Some libertarians dismiss concerns over social media companies’ suppression of news and opinions that contradict select agendas by pointing out that these platforms are private companies, not part of the government. There are two problems with this argument. First, there is nothing unlibertarian about criticizing private businesses or using peaceful and voluntary means, such as boycotts, to persuade businesses to change their practices.

The second and most significant reason the “they are private companies” argument does not hold water is the tech companies’ censorship has often been done at the “request” of government officials. The extent of government involvement with online censorship was revealed in emails between government and employees of various tech companies. In these emails the government officials addressed employees of these “private companies” as though these employees were the government officials’ subordinates.

Government officials using their authority to silence American citizens is a blatant violation of the First Amendment. Yet some conservative elected officials and writers think the solution to the problem of big tech censorship is giving government more power over technology companies. These pro-regulation conservatives ignore the fact that it would be just as unconstitutional if a conservative administration was telling tech companies who they must allow to access their platforms as it is when progressives order social media companies to deplatform certain individuals. Furthermore, since the average government official’s political views are closer to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez than to Marjorie Taylor Greene, giving government more power over social media companies is likely to lead to more online censorship of conservatives.

Instead of giving government more power over social media, defenders of free speech should work to separate tech and state. An excellent place to start is pushing for passage of the Free Speech Protection Act. Unlike other legislation, such as the PATRIOT Act and the Affordable Care Act, this bill is accurately named. Introduced by Kentucky Senator Rand Paul and Ohio Representative Jim Jordan, this bill makes it a crime for any federal employee or employee of a federal contractor to use his position to communicate with a social media company to interfere with any American’s exercise of First Amendment protected rights. Violators of this law would face fines of at least 10,000 dollars as well as suspension, demotion, or even termination and a lifetime ban from working with the federal government.

In addition to working to pass the Free Speech Protection Act, those who object to the big technology companies’ “content moderation” policies should abandon big tech for more free speech-friendly platforms. Many of the newer social media companies were started to meet the demand for a “content moderation”-free alternative to the dominant companies. Senator Paul himself stopped posting videos on YouTube because of its suppression of free speech. While my Liberty Report still airs on YouTube, its main platform is Rumble. It is wonderful to do a show on any topic I choose without worrying about being canceled.

Big tech censorship is a problem created by big government. The solution lies not in giving the government more power but in separating tech and state. Passing the Free Speech Protection Act and making big tech pay a price for cooperating with big government by leaving to use sites like Rumble are two excellent places to start.

 

Copyright © 2023 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

The post Separate Tech and State appeared first on Granite Grok.

New Hampshire loves itself some jackpot justice. They sued Exxon/Mobile over EPA-approved Fuel Additives and loved cashing tobacco settlement checks. But how about this? After preaching the 95% and safe and effective lies, does the State have the hutspa to follow Texas as it sues Pfizer for Deceptive Trade practices?

It’s a fair question because Florida began looking at this a year ago when Gov. DeSantis asked the state courts to impanel a grand jury to explore wrongdoing but has not yet (to my knowledge) formally filed a suit.

Texas AG Ken Paxton has pulled that trigger.

 

How did Pfizer’s vaccine achieve such widespread adoption, yet fall short of the stated goal of ending the pandemic? In a nutshell, Pfizer deceived the public. First, Pfizer’s widespread representation that its vaccine possessed 95% efficacy against infection was highly misleading from day one. That number was only ever legitimate in a solitary, highly- technical, and artificial way—it represented a calculation of the so-called “relative risk reduction” for vaccinated individuals in Pfizer’s then-unfinished pivotal clinical trial. But FDA publications indicate “relative risk reduction” is a misleading statistic that “unduly influence[s]” consumer choice. Indeed, per FDA: “when information is presented in a relative risk format, the risk reduction seems large and treatments are viewed more favorably than when the same information is presented” using more accurate metrics.

 

Who’s with me? There’s gold in them thar hills, boys! Potentially the largest class-action lawsuit in human history.

But not so fast. There are also problems aplenty. While even cash-strapped Democrat states have more reason than anyone to chase another pot of gold, they were the worst of the worst when it came to pronouncing the Pfizer/Moderna vaccine safe and effective. From scare tactics to fear tactics to mandates and vaccine passports, can those locales complicit in the lie (who put a rotten despotism cherry on top) sue Pfizer without getting sued themselves?

I hope they get sued, but their fallback response will be to blame the FDA, CDC, NIH, or NIAD. They approved emergency use repeatedly. Gave us public health marching orders.

Elected and public health officials, and everyone up and down either of those food chains, will point a finger toward DC while blubbering, but, but, well, they said it was okay! And if they told you to inject your citizens with poison, would you do that? Would you shout them down, shut them up, make fools of them in public, refuse them access to public spaces, even confine them for wanting nothing more than their right to both free speech, bodily autonomy, or fully informed consent?

Yes, because that is the entire pandemic vaccine policy tragedy in one run-on sentence.

And a private company guilty of fraud, injury, or even murder, as we’ve noted on these pages more than once, isn’t going to be able to hide behind immunity no matter who offered it.

 

The funny thing about getting politicians to promise you immunity from prosecution is that there are limitations to what can be excused. Take deliberate deception and fraud.

If you hide details that lead to harm, the political rats will abandon your ship faster than you can say mRNA Vaccines.

That’s the boat Pfizer may soon find itself in, and it should not expect its Pfederal Pfriends to lift a finger to help, noting that any who might have probably “retired” and have packed their”stipends” and inducements in their saddle bags as they ride into the sunset. Any still on the payroll (wink-wink) also got what they wanted. A full-scale global tyranny test that a majority of the Western World Pfailed.

 

Pfizer/Moderna got in bed with some of the dirtiest criminals on the planet. Politicians and bureaucrats who promised them they would protect them. Organizations and individuals with no intention of protecting the people from the known risks of harm from their products; so what chance would Pfizer have when things went sideways?

Sure, everyone kept lying. The drug companies, government, public and private health, the media, and big tech actively censored the truth to protect the fraud. And as Igor Chudov notes in the linked piece, don’t be surprised when they get sued, too.

Pfizer lied to everyone, but they had a lot of help. Deceptions that continued long after the Pfizer docs and internal emails explained what we saw in the real world. They knew early and not only released it to the public but engaged in one of the most deceptive promotional campaigns in history.

A lot of people need to be sued. Pfizer is likely doomed.

So, who is going to step up and follow Texas? Who will sue Pfizer before there’s nothing left on the carcass for these vultures to pick? And how much fun will it be for us to flog them ceaselessly for it? You called us deniers and accused us of spreading misinformation. And now that is the foundation of any claims against Pfizer.

Grab some popcorn, people.

 

HT | Igor Chudov

The post COVID-19 Vaxx: Texas Sues Pfizer for Deceptive Trade Practices – How Many Other States Will Follow Their Lead? appeared first on Granite Grok.

In September, Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut spoke to the Brentwood Republican Committee. I don’t hang out there, but Frank had just announced his non-candidacy for Governor, and a neighbor and fellow Grokster was aching to understand the skullduggery behind the move and offered me a ride to the event.

Frank gave a talk, not on himself or his aborted campaign but on education in New Hampshire. Before the talk, he told us he had not discussed pulling out with the Republican hierarchy, as they are not supposed to take a position in primaries. He did not talk about low name recognition and low odds against the Morse and Ayotte fundraising machines, but these are common knowledge.

Frank described demographic and cultural trends in New Hampshire. He called them “headwinds,” and I call them excuses. He said that government schools have been delivering poor results for decades, with more than half of students measured as not proficient. He said it started to trend worse in 2012, then drastically worse with the Covid outbreak. I asked him what happened in 2012, and he instantly said, “Common Core,”–though he added that people he views as credible have studied it and found no reason the federal curriculum standard would worsen outcomes. (Not directly, but mightn’t the imposition of federal mandates tend to drive bright and innovative people out of the field? And you don’t need Washington to mandate math and reading; if DC mandates other things, doesn’t teaching these take time away from teaching the fundamentals?)

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

Turning to policy recommendations, Frank espoused thinking outside the box. He questioned the assumptions that we need buildings, rigid daily schedules, and children sitting at desks filling out forms. He described numerous experiments presented to the Board of Education for programs involving a small group of kids with shared interests, such as robotics–teaching kids what you want to teach them as offshoots of a project they want to build. Sometimes, teachers and parents want these options badly enough to consider leaving government schools. Sometimes local school committees agree with the plan. But repeatedly, “the bargaining unit wouldn’t go along with it.”

(Now, thinking way outside the box, the education industry probably doesn’t need a subsidized government option as the dominant provider, a single State Board, and a State Commissioner who talks about matching “my students” to “my schools.”)

But Frank was more engaging and more authentic than I expect Morse and Ayotte ever to be. Morse’s recent, content-free campaign revolved around “603 Values,” only I have my own values and they aren’t based on my phone number. Ayotte’s last content-free campaign had the slogan, “Listening, Learning, and Then Leading.” That’s right; I’ll know what I believe just after I chat with you. No sale.

In stating his non-candidacy, Frank wrote that he preferred to finish his current job rather than seek a new one. Of course, his content-free boss famously took him to the woodshed for communicating with “the silly fringe,” that is, us.

I disagree with Frank’s decision based on my interpretation of the facts as he presented them. He has been in the job for six and a half years, supervising a system that has always failed most of its kids and is now failing badly. He has an understanding of the current situation as an executive who studies things and incorporates what he learns. He knows exactly what needs to be done–and, for institutional reasons, the Education Commissioner can’t make it happen and won’t be able to for the foreseeable future.

School Town Meeting is locked down by those receiving, benefitting from, or massaging the loot, and these “bargaining units” hardly bargain; they dictate. Frank is ready for a new challenge–and we are ready for a candidate for Governor who is not the state’s Backslapper Emeritus, nor the latest NHGOP Year of the Woman gimmick who let NBC wedge her away from her party’s own President a full four years before loudly splitting from Trump became a fad. (Meanwhile, the Democrat candidates are less interested in education than in barring a conservative like Dennis Prager from offering even educational materials that they concede are not conservative.) Thinking outside the box suggests that Frank Edelblut could do more for New Hampshire and even more for education in a new role.

 

The post Frank Edelblut Should Get Back in the Race appeared first on Granite Grok.

It would be best if you never trusted anyone who sees no limit to how much the government can spend, always increases budgets, and then claims they want to lower your property taxes. They are lying to you. They have to tax you more, but they don’t want it showing up as a bill in your mailbox.

Taxpayers find it irksome, and legislators don’t want to have to explain to the peasants why they need more and more of your increasingly devalued dollars. Your role is to shut up and pay. If you must do anything, applaud all the services the state provides, none of which you use, while those you need, like plowed roads and public safety, take a back seat to things like making electricity unaffordable, gender-reassignment surgery, housing illegals, and buying needles for addicts.

There is no lowering of taxes under Democrats, ever, so any suggestion to the contrary is a bald-faced lie.

That’s the bait and switch New Hampshire Dems have been working for years. They can’t shut up about high property taxes but have never lowered a budget or cut a taxor spending in their political lives – unless forced by Republicans. Their ‘lowering the property tax scam’ is sleight of hand. Deflections and distractions. Were they to succeed, you might briefly see a lower rate in that next bill, but you’ll pay in more places and more often. Total taxes will rise, property values will follow (because they spent that money, too), and then those tax rates will increase, and before you know it, you’re Vermont with some of the highest total tax burdens in the nation.

And I’m not claiming that any Democrat in Vermont ever promised they’d lower property taxes; I’ll leave it up to our Vermont readers to clarify the history, but the spending that always follows a Democrat majority has come to call upon the Green (as in higher taxes) Mountain State, and it is an impressive abuse of Vermonters property rights.

 

This year’s letter projects property tax bills to increase by an average of 18.5 percent next fiscal year, driven largely by a forecasted 12 percent increase in year-over-year education spending. In addition, many districts are seeing changes in pupil counts due to implementation of the new pupil weights from Act 127 of 2022. Changes in pupil counts affect education tax rates, which are based on per pupil spending.

“I understand that this will not be welcome news for Vermonters,” said Commissioner Bolio, “This forecast predicts an unprecedented property tax increase next year, with very real financial impacts at a time Vermonters are already struggling to pay for housing.”

 

Governor Scott is less than pleased, not that he can do anything about it but bitch, which he has.

 

“Vermont’s tax burden is already, unfortunately, among the highest in the country, and families are bearing an incredible burden with increased costs of living across the board, including new and higher taxes and fees imposed by the Legislature. Put simply, a nearly 20% property tax increase would hurt Vermonters and our economy, and we cannot let it happen.

“At a time when housing costs and interest rates are elevated, higher property taxes will make our housing and workforce crises worse, and I sincerely hope the Legislature agrees.

“For years, I have warned that Vermont is unaffordable for too many families and small businesses. This is why for seven years I focused on holding the line on higher taxes and fees, while offering solutions to reduce the tax burden on Vermonters. And for six out of the seven years, we were successful in preventing new taxes and fees.

A warning that fell on deaf ears when whoever or whatever elected a veto-proof majority of spendaholic lefties to the legislature. True to their nature, they overbudgeted, over-regulated, and overspent, and the bill has come due. And this is not the end but the beginning, and I challenge anyone to find an example where this is not the case when Democrats get unobstructed control of a state budget.

For comparison, New Hampshire continues to have one of the lowest total tax burdens in the nation. In 2023, the Granite State was 48th lowest out of 50, while Vermont was 4th highest – before this considerable increase. (Related: Survey: New Hampshire Has Best Return on Taxes in the Nation.)

Vermont is also one of the least Free States (while NH is the most), and those two things are connected.

Vermont should expect to continue to become less free as its tax burden grows. When you rob people for that much, that often, you need to take their freedoms as well.

Still, on the bright side, councilors are available if you’d like help killing yourself – some conditions still apply, though we expect those to get less burdensome over time in relationship to the rise in taxes, regulations, and deliberate abuse of the citizenry.

Fewer peasants are bad for the tax base but good for the planet  – or, at least, that’s their excuse for wanting people to die.

 

 

The post Night Cap: Democrats, Property Taxes, and Vermont appeared first on Granite Grok.

On Tuesday night, DC residents gathered to lament the state of their city.

“We are mad. We are scared in this community. There was a murder in our building just 10 days ago. A woman was shot in the face across the street on Saturday,” one resident told D.C. police Chief Pamela Smith at Tuesday’s town hall.

Smith did her best to respond to these frustrations, but real culprits — champagne race-baiters like Ibram X. Kendi and Patrisse Cullors — were nowhere to be found. Their ideas, however, are painfully present in the daily lives of Washingtonians.

In the capital of the most powerful nation the world has ever known, violent crime is up 38 percent in just one year. Gun violence breaks out in front of upscale restaurants. Eighty-five thousand people in the city’s poorest ward are about to lose their only grocery store due to unrestrained retail theft. Police gave up on stopping carjackers and started handing out free steering wheel locks instead.

And why? Partly because Black Lives Matter riots in major cities had a chilling effect on recruitment and policing. The result has been some 3,000 additional murders over a seven-year period, one study found. In D.C. alone, there is a shortfall of around 400 officers and no wonder. Who wants to be a cop in a city that rewards church-burning rioters by naming a street after them? (RELATED: Watchdog Reveals How Much DC Is Spending To Refresh BLM Mural As Violent Crime Surges)

 

DC’s mayor says nation’s capital is up to 400 cops short and “we have policies that make it difficult to recruit new officers.”pic.twitter.com/Qz0hIrrrd3

— Lucas Tomlinson (@LucasFoxNews) October 3, 2023

In addition to creating these problems, the prophets of systemic racism have also made it nearly impossible to solve them. The D.C. council’s solution to this crime wave was to reduce the punishments for carjackings and robberies.

When Chicago and Los Angeles had the opportunity to elect pro-police mayors, they doubled down on BLM resentment politics instead. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson immediately set about rebranding teenage looting mobs as “large gatherings.” The idea of doing something to stop those mobs — which drive taxpaying, job-creating businesses out of the city — would never occur to him. That would be racist.

 

 

Imagine being lectured by a guy who thinks “mob action” has anything to do with Al Capone. pic.twitter.com/SX2cYNIIzm

— 16th & 17th District Chicago Police Scanner (@CPD1617Scanner) August 2, 2023

No matter who you are, this ideology has probably made your life measurably worse.

Are you an affluent white woman out for a nice city walk in your Canada Goose jacket? Or a Brooklyn hipster on your way home from a wedding? You may well find yourself robbed at gunpoint or stabbed to death in front of your girlfriend.

If you’re a poor black woman in Southeast D.C., then congratulations! You now live in a crime-ridden food desert. Isn’t life grand without all that “over-policing”?

Maybe you’re an Indian-American family living in a Connecticut suburb, far from the chaos of the inner cities. Sorry, there’s still no escape. They’ll punish your daughter for outperforming her classmates “of color” or maybe cancel her honors classes altogether. Even families in small-town Oklahoma aren’t safe from blue-haired teachers who want nothing more than to privilege-walk their sons down the hallways until they hate themselves, their families, and their country.

Are you a law student excited to hear a prominent federal judge speak on your campus? Too bad. Your classmates, who’ve spent the last few years huffing uncut CRT, can shout the speaker down while a highly paid administrator eggs them on. (RELATED: Federal Judges Won’t Hire Clerks From Stanford Law After Students Shouted Down Federal Judge)

Even major corporations are suffering. Target is so afraid of the next George Floyd dying in its aisles with some chicken thighs stuffed down his pants that it’s allegedly preventing law enforcement from arresting shoplifters in stores. And that’s despite retail theft topping $1 billion for the company this year and forcing nine stores to close. Rough deal for the employees, too.

But maybe you’re just a regular guy who believes in fairness and wants things to work like they’re supposed to. You think planes should be flown by the sharpest pilots, troops commanded by the ablest officers, Oscars awarded to the best movies, professorships and grants directed to the most promising candidates and so on. Sorry. Every organization, in addition to its stated purpose, now has an overriding trinity of metapurposes: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.

The FAA exists not to ensure safe air travel but to promote diversity. The military’s primary objective is to maximize equity, not warfighting capacity. The Academy Awards declare dogmatically that there can be no artistic excellence without full inclusion. Awards and positions flow not to the best qualified but to those who can most eloquently restate the DEI Creed. (RELATED: Entire University System To No Longer Require ‘Diversity Statements’ From Applicants)

Everything is like this now. And as a result, everything is worse.

The only real beneficiaries (other than shoplifters) are the priests and priestesses of the anti-racism cult. Kendi got to rake in millions of dollars for a Center for Antiracist Research that published jack shit. Cullors ended up with a $6 million party mansion. Colin Kaepernick compared the NFL to slavery, making him the only slave in history with a seven-figure sneaker deal. Regina Jackson and Saira Rao, a particularly entrepreneurial pair of anti-racist educators, charged white women $5,000 a pop to call them racist and then yell at them for crying about it.

 

An excerpt from the book White Women by Regina Jackson and Saida Rao. This was from a Race2Dinner conversation. I love that we have a tangible example of “the urgency of brunch” now. Also Regina’s response was awesome pic.twitter.com/i8dkgDd4h6

— Holly Jolly MerBear (@WittyVitale) November 27, 2023

 

And, of course, there are all the university diversicrats, HR harpies, and roving DEI educators whose names we don’t know but who are raking in cushy salaries with full benefits for their work as full-time crybullies.

The results are in: Black Lives Matter has been an unqualified disaster across every stratum of American society. Everyone has suffered except for a small handful of grifting opportunists. The wave may be rolling back in some places, but it won’t roll back all the way. Even if it did, the damage is already done.

Grayson Quay is an editor at the Daily Caller.

 

Grayson Quay | Daily Caller

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline, and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The post The Legacy Of BLM — A Few Banked Millions While Literally Everyone Else Is Worse Off appeared first on Granite Grok.

Remember that time at COVID censorship camp when the government was publishing propaganda encouraging you to rat out friends and neighbors for violating mandates (too many people at a party or not following other oppressive mandates)? They wanted you to rat out your family, too.

DHS, through The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), had a cute little video about countering COVID-19 information.

The animated video featured an instructor who provided instructions on “Countering Disinformation: Cybersecurity 101.”

“Since 2020, there has been a lot of false and inaccurate information about COVID-19,” the video stated.

The instructional video produced by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) featured an illustrated version of a social media feed from the perspective of the fictional character, Susan.

“Consider this post from Susan’s feed: It’s from her Uncle Steve, who claims everybody knows COVID is no worse than the flu,” the video continued.

In the fictional scenario, Susan’s uncle is accused of backing up his claims about COVID with unreliable sources, including a “fake news story”.

In contrast, Susan supports her stance with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website, which is regarded as a “trustworthy” and “fact-based” source due to its large government funding. …

“You can’t win every argument online, but you can protect yourself from disinformation. You can stop it from spreading, too,” the video stated.

That video came down this year, but only this year, and no, I’m not Uncle Steve, though I would happily sub for the role. Both of us were correct: The government was suppressing the truth and propagandizing lies. We all know that, but we are inside a sector of the sausage factory from which not every truth escapes to find life among the majority of disinterested voters.

But they’ve been warming up to the idea.

We see fewer folks practicing the old pandemic ways, and that’s a sign of hope. If we can turn that into something, maybe we aren’t wasting our time with the political primary posturing as we speed toward another attempted presidential election theft.

But I’m not holding my breath.

 

The post ICYMI – DHS Takes Down Video Asking Family Members to Rat Each Other Out appeared first on Granite Grok.

In a recent interview with Joe Rogan, Elon Musk claimed the United States could be supplied with electricity by a 10,000-square-mile solar array. Mr. Rogan did not critically press the iconic X-owner as to the logistical or environmental problems such an installation would present.

Mr. Musk is undoubtedly a scientific genius, but even geniuses are susceptible to conflicts of interest – like owning a massive company that manufactures and sells solar panels in America while extolling their salvific benefits.

It is clear what a 10,000-square-mile solar field would do for the bottom line of a company like Tesla (which acquired SolarCity, a leading manufacturer of residential and commercial solar panels in 2016). But what would it do for America or the ecosystem supposedly being rescued from destruction?

A Panoply of Panel Problems

Solar panels have steadily improved in efficiency since their introduction. Early efforts were about 6% efficient in capturing the sun’s fusion energy. Some prototypes now extend into the potential range of 35% or greater: Elon Musk makes panels that approach 20-23% efficiency. At 13-14% efficiency, it has been estimated that an array of 22,000 square miles would be required to energize America, an area roughly the size of Lake Michigan. Musk’s upgrade using “next generation” panels would reduce the required space by more than half to an area akin to Lake Erie.

Depending on panel efficiency, estimates of the number of solar panels this installation would require vary, but range between ten billion and 18.5 billion panels. When asked by Rogan whether it was feasible to install such an array, Musk was enthusiastically optimistic.

“Absolutely,” Musk responded. “We need batteries, but yes.” Musk explained that “it’s not hard” and “very feasible” to power the entire country with solar because the sun is converting more than four million tons of mass to energy every second and requires no maintenance. “That thing just works. We have a giant fusion reactor in the sky,” he said.

It could be that Elon has been staring at the sun too long, developing a blind spot. He concedes there is a battery problem to solve – a huge hurdle not easily surmounted. Unmentioned are grid carrying capacity, inefficiencies of transmission, or the ongoing problem of intermittency: When clouds scud across the sky, the energy flow from panel to grid fluctuates erratically. But the more immediate (and consistently sidestepped) inquiry is: How much energy and pollution would ten billion solar panels require to manufacture, install, and eventually dispose of? Solar panels deteriorate in efficiency by about .5% annually and thus last about 25-30 years before their (toxic, non-recyclable) disposal is required.

Elon Musk and Silicon

Elon Musk’s battery limitation acknowledgement is much akin to the Utopian social justice statement: “Every human on the planet can have their own personal Taj Mahal. We need the marble and jewels, yes. But let us not quibble.” A similar sleight of hand ignores the energy and pollution costs of manufacturing billions of panels. Musk’s Tesla (SolarCity) panels are a hybrid of crystalline and silicon models. Silicon requires fossil fuels to create, according to Thomas Troszak, director of research and development at Reciprodyne, a company specializing in custom machine and process design, fabrication, and consulting. In “Why do we burn coal and trees to make solar panels?” Troszak explains:

“… every step in the production of solar PV [photovoltaic (converting the sun’s energy to electricity)] power systems requires an input of fossil fuels – as the carbon reductants needed for smelting silicon from ore, to provide manufacturing process heat and power, for the intercontinental transport of materials, and for on-site deployment. The only “renewable” materials consumed in PV production are obtained by deforestation – by burning large areas of tropical rainforest for charcoal (another carbon reductant) and to provide the wood chips that are necessary for all silicon smelters to function. Additional mineral resources and fossil energy are needed for constructing factories, process equipment, and maintaining the PV manufacturing infrastructure itself. Silicon smelters, polysilicon refineries, and crystal growers all require uninterrupted, 24/7 power that comes mostly from coal and uranium.”

Calculating the greenhouse gas (GHG) and carcinogen tally of the manufacture of 10-20 billion panels was not part of Musk’s Rogan experience. Arguably the world should await even more efficient “next generation” panels – or perhaps the lagging battery materials and technology – before ramping up these installations, but “climate urgency” means pollution and waste are just a cost of saving the planet from pollution and waste.

Climate ideologues crow that America has reduced its GHG production, ignoring increases abroad attributable to “renewable” manufacturing. As China faces an environmental crisis disposing of its aging panels while manufacturing new ones, the better course may be to simply leave the things unmade rather than have to clean up the toxic disaster they have clearly become.

Saving the World?

Or ideologues and captains of industry could pitch a worldwide solar array before batteries or grids exist to capture the juice, and with no proposal to replace or dispose of them when they expire in a few decades. This would require an estimated 92.7 billion solar panels, enough to completely cover America’s 11 smallest states (South Carolina, West Virginia, Maryland, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Vermont, Delaware, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Hawaii and Rhode Island) plus another 4,000 square miles!

There would be far less chemical pollution generated for the planet if every human were provided with a personal Taj Mahal. But hey, who’s counting? Just build toxic solar panels in China, NIMBY-style.

When it comes to making money, Elon Musk is the prophet of profits. It is to be hoped this oddball genius can calculate not only rocket prop

 

 

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

The post Elon Musk’s Solar Panel Paradox appeared first on Granite Grok.

You will have heard the news by now. Americans For Prosperity – the National mothership, not the local state groups – has endorsed warmonger Nikki ‘No Free Speech‘ Haley as their Insider of choice to keep Donald Trump from his all but certain nomination.

They would have been better off choosing DeSantis (Trump was never an option), but no. Nikki Haley, this Koch is for you. And it has not played well everywhere, including inside NH’s chapter of AFP. Former Grokster Chris Maidment took to X on December 1st to profess his outrage.

 

There’s a high likelihood I get fired for this, and I didn’t clean out my desk today, but here goes…

I joined @AFPhq and @AFP_NH because we were a principle based organization. 

I found them, almost accidentally, in 2017 when I was a keyboard warrior with no influence.

My wife, my 6-week-old baby, and I, ultimately attended. We found common cause and common allies. Folks that were dedicated to the same cause we were — making NH and America more free. 

Years of volunteering untimately led to a job. But not a job, a passion that paid.

A cause to fight for while still being able to supply for my family. A dream come true. 

I’ve disagreed with @AFPhq over the years on a number of things — COVID, for one — but ultimately believed that @AFPhq and @AFP_NH was such a force and principled enought that it was a place to stake my career. 

Earlier this week, we learned the opposite.

@NikkiHaley might have momentum, and she may even pull off the impossible and win the nomination, but with @AFPAction’s endorsement, I’ve lost all faith in @AFPhq. 

Nikki Haley is totally sideways on @AFPhq ‘s foreign policy stance. She’s anti free speech.  I respect my colleagues, many of whom will stay and do their jobs, and work to nominate and elect Nikki Haley.  I will not. In 10, 15, 20 years I want to look my children in the eye and tell them I did the right thing. The hard thing.  … (more from the thread reader unroll here.)

 

I’ll take exception to the ‘Keyboard warrior with no influence” jab. We don’t pay writers or offer insurance, but Chris was warring with us, and while that may ot have been the influence he was hoping for, it is there, and it is real. People wouldn’t be constantly threatening to expose, cancel, or shut us down if it weren’t. Democrats in the NH legislature even sponsored a bill that would have allowed them to lawfare us into obscurity (it failed). Otherwise, Chris is over the target and dropping truth bombs on the Koch endorsement and Haley.

To be clear as Vodka, Haley was a great UN ambassador, but she turned tail on her boss when the Left turned the heat up on everyone around him. That is a fatal character flaw and not uncommon among Republicans not named Trump. A point made in spades by Patricia McCarthy in a piece titled, “The Republican Party is saturated with abject cowards.”

 

They caved on Obamacare, a disaster by every account.  Along with their partners in crime, the media, some of them perpetrated the Russia collusion hoax for years, a colossal lie from the outset. They allowed the impeachment of President Trump twice on wholly fabricated and insignificant charges.

So malleable is this Republican Party, the Democrats stole the 2020 election with impunity.

And they’ve done nothing to bring those guilty to light. Why? Because they fear Trump’s promise to “drain the swamp” every bit as much as the Democrats do.

They are all, with the exception of a treasured few, committed members of that swamp.  They refuse to stop the extravagant spending that has put us $34 trillion in debt.

They will vote to expel one of their own but do nothing about the long list of criminals that currently sit in Congress:  James Bowman, Rashida Tlaib, Robert Menendez, Cori Bush, Ilhan Omar, etc.  Each of them has committed numerous crimes that should get them expelled from office.  Will the Republicans fight back? Not a chance. The few who do speak out are shouted down, silenced. Consider how Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene are treated by their fellow Republicans.

 

That’s Haley, and it is a portrait, perhaps not of individual Republicans, but certainly of Party impotence. As McCarthy notes, if it were Democrats, they’d be doing what they are doing to President Trump.

The default response to that is, well, we don’t want to be like them. The answer to that is that you are them when you enable it.

Stop being the bystander who records the serial gang-raping of Lady Liberty on your cell phone so you can use it to get more followers on Instagram (or get re-elected ‘cuz, look at what they are doing) and get in the fight.

Doing the right thing is hard, but we’ve got more seat-warmers than warriors, and if that doesn’t change, seat-warming is the only job they’ll let you have, and what scares me is that there are plenty of Republicans who would take it.

 

 

The post Nikki Haley, This Koch is for You appeared first on Granite Grok.

In a world drowning in information, I always find myself at the crossroads of truth and deceit, only hoping to get a front-row seat to a sinister ballet orchestrated by the unseen puppeteers of the deep state. This should not be labeled as the stuff of conspiracy theories.

Still, it is a collection of tales spun from our experiences, where we understand how deep connections with the media can birth monstrous offspring – fake news, lies, and propaganda.

From the trenches of my insider vantage point, I witness how the web of relationships between the deep state and media personnel paves the way for manufacturing distorted realities. It isn’t just about sowing seeds of disinformation; it is a meticulously crafted symphony conducted by puppet masters interested in manipulating public perception.

Behind the curtains of newsrooms, “deep connections” aren’t mere networking; they are lifelines of influence. Top media personnel become conduits, willingly or unknowingly, for disseminating propaganda. Imagine a world where news isn’t a mirror reflecting reality but a canvas painted with the hues of hidden agendas.

As an unsuspecting and mostly gullible audience, navigating a landscape fraught with half-truths and calculated deception is difficult.

“Repeating a lie a thousand times gives it a veneer of truth” – is a maxim that has become the mantra of every clandestine operation. As the whisper of deception echoes through the corridors of power, it gains strength, morphing into a shrill noise that drowns dissenting voices. How many lies, I wondered, have been thus engraved in the collective consciousness, shielded by the armor of repetition?

The process always begins with creating the lie that suits the narrative of the agenda to be unleashed, which could be a false news story, a misleading statement, or a distorted fact. This lie is then spread through various channels, such as social media, blogs, and traditional media outlets. The more times the lie is repeated, the more likely it is to be believed, especially if it aligns with a person’s pre-existing beliefs or biases.

The lie is often crafted to be as plausible as possible, using techniques such as sensationalism, fear-mongering, and appeals to emotion. It may also be presented as a fact or a widely accepted truth, making it seem more credible. Once the lie has been spread, it is often difficult to disprove, especially if it aligns with a person’s beliefs or biases. This is because people tend to ignore or downplay information that contradicts their beliefs, a phenomenon known as confirmation bias. Ask yourself the question – how did this bias enter into the head in the first place? It is through a long chain of trickery that you become a player.

The news ecosystem, that intricate web connecting publishers, information, and users, becomes the battleground. “Fake news” isn’t just a buzzword but a weapon meticulously wielded to sway public opinion. The manufactured narratives don’t merely stay confined within the traditional news outlets; they permeate every corner of the digital realm, finding refuge in blogs and social media platforms.

But how does this web of deception ensnare the unwitting masses? The answer lies in the interconnectedness of it all. The relationships, the influence, the repetition—it was a carefully orchestrated dance where each step led the audience deeper into the labyrinth of falsehoods. Have you ever questioned the news you consume, wondering if it’s a reflection of reality or a distorted mirage?

The power dynamics at play are both subtle and insidious. The relationships between the deep state and media personnel are the glue that holds this elaborate facade together. But who are these puppet masters, and what is their endgame? The answers may seem elusive, hidden behind secrecy and plausible deniability. But ask yourself, what is it they want? Simply put – they want it all for themselves – a few greedy at the top of the pyramid, with dumbed-down masses at the bottom. You know it all but want to look the other way or are ghastly callous, not thinking of the damage it is already doing to you and future generations.

As I navigate the delicate balance between revealing the truth and protecting my identity, I implore you to question the narratives presented to you. Are you a mere spectator in this dance, or are you an active participant, discerning the moves with a critical eye?

In the end, this isn’t just my story; it’s a cautionary tale for those who dare to peel back the layers of the media landscape. The web of deception is intricately spun, but with awareness and scrutiny, we can unravel its threads and reclaim the narrative that is rightfully ours.

The post The Media and the Subtle Art of Manipulation appeared first on Granite Grok.

PORTLAND, OREGON – Following an exciting visit to Taiwan with a legislative delegation, I lingered here in the Rose City with Beth to visit family and experience the Pacific Northwest. The foliage colored up about a month behind New Hampshire, so it was still beautiful in late November.

Spontaneity is very important. Just let yourself go and see what happens.” – American actor Aron Eisenberg

I was lying on a couch after church on a Sunday morning when Beth surprised me by asking if I wanted to shoot up to Canada.

“Sure!”

I’d floated the idea several days earlier and didn’t get much of a response, but I’d planted a thought in her pretty head. And such trips are always better when suggested by the spouse.

“We’ll leave in an hour,” said Dr. B.

Spontaneous road trips—like spontaneous parties—can be exciting and fun. Or disastrous. But nothing ventured, nothing gained.

We threw our bags into the Prius.

“Got your passport?”

“Wait one!”

A minute later we were heading north on I-5. British Columbia, ahoy!

We did detailed planning in the car.

“Let’s go to Vancouver,” I suggested.

“How about Victoria Island? It’s closer.”

“Okay.”

Things work out better when spousal suggestions are adopted.

“Is there a bridge?” I asked.

“Ferry,” replied Dr. B from the passenger seat as she studied a map. Then, she reserved a BnB using her cell phone. The 21st Century has its wonders. It would take about four hours to drive through Washington State to Puget Sound. Then, the 90-minute ferry to Victoria.

Shortly thereafter, I heard an “Uh-oh.”

Never good.

“We’re going to miss the last ferry. I’ll have to make a reservation in Port Angeles for tonight, and then we’ll catch the early ferry tomorrow.”

That meant that we’d be paying for an empty BnB in Victoria that evening while getting a hotel room in Port Angeles. Spontaneity has its dangers.

The Scenery

We enjoyed the scenery while hurtling north. Off to our right, to the east, we soon saw the towering Mt. St. Helens. Old enough to remember the major eruption there in 1980, we marveled at how terrifying it must have been to so many who could see it from all directions for 100 miles.

Further north we could see Mt. Rainier, again to the east. Also an active volcano, at 14,411 feet, it’s the most glaciated peak in the lower 48 states, spawning five major rivers.

Then it got dark, and an incredible full moon arose, also to the east. We listened to ’60s music on Sirius Channel 73 and truly enjoyed the ride.

After finally arriving at Port Angeles, we tooled around town a bit and did some prep for our excellent, spontaneous Canadian adventure.

As an NH State Representative, it occurred to me that Victoria was a provincial capital and that a trip to the capital building might be fun. So, I googled an email address for the Legislative Assembly and messaged to ask if any visitors might be allowed.

The Boat

The next morning, we got in line early for the ferry. We decided to take the car even though that would be pricier—and even though our BnB was within walking distance of the landing. It was still dark at 7 a.m. as we were in the far western part of the Pacific Time Zone. We drove aboard and then went up above for the 90-minute passage. It was a rare, sunny day with maximum visibility.

Puget Sound was like a placid lake, and I wondered how far from shore indigenous peoples took their boats centuries ago. I also pondered how this very waterway was once simultaneously claimed by the Spanish, the British, the Russians, and the Americans—as well as, of course, those indigenous folks.  (Google “54-40 or Fight!”)

The City

The city of Victoria is the capital of the beautiful province of British Columbia, 62 miles southwest of Vancouver and 62 miles north of Seattle. Named for the iconic 19th-century British Queen, the city features many older buildings, giving it a slightly European ambiance in contrast to America’s west coast metropolises. Its “Chinatown” is the second oldest on the continent, behind San Francisco’s.

That the traffic was relatively light was a surprise. It then occurred to me that we were on an island, which protected the city from countless vehicles driving in—unless they wanted to pay for the expensive ferry ride that we’d just experienced.

The government buildings were impressive edifices completed in 1897. But equally impressive was the imposing Empress Hotel, which opened in 1908. This truly grand hotel beckoned us to visit and explore.

The Parliament

We checked in early to our BnB, which overlooked the harbor and a small fleet of tourist boats. I checked my phone for messages and was surprised and delighted to see a response to my query from the provincial legislative assembly.

“Great news!” I exclaimed to Beth. “We’re not only invited to visit the Provincial Parliament, but they want to give us a special guided tour and then have us sit in on a “Question Time” assembly session. Wow!”

As a legislator, a visit to the provincial parliament called to me somewhat more than it did to Beth.

“Did you tell them you were some sort of big deal to get this invitation?”

“Just the facts, ma’am,” I replied. “Just the facts.”

“Do you have the right clothes for such a visit?”

“I just happened to pack the suitcoat I wore to Taiwan.”

“Well, now there’s a surprise,” replied Dr. B, rolling her eyes. But she admitted being excited to witness “Question Time,” which was obviously based the British model where the Prime Minister takes direct questions from all parties in the House of Commons. We’d both watched that tradition on C-SPAN.

“America should have a version of ‘Question Time.’ Don’t you agree?” asked Beth.

“Absolutely,” I agreed. I wanted to point out that our current president rarely even has a controlled press conference, much less take direct questions from Congress, but I didn’t want to stir things up. Spontaneous trips are always smoother when political arguments are avoided.

We were met by David near the entrance to the historic parliamentary edifice. He conducted a wonderful tour and provided us with gallery tickets to watch Question Time.

The Drama

Legislative assembly sessions invite theatrics, as the elected officials play not only to their colleagues but also to the gallery and to the cameras. Multiple parties were represented, but the two major ones in B.C. were the New Democratic Party (NDP) and the British Columbia United party (BCP). As we looked down from the gallery, the NDP was to our left, and the BCP was to our right, literally and figuratively. There were also two Green Party members and two Conservatives. There were no Liberals, which I found interesting, given that Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is a Liberal.

The questions mostly involved BCP members asking NDP leaders about healthcare shortcomings. Depending upon who said what, it was fun to watch one side or the other cheering and desk pounding—just like the Brits do in London on C-SPAN.

The Invite

After Question Time wrapped up at 11 a.m., Beth and I were the first to step out from the gallery. We wanted to head to the Empress Hotel for “Teatime.” We were surprised to run into David, who apparently was waiting for us.

“The Speaker would like to meet you,” he explained.

“Seriously?”  (The Speaker was still sitting on the throne in the legislative chamber.)

“Yes.”

David escorted us to the outer chamber of the opulent Speaker’s Office, where we waited and watched a screen showing a BCP member using some extra time to call out the Premier for what she felt was egregious behavior. After she finished, the session adjourned, and Speaker Raj Chouhan soon entered his chambers, followed by the Legislative Clerk, Kate Ryan-Wood. We followed them into the inner sanctum, where we all sat on some gorgeous furniture in front of a big fireplace and enjoyed some friendly small talk. Canadians obviously follow American politics—including the New Hampshire primary.

“I was just hoping to get a photo when I sent that email,” I explained. “We’ll never forget your extraordinary hospitality.”

“We know who you are,” responded Chouhan, which I found incredibly flattering. Someone must have googled me after I sent the message and saw that I was a House Committee Chair back in New Hampshire.

Rep. Mike Moffett and Dr. Beth with British Columbia Legislative Assembly Speaker Raj Chouhan at the provincial parliament building in Victoria.

We got a few more photos, and then Beth and I excused ourselves, leaving the Canadian lawmakers to go back to making laws.

“I’m glad I brought my tie and jacket,” I said to Beth as we walked toward the Empress Hotel.

“You knew they were going to invite you to the Speaker’s Office.”

“No way!”

“Yeah. Sure.”

The Tea The dining room at the Empress was also opulent, and I was glad we were dressed up for Teatime.  The pianist was playing the theme from Downton Abby as we entered, which somehow seemed apropos. I felt like we were walking into Highclere Castle, the building seen in the popular British series.

Being a country hoser from Groveton, I’d never done a “teatime,” but Dr. B had lots of class and knew how to proceed. Several pots were delivered over flaming heat sources with hourglasses so we could measure the appropriate amount of time for the giant teabags to do their things. The tea was accompanied by several courses of interesting and delicious food. I also ordered a large Merlot to celebrate our wonderful experience at the provincial parliament.

“I bought the ferry tickets so you can pay for teatime,” said Beth.

“Sure,” I replied.

“Don’t faint when you see the bill. It can be one of my Christmas presents.”

I’m glad she warned me. Teatime at the Empress turned out to be very pricey. But it was worth it.

The Return

We retrieved our Prius from the parliament parking lot and drove to the ferry. The passage back to the states was wonderful. After driving off the ferry we briefly chatted with a customs official who waved us along without even asking to see our passports. Nice.

The drive back to Portland was pleasant, as we found Christmas music on Sirius Channel 71. The first Christmas music of the holiday season is somehow the best.

After a couple hours Beth indicated she had a book on tape she could play. I was enjoying the music but wanted to be spontaneously open to a new experience. I had never listened to a book on tape before.

“Sure. What do you have?”

“THE WATERGATE GIRL: My Fight for Truth and Justice Against a Criminal President by Jill Wine-Banks.”

I inwardly groaned. I was content to keep listening to “Silent Night” or “Joy to the World.” But after two hours of listening to the audio book I was completely pulled in. I wanted to drive another hour after we reached Portland just to keep listening. It confirmed the value of being spontaneous and trying something different.

It was almost midnight when we finally got “home” to unload the Prius.

“What are we going to spontaneously do tomorrow?” I asked.

“I don’t know about you but I’m going to spontaneously sleep in,” replied Dr. B.

As a great philosopher (Jennifer Aniston) once said about spontaneity, “The funnest stuff happens when you break away from the script.”

So true.

The post Politics and a Spontaneous International Trip appeared first on Granite Grok.

You’d be hard-pressed to find a proper progressive who dislikes how China gets things done. Xi commands it, and everyone else, including the pretend legislature, lines up to make it happen. Failure could mean death and good fortune to someone needing an organ replacement.

China, China, Chi-Nah!

Democrats and their water carriers are forever telling us China is building and installing all that wind and solar we should, too. We must be like them, but China is also building nuclear power plants at a record pace.

 

To wean their country off imported oil and gas, and in the hope of retiring dirty coal-fired power stations, China’s leaders have poured money into wind and solar energy. But they are also turning to one of the most sustainable forms of non-renewable power. Over the past decade China has added 37 nuclear reactors, for a total of 55, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, a un body. During that same period America, which leads the world with 93 reactors, added two.

Facing an ever-growing demand for energy, China isn’t letting up. It aims to install between six and eight nuclear reactors each year. Some officials seem to think that target is low. The country’s nuclear regulator says China has the capacity to add between eight and ten per year. The State Council (China’s cabinet) approved the construction of ten in 2022. All in all, China has 22 nuclear reactors under construction, many more than any other country.

 

And not to just be disagreeable with The Economist, but I do not believe for one second that China is building Nucelar to get away from dirty coal. I think it is building nuclear because its military-industrial complex needs more power, and dirty coal isn’t enough. I also believe the wind and solar are just window dressing to saddle idiot Western elites with unreliable energy when the time comes to take over the world – financially, commercially, culturally, and militarily, if necessary.

China is a communist nation. They don’t give a sh!t about the climate cult’s dogma except to feed it because it advances their geo-political goals. Everywhere around the world, they open mines and extract resources. They destroy the environment at the expense of indigenous populations. But the American Left loves them! So, how about we love some new nuclear power? That net-zero fantasy is impossible, but it is much more possible with Nucelar.

I’m sure they’ve streamlined the bureaucratic process for permitting and construction, and in China, thanks to all the coal-powered energy capacity they created, steel is likely cheap and abundant. You can’t make steel without burning coal. Their economy has been built to build back better.

Meanwhile, given the current economic conditions, America would have a hard time competing with China on energy infrastructure, but what possible excuse could the Progs have for not following China’s lead on Nuclear Energy? Do they want China to be stronger? Do they want America to be a weak country that can’t compete? Are they loving the idea of brownouts and blackouts and making everything we make and do cost more because of expensive fuel and electric rates so our products can’t compete?

Shouldn’t we be building more Nucelar to keep up?

I’m sure it will be amusing to watch the Left make excuses for not following China’s Nuclear push but how funny is that The Economist, a once reliable source for global news, clings bitterly to the idea that China is doing this to achieve Net zero by 2060 without suggesting we should too?

Or that the only net zero that interests the Chinese government is net-zero resistance to their political and military power.

China is building nuclear plants; we should, too. Lots of them – starting now. And you’ve no excuse. You can’t achieve your emissions cuts BS without them, nor can you excuse away why it is okay for China but not America.

But I know you’ll try.

 

The post If China Can Build 8-10 Nuclear Power Plants a Year Why Can’t We? appeared first on Granite Grok.

On the heels of research that reported a 40% increase in COVID infections among regular mask users, the public masking menace has taken another shot to the McNuggets. This time, from a past that reinforces what we’re seeing now. Masks make matters worse.

Not to beat a dead horse dewormer narrative, but before the politicization of mask compliance and mandates, there was a respected body of evidence that was affirmed by science and scientists. Public masking was useless against the flu virus. But the Chinese do it, so Marxists decided that we should too. With few exceptions, the political and public health classes failed the test. They chose Marxism over science and rapidly embraced the totalitarian police state mentality about enforcement. It’s not a good look, and there’s no shortage of words on these pages about that, but our objection wasn’t just political. The science hasn’t changed, and more recent research affirms what UK Heath Minister Dame Jenny Harries has been saying since March 2020.

 

Professor Dame Jenny Harries, now the head of the UK Health Security Agency, explained that the policy wasn’t based on scientific reality and had the effect of instilling a “false sense of security,” convincing people that they would reduce their risk of becoming infected if they wore a mask.

She also told the inquiry that government advice on how to make a mask out of bits of cloth and old t-shirts was wholly “ineffective.”

 

Whatever your position was or is on public masking or reasonable exemptions from it, the problem (wholly aligning with what was passed for despotic mandates) was the false sense of efficacy and the increased likelihood of harm. While Norweigan researchers found that regular masking resulted in up to a 40% rise in COVID-19 infections – quite the opposite result of the stated purpose – there are numerous risks unrelated to flu that come with blocking your airway. But masked meant compliant, and new revelations about old science continue to damage the brand.

We’ll always have flu, and it will always be nasty for vulnerable populations, but if you can’t get everyone else to wear your gang colors, then the tyranny needs a new groove.

The WEFers, the UN, and its WHOs in Public Health Whoville need to find a replacement or a way to counteract the rise in “science” that contradicts their mask messaging. And while it doesn’t take much to get a local lib-majority council to impose one even now, if you’ve been paying attention, mask-wearing is less popular than the latest COVID booster. Useless Social Distancing is non-existent, and few, if any, give you the side-eye if you sneeze or cough in public.

“Bless you” is more likely than what we had from 2020-2022. Lane Nazis with hands shaking from rage, pointing at arrows on the floor in a direction opposite the one you travel. No arrows, no pointing, no angry eyes above even more useless cloth masks, but both fear and tyranny still lurk in the minds of weak men and women—Tin-pot local dictators on both sides of the aisle who keep running for and getting elected to office.

If we want mask mandates dead, those folks will need to be shown the door. Still, much like the complacency over meaningful election integrity reform outside what the left calls the radical right, that’s not happening to scale. Until it does, we can’t pronounce the policy doomed.

As much as we’d like to do that.

 

The post Is Masking the Public for the Good of Public Health Doomed Policy? appeared first on Granite Grok.

Hello, Friends of Freedom. I hope your Thanksgiving was everything you desired and more. This week I want to examine the patriarch Joseph in scripture and his prevalent role in leading a secular nation as a man of faith. His historical account is found in Genesis 39-41.

He was a man of dreams and dream interpretation. It is most likely he served under two Pharaohs ( Sesostris III and Amenemhet III), having lived in Egypt for over 70 years.

He was sold into slavery by the betrayal of his brothers, who were jealous of him and his dreams. Hence, when he came to visit them per his father Jacob’s request, they commented, “Behold the dreamer cometh.”

The reason I am mentioning this event is that it shows the role of spiritual guidance (faith) can have in literally saving the entire nation (much of the world) during a most severe famine.

Pharaoh had a dream that perplexed him, and it was confirmed by having the same dream two times, once with cattle and once with grain. He was deeply troubled knowing that the dream had significant meaning for him and his reign.

The point I am making is that the nation was on a collision course with destruction, and there were no political leaders with answers to the cataclysmic event that was going to happen. But God, in His sovereignty, had prepared an answer. The famine would be preceded by seven years of plenty, followed by seven years of certain death and starvation.

Joseph had the wisdom to address the problem and founded granaries to store the grain during the seven years of abundance, thereby saving not only the nation of Egypt but the nation of Israel as well.

God still gives dreams in answer to problems today, and he guides us through dreams as well.

Job 33:15-18 says, He speaks in dreams, in visions of the night, when deep sleep falls on people as they lie in their beds. He whispers in their ears and terrifies them with warnings. He makes them turn from wrong; he keeps them from pride. He protects them from the grave. from crossing over the river of death.”

Another political figure, Pontius Pilate, during the crucifixion of Christ, was warned by a dream his wife had. She encouraged him to have nothing to do with Christ’s crucifixion. Hence, he washed his hands the day of the trial to show his innocence from the deed.

While I have not been able to find in historical writings detailing any nighttime dreams the founding fathers had, I am convinced they dreamed of a better world and sought to create a nation that would allow people to dream and live out their dreams in a free society unravished by government control of their lives. From the Puritans, who saw America as the New Jerusalem and a Shining City on a Hill, to our civil rights declarations, America is synonymous with a Dream!

The American dream, if you will, is ensconced in the ideas found in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.

The actual term itself, “American Dream,” was hinted at throughout our history, and James Truslow Adams, the author of The Epic America, 1931, used the phrase American Dream to show how people were moving away from it.

The dream of America in the hearts of our founding fathers was the answer to the world’s demise and destruction as they saw it through the lens of studying all the known historical governments of recorded history.

They felt called to steward this dream in documents that would stand as long as those who have the courage to apply the lessons learned from history and continue to enforce the ideas of liberty and justice for all.

Dreams are without prejudice. They include the highest and best for everyone.

In closing, I pray we can keep the American dream alive by realizing sometimes God gives dreams to save mankind from sure destruction, and may we have the humility to accept them in whatever vessel he chooses to deliver them.

Until Next Week…

Allen

The post The American Dream appeared first on Granite Grok.

I’m not sure we’ve said this often enough for long enough, but Joe Biden will not be the Democrats’ candidate come November 2024. Even the Democrat-Press is warming its’ bony hands over that fire, so the conversation naturally turns to who the DNC will pick to displace Uncle Joe.

Inevitable isn’t too strong of a word for his departure, but does he even realize?

Herr Biden wasn’t fit in 2020, and it’s been downhill since then (for him and us), but the list of potential replacements reads like a horror story you tell hard-working Americans if there are any left after what Democrats have done to the Economy. Hillary Clinton! She doesn’t want to campaign or even do the work. It’s just a check box on her bucket list. But rumor has it she’d take the bit in her cackling mouth and run the nation further into the ground.

Michelle Obama is another name I hear a lot. It has been reported that she hated the Clintons, the Bidens, the White House, and Washington, DC. But she loved the prestige, the money, the access, the vacations, the entourage, and the fandom. Michelle-O wants to be queen, not President. The latter is way too much work. Even with Barry (likely) offering to do all the behind-the-scenes policy lifting through proxies for term number four, I doubt she’d be down for that public-profile struggle. And I’ve long since argued she is not on any list to take the reins from Stumblin’ Joe. So, why was she on Air Force One with the Clintons and Bidens and no one else?

 

The decision for Michelle Obama to take a plane alone to campaign for Joe Biden is seen as a powerful statement about her involvement in his presidential run.

Though she has denied any plans to run for president herself, Democrats are concerned about Joe Biden’s prospects going into 2024 elections.

It is easy to speculate. A handful of political elites on a plane will have discussed things that matter to them and “their” party, but are they talking about replacing Joe to his face? A better question is, why wasn’t Barry Obama on that plane? They are off to pay their respects to a former Democrat first lady. We’ve got Billery, the Bidens, and no Barry. Does he have another chef to paddle board?

If anyone has an opinion worth hearing on the Dem side about who can carry on Barry’s Legacy without Bidening it Up, it’s the Bamster. But he’s otherwise occupied. And I’m sure Michelle is at least as capable as any Democrat First Lady of thinking they got elected and can meddle in a nation’s business. But what’s so odd about a gaggle of “first ladies” flying together for the funeral of one of their own? Bill and Joe had to go; you can’t leave either alone for too long.

Perhaps I’m just too convinced Michelle has no interest in the nonsense that comes with that. She has her fortune. She is part of history, feted, paraded, and commands massive sums for almost any appearance (money doesn’t launder itself). Surely, there is some other Democrat capable of being a better president than Joe Biden, an admittedly low bar.

My money is still on California Gov. Nuisance. He wants the job and could have easily posed a successful primary challenge. But is he amendable to being manipulated by Obama’s proxies? Does he need to be? Newsom is about as Marxist as they come. They are probably on the same page, which would get him the Obama seal of approval.

And Michelle? I think she was catching a ride to Rosalyn Carter’s Funeral, but selling the transition to another candidate mid-campaign might have come up while Joe was sleeping. Why, exactly, will Joe be put out to pasture? How to make it work to a populist advantage?

 

(*)“Shot in the arm” used to have a positive connotation, which might not be valid anymore.

The post Speculation about Michelle Obama Replacing Biden in 2024 Gets a Shot in the Arm* appeared first on Granite Grok.

A controversial initiative by the Biden Administration proposes to permit the importation into the US of fresh beef from Paraguay. Many industry stakeholders protest that this will expose American agriculture to the risks of foot-and-mouth disease, with potentially devastating socioeconomic consequences.

Climate warriors increasingly target cows as destructive, and now Biden risks the entire US cow (and pig) industries to improve diplomatic relations with corrupt Paraguay. The economic risks are mammoth.

As the COVID pandemic illustrated, pathogens do not abide by governmental regulations and easily transcend porous borders. Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) is generally non-fatal to humans but is absolutely devastating to livestock – especially pigs and cows, which are more vulnerable. Yet the US Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) under Joe Biden has finalized regulations to open US markets to Paraguayan beef imports despite that nation’s history of FMD and rampant corruption.

American farming industry interests are unanimously up in arms against this plan, claiming there is no current data on Paraguayan safety protocols, and that animals from other countries not subject to oversight will end up in Paraguay’s beef stream. The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) asserts “… that the conclusions drawn in the proposed rule are based on outdated information that does not adequately calculate the risk to U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd. The United States Cattlemen’s Association and American Farm Bureau Federation also strongly oppose the rule change.”

Those risks are profound. A recent FMD outbreak in Indonesia suspected to have been caused by an illegal animal importation devastated that country’s economy and food supply. A 2001 outbreak in the UK cost that economy an estimated $20 billion. An outbreak in the United States would threaten the nation’s 90 million dairy and beef cows as well as its swine and other livestock industries. FMD also impacts wildlife species, yet further causing damage and complicating eradication efforts.

Foot and Mouth

The United States has not recorded a case of FMD since 1929 and has instituted rigorous prevention practices to safeguard its cattle industry. The disease begins with a high fever, and then develops into sores in the mouth and on hooves. FMD is highly contagious, requiring intensive countermeasures including vaccination and the slaughter of both infected and healthy animals. This is a disease that can wipe out whole industries overnight and promises to do so again.

The global presence in livestock of FMD is estimated to be 77%; the disease is enzootic (endemic) in South America, which is why Paraguay has struggled to control outbreaks for decades. The chief cause of outbreaks is usually illegally transported animals or inconsistent compliance with farm biosecurity measures, which makes corrupt Paraguay a particularly risky agricultural trade partner for an FMD-free mega-economy like America. One almost wonders if the seeds of a livestock crisis are being deliberately sown by recklessly importing dodgy meats against the cacophony of industry voices opposing the move.

Biden Ending Corruption?

Paraguay’s government enjoys a dubious reputation as an extremely corrupt cabal. President Biden, eager to establish himself as a foe of corruption (despite increasing scrutiny of his own conduct), has pushed hard to welcome Paraguay to the commerce table. The fear is that Biden’s crusade against foreign corruption may irrevocably corrupt the US food supply. As Foreign Policy noted last year:

“… corruption remains rampant, and government efforts to combat it continue to be underwhelming. Investigations have suffered setbacks; judicial processes have languished; transnational criminal activities in Paraguay have spiked; the Biden administration has now homed in on Paraguay to showcase its fight against global corruption.”

Trusting Paraguay to properly regulate its beef industry, prevent smuggling, and implement safety protocols is a bridge too far for US stakeholders. But it is exactly that rickety bridge onto which Joe Biden is dragging American consumers and agriculture. If the plan is to eradicate all cows, importing sketchy products from racketeers is the globalist way to go. Then, Americans would have no choice but to dine on insect burgers or synthetic beef grown in labs.

If FMD infects the US biosphere, the impacts on the economy and global food supply will be swift and far-reaching. The stakes for importing Paraguayan steaks are astronomical. The gamble is simply too great.

 

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

The post Biden Beef Deal Risks Foot and Mouth Disease appeared first on Granite Grok.

In the dynamic world of gaming, the slot development industry stands out as a vibrant and lucrative sector. However, success in this arena is not solely dependent on the creativity and innovation of game design; it also hinges on effective financial planning. The bankroll, often the lifeblood of any business venture, plays a crucial role in sustaining and growing a slot development studio. 

In this blog, we will delve into the intricate art of balancing a bankroll for slot development ventures, exploring key aspects of financial planning that can spell the difference between thriving success and unforeseen setbacks.

Slot Development Landscape:

Before delving into financial intricacies, it is essential to comprehend the unique challenges and opportunities inherent in the slot development landscape. The industry is highly competitive, driven by rapidly evolving technology, player preferences, and regulatory environments. Successful slot studios must not only create captivating games but also navigate a complex web of market demands, compliance requirements, and technological advancements.

Key Components of Financial Planning:

Here are the key components of financial planning:

1. Research and Development Budget:

One of the cornerstones of successful slot development is continuous innovation. Allocating a substantial portion of the bankroll to research and development ensures that the studio stays ahead of the curve, introducing new features, themes, and gameplay mechanics that resonate with players. A robust R&D budget facilitates the exploration of cutting-edge technologies, enabling the integration of virtual reality, augmented reality, or artificial intelligence to enhance the gaming experience.

2. Talent Acquisition and Retention:

Skilled and creative professionals are the driving force behind captivating slot online games. A portion of the bankroll should be reserved for attracting top talent in game design, graphics, sound engineering, and software development. Additionally, fostering a positive work environment and offering competitive salaries are crucial for retaining key team members, ensuring continuity and stability in the creative process.

3. Marketing and Promotion:

Even the most innovative and well-designed slot games can go unnoticed without effective marketing. Allocating funds for strategic marketing campaigns across digital platforms, trade shows, and industry events is essential for building brand awareness and attracting players. A dynamic marketing strategy should be flexible enough to adapt to changing market trends and player preferences.

4. Regulatory Compliance and Legal Expenses:

The gaming industry is subject to stringent regulatory frameworks in various jurisdictions. A portion of the bankroll should be earmarked for legal expenses associated with ensuring compliance with local and international regulations. This includes obtaining licenses, adhering to responsible gaming practices, and addressing any legal challenges that may arise.

5. Infrastructure and Technology:

Keeping pace with technological advancements is vital for staying competitive. Investments in robust infrastructure and up-to-date technology are necessary to support the development, testing, and deployment of sophisticated slot games. Cloud computing, cybersecurity measures, and scalable development environments should be considered as part of the technology budget.

6. Contingency Fund:

Unforeseen challenges and market uncertainties are inevitable. Setting aside a contingency fund within the bankroll provides a safety net for unexpected expenses, economic downturns, or sudden shifts in market dynamics. This financial buffer ensures that the studio can weather storms and remain resilient in the face of uncertainties.

End Note

In the intricate world of slot development ventures, the bankroll is more than just a financial resource; it is the foundation upon which creative visions are brought to life. Strategic financial planning is the compass that guides slot studios through the dynamic landscape, helping them navigate challenges and seize opportunities. By allocating resources wisely to research and development, talent acquisition, marketing, legal compliance, technology, and contingency planning, slot development ventures can achieve a delicate balance in their bankroll management, fostering sustained growth and success in this ever-evolving industry.

The post Bankroll Balancing Act: Financial Planning for Slot Development Ventures appeared first on Granite Grok.

The Summer of Love in 2020 grew out of the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis and the elevation of Black Lives Matter. Protests, violence, and destruction filled the evening news. Some of our bigger cities were taken over and destroyed by gangs in the name of ending Racism and violence towards Blacks. It was violence to solve violence, and it was anything but a love fest. It was ugly and an embarrassment for America.

The radical Left supported this movement and promoted BLM while simultaneously demanding the defunding of the Police. Prominent Democrats, including Kamala Harris, raised money and supported the Freedom Fund to bail out protestors arrested for their violent, destructive acts. There are strong indicators that the Left may be laying the groundwork for another Summer of Love. This time, the reason for protests is not Racism but something much more dangerous in the Democrat’s minds. The possibility of Donald Trump successfully beating Joe Biden in November and this Hitler-like dictator reentering the White House demands civil unrest to draw attention to the danger. This call to action is the subliminal message we are hearing and reading in some of the messages from the Left.

Here are a few comments from our President who promised to return civility to the White House. Joe Biden claimed to be President for all Americans. Joe was committed to healing America. You be the judge as to the healing properties of these words from our President.

Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our Republic.

Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans are determined to spread anger, hate, and division

This MAGA threat is a threat to the brick and mortar of our Democratic institutions.

We have Liz Cheney, whose constituents voted her out of office for turning on Donald Trump and taking an integral part in the made-for-TV January 6 hearings. She labeled Trump a fascist who, like Hitler, needed to be outed. She urges Americans not to downplay the danger that is Donald Trump and his sleepwalk to a dictatorship of the United States. This belief was echoed in the Washington Post, where Robert Keagan wrote, “Opinion-A Trump Dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. We should stop pretending.”

These people are evidence that Trump Derangement Syndrome is alive and thriving. These people are a dog-whistle call to action to prevent Donald Trump from overthrowing the country. These people are calling out rogue extremists to do what they don’t feel the American voter can do. They want Donald Trump taken out and his followers put down so it can never breathe life again. Donald Trump became a movement when he rode the Golden Escalator into the 2016 Presidential Election. He is a danger to the Swamp that is the Washington Machine. Trump is not one of them and must be put down like a rabid dog. That is how dangerous the Democrats are. Their policies have been exposed as destructive for all Americans, and they know it is no longer a messaging problem but a philosophy problem. They see the President’s ratings falling as Trump’s rises and know they will lose a legitimate election in 2024. Their dire situation requires a drastic reaction, which is what they call for. This is a smoldering situation and should make us all uneasy as we enter 2024.

The post Night Cap: Are We In For Another Summer of Love appeared first on Granite Grok.

The recent election of Argentinian President Javier Milei is a political earthquake as big as the election of President Donald Trump in 2016. The anti-establishment movements in Argentina and the United States share remarkable similarities. Comparable movements have also been showing up in Italy, Greece, Finland, Holland, France, Germany, Hungary, and other countries.

The establishment model of high taxes, expensive welfare systems, lax migration enforcement, and large (often corrupt) bureaucracies has been the dominant Western pattern since the end of World War II.

Throughout the world, people are finding that the system no longer delivers on prosperity, safety, accountability, and protection of national interests.

Milei’s election is one more example of the popular repudiation of the traditionally dominant establishment.

Argentinians decided that their economy was a disaster, their government was out of control, and corruption was rampant. So, gambling on a new, bold, aggressive reformer made sense.

The inflation rate in Argentina is approaching 150 percent a year. Compare this to the current 3.2 percent annualized rate in the United States (which peaked at 9.1 percent last year). You can see why Argentinians would be unhappy. If our inflation rate increased 50-fold, the level of pain and public anger would be almost unimaginable.

Argentina has been badly governed since the 1946 election of Juan Peron (of “Evita” fame). Argentinians have gotten used to enduring economic and political conditions that would lead to a massive response in the United States. Now, Argentinians are clearly tired of failure.

As Eric Lyman wrote for Just the News:

“Like former President Donald Trump, the coiffed Milei is a one-time television personality and political outsider who rode into office on a wave of discontent with the political establishment.

“He has promised radical solutions to entrenched problems (he wants to dollarize the Argentinian economy, for example, and says he will privatize companies and dramatically slash government spending, illustrating that goal using a chainsaw on the campaign trail.)

“Milei has like Trump also suggested the country’s political elite has left behind the country and has questioned the integrity of its election system.”

Sonia Cavallo Runde is a lecturer at The Catholic University of America and co-author of “Argentina’s Economic Reforms of the 1990s in Contemporary and Historical Perspective.” Runde explained the dramatic scope of change Milei’s election represents for Argentina:

“Milei has a popular mandate, ideological clarity and, for now, the political will to overturn Argentina’s decadence.

“Argentines have awakened from 20 years of populism… Those 50 and older, have positive memories of the stable 90s, when Argentina enjoyed a decade of price stability, was receiving investments, open to trade, exporting industrial and agricultural goods, and, of course, enjoying macroeconomic stability and growth.

“The young subjected to 2 decades of Kirchnerist propaganda were surprisingly enthusiastic supporters of Milei who explained in the campaign that there is no prosperity or growth without free markets and that there is no stability without fiscal balance.

“Milei’s credibility stems from the simplicity of his statements. The message got through, 55% of the Argentine population gave Milei a mandate for change. Now the challenge is to create the political consensus to implement the tough but needed changes.”

Indeed, Milei’s direct language is in the tradition of Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, and Trump. He argues, “Socialism is always and everywhere a violent, murderous, and impoverishing phenomenon.”

Barry Casselman captured Milei’s uniqueness as a political personality in his newsletter. Like Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Milei appeared in the political stage out of nowhere. As Casselman wrote, Milei is also “difficult to categorize:”

“He is a social conservative, an economic libertarian, and has been called an ‘anarcho-capitalist.’

“He admires Donald Trump, the late Hasidic leader [Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneersohn], the U.S.A., Israel, and free markets.

“He is pro-life and anti-climate extremism. He opposes current Argentine government regulations, and wants to replace the nearly bankrupt Argentine peso with the U.S. dollar. …

“With his trademark uncombed hair and leather jacket, he is a charismatic speaker who has a huge following among working class Argentinians.”

Milei’s rise has been amazing to watch. But he should take note: The establishment he is fighting will almost certainly defend itself with every tool available – including breaking the law.

It happened to President Trump, and it can happen to Milei, too.

Like Trump, Milei will discover that winning is just the beginning.

 

 

Newt Gingrich | RealClear Wire

The post The Trump of Argentina Wins appeared first on Granite Grok.

Joe Biden was in Colorado this week to push his Bidenomics Program and how it has the American economy on the right track. For a man who grew up on the railroad, the economy may be on the right track but is heading in the wrong direction.

You can stand behind the microphone, as his Press Secretary does daily, and tell stories and call them facts, but the American people are tuned in to this Biden Gaslighting. The truth is not on Joe’s side, but he refuses to give up the lie called Bidenomics.

Marie Harf appeared on the Faulkner Focus this week, and I know as a Socialist, she has to, but even a Radical Leftie must know she is not being truthful. She praised Biden for lower Gas and food prices than last year, but that is comparing today’s costs against the peak of Biden’s Inflation. That is like telling Mrs. Lincoln to hang in. The second act will be better. The latest statistics indicate the increased cost of living for the average family is more than $11,000 annually, more than what it cost in 2021. That increase is forcing families to use savings, early withdrawal from retirement accounts, or credit cards to make ends meet. That is why Biden’s approval ratings are mired in the 30s, which are not numbers to campaign on.

Biden was touting the 14 million jobs he created but failed to say 12 million people are going back to work after the pandemic. The majority of the net gain in new jobs are Government jobs and do not indicate economic growth. Biden talks about his brilliant mandate to have all Americans in electric vehicles in the same week he received notice of 3,900 car dealerships who will not back Biden’s EV car push. The car manufacturers are losing billions, there are 16-18 months of EV inventory sitting in new car lots, and 25% of all car dealerships now refuse EVs from the factories. One thing that Joe Biden forgot, or never knew, was you cannot dictate change on the American consumer. Change has to be their idea, and electric vehicles are not on many wish lists. Those good-paying union jobs Biden takes credit for in 2023 may become record layoffs in 2024.

It is very concerning for me that the truth and facts no longer seem to matter. As Fox Contributor Lisa Booth aptly wrote on X, we now live in a “post-truth era.” The Right has been fighting the team of the Left and the media. In the past, it may have been a difference of opinion or interpretation of an issue. Now, it is a case of the facts versus a narrative. Folks on the Left feel empowered to stray from the truth because what they say will be supported by the mainstream media. As we see every day from Karine Jean-Pierre and Gavin Newsom in his recent debate with Ron DeSantis, a statement does not have to be factual as long as it ends with the words; that’s a fact. It is as if those few words give indisputable credibility to their message, and then the people who get their news from these sources are getting inaccurate news.

We see thousands of naive people marching and demonstrating worldwide against Israel and for Palestine/Hamas. There is no such country as Palestine, and they refuse to believe the horrendous acts performed by Hamas on October 7th. They have been given a false narrative, bought it, and took to the streets in protest. It is easy to see how these same people will fall victim to the lies of the Left and think the country is in good hands with Biden/Harris. God bless us if this plan works.

The post The Bidenomics Fairy Tale And Other Leftist Lies appeared first on Granite Grok.

In light of the latest legal twist, wherein Special Counsel Jack Smith’s maneuvers have sparked a heated debate on the tightrope walk between privacy rights and the expansive reach of investigative tactics, I keep asking myself the question: Do we, as U.S. citizens, have any privacy rights or not?

“They won’t allow me to SPEAK?” ~ President Donald Trump

The issuance of search warrants, laying out a sweeping data collection strategy, has disturbed the delicate balance between privacy rights and the extent of investigative measures and raised legitimate concerns about poking around in the private lives of individuals, especially those in the public eye.

This investigation has become controversial, supposedly centered on the timeline and circumstances surrounding former President Donald Trump’s actions leading up to the Capitol riot. These probes reek of political motives, seemingly aimed at tarnishing or undermining Trump. The once-thin line between lawful scrutiny and political agendas has not just blurred; it’s become the defining feature of this unfolding drama.

The imposition of a gag order, apparently designed to rein in the president’s exercise of First Amendment rights, shears through the surface between legal constraints and preserving the principles of free speech and pushes us to ponder the broader implications of handcuffing any public figure’s ability to criticize the government.

Smith’s arrogant move into demanding data from Trump and his followers raises many eyebrows. How else do we grasp the exceptional nature of this demand, which is essentially an illicit surveillance operation? Shouldn’t Smith be duty-bound to protect against such clear violations of the Constitution?

Such requests are disproportionate, especially when the charges against Trump lack a solid foundation. Striking the right balance between investigative reach and protecting civil liberties emerges as a crucial aspect of this ongoing narrative.

Then, adding a layer of complexity is the green light given to the gag order by a judge with an apparent partisan background. The concerns about potential political bias within the legal system intensify the debate over the fairness and impartiality of the investigation. This episode underscores the urgent need for a legal process that’s robust and transparent, free from perceived affiliations.

Smith’s filing asserts that the “narrowly tailored” order aims to prevent witness harassment. The proposed directive seeks to muzzle Trump from making statements about prospective witnesses’ identity, testimony, or credibility, along with any disparaging, inflammatory, or intimidating remarks about parties, witnesses, attorneys, court personnel, or potential jurors.

Trump’s response to the gag order accuses Smith’s team of misconduct, “they won’t allow me to SPEAK?”

The gag order is one of several contentious issues in the ongoing case led by Special Counsel Jack Smith.

The narrative takes a surprising twist, with Twitter initially resisting the search warrants and eventually complying, culminating in a fine for perceived non-compliance. This development delves into the complexities of private corporations navigating the intersection of user data protection and legal obligations, raising broader questions about the role of tech companies in safeguarding individual privacy rights.

Stepping back to examine the broader context of the investigation, particularly the events leading up to the January 6 Capitol riot, unravels a multifaceted tale. While the spotlight is on holding Trump responsible for others’ actions, recent revelations about FBI-associated individuals partaking in the riot add a layer of intricacy. This revelation underscores the nuanced challenges of pinpointing responsibility within a convoluted web of events.

The political arena takes center stage with Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s role in rejecting a request to deploy the National Guard on that tumultuous day. The interplay between political decision-making and security measures invites scrutiny, underscoring the need for a comprehensive understanding of the factors contributing to the events of January 6.

As this legal and political saga plays out, don’t we find ourselves thinking about how the judicial system should find a balance between thorough investigations concerned with protecting individual rights at all costs?

As in recent history, the potential sway of political motives in legal proceedings and the intricate interplay of actors shaping a defining moment also play on our minds. The necessity for a judicious and impartial examination of events remains paramount as the narrative unfolds further.

To conclude, here is a sane piece of advice for Special Counsel John Smith: Upholding fairness and justice should be your top priority in this critical state, and not be a part of a political witch-hunt that compromises the integrity of the legal process and unfairly targets President Donald Trump.

The post Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Expansive Search Warrants and Legal Implications appeared first on Granite Grok.