Sen. Lindsey Graham says he will fight Fulton County subpoena  Clyde Hughes - 49m ago

July 6 (UPI) -- Sen Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said through his attorney this week he will challenge a subpoena to appear in front of a Fulton County grand jury in connection with efforts by former President Donald Trump to overturn the presidential voting results there during the 2020 election.

© Ting Shen/UPISen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., listens during a Senate Appropriations Subcommitthearing on May 25, 2022. He said Wednesday through his attorneys he will fight a subpoena issued by the Fulton County grand jury in Georgia. File Photo by Ting Shen/UPI

Graham had questioned Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger about certain absentee ballots after the 2020 presidential election while former President Donald Trump charged that he lost the state during to fraud and wanted the results overturned.

The Fulton County grand jury subpoenaed Graham requesting he testify about those conversations. But the senator's attorneys, Bart Daniel and Matt Austin, wrote a joint letter charging Graham did nothing wrong and should not be compelled to testify.

"Senator Graham plans to go to court, challenge the subpoena, and expects to prevail," Daniel and Austin said, according to CNN.

"This is all politics. Fulton County is engaged in a fishing expedition and working in concert with the January 6 Committee in Washington. Any information from an interview or deposition with Senator Graham would immediately be shared with the January 6 Committee."

Graham's lawyers said at the time Graham was chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee and was "well within his right to discuss with state officials the processes and procedures around administering elections."

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis on Wednesday rejected Graham's argument that politics have anything to do with the grand jury investigation.

"[Graham] doesn't understand the seriousness of what we're doing," Willis told NBC News.  

YEA RIGHT ! ..I don'r think they realize the seriousness of what they're doing   Especially giving this article to NBC  

Check the date on this article.. as we are paying exorbitant prices for gasoline, the demoRat administration was sending OUR petroleum to EUROPE

More Oil From U.S.Strategic Petroleum Reserve Heads To Europe By Tsvetana Paraskova - May 12, 2022,

Europe is set to receive more cargoes of U.S. crude from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) as the European Union discusses an oil embargo on Russia and looks to reduce reliance on Russian oil, Bloomberg reported on Thursday, citing tanker-tracking data and sources with knowledge of the shipments.

In recent weeks, Europe has increased purchases of U.S. crude as it considers the details of a ban on imports of Russian crude and refined products.

A week after the European Commission officially proposed a full ban on Russian crude and oil product imports by the end of the year, the EU is still scrambling to find a common position, trying to persuade Hungary and some other central European countries to drop their opposition to an embargo.

“We made progress, but further work is needed,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said late on Monday following a meeting with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban.

Meanwhile, U.S. crude is flowing to Europe at rates never seen before.

Two cargoes of high-sulfur crude from the U.S. strategic reserve are headed to Italy and the Netherlands, according to tanker-tracking data and sources briefed by Bloomberg. The tankers have loaded crude at terminals connected to storage caverns of the SPR in Texas and Louisiana.

According to Matt Smith, oil analyst at commodity data firm Kpler, these would not be the last crude exports out of the U.S. SPR to Europe.

In April, some 1.6 million barrels of U.S. crude from the strategic reserve made its way to Europe, Smith told Bloomberg, adding: “That’s the largest amount of SPR crude that’s been shipped to the continent based on historical monthly data.”

READ HERE

Report: Cassidy Hutchinson Texts Leak - Make Star Witness Look Like Fraud  By Warner Todd Huston  July 5, 2022 

It has been revealed that Cassidy Hutchinson, the Democrat’s surprise star witness at its January 6 show trials, was singing a different tune months ago in text messages where she called the left-wing kangaroo court a bunch of “BS.”

Hutchinson, a former aide to President Donald Trump’s White House chief of staff Mark Meadows in 2020, was brought in for what the Democrats and their compliant media operatives called “bombshell” testimony, though most of what she said was quickly debunked as fake news. After it was all said and done, it was more fizzle than bombs, but the left played it as big, big news.

Indeed, after her testimony, the cameras caught a telling moment when embattled Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney was seen throwing her arms around Hutchinson and offering great thanks for her quickly discredited claims.

TWEET

Greta Van Susteren  @greta·Follow

                     If questioner (Cheney) wants to appear fair to jury (American people), it probably is not a good idea to get caught on camera hugging the witness…see below from @Politico;already people have very strong feelings - both ways - about this hearing and pics like this don’t help;  

Still, it seems that Hutchinson had a whole different attitude about the Democrats’ Jan. 6 hearings back in February when she was served a subpoena by the committee to appear before them.

According to conservative activist Matt Schlapp, who heads up the long-time conservative convention CPAC, Hutchinson was trying to contact them for help defending herself before the Democrat onslaught, and even called the Jan 6 committee a bunch of “BS.”

On June 28, Schlapp blasted Hutchinson for “relaying WH hallway gossip as fact,” and revealed that she was seeking help ahead of her testimony.

TWEET

Matt Schlapp

@mschlapp

Ms. Hutchinson approached @CPAC for help through our First Amendment Fund which has helped J6 political victims defend themselves. I am pleased we did not assist her performance today. Relaying WH hallway gossip as fact does not qualify as first person testimony

Jody Hunt@realJodyHunt  Jun 28

Ms. Hutchinson testified, under oath, and recounted what she was told. Those with knowledge of the episode also should testify under oath. twitter.com/PeterAlexander…

8:40 PM · Jun 28, 2022·Twitter for iPhone

According to the Daily Caller, Hutchinson seemed keen to find some way of avoiding her appearance before the committee.

Hutchinson reportedly contacted one of Schlapp’s associates looking for a way to get the American Conservative Union or the First Amendment Fund POC to come to her aid.

“Do you happen to know a First Amendment fund POC I could reach out to? I was subpoenaed in early Nov., but the committee waited to serve me until last week (after Ben’s deposition),” Hutchinson texted the Caller reported.

“I had to accept service because the U.S. Marshalls came to my apartment last Wednesday, but I haven’t made contact with the Committee. I’m just on a tight timeline and just trying to figure out what my options are to deal with this BS,” Hutchinson continued.

Hutchinson also said that she didn’t want the situation to get “unnecessarily elevated.”

This series of communications makes one wonder what changed between calling the hearings “BS” and hoping that it all stays under the radar to suddenly becoming an out, loud and proud Democrat “bombshell” witness? What was Hutchinson offered to make such a splash during a “surprise” scheduling?

During her testimony, Hutchinson made several key claims, none of which ring true.

In one case, she claimed that Donald Trump actually assaulted members of the Secret Service and tried to take control of the presidential SUV on Jan. 6 with the intention of driving to the Capitol Building to join the rioting there.

Hutchinson testified that Tony Ornato, former Trump Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, told this story to her in the days after the riot.

But since then, Ornato says that he was nowhere near Trump and the SUV and that he never heard such a story before — and he certainly never told any such tale to Hutchinson.

Further, both Bobby Engel, the top agent on Trump’s Secret Service detail — who was actually in the SUV — and Ornato had already testified before the committee and no such story was revealed during their separate comments.

In another instance of her appearance, Hutchinson also claimed that she wrote a memo from Mark Meadows that had been placed in evidence before the committee. “That’s a note that I wrote at the direction of the chief of staff on Jan. 6, likely around 3 o’clock,” she said of the document.

However, the committee had already determined the memo had not been written by Hutchinson, and no one noted that during her false testimony.

A spokesperson for Herschmann told ABC News on Tuesday evening, “The handwritten note that Cassidy Hutchinson testified was written by her was in fact written by Eric Herschmann on Jan. 6, 2021. All sources with direct knowledge and law enforcement have and will confirm that it was written by Mr. Herschmann,” the representative said.

With this many contradictions on key points, it’s no wonder that the Democrats on the committee refused to allow any cross-examination of Hutchinson when she appeared before them.

Now, with this further story of her negative feelings about the committee months before she appeared before them, it all seems even more shaky and unreliable.

Biden and Democrat Governors Conspire to Kill More Babies  George Rasley, CHQ Editor 4 days ago

Leftwing news outlet Axios reports President Joe Biden will meet today with the governors of states where abortions will remain legal after the authority to regulate abortion was properly returned to the states by the Supreme Court's recent Dobbs decision.

In the wake of Dobbs, the Biden administration announced a plan to counter the ruling. It aims to "increase access" to FDA-approved abortion pills, among other steps, reported Axios' Oriana Gonzalez and Mike Allen.

Abortion will immediately become illegal in at least 13 states after the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, and more will likely quickly follow suit, Axios' Oriana Gonzalez reports. Lawmakers in Democrat-controlled states responded to Dobbs by quickly approving measures to allow women and doctors to continue to kill babies. Some are also advancing legislation to expand abortion access to prepare for an anticipated influx of out-of-state patients who are seeking to kill their baby.

California and Vermont are going even further by making abortion access a constitutional right. Making baby-killing a constitutional right in the state is the Democrats’ preferred alternative since state constitutions are "by design" "very hard to amend," Jessica Arons, senior policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, told Axios.

In that effort the Far Left is consciously trying to put abortion beyond the reach of the electorate. "You can pass a bill that codifies abortion rights ... but if a future election changes the political makeup of the legislature and who's in the governor's office, then they could repeal the statute that has codified abortion rights."

Additionally, Arons explained that courts can "invalidate" a state law, but not a constitutional amendment because they are "bound" by that document.

In Alaska, Florida, Kansas, Montana and New Mexico, abortion access is protected by state Supreme Court precedent, according to the Center for Reproductive Rights. But those precedents may fall in the next few months as Florida and other states enact reasonable restrictions, such as Florida’s 15-week limit.

READ MORE

In the following post, I may not agree with the Patrriot Front Members actions BUT...Why are there restrictions on SOME ETHNIC groups but not on OTHER, MORE VIOLENT ones ????

Where were the OBJECTIONS when "ANTIFA" and "BLM" marched through cities across the country, destroying and burning property, LOOTING stores and businesses and assaulting people, where were all these voices then ??

White supremacist Members of the "Patriot Front" march in Boston prompts calls for action from Black leaders  ABC News  Yesterday

Black community leaders in Boston are marking the Fourth of July by responding to the white supremacists who marched through Boston two days ago.

Members of the group, identified by police as Patriot Front, marched through the city on Saturday with concealed faces, wearing shirts that read "Reclaim America."

The Anti-Defamation League, which tracks hate groups nationwide, has called Patriot Front a white supremacist group that spreads racism, antisemitism, and other forms of hate online. The ADL says the group is focused on "preserving America's identity as a European-American one."

Police say a Black man reported that he was assaulted during the march, after the man said he was trying to record the group on his cellphone. In the police report sent to ABC News by Boston Police Department officials, the man said Patriot Front members with shields began to surround and shove him after he started to record.

© Obtained By ReutersThomas Rousseau, founder and leader of white nationalist group Patriot Front, along with other supporters march during the Fourth of July holiday weekend in Malden, Mass., July 2, 2022.

When he tried to shove back in order to free himself, he was knocked to the ground, kicked and beaten, the police report said.

The man suffered lacerations to his head, arms and hands, and was treated at a nearby hospital, according to the report. No arrests have been made.

MORE: 31 Patriot Front members arrested near Idaho pride event  But they arrested these men before really knowing WHAT yhey were going to do, unlike ANTIFA and BLM which were let go to do their dirty work even after the groups became VIOLENT !

The man later identified himself as Charles Murrell, an artist and social justice organizer. He spoke Monday at a gathering of Black leaders and urged listeners to attend local events about race, diversity and justice.

"There are ambassadors, artists, and people who care about the city and the image of this city, that have been doing the work, and we are inviting you to come share space with us," Murrell said.

Mawakana Onifade, a friend and mentor of Murrell, said, "We will always stand in the face of the new Klan, there's no mistake about this. When one covers one's face, we know what is behind that."

Local Black leaders called Patriot Front the "children of the KKK."

"We're not surprised. Boston has had a long legacy of racism," said Reverend Kevin Peterson. "In fact, the city was founded on racism. Slaves were imported here. And that legacy continues into 2022."

Leaders are calling on Mayor Michelle Wu to act quickly against the spread of hateful and dangerous ideologies.

"We can't look at this as the new age. This is the old age that needs to be dismantled," said Onifade. "Mayor Wu, what are you going to really do besides the words that we have been reading about. What is the call to action? Where is the accountability?"

Wu has condemned the march, tweeting that the "disgusting hate of white supremacists has no place here."

In a statement, Boston City Councilor Ed Flynn warned about growing white supremacist sentiment in the region.

"It is wholly repugnant to once again read reports and see videos on social media about dozens of Neo Nazis making another brazen public display with their hateful ideology," Flynn wrote. "They have continued to make their presence known, most recently in March at the St. Patrick's Day parade," when Patriot Front members reportedly held up a "Keep Boston Irish" banner.

Wu said the investigation into the latest incident is ongoing and is being spearheaded by the city's Civil Rights Unit, according to Boston ABC affiliate WCVB-TV.

"We're looking into their identities and there already has been some information shared in various parts about the national leaders of this group who were part of this effort, who were in town, were present at the recent events as this group has gone to terrorize other communities as well," Wu said.

cc

The Supreme Court fires broadside against the Constitution  BY HARLAN ULLMAN, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR 07/04/22

In its decisions to strike down the constitutional right to abortion and New
York City’s concealed firearms ban, the Supreme Court has let loose a 21st century volley amid an ongoing political, cultural and social uncivil war not seen since the firing on Fort Sumter in 1861.

These decisions have now created a “doctrine of selective inference” in the court’s interpretation of the law. This raised a judicial double standard that, ironically, will make the underlying reasoning of Dred Scott (1857) and Plessey v. Ferguson (1896) relevant again. And one consequence of returning the legality of abortion to the states is that it may well metastasize into a condition of permanent legal strife.

Proponents and opponents of these decisions should be very worried given the divisive, disruptive and contradictory consequences that will arise from these cases. About abortion and concealed carry, nowhere in the Constitution are abortion or self-defense as a reason for carrying a concealed weapon explicitly stated or enumerated.

Roe v. Wade inferred from the 14th Amendment that abortion was constitutional. By torturing and distorting the Second Amendment beyond the court’s 2008 Heller ruling , it inferred a constitutional right for concealed carry.

The court struck down Roe, asserting there was no inferred right in the Constitution to abortion. But stunningly, the court contradictorily struck down the New York law interpreting the 2nd Amendment as making concealed carry legal. Hence, a doctrine of selective inference in which ideology and politics and not the law seems to take precedence.

Consider one consequence. Suppose a woman living in a state that bans abortion travels to a state where the procedure can be legally performed. According to some state laws, she could be arrested upon returning for violating the relevant statute banning abortion. Or could an arrest warrant be honored if she did not return? How would the court rule in such a case?

This contradiction makes Dred Scott relevant. That case concluded that a slave who was taken or escaped to a free state was still the property of his or her owner and if apprehended must be returned. The same flawed logic seems to apply in 2022.

READ ON

Exclusive: FBI Agents and National Archives Goon Are Harassing 2020 Michigan Trump Electors By Ben Wetmore  Published June 22, 2022  Gateway Pundut 

(RoyalPatriot.com )- On behalf of the January 6th Committee, a “Special Agent” with the National Archives is going door-to-door in Michigan and harassing Trump electors who voted for him in the 2020 election. An elector has been served with a subpoena by the FBI as part of the anti-Trump witch hunt conducted by the January 6th committee. This group continues to harass Trump supporters.

This is most likely a response to the accusations made by Democrats that Trump electors committed “fraud” in 2020 when they presented an alternate slate of electors.

David Stupar is the person who has been calling and threatening electors for Trump in the 2020 election. Agent Stupar of the National Archives is nothing more than a glorified librarian without any significant legal authority.

The persecution and imprisonment of people who have attempted to stand up and challenge the official election narrative has continued even if the mainstream media continues to characterize allegations and proof of fraud in the 2020 election as “the big lie.” Since the government has been unable to persuade more than half of American voters that there has been no voter fraud, it has resorted to one of its preferred strategies to quiet opposition, which is persecution.

There have been reports that a subpoena for one elector has already been delivered to them today by a representative from the National Archives. An invitation to reply was extended to the served voter, Kathy Berden, but she did not respond. Additionally, elector Amy Facchinello was served a subpoena.

In the past, opposing slates of electors have been suggested when the parties are in the process of challenging the results of an election. The most recent time this occurred was in 2000, during the election between Bush and Gore when competing slates of electors were similarly proposed.

The primary issue, which the media chooses to ignore, is the fact that the Constitution requires suggested electors to assemble and be certified at the state Capitol at a particular date and time. The media conveniently ignore this fact. Even if a later investigation found widespread voter fraud and threw doubt on the results, there would be no way to maintain the capacity to cast votes that reflect the actual legal votes cast if there were not enough duly certified electors present at the correct location at the right time.

Allegations of election fraud in 2020 mainly were disregarded by authorities, the courts declined to hold hearings to investigate any proof, and the media ‘debunked’ claims without doing any investigations into them.

The media and their left-leaning allies in prosecutorial power are ignoring a crucial distinction, according to those close to the electors, which is that the electors were being sent to accompany and not replace the Biden electors.

Read More HERE

Conservative HQ

Ginni Thomas Attorney to J6 Committee: There is no story to uncover here.   George Rasley, CHQ Editor  4 days ago

As the testimony of the latest witness to appear before Pelosi’s illegitimate committee “investigating” the events of January 6, 2021 has imploded in a series of demonstrable lies,

an attorney for our friend Virginia “Ginni” Thomas has informed the Committee that “based on my understanding of the facts the Committee has in its possession, I do not believe there is currently a sufficient basis to speak with Mrs. Thomas.”nn

,,mm

In an 8-page rebuttal to the Committee’s letter summoning Mrs. Thomas before the Committee, attorney Mark Paoletta knocked-down the lies and mischaracterizations that the Committee and Democrats have unleashed against the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

Mr. Paoletta was particularly forceful in rebutting the innuendo and mischaracterization Mrs. Thomas’s communications with Trump attorney John Eastman, whom the Committee has attempted to paint as a central figure in its imaginary conspiracy to “overturn” the 2020 election.

Noting that leaks from this Committee have led reporters to write that recently produced “emails” from Mr. Eastman “show that Thomas’s efforts to overturn the election were more extensive than previously known.” Mr. Paoletta bluntly told the Committee, “…as you are aware, Mr. Eastman’s emails show no such thing” and “Not a single document shows any coordination between Mrs. Thomas and Mr. Eastman.”

Attorney Mark Paoletta’s letter to the Committee also destroys the narrative that Ginni Thomas was likewise at the center of some vast conspiracy involving then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.

Mrs. Thomas’s communications with Mr. Meadows are entirely unremarkable, wrote attorney Paoletta. As Chris Hayes of MSNBC put it, “The texts to Mark Meadows felt a little bit like, here’s something I saw on Facebook.” In those messages, Mrs. Thomas expressed her personal views about the recent election, encouraged Mr. Meadows to stand strong, and told him that she was “proud to know” him. She also passed along information that she had received and encouraged him to investigate reports that were circulating in the public domain... none of it was unethical, much less illegal, and none of it suggests that Mrs. Thomas had even the slightest role in the January 6th attack on the Capitol, or even has any information about the attack.

All of these texts were sent in Mrs. Thomas’s personal capacity as a private citizen, concluded Mr. Paoletta. She was not reaching out on behalf of any individual or any organization, and she held no official or unofficial role within the White House or President Trump’s campaign. She was simply texting with a friend. As anti-Trump columnist George Will wrote, “To say that she was ‘strategizing’ with the White House is akin to saying that the guy in the stadium’s upper deck yelling ‘Roll Tide!’ and shouting suggested plays is strategizing with Alabama’s football team.” These texts are simply much ado about nothing.

Finally, Mr. Paoletta did not hold back in pointing out the despicable stream of calumny and invective against Justice Thomas and his wife spewed forth from members of the Committee, especially Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson.

Wrote Mr. Paoletta:

There also does appear to be some animus exhibited by Chairman Bennie Thompson toward Mrs. Thomas’s husband, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Mr. Thompson called Justice Thomas an “Uncle Tom,” for the views Justice Thomas holds, despite those views being in line with the majority of black Americans. Shockingly, Chairman Thompson made these remarks while speaking to The New Nation of Islam, a group that believes, among other things, “that intermarriage or race mixing should be prohibited.” Chairman Thompson later doubled down on his comments and said that Justice Thomas “doesn’t like black people” and “doesn’t like being black.

These statements by the Committee’s Chairman certainly raise alarm bells when the Committee says that it wants to speak with Mrs. Thomas. Other comments from Committee members also raise similar concerns. Congressman Bill Pascrell claimed that Justice Thomas has “poisoned” the High Court by participat[ing] in one of the worst breaches of trust ever seen.”23 And Committee Member Adam Schiff has confirmed that he intends to ask Mrs. Thomas questions far exceeding the Committee’s legislative purpose, such as “whether [the supposed plot to overturn the election] was discussed with Justice Thomas given that he was ruling on cases impacting whether we would get some of this information.” Not only is this far beyond the Committee’s legislative purpose, Mrs. Thomas has already explained that she does not speak with her husband about pending Supreme Court cases.

We don’t expect Pelosi’s illegitimate J6 Committee to accept Ginni Thomas’s response as the final word on the matter of her testifying before the Committee, so conservative friends and admirers of Justice Thomas and his wife should plan on a long summer of standing by them as they are subjected to the next round of harassment.

Here's your demoRat run cities and states......Philly Pa (my city) is the same way..multiple SHOOTINGS just about every day

Major Liberal City Drained by Mass Exodus – Small Businesses Are Quickly Fleeing Crime-Ridden Chicago  

By Adam Casalino|June 30, 2022

In recent years, we’ve heard about the “Great resorting.” Americans are fleeing certain parts of the country for greener pastures.

There appears to be no sign of that stopping. And we are learning many small businesses are fleeing this major blue city, for one big reason.

From Fox News:

A business owner in Chicago, Illinois tells Fox News Digital that skyrocketing crime in the city forced him to quit doing business in town adding to the list of individuals and businesses that have fled Illinois over the past couple of years amid surging crime…

“We would do thousands of jobs a year in the city, but as we got robbed more, my people operating rollers and pavers we got robbed, our equipment would get stolen in broad daylight and there would usually be a gun involved, and it got expensive and it got dangerous,” Rabine told Fox News Digital.

How unbelievable. Crime is getting so bad in Chicago that road workers were being robbed at gunpoint… in broad daylight.

Criminals stole expensive equipment, disrupting work as they robbed these employees.

Gary Rabine, who owned 13 businesses in the state, said enough is enough.

He, along with many other business owners, is leaving Chicago and the state.

This isn’t some odd coincidence. Both the left-leaning Governor of Illinois and the Mayor of Chicago have turned a blind eye to rising crime.

It’s getting so bad that a seemingly endless parade of residents is fleeing even nice parts of the state.

The costs related to all this crime were making jobs twice as expensive. That is unimaginable.

How can any leaders, regardless of party, allow this kind of thing from happening? How can Mayor Lightfoot just sit back and watch criminals get away with robbing law-abiding citizens?

But that is just what Democrats are doing, all over the country. Their “woke” politics are putting hardened criminals ahead of hard-working citizens.

And these leftists refuse to admit such policies are driving people away. There is only so much a person can take before they are forced to leave.

Nobody can blame them. The scary reality is, that wherever Democrats have power in state and local governments, this happens.

Unless serious law-and-order leaders take over, the trend will only continue.

Key Takeaways:

• Numerous small businesses are fleeing Chicago due to rising crime.
• In some cases, criminals are robbing workers in broad daylight.
• The state’s left-wing governor and the city’s mayor are to blame.

The End of Oil & Gasin Biden’s America  Forbidden Knowlege

TRANSCRIPT
America is already suffering a food shortage, which can be felt by rising costs and emptying shelves at the grocery store.

But this is a cakewalk. It's going to get much worse. The writing, as they say is on the wall. Any reasonable person can see that this is all being done deliberately.

Over 10,000 cattle just died and we are told that it was due to 100ºF weather. And in just the past 17 months, nearly 100 disasters have mysteriously befallen the American food industry; dozens of catastrophic fires burning down food processing plants, in multiple cases caused by small aircraft crashing into them, thousands of tons of meat destroyed.

Over 2 million turkeys have been destroyed, over 40 million chickens have been destroyed and with the rising cost of fuel, farmers are unable to harvest their crops and it's only just beginning.

Remember, Joe Biden promised he would shut down oil and gas. And they are making god with their radical promise – except there is no alternative energy plan.

The Biden administration is doing everything they can to shut down all fossil fuel in this country and not only will that stop people from driving, all public transportation, all shipping and all industry will come to a halt. Millions will lose their jobs and hundreds of millions will starve to death.

Whether you like it or not, civilization is dependent upon oil and gas and our government is turning it all off.

We are also suffering a baby formula and what little we do have is being sent to the open southern border for the tens of thousands foreigners being brought in unchecked and flown to already-struggling cities across America.

And after several countries suspended the Moderna vaxxine for adults due to safety concerns, the United States FDA just unanimously voted to inject your children with the deadly shot.

Your government is trying to kill you and if anybody thinks this is hyperbole or fear-mongering, they are not paying attention or they are in shock.

The only solution we are being offered is to vote, even though we have a rigged election system and two parties that work for the same corporate establishment.

Starvation is coming fast and people can only survive a few weeks without food.

And so, what exactly will we do if the so-called "Red Wave" this November fails to turn the tide?

Running Time: 4 mins

The latest video by Greg Reese.

Forbidden Knowledge TV 

Jovan Pulitzer June 27th  Arizona Forensic Testimony

On Monday, Jovan Pulitzer testified about the staggering, preliminary findings of his team's ongoing forensic investigation of the 2020 General Election in Maricopa County, Arizona.

This included a highly-detailed video presentation, which begins at roughly 1 hour and 15 minutes into this full video of Right Side Broadcasting's livestream of the event.

MANIFOLD, HEADSPINNING FRAUD

During his live presentation, he describes how every conceivable form of fraud was deployed; digital, mail, Social Security, mules, dead voters, phantom voters, COVID, etc., etc.

COVID was first reported in the US in January. July 4th was the first holiday where people were told to stay home. By August, 38 states decided to go all-in on mail-in ballots.

But back on March 1st, Runbeck Election Services, a government contractor placed the largest order in history for ballot envelope stuffing machines. This was two weeks before the infamous "Two weeks to flatten the curve" emergency was even declared. Jovan asks, "How did they know?"

Jovan describes the US Postal Service's Mail Cover system, which snaps photographs of the front and back of all pieces of mail sent, storing the images for 6 years for investigational purposes.

He says that the USPS stopped its Mail Cover program on April 1st and image storage was changed from 6 years to 30 days. After Biden was installed, it was turned back on, indicating that this fraud went up to the highest levels of the US Government.

Jovan says, "If I wanted to buy every politician in the country making these decisions, there's about 7,000 of them. And if I made a deal with them, 'I'm going to pay $1 million a year if you look the other way', it's going to cost me $7 billion...so, where's the money and how is it hidden?...We discovered 10,000 people using the exact same Social Security Number...

"See if this one rings true: You take an illegal, you bring 'em in. They sign a piece pf paper promising to pay taxes. What they get is a Social Security Number, so the employers can take out the taxes...

"Here's what they do...they will bring in hundreds of illegals. They will spread them out all over these plants and factories, giving them jobs. They're all using the same Social Security Number. The IRS, unconnected are names from the Social Security Number, now, when you look it up, it just pings to see if there's an employer. If there is, it says it's good, it validates it.

"Why do they do that? Because all of these factories are giving them Social Security Numbers, the Government turns its back on it, as soon as you have a Social Security Number and you go over to Motor Voter, pass the driver's test, you get a driver's license... that's how they pack the rolls.

READ MORE

McEnany: The border is open, but where are MSNBC, CNN?   Fox News

'Outnumbered' panelists debate the issues at the border after nearly 50 migrants were found dead in a truck in Texas. #FoxNews

Tucker Carlson: This is a manufactured disaster  Fox News

Fox News host Tucker Carlson weighs in on the state of the American economy and inflation as he says companies pay for women to travel and get abortions on 'Tucker Carlson Tonight.' #FoxNews #tucker

This is a little DEEP for me but what I got from it is that Vice Pres. Pence DID have the authority to reject Electoral College votes he deemed questionable.

We Need More Lawyers Like Prof. John Eastman  George Rasley, CHQ Editor 4 days ago

Former law professor and outside counsel to President Trump John Eastman is under attack from Democrats and the Far Left for advising then-President Trump on strategies for challenging the Electors certified after the disputed 2020 election, including proposing that the Vice President had the power (if not the responsibility) to reject ballots cast by disputed Electors.

Prof. Eastman’s detractors, including anti-Trump “conservatives,” have alleged that his advice to the then-President amounted to insurrection or sedition and that the respected attorney and constitutional scholar, after being hounded from his teaching position, should be “cancelled” by being disbarred and possibly thrown in jail for offering what they claim is a baseless theory of the Vice President’s powers.

Even the center-right Wall Street Journal endorsed the claim made by former federal appeals judge J. Michael Luttig, who testified that “There was no basis in the Constitution or laws of the United States at all for the theory espoused by Mr. Eastman”; and Greg Jacob, a lawyer for Mr. Pence, who testified that “We examined every single electoral vote count that had happened in Congress since the beginning of the country. . . . No Vice President in 230 years of history had ever claimed to have that kind of authority.”

Let us first dispense with the claim that there is no legal or historical basis for Prof. Eastman’s position that the Vice President’s role in counting the Electoral College votes is not merely ministerial. As Mr. Eastman explained in a letter to the Wall Street Journal:

     The Journal’s reliance on these authorities introduces the distortion intended by the committee. Start with Mr. Jacob. What he is quoted as saying is not true. Here is what he wrote in a Dec. 8, 2020, memo he prepared for the vice president:

“There is some historical evidence that Adams and Jefferson both resolved issues over the validity of electoral votes in their own favor, and in 1857 the President of the Senate (a role filled by Senator John Crittenden, as the Vice Presidency was then vacant) personally overruled an objection to the counting of Wisconsin’s electoral votes, and asserted that it was his responsibility to make the validity determination in the first instance, while suggesting that the House and Senate might thereafter jointly overrule him.”

As for Judge Luttig, he appears to be unfamiliar with the scholarly and historical support of my position. As I have publicly stated many times, it is an “open question” whether or not the vice president has the power to judge the validity of disputed electoral votes. In the case at hand, I advised the vice president that, whether or not he had such a power, he would be foolish to exercise it.

As to the argument that the Constitution grants the vice president this power, to mention a few of the sources I relied on: Edward Foley, director of Election Law at Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law, acknowledged in a 2019 law review article that this argument has a “significant historical pedigree.” In an earlier article, Mr. Foley had noted, along with a coauthor, that “[d]uring the first period, from 1789 to 1821, the power [to count and/or determine the validity of votes] was generally thought vested in the states or the President of the Senate” rather than the two houses of Congress.

University of California, Berkeley, law professor John Yoo and University of St. Thomas law professor Robert Delahunty advanced this same position in an important article published at the American Mind in October 2020. From the other end of the ideological spectrum, Yale Law Professor Bruce Ackerman and George Washington University Law Professor David Fontana advanced a similar position in their 2004 article addressing Thomas Jefferson’s decision to count “obviously defective” electoral votes from Georgia in the 1800 election.

Another scholarly article cites Chancellor Kent’s statement in his influential treatise, Commentaries on American Law: “The Constitution does not expressly declare by whom the votes are to be counted and the result declared. In the case of questionable votes, and a closely contested election, this power may be all-important; and I presume, in the absence of all legislative provision on the subject, that the President of the Senate counts the votes, and determines the result, and that the two houses are present only as spectators, to witness the fairness and accuracy of the transaction, and to act only if no choice be made by the electors.”

Mr. Jacob acknowledged all this in his Dec. 8, 2020. memo: “Some scholars argue that under the text of the Twelfth Amendment, it is the sole responsibility of the Vice President to count electoral votes, and that it is accordingly also the Vice President’s sole responsibility to determine whether or not disputed electoral votes should be counted.”

There was substantial legal scholarship and historical support for the argument long before I advanced it in 2020…

READ ON