The discussion in the past thread with Amazona about the JFK assassination brings up the real subject we need to delve into: what do we know for certain? This might seem like a small – and might even seem like an irrelevant – question but in my view, it is the crucial starting point.
First off, let’s dispense with the whole phrase “conspiracy theory”. Yes, we do know there are some clearly kooky ideas about a lot of things out there but when we tag something as a “conspiracy theory” what we’re doing is both dismissing it and warning everyone away from it. “Come on! That’s just a conspiracy theory! You don’t want to be one of those crazies. Right?”. It is very effective propaganda designed to shut off debate and inquiry. And the kicker on it is that it can be used both ways by grifters – some using the accusation to get people to stop asking but the mirror-image of it is used by the other grifters…those who want you to believe nonsense and so they package it up as “they call me a conspiracy theorist but I’ve just found the truth!”…this makes that grift bullet proof the other direction. The most notable recent example of this is Candace Owens who has gone off on anti-Semitic rants of late and she’s keeping her listeners on board (and clicking!) by saying those who disagree are trying to “silence the truth by calling me a conspiracy theorist!”. So, have a little care here – and dispense with “conspiracy theory”. What we have is people making assertions – test them against known facts and your own good sense; only reject an assertion if the facts and your sense indicate against them.
So, back to it: what do we know? That is the first and most important question. As it relates to the JFK assassination what we know is pretty limited. When you really grind it down, all we know for certain is that JFK was shot and killed. Everything else related to it has some questionable aspects. Even for someone like me who asserts that forensics indicates Oswald as the lone shooter I am forced to admit that a good defense attorney could have shot reasonable doubt into the assertion…not enough to have saved Oswald in a putative 1964 murder trial, but certainly enough for a dispassionate observer ten years later to go, “not proved beyond a reasonable doubt”.
The really important aspect here when you ask, “what do we know?” is that assertions by Experts and government agencies are now known to be questionable. There is no neutral arbiter whom we can rely on to speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Might there have been in 1963? Possibly – but the seeds of what has come after – complete institutional collapse – were already planted by then. We can’t necessarily impose today’s dishonesty on the people and agencies of 1963 but we also can’t assume that the people and agencies of 1963 who went on to a whole series of now-exposed lies weren’t also lying in 1963.
It is good to keep in mind that in any analysis of the past, we’ll never have the complete picture. For some things we have more data than others, but all historical documents still only amount to what someone thought important enough to write down. For the historian, it is really good if several major players in an event wrote down independent, contemporary accounts because the compare and contrast can provide some real insights…but, still, even that is just what the players decided to write down. It is still incomplete. In fact, it never can be complete. There will be facts not recorded – perhaps not even known at the time by the principle actors. So, you’re never going to look back and get the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. All you’re going to get is part of the story and it is going to be written by people who had their own prejudices even if they didn’t have a specific agenda in what they wrote.
Our saving grace here is that, as God told us, “for every tree is known by its own fruit” (Luke 6:43-45). We can’t know exactly what happened in the past…but we can see what happened and so get some very deep insights into the actual motivations of those who made the decisions. Did a conspiracy kill Kennedy? I don’t know – and I likely can’t know. But what I do know is that after JFK’s death a muscular anti-Communism and a full-throated exploitation American power dwindled to “our long, national nightmare is over” and lets cancel Apollo’s 18-20. Oh, and “ask not” morphed somehow into the Welfare State. Like JFK represented something that our overall Ruling Class didn’t like…and it didn’t like Nixon…and didn’t like Reagan….and now really doesn’t like Trump…all four men being ardent American patriots who view America as the best thing and worthy of building up. If JFK’s assassination wasn’t a conspiracy it certainly worked out to a disaster for the United States…and the primary beneficiaries of the event were contemptible, thieving cowards who have just about ruined the USA.
Just to give you an idea of how bad it is – how low we’ve fallen – I looked up the construction of the USS Enterprise (CVN-65). It was an approximately 95,000-ton nuclear powered aircraft carrier that was laid down on February 4th, 1958 and went into commission (that is, a combat-effective warship for the United States Navy) on November 25th, 1961. A little over two years, nine months from laying the keel to sailing off into the ocean blue ready to do battle for the United States. I then looked up the USS Enterprise (CVN-80). It is an approximately 100,000-ton nuclear powered aircraft carrier laid down on April 5th, 2022. Wanna guess when its going into commission? They hope to have it ready in 2029. Seven years! And do you want to bet on us meeting the 2029 date?
On May 25th, 1961 Kennedy laid out the aspiration of going to the Moon in the 1960s. It was an aspiration. We had no idea how to do it other than some theories on paper. As we went into it we found that we not only didn’t know how to do it, we didn’t even know what we had to learn before we could start figuring out how to do it. But everyone went to work and the project was done in a little over eight years. Sheppard only made his suborbital flight twenty days before Kennedy set the goal. We set up the Artemis program in 2017 to get us back to the Moon and the first manned flight of the program is set for 2026. Who has benefited from this? Who’s fruit? What tree?
Kennedy wanted us to do great things. Nixon wanted us to do great things. Reagan wanted us to do great things. Trump is asserting we will do great things. Johnson: here’s some welfare. Carter: the age of limits. Clinton: depends on what the meaning of is is. Getting the picture? Those who want America to be great and get greater are hammered back into the ground…those who go along with decline are rewarded and praised. Did a conspiracy kill Kennedy? It is irrelevant if it did or didn’t – what’s relevant is that everyone the Establishment hates gets raked over the coals. That tells us what has happened even though we don’t know fact for fact how it happened. And, in the end, it doesn’t matter if its a cabal of wicked people or just a pack of stupid crooks…its all worked out the same and very badly for us.
So, in the end, all we really know is if something worked out well or badly. That it was good, or bad. And while we can’t know if the bad things were caused by malevolence or folly, we should treat all bad things as if they were caused by malevolence. Whether a person is bad or stupid, only whacking them about the head and shoulders will get them to stop being bad or stupid. I don’t care if, say, Mayorkas is in the pay of the Cartels or if he’s just stupid – in either case, I want him jailed for twenty years. It doesn’t matter, in the end, why he left the borders open…it only matters that he left them open and I’ve got no time or energy to figure out his motivation. Whether his successor is stupid or wicked won’t matter as long as in his successor’s office is a picture of him in jail.
And in service of this goal of just punishing the heck out of those who do wrong and/or are stupid, we have to stop going along with the Establishment’s demand that certain subjects aren’t open to question. I don’t care if the guy telling me something is wearing a literal tinfoil hat…I want to hear his statement and assess it on my own. And if he’s telling me that lizard people are causing the decline of American farming I’m only interested in knowing if American farming is declining. If it is, that’s bad – and I don’t care if the guys in charge were wicked or stupid, I want them broken.
Blogs For Victory 
Human nature never changes. The same lust for power and control that resided in the Roman Senate, resides in our current Senate. Since the internment camps of the 1930’s, to the New Deal, to expanded welfare of the 1960’s, to Obamacare, to Covid … the government will continue to design programs that will enslave the American people and cement power to those agencies and the people who run them, and the only “truth” that will come from that, will be to support the program and the agency. Bureaucracies will always grow to the point they protect themselves and not fulfill the original mission … and that is just once again, human nature. Look at the IRS, established just a little over 100 years ago, it is now a weaponized massive bureaucracy that has become a tool of “reward and punish” for big government. Reward those who support that mission, and punish those who don’t, and never let the truth get out. Remember Lois Lerner taking the Fifth? I do. That meant she has a lot to hide, and that’s just ONE AGENCY. Multiply that times 100, and that’s our problem.
We can all look towards the Great State of Canada (hilarious), to see a good example of what this post is about … human greed. Even though Canada is collapsing, the people in power are protecting themselves.
We usually think of politics in terms of the big issues that drive public debate, determine the health of the economy and society, and set the direction of a country. But the truth is that just as often as ideological differences determine outcomes, the interests of the people in power are the driving factors.
Also, Liz Cheney is being referred for criminal prosecution for witness tampering on the Jan 6 committee. They all should be prosecuted.
https://hotair.com/david-strom/2024/12/17/canadian-government-collapsing-before-our-eyes-n3797969
Also, Liz Cheney is being referred for criminal prosecution for witness tampering on the Jan 6 committee. They all should be prosecuted.
I think that’s probably going to happen.
As you say, it’s hard to know what we don’t know. Even what we think we know because we were there isn’t always true. I was once convinced that something I did caused an accident. A forensic engineer brought in by the insurance company did an investigation, and in spite of my insistence that I had done something he proved to me that it was physically impossible for this to have happened the way I “remembered”. The trauma of the event had blanked my memory so thoroughly that I had reconstructed everything in a way that seemed to explain everything. It wasn’t an effort to avoid responsibility—in fact I took full responsibility, with great detail about the mistake I had made. When the engineer showed me that what I believed was simply not possible and that the reason for the accident had always been totally out of my control I was so shocked that I actually fainted. He was horrified—I dropped like I had been shot, my husband was barely able to catch me before I hit the ground, and the engineer said he had never seen anyone react so strongly to any proofs he had ever presented.
My point is, it is possible to have complete conviction about something and be completely wrong, yet without any motive to deceive. Then you get into an area where there is a strong motive to deceive, or at least to promote a specific agenda-driven narrative, and it is even harder to sort out the truth. (Critics of the Warren Commission put it in this category.) Complicate this with a large cast of characters who were actually involved to some extent, add others who just want to insert themselves into the narrative for various reasons, and you have something like the JFK assassination.
That is why, in this case, I have gone with the preponderance of evidence, knowing that within the narrative are many hard facts but that their relationship to each other is not easily determined. Here is one example: forensic evidence of the direction of the kill shots to Kennedy. Visual evidence, from eyewitnesses and video, is that he appeared to be shot from the front. The reports from the doctors at the hospital were that he had been shot from the rear. So you start to factor in additional evidence, though it is less compelling because it is more dependent on personal interpretation of events. However, there is abundant evidence that people onsite felt, nearly unanimously, that the shots came from the front. Very few felt that the shots sounded like they came from behind or above the car. There is the statement from the Parkland nurse who said she examined the presidential limousine as it sat in front of the hospital and there was a hole in the windshield with spalling on the inside of the glass, indicating that whatever caused the hole entered from the front, or outside, of the car. So that gets weighed against the formal testimony from the medical professionals who swore that the damage they saw to the head of Kennedy proved he was shot from above and behind. That is pretty compelling testimony which tends to outweigh the contemporaneous impressions of people at the time. And so the needle swings back and forth between the two conflicting theories.
But then two pieces of information are added to the mix. One is the modern scientific ability to detect and measure alterations to X-rays, which in this case showed that the Kennedy X-rays had been altered, and one is the reminder that the first doctors who saw Kennedy were adamant that the damage they saw was due to a gunshot from the front, exiting the back of his head. (If I remember correctly, one of the doctors later said he had been pressured to revise his original opinion of a frontal shot, but I would need to see if I can track down that statement.)
That moves the needle, in my opinion, pretty far to the side of a frontal attack, especially when the only hard evidence of a shot from the rear is from some, but not all, of the attending physicians, and altered X-rays. Now you have conflicting professional opinions, a skull that is mysteriously missing and cannot be examined, and a theory that fits the government conclusion, vs modern scientific evidence that the forensic evidence has been tampered with, the statements from the original attending doctors, and the conviction of those present that they heard shots coming from the front, not the rear.
None of this will ever result in a definitive “fact” but there will be the Occam’s Razor aspect on this matter alone.
The conflicting statements about Oswald are even more confusing. The official narrative from the State is that he was a surly loner who acted on his own to shoot the president, for no known reason, but people who knew him said he was bright, personable, energetic, engaged, loved opera and playing pool, and had never expressed any animosity toward Kennedy or his politics. He did strange, inexplicable things that in retrospect would be more easily explained as efforts to establish credentials to allow him to act as a government agent than anything else. He got himself kicked out of the Marine Corps by openly requesting the USSR to grant him citizenship, (but then appealed to the Marines to reinstate him.) He moved to Russia, moved back, and then tried to get permission to return to Russia, or at least a demand that Russia give him and his wife return visas was the pretext for the oddly public and attention-grabbing visit by an Oswald impersonator to the Russian Embassy in Mexico City. He apparently went along with the ruse that his wife lived with Ruth Paine because she needed a translator, when in fact Ruth Paine’s Russian was very poor and Marina (niece of a highly placed KBG official) spoke excellent English. His job at the book depository was arranged by Ruth Paine (despite the fact that the TSBD Company — for which the building would become infamous — was in a down season and laying off employees) and who was responsible for linking Oswald to the attempted assassination of General Edwin Walker.
So even depending on “forensic evidence” can be misleading.
Biden Lied About Everything: Philly Fed Finds All Jobs “Created” In Q2 Were Fake
OT laugh for the day, (hat-tip Jeff Childers)
I caught that in his article and thought it was wonderful
As Saul Alinsky so accurately stated, ridicule is a powerful tool.
That has been my lecture/rant for years now. Just make fun of them. Don’t get mad because that gives them power. Just laugh at them.
Didn’t one of our trolls say, just a few weeks ago that X was losing customers to Bluesky faster than you can say “TRUMP WON.) (Ok, I made that last part up): (hat-tip again Jeff Childers)
And this, my friends, is how to deal with the rabid Left. Elizabeth Warren came out of her sweat lodge and went on the warpath against Elon Musk with heap big virtue signaling:
And the Trump camp sent a smoke signal that not only is there a new sheriff in town, he and his posse aren’t going to put up with any such ridiculous nonsense. Its response is pure gold:
Oh. My. Gosh. The “Pocahontas” gibe was a perfect setup for the “1/1024th” kill shot. (Though I am still irritated by the Trump failure to understand the real nickname, which is “Fauxcahontas”.)
The contempt was beautiful…and is the proper response. Warren is hip deep in Blue State corruption and is, personally, a known liar – and this is before we get into her expressed policies which are downright anti-human.
She’s not someone anyone needs to take seriously.
The comment was beautiful for a couple of reasons. Beyond the wholly deserved contempt for Warren and the humor with which it was presented, it makes it clear that the gloves are on the ice now and anyone who wants to take on this administration on anything but legitimate grounds is going to be met with appropriate response. In other words, “This is what you can expect, Lefties” It’s a perfect illustration of “Play stupid games, win stupid prizes”.
And I am much happier seeing this kind of thing coming from a Trump spokesperson and not just in a social media post.
Let’s wait and see (and wait, and wait, and wait….) how the Complicit Agenda Media choose to deal with the assassination of Russian General Igor Kirillov, who had “headed Russia’s Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defense Troops, charged to protect Russian soldiers from any of those weapons.”
Why should we be interested in this? Isn’t this just part of the ongoing Russia/Ukraine conflict? Well, not really.
And now he has, as the author of this article says, been “involuntarily relieved from duty”. Are we going to have to expand our vocabulary to include “Bidenized” along with with “Clintonized?”
Feds Race to Embed 1,200 DEI Bureaucrats Before Trump’s Return
Biden administration scrambles to fill high-paid diversity roles ahead of incoming GOP leadership.
Can Trump fire them when he takes office?
From an article in American Liberty: Trump Vs. Burrowing Bureaucrats: How Democrats Are Embedding Loyalists To Undermine Trump “…career civil servants are shielded by a labyrinth of federal protections, effectively making them irremovable. Thus, they weaponized the machinery of government to function as a shadow opposition.” (emphasis mine, thinking back to #RESIST in 2017)
………………………
When Trump returns to power, his approach to handling burrowed bureaucrats will need to be more refined. Rather than attempting a sweeping overhaul of civil service protections, a more targeted approach could be key. By strategically appointing aggressive reformers to lead OPM and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Trump could more effectively scrutinize burrowing cases and leverage existing performance review mechanisms to root out obstructive officials. Names already circulating as potential OPM leaders include allies who have publicly emphasized reforming the federal workforce to ensure accountability.
Additionally, legislative support will be crucial. A Republican-controlled Congress could push for reforms that tighten the rules around converting political appointees into career roles, adding layers of oversight that would make burrowing more difficult. Such legislation would need to focus on transparency, requiring public disclosures of all conversions from political to civil service roles and mandating that OPM report to Congress on these moves.
Trump made a couple of lateral moves to try to pry out some of these embedded political appointees, such as moving some agencies far from the Beltway, which caused some to just quit rather than move to a remote high desert Colorado town as one example. Another approach might be to simply remove these departments from these agencies, which can come from the DOGE.
I would have a special committee appointed to keep track of and archive all these unnecessary expenses, dumped on the taxpayer by the Democrat Party to force the taxpayer to fund its political ambitions. I’d like to see a running tally of money saved by DOGE, etc. Maybe like one of those giant thermometers they used to use to show how close a fund drive was getting to its goal, but with the figures showing money not spent by eliminating waste and overspending.
We need to start campaigning now for 2026 and 2028 and it will help to keep these things in the forefront of the minds of the people. It will also help when it comes to supporting candidates, as it would enable us to link every legislator with every unneeded expense or effort to eliminate it.
Another approach might be to simply remove these departments from these agencies, which can come from the DOGE.
That sounds like an excellent plan.
As Amazona noted, there are already plans. While not privy to Trump Team deliberations, in addition to those I’d say:
1. Assign them nothing. Maybe we can’t immediately fire them but we can give them nothing to do. Just tell them to report to an empty room (it has tables and chairs but no computers, phones, TV…just nothing but tables and chairs) for their 8 hour day. We’ll pay them for doing nothing and (a) see how long they stick about and (b) report to Congress the following year that these people have done nothing for 12 months and are thus surplus to needs, please zero out their pay.
2. Cronyism got a lot of these people hired and promoted. That’s illegal. Start reviewing the hiring and promotion decisions. Let everyone know we’re doing it. See how many just run away.
3. Aggressively enforce every performance metric.
4. Initiate an annual skills test. Guarantee a large number never met the job requirements and were hired for DEI or payoff reasons and have just been skating as protected persons all along.
5. Test case: find the ten worst that technically can’t be fired and fire them anyway – let the Democrats rise to their defense. Let the American people see that the Democrats are saying we can’t fire incompetent nitwits.
2. Cronyism got a lot of these people hired and promoted. That’s illegal. Start reviewing the hiring and promotion decisions. Let everyone know we’re doing it. See how many just run away. and 4. Initiate an annual skills test. Guarantee a large number never met the job requirements and were hired for DEI or payoff reasons and have just been skating as protected persons all along. are much in line with what I was thinking.
Now that most entrance written tests aren’t used, applicants typically complete an occupational questionnaire and a federal resume or an optional application form. There are occupational questionnaires that have to be filled out and approved, and I doubt that any of these new hires have done so. If someone is taking money for a position without qualifying for it by passing an occupational questionnaire, that might be grounds for firing, and whoever did the hire might be on the hook for fraud. So a sneak attack demanding production of occupational test results by end of the day might run a few off. Give every one of these new “career” bureaucrats 24 hours to produce copies of their resumes and any other information supporting their credentials for the positions, filed under penalty of perjury.
Everyone who applies for a federal job is tested however the vast majority of testing is conducted through a thorough evaluation of your application, occupational questionnaire, and federal resume, not through a written civil service test. Notice that I mentioned federal resume frequently. I emphasize “federal” because a resume in the federal sector is totally different from the typical one page private sector equivalent. A federal resume is highly structured and may contain 43 specific blocks of information, and the format is standardized. A typical federal style resume is between three and six pages long and if Knowledge, Skills, Abilities statements (KSAs) are required your resume could easily reach seven to 10 pages or more. If you submit an improperly formatted federal resume it may be rejected or at the very least you may not rate “Best Qualified” for the job
Some occupations require specialized testing and assessments and careers with mandatory testing are listed on this site. The tests are used to validate physical and mental ability and skills required for the position. The exams vary in length from several hours to half a day or more.
In other words, “show me your work”.
But I still think the best approach for any new DEI supervisor is just to eliminate the whole DEI program. No discrimination—it’s all gone along with everyone in it. As of February 1 2025 there is no DEI department in any federal agency. Period. Because that doesn’t just get rid of the burrowers in those departments, it gets rid of the departments themselves, and sends a message. As for burrowers in other departments, options are listed above.
This may have been touched on before, but there’s a website “1792 Exchange” that gives insight into the political leanings of many companies, that could be used in deciding where you do business. I’ve only looked at a few and they seem representative of what one might hope.
https://1792exchange.com/spotlight-reports/corporate-bias-ratings/
Trump Says He’s Looking Into Privatizing US Postal Service
The USPS is horribly and inefficiently run, with massive annual cost overruns. I can see Trump privatizing several other government run businesses too, which should ultimately save taxpayers billions in direct expenses. If done right, consumers should see both lower costs and better service. No doubt there will be lots of resistance with these efforts, along with most anything else Trump attempts, as there will be winners and losers in every action. Ultimately, I think the overall value will be perceived in a positive light. Still, you can bet the opposition will blast the downside of every Trump decision in every near future election.
Matt Gaetz Teases Comeback to Unveil Congress’s Secret #MeToo Settlements
On X, Gaetz stated that he is being urged to return to Congress on Jan. 3, 2025, to be sworn in for the term he won in the November 2024 election. This would enable him to file privileged motions to disclose alleged “#MeToo” settlements paid by the House of Representatives.
This is actually humorous, especially considering congress proceeded in a secret vote to release the investigation report on him. Not sure if he already has other plans for income but, I can imagine there would be some nervous congress critters wondering if he’d actually return. Plus, this settlement fund is beyond absurd, not only that it exist but also in the pretense that it’s used to protect congressional scum who were involved in activities that this fund is used to quell.
https://headlineusa.com/matt-gaetz-teases-comeback-to-unveil-congresss-secret-metoo-settlements/?utm_source=HUSA_EMAIL_NSP2000&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=HUSAemail
I’d love to see Gaetz back in Congress. He was elected, and he should be able to serve the term the voters wanted him to serve. There is the added benefit of him being right there in the faces of the scum who tried to railroad him. The problem with poking a bear is that sometimes the bear gets loose and comes after you and that can be very very unpleasant—-as Trump himself is illustrating, to our great amusement.
I don’t think a doctor or nurse ordered to administer the drug (it is NOT a “vaccine”) should be held liable if the patient requested it. However, I do think any official who made taking the drug a requirement to retain employment should be. And any official or pharmacist who refused to honor legitimate prescriptions for legal drugs, because of their association in the Agenda Media with certain political entities, should be.
It looks to me like the grift just keeps grifting along, and this looks a lot like a Biden retirement plan. And look who is in on it—–Xavier Becerra, secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). The “reasoning” is so specious it is insane. The pretense is that, well, maybe, we might have another outbreak of Covid, so we need to protect Big Pharma from liability for damages from their drug, which BTW does not protect against Covid.
As Chris Rock said of Biden; “‘I gotta hand it to Joe, he don’t move as fast as he used to, he don’t talk as fast as he used to, but that middle finger still works”
The article where this was printed was about the efforts to generate panic about the avian virus, but it seems very appropriate given the extension of the EU status of the Covid drugs, based on alleged concerns of a new outbreak of Covid or even a different pathogen.
Fear porn refers to mainstream media content that deliberately and enticingly plays on people’s fears about disaster, disease, and death. It is often used to describe sensationalized and exaggerated reports or stories that aim to provoke strong emotional reactions, such as fear, anxiety, or outrage. This type of content can be found in various forms of media, including news, social media, and online articles.
Some definitions of fear porn also include the idea that it is used to manipulate people’s emotions and attention, often for the purpose of increasing viewership, engagement, or clicks. Fear porn can be seen as a form of psychological manipulation, as it preys on people’s natural fear responses to create a sense of drama or excitement.
In some cases, fear porn can also be used to describe conspiracy theories or misinformation that is spread online, often with the intention of generating fear, anxiety, or outrage. This type of content can be particularly harmful, as it can spread misinformation and perpetuate harmful stereotypes or biases.
Overall, fear porn is a term used to describe a type of media content that uses fear and sensationalism to engage audiences and manipulate their emotions.
(AI-generated answer to Brave search query “Fearporn Definition”)
The bottom line here is that many national and global actors have long been known to exploit existential fear of infectious disease for political and economic benefit, and that there is a standard playbook for how this is performed. Therefore, the first thing that should come to your mind when you see this type of messaging being deployed and amplified in corporate media is the question, “Who and what is benefitting from this messaging”?
Fani Willis Is Officially Kicked Off Trump’s Case
“While we recognize that an appearance of impropriety generally is not enough to support disqualification, this is the rare case in which disqualification is mandated and no other remedy will suffice to restore public confidence in the integrity of these proceedings,” the ruling reads, finding that the lower court’s “remedy” was insufficient.
Accordingly, while Willis is “wholly disqualified” from prosecuting Trump’s case, her assistant DAs, “whose only power to prosecute a case is derived from the constitutional authority of the district attorney who appointed them” also hold “no authority to proceed,” per the appellate court order.
How fun to see the left continue imploding. Now, because they do chalk up some wins in that they’ve caused great hardship on Trump and some of his supporters, both financial and emotional, there needs to be retribution for all of their lawfare. This is an area many hope will become a part of Trump’s 2nd term.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/miacathell/2024/12/19/fani-willis-disqualified-n2649305
They seem to think that assuming the ability to simply define words they way they want also lets them do this with the law.
The Giuliani case is one of the worst. He commented on what was seen and documented on video, yet he has lost everything due to a Leftist court claiming that his perception of what he saw damaged the people involved so deeply that they were entitled to take his home, his possessions and his money to ease their pain. How were they damaged by this alleged “defamation”? Did they lose their jobs? Did they lose their houses? Were their “reputations” damaged? No one even remembers their names, and they were low-level Democrat activists in charge of counting votes. There was no damage to them by having someone say they counted them improperly.
People saved from LGBT lifestyles ask SCOTUS to overturn ‘gravely harmful’ ban on ‘conversion therapy’
The left is so hellbent on pushing people into LGBT and trans lifestyles and keeping them there they will do anything to that end. The absurdity of the law preventing someone from seeking help, especially when they might be feeling thoughts of depression, suicide and anxiety defies logic. Besides the fact that this law goes brazenly against freedom of speech, religion and choice of health care, denying people this kind of care is pure evil.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/people-saved-from-lgbt-lifestyles-ask-scotus-to-overturn-gravely-harmful-ban-on-conversion-therapy/?utm_source=daily-usa-2024-12-17&utm_medium=email
So many aspects to this. The first is the semantic manipulation of terms for counseling of people with gender dysphoria or confusion. By calling it “conversion therapy” the use of the word “conversion” implies an effort to change what is to what is not. Its implication is that the new identity is the “real” one and that counseling is an effort to “convert” it, but the counseling is more accurately that of restoration therapy, not conversion. The therapy is really to allow people with these disorders to return to their true selves. This semantic distortion is similar to that of “gender affirmation” which is, of course, gender denial.
And then it gets into your observations of the law being designed to put the State in control of the personal lives of people by legislating what kinds of medical or psychological or psychiatric or spiritual help they want. Once again we run into the Left’s distortions and lack of consistency—the whole abortion argument is, after all, based on the claim that the State has no authority over what these people claim is a personal decision about bodily autonomy. (This denies the existence of the other person in the equation, but again, we are talking about the Left here and its selective definitions and math.)
In this case the law has two purposes: One is to force people into lives they do not want, and the other is to deny them freedom of choice regarding what help or counseling they want to experience.