RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/12/what_are_the_new_scotus_justices_thinking.html

“The  SCOTUS justices have to be aware that our United States Constitution is under attack. Yet they do nothing.”

There is a tide in the affairs of men. Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune; Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat, and we must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures.

—Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act 4, Scene 3

The new SCOTUS justices have to be aware that our United States Constitution is under attack, not just from anarchists, but also from numerous politicians and the media.  Freedom of speech, the right to own a weapon, and property rights are all being attacked, and to a fundamental degree, our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is being increasingly denied.  There has been extreme violence in several of our major cities, which does not meet even token resistance from their governors and mayors.  Lives have already been lost.  In addition, the rioting has destroyed numerous businesses, thereby destroying property and denying liberty and pursuit of happiness for those business-owners.

There is a report that the chief justice, John Roberts, is afraid of inciting riots and said he would tell the other justices how to vote.  Considering John Roberts’s actions in the past that appeared to be politically motivated, he may well be concerned that a SCOTUS ruling could incite violence.  His determination to uphold the Constitution seems to be weak at best.  However, the older conservative justices, Alito and Thomas, proved that they were willing to hear cases about the fraudulent election when they dissented in the Texas v. Pennsylvania, et al. case.  So why wouldn’t the new SCOTUS justices follow the lead of Alito and Thomas, especially when the issue of free and fair elections is so vital to our Constitution?

“Americans have stood up to tyranny before. We’re a less hardy race than our ancestors, but that doesn’t mean the fighting spirit is dead. It’s merely dormant.”

I made up the word “sinosization,” because “sino” means “Chinese.” We are living in a “made in China” world, which means a world with rapidly decreasing prosperity and liberty. It’s a world in which our leaders, for fame and money, or in response to being blackmailed for their sins, have sold us out to a communist nation that steals our technology, takes our jobs, drugs our citizens, exports disease, and spreads oppression and despair wherever it goes. We know this – and, finally, there is a video that sums it all up.

One of the problems with what freedom-loving Americans face today is the immensity of what’s happening. All the pieces are in place, but they got into position so incrementally, we never noticed. Still, there they are: The left controls education, the media, corporate America, and large numbers of our most powerful politicians, including many Republicans.

To define terms, when we talk about these leftists, we are talking about people who have some overarching shared values. They have disdain for our Constitution, which they view as either a dead letter or a “living” document that can be interpreted to mean everything but what it actually says.

http://goudsmit.pundicity.com/24928/americans-in-name-only-aino

http://goudsmit.pundicity.com  http://lindagoudsmit.com

Who am I?

Identity is the universal conundrum of the human experience. We want to know who we are, where we came from, and if our lives have meaning. So, who are we?

We begin with our most basic identity. “It’s a boy!” “It’s a girl!” After sexual identity comes family identity, national identity, religious identity, educational identity, professional identity, and so on. Our identity gives us standing. We have identification cards that verify our identity. We have passports, licenses, diplomas, marriage certificates, and so on.

We verify our identity because we value our identity personally, and because ordered liberty requires verification that we are who we say we are. We trust that a hospital board certified surgeon is operating on us. We trust that a licensed pilot is flying our plane. We trust that those entrusted with our health and safety are trustworthy. American life is based on the ability to verify identity, and has established strict penalties for violating identity verification.

American jurisprudence is rooted in the motto “Trust and verify.” We give sworn testimony with an oath. “I swear by Almighty God that the evidence I shall give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” Intentionally lying under oath is the crime of perjury – a felony punishable to up to five years in prison.

Identity is an integral part of the universal human experience because it defines reality. We either are, or we are not, who we say we are. In politics and international affairs, identity has both domestic and international implications.

National identity is the universal conundrum of world politics. We want to know who we are, where we came from, and if our lives have meaning. The 2020 American presidential election is redefining our national identity. What does it mean to be an American?

https://www.theepochtimes.com/does-congress-know-that-this-is-how-communism-starts-trump-condemns-big-tech-policing-of-free-speech_3

President Donald Trump on Christmas Eve repeated his concerns over Big Tech censorship a day after he vetoed a defense-spending bill over Congress’s failure to remove liability protections for Silicon Valley’s social media companies.

“Twitter is going wild with their flags, trying hard to suppress even the truth. Just shows how dangerous they are, purposely stifling free speech. Very dangerous for our Country. Does Congress know that this is how Communism starts?” Trump said in a Twitter post on Thursday night.

“Cancel Culture at its worst. End Section 230!” he said.

Trump and his administration have repeatedly underscored the risks of unbalanced policing of user content on social media platforms, claiming that the companies are engaging in conduct that limits conservative viewpoints and stifles free speech. The president and the Justice Department have urged Congress to roll back legal protections under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act for companies that have engaged in censoring or political conduct.

Section 230 largely exempts online platforms from liability for content posted by their users, although they can be held liable for content that violates anti-sex trafficking or intellectual property laws.

The law allows companies to block or screen content “in good faith” if they consider it “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable.” The protections, however, weren’t intended to apply to services that act more like publishers than online platforms, outgoing Attorney General William Barr said in a speech in May.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/authors/victor_davis_hanson/

After Nov. 3, the meaning of some words and concepts abruptly changed. Have you noticed how new realities have replaced old ones?

Media cross-examination of the president is now an out-of-date idea. The time for gotcha questions has come and gone. Why ask a president whether he is a traitor or a crook when you can focus on his favorite flavor of milkshake or compliment him on his socks?

The old pre-election truth was that new vaccines take years to develop. The new postelection truth is that it’s no big deal to bring out new vaccines in nine months.

Impeaching a first-term president after his first midterm election — on a strictly partisan vote, for political reasons other than the Constitution’s “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors” — is now a terrible idea.

Worse would be to appoint a special counsel to harass a president on unfounded charges of collusion with China. An even scarier notion would be a conservative dream team of partisan lawyers hounding President Joe Biden — using a 22-month, $40 million blank check.

It would be unprofessional for university psychologists and physicians from a distance to diagnose, in pop fashion, the mental faculties of a President Biden.

Certainly, there would never be talk about Department of Justice officials contemplating wearing a wire as part of an entrapment scheme to remove a President Biden through the 25th Amendment. That would almost constitute a coup attempt.

Almost as bad would be for the holdover FBI director to start “memorializing” his private conversations with Joe Biden on FBI devices. He might then leak such memos to the press — just in case he were to be fired for secretly investigating Biden for “Chinese collusion” and then lying about such a probe.

What happened to the Logan Act? Not long ago it was assumed to be a critically needed guardrail. Wouldn’t it now ensure that presidential transition team members were not calling foreign leaders while Donald Trump is still president? How has it suddenly become a defunct, ossified relic?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d399gk-73J8

Below is a link to an Oval Office speech given by Trump.   It’s short, concise (about 11  minutes) … AND has been carried by no one.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/democrat-andrew-yang-files-for-nyc-mayoral-campaign_3631308.html

Far-left Democrat Andrew Yang filed formal paperwork on Dec. 23 that could see him run for mayor in New York City, according to the New York City Campaign Finance Board.

Yang ran for president in 2020 in a crowded field of more than 20 Democrats. He quit the race in February and endorsed former Vice President Joe Biden in March.

The 45-year-old ran on a promise to enact “universal basic income,” a wealth redistribution scheme in which the government would dole out $1,000 checks to each person in the United States aged 18 and older. Yang argued the scheme was necessary to counteract the advent of automation.

Current New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has similarly not been shy about ideas like wealth redistribution.

“We needed to profoundly change the distribution of resources. I like to say very bluntly, our mission is to redistribute wealth,” the mayor said earlier this month. “A lot of people bristle at that phrase. That is, in fact, the phrase we need to use.”

Yang has said that the idea is not socialist.

“Universal basic income is not socialism. It’s capitalism where income doesn’t start at zero,” he argued in a promotional video. “It’s the next form of capitalism. It’s the trickle-up economy.”