Tuesday, June 4, 2024

Why Trump Personifies the Courage of Our Founding Fathers


One day, when unbiased, non-woke, not-in-the-tank-for-the-Democrats historians appear once again in our nation, they will draw apt comparisons between former President Donald J. Trump – before, during, and after the sham show-trial forced upon him by the Democratic machine seeking to keep him off the ballot – and the likes of Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and John Hancock.

While some may find that a stretch, it is not. 

Just about two years ago, I authored a book titled: The 56 – Liberty Lessons from those who risked all to sign The Declaration of Independence. The sole purpose of that book was to not only warn of the far-left’s increasing attempts to cancel the 4th of July and our Founding Fathers, but to outline how to stop them.

For over a year prior to its publication, I spent endless hours researching the men who eventually signed the Declaration as well as those who did not. Men, by the way, who were all flawed and imperfect human beings, as are we all.

In many ways, it was the mindset of the men who refused to step up to sign the most famous document in our history, which ultimately highlighted the incredible courage, fortitude, sacrifice and genius of those who did sign. Most especially, the wealthiest of the Signers.

Back in 1776, the vast majority of the wealthy in the Colonies either remained silent, or openly became “Loyalists” to the British Crown. Why? They did not want to rock the boat or risk their wealth and privilege.

Fortunately for us, our wealthy Founding Fathers decided they could not live with themselves if they did not step out from that pack of entitled silent sheep to take a stand against the tyranny of the Crown. Each asked the two most critically important questions of their lives: “If not me, who? If not now, when?”

Now, let’s flash ahead to June of 2015.

At that time, Trump was one of the wealthiest and most well-known men not only in the United States, but in the world. He was a multibillionaire with a global business empire. Why in the world would he rock that boat? Better – like the wealthy of 1776 – to play nice with the entrenched establishment elites in both political Parties so as to secure his wealth and privilege.

I was told by friends of Trump that as he travelled the country in 2015 he was truly shocked and saddened by what he saw. That being countless Americans suffering under the failed policies of a broken and corrupt political system. And it was then, I was told that Trump asked himself those same two questions: “If not me, who? If not now, when?”

So, he declared himself a candidate for President.   

And from the second he did, he was savaged by the forces from the left as well as Republican “Never-Trumpers” who knew they could not control him. As we know, once he shocked the political world with his victory in 2016, those vile attacks only intensified. By 2020, it was clear that there was no line the Democrats and their bootlickers in the liberal media would not cross to “get Trump.”

Come 2024 Trump did not have to guess what some Democrats had in store for him if he ran for President because they openly telegraphed the strategy. They had a bloodlust to imprison him by any means necessary.

Now, think about that for a moment. Trump knew they were marshaling an army of activist liberal judges, prosecutors, district attorneys and state supreme courts against him in a desperate attempt to imprison him and he still chose to run for president.

Many have forgotten – or are not taught – that a number of Founding Fathers paid a cruel price for signing the Declaration of Independence. As in: having their homes and crops burned to the ground; their livestock slaughtered; being imprisoned; being tortured; having their wives arrested and sexually abused; and their sons arrested.

In spite of that – and because of that – our Founding Fathers believed that unless and until they imprison us or take our lives, they cannot silence our individual voices. They can’t stop us from speaking out in the defense of our liberty and our rights.

Trump would not be silenced. Illegal gag orders or not, he spoke out for his rights while highlighting the threats against his liberty and…ours.

And as his voice still echoes, we should all think: “There but for the Grace of God go I.” For if the forces of the far-left can do this to a multibillionaire former President of the United States, they can do it to any one of us.

Sadly, there are multiple conservative, Republican, and faith-based billionaires with broad reaching talents who have chosen to remain on the sidelines. Who have chosen to “not rock the boat.” Who have allowed themselves to be cowed into silence by the forces of the far-left.

Trump was – and is – not one. Honest history will one day record that when the United States of our time needed a champion with the traits of a “Founding Father,” Trump stood up and fought the good fight against the entrenched establishments and overwhelming odds.

A fight he is still waging.



X22, On the Fringe, and more- June 4

 




The Destructive Generation—Proving America’s Weakest Link ~ VDH


A single generation has broken apart the great 
chain of American civilizational continuance.


Reagan today might have expanded on his theme by declaring that civilization itself is both fragile and can lost by a generation that recklessly spends its inheritance while neither appreciating nor replenishing it—if not ridiculing those who sacrificed so much to provide it.

Such is the noxious epitaph of the Baby Boomer generation that is now passing after a half-century of preeminence and whose Jacobin agendas have nearly wrecked the nation they inherited.

In contrast to them, eighty years ago this week, the Allied powers of World War II—chiefly the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada—landed on five Normandy beaches to begin what Gen. Dwight Eisenhower, supreme commander of the Allied expeditionary forces, would call the great “crusade” to liberate Western Europe from four years of brutal Nazi occupation.

The plan was to land within a few hours and in stormy weather well over 150,000 Americans, British, and Canadians on the Atlantic Coast beaches of France, where they were to charge directly into the fire of tens of thousands of enemy troops. They were to charge uphill in the sand while being fired upon by entrenched German troops occupying the hills above. From there, the beachhead was to serve as the launching pad for two million more troops, who were to somehow drive eastward through France and into Germany to end the war and the devastation the Third Reich had inflicted on the world.

All that was accomplished in the ensuing 11 months. That can-do American generation assumed that impoverished teenagers emerging from the Great Depression, with equipment often inferior to their seasoned German enemies, would, over the ensuing months, surely prove able to route Waffen SS veterans. Many of them were hastily transferred from the murderous Eastern Front, such as the nihilist 2nd SS Panzer Division das Reich (“The Empire”). No matter, the Americans did the impossible in less than a year—from the Normandy beaches to well across the Rhine River.

That same generation went on to save South Korea, build an anti-totalitarian world order, defeat Soviet communism, and pass on to the Baby Boomer generation the strongest economy, military, and political system in history, or, to paraphrase the poet Horace, “monuments more lasting than bronze.” Or so we, the inheritors, thought.

And what are the now septuagenarian and octogenarian children of the veterans of Omaha Beach and Iwo Jima, leaving as their own legacy?

The self-infatuated and do-your-own-thing generation that gave us the Sixties and the counterculture has left the country $36 trillion in debt, now borrowing $1 trillion nearly every three months. Worse, there is not just no plan to balance budgets, much less to reduce the debt, but also no intention to stop or even worry about the borrowing of some $10 billion a day. 

The U.S. military is almost unrecognizable to that of just a few decades ago. It was humiliated in Kabul. In surrealistic fashion, it abandoned some $50 billion in lethal weaponry to the Taliban—along with our NATO allies, American contractors, and loyal Afghans. And our supreme command labeled that rout a brilliant retreat. Meanwhile, the military suffers from depleted inventory of key munitions while being short 45,000 annual recruits.

The Pentagon is torn by internal dissension over DEI, woke, anti-meritocratic promotions, and a politicized officer class—well, apart from now also being outmanned and outgunned by the Chinese. Many of the world’s key maritime corridors—the Red Sea, the Straits of Hormuz, the Black Sea, and the South China sea—are apparently beyond our navy’s ability to ensure the world safe transit.

For perceived cheap political advantage, the Baby Boomers destroyed the southern border, most recently allowing in nearly 10 million unaudited illegal aliens. With the disappearance of our national sovereignty, so too was lost the once-cherished idea of a melting pot of legal immigrants arriving in America longing to assimilate, to integrate in self-reliant fashion, and to show gratitude for the chance of something far better than what they left.

The country’s major cities are increasingly medieval, with a million homeless camped on fetid streets. Criminals terrorize the law-abiding. They assume their violence will be contextualized away by vacuous “critical legal” or “critical race” or “critical penal” theories. This generation releases violent felons to prey on the weak and sheds hardly a tear as police officers are shot unnoticed at the rate of nearly one a day.

America’s once great universities—such as Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, and MIT—are now into their fourth year of abolishing much of their prior standards. The youth who sought to wreck them from the outside in the 1960s now succeed in finishing the job as elders on the inside. These bankrupt campuses now adjudicate admissions and hiring by race, tribe and gender and then wonder why their students are entitled, ignorant, and arrogant yet unable to meet the very standards that the universities once insisted were critical to ensuring their preeminence.

Worse, the more elite the campuses, the more they became hotbeds of unapologetic anti-Semitism, gratuitous violence, and hatred for the country’s very institutions that guarantee their own freedom of action and speech. Who taught them and allowed them to think that as they illegally occupied buildings, defaced and defiled monuments, and shouted Jew hatred, they were absurdly entitled to free food deliveries and amnesties?

A rapacious higher education welcomed in profitable anti-American students and billions of dollars in hostile foreign cash from those who mock the laws of their host and feel a covetous America can be bought for 10 cents on the dollar. And as we learned after October 7, they were mostly correct.

Abroad, our nomenklatura opportunistically demonizes a democratic Israel trying to fight a terrorist Hamas that slaughtered 1,200 mostly unarmed citizens at a time of peace in the most grotesque fashion of the 21st century.

Yet our elite cannot distinguish killers from our democratic allies. Hamas deliberately drafted their own citizens to serve as shields to protect the terrorists safely ensconced in the tunnels below—on the sick assurance that Israel would surely try to avoid killing civilian shields whom the cynical Hamas apparat deliberately exposed to protect itself.

America hectors its most loyal ally in a way it does not its chief enemies, communist China and theocratic Iran. Not content with hiding its role in birthing the gain-in-function COVID-19 virus, now with impunity China helps kill 100,000 Americans a year through the export of fentanyl. It sends nearly 30,000 adult males into the US illegally. It relies on the espionage abilities of its students and visitors —and apparently exempt spy balloons—to ensure the People’s Liberation Army’s technological parity with the U.S.

But the greatest baleful legacy of this fading generation is the weaponization of the government against its own perceived American citizen enemies. That bastardization of institutions extends now to the very destruction of the once-hallowed tradition of American jurisprudence.

The degeneration was not just that our government and its political ancillaries cooked up the Russian collusion hoax that warped the 2016 campaign and crippled a presidency—but that, to this day, its unapologetic architects remain smug that they pulled it off and would do it again.

Ditto the efforts of “intelligence authorities” to delude the American people about “Russian disinformation” and the Hunter Biden laptop. The Sixties generation’s new normal is to impeach a president twice, to try him as a private citizen, and to seek to remove him from state ballots.

All that was now characteristic of a generation that learned in the 1960s that if it did not get its way, it would wreck what it could not control. So, it was logical that it sought to pack the court, to end the filibuster, to destroy the Electoral College—and to corrupt the law to achieve political ends. Or as the Sixties generation taught us, “by any means necessary”—an arrogant affirmation of Machiavelli’s dictum that “the ends justify the means.”

Now we are left with a final toxic gift from this generation: the destruction of jurisprudence, a system designed not to easily protect the popular and admired but those often pilloried in the public square, the unorthodox, eccentric, and unliked.

Even Trump’s antagonists know that had Donald Trump been a man of the left, or had he not run again for president, he would never have been charged, much less convicted, of felonies or been punished with nearly a half-billion dollars in legal fees and fines.

We all accept that the charges brought against him by a vindictive and left-wing Letitia James, Alvin Bragg, Fani Willis and Jack Smith—all compromised by either past politicized prosecutorial failures or boasts of getting Trump—have never before been brought against any prior political figure or indeed any average citizen. They were instead invented to target a single political enemy. So what hallowed law, what constitutional norm, what ancient custom, or what Bill or Rights has the fading left not destroyed in order to erase Donald Trump from the political scene?

There is now no distinction between state and federal law. Once a prosecutor targets an enemy, he can flip back and forth between such statutes to find the necessary legal gimmick to destroy his target.

Statutes of limitations are no more as errant prosecutors and political operatives in the legislature can change laws to dredge up supposed crimes of years past, to destroy their political enemies, by employing veritable bills of attainder.

The very notion of an exculpatory hung jury depends on who is to be hung.

Judges can overtly contribute to the political opponents of the accused before them. Their children can profit in the tens of millions by selling to politicos their relationship to the very judge who holds the fate of their political opponents in his hands.

In sum, the First Amendment guaranteeing the right of the defendant to free speech is now not applicable. Asymmetrical gag orders are.

The Fourth Amendment is now torn to shreds by those who boast of “saving democracy.” When the FBI, on orders from a hostile administration, storms into the home of the leading presidential candidate and ex-president’s home, armed to the teeth, treats a civil dispute as a violent felony, and then doctors the evidence it finds, then constitutional insurance against “unreasonable searches and seizures” becomes a bitter joke for generations.

The Fifth Amendment’s protection that no person “shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” has been destroyed when an ex-president cannot summon expert legal witnesses to testify on his behalf and when he cannot bring in evidence that contradicts his accusers. There is no due process when one ex-president is indicted for the very crimes his exempted successor has committed.

The Sixth Amendment’s various assurances are now kaput. No one believes that Trump was tried “by an impartial jury of the State”—not when prosecutors deliberately indicted him in a city where 85 percent of the population voted against him and are by design of a different political party.

No longer will an American have the innate right “to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor” when Donald Trump was never informed by prosecutor Alvin Bragg of the felony for which he was charged, with little advance idea of all the hostile prosecutorial witnesses to be called, and with no right to call in experts to refute the prosecution’s bizarre notion of campaign finance violations.

The Seventh Amendment is likewise now on the ash heap of history. The publicity-seeking judge Arthur Engoron, a political antagonist of Trump, warped the law in order to serve as judge, jury, and executioner of Trump’s fate, without recourse to a jury of even his biased New York peers.

The Eighth Amendment will offer assurance no longer to the American people that “excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

Donald Trump was fined $83.3 million in the E. Jean Carroll case for an alleged assault of three decades past, brought by partisan manipulative waving of the statute of limitations, with the politicized accuser having no idea of the year the assault took place, with her accusations arising only decades later when Trump became a political candidate, with her own employers insisting she was fired for reasons having nothing to do with Donald Trump, and with her narrative eerily matching a TV show plot rather than any provable facts of the case.

By what logic was Trump fined $175 million for supposedly inflated asset valuation to obtain a loan that was repaid with interest to banks that had no complaint? Since when does the state seek to inflict such “unusual” punishments for a crime that never before had existed and never will again henceforth?

In sum, our departing weak-link generation leaves us this final Parthian shot— that when a toxic ideology so alienates the people who are rising up to prevent its continuance, then the desperate architects of such disasters can dismantle the rule of law to destroy its critics.

And so, a single generation has broken apart the great chain of American civilizational continuance. But if this weak-leak generation thinks the evil that they wrought is their last word, they should remember the warning of a great historian:

“Indeed men too often take upon themselves in the prosecution of their revenge to set the example of doing away with those general laws to which all alike can look for salvation in adversity, instead of allowing them to subsist against the day of danger when their aid may be required.” – Thucydides 3.84.3



In the Foxhole with Donald Trump


For me, the worst part about New York’s Soviet show trial was how it tormented President Trump’s supporters.  I kept an eye on numerous messaging boards as the Democrat jury wrapped up deliberations, and so many people were struggling in real-time with the likelihood that Trump would be found “guilty.”  In some instances, I recognized the names of commenters who had been soberly pointing out how rigged the trial was for weeks yet nonetheless expressed agony at the inevitable result.  Grief can be a tricky thing.  Everyone understood that pathetic “Judge” Merchan presided over an un-American and unconstitutional spectacle engineered to deliver a guilty verdict, yet accepting that the expected outcome had, in fact, come to pass still felt like a sharp jab to the ribs.

I think people were desperately hoping that some measure of justice would prevail despite the unavoidable realities that corrupt prosecutors (including one of Biden’s highest-ranking at the Department of in-Justice) pursued Trump for imaginary crimes (transforming misdemeanor bookkeeping actions into felonies while ignoring New York’s statute of limitations) in front of an unethical judge (who repeatedly prevented the defense from presenting exculpatory evidence while enthusiastically violating Trump’s constitutional rights) and a jury filled to the brim with Trump-hating Democrats.  Justice died a long time ago.  Democrats and their Deep State cohorts bludgeoned it in a back alley.  “Judge” Merchan was simply urinating on its unmarked grave.

This trial was always going to end with a banana-republic conviction.  The whole sordid ordeal reminded me of the scene from My Cousin Vinny in which Joe Pesci tells a distraught defendant falsely accused of murder, “Hey, Stan.  You’re in Ala-****’n-bama.  You come from New York.  You killed a good ol’ boy.  There is no way this is not going to trial.”  Donald Trump may be from New York, but he embarrassed Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, reduced the Democrats’ psychologically unstable voter base to tears, exposed the epidemic of RINO-ism in the Republican Party, and refused to bow down to the Deep State.  They were always going to make him pay.

We live in a post-constitutional America whose government works for an international coalition of financial “elites.”  Donald Trump seeks to restore the Bill of Rights and rebuild a strong middle class through America-first economic policies.  There was no way the Democrat Deep State would peacefully accept Trump’s victories.  Ever since Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and the Gestapo FBI framed him as a Russian spy, it has been clear that prosecutors and judges would tear up the Constitution in their relentless efforts to imprison Trump and his supporters.

New York’s role in all of this has been particularly execrable.  Attorney General Letitia James and District Attorney Alvin Bragg ran for office on a promise to “get Trump,” an unconscionable betrayal of their official duties which deserved (but never received) widespread condemnation from government authorities and the press.  While ignoring skyrocketing violent crime and refusing to prosecute dangerous repeat offenders, James and Bragg have spent millions of dollars targeting Joe Biden’s chief political rival and the Republicans’ presumptive presidential nominee.  Likewise, state legislators have rewritten statutes in order to make it easier for celebrity-seeking plaintiffs to sue President Trump in civil court over matters that New York law would have otherwise barred as untimely and which judges should have dismissed for insufficient evidence.  AG James has bastardized civil fraud statutes in order to invent new offenses, seize hundreds of millions of dollars from the Trump family, and drive his business operations from the state.  In an all-hands-on-deck approach to harassing Trump, New York courts, lawmakers, and prosecutors have done everything they can to punish the innocent and protect the guilty.

At every turn, when New York judges have had the chance to prevent these miscarriages of justice from disgracing their courtrooms, they have instead conspired with prosecutors and plaintiffs to advance fanciful interpretations of the law while depriving President Trump of his constitutional rights.  They have repeatedly threatened to jail Trump for publicly defending himself against media calumnies.  They have chained Trump to a defense table during the most important political campaign of his life and issued overly broad gag orders designed to silence his political speech.  Instead of recommending that James, Bragg, and other lawfare assassins be disbarred and removed from office for having caused irreparable harm to the rule of law, these same partisan judges have condoned the sleazy efforts to confiscate President Trump’s wealth and toss him in prison.  That’s one hell of a way to treat a man who has spent a lifetime building Manhattan’s skyline, burnishing New York’s reputation around the world, and paying civil servants’ salaries with a fortune in state and city taxes.

With so much injustice directed against one man, it is quite understandable that his supporters would feel dejected.  To fight that poisonous inclination, look to the man himself!  Not once during “Judge” Merchan’s Soviet show trial did President Trump appear less determined, confident, or in charge.  Not once in all of the various lawfare proceedings arrayed against him has President Trump ever winced or expressed defeat.  He remains a man of action, a leader who cannot be bullied to change course.  We have a lot of work ahead of us, friends, and there will be many injustices that we are forced to endure.  Do not waste your energies worrying about the Democrat Deep State’s tyrannical schemes to imprison Donald J. Trump.  Look to the man.  Watch how he behaves.  Focus on the resolve in his eyes and the expression of purpose on his face.  He is meant to be in this battle.  He knows what he must do.  He’s got this.

Did you notice that within twenty-four hours of his lawfare “conviction,” a huge number of people were posting messages online promising that they would be voting for the “outlaw”?  Initial feelings of disbelief, sadness, and anger transformed into something much more valuable: eyes-wide-open commitment to fight like hell.  After all, an immoral law is no law at all, and an obscenely corrupt criminal “justice” system renders no lasting judgment.  The stigma of being a criminal is disappearing, as the Wild West days of Jesse James, Cole Younger, and Wyatt Earp return.  If the Deep State has diminished the public’s respect for authority, then it has inadvertently set in motion its own demise.  Every visionary starts off as a rule-breaker.  Every dissident begins as a criminal.  Every liberator is first a revolutionary.  There is no instruction manual for bucking the system.

Nobody will believe we can save America until we do, yet afterwards, everybody will conclude that our successes were inevitable.  Such is the way history is written: what looks impossible is recorded as certain.  When you get discouraged in the months and years ahead, I hope you’ll remember that no contest worth winning ever comes without pain.  It is the pain that makes the taste of victory sweet.  

To be sure, there are plenty of signs that the tide is turning.  Trump’s huge Bronx rally last month scared the snot out of Democrats and RINOs who have spent the last decade trying to paint Trump’s policies as appealing only to middle class whites.  Red MAGA hats on black teenagers and cries of, “Trump Veinte Veinticuatro!” terrify the permanent “ruling class” in D.C. that survives only by dividing Americans against each other.  Divisive Joe Biden plays the race card as if it’s the only one left in the Democrats’ deck.  

President Trump is willing to be persecuted if it opens up Americans’ eyes to the Deep State’s tyranny.  He’s a builder, after all.  His foxhole has plenty of room for everybody.



🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓


Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 
man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 


A Nuclear Iran Will Be Biden’s Biggest Foreign Policy Blunder

The Biden administration, focused on the upcoming November election, has pressured European allies to back off plans to criticize Iran.



The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) issued a gloomy report last week about the rapid advancement Iran has made in its nuclear weapon program. Iran’s progress directly results from the Biden administration’s foreign policy failures.

According to the IAEA’s May report, Iran’s overall stockpile of enriched uranium increased by 1,489.8 pounds since the agency’s last report in February. The nation now has 13,671.5 pounds of enriched uranium, exceeding the 661 pounds stockpile limit that Iran had agreed to in the 2015 nuclear deal. What’s also shocking is that Iran’s stockpile includes 313.2 pounds of uranium enriched up to 60 percent.

“Around 42 kilograms (92.5 pounds) of uranium enriched to 60 percent is the amount at which creating one atomic weapon is theoretically possible — if the material is enriched further to weapons-grade levels of 90 percent,” according to Politico.

The IAEA’s latest report shows that the Obama/Biden team’s faith in curtailing Iran’s nuclear ambition through diplomatic negotiation is misplaced because Iran has no interest in abiding by any international agreement. It also shows that Iran is well on its way to developing nuclear weapons, probably sooner rather than later.

Furthermore, since Iran never let the IAEA thoroughly inspect its nuclear program and has barred IAEA inspectors completely since September 2023, Iran’s actual stockpile of enriched uranium is likely higher than the figures IAEA reported. Rafael Mariano Grossi, the IAEA chief, warned that Iran has enough enriched uranium to make “several” nuclear bombs.

Iran has been able to make such significant advancements in its nuclear program thanks to the Biden administration. Before Joe Biden became president, Iran’s economy struggled under heavy economic sanctions imposed by the Trump administration after the U.S. withdrew from the ineffective 2015 nuclear deal. The Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” sanctions cost Iran at least $200 billion in oil revenue, and it had to cut its military spending and handouts to its militant proxies. Political leaders in the Middle East widely praised the Trump administration’s policy on Iran as the only approach that had worked in curtailing Iran’s belligerence.

Policy of Appeasement

But as soon as Biden came into office, he replaced the Trump administration’s maximum pressure policy toward Iran with his maximum appeasement policy. The Biden administration let it be known that one of its highest priorities in foreign policy was to revive the nuclear negotiation with Iran, insisting a deal would make the world safer. To win over the mullahs, the Biden administration has kept throwing Iran one lifeline after another.

For example, Iran reportedly has made $100 billion in revenue from its oil exports since Biden took office because Biden refuses to enforce the Trump administration’s oil sanctions on Iran. The Biden administration also let Iran access $6 billion from its unfrozen assets. Team Biden was foolish to believe that Iran would use the proceeds solely for “humanitarian purposes.”

The Iranian regime, flush with cash, has been able to fund its proxies to cause serious harm to the U.S. military, allies, and international commerce. For instance, Hamas launched the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attack against Israel. Houthi rebels in Yemen continue to use Iranian-supplied missiles and drones to attack civilian and military targets across the Middle East and to terrorize international shipping in the Red Sea. Early this year, a drone attack launched by Iran-backed militants killed three U.S. service members and injured at least 25 others in a U.S. military base in northeast Jordan near the Syrian border. Only a few weeks ago, the Middle East got dangerously close to a full-out war as Iran launched its first-ever direct missile attack against Israel.

Prioritizing the Election over Security

Now we know that the influx of cash has also enabled Iran to make significant progress on its nuclear program during President Biden’s first term. The world is a far less safe place today due to President Biden’s foreign policy failures.

What’s more depressing is that Team Biden has demonstrated they are incapable and unwilling to learn from their policy failures and change their course of action. They are so power-hungry that they have prioritized how to stay in power for four more years over how to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

According to The Wall Street Journal, the Biden administration, wanting to focus on the upcoming November election, has pressured European allies to back off plans to criticize Iran for advances in its nuclear program. European allies are “frustrated over what they see as U.S. efforts to undermine their approach,” the Journal reports. They are deeply concerned that the Biden administration “lacks a strategy for dealing with Iran’s nuclear advances” and “appears unwilling to either pursue a serious diplomatic effort with Iran or take punitive actions against Tehran’s nuclear transgressions.” The Journal editorial board warned that “while Mr. Biden stalls until November, Tehran won’t. Expect the pace of enrichment to continue.”

Iran has made it clear that it regards Israel and the United States as its mortal enemies. The fanatic mullahs will not hesitate to use nuclear weapons either directly or indirectly through proxies to seek the destruction of Israel and the United States. An Iran possessing nuclear weapons will be Biden’s biggest foreign policy blunder and the world’s worst nightmare.




Jordan Peterson kicks off “Pride Season” with a scathing critique of the movement

 Only one day into the Liberal government’s newly proclaimed “Pride Season,” and renowned psychologist Dr. Jordan Peterson has already had enough.

“Pride is not a festival of love. It’s a festival of pride. That’s why it’s called Pride,” Peterson said on X. “And now it’s a bloody season. Not a parade. Not a day. Not a week. Not a month. A season.”


https://tnc.news/2024/06/03/jordan-peterson-pride-season-scathing-critique/

He called the event, which has been transformed to encompass almost the entire summer, a “celebration of casual hedonistic, self-centred sex,” which he distinguishes from love.

He said despite the stated values of the movement, “Pride” doesn’t include those who are not part of the “bloody rainbow brigade” or those who are “sensible enough to keep their private lives private.”

Further, he criticized the government’s incessant financial support and promotion of the movement and celebrations.

“The government has absolutely no business involving itself in any of this,” Peterson said. “Even Justin Trudeau’s almost equally reprehensible father said and so famously, ‘There is no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation.’”

“Enough bloody pride. Enough pride in the banks. Enough pride in the churches. Enough rainbows on the streets,” he continued. “Enough of whatever the hell that flag purports to be.”

Peterson questioned who makes the decisions that lead governments and activists to incorporate whatever variant of the ever-evolving Pride flag, or as Peterson called it, the “demented rag,” is flown.

“Who decides where and when it flies, and why? Some secret cabal of dog-mask-wearing S and M aficionados and moralists?” he said. “And enough of the ever-extending idiot acronym that only the propagandized insiders can even remember.”

According to the Canadian government website, It has currently settled on the acronym being 2SLGBTQI+. The 2S stands for Two-Spirited, for people who “identify” as having both a masculine and feminine spirit but is exclusive to Indigenous people, the L for Lesbian, G for Gay, B is Bisexual, T is Transgender, Q for Queer, the I is Intersex and the plus encompasses everything else.

The gay rights movement, which began as a fight for the rights of gay people to love whomever they want, now includes “aromantic” people who don’t want to romantically love anyone, which the government distinguishes from sexual preferences.

Peterson aimed at what he called “the ‘gender-affirming’ butchers and liars,” who advocate for life-altering transgender procedures for children and adults.

He also noted an apparent divide among those the government and activists would call the 2SLGBTQI+ “community,” particularly among gays and lesbians.

“There’s no coalition at all on the LGBTETC, much less a ‘community.’ There is instead an internal battle there that is far worse than anything the LG types faced back when the only thing they had to worry about was Christian conservatism,” Peterson said. “At least no one was being castrated or subjected to unnecessary mastectomies in those bad old days.”

In an interview on the Shawn Ryan Show podcast, Peterson expressed his opposition to the Pride movement in another way.

“The words pride. That’s the word that was chosen, and it’s pride in relationship, as far as I can tell, to nothing but hedonistic self-gratification. It’s like your identity is going to be your sexual desire? That’s your identity? Your sexual desire?” he said on the show. “That means you’ve reduced your identity to the most immature and hedonistic part of you, the part that would exploit someone else for your gratification, for example, the part that would exploit you for your gratification.”

He said it’s that very identity that Western society is now being called to celebrate. Peterson thinks that is a “very bad idea.”

True North contacted Pride Toronto and PFlag Canada to respond to Peterson’s arguments but did not receive a response before the deadline.

https://youtu.be/ZwN4Qo1lnxU



As Climate Lawsuits Ramp Up Against Oil and Gas, So Could Energy Costs

 States are not just suing oil and gas companies; they are also lodging climate-related lawsuits against food companies.

As U.S. oil, gas, and coal companies struggle under an array of regulations and permitting roadblocks, they also face new challenges from climate activists in the form of lawsuits, fines, taxes, and shareholder activism from blue-state pension funds.

Meanwhile, U.S. states increasingly are set against each other, with liberal states leading the charge against fossil fuel companies, while red states attempt to defend them.

Starting in 2018, states including New York, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Delaware, Connecticut, California, and the District of Columbia began filing lawsuits against energy giants ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Sunoco, BP, and others.

Oil companies also face legal action from dozens of cities, including Honolulu, Hawaii; Chicago; Baltimore; New York; Charleston, South Carolina; San Francisco; Oakland, California; and Boulder, Colorado.

Analysts say there are multiple goals driving these suits.

“It’s partly ideological, trying to drive these companies out of business,” Kenny Stein, policy vice president at the Institute for Energy Research, told The Epoch Times. He also believes it has to do with consumers’ use of fossil fuels.

“These governments are trying to mandate that people use less oil and less natural gas, but people want to heat their homes as much as they want, they want to drive as far as they want,” Mr. Stein said. “If the state banned the sale of oil, the population would revolt, so this is their backdoor way of trying to impose their will.”

Many of the climate lawsuits assert that pollution caused by oil companies creates a “public nuisance” and the companies intentionally deceived the public about the harmful effects when they caused global temperatures to rise.

The activist organization Climate Analytics tried to calculate the alleged damages.

“Between 1985 and 2018, we estimate partial damages of the combined CO2 emissions from 25 companies—oil and gas carbon majors—of about $20 trillion USD,” Climate Analytics states.
Meanwhile, on May 30, Vermont became the first state to pass a law that forces oil companies to pay for damage caused by “extreme weather events,” such as floods. According to this law, Vermont will tally the cost to residents of extreme weather events over the past 30 years; any company that has released more than one billion metric tons of CO2 from 1995 to 2024 will be forced to pay its share of that cost into a state climate superfund.

But it’s not just about money.

“This is simply a strategy for the left to accomplish what they’ve been unable to do in Congress through the ballot box,” Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall told The Epoch Times, “and that is to implement a nationwide climate policy that’s consistent with their green agenda.”

Mr. Marshall and 18 other attorneys general—all from red states—appealed to the Supreme Court on May 22, asking the justices to rule on whether individual states and cities can “assert the power to dictate the future of the American energy industry.

“Their actions imperil access to affordable energy everywhere and inculpate every State and indeed every person on the planet,” the attorneys general wrote. “Consequently, [they] threaten not only our system of federalism and equal sovereignty among States, but our basic way of life.”

States are not just suing oil and gas companies; they are also lodging climate-related lawsuits against food companies.

In February, New York Attorney General Letitia James sued JBS USA Food Co., a U.S. subsidiary of the Brazil-based JBS Group, the world’s largest meat processor, alleging that the firm misled the public about its environmental impact and that “beef production emits the most greenhouse gasses of any major food commodity.”

The Climate Litigation Industry

The potential for enormous payouts from these lawsuits has attracted not only a seemingly endless supply of plaintiffs, but also numerous law firms and even wealthy investors who are placing bets that the lawsuits will succeed.

The plan to potentially wrest trillions of dollars out of energy companies has been developing for more than a decade. A 2012 workshop hosted by the Climate Accountability Institute sought to draw on prior successes that states had in suing tobacco companies.

A post-conference recap of the workshop stated that the group had fostered “an exploratory, open-ended dialogue about whether we might use the lessons from tobacco-related education, laws, and litigation to address climate change.”
Under the tobacco settlement, the companies agreed to make annual payments to states in perpetuity, summing to at least $200 billion within the first 25 years, as long as cigarettes are sold in the United States.

Over the past decade, an entire industry has emerged to bring the climate litigation plan to fruition on multiple fronts, and to raise millions of dollars to fund it.

A tug of war over jurisdiction has ensued between the states and the oil companies, with the companies pressing to defend themselves in federal courts and states fighting to have the cases remain within their borders.

“If you’re the state of California, you want a liberal judge hearing your argument about these cases,” Mr. Marshall said. He argued that federal courts are the appropriate forum to decide on national issues and to provide “a fair opportunity for both sides to be heard.”

In a victory for blue states, however, the U.S. Supreme Court in April 2023 declined appeals by oil companies seeking to move the cases to federal court from the states.

According to Mr. Stein, these lawsuits are unlikely to survive in federal courts, given the paucity of evidence tying specific weather events affecting states, such as floods to CO2 emissions, but also the challenge of quantifying the specific contributions of energy companies, given all the other endeavors that emit CO2, such as farming, animals, and people breathing.

“When you’re using political slogans to try and blame a company for something, you can talk in generalities, but when you’re going to try to charge somebody money in a court of law, you have to be able to defend that charge,” he said.

“The actual attribution of trying to claim that a certain amount of damages were caused by a certain oil company, the evidence just doesn’t exist for that.”

Whether the majority of these cases succeed on their merits could prove to be beside the point, however. A report on climate litigation published by Yale Law School states that “the litigants are hoping to find one judge in one state in one courtroom that sees a path to allowing these cases to go to trial.
“Once you get to that point—where you’re past preliminary motions and you’re heading toward discovery and trial—it’s a very different balance of power between the litigants,” the report states. “The plaintiffs can start asking for documents and can start constructing a narrative about what the industry knew and how it acted in the face of that knowledge.”

Teaching Judges About Climate

Climate activists also have developed an advocacy network to instruct judges on the merits of climate lawsuits. One such effort is the Climate Judiciary Project (CJP), founded in 2018 by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI).

The project “provides unbiased, objective continuing education courses to judges about climate science and the law,” ELI spokesman Nick Collins told The Epoch Times.

ELI says that it’s trained more than 3,000 judges across 28 countries since 1990. CJP trained more than 400 judges in 2022 alone, according to its annual report, and developed a program for select judges to play a leadership role within the judiciary system.

“The judges came away [from the Judicial Leaders in Climate Science program] steeped in facts about the science of climate change, deeply impressed with their consequences, and committed to working together and reaching out to fellow judges to convey what they had learned,” the report stated.

If climate litigation succeeds, the expense will most likely be borne by everyday consumers in the form of higher prices for gasoline, electricity, and home heating. While the skyrocketing cost of cigarettes may have encouraged people to quit smoking, a viable alternative to oil, gas, and coal, which currently supply about 80 percent of Americans’ energy needs, hasn’t yet emerged.
“These companies aren’t going out of business; both oil and natural gas are going to continue to be used for a very long time,” Mr. Stein said. “What will ultimately happen is that these companies are just going to have to raise prices to account for the legal costs.”

‘Shrinking’ Exxon
Beyond the courtroom, climate activists are also seeking to leverage the corporate shares owned by state pension funds to force changes within oil and gas companies.

The most recent example of this was an effort at the end of May by blue-state pension funds, led by the California Public Employment Retirement System (CalPERS), and joined by the states of New York and Illinois.

The states demanded to replace the entire board of Exxon Mobil after its management blocked a proposal by climate activists, such as Arjuna Capital and Follow This, that would have committed the oil and gas company to curbing greenhouse gas emissions and shrinking the size of the company.


CalPERS, which is America’s largest state pension fund, has been known to throw its weight behind progressive causes when voting its corporate shares.
Alabama State Auditor Andrew Sorrell wrote in an op-ed: “While it is unfortunate for Exxon to continually deal with political shareholders uninterested in the future growth of the company, the biggest losers are the pensioners who rely on their public officials to make investment decisions that will yield good returns to fund their retirements.”

Nineteen red-state financial officers also expressed opposition, in some cases getting their own state funds to cast votes against CalPERS.

“This is really an unprecedented and ridiculous move to attack the core business of Exxon, which, by the way, provides $145 million of revenue to the state of Louisiana through taxes,” Louisiana State Treasurer John Fleming, who led the movement against CalPERS, told The Epoch Times. “This would be damaging to households all across the country.”

While shareholders ultimately rejected CalPERS’s attempt, but the battle is far from over.

“If they continue efforts like this, they could begin to reach critical mass, or even if they only have a sizable minority, they can influence positions on these boards and leadership,“ Mr. Fleming said. ”I think it’s a very dangerous and destructive thing.”