Categories
constitutional republic Coronavirus COVID-19 Covid-19 tyranny Intelwars Mask mandates State legislatures

Horowitz: Iowa passes the mask bill that every red state needs

“Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body, and a surgeon who performs an operation without his patient’s consent commits an assault, for which he is liable in damages.” ~Supreme Court, Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health (1990)

“Breathing freely doesn’t seem like something we should have to ask any other people permission for,” said 10-year-old John in a now-viral video in front of the Martin County, Florida, school board. Well, Iowa has taken up that call and has now banned all school districts and local officials from ever instituting a mask mandate again. This should be a model in every red state.

Earlier this week, I called for all red states to pass “never again” legislation, ensuring that public health tyranny will never be attempted ever again by governors and mayors. The Iowa legislature has offered a model for doing so, at least for the masking issue. As part of a broader education tax credit package, the Iowa legislature passed HF 847 on Wednesday. It contains a provision barring all “authorities in charge of each accredited nonpublic school” from imposing a mask mandate on students and faculty. In addition, all cities and counties are precluded from forcing businesses to adopt a masking policy. The bill was signed by Gov. Kim Reynolds early Thursday morning.

“The state of Iowa is putting parents back in control of their child’s education and taking greater steps to protect the rights of all Iowans to make their own health care decisions,” said Gov. Reynolds. “I am proud to be a governor of a state that values personal responsibility and individual liberties. I want to thank the Iowa Legislature for their quick work in bringing this bill to my desk so that it can be signed into law.”

It is shocking that not every red state has yet come to the realization that masking is immoral, especially for schoolchildren, and resolved to end the practice. Arkansas is the only other state to pass a statute forbidding future state and local mask mandates. Several governors have used executive orders to temporarily stop localities and school districts from requiring masks. North Dakota passed a bill (over Gov. Burgum’s veto) blocking any statewide mask mandate in the future, but left local governments and school boards out of the ban. No other state appears to have taken precautions for the future.

Those precautions are absolutely necessary, because the mask cult is not over. Just yesterday, the CDC tweeted out a study warning about asymptomatic flu cases. Just a few days ago, Fauci suggested that mask-wearing could become the norm for flu season. Despite Fauci now admitting that asymptomatic transmission is “very, very low,” they continue to use it as an excuse to mask everyone. The CDC’s latest trial balloon tweet should serve as a warning to all of us.

The notion of masking being effective against a virus is so absurd that cases plummeted over 90% after Iowa terminated masking in early February, even as cases rose in neighboring masked states in the Midwest like Minnesota.

Indeed, with zero evidence masks have ever worked and with Fauci now admitting that in a post-vaccination world, masking is all “theater,” to force someone to wear one is a violation of the First Amendment (in addition to the 14th Amendment) because it is compelling political speech. In Janice v. AFSCME, the Supreme Court observed, “Compelling individuals to mouth support for views they find objectionable violates that cardinal constitutional command, and in most contexts, any such effort would be universally condemned.”

There is no greater example of compelling adherence to a cause than forcing someone to reduce their oxygen intake through the symbol of that cause. The fact that they place it over your mouth and shout, “Virus!” certainly makes it no better than forcing someone to wear a burka, a yarmulke, or a cross. If anything, the fact that it also covers one’s breathing likely constitutes an illegal seizure, in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Such a requirement must be subject to strict scrutiny, which would force the government to produce evidence that its religious symbol achieves any vital state interest and is the least restrictive manner of doing so.

It’s not too late to permanently ban masks even in the states where the legislatures have already adjourned. Every state will convene a special session at the end of the summer to redraw the election maps based on the new census. That will be our last chance this year to permanently codify into law that breathing is a human right and must never be infringed upon ever again. The best time to kick the mask cult is while it is still down.

Share
Categories
constitutional republic Coronavirus Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Covid-19 tyranny Emergency orders Intelwars Mask mandates Masks Public health orders State lawmakers State legislatures

Horowitz: A ‘never again’ law to prevent future public health fascism

With the momentum on our side, now is not the time to breathe a sigh of relief. It’s the time to go on offense against COVID fascism. Yes, we appear to be healing from the ailment of COVID fascism, but now is the time to inoculate ourselves against future usurpations while we still have the chance.

Unlike with the virus, there is no natural immunity against government tyranny under the guise of public health. This is the essence of what Ronald Reagan meant when he warned, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” We can always lose our freedom, and once it is given up, we seldom reclaim it. Part of the reason why is because every time we beat back an assault on our freedoms, we just move on to the next issue and fail to vaccinate ourselves against future usurpations. This time must be different. It’s time for every state and county to pass a resolution prohibiting any of these actions from ever being taken again. Preferably, they should be codified into state constitutions.

It’s not like the various federal and state agencies have admitted that lockdowns and masking are ineffective and harmful. They are just finally conceding that the measures are no longer necessary this round. Thus, we might have temporarily gotten our breathing back, but we did not reclaim our freedom, because it is always subject to infringement at the flick of the pen of a governor or mayor. In fact, Fauci has already hinted at masking becoming the new baseline for the flu season, and we all know that at the first sign of another virus (or a different emergency), these same actors will pull out this yet-to-be-repudiated playbook. Which is why we must repudiate it, burn the blueprint, and break the mold, so that it can never be used again.

The following is my proposal for a “never again” resolution that will permanently reclaim these lost rights from the clutches of public health tyrants.

Declaration of American rights and principles for an American sanctuary

Whereas what distinguishes this country from other supposed democracies is that our rights come from God, not from government, those rights are fully sustained in times of war as well as peace, times of sickness as well as wellness, times of scarcity as well as prosperity.

Whereas Justice Robert Jackson observed the same thing about the provisions of the federal Constitution and that the Founders deliberately omitted emergency exceptions to fundamental rights because they “knew the pressures they engender for authoritative action, knew, too, how they afford a ready pretext for usurpation.”

Whereas the state power to quarantine is only on the sick, not on the healthy, and that the Supreme Court has ruled that no effort to quarantine may be done in an “arbitrary, unreasonable manner, or might go so far beyond what was reasonably required for the safety of the public.”

Whereas all the measures taken to stop the spread of a recent virus have proven ineffective in their stated goal yet devastating in their collateral damage to society as a whole.

Whereas federal law prohibits anyone from using “law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom” to deprive any person of “any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution” (U.S. Code Title 18, Sec 242).

Whereas shutting down businesses without offering full and complete compensation violates the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause.

Whereas Sam Adams said the American Revolution was a contest over “not only whether we ourselves shall be free, but whether there shall be left to mankind an asylum on earth, for civil and religious liberty.”

Whereas even during the Articles of Confederation government, states lacked the authority to block citizens from traveling freely across state lines.

Whereas the Supreme Court has held, “No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law” (Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Botsford (1891)). And that the right of a human being to breathe freely through his or her nose and mouth is the clearest manifestation of that right to bodily integrity:

Be it Resolved, that this legislative body recognizes the state/county of _____to be an American sanctuary, an asylum on earth for the following liberties during any declared public health emergency:

  • The right of every citizen to move freely without being restrained or forcibly masked in violation of his bodily integrity.
  • The right of every citizen to responsibly open their businesses without government deciding which ones are essential.
  • The right of every citizen to worship freely during a declared emergency.
  • The right of every American child to attend school without physical and psychological abuse.
  • The right of every citizen to be shielded from government monitoring of his privacy.
  • The right of citizens to have their state governments shield them from any federal usurpations of inalienable rights.
  • The right of every citizen of this republic to travel freely across state lines.

Therefore, as the duly elected legislative body of this state, we commit to the principle that during a declared emergency – for health or other reasons – individuals absolutely retain the right to be free and independent and maintain their inalienable and fundamental right of self-determination to make their own health and personal safety decisions including, but not limited to, the right to refuse any of the following health-related countermeasures:

  • The wearing of masks or other medical devices.
  • Vaccination.
  • Testing or any physical examination.
  • Participation in contact tracing.
  • The involuntary sharing of personal data or medical information.
  • Forced quarantine of any individual who has not been infected with an actual disease that has been proven deadly and has not already proliferated through large portions of the population. The case fatality rate must exceed 1.5% in order to trigger any forced isolation of individuals.

Even in the case of a legitimate quarantine, it shall be implemented in the least restrictive means possible to prevent the spread of the toxic agent or disease; shall include reasonable notice and due process; shall protect the right of the individual to remain in his or her home and live with family members, friends, and significant others at all times. An individual’s quarantine or isolation shall not remove or alter the individual’s legal or medical custody of another individual. A minor child shall not be forcibly removed from his or her parent or legal guardian or home in order to enforce an individual’s quarantine or isolation.

In addition to respecting individual rights to bodily integrity and personal autonomy, during any declared emergency by the governor or any public health order issued by a government entity, a government entity shall not infringe upon the rights of business owners. No government official may revoke a business license, occupational or professional license, or liquor license because such business remains open. No government entity may fine, sanction, or seize funds or assets of a business because such business remains open. No government entity may force a business to close, to reduce its hours, to alter its manner of business operations, or to otherwise restrict such business in its manner of operation, including with respect to access by employees, customers, suppliers, consultants, or contractors.

Any violation of personal or business rights during a declared emergency will result in the immediate termination of the declared emergency or public health order and create an immediate cause of action against said government officials by any citizen. Any violator is guilty
of a misdemeanor and upon conviction must be punished by a fine not to exceed $10,000,
or by imprisonment for not more than 180 days.

Further, any executive order issued by an executive agency, department, or head of agency or department is to be treated as advisory for private citizens. Only with a two-thirds vote from the governing legislative body can public health orders affect the conduct of private citizens and must still be in accordance with the aforementioned limitations. An exception to those limitations can only become effective following a public hearing on the matter and a three-fourths vote to suspend the standing rules of declared public health emergencies. Such suspensions cannot last for more than 30 days.

Share
Categories
constitutional republic Elise stefanik GOP Intelwars Liz Cheney Liz cheney ouster from leadership republican party RINOs

Horowitz: Replacing Liz Cheney with Elise Stefanik is the whole problem with the GOP

Liz Cheney is not a bug, but a feature of the GOP. She is not an exception, but the rule. The exceptions are those few members who actually fight for the major tenets of the party’s platform in a meaningful way. Unfortunately, Cheney is well within the mainstream of the party on so many issues except for her open defiance of Trump. As such, when left to their own devices, the GOP will replace her with someone like Elise Stefanik … who is even more liberal.

The beauty of the Democratic Party is that Democrats appoint leaders and committee chairs and nominate people to high offices who not only believe in their party’s agenda to the core, but are their most vociferous fighters. Republicans, on the other hand, have their most liberal members in leadership and as committee chairs at the federal and state levels. Their health care chair will be someone who champions government-run health care. Their judiciary chair in a given state legislature will often be someone who supports open borders and is pro-criminal. Thus, the problem with Liz Cheney as House conference chair is not an aberration, but the general rule.

The good news is that conservatives are finally willing to eject Republicans from leadership positions who are out of step with our values. Certainly, for Cheney to support impeaching Trump under the notion that he is criminally responsible for what happened on January 6 should make her unfit to lead the conference. But what about a Republican who believes we need to be in Afghanistan forever? What about supporting COVID fascism, open borders, and the transgender agenda? Or, in the case of Cheney, let’s not forget that she supported candidates against conservative members like Thomas Massie. In fact, Cheney’s tweet praising Fauci at a time when he destroyed our civilization is more offensive to me than even her vote for impeachment:

In other words, we should not only focus on who kisses up to Trump as a person but who reflects the agenda for which the Republican voters sent Trump himself to the presidency. If we internalize that message, we’d understand that Elise Stefanik is not who we want to replace Cheney. Why should we have to settle on one of two bad choices?

Elise Stefanik, who now has the backing of Trump to replace Cheney as conference chair, is so liberal she even voted against the Trump tax cuts that were supported by even the typical liberal Republicans. Unlike Cheney, she has cozied up to Trump as a person, but that should not be our priority headed forward. She has co-sponsored “Dream” amnesty and voted for Big Agriculture amnesty. She was even one of 14 Republicans who voted to terminate Trump’s emergency declaration at the border and was one of 11 Republicans who voted to override his funding of the border wall!

Stefanik is terrible on social issues. She was one of just eight Republicans who voted for the original “Equality Act” codifying transgenderism into civil rights, now promoted by Biden and Pelosi. Stefanik has been a consistent supporter of the transgender agenda. She also supported a local D.C. bill that would have forced pro-life groups to pay for abortions. In 2015, Congress had an opportunity to nullify the D.C. municipal law when Republicans were in the majority, but she voted against it.

Even on some of the energy issues that tend to unite both wings of the party, Stefanik joined with Democrats. She joined just two other Republicans in voting for the Climate Action Now Act, which would have forced Trump to stay in the Paris climate accord, and voted to block Trump’s plan to drill for oil in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico.

Indeed, the Liz Cheney problem extends to many Republicans, but even more so to Elise Stefanik. Why is it that you can be a liberal on immigration, social issues, taxes, and energy, yet as long as you praise Trump, you are fit to lead the party that is supposed to fight against those ideals?

This is the broader problem within the party. Republicans control 31 state legislatures, 19 of them with supermajorities. Yet it’s so hard to pass conservative legislation because almost all the leaders and committee chairs are liberal on the issues that matter. Ditto for most Republican governors.

The dirty little secret is that there are Liz Cheneys in the majority of leadership positions in the GOP across the country. The only difference is that, in some way, Cheney is at least principled enough to stand by her views publicly, whereas the others remain undocumented Democrats and escape the ire of the base voters.

In reality, the fight over Liz Cheney should be a wake-up call to conservatives to make the upcoming primaries truly the most important election of our lifetime, especially at the state level where these issues matter most. Our republic will not rise or fall based on who is the third-ranking member of the GOP conference in an irremediably broken Congress. However, our future will depend on creating constitutional sanctuaries in red states, with leaders who actually represent our values. That begins with understanding where we went wrong. We didn’t just appoint GOP leaders who opposed us on style and personality, but on the core values that matter at any given time.

In other words, many more Republicans in every red state need to be given the Liz Cheney treatment.

Share
Categories
Anti-restrictions bill constitutional republic Coronavirus Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Covid-19 tyranny executive order Florida Intelwars Ron DeSantis

Horowitz: Florida Gov. DeSantis leads as other Republican governors drag their feet

Why do we only have one governor who is consistently fighting for individual liberty on the issues of our time?

Given that the 100 days of mask-wearing Biden prescribed turned into a joke – with cases rising in states with mandates and falling in those without them – one would think every red state governor would commit to permanently blocking COVID fascism. While many Republican governors have loosened restrictions, most have not committed to ending them permanently and ensuring that nothing like this can happen again. Moreover, few of them are truly fighting the growing trend of colleges and businesses illegally requiring vaccines.

Monday, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill (S.B. 2006) that will dramatically alter how pandemic orders are promulgated in the state going forward. Unlike other governors who fought the legislatures on limiting executive authority, DeSantis embraced the opportunity to promote liberty at the expense of his own power. He also went a step further. To bridge the gap between now and when the bill takes effect on July 1, he signed a companion executive order today that will suspend all remaining COVID-19 orders from local jurisdictions throughout the state. This includes all remaining mask mandates.

Most importantly, stripping localities of the ability to apply emergency orders will likely block school districts from requiring students to wear masks, effectively immediately. Last month, the Department of Education already announced guidelines to end the school mask mandate for the next academic year.

The governor also announced that there will be a complete clemency for any individual or business cited by a locality for violating COVID restrictions last year.

The long-term reforms included in the bill DeSantis signed today include the following:

  • Will continue to allow a governor to declare an emergency up to 60 days at a time, but not longer without affirmative support from the legislature.
  • Allows House and Senate to override any emergency by joint resolution even before 60 days.
  • Allows local subdivisions to create emergency orders for only up to seven days at a time.
  • Any extension of local orders must be approved by the local governing body and can only be done for seven days at a time for a maximum of 42 days. This would prevent health departments from running counties administratively or even local bodies from having mask mandates for a year, as was done in Miami.
  • Allows governor to override any local order if deemed too restrictive to liberties.
  • Assumes all schools and businesses should remain open during an emergency if they
  • can maintain safety protocols, and governor must provide explanation why it is
  • necessary to close them if not.
  • Bans vaccine passports by government, businesses, and schools as a condition of entry
  • or enrollment. The governor already banned them in his executive order on April 2, but this bill would make his order permanent. Under the bill, those officials who require vaccination could face a $5,000 penalty.

Very few states have passed laws this aggressive. Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson and the Chamber of Commerce watered down a bill blocking businesses and schools from requiring a vaccine in order to obtain service. The final bill was limited just to government actors. However, the bill barring all state and local mask mandates forever in future pandemics did become law. Under Florida’s law, a locality can still impose a mask mandate during a future pandemic for up to seven days unless the governor nullifies it. North Dakota passed a bill denying only state officials the power to impose mask mandates. Otherwise, very few red states have limited the ability of this illogical and inhumane practice to rear its ugly head again next flu season.

Republicans control 23 state governments the way they control Florida. Why are these victories so few and far between?

Share
Categories
constitutional republic Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Covid-19 emergency Covid-19 tyranny Idaho governor brad little Idaho legislature Intelwars Nation of laws

Horowitz: Idaho Gov. Brad Little thinks 60 days of dictatorial power are not enough for him

Californians are flocking to Idaho to escape the collapse of their culture and freedoms and in search of liberty. There is even an entire movement to create “Greater Idaho,” which would encompass eastern portions of Washington and Oregon as well as northern California. Yet many of them will be disappointed to know that, thanks to leftist Republicans like Gov. Brad Little and some legislators, they as may as well stay put and suffer under Gavin Newsom with the warmer weather.

A year ago, I wrote an article titled, “Governors, not gods: State executives cannot simply do whatever they want indefinitely,” observing the shocking tyranny committed by governors who, as of April 20, 2020, had unilaterally vitiated our most basic human rights without legislative input for a full month. Little did I know that a year later, most of these governors, including Republicans like Brad Little, would continue exercising the power of a king indefinitely. Now Brad Little has successfully killed a bill that would ever place any meaningful limitations on his dictatorial powers. Who needs Gavin Newsom when you have Brad Little?

With today’s transportation and communication, a governor should not be able to rule by emergency in a way that really alters people’s lives for more than a day or two. We have legislatures for a reason. Yet SB 1136, which passed both chambers with overwhelming support, actually gives the governor 60 days to continue a declared emergency before requiring affirmative support from the legislature. The bill also states that the governor cannot unilaterally change state laws during the declared emergency. Sounds pretty generous, right? Sixty days of emergency declaration, and if it is really that compelling, the legislature would continue it. Yet Brad Little vetoed the bill because he believes in the rule of one man. He claimed that the bill would add “more red tape and government bureaucracy.” Self-awareness is dead to these tyrants.

SB 1136 originally passed the House by 54-16, with four Republicans opposing it, and the Senate by 28-7, with all Republicans in support of the measure. That should have been enough to sustain a two-thirds majority veto override; however, the governor successfully flipped five Republicans in the Senate, netting just enough votes to sustain his veto. The Republicans who voted to make Little king were Jim Guthrie, Patti Anne Lodge, Fred Martin, Jim Patrick, and Jim Woodward. When it comes to this broken Republican Party, there is no majority large enough to uphold basic civil liberties as they existed before the pandemic.

The governor held a press conference last Friday with four former governors as well as Sen. Jim Risch to explain his veto. This demonstrates that the Republican Party in Idaho has been rotten to the core for years as conservatives have been complacent, not selecting authentic Republicans in the primaries.

The governor also vetoed HB 135, which, among other things, would bar the governor from quarantining the healthy, shutting down businesses and churches, and banning assembly. Idaho Gov. Little illegally barred assembly of more than 10 people for months, even longer than some blue states did. The House already voted to override Little’s veto, but as of this writing, it’s unclear whether the same senators who sided with the governor on SB 1136 will stay the course on HB 135.

It is truly shocking how a simple proposition banning the shutdown of businesses and churches and the quarantining of healthy people is now controversial in a red state. It is unfathomable that 60 days of unilateral emergency powers are not enough.

The governor had the nerve to suggest that the legislature acted out of “an emotional knee-jerk reaction” in standing for the Constitution, when it was he and his ilk who acted impetuously out of emotion to the virus. Thirteen months later, he has refused to look at the science. Little said he believes the legislature limiting his powers violates the state’s constitution. That is really rich. This man violates every clause of the Bill of Rights, yet suddenly when the legislature tries to check that power, it is they who are violating the constitution!

Perhaps he should study Art. I Sec. II of the state’s constitution:

All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter, reform or abolish the same whenever they may deem it necessary; and no special privileges or immunities shall ever be granted that may not be altered, revoked, or repealed by the legislature.

There are a number of other good bills that passed the House but are being blocked in the Senate by Little’s phony Republican allies. Evidently, a 28-7 majority is not enough. Some of the bills that will likely die in the Senate are:

  • HB 339 – Bars all state and local officials from ever instituting a mask mandate.
  • HB 140 – Bars all companies from discriminating against people who don’t get the experimental COVID vaccines and prohibits state officials from entering into public contracts with companies that do so.
  • HB 291 – A business bill of rights that precludes any layer of government from ever shutting businesses or revoking licenses for staying open.
  • HB 249 – Would require parents to have to opt in before the public school can teach any sex education.

Wouldn’t one expect these bills to easily pass in a state like Idaho? Well, governors like Brad Little make states like Idaho blue without Democrats ever assuming power.

Brad Little is up for re-nomination next year as a Republican running for governor in a state Trump carried by 31 points. Local media reports that Lt. Gov. Janice McGeachin might challenge Little for the GOP nomination. McGeachin has been openly campaigning against lockdowns since the beginning and seems to represent the values people expect from a state like Idaho.

Trump recently suggested that the key to winning for Republicans is to adopt his America-first agenda. Well, nothing more important was hatched in China to destroy America than the concept of lockdowns. Brad Little is antithetical to Trump’s base and why people voted for him. McGeachin, on the other hand, was the first Republican in the state to support Trump and nominated him at the RNC convention for the state of Idaho. Thus, if she runs, Trump will have a bold choice to make in Idaho. Does he stand with the Fauci governors, or does he stand with MAGA governors like Ron DeSantis?

The difference between Republicans like Ron DeSantis who reject “Fauciism” and Republicans like Little who embrace it is greater than the difference between a Republican and a Democrat. If Trump really wants to make an impact on changing the Republican Party from Fauci to DeSantis, he will endorse against lockdown governors in every red state primary. Otherwise, his most ardent supporters will quite literally have nowhere to live as free Americans.

Share
Categories
Constitution constitutional republic Coronavirus tyranny Covid-19 tyranny human rights Intelwars liberty Mask mandates U.S. Constitution

Horowitz: What ever happened to the right to breathe freely?

No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law.” ~Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Botsford (1891)

For how long can American governments continue denying the basic human right to breathe freely without showing a modicum of evidence that masking is effective, necessary in all circumstances, and outweighs the cost to liberty and human health?

Some rights are so natural that they need not be enumerated in the Constitution

We know there is a right to freely exercise religion or bear arms, but how do we know there is a right to breathe without the cruel and draconian covering of our mouths? Sadly, our court system seems to believe that no such right exists, even as judges concoct novel rights to numerous privileges and enshrine them in the Constitution nearly every day through ordinary litigation. However, some rights are so natural and inalienable that they need not be written. Breathing without a dangerous bacteria and carbon dioxide trap over our mouths is a pretty obvious one.

In fact, in many ways, this is why Madison initially opposed the concept of a written Bill of Rights – because it would imply that only those rights listed are inalienable and that rights only come from government and are not indeed self-evident truths of nature. Even as he was pragmatically introducing the Bill of Rights on the House floor on June 8, 1789, Madison noted that some objected to it on the grounds that “by enumerating particular exceptions to the grant of power, it would disparage those rights which were not placed in that enumeration, and it might follow by implication, that those rights which were not singled out, were intended to be assigned into the hands of the general government, and were consequently insecure.”

While introducing his first draft, Madison even conceded that he found this argument to be “one of the most plausible arguments I have ever heard urged against the admission of a bill of rights into this system.” The only reason he felt he “guarded against” this concern was because of the language he originally proposed in “the last clause of the 4th resolution.” That original draft language was very strong and categorical:

“The exceptions here or elsewhere in the constitution, made in favor of particular rights, shall not be so construed as to diminish the just importance of other rights retained by the people; or as to enlarge the powers delegated by the constitution; but either as actual limitations of such powers, or as inserted merely for greater caution.”

Although part of the spirit of this clause remained in the final versions of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, the language is not as strong as Madison’s original draft. Perhaps the fact that we think government can indefinitely regulate human breath is a fulfillment of Madison’s original concern.

On Friday, the Supreme Court, yet again, slapped down a California executive branch edict using COVID to interfere with freedom of religious worship. In a 5-4 decision, the court issued an injunction on the California health department’s rule banning home-based group worship or Bible study during the reign of COVID terror. “The government has the burden to establish that the challenged law satisfies strict scrutiny,” wrote the unsigned order. “To do so in this context, it must do more than assert that certain risk factors ‘are always present in worship, or always absent from the other secular activities’ the government may allow.”

I found myself shouting “Amen!” while reading this, but at the same time wondering why the courts only seem to apply strict scrutiny to COVID rules affecting a selection of very specific liberties, such as religious practice or gun rights, but not the more fundamental natural right to move freely and unrestricted, without one’s nose and mouth being restrained, or shutdown orders in general. Somehow it seems like our court system only recognizes unenumerated rights when they are fabricated and not rooted in natural law.

Even without questions of cruel and unusual punishment or a violation of the Fourth Amendment’s dictate against illegal search and seizure, it’s obvious that making someone cover his or her nose and mouth – to the draconian extent the government has applied it – violates the most basic definition of individual liberty itself. As defined by Blackstone, individual liberty is “the power of loco-motion, of changing situation, or removing one’s person to whatsoever place one’s own inclination may direct; without imprisonment or restraint, unless by due course of law.” William Blackstone wrote that the right to “personal security” includes “a person’s legal and uninterrupted enjoyment of his life, his limbs, his body, [and] his health,” as well as “the preservation of a man’s health from such practices as may prejudice or annoy it.” [1 Commentaries *125, *130.]

It’s one thing to mandate masks for a limited time on certain people in certain places – for example, for people with clear symptoms, in health care settings, or on mass transit. But to mandate them indefinitely in order to move freely, obtain vital goods and services, and basically live life in any way clearly violates the most basic individual liberties that never needed to be enumerated in the Constitution. And to do so without showing evidence that someone is a threat or aren’t already immune, or that the masks even work, violates the Fifth and 14th Amendments’ due process clause.

Ex post facto criminalizing human breath

The Supreme Court stated in the landmark Calder v. Bull (1798) case that a legislature cannot go so far as to violate natural law even if the “authority should not be expressly restrained by the constitution or fundamental law of the state.”

Chief Justice Samuel Chase stated: “An act of the legislature (for I cannot call it a law) contrary to the great first principles of the social compact cannot be considered a rightful exercise of legislative authority.” Chase was referring to the idea of a state criminalizing behavior ex post facto. His point was that even if Art. I Sec. 10 of the Constitution didn’t explicitly bar legislatures from passing ex post facto laws, “To maintain that our federal or state legislature possesses such powers if it had not been expressly restrained would, in my opinion, be a political heresy altogether inadmissible in our free republican governments.”

In many ways, the mask mandates going on indefinitely forever for children to obtain an education or for humans to live a free life is the ultimate form of ex post facto “law,” which was defined in Calder v. Bull as making “an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal.” We were all born as humans and are forced to live and obtain certain services. It’s one thing to force someone to wear a mask for a limited time, place, or scope. But to do so essentially all his life or for a child in school when healthy is retroactively criminalizing human existence predating COVID.

Mind you, Chase was speaking of a law duly passed by both branches of government, not the government edicts we have today. The notion that the CDC can simply mandate masks on two- and three-year olds, which fundamentally violates their bodily integrity and their cognitive abilities in the most basic function of their individual liberty, shocks the conscience. It’s mind-numbing how there hasn’t been a major lawsuit on this issue. This is especially jarring given the lack of evidence that children pose a risk of spreading the virus or that masks are even effective.

It’s impossible to harmonize COVID fascism with decades of case law on right to privacy

It’s not like we haven’t lived through decades of the courts inventing novel rights that aren’t written in the Constitution and most certainly aren’t natural. For example, in 2017, the Supreme Court, in Packingham v. North Carolina, ruled that the state’s law restricting child sex offenders from accessing social media was not enough of a “compelling interest” to outweigh what the court believed to be an important right, even though the state clearly had a much more compelling case for blocking pedophiles from social media than masking children for COVID.

The court in Packingham designated social media a place “to engage in a wide array of protected First Amendment activity” like streets and parks and noted, “By prohibiting sex offenders from using those websites, North Carolina with one broad stroke bars access to what for many are the principal sources for knowing current events, checking ads for employment, speaking and listening in the modern public square, and otherwise exploring the vast realms of human thought and knowledge.”

Think about that: One has a right to access social media even as a convicted child sex offender because one basically can’t live life properly without it, according to the court. Yet, at the same time, government can restrict human breathing in nearly every setting without having to provide any evidence one is a threat or that the experimental medical device of masks – authorized only under an emergency use authorization – even works. They can place people at risk for shortness of breath, headaches, lack of cognitive function, bacterial infections and rashes, and self-contamination, all without showing that they work.

Justice William Douglas was able to suggest in the famous Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) case, “The First Amendment has a penumbra where privacy is protected from governmental intrusion,” even though there is no right to privacy in the Constitution. Justice Arthur Goldberg stated in his concurrence that birth control is covered by the unenumerated rights of the Ninth Amendment. “The concept of liberty … embraces the right of marital privacy” and The right of privacy is a fundamental personal right.

Well, if birth control is a concept of liberty and privacy so fundamental as to serve as the backbone for Roe v. Wade to kill babies, then what about the privacy and liberty of breathing? If anything, in this case it’s worse because you are not asking to take an action (consume birth control), but to refrain from an inaction and not have government force you to wear an experimental medical device that has not been approved for respiratory viruses.

As Clarence Thomas stated in his famous dissent in Obergefell:

“In the American legal tradition, liberty has long been understood as individual freedom from governmental action, not as a right to a particular governmental entitlement.”

The court punctuated this right to privacy under the 14th Amendment by stating in the Lawrence v. Texas (2003) sodomy case, “The State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime.”

Think of how they are demeaning the existence of people who are in pain and have trouble breathing under a mask and are controlling the destiny of the most sensitive parts of our body with these Chinese face burka edicts. Mandatory mask-wearing for long periods of time to obtain vital services (especially outdoors) clearly violates the liberty of “bodily integrity” enumerated in the landmark Glucksberg (1997) case among those liberty interest secured under the 14th Amendment.

Moreover, a person certainly has a greater right and compelling human need to breathe without oxygen reduction and rebreathing their own toxins left on a mask than to engage in sodomy. This is especially true for children being forced to exercise and play sports for a protracted period of time with a face covering that undoubtedly compromises their intake of oxygen and exfiltration of CO2 while laboring with rigorous physical activity.

In Roe v. Wade, the court said, “The abortion decision in all its aspects is inherently, and primarily, a medical decision.” The court applied that even to when that decision is 100% directly killing a particular baby. It’s extremely hard to see how that doesn’t apply to human breathing, especially when there is no evidence that an individual is carrying the virus, has the ability to spread it, is a danger to a particular individual, or that said governmental regulation even helps.

When the court established the right to bodily integrity in the aforementioned Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Botsford case, Justice Gray noted, “The right to one’s person may be said to be a right of complete immunity; to be let alone.” That would imply that perhaps the forcing of a human to place something over his nose and mouth might not even be subject to any government interest balancing test. But even if we are to believe that the pandemic would align bodily integrity more in line with a typical right, like any fundamental right, it can indeed be regulated to some extent, but the burden of proof must be on the government to demonstrate it is necessary and efficacious in that particular circumstance, not the other way around.

Indeed, 80 years into the Supreme Court’s crusade to invent new rights not mentioned in the Constitution, the only rights the justices won’t recognize are those that didn’t even need to be stated in that document, such as the right to breathe.

Share
Categories
Constitution constitutional republic Executive Orders Intelwars Oklahoma Oklahoma legislature State constitutional powers

Horowitz: Oklahoma House votes to enable legislature to block Biden’s executive orders

James Madison once asserted that “in a republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.” Well, today, only executive power predominates, because federal and state executive agencies seem to be the only ones doing the legislating. As Joe Biden continues to pass sweeping “laws” unilaterally with no authority from Congress, the red states are the only even potential check on his abuse of power. It appears that the state of Oklahoma has now taken up the mantle as the second state to move to block these executive orders.

On Thursday, the Oklahoma House overwhelmingly passed a bill, HB 1236, that would grant the state’s attorney general and state legislature the authority to review the president’s executive orders to determine constitutionality. Specifically, the bill would authorize the legislature to recommend that the attorney general review any executive order, federal agency rule, or federal congressional action to determine whether the state should seek an exemption or declare it unconstitutional. If either the attorney general or the legislature, by concurrent resolution, declares the act unconstitutional, then all state and local officials and any publicly funded organization are prohibited from enforcing it.

The federal actions covered under this bill include any orders pertaining to health emergencies; the regulation of natural resources, agriculture, and land use; infringements upon the Second Amendment; the regulation of the financial sector as it relates to environmental, social, or governance standards, the regulation of education; the regulation of college or school sports; or any other powers reserved by the State of Oklahoma or the people of Oklahoma.

This bill is probably the single most direct and effective way of countering federal power-grabs. As written, it would potentially pave the way for the legislature to block Biden’s mask mandate, transgender agenda in school sports, and racially biased orders in finance and commerce, just to name a few.

Oklahoma’s House is now the second chamber to pass a state sovereignty bill against federal overreach. The North Dakota House passed a similar bill, HB 1282, earlier this month. However, that bill passed by a narrow margin, 51-43, with nearly 30 Republicans voting against it. The Oklahoma bill, on the other hand, was introduced by the speaker himself, Rep. Charles McCall, and passed 79-18 along party lines, which means it has a good chance of going to the governor’s desk.

A few minutes after passage of HB 1236, Rep. Jay Steagall introduced HR 1005, a resolution expressing the right of a state to defend the Constitution and intervene on behalf of the liberties of its citizens.

“Oklahoma hereby asserts sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers,” states the text of the resolution, which passed 80-14. “THAT this resolution shall serve notice to the federal government of our intent to maintain the balance of powers where the Constitution of the United States established it. THAT we intend to ensure that all federal government agencies and their agents and employees operating within the geographic boundaries of Oklahoma, or whose actions have an effect on the inhabitants, lands or waters of Oklahoma, shall operate within the confines of the original intent of the Constitution of the United States.”

In introducing the bill, Rep. Steagall, who is the chairman of the States Rights Committee, stated plainly the intent of the legislative effort this week. “I submit to you that it is the duty of the state to interpose between the central government’s abuse of power and the people in order to secure the authorities, rights, and liberties of the people, and that duty falls squarely on the shoulders of the state legislature.”

While so many conservatives are focused on Congress, many fail to see that the states are where the power resides. Republicans control both houses in 31 state legislatures, the majority of them with supermajorities. If every chamber were to mimic this legislation, there would be large swaths of the country free from the totalitarian edicts of the left, regardless of what happens in Washington.

Share
Categories
Constitution constitutional republic Intelwars Mask mandates Tennessee

Horowitz: Tennessee lawmakers introduce bill to prevent businesses from discriminating against customers without masks

In our society, businesses are sued for not looking at customers the right way or for not taking expensive actions to accommodate the needs of employees and customers through OSHA, ADA regulations, and anti-discrimination laws. Since when did it become OK, then, for businesses to force customers and employees to take very definite actions against their bodily integrity, such as wearing face masks, no matter their personal conditions? A group of conservatives are pushing a bill in the Tennessee legislature to address this problem, and it just might become a model for other states.

Tennessee is one of 12 states that currently does not criminalize breathing without a Chinese face burka, but the damage done by the local and federal mandates has made businesses feel as if they need to enforce it to cover their backs. Despite no statewide mask mandate and overall fewer restrictions than other states, RINO Gov. Bill Lee he has still declared going to church in person dangerous and tried to dictate to Tennesseans how many people with whom they could gather. He has also enabled and empowered localized health board tyranny instead of individual liberty, and even put out a video promoting face masks. Thus, like in every other state, Tennessee businesses are enforcing this mask tyranny on the citizenry.

A group of Tennessee lawmakers have introduced the Medical Non-Discrimination Business and Consumer Act (SB 0320/ HB 0794) to ensure that businesses are not enforcing what government is clearly incapable of doing. It is also designed to place anti-discrimination and disability laws vis-à-vis mask-wearing in line with every other practice of business regulation that prevents even private businesses from wholesale discrimination, invasion of medical privacy, and violation of the ADA.

Specifically, this bill would prohibit a person from denying an individual the full and equal enjoyment of goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of a place of public accommodation, resort, or amusement on the grounds of the wearing or use of a medical device, or whether the individual has received medical treatment, such as a vaccine.

On a practical level, this bill would prevent grocery stores, restaurants, movie theaters, and gyms from requiring masks or proof of vaccination in order to receive services. This is in line with current anti-discrimination law as it relates to every other facet of society. Just a year ago businesses would have been shut down for the rampant and cruel discrimination they are engaging in today.

Pursuant to the ADA (36.201), no individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of goods and services, without retaliation or coercion (36.206) covering any condition whether a physical or mental impairment (36.302.1) wherein mere presence does not constitute direct threat, even if contagious or noncontagious with transmissible diseases (36.302.b.2, 36.208).

Universal masking within businesses is unattainable because it does not address the chaos variable of the many who have an ADA right to reasonable accommodation to receive full access to goods and services, and you do not get to know what is wrong with them. Exemptions include PSTD from trauma, rape, and bound torture, autism, cancer, COPD, asthma, lung disease, pregnancy, and exposure/illness. Yet masking is the one thing that can violate anti-discrimination and disability laws, despite the fact that masks are worthless in combatting a respiratory virus.

Thus, this bill would merely place mask policies in line with every other ADA and anti-discrimination regulation we enforce on businesses today. It takes away the liability that businesses would potentially incur for allowing people to come in without a mask. It further prohibits local governments within the state of Tennessee from enforcing such mandates, a step Gov. Lee has failed to take until now.

The Senate bill is sponsored by Sen. Joey Hensley, and the House bill is sponsored by Rep. Susan Lynn. The bill is being promoted statewide by Tennessee Stands, a grassroots organization promoting a more rational approach to the virus.

Are you sick of the left regulating businesses into oblivion, then suddenly empowering them to enforce the ultimate form of discrimination when it comes to their sacred masks? If a mom-and-pop bakery must bake a cake for a gay wedding when the couple can find one hundred other businesses willing to service their event, then certainly businesses can’t shut off all vital goods and services to a human being for merely breathing, especially when there is no evidence they even have the virus. Moreover, if “businesses can do whatever they want,” then businesses can open without capacity restrictions or other lockdown policies. It’s time to apply anti-discrimination law and business regulations as a two-way street.

Let’s be clear, unless this legislation is passed in all the 31 states with GOP-controlled legislatures, the mask cult will never end. It’s time to even up the score and push back against government tyranny with equal and opposing force. The Medical Non-Discrimination Business and Consumer Act is that opposing force we’ve been waiting for.

Share
Categories
Constitution constitutional republic Constitutional sanctuary Intelwars north dakota

Horowitz: North Dakota House votes to block all existing and future unconstitutional federal policies

On Wednesday, North Dakota took another step toward becoming a constitutional sanctuary to protect individual rights from federal encroachments. The question now is whether Governor Doug Burgum will put the bill over the top.

By a vote of 51-43, the North Dakota House passed HB 1282, which would create a joint committee on nullification to review all federal laws or executive orders that are suspected of violating the Constitution. The committee, which is to be composed of the House and Senate leadership and six members from each body who would serve for two years, would recommend to the legislative body whether to nullify the federal policies based on constitutional violations. Upon the committee’s recommendation, the legislative assembly, by concurrent resolution, shall consider whether to nullify the federal action.

The consequence of this bill is that if the legislative assembly approves the concurrent resolution by a simple majority, all state agencies or political subdivisions of the state and all individuals employed by a state agency or political subdivision of the state are prohibited from enforcing the said federal law, regulation, or executive order.

Under the proposed legislation, the committee may review all existing federal statutes, regulations, and executive orders enacted before the effective date of this proposed law for the purpose of determining constitutionality and shall recommend whether to nullify in its entirety a specific federal statute, regulation, or executive order.

As I mentioned last week, this bill is probably the most important piece of legislation a state can pass given today’s political climate. It’s exactly what our Founders had in mind in the nightmare scenario where the federal government becomes tyrannical and inexorably hostile to the Bill of Rights. For example, if this bill passes, it would likely force a vote in the legislature on the implementation of the CDC’s unconstitutional and inhumane mask mandate on travelers.

You might notice that this bill only passed 51-43, despite Republicans enjoying an 80-14 majority in the House. More than a third of the Republicans voted against it. These were the 43 no votes: Adams; Anderson, B.; Anderson, D.; Anderson, P.; Beltz; Boe; Boschee; Brandenburg; Buffalo; Devlin; Dobervich; Guggisberg; Hager; Hanson; Hatlestad; Ista; Johnson, D.; Karls; Keiser; Klemin; Longmuir; Martinson; Mitskog; Mock; Nathe; Nelson, J.; Nelson, M.; O’Brien; Ostlie; Owens; Pollert; Porter; Richter; Roers Jones; Sanford; Schneider; Schreiber-Beck; Strinden; Thomas; Trottier; Vigesaa; Westlind; and Zubke.

The bill now heads to the Senate, where Republicans enjoy a 40-7 majority. However, there are many liberal Republicans in the Senate, and the governor has yet to endorse the bill. A number of liberal Republicans have bought into the erroneous notion that only courts can decide the constitutionality of issues. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Larry Klemin opposed the bill on the floor, claiming that it isn’t the legislature’s job to determine the constitutionality of a law.

As chairman, Klemin already watered down another similar bill, HB 1164, which I referred to last week. On Thursday, the new “modified” version of HB 1164 passed 79-13 – with all the fake Republicans pretending to support the Constitution. That bill, as modified, would only allow courts to determine the constitutionality of a presidential executive order, rather than the attorney general, as originally drafted.

Here’s the subterfuge we need to watch out for in other states only pretending to pass constitutional sanctuary legislation. What this effectively does is make the bill do the exact same thing as current practice, effectively gutting the entire effort. Thus, the chairman of the committee gets to brag about fighting for the 10th Amendment and standing up to tyranny, while doing absolutely nothing.

Worse, this bill continues to legitimize the myth that, somehow, only the judicial branch can interpret the Constitution. Indeed, each branch of government – both at the state and federal levels – has an obligation to use its respective powers to protect constitutional rights. For example, with Biden’s illegal and unscientific COVID mandates, it is the executive branch of the state that must defend the Constitution and refuse to implement them and the legislative branch that must prohibit and defund them from being implemented.

The judicial branch of government, with very few exceptions, has ignored flagrant violations of the Bill of Rights for 10 months. Fighting Washington at the local level will become a popular campaign issue for state and local politicians in the coming months and years. Perfidious Republicans understand this and plan to misdirect the grassroots energy away from bills that actually have teeth in them and send that force into a black hole.

If states are going to finally fight back against tyranny, it needs to come from the legislature. It’s time for legislators to stop running away from their constitutional obligations to represent the people and to protect their rights.

In a 2017 report, the Congressional Research Service observed that “early history of the United States is replete with examples of all three branches of the federal government playing a role in constitutional interpretation.” Members of Congress weren’t so complacent in their duties and, as the CRS observed, never sat idly allowing the courts to wield “a final or even exclusive role in defining the basic powers and limits of the federal government.” They subscribed to Madison’s view in Federalist #49 that “the several departments being perfectly co-ordinate by the terms of their common commission, neither of them, it is evident, can pretend to an exclusive or superior right of settling the boundaries between their respective powers.” He emphatically believed that “each [department] must in the exercise of its functions be guided by the text of the Constitution according to its own interpretation of it.”

Thankfully, the stronger bill, HB 1282, wound up passing over Chairman Klemin’s objections, but this demonstrates the struggle conservatives have even in red states in getting GOP supermajorities in both houses, not to mention the Republican governors, to work for the constitutional sanctuary movement.

As the legislative sessions reach their peak work weeks, conservatives should make HB 1282 the model bill. Rather than empowering the judiciary or even the executive to have exclusive authority over nullifying unconstitutional federal powers, it places the authority in the hands of the democratically elected legislature. This will force red-state Republicans to either finally stand up and fulfill their campaign promises or reveal to their voters that they are a false opposition to the Left, as over 25 Republicans in North Dakota did this week.

In order to make red states red again, we will have to make state legislatures great again.

Share
Categories
Constitution constitutional republic Intelwars Sanctuary counties Second Amendment

Horowitz: Missouri county authorizes arrest of feds who violate Second Amendment

What is our recourse when our own government criminalizes our most basic rights while it allows Black Lives Matter and Antifa to rampage through our streets with impunity? Is there no Plan B when the federal or state governments treat all conservatives like terrorists, business owners like pariahs, and those who yearn to breathe unmasked air like murderers? Well, one Missouri county is demonstrating the importance of sheriffs and county officials returning to self-government and interposing between the governmental usurpers and the most sacred rights of the people.

On Feb. 3, the Newton County, Missouri, Commission passed a bill that will not only block federal enforcement of unconstitutional gun policies, but criminalize their implantation thereof within the jurisdiction of the county. The “Second Amendment Preservation Act of Newton County Missouri” declares that “all federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations passed by the federal government and specifically any Presidential Administration whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in the county.”

That section of the Missouri constitution reads as follows:

That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms, ammunition, and accessories typical to the normal function of such arms, in defense of his home, person, family and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned. The rights guaranteed by this section shall be unalienable. Any restriction on these rights shall be subject to strict scrutiny and the state of Missouri shall be obligated to uphold these rights and shall under no circumstances decline to protect against their infringement.

Specifically, the ordinance targets federal policies that order the tracking or registering of firearms of ammunition, an idea that Democrats have been floating recently. It also bars the enforcement of any effort to confiscate guns except from those who are “suspected criminals.”

The Second Amendment sanctuary movement has been growing throughout the country, with hundreds of counties passing some form of a declaration protecting gun rights from encroachments perpetrated by higher levels of government. The sanctuary movement has only recently come to the state of Missouri, with several counties recently declaring themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries and the state legislature pushing similar bills. But Newton County might have adopted the strongest language in the entire country – going so far as to criminalize enforcement or cooperation with federal law enforcement who seek to enforce such policies.

This is a takeoff of what states like New York did when they criminalized the cooperation between state and county government officials and Immigration and Customs Enforcement with regard to enforcement of federal immigration laws, even against illegal aliens with criminal records. The difference, of course, is that the Second Amendment sanctuary movement seeks to protect legitimate constitutional rights for Americans and, unlike the illegal alien sanctuary movement, does not harbor suspected criminals.

Specifically, section 4a of the Newton County ordinance grants the sheriff’s department “full authority to make an arrest of any and all federal agents that violate state laws and enforce regulations” that violate the Second Amendment. Finally, the ordinance bars anyone “who enforces or attempts to enforce any of the infringements identified in this ordinance” from “being hired as a law enforcement officer or to supervise law enforcement officers in the county.”

It is to be hoped that this will spawn a debate in the country over what citizens should do when the higher levels of government violate the very essence of the social compact by wielding one executive power after another to confiscate the most foundational of natural rights, including self-defense, free speech, property rights, and the right to breathe free air unrestrained, which absolutely is a natural right that predated any government.

The Newton ordinance was signed by commissioners Bill Reiboldt, Alan Cook, and David Osborn on Feb. 3 and is effective immediately.

While most sanctuary ordinances have thus far targeted Second Amendment violations, some counties have begun to pass sanctuary resolutions protecting local business owners and citizens from COVID restrictions that violate the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution. SanctuaryCounties.com is a website that tracks the growing list of these sanctuary counties. Also, a group of listeners of my podcast have organized a network (Constitution Action Network) for people of the same state and county to meet, collaborate, and raise awareness of the power of state and local government to interpose against the growing list of blatant constitutional violations and extra-lawful lawmaking at the stroke of Biden’s executive pen.

The left-wing sanctuary city politicians, while wrong on the policy and legal merits of their arguments, will likely rue the day they created this monster that will now serve as the only remaining beacon for patriots to protect legitimate rights of American citizens.

Share
Categories
Committee assignments constitutional republic Intelwars Us congress us house of representatives

Horowitz: House Republicans should all resign their committee assignments and create their own

Congress doesn’t govern any more. The executive and judicial branches control every aspect of our lives, and Congress only exists to virtue-signal and sign off on the president’s insane budget without holding him accounting for power-grabs. This is true of both parties when they have control of either Congress or the White House. Yet with Democrats violating basic constitutional and even human rights of the GOP minority, why not actually break off and form a much more powerful messaging operation, given that the existing Congress is all about talk?

While Congress gets to determine the rules and proceedings of its body with majority support, Democrats have now run the chamber in such a way that it violates at least the spirit of democratic representation of individual members of Congress. Representatives cannot speak without muzzles on their mouths; they are prevented from uttering a number of things thanks to new rules; and they are now frisked on their way into the chamber, which are all in violation of the prohibition in Article I Section 6 against detaining a congressman on the way to work.

Representatives have the right to talk, debate freely, and offer amendments. Article I Sec. 6 not only prevents them from being detained on the way to and from work, it also guarantees them the right to speak and debate freely. Some might find their speech repugnant, but that is what elections are for.

This principle has been completely abrogated by the new rules of this Congress. Now, they are picking members they don’t like and throwing them off committees, even though they were duly elected by the people. Well, committees don’t do any work anyway. Nor can they offer amendments on the floor. All the important legislation that actually affects our future is crafted behind closed doors by lobbyists and executive branch officials and is either ensconced in a budget bill or an emergency bill, which is then voted on within hours of being introduced.

So, what is the point of the GOP members remaining in the House as a minority only to suffer abuse and humiliation without even being able to investigate, propose amendments, and use their voices?

There is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting them from simply breaking off and refusing to show up, opting instead to form their own shadow Congress. No, they will not conduct votes, and obviously will wield no constitutional authority, but as mentioned, this is essentially what the real Congress does anyway. It’s all about social media virtue-signaling. Their voices matter so much more than their votes, given our broken structure of government. So why not use their voices when and where they can actually talk freely?

They should divide members into shadow committees and hold fact-finding field hearings with guests to educate the public on the threat to civil liberties posed by COVID fascism, the two-tiered justice system, illegal immigration, and rampant crime, just to name a few issues. Rather than the same boring C-SPAN video, people would be able to view on a platform like Rumble an array of exciting guests and witnesses. Again, it would have no legal grounding, but everything that goes on in Congress anyway is nothing but showboating. So why not do a better job of it?

Nothing is stopping Republicans from putting out reports, broadcasting hearings, posting speeches, and giving voice to the concerns of their constituents. Democrats, with their majority, will do what they want anyway and always have the votes to pass anything. If they want to run the House like a dictatorship, why not let them have their fiefdom and show the American people their unvarnished radicalism without the Republicans as a distraction?

This is not cutting and running. Democrats have declared war on Republicans by kicking Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene off committees, a precedent that will not end with her. They are openly discussing banning members outright. So why play in their rigged system and get humiliated? Republican members should use their voices as private citizens, with the notoriety of elected officials, to augment the voices of their constituents more effectively.

A sane Republican Party would resign all committee posts in protest, regardless of what they think of Taylor Greene personally. This is a body that hosts members with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. This is a body that hosts Rep. Alcee Hastings, who was one of the only federal judges in history to be removed through impeachment. In 1989, he was removed for a charge of taking a bribe in exchange for a lenient sentence. He was originally impeached by the House, which was then controlled by Democrats, by 413-3. Why isn’t he thrown off committees?

Ilhan Omar made anti-Semitic insinuations and downplayed 9/11 — the exact same conspiracy theories Green is accused of parroting. Where is the censure vote or effort to strip her committee assignments? And speaking of committee assignments, Rep. Eric Swalwell is accused of being in bed – literally – with a Chinese spy, yet he not only sits on the Homeland Security and Intel committees, but is one of the Democrat impeachment managers!

Jerry Nadler, the current Judiciary Committee chair, secured a clemency for Susan Rosenberg, the woman who planted a bomb in this very Capitol in 1983. He is in charge of the law-and-order committee of this chamber that was bombed.

Some might suggest that in the case of Hastings, his Florida constituents knew about his history and still voted to elect him to Congress years later, and he therefore has a right to serve. I actually agree with that sentiment. But that should apply to Taylor Greene, too. We are not talking about new behavior in office. These comments she has made about conspiracy theories were well known. Either her constituents don’t care, or they are so sick of fake Republicans going along with much more harmful conspiracy theories being peddled by clowns like Dr. Fauci that they would rather elect someone who believes in bizarre conspiracy theories but gives voice to them on the core issue than members who don’t believe in those theories but give voice to bizarre conspiracy theories like lockdowns and masks stopping a virus. Either way, that is their constitutional right to vote for her as it is for Alcee Hasting, Ilhan Omar, and a number of other repugnant Democrats who are either corrupt, anti-Semitic, or racist.

Black Lives Matter and Antifa are rioting and promoting insurrection to this very day. They have destroyed more public and private property in one hour of rioting than right-wing criminals on January 6 and have killed many more people. Should every Democrat (and RINO) who has promoted BLM and Antifa be removed from Congress?

Either two must play the same game, or it’s time to play our own game, and for once, make the Left react and play follow the leader. The sadistic double standard and two-tiered system is unsustainable.

Share
Categories
constitutional republic Coronavirus Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Fascism Fauci Intelwars Mask mandates Osterholm

Horowitz: Ruling class openly saying fascism and masks will NEVER end. Will we FINALLY wake up?

You can’t blame people for not believing last March that “15 days to flatten the curve” would transmogrify into “restrict your breathing with a mask and lock you down until there is a vaccine.” Nobody could have imagined such an absurd conspiracy theory, especially after months of those measures failing to achieve the goal.

Yet now that the vaccine is being administered swiftly and the fascists are doubling down on the masking – literally – if you still think this will end on its own, you are willfully blind. Either we make it end, or we will be masking our humanity for the rest of our lives.

Consider the following:

  • Despite the fact that we appear close to hitting the de facto herd immunity threshold with so many people already having had the virus, the government now has the perfect pretext to continue the fascism and move the goalposts. Dr. Fauci recently said that we are all at a very high risk of getting the new strains of the virus, particularly the South African variant, even if we already had the virus. Never mind the fact that cases dropped nearly 88% in South Africa over the past three weeks.
  • OK, so this is what the vaccine is for, right? Well, indeed, this is why Fauci is telling us to get the vaccine even if we had the virus. But have you ever heard of a virus whose slight mutation is somehow not covered by natural immunity but is covered by the vaccine?
  • Which brings us to the next step. Yes, they absolutely are pushing the vaccine because the cronies must get rich off it. But will they let you out of mask jail after receiving a dose? Not a chance. They are all openly saying you will need to keep the sacred rituals alive even after having gotten the vaccine and natural immunity.
  • Thus, we have lockdowns and masks, which are so effective … that they can’t work and require a vaccine to do their jobs, but even with a vaccine and natural immunity, they still don’t work, so this charade of mask-wearing must go on! Also, they are so effective that if you don’t wear one, you are almost murdering someone. Never mind the fact that the curve rises and falls at the same time by region, regardless of non-pharmaceutical interventions.
  • Not only haven’t they eased off on the mask religion, even as so many people have gotten the virus and have gotten the vaccine, they are doubling down and tripling down, which in itself is a tacit concession that one mask has failed miserably, as they themselves predicted before the issue became political. What started out as an insane conspiracy theory is now mainstream, with Fauci now floating the idea of the CDC recommending the absurdity of double and triple masking. Never mind that Biden’s own adviser, Dr. Michael Osterholm, explained the obvious fact that this will further weaken the already improperly worn seal on the first mask and further push the aerosols out the sides – all the while magnifying all the physical problems caused by long-term masking.
  • Then again, is wearing two masks outside a clinical setting any more absurd than wearing one? Osterholm himself ridiculed the idea – not in March, but as late as June, after it had already become a religion. He has consistently described in great detail how the cloth and surgical masks are nowhere near effective in blocking an aerosol of microscopic viral particles. So why are we supposed to believe him now that he became Biden’s adviser when he says they do work? And why should we believe Fauci, who says that two masks work when one didn’t work, if Osterholm is saying that two don’t work just like he used to say one doesn’t work, before he became a politician? Are you confused yet?

Here is a transcript of what Osterholm said on June 12 in a video interview with the Midway Chamber of Commerce (beginning at the 39:23 mark):

So all the data we would have say at this point that just masking of itself with a cloth mask, or a surgical mask, surely may reduce the number of particles you put out, big particles, or the big particles you get in, but it’s the little particles that are coming along the sides that are the real problem. And so I’m telling you, I would throw the kitchen sink at this thing if I thought that it would make a difference. Masks are not a major issue, and by the way, in 1918, there were actually some very exhaustive studies done on masks after that, and John Barry, the historian who we work with closely, will tell you not one of them found that they made any difference.

Number two is, just think about this, common sense, this is a group of commonsense people here. The area of the world where geographically we had the most, the highest frequency of mask-wearing as just a social/cultural event was in China, Hubei Province, China, in November and December of last year. Did that mask-wearing have any impact on that emergence of that horrible, horrible city-on-fire situation? I mean, that was one where we had virtually everyone wearing a mask publicly. It didn’t make a difference, and so I only say this because if you want to wear masks, go ahead, feel free. I worry, though, that people who are at risk of having severe disease will take that mask and have now assumed a level of protection that they don’t really have and then put themselves in harm’s way, in a way that they wouldn’t have otherwise. And so there’s a downside to that. Finally, I just find the social/political pressure, you know, today, if you don’t wear a mask, oh my God what a bad person you are, so you know, and unfortunately we’ve now come to make judgments, not on science, but on basically emotions, and I worry about that, because this one’s not kind of a big one. But what if we start saying, okay, all heavy people, we’re going to do this to you because you’re at risk of getting this disease more, or all people who are of this age, we’re going to do this to you because you’re at higher risk? And they can say well, you know, I’m using the same basis for making those recommendations that I made for the masks; maybe it will help. And at some point you just, I’m just a scientist, a poor lowly scientist, I’m just sitting here telling you, you know, the data, you make a decision, how you decide, and I’m telling you right now that I, the masking is not an issue.

Look at those profound concerns he expressed! Every one of them has been proven right today, as the virus spread out of control months after the mandates were in place with a more religious degree of adherence and public shaming than anyone ever thought possible. Why are we to trust him now, when the science behind what he said has actually been proven by every epidemiological curve? How can he go from ridiculing mask-wearing to making it so sacred that we should violate every law of human rights and dignity, including for children, the elderly, and disabled, in order to enforce it?

  • The more information that comes out showing children are in less danger of getting sick from or spreading COVID than the flu, the more they double down on masking children, even during recess and sports. A survey of over 2,000 high school athletes in Minnesota who had to play with masks showed that 80% had a hard time breathing, 52% experienced excessive fatigue, and 48 players report going to an urgent care. Thus, no amount of science or evidence is able to stop this sadistic obsession with masks.
  • Some of you might be wondering what happened to OSHA? Don’t they have standards on PPE wearing in the workplace and safety guidelines dictating the parameters, types, and exemptions of those wearing masks? Well, they have changed their standards. It has long been the policy of OSHA that respirators, such as an N-95s, are the minimum standard for personal protective equipment, as Dr. Osterholm said in June. Now OSHA is requiring employers to force upon their workers unsafe practices that just a year ago would have gotten those employers prosecuted, with OSHA leading the charge.

Where does this leave us? The more the science shows the endless hypocrisy and absurdity of mask-wearing to stop a virus, the more the ruling elites violate the science and their own prior standards and warnings with even greater absurdities. Miraculously, a new pretext always materializes just at the moment they have milked dry the original excuse for mask-wearing. Those goalposts will never remain in place.

The time to stand up and say NO is now. The time to fight back in state legislatures and with ADA lawsuits is now. The time to pull out of public and private schools that engage in this abuse is now. The time to support those businesses that stand up to this evil and boycott Karen businesses is now. As they say, “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.”

Share
Categories
Biden administration Constitution constitutional republic Coronavirus tyranny Executive Orders Intelwars north dakota

Horowitz: North Dakota legislators introduce bill to block Biden’s illegal executive edicts

“All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security and benefit of the people, and they have a right to alter or reform the same whenever the public good may require. ~Sec. 2, North Dakota Declaration of Rights

A group of North Dakota legislators have taken up the call for states to reassert control over the Constitution, as the Biden regime continues to rule by executive fiat, often promulgating unconstitutional orders infringing upon civil rights. This is the key to thwarting a wholesale slide into national despotism and ensuring that there are some places for Americans to go and enjoy the blessings of liberty. The question is whether leaders in those legislative chambers as well as Gov. Doug Burgum will pick up the mantle, not to mention Republicans in other states.

Recently, Rep. Tom Kading and eight other Republicans in the North Dakota House introduced HB 1164, which would task the attorney general with reviewing the constitutionality of the president’s executive orders. If any of his orders are deemed to be unlawful, this bill would prohibit any state or county agency or publicly funded organization from enforcing the edict.

The list of issues covered under the bill are:

  1. Pandemics or other health emergencies.
  2. The regulation of natural resources, including coal and oil.
  3. The regulation of the agriculture industry.
  4. The use of land.
  5. The regulation of the financial sector as it relates to environmental, social, or governance standards.
  6. The regulation of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Thus, an easy first candidate for such legislation is Biden’s recent mask mandate, which unconstitutionally prohibits humans breathing without cloths on their mouths and noses inside any public transportation, including in-state ride-shares and taxis. The CDC created an entire criminal offense for something that never passed Congress.

What if Congress decides to pass a bill that is unconstitutional? HB 1282, introduced by Rep. Sebastian Ertelt, would take this a step farther by proposing a “Committee on Neutralization of Federal Laws” to recommend whether a given law or regulation is unconstitutional. Upon the recommendation of this committee, consisting of state legislative leadership and their appointees, the legislature would pass a concurrent resolution on whether to nullify the law or edict. Until the resolution is passed, state and county agencies would be prohibited from enforcing the law or regulation at issue.

These bills should serve as a model for all 31 GOP-controlled legislatures, especially in the 23 states where there are also Republican governors. I hear so many conservatives acting despondent and either resigned to tyranny or calling for secession or even a civil war. But the solution implied in these bills would keep the union loosely intact while peacefully maintaining a constitutional sanctuary for those who still value constitutional freedoms. This is the best way to peacefully and gradually separate blue and red America into their respective cultural, economic, and governing choices so we can live together more agreeably as a federal union.

North Dakota Republicans control the Senate 40-7 and the House 80-14. If this were a Democrat state passing a sanctuary bill for illegal aliens, the bill would pass in a day. Given that the rights of American citizens are on the line, Senate leaders Randy Burckhard and Rich Wardner should bring this bill to the Senate floor, and Speaker Kim Koppelman should bring the bill to the House floor immediately. North Dakota has an opportunity to lead the nation in liberty, if only all the Republicans in the state would govern the way they campaign.

Madison predicted in Federalist #46 that a federal encroachment would easily be mitigated by state action, because “the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand.” What is the winning formula?

The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps, refusal to co-operate with the officers of the Union; the frowns of the executive magistracy of the State; the embarrassments created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any State, difficulties not to be despised; would form, in a large State, very serious impediments; and where the sentiments of several adjoining States happened to be in unison, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.

In other words, public outrage, state and local officials refusing to enforce it, and correspondence with counterparts in other states together in unison would prevail over federal tyranny.

South Dakota already has a similar bill to HB 1164 targeting Biden’s executive lawmaking. Rep. Aaron Aylward of Harrisburg, South Dakota, introduced HB 1194, which would set up an executive board to review the constitutionality of executive orders pertaining to the six issues laid out in the North Dakota legislation. With a 32-3 majority in the Senate and a 62-8 majority in the House, South Dakota Republicans have the strongest majorities since the Eisenhower era. The Dakotas, as well as many other parts of the country, can easily become constitutional sanctuaries.

Additionally, county commissions, prosecutors, and sheriffs should also seek to criminalize enforcement of unconstitutional edicts at the county level.

Let’s be very clear: The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution subordinates states to follow only laws that are pursuant to the Constitution on issues that were given over to the federal government to determine. However, if the federal government blatantly violates the Constitution, especially in a way that harms individual liberty, even Alexander Hamilton, the great supporter of a powerful national government, said that states should ignore it. “It will not follow from this doctrine that acts of the large society which are NOT PURSUANT to its constitutional powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of the smaller societies, will become the supreme law of the land,” wrote Hamilton in Federalist #33. “These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such.”

Well, if it was good enough for Hamilton, it should be good enough for states with strong Republican majorities in the legislature.

There is no doubt that Biden’s presidency will take a bite out of our economy, especially with his cancelation of the international pipeline going through North Dakota. But if tyranny itself takes root and grows within the boundaries of these solid red states, then we as conservatives have nobody to blame but ourselves and our own complacency.

Share
Categories
Biden administration Constitution constitutional republic Intelwars Local Government red states

Horowitz: Red states must nullify Biden’s nullification of the Constitution

“That in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.” ~Virginia Resolution, 1798, against the Sedition Act

What happens when the federal government and some state governments turn against every provision of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence? James Madison foresaw such a day, which is why he designed a multilayered republic with numerous states and counties all under a federal union. Tyranny and lawlessness can persist in some places, but under his design, it shouldn’t persist fully in every part of the country. When the federal government chooses to nullify the Constitution, it’s time for the remaining lawful states to nullify the nullification.

As we watch the Biden administration, with the help of the media and blue state governors, impose COVID fascism, criminalize free speech and assembly, and misuse and abuse our military for what appears to be a fascist junta in D.C. — all the while rolling out the welcome mat for foreign invaders at our border and Antifa rioters in our streets — we should all be asking what red states and counties can be doing to push back.

No president has ever come close to the number of illegal executive actions the Biden regime has taken in less than two weeks. These unprecedented actions deserve an equally intrepid and determined reaction from the 31 GOP legislatures. The following are a mix of actions conservatives should push for in any unit of government controlled by those who can be pressured into adopting a constitutional sanctuary.

  • Block Biden’s mask mandate: Conservatives should push an immediate end to all state mask mandates in the 31 states where Republicans control the legislature. Next, in the states with Republican governors and attorneys general, they should take a chapter out of New York’s playbook by criminalizing the enforcement of Biden’s mask mandate on public transportation. Biden’s order makes it a federal crime to breathe freely even in a ride-share that doesn’t go across state lines. This is unconstitutional on so many levels. It’s time to criminalize the enforcement of this in the states. New York criminalized the enforcement of immigration law, which is emphatically the job of the federal government. There’s no reason why such action can’t be taken by the states when the federal government violates the civil rights of American citizens.
  • End all emergency orders: Every state with a GOP legislature should immediately terminate all emergency orders and pass restrictions on the ability of governors to abuse emergency powers in the future.
  • Call back the National Guard: The deployment of our National Guard to Washington was a disgrace from day one and was done under false pretenses. The fact that Biden is keeping them there indefinitely is indefensible. It is shocking that only eight Republican governors have called back their National Guardsmen, despite them being abused. Pressure needs to be brought to bear on the remainder of those governors to follow suit.
  • No men in female bathrooms or sports: State governors and attorneys general need to criminalize the entry of men into female private spaces and women’s sports so that Biden’s unconstitutional order cannot take root in the majority of states.
  • Fight discrimination against Trump supporters: The federal government has now harnessed the full force of law enforcement and the national intelligence apparatus against Trump supporters. States must commit to blocking federal law enforcement from arresting people merely for assembling or expressing their opinions. They should also file 14th Amendment lawsuits against federal agencies that clearly single out Trump supporters for questioning and investigations.

The Biden regime and Nancy Pelosi have stopped construction of the border wall designed to protect the American people and have instead constructed a wall around the Capitol to keep the people away from the politicians. If they want to cut off the Capitol from the rest of the country with a fence, that is fine. It’s time for states to reciprocate by cutting Washington off from their lives and interposing between the people and federal tyranny.

There can be no denying that our government has lost all legitimacy as it declines to even pretend to follow the Constitution. When the federal government violated the Constitution with just one law in 1798 – the Sedition Act – Thomas Jefferson and James Madison went to the Kentucky and Virginia legislatures to interpose against the act. Madison explained the rationale for the Virginia resolution as follows:

The states, then, being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity that there can be no tribunal, above their authority, to decide, in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently, that, as the parties to it, they must decide, in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition.

Even Hamilton, a strong proponent of a strong federal government, wrote in Federalist 26 that the state legislatures will lead the charge against federal tyranny:

The State legislatures, who will always be not only vigilant but suspicious and jealous guardians of the rights of the citizens against encroachments from the federal government, will constantly have their attention awake to the conduct of the national rulers, and will be ready enough, if any thing improper appears, to sound the alarm to the people, and not only to be the VOICE, but, if necessary, the ARM of their discontent.

This begins by states and counties passing Constitutional Sanctuary resolutions, committing to not only ignoring constitutionally flawed edicts but criminalizing their enforcement. As Daniel Webster said in protesting the federal military conscription in the War of 1812:

The operation of measures thus unconstitutional and illegal ought to be prevented by a resort to other measures which are both constitutional and legal. It will be the solemn duty of the State governments to protect their own authority over their own militia, and to interpose between their citizens and arbitrary power. These are among the objects for which the State governments exist; and their highest obligations bind them to the preservation of their own rights and the liberties of their people.

A military draft was actually something quite sensible to most of our Founders, yet Webster still called for interposition against it. What do you think he would have said if a new fourth branch of government called “the CDC” came and criminalized the breathing of a human being without a cloth? Would he or our Founders have remained silent?

Share
Categories
constitutional republic Gop governors Intelwars National Guard National guard to the capitol Vetting soldiers

Horowitz: Governors have an obligation to rescind deployment of National Guard

When our border was under assault by the drug cartels and human smugglers, the entire political class, media, and governors opposed the deployment of the National Guard to defend the sovereignty of the union. When cities were burning out of control night after night, they opposed using the military to stanch the bleeding in the streets. Now, these same people seem OK with 25,000 troops being paraded around in D.C. and in some state capitals with no end in sight. Worse, the military is being purged of “far-right extremists,” and it wouldn’t be surprising to learn that that encompasses all Trump supporters.

Where is this coming from, and where is this headed? That is the question all GOP governors should be asking – a question that should prompt them to immediately rescind the deployment order.

Why are we suddenly “vetting” our own soldiers in order to perform a “mission” in a way that appears to be an ideological litmus test? How long will these soldiers remain? These are the questions governors must ask before they sign off on indefinite deployment of their state’s Guard.

“These are vetting efforts that identify any questionable behavior in the past, or any potential link to questionable behavior, not just related to extremism … we’re not asking questions right now,” said Jonathan Hoffman, assistant to the secretary of defense for public affairs. He noted that they are not even asking questions, but “out of abundance of caution taking action and immediately removing them from the line,” in describing the purging of people while looking at their history and social media.

And as has been the case throughout the COVID restrictions, they are encouraging fellow Guard members to report one another.

Objectively speaking, what does this look like to you? Where have we seen this throughout history?

Put another way, can you imagine if these comments were made and these actions taken in support of Trump’s inauguration four years ago?

What is going on today is as shocking as it is chilling. What is even more shocking is the silence from most GOP governors who sent national guardsman to D.C. Texas Governor Greg Abbott expressed concern about the ideological litmus test, but only threatened to cut off cooperation in the future. He needs to go a step farther and commit to cutting off soldiers now until the purge stops and until there is a timeline and a justification given for keeping the soldiers there.

The thousands of people pouring over our border in 2019 were unmistakable. Plus, protecting our border is what our Founders had in mind as the purview of the military. Yet, the New Mexico governor pulled the National Guard from her own border with Mexico while facing a crisis of human and drug smuggling and is now sending them to D.C. for Biden’s military junta.

Keeping soldiers in our cities with no prima facie violence occurring anywhere is a recipe for a military junta-style government, absent the feds sharing legitimate intelligence with these governors justifying these unprecedented moves.

The purging is not just about taking these soldiers off this particular mission. It’s inconceivable that once they are flagged for concern and disqualified from duty at the inauguration (and beyond?), this will not be a black mark on their careers forever. Governors need to stand up for their guardsmen.

Two weeks after the Capitol attack with zero evidence of any residual violence on the streets, why is D.C. a military zone and why are some state capitals following suit? Just this Monday, 11 NYPD officers were injured in a Black Lives Matter riot, yet the American people haven’t even heard about it. When BLM was burning D.C. night after night, and after 60 Secret Service agents were injured at an attack near the White House, Pelosi lambasted Trump for using the military, even though he only used it when the violence was out of control.

“We are concerned about the increased militarization and lack of clarity that may increase chaos. I am writing to request a full list of the agencies involved and clarifications of the roles and responsibilities of the troops and federal law enforcement resources operating in the city,” Pelosi wrote in a letter to President Trump on June 4, 2020. “Congress and the American people need to know who is in charge, what is the chain of command, what is the mission, and by what authority is the National Guard from other states operating in the capital.”

Joe Biden accused Trump of “preening and sweeping away all the guardrails that have long protected our democracy.”

Which guardrails? Military loyalty to one party? Full censorship of any opposition? Banning protests and access to elected officials? Muzzling us with masks and lockdowns?

Now that the military is being used in greater numbers without clarity of a time limit for a speculative threat that is not evident on the streets – and they are engaging in the most comprehensive vetting of soldiers ever – why aren’t Republican governors raising similar concerns? Mitt Romney criticized Trump for using the military when D.C. was on fire. Where is he now?

Ultimately, it is up to the governors to put an end to this charade. Every one of them needs to ask what they would do if Trump had surrounded himself with 25,000 troops and destroyed the military careers of anyone who supported Hillary Clinton.

Share
Categories
constitutional republic First Amendment free speech Free speech threat FREEDOM OF SPEECH Intelwars

Horowitz: For the first time in our lives, free speech is about to be criminalized

Our First Amendment freedoms give us the right to think what we like and say what we please. And if we the people are to govern ourselves, we must have these rights, even if they are misused by a minority.” ~James Madison

We never thought this day would arrive in America. Last year, we learned that they can shout “COVID” as an emergency, and our life, liberty, and property disappear. They can shout “racism,” and our inalienable right to self-defense disappears. The last thing we had was the freedom to criticize what is happening, even if there was nothing we can do about it. Now they can shout “right-wing terrorism” or “right-wing conspiracy” and say that freedom of speech no longer applies.

Leftists in this country claim that their violence is speech and our speech is violence. That is why they glorified riots last year that burned down numerous cities, caused thousands of injuries, cost billions of dollars, and elevated their cause as the most urgent grievance in need of redress. At the same time, they are pushing to criminalize not just the violent acts and actors at the Capitol on January 6, but any view or speech or assembly predicated on views that are held by those people. This is why they seem to be taking direct shots at the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech for Americans, even as they plan to grant amnesty to those whose entire presence in this country is illegal.

As everyone focuses on the corporate world violating the spirit of the First Amendment by excommunicating anyone with conservative views, watch carefully how the governmental actors are coming very close to violating the letter of the First Amendment with the force of the “law” behind it. Big tech might have a monopoly on the internet and communications, but government has a monopoly on violence, law, and the ability to restrain our liberty. If we don’t wake up immediately, our speech and freedom to assemble will be not only censored, but criminalized.

It started on January 6, when Tom Edsall published a column in the New York Times noting, “A debate has broken out over whether the once-sacrosanct constitutional protection of the First Amendment has become a threat to democracy.” This is a tried and tested tactic of the Left – to have their columnists float a radical idea as a “debate,” while their governmental actors begin working on it in earnest.

Just take stock of what we are seeing out in the open. They are now arresting people all over the country for merely being in the Capitol, even if they didn’t engage in violence, vandalism, or theft. Had this standard been applied to Black Lives Matter, there would literally have been millions of arrests. So no, this is not just about punishing those who acted violently. The FBI is placing signs all over the country asking people to report those who were at the Capitol, something that never happened even in the most deadly BLM/Antifa riots last year, or at Trump’s inauguration four years ago in D.C.

They are militarizing D.C. with 20,000 troops, when the threat of violence against Trump’s inaugural guests four years ago was exponentially greater. They are declaring emergencies in states as remote as New Mexico with no evidence of violence present. Garrett Soldano, a leader in the anti-lockdown movement in Michigan, claims the FBI paid him a two-hour visit because a local called the FBI and claimed he is a violent extremist.

If the FBI had done this when hundreds of cities were on fire for days on end with no control among local police departments, I would just feel they are being overly cautious. Given that BLM was promoted as the leader of our civic discourse and we are all being treated like terrorists, however, we should be very scared they are coming for the First Amendment, not for national security. Remember, the Justice Department seems to believe this was a planned attack. So the hundreds of thousands of Trump supporters who just came there to express their views had no idea that a few bad actors were planning this. The fact that they are hunting down anyone and everyone should scare us all.

Last week, Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman said emphatically that the First Amendment doesn’t apply to sentiments he disagrees with. “This idea that saying that Pennsylvania was ‘rigged’ or that we were ‘trying to steal the election’ — that’s a lie. And you do not have the right, that is not protected speech.”

Thus, from now on, Democrats can unilaterally change election law in middle of an election – up until and including abolishing Election Day in favor of mail-in ballots – and anyone who criticizes it or organizes a rally against it is subject to prosecution? These comments would be comical if they didn’t coincide with actions taken by his party coming into power in Washington that look a lot like martial law.

In other words, if you watch the language the Left is using about our speech and the actions the Biden administration and the governors are taking, it’s quite evident that Big Tech is not the only thing we have to worry about. If nothing changes, I predict that even if Parler is able to become completely independent in the private market, the government, which has the ultimate monopoly on power, will shut it down.

Last week, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, the same man who is prosecuting business owners and threatening them with labor camps for earning a living, said on a conference call with prosecutors that he is investigating those from his state who merely attended the rally.

Already in 2019, Richard Stengel, the Biden transition “team lead” for the U.S. Agency for Global Media, wrote in a Washington Post op-ed that the First Amendment needs curtailment. “All speech is not equal. And where truth cannot drive out lies, we must add new guardrails. I’m all for protecting ‘thought that we hate,’ but not speech that incites hate,” wrote Stengal.

This is pretty bizarre coming from a side of politics that already controls 99% of all speech and big business that controls speech. What exactly are they afraid of? If anything, we are the ones who should be scared of their speech, given the monopoly they hold.

Well, George Washington already warned us about the motivations of those who clamp down on speech. “For if Men are to be precluded from offering their Sentiments on a matter, which may involve the most serious and alarming consequences, that can invite the consideration of Mankind, reason is of no use to us; the freedom of Speech may be taken away, and, dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the Slaughter,” said Washington in an address to the Continental Army on March 15, 1783.

The question facing patriots in the coming days is quite simply this: Will we allow that final domino to fall?

Share
Categories
constitutional republic Coronavirus tyranny Intelwars Red-state fascism

Horowitz: What North Dakota teaches us about our failure to drain the swamp in red states

You want to know why Trump voters feel so desperate with no one to turn to and nowhere to live in freedom? Look no further than North Dakota.

What if I had told you at this time last year that in a few months we would have to wear face burkas for the rest of our lives, including children who are not in danger of dying from or spreading the virus? You would have thought that even if Democrats conjured up such an illegal, immoral, and illogical idea, it would be immediately opposed by every red state. Think again. Welcome to North Dakota, which, thanks to leftist Gov. Doug Burgum, has a mask mandate just like in California, despite zero evidence that such unconstitutional edicts change the natural geographical and seasonal trajectory of the virus.

Despite zero evidence of efficacy, the alleged GOP governor once cried over people not wearing them in his state. He obviously would have no explanation for how 100% compliance has failed to work in Los Angeles:

The good news is that counties are starting to fight back for liberty and for our children. Already in November, the Tioga School Board in Williams County, North Dakota, voted unanimously not to mandate that schoolchildren wear masks.

However, after intense pressure from the state school superintendent, the school board capitulated. At the time, Kirsten Baesler, the superintendent of public instruction, threatened the school district with loss of funds. “Any time a person, including a school district or school board, disregards laws they do so with the understanding that consequences can occur,” said Baesler on November 19.

And the rest is history.

So here we are in a county Trump carried 82%-15% in a state Trump carried by 34 points, and schoolchildren can’t even learn without state-sanctioned child abuse. Baesler spoke about following the law, but what law? Mask mandates violate the essence of individual liberty. Plus, these edicts are all executive fiat, not law. The question is how this can persist in a state this conservative.

Every statewide elected official, including Gov. Doug Burgum, is a Republican. Republicans hold a 40-7 majority in the state Senate and an 80-14 majority in the state House – larger majorities than Democrats hold in California. How is it that Burgum was easily able to get re-nominated this past summer in the GOP primary? Republican primary voters went out and voted unanimously for Trump and then cast a ballot for a Republican who opposes what they believe in. Moreover, how is there no legislation to stop such craziness – at least against children who don’t spread the virus – in the state legislature? Republicans have veto-proof majorities.

This problem exists in the reddest states in the country. In Wyoming, for example, Republicans will hold a 28-2 majority in the Senate and a 51-7 majority in the House over Democrats. Yet even in that state, there will be a mask mandate in many places. That is also the state that elected John Barrasso as senator and Liz Cheney as a representative. Both of them support impeaching Trump, even though Trump carried the state by 43 points. For comparison, Biden carried New York by 23 points. The fascism we are seeing in red states would be the equivalent of New York rejecting gay marriage. But that never happens in blue states.

The reason we have this problem is because we elect leftist Republicans during the primaries, even in the reddest states. Just yesterday, Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma wrote a letter bizarrely apologizing only to black constituents for objecting to the certification of the election. Putting aside what race has to do with ballot harvesting and illegal changes in election law, these are the types of Republicans we have even in red states.

The point is we can complain about Democrats controlling the trifecta of government in D.C. from now until 2022, but we have nobody to blame for red-state fascism, especially on the issues determined at the state and local levels, other than ourselves. It’s time for a Never RINO movement parallel to a Constitution Sanctuary movement, which will ensure liberty in red states. If all the people at the rally in D.C. on January 6 would organize in each state and county primary, we could peacefully redress the grievances of the forgotten American, at least in the more conservative states.

Share
Categories
constitutional republic Constitutional rights Coronavirus fascism Intelwars Local politics State politics

Horowitz: Constitutional sanctuary movement begins to grow

Let us remember that if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom. It is a very serious consideration, which should deeply impress our minds, that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers in the event.” ~Sam Adams, Oct. 14, 1771

All politics is local. That is a principle patriots will have to use and maximize to its fullest extent in the coming weeks. As the federal government and many state governments violate the Constitution with COVID fascism and, likely soon, by clamping down on protected political speech, local law enforcement and elected officials will have to step up to the plate and defend our constitutional rights.

Trump won 83% of the counties, in addition to roughly half the states. There is no reason why each one should not become a constitutional sanctuary. If the local sheriff, county commissioners, county executive, school board officials, and prosecutor are all in favor of declaring the county a sanctuary from civil liberties violations, then “there shall be left to mankind an asylum on earth, for civil and religious liberty,” as Sam Adams predicted when embarking in the struggle for independence.

The constitutional sanctuary movement that started with the Second Amendment is gradually moving into COVID fascism and hopefully will be used to push back against any tyranny at the federal level in the coming months.

On Monday night, the Monument Board of Trustees declared Monument, Colorado, to be a sanctuary from restrictions on businesses. This small town in El Paso County voted 7-0 on “A resolution reasserting the rights of the Town of Monument and its residents and condemning the unconstitutional limitations imposed upon their freedoms by the governor of Colorado.”

Specifically, the resolution announced the town will “not abide by any executive orders limiting attendance of and free speech at public meetings within the town.” The trustees called upon each individual business owner to assess his own risk level and willingness to butt heads with the state government.

This is a good start, but county and town governments need to make it clear that they will unite and resist unconstitutional orders against state authorities. We must stop saying things are unconstitutional and then treat them as if they are constitutional. Either “life, liberty, and property” have meaning or not.

To that end, all of the officials in Bargara County, Michigan, a rural area in the Upper Peninsula, united in a letter declaring Governor Whitmer’s orders unconstitutional. The letter, which was posted on County Sheriff Joe Brogan’s Facebook page, noted how the people have not endured such tyranny since the settlement of this continent. “Our citizens’ rights to assemble, to freely practice their religion, to travel, to keep their property, businesses, and jobs, even to dress as they please have all been swept aside, and to what end?” declared the letter, which was signed by the county commissioners, prosecutor, clerk, and treasurer.

The sheriff notes that every state and local official swears an oath to the Constitution. If these measures are not unconstitutional, especially after 10 months of utter failure to even move the needle on taming the spread of the virus, then that document quite clearly has no meaning. “We hereby put the state of Michigan on NOTICE that we have no intention of participating in the unconstitutional destruction of our citizens’ economic security and Liberty,” continued the letter. “We further declare our intention to take no action whatsoever in furtherance of this terribly misguided agenda.”

Another Upper Peninsula county, Delta, passed a resolution supporting the right of businesses to open their establishments. There are a number of cities and counties across the country now considering these resolutions in addition to the nearly one-third of counties that have already declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries. SanctuaryCounties.com is keeping track of these developments.

What ultimately needs to happen is that, pursuant to the doctrine of lesser magistrates, communities work together with all their local officials to actively defend – both legally and morally – business owners who are attacked by state or potentially federal officials. Republicans control 31 state legislatures. They have an obligation to pass sanctuary resolutions statewide. In many of those states they have supermajorities to override the veto of a Democrat or RINO governor.

Every county, state, and federal official swears an oath to uphold the Constitution — the same oath taken by federal judges — no more, no less. In justifying why federal courts should have concurrent (not exclusive, as some erroneously think) jurisdiction over constitutional interpretation instead of upholding even unconstitutional laws passed by the legislature, Justice John Marshall pointed to this very oath. “How immoral to impose it on them if they were to be used as the instruments, and the knowing instruments, for violating what they swear to support!” declared an indignant Marshall in his famous Marbury opinion.

In defense of judicial review, Marshall rhetorically asked, “Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the Constitution of the United States if that Constitution forms no rule for his government? If it is closed upon him and cannot be inspected by him?”

Well, as state officials swear the same oath and wield even more robust power directly affecting the lives of citizens than judges do, don’t they have the same obligation to use their powers to counter illegal executive edicts that impose the most unconstitutional social changes imaginable? Changes to our law and society that violate the foundation of natural law and nature’s God, to whom that oath is directed?

If California and New York were able to offer sanctuary to the most vile criminal aliens – and even criminalize the enforcement of duly passed immigration law – then most certainly red counties and states can and must be sanctuaries for American businessmen, schoolchildren, and the Bill of Rights from the clutches of evil and illegal executive power.

Share
Categories
constitutional republic Coronavirus fascism Donald Trump GOP Intelwars Republicans 2020

Horowitz: How Republicans can get rid of Trump for good

It’s become obvious over the past week that Republicans are uncontrollably desperate to rid themselves of Trump and disentangle their voters from his unflinching grip. They have been trying to do this for five years, but now they are willing to try anything and everything to accomplish their long-held goal. Unfortunately for them, they are ignoring the one way to actually get rid of Trump, opting instead for a tactic that will destroy themselves more directly than anything they have done until now.

The reason why voters are attached to Trump has nothing to do with Trump per se. It is rooted in what predated Trump. In fact, the very people who hate Trump the most today are the ones responsible for his rise.

The GOP has gone for three decades without representing any of the values or concerns of half the country. The more Republicans conspired with the left to destroy this country, the more radical the left became. The left has won so many fiscal and social fights without firing a shot that naturally it is proceeding immediately to the next step. In turn, the base voters became increasingly desperate for some sort of check and balance on the left’s increasingly successful transformation of this country. Trump co-opted the sentiment of the time in 2015, and GOP voters jumped aboard. If you throw Ted Cruz into the mix, over 70% of primary voters chose two candidates abhorred by the entire party ruling class.

The mistake all these Republicans made is that rather than putting Trump out of business by offering voters a better and more effective version of that alternative vision they were looking for, they opted to make Trump a martyr. Rather than attacking the left even more skillfully than Trump, they reminded the voters that they couldn’t care less for their concerns and only attacked the one man they perceived as at least speaking to their concerns.

Which brings us to this pivotal week. Republicans think they can get rid of Trump by impeaching and convicting him with a stipulation barring him from running for office again. But what that will do is terminate their own time in office, because they will lose 90% of their voters. They don’t realize that, ironically, Trump served as a cover for them. You read that right. Trump’s presence kept the base happier and at bay and, much to the chagrin of people like me, actually kept conservatives from primarying Republicans. In fact, Trump actually endorsed so many RINOs against conservative challengers that without his presence in the arena, base voters would have taken out their frustrations on those congressional Republicans. Now, Republicans are redirecting all the anger among the base that is represented by Trump and detonating it on themselves.

You know how they can get rid of Trump without committing suicide? They can ride out the next 10 days in silence and then use every lever of power to filibuster every legislation and every budget bill under the Biden administration.

They can pass election reform in all the states they control.

They can combat the sexual licentiousness movement at every turn.

They can declare the red states sanctuaries from COVID fascism, First Amendment violations, and federal overreach.

They can terminate all lockdowns and mask mandates in red states.

They can take all the states where they have supermajority control and turn those states into conservative versions of California.

They can tell the federal courts to butt out of state affairs now that they have shown themselves to be frauds by allowing blue states to violate the Constitution and election law.

They can immediately pass self-defense legislation, toughen sentences on violent criminals, and decriminalize over-zealous laws against peaceful citizens.

They can serve as beacons of freedom and asylum for patriots disenchanted with the debased culture and an irremediably broken federal government.

Were they to do these things — were they to unite all of their state and federal leaders behind fighting for such an agenda in word and deed — Trump would not only be outshined by other candidates, he would lose his non-electoral appeal and sway over the base. Indeed, Trump would lose more clout than he would were he to be removed by the Senate, without becoming a martyr to his voters.

So why wouldn’t Republicans pursue this more auspicious path? Because the one thing they hate more than Trump is conservative values. They hate his voters more than the man himself. They would rather go to political hell while martyring Trump in the eyes of his voters than ascend to political heaven along with his voters while eliminating their supposed nemesis.

Unfortunately for them, there already is one Democrat Party, and there is no market for a second one. They will be the ones on the outside looking in.

Share
Categories
American politicians American republic constitutional republic Coronavirus tyranny Intelwars Marco Rubio

Horowitz: Marco Rubio made the best point about this week’s chaos. Now he should look in the mirror.

Seldom has a politician diagnosed a problem more accurately and even clairvoyantly than Marco Rubio did on the Senate floor Wednesday night when he summed up the state of affairs in this country.

“Everybody in this country has lost their minds on politics,” declared the senior senator from Florida. “And we have forgotten that America is not a government. America’s not a president. America’s not a Congress.”

Listening to this, I was shouting amen!

“Let me tell you what America is,” continued Rubio. “America is your family. America’s your faith. America’s your community. That’s America. That’s what our adversaries don’t understand, and that’s what we need to remember. That is how we’re going to rebuild this country and turn the page and have a future even brighter than our past.”

After that, I was so red-pilled, I felt like saying awoman!

Rubio is exactly right. In a constitutional republic, elections aren’t even supposed to be the most important thing. Yes, if the leader from the other faction wins, he might conduct foreign policy in a way that you find repugnant or he might not share your values. Perhaps he might collect the garbage and build roads or spend money in a way you find to be imprudent or profligate. But in the American Republic we used to live in, he didn’t rule over your lives, your business, your property, your family, your church, and your own bodily integrity.

That has all changed … thanks to politicians like Marco Rubio. There was a revolution, but it didn’t occur on January 6, 2021; it occurred on March 16, 2020. That was the day we adopted “15 days to flatten the curve,” which has turned into 15 centuries to flatten our lives, families, and communities. There has never been anything in the history of this country that has affected our family, faith, and communities more than the COVID fascism promoted by Rubio and all of his acolytes in the unibrow political class.

Thanks to Rubio and phony Republicans being complacent and downright complicit in the sacking of our Bill of Rights, we no longer have the most basic rights we took for granted. Indeed, thanks to Marco, America IS INDEED government. There is no way to escape it. We can’t even have our kids in private schools, and in some places where we can, they must be abused by wearing a subjugation cloth on their own bodies for seven hours a day. We can’t smile at each other. We can’t be together with community. We can’t even be together with family. There is no end in sight for these autocratic edicts, even after the forced vaccination passports.

One’s house was once regarded as an American castle, where we can escape from national turmoil and be with family and do what we want. Rubio believes the Constitution is suspended because he can shout COVID in a crowded theater. Now we can be arrested for having family over for Thanksgiving or, thanks to the sadistic hatred of fellow mankind imbued in us by the government, a neighbor will snitch on us.

Rubio could not have been more precise when he suggested America is not government. But he should have used the past tense. America was not government. Now, there is not a single thing government cannot do to us under the guise of COVID, and they are just getting warmed up. Business owners are crushed to the benefit of the large corporations, people can’t earn a living, the suicide crisis is so bad that it is now claiming preteen children. God save us.

The mere existence of our being is now criminalized. They have criminalized breathing free air, earning a living, schooling our children, playing together with friends and community (that Rubio referred to as defining America). They have criminalized happiness and life itself so that we not only can no longer live as Americans, we can’t live with basic human rights. Studies have shown that even rats become severely depressed when socially isolated. What is being done to our seniors in nursing homes with solitary confinement is a crime against humanity.

The mask cult, despite the utter fecklessness of its Chinese cloth idol, is so strong that its leaders have shredded all ADA and OSHA considerations of safety and disabilities. They are shoving them on the faces of crying two-year-old children on airplanes, even though children are not in danger nor are they vectors of spread – even assuming these things would magically work after failing for nine months. A German study of 25,000 mask-wearing children found that 68% of the parents reported impairments in their children: irritability, 60%; headache, 53%; difficulty concentrating, 50%; less happiness, 49%; malaise, 42%; impaired learning, 38%; fatigue, 37%.

The lockdowns and forced muzzling of Americans is both the greatest strategic mistake of a civilization and the gravest crime against humanity perpetrated by government.

Indeed, America has not only become government; humanity itself has become government. Not only hasn’t Rubio fought this, he declared, “Everyone should just wear a damn mask.”

Now, let’s put aside the fact that everyone has been wearing “a damn mask” for nine months in most places, except for his home state, which is doing better than most states with masks. More broadly, how can Rubio look us in the eye and tell us America is not government, when he is using government to control our own breathing in the most literal and personal sense?

The answer is as clear as it disquieting and downright chilling. As C.S. Lewis warned, “Those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” In his perverted elitist mind, everything the political class demands is exempted from constitutional constraints and doesn’t count as control over our lives. In his mind, so long as we throw endless “stimulus” at people, they can live “freely.”

After all, under Rubio’s definition of faith, family, and community, America is not really about government, because our very essence is already controlled by it. Which is why were he to look in the mirror to examine the source of the acrimony in America today, he would only see his own mask.

Sen. Rubio, take a listen to what your own governor had to say about lockdowns:

THAT is what it looks like to decouple government from American life, faith, family, and community. THAT is what it looks like to have a Republican Party that provides an alternative to the Left that doesn’t even involve Trump. Sadly, thanks to people like you, Ron DeSantis is just one in a hundred within the party. And that is exactly why we are at this precipice today.

Share
Categories
Conservative activism Conservative sanctuaries constitutional republic Constitutional rights Constitutional sanctuaries Intelwars

Horowitz: 7 ways conservatives can fight back at the state and local levels

Everyone is hoping and assuming 2021 will be a better year than 2020. But it will not happen on its own. We must get on the playing field and make it happen.

Assuming Joe Biden is sitting in the White House on January 20, there is little we can do to influence the direction of federal policy in the coming years. And given that too few Republicans in the Senate plan to stand against Biden’s fraudulent election victory this week, we are out of options at the federal level to fight back against voter fraud. Many parts of the country are irrevocably lost, and certain federal policies, particularly foreign policy, are headed down a dark path. But does that mean that in conservative parts of the country, we must submit to unconstitutional tyranny, especially from an illegitimately elected president? Only if we allow it. Now is both the time and the opportunity to fight back.

Republicans control state legislatures in 31 states. They control the trifecta in 24 states plus Kentucky, where there is a Democrat governor but veto-proof GOP majorities in the legislature. Additionally, Trump won the vote in 83% of the counties, and a large portion of them have GOP elected officials or officials who can certainly be influenced and pressured into going along with local popular sentiment. With legislative bodies going back into session this January, now is the time for us to make a stand for freedom throughout the country.

Did New York and California ever cooperate with Trump? Not a chance. They became even more liberal under his tenure and even resisted federal enforcement of the law against foreign criminals who violated federal sovereignty. Why can’t we do the same in the states and counties we supposedly control to at least return to constitutional governance?

To that end, here is a list of seven immediate agenda items for conservatives to focus on at the local and state levels to ensure that at least pockets of this country remain a sanctuary for ordered liberty and constitutional governance.

1) Constitutional sanctuaries against COVID fascism: Conservatives must immediately organize and push for the adoption of a declaration of rights and principles in the county and state legislative bodies over which they wield the most influence to make those jurisdiction sanctuaries against mask mandates, forced business closures, and draconian treatment of children in school. These declarations will affirm our rights to life, liberty, and property, terminate all emergency delegated authority to governors, and use the doctrine of lesser magistrates to fight unconstitutional suspensions of liberties from higher-ups in government.

2)Focus on local offices: Groups of patriots in each county need to assess, communicate with, pressure, and, if need be, recruit against the existing school board members, sheriffs, county judges, county prosecutors, county executives and commissioners. This is where all the power lies. There is no reason why in the 2,000+ counties Trump carried by easy margins that all of the aforementioned officials should not be on the same page to resist state or federal enforcement of unconstitutional lockdowns, mask tyranny, and abuse of our children at school. If not, we should immediately be working on candidates for those offices who share the values that reflect the presidential voting patterns of the county.

3) Immediately primary every lockdown governor: How is someone like Mike DeWine even able to stand for re-election this cycle, given that he has instituted the same lockdown policies as Andrew Cuomo in conservative Ohio? The answer is because we are not doing our job. Governors like DeWine in Ohio, Bill Lee in Tennessee, Brian Kemp in Georgia, Kay Ivey in Alabama, Brad Little in Idaho, Chris Sununu in New Hampshire, Greg Abbott in Texas, and Mark Gordon in Wyoming should easily attract a primary challenge. Trump should be recruited to support and rally for challengers. Why should we only have two anti-lockdown governors (DeSantis and Noem) of the 27 alleged Republican state executives in the country?

4) Vote on anti-crime/anti-riot and pro-self-defense legislation: While our governments took away our liberty with coronafascism in 2020, they also took away our safety by publicly blessing, rather than deterring, BLM and Antifa rioting. Additionally, they have released thousands of criminals, which has, in part, led to the sharpest increase in crime in a generation. Every Republican-controlled state legislature should immediately push legislation toughening sentencing on repeat violent offenders, clamping down on mob violence, and expanding self-defense laws. Ron DeSantis’ anti-rioting bill he plans to propose to the Florida legislature should be a model for two dozen other states.

5) Strengthen election integrity: The first order of business in states Republicans control should be to ban mail-in voting and ballot harvesting. They must make sure all elections are secure. I’ve detailed a list of nine ideas that should be pursued at a minimum. What about the federal courts inevitably inserting themselves into these laws? That leads me to #6.

6) Tell the federal courts to pound sand: If states had the “right” to thwart federal immigration law under Trump, according to these courts, and if they had the right to ignore their own election laws in a presidential election that affects the entire country, then it’s time for states to control areas of law that legitimately fall under their jurisdiction without judicial intervention. After turning down Trump’s lawsuits, the federal courts have forfeited any ability to get involved in election law. Red states need to stand up to them once and for all and teach them that federalism is a two-way street.

7) Block refugee resettlement: If Joe Biden becomes president, he will immediately increase the number of refugees we admit and force them upon the states. Additionally, he will try to resettle more Central American teens who crash our border as refugees. Although states don’t control the visa admission process, refugee resettlement requires state cooperation to place large numbers of refugees in local communities. While Americans are locked down, it makes no sense to admit more people from around the world. If states can welcome illegal aliens, then states can close their doors to the antiquated institution of refugee resettlement.

Notice a pattern? Most of the power on the relevant issues resides in the states where Republicans control a significant amount of power. They make it seem as if the world hinges on a razor-thin RINO majority in the Senate in Washington, yet they refuse to use the power in meaningful ways even when they control all of state government with supermajorities. The same legislatures that declined to challenge the election results refuse to fight on any other issue as well. That can all change if conservatives train their fire on local officials and candidates and fight national issues at the local level.

So, the next time Republicans give the excuse of “but Biden” and “but Pelosi” to justify their inaction on an issue, remember there are two dozen states that should look like a conservative version of California. They have their sanctuary states for tyranny and criminals. We should have ours for ordered liberty and the Constitution.

Share
Categories
2020 Election 2020 election fraud constitutional republic Democrat attack on america Democrat attack on the constitution Intelwars

Levin: On January 6, we learn whether our Constitution will hold

January 6 is the day we learn whether our Constitution will hold and whether congressional Republicans care.

The 2020 presidential election was, in several targeted battleground states, an unconstitutional electoral exercise. Even putting aside evidence of significant fraud, virtually none of which received a hearing by our courts, events leading up to and including the November national election constituted a radical and grave departure from the federal electoral system adopted by the framers of the Constitution and the state ratification conventions. Now, let’s be clear: None of this matters to the Democrat Party, since it and its surrogates perpetrated these unconstitutional acts, as I shall soon explain. Nor does it matter to the media, which is utterly illiterate on the subject and unequivocally supports the supposed outcome in any event. But it should be of great moment and concern to the people of this country and especially to congressional Republicans in both Houses, for if the latter do not at least confront and challenge this lawlessness on January 6, when Congress meets to count the electors, it will be the GOP’s undoing and, simultaneously, the undoing of our presidential electoral system. Ultimately, it will be the people of the United States who love our republic who will be the losers.

Win, lose, or draw, on January 6, the Republicans must not act as if “the people have spoken” and be cowered into passivity or worse, such as joining the Democrat Party and media hecklers, by insisting that they are part of a lawless party seeking to “reverse the results of the election.” Too many Republicans have already buckled, including the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, Sen. John Thune, and Rep. Adam Kinzinger. No doubt others who are unreliable and cowardly when facing the organized mob will follow. But let us not be judged by those who have intentionally and strategically manipulated our politics and the law to undermine our constitutional order. It is they who must be condemned.

Specifically, Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the federal Constitution could not be more explicit. It states, in pertinent part: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress …” This language was purposeful. During the Constitutional Convention, there were various proposals suggested for electing a president. Should the president be directly elected by the people? That proposal was rejected out of concern that such a purely democratic process could be hijacked by a temporary majority. Should the president be chosen in the first instance from within the national legislature? That proposal was also rejected on grounds of separation of powers. Should the judiciary play a role in the selection of the president? That idea was dispensed with as being the most objectionable, as judges were to be the least political of all public officials. The framers deliberatively and with much thought created the Electoral College process, in which the people and their elected legislatures — both state and national — would play important roles. But the electoral process rested first and foremost on the state legislatures directing how the electors would be chosen. The reason: While rejecting the direct election of a president, the framers concluded that the state legislatures were closest to the people in their respective states and would be the best representatives of their interests. At no time did the framers even raise the possibility that governors, attorneys general, secretaries of state, election boards, administrators, etc., would play any significant role in the electoral process. Indeed, certain of those offices did not even exist. Moreover, as I said, the courts were rejected out of hand. Thus, such an important power was to be exercised exclusively by the state legislatures.

After the 2016 election, the Democrat Party, its various surrogate groups, and eventually the Biden campaign unleashed hundreds of lawsuits and an unrelenting lobbying campaign in key states that had previously been won by President Trump, taking unconstitutional measures intended to stop President Trump from winning these states in the 2020 election, thereby literally undoing this critical constitutional provision. What had been carefully crafted at the Constitutional Convention and clearly spelled out in the Constitution was the main obstacle to defeating President Trump and winning virtually all future presidential elections. The problem for the Democrats was that in several of these battleground states, the Republicans controlled the legislatures, while the Democrats controlled state executive offices. The Constitution was not on their side. Therefore, they used the two branches of government that were to have no role in directing the appointment of electors to eviscerate the role of the Republican legislatures.

In Pennsylvania, considered the battleground of the battleground states, the Democrat governor, attorney general, and secretary of state made and enforced multiple changes to the state’s voting procedures, all of which were intended to assist the Democrats and Biden. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, whose seven justices are elected, has a 5-2 Democrat majority. (In 2018, there was a big push by the Democrat Party to fill three of the seats with Democrats, and it succeeded.) Just months before the general election, that court rewrote the state election laws to eliminate signature requirements or signature matching, eliminate postal markings that were intended to ensure votes were timely, and extended the counting of mail-in ballots to Friday at 5:00 p.m. (state law had a hard date and time — election day on Tuesday, which ended at 8:00 p.m. ET), thereby fundamentally altering Pennsylvania’s election laws and nullifying the federal constitutional role of the Republican legislature.

In Michigan, among other things, the Democrat secretary of state unilaterally changed the state’s election laws with respect to absentee ballot applications and signature verification. Indeed, she sent unsolicited absentee ballot applications by mail prior to the primary and general elections. State law required would-be voters to request such ballots. She intentionally circumvented the Republican state legislature and violated the federal Constitution by issuing over 7 million unsolicited ballots. Furthermore, a court of claims judge, appointed by a Democrat, ordered clerks to accept ballots postmarked by Nov. 2 and received within 14 days of the election, the deadline for results to be certified. The ballots would be counted as provisional ballots. The state legislature had no role in these changes.

In Wisconsin, the Elections Commission and local Democrat officials in the state’s largest cities, including Milwaukee and Madison, changed the state’s election laws. Among other things, they placed hundreds of unmanned drop boxes in strategic locations in direct violation of state law. Not surprisingly, the locations were intended to be most convenient to Democrat voters. In addition, they told would-be voters how to avoid security measures like signature verification and photo ID requirements. These bureaucrats and local officials bypassed the Republican legislature in altering state election procedures.

In Georgia, the secretary of state is a Republican. Regardless, as explained in the Texas lawsuit brought against Georgia and the three other states mentioned above, “on March 6, 2020, in Democratic Party of Georgia v. Raffensperger, Georgia’s Secretary of State entered a Compromise Settlement Agreement and Release with the Democratic Party of Georgia to materially change the statutory requirements for reviewing signatures on absentee ballot envelopes to confirm the voter’s identity by making it far more difficult to challenge defective signatures beyond the 22 express mandatory procedures set forth at GA. CODE § 21-2-386(a)(1)(B). 71. Among other things, before a ballot could be rejected, the Settlement required a registrar who found a defective signature to now seek a review by two other registrars, and only if a majority of the registrars agreed that the signature was defective could the ballot be rejected but not before all three registrars’ names were written on the ballot envelope along with the reason for the rejection. These cumbersome procedures are in direct conflict with Georgia’s statutory requirements, as is the Settlement’s requirement that notice be provided by telephone (i.e., not in writing) if a telephone number is available. Finally, the Settlement purports to require State election officials to consider issuing guidance and training materials drafted by an expert retained by the Democratic Party of Georgia.” Georgia’s Republican legislature had no role in these electoral changes resulting from consent decree.

Consequently, in each of these four battleground states — and there were others — whether through executive fiats or litigation, key, if not core, aspects of state election laws were fundamentally altered in contravention of the explicit power granted to the state legislatures and, therefore, in violation of the federal Constitution and the process set forth for directing the selection of electors. And this is before we even get to the issue of voter fraud. That said, in many instances, ballots that would have been rejected or, if counted, evidence of fraud, were now said to be legal — not by state legislatures but by those who unilaterally changed the election laws.

The United States Supreme Court had an opportunity before the election, and in this general election cycle, to make clear to the states that they must comply with the plain language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution. Indeed, when a federal district judge in Michigan altered that state’s election laws, a closely divided U.S. Supreme Court overturned his order. Justice Gorsuch pointed out that the state legislature writes election laws. However, when a case was brought to the Court involving the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s interference in state election laws, the U.S. Supreme Court was paralyzed. Chief Justice Roberts attempted to distinguish between federal and state courts, which is irrelevant; in another instance, Justice Alito ordered the Pennsylvania secretary of state, not once but twice, to segregate certain mail-in ballots, but nothing came of it. A court divided against itself cannot stand, to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln. Its failure to enforce the Constitution (and by that I don’t mean make law or intervene in legitimate state election decisions) has contributed mightily to our current plight.

Despite what has been reported and repeated, the president is not actually or officially chosen on Election Day. The president is not chosen upon the certification of electors by the states. The process ends in Congress. And on Jan. 6, Congress — following both the Constitution and its own procedural law — makes the final decision on who is to be president and vice president of the United States. Of course, in every election in my lifetime, up to now, while there have been some controversies, the process has proceeded without much attention. But this time is different, as it must be. The Democrat Party, its surrogates, and eventually the Biden campaign instituted an unprecedented legal and lobbying campaign, mostly under the radar, as it was not well covered by the usual media outlets, to undermine our Constitution, the Republican state legislatures, and the Trump re-election campaign, in favor of Biden. In other words, the Constitution’s electoral process for choosing electors and ultimately the president and vice president was systematically and strategically attacked. It is now left to Congress, or at least the Republicans in Congress, to confront this. The Democrat Party has done severe damage to the nation’s electoral system, to the point where the state legislatures are now in the position of having the least input on the manner in which elections are held and federal electors are chosen — the complete opposite of what the Constitution compels and the framers unequivocally intended. And the legislatures in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia have, in a variety of ways, objected to what’s occurred, underscoring the seriousness of the problem.

If this outcome is allowed to stand without a fight on Jan. 6, it is difficult to see how this can be fixed. The Democrats will view this as a sure sign that they are free to do more and even worse. It will become extremely difficult for Republicans to win nationwide elections (something the ten or so GOP senators who wish to run for president should keep in mind). It will also become increasingly difficult to win a Republican majority in the Senate. And the 2020 constitutional violations will be used as a baseline for even more unconstitutional manipulations of the electoral system. The Democrat Party’s goal is to turn the nation’s electoral system into the one-party rule that exists in virtually all blue states, especially California with its supermajorities.

As I said earlier, win, lose, or draw, the congressional Republicans must act. It is the Democrats and their media who seek to undo election results by undoing the election system. Look at what they did in 2016 (need I remind everyone of the relentless assault against candidate and then President Trump?) and now 2020. And they have every intention, as they have boldly proclaimed, to further undermine our constitutional system should they win the Senate majority in a few days — by eliminating the filibuster and any ability to slow their radical legislative agenda; packing the Supreme Court with left-wing ideologues; and packing the Senate with four more Democrats from Puerto Rico and D.C. And that’s just for starters. This is the same party that did not care that it had no hope of removing President Trump in the Senate, but impeached him anyway — on the most specious of grounds. They are playing for keeps and destroying our constitutional system, for which they have little regard. I am well aware that it takes a majority of both Houses to send the election of the president to the House of Representatives, where each delegation gets one vote, an extremely difficult hurdle.

Nonetheless, it is not asking too much for the Republicans to uphold the United States Constitution — which they all took an oath to do — and to fight to preserve and protect the plain words set forth in Article II. They must make the case to and on behalf of the American people. And they must make it clear to the Democrats that we, the people, who believe in this Republic, will not roll over! Now, let’s see how many statesmen there are among Republican members of Congress.

Mark Levin is the host of LevinTV on BlazeTV.

Share
Categories
Abolish the electoral college constitutional republic electoral college Intelwars US Constitution

Mark Levin warns: We CANNOT allow the Left to abolish the electoral college

A recent Washington Post editorial titled “Abolish the electoral college” the Washington Post editorial board argued that “the electoral college, whatever virtues it may have had for the Founding Fathers, is no longer tenable for American democracy.”

BlazeTV’s Mark Levin warned that abolishing the electoral college would mean that America’s cities would control the government, which in turn means that Democrats would control the country. Alarmingly, this nightmarish scenario is just one Senate seat away from becoming a reality. As Mark explained, if the Democrats win both of the two Senate runoffs in Georgia, the Senate’s 100 seats will be evenly split between Democrats and Republicans with the deciding vote going to the vice president. And if that vice president is Democrat Kamala Harris, the Democrats will almost certainly destroy the electoral college, and with it, our future as a constitutional republic.

“I’ve told you many, many times that this is the objective of the Left and the media, which are one and the same, because by abolishing the electoral college, the cities … all these heavy population centers, will control the government, meaning the Democrat Party will control the government,” Levin said.

“What they [Democrats] are saying is what I’ve been warning you about,” he continued. “They don’t want to represent republicans and they don’t want to represent areas that they do not control … and the fact is, if they destroy the electoral college and do all these other things they want, we won’t live in a republic, certainly not a constitutional republic any more. That’s why Georgia is so crucial. If we lose Georgia, by one vote — because the vice president of the United States is the president of the Senate and breaks all ties — you’ll have a 50/50 Senate. Kamala Harris will sit in that chair, she will rule over the Senate. Biden will rule over the executive branch. Pelosi … will rule over the House. They will pack the Supreme Court. There will be no where to go, and then they’re going to enshrine, as they did in California, their permanency as a party.”

Watch the video below:

Want more from Mark Levin?

To enjoy more of “the Great One” — Mark Levin as you’ve never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Share