1. In precisely what way did he defend the Constitution? Liberals throw two terms around as if they are sacred, but in practice trample all over the principles the words represent. One is Constitution, the other is democracy.
2. How has Trump shown a shared loathing with Putin for democratic norms?
Liberals preach about democratic values ad nauseam, yet they have betrayed the most basic of those values in America--the peaceful transition of power.
The Russian collusion story was and is a hoax, and everyone knows it. If you are naïve, you should at least know that there was no collusion, since Mueller officially concluded that. If you are paying attention, you know it was concocted as the basis and cover for a coup!
Vindman knows “Russian collusion” was an attempted coup, and so does the Atlantic. This new “constructive collusion” narrative is absurd and undemocratic. Vindman claims he is a “defender of the Constitution” on his bio (cringe) but he has bulldozed right through Art. II.
Vindman’s actions subverted the Constitution and America’s most cherished values. Trump is empowered, by virtue of his election to lead this nation as its chief executive, to set foreign policy. The American people chose Trump to use his best judgment. None of us chose Vindman.
The President is the "sole organ of the nation in its external relations," and Vindman's opinion that there are "guardrails" that define what is "acceptable" U.S. policy toward Russia is in direct contradiction to POTUS's Art. II power and accountability to the American public.
The revolt we have seen across the agencies against Trump's election and his administration has revealed a breathtaking arrogance. Entrenched, career bureaucrats have been running the country for decades and they think it is their right to do so. These people run around...
...declaring their loyalty to the Constitution and democratic values, when they have respect for neither. Their ideology lost in 2016, and they have been assaulting the will of the people and our constitutional system of self-government ever since.
So, to take back our country, we not only have to re-elect DJT, we have to root out the scores of bureaucrats who think their opinions trump the Constitution and who think that they know better than anyone else how this country should run...and that they have the right to run it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
John Eastman has articulated many times the clear argument against birthright citizenship. His argument is straight forward, it rests on history and precedent, and it avoids the absurd result we have today. Here are his basic points: 🧵
The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
The first problem is redundancy. If “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” simply means, as common parlance accepts, that one is subject to the law because of physical presence in the territory, that clause is redundant—"born in the United States” covers that base. An interpretation of a legal text that creates a redundancy is disfavored.
The @dmdiocese (Bishop Joensen) just announced a new policy for the care of those with gender dysphoria. The policy bans the use of preferred pronouns, mandates that lockers/bathrooms use must match biological sex, mandates a dress-code that reflects biological sex, and more.
Although the activists who want to permanently mutilate children are up in arms, the policy does go to some length trying to explain the Church's stance of compassionate care *without* compromising truth and morality.
The policy itself bans the use of preferred pronouns...
The Supreme Court of the State of New York (which is the trial/lowest level of the state court system there) has excellently ruled that the COVID vaccine mandate for public and private employees is arbitrary and capricious.
I think the courts have been too timid generally, but it has been my hope and prayer that as the lies were exposed more to the mainstream, truth would finally get some traction in court. That seems to be the case here. 👏🏻
The court found, among other things, that the vaccine mandate was not just about safety and public health, “it was about compliance.”
If you are Catholic, I encourage you to watch this short film on the necessity of lay involvement in society. It is time for people of faith to get involved more militantly in our communities to save our culture and nation. I also want to stress that in my personal opinion...
...it is the duty of faithful Catholics in this "age of the laity" to hold the Catholic Church itself accountable. We must ask to see our parish school's curriculum, demand that our children are taught the fullness of the faith, and encourage our priests to actually teach the...
...truth from the pulpit on Sundays. You have only to look at the numbers of Catholics who do not know their faith, or attend the many parish Masses where the homily is without substance week after week, to understand that greater vigor is required from the Church itself.
This op-ed in the WSJ today is a real gem. In the wake of the McCarthy audio, the author argues that the "top brass" of the GOP secretly want Trump gone (no, really?), and that they should just come out and speak the truth. But don't get confused. This is not about Trump...
It is us v. them. The author and the "top brass" can't see how successful Trump's policies were, because those policies benefited regular America (the America that globalism is crushing) while endangering "business as usual" in Washington, D.C.
The majority of Republican leadership is globalist. They are weak men and women looking to advance personally, without thought for middle America beyond the need for our votes. T wasn't perfect, but when you see how much the "top brass" privately despise him, understand they...
The @EpochTimes ran a great piece by @bhweingarten this last week explaining how “Trump attorneys” (aka MAGA) are being targeted. The Left wants to destroy good legal counsel for the America First movement.
There is a push to get the ABA to make challenging a “legitimate election” an ethics violation.
This right here is the tactic, but the man quoted is wrong that the “littler fish” are the most vulnerable. It’s the “conservative elite” lawyers who fear the most for their reputations and squirm away from the possibility they’d be mocked or shamed by mainstream society.