Real nature of satanic-globalist "neo-con" scum REVEALED, suckers--they're just puppets and mouth-pieces for anti-Christ Jew filth

[Apollonian]

​

The Neocon Jihad Against Free Speech Goes Full-Tilt​

BEN BARTEE
OCT 28, 2023

Link: https://armageddonprose.substack.com/p/the-neocon-jihad-against-free-speech/

[see vid at site link, above]

Shocker: a huge contingent of “free speech warriors” never really meant any of it.
All along, their “free speech” talking points were code for the much less noble principle: “I want my political opponents silenced and my political tribe amplified in the media because I’m scared my ideas can’t stand up to scrutiny.”
…And so, just like that, all of their alleged fidelity to the concept of freedom of speech is tossed out the window when the neocons catch the slightest whiff of a hot new Middle East war they might be able to finagle out of a tragedy.

Nikki Haley: ‘There should be freedom of speech, but you don’t get freedom of hate’​

​

In response to various university groups embracing Hamas and/or criticizing Israel (these are not interchangeable positions regardless of how hard neocons want to conflate them), Nikki Haley trotted out a new censorship slogan she might as well have ripped straight from a Women’s and Gender Studies manifesto:

“There should be freedom of speech, but you don’t get freedom of hate.”

(Note how the political dichotomy has a way of coming full circle when it comes to justifying censorship.)

Of course, Haley’s nonsensical catchphrase handed to her by her PR people doesn’t mean anything, but that’s the point: it’s incoherent and malleable enough to justify any crackdown on speech possible.

Ben Shapiro: ‘If you work in the media and uncritically and reflexively parrot the genocidal Jew-hating terrorist liars Hamas you should be fired’​

​

https://twitter.com/x/status/1714647034156716497

“But, Ben,” one might make the rhetorical counterpoint, “what should happen to you if you work in media and you’re a literal Israeli intelligence asset posing as an American patriot?”
Related: Former Breitbart Colleague: ‘I Saw Ben Shapiro Receive Tasking From Israeli Intelligence’

‘Israel First’ Laura Loomer calls for firing doctor for political speech​

​

Make Israel Great Again (MIGA) influence Laura Loomer recently demanded that a Danish doctor be fired for the crime of posting a meme she didn’t like.
“I am 100% reporting her,” the Karen wrote on Twitter/X.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1716199553529983306

https://twitter.com/x/status/1716243136165429497

“As many of you know, America is the only country with a First Amendment. But, it’s not the case in other countries. Especially not in Denmark where Dr. Loupis is a practicing physician. I suspect she will be losing her medical license soon. And even if you take this away, the fact that she is using her position as a medical doctor to make fake medical diagnoses of Jews online to smear them as mentally Ill is a violation of the Hippocratic oath. You cannot falsely diagnose someone online in an effort to smear them. She needs to be reported for abusing her medical license. Her behavior is dangerous and highly illegal as a medical professional.”

One might recall other doctors in recent memory, in another political context (COVID-19), targeted for their speech unrelated to their clinical practice, which the likes of Laura Loomer were highly critical of.
In supreme irony, earlier this year, Loomer peacocked on Twitter/X as a “free speech absolutist.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/1716285493522903437

Ron DeSantis censors speech at public universities in service to Israel​

​

“Meatball” Ron DeSantis was once lauded as the heir to the MAGA throne. He’s turned out to be a viscerally unlikeable standard neocon Swamp creation in the mold of George W. Bush – minus the charisma.
Hence his abysmal poll numbers.
Anyway, the “principled conservative” is using convoluted legal theory sure to be struck down in court as a publicity stunt to curry favor with the Israel lobby by crushing free speech on Florida campuses.
Via The Times of Israel:

“Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s administration is taking the extraordinary step of ordering state universities to ban a pro-Palestinian student organization from campuses, saying it illegally backs Hamas terrorists who attacked Israel earlier this month and massacred over 1,400 people.
As Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, aimed at destroying Hamas, has intensified, some college students have expressed solidarity with Palestinians, resulting in swift censure from some Jewish academics and even some prospective employers. But Florida has gone further, saying Students for Justice in Palestine is supporting a “terrorist organization…
State university system Chancellor Ray Rodrigues wrote to university presidents Tuesday at Gov. Ron DeSantis’ urging, directing them to disband chapters of SJP. He quoted the national group’s declaration that “Palestinian students in exile are PART of this movement, not in solidarity with this movement.”
“It is a felony under Florida law to ‘knowingly provide material support … to a designated foreign terrorist organization,'” Rodrigues said in the letter.”

“Material support for a designated terrorist organization” sounds terrible– except that there is no evidence to that effect. Instead, speech on Florida campuses – public institutions subject to constraints on government overreach under the Bill of Rights – is construed through tortured logic to be “material support” for Hamas.
The above is merely an hors d'oeuvres of the calls for censorship by neocons and MIGAs in the name of combating anti-Semitism.

Related: Anti-Defamation League Capitalizes on Hamas Attacks, Pushes Censorious DEI Fascism
This is a fair warning to all the neocon filth out there from both parties cheerleading this anti-American bullshit: you are sowing your karma. One way or another, you’ll reap it good and hard.

 

[Apollonian]

New Biden Regime Orders Out: Banks Must Lend To Illegal Aliens

Federale
11/01/2023

Link: https://vdare.com/posts/new-biden-regime-orders-out-banks-must-lend-to-illegal-aliens/

In a malicious use of civil rights statutes, the Biden Regime is ordering banks to make loans to illegal aliens, claiming that a bank that uses alienage and unlawful presence by said alien to be practicing some sort of discrimination under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA).

The Biden administration has warned U.S. banks and other financial institutions that they can’t reject illegal immigrants’ credit applications based solely or predominantly on their immigration status.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) said in a recent statement that rejecting illegal immigrants for credit cards and various types of loans just because they are noncitizens is unlawful.
The two agencies stated that they were issuing the warning “because consumers have reported being rejected for credit cards as well as for auto, student, personal and equipment loans because of their immigration status, even when they have strong credit histories and ties to the United States and are otherwise qualified to receive the loans.”
Biden Admin Orders Banks Not to Reject Illegal Immigrants’ Loan Applications, by Tom Ozimek, The Epoch Times, October 14, 2023

Now, a review of the Act shows the following language that prohibits discrimination in lending is based on several common characteristics that originate in the original Civil Rights Act of 1964.

(a) Activities constituting discrimination
It shall be unlawful for any creditor to discriminate against any applicant, with respect to any aspect of a credit transaction—
(1) on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex or marital status, or age (provided the applicant has the capacity to contract);
Equal Credit Opportunity, US Code, 15 USC Chapter 41, Subchapter IV:

Note what is missing from the Act: alienage and immigration status, as prohibited categories for discrimination. If it is not mentioned, then it is a legal basis for discrimination.
That language, mirroring the Civil Rights Act, is deliberate, as alienage and immigration status are bases for lawful discrimination, such as in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended, that prohibits employment of certain aliens and limits other aliens to certain approved employers and immigration statuses.
Another example of discrimination in employment is that the Federal government is generally prohibited from employing aliens, including Lawful Permanent Residents (green card holders).
But the Biden Regime has a strategy: they fraudulently conflate race and national origin with alienage and immigration status.
In a statement, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Credit Financial Protection Board (CFPB) claim that an implementing regulation to the ECOA, Regulation B, extends the non-discrimination protection regarding race and national origin to alienage and immigration status.

While Regulation B describes certain conditions under which creditors may consider immigration status, creditors should remain cognizant that ECOA and Regulation B expressly forbid discrimination on the basis of certain protected characteristics, including race and national origin.
Immigration status may broadly overlap with or, in certain circumstances, serve as a proxy for these protected characteristics. Creditors should therefore be aware that if their consideration of immigration status is not “necessary to ascertain the creditor’s rights and remedies regarding repayment” and it results in discrimination on a prohibited basis, it violates ECOA and Regulation B.
Joint Statement on Fair Lending and Credit Opportunities for Noncitizen Borrowers
under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, DOJ and CFPB, Oct 12, 2023

While the Biden Regime conflates race and national origin with alienage and immigration status, the regulations they use to justify such conflation instead specifically permit the use of immigration status in credit determinations.

Permanent residency and immigration status. A creditor may inquire about the permanent residency and immigration status of an applicant or any other person in connection with a credit transaction…
Immigration status. A creditor may consider the applicant’s immigration status or status as a permanent resident of the United States, and any additional information that may be necessary to ascertain the creditor’s rights and remedies regarding repayment.
Part 1002—Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Regulation B), Code of Federal Regulations, December 21, 2011

In fact, Regulation B specifically notes that alienage and immigration status may be used based on law, such as the INA.

National origin. A creditor may not refuse to grant credit because an applicant comes from a particular country but may take the applicant’s immigration status into account. A creditor may also take into account any applicable law, regulation, or executive order restricting dealings with citizens (or the government) of a particular country or imposing limitations regarding credit extended for their use.

This language is used to make it clear that alienage and national origin are not interchangeable, and that credit rights correspond to immigration status and even national origin can be used, such as with statutes and executive orders that restrict access to the U.S. financial system by certain nationals, usually based a foreign policy, war making, or counter-terrorism authority or statute.
The Biden Regime plan is to use this obscure area of civil rights law regarding credit to change the legal definitions of race and national origin to be the same as alienage and immigration status. If, as the joint statement claims, race and national origin commonly intersect, serving as a proxy for immigration status and alienage, then discrimination based on alienage and immigration status is illegal across the board. Interestingly, it is basically admitting that all illegal aliens are non-white and therefore worthy of protection.
The ultimate purpose is to administratively repeal the INA’s statutory restrictions on employment of aliens, making all illegal aliens eligible for employment, as, in their reasoning, discrimination based on alienage and immigration status equate discrimination based on race and national origin.
The reasoning is, of course, fallacious. The statutory language prohibiting race and national origin–based discrimination has never before been held as applying to alienage or immigration status. And is itself contradicted by either the regulations themselves or other statutes. But lawlessness is the primary aspect of the Biden Regime.

 

[Apollonian]

Global majority shocked by West’s response to, mishandling of Israel-Palestine conflict: a new world order is emerging​

by tts-admin | Nov 7, 2023 |

Ethan Huff – Natural News Nov 6, 2023​

Link: https://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=275403/

A new op-ed from Valdai Club Programme Director Timofey Bordachev explains how the global majority, meaning countries of the world that “link their development to the main trends of globalization,” are overwhelmingly opposed to Israel’s ongoing actions in Gaza.
While in the past the predominant Western view would have prevailed in favor of all things Israel, that Zionist-led world order is coming to a close, in Bordachev’s view.
“Up to now, this notion has been expressed rather discreetly, which is explained by our common participation in a system of relations in which Western countries not only played a leading role, but were also able, until a certain point, to come up with relatively optimal solutions for everyone,” Bordachev writes about how opposition to Israeli aggression used to be a more quietly held position among the global majority – but no longer.
“Recent events, however – especially the crisis in the Middle East – may open a new chapter in the perception of U.S. and Western European policies by most of the world’s countries and create new conditions that will make a return to the previous world order impossible.”
(Related: Even though they comprise a tiny percentage of the overall world population, Jewish Zionists hold many major positions of power in government – including at the CDC – media, religion and finance.)

The West is “destroying its own previous achievements” with unpopular support for Israeli genocide of Palestine​

Notice that Bordachev writes about recent events that merely include the crisis in the Middle East. This means there are other events as well that point to the end of Western rule over world affairs.
Concerning Israel, the Jewish state’s confrontational policy of aggression towards Palestine does not directly threaten Russia, China, or even the United States. At the same time, most people now seem to know that the U.S. has long been a ringleader in world affairs – the “global police force,” if you will – that is rapidly losing its top spot.
While in times past, a majority of Americans would have supported their country and its government, trusting their leaders to have their best interests at heart, it has become overwhelmingly apparent that not only is this no longer even remotely true, but We the People are now overwhelmingly aware that the rats have taken over the helm and the ship is sinking.
“The West is destroying its own previous achievements,” Bordachev writes about what the general sentiment now is among the global majority.
“The arguments for this assessment go something like this: In recent days, a wave of demonstrations in support of the Palestinians besieged in Gaza has swept the world. While Western leaders have repeated, like a mantra, boilerplate statements of full support and willingness to go to any length for Israel, their own citizens, not to mention the populations of Muslim countries, have protested against a unilateral violent solution to the conflict.”
So far, these peaceful protests are merely harbingers of a more complex future that is emerging from the ashes of this changing of the guard. Washington, D.C.’s shortsighted policies with regards to Israel and lots of other things are no longer supported by a majority of the people they supposedly represent, which points to the end of an age – and possibly even the end of an empire.
“The most important thing that worries our colleagues in the majority countries of the world is that several narratives that had virtually disappeared in previous years are back on the agenda: The U.S. and the Christian countries of the Old World are primarily responsible for the suffering of Muslims and their destruction in wars and conflicts; they also provoke confrontations that lead to economic crises, hunger, and unemployment in developing countries,” Bordachev writes.
Check out his full op-ed at RT.com.
What will become of this latest conflict between Israel and Gaza? Find out more at Prophecy.news.

Sources for this article include:
RT.com
NaturalNews.com
Source

 

[Apollonian]

Hate Speech Charges Dropped Against Politician Who Quoted the Bible​

November 16, 2023 8:00 am by CWR
by Chris Black

Link: https://citizenwatchreport.com/hate-speech-charges-dropped-against-politician-who-quoted-the-bible/

Okay, so, I guess you’re still allowed to read the Bible in Finland.
That’s good news, right?
If you’re having a discussion about sending people to prison for being Christians, you’ve already lost.
Catholic News Agency:

A court of appeal dismissed all charges of “hate speech” and “ethnic agitation” against Finnish lawmaker Päivi Räsänen on Tuesday in what has been hailed as a victory for free speech.

See also The U.S. Prepares To Use Military Force Against Hezbollah If It Joins The War Against Israel

The Finnish member of Parliament had been charged in 2021 after publicly sharing in 2019 her biblical, religious views on marriage as between one man and one woman.
Though Räsänen, 63, was unanimously acquitted by a Finnish District Court in 2022, prosecutors appealed her acquittal to the Helsinki Court of Appeal. The former minister of the interior faced the possibility of tens of thousands of euros in fines and two years in prison.

See also First Amendment Obliterated: Weaponization Panel Details Government Collusion With Universities to Censor Speech

Two years in prison for quoting the Bible. In Finland, a country that isn’t really even very politically correct (just innocent and generally confused and bedazzled by modernity).
This is the extreme nature of our plight.

 

[Apollonian]

Heroic LA Homeowner Guns Down Would-Be Burglar After Four Men Break Into His House With A Grandmother And Toddler Inside – Police Respond By Arresting The Homeowner (VIDEO)​

Women System December 04, 2023

Link: http://www.womensystems.com/2023/12/heroic-la-homeowner-guns-down-would-be.html/

Credit: Daily Mail
Los Angeles, California – A Los Angeles homeowner was taken into custody early Wednesday after killing a home invasion suspect while a grandmother and toddler were in the house.
KTLA reported that police were alerted to a “hot prowl” at a home in the 11400 block of Swinton Avenue in Granada Hills around 5 a.m. Saturday morning. A “hot prowl” is a law enforcement term for a burglary in progress when the homeowner is present.
The LAPD revealed that “three or four” males broke into the house before the homeowner turned the tables on them and opened fire.

On December 2, 2023, around 5:00 a.m., officers responded to a burglary radio call on the 11400 block of Swinton Avenue. The officers’ preliminary investigation determined that approximately 3 to 4 males in their 20s entered the home intending to burglarize the location.
— LAPD PIO (@LAPDPIO) December 2, 2023

One of the would-be robbers was struck by the gunfire and died at the scene. The other three suspects fled the scene to an unknown location.

The LAPD suspects an additional suspect was injured during the incident after finding “a trail of blood.”

One of the suspects was struck by gunfire & pronounced deceased inside the residence. The 3 other suspects fled the location to an unknown location. It’s believed that an additional suspect was injured during the incident due to a trail of blood located during the investigation.
— LAPD PIO (@LAPDPIO) December 2, 2023

But the heroic homeowner’s actions did not go unpunished. Video footage at the scene shows the hero being handcuffed following the incident. It is not known at this point whether he has been charged.
This is far from the first time Los Angeles has acted outrageously against a gun-wielding homeowner. The Gateway Pundit reported last month that a father who defended his family and home from intruders had his gun permit revoked for allegedly yelling at the police when they visited his home.
Pat Walsh, one of the hero’s neighbors, revealed to KTLA that there have been burglaries “every day” and residents are “fed up.”

We’ve been having burglaries every day in this neighborhood. So, I’m not surprised at all.
It’s been a real problem. Residents here are fed up.

Another neighbor fully supported the man’s actions in defending his home and expressed hope this could stop the robberies.

The suspects messed with the wrong homeowner, so hopefully this will stop them.
It makes me feel good that people are able to protect their homes and stop these guys.

The Los Angeles Police Department is asking individuals to contact them with information regarding the incident.

 

[Apollonian]

Legal scholar Jonathan Turley rips Colorado decision to disqualify Trump from presidential ballot: 'This country is a powder keg, and this court is just throwing matches at it'​

• A Colorado Supreme Court ruled Trump violated the insurrectionist clause of the 14th Amendment for his role in January 6 in a 4-3 decision
• Turley, a professor of law and Fox News legal analyst, believes the ruling endangers American democracy
• 'I mean, this country is a powder keg, and this court is just throwing matches at it. And I think that it's a real mistake. But I think that they're wrong on the law'

By STEPHEN M. LEPORE FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 21:06 EST, 19 December 2023 | UPDATED: 07:16 EST, 20 December 2023

Link: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ied-legal-Jonathan-Turley-Supreme-Court.html/

[vid at site link, above]

Legal scholar Jonathan Turley slammed the Colorado Supreme Court for its ruling that removed former President Donald Trump from the state's 2024 Republican primary ballot.
'Well, this court just handed partisans on both sides the ultimate tool to try to shortcut elections, and it's very, very dangerous,' Turley said on Fox News moments after the decision.
'I mean, this country is a powder keg, and this court is just throwing matches at it. And I think that it's a real mistake. But I think that they're wrong on the law,' Turley added.
The court ruled Trump violated the insurrectionist clause of the 14th Amendment for his role in January 6 in a 4-3 decision from Democratic-appointed justices.
Turley, a professor of law and Fox News legal analyst, added he believes the ruling endangers American democracy.

Legal scholar Jonathan Turley slammed the Colorado Supreme Court for its ruling that removed former President Donald Trump from the state's 2024 Republican primary ballot


Colorado Republicans threaten to CANCEL primary if Trump disqualified


Biden says there's 'no question' Trump engaged in an insurrection


Dem Jamie Raskin warns of VIOLENCE after Colorado disqualified Trump

Turley, speaking to Fox's Laura Ingraham, also disagrees with the court's premise on January 6.
'You know, January 6 was many things, most of it not good. In my view it was not an insurrection. It was a riot,' he said.
He said while he understands those in violation of the law that day should face consequences, the ruling against Trump goes a step too far.
'That doesn't mean that the people responsible for that day shouldn't be held accountable. But to call this an insurrection, for the purposes of disqualification, would create a slippery slope for every state in the Union.'
Turley concluded by saying that this gets in the way of free and fair elections just ahead of the start of primary season.
'This is a time when we actually need democracy. We need to allow the voters to vote. We need to hear their decision. And the court here just said, "You're not going to get that in Colorado. We're not going to let you vote for Donald Trump,"' he said.
'And you know you can dislike Trump, you can believe he's responsible for January 6 but this isn't the way to do it. I mean, it is, you know, for the people that say they're trying to protect democracy. This is hands down the most anti-Democratic opinion I've seen in my life.'
The 14th Amendment was approved after the Civil War and bars officials from seeking future office should they have 'engaged in insurrection.'

The court ruled that Trump violated the insurrectionist clause of the 14th Amendment for his role in January 6 in a 4-3 decision from Democratic-appointed justices
'A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,' the court wrote.
It is the first time in history the Constitution's 'insurrection clause' has been used to disqualify a presidential candidate.
The decision may not stick - with Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung confirming Tuesday evening that the ex-president would appeal it to the Supreme Court.
'We have full confidence that the U.S. Supreme Court will quickly rule in our favor and finally put an end to these unAmerican lawsuits,' Cheung said.

Trump attends a rally on the Ellipse on January 6, 2021, ahead of the Capitol attack. His role in the 'insurrection' and attempt to overturn the 2020 election make him ineligible to serve, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday

Supporters of former President Donald Trump broke into the Capitol Building on January 6, interrupting the joint session of Congress that cemented President Joe Biden's 2020 election win
Republican National Committee Chair Ronna Romney McDaniel called the decision 'election interference' and indicated the RNC would also fight it in court.
She said the RNC's legal team 'looks forward to helping fight for a victory.'
The Colorado Supreme Court's decision comes after a district court ruled that while Trump incited an insurrection - the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack - the provision in the Constitution was unclear whether it was intended to bar candidates for the presidency.
The lawsuit was filed by the Washington, D.C.-based group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, on behalf of six Colorado voters, some Republican and some unaffiliated with a political party.
The lawsuit pointed to Trump's role in the January 6 Capitol attack and also his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
The court found 'by clear and convincing evidence' that Trump engaged in an insurrection as defined by the Fourteenth Amendment.
The court found the section to be 'self-executing,' meaning further action by Congress was not required.

The court in its ruling referenced Trump's January 6 speech on the Ellipse on the day Congress met to count the electoral votes

WHAT DOES SECTION 3 OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT SAY?​

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.


It found the District Court 'did not err' when it determined that January 6 constituted an 'insurrection.'
It did so by citing Trump's January 6 speech, where he told a crowd on the Ellipse to 'fight like hell,' ruling that it was not protected speech under the First Amendment.
'The sum of these parts is this: President Trump is disqualified from holding the office of President under Section Three; because he is disqualified, it would be a wrongful act under the Election Code for the Secretary to list him as a candidate on the presidential primary ballot,' the court ruled.
It acknowledged the certain appeal, staying the decision until January 4 to allow for time.
And it included the caveat: 'We do not reach these conclusions lightly. We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.'
The judges that voted in favor of the ruling had been appointed by Democratic governors.
Cheung and other Republicans pointed this out, with the Trump campaign spokesman also dubbing CREW's lawsuit a 'Soros-funded, left-wing group's scheme to interfere in an election on behalf of Crooked Joe Biden.'
'Democrat Party leaders are in a state of paranoia over the growing, dominant lead President Trump has amassed in the polls. They have lost faith in the failed Biden presidency and are now doing everything they can to stop the American voters from throwing them out of office next November,' Cheung said.
Also piling on was Eric Trump, who made reference to how Trump's poll numbers have jumped even while he faces four criminal prosecutions.
'Prediction: This Colorado decision will add 5%+ points to @realDonaldTrump already runaway polls,' he posted on X.

Trump's team and other Republicans were quick to point out the four justices who voted in favor of the ruling were appointed by Democratic governors. They included Justice William W. Hood III (left) who was appointed by now Sen. John Hickenlooper and Justice Monica M. Márque (right) who was appointed by Democratic Gov. Bill Ritter

Additionally Justice Melissa Hart (left), who was appointed by Hickenlooper, a Democratic governor-turned-senator and Justice Richard L. Gabriel (right), another Hickenlooper appointee
Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy volunteered to pull his name off Colorado's March 5 Republican primary ballot in protest.
'I pledge to *withdraw* from the Colorado GOP primary unless Trump is also allowed to be on the state’s ballot, and I demand that Ron DeSantis, Chris Christie, and Nikki Haley to do the same immediately - or else they are tacitly endorsing this illegal maneuver which will have disastrous consequences for our country,' he posted Tuesday night on X.
CREW's president and the plaintiffs cheered Tuesday's decision.
'The court's decision today affirms what our clients alleged in this lawsuit: that Donald Trump is an insurrectionist who disqualified himself from office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment based on his role in the January 6th attack on the Capitol, and that Secretary Griswold must keep him off of Colorado's primary ballot. It is not only historic and justified, but is necessary to protect the future of democracy in our country,' said CREW President Noah Bookbinder in a statement.
'Our Constitution clearly states that those who violate their oath by attacking our democracy are barred from serving in government. It has been an honor to represent the petitioners, and we look forward to ensuring that this vitally important ruling stands,' Bookbinder added.
One of the plaintiffs, Norma Anderson, was the former Republican Colorado House and Senate leader.
'My fellow plaintiffs and I brought this case to continue to protect the right to free and fair elections enshrined in our Constitution and to ensure Colorado Republican primary voters are only voting for eligible candidates. Today's win does just that,' she said in a statement.
'Long before this lawsuit was filed, I had already read Section 3 of the 14th Amendment and concluded that it applied to Donald Trump, given his actions leading up to and on January 6th. I am proud to be a petitioner, and gratified that the Colorado Supreme Court arrived at the same conclusion we all did,' she added.

 

[Apollonian]

Ho ho ho--this is absolutely priceless, dink RINO, neo-con scum, descendent of Indian Sikhs, Haley, is caught pathetically flat-footed w. question at a question-answer session during campaigning in New Hampshire, suckers--listen to this--amazing--tells u what u need to know and CONFIRM about Jews-media too. As the vid ends, the talking head, McEnany, laments, breathlessly, do u realize so many think holohoax was myth?--answers her own question then by saying, "go to the holohoax museum in Wash.," ho hooo ho hoh o ho--like saying, do u think Ford cars suck?--go to a Ford car dealership and ask them, ho ho ho ho ho ho.

 

[Apollonian]

‘Ballot Cleansing’ – How Democrats Are Pushing US to Political Chaos​

by Sputnik
January 7th 2024, 7:54 am

Link: https://www.infowars.com/posts/ballot-cleansing-how-democrats-are-pushing-us-to-political-chaos/

Radical leftists removing Trump from state ballots putting U.S. "on one of the most dangerous paths in its history," legal expert warns

Democrats have resorted to nothing short of “ballot cleansing” as they try to bar Republican candidates for Congress under the 14th Amendment theory, writes renowned American legal expert Jonathan Turley, warning against placing the US on a slippery slope to political chaos.

Several US voters in Illinois and Massachusetts have filed motions seeking to remove former President Donald Trump from each state’s primary ballot for the 2024 election. Earlier, Colorado and Maine moved to disqualify the ex-president.

Jonathan Turley, a renowned US legal scholar, raised the red flag over Colorado’s Supreme Court decision to bar Trump from the 2024 election last month, stressing that the state’s justices “put this country on one of the most dangerous paths in its history.”

The unusual initiative is driven by Democratic politicians who decided to utilize Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which says that any candidates who have engaged in acts of insurrection after vowing to defend the US Constitution should be barred from holding political office. The amendment was ratified in 1868. Now, the Dems are arguing that the January 6 riots were a full-fledged “insurrection” and that the law could be applied to the former president.

“In December 1865 many in Washington were shocked to see Alexander Stephens, the Confederacy’s onetime vice president, waiting to take the same oath that he took before joining the Southern rebellion,” Turley wrote on December 22. “So Congress declared that it could bar those ‘who have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.’”
https://www.infowarsstore.com/healt...anner&utm_content=DJNFoundationalEnergybanned
According to the legal expert, the January 6 events – no matter how bad they were – cannot be compared to the US Civil War (1861-1865) and qualified as an “insurrection.”

“It was a protest that became a riot, not a rebellion,” Turley highlighted, arguing that the Civil War-era amendment should not be used in this case.

He warned that the Colorado court’s undemocratic decision and clear defiance of the First Amendment could result in a domino effect “where red and blue states could now engage in tit-for-tat disqualifications.”

Turley’s concerns aren’t unjustified given that Democrats have decided to bar not only Trump, but all Republican candidates for Congress who have dared to question the fairness of the 2020 elections. Some Democratic lawmakers have called for the disqualification of up to 126 Republican colleagues as “insurrectionists.” What is especially chilling is that many have supported them.

Thus, on December 11, US Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ) called on House leaders to remove congressional lawmakers who were “supporting Donald Trump’s efforts to invalidate the 2020 presidential election.”

“Stated simply, men and women who would act to tear the United States government apart cannot serve as Members of the Congress. These lawsuits seeking to obliterate public confidence in our democratic system by invalidating the clear results of the 2020 presidential election undoubtedly attack the text and spirit of the Constitution, which each Member swears to support and defend,” claimed Pascrell, citing Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) introduced a similar initiative which was supported by 63 Democratic co-sponsors, including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Jamaal Bowman, Ritchie Torres, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib.

Meanwhile, Turley drew attention to an obvious double-standard approach exercised by Democrats: previously, some of them have openly challenged and even sought to block certification of election results.

“Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) praised the effort then-Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) organized to challenge the certification of President George W. Bush’s 2004 re-election,” the legal scholar recalled on January 5, adding that Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) sought to block certification of the 2016 election result.

According to Turley, Democrats are increasingly using labels of “insurrectionists” and “Putin lovers” to cancel their political rivals, opponents, and even journalists.

However, if the trend turns into some sort of a legal precedent, nothing would stop overzealous lawmakers from expanding this cancellation spree, according to the expert.

“That is why the [US] Supreme Court needs to take up this issue and put this pernicious theory to bed once and for all,” Turley concluded.