Steve has been driving the process for years to create a mobile GrokApp – and lately, I’ve been the bottleneck (truth be told) due to “other stuff.”  However, now is the time.

Sure, you can always view GraniteGrok with a browser on your phone or tablet. That said, we want to go “native” – Android and then iOS.  While I spent 40 years in the computer industry as a software engineer, I don’t have the mobile app skills necessary to meet our own standards. Project manage it to be sure, but not start pounding out code (still on my bucket list to start writing once again – but blogging always seems to take precedence. Perhaps someday, but not now.

So, take a look at this proposal. It is built around the idea of an “iterative enhancement” process – start small and proceed with small incremental steps.  I’ve always used this process during my career, even before RAD (or other aligned processes) came into being.  Have we covered everything? Certainly not – but we can start.  And start we shall.

To peruse the document, hover over the page, and the navigation bar will appear.

RFP GrokApp V01

I know that a lot of our readers are software engineers so we are offering this first to them as well. Perhaps a group of you (many of you are long-term readers and have “met” each other in the comments over the years) will get together. After all, you, too, are being “invested” in the success of GraniteGrok as well, right?

We also will be posting this on UpWork as well to see if there are interested folks there. We had actually posted the project back earlier in the year but I grew concerned that we hadn’t done our homework well enough so I put a stop to it. Now we’re ready.

Note: Steve and I also wish to thank a couple of anonymous donors that have provided the “seed corn” to get this off the dock. They’ve been patient given that we started this process earlier in the year.  They’ve made this possible!

The post GrokApp – A Proposal appeared first on Granite Grok.

Not all, but a majority of Republicans in Congress do NOT want to win. More precisely, they define winning differently than the voters. The voters define winning as, for example, Republican control of the Senate.

Mitch McConnell and his cronies define winning as Mitch and his cronies “leading” the Senate-GOP, so they can continue their grift. So it doesn’t matter as much to Mitch and his cronies whether the GOP is a majority or a minority as much as whether they get to “lead” it.

Donald Trump posed … and still poses … an existential threat to these grifters. That is why Mitch has announced his agenda for 2023-2024 is to “bipartisan” with Biden. Yup, the same folks who, during the first two years of the Trump administration … when the GOP controlled Congress … refused to work with Trump, want to work with Biden. In order to prevent Trump from becoming President.

McConnell: "My message to [Biden] is let's find some things between the 40 yard lines that we can agree on and we did some of that this year: infrastructure, chips, school safety, mental health." pic.twitter.com/R10DWW1WIi

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) November 16, 2022

 

The post Mitch McConnell Unveils His Agenda for 2023-2024 … Reelect Joe Biden appeared first on Granite Grok.

11/15/22 Crypto6 Evidentiary Hearing

After almost 7 years of waiting we’ve finally got a trial date! So mark your calendar and put your employer on notice that you’ll need a few weeks off as there is finally a solid date for the trial: December 6th, 2022. Address: U.S. District Court, 55 Pleasant St, Concord, NH 03301. Time yet to be known. Bring a valid state issued ID (real ID and passport not required) to ensure entrance to court house, no cameras/phones.

Early 2013 interaction between Phil Christiana and free staters

For those who haven’t been paying attention and wondering what the Crypto6 case is all about here is a bit of the backstory. In March of 2021 56 FBI agents, half a dozen three letter agencies, and dozens of other law enforcement officials raided the Bitcoin Embassy,  the Shire Free Church, Free Talk Live’s studio, a half dozen homes of so-called co-conspirators among other locations over the bastardly crime of selling crypto.

Somewhat closer to reality the story actually dates back decades and surrounds a single FBI agent with a political grudge against libertarians, free staters, and the Free State Project’s libertarian migration to New Hampshire. To shorten the backstory a bit further after a decade of attempting to take Ian Freeman out and three FBI investigations later FBI agent Phil Christiana finally thinks he has a case he can make stick against his primary political opponent Ian Freeman. You see Ian Freeman is a significant figure in libertarian circles and was responsible for many early movers partaking in the Free State Project’s migration. Some would even credit him with the success of the Free State Project itself. Ian’s activism in New Hampshire dates back about ~16 years now and has been a thorn in the side of Phil Christiana and the federal government for nearly as long. With a majorly syndicated libertarian run radio show Ian has enabled public criticism of government, government agencies, and officials with a show called Free Talk Live broadcasting on about ~200 radio stations nationwide. During this time Ian & co-hosts have promoted the Free State Project and cryptocurrency as a path to peace and freedom. Something dirty agents just don’t like.

The Hearing

The most recent hearing was significant in deciding many issues. The hearing started with a ‘daubert motion’ which is a motion discussed outside the presence of a jury to exclude the testimony of expert witnesses that do not possess the requisite level of expertise or otherwise used questionable methods to obtain data. In this case one of the defendant’s objectives was to exclude an expert that headed the blockchain forensics unit of the FBI and claimed to be an expert on blockchain analysis.

The prosecution granted Ian Freeman’s lawyer Mark Sisti a pre-hearing interview with the prosecution’s blockchain expert and key witness in the case Erin Montgomery. In that interview it came to light that Erin Montgomery has never been qualified as an expert witness before any court. Mark Sisti proceeded to argue that blockchain analysis was not a scientifically validated process sufficient to pass muster at trial. While it has been utilized in other cases to obtain search warrants and the like the standards for use at trial are far greater. In order to utilize blockchain analysis at trial the tools and processes would need to be open to peer review and the results be duplicable by outside experts.

One question that the defenses lawyer raised was whether or not the prosecutors filings constituted a community of experts. For which the prosecutor responded that she was an expert on co-spend. Co-spend is the tracing of the flow of bitcoins via clustering by co-spending which looks at addresses that create a transaction controlled by a given wallet. Effectively the testimony would attempt to prove the different Bitcoin addresses were controlled by the same person or entity.

The defense further clarified that the problem with letting the witness on the stand to testify was that it would give an aura or the appearance that the witness was an expert. To which the judge said he was also not even sure the witness was an expert witness either. As such he was inclined to allow the witness to offer an opinion, but only for story telling sake.

The prosecution proceeded to clarify that it was more about co-spend, not her being an expert.

Mark, the defense lawyer, then got concerned about qualifying her as a witness if not an expert implying that there were different standards of evidence for witnesses than expert witnesses.

Erin Montgomery was then asked to take the stand and testify about her qualifications. She stated that she worked for the FBI in a supervisory role within the virtual asset unit providing expert support. Her expertise covered crypto and decentralized virtual assets. Her qualifications included a liberal arts and history degree and 15 years of service with the FBI. She worked for the FBI’s cyber division unit which was a unit that focused on financially motivated cyber crime.

What makes her qualified to speak as an expert witness included:

– Early on she educated herself using online forums

– As books became available she read up further on Bitcoin

In 2011 Erin Montgomery was one of two people who took “ownership” in the FBI’s first big push into cryptocurrency. From the beginning she was part of a criminal investigation unit that created the virtual asset unit.

She then proceeded to specialize in doing blockchain tracing using open source tools and later commercial tools. She obtained two certificates from a company called Chainalysis which produces a commercial blockchain tracing tool.

She eventually became the supervisor of strategic and tactical groups developing the FBI’s curriculum for blockchain analysis. Despite claiming to have trained hundreds even thousands of people at the FBI she revealed that there were actually only four employees in her unit.

The defendant’s lawyer further questioned the agents credibility pointing out that she had no college education in blockchain analysis from A&M or taken any courses on blockchain analysis. In fact her education pre-dates Bitcoin’s existence. He points out that she never testified as an expert in any courtroom. The Chainalysis tool relied upon was developed by a private company and unavailable for peer review. He asks what the training requirements were for her field. To which she responded that there were no training requirements. Rather the program was developed in house and not peer reviewed by any outside agency at all. There was no scientific basis either. However her work was at points double checked by team-mates.

When her work was questioned, she said that while the evidence was originally crafted by the way of a commercial tool she re-created her work utilizing open source software blockchain.info. Humorously this is not an open source program, but rather a website. Within the context of the questioning the lawyer was not asking about “open source tools”, but the ability of outsider expertise to analyze the source code. This so-called expert didn’t even understand the question let alone that the software she was referring was not open source, but rather merely a website open to the public.

When questioned about her colleague double checking her work she responded that errors had been found, but that she couldn’t remember if any errors were found in this particular case. As the testimony continued the blockchain expert gleaned at the prosecutor gesturing for confirmation of her testimony. A regular back and forth of this continued throughout the testimony. Upon follow up questioning by the prosecutor the witness reveals that it’s very easy to make mistakes. In giving an example of a mistake shes made before she humorously even made an unintentional error confusing Bitcoin addresses and amounts thereof.

The defense asks what makes you special, to which the expert witness responds that she doesn’t know that anything makes her special. This is an embarrassing blunder given she indicates that even the defense lawyer could reproduce her work using the same websites she utilized. Obviously- if anyone can do it then one is not an expert.

She testifies that co-spend can link different Bitcoin addresses to a single individual yet fails to grasp that multiple people can control a single private key. While it may generally be correct that one controls a wallet by way of a private key there is nothing that says more than one individual or entity can’t control a private key or wallet.

During the hearing the defense lawyer questions whether or not all work has been provided to the defense team. To which the judge is very concerned. He states he does not want a repeat of the ‘Enron situation’ which was a case where not all the evidence that the defense was entitled to was provided by the prosecution which is required by law for a fair trial to occur. Particularly important is evidence favorable to the defense. He concludes that not all evidence favorable to the defense appears to have been turned over based on the expert witnesses testimony.

The defense reveals that there will be a number of witnesses thus far unknown introduced. One piece of evidence introduced to the docket thus far was a legal opinion from a lawyer advising the Shire Free Church on how to operate and vend cryptocurrency without falling afoul of the registration requirements at the federal level and state level. The prosecutor previously attempted to have this letter excluded from trial by falsely claiming the letter was referencing state law only. While that effort may have failed it is now revealed that not only will the letter be introduced at trial, but so will the attorney that drafted it. Thus removing any question of its authenticity.

The defense will also subpoena New Hampshire’s banking commissioner of whom testified at a state house hearing. The hearing was focused on removing the authority of the banking department to regulate cryptocurrency businesses in New Hampshire. It had previously been granted this authority by accident and had never actually regulated cryptocurrency businesses in the state. The witness will testify to the fact New Hampshire did not regulate the very type of vending the Shire Free Church did. In fact, her example during the state house hearing was specific to the Shire Free Church’s operations and the bill proposed was in direct response to legislators and supporters wanting to protect the Shire Free Church and similarly operated vending operations in New Hampshire.

During the hearing it was also revealed that a key piece of evidence intended to prove a ‘knowingly’ aspect of one of the charges wasn’t directed at the Shire Free Church or Ian Freeman. Nor was this letter sent by certified mail or even the postal service. The letter was sent to numerous operators via email and resembled something akin to spam or a fraud.

One of the defenses arguments appears to be that the vending machines were open and notoriously operated for many years.

Judge’s Conclusion:

There will be no jury nullification argument allowed at trial. This however was never an aspect of the defenses argument, but rather created by the imagination of a prosecutor who is aware of Ian Freeman’s jury nullification outreach. That outreach pertains largely to state courthouses and it’s well known that the federal courts will not entertain such argumentation.

The following evidence will be permitted:

1. Owned and operated vending machines

2. NH stated the church need not be registered under state law

3. Attorney Seth Hipple’s testimony on legalities of vending

4. General intent vs specific intent, intent to cause a particular result is not a defense to federal law

Crimes with general intent involve knowingly committing a criminal act. Specific intent crimes involve knowingly committing the criminal act as well as an intent to cause a particular result by committing the act.

5. The non-expert witness / FBI agent testimony will be allowed, but will not be able to give an opinion that it was Ian Freeman’s wallet, but will allow that inference

It was also revealed that the trial will likely take about two weeks to conclude, and will start on December 6th. However while the trial will start immediately it is likely that the first day of the trial will likely primarily constitute jury selection.

Last Wednesday, 11/9/22, was the monthly meeting for the Belknap County Republican Committee.  Instead of the normal agenda, the first part of the meeting was set aside to consider charges against former NH State Rep Gregg Hough for materially disrupting the October meeting by calling into the Weirs Times office, via a proxy (who has now been named), to suggest that the Editor, Brendon Smith, call to cancel his speaking at the October meeting.  And in doing so, to do it at the last possible time such that the Executive Committee would not be able to find a replacement speaker.

Of course, IMHO, it was to continue the efforts by Hough and Gunstock Area Commissioner Doug Lambert (of DGF Industrial) during the last few meetings to materially disrupt the meeting with numerous “Points of Order” and motions at almost every single opportunity.  Hough even publicly berated the Executive Committee at the October meeting for not asking for the Gunstock Audit Report (that hadn’t been made known to be public nor, at the time of this writing (yesterday), still isn’t on the Gunstock.com website even as Commissioner Lambert assured the attendees at the October BCRC meeting would happen).  It has been one PR stunt / slight after another, IMHO, against the Conservatives Republicans – a case of “the aggressor accusing others of making him a victim”.  Never is there any acceptance of the idea that, perhaps, they have any culpability at all in their activities that are now causing a backlash.

Here are the charges for what the EC called a case of “serious misconduct” against the BCRC (Hover over the page and the Navigation bar will appear) in the case of Gregg Hough:

BCRC Gregg Hough Charge Sheet

During the time allocated to the Hough Affair, I did testify that I had spoken with Brendon and that he had affirmed that such a call had happened. Given that GraniteGrok put up the recording of his speech from the October BCRC meeting, it was clear that Hough, once again, was a complete failure.

It was clear, however, that the General Members voted to acquit Hough but that the margin was only by two votes: 14 YES, 18 NO, and 4 Abstentions. The motion to remove Gregg Hough from the General Membership of the BCRC failed.

.. IMHO, it was not because the charge was that far-fetched. It was that the Members would have preferred to have had Editor Smith(*) speak directly to the Members. Remember that Douglas Lambert also tried to “subvert” the October meeting by making a motion to move Brendan Smith’s slot in the agenda to the end (in hopes that Hough and Lambert could continually delay the meeting until Smith just left is my supposition).

BTW, he did mention that he wanted “to remove Skip Murphy” – what he actually did was to have GraniteGrok removed from reporting on the meetings of the BCRC.

And as you can see on video on multiple occasions, NH State Rep Mike Bordes, aligned (IMHO) with the Citizens for Belknap Democrat PAC end goals (removal of all Conservative Republicans from the Belknap Delegation and now from the BCRC) acted like an ass.  Worse than Hough and Douglas Lambert. It was CLEAR that his only purpose in being there was to disrupt the meeting at every chance he could. Given that he relied on poses with Sununu for his campaign, someone sent me the image…

…I think that the message was supposed to be “his pet”.

 

 

(*) Note: A response this BCRC action has been forwarded to the General Members confirming that what was under discussion by the BCRC Executive Committee members (and myself) that what was alleged to have happen was, indeed, what happened.  If this updated information “makes it into the wild”, I will put up an update.

 

The post November BCRC: General Members Only Meeting – Charges against Gregg Hough (Meeting Disruption) appeared first on Granite Grok.

This article — if you could even call it an article — is based on pure, unadulterated hearsay.

I’d like to go on record with my impression of the House race for Congress District 1.

Ten Republicans vied for the primary nomination on September 13, 2022 (Prescott, Rondeau, Towne, Alciere, Baxter, Huff Brown, Killbane, Leavitt, Maxwell, and Mowers.)

I put on a small campaign with zilch money and ended up with less than a thousand votes. Karoline won, with 15, 290. She got about one-third of the total of 45,737 Republican votes. (I am relying on Ballotpedia’s numbers here.) Mowers came in second.

The Democrats cast 41,990 votes for Chris Pappas, the incumbent, who was unopposed.

Karoline then campaigned for the November election against Pappas. She got 126k, he got 146K. So where’s the hearsay? It’s from me. When I talked to folks in the First District (Conway, Portsmouth, Exeter, Manchester, Meredith, Bedford, etc), I often heard people say “Pappas is hopeless.” Some said even worse than that.

I never heard a word of praise. I heard many words of praise for Karoline. Her age — she is a lass of 25 summers — would have attracted many young voters.

I am, therefore, surprised that so many Dems went for Pappas again. Do they love him? Did they think Party loyalty demanded that they not cross the floor for Karoline? If I recall correctly, polls had predicted her the likely winner.

If there was cheating, I don’t know how it was done. Please see my article of November 14, 2022, at Granite Grok, where I argue that cheating has been massive for decades. Frankly, I now doubt every elected politician’s authenticity. I don’t ask you to go that far. Anyway, just sayin’.

Maybe one could do a belated exit poll and ask pappas’ voters to own up.

Candidate Mary Gets Special Treatment

Whoops, something funny just happened. I went to see that Ballotpedia had correctly reported my primary votes for the midterm House race. They show me as having gotten 468 votes. I am sure I got 671 votes.

Ah, here is the Washington Post’s count after 98% of the votes were in (September 15, 2022) – I retrieved this on November 16, 2022:

 

 

I have no idea why Ballotpedia is misreporting me in such a simple case.

Now let me tell you how I got cheated on during the 2022 primary, by Wikipedia. Please recall that I ran for president of the United States in the 2020 “First in the Nation Primary” in New Hampshire. I came third of the 18 Republican hopefuls. Trump came first with 129,000, Gov Weld came second with 13K, and I came a far third with 929 votes. Still, it WAS a third, and I have the screen shots to prove it.

 

 

 

As you see, I got 103 more votes than Tom Walsh.

In late August 2022, while I was still a hopeful in the primary for the House, I checked Wikipedia to clarify my winnings in the 2020 presidential.  Wow, now it showed:

 

 

I was not mentioned at all.  The bronze medalist has disappeared!  Luckily, though I still have the printout from NY Times:

 

Let me tell you, I feel good about this. It means the Powers That Be feel a need to squelch Mary. And it gets even better.  Now see what the PTB got up to, in regard to my numbers when running for the House. In late August 2022, when I checked on the Wiki for this race, I discovered that I had, so speak, passed away:

 

• Tom Alciere, former state representativeand perennial candidate[14]
• Tim Baxter, state representative[15]
• Gail Huff Brown, news correspondent and wife of former  Senator from MassachusettsScott Brown[16]
• Mark Kilbane, businessman
• Karoline Leavitt, former  Office of the Press Secretarystaffer[17]
• Matt Mowers, former chair of the New Hampshire Republican Partyand nominee for this district in 2020[18]
• Russell Prescott, former Executive Councillor[19]
• Gilead Towne, sales associate[20]

 

So they have omitted Maxwell and a man named Kevin Rondeau.  Is that amazing?

(Don’t tell me it’s a typo, OK?)

WMUR and St Anselm’s

Both WMUR and St Anselm knew me from the presidential race, as I took part in the debates of the lesser-known candidates. I am still on C-Span for that occasion (me on far right):

 

 

So you’d think St A’s might call on me to be in the debates for the 2022 Congress job. Nope.

Here are four debaters in a different venue (not St A’s):

 

(By the way, I could debate the pants off of any one of them.)

 

Also, the state committee and the RNC never contacted me in any way when I ran for president or for Congress. Needless to say, The Concord Monitor did not mention that a Concordite was running for president — possibly the first Concordite who had ever done so. “Not interesting enough.”

As for WMUR, they must have written to every candidate but me in 2022.  I say that because, as you can see below, they sought answers to questions by each candidate, and when it mentions one man, Rondeau, it says: “This candidate has not responded to our requests. WMUR will post the responses when we receive them.” Thus the readers will surely think that the list in front of them is a complete list of candidates. I must ask WMUR’s political director, Adam Sexton, how he decided to leave me off.

 

Finally, I will mention another way I got cheated.  I was eager to answer Ballotpedia’s questionnaire. I filled it out but was not allowed to upload it until I furnished an FEC number. The law requires candidates to obtain an FEC number if their donations top $5,000 or if their expenses top $5,000.   Mine didn’t.  A delay of 2 weeks ensued while I obtained a number. I re-uploaded my answers, but they have still not appeared.  Someday I may print them at GraniteGrok, but right now, it is hardly worth anyone’s time.  (Note: I am poor at computer tasks.  I may have uploaded it incorrectly.)

Anyway, as I said, I think Leavitt won.  I think Pappas lost. Amen.

The post I Think Karoline Leavitt Won on November 8, 2022 appeared first on Granite Grok.

It is no longer a secret. Instead of letting consumers and markets drive energy decisions, environmental activists and special interests did. The byproduct of policymakers listening to moonbats is, ironically, going to be worse for the environment.

Related: Working Hard to Make Sure We All Freeze to Death

 

“Natural gas shortages and reliability concerns in New England are neither short-term, nor unanticipated…. ISO-New England and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission have for many months called attention to the very real reliability issues likely to face the region in the coming winter months due to insufficient supply of natural gas.”

“New England power plants generated an estimated 4.18 million metric tons of CO2 in January 2022, up from 2.77 million metric tons in January 2021, with the region’s heavier reliance on oil accounting for most of the difference.” (INGAA, below)

 

The fracking boom made natural gas more affordable and made us a world leader in carbon emission reductions over the past decade.

LNG is an abundant domestic American resource that’s efficient, reliable, and effective. We have so much that under President Trump, we tried to break Russia’s hold on Europe. That ended when Uncle Joe stumbled into the Oval Office, but New England was in trouble long before that.

The expert response to this boon in these parts was to make it less available, which came with a price.

Trying to turn natural gas into unobtanium has jacked up reliance on dirtier fuels that emit more of that stuff they tell us we need less of, or we will boil in our skivvies. In other words, the Green guardians of the Northeast Galaxy f-d up you, themselves, and the environment.

Related: Without Fossil Fuels, Millions of Americans Could Freeze to Death

They sold everyone a lemon, and while we’ve got laws for used cars, there’s no protection clause for selling energy solutions that will never be able to deliver as advertised.

 

New England will need natural gas to meet its power needs both this winter and into the foreseeable future…. Unfortunately, there is insufficient infrastructure connecting New England to domestic natural gas supplies and recent attempts to expand existing infrastructure at the request of local utilities and other energy users have been thwarted by misguided policies and vocal opponents to new infrastructure development.

 

And no, elections are no protection; look at the 2022 midterms. State Government in New Hampshire is closer to the freeze caucus after November 8th than it was on November 7th. So perhaps I need to take back my opening claim that it’s no secret. And that’s a problem. If we have service disruptions in January and February – not because of storms but due to shortages – people will wonder why.

 

New England’s reliance on imported LNG is not sustainable, and the negative consequences of overreliance on imported LNG can be avoided with additional natural gas pipeline infrastructure. This solution is especially compelling considering the region’s proximity to the Marcellus shale production area, one of the most prolific natural gas supply basins in the world.

 

Will anyone tell the truth? That poor decision-making motivated by short-sighted partisan activists peddling a false armageddon scenario is why the lights or the heat don’t work?

And how sad it is that if they’d just let us build the pipelines, we’d not only have electricity and heat but also be reducing “emissions.”

Instead, we’ll be making more of them.

The smartest people who know better, my ass.

 

 

The post New England’s Shortsightedness on Energy Isn’t Just Bad for You, It is Bad for The Green Agenda appeared first on Granite Grok.

On January 3, 2023, the 535 members of the 118th Congress will show up for duty on Capitol Hill. They owe nothing to any previous Congress. They can repeal or amend any law that was ever passed, going back to 1789.

The “new” Senate will have, in it, 66 members that did not have to face reelection. The other 34 seats were up, and many incumbents were returned. Technically, all 435 House seats got vacated. As of the counting of votes by November 15th, 218 Republicans got elected to the House; hence Nancy Pelosi will not be the Speaker. Republican Kevin McCarthy has already referred to himself as Speaker-elect.

No way, Jose. As I will explain below, a “new girl” is vying for that position.

Most Americans think that the old leaders of the Parties will have an automatic continuation. But that’s not correct. When they assemble on January 3rd, 2023, no member of the House or Senate has any privilege, not even committee membership. It’s a new Congress, the 118th in our history. Members of each chamber are dependent on a majority of their colleagues to provide them with any privilege.

Rules

According to the Constitution, each house (a.k.a. each “chamber”) makes its own rules. Article I, sec 5: “Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings.” The Senate, for example, can make a rule that their Tuesday sessions will begin at 10 am, “except, in case of snow, they will begin at 11 am.” Or whatever.

The House of Reps could make a rule — and it did in 2020 — that all members must wear a mask. But they could instead have made a rule that their rules must not include anything about facewear, including masks. A vote of 51% is needed for any such thing. (To be precise, not 51% but a majority, which is counted as half of the voting members plus one.)

The rules being made are only about Congress’s behavior; they aren’t law, and thus do not require the president’s signature or even the concurrence of the other house. At present, there is a Rules Committee, but even that could be ruled out by a new rule. Amazingly, the House could make a rule that it will no longer have committees! Congress needs to do only what the parchment told it to do (and it often declines to do even that).

The Westminsterizing of Congress

Part of the way in which the globalists have taken over America is by maneuvering the members of Congress into a fixed Party system, and maneuvering the pubic into thinking this is normal. It is not normal. John C Coleman reported, in his 1992 book The Conspirators’ Hierarchy, that Lloyd Cutler was tasked (by the globalists) with westminsterizing Congress.

This really ruins the concept of your local member of Congress representing you. How can he take orders from the field if he has already been given his orders from the globalists, as passed down through Party leaders?

As I said recently about New Hampshire’s two reps, Anne Kuster and Chris Pappas, they always vote with Nancy Pelosi and therefore don’t deserve to be paid $176,000 per annum. We could pay them an honorarium of $5,000 and all they would have to do is press the button to vote as instructed.

Of course, fixed Party control also eliminates the notion “Let a thousand legislative ideas bloom.” Believe me, it has assisted the decimation of intellectual life.

Your Humble Servant in the Speaker’s Chair

I have made a video (below) in which I name myself a candidate for Speaker of the House immediately. On the day I made the video (September 8, 2022), I was also on the ballot in New Hampshire’s primary, hoping to become elected as a member of the House. I lost, but no matter — I am advertising my availability as a layperson Speaker.

You may be shocked to hear that the Speaker does not have to be a congressperson. I reckon he or she does not even need to fit the requirements for Congress — age 25, US citizen, and seven years’ residence. It doesn’t require political experience, and I think the Speaker would be better without it.

Don’t worry about some tasks that have been given, by House Rules, to the Speaker. For example, that she would authorize particular decisions. If you make me your Speaker, I wouldn’t inherit any of those prerogatives. The House would need to vote to change such provisions. Very likely they’d give them to “the leader of the Party that has the most seats” — but even that is not pre-ordained.

What about the fact that the Speaker is presently “second in line after the VP to become president?” Not a problem. It was a federal law, not the Constitution, that made that happen. All that the Constitution says, in Article II, sec 1 is: “Congress may by law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice-President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President.”

Accordingly, there was a Presidential Succession Act in 1792, another in 1886, and the current one which was enacted in 1947. These all assumed that the Speaker is not of the Mary Maxwell variety but is a member of the House. So, if someone of the Mary Maxwell variety becomes Speaker (whether by a law or by a rule), both chambers would have to enact a variant on the 1947 order of succession.

Note: on five occasions a non-member of Congress has received at least one vote for the job of Speaker.

Recruiting a Layperson Speaker

As shown in the video below, I declared my candidacy for the Speaker position. Well, you have to start somewhere to try to get the position filled, and it was convenient for me to say “Let it be me.” But one can’t campaign to the general public. All the voters for Speaker are reps themselves. I could write to each of those 435 “voters.”

Perhaps, for a year or so, Congress should try out the new concept of a non-member Speaker. I imagine that merely discussing such a “crazy” idea would go some way to calling attention to the terrible problem of the Westminsterization of our precious legislature.

In theory, every one of the members of the House (barring those, if any, that are mind-controlled) should be pleased at the prospect of NOT having a central boss. “Mrs Speaker” or “Mr Speaker” would be their non-partisan employee. He or she would not direct legislation, much less promote any ideology. He or she would only run the business of the day.

Many of the 435 individuals may be pleased to picture such a scheme. Think of this, O Reps: If you are in Party A, and Party B has the majority and therefore the Speakership, you don’t feel very powerful, right? But if the Speaker were of the Mary Maxwell variety, y’all could make your demands on her with expectation of getting consideration.

VIDEO

The post One Way To De-Westminsterize Congress: A Layperson Speaker of the House appeared first on Granite Grok.

I remember being in my pediatrician’s office with my mom when I was a kid. He had a small desk, a white coat, a cup of coffee, and a lit cigarette dancing on his lips as he spoke. He was my health professional. And that was the norm.

Related: Tell COVID Karen What She Needs is More Vitamin D3

It turned out those things were bad for you. The cigarettes. Not that it stopped me from smoking them for a few years in my early to mid-twenties. And I knew they were bad for me. So, maybe we could cut Whoopi Goldberg and the Vaxx-pimps like her some slack. They got the jab-thing and want you to get it, even though it doesn’t protect you from COVID (Pontificating Whoopi Goldberg’s got it again).

No.

I didn’t try to force other people to smoke cigarettes. No one said you couldn’t go here or there or live an everyday life if you’ve smoked. These days they will tell you you can’t smoke while doing many of those things, but that’s different. And while it’s none of my damn business, and I’m still trying to get rid of the taxes on them, you should probably quit smoking. It isn’t good for you.

You should also stop telling people to get the COVID-19 “vaccine” or the boosters. Just look at Doc Walensky, the Director of the CDC. Rochelle is rumored to have had five shots. The original single and the B side, and then three more. She caught another case of COVID (I’ve lost count of how many) and took Paxlovid. Our readers know about Paxlovid, and true to form, it hid the symptoms without clearing the virus.

After taking Pfizer’s latest laundromat med (Pfizer and Ukraine have a lot in common), she got COVID again, which is to say she never stopped having it. She’s confined to quarters, while anyone who came into contact between bouts might have been exposed. For most of us, that means little or nothing but some of them may have genuinely been high-risk and jabbed, which amplifies the risk. And Just like Whoopi, who espouses the useless cure but keeps getting COVID, you have to wonder if they are stupid or evil.

And yes, they could be both.

 

 

 

The post Ask Multi-Jabbed Whoopi Goldberg. How’s The View From Your Second Case of COVID? appeared first on Granite Grok.

As much as I think the results of the Donald Trump Presidency will be considered one of the most successful in history, I hoped he would not re-enter the race for the White House.

I believe that Trump was the right person at the right time for America, and he did a phenomenal job of getting America back on track and regaining her respect worldwide. He also successfully kept America out of armed conflict during his term. He is the only President to accomplish this in recent history. Controversy, two impeachment hearings, and COVID hampered progress in the last year of his Presidency and possibly cost him a second term.

With all the good I can say about the President, I still feel he is too polarizing a man to step back into the race to regain the White House, but with his announcement on Monday night, he is officially running for President in 2024.

Trump had tremendous success pushing his choices to the top in the Republican primaries across the country. His success rate was above 85%. His candidates did not do so well in the general election. These results indicate Trump’s strength within the Party, but he may still struggle with Independents and Democrats. He would need to broaden his popularity to have a successful Presidential run. I think his divisiveness will be stronger than his popularity and message and will spell defeat.

It is imperative that the Republican Party and voters put forward the best candidates possible at all levels in 2024. The Midterms were disappointing, and many point to good to marginal candidates but poor delivery of the Republican message. A more positive approach must be used to let America know how the country will improve by placing its trust in Republican leaders.

Many names are bandied about as potential candidates for 2024. Readers of my posts know I am hoping for a Ron DeSantis/Jim Jordan ticket to run against whoever rises to the top on the Left. I do not see that being Joe Biden, but the Dems did elect John Fetterman or his wife, so anything is possible.

Some names are DeSantis, Mike Pence, Rick Scott, Nikki Haley, Glenn Youngkin, Tim Scott, Kristi Noem, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio. There are others, but this list shows how deep the bench is for the GOP. Any of these people would be better than any Progressive that the Democrats will choose should Biden not run. Add Trump to this list, and we may have a very hot and damaging Primary that will divide and not unite the Party.

The House has to do its job, keep Biden bogged down, and minimize his damage to the country until we retire him to the Delaware coast. Politics in America is a 24/7/365 bloodsport, but the 2024 campaign will not heat up until the summer of 2023. In the meantime, I hope that in that time, the Republican leadership will develop a platform that Republicans can stand behind and that Independents will understand and embrace.

The post Donald is in…..What’s Next appeared first on Granite Grok.

Liberty continues to live and grow in New Hampshire. We had 97 NHLA Endorsed Representatives and Senators elected!
We supported 158 candidates in the primary and general election and must replenish funds to be able to support liberty candidates in special elections. We are holding a PAC fundraising event at Vine 32 in Bedford on Monday, November 28th. If you can attend, we’d love to see you at the event. Please buy your ticket (which acts as a contribution to our PAC). If you can’t attend but have the means to help us prepare for what are sure to be challenging special elections in 2023, please consider donating to the PAC.

The post Running on Empty! PAC Fundraiser appeared first on NH Liberty Alliance.

So, confession. I watched the entire thing, and it made me laugh. Maureen Langan – never heard of her until I stumbled over this – is a funny lady. And as is tradition, when I find something that makes me laugh, I share it with you.

She does a great job of setting up her running jokes and works them but not to death. And did I mention that she made me laugh? The Kardashians, Martha Stewart, Cougars, helping people (that’s what she does), Anna Nicole Smith, Stephen Hawking, and a bunch more like how people made her hate them and even menopause.

If you have time, watch it all; if you don’t have time, the first five minutes should do the trick but it gets better.

 



 

The post Wake Up and Laugh: Maureen Langan – Don’t Make Me Hate You. appeared first on Granite Grok.

We’ve got some new ads in the sidebar (you’ll have to scroll down on the mobile version). Books by authors who are also readers or contributors to GraniteGrok. We’d appreciate it if you clicked the ad and checked out their offering. Ian Underwood has a book out on the 14th Amendment.

We’ve also got an ad for a book by David Scott, who is a fan and reads our stuff.

No obligation to buy, of course. That’s your call, but if you see ads we place in the sidebar (those are all there by our command), please check them out.

And then one maintenance, housekeeping matter. We’ve had readers who get our Newsletter tell us they’ve been unsubscribed and why we did we do that. Not us. We’d never.

We can add you back if this happens, but as a heads up, if you forward that Newsletter to other email recipients, they can unsubscribe you, thinking they are “unsubscribing” themselves.

We appreciate you sharing, but we recommend that after you have added your recipients, you scroll to the bottom and remove the Unsubscribe and the Manage your subscription links.

 

Before:

 

Just highlight them with your mouse and hit the backspace key.

After:

 

 

Note that those links should not be active when you forward them, but I’ve received these back from readers, and I can click on them. Please remove them before you share, and no one can unsubscribe you from our Newsletter.

If someone does, by the way, you’ll get an email saying you were unsubscribed that looks something like this.

 

Getting unsubscribed is not common, but if you do share the email – and thank you – just take the precaution to protect your subscription.

 

Thanks!

 

The post Do Us a Favor, Please? appeared first on Granite Grok.

Electric vehicles are to modern America what hair regrowth tonics were in the 18th century. Piss with ink. EVs are a lie wrapped in shadows and penumbras of wishes and dreams without grounding in reality. They are worse for the environment, a terrible transportation choice, and not even Consumer Reports can’t hide that fact.

 

The highest-ranked domestic brands were Lincoln and Buick, which ranked 10 and 11 respectively, while Volkswagen, Jeep, and Mercedes-Benz ranked the lowest.

Elsewhere, the survey found that owners of electric vehicles reported issues with charging systems, batteries, and electric motors. Of the 11 EV models that Consumer Reports has data on, only four of them have average or better than average predicted reliability, according to the survey. They were the Kia EV6, Tesla Model 3, Nissan Leaf, and the Hyundai Ioniq 5.

 

Four of eleven were average, meaning the other seven were below average for reliability. Surprised Face – Not!

What’s not surprising?

 

A total of 24 auto brands were covered in the 2022 survey, which found that hybrid vehicles and mid-sized or large and gas-powered sedans are among the most reliable vehicles sold.

 

I like to make fun of Prius Hybrids, but I’ve long been a fan of the scheme. If you’re going to dig all those rare earth metals out of the ground – preferably without the child labor – and make this massive carbon footprint mining, hauling ore, milling, molding, manufacturing, and shipping large pack lithium batteries, putting them in a car that can charge them itself is not the stupidest idea.

And given that the replacement cost for car-sized Lithium batteries often exceeds the entire vehicle resale value – even in this market – if that battery ever dies, you can still drive the damn car for as long as Toyota typically lasts, and that’s a good long while if you took care of it.

Then there are mid to large-sized gas-powered vehicles. They are among the most reliable sold, and we can attest to that after years of owning them.

As for EVs, they are like a Democrat-run government. Unreliable. Low satisfaction. Buyer’s remorse. It’s why the Left insists on having all the guns. They know that when the truth comes out, no one will be happy with it, and there are no refunds when you buy into Democrat Socialism, while the reviews are always stunning!

 

 

HT | Epoch Times

 

The post Consumer Reports: EV’s are Some of the Most Unreliable Vehicles Sold In America appeared first on Granite Grok.

Last year, NH State Rep Judy Aron and I tried to address what I think is a serious issue for a type of Elected Representatives that seemingly don’t believe that is what they are even as they run for election. In short, they call themselves “School Board members”. And many school boards have a policy in place that renders them imperviable to question (e.g., I think loyal readers are familiar with the phrase I oft have to use: “Easter Island stone-faced Moa Statues”. Its genesis is that at public school board meetings, almost nary is the time that when asked a question by a constituent will an answer be forthcoming from any of them. They just sit there, with fixed faces, in silence.

Infuriating.  In fact, I have a series of questions outstanding concerning a Policy (Transgender) that they have written as the part concerning commanding their staff to lie to parents concerning the transgender status of their child. While it seems to have been “softened”, I had questions. I have emailed my questions twice now with no response.  So, this bill (emphasis mine):

HB 1169 – AS INTRODUCED
22-2068
10/04
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Twenty Two
AN ACT relative to public comment and inquiry during school board meetings.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

New Subdivision; Public Comment and Inquiry During School Board Meetings. Amend RSA 189 by inserting after section 73 the following new subdivision:

Public Comment and Inquiry During School Board Meetings

189:74 Public Comment and Inquiry During School Board Meetings.

I. During any public meeting held by a school board there shall be a designated time period for interactive questions from the public and answers from the board, with sufficient time allotted to hear comments, questions, and complaints from members of the public. The public must be able to sign up to speak at the meeting, or otherwise be given time to speak during the meeting, where they may comment or ask questions.

II. During any public meeting held by a school board, the elected members of the school board, and any other school administrators present, shall hear from and shall respond to such direct questions, with as much detail as known at the time relative to a direct question, by one or more of the assembled elected school board members or school administrators, to such comments, questions, and complaints by members of the public assembled at the meeting.

III. During any public meeting held by a school board, an attendee may demand which New Hampshire statute or administrative rule gives the school board the authority described in a school policy or operational procedure. The school board shall immediately respond with a citation to its authority. If the school board is unable to respond affirmatively that there is such a New Hampshire statute or administrative rule, the school policy or operational procedure shall be immediately withdrawn until such time that the school board can show it does have such authority.

IV. If any public question remains unanswered by the end of the public meeting, the school board shall be responsible for obtaining the answer and responding to the questioner within 5 business days. Additionally, members of the public may also file a request pursuant to the right-to-know law under RSA 91-A:4 to the school board to obtain answers.

V. Members of the public may file a complaint to the commissioner of the department of education if the school board refuses to answer questions regarding school policy directly. School board meeting minutes shall specifically state the names of the school board members or school administrators who refused to answer a specific question or questions posed to them by a member of the public, as well as specify the question asked of them regarding school policy or any other school matters.

I don’t understand why this would be controversial – it was ITL’d 19-0. All it does is to have Elected Representatives interact with their voters/constituent during meetings – like with almost every other set of elected representatives here in NH. It’s called accountability which is called for in the NH Constitution (emphasis mine):

[Art.] 8. [Accountability of Magistrates and Officers; Public’s Right to Know.] All power residing originally in, and being derived from, the people, all the magistrates and officers of government are their substitutes and agents, and at all times accountable to them.  Government, therefore, should be open, accessible, accountable and responsive.  To that end, the public’s right of access to governmental proceedings and records shall not be unreasonably restricted.  The public also has a right to an orderly, lawful, and accountable government.  Therefore, any individual taxpayer eligible to vote in the State, shall have standing to petition the Superior Court to declare whether the State or political subdivision in which the taxpayer resides has spent, or has approved spending, public funds in violation of a law, ordinance, or constitutional provision.  In such a case, the taxpayer shall not have to demonstrate that his or her personal rights were impaired or prejudiced beyond his or her status as a taxpayer.  However, this right shall not apply when the challenged governmental action is the subject of a judicial or administrative decision from which there is a right of appeal by statute or otherwise by the parties to that proceeding.

As a Budget Committee member, I ALWAYS made sure that a constituent’s questions were answered – it was my job. I was elected to work for THEM and not the other way around.

This bill will be followed.

 

The post HB1169 Reintroduced – “Relative to Public Comment and Inquiry During School Board Meetings” appeared first on Granite Grok.

Government Integrity Project Co-Founder Tom Murray not only testified before New Hampshire’s Committee on Voter Confidence, he observed testimony by other Granite Staters. And while he thinks the Committee will get it right, he talked to me about his presentation and other thoughts on the issue.

Related: Here are a Few Potential Problems in NH That are Undermining Voter Confidence

By issue, we mean voter integrity and why Granite Stater’s might have lost confidence in our elections.

And by get it right, he means they will do what they were formed to do. Gather information about why voters lack confidence in our elections and then share that with the Secretary of State and Attorney General so they can sift, filter, and develop a plan to address concerns.

We talk about overvotes, a problem only addressed this past session after years of folks on both sides claiming New Hampshire was the Gold Standard for good elections. That was a lie, and we discuss why and why we might not believe similar promises today.

We also discuss the forces pushing back on unvetted testimony. A good discussion all around, except for a technical problem. We recorded it with full video, but I had some issues that forced me to create a video with no video. The audio is good, and you’d don’t need the visual, but I’ll work that out for my next interview.

And here is the overvote report Tom delivered to the committee and references throughout the interview.

 

 

 

If you missed it, please watch my interview with Brenda Towne on her testimony to the New Hampshire Committee on Voter Confidence.

 

 

The post Government Integrity Project Co-Founder Tom Murray on NH Elections and Voter Confidence appeared first on Granite Grok.

After publishing this article explaining to Sarah Earle from Reaching Higher NH about the connection between Social and Emotional Learning and Critical Race Theory, I felt more needed to be explained.

Too many people become partisan on these important issues showing that they are willing to ignore or dismiss what is going on in public education. I explained in my email to Ms. Earle that her inference to conservative parents, and their concerns about CRT in SEL, were well founded. Instead of patronizing parents who have seen the transformation in SEL, we should be applauding them for questioning the direction SEL is taking in our schools.

CASEL creates the standards that measure all SEL programs. CASEL explains here how they are shifting focus away from academics because children have access to the Internet. That’s code for, we are going to dumb down your public school. Just look at how they sell this snake oil:

 

 

There’s no need to teach your kids math, science, history, etc.; they can now find information on the Internet. Can you imagine expecting this from your surgeon? Hopefully your surgeon doesn’t have to keep checking the internet when operating on you. This is a fast track to ILLITERACY.

But there’s more.

In “Transformative SEL,” “self-awareness” encompasses “identity,” with “identity” defined now through the lens of “intersectionality.” “Self-management” encompasses “agency,” with “agency” defined through “resistance” and “transformative/justice-oriented” citizenship. “Transformative SEL” also embraces “culturally relevant/responsive” pedagogy. 

SEL is now taking on the role of infusing Critical Race Theory into the classroom.

Here you can see that CASEL is moving forward with SEAD.

Is your state prioritizing SEAD?

“Is Your State Prioritizing SEAD?,” released in 2022 by The Education Trust and CASEL, reviews policies in all 50 states to highlight how states are supporting student needs by prioritizing social, educational, and academic development (SEAD) and where state policies threaten equity and diversity, including state efforts to limit the accurate teaching of history and current events.

 

Since when did CASEL decide that they should be reviewing New Hampshire education policies? Who gave them the authority to dictate what we do in the classroom? If you click on that link and go to New Hampshire, they appear to give us low grades. I guess we are not walking in lockstep with their social justice agenda at this time. Let’s hope that continues!

Transformative SEL is also known as Justice SEL. You can see that from CASEL’s VP of Research, Robert Jagers. He unveiled this to educators at their 2019 conference. Their new definition of social-emotional learning is called: Transformative SEL. CASEL, which is the organization that sets the standards by which all social-emotional programs are measured, explains how their new form of “justice”/Transformative SEL is most essential to issues of equity (which, according to their definition, means distributive justice).

 

 

CASEL also invited Dena Simmons to talk about how SEL can be leveraged to create “the social change we need” by teaching children to be “anti-racist.” Anti-racism is not about not being a racist, it’s a way to dismantle the system that they believe to be systemically racist. This is Critical Race Theory, which is a form of racism.

CASEL, which creates the standards that measure all SEL programs, began this transformation back in 2019. They want to leverage SEL to create children who are anti-racist social justice warriors.  But anti-racism IS Critical Race Theory.

In a 2020 webinar, CASEL leaders discussed how they changed their framework and 5-Core competencies (that all SEL programs are measured against & rated by) to reflect their new Transformative SEL definition:

 

Nowhere did New Hampshire school boards or elected legislators approve of any of this. So what’s up next? Gender Ideology?!

They are implementing this system-side even though “there are currently limited options for evidence-based programs and implementation models for Transformative SEL.”

 

 

In 2020, they updated their evaluation criteria to better reflect their updated definitions of SEL (Transformative).

 

 

More directly from CASEL on Transformative SEL (Critical Race Theory SEL)

 

How has this impacted children in the classroom? From the Washington Examiner:

‘Transformational SEL’ is traumatizing students

 

As of this winter, 36 states had passed legislation aimed at keeping critical race theory and other “divisive concepts,” sometimes referred to in law as “prohibited concepts,” out of K-12 public school classrooms. Despite these efforts, these very concepts are still being taught under the guise of addressing mental health and well-being. And I fear it is creating mental health problems in children, through the introduction of such caustic ideas at inappropriate ages.

Since 2000, there has been a 350% increase in the suicide rate of children between 10 and 12 years old. What could be driving this explosion? Part of it could be that pre-adolescent children are being exposed to ideas about adult subjects through books, articles, and learning materials produced by social justice warriors steeped in critical race theory, critical gender theory, and critical feminism. Another might be the promotion of specific books and articles being introduced as part of the same programs, which feed suicide ideation.

The self-appointed mental health provider, CASEL, who is the gatekeeper to all SEL programs, may be doing your children more harm than if they left them alone. And Reaching Higher NH is wondering why parents are questioning this transformation in their child’s classroom!!

When your school uses SEL competencies to collect mental health data  on your children, remember what kind of mental health data they will now be collecting. They will be grading your child’s attitudes on race and gender through SEL competencies. Competency-Based Education does NOT permit a child to move forward UNLESS they pass their competencies. Your child MUST adhere to CASEL’s viewpoints, or your child does not advance.

Lisa Logan documents much of this here in the Second Step SEL Program:

As such, the new goal of SEL programs that align to CASEL’s standards is to groom students into thinking that the systems of society are intentionally built to be oppressive toward certain groups of people, and that they need to become agents of change (social justice activists) who want to overthrow those systems to make them more “equitable.”

SEL lessons, like those found in the program Second Step, manipulate the definitions of empathy and perspective-taking in their K-5 program to frame that being kind means you have to “do something,” which later becomes “choose a disruption strategy” by 8th grade. These disruption strategies encourage students to come up with concrete plans to advocate for causes related to race, gender and sexuality. Being that the assessments (like the surveys/screeners conducted by Panorama Education) also align to CASEL’s standards, they are measuring compliance to & students’ adoption of these Marxist values, attitudes, and beliefs, which will be scored and collected as data that reflects their “emotional intelligence.”

This isn’t about educating your children so that they can become doctors, lawyers, plumbers or electricians, this is about creating social justice warriors for the radical beliefs.  The best thing to do is to OPT OUT of ALL SEL in your school district. That may be difficult since SEL is now embedded in some of the curriculum. You must let school administrators know that your child is NEVER to be assessed on any SEL Competencies and keep an eye on it.

NOTE: Credit to Lisa Logon and Michele Kee

 

The post Part 2: How Social and Emotional Learning Now Means Critical Race Theory in Our Schools (CRT through SEL) appeared first on Granite Grok.

Mr. President, the most critical function of your office is the safety of Americans. With the loss of 100,000 Americans each year to Fentanyl poisoning, do you see the illegal drug as a problem?

With it known that the Fentanyl that is killing 100,000 Americans a year is coming through Mexico after originating in China, do you see Fentanyl as an International threat to America? Would you consider a foreign country crossing our border and killing 100,000 people an attack on America? Do you consider China or Mexico a threat to our National Security? If yes, and I hope your answer was yes, what are you doing to stop this attack?

This week, you had your first sit-down meeting with Xi Jinping of China. This lengthy meeting between the two leaders lasted for over three hours. There are three major issues that most Americans are disappointed and surprised did not come up in the meeting. The Uighurs’ treatment, the COVID virus origin, and the Fentanyl produced and imported from China were not discussed. With all due respect, Mr. President, I think most Americans are far more interested in these three topics than climate change.

I have a theory of why this was the approach of our President, and I have written about it in the past few months. I believe that his family’s business deals compromise President Joe Biden with Russia, Ukraine, and China. If my theory is valid, we have a severe problem in the White House. We have to have a President with the strength and fortitude to stand up to any country without any personal relationship with these countries. We do not have that in President Biden, which is a potential threat to our National Security.

We know that Hunter Biden took millions of dollars from companies in Ukraine, from the wife of the former Mayor of Moscow, and the Chinese government. We also know from emails and texts that 10% of any money obtained by Hunter was for “The Big Guy”; for Joe. None of these money transfers came without a hook. So if the money was given for access, then it appears they are cashing in on their investment. No President, who was not being constrained, would have come out of this meeting without broaching these three situations. Biden is being constrained, and because of those constraints, Americans and Uighurs tar dying in large numbers.

Biden claims that Secretary of State Blinken will continue to hold talks with the Chinese, but this was Biden’s opportunity to show strength, and instead, he came up limp. This perception on the global stage makes America weak. The omission in the dialog between the two leaders was observed by leaders worldwide, and what they sense in America is a country more concerned with Climate Change than Fentanyl poisonings, human rights violations, or uncovering the source of a virus that killed millions worldwide.

This compromise of our President is why the Midterms were so important, especially taking back the House. We can now get Hunter Biden under oath in front of committees and uncover the truth about the Biden Cartel. This will be a massive test of the power of a Republican lead House.

The post Hey Joe, Fentanyl is an Attack on America appeared first on Granite Grok.

I’m trying to decide what I’m like to enjoy more, Gov. Abbot invoking constitutional powers to stop the invasion across the Southern Border of Texas or whatever Team Biden comes up with as a response.

“I invoked the Invasion Clauses of the U.S. & Texas Constitutions to fully authorize Texas to take unprecedented measures to defend our state against an invasion. I’m using that constitutional authority, & other authorization & Executive Orders to keep our state & country safe.”

 

Almost three years too late.

 

I invoked the Invasion Clauses of the U.S. & Texas Constitutions to fully authorize Texas to take unprecedented measures to defend our state against an invasion.

I’m using that constitutional authority, & other authorization & Executive Orders to keep our state & country safe: pic.twitter.com/2Jt5HEMgp5

— Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) November 15, 2022

 

The Democrat response is to whine about domestic matters they claim need his attention more, like crime and shootings … in liberal-run cities. Pro-Tip for the Prog Trolls, Democracy is to blame for that. Abbott can try to pass state laws that limit the stupid that follows Democrat rule in America’s cities, but try as he may, the Dems dig in and try just as hard to find failure.

As for the border, good on him. I know that Americans, which in this case includes a majority of Hispanic Americans in Texas, are looking for relief. How that happens is unclear, despite the tweeted bullet list.

Gunboats!

We should expect local border Patrol to be ecstatic and DC leadership to be incensed. I’d be surprised If there isn’t a lawsuit headed to a judge for a stay or whatever the left thinks it can do to prevent Texas from protecting Texas, but I’ll take Texas on this one.

 

 

The post Gov. Abbot Invokes Invasion Clause of Texas and US Constitutions to Defend Southern Border appeared first on Granite Grok.

My question is: who fights for the disadvantaged? That’s what I want you to ask yourself as you read the story of Adam Cordano and other children who suffered at the Sununu Youth and Services Center.

We want to thank Megan Davis for this Op-Ed – Please direct yours to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.
You can review our ‘Op-Ed Guidelines‘ on the FAQ Page.

Last week, I sat down with Adam Cordano to talk to him about what he experienced in the NH state foster care system and at the Sununu Youth and Services Center. Adam is one of many plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the Sununu Youth and Services Center. The lawsuit alleges that state employees sexually and physically abused many children who were detained at the center.

I will just highlight some of my takeaways from the interview. I encourage you to watch the whole interview to hear Adam for yourself.

 



The foster care system needs to be overhauled.

Adam stated that he was constantly running away from foster parents because he always felt abused.

The abuse was not always physical, but it was emotional. The reason for that is that he was always one of many, many foster care children in a house, and he was treated like a paycheck.

One family had ten foster children and four biological children. They fed the foster children state rations. While the biological children ate store-bought food.

Because he was made to feel less, he ran away, and he did that repeatedly.

Can I trust the law enforcement community to take care of disadvantaged people?

After running out of foster homes to live in, at 13 years old, Adam was forced to live at YDC, which is now called the Sununu Youth and Services Center. At YDC, he was sexually abused repeatedly by Stan Watson. Stan would come into his room in the middle of the night and force him to have sex.

He reported the abuse to Joe Peters, the unit manager, but Peters refused to send Adam to the medical facility for an exam. Instead, he talked to Stan about it. After that, Stan beat Adam for reporting him.

Next, Stan asked Adam’s case worker, Evelyn Blaze, to let him be Adam’s foster dad. Adam told Evelyn that Stan was raping him. She told him that if he didn’t go with Stan, he would be forced to stay in King Cottage, a prison-like facility at YDC.

Without a background check or the usual hoops that foster parents need to go through, Stan was allowed to bring Adam home.

After some time of living with Stan, Adam got fed up and decided to hold Stan at gunpoint. The cops were called, and he told the cops what was going on. That’s when Stan’s dad, the chief of police from Merrimack (a different county from the arrest), stepped in. He told Stan that if he talked about what went on, he would never see the light of day.

So, Adam went back to Stan’s house.

According to Adam, Evelyn Blaze became the head of DCYF.

Where are all the good people at YDC?

If Adam had trouble learning, they would cuff him to a poll and put him in seclusion. How did that help Adam learn anything? Why didn’t someone step in and say, stop hurting these children?

Adam said that he was forced to wrestle other boys naked at YDC. Then, if a child was hurt, they brought them to medical. At medical, the workers never questioned why children were always getting hurt.

Why did it take so long for these things to get out?

Stan probably abused more children, not just Adam. Yet, why didn’t those children come forward after getting out of YDC?

If they did, what happened to their complaints?

Were the complaints treated like Adam’s complaint? Are we not a country that believes in innocence until proven guilty? Why were these children treated like liars if they reported their crimes?

Is that how the state treats all children who came forward with claims of abuse?

Why did it take so long for the state to investigate these crimes?

If there are over 300 people that have come forward to add their names to this lawsuit, many people have surely come forward in the past to report abuse.

Why did it have to take a class action lawsuit brought by so many people to get the state to investigate and question the system.

Who is fighting for these children?

Adam obviously felt very alone. His foster families used him as a paycheck. His case worker didn’t fight for him. Workers at the state facility were abusing him. When he reported crimes, his crimes were dismissed. The police threatened him if he spoke out.

Who was he supposed to turn to?

If you want to read about the horrors that went on at the Sununu Youth Center and other facilities for disadvantaged youths, check out this NPR article.

 

 

The post What About Adam Cordano and Other Children Who Suffered at the Sununu Youth and Services Center? appeared first on Granite Grok.

You might be one of the few who thought to yourself, “you know what, I don’t think I need that COVID vaccine.” Did you also think, assuming you are single and don’t want to be, that you don’t want the certain someone to have gotten it either?

There are dating sites for you.

 

Online Dating Sites Finding Unvaxxed in High Demand on Get Woke Up! https://t.co/pEuXstAjMy

— Get Woke Up! (@WokeMadnessNews) November 5, 2022

Depending on where you look, the mainstream reporting about apps like Unvxxed or Unjected have called them (Guess?) “anti-vaxxer” dating sites.

 

The app, meant to “connect critical thinkers across the world dedicated to a healthier tomorrow,” is called Unjected, and intends “on being a safe place for covid19 unvaccinated individuals to connect and find each other in their own communities.”

 

The mainstream also used to say things like you can’t get COVID from vaccinated people and some still do.

Hello, that is why the medical establishment stopped reporting the vaccine status of people hospitalized with COVID. If there was even the slimmest majority of unvaxxed filling beds, you’d never hear the end of it. Ergo, we know the truth, and thanks to the UK, Isreal, and a few other nations that cough up good data regularly, we know it’s true.

But what else should we expect? Even if you felt duped, what can you do about it but pretend you made the right choice and if you’re Liberal enough, make fun of people who were not sheeple? In other words, the vaccine, like masks, or their absence, became a gang sign. That passport business didn’t help.

So here we are a few years in, and the lines are drawn. Most of the people who got it, regret it or not, can’t undo that. More than a few feel like it was a mistake, and some of them have pursued detox programs. But a lot of them are just belligerent intolerant assholes who call people who never needed that needle anti-science or vaccine deniers.

Who wants to wade through the damaged dating gene pool only to watch that scum repetitiously rise to the surface? And you don’t have to do that. Dating apps have been popping up all over the planet to help pure bloods (their term, not mine) find each other and maybe make a connection. And since you already have that in common – and more than a few covid war stories along with it – odds are good you’ll have something to talk about.

Whether that conversation translates into anything meaningful is another matter, but that is for you to work out.

Unjected, for example, which started in 2021, isn’t just a dating app. It sells itself as a community that helps unvaccinated folks access all kinds of relationships, including with friends, family, and medical professionals. Sort of a package deals away from what, at that time, was an increasingly intolerant vaxxed community that in some places hasn’t much improved since.

So, would someone who is vaxxed try to connect with anyone in that community? And not just for detox advice. If you are dating and desperate, you’d have to be stupid not to try.

I didn’t sign up to find out any terms or conditions (I’m happily married to my unvaxxed mate), but what are the odds the potential paramour would ask you to take a blood test? German Researchers lead a multi-nation working group that proved you could identify people who are vaccinated by their blood. It’s different.

Awkward? Maybe, but when AIDS first reared its ugly head, it almost became socially acceptable for two people who were thinking about getting serious to volunteer to get tested together.

Maybe that’s the next new old thing in dating.

Swipe right, blood test, dinner, movie …

 

By the way, if you want a good laugh, check out the 2021 Mediaite piece I quoted. It’s quite the time capsule of approved opinion at the time. Talk about ideas with a shelf life.

 

 

The post The Post Pandemic Rise of COVID-VAXX-Free Dating Sites appeared first on Granite Grok.