Michelle Wu is a product of her party, which means failure isn’t just an option. It’s a goal! Maybe even a priority. Wu just unleashed a list of crimes she’d like to stop prosecuting in Wuville because this is how Democrats “reduce” crime.

It might “feel” like crime has gotten worse after these forward-thinking innovations are enacted, but that’s because you are a racist. The records will show crime went down, and that’s what truly matters.

 

Related: Boston Can’t Seem to Get a Handle on Violent Crime

Or as a tweet!

Boston Mayor @wutrain said she would support a policy that refuses to prosecute the following crimes:

-shoplifting
-larceny
-disorderly conduct
-receiving stolen property
-driving with a suspended license
-breaking and entering with property damage
-wanton and malicious… pic.twitter.com/ktwUvIhQAf

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) May 29, 2024

If anyone in Boston is curious about how this will play out, there are several laboratories within laboratories where Demcorats cities, in Democrat states, have done the same or similar. The abridged edition goes like this: you will get your stuff stolen, and no one is going to do anything about it and this should not be a surprise.

During her 2021 campaign, Wu was asked by left-wing nonprofit Progressive Massachusetts whether she supports Rollins’ list, to which she responded “Yes.” When asked if she supported closing the Boston Police gang database, she also said yes. She also supports firing any Boston PD employees involved in the January 6th protest in Washington DC.

Let me just add that the criminals couldn’t be happier about how difficult it is for law-abiding citizens to legally carry a firearm, a restriction that does not apply to criminals because laws do not concern them.

I know—another urban city run further into the ground by Democrats, elected by Democrats who can’t help themselves no matter how lousy things get. That is assuming this holds water. It has received national and global attention, so there at least a few folks will have some input into the “plan.” Will crime boss Wu get the sweet deal for her thugs (Gans for Wu!), or will someone harpoon the white whale of a crime wave before it has a chance to start?

It will take a lot of Democrat outrage (which we know they are good at) to generate enough pushback, but do they have it in them or, like all those other crime-riddled cities, will they wait until actual crime (not reported crime) is so intolerable that it spawns “peaceful” protests if you take my meaning?

 

The post Crime Boss Wu Gives Boston (Wuville) Dems A Great Reason to Vote for Someone Else appeared first on Granite Grok.

“Today’s verdict in Trump’s case is an absolute disgrace. From the very beginning, this entire witch hunt has reminded me of the sham trials and political persecution I saw in the People’s Republic of China before I fled to America.

The Manhattan District Attorney’s weaponization of the legal system is a move straight out of the CCP’s playbook. It is a farce and is completely un-American.

Today, the CCP and other hostile countries are laughing at us and will plan accordingly to take advantage of the weak and corrupt Biden regime. I stand with President Trump and will do everything I can to ensure he wins New Hampshire in November. The future of our country is at stake.”

Thank you,
Lily

Republican Candidate for New Hampshire Congressional District 2

The post Trump Verdict: The CCP is Relieved That Our Justice System Is Just Like Theirs appeared first on Granite Grok.

Today, we learned that we voted either Concur, Non-Concur, or Non-Concur with Committee of Conference (CoC) on 93 House bills and 20 Senate bills. Most bills passed the recommended motion of the committee chair with a voice vote. Some bills and their amendments were debated, and others were voted on with just a brief explanation of what the Senate’s fingerprints… I mean, amendments… were tacked onto the bills.

All in all, the House didn’t seem to mind a few word changes or adding or removing certain items… it was the tacking on of whole other bills that sent them to CoC land.

We learned that most of the returned House bills that we non-concurred on, or those House bills that were already designated to go to Committee of Conference, had some Senate bill tacked onto it that the House had already rejected or tabled. In fact, SB499, the bill that expands the school free and reduced breakfast and lunch program, along with making it available in the summer, and also expanding food assistance to eligible older adults and people with disabilities, was not only sent to the House on its own, but also tucked into HB1278. A similar House bill, HB1212,was already tabled in the House on 4/11/24. Seems like these free school meal bills keep repeating on us like a bad hotdog.

We learned that the first bill concurred today was HB185, relative to parental rights and responsibilities based on shared parenting. Republicans have been trying to pass this shared parenting legislation for over a decade, and finally, we got it done. Of course House Democrats were opposed to it. The bill also included language to require school governing bodies to post on their official website the amount of funds received by the state, either by allocation or grant. The bill was concurred 191Y-171N.

We also learned that HB1018 will go to a Committee of Conference (if the Senate accedes). The House voted Non-Concur CoC by a voice vote after a Concur vote failed 179Y-190N and a Non-Concur vote failed 180Y-190N.HB1018 was relative to on-premise and off-premise liquor licenses…simple right? But the Senate tacked on a current use bill (SB504) which provides that the owner of land in current use and designated as open space may post that such land is restricted to use for public recreation only and expands grounds for criminal trespass to include violation of open space land posted for recreational use only and when associated with a violation of the controlled drug act or human trafficking. Now why would the Senate do that? Well, SB504 (the current use bill) came to the House only to be amended to include the House version of bail reform (HB318). Well, why did they do that? It’s because the Senate amended the House version of HB318, which is going to a Committee of Conference (if the Senate accedes), which puts the Senate bill version in jeopardy. So everyone is tacking the language of bills that they want into bills that the other body may want in hopes of getting it passed. It can be very confusing… and that is why they call this “silly season”.

We learned that the Senate amended HB1633, cannabis legalization bill, was ultimately non-concurred with a committee of conference with a division vote of 261Y-108N. The House did not like the Senate version, and if the Senate accedes to having a CoC then they will have to come up with some sort of compromise next week or it’s dead. There were some who said we should pass this version and fix it later, especially since it doesn’t take effect for two years. There were others who didn’t think a state solution (like the liquor store model) was the right idea. Then there were House members who didn’t like either the House or Senate version. Rep. Anita Burroughs (D-Bartlett) spoke against the Concur motion and remarked, “I agree with my esteemed colleague [Commerce Chair Rep. Hunt (R-Rindge)] that a gummy before going to bed would be better than a drink because I only drink on legislative days.” That did get a good laugh. Visit Tandy’s after House session and count how many legislators you see there. (Wink)

We learned that the Senate changes to HB1186 was concurred with a roll call vote of 190Y-179N. The vote was basically on party lines. This bill was relative to firearm purchaser privacy. This bill prohibits the assigning of a specific merchant code to the sale of firearms, ammunition, or firearm accessories. This bill further provides a mechanism for enforcement of this prohibition. The folks voting in favor of this bill basically do not want the government tracking what we buy by putting little notation on our credit card purchases. Nah… we don’t want to be a part of that… but House Democrats do… because of “public safety” or something. Our friend Rep. David Meuse (D-Portsmouth) also just wants to make sure there’s no fraudulent activity going on with your credit card. I really didn’t know he cared so much about my purchases… how thoughtful.

We learned that HB115 brought us yet another turn at changing the date of the state primary. It would have moved our state primary to June. The House did not concur with this attempt to move the state primary and voted down the Concur motion 159Y-202N. A Non Concur motion passed on a voice vote. The issue is now dead. June would have been a good time to have the state primary because that is when the out of state “resident” voters at our college campuses are not around to “participate”, if you know what I mean.

We learned that HB1410, relative to certain professional licenses and relative to the board of optometry and the regulation of optometry, was tabled 192Y-170N. HB1410 was amended by the Senate to include SB440 since SB440 was Tabled in the House last week. So the Senate made another stab at trying to get this language passed. It would have increased the scope of practice of optometrists to include four new procedures that they currently cannot perform. This ostensibly is meant to alleviate the shortage of people performing those procedures. The ophthalmologists would have none of it, though, and they lobbied furiously to prevent passage of the bill. Optometrists claim they are trained in these procedures and the bill language required them to get more extensive training as well. In the end, we did not see this getting passed.

We learned that the “safe haven” bill was concurred 185Y-174N. The debate regarding this bill centered around an exclusionary clause. This means that if a child is dropped off and it had been abused, that the person handing off the child could not be prosecuted. The opponents of the bill wanted to make sure that abusers would be prosecuted and held accountable for their crimes. The proponents of the bill just want the babies to be dropped off to be taken care of and they claim that people would be more likely to leave the child if they knew they wouldn’t get in trouble for doing so or for whatever they’d done. Testimony during debate indicated that no other state with safe haven laws (or baby box drop offs) prosecute people who drop off babies.

We further learned that HB1215 was non concurred. This bill included language that would have allowed the Town of Hampton to discontinue a particular highway in order to lease that property. Currently, if there is a road in town that the town wants to change the designation (class 6 to class 5, etc.), it goes on a warrant article in a town meeting. This bill would allow the select board to make that decision. House members voted No on concurrence 172Y-180N (roll called) and sent this to a committee of conference on a voice vote.

We also learned that another House member changed her party affiliation from Democrat to Republican. Today the Republican Caucus welcomed Rep. Sherry Gould (R-Bradford, Henniker, Warner) to their side of the House.

Finally, we learned that next week, we’re taking a session break while House and Senate members duke it out in Committees of Conference while listening to The Rolling Stones sing “You Can’t Always Get What You Want.” We’ll be back on June 13th, ready to vote on Committee of Conference reports. See you then!

 

Editor: A quick thanks to Judy for all of these updates. I’m appending this week’s attendance list to this because we already have a ton of extra content this morning. There were very few roll call votes this week, which is why the numbers are so low, but again, the YTD missed vote totals on the right should interest voters.

5/30		YTD
7	Sanborn, Laurie (R, Bedford)	251
7	O’Hara, Travis (R, Belmont)	200
7	Brouillard, Jacob (R, Nottingham)	76
7	Crawford, Karel (R, Moultonborough)	76
7	Summers, James (R, Newton)	64
7	Dumais, Russell (R, Gilford)	49
3	Trottier, Douglas (R, Belmont)	149
3	Roy, Terry (R, Deerfield)	27
1	Guthrie, Joseph (R, Hampstead)	54
1	Packard, Sherman (R, Londonderry)	22

The post So Kids, What Did We Learn From This Week’s House Session (5/30/24)? appeared first on Granite Grok.

America is in need of another declaration! Our first was presented in a written form, but in today’s fast-paced world, ears are more adaptable to our living styles. As with America’s first declaration, today’s version also declares an abrupt turnaround from what is current, and in both instances, America’s abrupt turnaround comes from a highly credible source.

Concerning his initial ultimatum, Trump’s 2015/2016 declarations signaled a change from the usual political campaign prattling, and despite his latter-day version lacking Jefferson’s itemized listing, Trump’s campaign announcements constituted his modern list of injustices.

His original run mainly touched upon the public’s long-simmering doubts and uneasiness about why nothing ever changes. Therefore, he lit the hope that possibilities were actually doable, which was believable coming from a man who obviously wasn’t beholden. What followed during Trump’s presidency greatly strengthened the public’s faith by simply fulfilling his campaign pledges.

Now, with this 2024 campaign being as sporadic as it is with all these groundless court appearances, Trump’s messaging is no longer based upon hope, but now with an honest expectancy of what was will be again! And this isn’t just limited to his supporters but also from that mass of anti-Americans who realize that if he gets elected, their communist revolution will be history! In essence, his re-entry into politics, based upon his previous record and latest statements, once again builds a declaratory aura.

So, it’s not difficult to link both his original and current campaigning with a modern-day version of America’s 1776 Declaration! Think about it. The similarities are eerie. These times beckon a historic review since our young country also had to deal with those stubborn Tories, who were bent upon remaining subjects rather than becoming free citizens! Today, it’s backward; modern thought demands dependency rather than freedom!

Connecting our 1776 charter with today should also send chills. Let it be considered today, as it was declared back then that “…Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable…” As is today, a few of those past grievances continue to, “He has refused to assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public Good,” “He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance,” “He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone,” “He has erected a Multitude of New Offices, and sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People,” and lastly, “…depriving us, in many Cases, of the Benefits of Trial by Jury.” These and other grievances were included in America’s 1776 Declaration of Independence. By the way, “He” now refers to our present-day President.

It’s fair to say that the cause of today’s turmoil began as Trump’s original campaign gained credibility. His non-political talk and truthful platform caused his foes to circle their wagons and then to show themselves and their methods; which previously had only been suspected. After that, it’s been “Katie bar the door” and “all hands on deck” against Trump and our Blessed America. George Floyd’s reckless self regard and induced passing merely provided the excuse for their anarchy!

This revealing of America’s hidden power structure was costly, but Trump dictated its necessity. Its unplanned “coming out” meant that tomorrow’s revolution was now today’s. Since this wasn’t planned, we need to build upon our enemy’s disruption. Already, Trump’s agenda has uncovered the media‘s “fake news,” which caused a reduced readership. Also, traitorous corporations have shed their masks as China is now their chosen benefactor. And colleges have been unmasked when supporting their student’s hateful anti-American/pro-communist doctrines.

The end result of this election will undoubtedly usher in one of two futures. Similar to the alternatives back in 1776, the outcomes are either the darkness of living as obedient and mindless robots or the blessed light of living and prospering as free Americans.

This is not an exaggeration when considering the many hundreds of American citizens who have been incarcerated for over three years without any charges. And if that’s not abusive enough, let’s not forget the cold-blooded murder of Ashlie Babbit, which still awaits an investigation! From such lawless acts, the lesson is inescapable; as President Trump has stated, “it’s not just me that they’re after, they’re after all of you!” If Trump fails in November, his words will become an uneasy companion!

The post Our Modern Day Version appeared first on Granite Grok.

ROCHESTER, NH—UNH student and sixth-generation Rochester citizen Sam Farrington has announced his candidacy for the NH House, representing Rochester’s Ward 4.

“I am proud to announce my candidacy for State Rep.” Farrington said, “I have made this decision because my future is at stake. When I look around, I am worried about where we are headed. I stand for values like family, faith, and freedom, all of which are under attack. As a young person, I have skin in the game because my future is on the ballot.” Farrington continued, “As Rochester’s next State Rep, I will fight to advance the interests of Granite Staters. My priorities include decreasing the overall tax burden, lowering the cost of living, increasing educational freedom, protecting the rights of parents in schools, and securing New Hampshire’s border.”

Sam comes from a large and well-known family. His Chesley Hill farm has been in the family since 1913. Over the past few years, Sam has stepped up to manage the property and oversee its renovation. He successfully negotiated with the USDA to secure conservation funding, transforming the estate into a beautiful scene with a successful hay operation.

Sam is an active member of his community. He graduated at the top of his class from Spaulding High School in 2022. He gives back to his city by serving as an American Legion baseball coach and volunteering at Howie’s Field of Dreams, which provides opportunities for challenged kids to play baseball.

“New Hampshire can’t take “Live Free or Die” for granted. We need to elect prudent conservatives with a new perspective to the State House so that we can protect this great state.”

To learn more about Sam or to contribute to the campaign, visit SamuelFarrington.com.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 31, 2024
CONTACT: farringtonsam22@gmail.com

 

Reminder: Content about candidates or by candidates is not an endorsement by GraniteGrok.com or its authors.

The post Sam Farrington Announces Candidacy for the NH House of Representatives appeared first on Granite Grok.

Choosing the right birthday gift for your girlfriend can feel like a pressure cooker. You want to find something unique, thoughtful, and something that truly expresses your love and appreciation. But with endless options available, where do you even start?

This guide aims to take the guesswork out of gift-giving and help you discover the perfect present that will leave your girlfriend feeling cherished and loved.

Unlocking Her Heart: The Key to a Meaningful Gift

The most important factor in choosing a gift is understanding your girlfriend’s unique personality and interests. Here are some key questions to consider:

What are her passions? 

Does she love reading, cooking, music, or spending time outdoors? Tailoring your gift to her hobbies shows you pay attention and care about what brings her joy.

What’s her style? 

Does she gravitate towards classic elegance, trendy fashion, or a more bohemian aesthetic? Understanding her style preferences ensures the gift aligns with her taste.

Does she have any specific desires? 

Has she mentioned wanting something lately? Perhaps a new gadget, a piece of art for her home, or a subscription box related to her hobbies.

By reflecting on these questions, you gain valuable insights into what would truly resonate with your girlfriend.

Gift Ideas to Ignite Inspiration: Catering to Diverse Preferences

Here are some diverse gift categories to spark your creativity:

Experiences: 

Create lasting memories with a shared adventure like a weekend getaway, a concert ticket, a cooking class, or a hot air balloon ride.

Jewellery: 

A timeless and elegant choice, consider a necklace, bracelet, earrings, or a personalised piece with her birthstone or initials.

Fashion and Accessories: 

A new handbag, a cosy scarf, a pair of stylish shoes, or a designer watch can be a thoughtful addition to her wardrobe.

Beauty and Wellness: 

Pamper her with a luxurious bathrobe, a set of high-quality skincare products, a spa gift certificate, or a subscription to a beauty box.

Personalised Gifts: 

Show her you care with a gift that has a personal touch, like a custom photo album, a framed piece of artwork with a special message, or a piece of jewellery engraved with her initials.

Gourmet Food and Drinks: 

Spoil her taste buds with a basket of gourmet chocolates, a selection of artisanal cheeses and wines, or a subscription to a coffee or tea of the month club.

Handmade or DIY Gifts: 

If you’re crafty, consider creating a personalised gift like a painting, a knitted scarf, or a piece of pottery. The effort and thoughtfulness will be truly appreciated.

Remember, the most important aspect is not the price tag but the thought and effort you put into choosing a gift that reflects your love and understanding of your girlfriend.

Beyond the Gift: Adding the Extra Sparkle

While the gift itself is important, don’t forget the little details that make it extra special:

Presentation Matters: 

Wrap the gift beautifully with thoughtful paper and ribbon. A handwritten card expressing your love and appreciation adds a personal touch.

Plan a Special Occasion: 

Elevate the gift-giving experience by planning a romantic dinner, a picnic in a scenic spot, or a fun activity you can enjoy together.

Capture the Memories: 

Take photos or videos of her reaction to the gift. These memories will become cherished keepsakes.

By going the extra mile, you can ensure her birthday is a truly unforgettable experience.

FAQS: What if I’m on a tight budget? 

A: There are plenty of thoughtful and meaningful gifts that don’t have to break the bank. Consider homemade gifts, experiences like a hike or bike ride together, or a heartfelt letter expressing your love.

What if I’m not sure what she wants? 

A: Pay attention to her interests and subtle hints she might drop. You can also ask her friends or family for suggestions.

What if the gift doesn’t go as planned? 

A: The most important thing is the thought behind the gift. If she doesn’t love it, focus on the gesture and express your sincere appreciation for her understanding.

What if the experience provider cancels? 

A: If the experience provider cancels due to unforeseen circumstances, WonderDays will typically offer rebooking or choosing a similar experience.

Are there any blackout dates for specific experiences? 

A: Some experiences might have blackout dates (e.g., holidays, peak seasons) when they are unavailable. Check the experience description for details.

What about age restrictions and physical fitness requirements? 

A: Some experiences have age or physical fitness requirements for safety reasons. These are usually outlined in the experience description.

Here’s what WonderDays offer:

WonderDays offers a wide variety of experiences to suit almost any interest, including:

• Adventure: Hot air ballooning, skydiving, white-water rafting
• Food and Drink: Afternoon teas, cooking classes, gourmet food tours
• Relaxation: Spa days, weekend getaways, boat cruises

Some ways to find out more about WonderDays:

• Website: Visit their website https://www.wonderdays.co.uk/ to explore the full range of experiences, pricing, and locations.
• Social Media: Follow them on Facebook, Instagram, etc.

To read more, click here

The post Finding the Perfect Spark: Birthday Gifts for Your Girlfriend appeared first on Granite Grok.

Now comes, the Appellant Daniel Richard, pro se, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 16 (7), respectfully gives notice of a new compelling authority from the recent decision by the Supreme Court of the United States “SCOTUS”, decided May 23, 2024 in the matter of ALEXANDER v. SOUTH CAROLINA STATE CONFERENCE OF THE NAACP, No. 22-807 602 U.S.___ (2024). [Hereinafter, “Alexander”]. ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Argued October 11, 2023—Decided May 23, 2024, hereinafter Alexander v. South Carolina NAACP 602 U.S.___ (2024) (See attached exhibit A), where the Plaintiff here argues as compelling precedent applicable to the case at bar.

Accordingly, the Appellant respectfully submits to the court, where Alexander v. South Carolina NAACP—above, is an election law case reaffirming the Appellants previous citation of Moore v. Harper, 600 U.S. 1 (2023), and the New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc., et al. v. Bruen No. 20-843 (U.S. June 23, 2022), and the District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), on August 14, 2023, in the Appellants motion for late authorities this authority is not only appropriate but precedent in the present New Hampshire case, argued and awaiting release of the NH state court decision.

We want to thank Dan Richard for this Contribution – Please direct yours to Steve@GraniteGrok.com.
You can review our ‘Op-Ed Guidelines‘ on the FAQ Page.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas joining the majority opinion by concurring in part, in the Alexander v. South Carolina NAACP decision, reinforces the precedent of Moore v. Harper, in the examination of the elections clause of the Constitution for the United States, Article I, §4, cl. 1, reinforcing judicial review by State and Federal Courts who both possess the authority to exercise judicial review also over state legislative actions affecting the time, manner, and place of conducting Federal Elections.

Justice Thomas in his concurring opinion in Alexander v. South Carolina NAACP   has tied Moore v. Harper (2023) and Bruen (2022) together and reinforces the Appellants arguments, by stating a fact in law, that the standard of review for examination of the rights enumerated in the U.S. Const. including the Federal Elections Clause Article I, §4, cl. 1, must be examined under Heller/Bruen methodology, and not by means-end scrutiny.

Quoting Justice Thomas:

Although States have the initial duty to draw district lines, the Elections Clause commits exclusive supervisory authority over the states drawing of congressional districts to Congress—not federal courts. It provides: “The Times, Places, and Manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may it any time by – Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.” Art. I, §4, cl. 1. The first part of the Clause “imposes a duty upon” state legislatures to “prescribe the details necessary to hold congressional elections.” U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779, 862 (1995) (Thomas J., dissenting). The second part “grants power exclusively to Congress” to police the state legislatures’ performance of their duty. Id., at 864. Critically, the Clause leaves the Judiciary out of the districting process entirely.

The Clause’s assignment of rules is comprehensive. For example, a state legislature’s responsibility over congressional elections “‘transcends any limitations sought to be imposed by the people of a State’” through other state actors; the state legislature is the exclusive state authority. Moore v. Harper, 600 U.S. 1, 58 (2023) (Thomas, J., dissenting) (quoting Leser v. Garnett, 258 U. S. 130, 137, (1922)). In a similar vein, the Clause makes Congress the exclusive federal authority over States’ efforts to draw congressional districts, to the exclusion of the courts.

The historical record compels this interpretation of the Elections Clause text. gerrymandering and vote delusion are not new phenomena. The founding generation was familiar with political districting problems from the American colonial experience. See Vieth, 541 U.S., at 274 (collecting examples). But, the framers nowhere suggested the federal courts as a potential solution to those problems. Instead, they relied on congressional oversight. The framers’ considered choice of a non-judicial remedy is highly relevant to context to the interpretation of the elections clause. See New York State rifle& pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1, 26—27 (2022). See pages 26 and 27 in the Bruen decision below. 

Bruen provides:

We categorize these historical sources, because, when it comes to interpreting the Constitution, not all history is created equal. “Constitutional rights are enshrined with the scope they were understood to have when the people adopted them.” Heller, 554 U.S., at 634—635 (emphasis added). The Second Amendment was adopted in 1791; -pg. 25.

-the Fourteenth in 1868. Historical evidence that long predates either date may not illuminate the scope of the right if linguistic or legal conventions change in the intervening years. It is one thing for courts to “reac[h] back to the 14th century” for English practices that “prevailed up to the ‘period immediately before and after the framing of the Constitution.’” Sprint Communications Co. v. APCC Services, Inc. 554 U.S. 269, 311 (2008) (Roberts, C. J., dissenting). It is quite another to rely on in an “ancient” practice that had become “obsolete in England at the time of the adaptation of the Constitution” and never “was acted upon or accepted in the colonies.” Dimick v. Schiedt, 293 U.S. 474, 477 (1935).

Sometimes, in interpreting our own Constitution, “it [is] better not to go too far back into antiquity for the best securities of our liberties,” Funk v. United States, 290 U.S. 371, 382 (1983), unless evidence shows that medieval law survived to become our Founders’ law. A long, unbroken line of common-law precedent stretching from Braxton to Blackstone is far more likely to be part of our law than a short-lived, 14th century English practice. –pg. 26

Thomas has said specifically that these two pages apply as the corrected standard of review of constitutional interpretation of the Elections Clause Article I, §4, cl. 1.

Similarly, we must also guard against giving post enactment history more weight than it can rightly bear. It is true – pg. 26.

–that in Heller we reiterated that evidence of “how the second amendment was interpreted from immediately after it’s ratification through the end of the 19th century” represented a “critical tool of constitutional interpretation.” 554 U.S., at 605. We therefore examined “a variety of legal and other sources to determine the public understanding of [the Second Amendment] after its… ratification.” Ibid. And, in other context, we have explained that “‘a regular course of practice’ can ‘liquidate & settle the meaning of’ disputed or intermediate ‘terms & phrases’” in the Constitution. Chiafalo v. Washington, 591 U.S. __, __ (2020) (slip op., at 13) (quoting Letter from J. Madison to S. Roane (Sept. 2, 1819), in 8 Writings of James Madison 450 (G. Hunt ed. 1908)); see also, e.g.,  Houston Community college System v. Wilson, 595 U.S.___, ___, (2022) (slip op. at 5) (same); The Federalist No. 37, p. 229 (C. Rossiter ed. 1961) (J. Madison); see generally C. Nelson, Stare Decisis and Demonstrably Erroneous Precedents, 87 Va. L. Rev. 1, 10—21 (2001); W. Baude, Constitutional Liquidation, 71 Stan. L. Rev. 1 (2019). In other words, we recognize that “where A governmental practice has been open, widespread, and unchallenged since the early days of the Republic, the practice should guide our interpretation of an ambiguous constitutional provision.” [Emphasis added.] NLRB v. Noel Canning, 573 U.S. 513, 572 (2014) (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment); see also Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52, 174 (1926); Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898, 905 (1997). —pg. 27

            But to the extent later history contradicts what the text says, the text controls. [Emphasis added.] “‘[L]iquidating’ indeterminacies in written laws is far removed from expanding or altering them.” Gamble v. United States, 587 U.S. __, __ (2019) (Thomas, J. concurring) (slip op., at 13); see also Letter from James Madison 477 (G. Hunt ed. 1910). Thus, “post-ratification adaptation or acceptance of laws that are inconsistent with the original meaning of the constitutional text – pg. 27

–obviously cannot overcome or alter that text.” – pg. 28. Heller, 670 F. 3d, at 1274, n. 6 (Kavanagh, J., dissenting); see also Espinoza v. Montana Dept. of Revenue, 591 U.S. __, __, (2020) (slip op., at 15). 

Bruen stated that the Court has “made clear that individual rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights and made applicable against the States through the Fourteenth Amendment have the same scope as against the Federal Government.” 142 S. Ct. at 2137.—pg. 39.

The Heller decision abolished means end scrutiny as a test for the enumerated rights in the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution. Justice Scalia writes the following for the majority:

Justice Breyer moves on to make a broad jurispruden­tial point: He criticizes us for declining to establish a level of scrutiny for evaluating Second Amendment restrictions. He proposes, explicitly at least, none of the traditionally ex­pressed levels (strict scrutiny, intermediate scrutiny, rational basis), but rather a judge-empowering “interest-balancing inquiry” that “asks whether the statute burdens a protected interest in a way or to an extent that is out of proportion to the statute’s salutary effects upon other important govern­ mental interests.” Post, at 689–690. After an exhaustive discussion of the arguments for and against gun control, Jus­tice Breyer arrives at his interest-balanced answer: Be­cause handgun violence is a problem, because the law is lim­ited to an urban area, and because there were somewhat similar restrictions in the founding period (a false proposi­tion that we have already discussed), the interest-balancing inquiry results in the constitutionality of the handgun ban. QED. – pg. 635

We know of no other enumerated constitutional right whose core protection has been subjected to a freestanding “interest-balancing” approach. The very enumeration of the right takes out of the hands of government—even the Third Branch of Government—the power to decide on a case-by-case basis whether the right is really worth insisting upon. A constitutional guarantee subject to future judges’ assessments of its usefulness is no constitutional guarantee at all. Constitutional rights are enshrined with the scope they were understood to have when the people adopted— pg. 634

them, whether or not future legislatures or (yes) even future judges think that scope too broad. We would not apply an “interest-balancing” approach to the prohibition of a peaceful neo-Nazi march through Skokie. See National Socialist Party of America v. Skokie, 432 U. S. 43 (1977) (per curiam). The First Amendment contains the freedom-of-speech guar­antee that the people ratified, which included exceptions for obscenity, libel, and disclosure of state secrets, but not for the expression of extremely unpopular and wrongheaded views. The Second Amendment is no different. Like the First, it is the very product of an interest balancing by the people—which Justice Breyer would now conduct for them anew. And whatever else it leaves to future evalua­tion, it surely elevates above all other interests the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home. – pg. 635.

Justice Breyer chides us for leaving so many applica­tions of the right to keep and bear arms in doubt, and for not providing extensive historical justification for those regulations of the right that we describe as permissible. See post, at 720–721. But since this case represents this Court’s first in-depth examination of the Second Amendment, one should not expect it to clarify the entire field, any more than Reynolds v. United States, 98 U. S. 145 (1879), our first in­ depth Free Exercise Clause case, left that area in a state of utter certainty. And there will be time enough to expound upon the historical justifications for the exceptions we have mentioned if and when those exceptions come before us.” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)— pg. 635.

Fifteen other cases in the last eleven months since June 2023 citing Moore v. Harper are predicated upon this same principle in law and include the following:

“Since early in our Nation’s history, courts have recognized their duty to evaluate the constitutionality of legislative acts.”

“When government is alleged to have threatened any of [the provisions in the New Mexico Bill of [R]ights, it is the responsibility of the courts to interpret and apply the protections of the Constitution.”

Grisham v. Soelen, 539 P.3d 272 (N.M. 2023) 09-22-2023. See also Griego , 2014-NMSC-003, ¶ 1, 316 P.3d 865; Hoffmann v. N.Y. State Ind. Redistricting Comm’n, 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 6344 (N.Y. 2023); Keefer v. Biden, CIVIL 1:24-CV-00147 (M.D. Pa. Mar. 26, 2024) Election Clause case.

Meanwhile, the Bruen decision has been cited 78 times since June 27, 2022.

WHEREFORE, THE APPELLANT respectfully submits this Notice of New Authorities for additional consideration in this case forthwith.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Daniel Richard

Daniel Richard

 

 

 

 

The post Daniel Richard v. Christopher Sununu: Motion for Leave of the Court New Late Authorities appeared first on Granite Grok.

The Hush Money Trial of Donald Trump in New York is a stain on the American Justice system that had been the envy of the world. The justice system is another entity that President Joe Biden destroyed. Who could have predicted that Joe Biden, the guy from Scranton, could have successfully put a wrecking ball to so much of America?

Joe Biden has been a loser and liar his entire political life. He had to withdraw from two previous presidential bids for plagiarism and has suffered through three-plus years of lies in the White House. He had the cajones to cart out washed-up actor Robert DeNiro to read a prepared statement in front of the New York courtroom telling anyone who would listen how dangerous Donald Trump is. DeNiro, wearing a mask, was surrounded by a dozen thugs looking like a scene from Godfather 4, which was never shot. This fiasco was on the same day that Biden announced he would have a statement for the press at the conclusion of the trial. Biden is sadly salivating at the possibility of referring to his opponent as “Convicted Felon Donald Trump.” The house money is on acquittal, which is going to make Biden look like the horse’s ass he is. Joe Biden is shallow, devious, opportunistic, and a thief. He may also be guilty of treason, which will be the coup de grace of his legacy, and he can take Hunter down with him.

The trial entered the final arguments stage on Tuesday, after a trial when the crime was never divulged. This trial was scripted with the one intention of Biden being able to label his primary competitor a convicted felon. Every day of the trial gave ammunition for an appeal, but the one remaining fact loomed over the trial: there was no crime. The prosecution spent over five hours yesterday on its closing trying to convince the jury they could believe every word from Michael Cohen, who the defense labeled “The GLOAT” (the greatest liar of all time), and reminded the jury that Cohen had admittedly lied during his testimony. This entire sham of a trial is based on a nameless crime substantiated by a convicted perjurer.

This trial is a classic con game that distracts people from the real issues of the failed Joe Biden presidency. Look at Donald Trump, who is constrained to a chair in a courtroom and unable to campaign. Don’t look at the price at the gas pump. Don’t look at the thousands of young men crossing our southern border. Don’t look at the two wars we are funding. Don’t look at Biden defying the Supreme Court and transferring student loans to every American. Don’t look at the cost of your weekly shopping cart of groceries. This was the plan, but it is not working. The trial is not working out as planned by the Democrats, and people are not falling for the gaslighting. Biden has been trying to convince Americans he was on the right track and they needed to understand the new parameters. He actually insulted the intelligence level of Americans, and Americans do not forget being played for fools.

The post Night Cap: Six Week Trial And Nobody Knows The Crime appeared first on Granite Grok.

By now, bitter-clingers, you hopefully have read the prior two installments of this award-winning series: American Has Fallen … You Better Have and Exit Plan  and America Has Fallen (Continued). In our first installment, we discussed how the Woke-Communists have used their control of America’s institutions to turn Generation-Z into America-hating, Woke-Communist-bots:

Note that Generation-Z does NOT intend to have children. That dovetails nicely with the Woke-Communists Great Replacement project. The Woke-Communists preach that America is too White … that is one of the reasons, according to them, that America needs to transformed.

So the Woke-Communists convince Generation-Z NOT to have babies … for example, why have babies when climate-change is going to devastate the earth in a mere ten years. And they are bringing in illegal aliens in mind-boggling numbers to replace the babies that aren’t being born. Even in supposedly RED States:

And all of illegal aliens’ babies are American citizens by “birthright citizenship.” So even if the Woke-Communists do NOT succeed in getting voting for the present illegal aliens, in twenty years their children will be voting and will give the Woke-Communists permanent one-party rule.

America will be unrecognizable in twenty years. Unrecognizable. But just keep telling yourselves that all you need to do is click your heels together three times while repeating “there’s no place like MAGA” and everything will be alright.

The post America Has Fallen (Continued … Continued) appeared first on Granite Grok.

Madness at the Libertarian Convention, Ross Ulbricht gets a clemency promise from Trump, Victoria Sullivan’s Senate campaign launch, and more!



The post Manch Talk: Trump Booed at LP Convention and Yet … appeared first on Granite Grok.

I’m not telling you anything you don’t likely already know, but I felt we’d better acknowledge the verdict because people will want to know what we think about that.

There was no crime. The process was circus-like. Any effort to appeal the verdict will likely result in all counts being overturned, mostly because of how the trial was conducted.

I would not be surprised if the Judge gets into some deep “you know what” over this.

Everyone had better get their book deals soon because this thing ain’t over, and you’ll want to cash in before it all falls apart.

Trump’s polling will jump up, his fundraising will break records, and Dems will get overconfident.

Stay focused. The economy sucks, no one is happy about open borders or crime. Screengrab the progressive hate and save it.

 

The jury has found Donald Trump guilty on ALL 34 felony counts.

— erica orden (@eorden) May 30, 2024

 

One more (added after publication).

The post Trump Found Guilty on All 34 Counts … Riiiiiiight. appeared first on Granite Grok.

Dear Mr. Macdonald,

I feel your article was pretty biased because it was factually incorrect. Perhaps we can discuss where we agree or at least what is indisputable.

Related: New Hampshire’s “Red Flag” Camel’s Nose is Back! [Updated]

1. If you are involuntarily committed under our law in effect right now, you are automatically a “prohibited person” by federal law.
2. If you disclose this on your 4473, you will be denied
If you don’t, you’ve committed a felony.
3. Under current law, if you become a “prohibited person” for mental health reasons, you are banned for life unless your state has a “Restoration of Rights” law in place.
4. New Hampshire has no such law and therefore if you are prohibited for mental health reasons in NH you are banned for life.
5. You’re being a prohibited person is not dependent on the state reporting it. The federal law relies on the underlying condition that caused the prohibitions and not the state sharing the information with NICS. In other words, if you get convicted of a felony, and the state forgets to share it with NICS, and you lie on your 4473, you may purchase a gun, but you’re still guilty of being a felon in possession and of lying on the form. This applies to all prohibited persons.

Those are all indisputable facts.

We want to thank Rep. Terry Roy for this Contribution – Please direct yours to Steve@GraniteGrok.com.
You can review our ‘Op-Ed Guidelines‘ on the FAQ Page.

Now for some lesser known facts.

1. There are, at best guess, 1000 people in the NICS registry from NH for mental health prohibitions
2. Doctors and therapists are mandated reporters in New Hampshire. If they have reason to believe one of their patients presents a realistic threat to themselves or a specific person, they must report it to the Department of Safety. The Department of Safety reports these to NICS. This is why I was an advocate of doing away with the New Hampshire Gun Line. If you recall, the big argument was they “have local information not available to NICS.” Ever wonder what that was? These people, whenever reported are banned for life from ever owning a gun again. They may have had a bad day. Their wife may have died. They may have said in a moment of weakness, “I just want to die”. Well they continue therapy and pull through it. They decide to get a new hunting rifle. They are denied. It takes them an enormous effort to figure out why, and when they do, there’s literally nothing they can do.
3. Yes, HB1711 would have reported the involuntarily committed to NICS, but as I said, they already are prohibited persons by that point. But more importantly, now they know it and aren’t surprised at the gun store, and they know exactly what they must do to get off the list.
4. This is the reason 48 other states submit these. Even the most progun states like Florida, Texas and Alabama. They do it because the people are already prohibited but need a way to fix that. They cannot take advantage of the law restoring their rights, of whichb they never got notification that they were reported in the first place.

Look, this is a very complex issue and I clearly did a poor job of explaining it to the members, but I can assure you thay I researched the Hell out of it. I even called the ATF and made them explain the process of people being able to get their rights back. You MUST have the Restoration of Rights in state law and it MUST meet the ATF requirements for people to be no longer considered prohibited. I followed it to a T. I even put a safety valve at the end that said no names could be provided until the ATF approved our Restoration of Rights laws.

Finally, bringing up my employment dispute from 30 years ago was a low blow. Yes, my PD tried to use the gun laws against me, but that leaves out a lot of information, like that it was immediately after I arrested a city councilor for OUI, and that I sued in federal court and they settled restoring my gun rights, withdrawing the termination, paying me back pay, and giving me a positive job recommendation. That being said, I am extremely sensitive to the system being used to take people’s rights, including the mentally ill. They are being reported now, and even the ones who aren’t, are still prohibited persons and are banned for the rest of their lives for something that may have been a temporary situation. This law would have helped them.

I picked David Meuse because he would deliver all the Democrat votes and, more importantly, keep them from campaigning on “Republicans refuse to do anything in the wake of the New Hampshire Hospital and Maine mass shooting.” If you notice, we heard none of the usual “we must bam guns” or “we need waiting periods” arguments for the last seven months since the shooting.

I think the 2nd Amendment community has to be more strategic and proactive if we want to continue winning on these issues. The other side is not sitting around waiting. They are constantly scheming for new ways to infringe on our rights. We are always reactive, trying to defend the indefensible. This was our chance to show the public, that we can do more than thoughts and prayers. When in the rare incidences where legislation is necessary, for Republicans, it is laser-focused and not broad, sweeping up everyone but the people who are actually causing the problem. Furthermore, where someone’s rights are impacted, we provide a pathway for them to get them back. Not one Democrat bill has ever done that.

As you said in your article, and I agree, it is my baby and I failed to properly sell it to everyone, but that doesn’t change any of the facts about it. It may be a camel’s nose under the tent, but it’s the camel trying to get out and get his rights back.

 

Editors Note: Earlier today, the NH Senate killed HB1711 for good this session. While that is what I was after, I did want to get Rep. Roy’s take published before that, but due to delays in approval for publication, we were not able to make that happen.

The post I Feel Your Article Was Pretty Biased Because It Was Factually Incorrect appeared first on Granite Grok.

Once upon a time, scientific inquiry was premised on ideas of objectivity, factual analysis, and avoiding bias. The advent of social justice theory, post-modernist thought, and climate alarmism have polluted the waters of many once-prestigious science journals. This political transformation of what was once called science has given rise to pseudo-scientific partisanship on both sides of almost every issue. The result is dubious science, public confusion, and growing distrust of the scientific community, including the CDC and other public institutions.

America is reportedly engaged in a “culture war” that is itself delineated by two scientific worlds. Was COVID-19 created in a lab using dubious gain-of-function research, or did it hop to humans in a live-animal market in Wuhan? Are hormone blockers and gender surgeries beneficial and lifesaving for youth suffering from gender dysphoria, or irreversible sterilizations with potentially deadly and horrid outcomes? Is the planet doomed to end in a decade due to human-caused carbon emissions, or are such claims overblown and alarmist? This atmosphere of scientific division is seeding public distrust.

The Politicization of Science

Science itself has been politicized, and many major science platforms have been tainted. An intriguing survey of this modern phenomenon by the Manhattan Institute’s James B. Meigs concludes:

“Unfortunately, progressive activists today begin with their preferred policy outcomes or ideological conclusions and then try to force scientists and journalists to fall in line. Their worldview insists that, rather than challenging the progressive orthodoxy, science must serve as its handmaiden. This pre-Enlightenment style of thinking used to hold sway only in radical political subcultures and arcane corners of academia. Today it is reflected even in our leading institutions and science publications.”

A Failure of Journalistic Integrity?

Previously vaunted publications such as The Lancet, Nature, and Scientific American have come under fire for controversial positions in many of these important public policy areas. Scientific American openly endorsed Joe Biden in 2020, claiming “The evidence and the science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its people,” a not very scientific claim. The outlet later became an ardent opponent of the lab-leak theory, in articles such as “Lab-Leak Hypothesis Made It Harder for Scientists to Seek the Truth.” Bad science tainted with partisan bias may well damage the American people.

The result of this science-warping division is that citizens are becoming increasingly distrustful of scientific arguments and institutions. As the government seeks to stifle scientific inquiry contrary to its official endorsement of climate change, transgenderism, or the animal-transmission theory, disinformation, and misinformation have become linguistic terms of coercion. This further deteriorates public trust: no wonder more Americans have become “vaccine-hesitant,” a situation that is itself then employed to tamp down even harder on dissenting viewpoints. This vicious cycle seeds rancor and more societal division, in a vicious cycle that threatens scientific integrity as well as human health.

This muddying of the intellectual waters has been further compounded by a growth in shoddy scientific journals touting fraudulent “studies.” The Wall Street Journal reports that a “flood of fake science” has forced the closure of multiple journals “infected by large-scale research fraud.” The biggest casualty has been 217-year-old Hoboken, N.J. publisher, Wiley:

“In the past two years, Wiley has retracted more than 11,300 papers that appeared compromised, according to a spokesperson, and closed four journals. It isn’t alone: At least two other publishers have retracted hundreds of suspect papers each. Several others have pulled smaller clusters of bad papers.

“Although this large-scale fraud represents a small percentage of submissions to journals, it threatens the legitimacy of the nearly $30 billion academic publishing industry and the credibility of science as a whole.”

Finding Truth in a Post-Modern Chaos

In the not-so-distant past, readers critically seeking a balanced understanding of political or scientific issues could read the two sides and seek to find a middle ground. In the post-modern milieu of compromised science journals and partisan wrangling, both science and humanity suffer in a spiral that may not wane in time to prevent a major catastrophe. If facts are morphed willy-nilly to suit one’s socio-political agenda, nothing is reliable and there is no solid ground for either scientific or public policy.

As Meigs explains:

“….science is theoretically supposed to be insulated from political influence. Sadly, the new woke style of science journalism reframes factual scientific debates as ideological battles, with one side presumed to be morally superior. Not surprisingly, the crisis in science journalism is most obvious in the fields where public opinion is most polarized.”

The world seeks reliable data and policies with which to fashion crucial private and public decisions. The death of “real science” is a loss to both sides of the political aisle.

 

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

The post Social Justice Ideology Compromises “Real” Science appeared first on Granite Grok.

The Trump trial; Biden’s pier problems in Israel; is our military incompetent? How much was it destroyed by Obama/Biden? If Iran could build a bomb, can they deliver it? The libertarian convention; why do republicans want federal law to ban abortion (at any point in pregnancy)? Can republicans run against the national debt? Could anyone win the presidency on reducing entitlements or even any of the national debt? The panel had positive comments about Trump not pandering in either the Bronx rally or at the libertarian convention; new portrait of King Charles; baseball integrating stats from other leagues into their official stats.

The post The Conservatarian Exchange Podcast #208 appeared first on The Liberty Block.

In January 2024, there was a meeting of the New Hampshire House State-Federal Relations and Veteran Affairs committee. The committee heard two separate bills on secession.

The first one, CACR 20, would be a constitutional amendment that would see the people of NH vote to amend the constitution to say that if the federal government’s national debt reaches $40 trillion, New Hampshire shall peacefully secede from the union.
The second one, HB1130 would form a commission to study everything we would need to know about secession, such as economic impact.

This is video of the full public hearing for both bills and the people’s testimonies.

On Wednesday morning, NHexit.US announced that local liberty activists in New Hampshire have hired a chartered airplane pilot to fly a pro-independence banner over the three largest cities in the state. Over the past few years, the calls for serious discussions on peaceful separation of New Hampshire from DC and the union have grown dramatically. New Hampshire is already home to the most influential liberty movement in the world.

Notable events since 2021 include:

• legislation to place an independence referendum on the ballot which was sponsored by nine lawmakers in the New Hampshire House
• a poll by SurveyUSA finding that almost 100% of NH residents strongly resent the federal government and 29% are ready to secede immediately
• increasing demands by lawmakers and the centrist governor telling the DC tyrants to back off 
• An abundance of pro-independence sentiment, including flags for the Granite Republic, hats, T-shirts, books, articles, and podcasts, and even a national anthem

This Saturday, an airplane banner could be added to that list. The tentative plan is for the banner to fly over Nashua, Manchester, and Concord. If you look up while in one of these cities, you just might be able to snap a photo or record a video of the banner. We encourage our readers to post their photos to social media with the tags #NHexit, #secession, and #NHpolitics. 

Additionally, the question of secession will be asked by another highly reputable pollster. The University of New Hampshire is currently conducting a political survey that includes multiple questions related to New Hampshire independence. The results could be published within days or a few weeks. 

 

 

The post Secession Airplane Banner Flying Over Merrimack Valley Saturday appeared first on Foundation for New Hampshire Independence.

A recent poll conducted by SurveyUSA on behalf of the Foundation for New Hampshire Independence (FNHI) shows that while the peaceful separation of New Hampshire from the federal government has low support among politicians, it has significant support among registered voters.

According to an overwhelming number of respondents, the people of the United States are getting more and more divided over important issues like LGBT rights, guns, abortion, election integrity, race relations, involvement in foreign wars, climate change, immigration, and so on (91%).  Nearly as many fear that if this trend continues, it will lead to increases in political violence (89%).

Large majorities of respondents agreed that the federal government doesn’t have their best interests in mind (67%); that it violates their rights more than it protects those rights (65%); that it produces laws, regulations, and court rulings that are incompatible with New Hampshire’s culture of freedom (63%); and that its financial decisions and economic regulations hurt our livelihoods, and could lead to inflation and bankruptcy (77%).

In short, 63% of respondents feel that their state can be trusted more than the federal government.

One possible way forward would be for New Hampshire to begin ignoring federal laws and regulations regarding matters reserved to the States by the 10th Amendment. Fewer than half of respondents believe that the federal government should be able to force New Hampshire to follow federal mandates and laws regarding cannabis (27%), medicine (37%), public health (42%), education (41%), welfare (42%, firearms (42%), businesses (38%), and abortion (33%).

This approach, also referred to as ‘nullification’ is common, currently being utilized by dozens of states, and is consistent with the recent enactment of New Hampshire HB 1178, ‘prohibiting the state from enforcing any federal statute, regulation, or Presidential Executive Order that restricts or regulates the right of the people to keep and bear arms’. 

However, a more comprehensive way forward would be for New Hampshire to reclaim its sovereignty, peacefully separating from the federal government to govern itself as an independent country, an idea that was supported by 29% of respondents and 52% of Republicans. Only 58% of respondents do not support immediate and full secession from the federal government today. More than 2/5 of respondents agreed that the state should be able to do this without securing permission from the federal government (43%). And only 3% of respondents would support the use of military force by the federal government to interfere with such a separation.

Again, while politicians declined to put the question to the people, more than 2/5 of respondents support the idea of placing independence on the ballot (42%) while only 47% currently oppose it.

History is filled with proposals that seemed at first to be politically impossible, but after serious discussion and evolving circumstances, proved to be politically inevitable. To take just one example, shall-issue laws for concealed carry licenses, once viewed as extreme, are now the law in nearly every state. As the results of this poll show, peaceful separation already has more support now than shall-issue laws had in 1990. Today, not only is shall-issue the norm, but 25 states allow their residents to carry concealed guns without even requiring a permit. If New Hampshire independence follows a similar path, it may only be a few short years away from broad adoption. 

The survey also found strong support for independence and extreme discontent with DC politicians among all 8 states polled. In Texas, 90% of Republicans recently endorsed putting secession on the ballot, officially placing the position in their platform. California progressives have a strong independence movement of their own, and surveys show that around half of Californians support or are open to independence from the union. Progressives in Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington also support independence. States like South Carolina, Florida, and many other states have new independence movements that are rapidly growing, as well. 

The post New Hampshire Survey Shows Disdain For DC, Support For Independence appeared first on Foundation for New Hampshire Independence.

Over the past few weeks, a group of pro-freedom activists in New Hampshire has been holding informal meetings to brainstorm how to best promote independence in the next legislative session. Predictably, progressive authoritarians have already begun to attack the concepts of independence and liberty. A few conservatives cling to hope that they can fix DC and all 50 states, convince all Democrats to embrace conservative liberty values, and ‘save America’. 

 

I have written dozens of articles, published three books, and produced hundreds of videos making the case for a national divorce from the authoritarians. Here are just 100 reasons why every New Hampshire citizen who supports freedom should support a bill and a ballot referendum on independence from DC. 

 

1. Without the federal income tax, we’d each save around $25,000/year right off the bat.
2. The IRS is corrupt, tyrannical, and about to grow by 80,000 employees and billions of dollars. Years ago, they were caught targeting conservatives. Now, they are surely much more polarized and hateful against us. I could live without them.
3. The ATF is extremely anti-gun. They have been one of the biggest reasons that federal gun control laws have grown increasingly strict. The ATF passes laws and bypasses Congress. Once the murderous criminal, Dave Chipman is confirmed as the new ATF director, things will get much worse. I could live without the ATF. Once we divorce DC by declaring independence from the union, the ATF will no longer have jurisdiction over us. 
4. The CDC is out of control, and the agency will only ever grow more tyrannical. This was before corona-fascism made the CDC into the most harmful agency to liberty of all 400 illegal executive agencies. By the way, did you know that the CDC took legal ownership over every rental property in the united states?
5. I don’t trust Joe Biden to run my life or to do anything that could impact me. I have around 28 trillion reasons for distrusting that corrupt, evil, demented sociopath. 
6. I don’t trust Congress to run my life. They have proven time and again that they support authoritarian socialism. Even with majorities in the House and the Senate and even with Trump in the White House, Congress did nearly nothing to expand liberty. But they did pass many laws that violated my natural rights. 
7. The federal government benefits from terribly untrustworthy elections, such as the one in 2020. Once HR1 passes into law, all elections in the united states will be required to abide by the same insane rules that caused us all to doubt the legitimacy of the 2020 election.
8. Once HR51 passes into law, DC will be a state, complete with two more hardcore socialist Senators. The Democrats will control the Senate forever.
9. If you aren’t a big fan of sobriety checkpoints, you’ll be happy to learn that they are federally funded. Once we divorce the feds, it’s unlikely that any local police dept. will spend the money on the checkpoints. 
10. If you aren’t a big fan of immigration checkpoints, you’ll be happy to learn that they are federally funded and/or conducted. Once we divorce the feds, it’s unlikely that any local police dept. will spend the money on the checkpoints. 
11.  Local cops only use tanks, drones, BEARcats, and other aggressive military gear against us because the feds give them those toys. Once we cut ties with DC, our local cops will return to their proper role as peace officers instead of acting as soldiers against us.
12. One of the reasons that Dictator Sununu locked us down and derailed our economy involved pressure and money from DC encouraging him to do so. 
13. If you don’t like being forced to pay for the DC politicians to wage futile endless wars in dozens of countries all over the world while veterans, women, and babies in our own communities starve on the streets, it means you want to separate from DC. 
14. If you are ready to give up on the war on drugs and stop sending cops to homes to punish people for consuming a plant, separating from DC is the first step you must take. DC politicians STILL consider cannabis a schedule one top-tier dangerous substance that is 100% illegal to possess. 
15. Do you love it when cops steal your property (car, house, money, guns, etc.) without convicting you of a crime? Well, federal law allows law enforcement to seize any property that could be involved in a past, present, or even future crime. And the feds have ‘extended’ that authority to state and local cops. Once we sever ties with DC, cops in NH lose the power of civil asset forfeiture.
16. If you ever wondered why bad cops almost never receive any punishment, you should know that ‘qualified immunity’ is a federal doctrine. Without DC, local cops become much more accountable to their neighbors.
17. The millions of federal regulations cost businesses over 2 trillion dollars each year in lost productivity. Once we divorce DC, our businesses will truly be able to unleash their creativity, making New Hampshire more prosperous than we could ever imagine.
18. Who should decide whether NH accepts illegal aliens or Afghan refugees? Biden and Pelosi or our governor and legislature?
19. Are you tired of being ruled by nine lawyers in long black robes who live in DC and have the power of Gods? If five out of the nine rule a certain way, that becomes the law for all 330,000,000 people in the united states.  
20. The federal reserve and DC politicians have overseen a decline in 99% of the US dollar’s purchasing power over the past century.
21. DC politicians have run up a debt of 28 trillion dollars and counting. And they claim that you and I are responsible for it. 
22. Nearly every politician has ambitions and eventually wishes to be sent to DC. This affects nearly every decision they make. Once DC is no longer in their minds, they will focus on what is most important: you.
23. Federal law enforcement (including the FBI) have shown themselves to be thoroughly corrupt. Even conservative commentators like Dan Bongino have called for their abolition. A few months ago, the FBI and other federal cops came to New Hampshire and violently kidnapped six of my friends. They are charging them with crimes that could result in them spending the remainder of their lives in federal prison. Their excuse? That my friends committed some victimless crimes by using and selling cryptocurrency. Once we leave DC, that will never happen again. 
24. Want a suppressor so that you can save your hearing? They are only illegal because the feds prohibit them. Without the feds, NH would be totally free, and you could put a suppressor on your SBR without any worries. 
25. Are you worried about increasingly strict EPA restrictions on vehicles, houses, and everything else? Once we divorce DC, they will have no jurisdiction over us.
26. Are you sick of random federal judges issuing injunctions that overrule actual laws passed by Congress or state legislatures? An independent NH would not have to worry one bit about federal judges.
27. The DC politicians are destroying the once-mighty American military. Their current secretary of defense and commander-in-chief continually insist that the #1 priority for their military is pleasing LGBT individuals. An independent New Hampshire could have a military with a top priority of defending us against hostile militaries. As it should be.
28. Have you accumulated a respectable net worth? Soon, the federal government will tax your net worth each year in addition to all of the other taxes. 
29. The US Congress literally does not represent you or me.
30. The federal government hates you. Especially if you are white. 
31. Multiple federal court rulings have declared that the first amendment does not protect any speech that is insulting, especially towards a government agent. 
32. Right now, even policies that you think are set by state lawmakers are really controlled by the feds via extortion. 
33. If the thought of Pelosi’s Capitol Police Force growing worries you …. You might support NH independence from DC. 
34. If you would rather have your highway taxes spent on highways … You might be a NHexiter.
35. Do you think that Facebook and Twitter are too powerful and too damaging to liberty? Federal law grants them effective immunity from lawsuits while also granting them the power to manipulate content. They get to act as both a publisher and a platform, whichever suits them at the moment. 
36. If you support sound, free-market money like gold and silver (and crypto) ….You already support NHexit. It’s only a matter of time before the feds ban them.
37. If you are afraid that Donald Trump might become President again …. You just might be a NHexiter.
38. If you are afraid that Kamala Harris might become President…. You just might be a NHexiter.
39. If you think that Title IX is a major reason that free speech and due process in colleges were destroyed, you support NHexit.
40. If you believe that boys should not have a free pass to the girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers, you support NH independence. 
41. If you can’t count the billions of federal laws….you might support independence.
42. The FDA hurts and kills patients by stifling innovation and preventing people from using medications until the FDA spends decades of time and billions of dollars approving them.
43. Cutting ties with DC would immediately and drastically cut prices and improve the availability of drugs like epinephrine, insulin, loperamide, and many others. 
44. DC politicians use the federal department of education to brainwash your children to hate freedom. Once we are independent, that goes away.
45. The federal government believes that showing online ads to specific cohorts is a crime.
46. If you are not comfortable with the REAL ID becoming a dystopian federal identification card, you might be an NHexit supporter.  
47. Support in Congress for a magazine ban is getting very close to a majority. In a few years, your magazines will be federally illegal. 
48. Once HR127 passes Congress, every firearm will be effectively illegal. Hope you’re ready to turn in your guns to the feds! You are a patriot and not a criminal, so you’d never violate federal law, right? 
49. It is very likely that Congress (or federal regulators) ban armor plates for all civilians very soon. Hope you’re ready to turn in your plates!
50. Even the best ‘conservatives’ in DC are working with Bloomberg to take away your guns.
51. Technically speaking…the federal government should not exist anymore. 
52. Federal judges have ruled that police have no legal obligation to protect you. 
53. The federal government thinks it can take your property by force, as long as it plans to use the property for anything that could benefit the government, including giving your property to companies like Pfizer. Without DC, states and localities have no power of eminent domain (AKA theft of property).
54. Federal politicians from Biden to McConnell and everyone in between consistently sell us out to oligarchs like Putin and Xi to enrich themselves. 
55. We can’t take power back from Congress, even with a Convention of States.
56. The DC politicians incentivize single motherhood and discourage employment. 
57. If you don’t believe that global warming is the biggest threat to our lives, you should not be in the same union as DC, the federal government, and the other states. 
58. If you don’t appreciate being spied on by the NSA and other creepy DC agents and politicians, you should consider divorcing them. 
59. If you don’t want to support the Taliban by providing them with money and military weapons and helicopters, you should leave the union and stop paying federal taxes. 
60. The federal government considers people guilty until proven innocent – the opposite of how it was supposed to be. Peaceful protesters have been receiving punishments in prison for months despite never being convicted. If you support due process, you support NHexit.
61. The federal TSA regularly violates our natural rights, despite literally missing 95% of actual threats. 
62. DC politicians maintain a horrifically managed ‘no-fly list’, which mistakenly puts many people (including babies) onto the list, preventing them from flying. It’s also nearly impossible to get off of the list. 
63. Conservatives from Candace Owens to Matt Walsh have spoken in support of state independence from DC. 
64. Federal government leaders believe that if you don’t wear all the masks they recommend and if you don’t get all of the vaccines they recommend, you are just like the Taliban suicide bombers. 
65. DC politicians prohibit beneficial pipelines that would have been amazing for our national security and economy while simultaneously supporting pipelines for nations that are hostile to us. 
66. Who is arming the violent Mexican drug cartels? Federal agents from DC!
67. The federal government has kidnapped innocent Japanese people and put them in concentration camps. New Hampshire has never done that. And they couldn’t ever do that. Because we all have lots of guns. 
68. The US government banned firearms and ammunition from Russia. New Hampshire would never do that.
69. The US government puts many kids in cages at the border. New Hampshire would handle immigration in a much more sensible and humane way. 
70. Things will literally never change for the better. Even with Trump in the White House and Republicans controlling Congress and the SCOTUS, freedom only diminished and tyranny continued to grow.
71. New Hampshire citizens are the hardest workers and earn the most money, which is demonstrated by our continent-leading median household income. We don’t need DC politicians to be wealthy.
72. New Hampshire is the freest state. Nearly all of our issues are caused by federal laws. Once we are independent, we will be almost 100% free to live as we please!
73. New Hampshire is the safest state. We don’t need DC or other states bringing violence to our peaceful paradise. 
74. Half of the people in the united states believe that Biden was legitimately elected and that Republicans are all traitors, while the other half believes that Biden lost the election and progressives are traitors. How could one country be united if its people hate each other so much? 
75. The DC politicians now feel so entitled to infinite power that they essentially ban medications that could help treat COVID, such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. 
76. DC politicians are so arrogant that they no longer feel the need to pass legislation in Congress; they now use executive orders to pass new laws, including the most recent one forcing all private companies in the united states with over 100 employees to vaccinate their employees or test them for COVID weekly. This will affect 80 million employees. If you don’t want DC sociopaths coming between you and your employer (or you and your doctor), you support independence. 
77. When conservative states began having success treating COVID with monoclonal antibodies Biden and DC politicians began to BLOCK the life-saving treatments from getting to pro-freedom anti-Biden states like Alabama and Florida, potentially causing people to die.
78. DC politicians have made it clear that they will continue to prioritize foreign nationals and illegal immigrants over American citizens like you and me.
79. On the other hand, DC politicians have made it very clear that Cuban immigrants are not welcome here (because they tend to vote for freedom and against communism). 
80. The Biden IRS is now going to monitor every bank account with over $600 in it so that they can tax all people who make any money in any way. Those who receive more than $600 in PayPal transactions in a year will also be subject to taxation, according to experts. Peaceful separation solves this IRS issue because the IRS would no longer have any jurisdiction over us. 
81. When NH adopted federal food laws, it made selling mushrooms illegal, among many other prohibitions. Now, the only way to make it legal for anyone in NH to sell mushrooms is to create more regulation requiring ‘licenses’, which is somewhat counterproductive. The only other way to make mushrooms legal in NH would be to sever ties with DC. 
82. Dictator Biden nominated an actual Soviet communist to be the comptroller of the currency. If you don’t want your country’s financial system to be run by an avowed communist, you support separation from DC.  
83. On 10/8/21, the preliminary deal on a GLOBAL tax on businesses was officially agreed to. A total of 136 countries have signed onto the measure, guaranteeing that they will work together to stomp out businesses seeking to evade taxes by implementing at least a 15% tax on them, no matter where they come from. Once New Hampshire becomes a self-governing state, its low (or absent) tax on business could attract so much business to the state that it could cause the biggest economic boom in world history. 
84. Dictator Biden’s OSHA implemented a vaccine mandate for nearly every worker in the united states. It is extremely unlikely that an individual could beat this in federal courts or via federal legislation. Separating from the union is actually the more practical way to nullify this mandate. 
85. A federal law to require all new cars to have passive drunk-driving monitoring technology is about to go into effect, making all cars in the united states more expensive and much more intrusive. The law does not specify, but the new technology may be tantamount to perpetual breathalyzers and/or eye monitoring in every car. 
86. The medical system and all medical institutions in the united states are becoming increasingly racist towards whites, and it all starts with DC politicians. 
87. The Supreme Court is composed of 9 judges. The SCOTUS is perhaps the most powerful entity in the united states now. These nine judges are either evil or mentally retarded. They certainly do not believe in freedom. Is that who you want to be ruled by?
88. The US House of Representatives passed legislation that would take over control of elections, taking the power that always resided with the states and granting it to DC politicians. Among the many measures in the legislative package was a law that prohibited any election in the united states from requiring ID in order to vote. New Hampshire citizens who would like to retain their voter ID law must either support secession or give up voter ID forever once this federal law passes. 
89. DC politicians just passed a law mandating that all vehicles made after 2026 be equipped with perpetual monitoring systems to detect ‘impaired driving’. The vehicles must also have ‘kill switches’ that allow cops to turn them off at any moment. If you don’t like this policy, secession is the only solution. 
90. In the summer of 2022, federal government will begin to require facial recognition/uploading pictures of your face in order to access tax/ documents on the IRS website.
91. The President announced that the next US Supreme Court Judge he nominates will be a black woman. Upon joining the court, she will likely hear a massively important case involving ‘affirmative action’.
92. DC politicians are literally stealing our organs. In 2021, a policy change at UNOS essentially caused nearly all organs from donors in New Hampshire to be sent to NYC, CT, and MA, harming New Hampshire’s patients who desperately need organs to live. DC is viciously fighting NH legislation that would allow Granite Staters to state their preference that their neighbors be granted priority over foreigners if they pass away with viable organs. 
93. The brilliant experts in DC are using $30,000,000 in taxpayer funds to give out drug paraphernalia, including crack pipes, to drug users. The statement from the DC politicians specifically mentioned that they are being distributed primarily to minorities and that they are to be used for illegal drugs. 
94. Our Lords in DC believe that they must force New Hampshire to build more housing projects so that our state could look more like the Bronx.  
95. Our brilliant Lords in DC are destroying our savings and devaluing our salaries by printing so much money that annual inflation is now at a frightening 9.1% annual rate.
96. DC politicians have been forcing you and me to pay for dangerous bioweapons labs in Ukraine for years. 
97. Your federal tax dollars are being used to pay Tik Tok influencers to create and promote propaganda approved by Dictator Biden. If you don’t want to be forced to fund such endeavors, you may want to consider secession. 
98. If you don’t enjoy paying $6 billion for the annual NIAID budget doled out by Anthony Fauci to fund foreign bioweapons labs and development and approval of ludicrously expensive patented pharmaceuticals and suppress use of cheap off-patent drug, you should consider supporting a vote of NH residents to leave the union.
99. The federal government violates free speech in numerous ways. Leaving their jurisdiction solves these issues and restores freedom of speech, expression, press, association, and worship. 
100. The federal government is increasingly racist. Most recently, Dictator Biden nominated a black woman to be a judge on the highest court because of her gender and skin color. Ironically, she will likely soon be ruling on an affirmative action case. 

 

The post Top 100 Reasons New Hampshire Should Be Independent appeared first on Foundation for New Hampshire Independence.