Podcasts about united states constitution

UNBIASED University is in session! While Jordan is on maternity leave, she's breaking down the most critical aspects of the United States government — the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the three branches of the federal government, presidential elections, the evolution of political parties, and more. In this episode of UNBIASED Politics, we continue the UNBIASED University series by examining the Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. These amendments focus on the rights of individuals within the legal system and the balance of power between the federal government, the states, and the people. What protections exist in civil trials, what limits does the Constitution place on punishments, and how does the Constitution address rights that are not specifically listed? We break down the right to a jury trial in certain civil cases, the prohibition against excessive fines and cruel and unusual punishment, the recognition that unenumerated rights may still exist, and the principle that powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states or the people. This episode provides a clear, nonpartisan overview of how these often less-discussed amendments continue to shape constitutional law and federalism today. Intro (0:00) 7th Amendment (3:48) 8th Amendment (11:37) 9th Amendment (~28:41) 10th Amendment (~35:33) SUBSCRIBE TO JORDAN'S ⁠FREE NEWSLETTER⁠. ⁠Watch⁠ this episode on YouTube. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss the progressive view of government before introducing Ronald J. Pestritto. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. Progressives rejected the timeless principles of the American Founding and instead argued that the ends of government ought to be relative to historical circumstances. They viewed the Constitution as a “living” document, which could be transformed to meet the exigencies of the modern age.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss the progressive view of government before introducing Ronald J. Pestritto. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. Progressives rejected the timeless principles of the American Founding and instead argued that the ends of government ought to be relative to historical circumstances. They viewed the Constitution as a “living” document, which could be transformed to meet the exigencies of the modern age.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Day in Legal History: Lincoln's Second InauguralOn March 4, 1865, Abraham Lincoln delivered his Second Inaugural Address as he began his second term as President of the United States. The speech came during the final weeks of the Civil War, when Union victory was increasingly likely but the country remained deeply divided. Instead of celebrating the nearing end of the war, Lincoln used the moment to reflect on the deeper causes of the conflict. He identified slavery as the central issue that had brought the nation into war, describing it as both a legal institution and a moral injustice embedded in American law for generations. Lincoln noted that both the North and South had participated in a system that allowed slavery to endure within the nation's constitutional framework.In one of the address's most striking passages, Lincoln suggested that the war itself might be understood as divine judgment for the nation's long tolerance of slavery. He observed that slavery had existed in the Americas for centuries and reflected on the possibility that the immense suffering of the war was a form of punishment for that history. Lincoln famously stated that if divine providence willed that the war continue “until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword,” then such judgment might still be just. This reflection framed the war not simply as a political conflict but as a reckoning with a deeply rooted legal and moral wrong.Lincoln's remarks also pointed toward the constitutional transformation already underway through the pending Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Congress had passed the amendment earlier in 1865, and it awaited ratification by the states. If adopted, it would permanently abolish slavery across the United States and fundamentally alter the constitutional order. Lincoln's speech emphasized that the war's conclusion would also mark a legal turning point, ending a constitutional system that had protected slavery. At the same time, he called for reconciliation in rebuilding the nation, urging the country to move forward “with malice toward none.” Only months later, the Civil War ended and the Thirteenth Amendment was ratified in December 1865, permanently outlawing slavery in the United States.The House Oversight Committee has asked several high-profile figures to testify about their connections to Jeffrey Epstein as part of a broader investigation into how the federal government handled the case. Those requested to appear include departing Goldman Sachs Chief Legal Officer Kathryn Ruemmler, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, and Apollo Global Management co-founder Leon Black.The request to Ruemmler comes shortly after she announced plans to step down from Goldman Sachs and after Justice Department records brought renewed attention to her past communications with Epstein. Emails show that she sought career advice from him while exploring a move from Latham & Watkins to Facebook in 2018 and referred to him in messages as “Uncle Jeffrey.” The correspondence also mentioned gifts she received from him. Reports previously revealed that the two had numerous meetings during the 2010s, years after Epstein had served a prison sentence related to prostitution offenses involving minors.The committee's inquiry focuses on whether Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell used relationships with influential individuals to gain protection or influence while operating their sex-trafficking scheme. Lawmakers are also examining the federal government's handling of the investigation and the circumstances surrounding Epstein's death in a Manhattan federal jail in 2019.Along with Ruemmler, Gates and Black received similar requests for testimony. Gates has indicated he is willing to cooperate and answer questions from the committee. Black, meanwhile, is also facing a proposed class action accusing Apollo and its leadership of misleading investors about their connections to Epstein, allegations the firm has publicly denied.Other individuals asked to appear include Epstein's former assistants, political adviser Doug Band, and Gateway co-founder Ted Waitt. The committee has already interviewed several prominent figures, including former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as it continues reviewing the scope of Epstein's network and the government's response to his crimes.Goldman's Departing CLO, Gates Asked To Testify On Epstein - Law360 UKThe Justice Department quickly reversed course in an ongoing legal fight over executive orders issued by President Donald Trump targeting several prominent law firms. Late Monday, government lawyers told a federal appeals court they planned to drop their appeal after multiple federal judges ruled the orders unconstitutional. But the next day the department asked the court for permission to withdraw that dismissal request and continue defending the orders.The executive orders targeted firms including Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Susman Godfrey, and Jenner & Block. The measures sought to restrict the firms' security clearances, government contracts, and access to federal buildings, citing concerns about their clients and hiring practices. The firms challenged the orders in court, arguing they were unconstitutional retaliation against legal advocates.Federal judges consistently sided with the firms, with one ruling describing the order against Perkins Coie as an unprecedented attack on the legal system. After those rulings, the Justice Department initially appeared ready to abandon the appeal. Its sudden reversal, however, would allow the administration to continue fighting the cases before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.The law firms criticized the shift, saying the government offered no explanation for changing its position so quickly. They reiterated their commitment to challenging what they view as an unconstitutional attempt to punish law firms for representing disfavored clients. Civil liberties advocates echoed that criticism, arguing the orders represent a misuse of presidential power.The litigation highlights a broader dispute over the limits of executive authority and the independence of the legal profession. As the appeals process continues, the courts will ultimately decide whether the executive orders can survive constitutional scrutiny.BREAKING: DOJ Nixes Plan To Drop Law Firm EO Appeals In About-Face - Law360In quick reversal, DOJ seeks to continue Trump's battle with law firmsA trial beginning in Chicago will examine claims that baby formula made by Abbott Laboratories caused premature infants to develop a serious and potentially deadly intestinal condition known as necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). The case consolidates lawsuits from four families whose premature children were born in Chicago-area hospitals between 2012 and 2019 and later developed the disease. Although the infants survived, the lawsuits say several required surgery and continue to face long-term health complications.The case is part of a much larger wave of litigation against Abbott and Mead Johnson, the manufacturer of Enfamil. Nearly 1,000 lawsuits have been filed across the country alleging that the companies failed to warn doctors that cow's milk-based formulas used in hospitals may increase the risk of NEC in premature infants. Many of those cases are consolidated in federal court in Illinois, while others are pending in state courts.Abbott denies that its formulas cause the disease and maintains that the products are medically necessary when mothers cannot produce enough breast milk. The company and other researchers point to evidence suggesting that the higher risk of NEC is linked to the absence of breast milk rather than exposure to formula itself.Previous trials involving similar claims have produced mixed results. Some juries have awarded large verdicts to families, including multimillion-dollar judgments against both Abbott and Mead Johnson, though those decisions are currently under appeal. Other cases have resulted in defense wins or retrials, and several potential bellwether cases in federal court have been dismissed.The Chicago trial, which begins with jury selection, is expected to last several weeks and could influence how the remaining lawsuits move forward. With hundreds of similar claims still pending, the outcome may play an important role in shaping the broader litigation over infant formula and NEC.Abbott set to face trial over claims premature infant formula caused deadly disease | ReutersIn this week's column, I look at a new California proposal that attempts to sidestep the federal cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions by reclassifying vehicle sales taxes as licensing fees. The idea is simple: if the charge is treated as a property-style fee instead of a sales tax, it could fall into a category that allows taxpayers to make greater use of their federal SALT deduction. Supporters frame the proposal as middle-class tax relief and a way to reduce the amount of federal revenue flowing out of California. But while the policy is clever, its practical benefits would be limited and uneven.The proposal follows a familiar strategy used since the 2017 tax law capped SALT deductions: when one type of tax becomes less deductible, lawmakers try to redesign the tax structure so the revenue flows through a category that remains deductible. California's approach focuses on vehicle purchases, where sales taxes are currently difficult to deduct for many residents. By redefining those charges as licensing fees, lawmakers hope taxpayers could claim them alongside property taxes under the federal deduction cap.In practice, though, most lower-income taxpayers wouldn't benefit at all. Many households take the standard deduction rather than itemizing, especially after recent tax reforms increased its size. For those taxpayers, changing the label on a vehicle tax doesn't meaningfully change their federal tax bill. Even for many itemizers, the savings would likely be small.The proposal mainly helps a narrow band of higher-earning taxpayers—people with substantial state and property taxes who are still just below the federal SALT cap. For them, a vehicle purchase could generate a deductible amount that meaningfully lowers their federal tax liability. But that advantage grows with the price of the car and the taxpayer's marginal tax rate, which means the largest benefits flow to relatively affluent households.If the goal is truly middle-class relief, a more direct approach would likely work better. For example, a refundable state tax credit tied to vehicle purchases could help working families without depending on federal deduction rules or itemization. Another long-term option would be shifting some of California's tax burden from individuals to businesses, since certain business-level taxes remain deductible federally.California's proposal shows the creativity that the SALT deduction cap has sparked among state policymakers. The real question, however, is whether clever tax reclassification is the right tool—or whether more straightforward policies aimed directly at middle-income taxpayers would produce fairer and more predictable results.California SALT Deduction Proposal Is More Clever Than Helpful This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

UNBIASED University is in session! While Jordan is on maternity leave, she's breaking down the most critical aspects of the United States government — the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the three branches of the federal government, presidential elections, the evolution of political parties, and more. In this episode of UNBIASED Politics, we continue the UNBIASED University series by breaking down the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, the amendments that establish many of the core protections individuals have within the criminal justice system. What limits does the Constitution place on government searches and seizures, what rights protect individuals during questioning and prosecution, and what guarantees ensure a fair trial? We discuss the protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, the right against self-incrimination, the guarantees of due process, and the rights to legal counsel, a speedy and public trial, and an impartial jury. Through historical context and legal principles, this episode provides a clear, nonpartisan overview of the constitutional safeguards designed to balance law enforcement power with individual rights. Intro (0:00) 4th Amendment (4:46) 5th Amendment (~26:59) 6th Amendment (~44:15) SUBSCRIBE TO JORDAN'S ⁠FREE NEWSLETTER⁠. ⁠Watch⁠ this episode on YouTube. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

With the U.S. military amassing in the Middle East ahead of possible strikes in Iran, a Democratic lawmaker explains his effort to limit the president.The United States Constitution empowers Congress, not the president, to declare war.That hasn't stopped plenty of presidents from commanding military combat.It didn't stop President Trump from ordering airstrikes on Iran's nuclear sites last year – and building up the U.S. military in the Middle East while he mulls further action this year.So far in this Trump administration, efforts to reclaim that Congressional authority have failed.Sen. Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia, explains why he is still pursuing a war powers resolution.For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Email us at considerthis@npr.org.This episode was produced by Alejandra Marquez Janse and Karen Zamora, with audio engineering by Ted Mebane. It was edited by Patrick Jarenwattananon and Courtney Dorning. Our executive producer is Sami Yenigun.To manage podcast ad preferences, review the links below:See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

UNBIASED University is officially in session! While Jordan is on maternity leave, she's breaking down the most critical aspects of the United States government — the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the three branches of the federal government, presidential elections, the evolution of political parties, and more. In this episode of UNBIASED Politics, we continue the UNBIASED University series by breaking down the First, Second, and Third Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. What protections do these amendments actually guarantee, and how have their meanings evolved over time? We explain the freedoms of speech, religion, the press, assembly, and petition, the right to keep and bear arms, and the historical context behind the rarely discussed Third Amendment's protection against the forced quartering of soldiers. Along the way, we explore the historical origins of these rights, the major Supreme Court decisions that have shaped how they are interpreted today, and the ongoing legal and political debates surrounding them. Whether you're looking to better understand your constitutional freedoms or simply want a clear, nonpartisan refresher on the Bill of Rights, this episode provides a straightforward guide to the first three amendments. SUBSCRIBE TO JORDAN'S ⁠FREE NEWSLETTER⁠. ⁠Watch⁠ this episode on YouTube. Follow Jordan on ⁠Instagram⁠ and ⁠TikTok⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this powerful episode of the Know Your Numbers, REI Podcast, Chris McCormack sits down with historian Bill Federer to unpack the dramatic shift in U.S. government funding — from tariff-based revenue to the modern income tax system.You'll discover:How the British East India Company and the Stamp Act helped spark the American RevolutionWhy tariffs once funded nearly 90% of the federal governmentHow the American Civil War triggered the first income taxWhat the 16th Amendment to the United States Constitution changed foreverWhy World War II expanded taxes to nearly every AmericanHow policies from the New Deal to the Great Society shaped today's tax and spending systemThis conversation connects taxation, war, debt, entrepreneurship, and America's economic future — challenging you to think differently about money, government power, and opportunity.If you care about business, investing, economic history, or the future of America's tax system — this episode is a must-listen.Tune in for more insights on tax strategy, real estate investing, and building wealth the smart way.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••To connect with Bill, visit his Social Media Platforms:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/WilliamJFederer/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/the_americanminute/?hl=enLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/william-federer-981b1a17Website: https://americanminute.com/••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••➤➤➤ To become a client, schedule a call with our team➤➤ https://www.betterbooksaccounting.co/contact••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••Connect with Chris McCormack on Social MediaFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/chrismccormackcpaLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/chrismccormackcpaInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/chrismccormackcpaJoin our Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/6384369318328034→ → → SUBSCRIBE TO BETTER BOOKS' YOUTUBE CHANNEL NOW ← ← ← https://www.youtube.com/@chrismccormackcpaThe Know Your Numbers REI podcast is for general information purposes only and is not intended to provide, and should not be relied on for, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Information on the podcast may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information. No reader, user, or listener of this podcast should act or refrain from acting on the basis of information on this podcast without first seeking legal and tax advice from counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. Only your individual attorney and tax advisor can provide assurances that the information contained herein – and your interpretation of it – is applicable or appropriate to your particular situation. Use of, and access to, this podcast or any of the links or resources contained or mentioned within the podcast show and show notes do not create a relationship between the reader, user, or listener and podcast hosts, contributors, or guests.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss executive authority and secession before introducing Kevin Portteus. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. The South’s justification for secession was based on an erroneous reading of the Constitution. Whereas the South claimed a legal right to secede, Lincoln opposed what he called an illegal insurrection and sought to secure a “new birth of freedom” in America.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss executive authority and secession before introducing Kevin Portteus. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. The South’s justification for secession was based on an erroneous reading of the Constitution. Whereas the South claimed a legal right to secede, Lincoln opposed what he called an illegal insurrection and sought to secure a “new birth of freedom” in America.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

En La Previa,  @SkylineRacing  nos lleva al análisis profundo de lo que marcará esta nueva temporada de F1.Las nuevas regulaciones no solo modifican detalles superficiales, transforman por completo el comportamiento del auto en pista. La evolución de la unidad de potencia, la redistribución de la energía eléctrica y los ajustes aerodinámicos obligan a los equipos a replantear su filosofía de diseño desde la base.La gestión energética tendrá un peso mucho mayor en el ritmo de carrera, condicionando estrategias, adelantamientos y la manera en que los pilotos administran cada vuelta. El equilibrio entre eficiencia y rendimiento será más delicado que nunca, y pequeños márgenes marcarán grandes diferencias.Además, las arrancadas, la entrega de potencia y el llamado “Lift and Coast” podrían cambiar la dinámica del espectáculo en pista, exigiendo mayor precisión tanto del piloto como del equipo en cada fase del fin de semana.Antes de que se apaguen las luces y comience la temporada, aquí entendemos el reglamento que definirá la competencia.This video is fair use under U.S. copyright law because it is transformative in nature, uses no more of the original than necessary, and has no negative effect on the market for the original work. Furthermore, this video is protected speech as outlined by the first amendment of the United States Constitution.Title 17, US Code (Sections 107-118 of the copyright law, Act 1976): All media in this video is used for purpose of review & commentary under terms of fair use. All footage, & images used belong to their respective companies. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.This website is unofficial and is not associated in any way with the Formula 1 companies. F1, FORMULA ONE, FORMULA 1, FIA FORMULA ONE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP, GRAND PRIX and related marks are trade marks of Formula One Licensing B.V. *Las imágenes y videos mostrados no son de nuestra autoría y solamente se utilizan como recurso ilustrativo.

UNBIASED University is officially in session! While Jordan is on maternity leave, she's breaking down the most critical aspects of the United States government — the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the three branches of the federal government, presidential elections, the evolution of political parties, and more. In this episode of UNBIASED Politics, we take a deep dive into the foundation of the United States: the Constitution. What exactly does the Constitution do, why was it written, and how has its meaning evolved over time? We break down the core principles that shape the American system of government, including federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, and individual rights, while also exploring the historical debates that shaped the document. Whether you're brushing up on the basics or looking for a clearer understanding of how constitutional law affects everyday life, this episode provides a clear, nonpartisan guide to the document that governs it all. SUBSCRIBE TO JORDAN'S ⁠FREE NEWSLETTER⁠. ⁠Watch⁠ this episode on YouTube. Follow Jordan on ⁠Instagram⁠ and ⁠TikTok⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Before the Constitution was written, John Witherspoon was shaping the minds that would build it. Who was John Witherspoon and how did he influence James Madison and the Constitution? Discover how this forgotten Founder helped define America's moral and constitutional DNA, and taught a Republic how to think. This episode of the America's Founding Series explores how John Witherspoon's philosophy of "self-evident truths," moral realism, and human nature influenced James Madison and the structure of the United States Constitution. At a time when civilizational seriousness feels in short supply, Witherspoon's ideas about education, virtue, and limited government reveal why the survival of a republic begins in the classroom. It's time for a MATA moment – Make Americans Think Again – by looking at the Witherspoon model that we've abandoned. What You'll Learn Why John Witherspoon's teachings shaped James Madison and Federalist 51 The true meaning of "self-evident truths" in the Declaration of Independence How Scottish Common Sense philosophy grounded America's natural rights framework Why the doctrine of human fallibility led to checks and balances What modern leadership can learn from Witherspoon's model of education and statesmanship If the West is struggling with strategic and moral drift, the solution may lie in rediscovering the intellectual foundation laid by John Witherspoon.

Reposted from Still Slaying: A Buffy-verse podcast which you can find at Still Slaying: a Buffy-verse podcast | Podcastica. Fun, in-depth talk about great TV. “Xander, just because this is never gonna work there's no need to be negative.” Penny and Sam dive into this plot and action heavy episode that wraps up most of Season 4's stories. The conversation ranges from sadly relevant world events from the turn of the millennium, to sarcasm, favorite words, fascism, Andor, the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Privacy Laws, the outrageous cost of higher education, hangovers, bodily autonomy, heroism, extreme makeovers, Sinners, cults, Pluribus, the human need for community, the One Ring, Riley's emotional journey, and military culture.  Next time, we'll be covering Buffy the Vampire Slayer, season 4, episode 22, “Restless.”  Keep Slaying! News Links/Referenced Links Original Trailer/WB Promo: BTVS “Primeval” Original Promo Blade VS Buffy (Marvel VS Buffy the Vampire Slayer) | DEATH BATTLE! —---------------------------------------- Viewing Order Buffy 4x22 - Restless Angel 1x20 - War Zone Angel 1x21 - Blind Date Angel 1x22 - To Shanshu in LA BONUS: Blade Join the conversation! You can email or send a voice message to stillslayingfeedback@gmail.com, or join us at facebook.com/groups/podcastica and Still Slaying A Buffy-verse Podcast where we put up comment posts for each episode we cover.  Join the Zedhead community - https://www.patreon.com/jasoncabassi Theme Music:℗ CC-BY 2020 Quesbe | Lucie G. MorillonGoopsy | Drum and Bass | Free CC-BY Music By Quesbe is licensed under a Creative Commons License. #buffythevampireslayer #btvs #buffyverse #stillslaying #podcastica #spuffy #slaythepatriarchy #femisim Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss whether or not the American Founding supported slavery before introducing Kevin Portteus. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. Contrary to the Founders’ guiding principle of equality and their hopes for eventual abolition, slavery not only survived but spread and became entrenched in the South. Subsequently, a new ideology arose in defense of slavery, which rejected the principles of the Founding and fueled the sectional crisis that led to the Civil War.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss whether or not the American Founding supported slavery before introducing Kevin Portteus. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. Contrary to the Founders’ guiding principle of equality and their hopes for eventual abolition, slavery not only survived but spread and became entrenched in the South. Subsequently, a new ideology arose in defense of slavery, which rejected the principles of the Founding and fueled the sectional crisis that led to the Civil War.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Longtime drummer of The Black Crowes and now Minnesota morning rock radio voice Steve Gorman comes home to Maryland to discuss the state of world and his new supergroup Howl Owl Howl, featuring Mike Mills of R.E.M. and Darius Rucker of Hootie and the Blowfish. But we can't just stick to rock band nostalgia and sports halftime shows when The United States Constitution is being shredded in the streets of Minneapolis every day... The post Drummer and Minnesota morning radio voice Steve Gorman comes home to Maryland to discuss state of world and new supergroup Howl Owl Howl first appeared on Baltimore Positive WNST.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss whether or not the government should legislate morality before introducing Thomas West. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. While the first purpose of government is to protect citizens from foreign and domestic threats, it must also undertake other essential actions in order to secure natural rights. These include the protection of property rights, the defense of religious liberty, and the promotion of the moral character necessary to sustain free government.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss whether or not the government should legislate morality before introducing Thomas West. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. While the first purpose of government is to protect citizens from foreign and domestic threats, it must also undertake other essential actions in order to secure natural rights. These include the protection of property rights, the defense of religious liberty, and the promotion of the moral character necessary to sustain free government.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Day in Legal History: 25th AmendmentOn February 10, 1967, the 25th Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified, formally addressing presidential succession and disability for the first time in constitutional text. The need for such clarity had become urgent after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963 and President Dwight D. Eisenhower's repeated illnesses during his terms. Prior to this amendment, there was no definitive constitutional mechanism for filling a vacancy in the vice presidency or for managing presidential incapacity. The 25th Amendment established four key sections, each designed to ensure governmental stability during times of crisis.Section 1 confirmed that if a president dies, resigns, or is removed, the vice president becomes president—not just acting president. Section 2 allowed for the appointment of a new vice president, with confirmation by both the House and Senate, in the event of a vacancy. This provision was put to use shortly after its ratification when Gerald Ford was appointed vice president in 1973 following Spiro Agnew's resignation. Section 3 allowed a president to voluntarily transfer power to the vice president by submitting a written declaration to Congress—used during temporary medical procedures like surgeries.Most controversial and significant is Section 4, which allows the vice president and a majority of the cabinet (or another body designated by Congress) to declare the president “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” This provision has never been fully invoked but has been a topic of discussion during times of perceived presidential instability. It establishes a legal mechanism for removing a president against their will, albeit temporarily, with congressional oversight. The amendment reflects a post-World War II concern for continuity of leadership in a nuclear age. Its ratification marks a critical evolution in constitutional law, ensuring the executive branch remains functional even under extraordinary circumstances.A federal lawsuit filed in Texas alleges that an 18‑month‑old girl detained by U.S. immigration authorities was sent back into U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody after being hospitalized for a life‑threatening respiratory illness and then denied the medications doctors prescribed.According to the filing, Amalia and her parents were held at the family detention center in Dilley, Texas after a routine immigration check‑in in December. The toddler became severely ill in January with extremely high fever and breathing problems, and a hospital diagnosed her with multiple serious infections including COVID‑19, pneumonia and RSV. After about 10 days in the hospital, she was discharged with a nebulizer, respiratory medication and nutritional supplements—but those were confiscated when she was returned to the detention facility.The lawsuit says her parents repeatedly tried to obtain prescribed treatment from detention staff but were forced to wait in long lines and often were denied, contributing to the child's health deterioration. Legal advocacy led to the family's release after the emergency court filing; attorneys contend the case reflects broader problems with medical care, conditions and protections for children and families in immigration custody.Toddler was returned to ICE custody and denied medication after hospitalization, lawsuit says | ReutersThe Trump administration is proposing a significant change to federal employment law that would restrict fired federal workers from appealing their terminations to the independent Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). Under the plan, workers would instead have to appeal to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)—a shift critics say would compromise impartiality, as the OPM director reports directly to the president.The MSPB, historically tasked with mediating disputes between federal employees and agencies, experienced a 266% spike in appeals cases during Trump's second term, likely due to a surge in federal job cuts. In 2025, the federal workforce shrank by 317,000 employees, though OPM claims most departures were voluntary through buyouts rather than firings—an assertion not independently verified.This latest proposal would further President Trump's second-term agenda to reduce the size of the federal workforce while also narrowing employees' legal options for challenging dismissals. Trump has also weakened job protection enforcement by removing officials from agencies that safeguard civil service rights. Critics argue the proposal consolidates power over personnel disputes within the executive branch, potentially eroding longstanding civil service protections.Trump seeks to limit legal options for fired federal workers | ReutersMy column for Bloomberg Tax this week is about tax holidays for data centers–or the folly in offering them. India's bold new play to become the backbone of global digital infrastructure isn't just about its headline-grabbing 20-year tax holiday for data centers. The real shift is happening in the fine print—a 15% safe harbor for transfer pricing that removes much of the risk multinationals face when operating across borders. If a company like Microsoft India applies a simple 15% markup on services sold to its U.S. parent, the Indian government agrees not to challenge the pricing. That's not just a tax break—it's operational certainty, and it makes India's offer much more attractive than anything U.S. states currently have on the table.In contrast, American states are still offering scattered subsidies—property tax breaks, zoning perks, utility discounts—without any unified vision or reliable regulatory structure. There's no equivalent to India's safe harbor. No clarity on transfer pricing. No coordination across state lines. The result is what I see as economic development policy by improv, where officials hand out incentives like they're bidding on a sports arena rather than negotiating infrastructure strategy.And what do U.S. taxpayers get in return? A burst of construction, a few permanent jobs, and a long-term commitment to expensive infrastructure upgrades for data centers that don't meaningfully plug into the local economy. Meanwhile, India is making an offer that fits squarely onto a multinational's balance sheet—pre-agreed pricing, national alignment, and a clear path to long-term cost savings.I don't think the solution is to try to beat India at its own game. But if states are going to offer incentives, they need to extract something real in return: energy infrastructure, broadband expansion, or compute resources that benefit the public. Otherwise, they're just footing the bill for someone else's global expansion. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

American progressives at the turn of the 20th century saw major flaws in the United States Constitution and worked to correct them through the process of amendments. Each one was the subject of debate and controversy, and all four made measurable changes to American society (though one can debate the merits of some). Join us for this survey of the four progressive amendments--as well as a funny story from Jon's classroom--and tune in next week for our discussion about how these amendments shaped the future course of American history.

So friends, can I ask you a question? Does it feel like it might be time to start talking about a constitutional do-over?We have a corrupt and criminal president who feels completely unconstrained by the United States Constitution. As but one example: he has abused the constitutional pardon power beyond anybody's wildest imagination. We have a majority on the Supreme Court that feels completely unconstrained by the expressed language of the Constitution. As but one example, the Constitution provides that the president shall take care that the laws of the nation be faithfully executed. Yet the Supreme Court - a majority of the justices - interpreted that very language, that solemn duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, as indicating that a president has complete leeway to violate all the laws of our nation, victimizing wide swaths of the American population, and he has complete immunity from prosecutionThen we have Congress - one political party that has just laid down and let a tyrant in the oval office walk all over them - completely abandoning their status as a coequal branch of government.So let me ask you again friends: do you think it's time we talked about a constitutional do-over? Well, that's what I just talked about with my friend, law professor, and constitutional scholar Kim Wehle. Kim authored a great new piece - you can find it on Substack appropriately titled, "Is it time to start thinking about a constitutional do-over". And given that our Constitution is plainly not up to the task of governing in these dangerous and lawless times, I think the answer to that question is not just yes but hell yes! Link to Kim's piece: https://open.substack.com/pub/kimwehl...Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss the difference between democracy and republicanism before introducing Ronald J. Pestritto. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. The Framers understood that the “latent causes of faction . . . are sown in the nature of man.” Consequently, the Constitution establishes a number of institutional mechanisms such as representation and separation of powers to control the effects of faction. In so doing, the Constitution improved upon previous models of republican government.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss the difference between democracy and republicanism before introducing Ronald J. Pestritto. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. The Framers understood that the “latent causes of faction . . . are sown in the nature of man.” Consequently, the Constitution establishes a number of institutional mechanisms such as representation and separation of powers to control the effects of faction. In so doing, the Constitution improved upon previous models of republican government.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

So friends, can I ask you a question? Does it feel like it might be time to start talking about a constitutional do-over?We have a corrupt and criminal president who feels completely unconstrained by the United States Constitution. As but one example: he has abused the constitutional pardon power beyond anybody's wildest imagination. We have a majority on the Supreme Court that feels completely unconstrained by the expressed language of the Constitution. As but one example, the Constitution provides that the president shall take care that the laws of the nation be faithfully executed. Yet the Supreme Court - a majority of the justices - interpreted that very language, that solemn duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, as indicating that a president has complete leeway to violate all the laws of our nation, victimizing wide swaths of the American population, and he has complete immunity from prosecutionThen we have Congress - one political party that has just laid down and let a tyrant in the oval office walk all over them - completely abandoning their status as a coequal branch of government.So let me ask you again friends: do you think it's time we talked about a constitutional do-over? Well, that's what I just talked about with my friend, law professor, and constitutional scholar Kim Wehle. Kim authored a great new piece - you can find it on Substack appropriately titled, "Is it time to start thinking about a constitutional do-over". And given that our Constitution is plainly not up to the task of governing in these dangerous and lawless times, I think the answer to that question is not just yes but hell yes! Link to Kim's piece: https://open.substack.com/pub/kimwehl...Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This Day in Legal History: Fifteenth Amendment RatifiedOn February 3, 1870, the Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified, marking a pivotal moment in American legal history. The amendment prohibits federal and state governments from denying a citizen the right to vote based on “race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” Its ratification was the third and final of the Reconstruction Amendments, following the Thirteenth (abolishing slavery) and Fourteenth (guaranteeing equal protection and due process) Amendments.The Fifteenth Amendment was a direct response to the systemic disenfranchisement of Black Americans in the post-Civil War South. While it granted a legal foundation for Black men's suffrage, implementation faced immediate resistance. Southern states adopted literacy tests, poll taxes, grandfather clauses, and other discriminatory practices to circumvent the amendment and suppress Black political participation.Despite its passage, the amendment's guarantees would not be meaningfully enforced until the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, nearly a century later. The legal battles stemming from the Fifteenth Amendment's promise have shaped much of the country's voting rights jurisprudence and continue to echo in current debates about voter ID laws, redistricting, and access to the ballot box.A U.S. federal judge is set to hear arguments on February 5 regarding Danish company Ørsted's request to lift the Trump administration's pause on its offshore Sunrise Wind project near Long Island, New York. Ørsted has asked for a preliminary injunction, warning that without a decision by February 6, it could lose access to a specialized vessel crucial for cable installation, putting the project's timeline, financial viability, and even survival at risk. The Interior Department halted five offshore wind projects in December, citing newly obtained, classified national security concerns, particularly radar interference. Ørsted's filing states the company has already committed over $7 billion to the Sunrise Wind project, which is about 45% complete and projected to power nearly 600,000 homes by October.Judge Royce Lamberth, who previously granted an injunction for Ørsted's Revolution Wind project off Rhode Island, will preside over the case. Four similar wind developments have already won legal relief allowing construction to continue during litigation. The ongoing delays reflect broader tensions between offshore wind expansion and the Trump administration's skepticism of the technology, as well as evolving security concerns.US judge to consider last project challenge to Trump offshore wind pause | ReutersThe U.S. Department of Justice has launched a civil rights investigation into the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old ICU nurse, by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis. Pretti was killed during an enforcement operation that has since drawn national outrage and led the Trump administration to alter its tactics in Minnesota. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said the FBI is conducting a preliminary review, with potential involvement from the DOJ's Civil Rights Division, though he emphasized that the investigation is still in early stages.Video footage verified by Reuters shows Pretti being tackled by agents while holding a phone, and an officer retrieving a firearm from his body just before shots were fired. The Justice Department said a formal criminal civil rights probe would only proceed if the evidence supports it. Local officials have voiced distrust of the federal response and are conducting their own inquiry. Pretti is the second protester killed by federal agents in Minneapolis this month, and his family, represented by attorney Steve Schleicher, is demanding a transparent and impartial investigation. So far, no similar federal probe has been opened into the earlier shooting of Renee Good by an ICE officer.US Justice Dept opens civil rights probe into Alex Pretti shooting, official says | ReutersIn this week's column for Bloomberg Tax, I argue that Volkswagen's decision to cancel plans for a new Audi plant in the U.S. highlights the limitations of using tariffs as a cornerstone of industrial policy. The assumption underpinning tariff-heavy strategies is that the U.S. market is irresistible enough to force global firms to onshore production, even as tariffs erode that market's size and appeal. Tariffs have come to function like sin taxes—meant to discourage consumption—but unlike cigarettes or soda, the goal with trade policy is not abstention, but investment and economic engagement. Instead, firms like VW are responding by pulling back, as higher costs reduce consumer demand and make U.S. market share too small to justify large-scale investment. The belief that global manufacturers can swiftly build U.S. capacity ignores the time, cost, and uncertainty involved, especially in capital-intensive sectors. VW's exit is rational: it doesn't make financial sense to break ground on a multibillion-dollar plant when the target market is shrinking and returns are questionable.Policymakers need to move beyond blunt tools and design trade incentives based on real market data, such as U.S. demand and potential return on investment. That means requiring ROI modeling before tariffs are imposed, and asking whether the targeted company has enough exposure to be moved by them. If the answer is no, we risk losing access to competitive products, jobs, and consumer choice—not gaining them. Trade policy should be surgical, not punitive, and should acknowledge that capital follows incentives, not threats.In a piece I wrote for Forbes late last week, and with apologies for a double dose of me today: I examined California's long-running flirtation with a mileage-based tax to replace its declining gas tax revenues—and how what began as a test program has quietly become a form of policymaking through delay. In 2014, the state authorized a pilot program to study a “road usage charge,” a per-mile fee designed to keep transportation funding solvent as gas consumption drops. That pilot wrapped up in 2017 and showed the system works: vehicles can be tracked, billing can be simulated, and the technical challenges are manageable. But nearly a decade later, no mileage tax has been implemented, and new legislation—AB 1421—would extend the advisory committee until 2035.The real issue now isn't feasibility but political avoidance. The state has drifted into a passive strategy where permanent pilots and advisory boards take the place of real decisions. This kind of inertia has a name: policy drift—when the law remains formally unchanged, but materially obsolete. California's ongoing study phase has become a way to defer a difficult conversation about revenue and equity in a post-gasoline economy. The technology exists, and other states have already tested it. What's missing is political will and public engagement.AB 1421 doesn't collect revenue or educate voters—it simply extends the status quo under the guise of preparation. From the outside, it looks like planning. In practice, it's a weather balloon designed to measure political tolerance, not policy readiness.California Mileage Tax—Pilot Programs And Permanent Policy Inertia This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss how The Federalist influenced the Constitutional Convention before introducing Ronald J. Pestritto. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. The Articles of Confederation was America’s first attempt at establishing a national union. However, in many of the states, unchecked legislative majorities frequently trampled on the natural rights of minorities and disregarded the nearly powerless federal government. This experience of unstable and unjust government led to calls for a firmer union.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss how The Federalist influenced the Constitutional Convention before introducing Ronald J. Pestritto. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. The Articles of Confederation was America’s first attempt at establishing a national union. However, in many of the states, unchecked legislative majorities frequently trampled on the natural rights of minorities and disregarded the nearly powerless federal government. This experience of unstable and unjust government led to calls for a firmer union.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Gary and Suzanne welcome renowned astrologer Christopher Renstrom for his 34th appearance on the show. The discussion explores the significant "planetary traffic jam" occurring in early 2026, specifically focusing on the "Pluto return" of the United States Constitution and how shifting planetary climates from earth/water to air/fire are driving global volatility. Between analyzing daily horoscopes for the zodiac signs, Renstrom also shares insights into the historical connection between the planet Uranus and modern revolution.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss how the concept of natural rights informed the American Founding before introducing Thomas G. West. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. The principle of equality—which means no person may rule over another without his consent—is central to the political theory of the American Founding. Not only did it justify the Revolution, it also led to the creation of a government whose purpose is securing the natural rights of its citizens.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss how the concept of natural rights informed the American Founding before introducing Thomas G. West. The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. The principle of equality—which means no person may rule over another without his consent—is central to the political theory of the American Founding. Not only did it justify the Revolution, it also led to the creation of a government whose purpose is securing the natural rights of its citizens.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Day in Legal History: 18th Amendment to the US ConstitutionOn January 16, 1919, the 18th Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified, marking a pivotal moment in American legal history by establishing the prohibition of alcoholic beverages. The amendment prohibited “the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors” for consumption in the United States and its territories. It was the culmination of decades of temperance activism, led by organizations such as the Women's Christian Temperance Union and the Anti-Saloon League, which argued that alcohol was responsible for societal problems including crime, poverty, and domestic violence.The amendment passed Congress in December 1917, but ratification by the states was required for it to take effect. That threshold was reached on January 16, 1919, when Nebraska became the 36th state to ratify it. One year later, on January 17, 1920, the Volstead Act—the federal statute enforcing the amendment—went into effect, ushering in the Prohibition era.However, the law led to unintended consequences. Rather than curbing alcohol consumption, it fueled the rise of organized crime, as bootleggers and speakeasies flourished across the country. Enforcement proved difficult and inconsistent, and public support for prohibition waned through the 1920s.Ultimately, the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment on December 5, 1933, making it the only constitutional amendment ever to be entirely repealed. The legacy of the 18th Amendment remains significant as a historical experiment in moral legislation and the limits of constitutional power.A federal judge in Virginia will soon decide whether Dominion Energy can resume construction on its $11.2 billion Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project, which was halted by the Trump administration last month. The Interior Department paused five offshore wind projects on December 22, citing classified concerns about radar interference and national security. Dominion is now challenging that pause in court, arguing that it violated procedural and due process laws and is causing the company significant financial harm—around $5 million in daily losses. Dominion has already invested nearly $9 billion in the project, which began construction in 2023 and is planned to power 600,000 homes.Similar legal challenges from other developers, including Orsted and Equinor, have already succeeded in federal courts in Washington, allowing their Northeast offshore wind projects to proceed. Those decisions raise the stakes for Dominion's case, which could influence the broader offshore wind industry amid continued hostility from the Trump administration toward the sector. Trump has long criticized wind energy as costly and inefficient. While the outcomes of these lawsuits may let projects move forward, industry uncertainty remains due to ongoing legal battles and political opposition.US judge to weigh Dominion request to restart Virginia offshore wind project stopped by Trump | ReutersA federal judge in Boston, William Young, said he will issue an order to protect non-citizen academics involved in a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's deportation of pro-Palestinian student activists. The upcoming order would block the government from altering the immigration status of the scholars who are parties to the case, absent court approval. Young emphasized that any such action would be presumed retaliatory and would require the administration to prove it had a legitimate basis.The lawsuit stems from Trump's executive orders in early 2025 directing agencies to crack down on antisemitism, which led to arrests and visa cancellations for several students, including Columbia graduate Mahmoud Khalil and Tufts student Rumeysa Ozturk. These moves targeted those expressing pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel views on campus. Young previously ruled that these actions violated the First Amendment by chilling free speech rights of non-citizen academics.In his comments, Young described Trump as “authoritarian” and sharply criticized what he called the administration's “fearful approach to freedom.” He limited his forthcoming order to members of academic groups like the AAUP and Middle East Studies Association, rejecting a broader nationwide block as too expansive. Meanwhile, the administration, which plans to appeal Young's earlier ruling, accused the judge of political bias.US judge to shield scholars who challenged deporting of pro-Palestinian campus activists | ReutersA federal judge in California has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Justice Department seeking access to the state's full, unredacted voter registration list. Judge David Carter ruled that the department's claims were not strong enough under existing civil rights and voting laws, and that turning over detailed voter data—such as names, birth dates, driver's license numbers, and parts of Social Security numbers—would violate privacy protections.Carter emphasized that centralizing such sensitive information at the federal level could intimidate voters and suppress turnout by making people fear misuse of their personal data. The lawsuit, filed in September by the Trump administration, targeted California and other Democrat-led states for allegedly failing to properly maintain voter rolls, citing federal law as justification for demanding the data.California Secretary of State Shirley Weber welcomed the decision, stating her commitment to defending voting rights and opposing the administration's actions. The DOJ had reportedly been in discussions with the Department of Homeland Security to use voter data in criminal and immigration probes. Critics argue the push was driven by baseless claims from Trump and his allies that non-citizens are voting in large numbers.US judge dismisses Justice Department lawsuit seeking California voter details | ReutersWhy can't people harmed by ICE just sue the agents themselves?U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is a federal agency under the Department of Homeland Security, created in 2003. It enforces immigration laws and investigates criminal activities involving border control, customs, and immigration. ICE derives its authority from various federal statutes, including the Immigration and Nationality Act, and its agents operate with broad discretion during enforcement actions.Suing ICE agents or the agency itself is legally difficult. Individuals cannot usually sue federal agents directly because of sovereign immunity, a legal doctrine that protects the government and its employees from lawsuits unless explicitly allowed by law. One such exception is the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) of 1946, which permits lawsuits against the federal government when its employees cause injury or damage while acting within the scope of their employment. Under the FTCA, victims can bring wrongful death or negligence claims, as Renee Good's family is now considering.However, FTCA claims are limited. Plaintiffs cannot seek punitive damages or a jury trial, and compensation is capped based on state law where the incident occurred. The government is also shielded from liability for discretionary decisions made by its employees—meaning if the ICE agent used judgment during the incident and it's deemed reasonable, the claim can be dismissed. In Good's case, the government will likely argue self-defense.Suing ICE agents personally is even harder. The Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents case in 1971 created a narrow legal path for suing federal officials for constitutional violations, but courts have since restricted its use. In 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that Bivens does not apply to border agents conducting immigration enforcement, further insulating ICE officers from personal liability.Criminal prosecution of federal agents is also rare. State prosecutors may bring charges, but only if they can prove the agent acted clearly outside the scope of their duties and in an objectively unlawful way—a high bar that is seldom met.This week's closing theme is by Ludwig van Beethoven. Beethoven, one of the most influential composers in Western music history, revolutionized the classical tradition with works that bridged the Classical and Romantic eras.This week's theme is Franz Liszt's transcription of Beethoven's Symphony No. 5 in C minor, Op. 67 — specifically, the first movement, Allegro con brio, catalogued as S.464/5. As one of the most iconic works in classical music, Beethoven's Fifth needs little introduction, but hearing it through Liszt's fingers offers a fresh perspective on its brilliance. In this solo piano version, Liszt doesn't simply condense Beethoven's orchestral power—he reimagines it, capturing the storm, structure, and spirit of the original with astonishing fidelity and virtuosity.The movement begins with the unforgettable four-note “fate” motif, its rhythmic insistence rendered on the piano with punch and precision. From there, Liszt unfolds Beethoven's dramatic argument, demanding the pianist conjure the textures of a full orchestra with nothing but ten fingers and a well-calibrated pedal. Every surging crescendo, sudden silence, and harmonic twist remains intact, though filtered through Liszt's Romantic sensibility and pianistic imagination.It's a piece that asks as much of the performer as it does of the listener—requiring clarity, power, and emotional depth. As a transcription, it's both a tribute and a transformation, placing Beethoven's revolutionary energy in the hands of a single interpreter. We chose this movement not just for its fame, but for how it exemplifies two musical giants in dialogue—Beethoven, the architect of modern symphonic form, and Liszt, the artist who made the orchestra speak through the piano.Without further ado, Beethoven's Symphony No. 5 in C minor, Op. 67 — the first movement, Allegro con brio. Enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Hundreds of proposed amendments to the United States Constitution are introduced during each session of the United States Congress. From 1789 through January 3, 2025, approximately 11,985 measures have been proposed to amend the United States Constitution.[1] Collectively, members of the House and Senate typically propose around 200 amendments during each two-year term of Congress.[2] Most, however, never get out of the Congressional committees in which they were proposed. Only a fraction of those actually receive enough support to win Congressional approval to go through the constitutional ratification process. Some proposed amendments are introduced over and over again in different sessions of Congress. It is also common for a number of identical resolutions to be offered on issues that have widespread public and congressional support

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan introduce the course "Constitution 101". The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. The form of government prescribed by the Constitution is based on the timeless principles of the Declaration of Independence. These two documents establish the formal and final causes of the United States and make possible the freedom that is the birthright of all Americans.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan introduce the course "Constitution 101". The United States Constitution was designed to secure the natural rights proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Signed by Constitutional Convention delegates on September 17, 1787—Constitution Day—it was ratified by the American people and remains the most enduring and successful constitution in history. In this twelve-lecture course, students will examine the political theory of the American Founding and subsequent challenges to that theory throughout American history. Topics covered in this course include: the natural rights theory of the Founding, the meaning of the Declaration and the Constitution, the crisis of the Civil War, the Progressive rejection of the Founding, and the nature and form of modern liberalism. The form of government prescribed by the Constitution is based on the timeless principles of the Declaration of Independence. These two documents establish the formal and final causes of the United States and make possible the freedom that is the birthright of all Americans.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

i. Constitution We Believe 1. We believe the First Amendment's Establishment Clause was intended to prevent a federal government-sponsored or preferred religion, not to separate God from our government or to remove religion from public life; therefore, we affirm our right under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution to exercise our freedom of speech including religious speech. 2. We believe the Second Amendment is an individual right of the citizens of the United States to keep and bear arms; therefore, we oppose any attempts, whether by law or regulation at any level of government, to restrict any citizen's right to keep and bear arms (open or concealed), to restrict access to ammunition, or to record the purchase thereof. 3. We believe the United States Constitution directs the judiciary to interpret law, not make law or create law through judicial activism. 4. We believe in the concept that Congress shall make no law that applies to citizens of the United States that does not apply to the Senators and Representatives. 5. We believe in the concept of nullification as a legitimate tool for adjudicating disputes between the states and the federal government when the federal government enacts a law clearly not in pursuance of the constitution and powers delegated in Art. I, Sec. 8. 6. We believe in the Tenth Amendment that provides "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," and we oppose any attempt by the federal government to intrude on state's rights. 7. We believe the Constitution provides for a clear and distinct separation of powers among the three branches of government. Any governmental action that tends to promote or allow one branch of government to practice the power or powers of the other branches of government is a violation of the limits placed on government by the people. 8. We believe in the duty and obligation of the federal government and the State of Oklahoma to adhere to and respect treaties between the federal government and the Indian tribes. We Support 1. We support the display of Judeo-Christian religious symbols, including the Ten Commandments in public places. 2. We support legislation that will protect gun and ammunition manufacturers or resellers from lawsuits attempting to hold the manufacturers or resellers liable for misuse of guns. 3. We support requiring that candidates for president present public proof of qualification in accordance with the Constitution at the time of filing, through the election board of each state. 4. We support a US Constitutional Amendment requiring a balanced budget. 18 5. We support a US Constitutional Amendment instituting term limits for all elected members of Congress. 6. We support a U.S. Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. 7. We support a requirement that each piece of legislation only address one issue. 8. We support the review and minimization of the Endangered Species Act. 9. We support the abolishment, or reduction and restructuring, of the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Education, IRS, CIA, ATF, FBI, FEMA, NSA, DHS, CDC, and the Department of Labor and their powers and responsibilities distributed to state authority. 10. We support the protection of public and private sector whistleblowers who have firsthand information. 11. We support union's refunding dues used for partisan political activity. 12. We support the right of private associations to admit or deny membership based on what each association's conscience dictates. 13. We support an English Language Act, which would make English our official language in the United States. 14. We support the idea that when U.S. Conference Committees meet, they should consider only those terms submitted from the House and Senate, with no additional expenditures and items added. 15. We support the preservation of the National Day of Prayer. 16. We support legislation to limit the power of federal regulatory agencies. 17. We support the identification of persons as citizens or non-citizens in the census. We Oppose 1. We oppose any federal taxation on firearms, ammunition, or accessories and/or confiscation of firearms, ammunition, or accessories. 2. We oppose universal background checks and red flag laws for firearm purchases. 3. We oppose any legislation that would require the use of trigger or other locking devices on firearms. 4. We oppose any so-called "assault" weapons ban and any effort to register or restrict firearms, ammunition, or magazines. 5. We oppose legislation that would require gun owners to purchase insurance policies covering the misuse of their firearms. 6. We oppose the Patriot Act and the NDAA' s Sections 1021 and 1022, which allow American citizens, 19 except for enemy combatants, to be held indefinitely without due process, and call for its repeal. 7. We oppose court decisions based on any foreign law, such as Sharia Law, U.N. regulations and other international organizations, instead of U.S. law and Constitutional doctrine. 8. We oppose the creation of a new federal internal security force. 9. We oppose federal wage caps. 10. We oppose Statehood for the District of Columbia and allowing its representative a vote in Congress. 11. We oppose the appointment and funding of presidential "czars." 12. We oppose any attempts by the Federal Government to reinstitute the "Fairness Doctrine" or institute "Net Neutrality." 13. We oppose the construct of "Free Speech or Safe Zones." 14. We oppose national injunctions by federal district courts. 15. We oppose the use and sharing of data from Automated License Plate Readers as an infringement on our 4th amendment protected rights. ii. Criminal Justice We Believe 1. The rights of victims and their families must be protected in criminal proceedings, with notice and opportunity to attend all proceedings related to the crime(s) against them. 2. Restitution by the convicted criminal should be ordered to be made to the victim (or his estate) to compensate for losses and damages incurred as a result of the crime(s) committed. 3. The death penalty must be retained as an available punishment in appropriate cases. 4. Inmates who abuse the legal system by filing repeated frivolous claims should receive appropriate punishments for their misconduct. 5. Decisions on prison reform should be made by the Legislature after consultation with district attorneys, prison officials, and other interested parties, with the view towards stopping criminal behavior early, rather than adopting permissive treatment of low-level crimes which may deceive or encourage a young adult to continue on the wrong path under the mistaken assumption that there will be no consequences for criminal behavior. Consideration of incentives for first-time or youthful offenders who refrain from further misconduct may be a useful option to be considered in designing such reforms. 6. We believe in due process and that no one should be deprived of life, liberty, or property by the government or its agents without either being found guilty by a jury or pleading guilty of a crime. We therefore oppose the practice of civil asset forfeiture. 20 We Support 1. We support the repeal of The Oklahoma Uninsured Vehicle Enforcement Diversion Program as it is unconstitutional at the state and federal level. We Oppose 1. We oppose the monitoring, surveillance and tracking of United States citizens without a lawfully obtained warrant. iii. Federal & State Elections Preamble: The foundation of our representative-republic is honest elections. The Oklahoma Republican Party is committed to preserving every legally eligible Oklahoman's right to vote. We support only day of in-person voting as written in the Constitutions with limited exceptions to protect voting rights for the elderly, the disabled, military members, and all other eligible voters. We urge all elected officials around our state to take all necessary steps to ensure that voters may cast their ballots in a timely and secure manner. Security and transparency shall take precedence over convenience to ensure honest and fair, local, state, and federal elections. We Believe 1. We believe in fair and honest election procedures. 2. We believe equal suffrage for all United States citizens of voting age. 3. We believe in the constitutional authority of state legislatures to regulate voting. We Support 1. We support a bit-by-bit forensic audit of all electronic devices, including but not limited to servers, ballot machines, and paper ballots throughout the state immediately before and after each election. 2. We support vigorous enforcement of all our election laws as written and oppose any laws, lawsuits, and judicial decisions that make voter fraud difficult to deter, detect, or prosecute. 3. We support full enforcement of all voter ID laws currently enacted. 4. We support felony status for willful violations of the election code and increasing penalty for voter fraud from a misdemeanor back to a felony. 5. We support consolidating elections to primary, runoff, special, and general election. 6. We support sequentially numbered and signed ballots to deter counterfeiting. 7. We support expanding the Attorney General's staff for investigating election crimes and restoring the ability of the Attorney General to prosecute any election crimes. 8. We support the ability for civil lawsuits to be filed for election fraud or officials' failure to follow the Oklahoma Election Code. 21 9. We support allowing trained poll watchers from anywhere in Oklahoma with local party or candidate approval. 10. We support creating processes that will allow rapid adjudication of election law violations. 11. We support requiring voters to re-register if they have not voted in a five-year period. 12. We support requiring proof of residency, citizenship, and voter registration via photo ID for each voter. 13. We support retaining the 25-day registration deadline. 14. We support requiring a list of certified deaths be provided to the Secretary of State for the names of deceased voters to be removed from the list of registered voters, with checks every third year of the voter rolls to ensure all currently registered voters are eligible. 15. We support giving the Secretary of State enforcement authority to ensure county registrar compliance with Secretary of State directives. 16. We support protecting the integrity of the Republican Primary Election by requiring a closed primary system in Oklahoma. 17. We support drawing districts based on eligible voters, not pure population. Districts should be geographically compact when possible 18. We support hand counting of ballots. 19. We support recalls, audits, recounts, and irregularity and fraud investigations requested within 45 days of an election. 20. We support verification of United States citizenship for voting or registering to vote. 21. We support elections run by United States citizens. 22. We support counts to be posted on Precinct doors. We Oppose 1. We oppose internet voting, the use of tabulation machines and electronic voting machines of any kind for public office and any ballot measure. 2. We oppose all motor voter laws, automatic voter registration (AVR), and all forms of electronic databases, such as ERIC (Electronic Registration Information Center) and all third-party registration vendors. 3. We oppose all federal legislation, including but not limited to the Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022, which nullifies the 10th Amendment of the Bill of Rights. 22 4. We oppose unlawful voting, illegal assistance, or ineligible people voting in our national, state, and local elections. 5. We oppose ranked choice voting. 6. We oppose any identification of citizens by race, origin, creed, sexuality, or lifestyle choices and oppose the use of any such identification for the purposes of creating voting districts. We urge that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 be repealed. 7. We oppose any redistricting map that is unfair to conservative candidates in the Primary or the General Election. 8. We oppose the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact and any other scheme to abolish or distort the procedures of the Electoral College. 9. We oppose after-hours voting C. Natural Resources We Believe 1. We believe dependence on foreign energy sources is a national security issue. 2. We believe governments should ease restrictions in the search for energy and other natural resources. 3. We believe the federal agricultural appropriations should accurately show the percentage of money set aside for non-agricultural programs such as school lunch programs and food stamps. 4. We believe the responsible use of natural resources is essential for the benefit of future generations. We Support 1. We support the creation and enactment of a national energy policy to reduce dependence on foreign sources. 2. We support the private expansion of oil and gas exploration and refining capacity. 3. We support the exportation of U.S. petroleum products. 4. We support labeling of all food and fiber with country-of-origin labeling. Further, only products born, raised, slaughtered, and processed or sprouted, harvested, grown, and processed in this country should receive a U.S. label. 5. We support energy policy based on private development, efficient use and expansion of current resources such as fossil fuels, clean coal, and nuclear energy; and exploration and efficient use of other resources such as biofuels, wind, solar and water energy. 6. We support ending all federal and state subsidies, including tax credits, for industrial renewable 23 energy, including but not limited to, wind and solar. 7. We support the rights of individuals and businesses to refuse the installation of smart meters without penalties. 8. We support the right of states to provide water for present and future use within their borders by state residents before they can be designated for use to other states. 9. We support environmental recommendations that are based on sound science, that respect and protect the rights of property owners, and that do not impose unreasonable burdens on Oklahoma citizens or businesses. 10. We support more use of coal and natural gas to be used in the production of electricity. 11. We support the use of modular nuclear, or small natural gas fired generation facilities to be built close to high demand facilities to greatly reduce the need for long and expensive transmission lines. 12. We support mandatory country-of-origin labeling of meat products and that a country-of-origin label that states in any way that it is a product of the USA must be of the following requirements: Born, raised, harvested, packaged & processed in the USA. 13. We support The Packers and Stockyards Act and the enforcement of anti-trust laws. 14. We support private property rights and call for appropriate legislation to prohibit the use of eminent domain by private companies. 15. We stand with Oklahoma and her property owners against the Green Agenda. We Oppose 1. We oppose government curbs, moratoriums, punitive taxes and fees on our domestic oil and gas industry. 2. We oppose states selling water rights to out-of-state buyers. 3. We oppose the use of eminent domain for any water sale. 4. We oppose human rights for animals. 5. We oppose livestock taxation. 6. We oppose legislation that restricts or regulates family farms or farmers' markets. 7. We oppose restrictive regulation of carbon and particulate matter emissions in agriculture. 8. We oppose the "Cap and Trade" system for carbon dioxide. 9. We oppose the UN's Agenda 21, aka UN 2030, as a coordinated effort to relinquish the sovereignty of the United States to foreign powers. 24 10. We oppose the purchase or ownership of land by a foreign government or entity. 11. We oppose the production, selling, and labeling of a product that is an alternative protein source claiming to be meat, otherwise known as or referred to as fake meat, and labeling such product as meat, beef, burger, steak, or any other name given to an actual meat protein source derived from the production and slaughter of livestock. 12. We oppose current regulations that allow foreign beef to enter the U.S. and be packaged, repackaged, or commingled with domestic product and then labeled a product of the USA. 13. We oppose the theory that cow flatulence, belching, or any process of enteric fermentation that is said to emit methane or a greenhouse gas that some link to the theory of global warming is some sort of detriment threat to the environment. 14. We oppose any form of carbon tracking solutions imposed on farmers and ranchers that will ultimately lead to more costly and burdensome regulations. 15. We oppose NACs (natural asset companies) or similar companies derived by investors, the SEC, or any other entity that wishes to monetize, trade natural outputs, or otherwise maximize ecological performance in such a way that any company can control the management of public or private lands quantifying outputs of natural resources such as air and water. 16. We oppose any effort of the federal government to have any role in animal care or husbandry. 17. We oppose mandates or restrictions on the use of antibiotics for farm or veterinary use. 18. We oppose mandatory Electronic Identification device (EID) tags on livestock, birds, and animals. D. National Issues i. Defense We Believe 1. We believe that a strong national defense should be fully funded, provide sufficient compensation, educational opportunities, quality training, and the best equipment for our armed forces. 2. We believe any educational institution that inhibits the normal operations of ROTC or military recruiters should be ineligible for government funding. 3. We believe foreign enemies who have committed or planned acts of aggression against the U.S. are unlawful enemy combatants and are not entitled to citizenship rights under the U.S. Constitution. We believe they should be held in detention facilities such as Guantanamo Bay, not the U.S. Prisons Systems, and their cases adjudicated by military tribunals, not by U.S. Criminal Courts. 4. We believe Congress and the President should refrain from weakening the military through changes to the Uniform Coe of Military Justice. The military should be allowed to maintain its high level of honesty, integrity, morality, and operational capabilities. 25 5. We believe in the complete accounting of all MIAs and POWs that were engaged in military actions by the United States. We Support 1. We support maintaining a strong national defense and advocate "peace through strength", with a combat ready and capable force. 2. We support the right of the military's internal determination of who is qualified to perform the various roles and functions of each branch of the uniformed armed services. 3. We support veterans' and survivors' benefits, and to receive top quality health care. We support the reform of the Veteran's Administration and the use of private facilities when appropriate. 4. We support helping our veterans to succeed in their return to civilian life in medical care, mental health care, education, housing, and employment assistance. 5. We support the freedom of military chaplains to provide religious services including freedom of worship according to their faith. 6. We support and encourage continued public and privately funded exploration of space. 7. We support returning to "Don't Ask Don't Tell" for the military of the United States. We Oppose 1. We oppose re-instituting the draft except in time of war as declared by Congress. 2. We oppose drafting females into U.S. military service. 3. We oppose the military use of U.S. troops under foreign command except joint operations. 4. We oppose the erosion of our military's readiness through "gender norming" for training and promotion. 5. We oppose the further reduction of benefits and entitlements to service members, former service members, and their families. 6. We oppose halting military pay during US government shutdowns. ii. Foreign Relations We Support 1. We support economic stability be it in the U.S. or Internationally 2. We support the dollar as the principal currency of the world. 3. We support equal access of U.S. products to global markets and the elimination of trade barriers. 26 4. We support withdrawing from treaties and agreements, such as the Kyoto Treaty, and the Paris Climate Accord, that hamper the U.S. economy and compromises freedoms We Oppose 1. We oppose the Chinese Communist Party and any other governments that are manipulators of the U.S. dollar and exchange rates at the expense of U.S. National Security as well as economic stability. 2. We oppose paying into UN programs that are against American principles and freedoms. 3. We oppose any doctrines that infringe upon U.S. Sovereignty and the Sovereignty of U.S. allies such as Israel, the Ukraine, and Taiwan. 4. We oppose terrorism and any nations that sponsor terroristic organizations and groups that are anti-U.S. such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS. 5. We oppose the sale of technology by U.S. Corporations to terrorist and enemy nations. 6. We oppose the transfer of U.S. taxpayer wealth to any foreign governments under the umbrella of foreign, humanitarian aid, scientific research, and military assistance for non-U.S. interests. 7. We oppose the principles of the World Economic Forum to devalue the U.S. dollar and do not accept them as a body of global governance. 8. We oppose the creation of the Transatlantic Common Market 9. We oppose any United Nations Programs that seek a "world order" over the Earth's population and U.N. policies that are forced over the world's nations. 10. We oppose the World Health Organization's policies over U.S. citizens and setting precedent for the U.S. medical community. 11. We oppose foreign control over any ports or bases within the jurisdiction of the United States. 12. We oppose any actions taken by previous administrations that relinquish U.S. sovereignty and control over U.S. data and private communications. iii. Immigration We Support 1. We support limited legal immigration and embrace legal immigrants who choose to assimilate to our American culture, language, and values. 2. We support securing our borders against illegal immigrants and potential enemies of the United States including building a wall or barrier on our southern border. 3. We support legal requirements for citizenship, excluding provisions for birthright citizenship to children of illegal residents. 27 4. We support a strictly regulated and enforced guest worker program. Legal guest workers should assume social costs, such as education and health care for themselves and their dependents. 5. We support the method for determining the number of immigrants and temporary visa holders allowed in the United States should be revised to prevent an adverse effect on our national security, wages, housing, environment, medical care, or schools. 6. We support that the U.S. government should vigorously enforce and demand that all local law enforcement agencies uphold and enforce all federal laws concerning illegal immigration. We particularly support the work of the men and women of Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) and US Border Patrol and Protection. 7. We support the elimination of sanctuary cities for illegal aliens and the defunding of any government entity which declares itself a sanctuary city. 8. We support strong enforcement of state and federal laws dealing with illegal aliens. 9. We support substantial state fines for employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens. 10. We support issuing driver's license only to citizens and others who reside here legally, and not to illegal aliens. We Oppose 1. We oppose illegal aliens being given the same privileges as U.S. citizens or legal aliens, including entitlements such as Social Security, health care (excepting trauma care), education, and earned income tax credits. State government social programs should be available only to citizens and legal residents of the United States. 2. We oppose any form of blanket amnesty. 3. We oppose legal immigrants overstaying their visas. 4. We oppose a "path to citizenship" that would grant citizenship to illegal aliens faster than to immigrants who have come to the United States through legal means. E. State Issues i. State Legislature We Believe 1. We believe all bills should be limited to one issue. 2. We believe that it is the responsibility of individual legislators to read and to be knowledgeable of all pieces of legislation prior to voting. 3. We believe that all state-tribal compacts and agreements should require the approval of both houses of the legislature in addition to the ten-member Joint Committee on State-Tribal Relations. 28 4. We believe Oklahoma shall participate only in programs or plans that protect private property rights and encourage citizens to develop their property in a manner that does not harm others. 5. We believe Oklahoma should not participate in any global ID initiatives and should prohibit the introduction of a radio frequency identification device (RFID) in any state-issued identification card. 6. We believe the Oklahoma Lottery should be repealed. 7. We believe a fee shall be defined as funds collected for voluntary use of government service, be used exclusively for that service, and not to exceed the cost of that service. We Support 1. We support any legislation that protects our rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. 2. We support an explanation of the specific Oklahoma and U.S. Constitutional authority when filing a bill. 3. We support full funding of all state retirement systems. 4. We support legislation rescinding Oklahoma's previous calls for a U.S. Constitutional Convention. 5. We support the state and any county, municipality, city, town, school or any other political subdivision to display, in its public buildings and on its grounds, replicas of United States historical documents including, but not limited to, the Ten Commandments, Magna Carta, Mayflower Compact, Declaration of Independence, United States Constitution, Bill of Rights, Oklahoma Constitution and other historically significant documents in the form of statues, monuments, memorials, tablets or any other display that respects the dignity and solemnity of such documents. Such documents shall be displayed in a manner consistent with the context of other documents contained in such display. 6. We support full protection of U.S. Second Amendment rights in Oklahoma by amending the Oklahoma Constitution to mirror the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. 7. We support maintaining the Constitutional Carry law in Oklahoma statute. 8. We support the ability of state law enforcement to restore the peace and protect Oklahoma citizens through the arrest and prosecution of any persons/agents attempting to inflict unconstitutional laws/mandates on its citizens. 9. We support the fundamental right to own and to enjoy our private property and we oppose restrictions or losses of that right. 10. We support fair, just, and timely compensation for property owners when governmental regulations limit property use. 11. We support driver's license photos of a lower resolution that is perfectly adequate for visual identification, but not for biometric tracking. 12. We support the repeal of mandatory fingerprinting or other traceable biometric information, and 29 we oppose the maintenance of a biometric database, in connection with an application for a driver's license or government ID. 13. We support lawsuit reform including but not limited to "loser pays". 14. We support amending the current Right to Farm law to explicitly allow for expansion, production, technological changes, and measures to protect these activities. 15. We support the Unmanned Surveillance Act which prohibits the use of a drone when no warrant has been issued. 16. We support a state constitutional amendment requiring judges to inform jurors of their duty to judge the law (nullification); and prohibiting judges and district attorneys from infringing on the rights of the defense to inform the jury of this duty. 17. We support amending the Oklahoma Constitution to remove the unelected Judicial Nominating Commission and adopt the federal model authorizing the Governor to appoint Oklahoma appellate judges with confirmation by the Oklahoma State Senate. 18. We support the oversight and regulation of the medical marijuana industry for medical purposes only. 19. We support the state and its citizens maintaining control of all transportation instead of selling or leasing control of that right to foreign entities, corporations, private/public partnerships, or other states. 20. We support efficient and necessary spending on our state, county, and local roads and bridges because they are essential for economic growth and development. 21. We support a moratorium on creation of additional turnpikes in Oklahoma until existing turnpikes in Oklahoma have generated enough toll revenue based upon an independent audit to repay their original costs, are conveyed to state ownership, and converted to toll-free roads. 22. We support the elimination of the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority and all tolls. We Oppose 1. We oppose the final passage of any legislation before the full text has been read. 2. We oppose the concept of claiming property as "blighted" as a reason for taking land. 3. We oppose allowing state agencies to hire lobbyists to lobby other state agencies or the legislature. 4. We oppose animal ID programs by the government, leaving it up to the free market. 5. We oppose the expansion of gambling in any form in Oklahoma. 30 ii. State Agencies, State, County, and Local Government We Believe 1. We believe in transparent and honest government in the Oklahoma Legislature, all legislative committees, and in state and county agencies. 2. We believe all state agencies should be made accountable for maintenance of their records and accurate enforcement of rules, policies, and regulations. 3. We believe all government officials, including judges, who act in violation of the U.S. or Oklahoma Constitution should be impeached and removed from office in a timely manner. 4. We believe the Attorney General should be removed from the District Attorney's Council so that locally elected officials have the proper degree of autonomy. 5. We believe that no governmental agency or private business should require from any citizen any information that is not essential to the direct performance of the agency's/ business's operation or mandate. We Support 1. We support reducing the size of state government to allow citizens to do those things that people can do best for themselves. 2. We support legislative efforts to repeal outdated and irrelevant statutes in keeping with the philosophy of smaller government and support the elimination or consolidation of redundant authorities, boards, commissions, and agencies. 3. We support providing an enforcement mechanism to ensure compliance with the Open Meetings and Records Act and with audit findings. 4. We support external annual performance and financial audits. The auditor shall not be selected by the audited agencies. 5. We support public disclosure of all financial records of public institutions including trusts, authorities, libraries, community foundations, all state retirement funds, and teacher retirement funds. 6. We support the Whistleblower Act which protects all public employees, including higher education employees. 7. We support all elected and appointed officials to aggressively uncover, remedy, and prosecute all waste, fraud, and abuse in government including the elimination of all unnecessary state agencies. 8. We support the repeal of Title 11, Section 22-104.1 of the OK Statutes, which enables a municipal corporation to engage in any business it is authorized to license. 9. We support mandatory random drug testing for all employees of the State of Oklahoma and recipients of public assistance with sanctions for positive test results. 31 10. We support and call on the Attorney General to vigorously enforce Article XXII, Section 1 of the Oklahoma Constitution which prohibits foreign governments from owning businesses or real estate in Oklahoma. 11. We support that the state of Oklahoma shall not exercise any eminent domain action until at least 90% of affected property holders/interests has been acquired without the threat of eminent domain. 12. We support enforcement of state and federal Anti-Trust laws regulating the mergers of domestic and foreign corporations that create monopolies resulting in a loss of competition, and detrimental to Oklahoma entities. We Oppose 1. We oppose any exemptions to the current Open Meetings and Open Records Act. 2. We oppose unfunded mandates by the State Legislature and state agencies. 3. We oppose the declaration of a United Nations Day in Oklahoma. 4. We oppose legislative actions that would alter current county government structures (i.e. Home Rule). 5. We oppose self-serving legislation and conflict of interest legislation. 32   2025 Oklahoma Republican Party Platform Committee Casey Wooley, Chair Lori Gracey , Vice-Chair Patricia Pope – Blaine Bryan Morris – Canadian Rachel Ruiz – Canadian John Spencer – Canadian LeRoss Apple – Cimarron Bruce Fleming – Cleveland Sherrie Hamilton – Haskell Gary Voelkers – Kay Julie Collier – McClain Leslie Mahan – Oklahoma Ruth Foote – Oklahoma Mark Harris – Oklahoma Robert Scott – Okmulgee Jason Shilling – Payne Mishela DeBoer – Rogers Patricia Lyle – Rogers John Doak – Tulsa April Dawn Brown – Garvin Amanda Bergerson – Logan Michelle Wax – Carter Jana Belcher – Grady

We are living in the age of Trump-induced darkness: an executive branch that damn-near every day demonstrates a disdain for the rule of law and the United States Constitution. But there are so many points of light on the legal front.Glenn recently had the pleasure of sitting down with the Culpeper County Democratic Committee to discuss the legal issues of the day. This is part three of a three-part series of his extended chat with the Culpeper Dems, focusing on how Trump and Pam Bondi are misusing the power of the Department of Justice and abusing the rule of law, and how Trump and Pete Hegseth are misusing the power of the military and abusing our military members. Glenn finishes by discussing the many nonprofit organizations that are fighting in court every day for our rights and how they are true points of light giving hope in the darkness of Trumplandia. Thank you to Team Justice member Leo for video and editing work on this project. Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Welcome, everyone, to a special Cops and Writers Podcast. Due to the nature and timing of our topic today, I released this episode early. Back in late October, retired DEA Agents (legends) Steve Murphy, Wes Tabor, and Chris Feistl predicted on the Cops and Writers Podcast episodes 250 and 251, that the U.S. would take the fight to Maduro and attack on land. On January 3, 2026, the U.S. captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, in a military operation in Caracas, Venezuela. I have heard so many opinions on this from ‘experts’, I'm using air quotes, living in social media-fueled echo chambers, and I wanted to get the true story. So I brought back my experts in narco-terrorism, drug cartels, and international drug smuggling, Steve, Wes, and Chris.  Here’s an intro to my experts for today’s show. Retired DEA Special Agent Wes Tabor (episodes 235,236, & 237). Wes was embedded in Venezuela, battling the drug cartel and gangs for three years. He had a front-row seat to the prospering drug trade and threat to the United States and wrote the book, Infiltrate America: Blood Routes and the Rise of Latin American Gangs. So, of course, I asked him to be on the show again, and he graciously agreed. Of course, I would be remiss if I were going to be talking about drug cartels and smuggling, not to have two experts who took down some of the most notorious drug cartels and their leaders in modern times. Steve Murphy and Chris Feistl.  Retired DEA Special Agent Steve Murphy and his partner Javier Pena are best known for taking down the Medellin Cartel and its leader, Pablo Escobar. Steve is an expert in drug smuggling and cartels and is considered an expert in the world of narcoterrorism. Steve and Javier’s work was featured in many television documentaries and was featured in the Netflix special, DEA Narcos. Retired DEA Special Agent Chris Feistl and his partner Dave Mitchell are best known for taking down the Cali Cartel and its leaders Gilberto and Miguel Rodríguez Orejuela. Chris’s work was featured in many television documentaries and was also featured in season three of the Netflix special DEA Narcos. After listening to these three experts explain recent operations in Venezuela, I have gained valuable insights into why we arrested Maduro and his wife. I hope this clears things up for you as well. Please enjoy my conversation with these DEA legends and experts.   In today’s episode, we discuss: ·      Back in October, the big talk was about the United States Navy taking out 36 drug boats. ·      Why and what gave us the authority to conduct these operations?  ·      Article 2, section 2, of the United States Constitution gives the current administration the authority to carry out operations in Venezuela. ·      The United States military, most likely Seal Team Six and Delta operators, performed a surgical strike, taking Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, without hurting them. Six of our servicemen were injured, and an aircraft was damaged. All U.S. personnel and equipment made it back to the sea vessels. ·      Is Mexico next? ·      Going back in time and giving us a brief background on what brought us to this point. How did Maduro gain power, and what led to his indictment in 2020? ·      The parallels with Operation Just Cause and the capture and arrest of Manuel Antonio Noriega. ·      What do you predict for the outcome of this arrest? Time in prison, etc.? ·      What’s next for the country of Venezuela? ·      There are many who say this has nothing to do with drugs and is motivated by President Trump going after oil. What do you all say? ·      Our views on socialism.        Visit Steve Murphy's website! Visit Wes Tabor's Website! Visit Chris Feistl's Website!        Check out the new Cops and Writers YouTube channel! Check out my newest book, The Good Collar (Michael Quinn Vigilante Justice Series Book 1)!!!!! Enjoy the Cops and Writers book series. Please visit the Cops and Writers website.

We are living in the age of Trump-induced darkness: an executive branch that damn-near every day demonstrates a disdain for the rule of law and the United States Constitution. But there are so many points of light on the legal front.Glenn recently had the pleasure of sitting down with the Culpeper County Democratic Committee to discuss the legal issues of the day. This is part three of a three-part series of his extended chat with the Culpeper Dems, focusing on how Trump and Pam Bondi are misusing the power of the Department of Justice and abusing the rule of law, and how Trump and Pete Hegseth are misusing the power of the military and abusing our military members. Glenn finishes by discussing the many nonprofit organizations that are fighting in court every day for our rights and how they are true points of light giving hope in the darkness of Trumplandia. Thank you to Team Justice member Leo for video and editing work on this project. Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

We are living in the age of Trump-induced darkness: an executive branch that damn-near every day demonstrates a disdain for the rule of law and the United States Constitution. But there are so many points of light on the legal front amidst the Trump-induced darkness. Glenn sat down with the Culpeper County Democratic Committee to discuss the legal issues of the day. This is part two of a three-part series of his extended chat with the Culpeper Dems, focusing on how federal judges nationwide are standing strong and ruling against Trump's lawless and unconstitutional acts. Thank you to Team Justice member Leo for video and editing work on this project. Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

We are living in the age of Trump-induced darkness: an executive branch that damn-near every day demonstrates a disdain for the rule of law and the United States Constitution. But there are so many points of light on the legal front amidst the Trump-induced darkness. Glenn sat down with the Culpeper County Democratic Committee to discuss the legal issues of the day. This is part two of a three-part series of his extended chat with the Culpeper Dems, focusing on how federal judges nationwide are standing strong and ruling against Trump's lawless and unconstitutional acts. Thank you to Team Justice member Leo for video and editing work on this project. Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureCanada is having problems, they are following the green new scam, since Trump placed tariffs on Canada they are desperately trying to find trading partners.Trump shows how windmills kill birds, where are all the environmentalist. The EU is now pushing the CBDC, Trump’s economy will overshadow the rest of the world. The people of this country and others must see the criminal syndicate. Without seeing it they people would have never believed there was a criminal syndicate. Trump has the leverage, more is coming in 2026 and after the midterms Trump is going to unleash hell on the [DS]. Every crime, scam and violation of the Constitution will be exposed. Justice is coming. Economy Canada Trying to Find Trade Partners   Prime Minister Mark Carney reflects a particular reality of the problem their economy will face in 2026. It appears that Canadian government officials have finally recognized the Trump administration plans to dissolve the USMCA or what Canada calls CUSMA next year.  With that reality they have a big problem. Mexico has been working throughout the year to initiate economic policies in alignment with the United States.  However, structurally and politically this is an alignment that is impossible for Canada to do.  Like many contracting European countries, the economic policies of Canada are centered around their climate change agenda and green energy goals. In order for Canada to position their economy to be in alignment with the rest of North America (USA and Mexico), Carney would have to reverse years of legislated rules and regulations.  That is not going to happen, and Canada will always be at a disadvantage because of it.   With three quarters of their economic production tied to exports into the USA, and with the USMCA likely to be dissolved in favor of a bilateral trade agreement, Canada now has to find other markets for its products or lower all the trade barriers currently in place.  Prime Minister Mark Carney is trying to find alternative markets. Carney has looked toward Europe, but that is a closed trade bloc difficult to engage.  Carney has looked to southeast Asia, but that is an export driven market with limited capabilities to import costly western products.  Carney has looked to Japan and China, but on scale there's little to be gained. The question is, where can Canada send its products if not to the USA.   The brutally honest answer is nowhere.  There just isn't any other market, or combination of markets, who could replace the consumer base of the USA.  Canada is refusing to admit this reality and 2026 is going to be a harsh awakening for the Canadian people. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com  https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/2006140340068291046?s=20  – A 2025 Trump administration initiative aims to enforce $1 million fines per bald eagle death. (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Initial Jobless Claims End 2025 Near Record Lows The number of Americans filing for jobless claims for the first time plummeted last week to 199k – the lowest since the Thanksgiving week plunge and pretty much the lowest since Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2006392860006846799?s=20   to give them a shot at winning the midterms. https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2006141249045291038?s=20   went to the liquor store again and tried to buy €100 worth of booze using the government-run digital currency on your iPhone, but your transaction gets rejected. Why? Because some Eurotrash EU bureaucrat decided that it’s unhealthy for you to buy so much liquor in such a short period of time, so you gets nothing. And you have no recourse, because you have become a serf whose life is at the discretion of the government. (As an aside, single-payer, government-funded healthcare will work in synchronicity with this, deciding what is best for you health-wise, because after all it’s not fair that other citizens must pay for your cirrhosis and bad judgment.) You have been warned, Europe. Political/Rights https://twitter.com/SecDuffy/status/2006203195165462545?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2006203195165462545%7Ctwgr%5Ebc322e2414802c704b50bc3c2955bae6d38269c1%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Frusty-weiss%2F2025%2F12%2F31%2Fgavin-newsom-tries-to-keep-illegals-on-the-road-a-little-longer-sean-duffy-immediately-cuts-him-off-n2197630 including cutting nearly $160 million in federal funding. https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2006168699502215508?s=20   The Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General can get involved in any DOJ matter they choose. It'a not a judge's job to get in the middle of those internal deliberations. That's a serious violation of the separation of powers. The American voters want violent illegals out of our country. Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr., a Nashville Obama judge, needs to get back in his lane. https://twitter.com/HansMahncke/status/2006046386190422054?s=20   on taxpayers, should not exploit welfare systems built by the native population, should speak the language, assimilate into the host society, respect its laws and norms, and should not receive special carve-outs like separate schools, parallel institutions or different rules. If even these minimal basics can no longer gain agreement, then there is no realistic path to fixing the system at all. DOGE Geopolitical https://twitter.com/FBIDirectorKash/status/2005795643126595959?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2005795643126595959%7Ctwgr%5E813dbbc99cf3dee762087820edf11e55af9622ca%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fjenniferoo%2F2025%2F12%2F30%2Fisis-in-texas-fbi-arrests-man-who-helped-fund-global-terrorist-organizations-n2197594   propaganda, sent cryptocurrency believing it would fund terrorist activity, and attempted to deliver materials intended for explosive devices. This is radical Islamic terrorism, and it was identified and stopped. Great work by our FBI teams @FBIDallas and great law enforcement partners. https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/2006157155666182556?s=20 https://twitter.com/AAbsaroka/status/2005723457997484150?s=20 https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2006176939854196897?s=20 https://twitter.com/Osint613/status/2005961263419883887?s=20 https://twitter.com/Osint613/status/2006095673423179995?s=20 https://twitter.com/USABehFarsi/status/2005874044319436965?s=20 Courage if it were a picture…This is a black-and-white aerial photo depicting a scene from protests in Iran (likely Tehran, based on the post’s hashtags). It shows a lone individual standing defiantly in the street, holding a long pole or banner horizontally, facing a group of about a dozen uniformed security forces or riot police on motorcycles. The image symbolizes courage in the context of human rights and anti-regime demonstrations. War/Peace https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/2006367551878844863?s=20 https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/2006295058492882982?s=20 https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/2006107978504524105?s=20 Zelenskyy Urges Trump to Visit Ukraine to Seal Russia Peace Deal Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy suggested that President Donald Trump should visit Ukraine to help close a peace deal with Russia. Zelenskyy specifically urged Trump to travel directly into Ukraine rather than entering through Poland, arguing that such a visit would demonstrate confidence that a ceasefire is within reach. Source: newsmax.com Medical/False Flags [DS] Agenda Biden Housing Scandal EXPLODES: HUD Report Reveals Over $5 Billion in Questionable Rental Aid, Including Payments to Dead People and Non-Citizens  A bombshell federal report has blown the lid off yet another massive Biden-era taxpayer scandal — this time inside the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. According to HUD's own Fiscal Year 2025 Agency Financial Report, more than $5 billion in rental assistance payments during the final year of the Biden regime were flagged as “questionable” or improper, exposing systemic failures, nonexistent oversight, and breathtaking incompetence at the federal level. Among the most jaw-dropping revelations: tens of thousands of payments were made to people who were already DEAD, and thousands more went to recipients who may not have even been eligible to receive taxpayer-funded housing assistance at all, the New York Post first reported. Buried in the HUD report is a stunning admission that federal systems failed to stop payments to 30,054 deceased individuals who were either still listed as active tenants or continued receiving rental assistance after their deaths. HUD officials acknowledged that only after cross-checking Treasury databases did they finally identify the scope of the problem — meaning for years, taxpayers were unknowingly footing the bill for people who no longer exist. “[Over] 30,000 dead people receiving housing isn't an accident — it was systematic fraud by Biden and the left. HUD will hold those who defrauded the American taxpayers accountable,” HUD Secretary Scott Turner wrote on X. According to the report:   “large concentration” of these questionable rental assistance funds flowed to Democrat-run strongholds, including: New York California Washington, D.C. Yet payments to deceased recipients were found in all 50 states, proving the rot was nationwide. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2006068825272508679?s=20   to U.S. citizens. See 8 U.S.C. § 1623(a). There are no exceptions. Virginia violates it nonetheless. This court should put an end to this and permanently enjoin the enforcement of provisions of the Virginia Education Code that directly conflict with federal immigration law. Virginia Code §§ 23.1-502 and 23.505.1 explicitly classify illegal aliens as Virginia residents based on certain conditions. That classification makes illegal aliens eligible for reduced in-state tuition and state-administered financial assistance for public state colleges and universities while U.S. citizens from other states are ineligible for the reduced tuition and must pay higher out-of-state tuition rates. This is not only wrong but illegal. The challenged act's discriminatory treatment in favor of illegal aliens over U.S. citizens is squarely prohibited and preempted by federal law, which provides that “an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State . . . for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit . . . without regard to whether the citizen or national is such a resident.” 8 U.S.C. § 1623(a) (emphasis added). The challenged act, as applied to illegal aliens, is thus unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. This Court should declare Virginia's law, as applied to illegal aliens, preempted and permanently enjoin its enforcement.” https://twitter.com/jonesville/status/2006273719602475506?s=20 https://twitter.com/thehoffather/status/2006240702213099815?s=20 https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2006327355166589007?s=20 https://twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/2006031707724546400?s=20 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/2006038706893836481?s=20 https://twitter.com/HansMahncke/status/2006393802714439774?s=20 https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2006028437899862286?s=20  Patronage System here in America AND help them successfully assimilate. https://twitter.com/HHS_Jim/status/2006136004294664464?s=20  against the blatant fraud that appears to be rampant in Minnesota and across the country: 1. I have activated our defend the spend system for all ACF payments. Starting today, all ACF payments across America will require a justification and a receipt or photo evidence before we send money to a state. 2. Alex Adams and I have identified the individuals in @nickshirleyy ‘s excellent work. I have demanded from @GovTimWalz a comprehensive audit of these centers. This includes attendance records, licenses, complaints, investigations, and inspections. 3. We have launched a dedicated fraud-reporting hotline and email address at https://childcare.gov Whether you are a parent, provider, or member of the general public, we want to hear from you. We have turned off the money spigot and we are finding the fraud. @ACFHHS @HHSGov https://twitter.com/DOGE_HHS/status/2006145075315929532?s=20 will expand the system to support itemized receipts and photographic evidence, and make all data/receipts, where possible, available to the public. https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2006120694497857977?s=20   move to another state that is honest. Make sense? https://twitter.com/C__Herridge/status/2006091693259636775?s=20  alleges the probes were “buried” because it potentially implicated Biden Administration allies •Between late May 2025 and December 2025 FBI had 16 open investigations into approximately 32 healthcare and homecare providers accused of fraud •Described as massive, joint investigations including HHS Inspector General, Medicaid Fraud Unit, IRS, Postal Inspectors, MN Attorney General, MN Department of Education,  and others Probes Now Expanding In Minnesota, Investigators Are Exploring Nation-wide Fraud Schemes •FBI Surging forensic accountants and data analytics teams to MN •Identifying fraud, then “following the money” to see the “entire web” •Investigating potential links to elected officials and terrorist financing •Potential criminal violations include public corruption, fraud, cyber fraud, healthcare fraud, homecare fraud, money-laundering Investigations Include Federal Nutrition Programs •These investigations including day care facilities are exploring links to alleged fraud involving federal nutrition programs •The Feeding our Future probe exposed an alleged $250m fraud scheme that obtained federal funding during COVID for nutrition programs but almost NO meals were provided to children •It's alleged the monies were laundered through multiple entities to enrich the participants •78 have been indicted, 57 convicted, two found not guilty among the group. Just a heads up that Patel and Trump's FBI have been all over the Minnesota fraud thing for months, 78 people have already been indicted, and Kash is openly admitting that this was buried by the Biden admin. That’s not how FBI & DOJ work. Criminal investigations take months. Trials take years. No one knows yet if Bondi & Kash will measure up. It’s too early to tell. WATCH: Karoline Leavitt Says Trump “Not Afraid to Use Denaturalization” Against Somali Fraudsters — Search Warrants Being Executed and “People Will be in Handcuffs” Denaturalization, also known as revocation of naturalization, is the legal process by which the U.S. government revokes the citizenship of a naturalized U.S. citizen, effectively stripping them of their citizenship status. This is not a process that private individuals can initiate or “do” themselves; it is exclusively handled by the federal government through judicial proceedings in U.S. district court. It cannot be done administratively by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) alone, following a court ruling in 2000 that limited such authority. Grounds for DenaturalizationUnder the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), denaturalization can only occur based on specific legal grounds. These include: The individual did not meet statutory requirements for naturalization at the time, such as lawful permanent residence, good moral character, required periods of residence or physical presence, or attachment to the principles of the U.S. Constitution (INA 316 and INA 340(a)).  The person hid key information or lied during the naturalization process (e.g., on Form N-400 or in interviews), and this directly led to approval. The fact must be “material,” meaning it could have influenced the decision (INA 340(a); see Supreme Court case Kungys v. United States, 485 U.S. 759 (1988)). Within five years after naturalization, the person joins or affiliates with the Communist Party, a totalitarian party, or a terrorist organization, which is seen as evidence of lacking attachment to the U.S. Constitution (INA 313, INA 340(c), and INA 316(a)(3)). For those who naturalized based on U.S. military service, revocation can occur if they receive a discharge under other-than-honorable conditions before completing at least five years of honorable service (INA 328(f) and INA 329(c)). These grounds apply only to naturalized citizens (those who went through the full process, including application, interview, approval, and oath). U.S.-born citizens cannot be denaturalized under these provisions. The process is initiated and pursued by the government, not individuals. Here’s a high-level overview:  USCIS or other agencies (like the Department of Homeland Security) identify potential cases through audits, investigations, or tips about fraud or ineligibility. If there’s sufficient evidence, USCIS refers the case to the Department of Justice (DOJ) via the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Coordination happens through USCIS’s Office of the Chief Counsel. Judicial Proceedings: The DOJ files a complaint in federal district court under INA 340(a). The government must prove its case by “clear, convincing, and unequivocal evidence” that leaves no doubt. This is a high standard, and the process can take years. Criminal Revocation: If the case involves fraud, the DOJ may pursue criminal charges under 18 U.S.C. 1425 (unlawful procurement of citizenship). A conviction automatically revokes naturalization under INA 340(e), with proof required beyond a reasonable doubt. If the court rules in favor of revocation, it issues an order canceling the Certificate of Naturalization, which the person must surrender. Citizenship is revoked retroactively to the original naturalization date, reverting the individual to their prior immigration status (often lawful permanent resident, but this could lead to deportation proceedings under INA 237). USCIS updates records and notifies the Department of State. Denaturalization is rare—historically, around 22,000 cases occurred in the 20th century, often tied to wartime or political contexts—but it has been used more in recent years for fraud cases. https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2006013185355112758?s=20   fraud in a ginormous scale. Minnesota also lets one person vouch for 8 migrant voters’ eligibility to vote WITHOUT them having to prove it! Minnesota needs to clean house, NOW. https://twitter.com/StephenM/status/2006079447922008292?s=20 President Trump's Plan  https://twitter.com/FBIDDBongino/status/2006087308404314365?s=20   disrupted (210% increase) -2,000+ kilos of Fentanyl seized (up 31%), enough to kill 130 million Americans -Nihilistic Violent Extremism arrests up 490% -Over 6,000 child victims located (up 22%) -Historic drop in U.S. murder rate. Please read the post from Director Patel for more details on the progress that has been made, and is ongoing. https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2006091717074903047?s=20 https://twitter.com/Kimberlyrja8/status/2006193599365423586?s=20 LISTEN  (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureCalifornia is destroying their gasoline market, they want the state to own it, socialism. Oil prices are dropping, gas prices are dropping soon gas will be close to $1. Trump is reversing the [CB] illusion, jobs are being returned to the private sector. All in preparation to go back to the Constitution. The [DS] will continue to push back and try to delay everything Trump is trying to do. The House is prepared to make his EO into law, this will protect the country into the future. Trump had the real Generals stand behind him, these are the individuals that will protect the Republic from the [DS]. Trump is undoing decades of corruption, exposing the [DS] treasonous crimes, they will fight to hide their treasonous acts but this will fail. In the end the Military is the only way. Economy (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); https://twitter.com/US_OGA/status/2000639453866651711?s=20 https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/2000951982874636662?s=20 https://twitter.com/profstonge/status/2000628845918265518?s=20 https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/2000925538131829101?s=20 https://twitter.com/RealEJAntoni/status/2000925018281402525?s=20 https://twitter.com/profstonge/status/2000952081012940948?s=20 https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2000966123274068007?s=20 https://twitter.com/RealEJAntoni/status/2000936248370717073?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2000922549060858200?s=20   $2,000 per household, depending on the number of workers.” “[The economy] is gonna start lifting off in Q1 and Q2.” This is HUGE! Political/Rights https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/2000701268806062358?s=20 https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/2000713713423196652?s=20 https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/2000766725231665257?s=20 https://twitter.com/KnightsTempOrg/status/2000645606964933100?s=20 WEIRD? Police Publish and Quickly Delete Photos of Rob Reiner's Son Being Cuffed for Slaughtering Parents, Give No Explanation Nick Reiner, the 32-year-old son of liberal activist and famed director Rob Reiner, has been arrested and charged with the brutal murder of his parents. The LAPD Gang and Narcotics Division published dramatic photos of Nick's handcuffed arrest on Instagram on Monday, but quickly deleted them without explanation. Rob Reiner, 78, known for classics like The Princess Bride, Spinal Tap, and When Harry Met Sally, and his wife Michele Singer Reiner, 68, were found stabbed to death in their Brentwood, Los Angeles home on Sunday afternoon. The New York Post reports: Nick Reiner, whose face is blurred out, is seen being forced to the ground with his hands cuffed behind his back, according to one photo. Another snap showed law enforcement pushing the suspect against the front of a squad car. In the caption, the unit only identified the man as “a double homicide suspect.” The arrest was made by US Marshals with the assistance of the LAPD's robbery homicide division, according to the post. An LAPD spokesperson declined to comment when asked why the force's gang and narcotics unit deleted the arrest photo shortly after it was published. The since-deleted photos: Nick, who has long battled severe drug addiction starting in his teens, co-wrote and starred in the 2016 semi-autobiographical film Being Charlie, directed by his father, which chronicled a young man's struggles with substance abuse and rehab. Insiders report that Nick “really resented” his father and “hated himself for not being as successful,” amid ongoing family tensions. The night before the murders, Rob and Nick reportedly got into a “very loud argument” at Conan O'Brien's Christmas party, loud enough for other guests to notice. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/nypost/status/2000870292227260695?s=20 https://twitter.com/barrycunningham/status/2000736216354853228?s=20   lists are…well you know. TAKE A LISTEN https://twitter.com/RealSLokhova/status/2000919590449394156?s=20 Real Texas Conservative  The tragic deaths of filmmaker Rob Reiner and his wife Michele on December 14, 2025, have cast a somber shadow over Hollywood, prompting reflections on legacy, loss, and the lingering scars of political division. In response, President Donald Trump’s Truth Social post on December 15, 2025 – framing their passing through the lens of “Trump Derangement Syndrome” (TDS) – has ignited controversy. Yet, when examined against the backdrop of Reiner’s decade-long barrage of vitriolic rhetoric against Trump, the statement emerges not as callous, but as an appropriate blend of pointed satire, genuine sympathy, and a timely concern for mental health. This piece builds an ironclad case for its fittingness, rooted in factual history, psychological insight, and legal precedent. To understand the appropriateness of Trump’s words, one must first confront the unyielding hostility Reiner directed at him since 2015. Reiner, celebrated for directing classics like “This Is Spinal Tap” and “The Princess Bride,” transformed into one of Trump’s most vocal detractors after his presidential candidacy. In a 2016 interview with The Hollywood Reporter, Reiner labeled Trump a “con man” and “dangerous,” warning he would erode democratic norms. This escalated over the years. By 2018, Reiner tweeted comparisons of Trump to Hitler, accusing him of fostering fascism and white supremacy. His 2024 documentary “God & Country” explicitly tied Trump’s influence to Christian nationalism, portraying it as a threat to American democracy. Reiner’s social media feed became a relentless stream of attacks, calling Trump a “pathological liar,” “sociopath,” and “existential danger” in posts that amassed millions of views. Even in 2025, shortly before his death, Reiner urged boycotts of Trump-related events, framing his re-election as apocalyptic. These were not isolated jabs but a sustained campaign, often personal and inflammatory, that Reiner himself admitted stemmed from deep-seated outrage. This history of antagonism, predominantly initiated by Reiner, sets the stage for why Trump’s response is not only defensible but proportionate. Far from escalating the feud posthumously, Trump’s post acknowledges Reiner’s talents – “a tortured and struggling, but once very talented movie director and comedy star” – while attributing the tragedy to TDS, a “mind-crippling disease” fueled by “raging obsession.” This framing isn’t baseless invention; it’s grounded in credible psychological analysis. Critics have questioned the timing of Trump’s post, issued just a day after the tragedy, as potentially too raw or opportunistic. However, this immediacy is precisely what makes it authentic and effective, aligning with Trump’s longstanding style of direct, unfiltered leadership in a 24/7 news cycle where narratives solidify within hours. Historical precedents abound; consider how President Lincoln addressed critics’ deaths or political losses with prompt wit during the Civil War, using fresh moments to foster national introspection and prevent distorted legacies. Similarly, Trump’s swift response cuts through emerging media spin – already framing Reiner solely as a heroic anti-Trump voice – by injecting balance and psychological truth right when public discourse peaks. Delaying would risk seeming calculated or detached, whereas this timing underscores sincerity, especially paired with the post’s sympathetic close. In essence, it’s not haste but strategic candor, transforming grief into a teachable moment on division’s dangers before emotions calcify. Transitioning from personal history to broader insight, TDS has been recognized by mental health experts as a manifestation of intense political polarization leading to real psychological strain. Psychiatrist Dr. Keith Ablow, in analyses shared on platforms like the Mark Simone Show, described TDS as rooted in “mass hysteria,” where individuals project anxieties onto a political figure, resulting in paranoia, chronic stress, and potential health declines. Research in the Journal of Abnormal Psychology supports this, linking partisan hatred to elevated cortisol levels, anxiety disorders, and weakened well-being. Trump’s reference to TDS isn’t mockery; it’s a diagnostic observation, highlighting how Reiner’s fixation – evident in his own words – might have contributed to personal tolls, especially amid reports of familial strife surrounding the deaths. By raising this, Trump shifts the narrative from vendetta to vigilance, urging awareness of how ideological obsessions erode lives. Moreover, the post’s satirical edge aligns with a storied tradition of political commentary, making it intellectually apt rather than insensitive. Trump employs hyperbole – “driving people CRAZY” amid America’s “Golden Age” – to underscore the irony of Reiner’s paranoia against tangible achievements like record economic growth, Middle East peace accords, and energy independence during his administration. This mirrors Jonathan Swift’s exaggerated proposals in “A Modest Proposal” or Abraham Lincoln’s witty rebukes of critics, using humor to expose societal flaws without literal malice. Legally, such expression is shielded by the First Amendment; the Supreme Court’s ruling in Hustler Magazine v. Falwell affirms that satirical opinions about public figures, absent provable falsehoods, are protected speech. Trump’s “reportedly due to” phrasing acknowledges speculation, ensuring it remains opinion, not defamation. What elevates the statement to appropriateness is its undercurrent of grace amid past unkindnesses, including Trump’s rare direct engagement with Reiner pre-tragedy despite the instigations. The post concludes with “May Rob and Michele rest in peace!” This isn’t perfunctory; it’s a sincere extension of sympathy, humanizing both parties and transcending the feud while modeling reciprocity in an era of unrelenting acrimony. Trump’s words match rhetoric’s intensity yet cap it with compassion and a mental health caveat, turning potential gloating into a nudge toward understanding division’s toll. In conclusion, Trump’s response is ironclad in its fittingness because it reciprocates a decade of Reiner’s attacks with measured satire, validates psychological realities, and prioritizes sympathy over score-settling. It doesn’t diminish the tragedy but illuminates division’s costs, encouraging reflection. Postscript: While the author is not an attorney or mental health practitioner, his nearly two decades as a seasoned content writer and editor have honed expert research skills, enabling rigorous analysis grounded in verifiable facts and legal precedents. https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/2000931274744324237?s=20 https://twitter.com/AlecLace/status/2000700955457630718?s=20 https://twitter.com/KurtSchlichter/status/2000694706054029700?s=20  reason for it. Sadly, past experience, teaches us that the most likely reason for the lack of transparency is that the answers are not going to support the left-wing agenda of the local Rhode Island Democrats. I could be wrong. But if I was wrong, I have a nagging suspicion. I would've had answers to those questions already. The FBI is offering a $50,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of this man. Trump blames Brown, not FBI, for delay in finding shooting suspect President Trump blamed Brown University for the delay in locating the suspect in the fatal mass shooting on the school's campus in Rhode Island on Saturday. “You'd really have to ask the school a little bit more about that because this was a school problem,” Trump said when asked on Monday if FBI Director Kash Patel has told him why it's been difficult for the FBI to identify the suspected shooter. “They had their own guards. They had their own police. They had their own everything, but you'd have to ask that question really to the school, not to the FBI. We came in after the fact, and the FBI will do a good job, but they came in after the fact,” he said. Source: thehill.com War/Peace https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2000694318512652750?s=20 JUST IN: US OBLITERATES 3 More Venezuelan Drug Boats Just Hours After President Trump Designates Fentanyl as a Weapon of Mass Destruction United States Southern Command on Monday announced that Joint Task Force Southern Spear took out three narcotrafficking vessels in the Eastern Pacific.  A total of eight “narco-terrorists” were killed in the strikes. “Intelligence confirmed that the vessels were transiting along known narco-trafficking routes in the Eastern Pacific and were engaged in narco-trafficking,” US SOUTHCOM said. Video from the strikes shows massive explosions on each boat, turning them into burning piles of rubble. https://twitter.com/Southcom/status/2000756230252314901?s=20 Source: thegatewaypundit.com Trump: Syria is a key part of peace efforts in the Middle East Washington, Dec. 16 (SANA) U.S. President Donald Trump described the developments in Syria this year as “remarkable,” highlighting that the United States is committed to ensuring lasting peace in the Middle East, with Syria playing an essential role in that peace. Source: sana.sy 1306 Q !xowAT4Z3VQ ID: e7b971 No.1248119 Apr 30 2018 10:51:06 (EST) Define the terms of the Iran nuclear deal. Does the agreement define & confine cease & desist ‘PRO' to the republic of Iran? What if Iran created a classified ‘satellite' Nuclear facility in Northern Syria? What if the program never ceased? What other bad actors are possibly involved? Did the U.S. know? Where did the cash payments go? How many planes delivered? Did all planes land in same location? Where did the U1 material end up? Is this material traceable? Yes. Define cover. What if U1 material ended up in Syria? What would be the primary purpose? SUM OF ALL FEARS. In the movie, where did the material come from? What country? What would happen if Russia or another foreign state supplied Uranium to Iran/Syria? WAR. What does U1 provide? Define cover. Why did we strike Syria? Why did we really strike Syria? Define cover. Patriots in control. Q British Intelligence Head Says Prepare for War Against Russia  The newly appointed head of MI6, Blaise Metreweli, formerly known by her position as “Q”, is literally the granddaughter of factual Ukraine Nazi, Constantine Dobrowolski.  Now, as head of MI6 Metreweli wants war with Russia. In a rather remarkable speech to the British people, Blaise Metreweli proclaimed Europe is in “the space between peace and war,” with a direct military conflict with Russia looming as the biggest threat.  Metreweli declared, “Our world is being actively remade, with profound implications for national and international security.” Source: theconservativetreehouse.com https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2000898313579561365?s=20 https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2000896186413441184?s=20   have already been filed. The World Bank estimates the total at $524 billion over the next decade – triple Ukraine’s 2024 GDP. Zelensky: “It’s not enough to force Russia into a deal. It’s not enough to make it stop killing. We must make Russia accept that there are rules in the world.” Mechanism: Register of Damage (created 2023): collects claims from individuals, companies, and the Ukrainian state. Claims Commission: reviews, validates, and awards compensation case-by-case. Categories: sexual violence, child deportations, infrastructure destruction, religious sites bombed. Funding plan: Frozen Russian assets held by the EU, supplemented by member contributions. Dutch FM David van Weel: “The goal is to have validated claims that will ultimately be paid by Russia.” Enforcement? Still being worked out. Complication: Trump's team floated amnesty for war crimes as part of a peace deal – makes prosecuting the very individuals being billed impossible. Next steps: Convention takes force after 25 nations ratify it (if funds secured). Russia calls frozen-assets proposal “illegal,” denies war crimes, threatens retaliation. Reality check: This is post-WWII-style reparations applied to an ongoing conflict. The $524B estimate covers through 2024 only – 2025's escalated attacks on utilities, transport, and civilians already make the number outdated. https://twitter.com/AwakenedOutlaw/status/2000626884145754206?s=20   breaking out. Their position is legitimately insane. Sadly, what’s clear is that the European leadership is comprised of war-mongering, bloodthirsty psychopaths. The idiom, “With friends like these, who needs enemies?” comes to mind. Only in this case, it’s not a sarcastic observation. ______ EU Globalists Threaten to Dump $2.34 Trillion in U.S. Debt to Stop Trump's Ukraine Peace Deal JUST IN: Senate Advances $900 BILLION Defense Spending Bill with Military Aid to Ukraine Senate advances $900 billion defense spending bill The US Senate on Monday voted to end the filibuster and advance the National Defense Authorization Act to a final vote.  The bipartisan vote, 76-20, invoked cloture on the bill, bringing it one step closer to final passage, which could still take days. Still, some lawmakers seek to amend the bill further, which would then require House passage before landing on the President's desk. Burchett: Big vote tonight was the NDAA, National Defense Authorization Act, and it was $900.6 billion. There’s money in there for, of course, Ukraine, $800 million total, and some other things, money in there for recognizing an Indian tribe out of North Carolina— has nothing to do with national security— Syria, money, Iraq. But we just got to quit this stuff. Somebody's, America’s got to start paying attention. Trump didn’t even ask for that. You’ve got the war pimps that push for this stuff. And they always will tell you, Oh, it’s, “Burchett, man, they’re gonna spend all that money here buying those missiles.” You know, is that what we’re basing our votes on is they’re going to buy implements to kill other people on? I’m all for getting rid of our enemies, but this is just too much, way too much, and things are just not what they appear. We need to wake up. I voted no. Over 100 Democrats voted to pass this. That ought to tell you right there what this is about. Got some liberal stuff tucked in there, and it’s over 3000 pages. We get it on Sunday, and we’re voting on it today. There’s no way, no way, we will ever know what was in there, and just— anyway, frustrated, we’ll keep fighting. Thank y’all for sending me here. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2000775317577744797?s=20   commands down to 8. Under the plan expected to be presented to Secretary Hegseth this week: U.S. Central Command, European Command, and Africa Command would be downgraded and placed under a new “U.S. International Command.” U.S. Southern Command and Northern Command would merge into “U.S. Americas Command” (Americom), reflecting the administration’s shift toward Western Hemisphere operations. The remaining commands: Indo-Pacific, Cyber, Special Operations, Space, Strategic, and Transportation. A senior defense official on the urgency: “Time ain’t on our side, man. The saying here is, ‘If not us, who, and if not now, when?'” The plan aligns with Trump’s national security strategy declaring that “the days of the United States propping up the entire world order like Atlas are over.” Former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel expressed concern: “The world isn’t getting any less complicated. You want commands that have the capability of heading off problems before they become big problems.” Congress has required the Pentagon to submit a detailed blueprint before any changes can take effect. The Monroe Doctrine comes to CENTCOM. https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2000687672936030583?s=20   been done long ago, which is eradicate the cartels that are plaguing the Western hemisphere via drug/human trafficking. The cartels have gone unchecked for decades, while they murder millions of Americans and commit heinous crimes against humanity. Trump confirms that designating the cartels as a foreign terrorist organizations “is a big deal from a legal and military standpoint”. Trump is going to use the full force of the US MIL to shut this entire corrupt network down. The Dems/MSM, and the weaklings on the Right, are going to squeal and moan the entire way, but this must be done. Trump is going to neutralize this threat to the American People and do what past Presidents failed to do. Medical/False Flags [DS] Agenda https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2000857179142680769?s=20   been part of it. Her late father served as a colonel in the Somali army under dictator Siad Barre, whose regime carried out mass killings in the 1980s. That makes her backstory more complicated than she lets on. A resurfaced video shows a man resembling Omar's father discussing brutal tactics. There's no proof he committed war crimes, but some say he was close enough to know what was happening. Photos also show Omar's siblings with General Morgan – known as the “Butcher of Hargeisa” – and Omar herself at a 2022 event where Morgan was present. One relative even referred to him as “uncle.” Omar hasn't commented on the new findings, and her silence has led some to question how she can call for accountability abroad without addressing her own family's history. https://twitter.com/JamesRosenTV/status/2000723473182965780?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2000723473182965780%7Ctwgr%5Eb493e83212e9c33013500c56069b3622c19b2e21%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Frusty-weiss%2F2025%2F12%2F16%2Fice-officials-rip-ilhan-omar-over-ridiculous-story-about-her-son-being-racially-profiled-n2197175 https://twitter.com/thestoicplumber/status/2000748048683815183?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2000742064959455252?s=20 U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro: D.C. Authorities Were Artificially Deflating Crime Stats With ‘Manipulated' Numbers https://twitter.com/USAttyPirro/status/2000637280789188855?s=20  into MPD's reported deflation of crime statistics. The need for accurate information to fight crime is essential. After a review of almost 6000 reports and the interview of over 50 witnesses, it is evident that a significant number of reports had been misclassified, making crime appear artificially lower than it was. The uncovering of these manipulated crime statistics makes clear that President Trump has reduced crime even more than originally thought, since crimes were actually higher than reported. His crime fighting efforts have delivered even more safety to the people of the District. The conduct here does not rise to the level of a criminal charge. However, it is up to MPD to take steps to internally address these underlying issues. Source: breitbart.com https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2000822708389745055?s=20 There is FEC data analysis that strongly suggests that Mark Kelly, Elissa Slotkin, Jason Crow, Chris Deluzio, Chrissy Houlahan and Maggie Goodlander have been recipients of illegally laundered campaign funds. Kelly is currently under investigation. They’re all backed by Soros!! President Trump's Plan https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2000710555674325272?s=20  extremists after transitioning. https://twitter.com/george18kennedy/status/2000781888152129887?s=20   Staff of the Army (senior uniformed leader of the U.S. Army, member of the Joint Chiefs). – Admiral Daryl Caudle – Chief of Naval Operations (senior uniformed leader of the U.S. Navy, member of the Joint Chiefs). – General Eric M. Smith – Commandant of the Marine Corps (senior uniformed leader of the U.S. Marine Corps, member of the Joint Chiefs). – General Kenneth S. Wilsbach, USAF – Chief of Staff of the Air Force (senior uniformed leader of the U.S. Air Force, member of the Joint Chiefs). – General B. Chance Saltzman, USSF – Chief of Space Operations (senior uniformed leader of the U.S. Space Force, member of the Joint Chiefs). https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/2000668738203312188?s=20 TAKE A LISTEN https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2000725299420352640?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2000916623243300901?s=20   Something BETTER be done about this. https://twitter.com/RobLutherLawyer/status/2000697951295840722?s=20 https://twitter.com/FBIDirectorKash/status/2000961090612813971?s=20 https://twitter.com/SusieWiles/status/2000943061627548148?s=20   story. I assume, after reading it, that this was done to paint an overwhelmingly chaotic and negative narrative about the President and our team. The truth is the Trump White House has already accomplished more in eleven months than any other President has accomplished in eight years and that is due to the unmatched leadership and vision of President Trump, for whom I have been honored to work for the better part of a decade. None of this will stop our relentless pursuit of Making America Great Again! https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2000957946352820238?s=20  codification of the President’s executive orders.” “A very aggressive legislative agenda coming right out of the gates in January. We’re going to continue to work, for example, on health care to continue to bring costs down for the American people, to bring down the cost of living overall.” “He’s up to about 200 of those [orders], probably about 150 of them are codifiable by Congress and we’re working steadily through that list.” “You’re going to see us delivering for the American people while the effects of that giant piece of legislation that we did on July 4th, got signed on July 4th, comes into implementation.” “So much more, much more yet to do and the President and I talk about that almost every day and he’s excited about it and I am.” https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/2000685717497004167?s=20 to procedurally gum up the works behind the scenes. JD Vance Points Out the Consequence of the Senate “Blue Slip” Veto of Judicial Nominees It was passed by Congress on May 13, 1912, and ratified on April 8, 1913 The 16th Amendment to the United States Constitution grants Congress the authority to impose and collect income taxes without the need to apportion them among the states or base them on census data. constitution.congress.gov It was passed by Congress on July 2, 1909, and ratified on February 3, 1913. all of this is an outcome of the 17th Amendment, which stopped the state legislatures from having control over their senators.  Under the original constitutional framework, the Senate was designed to represent the interests of the state, as the Senators were appointed by state legislature, not popular votes.  The Sea Island assembly destroyed this cornerstone when they triggered the 17th Amendment. Repeal the 17th Amendment, and just about everything in federal government changes. Machiavelli said, “It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institution and merely lukewarm defenders in those who gain by the new ones.”  A prescient and oft repeated quote that is pertinent to the situation. When our founders created the system of government for our constitutional republic, they built in layers of protection from federal control over the lives of people in the states.  Over time, those protections have been eroded as the federal bureaucracy has seized power.  One of the biggest changes that led to the creation of the permanent political class was the 17th Amendment. Our founders created a system where Senators were appointed by the state legislatures.  In this original system, the Senate was bound by obligation to look out for the best interests of their specific states.  Under the ‘advise and consent‘ rules of Senate confirmation for executive branch appointments, the intent was to ensure the presidential appointee -who would now carry out regulatory activity- would not undermine the independent position of the states.  .When the 17th Amendment (direct voting for Senators) took the place of state appointments, the perspective of ‘advise and consent' changed.  The Senate was now in the position of ensuring the presidential appointee did not undermine the power of the permanent bureaucracy, which is the root of power for the upper-chamber. Senate committees, Homeland Security, Judiciary, Intelligence, Armed Services, Foreign Relations, etc. now consists of members who carry an imbalanced level of power within government.  The Senate now controls who will be in charge of executive branch agencies like the DOJ, DHS, FBI, CIA, ODNI, DoD, State Dept and NSA, from the position of their own power and control in Washington DC. In essence, the 17th Amendment flipped the intent of the constitution from protecting the individual states to protecting the federal government. Seventeenth Amendment- “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.” (link)   The biggest issue following the passage of the 17th Amendment became Senators who were no longer representing the interests of their state.  Instead, they were representing the interests of the power elite groups who were helping them fund the mechanisms of their re-election efforts. A Senator only needs to run for re-election every six years.  The 17th Amendment is the only amendment that changed the structure of the Congress, as it was written by the founders. Over time, the Senate chamber itself began using their advice and consent authority to control the executive and judicial branch.  The origination of a nomination now holds the question: “Can this person pass the Senate confirmation process?” source: theconservativetreehouse.com https://twitter.com/j3669/status/2000683161273897213?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2000952036238746070?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2000671858417422538?s=20   is going to save the GOP, AGAIN. (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

FB PROPHECY HOUR: Terror to Freedom: A Warning about America's Affair with IslamFeaturing: Mano BakhDate: 12-11-2025“Islam is a government of its own. It has its own laws for every facet of society and they are in complete disagreement with the United States Constitution.”Captain Mano Bakh speaks with passion and full conviction about the danger our country faces due to the insidious growth of Islam and what is happening within our complacent societyAnother do not Miss End-Time Radio program as “We are Warning the World as it HAPPENS!”“Remember we do not 100% agree with everything our guests, say, do, or believe. It's up to you to pray and sort it out!”ARCHIVES:https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/branchPLEASE VISIT:http://wichitahomeless.com/Donations and Contact:https://prophecyhour.com/https://www.messiahsbranch.com/Also Support are Guest's at:http://www.carlgallups.com/

FB PROPHECY HOUR: Terror to Freedom: A Warning about America's Affair with IslamFeaturing: Mano BakhDate: 12-11-2025“Islam is a government of its own. It has its own laws for every facet of society and they are in complete disagreement with the United States Constitution.”Captain Mano Bakh speaks with passion and full conviction about the danger our country faces due to the insidious growth of Islam and what is happening within our complacent societyAnother do not Miss End-Time Radio program as “We are Warning the World as it HAPPENS!”“Remember we do not 100% agree with everything our guests, say, do, or believe. It's up to you to pray and sort it out!”ARCHIVES:https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/branchPLEASE VISIT:http://wichitahomeless.com/Donations and Contact:https://prophecyhour.com/https://www.messiahsbranch.com/Also Support are Guest's at:http://www.carlgallups.com/

The United States Constitution is more than a document: it's a living experiment in freedom. The First Amendment protects our voices. The Second protects our right to keep and bear arms.But somewhere between speech and weaponry, the line has blurred. Technology once gave us the power to build tools. Now it gives us the power to build anything at home, in minutes, for virtually no cost.Artificial intelligence can write code, design weapons, and distribute information faster than any government can plan. It can replicate human ingenuity and amplify human intent. So what happens when AI meets the Second Amendment? When a machine can create a gun, a bullet, a bomb, and the algorithm decides who can access it?The debate over free speech, safety, and innovation is no longer theoretical. It's here - written in code, printed in metal, and living in the hands of the American people. I'm Mark Beckman. This is Some Future Day.Episode Links:Defense Distributed: https://www.defdist.org/DEFCAD: https://defcad.com/Order Marc's new book, "Some Future Day: How AI Is Going to Change Everything"Sign up for the Some Future Day Newsletter here: https://marcbeckman.substack.com/To join the conversation, follow Marc Beckman here: YoutubeLinkedInTwitterInstagramTikTok

This week's episode is late & unhinged, per usz. While researching the 22nd amendment, Julie & Brandy stumbled upon the unfortunate reality of (the lack of) women's rights protected under the United States Constitution. This revelation led to a spiral of hopeless histrionics, which can only be described as very f*cking annoying. ****CHECK OUT FREE EPISODES OF JULIE & BRANDY'S PATREON PODCAST****FOLLOW JULIE ON INSTAGRAM & TWITTER****FOLLOW BRANDY ON INSTAGRAM & TWITTER***CHECK OUT THEIR T-SHIRTS!***EMAIL THEM! JulieBrandyPodcast@gmail.com******* Dumb Gay Politics with Julie & Brandy **** Dumb Gay Podcast with Julie & Brandy **** Julie Goldman **** Brandy Howard **** Julie and Brandy *** The People's Couch *** DGP *** Gay Podcast *** Political Podcast *** Lesbian *** Bravo *** Housewives *** Queer *** Liberal **** LGBTQ **** Killer Burlesque *** Host *** Portland *** Denver *** Nightmare on Strip Street *** Funny *** Comedy *** Democrat *** Progressive *** Comedian *** Jewish *** Politics *** Left *** San Francisco *** Politics *** Rights *** See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Unleashed! The Political News Hour with Mayor Deb – In the United States, we have the 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech. Would you support the right of anybody to criticize your prophet Muhammad? Our 1st Amendment guarantees freedom of religion. Would you support the idea that Muslims can leave Islam? The 8th Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment and is in direct conflict with

Since the start of the Trump Era over a decade ago, few words have been deployed as often as "democracy": how it's become imperiled, who threatens it, and what to do to defend it. In The Right of the People: Democracy and the Case for a New American Founding, Osita Nwanevu sets out to understand the true meaning of democracy and defend it from its critics, not just on the right but those liberals who doubt the capacity of ordinary voters to determine their country's fate in a complex world. From there, he levels a critique of the Constitution for its myriad democratic deficits, then details what refounding the United States to be genuinely democratic—politically and economically—would require of us.Listen again: "The Wolfe in the White Suit" (w/ Osita Nwanevu), July 5, 2024Sources:Osita Nwanevu, The Right of the People: Democracy and the Case for a New American Founding (2025)— "Conservatism's Baton Twirler," New York Review of Books, Sept 25, 2025. Sheldon Wolin, Fugitive Democracy: And Other Essays (2016)Michael J. Klarman, The Framers' Coup: The Making of the United States Constitution (2016)Marilynne Robinson, The Death of Adam: Essays on Modern Thought (1998)Walter Lippman, Public Opinion (1922)Publius, Federalist 49 (February 1788)Matthew Sitman, "Will Be Wild," Dissent, April 18, 2023...and don't forget to subscribe on Patreon for access to all of our bonus episodes!