Donald Trump’s Executive Order Regarding The Johnson Amendment

Last Thursday, President Donald Trump signed an executive order (EO) that ostensibly relaxes enforcement of the Johnson Amendment–a 1954 amendment to the 501c3 Internal Revenue Code (IRC) that places churches under the regulations of non-profit organizations, thereby restricting their political speech and activity. For over sixty years, pastors and churches have labored under the threat of the loss of tax exemption should they run afoul of the 501c3 tax law. Trump said his EO is designed to give pastors and churches more liberty to exercise their freedom of speech without risking the wrath of the IRS. Obviously, it would take congressional action to actually remove or overturn the Johnson Amendment.

I personally think Trump’s EO is a step in the right direction–as far as it goes.

Of course, obvious Republican shills such as Tony Perkins are gushing all over Donald Trump for his decision. Perkins said, “No longer will the IRS muzzle the speech of pastors and non-profit organizations and the Department of Justice will address the host of other anti-religious policies and actions launched by the previous administration by issuing guidelines for all federal agencies. The guidelines will ensure religious beliefs and actions are respected and protected.”

“The open season on Christians and other people of faith is coming to a close in America . . . .”

Like too many Christians and conservatives, Perkins is just another toady for Trump–and a man consumed with the phony left/right paradigm. Republican presidents have been as culpable in the escalation of Big Government and the evisceration of constitutional government as Democrat presidents. And Trump himself has already committed many grave sins against the Constitution–sins to which Perkins is blind.

And predictable liberal lackeys were quick to denounce the decision. The ACLU put out this statement: “The actions taken today are a broadside to our country’s long-standing commitment to the separation of church and state.”

Of course, the ACLU version of the First Amendment is anathema to everything America was founded upon and to everything the First Amendment was intended to protect.

Most readers know that the phrase “separation of church and state” is contained in NO founding document: not the Declaration of Independence; not the Constitution; and not the Bill of Rights. The phrase is taken from a personal letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to some Baptist folks in Danbury, Connecticut. The letter simply acknowledged the People’s right to freedom of religion and that, under the U.S. Constitution, the state had no authority to abridge that right.

The religious freedom clause of the First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” In other words, there can be NO STATE CHURCH in America as there was in Great Britain and in several of the colonies in America previous to our War for Independence.

And actually, by putting churches under the 501c3 non-profit organization status, our country has come full circle. It is no hyperbole to say that 501c3 churches are, in fact, STATE CHURCHES. And it’s getting worse.

Now, the Supreme Court is about to rule in favor of churches receiving tax dollars directly from the state. G.W. Bush started this with his “faith-based initiative” programs, whereby churches and religious organizations would receive funding from the government. And with the kind of scriptural and constitutional ignorance displayed in most churches today, pastors and church leaders were only too eager to stick out their hands to get a piece of the pie. The soon coming SCOTUS decision will serve to forever overturn the First Amendment and further place the church under the dominion of the state. Like I said, the country has come full circle.

Here is the story about the Supreme Court decision soon to come:

SCOTUS To Decide If Churches Can Receive Taxpayer Dollars

I will deal with this subject in more depth in a future column.

But many conservatives are quick to point out that Trump’s EO is much ado about nothing.

“Today’s executive order is woefully inadequate,” writes the Heritage Foundation’s Ryan Anderson at the Daily Signal.

The Heritage senior research fellow explains:

“In reality, what Trump issued today is rather weak. All it includes is general language about the importance of religious liberty, saying the executive branch ‘will honor and enforce’ existing laws and instructing the Department of Justice to ‘issue guidance’ on existing law; directives to the Department of the Treasury to be lenient in the enforcement of the Johnson Amendment; and directives to the secretaries of the Treasury, Labor, and Health and Human Services (HHS) to ‘consider issuing amended regulations’ to ‘address conscience-based objections’ to the HHS contraception mandate.

“But the federal government should be honoring and enforcing our religious liberty laws anyway . . . .” (Source:

But this statement by a Virginia pastor is probably the most telling. After all, it comes from one who falls directly under the auspices of an IRS-created 501c3 non-profit organization:

“Daniel Glaze, senior pastor at Richmond, Virginia’s River Road Church, told [Wall Street Journal writer Ian] Lovett:

“‘Practically speaking, churches with any diversity in the congregation need to stay away from this business–it’s just dangerous to church fellowship. Building a church is hard enough these days. This is adding a whole ‘nother can of worms.’”

See the report:

Will Johnson Amendment Repeal Put Politics In The Pulpit?

Yeah. This command of God to His prophets to “cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression” (Isaiah 58:1) is just adding another can of worms. The responsibility pastors have to “preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort” (II Timothy 4:2) is just adding another can of worms. And herein lies the REAL problem.

The REAL problem is most churches don’t want to hear the truth; and most pastors don’t want to tell the truth. The Johnson Amendment is just a convenient cover pastors and churches have to hide behind.

Let me ask you: How many of you noticed any extra boldness in your pastor to speak out on the issues last Sunday (the first Sunday following Trump’s EO) than you did in all of the previous Sundays? I suspect for the vast majority of pastors and churches, there wasn’t a bit of difference.

Here is what I said last Sunday in my pulpit regarding this matter:

Message Highlight – Pastors Use 501c3 Law To Cover Their Cowardice.  Now What Will They Use?

I noted in this column three weeks ago that nearly 100 religious organizations–from Baptists to Catholics to Episcopalians to Hindus to Muslims to Jews–are coming together to urge Congress to NOT repeal the Johnson Amendment. In that column I said:

As soon as I heard Mr. Trump broach the idea of eliminating the Johnson Amendment, I KNEW that the biggest opposition to that idea would come from within the religious community itself. And it has. If the Johnson Amendment were eliminated, pastors would have no covering for their cowardice, so thousands of them are uniting with even pagan religions in an attempt to convince Congress to KEEP the Johnson Amendment intact.

I also said this:

Most pastors today are no more outside the political establishment than the political establishment itself. In fact, most pastors are PART of the political establishment. Most pulpits NEVER speak truth to power. Why? Because they are providing cover for the power elite via their silence. And nothing provides more incentive for this covert collaboration than the non-profit organization tax status provided in the 501c3 section of the IRC put in place by the ultra-liberal senator (and later president), Lyndon Johnson.

See the column here:

Baptists And Muslims Are Uniting

REAL men of God would never surrender the content of their preaching to the IRS any more than they would to the mayor, city council, county commission, deacon board, trustee committee, denominational brass, or the church congregation itself. REAL men of God preach so as to please but one: GOD.

The famed minister and author A. W. Tozer (1897 – 1963) summarized the heart and soul of this matter by saying:

Again, the pastor, when facing his congregation on Sunday morning, dare not think of the effect his sermon may have on his job, his salary, or his future relation to the church. Let him but worry about tomorrow and he becomes a hireling and no true shepherd of the sheep. No man is a good preacher who is not willing to lay his future on the line every time he expounds the Word. He must let his job and his reputation ride on each and every sermon or he has no right to think that he stands in the prophetic tradition.

The bottom line is this: the Johnson Amendment is a horrific abridgment of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. And churches in 1954 and forward should have never accepted it. But they not only accepted it, they enthusiastically embraced it; and now many of them are fighting fiercely to retain it.

And for most churches, Donald Trump’s EO will have ZERO impact on the pastor’s preaching. Pastors not only shy away from taking a stand on Biblical Natural Law principles of liberty because they fear they might offend the IRS but they also shy away from taking a stand on Biblical Natural Law principles of liberty because they fear they might offend their own congregations.

So in the end, it doesn’t come down to having Donald Trump in the White House; it comes down to having a REAL man of God and REAL people of God in the church house.

P.S. We continue to sell out of the fantastic book “Judaism’s Strange Gods” by Christian scholar Michael Hoffman. We have ordered–and sold out of–shipment after shipment. But we have more books on the way, so I encourage you to order NOW before the supply runs out–AGAIN.

In “Judaism’s Strange Gods,” Christian scholar Michael Hoffman documents his provocative thesis that Judaism is not the religion of the Old Testament, but the newly formalized belief system of the Pharisees, which arose in Babylon with the commitment of the formerly oral “tradition of the elders” to writing, in the wake of the crucifixion of Israel’s Messiah and the destruction of the Temple.

Basing his findings on authoritative Judaic sources, Hoffman demonstrates that Judaism is a man-made religion of tradition and superstition, which represents the institutionalized nullification of Biblical law and doctrine.

Liberating the reader from the accumulated shackles of decades of misinformation, this book shows that Judaism’s god is not the God of Israel, but the strange gods of Talmud and Kabbalah, and the racial self-worship they inculcate.

Christian bookstores are packed with tomes purporting to unmask the religion of Islam, but not one slim volume will be found delving into the depravities of Orthodox Judaism. “Judaism’s Strange Gods” corrects that imbalance with its fidelity to Biblical truth and the historic witness of the Church.

If you don’t read any other book besides the Bible this year, read this book. It is must-reading! Plus, I sincerely believe that the understanding of the truths presented in this book is essential to freedom. I really do! And don’t wait to order.

Find “Judaism’s Strange Gods” here:

Judaism’s Strange Gods

P.S.S. I give a BIG thumbs up to Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey. I said Trump needed to fire Comey in this column back on November 10, 2016. See the column here:

The Trump Victory: What We Saw And What We Need To See
© Chuck Baldwin

No Hope In Trump; No Hope In DC

At this point, people who are still holding out hope that Donald Trump is going to drain the swamp and save America are delusional. In less than 100 days, Trump has taken America to the precipice of World War III. He has filled his administration with Goldman Sachs banksters, CFR globalists, New World Order Zionists, and warmongers. Trump refuses to prosecute Hillary Clinton for egregious crimes against our country, but he is vowing to prosecute Julian Assange, a man whose “crime” is publishing the truth he receives from whistleblowers about the criminal conduct of the U.S. government. Plus, Assange isn’t even an American. He is an Australian. What jurisdictional authority does President Trump have to arrest and prosecute a citizen of another country who has committed no crime in the United States? None! And if all of that is not bad enough, Donald Trump killed more innocent men, women, and children last month than Syria, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and China combined.

See this report:

More Than 1,000 Civilians Reportedly Killed By U.S.-Led Airstrikes As Trump Expands War On Terror

And this one:

Law Of War? Civilian Deaths In US Strikes In Syria, Iraq Soar Under Trump  

No, Donald Trump is not going to drain the swamp; he has completely immersed himself and his administration in the swamp–just like every President of recent memory before him. And every 100 days of his administration from this day forward will only reconfirm this obvious reality.

At some point, the people who thought that Donald Trump was an outsider and “anti-establishment”–and the ones who continue to sacrifice their principles defending him in the forlorn hope that they are going to ride his coattails to glory–will be forced to awaken to the stark reality that either Donald Trump was totally disingenuous from the beginning or he has already capitulated to the swamp creatures ensconced in Washington, D.C. Either way, there is absolutely no hope in Donald Trump. And neither is there any hope in Washington, D.C.

Washington, D.C., is totally and thoroughly corrupt. It is run by bloodthirsty, conscienceless subhumans who will stop at nothing until they bring Armageddon upon the entire world. DC is nothing more than a coven of perverted, putrid, parasitic, pathetic, pompous, pretentious, prideful, pathological purveyors of global pestilence.

How long will freedom-loving Americans continue to believe the empty promises of phony politicians? How long will they continue living in the fantasy that somehow Washington, D.C., is going to see the error of its ways, repent, and return the nation to constitutional government? How long will they continue to look the other way while the swamp creatures in Washington, D.C., corrupt the minds and hearts of their children in these institutions of propaganda called public schools? How long will they continue to allow the swamp creatures in Washington, D.C., and their bottom-feeding serpent buddies at the Federal Reserve and on Wall Street demolish sound money principles and destroy a free market economic system? How long, folks? How long?

Donald Trump is finishing what G.W. Bush began. Bush forever destroyed the influence of genuine Christian patriotism in this country with his phony brand of warmongering Christianity. Now, Trump is forever destroying the influence of the Tea Party/Patriot movements in this country with his phony brand of warmongering/Police-State-building “nationalism.”

The truth is, Trump started drowning in the swamp even before he was inaugurated. Most of the people in his administration could have been picked by ANY of the other neocon Republican presidential candidates. Right now, Washington, D.C.’s neocon warmongers are gushing all over Donald Trump.

On the Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) recently said that on foreign policy “I am like the happiest dude in America right now. We’ve got a president and a national security team that I have been dreaming of. . . . I am all in. Keep it up, Donald.”

Ladies and gentlemen, please understand that the single issue that defines a neocon (i.e., Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Paul Ryan, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, G.W. Bush) and a neolib (i.e., Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Harry Reid) is foreign policy. To the swamp creatures in Washington, D.C., everything is defined by foreign policy. Everything! These are beasts of prey. They feed on the blood and carcasses of the dead. They are enriched by war; they crave war; they promote war; they create war.

Donald Trump ran on the coattails of Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul. Most of what Trump trumpeted (no pun intended) was proclaimed and popularized by Buchanan and Paul. They failed to win the White House. Trump succeeded. Do you really think Pat or Ron would have filled their administrations with globalists, billionaires, international bankers, and CFR members? Do you really think Pat or Ron would have turned control of the White House over to two ultra-liberal globalist Zionists such as Jared and Ivanka Kushner? Do you really think Pat or Ron would have launched 59 Tomahawk missiles on a sovereign nation without our country being attacked or consent from Congress? Do you really think Pat or Ron would take America to the precipice of World War III before finishing their first 100 days in office? Hell no!

Donald Trump ran on Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul’s platform of constitutional populism, but he didn’t really believe it. Like G.W. Bush betrayed the Christians who elected him, Donald Trump has betrayed the constitutionalists who elected him. And this time the fallout will be fatal–especially if, as it appears, Trump takes America into another war–or even nuclear war.

No one will ever believe the campaign rhetoric of constitutionalism and populism again. Trump has poisoned the pot. The Democrat Party is plunging further and further into radicalism, extremism, and socialism. But four years from now, people will embrace the radical leftist agenda of the Democrats over the phony constitutionalist agenda of Donald Trump. Then, watch out! Katy bar the door!

Face it: G.W. Bush gave us Barack Obama, and Donald Trump may give us…the antichrist.

From this point onward, freedomists need to “get religion.” I mean they need a revelation. They need to come to the disconcerting decision that there is NO HOPE in Washington, D.C.

There is only one course of action for freedomists: secession. The only other alternative is slavery.

And people need to understand that the spirit of secession is sweeping the globe. Currently, there are 42 separatist movements underway in Africa; 68 in Asia; 107 in Europe; 16 in North America; 18 in Oceania; and 9 in South America. That’s a total of 260 active separatist movements going on RIGHT NOW.

During the past few years, secession movements among states of the United States include Alaska (2006, 2017); California (2010, 2015 – 2017); Florida (2015); Georgia (2009); Hawaii (2011, 2017); Montana (2008); New Hampshire (2012, 2017); Oregon (2016); South Carolina (2010); Texas (late 1990s, 2009, 2017) and Vermont (2003, 2005 – 2007, 2017). This does not include the secession movement currently underway among the Lakota Indians in Montana, Wyoming, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota.

The answer has NEVER rested in Washington, D.C. It has always been a fatal mistake for people to expect an answer from Washington, D.C. The answer has always rested with “We the People.” Always! History proves that the bigger central governments become, the more tyrannical they become.

And the fact is, the United States is much too large and too populous to maintain liberty. Increasing population has taken government further and further away from the People. Politically speaking, the only thing that has thwarted Washington, D.C.’s total takeover of the states is the Electoral College system. But a rancid public education system, a cowardly pulpit, a corrupt news media, and runaway political correctness have brought liberty to the brink of destruction. Only the states can recapture the spirit of liberty–ONLY THE STATES! But which states is the sixty-four million dollar question. (My money’s on the Rocky Mountain states–which is one of many reasons why I was led to move here.)

At this moment, there doesn’t appear to be a single State with the understanding to recognize that a complete separation from the swamp creatures in Washington, D.C., is the only way to preserve liberty. YET! The swamp creatures have been bribing the states with federal tax dollars for the better part of a century. Many individuals have been living on the dole of the swamp creatures for much of their lives. Patriotic men and women who served in the U.S. armed forces find it difficult to believe that the Constitution that they took an oath to protect and defend doesn’t exist in Washington, D.C. But ladies and gentlemen, never mistake the love of liberty with devotion to government. They are NOT the same thing.

Remember these words? “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends [liberty], it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government. . . .” That’s from our Declaration of Independence, of course.

The Pat Buchanan Brigade, the Ron Paul Tea Party Revolution, God-fearing libertarians (there is NO liberty without God), and anti-war third parties need to start preparing NOW to elect State governors, legislators, attorney generals, mayors, councilmen, commissioners, sheriffs, etc., that love liberty enough to be willing to separate from the swamp creatures in Washington, D.C., that are swallowing us all alive.

Donald Trump is not going to save us. The Congress in DC is not going to save us. The Supreme Court is not going to save us. The Republican Party is not going to save us. The ONLY remedy we have is the same one that our Founding Fathers had: separation from a carnivorous, insatiable central government that is eating our liberties like a lion devours lambs.

If we start NOW, there still might be time. But trusting Donald Trump and Washington, D.C., for the next four years is a recipe for ruin.

Donald Trump Trounced Hillary Clinton In Second Debate, But…

As debates go, it was a thrashing: Donald Trump totally dominated the second presidential debate, as Hillary Clinton was reeling on the ropes from the very beginning. Trump did very poorly in the first debate, as I noted in this column. But he was obviously much better prepared for this second debate, and it showed. Hillary was beaten so badly, a majority of the major news media actually STOPPED polling shortly after Hillary’s embarrassing performance because respondents were giving Trump a landslide victory, and they didn’t want to be forced to report it.

Trump finally brought up Benghazi and did a much better job of talking about Hillary’s criminality in destroying emails after she had been subpoenaed by Congress to produce them. He also courageously made a commitment to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary’s obvious criminal conduct if he is elected President. That was a bold move and must have sent shock waves throughout the political establishments of both major parties. I hope it also put a little bit of the fear of God in FBI Director James Comey, as he has become party to the Clinton cover-up with his refusal to press charges against her.

Trump boldly stated his support for the Second Amendment, which forced Hillary to publicly defend her support for more gun control. He reiterated his support for the right to life of unborn babies, which forced Hillary to defend her pro-abortion position. And for the first time, I heard Donald Trump actually make a statement in support of the U.S. Constitution. And, of course, he continued pushing his economic positions of reduced taxes and less government regulation. He also continued hammering the so-called free trade deals like NAFTA and TPP.

Donald also did a great job of pointing out that Russia, Syria, and Iran are the ones that are truly fighting ISIS and that we should acknowledge it and support them in it. I don’t know that any other presidential candidate, Republican or Democrat, has or would ever admit that (except for Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan, of course). I give Trump big kudos for that one.

But the thing that sent Hillary reeling against the ropes was Trump’s courageous statement regarding Bill Clinton’s long history of abuse against women (including several alleged rapes) and Hillary’s culpability in providing cover for her husband’s abuse. Along with pressing the criminal cover-up in her deleted emails–and her culpability in the deaths of American soldiers and the American ambassador in Benghazi–the subject of both Clintons’ long history of abuse of women knocked Hillary for a loop. She never recovered.

The thing I continue to dislike about Trump, however, is his emphatic and continual support for what, in essence, is a burgeoning Police State in this country. His “stop and frisk” proposals and his repeated calls for religious profiling and increased police intrusions into privacy are a direct violation of the Fourth Amendment and portends further police abuse under a Trump administration. Unfortunately, this plays WELL to most conservatives and Christians.

People on the “right” have a HUGE blind spot when it comes to Fourth Amendment issues and all things “law and order.” On this issue, the Republican nominee could have been ANY of the contenders (excepting Rand Paul), and it would not have changed a thing. Republicans are notoriously anemic on the Fourth Amendment. If Republicans understood the Fourth amendment like they do the Second Amendment, America wouldn’t be staring a Police State in the face the way we are. And while the late Supreme Court justice, Antonin Scalia (the man Trump uses as the model for his future Supreme Court picks), was terrific on the Second Amendment and life issues, he was very inconsistent (sometimes even terrible) on Fourth Amendment issues.

Without a doubt, however, this was Donald Trump’s finest public showing.


There is a much larger issue that I am compelled to address. And, unfortunately, it is an issue that hardly anyone else is willing to talk about. So, what I say from this point on is probably going to make me very unpopular in many circles. So be it. It MUST be said.

What Donald Trump was recorded as saying eleven years ago is disgustingly repulsive to anyone who has a moral compass. And there should be NO defending it. Yes, Trump was willing to publicly apologize for what he said; and I give him credit for that. None of us is perfect. Certainly not me, and not you either. Regardless, that does nothing to change the seriousness of the situation. (And, no, I’m not overlooking the fact that the release of this recording was timed by the establishment to do optimum damage to Trump’s campaign; and it is also a fact that the establishment has damaging evidence against a variety of politicians–including the Clintons–that it withholds from the public. The hypocrisy of the establishment class is massive.)

And the seriousness of the situation completely transcends this election and even what Trump was recorded saying. Sadly, the ONLY thing people can focus on or talk about is the election. What Donald Trump’s behavior implies is never brought up–except by people who merely want to use it as a political ploy to help Hillary get elected.

Please bear with me, and let me explain.

Both sides of the political aisle are equally culpable in the destruction of our national character. Even “Christians” are caught up with political partisanship and are unwilling to address the underlying principles that are being sacrificed on the altar of an election.

I constantly hear conservative and Christian personalities excusing Donald Trump’s immoral lifestyle with a flippant comparison to Bill and Hillary Clinton’s immoral lifestyles. To be sure, it would be difficult for anyone to get any lower in the moral sewer than the Clintons. But is that our standard?

Let’s face the truth: Donald Trump has lived most of his adult life indulging in rampant narcissistic behavior. It is no wonder Donald has had so many marriages and divorces. In fact, if Trump is elected, he will be the first President in U.S. history who has had multiple failed marriages. The only other President to have had a divorce (one) was Ronald Reagan. Obviously, Trump would not be the only President to have bedded other women: including the obvious Bill Clinton, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Baines Johnson, Woodrow Wilson, James Garfield, Grover Cleveland, Warren G. Harding, and Franklin D. Roosevelt.

But, to me, the current crisis is NOT Trump’s admitted immoralities; it is the lack of a moral conscience by society itself–including and especially by our “Christian” society.

I’ll say it straight out: our culture is in the toilet.

Granted, people are frail creatures: ALL OF US. We often come up short. The Bible itself is replete with examples of how even some of God’s finest men and women fell short. And pride, arrogance, and judgmentalism are things that surely sicken God. The Pharisees prided themselves in being moral puritans, but Jesus condemned them FAR WORSE than those who had been guilty of fleshly sins. So, God forbid that what I am saying here be taken in such a light.

That being said, the glaring problem uncovered by the serial adulteries of both Donald Trump and Bill Clinton is the way our culture has come to promote and accept the sexual objectification of women. Our society is eaten up with it.

Hugh Hefner’s playboy revolution of the sixties and forward has caused women to be seen as little more than sex objects. Everywhere one looks, women are treated as sex objects by our culture. Television commercials, television programs, billboards, sporting events, magazines, Hollywood movies, and even many “churches” are guilty of promoting such a culture. FOX News has turned news casting into the flaunting exploitation of women. I dare say that the modern feminist movement would never have come into existence without the flagrant and repeated sexual exploitation of women by narcissistic men. No, what Donald Trump did was not “just talk.” It was part of an entire culture dominated by the sexual exploitation of women.

What Donald Trump and Bill Clinton have done is bad enough. But what is worse is the way people make excuses for them. People on the left (including the media) completely ignore Bill’s exploitation of women, and people on the right (including Christians) completely ignore Donald’s exploitation of women. (Yes, I understand the difference between forced sex and complicit sex, and in this regard, the sins of Bill Clinton are far greater.) The only thing either side is concerned about is winning an election. Neither side is the least bit concerned about what the sexual objectification of women has done to women and to our country as a whole.

Neither does either side seem to be concerned about what this continual sexual exploitation of women is doing to the young women and girls of our country. These young women and girls see the constant promotion of nudity or semi-nudity of women and grow up with the impression that the only way for them to be popular or liked is to join in. Other young women and girls wrongly compare themselves to what they see being flaunted before them, which causes them to develop deep inferiority complexes–all being predicated on a phony, manufactured and degraded cultural standard of what “beauty” should look like. The damage being caused our young women and girls by our culture’s sexual objectification of women is incalculable.

And let me hasten to add: I see a BIG difference in the playboy lifestyle of a Trump or Clinton and the way others have had to endure separation for reasons known and understood only by God. No matter what the Pharisees among us say, not every divorce is created equal. Some people have a tendency to judgmentally lump every act of divorce into the same category; and that is very unfair. The Scriptures make a big distinction between those who fall into an act of immorality or those who must make decisions about love and marriage due to uncontrollable circumstances (I Corinthians 7) and those who are sexual predators. For example, there is a big difference in Holy Writ between the woman taken in adultery in Jesus’ time and the sexual predator sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, or the blessings of God upon Job with a second wife and family.

In reality, Donald Trump and the Clintons are mostly a reflection of what our society has become.

All of that said, however, if Donald Trump should be elected President (and at this point I think he will be unless the powers that be are able to somehow rig the elections, which is certainly possible), I pray that early on in his administration he will use the Bully Pulpit of his office to recall his past debauchery and use it as an example (and he has done this for other things such as the bankruptcy laws and tax laws that allow the wealthy to evade taxes) of how degraded our culture has become and then subsequently launch a national campaign to lead the men of America to stop the sexual exploitation of our women and give them back lives that are free of a societal condition that, in effect, has made them unwitting slaves to a double standard that no one should be forced to live under. If he would do that, he could possibly become the greatest President since Thomas Jefferson–providing he also casts off his seeming infatuation with a Police State, of course.

“A Threat To All Humanity”

When it comes to constitutional government, the whole left-right, conservative-liberal, Republican-Democrat, even Christian-secular paradigms are, for the most part, an illusion. Over most of the last century, conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, and Christians and secularists have collectively jettisoned constitutional government in favor of a Welfare State, a Warfare State, a Nanny State, and a Police State.

So-called conservative Republicans like to talk about “limited government,” but in reality Republican presidential administrations and Congresses have equaled or sometimes even surpassed Democrats in exploding the size and scope of government. Likewise, liberal Democrats like to talk about ending foreign wars and so-called free-trade deals that favor international corporations, but in reality Democrat presidential administrations and Congresses have done nothing to bring the troops home or dismantle job-killing “free-trade” deals. After all of the campaign rhetoric, both major parties in Washington, D.C., have become nothing more than water boys for the 1 percent donor class.

Over the past several decades, Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, Christians and secularists have, for the most part, supported the creation of the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, the indefinite detention sections of the NDAA, the militarization of our local and State law enforcement agencies, the draconian, liberty-killing, blatantly unconstitutional Department of Homeland Security (DHS), ubiquitous government spying of the American people, endless wars of aggression overseas, “the war on terror” at home, ad infinitum.

It seems that the vast majority of liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, secularists and Christians want bigger, more intrusive government. It is not just inner city blacks (who often vote Democrat) who are taking advantage of America’s monstrous welfare system, so are a huge percentage of whites (who often vote Republican) from suburbia. I will make an educated guess that one will find as many so-called Christians living on the government dole as those who profess no faith. Plus, if you think that only liberals and secularists are getting abortions, think again. Some studies indicate that over half of the people asking for abortions are professing Christians. The paradigms mentioned above are all but useless.

Look at how Democrat and Republican presidential candidates feel they must go kiss the rings of the Zionists in Tel Aviv; look at how they grovel and pander to the globalist elite at the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), Trilateral Commission (TC), and Bilderbergs; and look at how quick they all are to go to war–and STAY at war.

When the Patriot Act was being rushed through Congress by G.W. Bush, I was living in a rather large metropolitan area in the southeast. There were over 100 Southern Baptist churches in my area. That’s JUST Southern Baptist churches. That doesn’t count all of the other brands of Baptist churches and all of the other denominations in town. Hundreds and hundreds of churches. Guess how many pastors joined together to oppose the Patriot Act. You’re looking at him, pal. In my town, it was me and the ACLU that stood in opposition to the passage of the Patriot Act. You read it right: the “conservative” Chuck Baldwin and the “liberal” ACLU. So much for labels. In fact, when it comes to Big Brother and the Warfare State, labels mean absolutely nothing.

This is what most people just don’t understand: the Constitution is neither a “conservative” nor “liberal” document. The Natural rights of man are neither “conservative” nor “liberal,” neither “Christian” nor “secular.” Our Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights were meant to protect the Natural rights of ALL men. And when it comes to opposing America’s burgeoning Police State and endless wars of aggression, throw political and ideological labels away: they mean absolutely nothing.

I have often said that when it comes to voting for candidates for federal office, we should focus much more on whether one is a globalist or nationalist than whether they are conservative or liberal. And I hesitate to use the word “nationalist,” because too many people associate that word with the phony “American exceptionalism” philosophy that is used to foment most of these endless international wars that the U.S. engages in. I actually prefer to say one is either a globalist or an AMERICAN, because historic American ideology (until the Twentieth Century at least) considered foreign entanglements anathema.

However, since World War II, globalists have controlled every presidential administration of both parties (with the possible exceptions of John F. Kennedy’s and Ronald Reagan’s) and most of the U.S. Congresses. This reality has brought America to the brink of a Police State and World War III. And, again, neither Republican nor Democrat, conservative nor liberal, Christian nor secularist means diddlysquat when it comes to stopping this juggernaut.

Preventing the complete implementation of a Police State and the advent of World War III is going to take a consortium of strange bedfellows–such as what happened when Bob Barr (representing the ACLU) and I teamed up to oppose the Patriot Act.

For example, I find it incredible that the only people I’ve heard who are trying to warn the world of how close we are to global nuclear war are “progressives” (aka “liberals”). And they are warning that if Hillary Clinton (a “liberal”) is elected, World War III is almost inevitable. I remind you the following report is produced by progressives, NOT conservatives. Plus, at least some of the people who report for this organization would identify themselves as atheists or agnostics. And THEY are warning us about the liberal, Hillary Clinton.

Listen to what THEY say in this video report:

“The leading likes of the so-called progressive movement argue that it is the left’s duty to vote for this neocon warmonger. But the consequences of this strategy may well lead directly to nuclear war.

“Hillary Rodham Clinton is a Wall Street-backed warmonger whose potential election as President of the United States this November poses an existential threat, not just to Americans, but to all of humanity.

“As First Lady and then as Senator, she actively supported the US’s illegal wars of aggression abroad.”

“She not only admitted the US’s role in creating Al Qaeda:

“[Hillary Clinton speaking] ‘When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, we had this brilliant idea that we were gonna come to Pakistan and create a force of Mujahideen, equip them with stinger missiles and everything else to go after the Soviets inside Afghanistan.’

“But then, despite this admission, as Secretary of State, her support of the war on Libya and the jihadis in Syria directly led to the rise of ISIS and the migrant crisis in Europe.”

“She was the one who announced the US’s so-called Asia Pacific Pivot that has seen more US military forces being placed in the Asia Pacific as a direct military threat to China.”

“And she has stated in no uncertain terms that Russia and Iran will be militarily targeted in a Clinton Presidency and that the nuclear option is as always ‘on the table.'”

“Hillary Clinton is a neocon, a war hawk, a liar, and unindicted criminal and a Wall Street puppet. Why is it then, that those on the so-called progressive left, who would be warning against her if she had an ‘R’ next to her name, are instead lecturing other leftists that it is now their duty to fall in line and help her get elected?”

“[Michel Chossudovsky speaking] ‘In so many words, Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy stance is to “blow up the planet.” She has made statements to the effect that a first-strike nuclear attack against Russia or Iran is on the table, so that if she is in the White House she could in fact unleash the unspoken which is World War III. I think this is something we have to address, both in terms of analysis, but in terms of political choice. So that anybody who wants to blow up the planet is not progressive. Secondly, she has a criminal record. Not only in regards to the email scandal but also in relation to the Clinton Foundation which is involved in fraud, money laundering, political cronyism, etc. It is amply documented. So that, in effect, the choice of the American people is to elect a war criminal.'”

“It is no hyperbole to say that the election of Hillary Clinton as President this November would be one of the greatest tragedies in the history of the United States and perhaps the world. It is incumbent on people of all stripes, American and non-American, Republican and Democrat, progressive and libertarian, anarchists and those who have never thought about politics a day in their life to protest her nomination at the Democratic National Convention, work against her campaign for President, and divert the nightmare that is now coming into view.”

Watch the video here:

Hillary Clinton: A Threat To All Humanity.

I have been trying to warn people for decades about the threat that the Clinton and Bush families pose to the future of the United States. In reality, the Clinton and Bush families are ONE CRIME FAMILY. They represent corruption, criminality, corporatism, cronyism, and global cannibalism to the nth degree. For twenty out of the last twenty-eight years, America has had either a Bush or a Clinton in the White House. And to the chagrin of Democrats who thought they were getting “change” with Barack Obama, for the past eight years, he has simply treaded water for the Bush/Clinton regime. And with Hillary winning the Democrat nomination, they are back. And as Ted and Heidi Cruz are ardent GW Bush disciples, had Ted won the GOP nomination, globalists would have had the presidency locked up. (Despite the allegations of some, I am still unconvinced that Donald Trump is a globalist; I tend to think he is not. However, I suspect Mike Pence might be a closet globalist. If Pence is a globalist, we could be looking at another Reagan/Bush scenario–and we all know what happened to Reagan, don’t we? But I will leave that subject for another column.)

Hillary (along with Bill, and GHW, and GW–and never forget to include Newt Gingrich among the globalist elite) is the globalists’ globalist. She is EVERYTHING the CFR, TC, and Bilderbergs want. And there is nothing that enriches globalists like war. The Bushes and Clintons have kept America at war for over two decades (and Obama did nothing to change it; in fact, he escalated it), but World War III is what the global gamemakers long for.

Let me pause here to encourage readers to purchase the book “War Is A Racket” by Major General Smedley Butler (USMC). Read this short book, and you will understand how the top 1 percent is enriched by war. Nothing enriches the elite like war. Nothing. And the bigger the war, the bigger the riches.

Find General Butler’s book in my online store here:

War Is A Racket

A Hillary victory puts the Bush/Clinton Crime Family back in the White House. And let’s be clear: the two main goals of Hillary’s administration would be the full implementation of a Police State in America (including gun confiscation) and the advent of World War III. And right now, it seems that some progressives understand the danger more than many Christians and conservatives.

Again, throw the labels and the paradigms away. Hillary Clinton is a threat to all humanity.

P.S. As the DHS continues to escalate Police State training tactics throughout America’s law enforcement agencies, it means the chances of citizens being subjected to all kinds of bullying by police officers also escalates–not to mention the “shoot first, ask questions later” mentality that is growing exponentially among law enforcement personnel. It is very incumbent on citizens to have a good grasp of their constitutional rights when confronted by a policeman. In these days and times, knowing what to say and what not to say and what to do and what not to do can literally save your life.

My constitutional attorney son, who was a prosecutor before becoming a defense attorney, has put together an outstanding video that teaches people the do’s and dont’s when contacted by police, whether it be a traffic stop or something else. What Tim teaches will help citizens better protect liberty in their communities and will help policemen to be better peace officers. Yes, I recommend this video for honest lawmen as well.

The video is called “Police Contact: How To Respond.” I highly recommend this video to everyone. Order the DVD here:

Police Contact: How To Respond


© Chuck Baldwin

Hillary Clinton Admits U.S. Created Al Qaeda, ISIS

chuck baldwin

Why isn’t the Mainstream Media (MSM) in America reporting the fact that Hillary Clinton admitted in public that the U.S. government created Al Qaeda, ISIS, Al Nusra, etc.? Why does the MSM refuse to tell the American people that the United States has not ever actually fought ISIS but instead has surreptitiously and very actively supported ISIS and the other radical Muslim terrorists in the Middle East? Why has the media refused to reveal the fact that ever since Russia started to fight a true offensive war against ISIS the terrorist organization has been reduced to almost half?

I’ll tell you why: the MSM is nothing more than a propaganda machine for the U.S. government–no matter which party is in power. The MSM doesn’t work for the U.S. citizenry. It doesn’t even work for its corporate sponsors. It works for the Washington Power Elite permanently ensconced in D.C. (and yes, those same Power Elite control most of those media corporate sponsors).

It is a sad reality that if one wants to get accurate news reporting, one must mostly bypass the U.S. propaganda media and look to sources outside the U.S. Here is a Canadian publication that covered the Hillary admission:

“The following video features Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton acknowledging that America created and funded Al Qaeda as a terrorist organization in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war:

“‘Let’s remember here… the people we are fighting today we funded them twenty years ago.

“‘Let’s go recruit these mujahideen.

“‘And great, let them come from Saudi Arabia and other countries, importing their Wahabi brand of Islam so that we can go beat the Soviet Union.’”

“What she does not mention is that at no time in the course of the last 35 years has the US ceased to support and finance Al Qaeda as a means to destabilizing sovereign countries. It was ‘a pretty good idea’, says Hillary, and it remains a good idea today:

“Amply documented, the ISIS and Al Nusrah Mujahideen are recruited by NATO and the Turkish High command, with the support of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Israel.

“The more fundamental question:

“Should a presidential candidate who candidly acknowledges that ‘We created Al Qaeda’ without a word of caution or regret become president of the US, not to mention Hillary’s commitment to waging nuclear war on Russia if and when she becomes president of the United States of America.”

The report continues:

“The Global War on Terror (GWOT) is led by the United States. It is not directed against Al Qaeda.

“Quite the opposite: The ‘Global War on Terrorism’ uses Al Qaeda terrorist operatives as their foot soldiers.

“‘Political Islam’ and the imposition of an ‘Islamic State’ (modeled on Qatar or Saudi Arabia) is an integral part of US foreign policy.”

The report further states:

“It is a means to destabilizing sovereign countries and imposing ‘regime change’.

“Clinton’s successor at the State Department, John Kerry is in direct liaison with Al Nusra, an Al Qaeda affiliated organization in Syria, integrated by terrorists and funded by the US and its allies.

“In a bitter irony, John Kerry is not only complicit in the killings committed by Al Nusra, he is also in blatant violation of US anti-terrorist legislation. If the latter were to be applied to politicians in high office, John Kerry would be considered as a ‘Terror Suspect’”.

See the report here:

Hillary Clinton: “We Created Al Qaeda”. The Protagonists Of The “Global War On Terrorism” Are The Terrorists

Think it through, folks: the U.S. government creates the radical Islamic terror networks that justify America’s “Global War On Terror” which directly results in millions of refugees (and no doubt plants terrorists among them) flooding Europe. At the same time, it purposely refuses to protect our own borders and even forces states and local communities to accept hundreds of thousands of Muslim refugees (but the government is not sending any Christian refugees to America, even though a sizable percentage of the refugees include Christians also) and pushes NATO to the doorstep of Russia, which to any objective observer could only be regarded as an overt incitement to war.

Furthermore, why doesn’t the MSM report the words of Hillary saying that the “best way to help Israel” is to destroy Syria? Why doesn’t the media acknowledge that official U.S. foreign policy is to foment perpetual war, not in the name of the safety and security of the United States, but in the name of “helping” Israel?

Here is how the same Canadian publication covers this part of the story:

“A newly-released Hillary Clinton email confirmed that the Obama administration has deliberately provoked the civil war in Syria as the ‘best way to help Israel.’

“In an indication of her murderous and psychopathic nature, Clinton also wrote that it was the ‘right thing’ to personally threaten Bashar Assad’s family with death.

“In the email, released by Wikileaks, then Secretary of State Clinton says that the ‘best way to help Israel’ is to ‘use force’ in Syria to overthrow the government.”

It continues:

“Even though all US intelligence reports had long dismissed Iran’s ‘atomic bomb’ program as a hoax, (a conclusion supported by the International Atomic Energy Agency), Clinton continues to use these lies to ‘justify’ destroying Syria in the name of Israel.”

And again:

“The email proves–as if any more proof was needed–that the US government has been the main sponsor of the growth of terrorism in the Middle East, and all in order to ‘protect’ Israel.

“It is also a sobering thought to consider that the ‘refugee’ crisis which currently threatens to destroy Europe, was directly sparked off by this US government action as well, insofar as there are any genuine refugees fleeing the civil war in Syria.

“In addition, over 250,000 people have been killed in the Syrian conflict, which has spread to Iraq–all thanks to Clinton and the Obama administration backing the ‘rebels’ and stoking the fires of war in Syria.”

See the report here:

Hillary Clinton: Destroy Syria For Israel: “The Best Way To Help Israel”

If destroying Syria is the way we “help” Israel, how many other nations must the U.S. destroy to “help” Israel? And before John Hagee’s braindead disciples start shouting “Destroy them all!” I remind you that Syria and other parts of the Middle East is the historic home of millions of Christians going back to the time of the Apostle Paul.

The truth is, Hillary (and the rest of the grubby gaggle of Neocons) doesn’t give a tinker’s dam about Israel. Neocons such as Hillary Clinton simply use Israel (and the misguided passions of Christians and conservatives who blindly support Israel) as cover to accomplish their real agenda: manipulating world governments to the enrichment and empowerment of themselves.

Donald Trump is untested. But if Hillary should be elected, I’m confident she would not make it through her first term without taking us into another G.W. Bush-type war (or worse)–except she will also add the attempted disarmament of the American people to her nefarious agenda.

That’s what Neocons do: they foment war. To their very soul, they are warmongers. And never forget that Hillary Clinton is a true-blue Neocon. Or if the word “Neoliberal” sounds better to you in describing Hillary, so be it. They both mean the same thing: WAR.

Here is a good explanation of how both Neocons and Neolibs are working from the same script:

Neocons And Neolibs: How Dead Ideas Kill

On the whole, Neocons and Neolibs are people without conscience. At their core, they have no allegiance to the United States or any other country. They are globalists. The only god they serve is the god of power and wealth, and they don’t care how many people–including Americans–they kill to achieve it. The blood of millions of dead victims around the world is already dripping from their murderous hands.

And if you think my indictment against the Neocons is an exaggeration, Paul Craig Roberts (Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under President Ronald Reagan) was even more scathing in his condemnation of them:

“The remaining danger is the crazed American neoconservatives. I know many of them. They are completely insane ideologues. This inhuman filth has controlled the foreign policy of every US government since Clinton’s second term. They are a danger to all life on earth. Look at the destruction they have wreaked in the former Yugoslavia, in Ukraine, in Georgia and South Ossetia, in Africa, in Afghanistan and the Middle East. The American people were too brainwashed by lies and by political impotence to do anything about it, and Washington’s vassals in Europe, UK, Canada, Australia, and Japan had to pretend that this policy of international murder was ‘bringing freedom and democracy.’

“The crazed filth that controls US foreign policy is capable of defending US hegemony with nuclear weapons. The neoconservatives must be removed from power, arrested, and put on international trial for their horrendous war crimes before they defend their hegemony with Armageddon.

“Neoconservatives and their allies in the military/security complex make audacious use of false flag attacks. These evil people are capable of orchestrating a false flag attack that propels the US and Russia to war.”

See Roberts’ column here:

The Fall Of The Unipower

And make no mistake about it: the national news media is a deliberate and willing facilitator of these international crimes against humanity.

Christians And Conservatives To Support A Third Party?

For as long as I can remember, Christians and conservatives, for the most part, have NEVER been willing to support a third-party candidate–especially for the office of PresidenThird_Parties-mattert of the United States. All we usually hear from these people is: “You are wasting your vote. A vote for the third party is a vote for the Democrat. We must support the Republican Party.” And it doesn’t matter how liberal or phony or big-government the GOP candidate is, either.

George H.W. Bush. Bob Dole. John McCain. Mitt Romney. You can’t scrape them from the bottom any lower than these guys. Name the salient freedom issue: these guys were on the wrong side. They no more represented Christian or conservative values than your neighborhood skunk. Yet, the Christian and conservative communities rallied behind them all: in the name of protecting America from the Democrat.

Suddenly, in 2016, all of that has changed. An “outsider,” Donald Trump, is the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. Trump bypassed the political protocols. He didn’t run for Congress, the Senate, or a governorship first. He didn’t come to the international bankers begging for money. He didn’t meet with Henry Kissinger (that I am aware of). He didn’t kiss the rings of the Republican establishment elite–and the establishment hates him. I’m talking ALL of the mainstream establishments: the political establishment, the media establishment, the business establishment, the international establishment, and yes, the religious establishment.

The establishment hates Trump so much that they are threatening to leave the Republican Party and run one of their establishment toadies as a third-party candidate. And guess what? A sizeable percentage of pastors, Christians, and conservatives are right in there with them.

Notable Neocons from the Republican Party have openly discussed running a Neocon Republican against Trump as a third-party candidate should Trump win the GOP nomination (which he will). I’m talking about such notables as Bill Kristol, Max Boot, George Will, the publishers of National Review and The Weekly Standard, Condoleezza Rice, Tom Coburn, Rick Wilson, Joel Searby, G.W. and Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, Lindsey Graham, Christine Todd Whitman, et al.

Think of it: Christians and conservatives would not support the third-party candidacy of Pat Buchanan or Ron Paul or Howard Phillips or Michael Peroutka or Chuck Baldwin. Instead, they chose to support Dole and Bush and McCain and Romney. Obviously, the “he can’t win” charge levied against the above-mentioned third-party candidates sure looks anemic, because Bush and Dole and McCain and Romney couldn’t win either. Yet, each third-party candidate listed was in almost total agreement with the values and principles held by most evangelical Christians and so-called “conservatives,” while the establishment GOP candidates were NOT. No matter. If he wasn’t a Republican, he wouldn’t (and didn’t) get their support.

Now, we have the consummate liberal Democrat Hillary Clinton as that party’s most likely presidential nominee. But instead of Christians and conservatives coalescing around the Republican nominee, Donald Trump, they are using phrases normally reserved for Democrats.

How many times did I hear people touting the candidacies of John McCain and Mitt Romney say, “Anyone but Barack Obama”? How many times did I hear people touting the candidacies of H.W. Bush and Bob Dole say, “Anyone but Bill Clinton”? But now these same people are saying, “Anyone but Donald Trump.” Really? Are these Christians and conservatives really willing to give the election to Hillary? It appears so.

It has become obvious that all of the talk over these past several decades about electing the lesser evil Republicans to keep the greater evil Democrats from winning the White House was just so much balderdash and poppycock.

Conventional wisdom says, if the Neocons run a third-party candidate against Trump, Hillary would win. (Maybe that’s what the Neocons want. After all, Hillary herself is a Neocon.) But what Kristol and company say in response is they think they can siphon enough votes from both Trump and Clinton to throw the race into the House of Representatives–where Neocon House Speaker Paul Ryan could shove an establishment candidate (maybe himself) through the House. It’s only happened twice in U.S. history: in 1800, when the House elected Thomas Jefferson after he and Aaron Burr received an equal number of electoral votes, and in 1824, when Andrew Jackson won the election in a four-man race but failed to win the number of required electoral votes, and subsequently the House elected John Quincy Adams. Ostensibly, that’s what the Neocons would be hoping for with an establishment third-party run in 2016.

And I do not buy all the pious talk from Christians who say they are not supporting Trump because of his morals (or lack thereof). Really? Christians have supported Republican candidates who have had more than their share of questionable character issues for as long as I can remember. The illicit businesses of the Bush family make Trump’s casinos look like Sunday School classrooms in comparison.

And I suppose I need to keep repeating myself, because so many people seem unable to separate objective analysis (which this is) from personal preference (which this is not): I am NOT endorsing Donald Trump. But it has nothing to do with his casinos or divorces or other so-called “moral” issues. Many of the politicians that Christians help elect year after year are moral and spiritual reprobates. Why are “morals” only an issue with Donald Trump?

Jimmy Carter was one of the most moral men to occupy the Oval Office, but in my opinion, he was one of our worst presidents. Jack Kennedy had the morals of an alley cat, but I would rate his presidency higher than Carter’s–and higher than several Republican presidents.  And, yes, I realize that Kennedy was not one of our BEST presidents either–although he might have been the last president we had with the guts to resist the globalists, which is probably what got him killed. (This is probably also what got Reagan shot and what ensconced the Bush Neocons in power–power they are still wielding today and power that Trump threatens.)

My concerns about Donald Trump have to do with my perception of how he would faithfully discharge his duties under the Constitution. I think we are dealing with a HUGE unknown with Trump. I honestly think Trump could become one of our country’s best presidents or he could become one of the worst. He says things that make me think he would be a great president. Then he says things that make me think he would be a horrible president. I TRULY DON’T KNOW. But that’s NOT what this column is all about.

I’m merely trying to point out the hypocrisy of the so-called “Christians” and “conservatives” who are unwilling to support the man who is the presumptive Republican nominee for president after decades and decades of voting for pathetic Republican candidates strictly on the basis of stopping the Democrat. And there could be no worse candidate for president than Hillary Clinton. Yet, these “Christians” and “conservatives” are willing to do what they have NEVER been willing to do before: support a third-party candidate and perhaps help elect a Democrat.

I scratch my head. Why? Why are they willing to support a third-party candidate NOW? Why are they willing to abandon the Republican Party NOW? I think I have the answer.

The people who are supporting Donald Trump are people who are not necessarily party people. In fact, they are sick and tired of both major parties. They are sick of the establishment. They are sick of business as usual. They are sick of elitism. They are sick of the Neocons in politics and the media manipulating their choices for president. They are sick of illegal immigration. They are sick of our jobs going overseas. They are sick of the Warfare State. They are sick of the Welfare State. They are sick of the way the Federal Reserve manipulates our economy for the benefit of the 1%.

Whatever else Donald Trump is or isn’t, he isn’t controlled by the establishment. He isn’t controlled by Wall Street or the military-industrial complex. He isn’t beholden to Jewish bankers or the Neocon war machine. But this isn’t true of the Republicans who are saying, “Never Trump.”

When push comes to shove, which is exactly what is happening RIGHT NOW, the Cruz-Republicans (who are the ones leading the “Never Trump” crusade) would rather support an establishment candidate than they would an anti-establishment candidate. All their rhetoric about Cruz being anti-establishment is just talk. Now that it comes down to it, they are willing to support an establishment candidate to keep the quintessential anti-establishment candidate, Donald Trump, from winning. This proves that these people are in reality establishment themselves.

I will say it straight out: it appears that many of our so-called “Christians” and “conservatives” are in truth ESTABLISHMENT NEOCONS THEMSELVES.

How many of our so-called “Christians” and “conservatives” are themselves living off of the public dole? How many of them are cheerleaders for our endless wars of aggression in the Middle East? How many of them are looking to Washington, D.C., instead of our states and local communities, to solve our problems? How many of them will shun the anti-establishment, non-501c3 fellowships and give their undying support to the establishment 501c3 churches and religious institutions? The answer: MOST of them.

In the final analysis, many of these “Never Trump” Christians and conservatives are simply proving that they are pro-establishment Neocons masquerading as Christians and conservatives.

Again, I am NOT talking about people who aren’t supporting Donald Trump out of genuine conviction. These people have been voting third party FOREVER. I am talking about the millions of Christians and conservatives out there who have held their proverbial noses for the last umpteen years and voted for all kinds of despicable Republican candidates, but who now feign self-righteousness in their refusal to vote for Trump. And not only that, but who are willing to support an establishment third-party Neocon candidate–even if it means electing Hillary Clinton.

And I’ll say this again, too: when it comes to foreign policy, Ted Cruz is as much of a Neocon as Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio. And I suspect that so are the vast majority of Ted’s supporters. In fact, if we really knew the foundational reason why so many Christians and conservatives love Ted (and hate The Donald), we might find that it could be summarized in one word: ISRAEL. It’s not about abortion, or the U.S. economy, or constitutional government, or future Supreme Court appointments (think who Hillary will appoint), or jobs, or the Second Amendment, or illegal immigration, or homosexual marriage, or anything of the sort. These people are all about ONE ISSUE, and the issue is ISRAEL. Ted Cruz is a toady for the state of Israel, and Donald Trump is NOT (at least he doesn’t appear to be at this point). And THAT, my friends, is why many of the Cruz people are shouting, “Never Trump.” (Come to think about it, NONE of the aforementioned third-party candidates were toadies for Israel, either. Are you not starting to see a pattern here, folks?)

Whether the Neocon establishment actually follows through with the effort to launch a third-party movement against Trump in November is yet to be seen, of course. More likely, they will try to do to him what they did to Ronald Reagan: convince him that he needs a Neocon vice president in order to win the general election. But Reagan needed George Bush as much as a 747 jet needs helium. Reagan could have picked Humpty Dumpty and would have won the general election. He was that popular. And Donald Trump has exceeded Reagan’s primary totals. In fact, Trump is on track to break all previous Republican primary records.

But an even higher likelihood is that the Bill Kristols of the world will probably wind up doing what Ron Paul predicts: simply supporting Hillary Clinton. (So, would these establishment Christians and conservatives join Kristol in voting for Hillary? Some of them probably would.) See the report:

Ron Paul: Third-Party Candidate ‘Purely A Dream,’ Kristol And The Neocons Will Vote For Hillary

But Trump has been beating the establishment all season long, and there is no reason to think that he cannot continue to beat them. The only thing Trump could do to hurt himself is listen to the Neocons and pick an establishment vice president. That would cast doubt in the minds of his supporters as to just how dedicated he is about his anti-establishment campaign rhetoric.

And, seriously, if all of these professing Christians and conservatives really want to vote for a third-party candidate that truly shares the vast majority of the principles and values that they profess to believe, they would vote for the Constitution Party nominee Darrell Castle. But to say they are willing to support an establishment Neocon third-party candidate only proves that, at their core, THEY are more establishment Neocon than they are Christian or conservative.

A Federal Judge Got It Right For A Change

cbaldwinHere is the report as covered by

“Apple scored a major legal victory in its ongoing battle against the FBI on Monday when a federal magistrate judge in New York rejected the U.S. government’s request as part of a drug case to force the company to help it extract data from a locked iPhone. The ruling from U.S. Magistrate Judge James Orenstein was issued as part of the criminal case against Jun Feng, who pleaded guilty in October to drug charges. It is a significant boost to Apple’s well-publicized campaign to resist the FBI’s similar efforts in the case of the San Bernardino killers.”

The report continued: “Perhaps most devastating to the FBI’s case is Orenstein’s recognition that the purpose of the FBI’s request is not simply to obtain evidence in one particular case, but rather to grant the government broad, precedential authority to force Apple and other tech companies to take affirmative technological steps to cooperate with criminal investigations generally. That the FBI is seeking to establish broad precedent is a key argument made by Apple and its supporters in the San Bernardino case. To accept that the U.S. government has this power, ruled the court, is to vest law enforcement agencies with statutory authority that Congress itself never enacted.”

And again, “The judge also accused the government of trying to manipulate secret judicial proceedings to obtain powers for itself against Apple that public debate and Congress would never permit. It is, Orenstein wrote, ‘clear that the government has made the considered decision that it is better off securing such crypto-legislative authority from the courts (in proceedings that had always been, at the time it filed the instant Application, shielded from public scrutiny) rather than taking the chance that open legislative debate might produce a result less to its liking.’ Because the government wants the courts rather than Congress to grant this power, the ‘government’s interpretation of the breadth of authority the AWA confers on courts of limited jurisdiction … raises serious doubts about how such a statute could withstand constitutional scrutiny under the separation-of-powers doctrine.’”

Continuing: “Finally, the ruling recognized that forcing Apple to compromise its own security systems at the behest of the U.S. government would impose a considerable cost far beyond financial expenses.”

“This cost, Orenstein wrote, is particularly high since–rejecting the FBI’s claim in the public debate that its request is limited to just one phone ‘the record of this case makes clear that the burdens the government seeks to impose on Apple under the authority of the AWA are not nearly so limited.’ To the contrary, ‘it clearly intends to continue seeking assistance that is similarly burdensome –if not far more so–for the foreseeable future.’”

See the report here:

Apple Wins Major Court Victory Against FBI In A Case Similar To San Bernardino

One of Apple’s attorneys was even more direct in assessing the importance of this case:

“Apple’s attorney painted a scary picture if Apple loses its fight with the FBI.

“In an interview with CNNMoney’s Laurie Segall on Friday, Ted Olson warned of a government with ‘limitless’ powers that could ‘listen to your conversations.’

“Olson said the demands would mount.

“‘You can imagine every different law enforcement official telling Apple we want a new product to get into something,’ Olson said. ‘Even a state judge could order Apple to build something. There’s no stopping point. That would lead to a police state.’”

See the report here:

Apple’s Lawyer: If We Lose, It Will Lead To A ‘Police State’

Hooray! A federal judge got it right for a change.

The three separate branches of government are supposed to serve as a check and balance when the other branches begin usurping constitutional liberties. For the most part, they have NOT done that. This particular U.S. Magistrate Judge did what courts are supposed to do: serve as a check to the overreach of the executive branch.

Virtually every abridgment of our Bill of Rights is committed in the name of “public safety” or “national security.” Most of us are patriotic, law and order people who want justice served. But in truth, the interests of justice and liberty are mutual. And this particular case–mandating that cell phone companies “unlock” the security and privacy features of cell phones–is fraught with violations of basic civil liberties, because the electronic search sought by the feds extends WAY BEYOND the individual suspected criminal.

The specific case above is only one of at least ten where the federal government is currently attempting to force cell phone companies to unlock the privacy features of their customers’ phones during criminal investigations. The ramifications of this prospective breach of personal privacy are staggering.

Unlocking a person’s cell phone would be worse than the current broad e-surveillance that is going on every day. This is a very specific and finite search that involves a person’s most private and intimate details.

Smartphones are more than talking devices; they record online searches, shopping data, travel information, medical information, private communication, and financial information–along with the personal information of EVERYONE CONNECTED to that cell phone. In other words, it’s not just the targeted person’s (presumably a suspected criminal) privacy that is being breached, but EVERYONE with whom that person had contact. Can you imagine the amount of private information of totally innocent people that potentially would be subject to police reports–all of which become “public record” and, therefore, available to the media, Internet bloggers, etc.?

Please read that paragraph again and let it sink in.

To get a little taste for just how much private information is stored on your smartphone and how dangerous it would be for the government to be able to freely unlock the information stored on your smartphone, read this article:

Your Smartphone Knows Who You Are And What You’re Doing

I’m not sure whether the American people comprehend just how serious an abridgment of privacy it would be if Apple loses this case, but in many respects, this is a technological Waterloo for liberty. I dare say this is a more egregious assault against our privacy (technologically speaking) than even the Patriot Act itself.

And, unfortunately, all of the remaining GOP presidential candidates–Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, John Kasich, and Donald Trump–oppose the protection of cell phone privacy. The Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have said they are “neutral.” But we all know that Clinton is as Big Government as Big Government gets. And if Sanders is truly in favor of cell phone privacy, why does he fudge his position?

In the name of “national security,” “the war on terror,” “the war on drugs,” “law and order,” etc., both Democrats and Republicans are turning America into a George Orwell “1984” surveillance society. And if history teaches us anything at all, it teaches us that a surveillance society is always a precursor to a Police State. ALWAYS.

At any rate, THANK YOU Judge Orenstein. Every obstruction to the burgeoning surveillance society that a judge or governor or State legislator or sheriff or congressman or senator can muster is much appreciated–and very needed.

A Tale Of Two Countries: What You Aren’t Being Told

Here are two factual cases involving two separate countries. The cases both begin similarly but have drastically different endings.images

Case One:

A foreign naval vessel is lumbering in international waters. It is flying a brand new 8’x5’ flag, which unmistakably identifies it as a major ally of the country whose coastline is nearest the ship. The ship’s markings are ten feet high on both sides. It is not a warship. It is an intelligence-gathering ship. For all intents and purposes, it is defenseless against any warship or attack aircraft having but four .50-calibre Browning machine guns without shrapnel shields as its only offensive weapons. On board are 286 souls.

Suddenly, and without provocation, the supposed “ally” nation attacks the ship with both warplanes and torpedo boats. For over an hour, the helpless ship is riddled with machine-gun fire, rockets, and torpedoes. Within moments, the ship is completely disabled. As it seems certain that the ship will sink, lifeboats are lowered, but the attacking torpedo boats immediately riddle the lifeboats with gunfire. Helicopters from the aggressive country carrying Special Forces troops hover over the ship, which is now listing at nine degrees. Clearly, the attacking country intends that no one survive.

The ship has no engines, no rudder, and no power. As the Special Forces soldiers from the attacking country are being positioned to launch their final assault, the ship’s Captain barks, “Standby to repel boarders.” One sailor yells, “They’ve come to finish us off.”

The only thing that saves that ship and those survivors that day is eight warplanes from a nearby aircraft carrier that had heard the initial “Mayday” cry from the ship. This caused the attacking country to withdraw. As it was, 34 of the ship’s officers and crew are killed and only a divine miracle and superhuman, Herculean effort from the sailors in the bowels of that steel graveyard keeps that ship afloat. When the attack first began, one general from the attacking country protested to his commanding officer saying, “This is pure murder.”

But what the country whose ship was attacked and whose men were killed did is most curious. It did NOTHING. In fact, the government of that country immediately declared that the attack had been a “mistake” and then proceeded to completely cover up what had happened. And to this day, the citizens of that country know almost nothing about what took place on that fateful day.

Case Two:

Two foreign military boats illegally enter the territorial waters of a nation. These boats represent a country that has declared the nation whose waters have been molested to be an enemy state. National leaders of the offending country have openly called for military action against the state–up to and including nuclear action. The offending nation is anything but an ally of the nation whose waters have been encroached.

The country whose waters have been compromised does what ANY country would do (including the offending country if the tables are reversed) if unauthorized foreign ships (especially military ships) encroach upon its territorial waters: it seizes the vessels. The country did NOT open fire on the sailors. No one was injured. After neutralizing the perceived threat and detaining the sailors, the country provides the sailors who had illegally entered their waters with a meal and then releases them and their boats unharmed.

But instead of being grateful for the way the offended nation had prevented what could have easily escalated into international hostilities, many of the leaders and media spokesmen from the country whose ships had illegally entered another nation’s territorial waters immediately accuse the offended nation of being the “aggressor” and use the incident to further enflame hatred against the alleged enemy state–including the incitement of war against it.

Case One was Israel’s murderous attack against the USS Liberty on June 8, 1967. Case Two was Iran’s incredibly-restrained handling of the U.S. naval vessels’ illegal incursion into its territorial waters not too many days ago.

Read the true story of Israel’s attack against the USS Liberty here:

Israel’s Attack On USS Liberty – The Full Story

Read the true story of the Iran incident here:

U.S. Media Condemns Iran’s “Aggression” In Intercepting U.S. Naval Ships — In Iranian Waters

The verbal attacks against Iran by U.S. politicians and dominate news media truly staggers the imagination. I think Pat Buchanan’s response to FOX News’ Sean Hannity was perfectly stated. After listening to Hannity’s senseless rant against Iran, Pat said, “Sean, you’re hysterical.” Hysterical seems to be the word that best describes most of what we are hearing today.

See the Hannity/Buchanan exchange here:

HEROIC: Pat Buchanan Tramples Sean Hannity On Iran Nuclear Deal

During a radio interview with Michael Berry, Ron Paul rightly observed, “I think there’s a distortion of the facts, for instance, we have learned and have been conditioned to distrust and hate the Persians and they’re going to kill us, just look at the conditioning we had for Saddam Hussein who used to be an ally and we gave him his first nuclear reactor. So, there is a lot of that that goes on, but there’s no history to show that Iran are aggressive people. When was the last time they invaded a country? Over two hundred years ago.”

Read the transcript here:

Ron Paul: Iran Hasn’t Invaded Another Country For More Than 200 Years accurately answers the question, “Is Iran a threat to the health and safety of U.S. citizens?” The report states:

“Iran has never attacked the United States, or even any of her interests overseas. In fact, they have not attacked or invaded anyone in at least 270 years. And they haven’t even threatened to harm the U.S. unless of course they are attacked first. . . . Iran is not an aggressor and certainly not a national emergency threat.”

The report goes on: “Even if they did [have a nuclear weapons program], why is that reason to attack them? Just having a weapon doesn’t make a country a threat. Plenty of countries have nuclear weapons and we don’t consider them a threat.”

The report continues: “Iran will not attack the West militarily with a nuclear weapon, or even conventionally, because they know they would be inviting their immediate destruction. Iran is a sophisticated secular society, much like Iraq was before America invaded. In fact, Iran has the third largest Jewish population in the world who live in harmony with Muslims and others. In other words, they have a lot to lose to invite war with anyone, and they know that any move viewed as aggression would be met with swift and overwhelming force. The West wants the world to believe their leadership is primitive and stupid, but they aren’t.

“Over 45 U.S. bases surround Iran. These bases are in addition to the fleets of U.S. warships parked in waters near Iran. A picture is worth a thousand words. Who’s the real threat here?”

See the map and the report here:

5 Reasons Iran Is NOT A Threat To The U.S.

Recall that even when many Arab nations were involved in the Six Day War with Israel back in 1967 (including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Libya, etc.), Iran did NOT participate. And what most Americans do not know is that immediately following the 9/11 attacks in the U.S. (that Iran had nothing to do with), tens of thousands of Iranian citizens held demonstrations, candlelight vigils, and moments of silence in SUPPORT of the United States. (Do the research for yourself.) Americans would be shocked to know that the vast majority of average Iranians actually hold very favorable views of the United States. The “Death to America” rallies we hear so much about actually do NOT represent the views of the vast majority of the Iranian people–no more than the copious “We Are Change” pro-Obama rallies represent the views of a majority of the American people.

Plus, the oft-quoted threat by former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to “wipe Israel off the map” is in reality a complete fabrication of the Western news media.

See this report:

“Wiped Off The Map” – The Rumor Of The Century

The Iranian Foreign Minister tried to set the record straight–albeit most in the U.S. media continue to regurgitate the myth that Iran has threatened to militarily destroy Israel.

“Iran has no intention of destroying Israel and has actually saved the Jews three times in history, but the current Israeli regime is a threat to Tehran, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif has said in an interview with American media.

“Speaking with NBC, Zarif slamed [sic] the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, after he once again said in his Monday’s speech before the US Congress that Iran openly threatened to wipe Israel off the map.

“The Iranian FM urged Netanyahu to refresh his knowledge of history as his comments have not only ‘distort[ed] realities of today,’ but also go against the Bible and Jewish sacred texts.

“‘He even distorts his own scripture. If you read the book of Esther, you will see that it was the Iranian king who saved the Jews…’ Zarif said.

“The Iranian Minister called Netanyahu’s accusations ‘truly regrettable’ stressing that they refer to ‘an entire nation which has saved Jews three times.’

“‘It is truly, truly regrettable that bigotry gets to the point of making allegations against an entire nation which has saved Jews three times in its history: Once during that time of a prime minister who was trying to kill the Jews, and the king saved the Jews; again during the time of Cyrus the Great, where he saved the Jews from Babylon, and during the Second World War, where Iran saved the Jews,’ he said.

“‘We’re not about the annihilation of Jews,’ Zarif stressed, reminding the channel that 20,000 Jews reside in Iran ‘in peace’ and even have their own representative in parliament.

“‘We have a history of tolerance and cooperation and living together in coexistence with our own Jewish people, and with Jews everywhere in the world. If people want to espouse fear mongering to fan such hysteria in the world, that’s to their detriment,’ Zafir said.”

Here is the report:

​We Saved Jews 3 Times, Netanyahu Should Revise History Lessons – Iranian FM

And here is one of the most truthful and accurate assessments that I have ever read of why the U.S. is enmeshed in all of these current conflicts in the Middle East:

Christmas 2015—–Why There Is No Peace On Earth

Had Case Two referenced above even remotely resembled Case One, we would be in the middle of World War III right now. Yet, President Lyndon Johnson and the U.S. government allowed a foreign country to commit a flagrant act of military aggression against a U.S. naval vessel–killing dozens of American sailors and Marines in the process–with no repercussions whatsoever. It even chose to cover up the incident and pretend it never happened. Why? Because the attacking country was Israel–a supposed ally of the United States and a nation that our government often uses to do much of its dirty work in the Middle East. Not to mention the fact that the Israeli lobby is the most influential and wealthiest lobby in Washington, D.C.; or the fact that the false doctrine of “Christian Zionism” (what an oxymoron) literally governs the prevailing politics among a majority of America’s churches–especially the largest ones lead by politically-powerful televangelists; or that a majority of U.S. congressmen and senators are joined at the hip (and bank account) with the Israeli lobby.

In much the same way, the U.S. government has chosen to cover up the attacks that killed a U.S. ambassador and other Americans in Benghazi. Why? Because the truth surrounding Benghazi would help expose what the U.S. government is really doing in the Middle East and would implicate our government’s role in facilitating terrorists.

It’s time for Americans to start facing the cold, harsh reality that our federal government cares absolutely NOTHING about the lives of American citizens. It didn’t give a hoot in hades about the victims of the USS Liberty, and it didn’t give a hoot in hades about Ambassador Chris Stevens and the others who died in Benghazi. But let Iran (a nation that poses absolutely no imminent threat to the United States) protect its own territorial waters (with no harm to any American citizen), and the national press corps and their neocon cohorts in Washington, D.C., are ready to start World War III.

This is all political theater, folks. It’s not about protecting the United States. It’s not about protecting the American people. It’s all about protecting the government’s hidden agendas and its own derriere.

Republicans Write Obama A Blank Check

chuck baldwin

House Speaker Paul Ryan, Montana House member Ryan Zinke, and other phony conservative Republicans have written Barack Obama a blank check for EVERYTHING he wanted in the 2016 Omnibus bill. (Thank you, Montana Senators Steve Daines (R) and Jon Tester (D), for voting against this egregiously evil bill.)

Despite all the conservative rhetoric proceeding from the mouths of the Republicans in Congress, the GOP passed a $1.1 trillion spending bill that grants Barack Obama EVERYTHING he requested. Remember, the House of Representatives completely controls the purse strings of the federal government. The White House can spend absolutely NOTHING without the House of Representatives signing the check. And that’s exactly what Speaker Ryan, Rep. Ryan Zinke, and the other phony conservatives in Congress did: they wrote Barack Obama a check for EVERYTHING he wanted.

In his nationally syndicated radio talk show on December 17, longtime Republican apologist Rush Limbaugh said, “Everything Obama wanted, everything he asked for, he got.  You go down the list of things, it’s there.

“And this is causing some people to wonder if they just dreamed all that stuff about Boehner resigning.  And then other people are wondering if they even dreamed all that stuff about the Republicans winning the largest number of seats they’ve had in Congress since the Civil War.  We had two midterm elections in 2010 and 2014, which were landslide victories for the Republican Party.  The Democrat Party lost over a thousand seats nationwide in just those two elections.  People went to the polls in droves wanting exactly what was rubber-stamped last night (or what will be) stopped.

“And instead they showed up in record numbers and they it turned out and they just defeated Democrats down the ballot. In the process, they elected Republicans to stop this.  And now the Republicans have the largest number of seats in the House they’ve had in Congress since the Civil War.  And it hasn’t made any difference at all.  It is as though Nancy Pelosi is still running the House and Harry Reid is still running the Senate.  ‘Betrayed’ is not even the word here.  What has happened here is worse than betrayal. Betrayal is pretty bad, but it’s worse than that.

“This was out-and-out, in-our-face lying, from the campaigns to individual statements made about the philosophical approach Republicans had to all this spending.  There is no Republican Party!  You know, we don’t even need a Republican Party if they’re gonna do this.  You know, just elect Democrats, disband the Republican Party, and let the Democrats run it, because that’s what’s happening anyway.”

See the transcript here:

GOP Sells America Down The River

Here is a partial list of what Obama requested and received from this so-called Republican congress:

  1. Funding for Obama’s executive amnesty program
  2. Funding for “Sanctuary” citie
  3. Funding for all of Obama’s refugee programs
  4. Funding for all of Obama’s immigration programs
  5. Funding for Obama’s illegal alien resettlement programs
  6. Funding for the release of criminal illegal aliens imprisoned in the United States
  7. Funding for tax credits for illegal aliens
  8. Eliminates spending caps
  9. Funding for Planned Parenthood abortion services
  10. Funding for ALL of Obama’s climate change programs
  11. Funding for Obamacare
  12. Funding for INCREASED government spying on U.S. citizens
  13. Funding for ALL of the U.S. wars around the world
  14. Funding for the increased militarization of American police agencies and the growing federal Police State

The list goes on and on.

Rush was right: there would have been absolutely NO DIFFERENCE in the Omnibus bill that passed Congress had Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the Democrats been in a majority. No difference at all.

The two-party system is a JOKE. No! It’s more than a joke: it is a total and absolute SHAM.

You know things are bad when longtime Republican disciple Franklin Graham quits the GOP and when the quintessential Republican apologist Rush Limbaugh says the GOP should  “disband.”

Elections have become moot. No matter which party assumes control of Congress and the White House, the Constitution is ignored and trampled and the American people are betrayed and sold out.

I’m wondering if the last chance America had at redemption was the candidacy of Ron Paul in 2012. Christian people, especially, vehemently rejected Ron’s message of constitutional government, sound economics, and a non-interventionist foreign policy. So-called conservatives nominated big-government neocons the last two presidential elections: John McCain and Mitt Romney. And then they wonder why the liberal Democrat Barack Obama was elected and re-elected. DUH!

Rank and file conservatives are MAD! They are sick and tired of being betrayed and sold down the river. They are sick and tired of trading neocons like John Boehner for neocons like Paul Ryan. That, in a nutshell, explains the surging candidacy of Donald Trump.

Trump has dared to call out the Republican leadership for the establishment, big-government hacks they are. And he has enough money to run a viable national campaign without groveling before the GOP donor class.

While I truly like the anti-establishment character of Trump’s campaign, I believe the desperation of conservative voters is being channeled in a dangerous direction. I have heard nothing to suggest that Donald Trump has any inkling of, appreciation for, or fidelity to the U.S. Constitution. In fact, much of his campaign rhetoric–and, unfortunately, much of the rhetoric that has made him so popular–is blatantly unconstitutional.

Trump is the owner and CEO of a mega international business conglomerate. As such, he snaps his fingers and subordinates jump. His word is law. That’s all well and good for a private business, but that’s NOT how a constitutional republic operates.

In a desperate attempt to break free from the neocon establishment ensconced atop the Republican Party, conservatives appear willing to embrace anyone who will challenge the insiders–even if that someone runs roughshod over the Constitution.

In America, when we elect civil magistrates, there is only ONE criterion we should look for: will he or she faithfully “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” It’s as simple as that.

Listen to Thomas Jefferson: “In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

Instead, most Americans are consumed with political parties and personalities. They need to be consumed with the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

When one wants to identify a phony dollar bill, he doesn’t study the counterfeits; he studies the original. The Constitution is the original measurement by which ALL candidates and incumbents should be judged.

The reason our politicians from BOTH parties have taken us to the precipice of the abyss is because the citizens of this country have failed to hold them accountable to the Constitution. It shouldn’t matter whether the candidate or incumbent has a “R” or “D” behind his or her name, or whether they call themselves “conservative” or “progressive.” All that should matter is, will they “preserve, protect, and defend” the U.S. Constitution.

Learn the Constitution and Bill of Rights (and Declaration of Independence), and gauge every magistrate or would-be magistrate by that standard. Try it.

What you will learn is just how few of our politicians and political candidates have even the remotest idea of what the Constitution says. And neither do they give a rat’s hindquarters about what the Constitution says. That’s why they never mention it on the campaign trail, don’t read it, don’t plan to enforce it when elected, and are, thereby, disqualified from public office. They are COUNTERFEITS–no matter how likeable they are or from which side of the political aisle they hail.

Right or left, conservative or liberal, Christian or non-believer: forget it. “In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

There is a quick remedy for what ails America: elect constitutionalists to public office. In my view, Rand Paul is the only constitutionalist candidate for President in 2016 from either major party.

First, I believe the biggest threats to liberty we face have nothing to do with Islamic terrorism. We have far more to fear from those miscreants in Washington, D.C., and from the international bankers at the Federal Reserve than any radical Muslim. Hence, all of the fearmongering about Muslim jihad and Sharia Law in America only plays into the hands of the globalists who are orchestrating all of this madness.

The words of Daniel Webster are especially fitting at this point:

“There is no nation [or group of terrorists] on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence. I must confess that I do apprehend some danger. I fear that they may place too implicit a confidence in their public servants, and fail properly to scrutinize their conduct; that in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men and become the instruments of their own undoing.”

Second, I am absolutely convinced that the greatest threats to our liberty are: 1) the neocon wars of aggression around the world–especially in the Middle East, and 2) a burgeoning Police State here at home.

I have now had plenty of time to examine the candidates regarding his or her commitment to defeating these two great threats to our liberty, and there is only ONE Republican candidate that sees these threats and would use the power of the Oval Office to defeat them–or at least curtail them: that candidate is RAND PAUL.

I know that Rand is not his dad. And I am not nearly as excited about Rand as I was Ron. And there are several issues with which I disagree with Rand. But I firmly believe Rand gets the whole neocon war issue and would put a stop to it if he were President. In this regard, Rand might be the ONLY major party presidential candidate who could potentially avert WWIII. I further believe Rand gets the Zionist issue and would not be a patsy for the Israeli lobby–his trip to Israel and that photo at the Wailing Wall notwithstanding.

I also believe Rand truly sees the growing Police State in this country and would rein in these out-of-control federal departments of [In]Justice and Homeland [In]Security. And, yes, Rand voted AGAINST the 2016 Omnibus bill.

In my view, none of the other candidates would do anything significant to change America’s foreign policy or to rein in the growing Police State in our country.

By giving Donald Trump so much negative publicity, the mainstream media is actually propelling his campaign. The candidates that the media truly despise and want to defeat are the ones they ignore–which is EXACTLY what they did (as much as possible) to Ron Paul’s campaign–and are doing now to Rand Paul’s campaign. That, by itself, speaks volumes.

The neocons within the GOP (I’m not talking about Donald Trump here) are no better than liberal Democrats. In fact, in some ways they are much worse. Phony conservatives like House Speaker Paul Ryan and Montana House member Ryan Zinke are as much a threat to our liberties as liberals Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. The blank check these neocons gave to Barack Obama is only the most recent example of this reality.

Absent a presidential victory by a constitutionalist such as Ron or Rand Paul, the preservation of liberty is going to eventually come down to free and independent states reclaiming it for themselves, or possible secession and/or a regional breakaway from Washington, D.C., or some kind of direct intervention from Heaven. But what the passage of the 2016 Omnibus bill absolutely proves is that it will NOT come from the national Republican Party.


Liberal/Neocon Domination Killing America

Can America survive another eight years of liberal/neocon domination of Washington, D.C.?

The past seven presidential administrations (Bush, Sr. – Obama) and congresses (Republican and Democratic) have taken the United States to the brink of oppression–and maybe destruction. That’s 28 years (counting 2016) of continuous domination by liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans. And make no mistake about it: there is virtually NO DIFFERENCE between liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans. They work in tandem. Best buds. Same agenda. Twins. Same parties. Same golf outings. Same clubs. Same money-grubbing. Controlled by the same people. Ad infinitum.

Under these liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans, the United States has become the most spied on country in the history of mankind. The brute-force of Washington, D.C., has all but expunged the Natural Law principles that founded this nation. Pulpit and pew; people and priest; magistrate and citizen; professor and student; newscaster and viewer: for the most part, they have all fallen in lockstep with the establishment Democrat and Republican parties. Hardly anyone understands the principles upon which our Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights were founded–including, and especially, the miscreants in Washington, D.C.

Beyond that, liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans have taken America into a perpetual state of war. Take down those yellow flags, folks, because our troops aren’t EVER coming home.

Not only have the liberal/neocon miscreants in D.C., made enemies out of virtually every country on the planet, they seem determined to make enemies out of the American citizenry. Just listen to the things our FBI and Justice Department spokesmen are saying about US–We the People. They seem to consider US more of an enemy than our enemies. Just like in banana republics, our prisons are filled with people who should be regarded as political prisoners. At the same time, sure-enough real criminals such as G.W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton enjoy the lifestyle of kings and queens.

Add tens of millions of illegal aliens who have absolutely no understanding of constitutional government, who respect nothing but raw power, and who see government as nothing more than something to give them stuff, and the problem is exacerbated exponentially. Yet, both liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans are facilitating this invasion of illegal aliens that is taking place–and will continue to take place if Paul Ryan and most of the Republican and Democrat leadership have their way (which they probably will).

In addition, the vast majority of our elected representatives and senators in D.C., appear drunk with power and personal ambition. It truly seems that hardly any of them give a hoot in hell what the Constitution says. They are in it for themselves–the country be damned!

The Republican-controlled House of Representatives had an opportunity to do something truly significant to reverse the power of the neocons over politics in D.C., by electing a genuine anti-establishment conservative. Sadly, they chose instead to elect another royal neocon, Paul Ryan, as Speaker. Republican House members could not have made a WORSE choice.

Paul Ryan has a Cumulative Freedom Index Score of 58% by the New American Magazine–which offers one of the more accurate assessments of a congressman or senator’s voting record.

Ryan voted for TPA, the horrific jobs-killing NAFTA-type trade bill–also called Obamatrade. He voted for Country of Origin Labeling Amendments Act, which repealed the requirements for Country of Origin labeling (which keeps Americans in the dark about where their food is coming from) and ceded authority over food-related regulations to the World Trade Authority (WTO).

Ryan voted for the National Cybersecurity Protection Advancement Act (NCPA). Rep. Justin Amash (R-Michigan) rightly warned, “These bills violate the Fourth Amendment, override privacy laws, and give the government unwarranted access to the personal information of potentially millions of Americans.”

Paul Ryan voted against a bill that would have prevented U.S. taxpayer dollars from being given to “Syrian rebels.” Those Syrian rebels, of course, are ISIS terrorists. Ryan is simply another warmongering neocon like Dick Cheney, John Boehner, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain.

Ryan voted against a bill that would have prevented the further militarization of our local and State police agencies by prohibiting the U.S. military from supplying local police departments with combat military equipment, such as drones, armored vehicles, grenade launchers, and bombs. These military utensils are more fitted for the military occupation of a hostile territory–which apparently is the way Paul Ryan and his fellow liberal/neocons in Washington, D.C., must view the American homeland.

Paul Ryan voted against an amendment that would have prevented the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens. “Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) introduced an amendment to prohibit the indefinite military detention of any person detained under the Authorization for the Use of Military Force authority in the United States, its territories, or possessions by providing immediate transfer to a trial and proceedings by a court. It also would strike language that would provide for mandatory military custody of covered parties.

“The House [with John Boehner and Paul Ryan’s leadership] rejected Smith’s amendment. Indefinite military detention is a blatant violation of the Sixth Amendment, and an executive who can wield such powers is akin to a monarch or dictator. As Rep. Smith said during consideration of the amendment: ‘That is an enormous amount of power to give the Executive: to take someone and lock them up without due process. It is an enormous amount of power to grant the Executive, and I believe places liberty and freedom at risk in this country.’”

See Ryan’s record here:

Freedom Index: Congressional Scorecard For Paul Ryan

The Conservative Review also gives Paul Ryan an “F” grade on their scorecard. They note that Ryan voted to fund Planned Parenthood. Ryan also voted against killing Obama’s amnesty deal for illegal aliens.

See the scorecard here:

Conservative Review: Scorecard Paul Ryan

Amnesty for illegals is one of Ryan’s priorities. He “promised” conservatives in the House that he would delay amnesty until 2017 (BIG DEAL), but everyone knows Ryan will most definitely ram an amnesty deal through the House. On this issue, Ryan is WORSE than Boehner.

“On Monday the Remembrance Project, a group which honors the memory of Americans killed by illegal aliens, hosted a press conference. Breitbart News spoke exclusively to many of the victim’s family members about their thoughts on House Republican leadership.

“‘We don’t want Paul Ryan whatsoever. He’s worse than Boehner. We’ve seen what he will do [if he’s elected Speaker]’ said the Remembrance Project’s founder, Maria Espinoza.

“A newly-aired PBS documentary shows how that Paul Ryan and Mick Mulvaney labored with Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) to push Rubio’s amnesty agenda through the House of Representatives. Rush Limbaugh has warned that if Ryan is Speaker and Rubio is President, ‘Then in the first 12 months of the Rubio�administration, first 12-to-18 months, the donor-class agenda is implemented, including amnesty and whatever else they want. That is the objective here.’

“‘All of us are against Ryan [as Speaker] and Marco Rubio [for President] because we’re against amnesty,’ Mary Ann Mendoza told Breitbart News exclusively.”

See the report here:

Families Of Victims Murdered By Illegal Aliens To House Republicans: ‘No Paul Ryan’

Just recently, the neocon Mitt Romney admitted what most of us knew all along (but what he vehemently denied on the presidential campaign trail in 2012): that he supports Obamacare and proudly helped pave the way for it. And, of course, who did Neocon Romney choose as his running mate? Neocon Matt Ryan.

See the report here:

Mitt Romney Praises Obamacare, Admits He Helped Pave The Way

Just this week, the new incoming House Speaker Paul Ryan is supporting John Boehner and Barack Obama as they collaborate together to remove another debt ceiling limitation for the current federal spending bill. As a report said the deal “effectively writes lame-duck President Obama a blank check to rack up debt.”

And, as I have told you before, the Gun Owners of America (GOA) has warned that a Ryan speakership would be “Boehner on Steroids.” GOA also said that a Ryan speakership “would be disastrous for gun owners.”

See GOA’s statement here:

Paul Ryan Would Be “Boehner On Steroids”

Replacing John Boehner with Paul Ryan is like trading a fox for a coyote. Neither one had or has any intention of guarding America’s constitutional hen house.

I tell you the truth: the ONLY thing that stands between us and open oppression is tens of millions of gun owners in this country. Our national media (and much of our local media–especially in big cities) is no help. In fact, they are enthusiastic supporters of our demise. Our institutions of higher learning are no help. And our pastors and churches have almost totally capitulated. For the most part, they provide no help for the cause of liberty. NONE.

How long is it going to take for our State governors and legislatures to realize that, like it or not, sooner or later the only way to preserve liberty will be to follow the example of our patriot forebears and separate from an out-of-control, power-mad American Crown–which is exactly the way D.C., is behaving. If an abused wife has the legal and moral right to separate from an abusive husband, abused states certainly have a legal and moral right to separate from an abusive federal government.

Of the current crop of presidential candidates, the only one that I think has a true grasp of the Constitution (even if he doesn’t always act like it) is Rand Paul. But his campaign is already on life-support.

For example, I live in what might be the strongest Ron Paul county in America. One still sees Ron Paul bumper stickers all over the place. So far, I have not seen one single Rand Paul bumper sticker. Not one! That is as big a testament to Rand’s inability to excite the Ron Paul revolutionaries and constitutionalist/libertarians as one could ever find.

Donald Trump is successfully taking on the establishment unlike anyone is modern politics. I see that as a huge net positive. Frankly, I like a lot of things he is saying. But other things he says concern me greatly. And maybe what I’m concerned about the most is what he is NOT saying–I haven’t heard him say anything about the Constitution.

As for the rest of the candidates, I don’t trust any of them–including Ben Carson and Ted Cruz.

Ben Carson’s emphatic promotion of government-forced vaccinations is anathema to anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge and appreciation for the Constitution and Bill of Rights. His support for forced-vaccinations portrays a vast constitutional ignorance. Plus, I see Carson as extremely weak on the Second Amendment. His initial belief was that people who live in big cities should not be allowed to own semi-automatic firearms. After entering the presidential race, and taking fire for his statements from GOP constituents, he seems to have changed his position. But I don’t trust that this is as much him “seeing the light” as it is him “feeling the heat.” As brilliant a mind as he has for medicine, I see Carson as constitutionally challenged.

And as good as Ted Cruz is on social issues and immigration, he is just another rabid neocon when it comes to foreign policy. The neocon wars of aggression in the Middle East would undoubtedly continue unabated (and probably even escalate) under a Cruz presidency. No thanks.

Jeb Bush is the neocon’s neocon. He is the quintessential establishment insider–and his list of contributors reflects this fact. In spite of the support Bush is receiving from establishment insiders, his campaign is floundering. If Jeb withdraws, establishment support will most likely fall to Marco Rubio’s campaign. Rubio is an establishment player through and through. In fact, as noted above, Rubio would be as bad as Barack Obama when it comes to amnesty for illegals. It does appear that the globalists are posturing a Rubio/Ryan team to take America into the New World Order.

Regardless, I am convinced of one thing: when the meltdown, or breakup–or whatever else you want to call it–happens, I am EXACTLY where I want to be. Like Switzerland in the middle of WW II, this region of the country will NEVER surrender its guns or its liberties. If the East Coast and West Coast want to dive headlong into oppression, let them. The Redoubt isn’t budging. Our resolve is as fixed as our mountains.

I hope Texas can hold out too.

I ask again: Can America survive another eight years of liberal/neocon domination of Washington, D.C., because that’s probably what we are looking at.

Maybe the better question is, Can your State and region survive?

P.S. As I said last week, I am pleased to announce that James Jaeger’s brand new film, “Midnight Ride: When Rogue Politicians Call For Martial Law,” will be premiered on Friday, November 6, 2015, from 6pm through 11pm Mountain Time. Distinguished luminaries such as Pat Buchanan, Larry Pratt, Ron Paul, G. Edward Griffin, Sheriff Richard Mack, Stewart Rhodes, Edwin Vieira, Jr., and several others are featured in this film. I am honored to also be featured.

I invite readers to go to my website on Friday evening, November 6, and watch the premiere of this outstanding film. And please tell your friends. DVDs of the film will also be available the night of the premiere via my website. Watch the film here:

Midnight Ride: When Rogue Politicians Call For Martial Law