On August 23 Dr. Mary W. Maxwell’s peice appeared with the title Update on Alex Jones’s “Defamation” of Sandy Hook Families, and the Maureen Crowley Quote. I generally enjoy reading many of the articles Dr. Maxwell submits.

We want to thank Stephen Peterson for this Op-Ed Please direct yours to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.

However in this piece she states the following “The deceit is that MSM implies that Jones lost in court by having his hoax claim refuted.  No, not at all. The matter did not even come up for discussion! The judge in Texas made a default judgment, as Jones did not cooperate in delivering financial papers.”

In my view, Dr. Maxwell is presenting, at best, a half-truth here.  The sense I had when reading this is that Dr. Maxwell is saying that Jones did not cooperate with discovery.  I believe the record shows that Jones most emphatically did cooperate more fully than any other defamation case in history.  The media is denying that Jones cooperated because the evidence they require for their case simply does not exist.

Today a press conference in Waterbury CT took place, and a video was made just 16 minutes long that I urge you to watch:

 

In this video Alex Jones appears with his attorney Robert Barnes, a well-known constitutional, first amendment, and criminal lawyer. He cites a Hartford Courant article published Oct 3 that states that under the default conviction of guilt, Alex is prohibited from defending himself from accusations nor allowed to discuss anything in a list of a half dozen topics.  Alex is not allowed to say he is innocent, nor can he challenge the falsehood that he did not provide all documents in the discovery, a falsehood on which his guilty verdict depends.

This is not a trial.  The judge has told Alex that he will be held in criminal contempt if he says he is innocent or bankrupt, or that he was not the first person to question Sandy Hook, or over ten other topics. No other judge in US history has ever told somebody what they can or cannot say.  Alex is being ordered to perjure himself if he answers questions, and he will be arrested if he tells the truth.

Attorney Barnes says that this case put the American Justice system itself on trial.  Alex Jones is being denied what everyone knows we deserve, which is our day in court.  Barnes says the court made clear that day that if Jones testifies truthfully, he goes to jail.  But if he answers the way the plaintiff’s attorneys want, then he also goes to jail.  So he goes to jail no matter how he testifies in his own defense.

The truth that the plaintiff’s lawyers are terrified the public will hear about is how Alex Jones provided more discovery documents than any media defendant in American libel law history. Barnes states that Internal documents, emails, and financial records were all disclosed to the plaintiff’s lawyers.

This case is in Connecticut, and Dr. Maxwell originally referenced a case in Texas.  There are actually three defamation cases against Jones, two in Texas and one in Connecticut, all using the same illegitimate tactics.

I encourage you to listen to the Oct 4 press conference to get a sense of the other side of this story that the media is not sharing because it is forbidden information.  The justice system is being weaponized against the people, and just as Alex was censored in Big Tech social media four years ago, before a multitude of other political dissenters, so yet again, Jones is a canary in the coal mine.

 

 

The post Alex Jones Sandy Hook Show Trial appeared first on Granite Grok.

Monday night was the October monthly meeting of the School Board, and this month was a joint meeting with the Gilmanton School Board (they tuition their high school students into Gilford High). Thus, the meeting was longer than normal; the video of that joint meeting is below.

Please also note that I have abstracted the three Public Comment sessions (one at the start of the joint meeting, at the end of that meeting, and a final one at the conclusion of the Gilford-only meeting; that is also below.

However, the most contentious part of the meeting was after the “joint meeting,” where the again modified JBAB was on the agenda.  It was highly changed (from the parts I was contesting in my lawsuit) and looked far better.  As a recap, I am suing over:

• Abrogating the Freedom of Speech by Government (the School Board) mandated use of [ever changing] “personal pronouns.”
• Giving itself the Power, absent any NH State statute delegating such Powers, to enforce staff to lie to Parents about the transgender status of their child.

Imagine my surprise when I saw these two sentences, “highly suggested” by their legal counsel, added on the first page (emphasis mine – Policy JBAB starts on page 4 of the “Second Read Policy Packet included at the very bottom of this post):

“Should” does not mean “shall” or “must” but is a permissive term. Nothing in this Policy limits the rights of individuals under the federal or state constitutions.

(Note: This was moved during the discussion from the first page to section J.  Still, I’ll take it).

Double-take time.  It has taken TWO YEARS of changing “A transgender student has the right to be called by their preferred pronouns and name” to “…Should be called by their preferred pronouns and name” (with Superintendent Kirk Beitler, in a phone conversation, telling me that the meaning of “should” was mandatory -I had to drag that out of him!) to the above.  Combine that with in the Names/Pronouns section (emphasis and markups by the School Board):

C. Names/Pronouns

A student Students under this policy should be addressed by a their preferred name or pronoun that corresponds to the student’s gender identity that is consistently asserted at school. “Should ”does not mean “shall” or “must” but is a permissive term.

So, they moved that last sentence to the first page.  BETTER as it then becomes “more inclusive” (heh!) relative to the entire policy. The end result, however, is EXACTLY what I have been saying for these two long years – a School Board, a mere subdivision of the State that has NO Powers (their own Policy BBA) except for those delegated to them by the State Legislature, can demand Government coerced speech from ANYONE – student, staff, or a visitor that just happens to be on school grounds.

YAY!

FINALLY, a recognition that the US and NH Constitutions come FIRST in any and all deliberations when it comes to policymaking!

However, one School Board member, Nicole Hogan, continuously insisted that the first quote MUST be deleted from the Policy. Her emphasis, as you will hear in this video, is all about “emotional trauma” and “safe environments.”  During the video, you will hear her talk about that she doesn’t want “should” to be deliberately changed to “must” (a long discussion before that utterance) but doesn’t want the clarification of what the intended usage of “should” is to be (at 22:00 in the video) so that people would think that it IS mandatory to:

“prevent wiggle room.“

Translation: she was demanding, even with my lawsuit, their lawyer telling the Board they can’t do this, and her fellow Board members she can’t coerce HER brand of speech on others, that the reference to our Constitutional Rights be removed so that she would get her ideological way; the camel’s nose under the tent. She WANTS to coerce peoples’ speech on behalf of her transgender activism (see 22:00).  In fact, around 41:00, Nicole puts mental health over any legal precepts and rejects the Policy, because “should” will be read and applied, now, in a voluntary way AND that Constitutional Rights should be “hidden”.

Jessica Jacques said “Yes, everyone has legal Rights and First Amendment but [those two sentences] only highlight one side. She wants students put over taxpayers. And also holds that simply allowing for Freedom of Speech creates an environment for bullying.

I am presenting the Gilford only and “Second Reading” Policies meeting first. The discussion on Policy JBAB starts at 10:25

 

 

I dryly note that School Board member Nicole’s motion to delete that Constitutional reference didn’t even get a second for her motion so it died.  She crossed the Rubicon and THEN discovered no one was following her anymore on this issue. Not a happy camper. Freedom of Speech finally prevailed – but there is still one more Reading to be done before the changes become official.

To the other point of my lawsuit, the Board instructing its staff to lie to Parents (by omission or commission) about the transgender status of their child, that language was also modified:

III. GUIDANCE

A. Privacy

The Gilford School Board recognizes a student’s right to keep private one’s transgender status or nonbinary presentation at school. The Board also recognizes a transgender and nonbinary student’s right to discuss and express their gender identity openly. Information about a student’s transgender status, legal name or biological sex gender assigned at birth listed on a person’s birth certificate also may constitute confidential information. School personnel should not disclose information that may reveal a student’s transgender status or nonbinary presentation to others. School personnel shall include parent(s) or legal guardian(s) when implementing a written plan for a student to address their needs as it relates to their transgender or nonbinary status.

Sometimes, it is a case of being careful about what you wish for. So, “to others” also include Parents at any time along a time spectrum?  Does “shall” only kick in when parents are brought in?

When contacting the parent or legal guardian of a transgender or nonbinary student, school personnel should use the student’s preferred name and pronoun listed in the student information system. Students’ legal names shall not be changed in the official records unless legally required to do so.

I learned at the last meeting that the student information system has been modified to expand the data elements for a student entity for preferred pronouns and names.  So, is “should” still permissive?  That staff have a choice to use what a student has decided for themselves or the name that the Parents gave their child?  It is unclear.  Ditto for “confidential information” is still withheld from parents.

I did NOT, given the battle over attacking/protecting our Freedom of Speech and the legal/emotional skirmishes, did not bring it up.  There was drama enough over just this issue. Thus, the question of whether or not this still is the understanding.

Here are the videos of the Joint Meeting and then the Public Comment Sessions. In the third video, the Comments, I am the last speaker and I lower the boom on Hogan by repeating her Oath of Office to her in which she PROMISES to support the Constitution:

[Art.] 84. [Oath of Civil Officers.] Any person chosen governor, councilor, senator, or representative, military or civil officer, (town officers excepted) accepting the trust, shall before he proceeds to execute the duties of his office, make and subscribe the following declaration, viz.

I, A.B. do solemnly swear, that I will bear faith and true allegiance to the United States of America and the state of New Hampshire, and will support the constitution thereof. So help me God.

I, A.B. do solemnly and sincerely swear and affirm that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all duties incumbent on me as …………………………………………., according to the best of my abilities, agreeably to the rules and regulations of this constitution and laws of the state of New Hampshire. So help me God.

I also point out that she is forcing HER transgender religion onto me – in effect, she is doing the exact bullying and marginalization (to people of faith that believe God made man and woman only – Christians, Jews, and Hebrews as three examples). I could tell she was rather unhappy. However, see the last video for that as well as “bringing the Science” over the Woke phrase “assigned at birth”.

Joint Meeting:

 

The Gilford only meeting: reports and “First Read” on new Policies:

 

Public Comment Sessions: I speak a little in the first one and then the last speaker in the third session.

Note: Superintendent Kirk Beitler also had another corker, this time in the meeting rather than over the phone.  I’m betting, this time, that I wasn’t the only one that took note of it.  This is why I always say that I want Progressives (and now, Wokesters) to keep on talking, talking, and talking some more even as they (like Gilford School Board member Nicole Hogan) wish to shut us all up.

The Second Read Policy Packet – Policy JBAB starts on page 4. Remember, too, that the NH School Board has completely stepped away from this policy that gave out and told School Boards that have adopted it that they are on their own – they saw the legal battles and they didn’t want any part of it.

Hmmm, that gives me more ideas…

10-3-2022 Gilford School Board Second Reading Policy Packet

 

The post Gilford School Board Meeting – They Have Finally Seen the Light! Well, except for One School Board Member appeared first on Granite Grok.

After months of back and forth with the leftist social media giant, billionaire tech mogul Elon Musk revived his original Twitter offer of $44 billion – or $54.20 per share. The news rocked the stock market, sending Twitter shares into double-digit gains and sets the stage for a final negotiation and handoff.

Newsmax wrote:

Billionaire Elon Musk is proposing to go ahead with his original offer of $54.20 to take Twitter Inc private, Bloomberg News reported on Tuesday, sending the shares of the social media firm surging.

Twitter shares jumped 12.7% at $47.93 before trading was halted for the second time, while Tesla Inc., the electric vehicle company that Musk heads, fell about 3%.

Musk made the proposal in a letter to Twitter, Bloomberg reported, citing people who asked not to be identified discussing confidential information.

After his initial offer was made public last April, speculation surrounded the use of spam and bot accounts. Musk initially said he would not buy the company if Twitter’s accounting of fewer than 5% of accounts being bots was inaccurate. Some people pinned the number of bot (i.e. fake accounts) as high as 20-25%.

Newsmax continued:

 

The news comes ahead of a highly anticipated faceoff between Musk and Twitter at Delaware’s Court of Chancery on Oct. 17, in which the social media company was set to seek an order directing Musk to close the deal at $54.20 per share.

 

…

Musk’s return to the table comes just weeks before he was set to appear in court with Twitter concerning the original offer and subsequent withdrawal. In April, Musk had originally offered $44 billion for the entire company, but in July seemingly walked away after expressing concern for the higher-than-publicized number of bot accounts. Twitter’s shareholders had agreed to the sale, despite internal company lefties constantly fretting over his position of supporting free speech.

Notably, many banned accounts returned to the platform after Musk’s initial offer and countless users have since been posting comments that would previously have gotten them kicked off as well. With the deal one step closer to being complete, there is optimism that the 21st century’s public square will allow discourse of all kinds.

And then, there is still massive speculation about if and when former president Donald Trump will return to the platform.

 

 

Hailey writes at The Blue State Conservative.

The post Elon’s Buying Twitter appeared first on Granite Grok.

Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion are Newspeak: “The invented language in 1984 to control the thought process and a system of brutal simplification that prevents complex thought or the expression of any concept not in line with the totalitarian government’s orthodoxy.” Need proof?

 

The Barre City Council got an earful from citizens concerned about three members of the city Diversity and Equity Committee telling fellow committee member William Toborg he should quit because he’s pro-life, and Chair Joelen Mulvaney’s emailed threat to mute him at future meetings.

 

Nothing says inclusive like suppressing other people’s words which (coincidentally) is a working item on the political Left’s bucket list. Just ask parents, taxpayers, and anyone who dares to say anything contrary to the approved progressive narrative. They label it disinformation, hate speech, or conspiracy theory. Whatever they believe their anodyne sheeple will swallow.

 

“I am conservative. I am pro-life, proudly….I have always believed in fighting for the powerless,” an attitude that conforms with and inspires his pro-life beliefs, Toborg said. Also, “I was concerned about the anti-Catholic bigotry at that meeting.” …

“I am concerned about the otherization that is going on,” Toborg said, citing a midwestern man running over a teenager because he thought was Republican. “There are forces here that want to divide us. There are forces that want us to express hatred against each other.”

 

Yes, there are, and many of them are drawn to positions on committees with names like anti-discrimination and equity, diversity, and inclusion.

 

 

 

The post Local Diversity and Inclusion Council Wants Member Who is Not Like the Others to Quit appeared first on Granite Grok.

Let’s look at pedophiles of high rank in the UK. Joachim Hagopian’s book Pedophilia and Empire, Volume 2, is my source for this material. His book is well-footnoted, though mostly referencing newspaper reports over the years.

We want to thank Mary Maxwell for this Op-Ed Please direct yours to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.

Hagopian gathers materials that incriminate three past British prime ministers in child sex trafficking: Tony Bair, Margaret Thatcher, and Edward Heath. Heath has also been accused of dumping boys overboard from his boat when he is finished with them.

Tony Blair’s wife Cherie is said to be involved; she was in charge of Barnardo’s Children and got a damehood for her charity work! Recent PM Teresa May is guilty of coverup, at least.

The BBC and the entertainment industry are also covered in Hagopian’s book. Much of the goings on revolve around one man, Jimmy Savile, a sort of children’s comedian. He spent holidays at 10 Downing St. and could show up at Buckingham Palace without needing an invitation. Imagine that! The most amazing thing is that Savile was made the boss of the insane asylum, Broadmoor, where he could carry out any crime unimpeded.

Needless to say, the hottest stories in Hagopian’s book (Volume 2 of a total of 5 volumes) is the royal family. Lord Mountbatten is well known to have been a pedophile. He was killed in 1979 when his boat was blown up allegedly by the IRA. I believe it was his own family that got rid of him. (I also believe they “demised” Princess Margaret and Princess Diana, and possibly the queen, though her age, 96, meant she would not stay on the throne for too long anyway.)

Prince Andrew was accused in court, in Virginia Giuffre’s lawsuit, of sex with a minor — herself. She worked for Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The other royal in whom we would be most interested is King Charles III (whose name I have heard pronounced on a read-out machine as “King Charles Eye Eye Eye”). The main crime he is accused of is being best friends with the aforementioned Sir Jimmy Savile, who was the lead child trafficker in London.

Now for lesser personages. As Hagopian reports, on page 326:

“In December 2014, MP John Mann submitted critical information contained in a dossier to police, naming 22 MPs implicated in pedo-parties at the notorious Dolphin Square flats … and boys from Lambeth group homes were being trafficked to nearby Pimlico for abuse as part of a wider pedophile ring. But as always, there has been no follow-up….”

We can inspect the local government oversight of care homes in Lambeth and Islington. You may wonder how so many orphans are still living in “care homes.” I don’t know what caused this demographic, but having seen what goes on in Australia, I venture that kids were taken from their families in order that such “supply” be created.

Joachim Hagopian particularly lashes into Margaret Hodge, MP, whose district includes Islington. (Both Islington and Lambeth are very close to the City of London, FWIW.) Dame Hodge’s maiden name is Oppenheimer; she is related, so to speak to the Los Alamos project and to the DeBeers diamonds.

Her late husband, Sir Henry Hodge, was a High Court judge who helped Tony Blair form New Labor. He was a supporter of PIE (Paedophilia Information Exchange) which proclaimed pedophilia good. So does NAMBLA in America: North American Man/Boy Love Association. Their website is nambla.org. I suppose there are times when a sexual relationship between an adult and a minor is of benefit to the minor, but when I am discussing pedophilia, I am discussing the harmful kind — very harmful.

We know from the thousands of people who came forward to Australia’s Royal Commission from 2014 to 2017 that sexual assault by a teacher, a scout leader, or any person in authority led to a boy’s life being thrown out of balance. Alcoholism failed relationships, and suicide were common sequelae.

People in law enforcement won’t do their job. Granted, in the UK, as described in Hagopian’s books (which are free downloads at pedoempire.org), many police tried to spill the beans, but they got killed. Same for journalists. Police commissioners and judges, however, remain silent.

I think it pays to dwell on the belief by the higher-up pedos that they are being “moral.” Surely part of the ease with which they overwhelm the masses of society is their unashamed approach. Today, a few at the top — such as Bill Gates or the Rothschilds — have announced a plan to totally control us. Yes, they say it openly. Gates gives it a very friendly sales pitch.

I recommend that political scientists proceed, in their mathematical way, to measure all the different forces of power here. What is needed to bring about a change, such that millions of children are not the playthings of adults who are motivated in some way to abuse them and kill them?

A very simple picture of the math tells us that a few members — far less than 1% — of our society have accumulated the power to break all rules. We had better stop seeing them as a hidden few behind the scenes. They are not behind the scenes of government — they are the government. The other folks who wear government badges — legislators, cops, even presidents — have no real power. We should stop honoring them as our leaders; they are slaves.

The Great Reset means most of us will be killed, and the remaining ones will be merged into machines. Putting up with this is stupid beyond belief. And yet at this very moment, governments are proclaiming it rapturously. Many, many people have stated their objection via the Internet, but to no avail. Note: The Internet is able to be shut down.

It is widely believed that a hidden coterie of bankers makes all the decisions for the economy. It is pretty obvious that the mainstream media designs our culture. A bunch of Dr. Strangeloves are doing science and medicine. Courts are corrupt.

Hey, I don’t like this! How dare you treat beautiful me like a plaything! How dare you treat the wonderful products of the human mind as worth nothing! How dare you throw my friends into hospitals! How dare you start horrible wars! Get lost, you creeps.

 

 

The post Pedophilia Is Not a Side Issue; It Is Central appeared first on Granite Grok.

Vermont planned to launch a COVID relief fund backed by the printing presses in DC. It would use American Rescue Plan dollars to reimburse employees who missed work because they caught COVID-19. Any employee. That was the plan.

 

Vermont’s program would have allowed workers to get up to $21 an hour and it didn’t matter if their employer offered paid sick time or not.

But the feds say not so fast. Their rules state in order for people to get these funds, each business applying would need to have an existing paid sick time policy and have already paid their workers before they would be eligible for that reimbursement grant.

 

Vermont Democrats neglected to read the not-so-fine-print or, more realistically, failed to get in touch with their corporatist-socialist roots. Ideologically competition is the antithesis of the planned anything. You can’t have just anyone offering products or services, or ideas, so all things must swirl inexorably toward that black hole of Democratic-Socialism (Marxism).

You need oligarchs who dominate every economic sector with unions or licensing cartels or something that can be used as leverage.

If you’d like a COVID-related example, Hospitals have been destroying private practice for years while politicians make it impossible for anything to compete with them. Everyone has to affiliate with the Hospital cartel, which, like health insurance, is spiraling down to just a few significant players.

During the so-called pandemic, politicians shut down mom and pops and allowed big box, chain stores to remain open for no public-health-discernable benefit. The larger their corporate footprint, the more permissions they could enjoy, probably because of the political leverage they could bring to bear if needed.

It wasn’t about health or health care, nor was the money printed to backstop the COVID relief handouts. Much is wasted on corporate friends and family or lost to fraud and corruption.

But someone in Vermont thought the people who need the help are folks in small concerns who might not be able to get paid days off for illness. They saw an opportunity to pander to them and figured, let’s get them on the dole too. 

The Feds like the dole, especially states that take deficit dollars. These once sovereign entities quickly become more dependent and docile when the swamp needs them to do something—a favor. Propaandize the kids. Declare parents domestic terrorists. Cut off the kiddie’s body parts. Or disarm the locals. But they need to control the bribes. You can’t let just anyone take a payoff from the Feds. They might vote Republican!

It may work out in the end. The Boss might find a way to get Vermont on another hook. But until or unless that happens, perhaps Vermont Dems can develop their own unsustainable, taxpayer-backed state-level program.

Your universal health care system collapsed. You’ve got a green energy commission with dreams Vermonter can’t afford. And that EV mandate will bite you in the ass.

Why not start your own COVID Paid Family Sick Leave?

 

 

The post Vermont Discovers Pandemic Relief Money is for Employees of “Essential” Businesses, Only appeared first on Granite Grok.

How can we get the attention of Joe Biden and his Administration to the crisis of Fentanyl poisoning? We are losing 100,000 Americans per year to Fentanyl Poisoning. It is now the number one cause of death for 18-45-year-old Americans.

This death toll does not appear to be enough carnage to raise an eyebrow behind Biden’s aviator glasses.

I called the Fentanyl situation a crisis, but there are more accurate terms that may be more impactful. Fentanyl is actually a terrorist attack by the Chinese government that condones the manufacture of the poison and allows it to be shipped to Mexico. In Mexico, the drug is processed into tablet form, including the newest form resembling Skittles candy and targeting a younger clientele. Should Fentanyl have every American’s attention? Absolutely. Why not?

The reason I mentioned the Wall is to draw a comparison between the American loss of treasure in Vietnam and the yearly loss to Fentanyl. We erected a beautiful black marble wall to memorialize the 58,000 Americans who died in the Vietnam Conflict. Maybe if we memorialize the Fentanyl War, it will be looked upon differently. These are the death counts for the major conflicts involving the United States.

Looking at other wars in which the U.S. was involved, the loss of life during Vietnam falls somewhere around the middle.

Civil War: 498,332
World War II: 291,557
Vietnam War: 58,220
World War I: 53,402
Korean War: 36,574

Over the past two decades, nearly one million people have died of drug overdose deaths. Still, most of those deaths in recent years have involved dangerous synthetic opioids like Fentanyl. This data means we have lost more Americans to drugs than in all wars since the Civil War combined.

To be fair, this assault on America is over twenty years old. Republicans did little to stop the carnage, although Trump did work to secure our Southern Border, which slowed the Fentanyl deaths, but it was not enough. We must get proactive and start treating Fentanyl as a terrorist attack on our country.

Biden has to shoulder most of the blame for the last two years, but he has company, and they deserve to be called out for their failure. Kamala Harris was named the Border Czar in March of 2021. It is safe to say, at this point, that she has no interest in visiting the Southern Border. She also does not plan on doing anything to secure our Border. It no longer exists, and anyone who wants to come to America can simply walk on in.

DHS Secretary Mayorkas has done a dismal job since he was confirmed. He has done nothing to enhance our security, but it is what he says that gets under our skin. He refuses to acknowledge that we have a crisis at our Border even though as many as four million illegals have entered our country in less than two years. He insists whenever asked that the Border is secure. Stop lying. We have eyes, and we have at least one network with drones giving us the real story.

We don’t need to go through Karine’s part in this misinformation effort. She is the epitome of misinformation. What we do know is that this Administration will not change its stance so we need to do it for them. Starting in five weeks, we need to change the balance of power and then get behind a DeSantis / Scott (Tim) ticket in 2024. These two will destroy anyone the Dems can pull out of the weeds to displace Biden on the ballot.

 

The post Maybe We Need a Fentanyl Memorial Wall appeared first on Granite Grok.

And she did. Bigly. That Moral Superiority bit and all.  Remember, “Hip check” was the one that decided she had the Moral Superiority to give Grokster and friend Susan Olsen a “hip check” into a table when no one else was looking while people were packing up from an NH House hearing (I was there but wasn’t watching from the eyes in the back of my head).

Steve has a post that Mrs. Altschiller decided that properly filling out campaign finance reports was “no big thang”: Debra Altschiller is Not Very Good At Filing Campaign Finance Reports.

You might know Democrat Rep Debra Altschiller for alleged attempts …to censor the press, hit an old lady, suppress free speech on public sidewalks, create speech carveouts for legislators to suppress the free speech of others, and just being an intolerable Democrat stooge, but now there’s this.

AG warns state Senate candidate The Sunday News received a copy of a letter from Attorney General John Formella’s elections unit regarding past campaign finance reports from state Rep. Debra Altschiller, D-Stratham, who is running for the state Senate this fall.

The Aug. 25 letter from Deputy General Counsel Myles Matteson noted that in 2020, Altschiller failed to file seven different campaign finance reports, and the ones that she did did not itemize expenses or document starting balances.

The letter gave Altschiller seven days to refile these reports.

And now she’s just DYING for some of that Streisand Effect as she decided to get more stuff even wrong.  You know, it is rather “interesting” that her husband, Howard Altschiller, makes their living reporting on others (emphasis mine):

Howard Altschiller has been the Executive Editor of Seacoast Media Group since 2003. He has worked as an editor and reporter for more than three decades at news organizations in New Hampshire, Maine, Massachusetts, New York and New Jersey. He is the current president of the New Hampshire Press Association and the co-chair of New Hampshire’s Committee on the Judiciary and the Media.

I dryly note that while most of his staff present their headshots, he has decided to hide his visage.  Just differently from how Debra attempted to hide her’s (courtesy of Steve) with triple masking:

 

 

But I digress. Steve alerted me a couple of days ago that Hausfrau Altschiller went on a tear. Upon looking at her captured tweets, she also confirmed that old Ronaldus Magnus (President Ronald Reagan for you in the younger set) quote:

“It isn’t so much that liberals are ignorant. It’s just that they know so many things that aren’t so.”

Like this first set of “facts” from “Debra’s A Team”:

 

 

First, you’re going to have to define what a hate blog is – and then, in order to back it up, cite the “hateful” posts. Like most Democrats that have called GraniteGrok, you can’t. It’s just a word that we expect from you “civil” folks (er, hip check??). And since we’ve had run-ins before because you aren’t always talking or acting civil, I’m not surprised at your yelping.  Remember, “Hate” is always whirled around by Democrats that are losing the debate; it has simply become a word standing for the phrase “Those evil Conservatives destroy all my political arguments all the time, and I must call them names to make them stop. Or make me look good to my base.”

Now, for a moment, I’m assuming she’s talking about me. No, I never was employed by any radio station, but I was part of a radio show on that station that you won’t name.  Thus, I wasn’t fired since I was never an employee.  I never received a paycheck from that station, so there’s one thing you’re wrong about. My real profession and paying gig for over 40 years was as a software engineer and software/business consultant.

While Doug Lambert (currently a Gunstock Area Commissioner of DGF Industrial) DID utter a homophobic slur aimed at NH Democrat Chair Ray Buckley (who as the head of YOUR Party, is now in hot water nationally in claiming that parents of transgender students will murder them – defend that, Ms. Altschiller?) was part of that team, he didn’t work for the radio show either and never received a paycheck from the station either.  IF you are not an employee, to make it clear again, you can’t be fired. But yes, for his antics, the show was canceled.

And for the record, the author of the blog POST that has your panties in a wad didn’t even know that Meet The New Press existed. He was never part of the show, and therefore (if you are referencing him instead of me, your tweet is rather vague on who is who (and I think it is because your info is vague or you don’t have the stones to name names).

So with that basic set of factoids out of the way, here’s this: YOU, Mrs. Altschiller, have now just PUBLICLY defamed me a by calling me a racist without proof. I’m going to check with and have a rather serious discussion with my legal counsel, but calling me a racist with no proof at all is legally actionable.

If I was the racist you are telling people I am, then why was I Herman Cain’s Belknap County Chair? And if you don’t remember, Herman was a Presidential candidate and I interviewed him a number of times before offering to volunteer for his campaign.  And because people like me only see actual individuals, I saw him as a PERSON – Altschiller would only, I imagine, only saw him as a member of the largest Democrat Identity Politics Group but heretical because he, GASP!, was a Conservative. Yes, he was Black.  If I was/am the racist you publicly are calling me, why would have done that, Ms. Altschiller?

Second, about the only thing that I can positively be accused of is supporting traditional one-man/one-woman marriage for which I’ve been called homophobic.  But for you, a public figure, to call me a homophobe for that, you’d best have much more proof than holding to the same value that Democrat Presidents Clinton and Obama held (until it was no longer politically expedient for them to do so – go figure). Go ahead, I’m waiting for real proof.  You only have 17,000 posts to review here at the ‘Grok.

And for the trifecta, sending snark in the direction of people who deserve it that also happen to be female is not sexist – it’s snarkism. Satire, even.  By the way, on that point, what IS a Woman anyways?  Your Party seems to have lot of issues lately in telling us what a woman is.  Failing that test, how could I be sexist if you can’t tell me what a woman is?

What is a woman, Ms. Altschiller?  Can you “wo-splain'” that to your humble scribe?  After all, I’m just a biologist…

To her next point /tweet, I have this in response from your Party luminaries, pundits, and high officials: Bushitler, Trump is a Hitler, DeSantis is a Hitler…the list goes on and on. Almost every top level Republican has been called that over the years and quite unapologetically by Democrats.  The Democrat Party is, far and beyond, the greatest breakers of Godwin’s Law in history. ANd one lowly blogger uses it and YOU go ballistic?  Go ahead, you apologize for the thousands upon thousands over thousands of times your Party has used that construction and I’ll apologize for the few dozens of times it’s been used on this other side.

Seriously, Debra, should we just mimic all of the similar rhetoric we see EVEN FOR ONE DAY that we see from your Party?  I’d be spending YEARS just trying to compile on that…

Kettle, black…

Given your past antics, “grassroots” and “transparent” are not words that easily come to mind. But I can think of a few PACs that would be happy to take money on this side to keep a BidenBro / Obama sychophant from getting into office…

She said it twice, so can we.

But would you really welcome ME to your campaign?  You did use the word “ALL“, right – can I make you live up to your rhetoric? Or SHOULD I make you live up to your own words?

Yeah, that’s what I thought.

So Ms. Altschiller (a very Public Figure and working hard to become an even bigger one), to recap, has called me a racist, a homophobe, and sexist.  With no proof of any of those three attributes. Legal counsel time.

And you have just brought me upon yourself.  Poke a bear? Don’t be surprised if the bear starts snarling and starts moving towards you (rhetorically, speaking – let’s not have a repeat of the Merrimack Democrat gals that accused us publicly of threatening them only to find out they were liars as well).

The post Yep, Steve Was 100% On Point about “Hip Check” Debra Altschiller: “On a Positive Note, I Think She Snaps Like a Twig When You Bring It Up.” appeared first on Granite Grok.

Democrats’ ads show that abortion is their top priority. Abortion is more important to Democrat politicians:

— Than your ability to feed your family and pay your housing, heat, electric, phone, and tax bills, etc. (Democrat incompetence created shortages; their votes created inflation.)

— Than protecting children and adults from the deadly drugs coming over our Mexican border that Democrats opened to drug dealers, criminals, and others.
— Than protecting innocent people from the criminals that Democrat prosecutors release without bail, refuse to fully prosecute, and release them arly from prison.
— Than your ability to fuel your car so you can get to work, shopping, doctor or dentist appointments, or do other needed or desired travel.
— Than your dwindling retirement or other savings.

Instead, Democrats demand ultra-extreme abortion laws far beyond Roe v. Wade. Only a few nations have such ultra-extreme abortion laws.

Democrats reject moderate, democratically established abortion laws like in Europe or New Hampshire, which limit unrestricted abortions to 15 weeks typically and 24 weeks, respectively. (https://tinyurl.com/2764eyun)

Democrats demand legalizing, nationwide, the barbaric practice of killing healthy, full-term babies at the moment of birth.

They demand that the rapists of underage girls be allowed to get them abortions without notifying their parents. They outlaw requirements that states believe are needed to ensure that women’s abortions are done safely. (https://tinyurl.com/547wryjw)

If ultra-extreme abortion laws are your top priority, vote Democrat knowing that Democrats will continue making all your other problems worse.

If you prioritize feeding and protecting your family, affording a comfortable modern life, and letting the people democratically decide the important issues regarding life and death, babies’ rights, women’s rights, and the kind of society we live in, then you better vote straight Republican in November.

 

The post Democrats More Interested with Abortions than Protecting Regular Families appeared first on Granite Grok.

People making gobs of money from mutilating children in the name of evidence-based care are upset that the practice rattles some folks. “The American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, and Children’s Hospital Association all signed the letter to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, urging the administration to “investigate.”

Related: Eugenics Party Advocates Mutilation and Sterilization Disguised as Gender Rights

“Providers of evidence-based gender-affirming health care and their colleagues are facing increased stress and fear on top of the conditions they have faced while working on the frontlines of a global pandemic for nearly three years,” the letter said. “Families seeking care at these institutions as well as our those providing their care fear for their personal safety in the wake of these attacks.”

 

If you object to cutting off children’s “sex parts” for profit, the AMA wants the DOJ to give you the 5 am morning raid treatment. You are a domestic terrorist for expressing an opinion. And let’s be clear. I’m not talking about people making actual threats to harm or those attempting or succeeding at the same. We have laws to address that without any need for Federal intervention.

It isn’t about that. It is an extension of the assault on free speech that began with the Climate Cult and spread to Public Health during the COVID Cult Karen years. The goal is to silence dissenting opinions by labeling them as hate or disinformation. Nothing more.

The National School Board Association did the same thing when parents became informed and then outraged about their children being discriminated against over slavery, labeled as white supremacists, and second-classed under the rubric of Critical Race Theory.

Related: Pushback: Alabama Senate Votes to Make Hormone Therapy, Surgery for Trans Youth a Felony

The Groomers are working the same scam, but this one has a heftier price tag—mutilating children under the guise of gender-affirming surgery equals big money. Huge money. And we know that while doctors and staff might not all agree, hospitals have no morals. They are businesses, many set up as non-profits making huge profits. COVID proved that. Death by hospital was a gold mine, and so is mutilating children.

With the COVID laundromat winding down, the greedy bastards are looking for a new revenue stream, and this appears to be it. One that might not last, so while they’ve got a favorable political wind thanks to Democrats in Congress and the Biden Administration, they intend to cash in on the scheme.

And they’d like Federal stormtroopers to protect their business model.

 

 

The post If You Object to the Medical Mutilation of Children the AMA wants the DOJ to Shut You Up appeared first on Granite Grok.

The Meredith Republican primary had three candidates for the New Hampshire House. Lisa Smart and Tofts are conservatives with traditional values. Cindy Creteau-Miller is pro-abortion and anti Second Amendment. She received a D rating from the NRA. How unusual is that?

We want to thank NH State Rep Jon Mackie for this Op-Ed. If you have an Op-Ed or LTE
you would like us to consider, please submit it to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.

The vast majority of Republicans serving in the House are A-rated. There are no D-rated Republicans and she is the only “Republican” candidate this year with a D rating. The majority of Republicans in the House are also pro-life. So why did Meredith Republicans make her the top vote-getter by 31 votes in the primary, 555 to 531 to 524?

They did not. Over 400 independents picked up Republican ballots for this primary. Not all of these were Republican-leaning independents. The Democrat-led Citizens for Belknap PAC spent about $5,000 on ads in The Laconia Daily Sun with their voter guide and other advertising and urged independents to pick up Republican primary ballots to defeat the “extremists” who were under-funding county services and destroying Gunstock.

Since neither Jeanne Tofts nor Lisa Smart were incumbents, they certainly weren’t part of that “extremist” group. Then what was their plan? In Meredith, they supported the one Republican whose views on abortion and gun control are the same as the Democrats. It was a clever strategy. Knowing that Democrats are unlikely to win a House seat in Meredith, why not urge left-leaning independents to pick up a Republican ballot and vote for a Republican who will vote like a Democrat? What can Republicans in Meredith do now? Definitely plan to vote for Lisa Smart in November and hope there is a conservative Republican willing to mount an aggressive write-in campaign to defeat the Democrats and Cindy Creteau-Miller.

NOTE: I strongly good Republicans and Independents to write in Jeanne Tofts on the Meredith ballot to defeat the Democrat-supported Cindy Creteau-Miller. We don’t need a Republican that hates the Second Amendment in the NH House that would be aligned with the Democrats.  THAT’S an Extremist Republican!

-Skip

The post Democrats Trying to Get Left-Leaning Independents into Republican Spaces appeared first on Granite Grok.

As a candidate for State Representative in District 19, Ward 5, Concord, I’ve heard many people express concern about the rising cost and availability of energy.

I’ve always been fascinated with subjects like quantum physics and frequencies and how they work, so I’m bringing some ideas that haven’t been seriously mentioned before to the table. Ideas that would be cost-effective and good for the environment. Why shouldn’t they at least be explored?

Did you know that low-cost energy has been around for a very long time? Why haven’t we ever heard of it? Why are we stuck with energy rates determined by entities like the Public Utility Commission?

Those questions all have a one-word answer: money. If the powers that be can’t make a great deal of money off of it, they don’t and won’t allow it to become known, much less available to the people.

I’m not an electrician, an engineer, or an inventor, so I can’t intelligently describe these concepts to you, so I’ve provided links to some YouTube articles (short ones) that can. At least they might be food for thought.

Have you ever heard of Nicola Tesla? Here’s a YouTube video about him, his inventions, how they work, and why they were never brought into use.

 

 

And this one describes the similarities between Tesla’s coil that produces low-cost, universal energy and the Egyptian pyramids.

 

 

This video link explains why energy doesn’t have to flow through wires:

 

 

Maybe we should demand that these alternative energy-producing inventions be explored and utilized. And if they already are, then support their efforts. Considering some of the things supported by our government, it might be refreshingly sensible.

 

 

The post Why Is No One Talking About Alternate Energy? appeared first on Granite Grok.

There are a few Republicans who will whine over this fisking, but it wasn’t my douchebaggery. I’m just reporting it. And it needs public airing. Chris Sununu is sending New Hampshire National Guard troops to the southern border in “response to a federal mobilization order from the Department of Defense.” Excuse me?

Related: Family Separation Week – Governor Sununu Carries The Left’s Water

 

Sununu said the soldiers are going to be focused on surveillance, acting as eyes and ears for the Customs and Border Protection agents handling what’s being described as a humanitarian crisis.

“They’ll be manning surveillance posts along the border that they’re responsible for and that will allow the agents to focus more on the ground and dealing with people coming directly across the border,” said Greg Heilshorn, director of public affairs for the New Hampshire National Guard. …

“This deployment, even more than others, directly affects New Hampshire, when you’re talking about the human trafficking, the drugs, the money and weapons that are coming across the border,” Sununu said. “That’s exactly what these orders are, for these men and women to be there to provide support services to push back on what’s coming across that border.”

 

When President Donald Trump was trying to stop the flow of drugs and human trafficking “across that border,” Gov. Chris Sununu said, “that while the New Hampshire National Guard has not been asked to send troops to the southern border to enforce the Trump administration’s controversial immigration policy if asked, he would refuse to deploy troops “to separate families.”

At that time, governors, all Republicans, were voluntarily sending Guard troops to help secure the border. Sununu not only did not volunteer guard troops, he said he would not send them if asked and used a Left-Wing talking point (lie) for cover.

Douchebaggery.

Sununu sent New Hampshire Guard troops to support Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s political militarization of the fenced capital compound. And now, the Biden bunch has asked for a political show of support before the mid-terms as if they have any interest in preventing drug or human trafficking, and Chris Sununu is Mr. hop to it!

And it’s always been a matter of separating families. Obama’s DACA inspired drug and human traffickers to take kids from families and use them to get into the US. The mere idea that the border is porous or that there’s some welfare pot of gold separates families when members die or are killed during the journey. Any talk to the contrary is just BS.

And you are sending troops to surveil so US Border Patrol agents can do what? Separate coyotes from the kids they stole or bought to help MS-13 gang members, cartel mules, and assorted terrorists get into America.

Yes, sending them now IS something, but it is so Sununu. It is a decision calculated to appease, not in any way based on principle. If he had any, he’d have been leading the charge to secure the border when we had a president who cared to do it. Obama’s open border policy started the overdose death spiral that has claimed thousands of Granite Stater’s lives and separated our families. Democrats defended that, and when Trump tried to stop it, Sununu leaned Left.

Chris didn’t take the podium, he didn’t suggest solutions, he didn’t ask how we could help, but he will take federal money to address the overdose epidemic or almost any federal money if we’re being honest. Deficit spending that devalues your dollars and aggravates inflation in a recession economy.

And yes, earlier this year, Mr. Sununu did “sign on” to an agreement between twenty-eight states to share information related to the crime that results from the open border problem he never cared to solve. A don’t patch the boat keep bailing strategy that will not solve the problem, and now this. Another show of support for the wrong president, and he says it is because they asked. So, if the Biden Bros didn’t ask?

What if Governor Abbot asked?

That’s what I thought.

 

 

The post Sununu Sends NH Guard Troops to Southern Border for Biden – Guess He’s Okay With “Separating Families,” Now? appeared first on Granite Grok.

As promised in the last Monday Memes, I have an overflow. My meme cup runneth over.  Almost certain about a Friday Overflow-Overflow.  We’ll see.

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

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

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

One can legitimately not like the guy or his actions in Ukraine, but this is spot-on accurate in his analysis of Western degeneracy… and I will give him credit for protecting Russian culture and tradition.  More on that:

Russia fines TikTok for ‘LGBT propaganda’, Twitch over Ukraine content (yahoo.com)

 

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

 

   

 

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

 

 

Now they want to use mRNA Jabs on all cattle.  And doubtless on all chickens.  It’s almost like there’s a world-wide conspiracy to push mRNA into every living thing.  Remember that mRNA gets excreted in milk, so once this starts it’ll not just be in the meat, but in all the dairy products you consume.

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

ROFL!  But that’s the way my mind goes too.  Every day I look to see what I can buy to increase my – and my family’s – chances of surviving the “Great Culling”.  Remember, they’ve been at this for at least a century.  Two of my essays on that:

The 7.3 Billion Dollar, er, Person Question – Liberty’s Torch (libertystorch.info)

Proverbs 16:18… and What’s Coming? – Granite Grok

And isn’t this interesting.  I search (on bing) for the first essay by “the 7.3 billion person question” and it pops as the first result.  To find the second, I search for “proverbs 16 18 nitzakhon” and it’s not there.  NO link to the essay.  I tried searching for the cut-n-pasted title itself.  Not on the first page.  Search for this, +”Proverbs 16:18… and What’s Coming?”, and NOTHING on bing.

It’s the third link at google.  The exact title… third link.

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

Understand, their hatred for Trump extends to anyone to the Right of Stalin.  These are the people who would cheerfully herd you into a concentration camp because you’re not on board with Socialism/Communism.  As Surak keeps saying, “They really do want you dead”.

 

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

 

 

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

 

Pick of the post:

 

 

Some will disagree with me and will want to expel all black people.  I won’t sign on to that.  But I expect everyone – from blackest-black to whitest-white – to be part of mainstream American culture, and to contribute positively to American society.  I don’t care what color you are: if you can’t do that, if you won’t assimilate, if you view others as prey not as a partner in America, GET OUT.  GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM.

 

 

And if, particularly for black people, remember: odds are good you were here because of slavery.  You are in a far better place because slavery happened to your ancestors.  Yes, of course, slavery was a horrific institution… but you are here only because of that institution that existed in every country and civilization until WHITE PEOPLE ended it.

 

 

—

 

OK, upon reflection a second one:

 

 

Again, in line with yesterday’s pick, this is simple, effective, uses humor, and can get through a lot of cognitive shields because it’s so damned true in a dark-humor way.

 

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

 

Back to the slavery thing for a moment:

 

 

AND

From Sowell’s notable book “Black Rednecks and White Liberals”:

 

 

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

 

Palate cleanser:

 

Wait for it…

 

 

 

 

The post Meme Overflow appeared first on Granite Grok.

To those who have been following the nightmare on our southern border over the past two years, it’s utterly inconceivable that anyone in America would be unaware of the problem.

But until Governors Abbott of Texas, and DeSantis, of Florida, enlightened the residents of a few liberal strongholds, it seems that they were completely clueless about the throngs of foreign citizens illegally swarming into our country every day. Some estimate that as many as five million immigrants have crossed our border illegally since Joe Biden took office.

Seemingly oblivious to the surge overwhelming border towns like El Paso and Eagle Pass, Texas, liberal meccas across the country continue to welcome and harbor people who are in this country illegally – including hardened criminals. Places like New York, Chicago, and Washington D.C have long been “sanctuary cities.” During the Trump Administration, entire states, like Massachusetts, jumped on the bandwagon, becoming sanctuary states. Illegal aliens across the country know full well they will be protected from deportation if they can only reach one of those sanctuary communities, purportedly established as enclaves of compassion and benevolence.

We would all probably agree that compassion and benevolence are not the same. Compassion is what we feel. Benevolence is what we do about it. We might all feel compassion for the plight of immigrants suffering under third-world conditions. Benevolence, on the other hand, refers to generosity – how far we’re willing to go to accommodate them as immigrants. No doubt liberals in those sanctuary communities have convinced themselves that they’re imbued with a generous amount of both attributes.

Recently, while serenely basking in their altruism, liberals in one sanctuary community were jolted into reality by a busload of Biden’s illegal immigrants, courtesy of Ron DeSantis. That’s when they came to realize that there were limits to their benevolence. They also learned that those millions of citizens coming from poverty-stricken nations don’t arrive here self-sufficient – that someone has to pay for their food, housing, healthcare, and education. Maybe they even began to understand that there really are good reasons to regulate immigration.

By delivering a taste of Biden’s open border policies to Martha’s Vineyard, DeSantis was demonstrating that now, every town is a border town, that no community can forever evade the impact of Biden’s policies. It was also his way of saying that those communities that incentivize illegal immigration should be the first to reap the consequences.

Naturally, the politicians in those sanctuary cities were, and continue to be, beside themselves. They’re so busy condemning Abbott and DeSantis as racist, un-American, and un-Christian that they can’t see their own hypocrisy. As they desperately tried to cling to their own version of moral superiority, they wasted no time shuttling those immigrants away from their communities and onto military bases or Republican suburbs. It suggests that there are limits to their compassion as well as their benevolence. If there’s any doubt about that, Nancy Pelosi recently cleared it up. While trying to explain the flood of immigrants and the need for them to remain in the south, she announced at a recent news conference that they’re needed to “pick the crops down there.” It tells us all we need to know about liberal compassion.

The unorthodox tactics used by Abbott and DeSantis highlight one of the less significant consequences of open borders. The unsustainable cost to taxpayers doesn’t begin to address the influx of drugs, the crime, disease, and the potential terrorism that also come with unregulated immigration. Governors Abbot and DeSantis can’t solve the border crisis alone. But they’ve taken a significant step in the right direction. They’ve exposed a critical problem that liberals have desperately tried to ignore.

The post Compassion and Benevolence of Sanctuary Cities appeared first on Granite Grok.

The Constitution doesn’t use the word “immigration.” Those consulting the constitutional debates of 1787–1790 (such as the essays in “The Federalist”) will find no discussion of the subject.

Consequently, some modern writers argue that, constitutionally, America should be an “open borders” country—that Congress has no power to limit immigration. Others say that there must be immigration-control authority somewhere in the Constitution. After all, the document alludes to a power in Congress, beginning in 1808, to prohibit the “Migration or Importation of … Persons” (Article I, Section 9, Clause 1). The word “Importation” refers to the slave trade, but “Migration” refers to the movement of free people.

This uncertainty has encouraged the usual claims that the Constitution is defective and that the framers made another of their alleged mistakes.

False Answers

In a recent Epoch Times essay, I described the “Great Forgetting,” during which 19th-century Americans lost the meaning of key terms in their own Constitution. One of the casualties of the Great Forgetting was the source of Congress’s immigration authority. The amnesia continues even today: I recently used the Westlaw database to collect articles on immigration composed by law professors. The overwhelming majority still had no clue as to the source of Congress’s immigration authority.

Even the Supreme Court has cast about for an answer. In 1875, the court concluded that Congress’s authority to restrict immigration stemmed from its power to “regulate Commerce with foreign Nations” (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3). The justices soon abandoned that idea—and with good reason: Non-commercial cross-border travel is not “Commerce” as the Constitution uses the word (pdf).

In 1889, the court suggested that the power to control immigration was “inherent” in the federal government’s sovereignty (pdf). Some modern writers agree. But that proposition directly violates the terms of the 10th Amendment, which prescribes that if a power isn’t listed in the Constitution (or incidental to a listed power), then the federal government doesn’t have it.

Still, other writers speculate that Congress’s authority to regulate immigration comes from its power “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (Article I, Section 8, Clause 4). But that dog won’t hunt, either. Immigration control is a subject as important as, and separate from, naturalization: It isn’t merely incidental to naturalization (pdf).

Modern writers have offered other suggestions as well, but they are even more far-fetched.

The ‘Define and Punish’ Clause

As I mentioned briefly in an earlier Epoch Times essay, Congress’s authority to limit immigration is contained in its power to “define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the High Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations” (Article I, Section 8, Clause 10). This is called the Define and Punish Clause. The phrase “the law of nations” is the 18th-century term for international law.

When the Constitution was written (as today), there was no international agency available to punish certain conduct internationally recognized as criminal. Moreover, international law usually didn’t specify the elements of such a crime, how a defendant should be charged and tried, or what the punishment might be. Without such standards, it was impossible to apprehend and punish those who violated international law while still respecting the rules of due process. It was a common practice on capturing a pirate, for example, to string him up then and there.

The Define and Punish Clause addressed this situation by granting Congress authority to enact criminal statutes setting forth the details of piracy and other “Offences against the Law of Nations.” 

The ‘Law of Nations’

In the 18th century, the term “nation” often referred to an ethnic group—such as “the Arabs” or “the Koreans”—rather than to a sovereign state. A sovereign state might be composed of one “nation” or of many. Or a “nation” might (as is true of the Arabs and Koreans today) sprawl across several sovereign states.

Two thousand years ago, the Romans developed a common law for non-Romans within their empire. They called it the ius gentium—“the law of ethnic groups” (or “peoples”). Later, the spelling was altered to jus gentium.

In accordance with the contemporaneous meaning of “nation” as an ethnic group, the phrase was translated into English as “the law of nations.” A more modern translation might be “the jurisprudence of all ethnic groups.”

Despite the ancient origins of the jus gentium, the modern law of nations didn’t take shape until the 17th century. The man generally recognized as its founder was the brilliant Dutch scholar and diplomat Huig de Groot. His masterpiece, published in 1625, was entitled “De Jure Belli ac Pacis” (“The Law of War and Peace”). It was, like all learned books of the time, composed in Latin, and the author’s name was Latinized to “Hugo Grotius.” It is by his Latin name that he is known today. (This is true of many historical figures: We also refer to Cristoforo Colombo by his Latin name: “Christopher Columbus.”)

As formulated by Grotius, the law of nations applied not just to “nations” in the sense of ethnic groups, but to sovereignties. It sometimes applied to individuals as well.

Following in the footsteps of Grotius were other outstanding international law scholars. The most important were Samuel von Pufendorf’, a German who published his leading work in 1672; Christian Wolff, another German, who published in 1749; and Emer de Vattel, a Swiss lawyer and diplomat, whose 1758 volume was composed in French. Additionally, a French scholar, Jean Barbeyrac (1674–1744), gained fame for his translations of, and commentaries on, the works of Grotius and Pufendorf.

America’s Founders were familiar with all of these scholars. American courts relied on the opinions of Grotius, Pufendorf, Barbeyac, Vattel, and, more rarely, Wolff. In 1783, a committee of the Confederation Congress recommended a list of important books for acquisition. They included the principal works of all these authors. The committee was a notable one. It consisted of three men destined to be among the Constitution’s framers: James Madison, Thomas Mifflin, and Hugh Williamson.

During the Constitutional Convention, delegates cited Vattel. During the subsequent public debates over the Constitution’s ratification, participants mentioned Grotius, Pufendorf, Barbeyrac, and Vattel.

An author even more famous among Americans also devoted some attention to the law of nations. He was William Blackstone, whose “Commentaries on the Laws of England” was the most popular law book in the United States.

Immigration Control as Part of the Law of Nations

We can summarize the rest of the story quickly. Here it is:

• All of these authors affirmed that just as one usually may not enter a property-owner’s land without permission, it usually is an “Offense against the Law of Nations” to cross another sovereign’s borders without permission.
• If a state intrudes into the territory of another state without the consent of its sovereign, the intruding state offends against the law of nations. If an individual enters the territory of a foreign state without the consent of its sovereign, the individual offends against the law of nations. It also violates the law of nations for a state to permit or encourage its citizens to cross a foreign border without permission.
• There are some exceptions and modifications to the foregoing rules. The authors disagree slightly on their scope. However, they agree that a sovereign has a legal or moral obligation to try to accommodate exiles, refugees, those shipwrecked on foreign shores, and those required to pass through a foreign country. Even in those cases, however, each sovereign has wide discretion to set the terms and conditions of entry.
• All of this was confirmed by yet another international law scholar, Georg Friedrich von Martens, a German professor who published in 1789, while the Constitution still was under debate in North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

Thus, Congress’s power to “define and punish Offenses against the Law of Nations” includes authority to adopt laws restricting immigration. As chief executive, it’s the president’s sworn duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”—and therefore to enforce those laws.

Once again, a claimed weakness in the Constitution turns out to be non-existent, and the framers are absolved of error. The prevailing uncertainty on this subject is our fault, not theirs.

 

 

Republished with permission from The Tenth Amendment Center

The post Understanding the Constitution: The Power to Restrict Immigration appeared first on Granite Grok.

Ivermectin is a Nobel Prize-winning medicine that was affordable, licensed, safe, and approved for off-label use until doctors tried to use it to treat flu patients with COVID19. The FDA not only got between you and your doctor, but they also convinced boards of health to threaten the licenses of physicians and pharmacists.

Related: We Know Why The Public Health Industrial Complex Had to Discredit Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin

The result was a chilling effect on the doctor-patient relationship that likely resulted in a significant increase in severe disease, hospitalization, and death.

An actual crime against humanity.

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) issued an amicus brief in support of Apter v. HHS,  the FDA, for meddling to the detriment of their patients.

 

“Defendant FDA has improperly exploited misunderstandings about the legality and prevalence of off-label uses of medication, in order to mislead courts, state medical boards, and the public into thinking there is anything improper about off-label prescribing,” AAPS writes in its amicus brief to the court. “Not only is off-label prescribing fully proper, legal, and commonplace, but it is also absolutely necessary in order to give effective care to patients.”

 

Until COVID, I’ve been led to understand that doctors were at liberty to write scripts for off-label use of licensed drugs for whatever purpose they and their patients deemed appropriate. It was a doctor-patient thing. Treat each person based on the symptoms and their circumstances. But the Wuhan flu sent the Public Health Industrial Complex (PHIC) into Hitler mode.

Politicians piled on blindly following Federal agency guidelines even when they contradicted all known practices, including those agencies’ previous research. The result was more illness, hospitalization, and death, complete with cash incentives for the PHIC if it ignored patient health and safety and did as they were told.

Related: FLCCC Doctor Gives COMPELLING TESTIMONY to NH House Committee in SUPPORT of IVERMECTIN Dispensed Without a Prescription

Hospitals and state’s cashed in, scooping up trillions in taxpayers’ dollars while those taxpayers were losing jobs and businesses and getting an illness for which they could not get proper treatment.

Let’s just say someone said, enough of this crap, and they sued the FDA.

 

AAPS General Counsel Andrew Schlafly pointed out to the court that the FDA “has engaged in a campaign of interference with the proper use by physicians of ivermectin, which has long been approved as fully safe for human use.” He alerted the court that once the FDA approves a medication as safe, then physicians have full authority to prescribe it to treat any illness, particularly a novel virus like Covid-19.

 

If the FDA gets away with it, they’ll do it again, putting the interests of politics and big pharma ahead of doctors and their patients the machinery of public health, and will continue to pursue self-interest before all else. And that, we cannot have.

 

Added: Amicus Filing by the AAPS

The post Physicians are Suing the FDA for Misleading the Public About Ivermectin appeared first on Granite Grok.

Joe Biden is the President that was to unify all Americans. It did not matter the color of your skin or the balance of your 401k, Joe wanted to be the man in your corner. Well, Joe is a flat-out fraud.

Joe has proven that he is the biggest divider ever to sit behind the resolute desk, and he has no prejudice when it comes to screwing Americans. Today, he threw his tomahawk squarely at the Red Americans. Today, he canceled all oil drilling leases on Indian reservations. The Red Man is unhappy with Joe today, and you don’t need to read the smoke signals to feel their anger.

The Indians relied on the income from these oil drilling rigs, and they are beyond angry. He has made a decision regarding the ability to make money on private land. In this case, he has violated the sovereignty of Indian land. Joe Biden may have gone too far with his war on fossil fuels. But at least he is making his Vice President happy by treating his war on fossil fuels with equity. He has effectively taken down every sector of American Society.

The cost of gas has been declining, which was something this warped administration was bragging about. They had driven the price of a gallon of gas to over $5, and they bragged about it coming down to $3.50. Great Job, Joe. It was $2.25 when you took your oath. You cannot remember either of these markers. It was and is your bad policies that are costing every American thousands a year in increased cost of gas and home heating fuel. Your anti-fossil fuel policies are the most significant broad-based tax increase ever.

It is evident that the American public does not share the administration’s zeal for Green policies and the war on fossil fuels. The American public is not excited about trading in their gas-burning automobiles for a toxic battery-powered electric vehicle. You will have to pull the keys of my four-wheel drive Jeep from my dying hands before you put me behind the wheel of a Chevy Volt.

Parshall, North Dakota includes 464 nearby oil and gas leases. Parshall (Hidatsa: dibiarugareesh) is a city lying within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Mandan Hidatsa and Arikara Nation. It is located on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation in Mountrail Count,y North Dakota. These Native Americans have lost a major revenue stream thanks to Joe Biden. Does Joe consider the collateral damage of any of the bad decisions he makes, or is that beyond his purview? This is only one situation. Joe Biden’s decision will impact nearly every reservation in the country.

Apparently, Joe does not see this as pushing American and Alaskan Indians away from the Democrat Party. Like Blacks and Browns, Indians have traditionally voted Democrat. This trend is changing significantly with Blacks and Browns, and bad decisions like this Fossil Fuel killing act by Biden may add the Reds to that changing demographic.

We are in a dynamic time domestically and internationally and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are filling the news cycle with their blunders when we need to see their best efforts at showing American strength and resolve. In the old days, when the Mafia families went to battle, they needed wartime leaders and consiglioreris. America is at war with illegal immigration, fentanyl poisoning, inflation, and an energy crisis. There is no wartime leader anywhere near 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, and will not be for two years. Can we hold on for two more years of Biden’s Progressive insanity? Only time will tell.

The post Biden Bangs the War Drums on Indians appeared first on Granite Grok.

While the Democrat spending spree continues to devastate Americans and demolish the economy, Whoever is Running the Biden Administration (Ron Klain?) just gave their wife a made-up job with full pay and benefits.

 

“For the first time, the United States is designating a special diplomat to advocate for global biodiversity amid what policymakers here and overseas increasingly recognize as an extinction crisis,” the Washington Post reported on Thursday, under the headline “In a first, U.S. appoints a diplomat for plants and animals.”

“Secretary Antony Blinken has designated Monica P. Medina as the United States’ Special Envoy for Biodiversity and Water Resources, signaling the Biden-Harris Administration’s commitment to resolving the world’s intertwined biodiversity and water crises,” the State Department announced Wednesday. “Monica Medina is the Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs and will take on the Special Envoy designation in addition to her current duties.”

 

Medina is an environmental activist lawyer (Georgetown and Columbia) who founded an Environmental Newsletter. She has experience in the swamp, and her hubby happens to be the guy who is probably running the country (into the ground). No, not Joe Biden, White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain.

Klain runs things, including deciding who gets cushy jobs like Special Envoy to the Earth Birthing Person. It is a position that will require a workspace, office staff, supplies, underlings, and a large budget, all of which will add to the government’s already significant carbon footprint, deforestation, and emissions. It will also increase the regulatory burden, which, by extension, will exacerbate that carbon footprint exponentially across the increasingly fruitless plains.

As usual, this is the opposite of the advertised outcome.

Do you know what would reduce emissions if you are into that? Downsizing the federal government. It is probably one of the biggest polluters on the planet. But that’s not what Democrats are after. Their number one goal is to grow government, even if it means creating a make-work job for the White House Chief of Staff’s wife.

The Lorax with a six-figure salary and a mission to increase emissions.

 

 

The post Wife of Biden Chief of Staff Gets Make-Work Job as “Ambassador” to Plants, Water, and Animals appeared first on Granite Grok.

Landrigan’s State House Dome (reformatted, emphasis his AND mine):

AFTER THE VOTES are counted Nov. 8, there will be another election at the State House. The race for speaker of the New Hampshire House of Representatives is heating up.

…Many observers figured House Speaker and 18-term state Rep. Sherman Packard, R-Londonderry, would have a clear path to the nomination by the Republican caucus to keep hold of the gavel. This would be Packard’s first full term after replacing House Speaker Dick Hinch, who died from complications with COVID-19 soon after taking over in December 2020. Not so fast.

According to multiple sources in both parties, four-term Rep. Leonard Turcotte, R-Barrington, told associates he is exploring a GOP challenge to Packard…Legislative process disputes are one motivation behind Turcotte’s potential candidacy. Packard removed Turcotte from two conference committees because of his strongly held views, including a desire to do away with Gov. Chris Sununu’s voluntary paid family leave program.

This isn’t an ideological debate — Turcotte and Packard are both solid fiscal and social conservatives.

…If the race happens, install Packard as a clear favorite. It’s very difficult to unseat a sitting speaker.

To be competitive, Turcotte would have to hope this election delivers dozens of newly elected House members who aren’t beholden to the status quo.
Some close to the speaker hope a cease-fire will emerge, with Turcotte brought more into the leadership fold as an olive branch.

All of the above assumes that the Republicans keep the majority, naturally.

Hmmm…we’ll be watching.

The post Well, This Will Be Interesting to Watch: NH Speaker of the House Race appeared first on Granite Grok.