President Biden addresses the nation as Russia attacks Ukraine

President Joe Biden will address the nation Thursday after pledging new sanctions to punish Russia for the “unprovoked and unjustified attack” on Ukraine.


'Very bloody, very quickly': Russia invades Ukraine -- new details & analysis

LiveNOW spoke with former intelligence officer Michael Pregent, who says the combat could become "very bloody, very quickly," depending on how Ukraine defends itself.

Ukrainian member of parliament has a message for the American public

Alexey Goncharenko says Ukraine is ready for the fight against Russian invasion and asks the U.S. to put on the toughest sanctions possible

“Transgender” man elected as president of California Republican women’s group! He finally resigned after pressure ignited by MassResistance.

A Trans Woman’s Experiences at the Conservative Movement’s Woodstock – LGBT Bangladesh


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

RINO statewide Chairman of the group had distorted by-laws to expel women who voiced outrage.

Another example of the GOP establishment’s embrace of LGBT radicalism – and the need to fight back.

February 24, 2022
Gina Roberts is a busy man. Besides being the "female" president of a GOP women's group, he was vice-president of the state-wide homosexual group Log Cabin Republicans of California.

One of the biggest divides between conservative Republicans and the establishment RINOs (who run the Party) is over the radical LGBT agenda.

The situation has worsened recently. As we’ve reported (herehere, and here), for years the LGBT movement has dominated CPAC (the so-called Conservative Political Action Conference), where Republican leaders annually go to pontificate. Last year, the Republican National Committee and President Trump formally announced their “Pride Coalition” to fully integrate the LGBT movement into the Republican Party. In November, twenty-one Republican Congressmen co-sponsored the so-called “Fairness Act” which would have embedded the radical LGBT demands in federal law. It’s not just the national GOP. Last year, every Republican State Representative in Massachusetts but one signed a statement that religious beliefs against homosexual behavior are “inappropriate and disturbing” and have no place in the Republican Party.

But at a certain point, the rank and file need to step up and draw the line.

In November 2020, a MassResistance activist in southern California contacted Arthur Schaper, our Organization Director (who lives in the area). She was very upset because the Escondido chapter of the California Federation of Republican Women had just elected a cross-dressing “transgender” man as its next president. She could not believe this was happening! She begged MassResistance to get involved and help overturn this.

Gina Roberts was sworn in as president of the CFRW Escondido chapter by "conservative" Congressman Darrell Issa, as the other RINOS in the group looked on.

Background: California Federation of Republican Women

The California Federation of Republican Women (CFRW) was founded in 1925 to give women a voice in politics and governance at the local, state, and national levels. Women tended to vote Republican after receiving the franchise in 1920 (and in some states, before the 19th Amendment had passed). This was because it was Republicans who had pressed for them to get the vote. The National Federation of Republican Women was formed in 1938. So the institution has a long history. California’s chapter is still one of the largest in the country, having numerous local units throughout the state.

According to the organization’s by-laws, men can only join as associate members. They cannot vote and they cannot become officers of the club.

Cross-dressing man identifies as a Republican “woman”

The man who was elected to be the Escondido chapter president calls himself “Gina” Roberts. He had already been making a name for “herself” by pushing the transgender agenda into the California Republican Party as a “Log Cabin Republican” member, and by getting elected to various local town boards. He received glowing press from the leftist media.

The leftist media ate it up!

Not surprisingly, a few months after his election, the national CPAC convention (in March 2021)  welcomed Roberts (along with well-known “gay” Republican Ric Grenell) with open arms.

Gina's tweet from CPAC.

MassResistance gets to work!

MassResistance was determined to help California’s Republican women halt this insanity.

Arthur began contacting other CFRW units throughout the state. Many of these women are dedicated MassResistance supporters and activists in pro-family battles across California.

Members of the South Bay CFRW group in San Diego filed official letters with their state leadership. Other members informed their club leaders that they would leave the organization if the state and national leaders did not rectify this situation.

CFRW state leaders: In the “trans” tank

Arthur contacted the leaders of the Escondido group to find out why they would allow this. Shockingly, previous club leaders and officers at the time engaged in non-stop gaslighting: “She is a woman. We did elect a woman to be our President,” they told Arthur. Their denial of reality was truly disturbing.

The leadership in some local units, as well as in the state organization, sounded off with the usual excuses: “We have our orders. We cannot do anything about it. We will get sued if we try to prevent him from becoming a member as a woman,” they said.

The CFRW state leadership was particularly adamant that Gina Roberts should continue to lead the Escondido group.

It's not just the CFRW leadership. This is supported by the state GOP. Here is Gina with California State GOP Chairman Jessica Patterson. (Apparently, Patterson has succumbed to the "transgender mass formation psychosis" that's going around.)

But across the country: More outrage!

Arthur reached out to Federation of Republican Women chapters across the country as well, urging them to pressure the National Federation leaders to do something to stop this. The Montana and Idaho chapters, and to some extent Virginia's, were supportive. The Texas chapter was the best. One Texas RFW group reacted to MassResistance’s call by changing their by-laws to include only “biological” women! The national office, however, was not interested in getting involved.

The California backlash grows

As word got out, more and more Republican women became angry. As an American Thinker article noted:

Immediately, MassResistance activists in the club, as well as surrounding CFRW clubs, started sharing and protesting how the organization’s leadership had rejected its own bylaws. They and others wondered why they should elect Republicans with an eye to smaller government, lower taxes, strong military, right-to-life, pro-Second Amendment, adherence to the U.S. Constitution, and all the other GOP talking points if the Republicans are going to vote and act like Democrats?

A MassResistance activist in Orange County who was a local CFRW member was furious. She began an email campaign, writing to other CFRW members across the state. She sounded the alarm that men were taking over women’s Republican positions. And she castigated the “woke agenda” taking over the California Republican Party.

October 2021: The state CFRW convention

In October 2021, during the statewide CFRW convention, the Orange County MassResistance activist and several others spoke out and even attempted to introduce an emergency amendment. But the leadership took extraordinary steps to silence them. As American Thinker reported:

Some members at the organization’s October 2021 convention in Rancho Mirage pushed back against the CFRW executive board’s unilateral decision that “woman” should be based on identity rather than biology. To that end, they attempted to bring an emergency bylaw amendment to the floor.

Yet each time someone came to the microphone, leadership cut off the mic and angrily told the member that she was out of order. Finally, one woman walked away from the turned-off microphone and yelled into the cavernous conference room about what was happening.

Some members were learning about this issue for the first time. Others had known but thought they were the only ones who felt it was wrong. A few had complained to the executive board and were called transphobic.

Several were annoyed that “conservative” Congressman Darrell Issa went along with the woke parade. “Republicans like Issa are exactly what is wrong with the Republican Party,” claimed one frustrated member adding, “Why should I volunteer my time to elect woke Republicans?”

Two CA chapters leave the organization

All of this only ignited more outrage across the state. Soon after the October convention, the East Valley and San Clemente CFRW chapters – including over two thousand members – voted to break away from their parent organization. (East Valley CFRW is now East Valley Republican Patriots. San Clemente Area CFRW is now East Valley Area Republican Women.) Reportedly, there were several issues roiling those groups, but the transgender issue was the final straw!

Retribution against conservative member!

In retaliation for this MassResistance activist’s efforts to expose the flagrant violation of the organization’s by-laws, Janet Price, the state CWFR president, wrote a letter to the woman’s local chapter, stating that she could no longer be a member of the CWFR local club or of the federated groups as a whole!

Price concocted a series of Orwellian arguments, asserting violations of various bylaws: (1) not “cooperating with the California Republican Party”; (2) “working against the goals of CFRW” and the national group; and (3) violating an ethical ban not to “speak disparagingly in public of any Republican or candidate.” (This absurd ban would keep a member running in a GOP primary from speaking critically of her opponent.)

A few weeks later, her chapter formally kicked her out and sent her a check refunding her dues.

Of course, this only inflamed the situation even more. She continued to write extensively about this, and more CFRW members became angry at their RINO leadership.

Gina Roberts resigns!

These efforts, along with the ongoing reports and complaints from other chapters around the state, clearly made an impact. On February 7, 2022, Gina Roberts finally resigned from the Escondido CFRW chapter. The official reason given for his resignation (as told to us by one of the Escondido officers) was an employment commitment.

Final thoughts

Republican activists across California are grateful to MassResistance for taking on this battle.

Many Republican women were extremely upset when they heard about this ridiculous, unnatural, and lunatic situation. But they felt alone and feared retribution by the often vicious RINO establishment. (It’s a common tactic among totalitarians of all stripes. The “cancel culture” also in exists in the leftist GOP.)

MassResistance made it safe for them to speak their minds – and demand a stop to this outrageous and degrading situation. This may seem to have been a small battle in the larger scheme of things, but it represents something much bigger!

Facebook Twitter Email Print

Please help us continue to do our uncompromising work!

Our successes depend on people like you.

Donate to MassResistance

Your support will make the difference!

Kremlin Invades Ukraine Putin warns the U.S. not to intervene.

Ukraine crisis: Joe Biden warns Russia of ‘severe costs’ of invasion – Ali Tech

Biden speaks with Ukrainian president amid concerns of Russian invasion



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

It’s official. The oft-repeated warning from the Biden administration that a Russian invasion of Ukraine was imminent has come to pass.

On February 21st, Russian President Vladimir Putin sent so-called “peace-keeping” forces across Russia’s border with Ukraine into two eastern Ukrainian provinces, Donetsk and Luhansk, in the Donbas region. These provinces have been controlled by Russian-leaning Ukrainian separatists who have served as Russia’s proxies since 2014. However, to the rest of the world, they are still considered within Ukraine’s internationally recognized borders.

Putin’s initial move in invading Ukraine followed his unilateral recognition of the “independence” of areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres denounced this decree as “a violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine and inconsistent with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.”

But Putin could not care less what the UN Secretary-General or the international community as a whole thinks. In his blistering speech on February 21st, the Russian president claimed that all of Ukraine belongs to Russia and should never have been created as a separate country in the first place.

Early in the morning of February 24th (Ukrainian time), Putin broadened the theater of war in Ukraine. He declared a “special military operation” in the country on the pretext of helping the people of Donbas. It was the equivalent of a declaration of war on all of Ukraine, punctuated by explosions that were heard in Ukraine’s capital, Kyiv, and other Ukrainian cities, in the aftermath of Putin’s “special military operation” order. Missile attacks and ground troop assaults are undoubtedly on the way.

Putin pulled the trigger for a full-scale invasion at about the same time that Secretary-General Guterres pleaded with Putin, during the second emergency session in a week of the UN Security Council, to step back from the brink of war. “I have only one thing to say from the bottom of my heart: President Putin,” the Secretary-General said, “stop your troops from attacking Ukraine. Give peace a chance. Too many people have already died.”

The White House issued a statement Wednesday night condemning Russia’s “unprovoked and unjustified attack on Ukraine” and warning Russia of severe consequences. But this rhetoric is simply more of the same.

Putin has a clear end game in mind:

He wants to take over all of Ukraine and is intent on achieving his objective on his own timetable. And he is very much willing to watch the Russian people suffer as he tries to restore several parts of the former Russian empire.

Biden is merely reactive and playing with a very weak hand.

The U.S. president talked tough before Russia’s invasion, giving the impression that very severe sanctions would be ready to go into force as soon as the first Russian troops and tanks crossed the Ukrainian border. All that Biden did right away, however, was to issue an executive order barring Americans from doing business in the Donetsk and Luhansk areas.

It took hours before a senior Biden administration official even used the word “invasion” to describe what was already underway. At first, the administration tried to downplay Russia’s military move into Ukraine, reminiscent of Biden’s attempt during a January press conference to draw a distinction between a minor “incursion” versus a full-scale “invasion.”

German Chancellor Olaf Sholz took the initiative and suspended certification of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, at least for now. Germany has more to lose economically than the United States in taking that action (although natural gas from Russia is still flowing to Germany through existing pipelines).

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki tweeted that the Biden administration welcomed Germany’s announcement and said that the administration would be “following up” with its own measures. That’s precisely what Biden ended up doing, following Chancellor Sholz’s lead from behind.

When Biden spoke to the country Tuesday afternoon, he announced what he described as the first “tranche” of sanctions. “We’ll continue to escalate sanctions if Russia escalates,” he said.

Biden announced that the United States is imposing “full blocking” on two Russian banks and “comprehensive sanctions” on Russian sovereign debt.

“That means we’ve cut off Russia’s government from Western finance,” Biden said. “It can no longer raise money from the West and cannot trade in its new debt on our markets or European markets either.”

Biden also decided to impose sanctions on several Russian oligarchs and their families.

In addition to the sanctions that Biden announced, he said that he has “authorized additional movements of US forces and equipment, already stationed in Europe to strengthen our Baltic allies: Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.” These countries are currently members of NATO. Ukraine is not. While declaring that the United States has no intention of sending American troops to fight Russia in Ukraine, he said that the U.S. “will defend every inch of NATO territory and abide by the commitments we made to NATO.”

Critics of President Biden’s handling of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine believe that Biden did not go nearly far enough in punishing Putin and his regime economically for initiating Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It took less than 36 hours for Putin to expand his invasion of Ukraine.

Why, for example, didn’t Biden immediately impose any sanctions directly on Putin himself and his family members?

Why didn’t Biden add to the sanctioned Russian banks that he announced on February 22nd another large Russian bank, Sberbank, which has been accused of transferring several million dollars from monies deposited in Ukraine to separatists fighting for Russian occupation? A senior U.S. administration official told reporters that U.S. sanctions against Sberbank could come later if Russia continues with its invasion of Ukraine. Let's see what happens now that Russia has continued with its invasion.

Why didn’t Biden immediately impose export controls to cut off Russia from sophisticated technologies it needs to keep its warplanes flying and its communications systems working? Why didn’t Biden immediately require any firms using U.S. equipment or software in order to make technological products overseas to obtain a U.S. license before shipping them to any Russian companies that support Russia’s military-industrial complex even indirectly? Better yet, why not prohibit such shipments altogether?

Biden tried in his remarks on February 22nd to prepare the American people for the “costs” they will bear “in defending freedom” for Ukraine. He had in mind the impact on energy prices and “the pain the American people are feeling at the gas pump.” But the U.S. president failed to answer two fundamental questions.

Biden has not explained why the American people should sacrifice to preserve the borders of Ukraine when the U.S. president has opened the U.S.-Mexico border to droves of illegal immigrants and dangerous drugs such as fentanyl. Biden has decided to sacrifice Americans’ safety at home in pursuit of his radical pro-illegal immigration policies while asking Americans to accept “costs” in order to safeguard the Ukrainians’ “freedom.” Former President Donald Trump’s America First policies would not have entertained such perverted priorities.

Biden has also not explained why Americans should swallow even higher costs at the gas pump to defend Ukraine’s “freedom” so long as Biden’s war on fossil fuels continues to drive the rise in gas prices. The United States had achieved energy independence on Trump’s watch, which Biden sabotaged with his radical green agenda.

The U.S. president said during his February 22nd remarks that his administration is “using every tool at our disposal to protect American businesses and consumers from rising prices at the pump.” He added, “We’re executing a plan in coordination with major oil-producing consumers and producers toward a collective investment to secure stability and global energy supplies.”

If that were so, why didn’t Biden issue an executive order immediately reinstating the permit to enable completion of the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline?  Why didn’t he offer financial assistance to the pipeline’s Canadian developer to restore the project that it had abandoned because of Biden’s cancellation of the U.S. permit? Shouldn’t that have been part of Biden’s self-proclaimed “collective investment” to secure global energy supplies?

Why didn’t Biden immediately open up federal lands and waters to oil and natural gas exploration and drilling? Just days before Biden’s February 22nd remarks, the Biden administration did the very opposite.

The New York Times reported that the administration “is indefinitely freezing decisions about new federal oil and gas drilling as part of a legal brawl with Republican-led states that could significantly impact President Biden’s plans to tackle climate change.” The administration is insisting on including the “social cost of carbon,” which, according to the Times article, “is designed to underline the potential economic threats from greenhouse gas emissions so they can be compared to the economic benefits from acts like oil drilling.”

After a federal district court judge halted the use of a social cost metric because it would “artificially increase the cost estimates” of oil and gas drilling, the Biden administration decided to delay indefinitely the permitting and leasing for such drilling on federal properties. A spokesperson for the Biden Interior Department explained that her agency “is committed to ensuring its programs account for climate impacts.”

Biden could have easily reversed this decision as part of his response to the Russian invasion. This would have concretely demonstrated his self-proclaimed intent to “limit the pain the American people are feeling at the gas pump.” But the U.S. president chose to stick with the far-left green energy activists rather than help the American people pay for their necessities here and now.

With energy independence, the U.S. would have far more leverage to blunt Russia’s efforts to weaponize its energy resources. Biden has taken that away. According to Global Energy, “Russia producers nearly tripled shipments of oil to the United States in 2021.”

The sanctions imposed so far, and the threat of tougher sanctions to come, are obviously not deterring Putin as he proceeds with his extensive attacks on Ukraine. Putin has China to back up the Russian economy with purchases of Russian oil, technology exports, and financial assistance. Moreover, oil prices remain high while Europe and the U.S. remain dependent on Russian energy resources. Russia’s coffers are filling up with revenues to pay for Putin’s pursuit of his territorial ambitions.

Putin is ready to retaliate against sanctions by shutting off the supply of oil and natural gas from Russia to the U.S. and Europe, upon which they have become so dependent. Putin’s arsenal also includes potential cyberattacks against key U.S. and European infrastructure facilities.

President Biden expects that the American people will bear “costs” in defending Ukraine’s “freedom.” Many Americans are not eager to make such sacrifices, especially after Biden has already managed to impose significant costs on the American people all by himself.

Vandersteel: The World is Being Raped and Pillaged by the Global Elite

Ann Vandersteel, host of Steel Truth Media, joins Alex Newman, senior editor for The New American magazine, to talk about chaos at the border, chaos in Ukraine and the Biden administration's ongoing attack on civilization. She warns that the globalist agenda aims to undermine our electorate by distracting Americans with repeated crises while the southern border goes unguarded, to disastrous effect.​ 🇺🇸 The New American:

Live Update from Ukraine: Traffic jams, no fuel, panic on the streets



Russian forces launch full-scale invasion of Ukraine

Russia has launched an all-out invasion of Ukraine by land, air, and sea, the biggest attack by one state against another in Europe since World War II and confirmation of the worst fears of the West. The attacks began on Thursday after Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a televised address that he had approved a “special military operation”. The move came after Moscow earlier recognized rebel-held territories in Luhansk and Donetsk and said they had asked for its “help”. Russian missiles rained down on Ukrainian cities. Ukraine reported columns of troops pouring across its borders into the eastern Chernihiv, Kharkiv, and Luhansk regions, and landing by sea at the cities of Odesa and Mariupol in the south. Russian troops attacked Ukraine from Belarus, as well as from Russia with Belarusian support. An attack was also being launched from the annexed Crimean Peninsula, Ukraine’s border guard service said.

Ukrainian describes 'chaos' on the ground: 'Nobody knows what to do'

Hatzalah Ukraine CEO Shlomo Rosilio tells 'Fox & Friends' people are 'starting to panic' as he attempts to evacuate residents on buses as Russia invades.


Find me in social media:
Instagram - @olgareznikova

Ukraine under attack by Russia | The latest

Russia has launched a wide-ranging attack on Ukraine, hitting cities and bases with airstrikes or shelling, as civilians piled into trains and cars to flee.

Russia launches full-scale military operation in Ukraine

Explosions were heard near major Ukrainian cities just moments after Vladimir Putin declared the start of a “special military operation” in a televised announcement overnight.

Gen. Jack Keane reveals the risks Putin faces

DR. STEVE TURLEY: The Liberal Globalist Order Has Officially COLLAPSED!!!

Today, March 24th, 2022, liberal globalism officially collapsed. The whole geopolitical project beginning in 1991 with the fall of the Soviet Union and Francis Fukuyama’s neo-con fantasy of the end of history, where he envisioned that the entire world would now turn to a global neoliberal order that has since culminated in an epidemic of wokeness, that vision died last night, and Russian President Vladimir Putin killed it!

Putin is calling the West's bluff: Rep. Meijer

D.C. City Council Bill to Allow Voting by Phones, Other Mobile Devices



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Forget about voting by mail, it is so yesterday. A Washington, D.C., City Council bill would allow people to cast their votes using their smartphones and tablets.

Brooke Pinto, a Democrat, introduced the bill dubbed “Mobile Voting Options for Turnout Equity Amendment Act of 2022,” or Mobile VOTE Act, Friday along with seven colleagues. She believes the initiative would simplify the voting process and enable individuals in “underserved communities” who would likely otherwise sit out the election to participate. 

According to Pinto’s press release,

“Our city and nation have well established values that voting rights are civil rights; enfranchising District residents by making voting easy and accessible for all is fundamentally important in advancing those values,” said Councilmember Pinto. “Despite District efforts to increase voting access, many residents continue to face voting barriers.”

Pinto further lamented that “hundreds of thousands” of eligible District voters don’t vote. While the capital residents showed up at the polls in previously unseen numbers to cast their ballots in the “historic 2020 elections,” they remain unengaged when it comes to the local races, per Pinto. This situation is, not surprisingly, blamed on racism and sexism. According to the councilmember,

Older adults, people with limited English proficiency, and people with disabilities, visual impairment, or limited transit access may have difficulty voting in person. Additionally, caregivers in the District, many of whom are women of color, and individuals who are hospitalized or have other emergencies, may also face barriers to voting.

These categories of voters, Pinto says, have been “historically underserved or excluded from the election process.” Pinto did not specify what are the modern “barriers” that are preventing older people or people of color from casting their ballots in the nation’s capital.

Nonetheless, she insists that “Mobile voting is one essential way to reduce barriers to voting and move the District to the forefront of modernizing elections.”

If passed, the bill would allow any eligible voter to cast an absentee ballot from a smartphone, tablet, or a computer “without having to travel to a polling site or mailbox or to stand in line to vote.” Pinto likened the process to submitting tax forms electronically. After voters submit their votes via mobile devices, the elections board would print and count the ballots. 

Likely foreseeing concerns over the proposed system’s security and privacy, Pinto claimed that it would “build on rapid advancements in cryptography in recent years that would allow voters to verify the system works correctly from end to end by verifying their own ballot and allow the Board of Elections to protect privacy, anonymity, and integrity of digital ballots.”

The bill would also establish an auditing system to report security threats and require the District’s Board of Elections (BOA) to create a system that protects voter data. It would also require personally identifiable information to be kept confidential and permanently deleted after a vote is cast.

The Washington Post reported how the initiative was supported by the representatives of various D.C. communities. Those included the senior pastor at Mount Lebanon Baptist Church, who said that mobile voting would “make voting more accessible for all D.C. residents.”

Tajuan Farmer, legislative chair for the National Federation of the Blind of D.C. Residents said he liked the initiative because he would not have to worry that “a voting location will be accessible or if the screen-reading features on the voting machines will work.”

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) claimed that people of color often encounter difficulty finding time to vote because of their busy work schedule, and praised Pinto’s initiative.

The bill will most likely face opposition over the system’s high susceptibility to hacking, according to DCist. Per the outlet,

“There is currently no internet technology available that allows for the secure transmission of voted ballots while also maintaining voter privacy and ballot verifiability,” wrote Mark Lindeman, an expert on voting security and audits with Verified Voting, a nonpartisan group that focuses on elections and technology, in a recent letter to legislators in Rhode Island considering a bill to allow ballots to be returned over the internet.

Four federal agencies concluded in a May 2020 assessment,

Securing the return of voted ballots via the internet while ensuring ballot integrity and maintaining voter privacy is difficult, if not impossible, at this time.

D.C. has already tried and failed to enhance its voting system with modern-day technology. For example, in August 2020, the elections board suspended use of its “notoriously buggy” and “unreliable” app that allowed voters to register to vote or change their registration.

The outlet points out that Pinto’s initiative follows a push launched last year by venture capitalist and former political operative Bradley Tusk “to make D.C. the first place in the country to formally adopt mobile voting.” Tusk is said to be passionate about mobile voting and heavily invested in at least 20 mobile voting projects. Among other initiatives, Tusk funded mobile-voting pilot programs across seven states — including WashingtonWest Virginia, and Oregon — mostly to support overseas and military voters, per DCist. “But his effort in D.C. would represent the first push to make mobile voting a permanent part of elections for all voters,” stressed the outlet.

The D.C. Council is already at work on a number of voting reforms, including one that would enshrine sending all district voters ballots by mail, and another that would introduce ranked-choice voting. 

The Fickle Nature of Canadian ‘Rights’



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Despite peaceful protest and the absence of any serious crime, the truckers who protested Canada’s draconian COVID-19 mandates were nevertheless subjected to police brutality; arrest and incarceration without just cause; deprivation of property, including their trucks and bank accounts, without due process; and various prohibitions on the right to travel, to work, and to assemble. Those are hallmarks of dictatorship, and the title of dictator is justly now the mantle Justin Trudeau has earned. Americans have always regarded Canada as a parliamentary democracy in which freedom comparable to our own was protected by the rule of law, but, in fact, Canadians have never enjoyed secure protection for their rights.

In 1982, the Canadian Parliament enacted a Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That Charter includes provisions that purport to recognize and protect certain fundamental liberties. For example, Section 2 (“Fundamental Freedoms”) protects “freedom of . . . expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;” “freedom of peaceful assembly;” and “freedom of association.” Moreover, Section 8 purports to protect Canadians from “unreasonable search or seizure” and Section 9 from arbitrary detention or imprisonment. Section 11 purports to ensure that every person charged with an offense has the right to be “presumed innocent until proven guilty.”

Because the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms includes those and other seemingly rights-protective provisions, many Canadians believed they were protected against actions by the prime minister in violation of their rights. Unfortunately for our freedom-loving friends and neighbors to the North, the reality is to the contrary, and that is, in part, due to the fact that Canadians’ rights exist by Act of Parliament, not from a written Constitution in which rights are deemed pre-political and unalienable.

In the very first section of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Parliament reserves to itself the power to impose “such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” In other words, the Canadian Parliament can enact measures that deprive Canadians of their rights based solely on Parliament’s conception of what deprivations are reasonable. To underscore that point, the Charter includes Section 33(1), which grants the power to deprive rights not only to Parliament but also to the legislatures of each Canadian province: “Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or the legislature . . . that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in Section 2 [Fundamental Freedoms] or Sections 7 to 15 of this Charter.”

Related: Are Trudeau’s Actions Under Canada’s Emergencies Act Unconstitutional?

The rights of Canadians are, thus, insecure, capable of being deprived whenever the state, acting through the legislature of a province or the Parliament thinks it appropriate. That is how, through the Emergencies Act, Justin Trudeau has succeeded in becoming a dictator and in transforming Canada into a police state. At root, the Canadian legal scheme has always proceeded on a faulty premise: that rights are not pre-political (do not come from God) but are bestowed by (and thus removable at the whim of) Parliament. What the state giveth, the state may taketh away, as Canadian truckers now know all too well. By contrast, the American polity is based on an opposite presumption which, when honored, proves formidable. Our Declaration of Independence in its second paragraph and our Constitution operate on the foundation that each American is endowed with rights from God at birth. Neither the President nor Congress may unilaterally take those rights away. They are unalienable.

Unlike many Constitutions in the world, the American Constitution does not contain an “emergency” exception (whereby the rights and legal strictures of the Constitution may be removed in response to whatever the executive or legislature deems an appropriate exigent circumstance). We have but one constitutional provision providing for our rights to be temporarily suspended and only in a single exigency. Under Article I, Section 9, Clause 2, the Great Writ of Habeas Corpus (which guarantees each person detained the right to petition a court to compel the government to prove the detention lawful and not indefinite) may not be suspended except “in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

As a constitutional matter, Canadians have no comparable restriction on government power, inviting their Parliament and prime minister whenever so inclined to deprive Canadians of their liberties. Our history reveals that even with recognition of pre-political rights and substantial constitutional limits on the exercise of government power, our federal government has nevertheless succeeded repeatedly in depriving Americans of their rights (e.g., the detention of Japanese Americans during World War II and the Biden Administration mandates compelling vaccination). Indeed, we have our own Emergency Act, which is vaguely worded and invites abusive executive action in transgression of the rights of Americans. Other federal statutory provisions also grant emergency powers to the president that may, from time to time, be abused.

Related: 2 of 3 Democrat Voters Approve of Canadian Fascism

As the American Freedom Convoy heads to the Capitol, we will see whether the Biden Administration will invoke and then stretch the bounds of the Emergency Act and related statutory provisions beyond constitutional limits to enable a police response comparable to that undertaken by the Dictator Trudeau. In the face of some of the most brutal authoritarian moves by Trudeau, which have destroyed individual liberty and the right to dissent from government orthodoxy, President Biden and his Administration have uttered not a single word of criticism, let alone grant asylum to Canadian truckers deprived of their liberty by Trudeau’s thugs. That is because consistent with their own authoritarian moves domestically, President Biden and his advisors find largely unobjectionable the use of government power to suppress views, assemblies, and protests antithetical to their own woke politics and vaccine mandates. We need only look at the number of times President Biden has acted without Congress to impose mandates later deemed unconstitutional by the federal courts to see that Biden has no problem exceeding constitutional limits on executive power.

Unlike in Canada, where the Charter of Rights and Freedoms rests on a fickle foundation, Americans deprived of their First Amendment rights to assembly and speech may yet avail themselves of independent judicial review and a law supreme to executive and legislative action: the Constitution. Our Constitution provides in law a far more robust foundation in defense of individual rights than the Canadian Charter. Whenever government presumes to censor free expression and resort to the police force to deprive us of liberty or property without due process of law, Americans uniquely in all the world may appeal through the courts to the Constitution’s protections, proving once again that the Founding Fathers’ recognition — that our rights come from God and not the state — is indispensable to preserve and protect individual liberty against abuses of political power.

Fox News Correspondent Caves to Woke Gender Theology and Uses Preferred Pronouns of Convicted Child Molester



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Has Bill Melugin at Fox News has lost his marbles? While reporting on a gruesome story in which child rapist James Tubbs (who calls himself “Hannah”) has been caught on tape bragging about the light sentence he got after sexually assaulting a ten-year-old in a bathroom, Fox News correspondent Bill Melugin went out of his way to call Tubbs “she” and “her” multiple times on America’s Newsroom. It’s not only wrong but confusing to the audience. Why would Fox News join the woke gender bullies who demand that everyone gets their preferred pronouns no matter what our eyes tell us or despite whatever heinous crime they’ve committed?

— No, not THAT Megan Fox 🦊 (@MeganFoxWriter) February 22, 2022

Strangely, Melugin did not call Tubbs “she” and “her” on Tucker Carlson’s show, seeming to know the audience wouldn’t appreciate calling the convicted child rapist “she.” So what’s the story? Is Melugin required to use the preferred pronouns of psychopaths, or is it a personal choice?

Don’t audiences have to put up with enough gaslighting from every other news network? How does Melugin justify showing a photo of a biological male predator and telling the audience he’s a she? Melugin isn’t responding to my inquiries.

As for the story, it’s a terrible one and should illustrate why these woke gender demands should never be indulged. Here’s a man who raped a child, and after he was arrested he claimed to be female, thus giving him access to a female juvenile detention center that housed underaged girls who are his preferred victims. And Los Angeles’ stupid woke laws allowed this to happen. Even the far left-wing prosecutor, George Gascón, admits he got played by a scammer. In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, Gascón considered the possibility that Tubbs faked being transgendered. (But it should be noted that the Times still refers to Tubbs as “she.”)

In an interview Monday afternoon, Gascón said he first learned of the recordings Thursday through an email from a Fox News journalist. He described himself as “very, very upset” and disgusted with Tubbs, who he said had taken advantage of his office, by among other things, potentially identifying as transgender in a bid to get more lenient treatment.

Giving Tubbs anything he desires is the wrong move. Justice starts with refusing to call him by female pronouns. Perhaps if more people refused to play these games, Tubbs would not have been able to manipulate the system to such an extent that he is now going to be free without even having to register on the sex offender registry.

Related: WATCH: Matt Walsh Destroys Woke Gender Narrative With One Simple Question

The tapes that Melugin uncovered are a good find and forced the prosecutor to admit that he made a big mistake. At one point in the taped conversation, Tubbs calls his victim a piece of meat. “I was young, and I was hungry for some meat.” Tubbs showed no remorse for his actions and mocked the system that didn’t punish him.

Transcripts from the call show Tubbs laughing at the justice system.

“I’m gonna plead out to it, plead guilty,” Tubbs says in one recording. “They’re gonna stick me on probation, and it’s gonna be dropped, it’s gonna be done, I won’t have to register, won’t have to do nothing.”

“You won’t have to register?” her father asks on the other line later in the conversation.

“I won’t have to do none of that,” Tubbs replies.

“So what are they going to do to you then?”

“Nothing,” Tubbs answers, then laughs.

Gascón also says he’s rescinding his policy of never prosecuting minors as adults due to the outrage this case caused. “It’s unfortunate that she [sic] gamed the system,” Gascón said. “If I had to do it all over again, she [sic] would be prosecuted in adult court.”

The victim spoke out about what she suffered. “The things he did to me and made me do that day was beyond horrible for a ten-year-old girl to have to go through,” she said. “I want him tried as an adult for the crimes he committed against me.”

Even after telling the media that referring to her rapist as a woman hurts her, the media and those in authority still continue to do it, silencing the actual woman who was harmed. “I’ve also heard that my attacker goes by she/them pronouns now,” she added. “I see it also unfair to try him as a woman as well, seeing how he clearly didn’t act like one on January 1st of 2014.”

It is unfair and unjust and a total whitewashing of the truth. This is not someone like Caitlyn Jenner, a law-abiding transwoman whose pronouns are a matter of politeness for most people. This is a child predator who has made a mockery out of the desire of well-meaning people to be accepting of trans-identifying people. This man has used the transgender blindspot in our culture to abuse a child and then get a lighter sentence by claiming an identity that is false.

Why are Bill Melugin and Fox News enabling him? Accepting that any man can claim womanhood puts women and girls in danger. Viewers of Fox News should start emailing and contacting Melugin to ask him to stop enabling kiddie molesters like James Tubbs and tell the truth instead.

This is not a woman. Period.

— No, not THAT Megan Fox 🦊 (@MeganFoxWriter) February 22, 2022