In Defense of Dr. John Eastman, Esq. Who Questioned the 2020 Election – Part 1

Some of YOUR Civil Rights are also at stake here…


I was on the witness stand for 8± hours last Thursday (9/28) and 4± hours on Tuesday (10/3), attempting to testify on behalf of attorney John Eastman. I spent an additional 30+ hours in preparation (reviewing old documents, etc.).

For those who are not familiar with Mr. Eastman, I was going to provide a link. When I searched his name online, the first 100± listings of articles were all left-wing propaganda. (That’s one of the reasons I chose to testify on his behalf.) Here is an objective overview I finally found.

This California trial is an attempt to disbar Mr. Eastman. In my view (as a non-attorney) two issues are being debated:

  1. Did John Eastman have a reasonable basis to believe that the certified 2020 Presidential election results of some states, were likely inaccurate?
  2. 2 If yes, what should have been his legal advice to VP Mike Pence regarding how such likely inaccurate certifications should be dealt with?

John Eastman says YES to the first question. As an election integrity expert (e.g., see here), I also say YES to the first question. The California prosecutor says NO. (Since I’m not a lawyer or a Constitutional expert, I can’t speak to the second question.)

FYI, here is a reasonable interview with Mr. Eastman about what this trial is about.

There are multiple Left-wing media sources “reporting” on this trial. Unfortunately, again I couldn’t find any conservative source in the first hundred or so Internet search results (using Duck). After quite a bit of additional research, I finally came across the Intellectual Conservative website.

This is run by a conservative attorney, and she has attended all of the six+ week (so far) proceedings of the Eastman trial. She has written several informative commentaries on what has transcribed. Here is a reasonably accurate article about what happened on my first day of testimony. If you are a glutton for punishment and would like to see what is transpiring here yourself, here is an online link to the trial itself. It’s likely to go on for a few more weeks.


Most citizens believe that trials and hearings are about:

  1. uncovering all the relevant facts, and then
  2. making an objective decision based on that information.

If only.

Much of the legal wrangling is about which facts are “admissible” — i.e., allowed to be considered by the court. Sometimes very relevant facts are discarded because a judge (sometimes seemingly arbitrarily) rules that something involved does not meet one or more of a plethora of legal “barriers”. These are things like standingmootlachesjurisdiction, etc.

In my case, the prosecution did not want anything substantive I had to say about Question #1 to be considered. Since it would have been a burden to try to disprove the accuracy of my testimony (e.g., about the conclusions of our ten Election Integrity Reports, written by my team of very qualified people), they instead focused on a legal technicality to minimize my testimony. They did not want the court to hear or consider any of my evidence of election anomalies that would support Mr. Eastman.

Their strategy was to assert that I was not an approved expert, so I was not qualified to speak about the conclusions of my own reports (!) or anyone else’s.

To do this, it appeared to me that the prosecution relied on two arguments:

  1. John Eastman’s lawyers had not filed the proper paperwork, at the proper time, in the proper way, to have me officially listed as an “expert.” Eastman’s lawyers disagreed with this assertion, but the Judge upheld the prosecution’s argument.
  2. I did not have a degree in election integrity, or the necessary “qualifications” to be an election integrity expert. The Judge again sided with the prosecution.

I can’t speak to the first objection, other than repeat that John and his lawyers insist that they did file adequate paperwork to have me legally considered to be an expert.

Regarding the second objection, my non-attorney answer is this…

All of our ten major election integrity Reports are about looking at numbers. I have a degree in Mathematics. Further, as a physicist I have had more mathematics classes than statisticians with a PhD would typically have. Additionally, statistics (matters like Bell curves — aka Gaussian distributions, Standard Deviations, etc. ) were frequently covered in many of my physics and mathematics classes, through graduate school. As such, I am very qualified to discuss numbers, plus I have had formal undergrad and graduate education in statistics.

On the first day of my testimony, the Judge asked Mr. Eastman’s lawyer a question something like: “ How can John Droz be an election integrity expert with only three years of involvement?” The attorney didn’t give a very strong answer, so on the second day, he asked me what would my response be? I felt that whether the definition of “expert” was normal or legal, I would qualify.

Regarding the first, Webster’s definition of “expert” is: “one with the special skill or knowledge representing mastery of a particular subject.” To demonstrate that I started listing examples of my extensive familiarity with the election integrity topic (e.g., having read some 1,500 articles and reports just in the preparation of my twice-a-month Newsletter).

However, I was cut off before I finished. The Judge said something to the effect that I was making an argument for being categorized as an expert. Well, yes!

I didn’t get to mention the legal definition of “expert” — so what is that?

TheLaw.com Law Dictionary and Black’s Law Dictionary, 2nd Edition* define an “Expert” as a “Person examined as a witness in a cause, who testifies in regard to some technical matter arising in the case, and who is permitted to give their opinion(s) as to such matter on account of their special training, skill, or familiarity with it.”  State v. Phair, 48 Vt. 366 [Also see this definition of an expert witness.]

As a professional physicist, it is indisputable that I have mathematical and statistical training. When this is added to my exceptionally extensive familiarity with the election integrity issue over the last three years, it clearly indicates that I meet the common sense and legal definitions of an election integrity expert.

However, John Eastman’s prosecutor repeatedly claimed otherwise — and the Judge went along with his objections. You decide whose case is better…

More to come in Part 2, in a few days.

* The link for this legal definition now has restricted access. Fortunately, before that change, I made a screenshot of what it said.

©2023. John Droz, Jr. All rights reserved.

Destinies Entwined: A Review of ‘Mother Teresa & Me’

Brad Miner on a compelling new film about the great saint. And it has a twist: a good and clever one you won’t see coming. A film that can deliver a jolt as this one does is worthy of our admiration, attention, and respect.


We know who Mother Teresa is, but who is the “Me” of the title? She is Kavita, a fictional young woman whose story is interwoven with Mother Teresa’s in director Kamal Musale’s new film, Mother Teresa & Me.

Kavita (played by Banita Sandhu) is a 20-something accomplished violinist living in contemporary London, but – musical ability aside – her life is a mess. Her Indian parents, unaware that Kavita is pregnant, are seeking to make an arranged marriage between her and a young man from a Brahmin family. In frustration, Kavita flees to Kolkata (once, Calcutta) to be with the woman, Deepali (Deepti Naval) who had been her nanny.

And why wouldn’t she flee? It’s bad enough that she’s between a rock and a hard place with her parents, but her guitar-playing “boyfriend” is a slug. He wants no part of becoming a father.

The film actually begins with a scene of Mother Teresa, in the habit of the Missionaries of Charity, accusing God of having abandoned her, then in flashback to Teresa as a black-habited nun of the Sisters of Loreto, crawling on the streets of Calcutta during the so-called Week of the Long Knives in 1946 – nationwide riots and murderous violence between Muslims and Hindus. Teresa is searching for food for the girls at the Loretto convent school where she is a teacher. A Muslim man threatens her with a scimitar but is shot by a Hindu man, who, in turn, is chased away by British police.

From this point on, director Musale interweaves mostly true stories of Mother Teresa’s work in the slums of Calcutta, in the 1940s and ‘50s, with Kavita’s present-day struggles to decide whether to keep her unborn child or abort it.

For both women, it’s also a story of self-discovery and doubt. As did William Riead in The Letters (2014), Mr. Musale dwells overmuch on Mother Teresa’s depression and disbelief. Are there any viewers who’ll watch a Mother Teresa biopic who don’t already know about her dark nights of the soul? And is this now the way we’re supposed to remember the great saint?

Anyway, these parallel lives of Mother Teresa and Kavita, in different eras, appear to be disconnected, except through the nanny, Deepali, who, in the film’s fictional context, worked with Mother Teresa at Nirmal Hriday, also known as the Kalighat Home for the Dying – the hospice founded by Mother in 1952. She is the moral force binding Kavita to her life both as an English woman and an Indian woman. And she’s Vergil to Kavita’s Dante.

When Kavita finally finds herself (or begins to), the journey of self-discovery has a remarkable twist. And she becomes more connected to Mother Teresa than she (or we) could ever have imagined.

Along the way, Kavita meets a real man, by which I mean a good one, named Rupert (Kevin Mains), an Irish volunteer at Nirmal Hriday. Romance seems to spark, although the flame never ignites true love, no doubt because of Kavita’s pregnancy.

Swiss actress Jacqueline Fritschi-Cornaz gives a fine performance as Mother Teresa. She is around 5’8” tall, whereas Mother was all of five feet – if that. Fritschi-Cornaz is convincing, stooping to conquer, you might say, when necessary, but always convincing as a little woman with so much courage and determination that it makes you want to weep or cry out with joy.

As Kavita, Miss Sandhu is believably a young woman who is talented, intelligent, conflicted, angry, lost, and, as it happens, courageously determined to find herself.

Kavita’s “arc” in the film suggests it’s the path that matters more than the destination. I know something about this, having been a lost soul through much of my youth. Then I became a Catholic. Years later, I saw again a friend from my years in the wilderness. I professed my faith to her, and she said, “I think I liked you better when you were a seeker.”

So, Kavita seeks, but what does she find? Mr. Musale leaves us to speculate about Kavita’s relationship with the man who is the father of her unborn child, about her feelings for Rupert . . . and about the fate of that child.

The best things about Mother Teresa & Me are Keiko Nakahara’s cinematography, in both color and black-and-white, and Ms. Fritschi-Cornaz’s ability to move back and forth between English and Bengali. She is multilingual (most Swiss are), and I’m given to understand she memorized her lines in Bengali as the shooting progressed. (I learned this from press coverage of the film – then called Kavita and Teresa – when it premiered in India in 2022.)

It’s good to come from Switzerland where there are four official languages – French, German, Italian, and Romansh – and where English is widely spoken. It makes for an extraordinary linguistic facility – even, apparently, in languages you don’t actually speak.

The principal problem with Mother Teresa & Me, besides its glacial pace (especially in the unnatural rhythms of its dialog), is that it offers nothing new in our understanding of the great saint – unless, that is, you really are someone unaware of Mother’s spiritual struggles.

And there’s an odd slackness about the film: for instance, it wants us to “be” in Calcutta/Kolkata, where 9 months of the year, minimum, it’s over 90 degrees, yet nobody sweats. It’s mostly a good story but with little authentic atmosphere, visual or emotional. And that sparking romance between Kavita and Rupert is simply dropped. Too bad. He seemed like a nice fellow.

Still, overall the story is compelling enough and very clever. I mentioned that there’s a twist: it’s a very good one, and I will not reveal it. I did not see it coming, and it packs quite a wallop. A film that can deliver a jolt like that is worthy of our admiration, attention, and respect.

Note: The film will have a limited release in theaters on Thursday, October 5th for one night only via Fathom Events. Tickets may be purchased here.

You may also enjoy:

Elizabeth A. Mitchell’s Juliek and His Violin

David Warren’s Against Life

AUTHOR

Brad Miner

Brad Miner is the Senior Editor of The Catholic Thing and a Senior Fellow of the Faith & Reason Institute. He is a former Literary Editor of National Review. His most recent book, Sons of St. Patrick, written with George J. Marlin, is now on sale. His The Compleat Gentleman is now available in a third, revised edition from Regnery Gateway and is also available in an Audible audio edition (read by Bob Souer). Mr. Miner has served as a board member of Aid to the Church In Need USA and also on the Selective Service System draft board in Westchester County, NY.

VIDEO: Breaking the Silence: The Reality of De-Transitioning

This video about men and women who reverted to their natal sex is disturbing and amazing. Disturbing because it shines a spotlight on their unhappiness and the cynicism of the transgender ideologues who helped them “transition”. Amazing because it was made by a commercial TV network in Australia. The interview with a medical expert at the end is one of the most fiery encounters on screen that you will ever see. Compelling viewing about a catastrophic medical scandal.

AUTHOR

MERCATOR STAFF

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Nebraska Regs Require 7-Day Waiting Period, 40 ‘Neutral’ Therapy Hours for Minor Gender Transition Drugs

Among Progressives, Belief in God Falls

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This MERCATOR video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Florida County Republican Registrations Report—September 2023

Note: the registrations numbers in this writing refer to active registrations, a subset of total registrations.


Florida Republicans continue the trend of making relative gains in voter registrations as Republican registrations relative to Democrat registrations increased by 25,445 registrations in August and by 300,518 registrations since the book closing for the 2022 general election. Florida Republicans now have a 606,468 relative registrations advantage over the Democrats. Republican registrations were 37.51% of total registrations and Republicans now enjoy a 4.46% of total registrations advantage over the Democrats (see attached tables).

The Democrats lost 62,986 additional registrations in June, 369,353 registrations since the 2022 book closing, and 701,278 registrations since the 2020 election. The Republican registrations decreased by 37,541 in June, and the number of registrations which are neither Republican nor Democrat decreased by 69,783 registrations in August (see chart).

Every Florida County has had a gain in the Republican percentage of total registrations since the 2022 election (see Table 3)!

Note: There have been some relatively large shrinkages in the number of registrations in Florida Counties. The law was changed to make it easier to shift voters into the inactive voter category, a category where the process of removing voters from the voter rolls is initiated. The decreases in the number of registrations should end when the supervisors of elections complete the job of making the transfers in accordance with the new measures.

The Republican Main Thing

“The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.” — Stephen R. Covey

Keeping the main thing the main thing is great advice. Republicans and Democrats have a differing “main thing” in the pursuit of getting people elected. Which party has the better “main thing”?

Democrats’ “main thing” is to improve their underlying political support by growing the relative numbers in the demographics which tend to vote Democrat. Secondary to this are the Democrat candidates and their associated campaigns. Republicans have chosen candidates, and their associated campaigns, as their “main thing”. Republicans lack any secondary efforts to grow the relative numbers in the demographics which tend to vote Republican.

The Democrats keep their focus on growing the relative numbers in the demographics that tend to vote Democrat and therefore have less concern about having poor candidates. The 2020 Presidential Election is a good example of this strategy. Their poor candidate won the election. They had a similar situation in a 2022 national senate race in Pennsylvania.

This inability of Republicans to win with their “main thing” has been demonstrated in recent losses in Georgia, a state previously carried by the Republican presidential candidate by 5.09% in 2016, 7.80% in 2012, and 5.2% in 2008. Republicans lost Georgia in the 2020 Presidential election by .23%, and two senate elections in a January 5th, 2021, runoff by margins of 1.22% and 2.08%. Republicans had nearly two years to come up with a formula to win back one of the lost Georgia senate seats in the 2022 general election. The Republicans, demonstrating their lack of strategy to grow their base, could not pull it off, losing the senate seat by 2.80%, a larger loss than the losses of early 2021!

A lack of strategy to grow the Republican base causes the Republican 2024 presidential primary effort to being akin to Nero fiddling while Rome burned. Resources which should be used by Republicans to implement strategies to grow the relative numbers in the demographics that tend to vote Republican are instead being used in self-seeking endeavors to become the next Republican presidential nominee. A Republican presidential nominee leading an effort to grow the Republican base by growing those demographics that tend to vote Republican is nowhere to be found!

The reason most Republicans vote Republican is that the Republican Pary is viewed as the party most supportive of The Constitution. The Constitution cannot stand without widespread political support. Republicans have not won the popular presidential vote since 2004, signaling decreasing political support for The Constitution. Republican factions, stuck in the Republican “main thing” paradigm of candidates and their campaigns, are failing to address this challenge to The Constitution.

The true reason for this loss of support for The Constitution is the Democrats having a better “main thing” strategy. The main thing for Republicans is to replace their “main thing” of having a laser focus on candidates, and their respective campaigns, with policy efforts which grow the relative numbers in demographics that tend to vote Republican!

A Much-Needed Republican Effort to Gain the Vote of the Alienated

A politically significant Democrat demographic is those voters who rent their housing. In times of rising home prices, rising interest rates and increasing rents, such as those being experienced since President Biden took office, it is easy to understand why those voters who rent their housing become alienated voters. Higher rents result in renters having less wealth. Homeowners who are shielded from higher interest rates owing to their possession of low-rate fixed interest rate mortgages obtained when interest rates were lower, see their wealth increase as the value of their homes increases and their mortgage payments stay the same.

The inability of renters to purchase housing are generally the result of policies championed by most Democrats, and too often by Republicans, yet it is the Democrats who gain politically by these policies as the Democrats are generally the recipients of the vote of the alienated! The demographic of those who rent their housing is an ever-growing demographic and the primary source of the political gains made by the Democrats over the past few decades! An indication of lost Republican market share is that Reagan lost one state in 1984, George H.W. Bush lost ten states in 1988, George W. Bush lost 20 states in 2000. And President Trump lost 25 states in 2020.

For Republicans to capture the vote of the alienated renter requires Republicans to champion polies that remove impediments to renters becoming homeowners. It should be pointed out to renters that Democrats politically prosper by making it difficult for renters of average means to purchase their first home!

Republican politicians also need to point out these housing related realities to Republican voters to build political support for lower rates of rentership. Republicans should not be seduced by the unearned wealth that homeowners gain by governmental policies that inhibit the real estate market from producing entry level owner-occupied housing.

©2023. Steve Meyer. All rights reserved.

‘White Rage’: General Mark Milley Leaves Behind A Checkered Legacy

  • Gen. Mark Milley retired Friday after serving four years as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under both presidents Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
  • Some view Milley as an upstanding adviser and protector of democracy, but many conservative leaders deride him as a political actor too willing to make his views on controversial progressive policies known.
  • “It’s his nature to pitch into a fight if he sees one going on,” retired Lt. Col. Thomas Spoehr, who served with Milley in the Pentagon, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Gen. Mark Milley retired Friday after serving four years as the top military adviser to the president and the secretary of defense. He is perhaps the most well-known individual to ever serve as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a development that seems likely to color his legacy for years to come.

Milley’s term was punctuated with crises: the Afghanistan withdrawal, nuclear tensions with Iran and North Korea, defense of Taiwan and Ukraine against would-be conquerors, and domestic turmoil. While some venerate Milley as an American hero who shepherded democracy through a chaotic administration turnover, many conservatives deride him as a political actor who obediently went along with the Biden administration’s progressive agenda.

“General Milley destroyed the U.S military’s 250-year tradition of staying above partisan politics. That’s his legacy,” Republican Rep. Jim Banks of Indiana, a Navy reserve veteran who serves on the Armed Services Committee and leads the House Anti-Woke Caucus, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Milley was a brash, combative former special operations officer with strong opinions informed by his four decades of experience in the Army and his deep affinity for history and literature, retired Lt. Col. Thomas Spoehr, who served with Milley in the Pentagon, told the DCNF.

Former President Donald Trump, who appointed Milley as chairman, is thought to have appreciated Milley’s machismo and appearance as the general’s general.

“​​He kind of really seemed to have a warrior’s mentality. He was clearly an officer who wasn’t afraid to say what he thought. Or so it seemed,” retired Maj. Chase Spears, a former Army public affairs officer, told the DCNF.

The DCNF spoke to multiple current and former officials who served alongside Milley as well as several military experts to form a fuller picture of the former chairman’s tenure. Milley, through a spokesperson, did not respond to questions.

As chairman, Milley’s job was to advise the president and the secretary of defense on national-security threats and operations abroad and maintain military communication channels with friends and adversaries.

“Sometimes, that advice would be misinterpreted or purposely used by others for political purposes despite trying very hard to avoid politics,” Col. Dave Butler, Milley’s spokesman, told the DCNF.

Yet, Milley has shown willingness to delve into political fights and mud sling when it suits him, experts told the DCNF. In his farewell speech, Milley said the military does not answer to a “wannabe dictator,” which many interpreted as a jab at former President Trump.

In a June 2021 House Armed Services Committee hearing, Milley gave a full-throated defense of the Biden administration’s budget request for funding to purge “domestic extremists” from its ranks.

“There is no room in uniform for anyone who doesn’t subscribe to the values of the United States of America,” Milley said during the hearing.

Milley himself seemed to be aware of how he was being perceived. Speaking in November 2021 before the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, Milley lamented that he had “become a lightning rod for the politicization of the military,” targeted by both Republicans and Democrats, the transcript shows.

“It’s his nature to pitch into a fight if he sees one going on,” Spoehr told the DCNF.

Some congressional Democrats criticized Milley for defending the strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassim Suleimani, leader of Iran’s elite Quds Force in January 2020, according to CNN.

Then, Milley was blasted by Republicans when he apologized for having joined Trump in a march across Lafayette Square after the square had been cleared of people protesting the killing of George Floyd in 2020. Milley said he did not mean to give the impression the military had taken sides in a political fight.

Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, called Milley’s apology video “self-serving.”

The apology proved the first major incident in a trend lasting for the next four years of his career through two politically opposed administrations. Milley would often project disdain for interfering in politics, but then make exceptions in crisis situations or to defend core military values.

Milley “tried his hardest to actively stay out of politics,” but if extraordinary events demanded he step in, “so be it,” an unnamed official told CNN in July 2021.

Perhaps Milley’s most politically perilous moment came after he admitted holding two calls with his Chinese counterpart in October 2020 and January 2021 during the tumultuous administration handover. Lawmakers hammered Milley for his actions months later during a September 2021 hearing. Milley defended his actions as apolitical and in the interest of national security.

“I firmly believe in civilian control of the military as a bedrock principle essential to the health of this republic, and I am committed to ensuring the military stays clear of domestic politics,” he told Congress.

This was a refrain he would reiterate time and time again.

“He’s been saying those things for as long as I’ve known him. And I do think he’s true to those words,” said Spoehr.

‘A Tight Rope To Walk’

Others have pointed to Milley’s willingness to defend social policies in the military and to comment on broader trends in society as undermining the very norm of the apolitical military he claims to embrace.

Milley showed himself “willing to wade into topics that many including myself would argue are beyond the scope of the Joint Chiefs,” said Spears, the former Army public affairs officer.

In the days following the Jan. 6 Capitol riots, Milley took it upon himself to “land the plane” as he and other leading national security officials worried the former president was displaying increasingly erratic behavior, Bob Woodward and Robert Costa reported in their book “Peril.”

Woodward and Costa portray Milley’s acts — including convening a “secret” meeting of senior military officials involved in nuclear command and control on Jan. 8 to review the procedures for launching nuclear weapons — as orchestrating the peaceful transfer of power and restraining a rogue president from triggering an international crisis.

In November 2021, Milley told House lawmakers about a January 8 phone call he had with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who he described as “quite animated.” During this call, Milley sought to “assure her” of the security of the nation’s nuclear weapons systems.

“It’s clearly recognized that the President and only the President can authorize the launch,” Milley said, “so he, alone, can authorize the launch, but he doesn’t launch alone.”

“Best practice suggests that ‘regular order is your friend,’” Peter Feaver, an expert in civil-military relations who previously taught Milley, told the DCNF. But the military has no role in the democratic transfer of power from one administration to the next, Feaver said.

Many in the media framed Milley’s actions in the latter days of the Trump administration as heroic measures taken to safeguard democracy. Milley “saved the constitution” from Trump, The Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg wrote in a glowing Nov. 2023 profile.

But, the savior of American democracy is not how Milley wants to be remembered.

“He would prefer not to be portrayed in that light,” a senior military official close to Milley told the DCNF.

While the chairman does not have command authority, he does serve at the top of the “chain of communication.” Some experts have argued this can give the chairman undue influence on policymaking.

“There’s a tightrope to walk here,” Bret Devereaux, a military historian who teaches at North Carolina State University, told the DCNF. “He’s expected to speak for the military as an institution and while, as an institution, the military does not have politics, it does have policies. In his capacity as an advisor, he advocates for certain policies.”

Milley repeatedly considered resigning during the Trump administration, according to reports. He felt Trump was “doing great and irreparable harm” to America and “ruining the international order,” according to a copy of the resignation letter included in Susan Glasser and Peter Baker’s “The Divider.” But resigning in protest of a legal policy with which he disagreed would be the “consummate political act,” Milley said, and he never submitted the letter.

“Milley concluded that difficult times do not release him from a duty to uphold those norms and traditions,” said Devereaux. “Milley was put in a situation where those two parts of the oath might conflict. He might have to say that the president himself was the constitutional danger.”

In the end, Milley testified to Congress that he never received an illegal order. Milley also admitted to speaking with reporters, including Woodward, who were working on books about the Trump administration. The former joint chief also said he spoke to Leonning and Rucker, for their book, and to Michael Bender, for his.

Milley’s expansive media presence “comes with some clear downsides since it means he becomes part of many stories that he probably could have stayed out of, or at least minimized,” Feaver explained.

“I don’t think that served him well. I don’t think it served the country well, for him to be talking to those guys,” Spoehr added.

‘White Rage’

Milley may also not have been served well by his outspoken defense of “woke” Biden administration defense policies and his willingness to wade into the culture wars.

“I want to understand white rage, and I’m white, and I want to understand it,” Milley said, deflecting criticism of Critical Race Theory being taught at West Point, during the June 2021 hearing. “What is it that caused thousands of people to assault this building and try to overturn the Constitution of the United States of America? What caused that? I want to find that out.”

Republicans in Congress who see CRT as antithetical to American values derided Milley.

“That was a partisan political question, framed in a particularly partisan way, and so he could have and should have deferred to the political figure on his side of the hearing table,” Feaver said.

In a CNN interview on Sept. 17, just weeks before his retirement, Milley pushed back against assertions the military had gone “woke.”

“The military is a lot of things, but woke, it’s not,” Milley said. “So I take exception to that. I think that people say those things for reasons that are their own reasons, but it’s not true. It’s not accurate. It’s not a broad-brush description of the U.S. military as it exists today.”

When Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville held up military promotions in opposition to a new Pentagon policy facilitating abortion access, Milley elaborated on the detrimental impact it could have on military readiness. But he declined to comment on the policy itself.

“I don’t want to enter into the whole discussion of abortion and the culture war. I’m staying out of all that,” he told the Washington Post.

The accusation of wokeness “certainly wasn’t something that we expected to have to deal with,” Butler, Milley’s spokesman, told the DCNF. “We did not expect that to be a new issue brought up by Congress or anybody else.”

Nor does the chairman have time to spend focusing or advising on internal personnel policies when he has global crises to attend to, Butler said. Butler estimated Milley spent 13 hours each day on external threats and operations, and maybe one on other issues.

‘Some Very Difficult Dives’

Just two months after the “white rage” comment, Milley would be dealing with a catastrophe abroad.

Afghanistan collapsed amid the U.S. military withdrawal much faster than administration analysts expected. Both Trump and Biden sought to wipe out the military’s footprint in Afghanistan and end the war. But they planned for the Afghan army to resist the Taliban. It didn’t.

At the September 2021 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Milley echoed Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina in calling the Afghanistan evacuation “a logistical success, but a strategic failure.”

Milley did not explicitly describe conversations with the presidents, but he made it easy to deduce both Biden and Trump had resisted his “best military advice” to maintain a contingent of American troops in Afghanistan. Military leaders’ advice to Biden in the lead-up to the withdrawal had not changed from the previous fall, and that his opinion was to keep 2,500 troops in country. He had also pushed back on a signed order directing a full withdrawal by January, according to his testimony. Trump rescinded the order.

“Based on my advice and the advice of the commanders, then-Secretary of Defense Esper submitted a memorandum on 9 November, recommending to maintain U.S. forces at a level between about 2,500 and 4,500 in Afghanistan until conditions were met for further reductions,” Milley said in his testimony.

A national security official close to the situation told the DCNF that Milley repeatedly warned Biden “of the risks of a poorly-timed withdrawal by recounting details from the chaotic 1975 Saigon evacuation.” in the hours before the president announced his decision in April 2021.

Likewise, Milley saw Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine coming, The New York Times reported.  He is blunt and level-headed in his assessment of Russia’s capabilities and Ukraine’s challenges — and he has often proven correct, according to Spoehr.

“He’s been a very good chairman,” Spoehr told the DCNF.

As Milley closed out his career, high-level military communication between the U.S. and China, America’s greatest competitor, had been stalled for more than a year. The war between Russia and Ukraine shows no signs of abating. And his successor, Air Force Gen. C.Q. Brown, faces the same culture war pressures.

Military leaders should be judged like Olympic divers, “taking into account the difficulty of the dive they have to do,” Feaver told DCNF. “Circumstances have conspired to force General Milley to do some very difficult dives. Even though he has kicked up some splash that does not necessarily mean he has under-performed.”

AUTHOR

MICAELA BURROW

Investigative reporter, defense.

RELATED ARTICLE: China Is On The Fast Track To Wage War Against Taiwan — And The US, Experts Say

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Elon Musk: Justin Trudeau is trying to ‘crush free speech in Canada’

The biggest accomplishment of Justin Trudeau is that he managed to make Canada a focus of intense international media attention, but not for respectable reasons. Canada’s freedoms are being severely compromised, and it is drowning economically as well. The latest out of Canada: Elon Musk tweeted that Trudeau is trying to crush free speech in Canada.

The proverbial ship has sailed. It has been a long, tough process for patriotic Canadians as they watch Trudeau strip away their freedoms. Musk was responding to a new law in Canada, Bill C-18, that requires social media and streaming services with revenues over $10 million to register with the government, starting in November 2023. Subscription television services which are available online, as well as Facebook, X, Netflix, and Disney, are also included, as are radio stations that livestream online, and podcast services. Individual podcasters need not worry, unless, of course, they make over $10 million in revenue.

The wing of the Canadian government overseeing Bill C-18 is the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). Details of the requirements can be found here.

Trudeau is beyond “trying to crush free speech” in Canada, as Musk observed. He has already largely succeeded, and has trampled not only the freedom of speech. Other examples of Trudeau’s infringement of the freedom of Canadians include:

Bill C-18 did not suddenly appear in a kind of jump scare. The impetus for it was building over time, and its basis was actually formed under Canada’s anti-Islamophobia Motion, M-103, which “progressives” did everything they could to present as a benign motion which didn’t carry any legal ramifications. Everyone already knew that it wasn’t legislation, but few were willing to address its impact in laying the groundwork for a future bill, which we now see in  Bill C-18.

In February, Trudeau’s own appointed Senator David Richards described the prime minister’s sweeping censorship Bill C-11, a precursor to Bill C-18, as “Stalinesque.” Richards called it “an Orwellian attempt to force individuals to comply with government messaging.” Richards’ description may have seemed exaggerated to those who were unaware of Trudeau’s activities, but it was spot-on.

Bill C-18 followed. It was also known as the Online Streaming Act. It was an updated version of Bill C-11, which it incorporated, with an addition: it requires digital giants such as Google and Meta to pay compensation to Canadian news sites to share any of the news content that appeared on their platforms. University of Ottawa Professor Michael Geist characterized it accurately: “Bill C-18 is a shakedown with requirements to pay for nothing more than listing Canadian media organizations with hyperlinks in a search index, social media post, or possibly even a tweet.

The response from Google, Facebook and Instagram to Bill C-18, when they were asked to compensate Canadian news outlets, elicited a meltdown from Trudeau. Did he really expect social media giants to comply with his shakedown? Meta said it would shut out news in the country, meaning that all Facebook and Instagram users in Canada would be blocked from accessing news on these platforms. Google stated:

We have now informed the Government that when the law takes effect, we unfortunately will have to remove links to Canadian news from our Search, News and Discover products in Canada, and that C-18 will also make it untenable for us to continue offering our Google News Showcase product in Canada.

When Canada’s wildfires broke out and news was fundamental to access, everyone knew exactly whom to blame: Trudeau. But he wouldn’t accept responsibility. Instead, he blamed Meta and Google for supposedly “putting corporate profits ahead of people’s safety.

Vicky Eatrides, Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer of the CRTC, stated:

We are developing a modern broadcasting framework that can adapt to changing circumstances. To do that, we need broad engagement and robust public records. We appreciate the significant participation during this first phase and look forward to hearing a diversity of perspectives at our contributions proceeding in November.

The government further explains:

A new bargaining regime to govern the making available of news content
The operators of dominant digital news intermediaries to which the Act applies would be subject to a new duty to bargain with eligible news businesses, which may bargain individually or as a group. This duty to bargain would arise when an eligible news business initiates bargaining with a digital news intermediary organization subject to the Act. The bargaining process could involve up to three sequential steps: bargaining sessions; mediation sessions; and final offer arbitration.

Final offer arbitration
When digital news intermediaries and news businesses do not reach agreements about making news content available through bargaining or mediation sessions, outstanding monetary disputes may proceed to a final offer arbitration process if at least one of the parties wishes to initiate arbitration. Under this process, an independent panel of arbitrators would select a final offer made by one of the parties.

This gibberish not only establishes powers of the CRTC online to set up an annoyingly inconvenient system in which potential users must now compete in a bargaining process, but it leaves a lot of questions about the players who will be comprising these “mediation sessions” and this “arbitration” on the government side. And beware whenever a government uses terms such as “independent panel,” because they are never “independent”; they end up being staffed with government cronies who are paid by taxpayers to advance the interests of the regime. And as for the sections of Bill C-18 guaranteeing the “freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression,” not even the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has  stopped Trudeau from his encroachments upon Canadian freedoms.

The world is increasingly coming to know what Canadians have been enduring ever since Trudeau came to power in 2015. In a telling gesture, Trudeau shut down the Office of Religious Freedom almost immediately after taking office. Three years later, his government made a change to the Canada Summer Jobs program that required organizations to tick a box affirming that they supported abortion in order to qualify for government funding. The former head of the Office of Religious Freedom, Andrew Bennett, pointed out Trudeau’s “totalitarian tendency,” and he has been proven right.

It was inevitable that Bill C-18 would now require registration with the Canadian government. The CRTC, which has been regulating Canada’s airwaves since 1976, is the reason why Canadian productions are so limited in content. Some would even say they’re boring. There is little room for full creativity. Now the CRTC has expanded online in its attempt to tighten its grip and stymie free expression, after the fashion of China and Iran.

M-103 was passed in 2018. It was cleverly presented as only a motion — not a law — but it was part of the groundwork for something more nefarious: a broad assault upon the freedom of expression. After extensive committee hearings, the Minister of Heritage, who was Melanie Joly at the time, published a document entitled “TAKING ACTION AGAINST SYSTEMIC RACISM AND RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION INCLUDING ISLAMOPHOBIA.” It stated:

The Government acknowledges that in order to fully understand the issues and challenges confronting Canada’s increasingly diverse population, comprehensive and high quality data is required to better monitor and target policies to eliminate discrimination and inequalities.

Those policies favored the red-green axis and were grounded in wokeism. They eventually resulted in the appointment of an “Islamophobia Czar“; Trudeau’s absurd designation of the patriotic Freedom Convoy as “racist” (and his subsequent crackdown on them); and the passing of Bill C-11, which promised “greater support for Black, Indigenous and racialized people’s content and viewpoints,” as determined by the woke Trudeau government. A group aligned with Trudeau, the Racial Equity Media Collective, called for a “mandatory collection of race-based data by broadcasters…” Then came a government-funded school booklet that warned the country’s children against the Conservative Party, the freedom of speech and even Donald Trump. The booklet was entitled Confronting and Preventing Hate in Canadian Schools; it was created by the far-left “anti-hate” network led by Bernie Farber, a member of the Trudeau government’s “’expert’ advisory group on online ‘safety.’” Some highlights of this 53-page propaganda booklet:

  • Freedom of expression is presented as a cover for “hate.”
  • Trump’s border wall to stop illegals is likewise presented as “hate.”
  • Mainstream Conservative parties are singled out, and are presented as being “infiltrated” by bigots, “groypers,” and “white nationalists.” The pamphlet actually states: “While the majority of Groypers are white, there are a growing number of youth of colour involved in the movement, as they engage in antisemitism, anti- feminism/misogyny, anti-2SLGBTQIA+, Islamophobia, and anti-Black racism.”
  • It condemns a “specific Canadian flavour” of the “worldview”  that is “seen on many college campuses, often under the banner of “Canada First.”
  • In a chapter on “hate promoting symbols,” the booklet names the Red Ensign flag as offensive, even though it was used as Canada’s national symbol until 1965.
  • It condemns concerns about terrorism and crime as “anti-immigrant.”
  • It references  Trump as a “problematic politician” and condemns his border wall as “racist.”
  • It warns about students who may inquire “why there aren’t any straight pride parades, or a white history month during class discussion.
  • Without context, anti-police sentiment is taught; the pamphlet claims that “Black residents are 20 times more likely to be shot by Toronto police than white counterparts.”
  • The booklet ironically utilizes intersectional tropes and stereotypes “people of colour,” stating that “shared beliefs in misogyny, anti-2SLGBTQIA+, Islamophobia, and anti-Blackness will often attract and unite people of colour to hate groups.”
  • It heavily promotes the Marxist, anti-nuclear family Black Lives Matter movement.

The Canadian government’s mission was clear by that point, and that mission is now broadening via Bill C-18. Trudeau has severely impaired and is now working to marginalize the freedom of speech. Trudeau, with whom Canadians are stuck until the 2025 elections, is well on his way to crushing that freedom. The leader of Canada’s official opposition Conservative Party tweeted:

As Trudeau tries to extend his egoism and oft-noted totalitarian tendencies beyond the borders of Canada itself, he may be in for a tougher ride than he anticipated. The ongoing controversy with India isn’t about to disappear, especially in light of the fact that India has just ordered Canada to remove 41 diplomats from its Delhi embassy. The Hindustan Times just published a story entitled Elon Musk’s Big Attack On Trudeau Amid India Tensions; ‘Canada Govt Crushing. Now Trudeau must contend with Facebook as well as Musk’s X. Add in the brouhaha over Canadian MP’s giving standing ovation to a prominent Nazi during a Zelensky visit to Ottawa, and the accompanying calls for accountability.

AUTHOR

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Elon Musk Drops Vaccine Bombshell Personal Story

The Covid shot “nearly sent me to the hospital.” There are tens of millions of post vaccine trauma stories not being told.

Elon Musk Drops Vaccine Bombshell Personal Story | Facts Matter

By: The Epoch Times, Facts Matter, September 28 2023:

2 days ago, the Vice President of the European Commission singled out Twitter as the largest platform hosting dis/misinformation — and added that they “will be watching” what Elon is doing.

This statement of hers came on the heels of an EU law recently implemented (the Digital Services Act) which—among many other things—forces social media companies to censor so-called “disinformation”.

However, as a rebuttable, Elon Musk took to his platform and started a thread wherein he exposed the hypocrisy of the government’s push to censor so-called disinformation, as well as his own experience with taking 3 doses of the mRNA vaccine.

Read more.

AUTHOR

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

House Votes To Remove Kevin McCarthy As Speaker

The U.S. House voted Tuesday to remove Kevin McCarthy as speaker after Democrats joined with eight House Republicans to vote for a motion to vacate the chair.

Republican Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz filed the motion to vacate the chair Monday night, which then picked up the support of Democrats. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries “definitively” called for a vote against any procedural motion to delay the motion to vacate the chair earlier Tuesday and also said Democrats should vote to remove McCarthy.

Before the actual vote, there was a motion to table to the vote, which failed with 11 Republicans voting against the motion to table the vote.

The actual vote on the motion to vacate was 216-210. Republican Reps. Gaetz, Bob Good, Tim Burchett, Eli Crane, Matt Rosendale, Andy Biggs, Ken Buck and Nancy Mace voted for the motion to vacate the chair.

“We need a Speaker who will fight for something, anything other than just becoming or staying Speaker. The polls show the public is blaming Biden and the Democrats for an imminent shutdown. If not fight now, when would we fight? Now is and was the time!,” Good said in a speech on the House floor before the vote.

“The thing we have in common? Kevin McCarthy said something to all of us at one point or another that he didn’t really mean and never intended to live up to,” Gaetz said on the floor before the vote.

Earlier in September, McCarthy challenged his GOP opponents to follow through with filing a motion to vacate the chair in a closed-door meeting with the conference, which came after Gaetz criticized McCarthy, giving him a list of demands while threatening a motion for McCarthy to vacate the chair.

“If you want to file the motion,” McCarthy told his GOP colleagues Thursday, “file the fucking motion.”

There will now be votes to decide who the next Speaker of the House will be.

AUTHOR

HENRY RODGERS

Chief national correspondent.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘File The F*cking Motion’: McCarthy Challenges GOP Opponents To Follow Through With Threat To Remove Him

‘Out Of Compliance’: Matt Gaetz Slams McCarthy On House Floor, Threatens Motion To Vacate The Chair

HISTORIC: The U.S. House Votes to REMOVE Kevin McCarthy as Speaker of the House

Kevin McCarthy BLOCKS Hunter’s Subpoena, Makes Deal With Democrats For MORE Ukraine Funding As House Votes to Oust McCarthy Happening NOW

RELATED TWEETS:

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden Secret Service Records Show Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Was Denied Protection Despite Numerous Threats

Washington, D.C. – Judicial Watch announced today that it received an 11 pages of Secret Service records detailing the denial of protection to presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., despite having received numerous threats from “known subjects.”

Judicial Watch received the document from the Secret Service in response to a July 28, 2023, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records and communications of:

a) Director Kimberly A. Cheatle

b) Deputy Director Ronald L. Rowe, Jr.

c) Chief Operating Officer Cynthia Sjoberg Radway

d) Assistant Director, Office of Protective Operations, Michael Plati  

On July 28, 2023, Kennedy posted to X (formerly Twitter), “Since the assassination of my father in 1968, candidates for president are provided Secret Service protection. But not me.”

Just last week, Kennedy again requested for Secret Service protection following an incident on the campaign trail involving an armed man impersonating a police officer.

The records obtained by Judicial Watch include a Secret Service “Protective Intelligence and Assessment” that reveals numerous threats to Kennedy (“Behaviors of Interest”):

On April 23, 2023, a known subject [Redacted] submitted an inappropriate comment on the White House website addressed to President Biden [Redacted] stated, “Born to a political family, his twelfth cousin—Robert Kennedy—announces their candidacy to succeed Joseph Biden for ‘President of the United States.’ There’s no way you’d… assassinate former president Donald Trump. `Go get ‘ern, kiddo!” No further USSS investigation was conducted.  

[Redacted] 

A known subject [Redacted] mailed a nonsensical letter to the hotel where Kennedy held his presidential campaign announcement event [redacted] warned a “madman” may commit a “serious terrorist act” and wanted to discuss his sins with Kennedy. [Redacted] is of record with the USSS [Secret Service] since March 2023 after he sent a nonsensical letter to President Biden with similar rhetoric. The USSS investigation is complete.

known subject [Redacted] sent numerous packages, including gifts and a wedding band, to Kennedy [Redacted] stated that she loves Kennedy and expressed anger about being kept away from him. [Redacted] 

A known subject [Redacted] sent materials to Kennedy’s residence. One letter contained a 32-page manifesto in which [Redacted] made nonsensical religious references and described himself as a “commissioned messenger of God.”

A known subject [Redacted] regularly sends threatening emails, stating he will “bury” Kennedy, “everyone will die,” and that he will make Kennedy “suffer.”

A subject [Redacted] sent inappropriate communications to Kennedy. The subject believed Kennedy was spying on him, paying people to follow him, and was responsible for vandalism against him. The subject state “your behavior has complete [sic] freaked me out. Focus on your damn campaign and leave me the hell alone.” 

The assessment also notes: 

Many comments suggested that, for no other reason than that he is a Kennedy, he would be at risk of assassination. In May 2023, Kennedy received increased media attention after accusing the CIA of involvement in the assassination of his uncle. Kennedy has advocated for the release of the individual currently imprisoned for assassinating his father, Sirhan Sirhan, because he believes a CIA contractor was responsible for the death.  

Kennedy has received both support and criticism for his stance on vaccines and has been described as an anti-vaccine activist.

In a July 28, 2023 email chain with the subject line “RFK Jr Says Biden Administration Denied Him Secret Service Protection – The Messenger” Secret Service officials discuss a news article in which Kennedy makes a case for protection.

The chief of communications, whose name is redacted, writes to Michael Plati, the assistant director of Protective Operations, and others: “We’re getting Press calls on this and sending to DHS.”

An official in the Office of Intergovernmental and Legislative Affairs, whose name is redacted, responds: “Request for protection to DHS dated 5/26; Response by Congressional Advisory Board 7 /11; Passed to DHS front office on 7 /14.” 

The deputy special agent in charge, whose name is redacted, adds:  

[T]he following language was key to the recommendation and subsequent decision.

“Protection under these guidelines should only be granted within one year prior to the general election. Protection more than one year prior to the general election should only be granted in extraordinary, case by case circumstances in consultation with the committee, based on threat assessment and other factors.” 

The records were produced earlier this week, the day after Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) over similar but broader requests for DHS/Secret Service leadership records regarding the decision to not provide Secret Service protection for Kennedy (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:23-cv-02846)).

“The Biden administration’s refusal to provide Secret Service protection to Mr. Kennedy is dangerous and vindictive,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “These FOIA requests and our new lawsuit aim to get the full truth on why Mr. Kennedy’s life is being put at unnecessary risk by the Biden administration.”

Judicial Watch Files Federal FOIA Lawsuit for Additional Records

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Matt Gaetz Blasts Kevin McCarthy For Paving Dems’ ‘Yellow Brick Road,’ Reveals His ‘Number Two’ Choice For Speaker

Republican Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz blasted House Speaker Kevin McCarthy while making remarks to the press on Monday.

Gaetz filed a motion to vacate McCarthy from his house leadership position on Monday. The move could lead to the house voting on whether McCarthy retains his speakership role. Gaetz has been critical of McCarthy’s deal with the Biden White House to raise the debt limit. He also claims that McCarthy has failed to reduce government spending levels.

A reporter suggested to Gaetz that McCarthy could simply run for the speakership again if his attempt to remove him is successful. That scenario could result in no one having the necessary votes. Gaetz brushed off this potentiality, pointing out that McCarthy needed 15 rounds of votes to become the speaker, and saying he should “take a hint” that he is no longer wanted in the role.

Another reporter asked Gaetz who his ideal replacement for McCarthy would be.

“Look, our number two is Steve Scalise. I think very highly of Steve Scalise. I would vote for Steve Scalise,” Gaetz said.

Gaetz outlined McCarthy’s supposed failures as speaker, including his inability to pass appropriations bills in an efficient manner. He said that it took a “political gun to the speaker’s head” to get appropriations bills passed.

“We’d only passed one of our appropriations bills, the veterans bill,” Gaetz said after slamming the apparent lack of work put in by lawmakers.

“The American people are tired of Washington, D.C., not having a budget, running $2 trillion annual deficits, sitting atop a $33 trillion debt,” Gaetz added.

Another reporter asked him if it is hypocritical to criticize McCarthy for working with Democrats when he will need Democratic votes to oust the speaker. Gaetz stated that the “yellow brick road of working with Democrats has been paved, constructed, engineered, and architected by Kevin McCarthy.”

“Look no further than the debt limit deal, a deal he passed with Democrats. Look no further than the last continuing resolution, which he passed with Democrats. And by the way, if he’s able to stay in power, it will be him working for the Democrats, continuing to do their bidding. So this is a revealing exercise, and I think it will show the country who’s really in charge,” Gaetz said.

McCarthy brushed off Gaetz’s announcement of his attempt to remove him from the speakership, saying that the Florida representative has tried similar stunts before.

“That’s nothing new. … He’s tried to do that from the moment I ran for office. … Yes, I’ll survive. You know, this is personal with Matt,” McCarthy said on ABC News’ “This Week.”

AUTHOR

COREY WALKER

Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Matt Gaetz Files Motion To Remove Kevin McCarthy As House Speaker

Here’s Where Conservative House GOP Members Stand On Removing Kevin McCarthy

GOP Congresswoman Threatens To Resign If Key Debt Reduction Demand Isn’t Met

Jamaal Bowman Begs Fellow Dems For Support After Fire Alarm Fiasco, Shifts Blame To ‘Nazi’ Republicans

Father Of Matt Gaetz Announces Run For Office

RELATED TWEETS:

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

IHG Hotel’s Attempt to Normalize Sin—Take Action!

IHG Hotels & Resorts is attempting to normalize the LGBTQ lifestyle with its liberal advertising choices. A recent IHG commercial focuses on a homosexual couple in a hotel room enjoying room service while toasting champagne in their pajamas. Blatantly throwing homosexuality in the viewer’s face, the ad includes a same-sex couple sharing an intimate moment in a hotel room.

This ad is inappropriate on many levels and is attempting to desensitize viewers. IHG should avoid aiming to please a small percentage of consumers while pushing away conservative customers. Obviously, IHG is refusing to remain neutral in the culture war. Promoting same-sex relationships has nothing to do with a hotel chain’s marketing campaigns. Yet, IHG wants to clarify its stand on this controversial topic instead of remaining neutral in the culture war. But One Million Moms continues to stand up for biblical truth, including passages such as Romans 1:26-27 which prohibits sexual perversion of this type.

One Million Moms must remain diligent. Scripture repeatedly states that homosexuality is wrong, and God will not tolerate this sinful behavior.

Of course, there is concern about how this advertisement is pushing the LGBTQ agenda, but it is also of great concern that this commercial is airing when children are likely to be watching television.

To see a comprehensive list of IHG Hotels & Resorts, go to IHG.com and look under the “Our Brands” tab.


TAKE ACTION!

If you agree this ad is inappropriate, sign our petition urging IHG Hotels & Resorts to pull its LGBTQ-inclusive ad immediately. Thank you for signing, and please share with your friends and family today!


©2023. One Million Moms. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Nearly naked prostitutes prowl streets in broad daylight, but California law ties police hands: Mayor

Largest Electric Vehicle Charging Station In World Powered By Diesel-Powered Generators

The de-civilization and dismantling of the West is due in large part to an increasing lack of intellectual curiosity by the body politic, propaganda by an immense, unfathomable left wing machine, laziness and downright stupidity.

Largest EV Charging Station In World Powered By Diesel-Powered Generators

The Harris Ranch Tesla Supercharger station is an impressive beast. With 98 charging bays, the facility in Coalinga, California, is the largest charging station in the world. But to provide that kind of power takes something solar can’t provide — diesel generators.

By: Kevin Killough, Cowboy State Daily, September 30, 2023:

The Harris Ranch Tesla Supercharger station is an impressive beast. With 98 charging bays, the facility in Coalinga, California, is the largest charging station in the world.

In 2017, Tesla CEO said that all Superchargers in the automaker’s network were being converted to solar.

“Over time, almost all will disconnect from the electricity grid,” Musk posted on X, formally known as Twitter.

Superchargers charge vehicles up to the 80% sweet spot in as little as 20 minutes, but to provide that kind of power for nearly 100 bays takes something solar can’t provide — diesel generators.

Investigative journalist Edward Niedermeyer discovered that the station was powered by diesel generators hidden behind a Shell station. Reporters at SF Gate tried to find out how much of the station’s electricity was from the generators, but couldn’t get a response from Tesla.

The station isn’t connected to any dedicated solar farms, which means that absent the diesel generators, the station is powered by California’s grid.

According to the U.S. Energy and Information Administration, in June 2023, natural gas supplied nearly 5,000 megawatt hours of electricity in California, whereas non-hydroelectric renewables supplied about 7,250 megawatt hours.

Another Case

Energy analyst and writer David Blackmon, author of the “Energy Transition Absurdities,” told Cowboy State Daily that the use of diesel-powered generators is not limited to the Harris Ranch station.

He used to shop at a Whole Foods in Houston. The company had installed a charging station in front of the store for its customers.

“It was the best parking spot in the lot, and it crowded out a bunch of handicap spaces,” Blackmon said.

He said there were diesel generators behind the store and whenever someone was using the chargers, the generators would kick on.

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

US Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Block Trump in 2024 In Rebuke of Democrat Tyranny

We live in such a morally inverted, insane age that when there is a rational ruling in accordance with the pillars of this Constitutional Republic, the people express shock, amazement and awe. Sick.

The Democrat destroyers figure they’ll just keep throwing shit against the wall and something, anything will stick.

US Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Block Trump in 2024

The former president’s eligibility to be on 2024 presidential ballot is being challenged in a number of states

By Jack Phillips, The Epoch Times, October 2, 2023:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to take a longshot challenge to former President Donald Trump’s eligibility on New Hampshire’s ballots during the 2024 election.

John Anthony Castro filed an appeal with the Supreme Court several weeks ago and claimed that the former president should be disqualified under a reading of a section of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment. Mr. Castro, a Texas lawyer who is running for president, claimed President Trump partook in an insurrection against the federal government due to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach.
“The decision by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida dismissing Petitioner John Anthony Castro’s civil action on the grounds that he lacks constitutional standing to sue another candidate who is allegedly unqualified to hold public office in the United States pursuant to Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution,” Mr. Castro wrote in a petition for a writ of certiorari (pdf).

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Oversight Committee Announces 3 Witnesses For Biden Impeachment Hearing

President Trump: 80% of Letitia James’ Case Against Him Have Been DISMISSED By Judge Due to Statute of Limitations.

In Court, Anti-Trump Judge Mugs for the Cameras, Watch Donald Trump Speak to Press After Courtroom Farce

FTX Billionaire Fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried Donated MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to McConnell’s List of ANTI-TRUMP REPUBLICANS after Private Meeting with Senate Minority Leader

Jan 6 Federal Prosecutor Arrested For Stabbing Driver on Florida Highway

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

HORROR: Exclusive footage of federal contractors delivering children across the U.S.

Through exclusive footage, whistleblower testimony, and other documentation, Muckraker has exposed how the United States federal government is facilitating the largest child trafficking ring in the world.

Federal Child Trafficking Pipeline Exposed – EXCLUSIVE FOOTAGE OF FEDERAL CONTRACTORS DELIVERING CHILDREN ACROSS THE UNITED STATES

AUTHOR

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

President Trump: 80% of Letitia James’ Case Against Him Have Been DISMISSED By Judge Due to Statute of Limitations.

President Trump says that 80% of Letitia James’ case against him has been dismissed by the judge due to statute of limitations.

Did Letitia James actually go to Law school? Or is that requirement racist?

Now they are trying to gag Trump.

Judge Arthur Engoron purportedly agrees that the STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS have run out on transactions that were closed prior to 2014 and they are now out of Trump’s NY fraud case..

AUTHOR

RELATED TWEETS:

RELATED ARTICLES:

In Court, Anti-Trump Judge Mugs for the Cameras, Watch Donald Trump Speak to Press After Courtroom Farce

In Case You Forgot: The Accomplishments of President Donald J. Trump

Rep. Matt Gaetz announces plans to oust Speaker McCarthy

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.