Let Love Be Your Driving Force; Zuckerberg limited distribution of the Hunter laptop story; It About To be Expose

When Australian farmer Ben Jackson couldn’t attend his Aunt’s funeral in 2021 due to Covid restrictions, he laid out grain for his Sheep in the shape of a heart in order “that she could see it through the clouds”.

May Love Be Thé Driving Force in your FIGHT For Freedom!

Zuckerberg just told Joe Rogan that Facebook limited distribution of the Hunter laptop story on request from the FBI


The Memo Caught Them All, Trump Is About To Expose It All, Tick Tock – Ep. 2859

 

God Wins; Jan. 6 ‘Electronic Surveillance Unit’ Was ‘Illegal,’

Supreme Court rules for coach in public school prayer case

“The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a Washington state high school football coach had a right to pray on the field immediately after games, a decision that could lead to more acceptance of religious expression at public schools.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna31662

TN Rep. Jason Zachary Asks Gov. Lee to Halt COVID Vaccines for Kids

Abortion doctor admits sold baby parts often came from babies born alive

Jan. 6 ‘Electronic Surveillance Unit’ Was ‘Illegal,’ Says Rep. Gohmert; Attorney Suggests ‘Entrapment’

‘We can’t have secret units doing secret surveillance of people that have committed no crime, no probable cause of a crime. Just getting blanket surveillance.’
By Patricia Tolson      June 27, 2022 Updated: June 27, 2022

As previously reported in an exclusive June 20 report, evidence proves that “plainclothes” members of a special Electronic Surveillance Unit (ESU) were embedded among Jan. 6, 2021, protesters for the purposes of conducting video surveillance. According to experts, one believes the activity itself may have been against the law. The other contends it was done for the purpose of entrapment.

Against the Law?

Speaking as a former prosecutor and three-term District Judge, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) told The Epoch Times, “if you’re going to have electronic surveillance of people there has to be warrants.”

As Gohmert explained, “FISA courts have granted warrants,” with “no particular clarity” and “no probable cause that a crime’s been committed or that this person engaged in a crime.”

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) was established under the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). “Pursuant to FISA,” the FISC website explains, “the Court entertains applications submitted by the United States Government for approval of electronic surveillance, physical search, and other investigative actions for foreign intelligence purposes.”

Regarding domestic electronic surveillance, the Department of Justice (DOJ) website, “Because of the well-recognized intrusive nature of many types of electronic surveillance, especially wiretaps and ‘bugs,’ and the Fourth Amendment implications of the government’s use of these devices in the course of its investigations, the relevant statutes (and related Department of Justice guidelines) provide restrictions on the use of most electronic surveillance, including the requirement that a high-level Department official specifically approve the use of many of these types of electronic surveillance prior to an Assistant United States Attorney obtaining a court order authorizing interception.”

Furthermore, “when court authorization for video surveillance is deemed necessary, it should be obtained by way of an application and order predicated on Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(b) and the All Writs Act (28 U.S.C. § 1651). The application and order should be based on an affidavit that establishes probable cause to believe that evidence of a Federal crime will be obtained by the surveillance. In addition, the affidavit should comply with certain provisions of the Federal electronic surveillance statutes.”

Gohmert surmised: “When you see confirmed judges are just willing to completely abrogate the U.S. Constitution because they’re the star chamber of the secret court, and they figure nobody will ever find out what they’re doing, then you know when you see there’s an Electronic Surveillance Unit, well, something’s not right.”

Gohmert’s concerns with the ESU surveillance are two-fold:

  1. Were the legally required warrants obtained?
  2. If so, how could a judge approve a warrant for surveillance before a crime has been committed and with no probable cause?

“We can’t have secret units doing secret surveillance of people that have committed no crime, no probable cause of a crime. Just getting blanket surveillance,” Gohmert asserted. “We don’t know what kind of warrant they had or even if they had warrants. But to deploy Electronic Surveillance Units tells us there’s a lot more here that we need to find out about and obviously it’s not going to be uncovered at least for another six months.”

But Gohmert added that “there is also more information we haven’t gotten and information that continues to leak out drip by drip.”

“Like this in [article] The Epoch Times,” Gohmert noted, “pointing out how until the deployment of munitions, the crowd was peaceful. I had heard from people and seen people interviewed saying there wasn’t any violence out there. ‘We were just mulling around, chanting stuff from time to time, then they started firing on us with tear gas and provoked the crowd.’ They created chaos, and you just wonder what was going on.”

The Evidence

Evidence of the embedded ESU members was discovered in a Jan. 3, 2021, First Amendment Demonstrations report, issued by Chief of Police Robert Contee of the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), Homeland Security Bureau, Special Operations Division, obtained exclusively by The Epoch Times. While it is unclear who the MPD ESU “members” were, the report stated they wore a specific “bracelet on their left wrist identifying them as MPD personnel” among the protesters. Of the 37 “Specialized Units” listed as part of the MPD, an ESU is not among them.

Photo of bracelet worn my plainclothes members of the Metrolpilitan Police Department's Electronic Surveillance Unit, embedded in the crowds on January 6, 2021.
Photo of bracelet worn by plainclothes members of the Metropolitan Police Department’s Electronic Surveillance Unit, embedded in the crowds on Jan. 6, 2021 to “document the actions of the demonstrators and MPD’s response to any civil disobedience or criminal activity.” (Metropolitan Police Department First Amendment Demonstrations report.)

Also in the report, revealed now for the first time, was the advisory that the Special Operations Division “will have personnel to assist with this detail and will assist with any demonstration.” Among them were Domestic Security Officers, or DSOs.

The Special Operations Division is part of the United States Secret Service, which is part of Homeland Security.

Under the heading of “Special Operations Division — Deployment Requirements,” the report said “the Incident Commander” shall ensure that specific objectives were “adhered to.” Among those is the order that “Long Range Acoustical Device (LRAD) – The LRAD along with the warning sheets shall be deployed by the DSO members along with the munitions load out and arrest kits.”

Domestic Security Officers (pdf) are also part of Homeland Security’s Special Operations Division.

Epoch Times Photo
Homeland Security Organizational Flowchart (ACTIVE MPD Org Charts)

According to The Focus, the DSO “can be heard shouted on audio recordings of the Capitol siege, when law enforcement officers needed additional support against the oncoming masses.”

“DSOs are primarily used as riot police, to dole out such crowd control measures as tear gas, pepper spray, batons and rubber bullets intended to disperse rioters. Their weapons can be lethal and are only to be used in the most extreme circumstances.”

Video evidence shows an unidentified individual handing weapons to people through a window from inside the Capitol building.

Joseph McBride, an attorney for multiple January 6 prisoners and defendants identified a man tagged by “Sedition Hunters” as “Red-Faced 45.” The man McBride says is “clearly law enforcement,” was dressed in red from head to toe—with even his face painted red. He appears in a video engaging in continuous dialogue with others whom McBride also insists are agents embedded in the crowd.

“He passes out weapons, sledgehammers, poles, mace. Some of those things come in contact with some of the other protesters who have subsequently been charged with possessing dangerous weapons and are using dangerous weapons at the Capitol. That is clearly entrapment.

That is clearly the government creating conditions of dangerousness and entrapping members of the crowd to possess weapons and possibly use them for reasons that we cannot comprehend.”

According to a 140-page report issued by then-Capitol Police Inspector General Michael Bolton—”Review of the Events Surrounding the Jan. 6, 2021, Takeover of the U.S. Capitol”—Capitol Police’s Civil Disturbance Unit was ordered by supervisors not to use the department’s most powerful tools, like stun guns. Also, “heavier, less-lethal weapons,” including stun grenades, “were not used that day because of orders from leadership.”

However, the “UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE TIMELINE OF EVENTS FOR JANUARY 6, 2021 ATTACK,” also obtained by The Epoch Times, says “Less lethal munitions” were “deployed to Center Steps” at 1:59 p.m. after “Insurrectionists breach Inauguration Stage and begin tearing things down” and “breach barrier at the north side of the plaza.”

It does not specify if these munitions were “flash bangs” or “tear gas.”

Screenshot from UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE TIMELINE OF EVENTS FORJANUARY 6, 2021ATTACK showing moment "less lethal munitions" were "deployed to center steps."
Screenshot from UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE TIMELINE OF EVENTS FOR JANUARY 6, 2021 ATTACK showing the moment “less lethal munitions” were “deployed to center steps.” (Obtained by The Epoch Times)

Prior to the deployment of munitions, a video shown on Red Voice Media shows that at 1:05 p.m., an unnamed officer is repeatedly encouraging people to climb onto the bleachers of the inaugural stage.

On January 6, 2021, tear gas was fired into crowd of pro-Trump protesters well before the violence began. Even with the tear gas, the crowd remained orderly..
Tear gas fired into the crowd of pro-Trump protesters well before the violence began on Jan. 6, 2021. Even with the tear gas, the crowd remained orderly. (Courtesy of J. Michael Waller)

From multiple eyewitness accounts and video evidence, the crowds were relatively peaceful and calm until after munitions were launched and rubber bullets were fired into the crowd.

Video footage shows flash grenades being launched into a group of protesters, consisting of women, children, and elderly people, who were standing peacefully behind barriers. According to American Greatness, Capitol Police were also firing on the crowd with rubber bullets. The approximate time of the confrontation was around 1:36 p.m.

gallery slideshow from TMZ, reporting damage “after Capitol riots” shows damage only to the fabric, not the bleachers themselves.

The evidence raises the questions:

  1. Are the DSOs, rather than Capitol Hill police or the MPD, the ones who launched flash bangs into the crowd?
  2. Are DSOs the ones seen in videos doling out weapons to people in the crowd?
  3. What about the LRAD?

According to Acentech, a company with 70 years of acoustic expertise, “LRAD systems are a type of Acoustic Hailing Device (AHD), used to send messages over long distances. LRAD systems produce much higher sound levels (volume) than normal loudspeakers or megaphones.”

Over shorter distances, LRAD signals are loud enough to cause pain in the ears of people in their path. LRAD systems have recently been used by police as “sonic weapons” to break up crowds. At first blush, the use of noise rather than physical force might seem like a safe, non-lethal way to move and direct crowds, but if used improperly they can cause permanent hearing damage.

There does not appear to be any evidence that the LRAD was deployed.

Outrageous Government Conduct

According to Joseph McBride, the attorney for several Jan. 6 prisoners and defendants, “if they had memos that preexisted January 6, that the D.C. Police and/or the FBI or the CIA or anybody else had the time to organize and send operatives or undercovers into the crowd whether it was to collect evidence or to videotape or for any other legitimate or illegitimate purpose, this, by definition would be they had foreknowledge of what was going to happen.”

McBride added that “they could have and should have and most likely didn’t, share that information with the relative authorities.”

By comparison to the ill-prepared CDU and unused National Guard during Jan. 6, in anticipation of violent protests regarding the leaked Supreme revealing the likely overturn of Roe v. Wade, McBride noted how security was heightened and law enforcement was quick to fortify the Supreme Court building with tall fencing.

Epoch Times Photo
U.S. Capitol Police guard a security fence surrounding the Supreme Court in Washington on June 8, 2022. (Nathan Howard/Getty Images)

“They did not do that on January 6,” Mc Bride said.” The question is—Why?”

To McBride, Jan. 6 easily clears the high bar set to prove the rare defense known as “outrageous government conduct.”

“In most cases,” Doug Murphy Law explains on its website, “the courts presume that the government is acting reasonably when they pursue criminal charges against an individual.”

“As long as the federal government’s intentions are good, the courts will not prevent a case from moving forward. However, some conduct by the federal government is so outrageous that moving forward with a criminal prosecution violates a defendant’s due process rights. This is a high bar to prove, as it must involve acts so fundamentally unfair that justice would prevent a criminal prosecution.”

“In layman’s terms,” McBride said “it has to do with when the government behaves in a way that’s so outrageous and so out of bounds of what is decent and normal that, but for their participation, things would have happened differently that day.”

Considering the mounting evidence from eyewitness accounts that law enforcement was directly involved in encouraginginvitingprovokinginstigatingparticipating, and trying to cover up the truth about the origins of the violence on Jan. 6, it becomes a legitimate defense to anyone who may be charged with crimes related to Jan. 6 “because the government was engaged in a bunch of things that rose to the level of being outrageous,” McBride asserted.

“Their job is to prevent things from happening. What happened was they participated in making things happen, with advanced knowledge, and therefore, they themselves are on the hook. You can’t say John Doe and Jane Doe are going to be charged with January 6-related crimes But officer X and Officer Y, who did the same thing, are going to get a pass because they are with the government. That [expletive] doesn’t fly.”

Entrapment

“My Spidey senses tell me they used the documentation of things through surveillance was for the purposes of entrapment. The idea of an Electronic Surveillance Unit roaming through a crown is highly dubious. The only time I have ever seen law enforcement do this, they have almost always been accused of doing this to rile up the crowd,” said McBride.

Julie Kelly—a political consultant in Illinois and senior contributor for American Greatness—described Jan. 6, 2021, as “an inside job” and “something Democrats and some Republicans and federal agencies put together to entice” and “entrap” people who went to hear former President Donald Trump’s speech. She further noted that the FBI used agents to try to infiltrate the so-called militia groups. Jeremy Brown exposed a video of FBI Terrorist Task Force agents attempting to recruit him to spy on fellow Oath Keepers.

McBride described first-hand how he saw people in the crowd “at the tunnel entrance” on Jan. 6 “videotaping all over the place.”

“They were cops, clearly,” he insisted.” They were working in concert with other people in the crowd who were causing discord, using hand signals. There were people there causing the fights and there were people videoing it. The job of a police officer is to prevent crime. It’s not to record it. If something is happening, you prevent it from happening. The fact that they let it happen and sowed up only to record it, it has entrapment written all over it.”

2022 Elections

Despite what Gohmert sees as lies, injustice, and mounting unanswered questions surrounding Jan. 6, he believes the turning of the tide is dependent upon who comes out of the 2022 primary elections with control of the House and Senate, and until Congress can “properly addresses the unconstitutionality of federal judges granting warrants that never should have been granted,” Gohmert said, “this kind of stuff is going to go on.”

“If Republicans get the majority back we have got to get to the bottom of these matters,” Gohmert vowed. “There won’t be any way to undo the jail sentences of these people who were illegally entrapped. But there will be a way to put people in jail that committed crimes in order to create the chaos.”

Still, there is one of the questions that nags Gohmert.

“Since we know there were provocations on January 6 and we know that there were people that were provided weapons from people that may have been planted by the federal government, you can’t help but wonder, how many Democrats if any, who are making the most noise now about the horrors of January 6, knew that this was a setup?”

The Epoch Times reached out to the MPD for comment.

Patricia Tolson

REPORTER
Patricia Tolson, an award-winning national investigative reporter with 20 years of experience, has worked for such news outlets as Yahoo!, U.S. News, and The Tampa Free Press. With The Epoch Times, Patricia’s in-depth investigative coverage of human interest stories, election policies, education, school boards, and parental rights has achieved international exposure. Send her your story ideas: patricia.tolson@epochtimes.us

Supreme Court Rules New York’s Concealed Carry Gun Law Is Unconstitutional; Crimes Against Humanity

Supreme Court Rules New York’s Concealed Carry Gun Law Is Unconstitutional, Recognizes Right to Carry in Public

Justice Thomas: Law violates Constitution by preventing law-abiding citizens from defending themselves in public
By Matthew Vadum
June 23, 2022 Updated: June 23, 2022

The Supreme Court voted 6–3 on June 23 to strike down New York state’s draconian concealed carry gun permitting system on constitutional grounds, recognizing for the first time a constitutional right to carry firearms in public for self-defense.

The ruling is a sweeping victory for Second Amendment gun ownership rights and may help to undo restrictive gun control laws outside New York state, possibly including so-called red flag laws, which allow the confiscation of guns in certain circumstances with limited due process.

The Second Amendment states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The Supreme Court has been strengthening Second Amendment protections in recent years, and observers have said that the court’s six-member conservative supermajority could help expand gun ownership protections. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protects “the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” and in McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), it held that this right “is fully applicable to the States.”

The ruling comes amid rising crime rates, activist demands to defund police departments, and a Biden administration push to strengthen gun control policies. A legislative package, introduced in the wake of a series of high-profile mass shootings, is moving forward in Congress.

Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association (NRA) hailed the decision, calling it a “watershed win for good men and women all across America” and taking credit for the victory after “a decades-long fight the NRA has led.”

“The right to self-defense and to defend your family and loved ones should not end at your home,” LaPierre said.

President Joe Biden condemned the new ruling, which he said “contradicts both common sense and the Constitution and should deeply trouble us all.”

“I call on Americans across the country to make their voices heard on gun safety. Lives are on the line,” Biden said.

The Empire State’s gun permit law, as with laws in seven other states, generally requires an applicant to demonstrate “proper cause” in order to obtain a license to carry a concealed handgun in public.

New York makes it a crime to possess a firearm without a license, whether inside or outside the home. An individual who wants to carry a firearm outside his home may obtain an unrestricted license to “have and carry” a concealed “pistol or revolver” if he can prove that “proper cause exists” for doing so, according to state law. An applicant satisfies the “proper cause” requirement only if he can “demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community,” according to a 1980 ruling by the Supreme Court of New York in Klenosky v. New York City Police Department.

The specific issue before the court was whether the state’s denial of the petitioning individuals’ applications for concealed carry licenses for self-defense violates the U.S. Constitution.

Oral arguments in the case, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, court file 20-843, an appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, were heard on Nov. 3.

Respondent Kevin Bruen heads the New York State Police. Founded in 1871, the lead petitioner, the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, describes itself as “the state’s largest and nation’s oldest firearms advocacy organization,” and as the official NRA-affiliated state association in New York.

The majority opinion (pdf) was written by Justice Clarence Thomas, who declared that New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the 14th Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense.

“Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State’s licensing regime violates the Constitution,” Thomas wrote, before quoting Konigsberg v. State Bar of California (1961).

“In keeping with Heller, we hold that when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify its regulation, the government … must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s ‘unqualified command.’”

It makes no sense to deny Americans the ability to defend themselves outside their homes, he said.

“To confine the right to ‘bear’ arms to the home would nullify half of the Second Amendment’s operative protections. Moreover, confining the right to ‘bear’ arms to the home would make little sense given that self-defense is ‘the central component of the [Second Amendment] right itself,’” Thomas wrote, quoting the Heller opinion.

“After all, the Second Amendment guarantees an ‘individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,’ and confrontation can surely take place outside the home. … Many Americans hazard greater danger outside the home than in it.”

In a concurring opinion, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that in 1791 when the Second Amendment was adopted, “there were no police departments, and many families lived alone on isolated farms or on the frontiers. If these people were attacked, they were on their own. It is hard to imagine the furor that would have erupted if the Federal Government and the States had tried to take away the guns that these people needed for protection. Today, unfortunately, many Americans have good reason to fear that they will be victimized if they are unable to protect themselves. And today, no less than in 1791, the Second Amendment guarantees their [rights].”

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a dissenting opinion, which Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined.

“In 2020, 45,222 Americans were killed by firearms. Since the start of this year (2022), there have been 277 reported mass shootings—an average of more than one per day. Gun violence has now surpassed motor vehicle crashes as the leading cause of death among children and adolescents. Many States have tried to address some of the dangers of gun violence just described by passing laws that limit, in various ways, who may purchase, carry, or use firearms of different kinds. The Court today severely burdens States’ efforts to do so.”

Matthew Vadum

CONTRIBUTOR
Matthew Vadum is an award-winning investigative journalist and a recognized expert in left-wing activism.
Kari Lake embarrasses CNN reporter

“Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is
manifest in the laws of the universe—a spirit vastly superior to that of man.”
—ALBERT EINSTEIN, GERMAN THEORETICAL PHYSICIST

 

 Dr. Simone Gold, Prominent Critic of COVID-19 Vaccines Sentenced to Prison; Supreme Court Strikes NY Gun Law; US biolabs in Ukraine; Biden Laptop

Prominent Critic of COVID-19 Vaccines Sentenced to Prison; Jan. 6 Committee Hearings Enter Day 3 | NTD Evening News

 

by STEFANIA COX

 Dr. Simone Gold, a prominent critic of COVID-19 vaccines, was sentenced to 60 days in prison and a year of supervised release for entering the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The congressional committee investigating the events of Jan. 6 held its third hearing on June 16, and it put former Vice President Mike Pence back in the spotlight.

* Click the “Save” button below the video to access it later on “My List.”

Follow EpochTV on social media:

Twitter: https://twitter.com/EpochTVus
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/EpochTV
Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@EpochTV

Gettr: https://gettr.com/user/epochtv
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/EpochTVus
Gab: https://gab.com/EpochTV
Telegram: https://t.me/EpochTV

The Truth Is Spreading,[DS] Prepares To Shutdown The Truth,Be Careful What You Wish For

Supreme Court strikes New York gun law, expanding gun rights | AP News

Thursday, June 23rd 2022, 2:58:42 pm
article
views: 170
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Thursday that Americans have a right to carry guns in public, a major expansion of gun rights. The justices’ 6-3 decision follows a series of recent mass shootings and is expected to ultimately allow more people to legally carry guns on the streets of the nation’s largest cities — including New York, Los Angeles and Boston — and elsewhere.
U.S Police whistleblower John Mark Dougan explains what U.S Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland’s role was in relation to biolabs and destabilizing Ukraine.
Sunlight causes cancer theory debunked.
LEGAL UPDATE: DailyMail Report Indicates FBI Is No Longer Investigating The Ashley Biden Diary as Being Stolen; Contradicting The DOJ’s In-Court Statements
Laptop from hell due to be leaked this week. Let’s see if this actually comes to fruition.

Planned Parenthood Uses Partial-Birth Abortions to Sell Baby Parts; More on Roe vs. Wade

In the video below,  Dr. Deborah Nucatola, Senior Director of Medical Service for Planned Parenthood  is at a business lunch with actors posing as buyers from a human biologics company. As  the Senior Director, she has overseen medical practice at all Planned Parenthood locations since 2009.

“We’ve Been Very Good at Getting Heart, Lung, Liver, Because We Know That, So I’m Not Gonna Crush That Part, I’m Gonna Basically Crush Below, I’m Gonna Crush Above, And I’m Gonna See If I Can Get It All Intact.”

Roe vs. Wade
Roe’s Death Bed Confession that rocked the world of abortion.

Supreme Court Has Decided to Overturn Roe v. Wade, Leaked Opinion Suggests

A newly published majority draft opinion penned by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito suggests the nation’s top court has decided to strike down Roe v. Wade, the seminal precedent that in 1973 wrested the regulation of abortion from the states and made the procedure lawful throughout the entire United States.

The 67-page opinion, along with a 31-page appendix, was published on May 2 by Politico.

“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito states in the document.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” Alito writes in the document, which is labeled as “the opinion of the Court.” “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

The draft begins: “Abortion presents a profound moral issue on which Americans hold sharply conflicting views. Some believe fervently that a human person comes into being at conception and that abortion ends an innocent life. Others feel just as strongly that any regulation of abortion invades a woman’s right to control her own body and prevents women from achieving full equality. Still others in a third group think that abortions should be allowed under some but not all circumstances, and those within this group hold a variety of views about the particular restrictions that should be imposed.”

Politico said it received a copy of the draft opinion from a person familiar with the court’s proceedings in a pending challenge to a Mississippi abortion law, along with other details supporting the authenticity of the document.

The Supreme Court later confirmed the authenticity of the document but said the leak was a betrayal and will be investigated. The court also said the draft does not represent a decision by the court “or the final position of any member on the issues in the case.”

Justices often change their minds in deliberations as they attempt to win over other members of the court to their point of view.

The circulation of the document constitutes an unprecedented breach of Supreme Court protocol.

Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz, who said he opposes Roe being reversed, told Fox News he couldn’t recall a Supreme Court opinion ever being leaked to the media.

“I have a theory, and it’s only a theory. I think this was leaked by a liberal law clerk who was trying to change the outcome of the case, either by putting pressure on some of the justices to change their mind, or by getting Congress to pack the court even before June, which is very unlikely, or to get Congress to pass a national right-to-abortion law, which would apply to all the states,” Dershowitz said.

The influential SCOTUS blog website weighed in on Twitter, writing on May 2 at 9:07 p.m.: “It’s impossible to overstate the earthquake this will cause inside the Court, in terms of the destruction of trust among Justices and staff. This leak is the gravest, most unforgivable sin.”

The draft opinion is on the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, court file 19-1392, a challenge by the only state-licensed abortion clinic in Mississippi to the state’s Gestational Age Act, which allows abortions after 15 weeks’ gestation only for medical emergencies or severe fetal abnormality. Citing Roe, lower courts held the state statute was unconstitutional.

As The Epoch Times reported five months ago, during oral arguments Dec. 1, 2021, the Supreme Court seemed generally open to the possibility of answering Mississippi’s call to scuttle Roe v. Wade.

Roe v. Wade is “an egregiously wrong decision,” Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart said during oral arguments, appearing to foreshadow Alito’s words in the draft document.

“Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey haunt our country,” Stewart said, referencing Roe’s companion ruling from 1992, which held states can’t impose significant restrictions on abortion before a fetus becomes viable for life outside the womb, somewhere around the 24-week gestation mark.

“They have no basis in the Constitution. They have no home in our history or traditions. They’ve damaged the democratic process. They’ve poisoned the law. They’ve choked off compromise. For 50 years, they’ve kept this court at the center of a political battle that it can never resolve. And 50 years on, they stand alone. Nowhere else does this court recognize a right to end a human life.”

The Dobbs case is the first direct challenge to Roe in the high court since Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s appointment on Oct. 26, 2020, gave the court’s nominally conservative wing a 6–3 majority. Some conservative court observers argue the conservative-to-liberal split is more like 5-4 because they consider Chief Justice John Roberts to be a moderate or even a liberal because he frequently sides with liberal justices when the court seems on the verge of overturning a precedent disliked by conservatives. Barrett replaced the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died the previous Sept. 18.

Ginsburg was a defender of abortion but she spoke out about the problems she saw with the Roe decision. For example, at a May 11, 2013 appearance at University of Chicago Law School, she said her “criticism of Roe is that it seemed to have stopped the momentum on the side of change.” It would have been better if abortion rights had been brought about more gradually, preferably in a process that included state legislatures and courts, she said. Roe isn’t really about the woman’s choice, is it?” Ginsburg said. “It’s about the doctor’s freedom to practice…it wasn’t woman-centered, it was physician-centered.”

Matthew Vadum

CONTRIBUTOR
Matthew Vadum is an award-winning investigative journalist and a recognized expert in left-wing activism.

AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH – REPUDIATION AND REVOCATION OF CITIZENSHIP

We have been fooled and deceived  far to long. We are a product of our  culture,  influenced by our medical, education, media, political and religious and belief systems. We have been spoon-fed information by the media and bureaucrats that follows a narrative prescribed by the elites.  But their plan is not working and  the masses are waking up. Little did we know that we have programmed since birth as Dr.  Bruce Lipton explains in this video and the Government continued the programming  through  Operation Mockingbird. We have been guided daily through a world wide messaging system, to believe vaccinations, GMO foods, pesticides and chemicals are needed to heal and feed the world. In reality, even global warming is part of the scam and plan to depopulate the world as they geoengineer the air we breath.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is time to break free from the matric and we do that through knowledge.  Knowledge is power. Wisdom is deciding how to use that power. Insight is developed when you consistently make use of wisdom. To gain knowledge, you have to read, listen, see, experience, and get familiar with certain things. To gain wisdom, you first need to have the knowledge and that consist of seeking the truth. David Straight in the video  below is a very informative explaining our true rights involving the government.


Trump restoring the republic while people were asleep. Now he’s taking down western medicine (aka pharma cartel).

David Lester Straight  is a former Intelligence Officer, Former County Sherriff Deputy, Former Presidential Task Force Agent, and has also been helping people succeed in court for over 30 years.

David Lester Straight-AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH – REPUDIATION
AND REVOCATION OF CITIZENSHIP

David Straight: Making these United States of America Great Again (substack.com)

https://davidstraightlive.com/

They don’t just teach us what to believe. They teach us who we are. They give us the frameworks upon which we cast our ambitions and evaluate our success, and we build psychological identities out of those constructs. I am a businessman. I am unemployed. My life is about making money. My life is about disappointing people. I am a success. I am a failure. They invent the test of our adequacy, and they invent the system by which we are graded.

These artificial constructs take up such vast portions of our personal psychology that people will live their entire lives completely enslaved to them, making them their entire focus. This enslavement is so pervasive that people will often even take their own lives based on what those made-up constructs tell them about who they are and what they’re worth.

And it’s all a lie. A dream world, made entirely of narrative, constructed by the powerful for the benefit of the powerful. Things as intimate as the thoughts in our heads and the movement of our interest and attention are controlled and dominated with iron-fisted force, all for the benefit of some stupid made-up games about imaginary money and fictional authority.

Reading by Tim Foley.

They Don’t Just Lie To Us About Wars. They Lie To Us About Everything

Biden Family Corruption Goes Mainstream; Income Tax is Voluntary and Woke Feminist’s Speaks

WATCH — CBS News reports on the Biden family corruption scandal, including a federal investigation into the Biden family’s foreign business deals.


Most Americans do not know that income tax is voluntary.

 

Yes, it’s true that it is voluntary however if you don’t pay it, then they may go after your bank accounts and threaten in jail. IRS is another method  of enslaving the masses.  What would happen if we all quit paying taxes?


 

Discussion between Charlie Kirk and a woke feminist.

So much nonsense in our culture today coming out of so-called higher education educations systems.  Logically thinking, I believe we have much bigger issues to debate.   

 

 

SCJ Clarence Thomas Poisoned, SUPREME COURT SAYS, TWO DAYS AFTER HE ENTERED THE HOSPITAL

Like the US Government, German Leaders Give Themselves Pay Raises While Telling Ordinary People to Tighten Belts: Report 

  • Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Finance Minister Christian Lindner, Economy Minister Robert Habeck, and other senior officials have taken pay raises while encouraging ordinary Germans to hunker down and prepare for the worst, DWN reports, citing new government salary figures that went into effect on Friday.
  • Scholz, whose monthly salary amounts to under 30,000 euros, got an increase of 345 euros per month. Lindner and Habeck are now getting 275 euros more each.
  • The salary bump comes amid comments by senior officials calling on ordinary Germans to prepare for “hard times”. On Friday, Habeck warned that the crisis in German-Russian relations over Ukraine and the resulting possible energy crisis would take a bite out of Germans’ economic wellbeing.

Mainstream Media Whistleblowers Say MSM Spread Misinformation During COVID


The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to take the case of a Denver-area website designer subject to a Colorado state law that censors and coerces the speech of creative professionals whose religious beliefs do not conform to state orthodoxy. The US Supreme Court normally accepts and hears about 5 percent of all cases presented so this may be one to watch. Freedoms are slowly being taken away and this one will make an impact.

US Supreme Court to hear case of artist threatened under ‘Orwellian’ Colorado law

 

Canada crackdown on protesters

The world is changing before our eyes in every aspect imaginable.

Know what is in front of your face, and what is hidden from you will be disclosed to you. (THE GOSPEL OF THOMAS- Saying 5)

 

 

Jab testing resulted in animals dying; International Criminal Complaint filed and more

They stopped the vaccine testing because animals were dying.

Covid-19: Pharmaceutical giants, Gates, Fauci, UK officials accused of crimes against humanity in International Criminal Court complaint

Doctor Theresa Long testifies the COVID Vaccine is more deadly than the virus

Back at the LA Zoo

See the source image

 

Natural Immunity Likely Contributing to Lower Hospitalization Rate in South Africa Amid Omicron Surge: Studies

December 22, 2021 Updated: December 22, 2021

A high immunity among South Africans that stems primarily from prior infection is likely a contributing factor to the lower hospitalization rate the country has recorded amid the surge in COVID-19 cases after the Omicron variant of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus became dominant, according to a pair of new studies.

COVID-19 infections in South Africa have skyrocketed in recent weeks, but hospitalizations have risen much more slowly compared to the previous wave, which was driven by the Delta variant.

In the first 31 days of the current wave, 164,911 cases were recorded, but just 3,432 patients required hospital care, and 194 died.

In comparison, during the same time period of the last wave, 38,577 cases were recorded, with 10,088 requiring hospital care and 668 dying.

“We believe that the evolution of cell-mediated immunity from prior natural infection and vaccination is resulting in the uncoupling of the high case rates seen with the Omicron variant and the rates of severe disease,” South African researchers said in one of the new studies, a preprint done with funds from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The immunity is “primarily due to natural infection, with or without COVID-19 vaccination,” they added later.

In the other study, also not yet peer-reviewed, South African scientists said people who get infected now face roughly 80 percent lower odds of needing hospital care when compared to individuals who got COVID-19 from the Delta variant.

Additionally, people who do get admitted to hospitals have a lower chance of developing severe disease and are staying, on average, for fewer days than before.

That’s likely due in part to “high levels of population immunity (due to natural infection and/or vaccination),” wrote the researchers, who received funding from the South African Medical Research Council.

While seropositivity estimates have been high in South Africa, vaccination rates have been relatively low. As of this week, about half of adults 18 or older had received a COVID-19 vaccine, including people who only got one shot.

Epoch Times Photo
A man receives a dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in Johannesburg, South Africa on Dec. 15, 2021. (Luca Sola/AFP via Getty Images)

Early studies indicate Omicron can better evade immunity from both prior infection and vaccination, though both have held up well against hospitalization and severe disease. Just 1.7 percent of patients with COVID-19 were needing hospital care in South Africa, compared to 19 percent during the Delta wave, Health Minister Joe Phaahla told reporters last week.

Vaccine booster doses, meanwhile, show promise against Omicron, though experts aren’t sure how long the restored protection will last.

In South Africa, most people who have been admitted to hospitals or died with COVID-19 in recent weeks either did not receive a vaccine or just received one dose, according to the country’s National Institute For Communicable Diseases. Officials there are encouraging people to get a vaccine or get a booster if they’ve already gotten one.

Cheryl Cohen, an epidemiology professor at the University of the Witwatersrand who helped with the second study, told reporters in a virtual briefing Wednesday that researchers could not tell if vaccination, natural immunity, or an intrinsic reduced virulence of Omicron have played the largest role, but that she believes the findings are generalizable to other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, which have similar levels of previous infection.

“I think what is unclear is how the picture will be similar in countries where there are high levels of vaccination but very low levels of previous infection,” she added. “The baseline epidemiology is different. But I think, compellingly, our data really suggests a positive story of a reduced severity of Omicron compared to other variants.”

Real-world data from other countries also points to a reduced severity, including lower hospitalization rates in Denmark and the United Kingdom when compared to previous waves.

At the same time, Imperial College London researchers said last week that they found no evidence of lower severity with Omicron versus Delta; and in Denmark, “the jury is still out” because of the small amount of data to study thus far, Troels Lillebaek, professor of infectious diseases epidemiology at the University of Copenhagen, told The Epoch Times in an email.

Still, there does seem to be enough evidence out to show Omicron is less severe than previous strains, “but we do not know yet if this is because of increasing cellular immunity in the population in December 2021 versus an inherent property of the strain that makes it less virulent or both,” Dr. Monica Gandhi, director of the University of California, San Francisco-Bay Area Center for AIDS Research, told The Epoch Times via email.

Beyond the high immunity in South Africa “this could be partially because the strain is less virulent and there was data from the University of Hong Kong last week that it is less likely to be able to infect lung cells than previous variants, a finding replicated by a laboratory at the University College London,” she added.

Zachary Stieber

REPORTER
Zachary Stieber covers U.S. news and stories relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. He is based in Maryland.

 

Message to Parents: Second Holocaust; Heart Inflammation Risk Higher for under 40 and God Is Within

Inventor of mRNA Dr. Robert Malone sends this message to parents considering vaccinating their children.


The Second Holocaust



Attorney Mike Hamilton joins the Mike Adams to reveal LEGAL truths about vaccine mandates and medical tyranny

Tidal wave of lawsuits coming against dangerous vaccine mandates – Thomas Renz interviewed by Mike Adams

Attorney General Documents

Heart Inflammation Risk Higher From Moderna Vaccine Than COVID-19 for Those Under 40: Study

December 15, 2021 Updated: December 15, 2021

The risk of developing a form of heart inflammation is higher for people younger than 40 after receiving Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine than it is from contracting COVID-19, according to a new study.

Researchers found 15 excess cases per 1 million people who received a second dose of the vaccine compared to 10 extra cases of myocarditis following a positive COVID-19 test. Moderna’s vaccine is typically taken in a two-dose regimen.

The risk of myocarditis, a form of heart inflammation, was much higher following the second dose of the Moderna vaccine, but there were still eight excess cases per 1 million people following the first dose as well.

“Time to abandon the belief that COVID-19 myocarditis risk is always higher than mRNA vaccine myocarditis risk. For some individuals, myocarditis risks of the vaccine(s) are higher than those of the disease,” Euzebiusz Jamrozik, an infectious disease expert who works at the University of Oxford, wrote on Twitter.

The elevated risk stood out against what researchers found for the Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccines. People were found to be more at risk of contracting myocarditis from COVID-19 than from either of those vaccines, regardless of age.

“This population-based study quantifies for the first time the risk of several rare cardiac adverse events associated with three COVID-19 vaccines as well as SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 in adults was associated with a small increase in the risk of myocarditis within a week of receiving the first dose of both adenovirus and mRNA vaccines, and after the second dose of both mRNA vaccines. By contrast, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a substantial increase in the risk of hospitalization or death from myocarditis, pericarditis, and cardiac arrhythmia,” the researchers wrote.

SARS-CoV-2 is another name for the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, which causes COVID-19.

The study was published in Nature and was carried out by professors from multiple colleges, including the University of Oxford, which helped develop the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine.

Researchers utilized data from the English National Immunization database, which includes information on all people vaccinated in England. The database featured information on 38.6 million people through Aug. 24.

Limitations on the study included not breaking down the data further—previous studies indicate that teenagers are at much higher risk of myocarditis from vaccines than older people—and Moderna’s vaccine not being available in the UK until April.

Representatives for Moderna, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Moderna
Moderna’s headquarters is seen in Cambridge, Mass., on Nov. 30, 2020. (Maddie Meyer/Getty Images)

Myocarditis and another form of heart inflammation, pericarditis, have been identified as serious side effects following vaccination with the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines, which are both built on messenger RNA technology. A U.S. study analyzing reports submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System found that teenage boys were more likely to suffer heart inflammation from the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines than they were from COVID-19 hospitalization.

Some countries, including Finland, paused their administration of Moderna’s vaccine to youth because of concerns about the side effect.

“The preliminary data showed that among those under 30, the myocarditis and pericarditis incidence was higher than expected,” Dr. Hanna Nohynek, chief physician of the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare’s Unit Infectious Diseases Control and Vaccines, told The Epoch Times in November.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration pushed back a decision in late October on whether to authorize the Moderna vaccine for children aged 17 and younger. Moderna stated that this was done so that drug regulators could more closely analyze the risk-benefit calculus.

Moderna stated in a November call that its vaccine, which is administered at a higher amount than Pfizer’s, offers better protection, but also brings more myocarditis risk.

A Canadian pre-print study published last week found that the incidence of heart inflammation was 5.1 times higher for males between 18 and 24 who got a second dose of Moderna’s vaccine versus those in the same population who received a second dose of Pfizer’s vaccine.

The risk of myocarditis following vaccination was much lower in youth who received the second dose at a longer interval, researchers found. Some countries have stretched the time between the first and second vaccine dose as a result of similar studies.

Zachary Stieber

REPORTER

Zachary Stieber covers U.S. news and stories relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. He is based in Maryland.


GOD IS WITHIN YOU

Jean Claude Koven

15 October 2009

When people ask me if I am religious, I tell them I love God far too much to be religious. “Oh, then you must believe in God?” they inevitably God is within you ask. “Of course not,” I reply with a smile, “does a fish believe in water?” For me, God is all there is. What’s to believe?

Although all the world’s major religions agree that God (however they define the term) is omnipresent, it seems that very few of their followers including their clerical hierarchy actually understand what omnipresence really means. And therein lies the source of the world’s ills.

For a start, we take our relationship with God far too seriously. We bring so much solemnity to the way we view God awe, veneration, obedience, and the like that we end up creating distance between us and the object of our worship.

Expressions such as “God is my judge,” “God forbid,” and “God bless you” creep into our language, and consequently our thoughts. People are actually proud to call themselves God-fearing folk. For too many of us, God is somewhere out there, watching and judging us as we struggle through our imperfect lives.

And consider this: Some religions consider the name of God so holy that it is never pronounced. Instead they create a litany of substitute terms so they can talk about God without having to commit the blasphemy of actually using his name.

When practitioners of these religions write about their deity, they are instructed to omit the vowel: G-d. Other religions take the opposite tack. They encourage their devotees to chant or meditate on the name of God for hours at a time.

To their way of believing, focusing on God leads to a state of bliss that opens the door to transcendence and enlightenment. But if God is truly all that is, what can possibly make one of his names more powerful than any other?

For that matter, what is the purpose of naming him (or her or it) in the first place?

Naming anything creates a subject/object relationship between you and the thing named, and that in and of itself means a separation. Every name of God, no matter how holy, drives a wedge between the creator and the created which includes you and me.

This separation is the primal breeding ground for fear, for we then see ourselves as tiny beings, abandoned (or evicted from Paradise) and living on the fringe of an incomprehensibly huge cosmos.

But what if the phrase “God is all that is” were literally true? This is what R Buckminster Fuller must have understood when he said, “God, to me, it seems, is a verb not a noun.” His words, when I first read them, lodged in my mind.

But I didn’t get their full import until many years later, during my first visit to Findhorn, the renowned spiritual community in northeast Scotland.

It was there, sitting in a circle with my fellow newbies, that the penny dropped. One young man in our group, Peter, suddenly exclaimed, “Oh, wow, I finally see it. It is not that God is in all things; it’s that God is all things.”

His exclamation triggered two remarkable realisations for me. First, the obvious is obvious only to those who are sufficiently present to see it. The delivery of Peter’s life-changing epiphany had virtually no effect on the rest of the group.

Our facilitator was so consumed by his orientation agenda that he missed the moment completely. Thanking Peter for his contribution, he simply asked the group if anyone else had anything to share.

Second, what Peter said is literally true. In an instant, Bucky’s words became crystal clear. God is indeed a verb. He is not the creator. He is the ongoing unfoldment of creation itself. There is nothing that is not a part of this unfolding. Thus there can be nothing separate from God. God is infinite and infinity is One.

From that moment, everything in my life began to change. It wasn’t immediate; it was rather like a giant oil tanker slowly making a U-turn. As if I were facing in a new direction, I looked at the world in a new way “How,” I asked myself, “do we dupe ourselves so completely? How come so few people see what Bucky and Peter see? How could I myself have been so blind?”

When we perceive God as a noun, we envision him as the creator, the architect of, and therefore separate from, his creation.

Identifying ourselves as part of that creation, we see ourselves not only separate from our source but separate from each other and all other manifest things as well. This is the fatally flawed axiom underlying virtually all of the world’s faiths.

Once I viewed God as a verb instead of a noun, my perception of life shifted. Everything around and its manifestation became God. There was only God. When someone spoke to me, it was with God’s voice; when I listened, it was with God’s heart. I invite you to try it.

The small shift from noun to verb may well be the antidote to the forbidden fruit that banished us from Eden. As you begin to view God not as the creator but as the constantly changing dance of creation itself, you’ll discover him in everything you see including yourself.

Source: Times of India, New Delhi

URL of this page: http://www.newageislam.com/spiritual-meditations/god-is-within-you/d/1993

    “The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who areAlbert Einstein evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.”

Albert Einstein

%d bloggers like this: