On December 7, 2022, Fred Teeboom, a former alderman and self-represented, took the City of Nashua to NH Superior Court for violating Nashua’s spending cap. I had the pleasure of attending part of the hearing.

The City brought an entourage from the legal office and finance office. Attorney Bolton presented for the City.

Mr. Teeboom articulately presented Nashua’s spending cap history. Currently, Nashua has not a single alderman who fully comprehends the budget and can respond to citizens’ questions about the spending cap in a clear and precise manner. This failure of our elected officials, coupled with the demise of the local daily newspaper, opened, for Mayor Donchess and CFO Griffin, the opportunity to misrepresent the calculation of the spending cap.

Bringing a pro se case against the city is difficult and stressful. It was apparent Mr. Teeboom put a lot of time and effort, and experience into his presentation and exhibits.

Soon after taking office in 2016, Mayor Donchess attempted to bypass the city’s spending cap by claiming all “mandated” funding was exempt from the cap. In 2017 the city removed wastewater expenditures from the cap, leading to a court challenge by Mr. Teeboom and then-alderman Dan Moriarty. In 2022, under a new financial creation by CFO Griffin titled “gross budgeting,” the city added grant funding and the full value of authorized but unsold bonds to the spending cap calculation.

The mayor presented the 2023 budget, astonishingly, at $113 million dollars under the cap. This financial manipulation was created by allowing the $348 million budget introduced in FY2022 to rise to $506 million by adding a combination of grant funding and unsold bonds to the budget, thereby producing a calculation that presented the FY2023 budget to be $113 million under the cap when in fact it was $8.5 million above the cap.

Incredibly, the aldermen accepted this deception without question, without examining past practice for calculating the cap, and without examining SB52 adopted into state law in 2021, which intended to further regulate and clarify the tax and spending caps that had been adopted in 2011. The budget committee chairman even refused to consider the spending cap, stating this was of no concern to the committee.

Citizens who believe their tax bills are too high should be justifiably concerned. This city has free reign to spend hundreds of millions of dollars without concern for the constraint on spending imposed by the spending cap ordained in the city’s charter…..until Mr. Teeboom filed his lawsuit.

The aldermen frequently state that the government “has needs” without concern for “the needs” of taxpayers who pay the bills. The mayor has promoted a group-think government that ostracizes and attacks individuals expressing viewpoints that differ from the appointed and elected body.

Mr. Teeboom should have a Court order in early March 2023. Thank you, Mr. Teeboom, for your efforts in addressing this important financial issue that affects all taxpayers.

 

The post The Nashua Spending Cap has its Day in Court appeared first on Granite Grok.

Insurance Companies rely on accurate information about the dead. Their business depends on it. And their reporting is one of the ways we knew young and healthy people were dropping dead following the “safe and effective” intravenous COVID preventative campaigns.

Related: Insurance Company Refuses to Pay Claim, Says Death by Experimental COVID Vaccine is the Same as Suicide

The numbers are off the charts. We saw it coming when athletes started dropping dead. Members of the military began dropping dead. Performers on stage. Airline pilots. People Dropping Dead. As the numbers got out of control, the Medical Industrial Complex, with help from politicians and the media, tried to blame the unvaccinated, but that didn’t work so they concocted Sudden Adult Death Syndrome (SADS). It was a mystery. What could be causing people to shuffle off their mortal coil abruptly?

How about a global mass injection campaign of an emergency use pharmaceutical with known but dismissed or suppressed side effects that could lead to complications, including sudden death?

Ding!

While they are still in denial, the latest bad news, pictured above, comes from Germany and the “National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (KBV), which insures 72 million lives.”

 

Just after the rollout of COVID-19 injections, there was a sharp, unprecedented spike in unexpected deaths, a 1,000% increase. The KBV denies a causal relationship to vaccination. The cause for the deaths is unknown, but it is not COVID-19. Authorities have not yet done appropriate studies to investigate a possible vaccine connection. Mainstream media did not attend a press event where data analyst Tom Lausen presented the figures, which he calls a “risk signal.”

 

Risk signal. Do you think?

 

 

 

And it’s not just Germany. This is evident everywhere mass injection was promoted as safe and effective. Sure, if culling the population is the goal.

 

From CDC data, equity investment advisor Edward Dowd calculates that Millennials, age 25 to 40, experienced an 84% excess mortality in the fall of 2021, coinciding with vaccine mandates and boosters—a Vietnam War-size event.

 

That’s a trend in every country that went all in on the EUA Vaccine* but daring to make the connection is branded as a conspiracy theory … by the murderers pushing the injections.

Nothing to see here. Just move along.

 

 

 

 

 

HT | American Association of Physicians and Surgeons

The post After the Rollout of COVID-19 Injections, There Was a 1000% Increase in “Unexpected” Deaths appeared first on Granite Grok.

Cameron Kegan’s article “Why Any Federal Law Defining Marriage Is Unconstitutional” was published at GraniteGrok.com on December 13, the very day Biden signed the new federal law “Respect for Marriage Act.”

I agree that this RFMA is unconstitutional, although I am four square in favor of the right of gay people to marry. Allow me to sort through some confusing facts. And then to analyze the conservative position on — wait for it — sex.

I’ll start with my sense of the hierarchy of constitutional principles (which federal law must bow to, of course, of course.):

Article I, sec 8 grants power to Congress to legislate in the 18 enumerated areas. For example, Congress can enact a law to establish a Navy, to establish federal courts inferior to the Supreme Court, to coin money, etc. If marriage ain’t on the list, and it ain’t, Congress should not touch it.

(They do, though, every day; they outrageously pass laws ultra vires, they did so with RFMA, which Biden signed today, Dec 13, 2022. And they’ve gotten away with it regarding Education.)

But each state can legislate on topics not given over to Congress in the aforementioned Grants bit. (Art I, sec 8.) NH can pass a health bill such as “Masks, everybody, masks.” Or it can add to the rights in the Bill o’ Rights by saying, for example, “No doctor in this state can abort a 15-week-old fetus, as that baby has a right to live.” Per Amendment 9: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

In short, legislatures have particular powers under the US Constitution to pass certain bills and not others. But even where they have a proper power to indulge in a certain area, someone may take the matter to court and say that it offends some other item in the parchment. I myself went to court in 2020 and said, “Excu-use me. You can’t order an injection that deprives me of my Fourth Amendment Rights.”

(The court should have said, “Oh, Mary dear, you are so right. We’ll make sure that the offending EO, or whatever it was, gets deep-sixed.” As usual, tho, they said, “Mary, go home and shut up. You lack standing.”)

Clearly, Congress has no power to enact a law about marriage. But if a state does so (and yes, it can), a person could still take it to court, claiming that the content of the law offends his/her Constitutional rights. If the racial purity laws of TX prohibited Black Susan from marrying White Joseph, Susan may win her right by the US Supreme Court’s opining that the TX law is invalid.

Could the state of Maine pass a law entitled Respect for Marriage, or just Marriage Equality, giving two females the right to marry? Yes. And if the new couple then moved to Nebraska, Nebraska would be forced to accept that the two females are married, thanks to Article IV: “Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts and judicial proceedings of every other state.” Plain as day. Good old Founding Fathers they had a knack.

Sex

Every human is born with a SEX — the person is male, female, or, rather rarely, is a hermaphrodite, having some combination of male and female. Basically, each person is stuck with the genitals and hormones God gave him or her. It’s not a social construct. It is anatomical.

As a separate matter, every person is born — or later acquires — a SEXUAL ORIENTATION, which determines whether they will develop a longing for a male partner or a female partner. You are hetero or homo. If homo, you may be pressured to keep your sexual orientation a secret.

Additionally, and this is something we did not know till recently, each person has a GENDER IDENTITY that is not necessarily identical to that person’s sex. Because of its oddity, this gives rise to jokes. Then the jokes make us believe that the topic is not a serious one. But it is.

By “gender identity” is meant the sense a person has of being in this world as a male or female. Since you know that my name is Mary, you can assume that I experience my role as that of woman. But you could be wrong. I might have a genuine self-identity as a man.

The fact is, I do identify as a woman, but the place in my brain that controls that gender-identity is not the same place that runs the decision as to whether I be hetero or homo. Some doctor specializing in the brain may be able to tweak the situation, and behold, I start to think I am a man.

My family will feel confused and maybe send me to a psychiatrist. I’ll probably experience “gender dysphoria.” My driver’s license reminds me that I’m female, but I now am uncomfortable as a female. I’m dysphoric. It will please me to dress masculine, and I’ll be delighted if someone calls me “Sir.”

I might even inquire about transitioning, e.g., having a sex-change operation. Or I might load up on testosterone which will make me grow a beard, and my voice will get lower. I’ll probably change my name from Mary to, say, Gregory. After a while, I can apply to the passport office to change my sex legally. Still, the whole thing is expensive and laborious and may result in the loss of many friendships. I think no one would choose to do it for kicks.

Note: I personally am vehemently opposed to encouraging transgenderism in children, but we’ll save that discussion for another day.

The Right To Choose One’s Sexual Orientation and One’s Gender Identity

As adumbrated above, folks don’t usually make a choice about their sexual orientation — gay or straight — they discover it, probably in adolescence. Who could thus say that a human being lacks the right to be gay? We don’t claim that anyone lacks a right to end up tall or short, do we? Your height develops outside of your control.

If a person’s gayness is given to them, like their height, it would be wicked to condemn them, or to ostracize them. Granted, there are societies today that do condemn or even kill a man for being homosexual or for “performing homosexual acts.” Lesbians do not get such a strong punishment, but they are often made to feel unwelcome and inferior. “They don’t fit the ideal of femininity.” Gee, is that so bad?

The culture of the United States made a change about 50 years ago whereby gayness became largely OK’d. The LGBT community, so-called, first demanded rights such as the right not to be refused a job or housing. This was easily tied into the civil rights laws of 1964 that protect everyone from discrimination.

Similarly, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 — the ADA — extends equality to any person regardless of blindness, muscle paralysis, mental retardation, or whatever. The disabled are now entitled to “access.” Parking lots have places for the cars of the disabled; hotels have bedrooms and bathrooms that can be navigated by wheelchair-bound persons; schools are required to pay a teacher with sign-language fluency for deaf kids, etc.

Is It Constitutional To Legislate, Federally, for the Disabled?

You could call me a relentless or even an extreme advocate of states’ rights. Sure, I know that people move around a lot and so think of themselves more as a citizen of the nation than of their state. I know that some people want the US government to crack down on a given state for such-and-such naughty behavior. And I know that it’s more convenient for there to be One Law on a particular subject and not 50 separate laws. But there is good reason to maintain the separation of powers. Much depends on a state guarding its prerogatives, its turf, jealousy.

This article started out examining Congress’s new Respect for Marriage Act, which I think is blatantly unconstitutional. However, it may be easier to discuss the Americans with Disabilities Act. Ask: Is it constitutional? The first place to go to answer that is Article I, sec 8. There is nothing there to make us permit any federal legislation on the topic of disability.

Three parts of the ADA that no doubt have raised the dignity of disabled people are Title I’s requirement that any employer with 15 or more employees not discriminate against a disabled person when hiring, Title II’s requirement that all transportation be helpful to persons in wheelchairs (even to the point of offering paratransit, such as vans, where the regular bus is not able to host a wheelchair), and Title IV’s provision for special communications such as sign language translations of TV news.

Have a squiz at Article I, sec 8’s enumerated powers. Clause 3 says, “The Congress shall have Power to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States and with the Indian Tribes.” This is known as the Commerce Clause, and federal legislators have used it to their heart’s content to tell states what to do.

Conservatives like myself object to stretching the word “commerce” to mean any aspect of business. The Framers intended it to mean the flow of goods across state borders. They wisely appointed the federal government as referee if one state was harming another in regard to commerce. Otherwise, one state may mistreat another. Fine, but that doesn’t mean Congress can legislate as to how much you should pay for a shirt at Walmart.

I believe Congresspersons have no right to make laws about labor. But they do so all the time. And the US president puts a Secretary of Labor into his Cabinet. Sorry, this is a state power. Each state can make rules for a 40-hour week, a minimum hourly wage of $8, or whatever. If a majority of people in a state want something different (say, a 35-hour week or a $4 minimum hourly wage), they should be able to get their state legislators to cooperate. If not, as a last resort, they can hitch a ride to another state.

Here is a way the feds could be helpful and yet not breach the Constitution’s separation of powers. It could offer model laws. I am used to this in Australia. For example, “Canberra” passed a Commonwealth (i.e., federal) Criminal Code to cover crimes within federal law and made it available to states. Three of Australia’s six states copied it: Tasmania, Western Australia, and Queensland. So the nation has three “Code” states and three “common law” states: New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia.

To summarize thus far, regarding the ADA, I think its Title I requirement about hiring the disabled is not supported by the Commerce Clause because I think labor is not part of the interstate flow of goods. Yet I think the ADA’s Tile II mandate that wheelchairs be accommodated on buses is well within the Commerce Clause, as the transportation industry is largely concerned with the flow of goods across borders. (By the way, do you know that you can’t say “F!!k” on a Greyhound bus from NY to Boston? Or anywhere else. Congress did have the right to legislate that imposition of decency because buses are within its jurisdiction.

As for Title IV of the ADA, which tries to help the blind and the deaf in regard to communication, I recognize that the Founding Fathers did not foresee electronic communication and so did not add a 19th clause to sec 8. I think they would have done so just as they arranged other things that have a naturally national scope, such as the coining of money and the building of post roads. But it’s not there, so the ADA should not pretend it is.

Don’t forget, however, that the Framers gave us the means to update the parchment via Amendment. And don’t forget the Australian technique as a stop-gap. The feds can pass a law that simply offers a model law for any of the 50 states that choose to adopt it. This would respect states’ rights. I claim that we should insist on no overstepping by Congress.

Can the Feds Protect Rights As Such?

To have lived during the 1960s was thrilling. Improper authority got thrown over. It must have been like that in the 1500s when Luther posted his 95 theses on the door of Wittenberg Cathedral, complaining of abuse of power within the Church. Congress helped America (and the world) by cleaning out some of the bad practices of the US Government and turning that government into the backer of human rights. Note: in regard to outlawing the racist Jim Crow laws of the South, Congress was acting against state’s rights.

Congress Defining, or Defending Marriage

Sorry, at this juncture, I can’t hold forth on the constitutionality of Congress’s products, such as the Civil Rights Law of 1964, as I do not know if the feds can legislate to protect rights. Clearly, it’s not one of their specifically enumerated grants of power in Art I, sec 8.

Possibly Clause 18 could do it: “The Congress shall have Power to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing [seventeen] Powers and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” But I don’t know if “all other powers vested by this Constitution” includes the power to protect rights.

And since I’m thus unable to preach on the scope of Clause 18, I do not know if it is in Congress’s bailiwick to protect gay persons by stating their right to marry legally in every state.

I don’t even know if gays need this since the US Supreme Court ruled in the 2015 case of Obergefell v Hodges that all 50 states must refrain from forbidding a same-sex couple permit to obtain a marriage license.

Obergefell was based on the Fourteenth Amendment. That’s the post-Civil War amendment that says: “Nor shall any state… deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” For example, you can’t prevent a slave’s descendant from voting.

As far as defining marriage, I think that job belongs to culture. I take marriage to be a wonderful commitment of two persons to each other and their potential progeny. Homo sapiens is a pair-bonding species, as any zoologist or anthropologist can attest. Some societies approve of polygamy (more than one wife per man). Some approve of the marriage of children (I am referring to an arranged marriage that could begin almost at birth but does not take effect till maturity.) Some approve of same-sex unions. It looks to me that the USA does not approve of polygamy but does approve of gay marriage. “That’s how it is.” The fact then defines marriage.

I realize that some conservatives have a personal distaste for gay people. Lately, they express their objection to gay culture as its being an onslaught on the traditional family. I don’t agree that gay marriage harms the more popular type of marriage between a man and a woman. I think it’s other forces in society, some of which are sinister and well-planned, that aim to cause a breakdown of family life.

If anything, a happy marriage of two men or two women adds to the strength of families. Although I’m as conservative as you can get, I don’t think a conservative argument against same-sex marriage has a leg to stand on. Some conservatives may say, “God does not want this,” but what God wants is not a criterion that the Framers invoked. They created a power structure that would give us maximal protection against tyranny. No comment on sexual mores.

To repeat, I think the RFMA and parts of the ADA are unconstitutional. Sure, I like their results — my wheelchair friends get to travel, and my lesbian friends get to marry — but any unconstitutional law is a threat to our survival. We can do better. Also, we can do better than cultivate divisiveness. Social harmony is at a premium now. Let’s get together and support the USA.

And let’s get sex indoctrination out of the schools immediately. I attribute sinister motives, not rights-based motives, to anyone who is trying to influence a kid’s sexual orientation or gender identity. No doubt it’s a crime to do that. Arrest the criminals!

 

The post The New Respect for Marriage Act — Where Does It Fit As Federal Legislation? appeared first on Granite Grok.

If you wanted to find a busy-body-positive social justice gender warrior and had no interest in joining Instagram or TikTok, a school board might be the first place to look for her. Moth to a flame that.

And if you’d like to see such an individual discriminate in the name of non-discrimination (oft referred to as Inclusion, Equity, or Diversity), allow them to speak (as if you could stop them).

If you want accountability for those contradictions, instances are rare, but even a blind squirrel, as they say.

To borrow from Skip, here’s the shot:

 

“I believe that Mr. D’Elia would make an excellent president,” [Jennifer Solot] said. “However, I feel that electing the only cis White male on this board, president of this district, sends the wrong message to our community: a message that is contrary to what we as a board have been trying to accomplish.”

 

Mr. Greg D’Elia is white (a race) and heterosexual (a gender choice), but if they picked him, despite his qualifications, that wouldn’t be non-discriminatory even though he serves on a board whose majority appears, to my untrained eye, present as human females (77.77%).

[Note that had he announced he was a woman before vying for the top job on this board, whether he was or not, he would be a shoo-in (this is Pennsylvania)]

Speaking of Diversity, have you seen much of that at the public school? Women predominantly fill the positions. Finding an (identifies as) male school teacher is not as rare as locating a busy-body-positive social justice gender warrior who is held to account for her hypocrisy, but it’s close.

A heterosexual man teaching in a grammar school is almost unheard of; they are so rare. Endangered would be the term if we were talking about wildlife in a habitat. But no one is gluing themselves to the Cafetorium stage in outrage or concern (except perhaps over the food, but let’s not get distracted). Instead, we get “sends the wrong message to our community.” A community that’s mostly white, by the way.

So (chaser), what message did Ms. Solot send?

 

“As a result of this incident, Ms. Solot has decided to resign from the board effective January 2, 2023,” Elliott said. “She wishes to apologize for her poorly chosen words and does not want to be a distraction from the great things happening in our schools on a daily basis. The district thanks Ms. Solot for her five years of service to the Upper Moreland community as a board member.”

 

And how odd is that? If we’re being honest, her remarks – on the spectrum of hypocritical exhortations – were almost polite. He’d make an excellent president who supports diversity (who doesn’t), except he can’t because he has a penis and is unwilling to share it with other men.

By the way, they have a woman of color and a man of color (cis-status unknown) on the board, but no one voted for them. Relax. It’s not racist. They didn’t want the job, which is the exact reason why many occupations lack an abundance of women or people of color.

Like Professional Hockey, to name one. Not to be confused with how school boards with women like Jen Solot treat parents and taxpayers (generalizing), though not Jen so much anymore, seeing as she’s retired herself for conduct unbecoming. But is it, unbecoming, I mean?

The busy-body-positive social justice gender warriors can’t help themselves even if she meant it in the nicest way possible. You are capable and qualified, but I have to vote for someone else because you’re a white man.

That’s racism and sexism in the same breath; pretending it’s not doesn’t change this fact. It is also liberal privilege, and that always jumps the queue.

But this time, it cost someone their ability to use that privilege to influence a school board. Very rare, indeed.

 

 

The post School Board Member #Wokesplains Herself Out of Office appeared first on Granite Grok.

The only thing more embarrassing about being American than Joe Biden is Kamala Harris. She’s actually a bigger train wreck than the ‘Big Guy,’ and that’s saying something. Biden is a fool and a joke which, in my opinion, is the only reason they let Kamala out of the box every now and again.

She makes Joe look better and that’s a very low bar. So here we go.

I’d like to tell you that this is time well spent, but I can’t. In fact, it may feel like 40 seconds of your life you wish you had back. But then, perhaps not. This is so absurdly written and badly delivered that it might just make you feel good about not being a Democrat (as if you need help with that).

It’s so bad it’s funny, by which I mean sad. Yes, sad. Maybe tragic. It’s like she dialed it in – her robot double could have done it better.

 

 

 

The post Wake Up and Laugh – at Kamala Harris! appeared first on Granite Grok.

There is an update on the Voting Lawsuit I filed back in September. The State’s Motion to Dismiss was granted by the Court in citing a lack of  “standing” and a failure to state a claim by which relief could be granted. The following is my motion to reconsider the Court’s ruling:

We want to thank Dan Richard for this update. If you have an Op-Ed or LTE
you would like us to consider, please submit it to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.

Memorandum of Law
Facts of the Case

1. The Plaintiff’s petition for an emergency hearing was granted, but the Court erred in ignoring the emergency and the Plaintiff’s due-process rights to present his expert witness to validate the emergency, viz: ignoring the state’s violation in both state and federal regulatory laws concerning the safety and efficacy of electronic devices exposed to election workers and the general public at-large, specifically, RSA: 659:42. OSHA regulatory law 29 CFR, section 1910.7, 1910.303(b)(2), and the expert report submitted in this case.

a) The Plaintiff’s expert witness testimony was denied, leaving the Court with no safety expert witness, nor was there any hearing of any experts for this Court to make a fair judgment of the Plaintiff’s claim.
b) Plaintiff’s claim was not permitted to be appropriately examined or validated by any experts for this Court to make a fair judgment regarding the safety and efficacy of the public.

2. The Court order cites in error; that “some of the devices have been altered such that they…

The entire pleading to have the Judge reverse his ruling is here.

(Hover over the page, and the Navigation bar will appear)

Dan Richard - Motion to Reconsider Revision 2

 

The post Dan Richard: Update on Voting Lawsuit appeared first on Granite Grok.

We have been blessed as a nation with the “gold standard” of government. Unlike other nations that grant rights and take them away, the basic premise of our Constitutional Republic is: “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights.”.

It is the function of government “to secure these rights.” Without these truths, our liberty is on the brink.

The “gold standard” of economic systems is a free enterprise based on morality. The system has been lost because the electorate lacks a moral foundation of biblical morality. Our Founders knew the foundation of money for free people must be anchored to “thou shall not steal.” The result therein is private property, an essential foundation of liberty.

In The Economic Consequences of the Peace, John Maynard Keynes states, “the best way to destroy the capitalist system [is] to debauch the currency,” a quote said to be traced back to Vladimir Lenin. Birthed in 1913, the Federal Reserve (FED) has usurped our liberties using Keynesian economics. A mechanism by which the government inflation machine increases the dollars in circulation while citizens are blind to who initiates their dollars being worth less. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method, they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some.

Americans need accountability from the FED. The national debt was only 1 billion in 1913, jumping to 8 billion by 1918, 1980 achieving a trillion, today 30 plus trillion, and tomorrow? The sky is the limit.

Did you know that the FED became the embodiment of the fifth step that Karl Marx advocated in the Communist Manifesto needed to enslave a nation? Marx said, “centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly” What it amounts to is pre-meditated well planned generational robbery. Do you appreciate your elected officials ignoring this theft of your hard-earned money?

To combat the theft, we need citizen support for HR 9157: The Gold Standard Restoration Act. The bill sponsored by U.S. Rep. Alex Mooney from W. Virginia puts control of the money supply with the free market instead of with the Federal Reserve. He informs us of the reality of how deep the hidden tax of inflation has been. He contends that the U.S. dollar has lost 97% value since 1913. That is a rate of stealing half the value of the American people’s wealth measured in dollars every 35 years. This is nothing more than the “euthanasia of capitalism”.

Congress plays the game of buying party support with your money. They please the bankers while simultaneously hiding big spending. The time is now to take back your wealth. Go to JBS.ORG for consequential legislative action. Demand your legislator support HR 9157. This is the solution to get the worlds greatest pickpockets out of our pockets.

The post The Gold Standard Restoration Act appeared first on Granite Grok.

I LOVE explosions. Especially of Big Things. This clip has 10 of those things – Bridges!

I really like the second one shown (their #9) as you can see the det-cord lighting up as the explosion goes right to left in the frame.

Enjoy!

(H/T: Linkiest)

The post Palate Cleanser – Let’s Blow Up Some Bridges! YEAH! appeared first on Granite Grok.

Fusion power is a hot idea. Figure out how to do what the Sun does without all the gravity. X amount of energy in and get x+ out. The world has been chasing this for a while, but you may have seen recent headlines suggesting they’ve had a breakthrough.

Did they? Really?

First, several people have seen this link or something similar. “US scientists make major breakthrough in ‘limitless, zero-carbon fusion energy: report.”

These headlines are popping up as if zero-carbon energy is something we must have (not true) and that this breakthrough will get us there (it won’t). And I didn’t know that. I didn’t know much about this pursuit until I went looking. And I’m still looking.

So, here’s the sales pitch.

 

U.S. government scientists at a California laboratory have reportedly made a monumental breakthrough in harnessing the power of fusion energy.

The scientists, working at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, recently achieved a net energy gain in a fusion reaction, the Financial Times reported, citing three people with knowledge of the experiment.  …

U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm and under-secretary for nuclear security Jill Hruby are expected to formally announce “a major scientific breakthrough” at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory on Tuesday.

 

It didn’t take me long to debunk the PR, which has a lot in common with the Climate Cult.

Electric vehicles (for example) are not clean, nor is the power they use, nor can we ever create enough energy to make them that way or charge them or replace the batteries without fossil fuels, but they leave all of that out. They offshore emissions or ignore them and pretend we’ve made a breakthrough toward net zero when they’ve done no such thing.

Fusion has a similar problem. When they say they’ve gotten close to the same energy out as energy in (or Q=1), they are not including all the energy used or needed, just some of it.

In the recent case, we have laser energy used to hit a fuel pellet but not the energy that powers the facility, maintains the vacuum, and cools and powers the electromagnets, without which the experiment and fusion were impossible. To quote Ace,

 

This is like claiming your company is running at a “profit” because revenues exceed the costs for materials — without noting that there are some other costs, like labor, rent, insurance, etc., that must be included to determine if you’re really running at a profit or not.

 

But it’s worse than that. Fusion is another way to create heat and steam to move a turbine that generates electricity. Energy is lost in each of those transitions, but none of that loss is calculated in the announced results.

Pointing an x amount of laser at a fuel pellet that releases 0.7 x of the laser energy is an improvement over the same experiment producing 0.67 x, but you’re not 0.3 x away from Q=1. You are 0.3 x away, and all the other stuff they left out of the calculation.

It’s a lot like Climate Cult math.

As you’ll see in the video below, when you roll all of that math in, the actual best guess is closer to Q = 0.1. That’s a far cry from the reporting (surprise!) and no improvement on the previous best, which all tolled resulted in about Q = 0.1. (watch the video, and by all means, send me more info on the topic, please).

Lots of headlines and back-slapping, and the stooge at the head of the Dept of Energy is selling the lie to the people, and she’s one of those people handing out the research grants. She needs to be appeased and appease; after all, it’s not her money, though I suspect she believes it is.

So, what incentive do scientists who want more funding have to be honest? What benefit is there to journalists looking to make a few extra clicks when it only debunks their intended eye-catching headline? None, by the look of it (like the Climate Cult or COVID-19).

The truth is not attractive enough, or the deception advances some other interest.

And I’m not saying fusion is a dead end (I do not know that) or that they didn’t make progress, but we are nowhere near what the rhetorical glossy tri-fold pamphlet they just handed out claims.

If you encounter the approved narrative, send them here or share this with them, and get (or give) some feedback. Maybe someone has more convincing math, and we’d be happy to have a look and share that.

 

Watch this to get a sense of the fusion energy misinformation campaign. There’s a bit of an ad for the video sponsor after her opening remarks, but most of the 12 minutes are devoted to the topic.

 



 

The post An Inconvenient Truth Behind That Fusion Energy “Breakthrough” … appeared first on Granite Grok.

Yes, it has been a bit amusing to see how banal and dribble-ish the high minded folks have expressed their ire. However, as with all good things, this, too, must come to an end (er, until the next set!). These mailers were meant to be multi-purposeful:

 

• Show how the Sexuality Identity Wokster Educators have taken over your schools
• Show their intent in replacing the morality you are teaching your children with theirs – and you didn’t know it what and how
• That your public servants don’t care about distributing/make available kiddie porn to underaged children
• And let you know that there are NH House Representatives that voted against YOU being in charge of your children (voted against bills dealing with Parental Rights)

Frankly, it was a bonus to show you all that Ray Buckley, Chair of the NH Democrat Party* said that “You’re a parent who will beat [your children] to death” if you done agree with the above. And noting that it was Maggie Hassan (while NH Governor) who installed the judge that ruled in the Manchester legal case that parents had no rights to their kids with respect to knowing their sexual identity while in Government schools.

But I digress. Three last and final returns to show what people thought about the porn in schools – or at least, what they thought of GrokPAC for pointing it out. At least until I write a couple of them back (heh!).

First, the “Republican Something”. What, they ran out of adjectives or couldn’t think of a proper last name for the envelope?

And the message back to GrokPAC was that the person sending it back was ABSOLUTELY thrilled that pornography is being taught to their children:

Who knew?  Will that person propose that the District hire a Pornography Coordinator?  The mind (and heart, sad to say) boggles at this outlook.

There was also a person that returned our envelope with their only message on it. At first, when I read just the first line, I thought it was our FIRST person that actually agreed with us at GrokPAC – that pornography in Public Schools is a PATHETIC idea!

Then I read the second line – oops!

 

So, shoot the messenger type of deal once again.

What’s a bit different on this one is that the Robicheau household is represented by Cassandra Levesque. She was the student (at the time) that led the charge to raise the age limit for marriage from 13 to 18. Her bill, introduced by Jackie Cilley, failed but the latter had other bills that did finally move the age to 16. Levesque is still campaigning on this platform.

Yet, I point out that if part of her “no more minor child marriage” is about sexual objectification of a minor girl, why did she vote against HB1431 (see here) that codified Parental Rights? Or even worse, voted against Parent Rights with respect to empowering Parents to pull their kids from objectional materials (HB1434 – her vote here, bill text here), like Pornography?

This one was short and sweet – and didn’t have the courage to “tell it to our face::

I do have to wonder HOW the word “Ignorant” is defined for them – just SO many questions that leads to! But, indeed, the “lower level vocabulary” march continues from another one:

So much for “involved Parents” and “elevated discourse”, eh? And people keep telling us that GraniteGrok is in the gutter? Pardonez, mois!

However, we did have one person that decided to actually say a few words:

“Invade my privacy…”?  Seriously?  It’s just another piece of campaign mail (even if targeting an issue few know about.  Or, so it seems, cares.  I would like to know what the “half-truths” are in the mailer as you can be sure that we can back up everything that was in the mailer. After all, it is MY name on it and I’m not going to intentionally going to put something out there as it’s my reputation at risk.

And if I didn’t believe in “transparency”, they would have been sent out and never mentioned again. Problem for the writer is that we HAVE made it quite publicly known and posted everything here.  You know, I keep reading “the lie,” “the hate, “…and “violence”?

Sorry, but that bit about “Never have I been so ashamed of the Republican Party”? I’ve never known ANY Republican to talk in terms like that….oh wait, I DO! From the Laconia Daily Sun, it was Cindy Creteau-Miller -> Cindy Creteau-Miller: Don’t believe lies pushed by sore loser extremists:

I guess the far-right extreme Free Staters are still spreading lies about me….over the mess the Free Staters created…sore, losing extremists who don’t care about anything but their own agendas…and won my primary because the people of Meredith who know me and voted for me know I will represent them in the Legislature.

The problem, it seemed that, like during the TEA Party movement a decade ago, EVERYONE that opposed her  RINO verbiage, is a Free Stater (did you know that Jeb Bradley was a TEA Partier back in the day?  No, I didn’t either and GraniteGrok was a co-founding member of the NH TEA Party Coalition). And like the Democrats (e.g. Citizens for Belknap Democrat formed PAC). And like Democrats, she decided to get on the “Scapegoat Express” – well it WAS Kiedaish that recruited her that had his own agenda. And while she won her Primary, it was clear that after the Primary, the Citizens for Belknap and associated Democrats made sure she lost – regardless of the “boosting” she gave them in her Letter to the Editor.

But I digress. The next message was from Hillsborough District 37 (Amherst, Milford) – no words needed:

 

Yeah, I don’t think GrokPAC or I am on their Christmas list. Oh wait – this person did ‘send words’:

 

All of the above aside, I’m glad the mailers were created. If I am going to tell other Conservatives (and other concerned Parents from other parts of the political spectrum) that they NEED to stand up in the fight in the Culture War, well then, by gum, I’d best lead from the front.  And GraniteGrok, I believe (with all of the writers), is in that fight and has been since 2006.

We have a track record and it’s path has been Consistent. And will be going forward.

And we’re not done yet!

* -Who will ever be remembered, at least for a generation, as THE guy that lost NH’s First In The Nation Primary for Democrats. Ancillary damage to follow.

 

The post GrokPAC – More from People Who Don’t Care About Smut in Public School Libraries Part 5. Last Edition for 2022 appeared first on Granite Grok.

Let’s take a look at the repressive measures the Bidenistas have employed on peaceful American demonstrators:

1.) The Pelosicrats ignored President Trump’s offer of the National Guard to supervise the peaceful demonstration at the Capitol. Remember, these same Americans peacefully populated the National Mall during President Trump’s speech.

2.) The Capitol Police were ordered to allow unsuspecting Trump supporters and American taxpayers to enter the Capitol.

We want to thank Charles Bradley for this Op-Ed. Please submit it to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.

3.) The FBI (think Ray Epps) provided professional agitators to encourage  American citizens to ” break the law.”

4.) Having seduced ( entrapped) innocent, unsuspecting individuals into the Capitol, the FBI, Pelosicrats, and other denizens of the Deep State sprung the trap by using little-known cellphone technology to locate and arrest mostly innocent Americans in their homes.

5.) The Bidenistas ordered and executed a nationwide round-up of innocent American citizens. In criminal conduct worthy of Josef Stalin and the current Chinese Communist gangsters terrorizing China, the Bidenistas imprisoned these innocent American citizens under conditions unimaginable under the Constitution of the United States.

6.) As recounted in Julie Kelly’s book entitled ” JANUARY 6″, these horrific measures include the detention of non-violent offenders for over a year without bail, physical torture,  demands that their support of Trump be recanted, deprivation of medical care, and near starvation. The detained J6 Americans actually requested a transfer to Guantanamo with international terrorists, who are treated far better.

7.) Despite this monstrous treatment of peaceful American citizens in violation of endless Constitutional rights, nearly all  Republican politicians have distinguished themselves by their cowardly silence.

So, unfortunately,  the 2022 Holiday and Christmas season is besmirched by our failure as a Nation to accept this unprecedented defilement of our national character by the Bidenistas and Pelosicrats, who actually hate your country.

My fervent hope is that 2023 will cure this disease.

The post Are We Failing to Tell Government That They Work for Us? appeared first on Granite Grok.

As promised in the last Monday Memes, I have an overflow. My meme cup runneth over.  Maybe a Friday Overflow-Overflow this week but not sure about that.  Hopefully.

Now, let the mayhem, mockery, and ridicule resume:

*** Warning, a few possibly off-color ones, in case tender eyes are about ***

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

Until I met my wife I hadn’t been to Boston’s Museum of Fine Art since, well, elementary school.  Was not an art fan.  But we’ve gone several times (and IMHO we’re due to go again).  But I’ve never really liked “modern” art.  It uses shock value, not talent or discipline, to grab attention.

Art should inspire and uplift.  IMHO it should be an expression of the part of the soul that is most divine.  Not the most base.

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

Many things in life, in my experience, are a matter of perspective.  I’d always bought the line that non-white was “diverse” until a video discussed the incredible diversity above among white people.  As noted in the image.  That definitely changed my perception.

There is an oikophobia / xenophilia in our society these days… I remember one comedian years ago, don’t recall his name, talking in his routine how “sun people” have exciting, energetic, sensuous & sensual dances.  Meanwhile the Irish, “snow people”, have Riverdance, said with derision.  Yet… and I concede I’m not a dance fan in general… the videos I’ve seen of Riverdance, as well as other European dances, are equally amazing and captivating to my non-aficionado eyes.

 

 

All dance takes talent and incredible amounts of practice.  Is “good dance” hips-swaying pseudosexual?  No, and it doesn’t need to be!  Hopefully I’m around and alive for the next Scottish festival in New Hampshire… hopefully there will be one in the coming year!  Just because it’s not quasi-porn dancing, doesn’t mean it’s not highly worth watching.  And here’s some dancing from my wife’s homeland:

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

The problem is that Ranked Voting – as presented – does sound good.  But a thing must be judged by the results, not by the intent.  And thr results are stark: lots more Dems in office than would otherwise be.  Which, of course, is why they like it.

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

Quote them, and they call you raaaaacist.  And doubt your citation, even when you’re citing what they actually said.

 

(I have not vetted this quote.)

 

E.g., I’ve often cited – and been white-hot angry at – Barbara Spectre and her stating that Jews need to be leading the demographic changes in Europe.  Certainly, neither she – nor the other Tikkun Olam fetishists – speak for me.

An Open Letter to Pro-Migration / SJW Jews – Urban Scoop

 

(I’ve seen the video where she says precisely this.  The quote is accurate.)

 

But more broadly, this woman, and other Jews, openly discuss these things… and then express shock and horror that the native peoples might not be interested in being diluted or outright replaced, and that they might resent those who openly state this is their goal.

No, I don’t like the white nationalist types and their Jew-focus – because it’s much broader than that.  But I understand where they’re coming from.  I can understand a viewpoint without agreeing with it.

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

Until ships became reliable enough to transport slaves profitably, slavery was purely a local affair.   Here’s Thomas Sowell’s chapter on slavery from his book Black Rednecks and White Liberals, read aloud:

 

 

Slavery existed until WHITE nations, specifically the US and Britain, put their militaries on the line to end it.  Might I speculate that one reason so many countries resent whites is because of this?  And stopping other practices, like sati in India?

“Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs. [To Hindu priests complaining to him about the prohibition of Sati religious funeral practice of burning widows alive on her husband’s funeral pyre.]”

― Charles James Napier

 

If this is cultural imperialism, I’m all for it.  Some cultures are better than others.  And Western Civilization is the worst of all… until you consider all the others.

Civilization: The West and the Rest

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

 

My prediction?  Diddly squat.

 

 

This will, alas, not be fixed by voting.  TINVOWOOT.

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

Pick of the post:

 

 

Why is the enemedia not asking?  Their masters have told them not to.  Can’t have the people noticing that natural immunity – so roundly derided by the intelligentsia and our *cough* moral, intellectual, and educational superiors, is actually superior to their mRNA BS.  As was known by every Immunology textbook for the last 50 years.  Nor will they mention Sweden’s results.

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

>>>>>=====<<<<<

 

Palate cleansers:

 

 

In a cold second.  Throw in free farm animals and I’ll make it every sport.

—

—

 

The post Meme Overflow appeared first on Granite Grok.

There are many results when you search for forex broker scams on the internet. Even if the Forex Market is gradually getting more regulated, many unethical brokers still operate in the industry.*[1]

It’s important to recognize trustworthy and viable brokers when searching to trade forex and to stay away from the latter.

TradeEU is here with the goal of making it simple for both novice and experienced FX traders to start trading on its platform. TradeEU offers sophisticated trading tools and a simple dashboard to aid your endeavor. Their motto is to bring knowledge, simplicity, and fair play to trading online.

What Makes TradeEU Special?

To be able to quickly, efficiently, and effectively access marketplaces, TradeEU aims to make trade accessible to everyone and as simple to use as feasible. TradeEU provides trading accounts for all skill levels, first-rate assistance, and a tonne of helpful tools to help with crucial trading decisions.

TradeEU gives you all the tools required to set up your account, begin trading, and conquer the markets. The best part is TradeEU is SSL encrypted and regulated by CySEC.

Beyond A Trading Platform: From information about online trading to building an aim and to start using the platform. You have privy to a cutting-edge range of trading tools when you make choices and assemble a strong portfolio.

You Don’t Have To Trade Alone: TradeEU is aware that occasionally you will require assistance. The guidance of experts is available to support you at any moment, whether you need assistance with account setup or using trading tools.

Practice Trading at Your Own Pace: TradeEU works with you to outline your trading objectives, create an action plan, and keep you updated on the industry trends, news, assets, risks, and trading tactics. You control all the trading decisions; TradeEU is always there to assist you as needed.

Get A Comprehensive Understanding: You can learn something new with TradeEU and can access economic calendars, webinars, asset analyses, asset ratings, and more. It gives you the tools to navigate the markets and get an idea about the present and upcoming trading possibilities.

Licensed Broker, Open Trading, and Safe Payments: TradeEU abides by the rules the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission regulates it. A top-tier platform, TradeEU combines snipping technology with robust security standards.

Why Choose TradeEU?

TradeEU is simple: Since simplicity is the pinnacle of elegance, TradeEU is straightforward. Your time is valuable. Thus the platform was designed to be super simple as possible to get you up and running quickly.

Knowledge: A conviction that knowledge is power. You can trade with confidence and make wise decisions. With the aid of TradeEU‘s cutting-edge technologies, you may design a trading tactic and act swiftly depending on the information, but remember there is always a risk factor involved in the CFD marketplace.

Fair Play: TradeEU aims to eliminate any hurdles off your path to victory in online trading. TradeEU ensures that the platform is fair, transparent, and compliant with regulations.

Is Trade EU Safe?

While TradeEU is a CFD provider, for Forex and CFD traders for countries accepted (Residents of the United States, Canada, Israel, Iran, and Japan are not the intended audience for the content on TradeEU. While Non-Muslim forex traders are not eligible for Islamic forex accounts.), not only this, because now TradeEU is open to trade only in Portugal.

TradeEU is a reputable brand that offers a first-rate trading experience. Along with restricted access to MetaTrader, it delivers a diverse selection of markets and an outstanding array of custom platforms.

The Cypriot investment firm (“CIF”) Titanedge Securities Ltd, generally referred to as “the Company,” owns and runs the trade name and domain “TradeEU.” The Company is incorporated and registered in accordance with Republic of Cyprus legislation; its registration number is HE 411909; it is also approved and subject to regulation by Cyprus Securities & Exchange Commission (CySEC); this is evidenced by the CIF license number 405/21. The Panayides Building, 1st floor, Office No. 11, 1 Chrysanthou Mylona Street, Ayia Zoni, 3030 Limassol, Cyprus, is home to the Company’s registered office.**[2]

Hence, TradeEU is legit.

Services Offered by TradeEU

The following investment and ancillary services are offered by the firm TradeEU under its Cyprus Investment Firm (CIF) license:***[3]

Investment Services:

(i) Receiving and sending customer orders for each financial instrument that the Company offers.

(ii) Execution of Orders in any Financial Instrument issued by the Company on behalf of the customer.

Ancillary Services:

(i) Custodianship and related services, such as cash/collateral management, are provided in connection with the aegis and management of financial instruments held on behalf of customers.

(ii) Giving credits or loans to investors to enable them to trade in one or more financial instruments when the lending company is itself a party to the transaction.

(iii) Foreign exchange services when they are associated with offering investment services.

Segregation of Accounts:

The Company’s primary goal is to safeguard its clients’ funds. Titanedge Securities Ltd, doing business as TradeEU in its registered trade name, constantly makes a tremendous effort to create an open trading environment that will protect its client’s personal information, money, and assets.

Thus, the Company ensures that the money belonging to its clients is held in separate bank accounts and placed in reputable, prestigious, and international financial institutions. The Company protects its clients’ money by never using it for its operations or any other investment.[4]

Cutting-Edge Technology:

With cutting-edge technology and the most recent, up-to-date, and sophisticated physical hardware and software, it protects all data systems by promising the security of all transactions done by its clients. The following are the services provided by TradeEU:

 

• Strict firewalls and software that uses SSL to encrypt all data transmissions.
• Level 1 PCI compliance services are used to moderate transactions.
• Trading servers housed in data centers with SAS 70 certification.
• Data servers for encrypted communications and transactions.

 

TradeEU takes serious precautions to protect the user’s personal data’s security and ensure that no one else has access to it. Employees and approved service providers who require it to do their jobs only have access to Personal Data. The customer is not permitted to divulge or share his or her log-in information with any third party.

The Company takes strong security measures to guard against loss, theft, copying, misuse, unauthorized access or disclosure, alteration, or destruction of Customers’ personal data.

Risk Warning: Tradeeu is the trading name of Titanedge Securities Ltd with Registration Number HE411909, regulated and authorized by the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission under license number 405/21. CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. 74-89% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. You should consider whether you understand how CFDs work and whether you can afford to risk losing your money.

FAQs How can I signup for a TradeEU account?

To open an account, you need to click on “Open an Account,.” The registration page will be linked to you, where you have to enter your personal information and set up your account.

What documentation is required for KYC at TradeEU?

You must give TradeUE proof of your identity and address in order to validate your account in accordance with the KYC (know your customer) procedure. This is a standard requirement set forth by regulators and by CySEC policy. You will be led through it step-by-step by the support staff.

Why do I have to complete the KYC process?

All regulated financial services providers must carry out this procedure with all account holders. This procedure is in place to make the trading environment as safe as possible.

What should I do if none of my invoices are in my name?

Here are some alternative options:

 

• Ask your local government for a certificate of residence.
• Request a letter of reference from your bank attesting to your residence.
• As an alternative, you could provide an affidavit from a lawyer, the court, or the police to confirm your residential address.

 

Please take note that the aforementioned document must be dated, signed, and have the seal or stamp of the appropriate authority in each of the instances mentioned above.

Can I lose more money than I deposited?

TradeEU’s major priority is risk management, and as part of the CySEC regulation package, they have introduced the “Negative Balance Protection” norm. With this feature’s help, you can ensure that your trading risk will never exceed your invested money.

 

[1] *This financial information is quoted from Investopedia
[2] **This financial information is quoted from Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission
[3] ***This financial information is quoted from TradeEU
[4] ***This financial information is quoted from Hellagood.Marketing

 

The post TradeEU Review: Is It Safe? appeared first on Granite Grok.

Florida has taken the lead on things that needed doing, from groomers to invaders, and now they’ve elevated their latest target. Back in October, the State’s top Doc, Surgeon General Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo, recommended that males 18-39 NOT get a COVID-19 vaccine or booster.

 

The Florida Department of Health (Department) conducted an analysis through a self-controlled case series, which is a technique originally developed to evaluate vaccine safety.

This analysis found that there is an 84% increase in the relative incidence of cardiac-related death among males 18-39 years old within 28 days following mRNA vaccination. With a high level of global immunity to COVID-19, the benefit of vaccination is likely outweighed by this abnormally high risk of cardiac-related death among men in this age group. Non-mRNA vaccines were not found to have these increased risks.

Boom!

Governor DeSantis has also announced that “Florida is creating a Public Health Integrity Committee, which may operate as a replacement for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).”

I’ve included the Health Integrity Committee Roundtable below if you’d like to wade through that, but the entertaining part is this.

“In Florida, it is against the law to mislead and misrepresent, particularly when you’re talking about the efficacy of a drug,” DeSantis said. “So, today, I’m announcing a petition to the Supreme Court of Florida to impanel a statewide grand jury to investigate any wrongdoing with respect to the COVID-19 vaccines.”

 

New Hampshire might want to get in on this or start an investigation. The Granite State loves jackpot justice. MBTE, Tobacco, and Oxycotin are but a few recent examples. Take something that was either mandated (MBTE) or legally sold or taxed, and later file a lawsuit alleging fraud to get a big payday.

The COVID-19 pandemic “vaccine*” is ripe and ready to be picked.

Big Pharma is fat and happy thanks to the Democrat congress printing presses packing its pockets with the fruits of the labors of those not yet born. But they failed to meet the most fundamental measure of informed consent for an emergency use authorization. Vaccine harms are undercounted but still numerous enough to make it the most dangerous vaccine in modern memory and perhaps medical history.

The discovery process would be a joy, and we’re happy to direct you or loan any links or research from the ‘Grok, given that the establishment media never reported any of it.

You would have to accept that whenever you (Gov. Sununu) or anyone in or connected to the government (like the State Dept. of Health and Inhuman Services) claimed it was safe and effective, they were a useful idiot. Perhaps the AGs office could avail themselves of the opportunity to run a parallel investigation into the CDC or the FDA. Or are we too fat and happy thanks to the Democrat congress printing presses packing New Hampshire “pockets” with the fruits of the labors of those not yet born in the name of COVID-19?

“Leading” is a balancing act, but I hear you have big shoulders, so it’s nothing you can’t manage.

And look on the bright side. Your Political opponents wet themselves with joy promoting this poison, so it would be difficult or impossible for them to make hay if you decided to give it a go. And let’s be honest. They love jackpot justice too.

I suppose you could wait to see what Florida digs up and then sign on to that.

There are so many options, but I don’t expect you to stretch. The real challenge here is whether the Ruling Class would permit you to embarrass them for a bit more coin, and you don’t strike me as the sort to ask.

 

Here’s the DeSantis COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Accountability Roundtable if you’ve got the steam and the bandwidth to wade through it.

 

Governor Ron DeSantis holds an accountability roundtable for mRNA shots. https://t.co/aiHpQWJ2g2

— Ron DeSantis (@GovRonDeSantis) December 13, 2022

 

 

HT | Finish the Race

The post Florida vs. Big Pharma …. Fight! – And Does NH Want in on This Gig? appeared first on Granite Grok.

Indeedie do! Or should I say doo-doo?  After all, that seems to be where the Left has taken this Culture War Battlefield.  It’s always denial, denial, denial with the Left – they accuse us on the Right of what they are actually doing.  And deny that they’ve done anything wrong.

We’re seeing this upfront and naming names in the release of the Twitter Files. For YEARS, the Left said that Conservatives were not being censored, shadow-banned, or locked out of their account for no reason at all. Now we’re finding out that, indeed, it happened.  Why do you think I do Right To Knows for emails so often of government workers and officials – it’s there, plain and simple.

And I’m going to have to do something similar (but still akin to it) for this next “responder” to our mailers.  As a reminder, here’s what the front of our mailer (stuffed into an envelope so that WE wouldn’t get arrested by the Postal Inspectors for trying to warn Parents (in this case, again, NH House Cheshire 10, District of Barrett Faulkner) that their child’s Public School Libraries have pornographic books. Some are incredibly graphic.

SIDENOTE: Warning – Not Safe For Work near the bottom of this post, but somebody’s got to fight at their level.  It is gross, however. Most of the books that are in this “space” and targeting young children is far worse. I’m embarrassed even to put excerpts up, but if good parents care about the innocence of their children, and they believe that THEY are the ones responsible for the issue and NOT the Government, they have to know what the Government is doing to their kids.

So this time I didn’t get a return address to send something back, but I did get this:

Now, I’m not surprised at the general tone or tenor of this but I was kinda amused at the hopscotch from one thing to another.  So GrokPAC (or me) is a “hater”just because we think that porn isn’t just that which is at X-rated shops or the magazines that used to be everywhere (but wrapped in brown paper to prevent little kids from viewing it)?  Or that we are to just surrender the “moral low ground” due to their Moral Superiority complex?  The books listed on the mailer (see below: Flamer, Gender Queer, This Book Is Gay, and Sex: an uncensored Introduction) have pornography. Heck, I was uncomfortable with the limited descriptions we used, but here we are:

Adults having no issues with underaged children pornography in their child’s schools as identified by their political affiliations.

But now I’m a bigot. Well, it isn’t the worst of words I’ve been called. Simply because I think that adults should be protecting, as the Left keeps wailing about, the “most innocent and vulnerable amongst us”.  I’ll take being called that, and worse, all day long with respect to that issue. More and more, I guess, adults on the Left are becoming more and more comfortable (if these returns are showing) with kiddie porn.  Sure, “moral high ground” indeed.

The part of the screed about the OBGYN?  Out of Left field, I guess (smirk). Just had to throw that Religion card in there for some reason. Again, when we made babies a profit center for abortion mills, our society lost a chunk of its soul. And if the person wants to talk about “The Science”, I am HAPPY to have that discussion (remember, I am a biologist so I know what a woman is – and a baby undergoing development).

And the another one, short and sweet (handled out of White River Junction, VT) was out of Grafton District 12 (Hanover, Lyme):

So from FLAMER, here is the least offensive illustration I could find. Remember, the folks writing this smut are preying on your children.  What child doesn’t like what we “of age” called comic books?  And now these “graphic illustrations” have been weaponized.

Yeah, this is in the Hanover School District (author: Mike Curator, ISBN: 978-1-62779-641-5). Also, in the Hanover Public School Libraries is Gender Queer (author: Maia Kobabe, ISBN: 978-1-63715-072-6) – it gets much more graphic:

BTW, I nixed those images for the mailers. There is much, MUCH worse in this and other books.

Which reminds me of the Right To Know for the Hanover Public School District’s card catalog (among other Districts) – I need to put that up.  And card catalogs from Berlin, Gilford, Laconia, and Oyster River.

 

The post GrokPAC – More from Pornography Deniers Part 4. Yep, Gonna Have To Break Rule #1 For This One. appeared first on Granite Grok.

Firearms owners know that in order to legally purchase a firearm you have to complete an ATF Form 4473 and submit to and pass a criminal history background check prior to taking possession of a firearm. Note that criminals do not have to do this.

That is why they are criminals.

Doing so, enters your personal information into an FBI database called NICS (National Instant Criminal background check System). That information is required by current law to be deleted within 24 hours, though the dealer is required to keep your 4473 for 20 years.

The controversy around whether or not the NICS database could or is being used to create a de-facto registry of who owns firearms is long established. Most firearms owners take comfort in the assumption that the FBI and NICS are following the law and believe that their information is being deleted as required.

That said, recently passed legislation has changed some aspects of the information provided to NICS when a background check is performed. With the passage of the NICS Denial Notification Act (NDNA) of 2022, the confidence that the FBI and NICS are following the laws is called into question. Two bills that have been made law at the Federal level are the cause for raising this question. They are S.675 and H.R.1796. Links to both are provided here for your convenience.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/675/related-bills
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1769/text

When the FBI NICS conducts a background check on people wanting to purchase a firearm there are three possible responses that can be provided – Proceed, Delay, or Deny. A Proceed means that a dealer can transfer the firearm to the applicant. A Delay means that NICS requires additional time to research the applicant. A Deny means that an applicant is a person prohibited from possessing a firearm or ammunition.

The new law is titled the NICS DENIAL (caps provided for emphasis) Notification Act (NDNA). The bill as passed, is silent on a Delay, outcome but is clear on a Deny outcome in requiring that the applicant’s address information (line 10 of the ATF Form 4473) be provided to the FBI NICS agent. That information is not normally provided in the course of conducting a background check.

When the line 10 information is requested, it is prior to the dealer being notified if the background check result is a Delay or a Deny. The line 10 information, by the new law, should only be requested for a denial and not for a delay. When a person is in a Delay status, their information, once moved to a Proceed, should be subject to the 24-hour deletion requirement. But is it, given the changes in reporting requirements? And what happens to the line 10 information that, by law, should not have been provided?

If a delay converts to a deny, then it becomes consistent with the law for the line 10 information to be provided. This is to allow the FBI to provide that information to local law enforcement authorities for possible action. In my opinion, this is a good thing.

I frequently make calls to NICS to perform background checks. Occasionally I will receive a request for the line 10 information. This is BEFORE receiving an NTN (NICS Transaction Number) is provided, which is the last step in the background check and when the status of the check is revealed to you. Most often, when the line 10 information is requested, the applicant is being placed on a Delay, not a Deny. This is inconsistent with the NDNA in that the law as written is silent on a Delay response and only addresses a Deny as the name of the law suggests.

After asking the question to a NICS agent and subsequently being transferred to two different people, I was never able to speak with anyone who could provide an answer to my question. I ended up leaving a voicemail for someone I was referred to but never received a return call. I sent an email to the FBI and got a reply from a Firearms Enforcement Specialist suggesting that I contact our FBI Field Office, which I did.

I talked with an agent at our local FBI branch in Boston who agrees that what is being done is inconsistent with the NDNA but did not have a remedy. The Specialist also suggested that I contact my Congresswoman, which I have done (Ann Kuster). I called the FBI Headquarters in DC and, after being on hold for 30 minutes, was transferred to another person who said we are just doing what “they” told us. When I asked who “they” are, he had no answer. This is a clear case where the FBI is acting in violation of current Federal law. And no one that I have been able to contact can explain why or suggest a remedy.

I get that they need to maintain a database of prohibited persons. But what are they doing with the information for the Delay responses, which 99% of the time comes back as a Proceed?

This is yet another troubling fact about the weaponization of the Judicial System in America. A Bill becomes law and then is poorly implemented. Or has it been implemented with a larger agenda in mind?

 

The post Is the FBI Now Keeping a Database of Firearms Purchases? appeared first on Granite Grok.

Apparently the government thinks having large amounts of cash makes you a criminal! If so come and arrest me! Note: Lawyers will say that having or moving large amounts of cash isn’t a crime despite what the government wants you to believe and it’s not evidence of ill gotten gain either. In this case it’s business cash of my company in my possession as I write this.

Crypto6 Day 4

[the accounting of Day 4’s trial has now been updated and completed, if you already started reading day 4 you can start off where it is noted below]

When passing through security and United States Marshals asked a question or two I said “I don’t speak to liars and thieves”, to which a Marshal humorously responded “You just did”, in those EXACT words. If I had been quick thinking I would have liked to have responded with “I rest my case”.

Today there were about ~16 freedom loving crypto6 supporters in attendance in spite of little advance notice about the fact the trial was now to be held on Fridays too. Previously we had been told or it had been implied based on the estimate end date and calendar days that the trial would not be conducted on Fridays. Apparently the court can’t do basic math.

Here is my Day 4 summary:

New witness

Name: Hope Cherry

Silverspring MD

Worked for agriculture federal credit union

Worked as the VP of security

Federal credit [something or other, possibly regulated by or some similar word] USDA

The credit union has 3 branches

Q What is a credit union?

A non-profit member owned financial institution

Q Smaller?

A Mine is

Q What is shared branching?

A As one does not have a lot of locations shared branch banking enables members to make deposits at associated credit unions

Q How do you use shared branch banking?

A Most use it for deposit and withdraws

Q What do you do?

A I’m a compliance officer

Q Bank secrecy officer?

A Make sure in compliance with law

Q Are you required to register with FinCEN?

A Yes

Q Do you have to have anti money laundering program?

A Yes

Q Do you have to have an anti money laundering program?

A Yes

Q Does it have a reporting requirement?

A Yes, anything in excess of $10,000

[what is interesting about this is that they’re not claiming he was required to register as a bank and money transmitters are regulated differently than banks of which they are saying is he required to register as, though the defense is claiming or will be claiming he was legally advised by state and a lawyer that the church was NOT required to register given the way the church operated its vending or crypto sales operations… it’s also important to note that if you are doing a check or credit card or something similar via a bank these things are not required of businesses selling stuff]

Q Anything else?

A Yes, also SAR

Q Like?

A If we suspect exploitation or elder abuse

Q What did you collect to comply with these laws?

A Name, Address, TAX ID, day to day transaction of the person

Q Do FinCEN give guidance on filing a suspicious activity report and what it is?

A Yes

Q How does someone open an account?

A Come in or online

ID, Name, address, tax ID, employment, use

Q Do you know Ian Freeman?

A Yes

Q How did he open an account?

A Online

Q Type of account opened?

A Personal

[something to note is that someone operating a business from a personal account is ok, one can also do business without registering a corporation, trade name, doing business as, etc, with some restriction possibly, but basically if you aren’t incorporated you’re generally a sole proprietor, but it may also be unclear what you should register as if you are another type of entity like a non-profit or a church]

Q Purpose listed?

A Household

[It is also the case that one might open an account for one purpose and end up using it for another, there is nothing indicating to the opener what a personal or business account are or which one to choose either or why in most instances but it also usually will come down to marketing of features even if, so one for example might open a business account if they do a lot of wire transfers because then they don’t have to go into the bank to conduct the wire transfer, but that will usually cost more, so you might prefer a personal account for a business if not much business is going to go through it, or only certain types of transactions will be passing through it]

Q Source of funds?

A $500k in transactions / month, location NH, it was unusual, and only application we’ve had from NH

Q Type of activity expected?

A Regular stuff, paychecks, bills, etc

[that is curiously maliciously answered response considering I know for a fact many small business are sole proprietors and will also use personal accounts for business, not just bills and paychecks, I both have had sole proprietor businesses and did work for MANY MANY other small businesses operated in the same LEGAL way]

Q Anything stuck out about this account opening?

A We checked into it and there were multiple inquires from other institutions

Q Example?

A Check tax ID correct, etc

Q If it was suspicious why did you open it anyways?

A This does not mean he is up to no good

[they are showing a bank statement on the screen]

Q What month was this?

A 2nd

Q What does ver. Mean?

A Verify account # is correct

statement shows deposits from all over the country

Q Anything suspicious? Did you file a report?

A Yes

[this is humorous because I also operated a computer repair business at one time with deposits coming in from all over the country… in and of itself this is NOT or should not be suspicious.. in my case contractors would deposit checks and cash into the business account once conducting repair work for customers and I’d then pay them per agreed terms for said work, and this is actually very common and there were far far far larger players in this field than me, in fact Dell did something similar for years, and other smaller players focus exclusively on contracting out repair work to third parties and then pay their contractors this way to such a degree they have custom developer websites and portals for it all]

Q Was there information from any other credit union(s) available?

A I asked others and got told they were seeing deposits and names of people making deposits

[Share branch deposit tick shown on screen with a $6,700 ticket]

Q What is this photo?

A I asked for a photo of the person making the deposit

[they bring up a page on screen from a currency transaction report]

Q What does this show?

A Someone other than the person owning the account made a deposit

[again none of that should be suspicious in and of itself, this is common with businesses for a variety of reasons, one is to avoid fees, wire fees have a $15-40 cost for instance whereas cash or check deposit is free and faster than mailing it and you avoid credit card fees, for years I paid a couple other small businesses that supplied my company with certain products or components used in products with a check from my bank, but I’d stop at their bank to make the deposit directly into their checking accounts as it was far far easier than mailing the check and cheaper than using a credit card and for that we would get a 1-3% additional discount on top of another discount we already got, my company sells computers and accessories for clarity on what we did/do aka ThinkPenguin.com ]

Q Did they get ID?

A Yes

[this is or was uncommon, I don’t think I’ve ever been asked for ID to deposit money into someone elses account and this is not or was not a standard procedure at most banks, though it’s possible in recent years it has become more common, but based on what I’ve heard at trial it sounds like this is still rare, but done at least at one financial institution]

Back to statement on screen

Q Stop after 12/6?

A Right, and serious concern about source of money so we restricted account

This activity cause us to talk to Mr Freeman

I called Mr Freeman and he said he was dealing in rare coins

Turned out to be virtual currency

Drilled down and found virtual currency

[she’s admitting that Mr Freeman was not dishonest about his use of the account and told them what it was being used for when asked for further details here which is the exact opposite of the governments claims that he lied to banks, they may not have understood that rare coins is an accurate description for what he was involved in, but as will or was demonstrated through anothers testimony who better although still poorly understood bitcoin that bitcoin has the word coin in it and what makes bitcoin valuable is its rarity, there are only 21 million coins that will ever be ‘minted’, and bitcoin when explaining it to people is commonly explained by comparison to gold and silver in that it’s valuable because of its rarity]

 

[it’s funny how I had a similar banking situation for years and years and no one ever restricted my account or asked questions about it, now there was one difference and that was that I believe I was using an actual bank rather than a credit union for business at the time, but there was a time where I used a credit union too, and it is possible that they would have seen this as suspicious as running a business from a credit union account while possible is less common, so to them it might have been seen as odd by comparison to other customers, the reason it’s hard to do business with a credit union as a business is usually due to wire transfers having to go through a bank and thus you end up with multiple intermediaries where mistakes can occur in the wire process… I actually closed a credit union account after a few years because it was just too much of a pain in the neck because of this, though not all small businesses do a lot of wire transfers, so I suspect at least some small businesses still do use a credit union over a bank like I did for my business for a while]

Q How did you feel about this?

A It was a red flag, but unsure about it

Q Type of business when asked?

A Shire Free Church

Q Did you search for it?

A Yes, I found the church with a search

Q Make any conclusion?

A It was a little different type of church

We felt we were dealing with and he was not registered

[ while I can’t speak with certainty it is my belief that it was probably the case that the Shire Free Church was not registered with any government at that time, and at some point something did get registered because of this incorrect assumption by financial institutions about the law, or at least they felt obligated to see that a church was registered even if not because of their own legal requirements, and it’s my understanding that churches can’t be required to register with the government because of other supreme court precedent, but that doesn’t mean you can’t register either, and many churches are registered in one way or another with government(s) in the united states at I believe the state level]

Q Did you close his account?

A We suggested he close it or we would

Defense cross examines the witness

Q You are employed as fraud officer?

A Yes

29 years

Q He applied in his name?

A Yes

Q Not a fake name?

A Yes, it was his real name

Q Address?

A Yes, it was a real address

Q He opened for minimum amount of money like most people do?

A Yes

Q $55,000?

A It went to buy bitcoin

Q Made deposit and purchased bitcoin?

A Yes

Q When opened account some red flags?

A No clear cut reason to say no

[this was a simple yes or no question she answered with a sentence… she was trying to avoid giving the defense evidence of innocents here because what this shows is that you don’t have to refuse business with people just because there are red flags and not even financial institutions who actually have to register need refuse service, so that begs the question why should a church who sells bitcoin and isn’t required to register as a money transmitter let alone a bank have to… remember she is also competing with bitcoin and as a competitor she doesn’t want this bitcoin thing to take off because it puts them out of business]

Q When asked for drivers license he provided it right?

A Yes

Q he didn’t stop doing business right?

A No

Q He was compliant right?

A Yes

Q No negative balance right?

A No

Q All positive searches?

A Yes

Q When did you find out cash coming in?

A We have a report, but didn’t immediate stop it

Q Shared branch did business with victim?

A Yes

Q Was there a problem?

A Concern, yes

Q Shared branch bank allowed it despite concerns right?

A Yes

Q She still has money in her account right?

A I can’t tell you

Q This one isn’t in her late 80s or even 70s right?

A Yes, that’s right, she is in her 50’s

Q She was a school teacher right?

A Yes

Q Because over $12,000 a report was filed right?

A Yes

Q They didn’t refuse it right?

A Right

Q Did teller have any problem with 2nd transaction shown?

A No, not that I’m aware of

Q He gave account info on how to contact him right?

A Correct

[ at this point the judge criticizes prosecutor for wanting to censor his own evidence]

[Exhibit on email communications between ian and bank compliance officer shown on screen]

[It’s admitted for what they call a limited purpose]

Judge says ~“can’t be considered true statements, only to understand his point of view, and to round up and understand conversation”

Overview of letter:

Letter explains Ian is a minister of church and law does not apply according to his lawyers. He explains why he thinks the compliance officer is wrong to close account.

There is no difference between vending person to person and selling online.

New Hampshire says “we don’t regulate that”

[this is a reference to what the banking department of New Hampshire stated prior to the state removing their authority to regulate cryptocurrency businesses, meaning the state already wasn’t regulating even if the banking department had the authority to do so before the bill removing their authority passed: https://freekeene.com/2016/09/29/full-video-of-nh-state-house-commission-to-study-cryptocurrency-first-meeting/ ]

The letter says the church conducts know your customer and gets IDs of buyers to stop fraud that is rampant in the online world.

We confirm buyer knows they are buying coins.

[He uses coins in regular conversation and not just “rare coin” when convenient. I believe later on there is evidence Ian even goes out of the way to call customers that he thinks may be getting scammed to ensure they know what they are doing. So much for the claim he didn’t stop transactions that were red flags. Notice though that the credit union lady already said they weren’t stopping transactions because of red flags because that isn’t what the law actually requires.]

Q Is that an accurate letter?

A Yes it is

Q Can you recall attached letter?

A Yes

[the attached letter is separate to the email discussed above]

It was NH banking commission

[while I’ve seen this letter I haven’t been able to locate it online anywhere unfortunately, not on FreeKeene.com nor in the docket, but the letter exists and was displayed in court]

Q You did send his remaining balance to him?

A Correct, there was no suspicion of wrongdoing

[aww wait wait wait what??? didn’t you just close his account for some sort of wrongdoing? Now you are agreeing with the defense that no wrongdoing on his part occurred? What this is suggesting is that the reason they closed the account was of liability on their part, not wrongdoing on the Shire Free Church’s part nor Ian Freeman]

Prosecutor cross examines

Q Did you speak to victim?

A Yes

Q How did you feel after talking to victim?

A I felt she could be victim of scam

[notice we don’t have any evidence that she is a victim of a scam and I’m not even sure they presented evidence she was a victim of a scam here, though this case is so unclear it’s hard to say one way or another, lots of “evidence”, but much of it is to make you feel bad, not that there is evidence of a crime, or at least not of Ian Freeman or the Shire Free Church, and remember the bank let this transaction through too, not just Ian Freeman]

Judy admits in writing to Ian Freeman/Church that the letter is “compelling” evidence of his argument.

Q Do you believe he was honest after using personal account for business?

A No

[this is such a load of crap, people use “personal” accounts for business all the time and she’d know that as the compliance officer, a sole proprietor is a non-registered entity effectively that is representing themselves unless they have a doing business as, but even in that case they are still a sole proprietor and would normally likely open a personal account for business because of the way taxes are conducted even if they have a separate personal account for their business activities separate from their bills/personal stuff]

Defense cross examines

Q Ian wasn’t taking deposits right?

A Correct

Q It would be up to each branch to stop transactions right?

A Not as clear cut as that

[she’s admitting that you only have to stop a transaction if you believe it suspect, and even then not necessarily which backs up the fact that simply doing some amount of due diligence even if you can’t confirm someone isn’t being scammed is sufficient under the law, thus Ian calling people who he thinks might be victims and getting additional verification from them about the transaction is exactly the same level of compliance that the banks do, but unlike the banks he has no legal obligation to do it on behalf of the church because he is neither a financial institution nor a money transmitter under the law, and while this COULD be different for another business if operated differently that wasn’t the case here, selling your own bitcoin from your own wallet does not make one a money transmitter, but an actual bitcoin exchange would make one a money transmitter under the law because you are acting as middlemen in the transaction and moving money or value from one location to another or one place to another, this is exactly what the law says, and the church didn’t do that]

Q They don’t try and stop it?

A [Silence]

Q Ian couldn’t stop it right?

A Correct

[wow, just wow, remember that this is the prosecutor’s own witness and has come in with an agenda of making Ian Freeman look bad]

Q They [the teller] took the deposit right?

A Correct

Q They [the teller] had control over that transaction right?

A Correct

Q Mr Freeman wasn’t there?

A Correct

Q He didn’t see any tell tail signs of a scam, right?

A Correct

Q If red flags existed Mr Freeman wouldn’t have known, right?

A Correct

Q The only person who could have stopped it was the branch employees, right?

A Correct

Q Is it policy to return funds to illegal transactions?

A What were we supposed to do?

[she doesn’t want to answer this one!!! I wonder why]

Q Did you ever sit down with FinCEN?

A No

Prosecutor asks some more questions

Q Do you know what Ian said that led to these people to deposit money?

A No

[how about what the fraudster said if this was a case someone was scammed because Ian wouldn’t have known what they told the victim and the bank wouldn’t have known either, this is a man in the middle scam, it’s neither the bank nor Ian/the Shire Free Church whom are to blame]

New witness

Name: Bruce Sweet

US Postal inspector

Federal agent related to crimes involving US mail

He works with drugs, money laundering, etc

Q Was Ian investigated?

A Yes

We investigated a package going to the church at shipping shack mail box

It was addressed to the shire free church

We open’d it and found a galaxy s phone box with cash inside it

It had $4,000 inside it

Box was from same victim as prior bank victim

Defense cross examines

Q Was complaint from victim?

A No

Q Do you know what cash was for?

A Yes, bitcoin

Q Wasn’t for drugs, right?

A Yes, it wasn’t for drugs

Q Legal product right?

A Yes

New witness

Name Paul Priosey

US Treasury IRS criminal investigation special agent

14 years

Investigated potential violations of the law like money laundering

Based out of charlot Virginia

Previously based out of NY

Q Was Ian investigated?

A Yes

Undercover doing transaction with Ian Freeman

Q What did Ian use? [forms of payment presumably]

A It depends

Q What was your role?

A Conduct bitcoin transactions with freeman

Q How long was your part in the investigation?

A One year

Q Much of it in writing?

A Yes

Q How did you connect with freeman?

A localbitcoin.com

Q Who told you where to start?

A Yea, others

[transactions shown on screen from 2019]

confirms he did these transactions with ian on localbitcoin.com

Q Why did you ask Ian to do a transaction off localbitcoin.com?

A It was easier

[curious – so they aren’t suggesting doing it off localbitcoin.com is to hide some sort of crime]

Q Transaction size?

A $502

“video” pulled up of conversation on telegram

[the prosecutor doesn’t understand what the word means, but none the less telegram is pulled up on the screen]

Q Can you ID defendant?

A Yes blue shirt

[in the room he identifies defendant]

Q Why did you tell freeman wire to bank account wasn’t working if that wasn’t true?

A To get another bank account

[agent openly admits he lied to mr freeman, a red flag you’re dealing with an undercover agent and I have to wonder if Ian wasn’t thinking this too at the time because it’s rare for stuff to not work like this for no apparent reason, but stupid could also explain it]

[chat logs on the screen show agent tried to get ian to do an in person sale after making a series of cash transactions into bank accounts]

Q Did he ask about source of funds?

A No

Q He told you what to tell the bank?

A Yes

[The undercover talks about church events like social sunday, night cap, crypto meetup, new vending machine at thirsty own, does $1000 transaction at vending machine, etc]

Q Asks no questions about why you have so much cash?

A No

[does $1500 constitute a lot of cash these days? If so I must be guilty of being a criminal… there is I believe $8k in cash in my hand right here or thereabout I believe and cash isn’t a crime, and do you know where I got this cash? the bank, and do you know the upstream source of this cash? a legitimate business where I sell computers and accessories called ThinkPenguin.com, and do you know what a lawyer would tell you? Possessing large amounts of cash isn’t a crime! :

 

 

 

 

[Day 4 continues from here… ]

Q Where did you meetup?

A Central square

Q Who there?

A Aria, Ia, Nobody

Q Was it recorded?

A Yes

Q Was it clear?

A No enough

Q We have short clip, does it accurately report what was said?

A Yes

[They play the audio clip in court. It’s entirely unclear  what was said other than “I don’t know. I’m gay” which is humorously something I said in response to someone else. Pretty sure that doesn’t make any of us criminals unless they criminalized me when I wasn’t looking. The agent said something about “infiltrating” our group which is humorous as it is an open to the public group on Telegram or was at the time Monadnock Cryptocurrency Network, and now on Matrix.. this clearly isn’t the brightest fed in the room and it was repeatedly stated by us over the years that the room had or likely had feds it… not that anyone was doing anything illegal, but people should be conscious of the fact that thugs were lying in wait to pounce on folks for doing legal things…]

A chat log containing conversation with Ian is put up on screen.

“only suckers pay tax on crypto

Also how was I obligated to pay taxes created in the first place?”

More Ian quotes from chat log shown:

“they sent a threatening letter to cvm operators a year ago

we all ignored it”

[the interesting part of this is that the church and Ian ignored it because legal council had already been advised that the church was operating in a way that didn’t require registration, which of course the government completely ignores that aspect of it all, and is actively fighting to keep evidence of this out, though they failed]

Ian chat log:

“I can’t sell you crypto because you told me too much”

[this is in response to the undercover fed who pretended to be a drug dealer, and there is NOTHING wrong with what is being said as the law says KNOWINGLY, so once you know you can’t, but prior to that you can, this is actually evidence Ian and the church were not committing a crime even though he may have wanted to]

More Ian chat log:

“I can’t KNOWINGLY assist you with your financial matters”

[again KNOWINGLY is literally in the law, yet this is what the feds are claiming was a ‘wink and a nod’ that it was “OK” to buy crypto from him despite NOT helping him with buying crypto or other financial matters]

Fed asks “Why not?”

Ian responds:

“You told me you sell drugs”

“Money laundering is knowing of illegal activity”

“I advocate for ending the war on drugs and responsible use of various substances”

[The undercover fed pretending to be a drug dealer came to a meetup and recorded audio and video at meetup.]

The prosecutor plays a VERY short video clip on screen.

Video shows nothing Ian and him saying machine is still at thirsty owl.

Q Agent say “You can still use it”

A Yes

[this was false… wait till the cross examination … it gets interesting ]

Q What did you do next?

A Went to thirsty owl and bought $20,000 from machine

They show a receipt of the money bought from the vending machine on screen

Q What was fee?

A 14%

Aug 25, 2020(?)

Defense gets up and cross examines undercover agent pretending to be a drug dealer

Q Purpose of undercover is to obtain evidence of criminal activity through deception, right?

A Yes

Q Sometimes it works and sometimes it does not right?

A Yes

Q No problems nothing illegal about the first dozen transactions, right?

A Yes

Q Telegram used because it is easier right?

A Yes

[interesting because I half expected them to try and claim it was used to cover up criminal activity, claiming something about encryption, when in fact Telegram is NOT end-to-end encrypted, but they didn’t go there in this case like they have in certain other cases in the past 5 years]

Q Why didn’t you disagree with him if investment wasn’t why you were buying bitcoin?

A Because I have a strategy to get conviction

[hmmmm so you don’t care about how you achieve the results, only that you achieve results]

Q Did you want to be willfully ignorant?

A No, just following directions

Q He didn’t say you couldn’t ask questions right?

A No

Q How do you know that his intent was to donate part of transaction to church?

A I didn’t

Q Meetup wasn’t illegal right?

A No

Q Nothing illegal about being a libertarian crypto guy right?

A No

Q You wanted to do this to further the trust aspect?

A Yes

Q Your goal was to get him to do something illegal?

A Yes

[How is this not entrapment???? definition of entrapment: the action of tricking someone into committing a crime in order to secure their prosecution.]

Q You want him to slip-up and fall?

A Yes, depending on how transactions go

Q you did not correct anything, right?

A Right

Q Did he ever say he wanted to lie?

A If asked to tell then it was donation or investment

Q But you did not ask Ian why that was, right?

A No

Q Ian dropped from 14% fee to a 10% fee for you right?

A Yes

Q He wanted your legal business, right?

A Yes

Q If they didn’t like you no break right? [if he didn’t like you he wouldn’t have given you a break, right]

A Yes

Q If they didn’t like you no break right?

A It depends but usually yea

Q Before [he knew of your criminal dealings he gave you a] 10% rate, but not once he knew you were involved in drug activity, right?

A Yes

Q Once he knew he didn’t want to do business with you right?

A Yes

Q Even after you didn’t stop trying to get him to commit crime right?

A Yes

[there is an aspect of entrapment in the law that basically says the government can’t try and get you commit a crime you wouldn’t already have committed on your own, which is probably why the lawyers asking these questions, they can hang out with you, but they can’t ask to buy drugs from you, if you are a drug dealer, but if after befriending them they try and buy drugs from you- then it’s not entrapment- it’s something along these lines anyway- but trying to win a fight with the government over entrapment is hard as everything favors them]

Q Despite insistence you still tried, right?

A Right

Q “I can’t tell you you can do that”, he said that right?

A Yes

Q You asked him specifically about using machine, right?

A He said I can’t tell you you can use it

[the fed admits that he lied previously on the stand under oath and that Ian didn’t say he could use the vending machine]

Q He said he can’t deal with you any more?

A Yea, but he said knowingly

[aww yea, cause buddy, he knew you were a fed, and he was quoting a key aspect of FEDERAL LAW]

Q You did ask and did get answer right?

A Yes

Q You put money in machine and out came receipts right?

A Yes

Q When he wanted you it was a 10% rate and after what was it?

A 14%

[ie the vending machine was 14% and Ian was giving the guy a 10% rate up until he couldn’t legally do business with him any more]

Q You did it on your own right?

A Yes

Q And this is a guy who gave you a break when he thought you were legal, right?

A Yes

Q You speculated, right?

A Yes, but he knew based on prior conversations!

[referencing that wink and a nod comment he made previously]

Prosecutor asks questions:

Q You broke his rule by telling him what you do right?

A Yes

Q What did he understand your intent to be?

A Ian said “If you mail UPS or Fedex because private mail service they can open package, but if USPS they supposedly need warrant so probably best with track + signature required”

[yea, this doesn’t mean he thinks you’re doing anything criminal, it’s also protection potentially from companies one might not trust, and I’m pretty sure there was evidence presented to this end, but he was saying some people trust USPS over UPS/Fedex because supposedly USPS needs a warrant whereas the others don’t, not that he even thinks this necessarily, he wasn’t the one with this concern, you were]

Q Is it your experience when people talk about search warrants they talking about criminal activity?

A Yes

[everyone thought this guy was a fed, hard to believe anything from this liars mouth]

[actual friends were given way better in person rates too at certain points as low as I believe 5% at one point, which was also the normal in person rate people were charging, so the market rate at the time, I can’t speak to later on, which probably would have been higher, but I suspect it wouldn’t have been 10%, but still would have been lower]

Defense cross examines witness again:

Q You did break the golden rule, you said you do something illegal?

A Yes

Q If you tell the bank you are a drug dealer they won’t do business with you either right?

A Yes

Q UPS is different right?

A Yes

Q USPS is safer right? Protect by government, right?

A Yes

Q But fedex you don’t know who is touching your stuff right?

A Right

Q They might have a criminal record right?

A Yes

Q One reason to suggest USPS is because it is safer, ever think about that?

A No

Q Postal is more regulated right?

A Everyone has there preferences

[humorously he didn’t answer the question]

Q It isn’t illegal to mail cash right?

A Right, send whatever you want

Q Did you ever ask why USPS over fedex specifically?

A He answered in voice

Q He said search warrant right?

A Yes

Q Makes it more secure right?

A Yes

Q You said it was legal to mail cash right?

A Yes

Q To get a search warrant illegal activity must be suspected, right?

A Yes

Q It starts warning people of scams right?

A Yes

[they are referencing the signs a the crypto vending machines]

Q Did he tell anyone to scam, or he activity sit there and let people get scammed?

A “I don’t recall”

[wow-really? are you kidding me? Does anybody believe this liar? why would you invest in a machine if a person was going to do the job??? this makes no sense and I have a hard time believing a jury if they’re following this would believe it either]

Q He specifically told you he didn’t want to do business with you right?

A Yes

Q “I can’t tell you you can use it” right?

A Yes

New witness

Name: Renee Spinella

25 years old

Married to Andrew Spinella

Live in Manchester

Completed high school 2014

Employment history: waitress

Q Know freeman?

A Yes, a decade

Q How did you first meet him?

A I don’t recall

We started dating in 2014

Q 2014-2017 living at his house?

A Yes

Q Professional relationship after breakup?

A Yes

Q What is this agreement?

A Agreed to generally help me move on

[the agreement they are referring to was effectively a breakup agreement that provided Renee with a bit of cash to move on with her life and was clearly not something Ian had to do because of some sort of court order, but simply because he was a good guy and wished the best for her, and I think those around Ian also were aware of his best intents for her even if not this agreement]

Q You had separate agreement for shire free church?

A Yes, selling bitcoin

Q Were you charged?

A Yes to one charge

Q Do you have immunity here?

A Yes

Q How long did you do the job?

A 2017-2021

Q Did you write contract?

A No

Q Do you know who wrote it?

A No, someone from the church

Q How did you communicate?

A Text, telegram, signal

Summary of screen chat log or similar content: Renee was told by Ian to tell banks she traded and banks would assume she was talking about trading stocks and commodities.

[what is interesting about this is that the day of the 2021 FBI raid the half dozen different 3 letter federal government agencies were all arguing about what to call bitcoin… some were saying it was a commodity, some were saying it was a currency, some were saying it was a security… if the government can’t come up with a straight answer here why is this a problem?? ]

Q Did you sell stocks and commodities?

A Bitcoin is a commodity isn’t it?

[to be fair I’m not sure even Renee knew, but probably thought yes here, but given government doesn’t know how is this even a fair question?]

Q Why did you say in chat he was rich?

A People making normal salaries are rich to me, as I’ve always been poor

ItBit log shows they want money service business registration stuff if operating an ATM

Government shows Ian saying “fuck” in the chat log to the demand for money service business registration documents

[something to note is that most people hate documentation of any kind or having to provide it whether or not they doing something criminal, being disgusted by this is not evidence of anything]

Q Did you open accounts for Mr freeman?

A For the church

Q Did it seem like a lot of money or a bit

A “A bit”

Q Would Ian review chats for you?

A Yes

Ian helps Renee with dealing with banks, itbit, and others, and making letterhead for crypto church

They play audio of FTL show talking about Nigerian scam

[totally missed the point of this audio clip, I guess we are suppose to assume he’s guilty because he is aware of some Nigerian’s scamming folks? I guess you shouldn’t do business with folks in an entire country just cause there are some bad apples… but of course if we took this literally then no one could do business anywhere because there are scammers everywhere]

End of day 4!

[Renee gets sick so she isn’t going to be coming back to testify until at least day 8 of the trial (ie which will probably be 12/19/22 assuming she tests negative for COVID and is feeling up to it), but her testimony is not over, and the defense has not had a chance to cross examine yet either, also two days were canceled of the trial already due to her and her attorney coming down ill]

 

 

Still catching up on a few things and hopefully, this post will catch up on all the details of this saga until the actual court hearing happens. Last time, it was set for November 29 and I arrived at Laconia District Court ready to video the proceedings (set for a 1/2 hour).

When I went to register with the Clerk of Court, I was told that the hearing was off and that it had been continued. As I said in that previous post…

Sidenote: you can see the previous posts on this by clicking here).

…he had lawyered up. Turns out that he hired Seth Hipple of Martin & Hipple to be his legal counsel. It also turned out that Hipple couldn’t attend and had filed earlier (back on 11/23/22) for a continuance as he could not attend. So, hiring a lawyer for a single hearing that can’t attend and has to push out the hearing date is a legal strategy?

Apparently, with no other information, it is. This:

Notice of Hearing on Stalking Petition 2022-11-08 Golter v Lambert for 2022-11-29 Laconia District Court

 

And this:

Defendant Motion to continue Stalking Petition 2022-11-23 Golter v Lambert via Lambert Lawyer Seth Hipple Doc 1 Laconia District Court

 

And now, it has been pushed out even further:

Lambert lawyer Seth Hipple request of Continuence Stalking Petition 2022-11-23 Golter v Lambert Granted for 2022-12-29 Laconia District Court

 

So, a stalling game – from 11/23 to 11/29 to 12/27? Look, I know that the Court system is still short-staffed and still trying to dig out from the COVID mess of a schedule that accumulated. I also realize that this is the Thanksgiving/Christmas/New Year’s season which makes scheduling just that much harder. So who is doing the stalling?  Is it Seth Hipple, the lawyer, or Lambert himself?  I can think of several reasons why the latter might, though.

UPDATE: as I was typing this up, another delay by Lambert:

Now, I’m no lawyer and have very little contact with the judicial system so I have no idea if this is par for the course in our neck of the woods or not But it does seem rather…different.

So the reason behind getting the Restraining/Stalking Order still exists – just not the order itself. So why (or by whom, I guess, is the better question) is this hearing being delayed again?

 

 

 

The post NH GOP Delegate / Gunstock Area Commissioner Douglas Lambert – Restraining Order / Stalking Order Sought – Paperwork Part 5 appeared first on Granite Grok.

Bizarro world was one of my favorite Seinfeld episodes. It was the story of Elaine meeting three new friends and entering a parallel existence where everything was the polar opposite of Jerry, George, and Kramer. She was torn between the dysfunctional friends she joined at the hip and the better civil versions. Many of us are experiencing the opposite of Elaine’s dilemma. We like and enjoy the civil, everyday life we have lived for decades and want nothing to do with the bizarro version of Joe Biden and the Progressives. We are fighting hard not to switch. Can we hold on?

Why do people like Biden, Harris, Cortez, and Sanders dislike America so much, and why do Americans send them to Washington repeatedly? I think there are two primary reasons. Probably many more, but two are significant. The first is that these people lie, especially Joe Biden. They campaign and give speeches convincing Americans that they are the same. They talk about their roots and how they feel our pain and have solutions. It is all a charade. They don’t have solutions. They have an agenda, but they want you to believe the former, and people are naïve enough to buy it, vote for them, and even send them money. People are scraping to put food on the table and keep the home warm, yet they are sending these millionaires cash to keep them in office. As I said, it is a bizarro world.

Look at today’s issues that explain the conundrum many of us feel. Millions of Americans who didn’t go to college and work hard to make ends meet are asked to pay the college loans of people who graduated with a useless degree and cannot afford the student loan payments. Until recently, you had to be Vaxxed and wear a mask to deplane and enter America. At the same time, thousands of unvetted and Unvaxxed people from around the world were wading across the Rio Grande to get a piece of the American Dream.

We have rising crime and homicide rates in many of our major cities, but Progressives want to defund or dismantle our Police forces. We are housing illegal aliens in $500 a night hotel rooms while we have active military on food stamps and veterans living on the streets.

We have a President who shut down our pipelines and declared war on the fossil fuel industry and petroleum executives while using our money to help mining and drilling in enemy countries like Venezuela and Iran. We are pushing people to buy electric vehicles while telling them not to charge them as brown-outs darken our cities. There are dozens of examples, but I think you get the message. The Biden administration and Progressive politicians conflict with themselves and think that is a better state of mind than the one we enjoy. It is a bizarro world.

There are so many unanswered questions. Why do these politicians want to destroy the America many of us love? Why do teachers teach our children to dislike America and disavow its history? Why do teachers want to discuss alternative sex lives and promote gender reassignment to children in elementary school? The Democrats blame Russia for interfering with every election they don’t win while they are working on getting illegal immigrants the right to vote. We have a President whose policies are destroying economies worldwide yet says he never pays attention to the Stock Markets. You cannot make these situations up. But they do exist. Nobody is coming forth with the why, but they are doing their best to keep us in the dark about the process.

Feelings of futility are overtaking our psyche, and we feel hopeless about stopping the new world order thrust upon us. We cannot let this happen, for that is part of their plan. If we give up, it will allow them to put into place all the ideas they have to transform our world into the one they envision. Our forefathers and all the patriots who followed never knelt to the pressures of the irrational people who wanted to tear down this great country, and we are not going to be the first to take a knee. Stay strong and God bless our efforts.

The post We Used to Laugh At Bizarro World, Now We Live It appeared first on Granite Grok.

Stew Peters is a feisty journalist who has emerged among the vast field of alternative media voices as a fearless opponent of today’s anti-American movement. Much of his focus turned to cover the COVID response as Peters, a natural skeptic of his government, could tell something wasn’t right from the outset.

Related: From The Stew Peters Network: ‘Died Suddenly’ – Watch It Now!

After two years of following the pandemic leadership response and exposing the lies, hypocrisy, double-speak, and abuses, he began to cover the sudden uptick in deaths occurring hours, days, and sometimes a few weeks among the recently vaccinated. The causal link wasn’t certain, but the evidence of adverse reactions to the vaccines was mounting quickly.

For example, insurance companies who considered the mother of all catastrophes a 10% increase in all-cause mortalities were now seeing an unimaginable 40% increase, not just in the United States but around the world. Instances of myocarditis and pericarditis in young men were occurring among the vaccinated at staggering levels. An internet search of the term “died suddenly” brought up so many thousands of hits it was hard to fathom. Even more so, those dying were often remarkably young and healthy, such as professional soccer players in Europe.

Embalmers began to discover a new type of clot never before seen in humans. Long, fibrous, and with the consistency of a rubber band or calamari, as one put it. Normal clots disintegrate under embalming – not these. Many reported the blood they were drawing out looked filled with sand or coffee grounds. They began to talk in their professional networks. Something was clearly not right, not since the virus began, but since the vaccines were released.

Died Suddenly chronicles these events, interviews medical experts who offer the grim reality they’ve witnessed, and paints a picture of what many in the film refer to as likely the greatest moral evil ever perpetrated among mankind. This movie is not for the faint of heart. Graphic images of blood clots and autopsies alongside actual footage of people going into cardiac arrest and stroke from all over the world (WARNING: some even falling under moving trains) run throughout the film to bring the point home. The unvaccinated are not dying suddenly, but the vaccinated are – why?

Click here to go to the Died Suddenly page.

Click here to read the Epoch Times article with cardiologists explaining the “died suddenly” connection to vaccines.

If you have been vaccinated and want to know how others who took the same batch have fared go to How Bad Is My Batch?

If you want ways to counteract the negative effects of the spike protein, which the medical experts say is the cause of these mutations and problems, here is an article by the Epoch Times touting resveratrol as a leading natural treatment option.

 

The post Died Suddenly: A COVID Documentary appeared first on Granite Grok.