Uncategorized

Anthony Fauci’s Presidential Pardon Versus State Crimes

Guest post by Vietnam veteran Paul S. Gardiner
President Joe Biden receives a briefing on COVID-19 on Friday, July 16, 2021, in the Oval Office of the White House. (Official White House Photo by Adam Schultz)
Over the past three years, the Vires Law Group (VLG) headquartered in West Palm Beach, FL, has devoted much time and resources pro bono to researching and compiling extensive legal briefs submitted to several state attorneys general requesting an investigation of Dr. Anthony Fauci and other health care officials for alleged violations of state criminal codes.
To date, requests for criminal investigations have been submitted to the attorneys general of Florida, Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma, and Missouri. The Texas legal brief and supporting documents can be viewed at https://diamondmindfoundation.org/justice/
Regarding Anthony Fauci’s recent presidential pardon, the Office of the Pardon Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, states that “the President’s authority to grant clemency is limited to federal offenses and offenses prosecuted by the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States in the D.C. Superior Court. An offense that violates a state law is not an offense against the United States.”

Therefore Dr Fauci’s pre-emptive federal pardon does not shield him from prosecution for violations of state criminal laws, and the efforts of VLG described herein become paramount if Dr Fauci and other health care officials are ever to be held accountable for alleged heinous crimes committed against literally hundreds of thousands of American citizens.

The requested investigations focus on alleged criminal actions taken against patients being treated in hospitals for the COVID-19 virus. VLG’s efforts are in response to hundreds of letters received from aggrieved families who lost loved ones in hospitals—all earnestly demand that investigations take place.
Among other things, these letters attest that the great majority of loved ones who died in hospitals received one or more doses of the drug Remdesivir which was known to have a mortality rate in excess of 50 percent.

The testimony of Dr David Martin before members of the Oklahoma state legislature concerning the toxicity of Remdesivir can be viewed here: https://rumble.com/v5jrx85-the-shocking-truth-about-remdesivirs-lethality-rate.html.
The promoted (and mandated) use of Remdesivir for Covid patients by Dr Fauci and other health care officials is perhaps the most egregious, heinous crime that allegedly occurred.
Much more can be said about the ongoing efforts of VLG to secure justice for the thousands of victims of alleged hospital homicides, but the necessity of thorough criminal investigations by state and county officials cannot be overstated.

Citizens need to contact their respective state attorney general and county district attorney and demand that these investigations occur! It is time for truth and justice in this matter. and the Vires Law Group is at the forefront of the effort.
Paul S. Gardiner is a retired Army officer, Vietnam veteran, and avid lover of America. He is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of Alabama, and the U.S. Army War College. […]

Uncategorized

Student Governments Must Ditch National Politics

Anti-Israel protesters form a tent city and take over the Columbia University campus. Classes were cancelled on Monday April 22, 2024 and Jewish students were told not to attend classes by prominent Jews.
This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire
By Alex RosadoReal Clear Wire
As politics have become increasingly nationalized and polarized, more and more local political bodies are being swept up by the news of the day to the detriment of their constituents. Nowhere is this more apparent than in student government associations (SGAs) – a new battleground for the culture war.
It’s becoming common for SGAs to hijack what should be apolitical offices that serve students. SGAs are being wrongly used for global affairs activism, blocking funding for groups that do not promote critical race theory, and adopting gerrymandering to skew the student body’s representation. In response, some students say that SGAs don’t work for them.

This lack of trust limits SGAs’ ability to make any real-world impact.

To strengthen their relevance and effectiveness, SGAs should remember why they exist – to ensure student welfare – and shift their energy to local campus issues like campus safety and academic policies rather than grandstanding national political agendas.
Local administrations like SGAs are what make America great. At least, that’s what Alexis de Tocqueville concluded in 1831 when he came from France to study American democracy. In his masterwork, “Democracy in America,” Tocqueville was blown away by how local administration could be a blueprint for free and fair societies everywhere, with America’s adoption of such ideas setting the country up for long-term success:

“In no country in the world do the citizens make such exertions for the common weal; and I am acquainted with no people which has established schools as numerous and as efficacious, places of public worship better suited to the wants of the inhabitants, or roads kept in better repair,” Tocqueville writes.
Major national events may capture students’ attention, but local governments most directly impact their lives. For many young Americans, SGAs offer an education in how local governments operate. They provide students an outlet for civic engagement and communal responsibility – experiences and habits that they can take with them when they graduate. Whether it be extending library hours or getting new dining options, students should be united to better their schools’ offerings, not be dissuaded because their colleagues play politics with other matters.
Tocqueville also warned against centralizing power, where a hyper-individualized population would undo its social cohesion and disconnect it from the issues most affecting it. SGAs distracted by broad nationalized political agendas have a harder time serving the needs of their individual students.

For example, look at what happened last April at the University of California, Davis, when their SGA passed a bill to divest their $20 million budget from companies with Israeli ties. This led to a campus frenzy and a Title VI complaint filed with the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, accusing the school and its SGA of failing to protect Jewish students.
Throughout all of this, the SGA ignored the months-long shortage of hot water that had been plaguing student housing since February.
The UC Davis dilemma is a prime example of Tocqueville’s guidance: Local governments can betray their duties and breed discontent if they intentionally prioritize the wrong issues.

If SGAs do what they’re supposed to and focus on the needs of their immediate college environments, they’ll be able to maintain their autonomy and presence, avoid the dangers of overreach, and build the bonds required for trust and solidarity.
If they instead seek to align with national politics, they run the risk of allowing a “tyranny of the majority” when the largest group bullies smaller ones through legal means.
That’s what happened at St. Louis University in late 2023 when the SGA president booted their vice president for criticizing his support of Hamas. The common thread linking St. Louis, UC Davis, and similar SGA abuses is that personal affiliations and beliefs related to national politics bleed over into these institutions’ agendas. Thus, whatever stances those in charge take risk becoming the SGAs’ official positions.

SGAs shouldn’t become a platform for individual leaders’ personal political beliefs. Instead, they should be the arena where future leaders practice representative government. That entails developing an ability to tune out national politics and promote inclusive decision-making processes that encourage deliberation. The “tyranny of the majority” is avoidable by defining clear boundaries between personal expression and collective governance, a Tocquevillian characteristic SGAs should strive to achieve.
That’s not to say SGA members shouldn’t be allowed to speak up about current and national politics. They should just get their priorities straight and avoid placing their own personal beliefs over the most pressing student and campus concerns. As former U.S. Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill famously quipped, “All politics are local.” That knowledge will guide SGAs in doing their jobs more efficiently in the future.

This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.

Alex Rosado is a professional programs assistant at the Alexander Hamilton Society. Follow him on Twitter/X at @Alexprosado. […]

Uncategorized

Louisiana Takes Step Toward Paper Ballot Voting System

Ballots – fair use openverse
Louisiana’s Republican State Central Committee (RSCC), the governing body of the Louisiana Republican Party, recently took a significant step toward a paper ballot voting system and away from voting machines. One of the voting machine experts, Alex J. Halderman, previously testified before the Louisiana Voting System Commission on the gaping vulnerabilities of electronic voting.
A previous resolution by Randolph Bazet was unsuccessful, but on Saturday Christy Haik’s Resolution recommending an auditable paper back-up system passed by a vote of 79-77 with numerous co-sponsors. An irony worth noting is that, at the request of RSCC members who oppose a paper ballot voting system for Louisiana, the RSCC vote on the Haik Resolution was conducted using paper ballots.
It is widely believed that Governor Landry plans to invest a minimum of $100 million of taxpayer money in new voting machines. Landry has significant influence over RSCC policy recommendations in this regard. It would reportedly take a fraction of these funds to train, equip, and hire bi-partisan poll commissioners to conduct elections using a secure paper system.
Saturday’s vote is a strong indication that the momentum is shifting as Republican leaders across the State become more aware of the serious vulnerabilities of machine based voting. There can be little doubt that President Trump’s consistent public call for a far less expensive, counterfeit proof, secure, serialized paper-only system has influenced this shift in opinion and will continue to do so.

Also at work are multiple citizen advocacy groups including but not limited to We The People, Louisiana Republican Assembly, and Louisiana Citizen Advocacy Group. These groups are making their voices heard regarding the vital importance of fully securing our election system through a secure paper ballot system.

Germany, a Country of 80 million, Norway, Netherlands, France, and numerous other Countries already protect the integrity and trust of their elections with secure, publicly observable hand-counting of paper ballots. Louisiana has a population of 4.5 million. The suggestion that such a system cannot be effectively implemented in Louisiana defies both precedent and logic. This isn’t an issue of ability in our State, but one of will: will to save precious taxpayer resources while shoring up our election vulnerabilities.
The pendulum is swinging back in Louisiana as the weight of opinion moves toward an election system in which we can all have confidence: secure, serialized, hand-marked, publicly counted paper ballots. This is an issue we have the power and ability to get right, and one we cannot afford to get wrong. The passage of the Haik Resolution is a meaningful step forward.
J. Christopher AlexanderLouisiana Citizen Advocacy Groupwww.lacag.org […]

Uncategorized

Hohmann: United Nations Renews Push for Globalized Digital Marking System to Deal with ‘Emergencies’

Guest post by Leo Hohmann – republished with permission.
Regardless of who’s occupying the White House, the global beast system marches forward. Don’t be caught in the camp of ‘irrational exuberance’ or you will be deceived.
United Nations flag – USAID photo
The United Nations is calling on governments around the world to fight climate change and other “emergencies” by mandating biometric digital ID systems, giving governments worldwide the ability to tag and track the masses in their every move.
Digital ID systems that have already been implemented in other countries are typically tied to the financial system, allowing the government to track one’s spending habits as well as their movement.

A biometric digital ID requires the recipient to upload a face scan, eye scan, palm scan or other unique identifier, which is then integrated into a central system and tracked by an app on the person’s phone. Eventually, the plan is to place this surveillance device “under the skin,” as the Israeli historian and World Economic Forum adviser Yuval Harari has repeatedly stated.

As reported by Slay News, unelected foreign bureaucrats who serve on the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) renewed the demand for digital IDs.
UNDP officials made the case for why digital identity is allegedly a key weapon in their anti-human climate agenda in an article titled: “Why legal identity is crucial to tackling the climate crisis.”

If governments assign digital identities to citizens, they explained in the article, authorities can track populations more easily in an “environmental disaster.”
The UNDP further argued that countries that roll out digital identity programs will have more data about their taxpayers that can then be used in an emergency.
We all know how governments use so-called emergencies to enact tyrannical and authoritarian policies they would otherwise never get away with. They do this by using the news media to whip up fear in the population, dividing the people against each other.

During Covid, more than a few states implemented 24-hour snitch-lines where residents could call and turn in their neighbors for not following the lockdown rules.
Governments should know the income and health status of every taxpayer, as well as their education level, the UN agency states in the document.
This would help authorities have a more “targeted response” to citizens during, for example, a weather disaster, according to the world body.

However, as noted by Slay News, a digital identity is not only for tracking taxpayer movements and backgrounds.
It can also be used to track how much energy taxpayers are consuming.
Once a government has this data, it can force citizens to change their energy-consumption habits.

The UNDP euphemistically refers to this state coercion in Orwellian fashion, calling it “inspiring behavior change.”
When’s the last time you were “inspired” to perform a certain action by the government, may I ask?

“Leveraging digital legal ID data to track energy consumption, inspire behavior change, and enhance sustainability measures can mitigate climate-related disasters,” the UNDP officials wrote.

That’s a nice way of saying we will force you out of your gasoline-powered vehicle, out of your house on an acre or more of land, and into a tiny apartment in the city, eating bugs and riding public transit.
The United Nations has long pushed for a global ID system that would digitally tag every human being on the planet. This is embedded within the global body’s 17 sustainable development goals associated with its Agenda 2030 document, adopted by some 190 nations, including the U.S., in September 2015.
On its website, the U.N. writes:

Sustainable Development Goal Target 16.9 (“legal identity for all, including birth registration, by 2030”) is key to advance the 2030 Agenda commitment to leave no one behind, and equally relevant is SDG 17.19 — support to statistical capacity-building in developing countries, monitored by the indicator “proportion of countries that have achieved 100 per cent birth registration and 80 per cent death registration”.
This is just another way of describing what is, in essence, a social-credit scoring system similar to what’s already in place in communist China.
If you drive too much, spend too much on the wrong products, such as meat or dairy, or if you’re guilty of wrongthink, you will see your social-credit score dip, meaning you will be banned from getting loans or the best housing, jobs, or educational opportunities.

This agenda will no doubt be brought up at the 2025 World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, Switzerland, later this month. President Trump has reportedly agreed to address the WEF remotely.
None of this agenda has any place in any country that claims to be free.
If you appreciate these updates and wish to support my work, you may send a donation of any size c/o Leo Hohmann, PO Box 291, Newnan, GA 30264, or donate via credit card here. Thank you and HAPPY NEW YEAR! […]

Uncategorized

Clemency Request ‘Pending’ for Far Left Contractor Who Leaked Trump’s Taxes

US Federal Govt employee, Wikimedia Commons
This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire
By Paul SperryReal Clear Wire
The Biden administration is formally considering commuting the sentence of the convicted felon who stole and leaked incoming President Trump’s tax records along with those of thousands of other taxpayers, in the biggest tax data heist in U.S. history.
A search of the Justice Department’s pardon database reveals Charles Edward Littlejohn — who just began his five-year sentence in May — has been assigned a clemency case number. It says a petition for “commutation of sentence” was recently sought and is “pending.”

A number of liberal watchdog groups, including Revolving Door Project and Patriotic Millionaires, have been lobbying President Biden to free Littlejohn from prison because they believe his leaks provided a “public service.” They argue he is a “selfless defender of tax fairness” for exposing how Trump and other wealthy Americans, including billionaires Elon Musk, Rupert Murdoch, Michael Bloomberg, and Jeff Bezos, take advantage of tax breaks to reduce their tax bills. Littlejohn leaked the sensitive IRS data to the New York Times and the liberal news site ProPublica, which published them in a series of articles before and after the 2020 election.

Biden would have to make the decision before he leaves office on Jan. 20. The White House did not respond to requests for comment. The pending clemency comes as Biden has issued a record number of controversial pardons and commutations, including ones for his son, Hunter Biden, for tax evasion and firearms violations.
National Legal and Policy Center counsel Paul Kamenar doubts Biden will grant the request, “especially since he already pardoned Hunter on tax charges. This would further undermine his support of the rule of law.” He added that it would also overrule the sentencing meted out by a Democratic judge he appointed.

“DOJ already let him [Littlejohn] off with a slap on the wrist by allowing him to plead guilty to just a single felony count for reportedly leaking thousands of Americans’ tax returns, ” said former Senate Judiciary Committee chief investigative counsel Jason Foster, who co-founded Empower Oversight, a Washington watchdog group. “If President Biden commuted his sentence, it’d be like letting him off the hook all over again.”
Calls to release Littlejohn were led by University of Michigan tax professor Reuven Avi-Yonah. In a letter to the president last month, petitioners argued the leaker should be offered leniency because he disclosed “highly relevant information to the voting public.” Though they acknowledged the privacy concerns of such a breach, they said it nonetheless was important to expose “how little tax” the “super-rich” pay.
“Going after Mr. Littlejohn creates the perception that the system protects the interests of the super-rich taxpayers whose returns he leaked,” they rationalized in their four-page letter to Biden. They added that his five-year sentence was “particularly harsh.”

Disclosing tax returns is a crime, and after Littlejohn pleaded guilty to a felony, he was sentenced to the maximum punishment under the law by Democratic judge Ana Reyes, who was appointed to the federal bench by Biden.
Federal records show Avi-Yonah, who has called Littlejohn a “public hero,” is a Democrat who has donated to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. He has advocated for soaking the rich to keep “inequality in check.” Littlejohn has also given to Democrats and was raised in an affluent Democrat household.
The 39-year-old Littlejohn, who goes by “Chaz,” pilfered the trove of private tax returns while working for the IRS as a contractor for Booz Allen Hamilton, a Washington consulting firm with deep ties to Democrats. RealClearInvestigations was the first to report his connection to Booz Allen, which last summer received a lucrative new contract from the IRS in spite of the massive breach.

The IRS recently sent letters to the thousands of victims of Littlejohn’s theft, noting the breach of their confidential tax files was unacceptable but that the full scope of what he disclosed is still unknown. The IRS has already settled one lawsuit filed by billionaire Kenneth Griffin. Other victims are suing Booz Allen for its failure to monitor Littlejohn while he worked at the IRS.
Supporters of Littlejohn, most of whom are anti-Trump voters, have set up a GoFundMe pagethat has raised nearly $60,000 to help pay for his legal defense.
Littlejohn is incarcerated at the federal prison in Marion, Ill. He is pursuing an appeal that could lower his sentence.

This article was originally published by RealClearInvestigations and made available via RealClearWire.

Paul Sperry is an investigative reporter for RealClearInvestigations. He is also a longtime media fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution. Sperry was previously the Washington bureau chief for Investor’s Business Daily, and his work has appeared in the New York Post, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and Houston Chronicle, among other major publications.
For media inquiries, please contact [email protected]. […]

Uncategorized

Brooke Shields Reignites Antidepressant Controversy

Brooke Shields at arrivals for New York Academy of Art”s Tribeca Ball (Photo credit: depositphotos.com)
Republished with permission from AbleChild
During a 2005 interview with then “Today” show host Matt Lauer, actor Tom Cruise claimed that Brooke Shields was “irresponsible” for taking medication for postpartum depression because “it didn’t cure anything.”
Fast forward two decades and Shields, in a new memoir Brooke Shields Is Not Allowed to Get Old, lets the public know that Cruise “eventually” apologized for shaming her explaining that “it wasn’t the world’s best apology, but it’s what he was capable of, and I accepted it.”
Gee, that’s so big of the actress considering that Cruise was accurate in his statements. Shields might not have liked the delivery, but Cruise was right that antidepressants “didn’t cure anything.”

More galling, though, is that Shields continues to get it wrong. Shields says of Cruise’s remarks that “it was so ridiculous to me. It’s not about the moral thing, or the right thing, or the good thing. It’s about who has more power.”

No, Brooke, it is about the “right thing.” It’s about providing accurate information because lives are at stake when someone in a position of power, like yourself, doesn’t provide accurate information and disparages others who do.
For example, not only do antidepressants not cure anything, but the mind-altering drugs also don’t treat any known abnormality. That’s called accurate information. Let’s repeat. Antidepressants do not treat or cure any known abnormality.

The fact that Shields refers to Cruise’s 2005 remarks as “his ridiculous rant” to “advance his own (deluded) agenda,” reveals just how out of touch Shields is and how little the Ivy League graduate knows about the psychiatric drugs she took/takes.
This information isn’t a new revelation. Never in the forty years that SSRI’s have been on the market has any antidepressant treated any abnormality, least of all postpartum depression.
Is Shields still under the impression the antidepressants treat a “chemical imbalance?” Hello? That theory has been utterly and completely debunked in a 2022 paper by Professor Joanna Moncrieff and Dr. Mark Horowitz that revealed that “It is important that people know that the idea that depression results from a “chemical imbalance” is hypothetical.

And we do not understand what temporarily elevating serotonin or other biochemical changes produced by antidepressants do to the brain. We conclude that it is impossible to say that taking SSRI antidepressants is worthwhile, or even completely safe.”
While many physicians have known this for decades, if anyone took the time to really consider the “chemical imbalance theory” they’d quickly realize the nonsense of it.
First, did a doctor conduct a test of the patient’s brain chemicals to identify which chemical was out of balance? No. Why? There is no test known to man to measure anyone’s brain chemicals. Moreover, even if there was a test, who decides what chemical level is accurate and when and how does one deduce that the chemical level is correct?

And let’s also be clear about Cruise’s remarks. The Mission Impossible actor said, “there is no such thing as a chemical imbalance.”
Twenty years ago, Tom Cruise provided accurate information that may have been helpful to not only Shields but the wider television audience who may have been as misinformed as Shields. Rather than do her own research, which would have led her to the same accurate information as Cruise, the actress decided to take personal offense.
If Shields believes that antidepressants were helpful to getting through postpartum depression that’s great, but to suggest that the antidepressants were “treating” any known abnormality is completely delusional.

The actress could have known this fact by simply doing a brief search of whichever antidepressant she was taking, and it would have provided the information that she lacked.
For example, if Shields had been prescribed Prozac, Eli Lilly, the pharmaceutical company that manufactured the mind-altering drug, advised the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that “the actions of Fluoxetine (Prozac) are presumed to be linked to its inhibition of CNS neuronal uptake of serotonin.” “Presumed?” Eli Lilly didn’t have any definite idea about how the drug worked in the brain and hence they used a very lawyerly word to explain what is believed to be working.

Twenty years later, drug developers still are no closer to understanding why people are depressed or how any of the antidepressants “work” in the brain.

Plus, Shields also fails to reflect on the known very real serious adverse events associated with antidepressants, including mania, psychosis, suicidality, abnormal behavior, anxiety, aggression, confusion, depression, depersonalization, hallucination, paranoia, and abnormal dreams, and thinking to name a few.
If Shields felt the need to start yapping about Tom Cruise again, it might have been nice to have her apologize to the actor for accusing him of providing misinformation twenty years ago.
But it is no longer acceptable for the actress to continue to insinuate that Cruise was even remotely wrong in his statements about the now debunked “chemical imbalance.”

Too many people are being harmed by these prescribed mind-altering drugs for someone in Shields position to continue to suggest that a chemical imbalance causes any psychiatric disorder and that any of the antidepressants “treat” a chemical imbalance. It simply is false information.
In fact, in the actress’s new memoir, Shields could have corrected the record but, rather, the actress crows that Cruise apologized to her. Well, the record has been corrected. The actress now knows the facts. It probably won’t be “the world’s best apology” but we’ll wait for it.
Please consider joining AbleChild at its Awards Dinner – see info below:

Be the Voice for the Voiceless
Every dollar you give is a powerful statement, a resounding declaration that the struggles of these families will no longer be ignored. Your generosity today will echo through generations, ensuring that the rights and well-being of children are fiercely guarded. Don’t let another family navigate this journey alone. Donate now and join us in creating a world where every child’s mind is nurtured, respected, and given the opportunity to thrive. As a 501(c)3 organization, your donation to AbleChild is not only an investment in the well-being of vulnerable children but also a tax-deductible contribution to a cause that transcends individual lives. […]

Uncategorized

Canada Adrift

Sydney Phoenix / U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Wikimedia Commons
This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire
By Andrew LathamReal Clear Wire
How Trudeau Neglected National Security and Sovereignty
Justin Trudeau’s tenure as Canada’s prime minister has been marked by a mix of lofty rhetoric and lackluster follow-through, but nowhere is this more evident than in the realm of national defense and security. While Trudeau has made some noteworthy pronouncements about Canada’s role in the world, his actual record reveals a profound failure to safeguard Canadian sovereignty and support the Canadian Armed Forces. When it comes to protecting Canada’s strategic interests, Trudeau’s leadership has proven to be among the weakest of any modern prime minister.

Trudeau’s failures are perhaps most glaring in the area of defense spending and procurement. Despite years of promises to meet NATO’s target of spending 2% of GDP on defense, Canada remains far below this benchmark, consistently ranking among the lowest contributors in the alliance. This is not merely a failure to honor international commitments; it is a failure to invest in the fundamental capabilities required to protect Canada itself. The government’s inability to replace aging equipment, from fighter jets to naval vessels, has left the Canadian Armed Forces struggling to fulfill even its most basic responsibilities. For a country with vast territorial waters, an increasingly contested Arctic, and a close partnership with the United States, this neglect is indefensible.

The Arctic, in particular, stands as a glaring symbol of Trudeau’s shortcomings. The region is critical to Canada’s sovereignty and security, yet the government has done little to assert control over this strategically vital area. As Russia and China ramp up their presence in the Arctic, Canada’s capabilities remain woefully inadequate. Promises of bolstered Arctic patrols and modernized icebreakers have largely gone unfulfilled, leaving Canada vulnerable in a region that is rapidly becoming a focal point of great-power competition. If sovereignty is defined by the ability to project power and influence within one’s own borders, then Canada under Trudeau has fallen short.
Equally troubling is the state of Canada’s broader strategic posture. Trudeau’s government has often appeared more concerned with projecting an image of Canada as a moral beacon than with addressing hard security realities. This has led to a pattern of overpromising and underdelivering. While Trudeau’s government released a defense policy in 2017 that committed to “Strong, Secure, Engaged,” the actual implementation of this strategy has been halting at best. The policy called for significant investments in personnel, equipment, and capabilities, yet the funding and political will to follow through have been sorely lacking. The result is a Canadian military that is overstretched, under-resourced, and increasingly irrelevant on the global stage.

It is important to acknowledge that Trudeau has not been an unmitigated disaster in every aspect of national security. His government has articulated some important principles regarding Canada’s role in a changing international order. Notably, there has been a recognition that Canada must adapt to the realities of great-power competition and the decline of American hegemony. This has been evident in Trudeau’s rhetorical emphasis on multilateralism and a “rules-based international order,” as well as in the acknowledgment of emerging threats in the Indo-Pacific and Arctic. These pronouncements suggest a certain clarity of vision about Canada’s place in the world, even if that vision has not translated into effective action.
Trudeau’s record also includes some positive steps in aligning Canada’s grand strategy with its geography. There has been a gradual shift in focus toward the North Pacific and Arctic, which aligns with Canada’s natural strategic priorities. However, these efforts have been more symbolic than substantive. Canada’s contributions to the Pacific theater remain marginal, and the absence of a robust Arctic strategy continues to undermine national security. This disconnect between strategy and execution has been a hallmark of Trudeau’s leadership on defense issues.
The most damning critique of Trudeau’s approach to national security lies in his failure to understand that defense and sovereignty are not optional luxuries but core responsibilities of the state. This misunderstanding is evident in the government’s repeated delays and mismanagement of defense procurement projects. From the botched effort to replace the CF-18 fighter jets to the prolonged and still-unresolved plans for new naval vessels, Trudeau’s government has shown a stunning lack of urgency. These delays not only weaken Canada’s military capabilities but also signal to allies and adversaries alike that Canada is not serious about its defense commitments.

Moreover, the Trudeau government’s reluctance to make hard choices on defense has undermined Canada’s credibility as a partner. This is particularly evident in the context of NATO, where Canada’s failure to meet spending commitments has become a source of frustration for allies. At a time when the alliance is facing renewed threats from Russia and an increasingly assertive China, Canada’s underperformance is more than an embarrassment; it is a liability. The same can be said for Canada’s defense relationship with the United States. As Washington grows increasingly focused on great-power competition, Canada risks being seen as a weak link in the North American defense partnership.
Trudeau’s defenders might argue that his government has faced significant constraints, from fiscal pressures to political opposition, which have made it difficult to prioritize defense. While there is some truth to this, it does not excuse the lack of vision and execution that have characterized his approach. Other leaders have faced similar challenges and risen to the occasion; Trudeau has not. His failure to address Canada’s defense and security needs is not a matter of circumstance but of choice.
In assessing Trudeau’s legacy, it is tempting to focus on his strengths as a communicator and his ability to project Canada as a progressive, outward-looking nation. Yet these qualities cannot obscure the reality that his record on national defense and security has been deeply flawed. For all his talk of Canada’s role as a global leader, Trudeau has neglected the fundamental building blocks of sovereignty and security. His tenure has left Canada less prepared, less capable, and less credible in a world that is growing more dangerous by the day.

Justin Trudeau’s time as prime minister will likely be remembered for many things, but his handling of national defense and security will not be among his proudest achievements. While he has occasionally articulated a compelling vision for Canada’s place in the world, his government has consistently failed to back that vision with the necessary resources and resolve. In this sense, Trudeau has not only failed to deliver on his promises but also failed the fundamental test of leadership: the ability to protect and advance the national interest.

Andrew Latham, Ph.D., a tenured professor at Macalester College in Saint Paul, Minnesota. He is also a Senior Washington Fellow with the Institute for Peace and Diplomacy in Ottawa and a non-resident fellow with DefensePriorities, a think tank in Washington, DC.
This article was originally published by RealClearDefense and made available via RealClearWire. […]

Uncategorized

‘Gender Secrecy Regime’: Parents Battle Trans Brainwashing in Schools

This article originally appeared on WND.com
‘Parents are precluded from exercising their religious obligations to raise and care for their child at a time when it may be highly significant.’
A lawsuit over whether parents are allowed to know about what their schools are telling their children is going to continue.
Officials with the Thomas More Society say that U.S.. District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez in California has denied in a court order all Motions to Dismiss in Mirabelli v. Olson.

That lawsuit challenges “Parental Exclusion Policies” adopted by schools that specifically prevent parents form knowing about some of their own children’s activities in school.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta and members of the California Department of Education and the Escondido Union School District had demanded the case be thrown out.
They had claimed that their rules limiting what parents are allowed to know was “just a suggestion” so there was nobody really harmed by their agenda.

However, Benitez found that the parents “enjoy standing and have stated plausible claims upon which relief can be granted.”
“The Supreme Court has long recognized that parents hold a federal constitutional Due Process right to direct the heath care and education of their children,” the judge said.
“The Defendants stand on unprecedented and more recently created state law child rights to privacy and to be free from gender discrimination.”

Paul Jonna, special counsel with the society, explained, “We are incredibly pleased that the Court has denied all attempts to throw out our landmark challenge to California’s parental exclusion and gender secrecy regime. Judge Benitez’s order rightly highlights the sacrosanct importance of parents’ rights in our constitutional order, and the First Amendment protections afforded to parents and teachers.”
The judge said, “By concealing a child’s gender health issues from the parents, parents are precluded from exercising their religious obligations to raise and care for their child at a time when it may be highly significant. [T]he teachers make out a plausible claim for relief under the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause.”
The judge added, “This Court concludes that, in a collision of rights as between parents and child, the long-recognized federal constitutional rights of parents must eclipse the state rights of the child.

Guest by post by Bob Unruh
Copyright 2025 WND News Center […]

Uncategorized

Exclusive: David Clements Interviews Tina Peters at the Laramer County Jail – “When You’re Locked Up for Doing the Right Thing, It’s Hard” (VIDEO)

Guest post by Joe Hoft at JoeHoft.com – republished with permission.

Attorney David Clements interviewed Tina Peters on Friday at the Larimer County Jail in Colorado.
In October Tina Peters, a Gold Star Mother who lost son, was sentenced by a partisan Colorado judge to 9 years in prison for preserving election results that she was legally told to preserve when state officials demanded that the voting machines be scrubbed of results following the 2020 election. Tina is 69 and will be 78 when she is released from prison in Colorado.
Earlier this week Professor David Clements interviewed Tina Peters at the Larimer County Jail. Tina is having a rough time. Please pray that Donald Trump pardons this innocent woman.
Here is that interview with transcript below:

David Clements
All right, everyone. I’m in the Laramie County Jail with hero, Tina Peters, and I just wanted to give her a chance to check in with you all and tell you all what’s on her heart. Tina, just give us an update.
Tina Peters
Well, the only thing that keeps me going are you guys out there. It’s been some pretty dark days, I’ll be honest. I never, ever thought, and I’m sure you out there have never thought about being locked up in a small cell. Especially, a lot of these women here, probably all of them, have done something to deserve being here, either drugs or other offenses. But when you’re locked up and you’re innocent and you’re locked up for doing the right thing, it’s hard. It’s really hard because I don’t have anything in common with the people here, and you have no freedom. You really don’t have any freedom. We’re usually locked down most of the day. When we get out, it’s to have lunch. Our meals consist of… I finally got on a kosher diet because I knew I could get something fresh.
David Clements
Tell us a little bit about what a typical day looks like.

Tina Peters
Okay. All right. Well, 5:30 in the morning, they wake us up. The lights run 24/7, in our cells. But the bright lights, the brightest lights, come on at 5:30 in the morning, and then they stay on until 10:00 at night. We get out about that time to go have breakfast. My breakfast consists of an apple and peanut butter, which I’m grateful because that’s on a kosher diet. For lunch, I’m lucky if I get the Sliced carrots, raw carrots, and they give me cookies. The rest of the stuff I can’t eat. Then for dinner, we always get a sandwich. It’s either bologna and cheese, which I don’t eat bologna, or peanut butter and jelly, and it’s not the jelly that you get at home. Everything is very basic. Then the language these women use, the things they talk about. A lot of these women have been… I was sitting with a girl at breakfast today, and her mom, 43 years old, has always been an addict, and she’s in here. Her brother was in here. It’s just systemic. It just goes through families.
David Clements
You mentioned that behind you is the entertainment. The library.
Tina Peters
That’s the library. This is it. There’s There’s a few books that are not the type of books that most of us would want to read. Then the other two levels are Bibles, which you only need one Bible. You’re only allowed three books. You can’t receive books from outside. They say you can use your tablet. The tablet is an Android device that is not like an iPad at all. You don’t have internet, no internet access at all. I don’t even know what’s going on in the news, except for what what you can tell me.

David Clements
Then I want to ask you much of what you’ve been through, even though you’ve got so many tireless advocates that care about you, I shared with you the The Joe Hoft story where your mom reached out and asked that some of the articles that had been circulating to be sent to Trump. I just got back from DC for the Press Conference for the J6ers, you’ve been integrated into the J6 community because everything that you’re fighting for is a little of the same stuff that they have. But you’ve been convicted of state charges. We’re all praying for a miracle, not quite knowing how this is going to unfold. But if you could send a message to Donald Trump, whether it’s your case or all the J6 cases, what would your wishes be?
Tina Peters
Well, as you know, every Friday in my show, I was dedicated to the J6 community. Micki Witthoeft , Ashli Babbitt’s mom, was a dear friend as well as the other ladies with her Freedom Corner. I’ve been there, and it’s a really special place. These people are standing out there. They were standing out there just this past week and every night for over 700 days in snow, in the rain, … faithfully. It’s people like them that are standing up for people like us. That really means a lot.
But I would say to President Trump, we’re standing up for you. The election records that I preserved I’m the only one in Colorado, and maybe across the United States, that preserved the 2020 election records. All the rest of them in this state were erased, if not for doing the images, the before and after image before the trust to build. I don’t even like to call it that. We would not have those records. President Trump, there’s more clerks, there’s more election officials that want to stand up for transparent, free, fair elections. It needs to be fixed. We’re wishing. We were risking it all to make sure that every single person in this, not just the United States, but around the world… because we know that Venezuela was affected by this Brazil, many, many nations.

Tina Peters
This is going on in Serbia. The judge would not allow us to put in the emails from Serbia linking me and what was going on with what we found. I would encourage President Trump that you have someone review the Mesa County reports one, two, and three, if you haven’t already. We need to implement change before the midterms, because governors will be elected during that time and other legislators…
David Clements
Just the American people, MAGA has been seen by you, but right now, I just want to let you know that we we aren’t forgetting about you. We do love you. If you had a message to send to just the Americans out there, what would you tell them right now?
Tina Peters
You’re the wind under my wings. I had somebody ask me what I do in my cell. Really, it’s just the thoughts of getting out. You can’t acclimate to this life. You can never give up. You can never give in. You can never back down. I would say, stand up, ask God what it is that he’s called you to do in this lifetime and be about doing it and stand for something. I appreciate you all so much. I’m very grateful. I’m grateful for the yellow ribbon campaign, for the banners, for the letters, and for reaching out to President Trump. He is a great President, always has been, and we need to protect and make sure that our vote counts. Thank you all so much. I’m so grateful.
Here is the video:

Ask God what it is that he’s called you to do. […]

Uncategorized

Biden’s DEI Obsession Leaves Trump a Diplomatic Disaster to Fix in Paraguay

Biden’s DEI Obsession Leaves President Trump with a Diplomatic Disaster to Fix
Ambassador Marc Ostfield
The Biden administration’s obsession with DEI has left a trail of cultural and diplomatic disasters, setting the stage for a nightmare scenario that Donald Trump must confront when he returns to the White House in less than two weeks. One glaring example is the appointment of Ambassador Marc Ostfield to Paraguay, a DEI-driven choice who prioritized identity over competence, leaving U.S.-Paraguay relations in disarray.
Paraguay, a small but strategically significant nation in South America, has long maintained strong ties with the United States. This relationship stretches back to the nineteenth century, when President Rutherford B. Hayes arbitrated a boundary dispute between Paraguay and Argentina, ruling in Paraguay’s favor. In recognition of this historic decision, Paraguay named a department after Hayes, cementing his legacy in the nation’s history. This foundational bond between the two countries has made Paraguay a key partner for the U.S. in promoting regional stability and economic cooperation.
However, the Biden administration’s neglect of this vital ally has weakened those ties. The appointment of Marc Ostfield as U.S. ambassador in March 2022 was heralded as a milestone for diversity, as Ostfield is openly LGBT. While this fit neatly into the administration’s DEI priorities, it did little to address the practical realities of U.S.-Paraguay relations. Ostfield’s tenure was marred by missteps, including a failure to maintain strong diplomatic ties and mismanagement of growing tensions with Paraguayan leaders.

In August 2024, the Paraguayan government effectively ordered Ostfield to leave following U.S. sanctions on a tobacco company linked to former Paraguayan President Horacio Cartes. These sanctions, while aimed at combating corruption, were perceived as heavy-handed interference, further straining relations. Adding to the confusion, it remains unclear if Ostfield has actually departed Paraguay. This uncertainty exemplifies the instability left by Biden’s foreign policy and highlights the challenges awaiting Trump as he works to restore order.

Paraguay is far more important than it may appear at first glance. Strategically located in the heart of South America, it serves as a critical hub for regional trade and energy. The Itaipu Dam, one of the largest hydroelectric projects in the world, supplies energy to Brazil and Argentina, making Paraguay a linchpin of the continent’s energy infrastructure. Additionally, its agricultural output, particularly in soybeans and beef, plays a vital role in global food supply chains.
Under Biden, aid programs have been cut, and diplomatic engagement has waned, leaving Paraguay vulnerable to outside influence. While the U.S. has traditionally been a trusted partner, the mishandling of relations under Biden has created a vacuum that adversarial nations are eager to exploit. Rebuilding this trust and stabilizing the relationship will now fall to Trump, who inherits a fractured landscape both at home and abroad.

The failure of Biden’s DEI-driven appointment strategy is not limited to Paraguay. It reflects a broader pattern of prioritizing identity politics over competence, with real-world consequences. Paraguay stands as a case study of how these policies can weaken alliances and undermine U.S. interests on the global stage. Trump faces the monumental task of repairing this damage, ensuring that American diplomacy is once again focused on strategy and substance rather than ideological priorities.
Steve Grillon is a businessman living in Miami with extensive diplomatic experience and knowledge of South America Sent from my iPad […]