There is a disturbing trend at the Public Meetings of the Town Council, in which elected officials have repeatedly opted to take time after the closure of public comment to make inaccurate statements about citizens or events in town. This is a repeated pattern of behavior in which Council members are allowed to make statements, free from public rebuttal or examination, in an attempt to control the narrative surrounding town issues.

At the most recent public meeting of the Town Council on Friday, Jan. 12, the Council Chairman made vague, non-specific complaints regarding what he felt were “inaccuracies” in a “local publication.” Notably, Chairman John Farrell appeared to use this time to deride former Town Councilor Debra Paul, as well, as opposed to limiting his remarks to the content of the paper. This does not seem to be in line with the Council’s suggested rules of order and Chairman Farrell’s own previous statements, in which it was stated that attacks on individuals were not encouraged. Most notably, Farrell did not seem eager to apologize for wasting thousands of taxpayer dollars fighting Mrs. Paul over the release of documents related to Town Manager Mike Malaguti’s frivolous actions against Mrs. Paul. Despite Chairman Farrell’s claims that certain articles were one-sided, the majority of the story he referenced was comprised of court documents, highlighting a nearly nine-month wait through the courts, where, in the end, a judge ruled that the town needed to hand over the document and also pay all attorney fees associated with it.

Farrell also made an incorrect assertion that, in his opinion, the only reason Deb Paul chose to pursue a remedy through the courts was so she could print the sexual harassment letter in the newspaper. Thankfully, the judge did not agree, clearly placing the onus for frivolous behavior on the Town Manager.

Contrary to Farrell’s assertion, the letter was NOT published in this paper, though there were links published on the website to the letter for readers to verify its content. The story that was written at the time focused on the judge’s decision.

The Chairman also made references to an investigation that the town conducted into these matters but falsely claimed that Mrs. Paul was privy to the fact that an investigation was ongoing at the time; she was not.

Chairman Farrell refused to elaborate further.

In our opinion, Farrell has used his gavel repeatedly as a shield to hide behind while he pontificates on his version of the truth.

If the town felt that articles in the paper were inaccurate, they could have taken the opportunity we provide to request a correction to be run. It is noteworthy that this paper has not received any requests regarding the story being referenced.

It is clear that as long as Mr. Farrell is sitting in the Chairman’s seat, he will continue to try and “control the narrative” without allowing folks in opposition a chance to respond.

For us, as long as we continue to publish the Londonderry Times, we will continue to give folks a voice in the “letters to the editor” section.

The editorial is in response to comments made by Chairman Farrell at the 1/12/2024 Council meeting.

 

 

It’s important to note that Councilor Farrell Chose NOT to address the other comments made during public comment. Those comments are below.

 

We want to thank The Londonderry Times for being a partner and supporter of  Independent Media. You can support us here, or if you prefer to donate by check, email steve@granitegrok com for details.

The post For the Record, Defense of Public Comment appeared first on Granite Grok.

A meme recently raised eyebrows by comparing the cost of groceries purchased for twenty dollars in 1990’s Home Alone movie by child actor Macaulay Culkin with what that basket of goods would cost today. US food inflation has spiked in recent years, exacerbated by the COVID pandemic and substantial federal spending. Despite this, government and media reports claim inflation is cooling sharply and food prices are coming down. Consumers may be forgiven for being skeptical.

Biden’s approval ratings are subterranean, driven in large part by a struggling economy pummeled by record spending. Suddenly, Americans are told that these inflationary pressures are reversing due to Biden’s stellar economic policies. It is to be hoped that inflation is indeed cooling, but Americans’ grocery bills have yet to reflect that optimism.

Inflated Credibility

The government/media alliance that fabricated a Russia-Trump connection and covered up Hunter Biden’s laptop in 2020, might find it has credibility problems telling the public the economy is fine and that there is nothing to see behind that Federal Reserve curtain. Current Biden-exalting economic headlines sound less like news than they do reassuring soundbites courtesy of Karine Jean-Pierre. Reuters reported the rosiest of predictions, claiming recent numbers suggest the economy is “regaining speed after appearing to falter at the start of the fourth quarter.”

“This was yet another data set showcasing the durability of the economic expansion, thanks to a resilient labor market. The economy has defied dire predictions of recession from economists and some business executives going back to late 2022.

“The government reported on Thursday that core PCE inflation increased at a 2.0% annualized rate in the third quarter. That, combined with November’s mild gain, put the six-month core PCE inflation rate at 1.9%.”

Inflation Politics?

Such wishful thinking may prove short-lived. A frantic effort to bring down fuel and food prices as the 2024 election approaches may woo disillusioned Democrats, but these economic hijinks cannot endure. Indeed, the PCE price index relied upon by Reuters and others excludes fuel and food prices precisely because they are volatile. This has yielded a sort of inflation-gauging shell game, in which the government skews the data to procure sanguine predictions that do not jibe with consumers’ grocery store and gas pump realities. This is the difference between “headline inflation,” which includes these volatile, fundamental household expenditures for food and fuels, and “core inflation,” used artfully (as in the above quote) to pooh-pooh claims that consumers are hurting at the check-out counter.

When partisan forces corrupt the reliability of data, Americans must keep their eyes peeled. There are legitimate uses of core inflation figures, but to ignore food and fuel costs while telling Americans inflation is in the rearview mirror is disingenuous. Core inflation strips out volatile food and energy prices because they can be impacted by international geopolitics (think grain and energy from Russia and Ukraine) and environmental factors (such as drought, or unseasonable deep freezes).

Causes of Food Inflation

The Biden Administration has made geopolitical nation-building and climate change the two centerpieces of its foreign and domestic policies. Both efforts have driven up food and energy prices and will continue to do so. Closing pipelines and new oil exploration increases the cost of fossil fuels used to plow, sow, treat, and harvest hundreds of millions of acres of crops, as well as the costs of equipment, synthetic fertilizers, and transportation. Plastics for packaging and wages for grocery clerks have sharply increased in cost as well.

These increased overheads are directly connected to Biden’s energy and food policies (targeting cows and promoting synthetic meats also drive up meat prices). Yet these are precisely the costs excluded from the gushing claims that inflation has been conquered, and interest rates will soon start coming down. American consumers lack the luxury of recategorizing their monthly budgets between “core” and “headline” expenditures – they are always going to pay the headline.

Hazy Food Price Projections

That headline is not looking so optimistic. War in Russia continues, along with the food and energy pressures that conflict has inflicted on the world. The Biden administration has not diminished its assault on oil and natural gas resources, either, reducing supplies and driving up prices. The USDA notes: “In 2022, food prices increased by 9.9 percent. Food-at-home prices increased by 11.4 percent, while food-away-from-home prices increased by 7.7 percent.” Despite claims of lower “core” inflation, the USDA predicts food prices will not decline in 2024:

“USDA economists said in the forecast that food prices are expected to continue to decelerate but not decline in 2024. In 2024, all food prices are predicted to increase 2.9% in 2024, with a prediction interval of -0.9% to 6.8%.”

These food numbers, too, should be ingested with a large serving of salt. The “basket of goods” employed to calculate such predictions is subject to abuse. Just as Macaulay Culkin’s fictitious purchase in 1990 of Tide detergent, a gallon of milk, and a package of toy soldiers may not accurately mirror what most Americans drop into their carts, the USDA’s measures may bypass volatile products that are favorites at the dinner table. Eggs have skyrocketed; live beef prices have dropped slightly but are expected to rise substantially in 2024, as is chicken. Sugar, coffee, and soybeans are expected to drop in 2024 – but what of seafood, poultry, pork, and cheese?

The Future Food Inflation Climate

Food prices are difficult to accurately predict due to many variables impacting costs and supplies. American consumers would do well to stock up despite rose-colored predictions about core inflation. Joe Biden’s agenda-driven policies – especially geopolitics, and “rescuing” the climate by tamping down oil in favor of coal-fired solar panel manufacturing – will continue to disproportionately impact headline inflation. Core inflation is the number trumpeted by propagandists to sway voters; Headline inflation is the number that meets the consumer at the pay counter.

There are no signs that food inflation – or the Biden policies that continue to pressure food prices upwards – will broadly decline any time soon.

The post Night Cap: Food Inflation for 2024 – Understanding the Government’s Shell Game appeared first on Granite Grok.

Today’s (1/20) Real Clear Politics Average has Biden’s job approval at 40 percent. Stated differently and arguably more accurately, 40 percent of Americans hate America. The Biden Regime is, in reality, Obama’s third term, and the people really running the Biden Regime are hell-bent on completing Obama’s goal of “transforming” America into a socialist-based-on-woke, apartheid dystopia.

We are watching the Great Replacement before our very eyes and yet many of those who disapprove of Biden claim the open Southern border is merely “incompetence.” DEI is replacing meritocracy everywhere and yet many of those who disapprove of Biden intone “diversity is our strength” to rationalize discrimination based on race, sex, etc.. The Biden-Regime is filling the federal bench with the most radical left-wing activists imaginable, and yet many of those who disapprove of Biden content themselves with ‘Senator Kennedy really skewered that Biden nominee in the committee hearing.’

Forty percent of Americans hate America, and far too many of the other 60 percent are oblivious to or in denial about how the Biden-Regime is successfully “transforming” America into a socialist-based-on-woke, apartheid dystopia.

The post Forty Percent Of Americans Hate America appeared first on Granite Grok.

We announced it live on the air during day one of Radio Row, but if you missed it, Gov. Ron Desantis, just days before the NH Primary, has dropped out .. and Endorsed Donald Trump.

I’ll have more to say when I have more time, but my first thought was wow. My second was I know a few not-very-Trump-freindly DeSantis supporters who will be less than pleased. They can’t be taking this news well.

Here are Gov. DeSantis’ remarks and why he is supporting Donald Trump for the GOP nomination.

“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.”

– Winston Churchill pic.twitter.com/ECoR8YeiMm

— Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) January 21, 2024

The post ICYMI – DeSantis Drops Out – Endorses Donald Trump appeared first on Granite Grok.

The Emmy Award-winning television show Survivor will be headed to the Green Mountain state to film their latest installment, “Survivor: Burlington,” this month. Airing its forty-second series since it debuted in 2000. The producers were looking for a location that could provide a unique set of challenges not yet faced by previous contestants.

Survivor has been known to fly its team to remote tropical locales, typically islands, where contestants need to work as a team in order to win the competition.  This will be the first time they compete in an urban setting in winter.

As they scoured the world looking for the best urban challenge, they were shocked to find Burlington, VT, had a D- rating for crime, putting it in the top 10% least safe cities in the United States.

“We were tired of always shooting in the tropics.  You can only get so tan and eat so many fish tacos before you feel like you’re going to lose it” remarked the show’s co-founder and host Jeff Probst.

“We knew we wanted somewhere cold to mix it up, and it came down to Chicago or Burlington.  We were shocked and pleasantly surprised Burlington had the worse crime rate.” said the Emmy award-winning host.

Pleasantly surprised?

“I drive a Tesla, and I love to ski,” remarked co-producer Mark Burnett, who also declared his love of Ben and Jerry’s ice cream.

The series usually has two or three tribes, but will be adding a fourth this year.  Contestants were chosen at the Texas border, where their airfare and rooms were already paid for, saving the production team tens of thousands of dollars.

The emphasis on true tribal allegiance has been set by choosing undocumented migrants to represent their respective nations: Venezuela, China, Syria, and California.

The tribes will be released into one of the following hi-crime locations: City Hill Park, Ethan Allen Park, Battery Park, or Church Street. The contestants will begin the game wearing a pair of Darn Tough socks, a backpack, and a ski cap, yet otherwise completely naked so as not to arouse suspicion from locals.

Per the game’s format, the tribes will be given a series of tasks in order to win immunity, while the losing tribes will have to face secondary challenges to remain in the game.  Bananas Media was able to get a glimpse of the list of competitions and immunity challenges, some of which include:

Team challenges:

• BURLINGTON ROULETTE – contestants walk Church street blindfolded trying not to step on a needle; opt-out challenge is to take a COVID vaccine and not develop myocarditis, an auto-immune disorder or die suddenly before the end of the season*
• STATUTORY DRAPE – the first team to knock down a designated statue or completely drape it wins (teams will need to find or make their own drape)
• PRONOUN ASSASSINS – the first tribe to mis-gender ten local residents will gain immunity
• CAMPING IS IN-TENTS – contestants will have to steal a tent no greater value than $999 from a local outdoor store then erect it at a designated location, the first team to achieve full erection wins
• JUMPING JACKS & JILLS –  teams will be tasked with jump-charging an EV in sub-zero temperatures with the winning team able to both keep the vehicle running until sun-up and not get car jacked

Immunity challenges:

• BEETLEMANIA – first to drink a milkshake made of pureed dung beetles using a paper straw wins immunity
• SOLAR FLARE – first contestant to make a fire using only a solar panel wins immunity

 

Hidden immunity idol:

• SWING THE VOTE: Contestants will hang from a drone on a swing as they look for the hidden idol. The first to find it will be given a Dominion Voting machine to ensure they win the vote every time

 

Also seeing a return will be the Survivor feature Exile Island challenge.  Each week, at least one castaway will be sent to Isle La Motte (pop. 488), where they will be given a pair of ice skates, a gallon of maple syrup, and a Jeremiah Johnson Hawken muzzle-loaded rifle with one live round pre-loaded to survive the week or attempt to skate back over Lake Champlain to the mainland.

Burlington mayor Miro Weinberger was surprised to hear of his city being chosen for this unique event. When not engaged in acts of white supremacy, Mayor Weinberger spends much of his focus on getting the city to net-zero carbon emissions.  After hearing his Queen City ruled over Chicago for crime rate, Mayor Weinberger beamed with delight, noting the hard work and dedication necessary to achieve such a milestone.

“Defunding the police really helped.  We also set a standard of excellence for tolerance, which means tolerating things other cities won’t, like crack-heads, vagrants, men in women’s bathrooms, sex workers, and asylum seekers from known terrorist hot spots.  We may be a small city, but we’ve got a big city crime rate AND zero-carbon emissions. Can Chicago say that?  I doubt it.”

When asked if he’d be willing to fill-in if the show needs a replacement, Weinberger rejected the offer since he will be in Florida during the show’s shooting, where he will be training for his upcoming men’s over 35 baseball league.

*The Centers for Disease Control assert that COVID-19 vaccines are both safe and effective. 

The post Bananas: CBS Newest “Survivor: Burlington” appeared first on Granite Grok.

As reported here on Bear Pond Conservative Chronicles and other sources like The Maine Wire, the Chinese Cartel has set its sights on rural Maine and is now operating hundreds of illegal pot farms.

This assault on Maine began a few years ago when folks with Chinese links from New York and New Jersey started to buy properties in Maine and convert them to pot farms. The harvested product was exported up and down the eastern seaboard from Canada to Florida. These properties were bought with cash and modified with high-power electrical and climate control systems. The windows and doors were covered to hide the new purpose of the buildings, and neighbors were traumatized by the latest “industry” permeating their communities. The state seemed stymied to take action, and calls for help by Maine’s Senators and Congressmen remain unanswered by the Department of Homeland Security and Joe Biden’s Justice Department. Even though the Maine Congressional Delegation is predominantly Democrat (except for Susan Collins), the Biden Administration has ignored the pleas for help.

Local and state enforcement has stepped up, and though there have only been eight farms raided, it is a start with a lot of work still to be done. Plants have been confiscated, and the local operators have been arrested and charged. These people are just the foot soldiers in a much larger operation. This Chinese Cartel has money and power, and with over 200 locations statewide, many more sites need to be shut down before they feel the heat.

The biggest question I see in this story is why Maine. Maine is not alone, as this scenario repeats in rural Midwest and West Coast states. Oklahoma, New Mexico, and California have also been targeted. This multi-billion dollar operation is linked to the Chinese and is another example of China infiltrating our country for nefarious purposes. Whether it is buying agricultural land, land around sensitive military facilities and businesses, or setting up illegal pot operations, the members of this Chinese Cartel are not good neighbors or a positive influence in communities. Their actions are allowed because the Biden Administration is powerless due to their indebtedness to the Chinese government.

Like the other states dealing with this situation, Maine is large and predominantly rural, and it is difficult for strapped law enforcement to cover with their depleted staff. These illegal pot growers have space, privacy, intimidation of your neighbors, and a low chance of being caught and paying for your actions. Though marijuana laws are lax in Maine, unlicensed growers and exporters are not.

Recently, the Somerset County Sheriff’s Department led a raid on a property in Cornville, Maine, that led to the discovery of an illegal marijuana growing facility operated by two Asian males and an Asian female who spoke little or no English. Authorities reported it takes about a month to gather information and build a case strong enough to get the approval for a raid. The road is long to eradicate the Chinese Pot problem in Maine, but it must be done. Law enforcement deserves our support, as well as any information about locations you may suspect are being used as growing locations. Step up and say something. Let’s not let up until every one of these sites is closed.

The post Bear Pond Conservative Chronicles: Eight Successful Raids, Hundreds More Needed appeared first on Granite Grok.

On January 10th, Rep. Laura Sibilia (I-Dover) introduced H.634 – An act relating to school closures and the designation of a public school to serve as the public school of the district. It is another salvo against Vermont’s 150-year-old school choice system, “tuitioning,” and the independent schools that thrive – along with their students – as a result of this highly popular and effective program.

The bill is not remarkable as the VTNEA and their allies (like Sibilia) are doing all they can while enjoying supermajority, veto-proof power to eliminate any competition for the public school monopoly – and plunder the spoils of the vanquished. What is more remarkable is Sibilia’s explanations for why she is submitting this bill.

At one point in her testimony she says, “I’m very nervous. I have seen within my district, around the state, rural communities that are in stress contemplating, we’re going to shut down [the failing local public school] and just give our kids choice.”

Well, if that’s what the voters in your district want, why wouldn’t you support the wishes of the people who elected you? And why wouldn’t families want the ability to send their kids to the best school around, public or independent, that fits their child’s and their family’s needs? Not only does this practice lead to better student outcomes, parents being more involved in their kids’ education, and generally more satisfaction with a school, it also increases the property values in the communities that have it.

Sibilia should know this because, as she says, “I represent both choice towns and non-choice towns in my district. And my pledge to my choice towns when I ran was, I will defend what you have.” So much for campaign pledges, as this bill intends to do away with that choice by forcing those districts to designate public schools that the kids would be forced to go to, eliminating options such as Burr & Burton Academy, the Long Trail School – not for nothing, two of the top performing schools in the state – as well as other independent schools in the region.

These are schools Sibilia acknowledges her constituents are “really happy to send their students to.” But, she wants to kill that happiness and force the kids to go to schools the parents would not be really happy to send them to. Why?

Sibila calls the independent schools “aggressive,” whatever that means in this context. I think it means not rolling over to do what she is telling them is best for them, their students and the communities they serve. And she is using this bill to punish the Academies because, she is “extremely [emphasis in the original] disappointed that they have not come to the table [and accept designation]… “which I have districts that will not. They refuse.” For good reason. Let’s hope they continue to stand up to this bully.

Now, the spin Sibilia is trying to put on her position is that expanded school choice would “leave rural communities behind. “We simply don’t have the ability to do that with the number of buildings, with the terrain, with the transportation, with the dollars…. So, I will never support it.” Which begs the question, has the woman ever been to the Northeast Kingdom?

The NEK is the most rural region of our state, with some of the most challenging terrain. It also has near universal school choice, in many parts full school choice from K through 12. They have figured out the transportation. They spend on average less money per student and get better than average outcomes. Parents can choose schools like St. Johnsbury Academy – a top school in the state – Lyndon Institute, Thaddeus Stevens, Riverside, as well as public school options in Vermont and New Hampshire. It works! It works great.

Forcing tuitioning districts to designate public schools creates an issue even the House Education Committee Chair, Peter Conlon (D-Cornwall), certainly no friend of school choice, called out. “If the issue is geography, one could foresee a small high school closing, and the nearest high school is one of the four academies, and this would remove that as an option. And, I guess, some might say that doesn’t seem logical. [It’s not.] How would you respond to that?”

She gave a non-answer, but a revealing one. “This is an extraordinarily challenging opportunity, and if we can agree on what the problem is that we want to solve, and we can all come together we can solve it…. Again, I point to where are the academies? The academies are driving toward market-based solutions. And that doesn’t work for me.”

So that’s the problem she wants to solve: Letting her constituents decide what’s best for themselves and their families doesn’t work for her. She opposes a proven effective model that many of her constituents have and more want because under that model she doesn’t get the control – people do. That doesn’t work for her, and sadly it doesn’t work for most of the lawmakers in that building.

Conlon said he looks forward to discussing the bill in his committee further.

Rob Roper is a freelance writer with 20 years of experience in Vermont politics, including three years of service as chair of the Vermont Republican Party and nine years as President of the Ethan Allen Institute, Vermont’s free-market think tank. He is also a regular contributor to VermontGrok.

The post My Constituents Want School Choice and Must Be Stopped! appeared first on Granite Grok.

Hello, Friends of Freedom! This week, we will discover exactly where the phrase “Separation of Church and State” came from. So, let’s dig in!

On October 7, 1801, the Baptist Association of Danbury, Connecticut, sent a letter to then-President Thomas Jefferson. They expressed to him their concern with the appearance of religious protection they had read about in certain laws and constitutions being formed. They believed that religious freedom was a God-given right and that no government should regulate religious activities.

They feared because of religious freedom appearing in these documents that the government would one day overstep its bounds and feel it had the power to regulate that freedom.

President Jefferson responded to their concerns with a letter of his own on January 1st, 1802. He reassured them that man is accountable only to God in areas of faith and religious practice. Also, as was understood by all the founding fathers, President Jefferson reassured them that all of man’s inalienable rights, including religious practices, would never be able to be controlled by the new American form of government because, as he states in the LETTER, there is a wall of separation between the two. I emphasized the letter because this was a personal correspondence between men of faith and the President. That phrase was meant to show that they need not worry about the government in America creating the kind of church-state Europe had done.

Note, once again this is a letter, that statement is not found in any of the founding documents.

A direct quote from President Jefferson reads as follows, “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between and his God, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation of Church and State.

Jefferson was making sure they understood that the new American government could not control the expression of religion and that the Constitution was to provide security AGAINST government interference, private or public.

As time moved on and cases were brought forth to challenge this view, several actually prevailed. This occurred in 1947 with the case of Everson v. Board of Education. Here, the court ruled for the first time that the government could remove religious expression from the public square. The court interpreted the word “separation” as a license for them to take some control over religious expression. They did this by separating the phrase from Jefferson’s letter, which shows the clear intention and meaning of what he wrote.

Other cases begin to occur, and finally, today, we have arrived at a place our founding fathers never intended the country to go.

It is sad, but we must believe that this situation can be turned around. It may take years, but progress in the right direction is being made.

We must continue to pray and get good, God-fearing people elected to office. Proverbs 19:2 When good men rule the people rejoice and prosper, when dishonest men rule the people mourn.

Until Next Week

Allen

The post Don’t Blame the Danbury Baptists appeared first on Granite Grok.

Beginning at 10 am Eastern Time, we will be live from Radio Row in Manchester, New Hampshire.

Today’s guests are NH House Jason Osborne, NH GOP Chairman Chris Ager, Nashua Trump Captain Di Lothrop, Rep. Jeanine Notter, from the Free State Project – Carla Gericke and Mike Brakey, and then from the Government Integrity Project – Tom Murray and Ken Eyring.

To tune in we will be streaming live on the Grok Facebook Page (issues with Twitter, sorry no stream there today).

Take Me To The Live Steam

 

More guests tomorrow and Tuesday, so check back!

 

The post Live From Radio Row in Manchester! appeared first on Granite Grok.

The world will always be full of problems in your state or county, town, neighborhood, and perhaps even your household. They might not all be as onerous as figuring out dinner every night for the rest of your life. Some will, but most won’t.

And most won’t require the government to get involved.

This one, sadly, must. It can’t be avoided. The problem of public records. They are public. You have the right to see them. But towns and cities are often disinclined to hand them over without what, in divorce court, would be defined as mental cruelty. They’ll spend thousands, even hundreds of thousands, in court to fight that right or to argue they aren’t public or simply can’t be provided rather than just pay someone to find and deliver them.

Court challenges are a huge investment in other people’s money, and it would be fair to wonder if that was to hide misfeasance, malfeasance, common, ordinary, incompetence, fraud, and corruption.

Enter HB1002, which “establishes parameters for when a public body may charge a fee for records provided under RSA 91-A.” Fourteen Republicans sponsored this thing.  (Prime) Kuttab (R), Michael Cahill (D), Ball (R), Maggiore (D), Ankarberg (R), DeSimone (R), Dunn (R), Nelson (R), Bill Boyd (R), Edwards (R), Grassie (D), Carson (R), Gannon (R), Watters (D), Lang (R), Avard (R). Its purpose is to assess a tax to access public records, euphemistically referred to as a fee. One that, in the event that the time required to assemble the requested material exceeds ten hours – as if you’d let them figure that out and assume it is both accurate and just – you will be quoted a labor cost for access. Things could, sorry, WILL, get costly and quickly.

Right to know requests as a revenue stream. What could go wrong?

Sadly, I didn’t hear about this bill until after the public hearing, which I do not have time to watch – but I understand that there was a lot of pushback, as there should have been. These are public records. Public employees exist to fetch them when requested. They get paid to do it. If the number of requests seems excessive, too bad. How about paying another staffer instead of lawyers to sue citizens to keep them from accessing … public records? I bet you’d save the taxpayers some money.

Take Nashua, for example. They have wasted hundreds of thousands, losing 91-A records cases in court. It’s gotten so bad that suing seems to be the only way to separate the city from public documents.

One resident informed me that Nashua, to defend its refusal to provide public records, hires outside legal help. For one case, they are paying five lawyers to fight a pro se citizen with a tab that has to be approaching half a million dollars. One case. Public records. How many hours of looking for records, using the 25.00 fee rule in HB1002, does that equal?

For a 25.00 tax “Citizen A” can get ten hours of looking for whatever they requested. In the half-a-million example, you get 200,000 hours. 500,000/25.00 x 10 hours.

There are 8,760 hours in a year, so Nashua has spent the equivalent of 22 years’ worth of Right to Know request “fines” as proposed in HB1002 – to prevent one citizen from accessing some emails or other public documents.

If one city can afford to waste that sort of time and other people’s money to keep public documents private, imagine what the sum would be if we included Rochester, Londonderry, and any of the other cities and towns that are getting to be like or worse than Nashua. Wouldn’t the public interest be better served if that time was used to obtain public records?

The obstruction and lawfare are not about cost or time or labor, but if that is still a sticking point, rather than turn government impedeiment into a revenue stream, why not create RTK donor towns? Nashua has time and cash to burn. Smaller bergs and villages could be reimbursed for the cost of local fulfilling 91-A requests so that residents are not required to pay a tax to see a document they already paid for. It’s a very popular scheme with education funding, and making rich cities pay for poor towns sounds a lot like equity to me. I’m sure the Democrats will find a reason to complain, but this fits nicely in their ideological wheelhouse.

Or, we could trach HB1002 and go back to business as usual, which – in an increasing number of towns – means wasting small fortunes to keep public documents from the public.

If they’ve got that kind of time to waste, and time is money, the problem isn’t burdensome public inquiry. It’s town and city government, and taxing them to access public documents is only going to make that problem worse.

 

The post Fourteen NH Republicans Sponsor Bill to “Tax” Public Records Access appeared first on Granite Grok.

VT Digger recently posted an article lamenting that we Vermonters are not heeling to the mandate to transition our vehicles to electric. Alas, “As of October 2023, there were just under 11,000 plug-in EVs registered in the state, David Roberts, a consultant for the Vermont Energy Investment Corporation, told the House Transportation Committee.

But meeting state emissions goals [under the Global Warming Solutions Act] for the transportation sector would require that there be about 27,000 plug-in EVs registered in Vermont by 2025 (including plug-in hybrids) and 126,000 by 2030.” We’re not going to get there. It’s totally unrealistic.

Why? WE CUSTOMERS/VOTERS DON’T WANT THESE FREAKIN’ CARS!

At least not nearly to the extent the climate alarmists in Montpelier demand. Still, they persist in forcing down our throats this technology that is too expensive and far too impractical for the overwhelming majority of drivers. This is bad policy on so many levels inflicted upon us by people who simply don’t care.

The growth in EV ownership in Vermont, what there is of it, is driven in large part by huge taxpayer and electric ratepayer subsidies that are grotesquely regressive. As VT Digger reports, “In an attempt to meet those targets, the state has introduced a slew of incentive programs in recent years on top of existing federal incentives to encourage Vermonters to go electric. The state programs include the Replace Your Ride program, which grants $3,000 to drivers who give in old cars that use fossil fuels, and the MileageSmart program, which offers Vermonters up to $5,000 to buy a used plug-in EV or hybrid.”

This is on top of government subsidy money doled out directly to auto manufacturers. In 2023, for example, the Biden administration offered $12 billion in grants and loans for automakers and suppliers to retrofit their plants to produce electric vehicles – THAT CONSUMERS DON’T WANT.

That’s all money transferred from hard-working Vermonters’ bank accounts to a politically favored class of drivers – who are by and large wealthier than those paying the bills.

Energy reporter Robert Bryce just published a fantastic article on just how regressive and politically motivated the EV push really is, and who is taking advantage of all this taxpayer-funded largess.

Last October, researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, released a remarkable study that found “counties with affluent left-leaning cities” like Cambridge, San Francisco, and Seattle [and Burlington?] “play a disproportionately large role in driving the entire national increase in EV adoption….”

87% are white. Last March, Gallup reported, “a substantial majority of Republicans, 71%, say they would not consider owning an electric vehicle.”

So, what’s happening here is that lower-income tax/ratepayers are being forced to subsidize the climate fetishes and virtue signaling of rich, white liberals.

Beyond these more person-to-person wealthfare transfers, Bryce cites statistics showing that the money is overwhelmingly flowing into wealthier, liberal cities and states — another form of wealth transfer.

Despite all this, Automakers are, according to NASDAQ, “already losing money on their EV investments. Ford, for example, lost about $36,000 for every EV it sold last quarter.” Bryce cites bigger numbers:

Ford reported an operating loss of $1.3 billion in its EV division during the third quarter. That translates into a loss of $62,016 for each of the 20,962 EVs it sold during the period. means that FoMoCo has already lost about $3.1 billion on its EV business this year. As I noted in these pages in July, the company said it expected to lose $4.5 billion on its EV business in 2023.

Honda and General Motors “were ending a $5 billion plan to develop lower-cost EVs together just a year after announcing the effort.”

This is not to use a favorite term on the Left, sustainable.

In other news, the rental car company Hertz just announced that they are dumping 20,000 electric vehicles and switching back to gas-powered vehicles. “Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas said in a note Hertz’s move was another sign that EV expectations need to be “reset downward”. (Source: Reuters)

Last month, 3900 car dealers sent a letter to President Biden stating, “The reality, however, is that electric vehicle demand today is not keeping up with the large influx of BEVs arriving at our dealerships prompted by the current regulations. BEVs are stacking up on our lots,” and urging the administration to back off unrealistic EV mandates. Further, they state the obvious that such goals “require consumer acceptance to become a reality. With each passing day, it becomes more apparent that this attempted electric vehicle mandate is unrealistic based on current and forecasted customer demand.”

Reality, however, is not a concept the Vermont supermajority in the legislature is familiar with. Nor is any concern for the actual policy preferences of a majority of their constituents. In fact, at the first meeting of the Senate Natural Resources & Energy Committee in their discussion of priorities for 2024, Senator Mark MacDonald (D-Orange) expressed his desire to “Stop the practice of selling cars, trucks, and SUVs that burn gas.”

Asked if he thought Vermont joining the California Clean Cars Initiative, which phases out the legal sale of ICE vehicles by 2035 wasn’t enough, MacDonald said no, “I’d like to get ahead of that.” To which his colleague Senator Becca White (D-Windsor) enthusiastically pointed to her own bill to do just that, S.24, An act relating to the Clean Fuels Program.

To which I reply, screw these people and the horses they expect us all to ride in on.

Rob Roper is a freelance writer with 20 years of experience in Vermont politics, including three years of service as chair of the Vermont Republican Party and nine years as President of the Ethan Allen Institute, Vermont’s free-market think tank. He is also a regular contributor to VermontGrok.

The post Stop Forcing EVs Down Our Throats appeared first on Granite Grok.

I hereby offer my services as an expert witness to any proper court on the subject of false flags and, separately, on the subject of the withholding of evidence and the tampering with evidence by investigative agencies that work for the government.

My law degree is from Adelaide University, in 2011. The subject of my Ph.D. dissertation is the application of sociobiology to international law.

It has just occurred to me today to offer my expert witness service in any new alleged case of false flag, as I can claim experience in having dealt with a span of cases. I show how the standard scheme works by cover-up, by media falseness, and — sorry to say — by corrupt judges.

Here are three false-flag cases that I have deeply studied and written about at book length:

1. The Boston Marathon bombing of 2013. My book (recently renamed) “The Scandalously Unjust Trial of Jahar Tsarnaev” contains numerous pieces of solid evidence of the boy’s innocence. Moreover, I mounted a civil RICO case against the FBI and others for creating this criminal “enterprise.”

2. The hostage-taking scene by a so-called Muslim terrorist in a Sydney restaurant in 2014, in which two people died. My book “Inquest: Siege in Sydney” is based on my attendance at the inquest, which, at a superficial glance, was on the up and ups but which, once contradictions were found, turned out to be a great game of words.

3. That thing known as the Sandy Hook school massacre of 2012. My book “The Human Mind and Sandy Hook’s Unreality” dwells on the great difficulty of getting people to believe that a government narrative, or media narrative, is fictional. At least three judges must be aware of the dishonesty involved, but people are too scared to accept that.

We want to thank Mary Maxwell for this Contribution – Please direct yours to Steve@GraniteGrok.com.
You can review our ‘Op-Ed Guidelines‘ on the FAQ Page – Opinions are those of the originating author.

I have, in some cases, such as that of Troy Davis and of Nathan Wood, petitioned the court for a Writ of Error Coram Nobis to stop a wrongful execution, but no court has replied to me.

Additionally, my book, “Port Arthur: Enough Is Enough,” co-authored with Dee McLachlan, up-ends a 1996 conviction that had no merit whatsoever and for which the man is still in prison. And my book “Fraud Upon the Court” delves into various other cases.

This does not mean that I could walk into a new case — let’s say the Lewiston, Maine, shootings of November 2023 — and be knowledgeable about the particulars. I do not offer that service. I can only:

*show the general template of false flags (a subject on which James Perloff, Ole Dammegard, and the late Elias Davidsson have turned out great work),

* show that a stand-down by police is diagnostic and should be factored into a case as such.

*show how easy it is for court personnel to get around the law, the precedents, and rules of court procedure. (It’s a snap.),

*identify areas in which the new case is likely to have holes. Typically, where a killer has allegedly “turned the gun on himself,” there is a chance that he operated under hypnosis.

Wait — isn’t hypnosis too iffy a thing, or too “woo-woo,” to be brought up in legal argument? No, it isn’t. The CIA has spent billions of dollars to master a range of mind control techniques.

Wait — isn’t judicial corruption too sensitive a topic to be discussed in court? No, of course it isn’t. What is there to be embarrassed about when the powerful harm the powerless? It’s normal.

Wait — if a lot of falsely accused convicts are now proven to be innocent and will have the right to sue for malicious prosecution, won’t that cost a lot of money? My reply is “Shouldda thought of that before.”

Note: If my services as an expert witness are not usable, I can instead send an amicus curia brief to the court. The court is generally required to accept such a brief but is free to pay no attention to it. This happened with a 3-person amici brief that we sent to Judge George A O’Toole for the Boston Marathon case, and it was similarly overlooked — despite being crucial — by the First Circuit Court of Appeal and all nine justices of the US Supreme Court.

One more thing. I specifically offer my expert-witness services to matters arising from the Maui fires of August 8, 2023, and matters connected to the threat of the release of mosquitos. In regard to the latter, my argument would refer to the false claim that Covid vaccinations are “safe and effective.” The same would probably apply to persons claiming that the mosquito release will be “safe and effective.” Only proper testing, not observation or speculation, can determine that. And the testing would have to measure its broader ecological effect, wouldn’t it?

The pay for my services? I will charge at cost for travel expenses and only $7.25 (the NH minimum wage) an hour for my testimony (unless the falsely accused defendant is filthy rich — but what falsely accused defendant is filthy rich?). My aforementioned books are freely available for your perusal at my campaign website, www.ConstitutionAndTruth.com.

Speaking of “campaign,” if things take a drastic turn at the NH polls next Tuesday, I may not need to pound the pavement after all!

 

The views and opinions expressed by contributors are those of the author and may not reflect the opinion or position of  Grok Media, GraniteGrok.com, its authors, advertisers, donors, or sponsors.

The post Night Cap: Mary Maxwell Seeks Work As an Expert Witness in False-Flag Cases appeared first on Granite Grok.

There was a Kamala Harris sighting this week as she visited The View for a softball session in the henhouse. In addition to the adoration showered upon the Vice President by these faux journalists, Harris seized the opportunity to lay out the campaign strategy for the Biden/Harris reelection bid.

It can be summed up in three words: Fear, Free, and Abortion. Since the Administration is underwater in the polls on every aspect of their job, they cannot point to their results and future plans, so they need to simplify their campaign to emotion and patronizing.

First, an observation. At this point in Kamala Harris’ career, she should not require communication coaching, but her skills have been an embarrassment to her and, worse, to the country. Her presence and presentation were a vast improvement over her past efforts. Unfortunately, the content was still lacking. There was nothing substantive in her talking points describing the Democrat platform. Nothing about the status of the efforts of the first term or what to expect in a possible next.

What she did accomplish was to echo the primary message of the President’s two speeches of a week ago. In the Democrat world, there is only one vote that is pro-American. There is only one vote that will save the Democracy. A vote for any Republican is a nod toward the destruction of America. In her mind, and Biden’s, when he has an infrequent moment of recall, a vote for Donald J. Trump is to put a nail in the coffin of our Democracy.

There is nothing to back up this statement, but there does not need to be. The Democrats et al. are consistently using this talking point, as is the mainstream media. They are all fear-mongering. Because the Left is a feeling-based group, fear works, and to the narrow-minded corps of followers, they can justify it.

The content was disappointing.

Fear is the ace and feature of the platform, but a close second is Free. This is the third time Biden/Harris has gone to the well on Free (as in tuition) as they try to again con the youth vote. Though the Supreme Court continues to say no to Biden’s efforts, Joe ignores the High Court and forgives Student Loans. That is what the Left thinks of our structure of government. They have no respect for the courts or the law. Free is on steroids when it comes to the Border, as these illegals are treated to a plethora of benefits, including housing, education, and healthcare. This is an injustice as they should be given an arrest citation, a court date, and a return ticket to their homeland.

And finally, the golden ticket for Democrat votes. Abortion, incorrectly named Reproductive Rights, is always a guarantee for high voter turnout. This was obvious in last year’s elections. Any ballot with an abortion question or bill on the ballot received incredible Democrat support. Democrats continue to claim their right to abortion was eradicated by the Supreme Court when, in actuality, the decisions on abortion were returned to the states. That is the beauty of a Constitutional Republic versus the Democracy that the Democrats claim. The state we live in can set laws that suit its residents. If you disagree, you can work to make a difference or move to a state that better matches your needs and beliefs.

Harris and Jill Biden will be the face of this campaign, and you can bet on Biden seeing very little daylight outside of the White House or Rehoboth. They will keep him silent and hope they can steal another four years in charge.

The post Fear, Free, And Abortion appeared first on Granite Grok.

The more we learn about Nikki Haley the more obvious it becomes that Nikki is a Democrat. The latest: Nikki’s main man in New Hampshire, some lobbyist named Tyler Clark, lobbied for a DEMOCRAT DARK MONEY GROUP that helped Biden STEAL the 2020 election. From the Washington Examiner:

Tyler Clark, who became Haley’s 2024 state director for the Granite State late last year, is listed on lobbying disclosures filed in New Hampshire as working in 2020 on behalf of Sixteen Thirty Fund, a nonprofit group managed by Arabella Advisors, the largest liberal dark money network in the United States. Sixteen Thirty Fund, which is being investigated by the Washington, D.C., attorney general’s office over financial mismanagement allegations along with the broader Arabella network, doled out more than $410 million in 2020 to boost Democrats and help unseat former President Donald Trump, all thanks to billionaire donors such as George Soros.

It’s also becoming clearer and clearer why Chris “Sun-King” Sununu went all-in for Haley. She belongs to the same club as his daddy and he do … the GOP grifter wing of the UNIPARTY.

 

The post Grifters Are Going To Grift … Nikki Haley’s Main Man In New Hampshire Linked To Democrat Dark Money appeared first on Granite Grok.

Regardless of your thoughts about President Donald Trump, you should find the FBI raid on his home in Mar-a-Lago disturbing. I won’t relitigate all the content we’ve provided to date here, but the effect the act places on the Left’s alleged love affair with democracy is chilling.

Third-world, banana-republic, former Clinton confidant chilling.

The usual suspects, many of them your Democrat representatives in local and state government, applauded the illegal and unconstitutional raid. The evidence of that is still on social media if you have the bandwidth to scrape it before Jack Smith’s case gets tossed. The glee they express online shows the support of fascism they attribute to their political opponents. And fascist it is.

There is strong evidence of collusion between the White House and the prosecution, and the prosecution is deliberately hiding that evidence from the defense.

Any one of those things should rattle the rusty cage of axes grinding for judicial and sentencing reform. Hiding evidence from the defense is sinister enough, but if it is exculpatory, that is not just criminal. It’s evil.

And maybe you don’t care about any of that. This is Trump. He’s [insert your opinion with or without expletives here]. Many Democrats don’t care about the law unless it advances their petty agendas. Still, Republicans ought to be horrified, even those embedded like a tick in the uniparty ass. Their guy or gal is never going to be dear leader, which means they will always be suspect and a few steps closer to being suicided or executed for crimes against the state by a regime that is happy to claim that taking selfies in the US Capitol makes you an insurrectionist. Life in prison without due process might be in your post-America global reset future, and won’t that be ironic?  You can chat with the once-cackling lefties who applauded without considering the side effects.

This gets me to the point I wanted to share, not that those preceding are not equally relevant. As previously reported, whether or not you believe President Trump can declassify material for his personal use (he can), he still had his top-level clearance at the time of Biden’s raid. There was no US government document in existence he was not allowed to see or possess.

That fact is evidence in his trial that the government is still trying to hide.

In other words, how could Trump have illegally possessed classified materials if he held the highest possible security rating at the time? And then the government’s attempt to surreptitiously erase that inconvenient fact suggests consciousness of guilt.

These facts are too inconveninet for our never-Trump “friends.” The ones making excuses for Vice-President Biden’s possession of Obama-Era documents for which he did not have clearance. The story that the Mar-a-Lago raid was meant to defenstrate.

It seems evident to me, and this is not the first time I or anyone else has made the connection, that knowing the Biden-docs problem would find daylight, they coordinated the Mar-a-Lago raid under the pretense of flooding the media with a false moral equivalency at best and a favorable distraction at least. This was never about what Trump did legally – which will play out eventually (the trial is media-muel distraction); it was to bury Biden’s illegal action.

It’s an easy trick to pull when your victim is some work-a-day schlub who took a few days off to visit DC in early January, not so much when the guy has a lot of money to fight back – another problem with which many on the Left have no issue until it’s their turn. And their turn will likely come under a government allowed to do these sorts of things, and having a (D) next to your name won’t protect you; we will never grow weary of telling you that.

You can still hate Trump and love the law meant to protect all of us. Those who don’t are likely to find out the hard way that they are not nearly as clever as they think.

The post ICYMI – Jack Smith’s White House Collusion Problem Meets Trump’s Top Level Security Clearance appeared first on Granite Grok.

How much Haley Mail have you received lately?  If you’re like most people I know, you’ve probably received no less than 25-30 cardboard flyers in one week.  In one week!

How many of those have you actually read, and how many have you dumped into the trash can?

Those brightly colored flyers cost a lot of money, and yet they tell you nothing of the candidate.  They tout Nikki Haley with their media spin:  she’s a “proven” conservative leader.  She is the only candidate who can lead the country.  She’ll be “tough” on China, etc.  She makes a lot of promises, but her record tells a different story.

As governor of South Carolina, she was all-in with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) welcoming and accepting hundreds of millions of dollars of investments from Chinese businesses, giving them free land and tax incentives – all on taxpayer money.  She supported Obama’s refugee program to import Syrian refugees.  She is Pro Amnesty.  She’s against the Border Wall.  And, as a lobbyist to the U.S. Military Industrial Complex she WANTS the war in Ukraine – so she continues to rake in those millions for her own bank account.

She is funded by big Democrat money and never-Trumper RINO’s.  They are pushing her because they want her in their fight against Trump.

She is their pawn.  And they own her.  In the words of former candidate Christie: she’s going to get smoked!

A vote for Haley is a vote for another Biden.

The post Haley Owned by Democrat Donors appeared first on Granite Grok.

House Bill 1419 was presented to the House Education Committee on January 18, 2024. The Bill prohibits materials that are obscene or harmful to minors in school and creates a procedure for removal and cause of action.

Children now have access to school library apps on their iPads and Chromebooks that contain pornographic content. This Bill would not prohibit sexual content but prohibit some of the worst x-rated and pornographic content that should never be available to children.

Included in the testimony, you can watch a former therapist and sex offender counselor at a New Hampshire prison. Listen to how she explains how one book on the school library app. allows children to access hyper-links to sexual predators. That’s considered sex trafficking. Not only are schools providing pornographic books to children through their library app, those children can also follow a hyper-link to websites that will put them in touch with child sexual predators. (3:20:00)

A lobbyist from the New Hampshire School Administrators Association. (NHSAA) OPPOSED prohibiting schools from making pornographic content available to children. Esther Asbell, Superintendent of SAU16 (easbell@sau16.org), is the Executive Director of the NHSAA. Why are they not speaking out against this dangerous content that is now available to children in our schools? Why are they opposing good legislation that will protect our children from pornography and child sex trafficking?

Sydney Leggett, from the NHSAA Equity Committee, essentially says that students have a right to access pornographic materials in the school. This Bill would infringe upon their rights and deny them access to porn and materials that show them how to connect with sexual predators.
(3:44:00)

I also addressed the committee to explain how an autistic child was exposed to pornographic content on his Chromebook. This child was punished because of the behavior he was exhibiting at school after accessing this content. (3:57:00)

Michael Bessett, Assistant Superintendent in the Kearsarge Regional School District (mbessette@kearsarge.org), also spoke in opposition to HB1419. I don’t know if he took a vacation day to testify or if the taxpayers in the district paid for him to oppose HB1419, but you can listen to all of the reasons he had for his opposition to legislation that would prohibit X-rated content in the schools, and a sexual predator’s ability to access young children.

Asst. Superintendent Bessett first describes that educators are protecting children. That is true for many, but we also know that school library apps are making x-rated content available to children and providing a path for children to connect with child sexual predators. He does a lot of talking about who gets to decide what is appropriate content, but it was Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart who was asked to describe his test for obscenity in 1964, and he responded: “I know it when I see it..” (4:35:00). If you want to see some of the pornography available to children today, follow this link.  WARNING: It is graphic.

This Bill would not remove much of the sexual content available to children. It only prohibits the most extreme obscene content.

At the beginning, Rep. Glenn Cordelli introduces the Bill and explains why it’s needed.  After listening to those in opposition, you have to wonder if they are willing to put children in a dangerous position. Will anyone in the school communities take responsibility if a child ends up sexually abused because they followed the hyperlink to a sexual predator?

The New Hampshire School Boards Association (NHSBA) took no position on the Bill, but their lobbyist testified to how much they disapproved of the language.( 3:00:00.)

 

Finally, Stopitnow.org is an organization committed to stopping the sexual abuse of children. Here is what they say about making pornographic pictures available to children:

Showing pornographic pictures to a child is considered sexual abuse. https://www.stopitnow.org/advice-column-entry/is-it-considered-child-sexual-abuse-if-someone-shows-a-child-pornographic

See: Nashua Teacher’s Grindr-Sexting Case: Another Charge

When you hear adults object to prohibiting pornographic content to children and putting them in the path of sexual predators, how are parents to trust them? How are parents to trust our public schools. All this does is drive more families to seek education alternatives.

Thank you to the good teachers and administrators working in our schools. Sadly though, we are still finding predators among them. Those who oppose removing pornographic content for children remain suspicious to parents.

Read more here.

The post Did SAU16 (Exeter) and Kearsarge Administrators Inadvertently Approve of Child Sex Trafficking? appeared first on Granite Grok.

On January 28, 2023, at the New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting, the entire state committee unanimously adopted the following resolution: “RESOLUTION TO SANCTION ANY NH REPUBLICANOFFICIAL FROM ATTENDING OR SUPPORTING THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM.”

We, the undersigned elected members of the NH GOP State Committee and the Republican elected delegates, declare the Candidate for President, Nikki Haley, and Governor Christopher Sununu  to be in violation of the resolution stated previously and posted below:

 

 

So, today, January 18, 2024, per: “RESOLUTION, We, the People of New Hampshire, compel the Chair of the New Hampshire Republican Committee to take the highest and fullest level of sanctions under their control against any New Hampshire Party Member or Candidate for Office who knowingly and will associate with the WEF from this day forward.”

We, the elected members representing the NH GOP State Party, are compelling State Party Chairman Chris Ager to put out a public statement to discuss the highest levels of sanctions against Candidate Haley and Governor Sununu up to and including censure and sanctioning any NH state delegates to be allowed to go to Candidate Haley for their association with the WEF and apparent election interference jeopardizing the integrity of the “First in the Nation Primary.”

 

Please Submit Group communications or Press Releases to steve@granitegrok.com.
Submission is not a guarantee of publication – Publication is not an endorsement.

Editors note: reformatted.

The post Resolution To Sanction Any NH Republican Official From Attending or Supporting the World Economic Forum appeared first on Granite Grok.

Climate change activists increasingly target agriculture as a primary source of greenhouse gas emissions and pollution. Too often, this translates into condemnation of gentle cows or the pleasures of meat-eating instead of drawing attention to proper farming practices and land management. This is especially true with respect to water use and the ethanol industry.

Water in Agriculture

American agriculture has continued to be dominated by ever-larger farms and producers, increasing productivity and economic growth and amplifying vital water resources’ drawdowns. This is apparent in water-precious regions such as Arizona and California, but also includes Idaho’s exploding dairy industry and Arkansas’ astoundingly productive poultry economy.

Growing alfalfa for cows (or for export to China), and corn and soy for chickens, requires substantial amounts of water in addition to what is used for the animals themselves. Corn and soy require chemical applications that erode soils and contribute to water pollution. The larger the scale of operations, the more significant the environmental impacts – especially on water resources.

Food Versus Ethanol

Voices calling to curtail carnivorous dining are howling up the wrong cornstalk: Reassessing the impacts of ethanol production and livestock management methodology would leave the American palate intact. These are problems not of animal pollution but of animal husbandry and sensible land management.

The United States leads the world in biofuel production. Of the 92 million American acres planted to corn in 2023, approximately 40% will be processed into ethanol to meet subsidized mandates in Americans’ fuel blends. Ethanol incentives have pushed up corn prices but also encouraged farmers to reduce lands used in (carbon-sequestering) conservation programs and expand corn cropping to less desirable soils and slopes. The combined effect is to make ethanol production a much less attractive environmental alternative than has been presented.

Corn Ethanol Is Environmentally Destructive

Corn is a particularly soil-draining crop. Most corn is now genetically modified for resistance to widely sprayed glyphosate, and the endocrine-disrupting herbicide atrazine is still used in its production. Neonicotinoids reputed to threaten bees and other wildlife are also standard tools in corn farming.

This makes fuels derived from corn dubious environmental saviors. One five-year study concluded in 2022 that corn ethanol led to at least 24% more emissions than gasoline:

“Our analyses show a modest change in the use of US agricultural land for crop production due to the RFS [Renewable Fuel Standards], which led to sizable increases in associated environmental impacts including nitrate leaching, phosphorus runoff, and soil erosion. While improvements in production efficiency have likely reduced the carbon intensity of corn ethanol since inception of the RFS, the previously underestimated emissions from US land conversion attributable to the policy are enough to fully negate or even reverse any GHG advantages of the fuel relative to gasoline. … [O]ur findings confirm that contemporary corn ethanol production is unlikely to contribute to climate change mitigation.”

Instead of forcing Americans to give up hamburgers, the reversal of the boondoggle ethanol program would free up some 36.8 million acres of land from corn cropping, eliminating the application of tons of chemicals and preserving vital water supplies. Liberating cows from confinement feed operations into rotational grazing on some of those formerly corn-sown lands would restore depleted soils, sequester carbon, and convert grasses to milk, cheese, and T-bones.

Biden’s Love of Ethanol
Instead, the Biden administration has favorably expanded ethanol use. In April 2022, the President extended the availability of higher biofuel blends to offset nosebleed gasoline prices. Reuters reported:

“The decision represents a win for the U.S. corn lobby by likely expanding demand for corn-based ethanol and a setback for oil refiners, which view ethanol as competition….

“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and sanctions and boycotts that followed launched retail gasoline prices to record highs, a vulnerability for Biden’s fellow Democrats in November’s congressional elections.”

Then, in June 2023, the USDA announced “plans to invest up to $500 million from President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act to increase the availability of domestic biofuels and give Americans additional cleaner fuel options at the pump.” Much of the announced funding is directed to ethanol production and distribution facilities. Notwithstanding the substantial environmental degradation inflicted by 36.8 million acres of industrially grown corn, the USDA claims this is “Through the Inflation Reduction Act, the Administration is delivering on its promise to fight climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions across America.”

Inflating gasoline prices through sloppy monetary policy and oil-stifling regulations and then faux-reducing them with ethanol is as useless as subsidizing polluting corn and calling it “clean energy.” This reflects a perversion of policy priorities, quickly remedied by reversing well-intentioned but ultimately counterproductive ethanol production. Taking tens of millions of acres out of corn cropping for ethanol would save a lot of water.

 

John Klar is an Attorney, farmer, and author. Mostly farmer… And Regular Contributor to GraniteGrok and VermontGrok.

The post The Corn Ethanol and Water Pollution Boondoggle appeared first on Granite Grok.

Concord, NH: Today, House Speaker Sherman Packard (R-Londonderry) announced the formation of the Special Committee on COVID Response Efficacy:

The bipartisan committee is tasked with investigating and evaluating the State’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The committee will function in a science-based, fact-finding review, specifically acquiring comprehensive, accurate data and all related information pertaining thereto.

Areas of particular focus will include the administration of Federal guidance, acceptance of Federal Funds, and implementation of Emergency Use Authorization vaccination efforts. A report will be issued outlining the committee’s findings and the impact on New Hampshire citizens.

Rep. Barbara Comtois of Barnstead will serve as chair of the Special Committee.

Pursuant to House Rule 29, the committee will be comprised of an equal number of Democratic and Republican members, reflecting the nearly even partisan make-up of the House.

“A large number of House members indicated interest in having the legislature take a look at this subject matter and asked me to form this Special Committee. This process should help us understand more about the state’s response during the pandemic and help us shape public policy to better prepare us for future emergency response efforts,” Packard said.

For Immediate Release
January 19, 2024
Contact: Jennifer Tramp
NHHouse@leg.state.nh.us
603-271-3664

 

The post House Speaker Forms Special Committee on COVID Response Efficacy appeared first on Granite Grok.