:

• Federal, state, and local government buildings;

• Health care facilities (including behavioral health and chemical dependency);

• Libraries, public playgrounds, public parks and zoos;

• Childcare facilities;

• Nursery schools, preschools and summer camps;

• Programs for people with developmental disabilities, addiction and mental illness;

• Homeless shelters, domestic violence shelters and emergency shelters;

• Programs funded by the Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance;

• Schools and colleges;

• Public transportation, airports, train stations and bus terminals;

• Places with licenses for alcohol and cannabis consumption;

• Places of worship;

• Spaces where crowds gather for performances, entertainment, gaming or sports, including theaters, stadiums, conference centers and amusement parks;

• Polling places;

• Public sidewalks or other public areas that have been blocked off for a limited time or for special events;

• Protests; and

• Times Square.

And, just to make sure that law-abiding gun owners get the message, possession is also prohibited on private property unless the owner of that property has prominently posted permission to do so.

Back in September, Brett Christian, a law-abiding gun owner who also had a concealed-carry permit, filed suit, claiming that New York’s new law was unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge John L. Sinatra, a Trump appointee, shredded the attempt by lawyers for the state to justify the outrageous infringement of Christian’s rights in his decision:

[New York] argues that private property owners have always had the right to exclude others from their property and [therefore] may exclude those carrying concealed handguns. But that right has always been one belonging to the private property owner — not to the State….


Property owners indeed have the right to exclude. But the state may not unilaterally exercise that right and, thereby, interfere with the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens who seek to carry for self-defense outside of their own homes.

He issued a temporary restraining order (TRO). The state appealed. The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) entered with its plea to make the TRO permanent:

Following its loss in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen, , the State of New York enacted a sweeping series of restrictions on the right to carry firearms that together rid the right to carry of much of its practical utility.


At issue in this appeal is one particularly pernicious part of the State’s law — the State’s decree that it is criminal to carry firearms on every parcel of private property throughout the State, including private property open to the public, absent the express consent of the owner or lessee of the property.


Far from being “consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation,” New York’s Anti-Carry Default is unprecedented in the Nation’s 246-year history, and the district court properly ordered it preliminarily enjoined.

According to SAF, all private property (i.e., most of the state of New York) is now considered to be a “restricted location” under the new law, hence the name “Anti-Carry Default.”

Said Alan Gottlieb, the founder and executive VP of SAF, “The restriction is absurd. Brett Christian’s dilemma exemplifies the problem, and the very real threat of prosecution, all of our New York State members now face under this new law. Christian and others like him can’t even legally carry at a gas station or a hardware store.” Gottlieb continued,

The case for freedom from the latest attempt at infringing Second Amendment rights in New York was clearly spelled out in Christian’s November lawsuit:


The Supreme Court’s cases addressing the individual’s right to keep and bear arms — from Heller and McDonald to its June 2022 decision in Bruen – dictate that New York’s private property exclusion is equally unconstitutional.


Regulation in this area is permissible only if the government demonstrates that the current enactment is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of sufficiently analogous regulations.


… New York fails that test.

It cannot be reiterated too often: But for the appointment of constitutionalist judges such as Sinatra by Donald Trump, New York gun owners — nay, gun owners across the land — would see their precious Second Amendment rights abridged, denigrated, and denied. Thanks to Trump’s determination to nominate “originalists” to both the high court and inferior courts across the country, gun owners such as Brett Christian will retain their Second Amendment rights, even in the face of anti-gun, anti-freedom, anti-Second Amendment politicians infesting the legislatures of states such as New York.

For readers concerned about the other infringements in the new law as outlined above, nearly a dozen other lawsuits contesting them have already been filed, with similar outcomes expected.

Deputy DA under Soros-backed George Gascon Awarded $1.5 Million in Retaliation Lawsuit

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, March 7, 2023:  

Deputy District Attorney Shawn Randolph, a 35-year veteran prosecutor in Los Angeles County, was awarded $1.5 million in civil damages on Monday in her retaliation lawsuit against her boss, DA George Gascon.

This is the first case to go to trial, and there are nearly 20 other similar lawsuits pending. A previous retaliation lawsuit was settled out of court for more than a million dollars.

Even the far-left Los Angeles Times admitted that the award doesn’t bode well for Gascon, who has survived two recall efforts:

The verdict does not bode well for Gascón, who testified at the two-week trial and faces similar lawsuits from prosecutors who say they were reassigned or passed up for promotions after speaking out against his progressive policies.


A number of people are suing Gascón, including Victoria Adams, his former chief of staff, and Deputy Dist. Atty. Maria Ramirez, who testified against him at Randolph’s trial.

The other lawsuits pending from prosecutors claim that Gascon retaliated against them when they raised objections about his “reform” policies by disparaging them and demoting them to dead-end positions. The vice president of the union representing prosecutors, Eric Giddal, celebrated the award:

We all know what George Gascón thinks about public servants.


He has called lifelong public servants “internal terrorists.” And he treated them as such.


He silenced their voices, he engaged in petty and vindictive acts of retaliation, and rewarded political loyalty instead of competency and professionalism.


Far worse, he did so at the expense of public safety. Today, jurors spoke out against Gascón’s incompetence and condemned his illegal machinations.

Gascon’s former chief of staff Victoria Adams filed a retaliation lawsuit in December, claiming she was demoted for challenging the legality of a number of Gascon’s policies upon his taking office. They included eliminating cash bail, a ban on the prosecution of juveniles as adults, and sentencing “enhancements” for crimes involving a firearm or defendants with previous felony convictions. He also instituted a policy of not seeking the death penalty even for the most horrific crimes of violence.

The case of a man claiming to be a woman serves as just one example of how Gascon’s “reforms” turned out. Hannah (James) Tubbs sexually assaulted a 10-year-old-girl in a restroom when he was just under age 18. He wasn’t charged with the crime until a DNA match when he was 26. Gascon charged him as a juvenile and obtained just a two-year sentence in a “youth” facility for his crime.

John Lewin, another prosecutor who was demoted for challenging Gascon, celebrated the court’s decision to award damages to Randolph:

When George Gascon tried to implement policies that are not only illegal, but which have resulted in the deaths and victimization of an untold number of innocent citizens, Shawn risked her career and her reputation to do what was right.


George Gascon is derelict in his responsibility as District Attorney, and is a scourge to the community at large. This is the beginning of the end for him! His horrible reign of terror will not last past the next election!

George Santos Being Investigated by House Ethics Committee

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, March 3, 2023:  

When George Santos (R-N.Y.) is removed from the House of Representatives, he will be remembered for this one thing: the fact that his lies, falsehoods, crimes, and generally turning his entire resume into a complete fabrication will have set a new standard. It will exceed those of another George — George W. Plunkitt, a Tammany Hall pol who openly practiced what he called “honest graft” and is best known for bragging about it. Plunkitt defended his actions by declaring that while in office, “I seen my opportunities and I took ‘em.”

Plunkitt would be embarrassed by the extent to which Santos has taken his “opportunities” and by the fact that he not only won an election with them, but remains in office as this is being written.

The House Ethics Committee announced that on last Tuesday it created a subcommittee specifically to look into Santos’ long list of criminal actions. That list is so long that it assures that members of the subcommittee will likely spend the rest of their two-year terms looking into it. Said the committee:

Investigative Subcommittee shall have jurisdiction to determine whether Representative George Santos may have: engaged in unlawful activity with respect to his 2022 congressional campaign; failed to properly disclose required information on statements filed with the House; violated federal conflict of interest laws in connection with his role in a firm providing fiduciary services; and/or engaged in sexual misconduct towards an individual seeking employment in his congressional office.

This just barely scratches the surface of the depth of corruption they are likely to find.

Santos has no shame. When pressed on a few of his fibs and fabrications, he said, “I’ve been a terrible liar on those subjects, and what I tried to convey to the American people.… I ran in 2020 for the same exact seat for Congress, and I got away with it then.”

Vanity Fair, the left-wing magazine that loves to excoriate Republicans for their misdeeds both real and imagined, tried unsuccessfully to condense Republican Representative George Santos’ long list of deceits and prevarications into a single paragraph:

In addition to lies about his work history, educational background, grandparents, mother, being Jewish, having multiple employees who died in the Pulse nightclub shooting and about a million other things, there are significant questions about the source(s) of Santos’s campaign funds. For one thing, despite being evicted on more than one occasion, he apparently had $700,000 to freely lend. Meanwhile, a relative whose name was marked down next to a donation of $5,800 said they have no idea where that money came from.

On the other hand, New York magazine’s Intelligencer had no such desire. It took the opposite approach. In 11 pages of single-spaced paragraphs it reported the following. Santos

Lied about where he went to high school…

And college….

He never worked on Wall Street….

Where did the $700,000 come from?….

He lied about founding an animal charity….

He … swindled a disabled vet whose dog was dying….

Did he rip off an Amish dog breeder with a bad check?….

What’s the deal with his marriage(s)?…

It’s unclear if his mother’s death was related to 9/11….

His grandmother was definitely not a Holocaust victim….

And he did not have employees who died in the Pulse (nightclub) shooting….

Is he Jewish or “Jew-ish”?…

Was he a drag queen in Brazil?…

Was he a Broadway producer?…

Was he really a journalist in Brazil?…

Did his campaign deliberately repeatedly illegally charge donors on their credit cards?…

Was he the target of an “assassination” in December?…

Wikipedia was happy to expand the list of Santos’ falsifications, including these summaries:

There is no known record of Santos ever having attended any college or university, despite his claims that he attended the toney Horace Mann School, Baruch College, and New York University.

His aliases include Anthony Abrovsky and Anthony Devolder, names he fabricated as part of his efforts to dupe investors and donors to his cause.

His claim of employment at Citigroup overlapped with his employment as a Disk Network customer service representative.

His claim that he and his family owned 13 rental properties in New York when in fact neither he nor they owned any.

His claims that he was robbed when there is no evidence provided either by New York police or surveillance cameras at the alleged scenes.

His claims that he was worth millions when he has actually broke, behind on his rent, and in the process of being evicted.

His scam of overreporting campaign expenses in such a way that they didn’t need to be reported.

The more than 20 letters his campaign received from the Federal Election Commission about “problems” with his disclosures.

Contributions to his campaign by people who didn’t exist.

His Brazilian check fraud charges that remain open from 2013.

His 29 unpaid traffic tickets in New York and another six in Florida.

Another George — George Carlin — explained why the Ten Commandments aren’t posted in a courthouse:

The real reason that we can’t have the Ten Commandments in a courthouse: you cannot post “Thou shall not steal,” “Thou shall not commit adultery,” “Thou shall not lie,” in a building full of lawyers, judges, and politicians: it creates a hostile work environment.

Until he is ousted, Santos certainly must feel right at home.

Note: Santos is simultaneously being investigated by U.S., New York state, and Nassau County authorities over his fabrications, distortions, and fictions.

Former Wyoming Congresswoman Liz Cheney Accepts Temporary Professorship at UVA

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, March 2, 2023:  

Liz Cheney, overwhelmingly rejected by Wyoming Republicans last summer, has accepted a temporary teaching position at the University of Virginia (UVA). It’s a one-year gig, with options to renew.

Her intense hatred of Donald Trump led her to destroy her career as a politician in the Cowboy State. In November 2021, the Wyoming GOP Central Committee voted to no longer recognize her as a member of the party.

She had previously been removed from her position as chair of the House Republican Conference in May 2021, and in February 2022 the Republican National Committee overwhelmingly voted to censure her for taking part in her investigation of the so-called January 6 riot or insurrection.

Her continued scorching of former President Donald Trump led to her resounding defeat in the Republican primary in August, when she garnered less than 30 percent of the vote.

She was rewarded a political plum for her continued vitriolic attacks on Trump by Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who invited Cheney to co-chair the faux January 6 committee.

Now out of office, Cheney will continue her attacks on Trump and his supporters as a professor on the far-left campus of UVA. In her concession speech, she made it clear what her life’s mission would be:

This fight is not over — it may take many years. For anyone wondering about my own future, let me say this: I will do everything in my power to make sure Donald Trump is never again near the Oval Office.

In case anyone still wasn’t clear about her intentions, she reiterated her life’s mission on NBC’s Today show last August:

I believe that Donald Trump continues to pose a very great threat and risk to our republic. And I think that defeating him is going to require a broad and united front of Republicans, Democrats and independents, and that’s what I intend to be part of.…


I am absolutely going to continue this battle. It’s the most important thing I’ve ever been involved in, and I think it’s certainly the most important thing — challenge — that our nation has faced in recent history, and maybe since the Civil War. And it’s one that we must win.

She’ll be using her new soapbox at UVA to continue her fight against Trump:

I am delighted to be joining the UVA Center for Politics as a Professor of Practice. Preserving our constitutional republic is the most important work of our time, and our nation’s young people will play a crucial role in this effort….


There are many threats facing our system of government and I hope my work with the Center for Politics and the broader community at the University of Virginia will contribute to finding lasting solutions that not only preserve but strengthen our democracy.

Her boss, Larry Sabato, who is the founder and director of UVA’s Center for Politics, sees Trump as the enemy of “our democracy” as well, calling him the “worst” president in the history of the United States.

This fits, of course, as Sabato’s belief system reflects his past work as a Democratic operative after having obtained degrees in government and politics at Princeton and attended Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar. Rejoicing at Cheney’s arrival he said:

With democracy under fire in this country … Liz Cheney serves as a model of political courage and leadership. Liz will send a compelling message to students about integrity. She’s a true profile in courage, and she was willing to pay the price for her principles – and democracy itself.

As students of the Constitution know, the Founders didn’t create a “democracy.” Indeed, they did everything they could to keep the constitutional republic they were creating from becoming one.

In any case, the voters aren’t buying the lie. In the six polls taken last month concerning the 2024 presidential race among Republicans, Cheney didn’t even register in four of them, while in the other two she garnered an infinitesimal two percent.

She remains clearly an outsider, barking at the back door of the present front-runner, Donald Trump, who is between 15 and 30 points ahead of his nearest likely opponent in 2024, Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis.

Nevertheless, in her fevered hatred of Trump, Cheney has decided that keeping him out of the Oval Office for a second term is her hill to die on.

Missouri AG Moves to Expel Soros-backed Attorney, Calling Her a “Usurper”

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, February 24, 2023:  

Time ran out on George Soros-backed St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kimberly Gardner at noon on Thursday. Missouri’s Attorney General Andrew Bailey gave her until 12 noon to resign or he would file a petition to remove her.

At 12:01 p.m. yesterday, he filed.

Gardner is a prime example of what George Soros wants: a compliant attorney with little respect for the law, the Constitution, or her oath of office, and who instead is committed to overthrowing the existing judicial system, claiming it to be unfair, biased, and prejudiced against black people. The people of St. Louis bought the lie in 2016, and repeated the error in 2020 when they voted overwhelmingly to keep her in office, giving her 74 percent of the vote.

St. Louis citizens have been paying the price ever since. Under fire from all sides, including some Democrats, Gardner has racked up multiple examples of injustice at DiscoverTheNetworks, and a long list at the leftist-friendly Wikipedia.

Bailey filed a “petition in quo warranto,” which is used to challenge Gardner’s right to hold her office. The petition opens with the most recent and perhaps most egregious example, that of Janae Edmonson. That story begins:

Janae Edmonson, a teenage athlete, was walking back to her hotel in downtown St. Louis on Saturday, February 18. Ms. Edmonson, who was in town for a volleyball tournament, had just verbally committed to play sports for a college in Tennessee.


As Ms. Edmonson and her family walked down the sidewalk, a speeding car driven by Daniel Riley crashed into another car and struck Ms. Edmonson, severing one of her legs and maiming the other.


Her father, thanks to his quick thinking and military service, applied two belts as tourniquets as he watched the life drain from her face.


Thankfully, Ms. Edmonson survived, although both of her legs were amputated.

The petition failed to mention that Janae is an outstanding student-athlete at Smyrna High School in Tennessee. She is a member of the National Honor Society, plays a number of sports, and plays the violin in the school’s music program, all the while double-enrolling in college courses.

And just who is this Daniel Riley? He was out on bail, thanks to Gardner’s “enlightened” view of law enforcement in The Gateway City. From the petition:

Daniel Riley never should have been driving that car. In 2020, the St. Louis Circuit Attorney’s Office charged Riley with First Degree Robbery and Armed Criminal Action for stealing a firearm from [a] victim at gunpoint.


The Circuit Attorney [Gardner] dismissed and refiled that case on July 18, 2022, but not before Riley—who was out on bond—earned 54 separate violations for failing to comply with the pre-trial bond conditions.


After the Circuit Attorney refiled the case, Riley earned 50 more violations. The Circuit Attorney never filed a motion to revoke Riley’s bond. [Emphasis in original.]

For this reason alone Gardner should be reprimanded severely. The petition continued:

Ms. Edmonson’s injuries are the direct result of years of willful neglect from Circuit Attorney Kimberly M. Gardner. As the Circuit Attorney, [Gardner] is morally, ethically, and legally responsible for the conduct of her office.

But the history of her malfeasance goes back to the very beginning of her position, starting in 2016:

For years, the Circuit Attorney’s Office has failed to prosecute cases to resolution, has failed to inform and confer with victims, and has failed to even review and file cases submitted by the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department.

[Gardner] has, therefore, forfeited her office.

The blame for Edmonson’s injuries is squarely on Gardner:

[Gardner] willfully neglected her official duty or knowingly or willfully failed or refused to timely move to revoke bond and prosecute Riley, and as a result, Riley was not in custody on February 18, 2023, when he drove his car into Ms. Edmonson, resulting in the loss of both of her legs.


On September 4, 2020, [Gardner’s] office charged Riley with First Degree Robbery and Armed Criminal Action for stealing a firearm from a victim at gunpoint.


Between September 4, 2020, and February 18, 2023, Riley earned at least 94 bond violations for his misconduct, and [Gardner’s] office dismissed and refiled the criminal charges against Riley because the State “was not ready to proceed.”

The petition reviews another example of her malfeasance:

Over the course of about three months, and concluding on July 14, 2021, [Gardner] repeatedly failed to fulfill her discovery obligations and failed to appear in court and to prosecute the charges that had been brought against the defendant in State of Missouri v. Brandon Campbell … resulting in the dismissal of the charges, which included a charge of murder in the first degree.


The trial court found that [Gardner’s]  office failed to appear despite having been served with an order to show cause.

It gets worse. The petition notes that in Gardner’s determination not to prosecute, she “has a backlog of at least 3,000 cases that she has failed to review for charges, including some number of violent crimes.”

In another example, Gardner refused even to file charges in a B&E (breaking and entering) case until a video of the incident appeared on TikTok! She and her office, now staffed with lawyers of a similar stripe, have refused to prosecute cases brought by the St. Louis Police Department:

For instance, police referred charges on a case where a family was terrorized in their home by a woman who was attempting to break in.…


According to news reports, [Gardner] failed to review the case until the victims gained notoriety on TikTok by [posting] video footage of the woman attempting to break into their home.

All of which, according to the petition, means that Gardner “has forfeited her office and is a usurper who must be removed from office.”

Evidence of her destruction of the judicial and law-enforcement system in St. Louis appears everywhere. In 2019, for example, St. Louis police filed 7,045 felony cases with her office, but she prosecuted only 1,641 of them. She claimed that police hadn’t provided her office with “enough evidence” to prosecute them.

The turnover rate of attorneys in her office is atrocious, with their replacements suffering from the same liberal mindset and thus being incapable and unwilling to bring charges in even the most egregious (i.e., first degree murder) cases.

And those they do file, they deliberately delay by using the grand jury process, resulting in an average wait between filing and trial of more than 340 days. Even after the state’s Supreme Court saw what she was doing and modified the rule to greatly shorten that wait time, Gardner ignored the new rule.

She was also involved in prosecuting Mark and Patricia McCloskey, the couple who protected their property during the George Floyd riots by displaying firearms. The judge in that case saw what she was doing and disqualified her from continuing, writing that it was “a criminal prosecution for political purposes.”

All of Gardner’s behavior is according to the Soros script. He has funded her election and reelection campaigns with hundreds of thousands of dollars through various political action committees — and the crime rate in St. Louis has skyrocketed. The 264 homicides the city recorded in 2020 was more than 36 percent higher than the year before. Neighborhood Scout reports that property crime in St. Louis is more than four times the national average, while the murder rate is more than eight times the national average! The service puts St. Louis at the very bottom of its crime index.

Montana’s Democrat Jon Tester to Seek Reelection in 2024

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, February 23, 2023:  

Montana’s senior senator, Jon Tester, the only Democrat to hold elective office in that ruby-red state, announced on Wednesday his intention to run for a fourth term:

I am running for re-election so I can keep fighting for Montanans and demand that Washington stand up for our veterans and lower costs.


Montanans need a fighter holding Washington accountable and I’m running to defend our Montana values.

Tester is a primary GOP target in the 2024 general election, and he knows it. His previous election victories were decided by low single digits, and as more Montanans become aware of his real voting record, the contest next year will likely return the Democrat to his Montana ranch.

Before looking at his voting record, it’s helpful to view the general electoral landscape in Big Sky Country. In a state that Donald Trump won over Joe Biden by 16 points in 2020, just 32 percent of registered voters currently approve of Biden’s job performance, compared to 62 percent who disapprove.

Democrats will be defending 23 Senate seats in the upcoming general election, compared to just 11 by Republicans. And just one Democrat-to-Republican flip would return control of the Senate back to Republicans (assuming a Republican wins the White House).

Tester is rough-hewn, known for his often vulgar, expletive-laden language. The population of Montana has grown considerably over the years, however, especially following the Covid pandemic, forcing Tester to woo many new voters coming from more-sedate communities.

The senator managed to offend then-President Trump when he torpedoed Trump’s pick to head up the Veterans Affairs Department. He added to that offense by declaring that the January 6 incident was instigated by Trump, calling it a “despicable and dangerous attack on our democracy [sic]” and “a coup for domestic terrorists.”

Now to his voting record. Tester played a key role in passing the Senate’s pork-laden “infrastructure” bill. He voted for Obamacare and the odious and anti-capitalist Dodd-Frank financial services overhaul legislation.

During his first two campaigns Tester held to the traditional marriage position, but then praised the Supreme Court’s audacious ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges for protecting “the rights and freedoms of every married couple,” including men who want to marry other men, and vice versa.

He went on to compound his flagrant rejection of traditional marriage by voting for the misnamed Respect for Marriage Act, which repealed the Defense of [traditional] Marriage Act that was passed in 1996.

He is pro-abortion and supports embryonic stem-cell research, which kills embryos that are three to five days old, raising significant moral and religious issues for those who hold that life begins at conception.

He has consistently voted for liberal justices to the Supreme Court (i.e., Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson), while voting consistently against conservatives (i.e., Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett).

His Freedom Index (FI) rating from The John Birch Society reveals his low regard for the United States Constitution and his own oath to support and defend it: he has a dismal lifetime rating of just 21 out of a possible 100 in his three terms as senator.

His challenger is likely to be Montana’s Representative Matt Rosendale (Freedom Index of 100), who lost a razor’s edge contest to Tester in 2018. Rosendale is one of those Republican House member “holdouts” who held California’s Rep. Kevin McCarthy’s feet to the fire during his campaign for speaker of the House.

Tester is one of three incumbent senators likely to lose in 2024, according to political handicapper Sabato’s Crystal Ball at the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics. The other two in jeopardy are Joe Manchin of West Virginia (FI rating of 27) and Sherrod Brown of Ohio (FI rating of 20).

San Francisco’s Red-state Boycott Fails

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, February 22, 2023:  

After six years of trying to influence other states to adopt its far-left agenda through its Chapter 12X boycott, San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors asked the city’s administrator to see if it was working.

From the report released on February 10:

In response to this inquiry [by the board], this report finds that:


12X’s policy impacts are not clear; the CAO [City Administrator’s Office] was not able to find concrete evidence suggesting 12X has influenced other states’ economies or LGBTQ, reproductive, or voting rights.

Instead, most of the impact has been negative, falling on San Francisco itself:

12X has created additional administrative burden for City staff and vendors, and unintended consequences for San Francisco citizens, such as limiting enrichment and developmental opportunities.

In other words, allowing its political pique over red states not following in San Francisco’s footsteps due to its boycott has not only cost the city’s taxpayers serious dollars — contracting costs have risen between 10 and 20 percent since the boycott began in 2016 — it has accelerated the exit of citizens from the City by the Bay. More than 500,000 citizens have left the city since the boycott was enacted.

Specifically, the 12X boycott banned city-funded travel to 30 states that have failed to line up with San Francisco’s radical policies over gay rights, abortion rights, and voting rights. It also prohibited the city from doing business with any company with headquarters in any of those 30 offending states.

In fact, the number of “offending” states more than quadrupled following 12X’s inception. The report stated: “Since 12X became operative, the number of banned states has grown from 8 states in 2017 to 30 in 2022. This increase suggested that the City’s threat of boycott may not serve as a compelling deterrent to states considering restrictive policies.”

There is a movement among members of the board to repeal, or at the very least remove the most onerous of, the 12X limits. Putting distance between himself and the 12X ban, Supervisor Matt Dorsey said:

There has been a lot of frustration over the years about how cumbersome and expensive and labyrinthine our contracting processes can be.


I am convinced if San Franciscans had any idea how much money, how much of their taxpayer dollars we are wasting on processes and the performative things we do with our contracting, they would be furious about it and rightfully so.

Another supervisor who has seen the light is Rafael Mandelman, who told the San Francisco Chronicle:

It’s an ineffective policy that complicates the business of San Francisco government and makes it very likely that we pay more than we should for goods and services.

This is how far-left politicians apologize for making such a stupid move.

Many of the states on San Francisco’s banned list are enjoying the exodus of unhappy San Franciscans who have had a bellyful of such nonsense. They include, not surprisingly, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Texas, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Dianne Feinstein, Oldest Senator With Worst Voting Record, to Retire

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, February 15, 2023: 

A moment of confusion arose on Tuesday when California’s senior senator, Dianne Feinstein, said she hadn’t decided about whether to run for reelection in 2024, and then, when informed by one of her staff that her office had already made that announcement that she wouldn’t, she confirmed the fact.

One reporter witnessing her confusion wrote:

Asked by reporters about her announcement to resign, [Feinstein] says “If I haven’t made that decision, I haven’t released anything.” A staffer then told the senator that a statement had been released. Feinstein responded saying “I didn’t know they put it out.”

Another reporter confirmed Feinstein’s confusion:

Feinstein: I haven’t made that decision. I haven’t released anything.


Staffer: We put out the statement.


Feinstein: You put out the statement? I didn’t know they put it out.

After 30 years in the senate, at age 89, Feinstein is the oldest sitting U.S. senator and member of Congress, and has managed another record: the poorest voting record. According to The Freedom Index compiled by The New American, Feinstein’s “lifetime” average voting record, on a scale of 0 to 100, rates a 12. This reflects her utter disregard for the U.S. Constitution and her oath to support and defend it. In two terms, she scored just a three out of 100; in another two terms she scored a five; and in the latest Congress, the 117th, her voting record, compared to the Constitution, was a zero.

In the statement that Feinstein’s staff issued, she said:

I am announcing today [that] I will not run for reelection in 2024….


Each of us was sent here to solve problems. That’s what I’ve done for the last 30 years.

What’s she’s done over the last 30 years is toe the liberal/socialist/progressive party line to the detriment of America. Consider her comment on her failed attempt to pass a federal gun ban:

If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban [on firearms], picking up every one of them … “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in,” I would have done it.

She succeeded in passing the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons ban. And when it expired 10 years later (without proof that it had any salutary impact on gun violence) she tried to have it renewed.

On immigration she has long pushed for granting citizenship to illegals, even those convicted of horrific crimes — aggravated felonies, domestic violence, stalking, violation of protection orders, crimes against children, crimes relating to illegal possession of firearms.

On abortion she has repeatedly voted in favor of using taxpayer monies to fund abortions here and abroad. She voted against a ban on partial-birth/late term abortions. She supported fetal cell tissue research.

On energy development, she voted consistently against approving the Keystone XL Pipeline, delaying its construction until the primary contractor finally gave it up.

On federal spending, she repeatedly voted against a balanced budget amendment, preferring instead to fund all manner of unconstitutional programs.

On healthcare, she voted for ObamaCare, and against any suggestion of reining it in after it became operational. She voted for the Real ID Act, against an amendment declaring English to be the national language, and against the Defense of Marriage Act.

During Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Feinstein attacked her and implied her Catholic faith would negatively impact her rulings:

Why is it that so many of us on this [Democrat] side have this very uncomfortable feeling that dogma and law are two different things, and I think whatever a religion is, it has its own dogma. The law is totally different. The conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you.

In another incident showing her perfidy, Feinstein withheld evidence that alleged that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh had unspecified but untoward relations with an unnamed accuser 36 years earlier. She withheld it for six weeks, waiting for one week before the committee was to vote on his confirmation, hoping to derail his nomination.

Four far-left pols have leaped into the vacuum left by Feinstein’s exit: Adam Schiff (Freedom Index rating 16), Ro Khanna (FI rating 18), Barbara Lee (FI rating 27), and Katie Porter (FI rating 7).

At the moment, prognosticators are predicting Porter will win the prize for being the most liberal/communist/socialist/progressive candidate to replace Feinstein in 2024.

More Proof the FBI Is Being Weaponized Against American Citizens

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, February 13, 2023:  

On Thursday, former FBI agent Nicole Parker, an 11-year veteran of the agency before she quit four months ago, testified before the House Subcommittee on Weaponization of the Federal Government.

She quit because the agency has now become a weapon pointed at innocent Americans:

For me, distancing myself from egregious mistakes, immoral behavior, politically charged actions taken by a small but destructive few FBI employees became exhausting.… [I] no longer felt [that I was] the type of agent the FBI valued.

Her testimony came just a day after another former agent released a document that the Richmond, Virginia, office of the FBI had generated urging field agents to infiltrate the Catholic church looking for terrorists.

Kyle Seraphin, a former FBI special agent, federal whistleblower, and USAF veteran, posted a copy of the report dated January 23, 2023, regarding “Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists in Radical-Traditionalist Catholic Ideology.” The report referred to “Radical-Traditionalist Catholics” (RTCs) and expressed “high confidence” that agents can mitigate their terrorist objectives by infiltrating local Catholic churches.

And where did the FBI get such information? Wrote Seraphin:

The attached appendices refer to a number of articles and the out-of-FBI-policy Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) at the end of the document.


For example, Appendix D is a direct copy of the SPLC list of “Radical Traditional Catholicism Hate Groups,” including the web address accessed. The SPLC appears to be a source for the intelligence analyst’s beliefs that RTCs exist and that they are anti-Semitic. The SPLC description for this “hate group” states RTCs “may make up the largest single group of serious anti-semites in America.”

Seraphin didn’t spend any ink excoriating the SPLC for its anti-Christian, anti-traditional values or anti-American bias. He didn’t have to. Readers can go to DiscoverTheNetworks.org and find dozens of pages of examples of its bias, along with connections to 56 hard-core left-wing individuals intent on destroying American culture and turning the nation into a socialist nightmare.

All of which is well known to the FBI, which formally disassociated itself from the outfit back in 2014. But that hasn’t changed how propagandists at the top of the agency obtain their “information.”

Seraphin gives the agency just a tap on the wrist:

Poorly sourced and highly speculative intelligence products [such as this report] lead to opening badly articulated … investigations into Americans in violation of their God-given, First Amendment-protected civil liberties.

He’s right about one thing: the agency’s poor intelligence products can and will lead to grievous infringements of those rights unless the agency is reined in, reorganized, or eliminated altogether:

Opening the door to associating white supremacists with traditional religious practices based on common Christian positions on abortion and the LGBTQ political agendas is a dangerous step. Such investigations can easily lead to the same analysis of Radical Traditional Baptists, Radical Traditional Lutherans, and Radical Traditional Evangelicals. [Emphasis added.]


The FBI is forbidden from opening cases or publishing products based solely on First Amendment-protected activities. By tolerating the publishing of intelligence products as shoddy as this, they are crossing a line many Americans will find themselves on the wrong side of for the first time in history.


This is what a politicalized FBI looks like; it should not be tolerated if Americans expect to enjoy the protections of our Bill of Rights.

Another former FBI agent, this one the former chief of FBI intelligence, Kevin Brock, weighed in on the perfidy:

[The report] is lazy, it is absurdly speculative, it provides no evidence for its thesis, and it relies exclusively on sources known to be aligned with the political left, such as the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center, Salon, and the Atlantic, that have been known to be habitually critical of the Catholic Church. That’s not intelligence analysis. It’s parroting.

When the FBI discovered that Seraphin had leaked the incriminating report, it backtracked immediately, saying that it was only distributed in-house and not meant for public consumption, and that, once found out, the agency brass declared it inoperative. The walk-back language is remarkable for its dissemblance and deceit:

While our standard practice is to not comment on specific intelligence products, this particular field office product — disseminated only within the FBI — regarding racially or ethnically motivated violent extremism does not meet the exacting standards of the FBI….


The FBI is committed to sound analytic tradecraft and to investigating and preventing acts of violence and other crimes while upholding the constitutional rights of all Americans and will never conduct investigative activities or open an investigation based solely on First Amendment protected activity.

Happily for the security of the American people, more than two dozen FBI whistleblowers have emerged in recent months alleging FBI bias in cases ranging from the Hunter Biden corruption scandal, to claims that parents attending school board meetings are terrorists, to faux claims surrounding President Trump and Russia.

Rep. Kat Cammack (R-Fla.), a member of the House committee who heard Nicole Parker’s testimony last week, said that that testimony adds to the increasing body of evidence that the FBI has habitually and intentionally overstepped its bounds, engaging in promoting cancel culture, encouraging censorship on Twitter, treating parents at school board meetings as domestic terrorists, and on and on:

When the FBI is being tasked to go after parents who have expressed concerns at their local school boards about what their children are being taught, and labeled a domestic terrorist … that’s a problem.


When you have the FBI and the administration and agencies coordinating with Big Tech, essentially pressuring a private company to do their bidding in deplatforming, censoring, or silencing dissenting voices, that’s a problem….

Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and whistleblowers like Parker, Seraphin, and Brock are shining that light at the core of the problem: the very top brass at the FBI.

Florida Retaliates Against Disney, Plans to Pull Its Independent Status

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, February 9, 2023:  

When Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed House Bill 1557 into law last year — Parental Rights in Education — it evoked an eruption from The Walt Disney Company. This week, in special session, Florida’s Legislature is slated to pass a bill removing the virtually independent status of Disney World in Orlando and turning control of its 25,000-acre development over to a board appointed by the governor.

Last year Disney challenged DeSantis and the state’s Legislature directly for passing the parental rights bill. Former Disney CEO Bob Chapek issued this statement:

Florida’s HB 1557, also known as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, should never have been passed and should never have been signed into law.


Our goal as a company is for this law to be repealed by the legislature or struck down by the courts, and we remain committed to support the national and state organizations working to achieve that.


We are dedicated to standing up for the rights and safety of LGBTQ+ members of the Disney family, as well as the LGBTQ+ community in Florida and across the country.

This naturally outraged DeSantis and those legislators who overwhelming supported the new law. The statement from Disney reflected how far the corporate entertainment giant had moved from being “family friendly” to being a propaganda transmission belt for radical cultural change.

HB 1557 is simplicity itself. It prohibits classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity to students in kindergarten through third grade. It also requires schools to keep parents informed of healthcare services provided, and allows parents to pre-approve any questionnaires or health screenings on their children beforehand.

Yesterday DeSantis spoke to reporters about the bill about to be passed:

Disney is going to pay its fair share of taxes and Disney is going to honor [its] debt….


This is now going to be controlled by the state of Florida. So, there’s a new sheriff in town.

A statement from the governor’s office explained:

Until Governor DeSantis acted, The Walt Disney Company maintained sole control over the [Reedy Creek Improvement] District.


This power amounted to an unaccountable Corporate Kingdom.

The statement added that the new legislation would permanently eliminate Disney’s self-governing status and in its stead impose a “state-controlled, term-limited board” with its members being appointed by the governor.

It also made clear that Disney’s main office, located in Burbank, California, wouldn’t be able to meddle in Florida’s Disney World’s affairs:

[The bill] provides no control of the district to the leftist local government in Orange County, which threatened to leverage the situation to raise local taxes.

That leftist Orange County had already turned Disney into a transmission belt for leftist agendas. As the New York Post noted:

In a sinister cartoon airing on Disney+ called “The Proud Family: Louder and Prouder,” the characters proclaim, “Slaves built this country, and we the descendants of slaves in America have earned reparations for their suffering and continue to earn reparations every moment we spend submerged in [the] systemic prejudice, racism and white supremacy that America was founded with and still has not atoned for.”

Disney also put money ahead of principle in protecting its relationship with the communists presently running China. It has billions invested in a number of theme parks in that country and caters to its leadership.

For example, in 2022, Disney removed an episode of The Simpsons from its streaming platform in Hong Kong. This particular episode mentioned “forced labor camps” in China and the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, which the communists want to continue to suppress.

DeSantis is very well aware of Disney’s proclivity to get into bed with the communists in China. In March 2022, when Disney first announced its intention to repeal Florida’s parental rights law, he said:

… you have companies like … Disney that are going to say and criticize parents’ rights — they’re going to criticize the fact that we don’t want transgenderism in kindergarten and first grade classrooms.


If that’s the hill they’re going to die on, then how do they possibly explain lining their pockets with their relationship with the Communist Party of China?


Because that’s what they do, and they make a fortune, and they don’t say a word about the really brutal practices that you see over there at the hands of the CCP [the Chinese Communist Party].

DeSantis and the Florida Legislature are to be commended for bringing a modicum of common sense back to a world seemingly intent on destroying itself — and for providing a warning to other companies seeking to overstep their bounds in attempting to influence the culture in deadly ways.

Seattle Crime Report: “Defund the Police” Comes Home to Roost

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, February 8, 2023:  

Without saying so out loud, the latest Crime Report published by the Seattle Police Department (SPD) reveals the natural consequences of the Marxist-backed “defund the police” initiative.

Following the death of George Floyd in May 2020, Seattle suffered from Marxist thugs and revolutionaries who instigated riots, protests, and lootings. In 2021, Seattle’s City Council cut the budget of the SPD by 17 percent — one-sixth — setting in motion the inevitable rise in crime.

The Crime Report revealed that “reported crime for 2021 was at an all-time high. 2022 totals have now exceeded that with 49,577 reported violent and property crimes.” It added that “Aggravated Assault and Motor Vehicle Theft were significantly high in 2022 when compared to a five-year weighted average.”


  1. Gun violence reached an 11-year high in 2022;
  2. Motor vehicle theft reached a 15-year high in 2022;
  3. A total of 7,753 individuals were arrested in 2022, an 18-percent (1,174) increase over 2021;
  4. More than 20 percent of those individuals were arrested at least twice in 2022; and
  5. The average response time for police in 2022 was more than 10 minutes.

The SPD has lost 525 officers since 2020, bringing the department down from just over 1,400 officers in 2019, to under 900 at present.

Hosea 8:7 from the English Standard Version of the Holy Bible says: “For they sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.” The damage done by the failed “defund the police” movement will last for years. Senator John Thune (R-S.D.) put it well:

Defunding the police is a terrible idea. Some of the cities that cut their own police funding are even recognizing the mistake they’ve made and seeking to restore funding they cut.


Unfortunately, the problem won’t necessarily be fixed that easily. Because the “defund the police” movement has not just resulted in smaller police budgets, it has also resulted in lower police morale, leading to a wave of police retirements and resignations.

Thune puts the blame where it belongs:

Democrats bear a substantial amount of responsibility for this situation. Far too many of them actively supported the “defund the police” movement and encouraged resentment toward law enforcement.


It is disgraceful that anti-police rhetoric has become such an accepted part of our national conversation — and has been winked at or endorsed by so many Democrat leaders. We owe our police officers much better.

Thune does see a ray of light, however:

If any good can come out of all this violence and heartbreak, I hope it’s [an] increased recognition of how essential police officers are to keeping our communities safe and a rejection of any idea of defunding the police.

Denver Is Now America’s Crime Capital

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, January 7, 2023:  

Crime statistics for Denver, Colorado’s capital city, are astounding. They now put the Mile High City at the very bottom of the safest cities ranking at Neighborhood Scout. Crime in Denver is now worse than that in New York City or Chicago.

Some statistics from the Denver Police Department: Aggravated assaults, robberies, and homicides, through mid-December 2022, numbered 6,810. Three years ago, that number was 4,924. Property crimes in 2019 were 26,133. In 2022, through mid-December: 42,100.

In Denver, the murder and assault rates are twice the national rates, and three times the national rate for rapes and robberies.

Statewide the crime rate in 2022 was up more than 20 percent since 2008 — the year conservative Republican State Representative Rob Witwer announced he would not seek reelection. He saw what was coming.

The “gang of four” — four far-left millionaires — had completed their takeover of the state government. In 2004 Republicans held the governor’s office and control of both houses of the legislature. By 2007 Democrats held all three positions of power and have never looked back.

It’s now referred to as “The Colorado Model.”

As Witwer wrote in 2009:

In hindsight, what Colorado Democrats did was as simple as it was effective. First, they built a robust network of nonprofit entities to replace the Colorado Democratic party, which had been rendered obsolete by campaign-finance reform.


Second, they raised historic amounts of money from large donors to fund these entities.


Third, they developed a consistent, topical message.


Fourth, and most important, they put aside their policy differences to focus on the common goal of winning elections.


As former Democratic house majority leader Alice Madden later said, “It’s not rocket science.”

As famous Tammany Hall pol George Washington Plunkett famously said, “I seen my opportunities and I took ’em.” Campaign reform had greatly reduced the influence of local Coloradans in elections and the “Gang” saw their opportunity: outside money, huge amounts of outside money, could flip elections.

The “Gang” included the following:

Pat Stryker, granddaughter heiress of the Stryker Corporation;


Tim Gill, the founder of software company Quark;


Rutt Bridges, a Chevron executive who then created and sold software for the petroleum exploration industry; and


Jared Polis, a co-founder of American Information Systems (AIS), an internet access provider, and a founder of ProFlowers.

Tagging along behind the four multi-millionaires was Al Yates, former president of Colorado State University (CSU), whose university reaped millions in gifts from the four after their successful takeover of the state’s political machinery.

The gang brought with them their ideology, particularly their agenda supporting the LGBTQ movement. In 2019, Gill was the single largest individual donor to that movement in U.S. history, having personally committed more than $500 million to that cause since the early 1990s.

Polis proudly states his history as a homosexual on his Wikipedia page:

As an openly gay man, Polis has made history several times through his electoral success.


In 2008, he became the first openly gay parent elected to Congress.


In 2018, he became the first openly gay man and second openly LGBT person (after Kate Brown) elected governor of a U.S. state….


In 2021, he became the first U.S. governor in a same-sex marriage.


In 2022, he became the first openly gay man and the first U.S. governor in a same-sex marriage to be reelected.

Does being run by liberal Democrats translate into rising crime for a city? The Daily Signal reported that 27 of the top 30 most crime-ridden cities in the country are run by Democrats.

And it shouldn’t surprise anyone that citizens, contrary to popular belief, are leaving the state. A 2022 United Van Lines study showed more people leaving than coming, while a CBS Colorado study reported that in 2010, 37,569 people moved into Colorado while in 2021 that number dropped to 14,371.

With far-left Democrats firmly in control, the outlook for Colorado appears bleak.

Bishop Calls Out Biden for His “Fake Catholicism”

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, February 1, 2023:  

Days after the chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities asked Congress to pass a bill prohibiting taxpayer funding for abortions, Joe Biden was asked about it:

Reporter: Catholic bishops are demanding that federal tax dollars not fund abortions.

Biden: No, they are not all doing that, nor is the Pope.

Bishop Joseph Strickland of the Catholic Diocese of Tyler, Texas, immediately tweeted: “Mr. Biden can’t be allowed to twist the words of Pope Francis in this way.… It is time to denounce Biden’s fake Catholicism.”

It’s long past time. Biden, the master flip-flopper, was, once-upon-a-time, back in 2012, a “pro-life Democrat.”

But that was then. Now, he’s all-in for abortion “under any circumstances.” And he’s all-in for ending the Hyde Amendment that prohibits Congress from funding abortions.

Back in July, Pope Francis made his church’s position on abortion clear: “A month after conception, the DNA of the fetus is already there and the organs are aligned. There is human life.”

And then Francis added a question directed to Biden, a self-proclaimed “devout Catholic”: “Is it just to eliminate a human life?”

The question was rhetorical. Said Francis: “I leave it to [Biden’s] conscience, and [request] that he speak to his bishop, his pastor, his parish priest, about that incoherence.”

National Public Radio (NPR) exposed the conflict just days after Biden was inaugurated, posing the issue: “Biden Is Catholic. He Also Supports Abortion Rights.”

One knows that Biden is a “devout Catholic” because his first press secretary, Jen Psaki, said so. At Biden’s very first press conference she was asked point blank about Biden’s abortion policies. Here is her response:

I will just take the opportunity to remind all of you that he is a devout Catholic, and somebody who attends church regularly. He started his day attending church with his family this morning.

The Most Reverend Jose Gomez, archbishop of Los Angeles and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, was far more enlightening. In his statement following Biden’s inauguration, he reminded his readers:

The bishops and Catholic faithful carry out Christ’s commandment to love God and love our neighbors by working for an America that protects human dignity, expands equality and opportunities for every person, and is open-hearted towards the suffering and weak. (Emphasis added)

And Gomez certainly expected Biden, as a “devout Catholic,” to be willing and open to “engage” with him on the touchy topic of abortion:

It will be refreshing to engage with a President who clearly understands, in a deep and personal way, the importance of religious faith and institutions.


Mr. Biden’s piety and personal story, his moving witness to how his faith as brought him solace in times of darkness and tragedy, his longstanding commitment to the Gospel’s priority for the poor — all of this I find hopeful and inspiring.

But, Gomez warned:

We cannot stay silent when nearly a million unborn lives are being cast aside in our country year after year through abortion….

I must point out that our new President has pledged to pursue certain policies that would advance moral evils and threaten human life and dignity, most seriously in the areas of abortion, contraception, marriage, and gender.

He added that those policies, as they are enacted, would affect all human beings, especially Catholics who hold that life is precious, dear, and a gift from God: “Of deep concern is the liberty of the Church and the freedom of believers to live according to their consciences.”

As Biden’s mental and physical health continues to deteriorate, the time gets nearer that he will learn his final destiny. As Jesus’ Apostle John wrote in Revelation 21:8:

But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.

CNN Suffers Worst Viewership Week in Nine Years

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, January 31, 2023:  

The latest Nielsen ratings show that CNN’s viewership last week fell to its lowest level since 2014. And the demographic most critical to sponsors has all but disappeared.

For the week ending January 22, CNN averaged just 444,000 viewers during prime viewing time, falling below 450,000 for the first time in nine years. In the critical advertising demographic, age 25-54, the network had just 93,000 viewers.

Fox News, on the other hand, enjoyed two million viewers, with 256,000 viewers between ages 25-54.

CNN This Morning, created three months ago to challenge Fox News’ Fox & Friends, has failed to gain traction as well. It attracted 331,000 viewers last week, while Fox & Friends had nearly a million.

TheWrap, a news outlet focused on the entertainment industry, reported that insiders familiar with CNN’s troubles are saying that a simple revamp of the present lineup proposed by CNN’s new CEO Chris Licht isn’t likely to improve things anytime soon.

Licht, who came on after the noisy termination of host Chris Cuomo over sex allegations and political shenanigans concerning his brother, former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, put the best face he could on the latest data from Nielsen. In an interview with the Los Angeles Times he admitted that “trust” in the network “has eroded,” but that the owners, Warner Brothers Discovery, are very patient: “The people I work for understand that we didn’t get here overnight, and we’re not going to get out of it overnight.”

Chris Cuomo was CNN’s highest-rated host until his termination, and his replacements — Don Lemon, Kaitlin Collins, and Poppy Harlow — just aren’t cutting it.

Licht has said that the network has to overcome its perception of promoting far-left propaganda delivered by noisy and acidic newsreaders. He correctly noted:

The general sense was that you [as a conservative] would not get a fair shake and you wouldn’t be allowed to make your point.


I don’t want CNN to be a place where you [as a conservative] have such a combative experience that you go fundraise off of it.

He added:

We … want to be a place where we can have an open exchange of ideas no matter where you’re coming from, and that you would be treated with respect.


We won’t invite you on to score points on you.

However, Licht is determined to stay with the same people, just move them around a little on the network’s chessboard: “I think we have all the right raw materials, and now it’s just really about coalescing how the show is produced around those three personalities.… It’ll take some time to grow again.”

Moving the hosts who are the face of the failing network and the cause of its declining viewership around to different time slots isn’t going to solve CNN’s problem, if it is to be solved at all. The demographic CNN needs has moved on to Newsmax, The Epoch Times, and other more balanced networks. Until Licht and his bosses at Warner Brothers Discovery awaken to that fact, CNN will continue to flounder.

Such an “awakening” is extremely unlikely to occur, thanks to ties Warner Brothers Discovery and its other five media giants have with the globalist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The other five are:

General Electric (Comcast, NBC, Universal Pictures, and others);

News Corp (New York Post, Fox News, and The Wall Street Journal);

Disney (ABC, ESPN, Miramax, and others);

Viacom (MTV, Paramount Pictures, and others); and

CBS (NFL.com, Showtime, 60 minutes, and others).

As The New American pointed out at the time the CFR was celebrating its 100th anniversary:

The CFR has managed to place its members into controlling positions in the major corporate media. In plain words, the fix is in.


The three-letter “news” organizations – ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, NYT, WSJ, FOX, NPR, etc. – are merely echo chamber adjuncts of the CFR.

As Jasper noted, nothing is likely change, either at CNN through its proposed changes in formatting (moving the same players around to different positions on the chessboard), or the other majors controlled by the CFR, until “more Americans awaken, expose the CFR’s growing control, and oppose its New World Order agenda.”

Colorado Baker Targeted Again by Anti-Christian Left

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, January 30, 2023:  

In its ruling in another lawsuit against Colorado baker Jack Phillips, the Colorado Court of Appeals last Thursday said its decision wasn’t biased against him just because he is a Christian:

These proceedings were not marked by any hostility toward Masterpiece [his bakery design business] or Phillips, or by a desire to punish or target them based on their religious views.

Of course they weren’t. Ignore the fact that two of the three judges ruling unanimously against Phillips had been appointed by far-left Governor Jared Polis, who is “married” to a man, and the third by Governor John Hickenlooper who, while a senator, racked up a treasonous Freedom Index score of 5 out of 100. This reflects Hickenlooper’s complete and utter disregard for any constitutional limitations on governmental power, especially in the realm of free speech and the free exercise of religion.

The entire lawsuit was a setup from the beginning.

Following a modest victory for the baker in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (where the Supreme Court decided in June 2018 that the “civil rights” commission had so grievously expressed its anti-Christian and anti-religious zeal that they ruled, 7-2, against the commission and in favor of Phillips), a queer lawyer from Denver asked Phillips to make a cake celebrating his transition from a man to a woman. He wanted Phillips to create a custom-designed cake that would be pink (female) on the inside and (blue) male on the outside.

The call was made the very same day that the high court agreed to hear Phillips’ case. And just to make sure that Phillips — and every other Christian wishing to enjoy his First Amendment rights — got the message, the queer mouthpiece for the commission called back to ask Phillips to make another cake depicting Satan smoking marijuana. The man/woman interposer said he/she wanted to “correct the errors of [Phillips’] thinking.”

The attorney filed a complaint with the commission, which was prepared to go after Phillips again until the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) informed them that if they did, the ADF was prepared, once again, to defend Phillips.

When the commission decided to back away and settle (details undisclosed), the queer attorney filed suit in state court. The state court ruled against Phillips (surprise!), declaring that “the act of baking a pink cake with blue frosting does not constitute protected speech under the First Amendment.”

In its press release following the state court’s ruling against Phillips, the ADF announced that it will appeal once again to the high court. This time the high court will have a second chance to rule in favor of Phillips’ First Amendment right, which they avoided in their earlier ruling.

The ADF is also defending Denver business owner and website designer Lorie Smith, owner of 303 Creative, over the same issue. That issue, according to the ADF, is whether elected government officials or unelected bureaucrats, as is the case with Colorado’s civil rights commission, have the power to inhibit individuals’ God-given rights to worship Him as they so desire and run their businesses accordingly.

The ADF, with all due respect, misses the point. The anti-religion, anti-Christian Left doesn’t care whether Phillips makes a blue and pink cake, or whether Lorie Smith designs a website celebrating an event that violates her religious beliefs. What they do care deeply about is that the message is delivered: Thou shalt not express Christian beliefs in the public square. Anyone who does so will be subjected to the same torments of hell being visited upon Phillips and Smith.

WH Press Secretary Repeats Lie That the Clinton Assault Weapons Ban Reduced Gun Violence

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, January 25, 2023:  

Like clockwork following the California shootings, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre once again rolled out the canard that the Clinton-era assault weapons ban (the “Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act”) measurably reduced gun violence and therefore, by implication, it should be reinstated:

The last time we had an assault weapons ban on the books [1994-2003], thanks to the President [Biden was a senator then] and Senator [Dianne] Feinstein’s [D-Calif.] leadership, mass shootings actually went down.

She failed to note that the attackers in Monterey Park and Half Moon Bay used pistols and not rifles to commit their mayhem.

Biden himself repeated the lie back in March 2021 following another mass shooting:

We can ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines in this country once again.


I got that done when I was a senator. It passed. It was law for the longest time, and it brought down these mass killings. We should do it again.

In 2004 Christopher Koper, then a research criminologist at the University of Pennsylvania, issued his third and final report on the results of the ban on gun violence and mass shootings. The document, “Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003,” is available to the public and can be accessed here.

Said Koper:

We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence….


What we found in these studies was that the ban had mixed effects in reducing crimes with the banned weaponry … as a result, the ban did not appear to affect gun violence during the time it was in effect.

Koper warned that if the Clinton ban were reenacted, the reduction in gun violence would likely be too small to measure:

Should it be renewed, the ban might reduce gunshot victimizations. This effect is likely to be small at best and possibly too small for reliable measurement.

He concluded:

By most estimates, AWs [automatic weapons] were used in less than 6% of gun crimes even before the ban.


[Our research] suggests that the ban’s impact on gun violence is likely to be small.

Since Koper’s study was completed in 2004, any gradual reduction in gun violence that could be reliably traced to the ban’s impact would certainly have been noted in subsequent studies.

There have been none. But the lie that the ban reduced gun violence continues to be mouthed by politicians eager to remove firearms from private owners.

Enthusiasm Fading for Electric Vehicles

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, January 23, 2023:  

The recent announcement that electric vehicle (EV) manufacturer Tesla has cut its prices by between six and 20 percent just to maintain its production goals and market share is the latest manifestation of the fading enthusiasm for electric vehicles.

In essence, the result of government meddling in the private market is now showing up in such moves.

In 2021, for example, auto executives were “very optimistic” about EVs, expecting them to capture as much as 70 percent of the total automotive market by 2030. A year later that optimism had subsided considerably, with those same executives cutting their expectations to 40 percent.

The latest report from international accounting firm KPMG reveals that car dealers expect EVs to capture just over 20 percent of the total automotive market by 2030.

The initial enthusiasm was generated by the belief that somehow EVs would save the planet. Governments got on board with the fraud, allowing massive tax credits to be given to purchasers of them to stimulate demand and hasten the transition.

That demand is now causing consternation, especially in California, where the far-Left interventionist governor and his Democratic sycophants in the state’s Legislature have deemed that 100 percent of vehicles sold in the state by 2035 be electric. The only problem, of course, is that making the demand and providing the supply are separate issues. As Ram Rajagopal, a professor at Stanford University, pointed out, a complete transition to electric vehicles in the state would require at least 15 times more charging stations than the 80,000 that presently exist.

And the demand on the state’s existing energy grid would be highly unlikely to be met. For instance, during a heat wave last September, just days after Governor Gavin Newsom announced that his state was going 100 percent “green” by 2035, the California Independent System Operator (which runs the state’s power grid) asked residents owning EVs to avoiding charging them during peak usage hours.

There are other issues as well. As inflation impacts the cost of building EVs, the so-called “cost advantage” of owning one over the traditional internal-combustion vehicle has narrowed to almost zero. An analysis by The Wall Street Journal in December showed that drivers of Tesla’s Model 3 had to pay the same to drive 100 miles as did the owner of a Honda Civic.

And there are political issues as well. Geopolitical strategist Peter Zeihan wrote:

The lithium comes from one place, and it’s all processed in China. So, just building the alternate processing infrastructure … and by the way, we [would] have to invade Russia too … just to get the materials to do EVs at scale is just laughable for the next decade.

There are reliability issues, too. Consumer Reports noted in its 2022 Annual Auto Reliability survey that just four of the 11 EVs in that survey had “average or better than predicted” reliability.

Plus, there are battery issues — they are expensive to replace. Consumer Affairs reported that “all EV batteries will eventually fail to hold a charge and require replacement.” In its survey of auto mechanics, the company reported that the total cost to replace a battery in a nearly 10-year-old Toyota Prius was $4,489, while the cost to replace the lithium battery in a 2014 Nissan Leaf was an astounding $17,657. A quick check on the price of a used 2014 Nissan Leaf reveals sellers are currently asking around $10,000 or so to get rid of them.

Then there are supply-chain issues. Last February the Felicity Ace — a cargo ship carrying hundreds of EVs — caught fire and sank in 10,000 feet of water off the shores of the Azores, Portugal. As Captain Rahul Khanna, global head of the marine insurance firm Allianze Global Corporate & Specialty (KGCS), noted, a single fire, from whatever cause, could (and did) incinerate an entire ship. In an interview with Autoweek, he said:

There have been quite a few, let’s say, near misses that the industry has seen over the years. And we … recognize the fact that EVs can be problematic, especially when it comes to fire….


The problem with EVs is that the lithium-ion batteries can actually propagate the fire. In fact, they can actually encourage a fire if a fire has already started and you have lithium-ion batteries — they can ignite a lot more vigorously as compared to any other cars.

Just last Friday a Norwegian shipping company banned EVs on its ferries, explaining that if an EV catches fire, the fire cannot be extinguished.

The bloom appears to be off the rose for EVs now that the reality of government interference for political reasons is becoming increasingly obvious. The cost of “going green” continues to escalate, and consumers are reacting accordingly.

Supreme Court Has Another Opportunity to Reverse a Poor Prior Decision

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, January 20, 2023:  

In agreeing to take under review a lower court’s decision in Groff v. DeJoy, the Supreme Court has another opportunity to right two wrongs simultaneously.

Gerald Groff, a Sabbatarian Christian, started work for the United States Postal Service (USPS) in 2012. His job description allowed him to take Sundays off. Even though the local post office grew over time, the service accommodated his religious commitments.

But then that office withdrew the accommodation and, when he couldn’t come to terms with the local postmaster, Groff moved to another location that allowed him to have his Sundays off.

When that second location’s rules changed, requiring Groff to work on Sundays, he tried to work out an accommodation, without success. He was forced to resign rather than violate his religious beliefs and, with the help of three public-interest law firms, filed suit against the USPS in 2016.

He was rebuffed at both the district and appeals court levels. The most recent decision claimed that “exempting Groff from working on Sundays caused more than a de minimis cost on USPS because it actually imposed on his coworkers, disrupted the workplace and workflow, and diminished employee morale….”

The 1964 Civil Rights Act, as amended, makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discriminate against an employee on the basis of his religion. It requires that an employer make “reasonable accommodations” to the religious needs of its employees.

In the recent decision, the appeals court based its ruling on TWA v. Hardison, decided in 1977, which tilted the equation heavily in favor of employers and against employees seeking similar accommodations.

The dissenting opinion in TWA v. Hardison exposes that “tilt”:

Today’s decision deals a fatal blow to all efforts under Title VII to accommodate work requirements to religious practices.


The Court [majority] holds, in essence, that although the EEOC regulations and the Act state that an employer must make reasonable adjustments in his work demands to take account of religious observances, the regulation and Act do not really mean what they say.


An employer, the Court [majority] concludes, need not grant even the most minor special privilege to religious observers to enable them to follow their faith.


As a question of social policy, this result is deeply troubling, for a society that truly values religious pluralism cannot compel adherents of minority religions to make the cruel choice of surrendering their religion or their job.

A lawyer from the Independence Law Center (ILC), one of the three pro-bono law firms assisting Groff, said, “Observing the Sabbath day is critical to many faiths — a day ordained by God. No one should be forced to violate the Sabbath [in order] to hold a job.”

A lawyer from the Church State Council, another firm representing Groff, added:

Workers have suffered too long with the Supreme Court’s interpretation [in TWA v. Hardison] that disrespects the rights of those with sincere faith commitments to a workplace accommodation.


It’s long past time for the Supreme Court to protect workers from religious discrimination.

Kelly Shackelford, president, CEO, and chief counsel for First Liberty Institute (also assisting in the case), added: “It’s time for the Supreme Court to reconsider a decades-old case [TWA v. Hardison] that favors corporations and the government over the religious rights of employees.”

Groff is hardly alone in fighting to keep both his religion and his job. As Nathan Lewin, a writer for Newsweek, noted:

Countless committed believers have been demoted or denied employment since the Hardison [decision] because their … employers were unwilling to make more than de minimis adjustments in their working conditions and schedules.

The importance of this case is reflected in the fact that fourteen amicus briefs were filed by religious liberty advocates with the Supreme Court, along with 17 state attorneys general and members of Congress.

As ILC attorney Jeremy Samek noted:

At the end of the day, Mr. Groff wants his job back. It’s important for him, but it’s also important for lots of other people who work for the federal government or the post office that they be able to continue their employment and to continue to observe their religious beliefs.

Oral arguments in Groff v. DeJoy (the postmaster general) will begin in a couple months. As noted earlier, the high court has another chance to right two wrongs simultaneously in this case.

Matt Gaetz Moves to Abolish the ATF

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, January 19, 2023:  

To Representative Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), the move last Friday by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to require citizens owning pistol braces to register them with the government was the “final straw.” On Tuesday, he rolled out a bill to abolish the rogue agency altogether.

The bill is one page long: “A Bill to abolish the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.… The [agency] is hereby abolished.”

Would that this would be so simple!

In June 2021, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene proposed the same thing but gave the agency six months to move its responsibilities to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI). Her bill included:

  • Repealing all ATF regulations issued after August 1, 2020;
  • Rescinding all hiring authority for the agency;
  • Publishing a list of all the weapons it had confiscated, and then selling them to licensed firearms dealers via a public auction;
  • Putting those proceeds into a fund for Border Patrol agents killed in the line of duty as a result of one of its botched operations, Operation Fast and Furious; and
  • Using any remaining funds to fund grants to states to establish firearm safety programs.

In 2014 Representative James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) had offered a similar bill, but with some of its operations being handed off to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) rather than the FBI.

When Gaetz rolled out his bill to abolish the ATF, he said:

The continued existence of the ATF is increasingly unwarranted based on the actions they’re taking to convert otherwise law-abiding people into felons. My bill would abolish the ATF.


If that doesn’t work, we’re going to try defunding the ATF.


If that doesn’t work, we’re going to target the individual bureaucrats at the top of the ATF who have exceeded their authority in rulemaking. And if that doesn’t work, we’re going to take a meat cleaver to the statutes that the ATF believes broadly authorize their actions.

When Representative Greene presented her bill back in 2021, she said the Biden administration was using the agency to harass lawful gun owners:

Joe Biden and the radical, anti-gun Democrats want to unleash the ATF on law-abiding gun owners across America, attacking our God-given Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.


The ATF’s ongoing, unconstitutional attacks on the Second Amendment must end.

And, when Representative Sensenbrenner proposed abolishing the ATF, he also minced no words:

The ATF is a largely duplicative, scandal-ridden agency that lacks a clear mission.…


It is plagued by backlogs, funding gaps, hiring challenges and a lack of leadership.


For decades it has been branded by high-profile failures. There is also significant overlap with other agencies.

While neither of these last two bills saw the light of day (as will likely be the outcome of Gaetz’ effort), the history of the ATF shows it to be corrupt to the core. Sam Jacobs, in an article published by the Libertarian Institute in 2020, took 19 pages to review just a few of the agency’s egregious and illegal operations.

They included:

  • A review of the agency by a Senate subcommittee back in the 1980s that concluded: “Based upon these hearings, it is apparent that ATF enforcement tactics … are constitutionally, legally, and practically reprehensible”;
  • Its Siege at Ruby Ridge;
  • Its Siege at Waco, Texas;
  • Its expanded powers granted after 9/11;
  • Its harassment of gun-show buyers and sellers in Richmond, Virginia;
  • Its “baiting” of innocent Hmong refugees in Laos;
  • Its entrapment of mentally disabled teenagers;
  • What the agency actually does with all those Form 4473s gun buyers must complete to purchase a firearm;
  • What the agency does with its slush fund generated from its illegal sales of cigarettes; and
  • How it punishes whistleblowers inside the agency when they bring to light some of the agency’s illegal activities.

For readers who may be unfamiliar with some of these illegal overreaches, the source is here. Upon reading, they may agree with Gaetz, Greene, and Sensenbrenner: The time to abolish this rogue agency is long past due.

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