US Elections (& Politics) :)

Joined
Aug 3, 2015
Messages
3,824
Reaction score
12,280
Location
Charlotte

June 27, 2022

It's Not About Abortion


Dear Patriots,


We have spent some time in the last months praising our federalist system and the rights, granted by The Constitution, to the states to govern themselves.

For example, during the pandemic, the Governor and legislature of Florida have approached Covid-CCP challenges with calm sensibility. They showed the rest of the world a way to handle an emergency without falling in line with federal government mandates on shots, masks and shutdowns.

The left loves a centralized government. They love a top down, dictatorship which rules with an iron fist. They wish ardently to cut off all alternative avenues of governing so that they can have complete control over everything.

In 1973, Roe v Wade was pulled from thin air.

The left has conveniently forgotten what their judicial idol Ruth Bader Ginsberg herself said.



It was just the start of a five decades long march to take many powers from the states and to circumvent the Constitution for centralized control.

This current Supreme Court is looking at, and interpreting, the Constitution, which is its only job, and deciding what it actually says and what it does not. On Friday, the Court announced its ruling that the decision on abortion should be decided as close to the people as possible, in the states.

The federal government has no power or authority to make any decisions on abortion because there is NO PLACE IN THE CONSTITUTION that gives it this right.

Giving back to the states their constitutional rights is what Dobbs Vs Jackson Women's Health was all about.

This ruling strikes fear in the communists. Because once this decision is made, it will be the basis for hundreds of other cases where the onerous, greedy, and inept federal government has over-stepped its bounds.

The ruling was not really about abortion.

Despite the hysterical wailing screeching threats of the misinformed on the Left, this Supreme Court decision does not ban any woman in America from obtaining an abortion.

It simply returned the power to the states to decide because The Constitution provides no basis for a "right to an abortion."
It is all about what rights the states have versus the "rights" of the federal government.
We only pray this victory is the start of both big and small claw-backs in our war to get our country back.

THE ONLY LINE IN THE DECISION OVERTURNING ROE YOU NEED TO READ:

"The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives."

1- In another Supreme Court case, they ruled that a 100 year old law that made it impossible to get a concealed carry permit in New York was unconstitutional.

Drew Allen

The SCOTUS Exposes the Lying, Lawless Left

QUOTE: The Left's response to the Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling in New York Rifle Association v. Bruen to strike down an unconstitutional New York gun law that restricted concealed carry was entirely predictable. The Left hates the Constitution, especially the 2nd Amendment, and nothing makes them angrier than the Supreme Court rebuking their lawlessness and upholding the unalienable right of the law-abiding American citizen to exercise his or her 2nd Amendment right.

In this case it was a New York law from 1911 that effectively prevented New York residents from acquiring a concealed carry license. The state law required the licensee to "demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community."

Robert Nash and Brendan Koch, two New York residents tried to get a concealed carry license and were both denied on the ground that they "failed to show 'proper cause' to carry a firearm in public for the purpose of self-defense." Both had extensive firearm safety training and Nash cited "a string of recent robberies in his neighborhood" as a need. If these two men couldn't get a concealed carry license in New York, then who could? You'd have to be dead before you could prove 'proper cause.'

The only thing to be outraged by is the fact that this unconstitutional law has survived for more than 100 years. But instead, the left is predictably apoplectic that the Supreme Court has finally struck it down.


2- North Carolina has been trying to get a Voter ID law for years, only to be thwarted by leftist lawsuits. This victory allows the Republican law makers to argue their case instead of the state's hard core leftist Attorney General.

Conservative Brief

Supreme Court Says North Carolina Republicans Can Defend Photo ID Law In Court

QUOTE: The US. Supreme Court has ruled 8-1 that leaders of North Carolina's Republican legislature can step in to advocate for a voter ID law in court that they believe the state's Democratic attorney general isn't fighting hard enough to defend.

"At the heart of this lawsuit lies a challenge to the constitutionality of a North Carolina election law. But the merits of that dispute are not before us, only an antecedent question of civil procedure: Are two leaders of North Carolina's state legislature entitled to participate in the case under the terms of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure," Gorsuch wrote in the opinion. "Within wide constitutional bounds, States are free to structure themselves as they wish. Often, they choose to
conduct their affairs through a variety of branches, agencies, and elected and appointed officials.


These constituent pieces sometimes work together to achieve shared goals; other times they reach very different judgments about important policy questions and act accordingly. This diffusion of governmental powers within and across institutions may be an everyday feature of American life. But it can also pose its difficulties when a State's laws or policies are challenged in federal court," he added.

The case involved whether Republican lawmakers in North Carolina can intervene to defend the state's voter ID law from lawsuits. Republican lawmakers say the state's Democratic Attorney General Josh Stein is not properly defending the law from legal challenges brought by the NAACP and other groups who claim it violates the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act.



Pray! He is hearing our prayers.

Hold Fast,

Defending The Republic


Comments or Questions? Contact: editor@defendingtherepublic.org

Join Our Fight

To have confidence in the outcome of any election, we must continue to demand (1) real paper ballots, (2) hand counted in a bipartisan transparent process, and (3) citizen voter ID.
Missed a newsletter or to revisit a past newsletter? They are archived HERE .
NOTE: Defending The Republic, Inc. is a §501(c)(4) non-profit organization, gifts to which are not deductible as charitable contributions for Federal income tax purposes.

Follow Our Progress:
DefendingTheRepublic.org
DefendingTheRepublicPAC.com
SidneyPowell on GETTR
Sidney on Telegram

Sidney onTruthSocial: @realsidneypowell
SidneyPowell.com

DTR's Rumble page!
DTR GETTR


This email was sent by Defending The Republic, located at 2911 Turtle Creek - Suite 300; Dallas, Texas 75219 (United States).
 

Parley

Known around here
Joined
Dec 19, 2015
Messages
5,628
Reaction score
16,043
Location
Cypress, California
Even Fox???

Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade Says Donald Trump Was ‘Unhinged’ Before Jan. 6 Riot (Video)



  • Donald Trump

Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade Says Donald Trump Was ‘Unhinged’ Before Jan. 6 Riot (Video)
Thom Geier
Sun, June 26, 2022 at 8:26 PM


In this article:



  • Donald Trump

    Donald Trump
    45th President of the United States


Fox News’ host Brian Kilmeade launched an unexpected broadside at Donald Trump, calling the former president “unhinged” after the 2020 election in the period before the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021.
Speaking on Howard Kurtz’s “Media Buzz” show on Sunday about the House Jan. 6 committee hearings, Kilmeade also rejected Trump’s repeated assertions that “he was robbed” due to widespread election fraud. “I have not seen any evidence,” he said, adding that Trump’s continued false claims are hurting his chances for political comeback.
“I’ve said this before, I believe from the time when the election results came in until January 6th is the worst moment of Donald Trump’s political career, and had he just said I’ve got problems, I’m going to have my legal team look at it, going to welcome the Bidens to the White House, he’d have about 70% approval rating right now and a clamoring to have him back in office,” the “Fox & Friends” host said. “It would be a coronation, not even an election. So I think how you lose in life defines who you are, and even if there are things that bother you, welcome to the world.”
Well ctgold wing this article is just for you. Looks like the Jan 6 committee is lying.

Exclusive: Former White House Staffer Confirms Jan. 6 Committee Lied About DOJ Attorney

Over the weekend, former Department of Justice lawyer Ken Klukowski called on the Jan. 6 Committee to release the full transcript of his deposition testimony to correct the lies they told about him to the American public. Now The Federalist has exclusively obtained a statement from a former White House staffer confirming Klukowski’s claims.

Last Thursday, the Jan. 6, 2021 show trial continued, with the Democrat-stacked committee presenting testimony concerning a draft letter Jeff Clark, a former assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice, proposed sending to the Georgia legislature.

That draft letter, dated December 28, 2020, stated the Department of Justice was investigating the 2020 election and recommended the Georgia legislature convene a special session to “evaluate the irregularities in the 2020 election including violations of Georgia election law,” and “determine whether those violations show which candidate for President won the most legal votes in the November 3 election.” The draft letter then suggested the General Assembly could appoint an alternative set of electors based on its findings.

The draft letter’s signature line included spaces for Clark, Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen, and Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue. But when Clark pitched the idea of sending the letter to Georgia officials, Rosen and Donoghue rejected the idea out of hand, because it was “not the department’s role to suggest or dictate to state legislatures how they should select their electors,” and “for the department to insert itself into the political process this way,” Donoghue told the committee, “may very well have spiraled us into a constitutional crisis.”

Donoghue was blunter with Clark in person, with Donoghue testifying he told Clark, “What you are doing is nothing less than the United States Justice Department meddling in the outcome of a presidential election.”

While last Thursday’s hearing by the Jan. 6 Committee centered on Clark and his efforts to have the letter sent to the Georgia legislature, the committee connected another DOJ attorney to Clark’s efforts, Klukowski—and did so by blatantly lying to the American public.

Exclusive: WH Staffer Confirms Jan. 6 Committee Lied About DOJ Attorney (thefederalist.com)
 
Joined
Dec 6, 2014
Messages
3,651
Reaction score
15,123
Location
South Dakota
Well well well..... HOWARD STERN wants to be President. LOL

But wait--- there's More--- He is going to get rid of the Electoral College! Bahahahahahahahahahaha

 

Michael Diehl

Getting the hang of it
Joined
May 30, 2019
Messages
108
Reaction score
80
Location
maggotland
This unfortunately is an attitude I observe in far too many so-called liberals: "just to piss you off".
"Turnabout is fair play", and who said I'm a "liberal"? If a "Liberal" is somebody who will not vote to turn the country into a ultra right-wing autocratic theocracy, then I am.
 
Joined
Dec 6, 2014
Messages
3,651
Reaction score
15,123
Location
South Dakota
"Turnabout is fair play", and who said I'm a "liberal"? If a "Liberal" is somebody who will not vote to turn the country into a ultra right-wing autocratic theocracy, then I am.
Why would you think that's a possibility. It's not by the way--- that would clearly go against a large chunk of our constitution.

It seems like leftists fear some "right wing takeover" and establishing a dictatorship. The danger of that is clearly and absolutely on the left, as they are the ones with such open disdain of the Constitution. The majority of conservatives want the constitution of this country FOLLOWED.
 

Michael Diehl

Getting the hang of it
Joined
May 30, 2019
Messages
108
Reaction score
80
Location
maggotland
Well well well..... HOWARD STERN wants to be President. LOL

But wait--- there's More--- He is going to get rid of the Electoral College! Bahahahahahahahahahaha

Why would you think that's a possibility. It's not by the way--- that would clearly go against a large chunk of our constitution.

It seems like leftists fear some "right wing takeover" and establishing a dictatorship. The danger of that is clearly and absolutely on the left, as they are the ones with such open disdain of the Constitution. The majority of conservatives want the constitution of this country FOLLOWED.
Oh, maybe its got something to do with your Golden Golem of Greatness and his admiration for Authoritarian Dictatorships he seemed particularly fond of Putins "President for Life", and the Puritan Hats the most of SCOTUS now wears (they only "came out of the closet" once they had majority).
 
Joined
Dec 6, 2014
Messages
3,651
Reaction score
15,123
Location
South Dakota
Oh, maybe its got something to do with your Golden Golem of Greatness and his admiration for Authoritarian Dictatorships he seemed particularly fond of Putins "President for Life", and the Puritan Hats the most of SCOTUS now wears (they only "came out of the closet" once they had majority).
Wow. That is some seriously athletic jumping you're doing to reach those conclusions.

Why aren't we in a right wing dictatorship now? Lemme guess-- ANTIFA stopped it? LOL

So you hate Trump. OK. Please tell me about how his POLICIES hurt you or the country-- because THAT is what matters at the end of the day.
 

Michael Diehl

Getting the hang of it
Joined
May 30, 2019
Messages
108
Reaction score
80
Location
maggotland
Wow. That is some seriously athletic jumping you're doing to reach those conclusions.

Why aren't we in a right wing dictatorship now? Lemme guess-- ANTIFA stopped it? LOL

So you hate Trump. OK. Please tell me about how his POLICIES hurt you or the country-- because THAT is what matters at the end of the day.
What "stopped it" was that he LOST the Election (as he admitted privately it turns out). This was also "another" "Great Disappointment" for a large portion of his religious base, who thought prior to 2020 that although most didn't like Trump at all, thought he was "Gods Tool" (he was a Tool all right..) and that he would be re-elected, and then The Rapture" would follow in four more years. He liked that too, for anybody who thinks that would believe anything he said...
I'll work on the "policy list", unlike most here, I don't rely on "Q" (are you guys getting more "Q-Tips"...ha, ha, ha,) or any other contrived magnified Village Gossip (A.K.A. "Social Media) so may take a bit....
 

TonyR

IPCT Contributor
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
16,808
Reaction score
39,112
Location
Alabama
Open border catch and release into the country policy.

All that needs to be done is have a policy that allows only those that follow the law are allowed to say in the country.

View attachment 131993


Does this sound about right?

Liberals: "This is a sad event and it is the kind of thing that happens when the borders are NOT open. Poor, downtrodden, freedom-seeking immigrants risk their lives just to come to America. If we would just open the borders this sort of thing would not happen to the innocents, there would be no victims like this."
Conservatives: "This is a sad event, no doubt. But if we had totally open borders the gangs and drug cartel operatives would explode into the streets even more than now and the numbers of homicides in the inner cities and overdoses and deaths everywhere due to illicit drugs would be 10X that it is now. The law abiding, USA-born citizens and the law abiding, legal immigrant citizens of this country would be the victims, including the innocents."
 
Last edited:

qflyer

Pulling my weight
Joined
Oct 22, 2021
Messages
171
Reaction score
110
Location
USA
Does this sound about right?

Liberals: "This is a sad event and it is the kind of thing that happens when the borders are NOT open. Poor, downtrodden, freedom-seeking immigrants risk their lives just to come to America. If we would just open the borders this sort of thing would not happen to the innocents, there would be no victims like this."
Conservatives: "This is a sad event, no doubt. But if we had totally open borders the gangs and drug cartel operatives would explode into the streets even more than now and the numbers of homicides in the inner cities and overdoses and deaths everywhere due to illicit drugs would be 10X that it is now. The law abiding, USA-born citizens and the law abiding, legal immigrant citizens of this country would be the victims, including the innocents."
So let’s legalize drugs. No more drug cartels when you can go to the local pharmacy and buy your clean and regulated drugs, right?
But then what excuse would you come up with to turn brown people away?
 

bigredfish

Known around here
Joined
Sep 5, 2016
Messages
17,530
Reaction score
48,786
Location
Floriduh

Parley

Known around here
Joined
Dec 19, 2015
Messages
5,628
Reaction score
16,043
Location
Cypress, California
So let’s legalize drugs. No more drug cartels when you can go to the local pharmacy and buy your clean and regulated drugs, right?
But then what excuse would you come up with to turn brown people away?
Leftist always play the race card. By the way Hispanics are jumping over to the Republican Party in big numbers. They do not like Biden's border policies either. A Hispanic Republic Congresswoman just got elected to a district in Texas with a 97% Democrat registration edge.
 
Top