What Patriotic Americans Can Do to Resist the Destruction of Our Constitutional Republic

From The Gateway Pundit.com (June 22, 2022):

First, recognize that the United States is not a functioning constitutional republic, but a government being deliberately transformed into a one-party totalitarian state.

The federal government, as an institution, is hopelessly corrupt and, although we have elections, we do not have a representative government. It cannot be reformed. It can only be ripped out and replaced.

Do not expect any top-down solutions for America’s problems to miraculously emerge from Washington D.C. The U.S. government has seceded from the people. Most members of Congress act more like foreign occupiers than executors of the views and needs of their constituents.

Angelo Codevilla noted that the United States already has a bona fide ruling class, which transcends government, a political aristocracy that sees itself as distinct from the rest of society and as the only element that may act on its behalf. The ruling class considers those who resist it as having no moral or intellectual right, and, now, any civil right as well.

Republican Party leaders neither contest that view nor vilify their Democrat counterparts because they do not want to challenge the ruling class, they want to be part of it.

The Republican leadership has solidified its choice to no longer represent what had been its constituency, but to adopt the identity of junior partners in the ruling class. By repeatedly passing bills that contradict the views of its voters, the Republican Party has made political orphans of tens of millions of Americans.

The only remaining course of action for patriotic American, who want to restore our constitutional republic, is a bottom-up political insurgency based on the Constitution and the Founding documents.

Foremost among them are the Second and Tenth Amendments.

The Second Amendment, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,” is now the only obstacle standing between freedom and the absolute tyranny the federal government now wishes to impose.

Buy firearms and lots of ammunition. [read more]

Sound advice.

Chinese students with CCP membership, military links ‘infiltrate’ U.S. universities, watchdog says

From Just the News.com (Feb. 3):

Chinese students and scientists who are members of the Chinese Communist Party, attended schools tied to the Chinese military or worked with companies connected to Beijing's theft of U.S. technology have “infiltrated” several top American universities, according to a watchdog group report that raises fresh concerns about America's vulnerabilities to its most fierce adversary.

A conservative non-profit oversight group, the American Accountability Foundation, reported that it found nearly two dozen Chinese academics working at elite U.S. schools and labs “who because of the dual-use threat of their research, close ties to the military research sector in China, and/or clear ties to the Chinese Communist Party should be expelled from the United States or never be re-admitted."

The research document — titled "Chinese Scientist Infiltration Threat Assessments " — says that Chinese students working at some of America’s top colleges, often receiving U.S. federal funding (some of it from the Pentagon) to conduct research into advanced technologies have troubling backgrounds which could pose a risk to U.S. national security.

Many Chinese scientists at U.S. institutions have CCP connections

The concerns raised by AAF’s new report include the fact that some of the Chinese scientists ensconced inside American academia and at cutting-edge U.S. labs appear to be members of the CCP and are affiliated with the CCP’s projects aimed at stealing U.S. technological know-how or military secrets, and worked with or for companies which serve the Chinese defense industry.

Some of these Chinese academics have clear links to problematic Chinese firms like Huawei or to China’s notorious Thousand Talents program, of which the FBI said "American businesses, universities, and laboratories should understand the potential risks and illegal conduct incentivized by Chinese talent plans and take steps to safeguard their trade secrets and intellectual property." At least one of the Chinese scientists appeared to have been employed by the Chinese government while in the U.S.

The schools employing the Chinese scientists named in the AAF report include Harvard University, Carnegie Mellon, Cornell University, Brown University, Purdue University, the University of Wisconsin, Georgia Tech, the University of Florida, the University of Michigan, University of Florida, Penn State University, the Stevens Institute of Technology, Michigan State University, Indiana University, and the University of Southern California, as well as Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

The research areas focused on by these Chinese students — many of whom are receiving U.S. government funding for the lab research they are doing in the U.S. — include unmanned aerial drones, robotics, exoskeletons, artificial intelligence, large language models, viral research into highly-infectious pathogens, advanced materials research, next-gen semiconductors, advanced laser welding, quantum sensing, nuclear materials research, thermal-resilient electronics, electrical grid technologies, pharmaceuticals, applied mathematics, condensed matter physics, and other key areas which could have dual-use military applications. [read more]

They are both students and spies. The Chi-Coms require by law any Chinese national student to report any info they learn to the Chinese Embassy. I believe this is a general law for any country a Chinese national is in.

Another article on the matter

Report: These Chinese Researchers At U.S. Universities Have CCP Ties

‘This Is About As Big as It Gets’: Trump Formally Guts Obama-Era Climate Finding That Allowed Feds To Regulate Emissions

From Free Beacon.com (Feb. 12):

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Flanked by EPA administrator Lee Zeldin in the Roosevelt Room, President Donald Trump announced that his administration has formally rescinded a 2009 Obama-era finding that greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide endanger public health. That finding led to a slate of federal climate regulations targeting gas-powered vehicles, including former president Joe Biden’s top-down effort to force Americans to buy more electric cars.

Trump’s action will have a domino effect, toppling years of federal regulations targeting emissions produced by vehicles, power plants, and oil facilities. Zeldin said it is the "largest act of deregulation in the history of the United States" and would save Americans more than $1 trillion, a point Trump emphasized.

"This is about as big as it gets," Trump remarked as he entered a news conference announcing the action. "This action will eliminate over $1.3 trillion of regulatory cost and help bring car prices tumbling down dramatically. You can get a better car, you can get a car that starts easier, a car that works better, for a lot less money."

Surrounding Trump were signs emblazoned with the $1.3 trillion figure and stating that the action would decrease the cost of the average vehicle by $2,400. "Largest deregulation in U.S. history," read another sign.

"Under President Trump's leadership, vehicle manufacturers will once again build what Americans want, not what politicians and bureaucrats in Washington demand," Zeldin said.

The action makes good on Trump’s 2024 campaign promise to achieve the "most aggressive regulatory reduction" in the nation’s history and represents the president’s single greatest achievement to date in his pursuit to unwind previous administrations’ climate policies. The president has labeled efforts to fight global warming as a "scam" and, like many critics of the climate movement, blamed it for rising affordability issues in the United States.

Still, the action tees up an expected deluge of lawsuits from Democrat-led states and far-left activist organizations that have argued that preserving the endangerment finding and regulating greenhouse gases is essential for combating climate change. Many of those states and groups have vowed to challenge any move to rescind the finding.

"California will not stand by," Governor Gavin Newsom (D., Calif.) wrote to Zeldin in September. "You still have a choice: honor the law, follow the credible and established science, and fulfill your duty to the American people. Or go down in history as the administration that abandoned its mission, betrayed its mandate, and failed its country."

Every Senate Democrat signed a separate letter to Zeldin, warning that rescinding the finding would be a "dereliction of duty" and take "breathtaking hubris." And Loren Blackford, the Sierra Club’s acting executive director, wrote this week that "removing EPA’s authority to limit deadly greenhouse gas emissions is as shortsighted as it is stupid."

The expected litigation could ultimately force the Supreme Court to weigh in on the issue. According to former DOJ counsel Michael Buschbacher, that means Trump’s action on Thursday risks having the opposite of its intended effect and could solidify the endangerment finding.

"Unless this is done really, really well, this has the potential of being a kind of regulatory Vietnam, which is surely what administration opponents will be trying to accomplish," Buschbacher told the Washington Free Beacon in July.

The issue dates back to the 1970s, when Congress passed the Clean Air Act. The act requires the EPA to regulate any air pollutant emitted by mobile sources, like cars, and stationary sources, like power plants, that the agency determines to cause or contribute to pollution endangering public health or welfare. For decades, the EPA did not interpret that provision to include greenhouse gas emissions such as carbon dioxide and methane.

A coalition of states led by Massachusetts eventually sued the EPA after the agency formally determined in 2003 that the Clean Air Act did not authorize it to consider greenhouse gas emissions. In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the states and directed the EPA to consider whether greenhouse gas emissions do, in fact, endanger public health, leading to the 2009 endangerment finding. [source]

The wins keep coming! 

Trump WH Pulls $1.5B in DOT, CDC Grants From Dem States

From Newsmax.com (Feb. 12):

The Trump administration is rescinding more than $1.5 billion from a handful of Democrat-run states on the grounds that the funds were being mishandled.

The White House Office of Management and Budget directed the Transportation Department to scrap more than $943 million in grants and ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to roll back at least $602 million more from California, Colorado, Illinois, and Minnesota, the New York Post reported.

An OMB spokesperson told the Post the states were being targeted for "waste and mismanagement" of taxpayer funds.

The targeted DOT programs included $100 million for the deployment of electric vehicle charging stations in Illinois near underserved communities; $15 million for Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota, to deploy EV chargers in low-income and high-pollution areas; $15 million for a "robust, accessible, and equitable" EV charging network for "disadvantaged communities" in nine counties across San Francisco; $2 million for California's "climate change adaptation" plans; and $4.9 million for Colorado to install charging stations in low- and middle-income neighborhoods.

"At this time, Colorado has not received any official cancellation notices from the federal administration related to these grants," a spokesperson for Gov. Jared Polis told the Post.

"There is nothing 'woke' about making sure American roads are safer for everyone."

A Transportation Department spokesman confirmed the cuts were being carried out, the Post reported.

None of the rescinded CDC grants involved disease-specific research funding.

Instead, the money came from a pool of taxpayer funds distributed to the states, according to the Post.

Chicago was in line to receive $7 million for research involving "adolescents, racial and ethnic minorities, and men who have sex with men" being "disproportionately affected with sexually transmitted diseases," according to the Post.

Another $7.2 million was rescinded for the Illinois branch of the American Medical Association, which officials said supported gender reassignment surgery for children.

"Time and time again, the Trump administration has attempted to politicize and punish certain states President [Donald] Trump does not like," a spokesperson for Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker's office told the Post.

"It's wrong and often illegal, so Illinois will always fight for the resources and services our taxpayers are owed."

At least $3 million had been outlined for Colorado to "Address COVID-19 Health Disparities Among Populations at High-Risk and Underserved, Including Racial and Ethnic Minority Populations and Rural Communities," according to the Post.

Another $1.2 million grant was cut that would have allowed the state to "partner with local public health departments, local health agencies, community-based organizations, STD clinics, family planning clinics, [and] Title X clinics."

Los Angeles County is set to lose $1.1 million in remaining funding for an HIV behavioral survey after an initial $4.3 million grant was approved in January 2022, the Post reported.

California universities were also awaiting hundreds of thousands of federal dollars for research projects "reducing social isolation among older LGBTQ adults," "Creating Medical Trust with Latinx Communities," and a National Transgender Health Summit.

San Francisco had $337,000 remaining from a larger grant for "intersectoral climate adaptation," while Minneapolis was set to receive about $754,000 for "Racial and Ethnic Approaches to Community Health," according to the Post.

The OMB spokesperson said additional grant cancellations were expected.

Officials with the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the CDC, did not immediately confirm the cuts, the Post reported. [source]

Good.  If a state wastes gov't grants, it shouldn't receive anymore money. It's called accountability.

Democrats Hate The SAVE Act Because They Want Illegals To Vote

From The Federalist.com (Feb. 6):

Democrats’ recent hysteria over the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act has unsurprisingly manifested in claims that it’s “Jim Crow 2.0” and a threat to democracy itself. But cut through the hysterics and you’ll find that Democrats’ opposition to the SAVE Act is based on something far simpler: They hate anything that interferes with their long-running effort to control elections and consolidate power.

The SAVE Act would amend the 1993 National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) to require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections.

It’s not a literacy test or a poll tax. It’s just asking would-be voters to prove that they’re citizens of the country of the election they are participating in because currently, the only thing standing between a noncitizen and our “free and fair” elections is a small square box on the federal registration form asking applicants to attest under penalty of perjury that they are a citizens. In other words, the honor system.

Our “democracy” is so important to Democrats that they hinge it entirely on the honor system. But Democrats’ fight against the SAVE Act is part of a bigger effort to remake American elections in ways that permanently advantage Democrats.

Take H.R. 1, also known as the For the People Act. This was one of Democrats’ top priorities during the Biden administration. The legislation would, in part, mandate mail-in voting, require states to accept late ballots, and override state voter ID laws, as reported by The Federalist’s Joy Pullman. In other words, H.R. 1 would normalize the problems of the 2020 election and codify them into law.

Democrats wanted to grant the federal government veto power over state election laws, particularly laws that ensure the integrity and security of elections.

Similarly, Democrats tried to pass the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. This legislation would strip states and local jurisdictions of their control over elections. For example, the Department of Justice would be allowed to seize control of elections where voter ID laws were in place, according to The Heritage Foundation.

When states have acted on their own to protect the integrity of their elections, Democrats turned to the courts. Democrats have been particularly opposed to voter ID laws, with the Biden administration going so far as to sue Georgia in 2021 over its election integrity law that mandated voter ID. The DOJ alleged the legislation was discriminatory. Georgia later saw record turnout after the implementation of the bill.

The Biden administration sued Arizona in 2022 over the state’s requirement that prospective voters show documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in statewide elections. Notably, Arizona came up with its dual registration system after the Supreme Court ruled in 2013 that the state could not require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections. The state permits individuals who can provide documentary proof to register for both statewide and federal elections, while those unable to provide documentation may be registered as “federal only” voters.

The administration also sued Virginia for trying to remove noncitizens from its voter rolls in 2024. The suit alleged that the removal of noncitizens from the voter rolls violated the “Quiet Period Provision” of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, which requires states to complete voter list maintenance “not later than 90 days prior to the date of a primary or general election for Federal office. …”

The pattern is clear: Anytime a red state tries to enforce basic election integrity (whether cleaning voter rolls or implementing secure election practices), Democrats respond with lawsuits, threats of racism, or attempts at federal overreach.

In this context, Democrats’ hatred of the SAVE Act makes sense. Proof of citizenship to register to vote limits Democrats’ ability to exploit insecure election infrastructure, which could lead to noncitizens voting. The SAVE Act also reinforces the idea that voting is a right only of citizens — not just anyone within our borders.

And at this point, the only explanation there could be for opposing requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote is a desire to have noncitizens voting. There is no alternative rationale that survives even minimal scrutiny.

The same party that falsely claimed it was the end of democracy and “Jim Crow 2.0” when Georgia passed voter ID requirements in 2021 is the same party now selling the same shtick about the SAVE Act. Of course it’s just Democrats’ go-to defense line, but the rationale has been proven false time and time again.

When Democrats try this hard to kill a measure so reasonable and broadly supported, the facts speak for themselves about their motives. [source]

So, true. That and the SAVE act makes it hard for the Left to cheat. If the Dems are so against ID (they aren't really) why do Democrat conventions require ID to enter? It seems they like the Jim Crow laws of yesteryear that Chucky Schumer likes to invoke all the time.

The act only requires a person to show their ID when they register to vote not when they actually vote. Nonetheless, a good start. Hopefully, legislation later on will make it mandatory that a person will have to show their ID to vote.

Along the same lines...

• Mitch McConnell Might Try To Smother The SAVE Act To Spite Trump
• Democratic senator requires photo ID to enter campaign event while opposing voter ID for elections
• Sen. John Fetterman: Voter ID Is Not Radical, "Absolutely Not Jim Crow"
• Top Dems Scramble To Explain Why They’re On The Wrong Side Of Voter ID
• House Passes Bill to Require Proof of US Citizenship for Midterm Voters

Cultural Spectacles and the Eternity in Human Hearts

From Breakpoint.org (Feb. 10):

This past weekend, a pair of events drew global audiences. The Opening Ceremonies of the 2026 Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics and Super Bowl LX in San Francisco are the most recent installments of events that have become contemporary cultural flashpoints and feature the clash of worldviews.

Thankfully, this year’s Opening Ceremonies were tame compared to recent Olympics, especially the debauched 2024 Paris debacle. This time, Grammy-winner Mariah Carey performed the Italian classic “Volare,” invoking much online discussion centered about whether she was lip-syncing. With that as the biggest controversy, parents could breathe a sigh of relief and say to themselves, “Well, at least it wasn’t Paris.”

And it’s a good lesson for future host nations: avoid overt desecration of things much of the world considers holy. Instead, as the iconic Olympic rings came together in the arena, NBC announcers noted how these games focused on “harmony between seemingly dueling ideals,” symbolizing an emerging global unity.

Seattle fans are happy, but the pre- and post-game buzz of the Super Bowl had far more to do with the dueling halftime shows than the game itself. The NFL’s official halftime show was headlined by Bad Bunny while an alternative show, produced by Turning Point USA, was described as entertainment “without parents having to worry about shielding their children’s eyes.” That’s been a very real concern since the infamous 2004 “wardrobe malfunction” and several provocative performances since. Many also noted the irony of Kid Rock being the family-friendly alternative, but he was. The Bad Bunny performance featured homoeroticism and, for those who understand Spanish, sexually charged lyrics.

As expressions of worldviews, both the Opening Ceremonies and the Super Bowl, in distinct ways, demonstrate a reality of the human condition. God made people to yearn for something larger than themselves. This longing, which can take the form of athletic struggle and triumph, national pride, or an idealized vision of global harmony, is embedded in humanity’s created nature. As C.S. Lewis observed in Mere Christianity:

Creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists. . . If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world.

The Olympic ceremonies reflected this human longing specifically. The theme of peace and the joining of the rings presented a dream for harmony and unity that recalled the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics, in which John Lennon’s “Imagine” served as a theme song of the Opening Ceremonies:

Imagine there’s no countries

It isn’t hard to do

Nothing to kill or die for

And no religion too

The song, which is often played at nostalgic cultural moments, captures the utopian vision of progressivism: a world without borders, conflict, or transcendent authority, in which humanity is perfectible and human nature is inherently good. Of course, the dissonance between the song and the reality of the human condition, especially given the nation hosting those Olympics, was palpable. At the time, Beijing was actively persecuting Uighur Muslims, clamping down on churches, and violating the 50-year agreement about Hong Kong.

In fact, from the Tower of Babel onward, history is full of the futility and dangers of seeking unity above everything else. Often, it is sought by replacing God with government. Scripture describes how God “put eternity into man’s heart,” and how creation “groans” waiting for Christ’s redemption to be complete. So, what humanity actually longs for is not a utopia, but for our Creator. When that longing is sought outside of Christ, it manifests in what is profane, idolatrous, and futile.

Unity and cooperation are high ideals but remain fleeting and incomplete when pursued apart from God. Christians have the opportunity to bring clarity and meaning to these human longings. As Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 5, “Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation.” Christians who are anchored in the truth of what Christ has accomplished and the assurance that He is making all things new are empowered for faithful engagement in this world.

Lewis captured well the paradox that intentional and continual looking to the eternal “does not mean that we are to leave the present world as it is. If you read history,” he continued, “you will find that the Christians who did most for the present world were just those who thought most of the next.”

Humans always hunger for more meaning, purpose, and transcendence than fleeting spectacles such as the Olympics or the Super Bowl can provide. Today, in addition to the deep-seated longing etched into every human heart are the failed utopian visions that promised what they could not deliver. Thus, Christians have both the opportunity and responsibility to respond with courage and clarity to point people to the true Reconciler, the Prince of Peace. Only Jesus Christ can fully satisfy the eternity God has placed within us. [source]

Amen.

Abuse of Power Part 1: FDR

[David] Burnham [formerly a New York Times investigative reporter] writes that “confidential government documents prove . . . that . . . Roosevelt [FDR] and the officials around him did not hesitate to mobilize the IRS in efforts to destroy the careers of individuals they had decided were enemies. The records even show that on one occasion an inquiry from Eleanor Roosevelt prompted Treasury Secretary [Henry] Morgenthau to order a tax investigation of a conservative newspaper publisher who had become one of the Roosevelt administration’s leading critics.”

Roosevelt was particularly hostile toward Andrew Mellon, a former Republican Treasury secretary and successful businessman. “Probably the single most brazen display of the Roosevelt administration’s willingness to use the tax agency for political purposes,” declares Burnham, “was its attack on Andrew Mellon, the millionaire capitalist who served as the Republican secretary of the treasury from 1921 to 1932. . . . Elmer L. Irey, the first director of what is now called the Criminal Investigation Division, acknowledged that Treasury Secretary . . . Morgenthau ordered him to develop serious tax charges against Mellon even though he knew that the just-retired treasury secretary was innocent. It seems unlikely that Morgenthau would have mounted such a campaign without the approval of FDR.”

Mellon was harassed for years, with false charge after false charge filed against him. In the end, “all criminal and civil fraud penalties the Roosevelt administration had brought against him” were dismissed.

Burnham explains that Roosevelt “was a driven man who did not hesitate to adopt questionable tactics to maintain his power.” “The Mellon case was hardly the only occasion on which the Roosevelt administration mobilized the tax agency for political purposes. From his very first moments as the Democratic presidential candidate in 1931, for example, Roosevelt had understood that Huey Long . . . represented a genuine political threat.” “The administration’s deep concern about Long was translated into action exactly three days after Morgenthau became Roosevelt’s treasury secretary . . . , when Morgenthau ordered . . . Irey, the man he had instructed to go after Mellon, to launch a second campaign against Long.”

Source: Unfreedom of the Press (2019) by Mark R. Levin.