Tuesday, August 8, 2023

Trump Indictment Is a Mockery of Common Sense


Attempting to criminalize Trump's dispute of the election could stunt healthy political dissent


At the end of the classic independent film Reservoir Dogs, the characters end up in a Mexican standoff. The criminal gang’s ringleader, Joe, insists that Mr. Orange is working with the police, even though he is dying on the floor, having been shot during a failed jewelry store heist. Mr. White – the crooks use aliases – insists that Joe is wrong. Guns get drawn. Mr. White demands some proof for Joe’s claim about Mr. Orange. Joe angrily responds, “You don’t need proof when you have instinct!” You can watch the (admittedly brutal) scene here.

This illustrates something we all experience: People disagree about many things for many reasons. Sometimes they have different sources of information. Often, they have different intuitions about shared information. Sometimes, their views are clouded by self-interest. And, frequently, people disagree because a pattern of facts matches their experience, even though they do not have rigorous proof.

Much of politics has this quality. Politics arise from disagreements. People disagree about their values and opinions, about who should rule and how, and sometimes they disagree about facts, particularly complex ones. What caused a recession? Who started a war? What is the best way to reduce crime? These are factual questions of a sort, but beliefs about these kinds of facts are inseparable from one’s values and loyalties.

A Stretch of an Indictment

For Special Counsel Jack Smith, who has now brought a second indictment against former President Trump, the world is much simpler: There is only truth and fraud. There are no honest disagreements, misunderstandings or debates.

Thus, most of the indictment consists of ridiculous constructs: The election was not stolen, and we know because Jack Smith told us so. Someone told Trump this, but Trump disagreed. Because Trump didn’t embrace the conventional wisdom, he is now a liar committing criminal fraud.

In one typical passage, the indictment alleges: “On November 13, 2020, the Defendant had a conversation with his Campaign Manager, who informed him that a claim that had been circulating, that a substantial number of non-citizens had voted in Arizona, was false.”

Let us set aside the fact that contesting elections has never been criminal before. Since when does someone have to believe everything they’re told? Millions of Americans have concluded the election was stolen or, at the very least, rigged. Are we all criminal coconspirators too?

Information, Misinformation and Disinformation

One of the more corrosive developments of recent years is what I would call the “Results-Oriented Epistemology of the National Security State.” For the bloated national security regime, everything is an information operation. There is no truth as such, only what advances the mission or the party line. After it’s dressed up with the trappings of science, or the intelligence community’s consensus, or NPR’s imprimatur, otherwise unproven beliefs become gospel truth. Indeed, their opposites do as well when the party line changes.

The whole thing reeks of insecurity because outside of this official “truth,” there is very little room for disagreement or debate. Any deviance is given a sinister and value-laden label: disinformation, misinformation, conspiracy theory and hate speech. It is of minor importance that the government-dictated truth is not, in fact, always true.

Under this view of truth and falsehood, the fact/opinion distinction collapses too. Things that were always considered opinions or mixed assertions of fact and opinion – questions like “Who is the most beautiful woman?” or “Who has the best football team?” – now become undebatable axioms, for which there is only one correct view when they involve analogous political questions, like whether an election was fair or what are our foreign policy interests.

This way of thinking really took shape during the Russian Collusion hoax. The media, the FBI and Robert Mueller transformed a handful of Russian-funded memes into dangerous “election interference” and “disinformation,” a threat to our sacred democracy. They repeatedly connected Trump to these hackneyed efforts with a vague charge of “collusion,” even though it was actually his callow opponent, Hillary Clinton, who funded a completely false “dossier” on Trump and colluded with foreign nationals to do so.

Donald Trump pointedly said in a recent opinion piece, “As the Twitter Files have proven, the Radical Left establishment also used the Russia Hoax to attack freedom of speech. They built a sprawling domestic censorship regime under the guise of combatting so-called ‘Russian disinformation’ – which they quickly defined to include any content they did not like.” Having achieved some results this way, our ruling class applied the same approach to complex matters like COVIDmRNA vaccines and the recent transexual mania.

This understanding of truth empowers the government to prosecute Trump for contesting the 2020 election. Trump has done nothing novel here. Candidates have previously contested elections both in court and in the court of public opinion. Remember Stacy Abrams and Al Gore.

Is Political Disagreement Still Allowed?

Until recently, Americans always understood that politics could be rough and tumble, that people have different beliefs about both facts and values and that some things cannot be known with 100% certainty.

The competitive election process was supposed to air out both sides. Voters knew politicians exaggerated the facts a little bit (or a lot). Even so, there used to be a certain amount of trust in the common sense of voters to navigate through the fog and arrive at a reasonable decision. After all, if we do not trust voters to sift through competing accounts of reality and judge proposed policies, why so much praise from our overlords about Our Democracy?

With the Deep State and donor class now united on most items, everyone running for office is supposed to endorse a single, narrow party line or else. We have seen this before.

The indictment alleges Trump fought like hell over the 2020 election, even though he secretly knew he lost. This is ridiculous. Trump, I’ll admit, likely didn’t do extensive regression analysis; it’s not his style. But he smelled a rat with Biden’s avoidance of campaigning, extensive mail-in voting, the prolonged vote-counting process, and the various mid-game rule changes in places like Pennsylvania and Michigan. Trump is being persecuted for noticing.

Returning to the opening vignette from Reservoir Dogs, Mr. Orange really was an undercover cop. Joe was right. Like he said, “You don’t need proof when you have instinct!”



On the Fringe, Red Pill news, and more- August 8

 




VICTORY!!!! 🥳🥳🥳 The woman who ruined Hallmark is finally stepping down!!!!! 🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳


 

Source: https://www.dailywire.com/news/ceo-behind-hallmark-channels-woke-journey-announces-plan-to-step-down

Hallmark Media CEO Wonya Lucas — who oversaw the company’s transition into embracing more LGBTQ-friendly storylines — will step down.


According to a report published Tuesday by The Hollywood Reporter, Lucas will stay until year’s end, and will remain on the Hallmark Media board of directors — and Hallmark Companies CEO Mike Perry will manage the transition as she exits.


“I am honored to have led this company and am tremendously proud of the progress we’ve made by creating an evolved entertainment experience that inspires meaningful, emotionally connected moments for our audiences,” Lucas said in a statement. “My passion for the Hallmark brand has grown in deeply rewarding ways and will remain paramount as I continue to help guide Hallmark Media’s future in a more strategically focused capacity.”


Lucas came to Hallmark from TV One in 2020, taking the reins from former CEO and President Bill Abbott after backlash over Hallmark Channel’s removal of a commercial featuring a same-sex couple — and one of her priorities while at the helm was to increase “representation.”


Lucas’ arrival followed a promise from Perry for Hallmark Channel to work with GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation ) to create a more inclusive environment and promote more diverse storylines. During her tenure, the channel not only introduced several LGBTQ+ supporting characters but also premiered its first feature film centered on a same-sex relationship.


But while Lucas the niece of late baseball legend Hank Aaron oversaw a move to more diverse and “inclusive” programming, she also oversaw the abrupt exits of a number of the network’s biggest stars.


Candace Cameron Bure, who headlined a number of holiday films for the network in addition to starring in the Aurora Teagarden mystery series, announced in 2022 that she was joining ex-CEO Bill Abbott’s new venture — Great American Family — which would keep the focus on traditional marriage and faith-based storylines.




Among the other actors who made the jump from Hallmark to Great American Family are Trevor Donovan, Jennie Garth, Daniel Lissing, Lori Loughlin, and Jen Lilley.



The Remaking of America ~ VDH

Every aspect of American life & culture is under assault


We are in the midst of one of the most radical revolutions in American history. It is as far-reaching and dangerous as the turbulent years of the 1850s and 1860s or the 1930s. Every aspect of American life and culture is under assault, including the very processes by which we govern ourselves, and the manner in which we live.

The Revolution began under the Obama administration that sought to divide Americans into oppressed and oppressors, and then substitute race for class victimization. It was empowered by the bicoastal wealth accrued from globalization, and honed during the COVID lockdown, quarantine-fed economic downturn, and the George Floyd riots and their aftermath. The Revolution was boosted by fanatic opposition to the presidency of Donald Trump. And the result is an America that is unrecognizable from what it was a mere decade ago.

Here are 10 upheavals that the Left has successfully wrought.

Free expression. In large swatches of American society—particularly the corporation, the media, the government, the public schools, and the university—it is suddenly dangerous to speak freely. At a DEI workshop, politely object that “whiteness” does not account for all the challenges of “marginalized peoples,” and you will become either ostracized, reprimanded, or perhaps fired.

Suggest to a class that man-made climate change and the state remedies for it, are still under debate—and your career and livelihood are endangered. In 2020, state that Covid lockdowns would do more eventual damage than the virus—and your career was through. Express doubt that there are more than two biological sexes, and if an athlete or high school principal you will be shunned or rendered professionally inert.

The government, in league with social media, censors the news. “Liberal” universities often first require McCarthy-era type “diversity” statements for one to be hired. Commissars review syllabi to spot incorrect or improper speech or insufficient DEI zeal.

The Left now seeks to modify the First Amendment, and its empowerment of “hate speech,” defined as most anything impeding the progressive project. The state and the universities properly issue word lists of approved vocabularies.

The old ACLU or Sen. Church Committee would now probably be deemed rightwing. The methodologies of Joseph McCarthy and J. Edgar Hoover are the preferred models, once they were rebooted to the right cause.

The Weaponization of Justice. Administrations and their efforts to stock the justice department with supporters come and go. But in the last decade the Left has viewed the Department of Justice as a political extension of the party—whose unchecked power must properly be directed to hurt enemies and help friends. No wonder Eric Holder described himself as Obama’s “wingman” and became the first Attorney General to be held in contempt for ignoring a congressional subpoena.

Never in U.S. history have the Department of Justice and sympathetic state and local prosecutors indicted a leading opposition candidate and likely nominee of one of the two major parties, and at the beginning of a presidential campaign. Donald Trump is currently charged with nearly 100 felonies by at least two prosecutors. He likely eventually will be hit with more than- 500 indictments, from four prosecutors, every one of the latter with a long record of either leftwing associations or Democratic service.

The mass murderer Charles Manson faced less legal exposure. No one believes Trump would have been indicted on such counts—most of them involving allegations from years past—were he not running for President.

One count that Donald Trump is not charged with is bribery, or taking money while in office, a crime cited as impeachable in the Constitution and germane to the accusations that Joe Biden and his family raked in millions from foreign governments due to the improper use of his prior Vice Presidency. For what reason did Joe Biden lie that he never discussed his son’s business? Why did Hunter complain to his daughter that Joe demanded half of his own grifting income? Why would a Vice President serially call disreputable American grifters and foreign corrupt oligarchs? Can Joe’s lifestyle ever be reconciled with his reported income?

Given such asymmetry in the application of the laws, conservative or even apolitical Americans are apprehensive that any political prominence will draw the attention of government in effort to either indict or bankrupt them with legal expenses.

The last four FBI Directors have either admitted they lied under oath, or preposterously under oath claimed ignorance or amnesia about events directly under their control. Or they simply stonewalled subpoenas and testimonies about alleged FBI crimes. 

The former CIA Director admitted to lying twice under oath. The FBI hired social media corporations to suppress election-cycle news deemed unhelpful to the Left. The agency, along with Democratic operatives, helped hatch the election-cycle conspiracy of the 2015-2016 Russian-Collusion hoax, and the 2020 Russian disinformation laptop hoax. The FBI played a central role in many of the 2024 indictments. In other words, the FBI along with the DOJ, has sought to warp three presidential elections in a row.

On the prompt of a Joe Biden campaign official (and now Secretary of State) and a former interim CIA director, 50 former intelligence officials lied to the electorate that an authentic but incriminating Biden computer was a likely Russian plant—a fact known to be lie but not disclosed as such by the FBI.

The Attack on the Supreme Court. Once the Court achieved a more or less predictable conservative majority, the Left sought to diminish it in a variety of ways. It has called for packing the Court with leftist jurists to create a new 15-justice bench. Leftist law professors in the Ivy League, in neo-Confederate nullification and insurrectionary style, call for the nation to ignore Court rulings on abortion and affirmative action.

The Senate minority leader led a throng to the doors of the court, threatening justices by name: “You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

Protestors now mob the homes of individual justices hoping to intimidate them and alter their upcoming opinions—confident that the Department of Justice will exempt them from any legal consequences of such felonious behavior.

The media routinely accuses conservative justices of improper or illegal behavior, without worry about the emptiness of the charges. A traditionalist justice now accepts that a controversial ruling can result in media charges that he is corrupt, in shrieking protestors mobbing his home, in a mob assembling at the doors of the Court, in disruptions during Court hearings, in politicians issuing threats to his person, in congressional calls to alter the century-and-a-half make-up of the Court, and in Ivy League law professors urging the country to ignore majority decisions.

In sum, a conservative jurist must be careful where and when he goes out in public.

The Media-Democratic Fusion. If one were to listen during the last few years to NBC, ABC, CBS, NPR, PBS, MSNBC, or CNN, or read the New York Times, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, or the Los Angeles Times, then one would have believed the following:

A) Donald Trump worked with the Russians to throw and win the 2016 election. As part of that skullduggery, frolicking amid prostitutes he urinated on a Moscow hotel bed to spite Barack Obama. B) He was mentally incapacitated as president and should have been removed under the 25th Amendment. C) In 2020, his campaign once more worked with the Russians to create an exact replica of Hunter Biden’s laptop, replete with dozens of lurid fake photos and hundreds of cleverly doctored emails to smear the Biden family and aid his own reelection effort. D) Trump as chief conspirator preplanned a violent and armed insurrection that sought to storm and permanently occupy the government, violently hijacking the balloting and seizing the presidency—resulting in the murder of a Capitol police officer and the subsequent deaths of other traumatized officers.

E) For the last eight years, none of Trump’s political opponents have ever destroyed subpoenaed evidence, conspired to hire foreign nationals to compile false and lurid files on him to subvert his political campaigns, or used their political offices to help solicit foreign money for family lobbyists. F) Trump is the first major candidate and politician who allegedly overvalued his real assets to obtain a loan that he repaid; the first to have concluded non-disclosure agreements with potential embarrassing liaisons; the first ex-president to remove sensitive files to his personal residence; and the first to phone a state official to whine about the integrity of the vote count. G) He is the first losing presidential candidate or major politician to question an election result or to seek redress through government agencies to rectify the purported corruption of the balloting.

In sum, for the first time in American history, nearly all the major communication and journalistic networks have been fused with a political party. They believe the new role of the media is to advance a shared progressive cause, oppose and even defame common opponents, and feed their audiences things that are not, and cannot possibly be, true.

The Destruction of Common Law. By defunding the police in major cities, and by showering leftwing district attorney candidates with millions of dollars in campaign funding, the Left systematically eroded the law as we know it in our major cities.

As a result, downtowns are after-dark, no-go zones, as once great metropolises resemble veritable combat theaters. Cities are becoming depopulated as consumers and businesses no longer find it safe to conduct commerce. Criminals and homeless now routinely break the law with impunity. Public violence, defecation, urination, fornication, and injection do not even rate as misdemeanors.

The Left has redefined violent crime to such an extent that shoplifting is no longer actionable. Flash mobs that take over streets and swarm to loot stores are rarely if ever arrested. Security officers who apprehend thieves or intervene to stop violence are more likely to be prosecuted than criminals themselves. There is no longer any immigration law; it has been utterly destroyed by Joe Biden. Seven-million illegal entrants flood into the U.S. and, along with the Mexican government, make demands on their hosts to accommodate their illegality.

In sum, in blue states and at the federal level, leftwing prosecutors and justices decide to enforce or ignore statutes, pile up or reduce indictments, increase or decrease punishments not on what the law entails, or evidence directs, but on the race, class, or ideology of the perpetrator, usually in connection with the particular status of his victims. If asymmetry in race, class, or ideology is suggested, then the law must modulate in redistributive fashion to contextualize the crime and criminal as a victim rather than a victimizer. The result is the veritable destruction of law and order as we once knew it.

The Erosion of the Military. Rarely has the American people polled so little confidence in the U.S. military. It perceives the Pentagon mission largely one to greenlight social change through the rapidity of the chain of command, not necessarily to maintain deterrence, much less to win all its wars. 

The Left has ensured that our armed forces are underfunded, short on munitions and weapons, and military officers are used to promote progressive social agendas. Officers expect to be promoted or stalled on the basis of their views on race and gender.

Those who traditionally died at twice their numbers in the general population in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan are ostracized and in near record numbers leaving, while their friends and relatives are no longer enlisting in the military.

Former Pentagon four-star officers violated the Code of Uniform Military Justice in attacking a sitting president with the harshest invective, invoking comparisons to Hitler and Mussolini, again predictably from a leftwing point of view.

The public expects the Joint Chiefs to be both appointed on ideological considerations, and from time to time even to free-lance to contact enemy counterparts should they feel a conservative president is dangerous to world peace.

There is no longer any social stigma or legal jeopardy for retired officers in working as defense contractor lobbyists or board members, after revolving from or soon back to the Pentagon.

Sexes. The heterosexual male and female, marriage, and the nuclear family are all to be suspect. There are three sexes or perhaps still more. English language pronouns are inadequate to reflect sexual diversity.

So adherence to such ossified languages is career endangering. An epidemic of childlessness, singlehood, and collapsing fertility rates are either of no national importance or illustrate the preferred non-nuclear family model. Powerful hormonal drug regimens and permanent radical sex-change surgery should be the choices of minors alone who know best when they choose to transition to another sex. Graphic sex manuals and drag queen shows with simulated sex acts can perhaps acculturate preteens to the dangers of growing up in an oppressive “normative” binary society.

Sex, but not race, is constructed, and thus a matter not of biology but of individual choice.

Race, Not Class. Racial inequality and lack of parity are due to “whiteness.” Racial quotas, segregated dorms, graduations, workshops, and safe spaces are exempt from civil rights statutes given they are necessary to achieve equity. Integration and assimilation are the opiates of the masses. Apartheid and segregation are misunderstood modalities, and thus, if enlightened, sometimes necessary corrective measures.

Reparations are to supersede ineffective affirmative action. Wokeness liberates us to see how race explains everything in America, past and present. At universities and in popular culture “proportional representation” of various ethnicities and races is no longer sufficient remedy.

Instead reparatory hiring and admissions are required to atone for prior generations of discrimination. It is taboo to suggest that cultural conditions not just race accounts for inequality. Everything from meritocracy to promptness to physical fitness is racist in nature, requiring DEI experts to expose and inform about the systemic nature of American racism.

Debt is a Construct. Modern monetary theory proved that annual deficits and national debt are just a state accounting challenge. So printing more money is an act that properly diminishes the value of existing capital improperly horded by parasitic profiteers. Spreading the ensuing cash wealth to the more deserving and victimized is long overdue social justice.

At any time, the national “debt” can be deconstructed by renouncing usurious bond obligations, appropriating private retirement accounts, or further inflating the currency—if governments are committed enough to social justice.

Universities. It is now heresy that universities should be places of disinterested inquiry and inductive investigation. They can properly instead become a valuable tool in ridding society of racist and sexist forces, platitudes about free speech and equality under the law, and the tyranny of private property, capitalist profiteering, and white, male heterosexual Christian oppression.

So the role of a university is to create a brief safe space in which graduates can leave with proper training about the terrible history of the United States and the ways in which it must be dismantled and then be rebuilt by the properly trained experts from the ground up. Counterrevolutionaries or deluded liberals and their quaint adherence to a racist and archaic Bill of Rights have no place on these islands of progressive resistance.

None of the above was true at the millennium; all are now—with more still to come.



‘Hail Satan! Hail Thyself’: What the Gender Cult and Satanism Have in Common

It should come as no surprise that rebellion against God’s design for humanity is satanically inspired. That is, after all, his mission.



A self-described transgender graphic designer made national headlines this June when a number of her designs were used in Target’s controversial pride collection. One design found on the London-based designer’s own online apparel shop has the message: “Satan respects pronouns,” encircling a goat head. 

The designer, whose shirts feature phrases like “astrology made me queer” and whose UFO-shaped pin says “no gender no problem,” doesn’t claim on her site to be a Satanist per se. Instead, “Erik” says, “There’s something magical about the unknown, the frightening, and the mystical which is why I so frequently feature these themes in my art.”    

Erik’s work isn’t the only pride-adjacent satanically inspired activity to feature in pop culture recently. The brand Nair, which supports pride as evidenced by its Instagram posts, ran an audacious “worship yourself” ad campaign that harks back to the “father of modern Satanism’s” motto, “Hail Satan! Hail thyself.” 

At the 2023 Grammy award show, self-proclaimed “nonbinary” singer Sam Smith and transgender Kim Petras’ performance of their hit single “Unholy” included blatant satanic imagery.

Smith and Petras don’t publicly identify as Satanists, but many LGBT members and “pride” proponents do. A simple search of “Satanist” among Twitter accounts brings up countless results that include rainbow flags and gender tags such as “nonbinary” and “she-they.” 

Lucien Greaves, cofounder of the Satanic Temple, says most members of the Temple are LGBT folks who consider themselves rejected by orthodox churches and other such religious establishments. Greaves told Out.com, “We will always fight them, we will fight them to the death to ensure that there are equal rights for the gay community.” 

History shows, too, that Satanism has been a fitting spiritual home for the pride “community.” Aleister Crowley, the early 19th-century occultist credited with being the “grandfather” of modern theistic Satanism, was keenly interested in ancient pagan deities, many of whom are seen today as “gender-bending.” Androgyny or hermaphroditism was seen by Crowley and other forebearers of the modern occult as mystical, powerful, and closer to the divine. Crowley’s “Gnostic Mass” includes the phrases:

Male-female, quintessential, one

Man-being veiled in woman-form. 

The infamous icon of Satanism, the goat-headed “Baphomet,” represents a fusion of the male and female, with the two halves of the body representing each sex. The “divine androgyne” is “the hieroglyph of arcane perfection,” according to Crowley. While Baphomet has a complicated history of iterations and interpretation, it’s not unreasonable to imagine that gender-confused young people might welcome this binary-breaking symbol of “balance and harmony” and see a satanic sect as a spiritual home for them.

The two most famous philosophical statements of the 20th century’s most iconic Satanists, Crowley and Anton LaVey, serve to illustrate the strong ties between modern “pride” and their belief systems. The life of Crowley especially finds continuity in the gender-expansive, free-love universe of pride. 

‘Hail Satan! Hail Thyself’

In the 1960’s, LaVey, known as the “Black Pope,” created a Satanism that differed from other, older satanic traditions in that it claimed to be atheistic, considering Satan to be a literary figure. LaVey’s most famous chant is “Hail Satan! Hail Thyself.” His Satanism prescribes self-worship and gratification: staples of LGBT pride culture.

Two of his Nine Satanic Statements are: “Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification!” and, “Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence!”

While most who wave the rainbow flag no doubt would agree that, for instance, murder is wrong (a “so-called sin” Satan represents), pride nevertheless allies itself with the pro-abortion agenda. The right to murder a preborn baby leads to “mental and emotional gratification” for the abortive mother (and often her sexual partners). And ridding oneself of progeny to care for promotes further indulgence Satan is said to represent. Proponents of sexual libertinism and gender fluidity don’t usually describe themselves as Satanists, but LaVey’s philosophy of carnal hedonism is the bedrock of today’s pride culture.

Writing for the Encyclopedia of Religion, professor of religious studies Eugene V. Gallagher describes LaVey’s Satanic Bible as promoting “ritual and pageantry” and displaying “a flair for mockery.” On a ritualistic and philosophical level, drag queen, queer, and homosexual subcultures would mesh well with LaVeyan Satanism. What is drag but pageantry mocking femininity? And what would foment the mockery of Judeo-Christian sexual norms and family structure better than hailing Satan, the enemy of the God who made humankind into the “restrictive” physiological categories of “male and female”? 

‘Do What Thou Wilt’

One familiar repeated sentiment in Crowley’s 1909 The Book of the Law has echoed through culture for over a century now: “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law. … Love is the law, love under will.” We may not know it verbatim, but we recognize its other iterations such as “follow your heart” or “do what you want” or “all you need is love.” These popular cultural expressions guide the pride movement; they encourage the unshackling of human expression from heterosexual mores. 

Unlike LaVey who came after, Crowley was an unabashed theistic Satanist. He wrote in his autobiography of his desire to “get hold of [Satan] personally and become his chief of staff” and “get into personal communication with the Devil.” His pride and egotism, modeled in today’s pride movement, would seem prerequisites even to aspire to such a position.

Activities the Bible labels sexual depravity, the kind celebrated in pride parades, were rampant in Crowley’s life. Early on, he rejected Christian morality and saw taboos as things to be deliberately shattered. The occultist was keen on “sex magic” and was bisexual, as evidenced by his more recently discovered homoerotic poetry. The Book of the Law reflects his belief in “free love,” a lifestyle most accepted within pride: Also, take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where and with whom ye will!” 

Today, we can see the blending with LaVey’s and Crowley’s philosophies under the rainbow flag: While so-called love is esteemed, the only true reverence is for the self, and the only allegiance is to its will. The highest virtue is the expression of one’s true self: to live authentically, or live your truth. “Hail thyself” and “do what thou wilt” are guiding principles of the pride movement. 

In Christian theology, pride is the original sin that prompted God to cast Satan down from heaven. He now leads a rebellion against God’s will. What a wonder is it that pride is the name taken on by the LGBT alliance, which is also leading a rebellion against biblical morality? Those who don’t support pride are routinely shocked by the rhetoric, imagery, and stated desires of the pride movement, such as offering graphic sexual material to young children in school libraries.

But it should come as no surprise that rebellion against God’s design for humanity is satanically inspired. That is, after all, his mission.



Judge Cannon Denies Special Counsel Motions to Seal Evidence, Asks Smith to Justify Out of District Grand Jury


Florida District Judge Aileen Cannon denied a DOJ request to keep evidence sealed in the Mar-a-Lago documents case against President Donald J Trump.  Additionally, Cannon has demanded that Special Counsel Jack Smith explain why he is using an out of district grand jury to construct additional charges against the defendant.  [2-page ruling pdf here]

Cannon has presided over the document issues even before the indictment against Donald Trump was unsealed.  As a result, she has a good frame of reference for the Lawfare tactics the Special Counsel is attempting to deploy.

Apparently, the DOJ doesn’t want defendant Waltine Nauta to have the same attorney as someone who might also be a co-defendant or witness in the case.  A “Garcia Hearing refers to hearing held under criminal procedure to ensure that a defendant who is one of two or more defendants represented by the same attorney realizes the following:

1.that there is a risk of conflict of interest inherent in the joint representation;  2.that s/he is entitled to the services of an attorney who does not represent anyone else in the defendant’s case.”

Judge Cannon denied the DOJ request to keep filings sealed in the case and she removed sealed filings from the record.  Cannon also asked for prosecutors to provide additional explanations about their continued use of a DC jury in the case, which is situated in Florida.



It Sure Looks Like Gavin Newsom Is Looking for a Way Out of His Debate With Ron DeSantis

It Sure Looks Like Gavin Newsom Is Looking for a Way Out of His Debate With Ron DeSantis

Bonchie reporting for RedState 

Is Gavin Newsom looking for a way out of his debate with Ron DeSantis? That’s sure what it looks like after the California governor’s latest fit.

As RedState reported, DeSantis accepted the debate challenge during a recent appearance on Fox News. Newsom had previously sent his offer to Sean Hannity in late July, who he wants to moderate the event.

But Newsom is now crying foul after DeSantis sent his proposed debate rules.

“What a joke,” Newsom spokesperson Nathan Click said in a statement. “Desantis’ counterproposal is littered with crutches to hide his insecurity and ineptitude — swapping opening statements with a hype video, cutting down the time he needs to be on stage, adding cheat notes and a cheering section.”

“Ron should be able to stand on his own two feet,” he added. “It’s no wonder Trump is kicking his ass.”

The line about Trump beating DeSantis is cute (while ignoring Newsom is too chicken to run against Joe Biden), but it completely papers over the fact that this is a debate between Newsom and DeSantis. A debate that Newsom himself proposed. And while the statement from his spokesperson above includes a lot of rhetoric to make it seem like DeSantis’ terms are unreasonable, when you actually look at the details, they are simply normal things you’d expect in any debate.

For example, DeSantis is proposing the same 90-minute time frame that Newsom did. He’s also proposing the debate take place in Georgia, a state Newsom himself suggested. The Florida governor is even agreeing to Newsom’s rules about no interruptions and having two-minute closing statements. Lastly, DeSantis agreed to a November 8th debate, which is one of only two dates Newsom offered.

None of that seems unreasonable, does it?

The two sides’ proposed rules detail a number of similarities. They both agree on Hannity being the lone moderator, a 90-minute run time, equally divided speaking time and two minutes of closing statements.

Between the two governors’ proposals, Nov. 8 is the only date in common, while Georgia is the only location in common.

In fact, aside from the idea of having opener videos highlighting each state’s achievements, which doesn’t seem like that big of a deal, Newsom’s freakout seems to revolve around just a single request: Having a live audience.

Apparently, the California governor believes his much-loved COVID lockdowns are still in effect throughout the country. They aren’t, though, and debates have traditionally taken place in front of live audiences. DeSantis’ proposal to have people in the crowd even includes a 50/50 split of tickets so those who attend are evenly divided between the two participants.

The idea that Newsom would scoff at such a request and call it a “joke” is laughable. It also exposes the California governor’s cowardice. He wants a controlled environment where real people have no ability to respond to anything he says, which is exactly what he’s used to living in his insulated deep blue kingdom.

Putting all this together, it sure looks like Newsom is just looking for an excuse to bail. Never in a million years did he expect DeSantis to accept his debate challenge. Heck, I didn’t expect it given Newsom isn’t running for president (officially, at least).

Ask yourself, why did Newsom only propose dates in mid-November? No one actually believes he doesn’t have a free evening until then, especially given all the other press appearances he’s been making. Does he really need that much time to prepare for a single debate on the issues he claims he’s winning on? Or is he trying to stall in hopes that things fall apart and he doesn’t have to show up? With all the crying about simply appearing in front of an audience, my money is on the latter.

Is Newsom a better debater than DeSantis? I don’t know. What I do know is that the facts are on DeSantis’ side, and I’d much rather be defending Florida’s governance than California’s. No amount of slick talking is going to change the gulf of success between the two states. I’d suspect Newsom knows that, and now he’s scrambling.