The A.M. Dispatch
Edition For - January 21st, 2024: The Pipe Bomb Narrative Collapses, RINO's Expose Themselves, Chutkan's Clown Court, and an America Mission Call to Action.
Welcome to the America Mission Dispatch.
Our Digital Newspaper.
We welcome any feedback to make your experience more enjoyable.
Send any feedback to Editor@WCdispatch.com
The Pipe Bomb Plot Unraveled: A Narrative Shattered
January 19th, 2024: By, Walter Curt
In what can only be described as a seismic revelation, the story of the January 6th pipe bombs has undergone a dramatic and unsettling transformation. The narrative that has been peddled by mainstream media for years is now teetering on the brink of collapse, thanks to the meticulous reporting of Darren Beattie at Revolver News. The uncovering of these new details not only raises serious questions about the events of that fateful day but also poses grave implications for the official narrative surrounding the January 6th Capitol protest.
On the eve of January 6th, two alleged explosive devices, eerily resembling pipe bombs with egg timers, were discovered outside the RNC and DNC headquarters in DC. The first bomb, found at the RNC at 1:40 PM by a random pedestrian, showed a timer with 20 minutes left, ominously frozen. Mere minutes later, a second device was discovered at the DNC headquarters - a location where, as later revelations would shockingly confirm, Vice President-elect Kamala Harris was present, not at the Capitol as initially reported.
The discovery of these devices, timed to match the scheduled start of the electoral vote certification at 1 PM, is no mere coincidence. It's a chilling reminder of the potential catastrophic events that were averted. However, the story doesn't end there. The perplexing delay in cordoning off the areas and the mysterious manner in which these bombs remained undiscovered until the critical juncture raises a slew of unsettling questions.
Furthermore, allegations have surfaced that the FBI's surveillance footage of the pipe bomb planting may have been manipulated or incomplete. This raises the specter of a far more sinister plot, one that extends beyond the realm of mere happenstance or the actions of a lone wolf.
The implications of these revelations are staggering. The presence of Kamala Harris at the DNC headquarters at the time of the discovery of the second bomb shatters the established narrative and raises profound questions about the actual intentions behind these planted devices. Was this a carefully orchestrated plot, a backup plan designed to unleash chaos if the Capitol protest didn't escalate as planned?
The narrative that has been spun around January 6th and the pipe bombs is crumbling. The inconsistencies and unexplained coincidences point to a narrative that was carefully constructed but is now being exposed for its glaring holes and questionable motives. This is not just a story about a failed terrorist attack; it's a narrative about manipulation, potential political machinations, and a mainstream media complicit in perpetuating a story that is now falling apart at the seams.
This bombshell report by Darren Beattie doesn't just raise questions; it demands answers. It's a call for a thorough and unbiased investigation into the events leading up to and on January 6th. The American public deserves the truth, not a narrative woven for political convenience or to fit a particular agenda. The pipe bomb story, as it stands now, is a stark reminder of the lengths to which certain elements will go to shape and control the narrative. It's a wake-up call to remain vigilant and question the stories that are fed to us, for often, the truth is more complex and far-reaching than it appears.
Betrayal in the Ranks: The Six RINOs Undermining Trump's Ballot Battle
January 20th, 2024: By, Walter Curt
In a pivotal moment for the Republican Party, six senators - Mitt Romney, Lisa Murkowski, Rand Paul, Steve Daines, Todd Young, and Susan Collins - have brazenly turned their backs on the party's core principles by refusing to sign a petition supporting Donald Trump's rightful place on the Colorado ballot. This act of defiance not only undermines the united front of the GOP but also casts a shadow of betrayal over the party's commitment to fair play and democracy.
The petition, a vital document upholding the constitutional prerogatives of Congress, presents a formidable argument against the Colorado Supreme Court's overreach. It asserts that the court's decision to enforce Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment without congressional authorization is a blatant intrusion into congressional powers. The petition rightly contends that such enforcement demands specific legislation from Congress, as the Amendment clearly stipulates the need for "appropriate legislation" to enforce its provisions.
Furthermore, the petition exposes the dangerous implications of allowing state courts to unilaterally de-ballot a candidate. This not only impinges on Congress's power to remove a Section 3 disability but also sets a perilous precedent that could be exploited for partisan gains. The political question doctrine, as the petition argues, clearly commits such determinations to Congress, not to state courts or any other judicial bodies.
Most alarmingly, the petition underscores the Colorado court's vague and expansive interpretation of "engage in insurrection," a term used in Section 3. This broad and indiscriminate application poses a significant threat to the democratic process, opening the door to widespread partisan abuse and the potential disqualification of political opponents based purely on ambiguous criteria.
The refusal of these six Republican senators to sign the petition is not merely a political misstep; it is an outright betrayal of the party's efforts to safeguard the integrity of our electoral system. It is particularly disheartening to see names like Rand Paul, who has often stood as a beacon of constitutional fidelity, among the dissenters. Despite reaching out for a comment, his office remains silent, leaving us to speculate on the reasoning behind this baffling decision.
These six senators, by their action (or rather, inaction), have effectively aligned themselves with those who seek to manipulate legal interpretations for political gain. They have shown themselves to be RINOs (Republicans In Name Only), placing personal agendas or misguided principles above the collective interest of the party and, more importantly, the nation.
This episode is a stark reminder of the deep divisions and the presence of ideologically unaligned members within the Republican Party. It's a call to action for true conservatives to recognize and challenge those in their ranks who fail to stand up for fundamental party values and constitutional principles. As the battle for Trump's place on the Colorado ballot continues, the GOP must confront and address the rifts within, purging itself of those who do not have the fortitude or loyalty to support the party's chosen leader and his rightful place in American politics.
Victory Against 'Woke Capitalism': SEC Drops NAC Proposal
January 19th, 2024: By, Walter Curt
In a resounding triumph for economic sanity and free-market principles, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has decisively scrapped the New York Stock Exchange's (NYSE) dangerous proposal to list Natural Asset Companies (NACs). This move, a clear win in the fight against the insidious rise of 'Woke Capitalism', marks a pivotal moment in safeguarding American economic interests from veering into a perilous path of 'Degrowth Communism'.
The NYSE's proposal, filed on September 27, 2023, to establish listing standards for NACs was nothing short of an audacious attempt to commercialize and commodify nature itself. Masked under the pretense of environmental conservation, this proposal, had it been approved, would have set a terrifying precedent, paving the way for an unprecedented concentration of control over natural resources in the hands of a few powerful entities. This was not conservation; it was a blatant power grab.
Under the guise of environmental stewardship, figures like Rob Leary and Tom Vilsack were poised to orchestrate a shift towards a government-regulated carbon trading scheme. Such a move would have not only threatened public access to natural resources but also choked economic freedom, placing an undue burden on the public through increased taxes and stringent regulations.
The SEC's initial extension on November 7, 2023, to deliberate on this proposal signaled a potential threat looming over the horizon. However, with the SEC instituting proceedings on December 21, 2023, to determine the proposal's fate, a glimmer of hope emerged. Finally, on January 17, 2024, in a decisive move, the NYSE withdrew the proposal (SR-NYSE-2023-09), effectively derailing this perilous initiative.
This withdrawal signifies more than just a regulatory decision. It is a testament to the vigilance and unwavering stance of organizations like America Mission and other champions of true free-market capitalism who stood firm against the tide of 'Woke Capitalism'. It is a confirmation that our collective voice against the encroachment of 'Degrowth Communism' in corporate governance has power and can yield results.
We must remain vigilant, however. The fact that such a proposal was even considered by the NYSE and entertained by the SEC is a stark reminder of the continuous threat posed by those who seek to manipulate environmental causes for their gain. This is not about conservation; it is about control. It's about a select few trying to dictate the terms under which natural resources, a common heritage of humanity, are accessed and utilized.
The withdrawal of the NAC proposal is indeed a victory, but the war against the rampant spread of 'Woke Capitalism' and its 'Degrowth Communism' agenda is far from over. We must continue to stand guard, ready to challenge and push back against any attempts to undermine the foundations of our economic freedom and prosperity. The SEC's decision to drop the NAC proposal is a crucial battle won, but the fight to preserve our free-market values and economic sovereignty continues.
Chutkan's Complicity in Weakening Trump's Defense: A Mockery of Justice
January 19th, 2024: By, Walter Curt
In the latest chapter of the legal saga surrounding Donald Trump, the DC Court's decision, presided over by Judge Chutkan, serves as a stark reminder of the corrupt judicial system's ongoing efforts to burden and undermine the former President. The court's half-hearted ruling on Trump's motion seeking contempt sanctions against prosecutors, who blatantly disregarded the stay order by continuing to produce discovery and file motions, is nothing short of judicial mockery.
Trump's legal team, rightfully aggrieved by the prosecutors' relentless pursuit even during a stay pending appeal, was met with a decision that only partially acknowledges their plight. The court, while conceding that the stay order relieved Trump from deadlines and trial preparations, feebly argued that it did not explicitly forbid prosecutors from voluntary compliance with the now-stayed deadlines. This is a classic case of judicial doublespeak and a blatant display of the court's skewed priorities.
Judge Chutkan's ruling that Trump is not required to review or respond to discovery productions at present is a mere facade of fairness. The decision forces Trump's attorneys to preliminarily review any substantive motions filed to ascertain the need for a response. This, unmistakably, is a burden - a burden strategically imposed to exhaust and distract Trump's defense team. It's a cunning ploy, a maneuver designed to handicap Trump's legal strategy while giving the illusion of judicial equanimity.
The directive that parties must now seek leave of court before filing any further substantive pretrial motions, and clarify if the motion concerns matters involved in the appeal, is an afterthought, a token measure to feign judicial diligence. The damage, however, has already been inflicted.
The court's refusal to hold Jack Smith and his team accountable for their blatant disregard for legal protocol and the stay order is a glaring indication of the bias entrenched within the judicial system. The court's dismissal of Trump's motion for contempt sanctions, on the flimsy ground that the government did not "clearly" violate the stay order or act in bad faith, is a testament to the double standards that plague our legal system.
Judge Chutkan's decision is a travesty of justice, a clear indication that the courts are complicit in the ongoing persecution of Donald Trump. The ruling effectively burdens Trump's defense while letting the prosecutors off the hook for their aggressive and unprecedented tactics. This case is yet another example of the judicial system's bias against Trump, an evident ploy to derail his defense through procedural hurdles and legal gymnastics.
In essence, the court's decision is not a ruling; it's an endorsement of the continued harassment of Trump by a biased prosecutorial team. It's a clear message that in the current judicial system, fairness and justice take a backseat when it comes to Donald Trump. This ruling is not just a failure of justice; it's a deliberate attack on the principles of fair play and a stark reminder of the uphill battle Trump faces in a system rigged against him.
The End of Chevron Deference: A Crucial Step Toward Shrinking Federal Overreach
January 18th, 2024: By, Walter Curt
The United States Supreme Court is poised to make a historic decision that could mark the end of the Chevron Deference, a ruling that has long served as the linchpin for the unchecked power of federal regulatory agencies. This landmark case, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Gina Raimondo, is more than just another legal dispute; it's a pivotal moment in American jurisprudence that could dramatically rein in the bloated administrative state.
Established in 1984, the Chevron deference has been a cornerstone of administrative law, compelling courts to defer to a federal agency's interpretation of an ambiguous statute. This doctrine has enabled unelected bureaucrats to wield legislative-like power, interpreting laws in ways that often extend beyond their intended scope. The time has come to dismantle this construct and restore the balance of power as intended by the Constitution.
The potential overturning of Chevron deference is not merely a procedural shift; it's a decisive blow to the overreaching powers of regulatory bodies like the EPA. These agencies have, for decades, hidden behind the ambiguity of statutes to push aggressive policies, particularly evident in the current administration's climate change agenda. By ending Chevron, the Supreme Court will enforce a crucial principle: only Congress, the elected representatives of the people, has the power to make laws.
Data reveals the stark reality of Chevron's impact: lower courts apply this deference far more frequently than the Supreme Court itself, resulting in agencies winning a staggering 78% of cases. This disproportionate success rate is a clear indicator of how Chevron has skewed the legal landscape in favor of the administrative state, at the expense of judicial oversight and accountability.
The arguments against Chevron deference are compelling. It's an unconstitutional and ahistorical doctrine, a product of the 20th century's burgeoning administrative state. Overturning it would not only restore accountability but also ensure that laws are interpreted as written, not as agencies wish them to be.
Justice Neil Gorsuch has been a vocal critic of this doctrine, and his stance resonates with many who see Chevron as a relic of a bygone era, where federal agencies operated with little to no checks on their power. The Court’s conservative justices, including Chief Justice Roberts, have signaled a willingness to overturn or at least significantly limit Chevron, indicating a shift towards more stringent judicial scrutiny of agency interpretations.
The Solicitor General's argument that overturning Chevron could lead to extensive litigation and question thousands of prior rulings is a testament to the profound impact this doctrine has had. However, this is not a reason to uphold a flawed principle; rather, it underscores the necessity to correct course.
In summary, the Supreme Court's decision to reconsider the Chevron deference is a critical juncture in the fight against federal overreach. Overturning this doctrine would mark a significant step toward reining in the power of unelected bureaucrats and restoring the constitutional balance of power. It would ensure that agencies can no longer hide behind vague statutes to enact sweeping policies, bringing a much-needed reduction in the size and scope of the federal government. The end of Chevron Deference could herald a new era of accountability and transparency in the American administrative state.
Challenging the Faithful: The Political Activism of Faithful America
January 19th, 2024: By, Chris Filby
President Trump continues to face relentless challenges, not least from online and media groups like Faithful America. This organization positions itself as the sole arbiter of morality and religious correctness, dismissing any values that diverge from its own. Despite their vocal presence in the media, Faithful America's influence is limited; they lack a broad or deep base of support. Contrary to their self-perception, they are not the gatekeepers to divine wisdom, and their following is far from massive.
Faithful America, a far-left organization known for its extreme views, has launched a campaign targeting the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). They are pressuring the USCCB not to endorse President Trump, arguing that his promotion of Christian Nationalist values contradicts Biblical teachings and conflicts with guidance from the Vatican, specifically citing figures like Cardinal Timothy.
Interestingly, Faithful America is a 501(c)(4) organization, as noted by Charity Navigator, a charity rating website. This categorization implies that donations to them are not tax-deductible, contrary to what is typically expected from charitable organizations. They state their mission as being a large online Christian community actively working for social justice.
The Catholic News Agency provides an insightful history of Faithful America. Founded in 2004 as a ministry of the National Council of Churches, USA, it initially focused on mainline Protestant denominations. Key founding figures included Tom Perriello, co-founder of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good and former U.S. Democratic congressman. Faithful America has been involved in various high-profile campaigns, including partnering with Faith in Public Life and working with the progressive group NETWORK on the Nuns on the Bus campaign. In 2013, it became a project of the Citizen Engagement Lab based in Berkeley, California.
The organization has been particularly confrontational towards US Catholic Bishops and the Catholic Church. A 2014 article by Kevin J. Jones in the Catholic News Agency highlighted their aggressive stance against these religious figures.
Dale Hurd of the Christian Broadcasting Network, in a 2020 article, questioned Faithful America's claim to represent Christian voices, citing their efforts against entities like Hobby Lobby, Google’s partnership with World Vision, and MSNBC's collaboration with the Family Research Council. The group has also been known for its protests against well-known Christian figures like Franklin Graham, Jerry Falwell, Jr., and Albert Mohler.
In summary, Faithful America's actions and history paint a picture of an organization deeply invested in pushing a specific agenda, often at odds with broader Christian values and teachings. Their campaign against President Trump and his supporters is another chapter in their ongoing effort to shape religious discourse in America according to their far-left ideological leanings.
Dawn of a New Era: The Overton Window Shifts Toward Truth and Freedom
January 20th, 2024: By, Walter Curt
In a world inundated with collectivist rhetoric and overbearing state intervention, the winds of change are beginning to stir. Two seismic events in the past week have signaled a potential shift in the Overton window, moving away from the shadows of collectivism and towards the light of individual freedom and truth. Jamie Dimon's defense of Trump supporters on CNBC, coupled with Havier Melie's powerful critique of the World Economic Forum's collectivist agenda, represents a beacon of hope in a landscape long dominated by distorted narratives.
The Argentinian President's speech at the WEF was nothing short of revolutionary. He boldly challenged the destructive path of socialism and collectivism, shining a spotlight on the empirical success of capitalism. He argued that free enterprise capitalism, not state intervention, is the true solution to poverty and economic stagnation. His message was clear: economic freedom, limited government, and respect for private property are not just ideological choices; they are proven pathways to prosperity.
Melie's speech was a clarion call to business leaders and capitalists to stand firm against the encroaching demands of the political class and the state. He reminded us that ambition is not immoral but a driving force for economic growth and societal well-being. His words resonate with a truth long suppressed in the halls of power: "Do not surrender to the advance of the state. The state is not the solution. The state is the problem itself."
Similarly, Jamie Dimon's statements on CNBC were a refreshing dose of reality in a political discourse too often mired in divisive rhetoric. His critique of the Democrats' anti-MAGA narrative and acknowledgment of legitimate concerns among Trump's voter base challenge the prevailing media narrative. Dimon's assertion that Trump was right on key issues like NATO and immigration underscores the importance of respecting diverse political views and the need for bipartisan cooperation.
These events mark a pivotal moment in the global conversation. The narrative that has been force-fed to the public for years is beginning to fracture under the weight of truth and genuine innovation. The lies that have long been propagated are meeting their inevitable end, as the truth shines through the cracks of a crumbling facade.
We are at a crossroads, facing a choice between the principles of a free Republic and the resurgence of collectivist ideology. The shift in the Overton window suggests that as long as there are voices courageous enough to speak the truth and defy the lies, there is hope for a return to the ideals of freedom and individualism.
In summary, the recent events signify a momentous shift in public discourse. The defense of Trump supporters by a figure like Jamie Dimon and the powerful condemnation of socialism by Havier Melie are not isolated occurrences; they are harbingers of a changing tide. The Overton window is shifting, and with it, the potential for a return to the foundational principles of liberty, individualism, and economic freedom. This is more than a fleeting change; it's the dawn of a new era in which truth and freedom regain their rightful place in the narrative.
X-SPACE OF THE WEEK
Urgent Call to Action: America Mission Fights LD-1735
January 19th, 2024: By, America Mission Inc.
This week, America Mission, alongside Riley Gains, Jennifer McWilliams, and Courage is a Habit, has been at the forefront of a critical mission to halt the progression of Maine's LD-1735 bill, a legislation with alarming implications. Known as the Transgender Trafficking Bill, LD-1735, if passed, would grant the state of Maine the authority to receive minors from other states for transgender treatments, effectively bypassing parental consent. These treatments range from breast binding and penis tucking to irreversible puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries.
The concerted effort by America Mission and its allies has successfully delayed the bill's hearing, now rescheduled for January 25th, 2024. However, the battle is far from over. In a united front, these organizations are mobilizing further to oppose this bill, which represents a serious infringement on parental rights and the well-being of minors.
LD-1735 poses significant ethical and social concerns. By enabling the state to take minors into its custody for gender-related treatments, the bill undermines the foundational family unit, removing critical decisions from parents and placing them in the hands of the state. This shift not only challenges parental authority but also raises questions about the long-term impacts of such treatments on children, given the current lack of comprehensive long-term studies on "gender-affirming care."
In response to this pressing issue, Courage is a Habit's website provides resources for concerned citizens to voice their opposition. This includes sample emails and a list of email addresses for committee members overseeing the bill. The organization emphasizes the importance of customizing these emails to make a more impactful appeal to the legislators.
As the email window extends until January 24th, 10:00 PM ET, America Mission urges individuals to take swift action. The collective goal is to influence the committee's decision and prevent the bill from moving forward. This effort is not just about stopping a single piece of legislation; it's about safeguarding the rights of parents and the welfare of children across the nation.
In summary, LD-1735 represents a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over transgender treatments for minors and the role of parental consent. America Mission's mobilization against this bill is a testament to the power of collective action and the importance of standing up for fundamental family values and the protection of children. The outcome of this effort will not only affect Maine but could also set a precedent for similar legislation nationwide.
LIST OF EMAILS OF LEGISLATORS:
Senator Eric Brakey - R Senate District 20
Senator Anne Carney - Chair D - Senate District 29 Anne.Carney@Legislature.Maine.gov
Representative Matt Moonen - Chair D - House District 117 Matthew.Moonen@legislature.maine.gov
Senator Donna Bailey - Senate District 31 - Donna.Bailey@Legislature.Maine.gov
Representative Amy Kuhn - House District 111 - Amy.Kuhn@Legislature.Maine.gov
Representative Adam Lee - House District 89 Adam.Lee@Legislature.Maine.gov
Representative Stephen Moriarty House District 110 Steve.Moriarty@legislature.maine.gov
Representative Erin Sheehan - House District 132 Erin.Sheehan@Legislature.Maine.gov
SEND THE AMERICA MISSION SAMPLE EMAIL YOURSELF:
Subject: Immediate Action Required: Reject LD 1735 for the Sake of Our Children
Dear Judiciary Committee Members,
I am writing to you as a deeply concerned citizen regarding the alarming LD 1735, infamously known as the Transgender Trafficking Bill. I implore you to consider the profound implications of this legislation and to reject it outright in defense of our children and families.
This proposed bill stands as a direct affront to the sanctity of parental rights and the well-being of our youth. By potentially allowing the state to assume guardianship over minors for transgender treatments, LD 1735 would egregiously separate children from their parents. This is not just an overreach of state authority; it is a moral transgression that threatens the very fabric of our familial bonds.
The gravest concern here is the irreversible nature of these transgender treatments and the lack of comprehensive long-term studies substantiating their benefits. You are contemplating a decision that could lead to life-altering, possibly detrimental consequences for these children. How can such a monumental choice be made without a full understanding of the long-term outcomes?
The surge in lawsuits against hospitals and schools in 2023 is a clear indication of the growing public apprehension and resistance to such drastic measures. The people are increasingly aware and critical of the potential harms these treatments could inflict on our youth. Passing LD 1735 would not only ignore these concerns but would also set a dangerous precedent, suggesting that the state knows better than parents when it comes to the well-being of their children.
I demand, as a member of the community you serve, a thorough explanation for even considering such a bill. What rationale could possibly justify stripping parents of their rights and subjecting children to irreversible medical procedures? Your constituents deserve a public response and an insight into your intended actions on this matter.
I urge you, with the utmost urgency, to vote "ought not to pass" on LD 1735. This is not merely a legislative decision; it is a moral imperative to protect our children from irreversible harm and to uphold the rights of parents to guide and care for their offspring. Your action on this matter will be closely monitored and remembered.