Search Results

Today's Secure Freedom Minute  with Frank Gaffney: U.S. government and business leaders have long promoted the glories of “globalization.” With its reliance on low-cost foreign producers, notably in Communist China, to supply critical materials, components, and equipment, the integration of markets and national interests seemed not only desirable economically but strategically sound. In fact, this model resulted in the wholesale destruction of America’s industrial base and a dangerous dependence on a hostile power for everything from medicine to advanced electronic products. An alarming webinar on Friday documented that even the U.S. military now is critically reliant on our enemy, the Chinese Communist Party.   The Wall Street Journal reports today that many businesses are finally moving en masse to production facilities outside of China. Unfortunately, so are the Chinese. We must actually decouple from the CCP, not simply transfer our fraught dependencies to its companies doing business in new locations. 2024 Election MAGA Agenda New Institute for the American Future Frank Gaffney Early Warning IAF Save America's Military Coalition Sovereignty Coalition Save the persecuted Christian's coalition Gitmo Panama Canal Jimmy Carter China Chinese arson Mike Waltz TikTok

Vice President J.D. Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference shocked European leaders and the DC establishment when he chastised European governments for their extreme censorship laws and violations of basic civil liberties. Vance’s call for European governments to stop terrorizing the free thoughts, speech, and even silent prayers of their citizens put insidiously authoritarian European governments on notice that America’s clear moral leadership on the world stage is back. The full text and video of Vice President Vance’s historic speech follows:   One of the things that I wanted to talk about today is, of course, our shared values. And, you know, it’s great to be back in Germany. As you heard earlier, I was here last year as United States senator. I saw Foreign Secretary David Lammy, and joked that both of us last year had different jobs than we have now. But now it’s time for all of our countries, for all of us who have been fortunate enough to be given political power by our respective peoples, to use it wisely to improve their lives. And I want to say that I was fortunate in my time here to spend some time outside the walls of this conference over the last 24 hours, and I’ve been so impressed by the hospitality of the people even, Of course, as they’re reeling from yesterday’s horrendous attack. And the first time I was ever in Munich was with my wife, actually, who’s here with me today, on a personal trip. And I’ve always loved the city of Munich, and I’ve always loved its people. I just want to say that we’re very moved, and our thoughts and prayers are with Munich and everybody affected by the evil inflicted on this beautiful community. We’re thinking about you, we’re praying for you, and we will certainly be rooting for you in the days and weeks to come. We gather at this conference, of course, to discuss security. And normally we mean threats to our external security. I see many, many great military leaders gathered here today. But while the Trump administration is very concerned with European security and believes that we can come to a reasonable settlement between Russia and Ukraine, and we also believe that it’s important in the coming years for Europe to step up in a big way to provide for its own defense, the threat that I worry the most about vis a vis Europe is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor. What I worry about is the threat from within. The retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values: values shared with the United States of America. I was struck that a former European commissioner went on television recently and sounded delighted that the Romanian government had just annulled an entire election. He warned that if things don’t go to plan, the very same thing could happen in Germany too. Now, these cavalier statements are shocking to American ears. For years we’ve been told that everything we fund and support is in the name of our shared democratic values. Everything from our Ukraine policy to digital censorship is billed as a defense of democracy. But when we see European courts cancelling elections and senior officials threatening to cancel others, we ought to ask whether we’re holding ourselves to an appropriately high standard. And I say ourselves, because I fundamentally believe that we are on the same team. We must do more than talk about democratic values. We must live them. Now, within living memory of many of you in this room, the cold war positioned defenders of democracy against much more tyrannical forces on this continent. And consider the side in that fight that censored dissidents, that closed churches, that cancelled elections. Were they the good guys? Certainly not. And thank God they lost the cold war. They lost because they neither valued nor respected all of the extraordinary blessings of liberty, the freedom to surprise, to make mistakes, invent, to build. As it turns out, you can’t mandate innovation or creativity, just as you can’t force people what to think, what to feel, or what to believe. And we believe those things are certainly connected. And unfortunately, when I look at Europe today, it’s sometimes not so clear what happened to some of the cold war’s winners. I look to Brussels, where EU Commission commissars warned citizens that they intend to shut down social media during times of civil unrest: the moment they spot what they’ve judged to be ‘hateful content’, or to this very country where police have carried out raids against citizens suspected of posting anti-feminist comments online as part of ‘combating misogyny’ on the internet. I look to Sweden, where two weeks ago, the government convicted a Christian activist for participating in Quran burnings that resulted in his friend’s murder. And as the judge in his case chillingly noted, Sweden’s laws to supposedly protect free expression do not, in fact, grant – and I’m quoting – a ‘free pass’ to do or say anything without risking offending the group that holds that belief. And perhaps most concerningly, I look to our very dear friends, the United Kingdom, where the backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious Britons in particular in the crosshairs. A little over two years ago, the British government charged Adam Smith Conner, a 51-year-old physiotherapist and an Army veteran, with the heinous crime of standing 50 meters from an abortion clinic and silently praying for three minutes, not obstructing anyone, not interacting with anyone, just silently praying on his own. After British law enforcement spotted him and demanded to know what he was praying for, Adam replied simply, it was on behalf of the unborn son. He and his former girlfriend had aborted years before. Now the officers were not moved. Adam was found guilty of breaking the government’s new Buffer Zones Law, which criminalizes silent prayer and other actions that could influence a person’s decision within 200 meters of an abortion facility. He was sentenced to pay thousands of pounds in legal costs to the prosecution. Now, I wish I could say that this was a fluke, a one-off, crazy example of a badly written law being enacted against a single person. But no. This last October, just a few months ago, the Scottish government began distributing letters to citizens whose houses lay within so-called safe access zones, warning them that even private prayer within their own homes may amount to breaking the law. Naturally, the government urged readers to report any fellow citizens suspected guilty of thought crime in Britain and across Europe. Free speech, I fear, is in retreat and in the interests of comedy, my friends, but also in the interest of truth. I will admit that sometimes the loudest voices for censorship have come not from within Europe, but from within my own country, where the prior administration threatened and bullied social media companies to censor so-called misinformation. Misinformation, like, for example, the idea that coronavirus had likely leaped from leaked from a laboratory in China. Our own government encouraged private companies to silence people who dared to utter what turned out to be an obvious truth. So, I come here today not just with an with an observation, but with an offer. And just as the Biden administration seemed desperate to silence people for speaking their minds, so the Trump administration will do precisely the opposite, and I hope that we can work together on that. In Washington, there is a new sheriff in town. And under Donald Trump’s leadership, we may disagree with your views, but we will fight to defend your right to offer in the public square. Agree or disagree? Now, we’re at the point, of course, that the situation has gotten so bad that this December, Romania straight up cancelled the results of a presidential election based on the flimsy suspicions of an intelligence agency and enormous pressure from its continental neighbours. Now, as I understand it, the argument was that Russian disinformation had infected the Romanian elections. But I’d ask my European friends to have some perspective. You can believe it’s wrong for Russia to buy social media advertisements to influence your elections. We certainly do. You can condemn it on the world stage, even. But if your democracy can be destroyed with a few hundred thousand dollars of digital advertising from a foreign country, then it wasn’t very strong to begin with. Now, the good news is that I happen to think your democracies are substantially less brittle than many people apparently fear. And I really do believe that allowing our citizens to speak their mind will make them stronger still. Which, of course, brings us back to Munich, where the organisers of this very conference have banned lawmakers representing populist parties on both the left and the right from participating in these conversations. Now, again, we don’t have to agree with everything or anything that people say. But when political leaders represent an important constituency, it is incumbent upon us to at least participate in dialogue with them. Now, to many of us on the other side of the Atlantic, it looks more and more like old entrenched interests hiding behind ugly Soviet era words like misinformation and disinformation, who simply don’t like the idea that somebody with an alternative viewpoint might express a different opinion or, God forbid, vote a different way, or even worse, win an election. Now, this is a security conference, and I’m sure you all came here prepared to talk about how exactly you intend to increase defense spending over the next few years in line with some new target. And that’s great, because as President Trump has made abundantly clear, he believes that our European friends must play a bigger role in the future of this continent. We don’t think you hear this term ‘burden sharing’, but we think it’s an important part of being in a shared alliance together that the Europeans step up while America focuses on areas of the world that are in great danger. But let me also ask you, how will you even begin to think through the kinds of budgeting questions if we don’t know what it is that we are defending in the first place? I’ve heard a lot already in my conversations, and I’ve had many, many great conversations with many people gathered here in this room. I’ve heard a lot about what you need to defend yourselves from, and of course that’s important. But what has seemed a little bit less clear to me, and certainly I think to many of the citizens of Europe, is what exactly it is that you’re defending yourselves for. What is the positive vision that animates this shared security compact that we all believe is so important? I believe deeply that there is no security if you are afraid of the voices, the opinions and the conscience that guide your very own people. Europe faces many challenges. But the crisis this continent faces right now, the crisis I believe we all face together, is one of our own making. If you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you. Nor for that matter, is there anything that you can do for the American people who elected me and elected President Trump. You need democratic mandates to accomplish anything of value in the coming years. Have we learned nothing that thin mandates produce unstable results? But there is so much of value that can be accomplished with the kind of democratic mandate that I think will come from being more responsive to the voices of your citizens. If you’re going to enjoy competitive economies, if you’re going to enjoy affordable energy and secure supply chains, then you need mandates to govern because you have to make difficult choices to enjoy all of these things. And of course, we know that very well. In America, you cannot win a democratic mandate by censoring your opponents or putting them in jail. Whether that’s the leader of the opposition, a humble Christian praying in her own home, or a journalist trying to report the news. Nor can you win one by disregarding your basic electorate on questions like, who gets to be a part of our shared society. And of all the pressing challenges that the nations represented here face, I believe there is nothing more urgent than mass migration. Today, almost 1 in 5 people living in this country moved here from abroad. That is, of course, an all time high. It’s a similar number, by the way, in the United States, also an all time high. The number of immigrants who entered the EU from non-EU countries doubled between 2021 and 2022 alone. And of course, it’s gotten much higher since. And we know the situation. It didn’t materialize in a vacuum. It’s the result of a series of conscious decisions made by politicians all over the continent, and others across the world, over the span of a decade. We saw the horrors wrought by these decisions yesterday in this very city. And of course, I can’t bring it up again without thinking about the terrible victims who had a beautiful winter day in Munich ruined. Our thoughts and prayers are with them and will remain with them. But why did this happen in the first place? It’s a terrible story, but it’s one we’ve heard way too many times in Europe, and unfortunately too many times in the United States as well. An asylum seeker, often a young man in his mid-20s, already known to police, rammed a car into a crowd and shatters a community. Unity. How many times must we suffer these appalling setbacks before we change course and take our shared civilization in a new direction? No voter on this continent went to the ballot box to open the floodgates to millions of unvetted immigrants. But you know what they did vote for? In England, they voted for Brexit. And agree or disagree, they voted for it. And more and more all over Europe, they are voting for political leaders who promise to put an end to out-of-control migration. Now, I happen to agree with a lot of these concerns, but you don’t have to agree with me. I just think that people care about their homes. They care about their dreams. They care about their safety and their capacity to provide for themselves and their children. And they’re smart. I think this is one of the most important things I’ve learned in my brief time in politics. Contrary to what you might hear, a couple of mountains over in Davos, the citizens of all of our nations don’t generally think of themselves as educated animals or as interchangeable cogs of a global economy. And it’s hardly surprising that they don’t want to be shuffled about or relentlessly ignored by their leaders. And it is the business of democracy to adjudicate these big questions at the ballot box. I believe that dismissing people, dismissing their concerns or worse yet, shutting down media, shutting down elections or shutting people out of the political process. protects nothing. In fact, it is the most surefire way to destroy democracy. Speaking up and expressing opinions isn’t election interference. Even when people express views outside your own country, and even when those people are very influential – and trust me, I say this with all humor – if American democracy can survive ten years of Greta Thunberg’s scolding you guys can survive a few months of Elon Musk. But what no democracy, American, German or European will survive, is telling millions of voters that their thoughts and concerns, their aspirations, their pleas for relief, are invalid or unworthy of even being considered. Democracy rests on the sacred principle that the voice of the people matters. There is no room for firewalls. You either uphold the principle or you don’t. Europeans, the people have a voice. European leaders have a choice. And my strong belief is that we do not need to be afraid of the future. Embrace what your people tell you, even when it’s surprising, even when you don’t agree. And if you do so, you can face the future with certainty and with confidence, knowing that the nation stands behind each of you. And that, to me, is the great magic of democracy. It’s not in these stone buildings or beautiful hotels. It’s not even in the great institutions that we built together as a shared society. To believe in democracy is to understand that each of our citizens has wisdom and has a voice. And if we refuse to listen to that voice, even our most successful fights will secure very little. As Pope John Paul II, in my view, one of the most extraordinary champions of democracy on this continent or any other, once said, ‘do not be afraid’. We shouldn’t be afraid of our people even when they express views that disagree with their leadership. Thank you all. Good luck to all of you. God bless you. 2024 Election government shutdown Democrats DOGE Department of Government Efficiency U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer District Judge John McConnell Jr. funding freeze FACA Deep State Mass deportation tariffs U.S. trade trade partners trade agreements free trade labor and environmental practices foreign subsidies manufacturing goods

The deadline President Trump created for the release of all hostages seized by the terrorist organization Hamas is less than twenty-four hours away. He suspects they may have been starved, tortured and raped to death.   Mr. Trump left up to Israel the decision to let “all hell break loose” if Hamas doesn’t comply. Its government has agreed to do so. Predictably, the jihadists and their enablers will do everything possible to buy more time on humanitarian grounds. Actually, the humane thing is for Israel to be allowed finally to “finish the job.” The decisive defeat of Hamas and the recovery of the remaining hostages, dead or alive, will foreclose the idea of effectively permanently incarcerating all Gazans in a “demolition zone” and ensure their swift relocation to far better lives elsewhere.   Secure Israel’s victory – and ours, starting at high noon on Saturday. 2024 Election MAGA Agenda New Institute for the American Future Frank Gaffney Early Warning IAF Save America's Military Coalition Sovereignty Coalition Save the persecuted Christian's coalition Gitmo Panama Canal Jimmy Carter China Chinese arson Mike Waltz TikTok

A veritable who's who of pro-life conservatives, led by Tim Chapman, President of Advancing American Freedom (AAF), on Friday released a letter to President Trump's Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) urging the new administration to "take all legal steps possible to ensure that American taxpayer dollars do not flow to Planned Parenthood or any of its subsidiaries."   The full text of the letter and list of signers follows:   Dear Mr. Vought:   Congratulations on your recent confirmation to serve as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Last year, you wrote, “Defending life is the most important issue to me.” We could not agree more. We look forward to supporting your work in protecting Americans' hard-earned tax dollars from wasteful spending and funding abortions. As OMB Director, we strongly encourage you to review all federal funding to Planned Parenthood and to take all legal steps possible to ensure that American taxpayer dollars do not flow to Planned Parenthood or any of its subsidiaries. In 2022, Planned Parenthood ended the lives of almost 400,000 babies, aborting more than 220 for each child they referred for adoption. American taxpayers should not be funding this. The number of abortions performed by Planned Parenthood has only continued to trend upward since 2010. According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Planned Parenthood Federation of America affiliates received $148 million in HHS grants and $1.5 billion in Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP payments. Planned Parenthood’s regional organizations received around $108 million in payments from these programs. Shockingly, taxpayer dollars comprise 34% of Planned Parenthood’s overall revenue, and its taxpayer funding has soared more than 40% since 2010. Because money is fungible, and the Biden Administration removed key regulatory safeguards ensuring that Title X dollars are walled off from Planned Parenthood’s abortion services, American taxpayers are heavily footing the bill for abortions and keeping Planned Parenthood’s doors open. We look forward to working alongside you to prevent American taxpayer dollars from funding abortions through Planned Parenthood.     Tim Chapman President Advancing American Freedom   Abby Johnson CEO And The There Were None and Prolove Ministries   F. Brent Leatherwood President Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission   Bob Vander Plaat President The FAMiLY LEADER   Kristen Day Executive Director Democrats for Life of America   Kristan Hawkins President Students for Life   Lila Rose Founder and President Live Action   Jody Hice President FRC Action   Tom Brejcha President & Founder Thomas More Society   David Daleiden Founder & President The Center for Medical Progress   Jennie Bradley Lichter President March for Life Education and Defense Fund   Fr. Shenan J. Boquet President Human Life International   Jenna Ellis Senior Public Policy Advisor American Family Association   Ralph Reed Founder & Chairman Faith & Freedom Coalition   Catherine Glenn Foster, M.A., J.D. President & CEO First Rights Global   Kristen Ullman President Eagle Forum   Morton C. Blackwell National Committeeman Virginia Republican Party   TJ Burgess President Men for Life   Jonathan M. Alexandre, Esq. Vice President of Governmental Affairs Liberty Counsel   Tom McDonough Executive Director American Family Project   Niki Mattson CEO Mosaic Virginia   Melissa Ortiz President Capability Consulting   Rep. Steve King (Ret) Member U.S. Congress   The Honorable George K. Rasley Jr. Managing Editor ConservativeHQ.com   Shannon McGinley Executive Director Cornerstone Action of NH   Richard A. Viguerie Chairman ConservativeHQ.com 2024 Election MAGA Agenda Planned Parenthood Federal Budget Budget negotiations Donald Trump Russell Vought OMB abortion HHS grants Medicaid payments

Pundits of various stripes have been talking about the “Trump effect” ever since Donald Trump came down the escalator in 2015 and announced he was running for President. Generally, the “Trump effect” has been applied to measures of economic success or foreign relations – the stock market going up and other countries coming around to the Trump point of view or policy goals. However, pollster Scott Rasmussen’s famously insightful poll has recently identified what could be the most important “Trump effect” yet, and it spells great news for America: Rasmussen’s poll released February 13 found for the first time in over 20 years more Americans think that our country is on the right track than think it is on the wrong track. This is an astonishing turnaround from the waning days of the Biden administration when only 31 percent of those surveyed thought the country was headed in the right direction. And the news for Trump and the MAGA Movement gets even better. Rasmussen also found that President Donald Trump’s strongly approval rating was at +3; meaning 39 percent of those polled strongly approve of the job he is doing, outnumber the 36 percent who strongly disapprove of the job he is doing. Trump’s overall approval rating stands at 54 percent approval of the job he is doing versus 44 percent who disapprove of the job he is doing. Rasmussen’s “right track” is confirmation that the public approves of what President Trump has been doing or saying, even though he is getting hammered in the day-to-day news cycle. Leading up to Election Day Trump was getting 89 to 95 percent negative coverage and the establishment media continues to be overwhelmingly opposed to his policies. Despite the negative press, Rasmussen found that 55 percent of Likely U.S. Voters approve of Elon Musk overseeing DOGE, which is assigned to find waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government. That includes 38% who Strongly Approve. Rasmussen found the mission of DOGE is hugely popular with voters. Eighty-six percent (86%) consider it important to reduce waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government, including 66 percent who say it’s Very Important. Just 11 percent disagree. Another signature Trump policy – tightening immigration enforcement – is also hugely popular. Despite the daily news coverage of criminal alien arrests, it appears voters want even more enforcement – 41 percent of Likely U.S. Voters still feel the government is doing too little to reduce illegal border crossings and visitor overstays. And the demand for more enforcement is bipartisan; 54 percent of Republicans and 43 percent of voters not affiliated with either major party say the government is not doing enough to reduce illegal border crossings and visitor overstays, as do 29 percent of Democrats. As Americans headed to the polls  in 2024, 61.3 percent of voters felt the country was on the wrong track, compared to 28.4 percent who thought was on the right track – a gap of 32.9 points. Before Biden withdrew from the race in July 2024, the situation was even worse, with 67.7 percent of voters believing the country was on the wrong track and just 22.2 percent feeling positive about its direction.   Throughout most of Biden’s presidency, public perception was similarly negative. Although he began his term with a relatively small negative perception of -6 points in April 2021, that figure surged to over -30 points following the deadly Kabul airport attack during the Afghanistan withdrawal, where 13 American service members were killed. This drop in public confidence, and the feeling that the country was moving in the wrong direction persisted throughout Joe Biden’s term. The dramatic turnaround in right track, wrong track opinion is the first sign that Trump’s policies are working, and Americans are starting to believe in themselves once again, and that making America great again in still possible – at least with Donald Trump at the helm. 2024 Election government shutdown Democrats DOGE Department of Government Efficiency U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer District Judge John McConnell Jr. funding freeze FACA Deep State Mass deportation tariffs U.S. trade trade partners trade agreements free trade labor and environmental practices foreign subsidies manufacturing goods

President Trump is surging at full speed to expose and stop the deep state’s drive to destroy the American culture of free enterprise, private property, and limited government. For over three decades climate change and environmental protection have led the lies to trick Americans into voluntarily surrendering their liberties. American farmland has been, and continues to be, one of the leading targets in the agenda as more and more land is being subjected to eminent domain takings by private developers. However, there are self-appointed heroes rushing to the farmer’s rescue. Private non-governmental land trusts are pouncing on farmers to assure their land can be saved and protected – to be farmland forever! Their tool of choice? Conservation Easements! Say proponents, “A conservation easement is a voluntary perpetual agreement that restricts non-agricultural uses such as mining and large scale residential and commercial development.” They boldly promote the easements by promising that “the landowner continues to own, live on, and use the land.” They even promise that the land can be passed down to heirs, along with generous tax credits. What’s not to like? Desperate farmers are flocking to the pitchman’s wagon to buy his life-saving potion. All a farmer must do, promise the land trusts, is sign such an easement controlled by them, and no developer can ever take their land. If it were politically correct to do so, one might actually hear “God Bless America” playing in the background as the promises to save the family farm roll off the land trust’s pitchman’s tongue. However, as H.L Mencken once warned, “ A plan to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule. ” Or, as another famous pitchman, P.T Barnum, once said, “ There’s a sucker born every minute .” Farmers beware the slick talker who has the answers to your woes. His answers may well be your demise – and your farm’s. It’s wise to read the fine print of a conservation easement agreement. Here are some facts. In a typical conservation easement, the private land trust purchases some or all, of the property owner’s rights to control the land. That gives the land trust the ability to overrule the owner’s choice of how to use the property, including banning new buildings or even renovating old ones. It may also include controlling which fields may be used to plant or even dictating which crops can be grown and how they are grown. This comes from the environmental protection agenda every land trust follows. “Sustainable” is the rule over every decision. It all comes about because once the farmer signs the easement “in perpetuity,” making the easement in control “forever,” the owner’s rights are legally subservient to his new partner – the land trust. Before signing any conservation easement, the property owner must ask some very specific questions and had better get some satisfactory answers from the land trust or run in the opposite direction! Here’s the first question. If the farmer owns the land and doesn’t want to sell, why can’t he just say no and be allowed to live in peace? It’s his land. The answer is that local governments have fallen into the trap of believing that they are obligated to follow the dictates of appointed boards, non-elected regional councils, and land trusts to create comprehensive development plans to prepare for future growth. That means that future growth can include the need to install wind and solar farms, carbon capture pipelines, or massive data centers that cover multiple acres of land. Once the comprehensive plan is in place all that’s then needed is a signed order for taking by eminent domain. It’s all for the common good! Individual property rights no longer count, conservation easement or not.   Second question: Why would the land trust want to pay to control my land? Where did that money come from and what does the land trust get out of the purchase? Conservation easements are a profitable commodity for land trusts. While the farmer must sign one agreement that puts his land in the easement in “perpetuity” meaning forever, such a control does not apply to the land trust. They are free to buy, sell, and trade land trusts with other such organizations, or even with the federal government. Your conservation easement becomes the land trusts profit center.   Third question: If land trusts are concerned with protecting agriculture, then what have they done to alleviate these real pressures of government takings? Nothing. The real purpose of the conservation easement is to act as a tool, first to steal the land and then to push rural residents off their land and into cities to live under the Smart Growth policies in order to control energy use, development, and human populations. That’s how the land trusts serve the false climate change agenda. Conservation Easements are little more than a land grab promoted through scare tactics that farmers are going to lose their land unless they comply. The fact is, if you DO comply, that’s when you lose the land. With the conservation easement in place the market value of the land is rendered worthless. There is nothing left to your family, as the easement stays in place forever.   What should honest local governments do to protect farmers and the farming industry? Conservation Easements should not be issued in perpetuity – forever.  Instead, if issued at all, they should come with some form of opt-out for either party – perhaps after a period of five years.  In that amount of time, the property owner can fully test to see if it is a desirable situation or not. If not, the farmer regains complete control of his property. Above all, the main consideration under any such policy must be that private property ownership and its inherent rights are not negated or sacrificed. Private property rights are the most important of all American rights. Without the right to stand on our own property, it is very difficult to declare our First, Second, or even Fourth Amendment rights. As rancher Wayne Hage famously said when the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) waged war on his property rights, “ Either you have the right to own and control private property or you are property. ” Finally, some action is being taken to stop the theft. President Donald Trump signed a memorandum on February 6th ordering a review of funding to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that receive money from federal agencies. That must include the practices of land trusts and their conservation easements.  President Trump is determined to protect the rights of all Americans in the face of a deep state that seeks to destroy and control us. Appropriately, some state legislatures are finally beginning to take action to protect farmers. In Montana, State Senator Tony Tezak filed Senate Bill 209 limiting the term for conservation easements in his state so that no easement could be taken “in perpetuity.” Specifically, section 4 of the bill stated” “Conservation Easements may be granted for a term of not less than 15 years and no more than 40 years. That would give all parties, including landowners, plenty of time to decide if it was a workable plan. If not, they could pull out to protect the family’s ownership and control. However, the bill was pulled by Senator Tezak after the land trusts rushed into the legislative hearing to declare that the bill would damage property rights. Some property owners have been misdirected to believe the land trusts are their friends and stood with them in opposition to the bill. That’s an interesting tactic considering that it’s the conservation easements that are the true threat. Local government representatives must be aware of the relentless drive by these green forces. They refuse to back down. No matter, the Montana bill was well written and offered a reasonable approach to the easement threat. It should still serve as model legislation for other states to follow. But to succeed in protecting property rights they’ve got to have a strong backbone to stand up to the power of the land trusts. I have been engaged in this battle for more than 40 years. I have held the hands and shared the tears of a lot of Americans who were victims of these and other oppressive government policies and determined NGO groups. A property owner who wants to conserve his land should not be punished by the very program he sought to help him protect it. Author Tom DeWeese is President of the American Policy Center and National Grassroots Coordinator for CFACT (Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow) working to help local activists organize into Freedom Pods ( www.CFACT.org ). He is also the author of three books, including Now Tell Me I Was Wrong, ERASE, and Sustainable: the WAR on Free Enterprise, Private Property, and Individuals. 2024 Election Elon Musk DOGE Private property Climate change American farmland Eminent Domain Non-governmental land trusts Conservation Easements banning new buildings sustainable development data centers wind and solar farms energy use Smart growth NGOs

Today's Secure Freedom Minute with Frank Gaffney: President Trump hosted Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi yesterday. They will seek to rekindle their personal, very special relationship, overcome bilateral disputes about trade, tariffs, and immigration, and forge a strategic bulwark against the two countries’ mutual enemy: the Chinese Communist Party.   Topical as all those agenda items are, one may be of surpassing importance: the systematic persecution of Christians and others by the Prime Minister’s Hindu nationalist base and its party, the BJP. Mr. Trump has rightly made a personal priority of protecting Christians and promoting religious tolerance. Seven years ago, he challenged then-Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari over his government’s failure to stop the genocidal murder of Christians. It made a difference, at least for a time.   A real Indo-American strategic partnership must be founded on an enduring respect for non-Hindu minorities and lower-caste Indians. Let it begin today. 2024 Election MAGA Agenda New Institute for the American Future Frank Gaffney Early Warning IAF Save America's Military Coalition Sovereignty Coalition Save the persecuted Christian's coalition Gitmo Panama Canal Jimmy Carter China Chinese arson Mike Waltz TikTok

Today's Secure Freedom Minute  with Frank Gaffney: The adage that “elections have consequences” certainly applies to the Middle East and America’s vital interests there following ours in 2020.   Donald Trump bequeathed to Joe Biden a region as tranquil as it had ever been, with Israel prosperous, powerful, and secure, a growing number of Muslim nations making peace with the Jewish State and her enemies and ours – especially Iran and its terrorist proxies – in check. Today, the legacy of the third, pro-Iran Obama-Biden administration is appalling. Most of the Mideast is effectively at war with Israel. And her “cold peace” partner, Egypt, seems ready to pile on with Sharia-supremacist regimes and the jihadist organizations they support.   Mr. Trump has warned that “all hell will break loose” if Hamas refuses to release its remaining Israeli hostages. The truth is, thanks in no small measure to Biden and Company, it already has. 2024 Election MAGA Agenda New Institute for the American Future Frank Gaffney Early Warning IAF Save America's Military Coalition Sovereignty Coalition Save the persecuted Christian's coalition Gitmo Panama Canal Jimmy Carter China Chinese arson Mike Waltz TikTok

Representative Eli Crane (AZ-02) is filing Articles of Impeachment against U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer, an activist judge who has issued a ruling blocking DOGE from accessing Treasury systems, and Rep. Andrew Clyde (GA-09) is drafting articles of impeachment for Rhode Island District Judge John McConnell Jr. for blocking Trump’s spending freeze. How did Judge Engelmayer come to issue an order protecting the vast scheme of corruption DOGE is uncovering? Some 20 Democratic state Attorneys General filed suit . Not about the fraud. Not about the waste. Not about billions vanishing into accounts without SSNs. But about "protecting" the Treasury Department from its own Secretary. It’s hard to understand how the 20 Democratic state Attorneys General even had standing to file such a suit, let alone prevail in their request for a temporary restraining order. But it gets worse. According to reporting by the team at EKO , it was done through an ex parte order blocking Treasury officials from accessing their own department's data. No warning. No chance to respond. No opportunity to present evidence. Just a wall between the people elected to fix the system and the system itself. And then there’s the small matter that Engelmayer’s wife was once a USAID contractor, although her involvement with USAID seems to have ended back in 2008, well before he was confirmed to the Bench. Judge McConnell inserted himself into the freeze on spending controversy when some 20 Democrat state attorneys general, co-led by Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha, sued the Trump administration to stop a funding freeze to various programs nationwide. McConnell first issued a temporary restraining order (TRO), putting the freeze on hold, and then a subsequent order Monday directing the Trump administration to abide by his TRO as he found they had violated it. McConnell wrote in his initial order, “Are there some aspects of the pause that might be legal and appropriate constitutionally for the Executive to take? The Court imagines there are, but it is equally sure that there are many instances in the Executive Orders’ wide-ranging, all-encompassing, and ambiguous 'pause' of critical funding that are not. The Court must act in these early stages of the litigation under the “worst case scenario” because the breadth and ambiguity of the Executive’s action makes it impossible to do otherwise. The Court finds that, based on the evidence before it now, some of which is set forth below, the States are likely to succeed on the merits of some, if not all, their claims.” In other words, the Judge anticipates ruling that states must continue to receive fraudulent or other unjustified payments from the federal government. The Capitol Switchboard is (202-224-3121), we urge CHQ readers and friends to call their Representative and Senators to demand they impeach US District Judges Paul Engelmayer and John McConnell Jr. for their outrageous breach of the Constitution’s separation of powers in these cases. 2024 Election government shutdown Democrats DOGE Department of Government Efficiency U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer District Judge John McConnell Jr. funding freeze FACA Deep State Mass deportation tariffs U.S. trade trade partners trade agreements free trade labor and environmental practices foreign subsidies manufacturing goods

The Supreme Court's ruling in the  1982 Plyler v. Doe  case established that states must provide education to all children, irrespective of their immigration status. Still, the rules about who must pay for these students are not specific. Applying the framework of the international funding model could create a more practical approach to funding undocumented students. President Trump talks about using a common sense approach to government. States and local districts could recoup billions of dollars by shifting the funding burden to the family’s home country to be responsible for educational costs. The Trump team has already successfully made other countries pay their fair share. Logistics-wise, this would involve school districts submitting billing to the newly established External Revenue Service (ERS) for reimbursement, effectively designating the federal government as the bill collector for these costs.    The school district's nationwide funding formulas enable them to secure the financial resources necessary to support diverse student populations. From transportation costs linked to student ridership to specialized services funded through federal programs, districts have refined their ability to maximize funding opportunities. However, one significant issue remains unaddressed: the financial burden undocumented students place on local school districts.   More than half (54%) of K—12 undocumented students hail from Central and South American countries. This includes approximately 130,000 from Mexico, 50,000 from Honduras, 40,000 from Guatemala, and 30,000 from El Salvador. Around 22% of these students come from Asia, 7% from sub-Saharan African nations, and 5% from Caribbean countries.   To put the actual cost into perspective, enrolling undocumented students often requires additional support, particularly for those who struggle with English and need additional tutors and translators. This necessity significantly increases educational costs. For example, the average price for a general education student in Florida is $18,000 per student, while undocumented students needing English as a second language support costs around $22,000. Those with special needs may incur costs nearing $27,500.    According to estimates from   FWD.us ,  an immigration reform organization backed by Mark Zuckerberg, there are approximately  620,000 undocumented K-12 students  in the United States. This figure represents a financial burden exceeding $11.16 billion annually, based on an average cost of $18,000 per general education student. Analysis indicates most states enroll at least 1,000 undocumented students in their K-12 schools, with exceptionally high populations in Texas (111,000), Florida (74,000), and California (72,000).    We can use the existing K-12 international student rules and laws to address the funding of undocumented students. Currently, most state schools receive funds from unsubsidized international students to cover the full cost. Funding these students based on the "international student" framework ensures that local taxpayers are not responsible for covering these expenses.   To put in place an official reimbursement framework for undocumented students, we can draw from these key aspects of existing international student funding models:   1. Full Cost Reimbursement: International students pay the full cost of their education, relieving local taxpayers of this burden. 2. "Out-of-State" Status”: These students incur significantly higher tuition fees than resident students, reflecting their non-resident status. 3. F-1 Visa Requirement: International students must secure an F-1 visa, necessitating upfront payment of educational costs. 4. Per-Student Calculation: Each school district calculates the per-student cost of education, which includes teacher salaries, facilities, and other operational expenses.   Some argue that these countries will never pay their debts, but the counter is that we are in a new era with different leadership. Under the Trump administration, circumstances have changed. As long as these countries continue to seek U.S. funds, we must consider why a double standard should exist for foreign nations, forcing American taxpayers to foot the bill.   Just as Americans understand tax refunds cannot be issued until outstanding debts are settled with the IRS, we should apply the same principle to foreign nations through the new powers of the ERS. Any assistance they seek from the U.S. should be contingent upon addressing their financial obligations first, starting with paying back school districts. Author Laura Zorc  is President of  Best In Ed , author of  School Board Leadership: The Right Wa y,  and former FreedomWorks National Director of Education Reform. 2024 Election Elon Musk DOGE education funding undocumented students Trump administration Shifting burden External revenue service diverse student populations ESL Special needs students international student framework full cost reimbursement Out of state status

President Donald Trump and his administration -- especially with the help of Elon Musk -- are creating an inflection point in the centuries-old ebb and flow of freedom and tyranny. What makes Trump’s barrage of action since even before taking office as America’s 47th President so brilliant -- and effective -- is that he and the team of patriotic disruptors he has assembled are using government power for good  to combat government power for corruption .   We are privileged to be watching in real time a moment when the forces for freedom fight back and defeat the growth of tyranny, at least for a while.   There have been several significant moments in our history of Anglo-American law based in Judeo-Christian principles that inform us about what’s happening.    When we hear people talk about the rule of law, our American system of law begins with a fundamental and paramount law governing government itself, the Constitution.  Sure, the rule of law applies to people, but without a rule of law over government itself  we have tyranny.   Our treasured history of liberty dating back to Magna Carta  shows that the law was best used to control government.  Magna Carta  is celebrated precisely because it is a law over government itself, implemented for “our salvation” because it protected individual liberty by governing government.   Now, for over 100 years since the rise of the Progressive movement American government has used its power to grow government.  With that growth and the aggrandizement of power in government came not merely incidental corruption and graft, but institutionalized lawbreaking by government.   Trump and his team of patriotic disruptors know this.   In 2011, Richard A. Viguerie and I wrote The Law That Governs Government , which is the Constitution.  Trump is addressing the very same problems (and now worse!) we identified, but is using a tactic that far exceeds our humbler solution.   We conservatives should applaud his approach, even as we monitor it for potential or eventual abuses by the Left.   Here’s how we opened The Law That Governs Government :   Government is the oldest, largest and most pervasive lawbreaker in America.   Lawbreaking by government in terms of cost and the number of people victimized is of a scale unmatched by any other organization or group -- leaving nothing as a close second.   Government has injected itself into nearly every aspect of private affairs, and has taken an excessive, intrusive and omnipotent view of what are public matters.  Given the vast and unilateral authority it claims to have over so much of society and property, government has unmatched opportunity for lawbreaking.  It makes and rigs the rules in its favor.  It cloisters and covers up its lawlessness, and makes it almost impossible to challenge its lawbreaking when exposed.   Government lawbreaking is bringing down the greatest and fairest engine of prosperity in history -- the American economy.  Political establishment lawbreaking is economically and morally rotting America from within.   The political establishment is now openly contemptuous and arrogant in its high-profile lawbreaking.  After all, who’s going to prevent the government from breaking the law?  The government has more resources, and is bigger and more powerful than any of its victims.  Plus, it has what private lawbreakers do not have:  the power to control and change the rules of the game, and with penalties of law on its side.   Government has become a bully to the very people it is supposed to protect and keep free.   In addition to its lawbreaking that takes place in the open, there is the cloistered lawbreaking done by anonymous bureaucrats and in backroom deals by public officials.  Government transparency is mostly a fiction.  We see and know only what government wants us to.   The irony is that government lawbreaking is done mostly under the guise and misnomer of the rule of law.  The law has become one big slap in the face to all Americans.   Trump is fighting fire with fire, using government power to attack government power, and it is sheer joy to witness.  Meanwhile Democrats and the corrupt Administrative State are learning that if you live by the sword, you can die by the sword.   Trump’s actions have made Democrats defend the corrupt status quo .  Activist Democrat judges hearing injunctive challenges are taking the “conservative” (small “c”) approach of slowing down the change.  This will eventually lead to some landmark Supreme Court decisions about the separation of powers, the role of the courts, the constitutional authority of the executive branch, and how to tame and put the Leviathan Administrative State in its proper place.   Constitutionalists are swooning.   All the while, Trump and his 21st Century band of Runnymede battlefield knights and keyboard warriors continue to expose the rot and lawbreaking within American government at dizzying speed.   Nearly at age 250, America still has some discovering to do about liberty and its rule of law over government, it seems. 2024 Election government shutdown Democrats DOGE Department of Government Efficiency FACA Deep State Mass deportation tariffs U.S. trade trade partners trade agreements free trade labor and environmental practices foreign subsidies manufacturing goods

Democrats have been going crazy over the work Elon Musk’s DOGE team has been doing to root-out corruption, wasteful spending, fraud and good old DC graft and grifting. They’ve even gone so far as to claim that he is somehow getting richer off his public service. (Note to self-righteous Democrats: Please check Nancy Pelosi’s stock trades.) However, as our friend Stephen Moore pointed out in a recent edition of his must-read Committee to Unleash Prosperity Hotline , nothing could be further from the truth. Indeed, not only has Elon not used his influence to try to change Trump policies, like President Donald Trump, it appears Elon’s public service is costing him a lot of money. In a Hotline article titled “Trump Pulls Plug on Electric Vehicle Chargers” Mr. Moore pointed out:   The Left and the media keep claiming that DOGE is only targeting left-wing pork and not programs that benefit conservatives.   But the Trump Transportation Department is ordering a halt to a $7.5 billion Biden program to build electric charging stations in all 50 states. The program passed almost four years ago, but has so far installed a total of just - count 'em - 55 stations. And guess who is one of the biggest beneficiaries of that historically wasteful boondoggle: Elon Musk and Tesla.   As we've reported many times on these pages, the original Biden goal was to have half a million chargers up and running by 2030.  This is the program that former Biden Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg will be defending (good luck!) when he runs for the U.S. Senate in Michigan next year.   Lawsuits are already being filed demanding that Trump "unfreeze" the pause that blocks federal money for chargers flowing to state agencies.   Musk's Tesla electric car company has received at least $31 million in federal funding for charging stations, or about 6% of the money already allocated. It also won't be happy with Trump revoking the 2021 Biden executive order that strived to make 50% of new vehicle sales electric or plug-in hybrids by 2030.   Will this stop progressives and the media from charging that Musk is using DOGE to make himself richer? Nah. What’s more, Democrats and their Far Left allies have mounted campaigns to boycott Tesla and other Musk-related ventures. Inside EVs reported that over the weekend, protests erupted in California and New York at Tesla showrooms to take a stand against Musk. Those involved specifically called for the boycotting of Tesla because of Musk, urging anyone who would listen to consider an EV made by—quite literally—any other automakers.   "Stop Musk's coup," read one protester's sign.   "Don't Buy Swasticars," read another plastered to a Tesla logo, while a second taped to a Cybertruck read "Elon Musk is not my president!" And it's not just protests, either. The FBI recently became involved after a Colorado Tesla showroom was vandalized. Police say that the words "Nazi cars" were spraypainted on the building and someone attempted to set the showroom ablaze. Posters on Reddit are reminding EV shoppers not to buy a Tesla whenever given the opportunity and urging Tesla to move on from Elon Musk's leadership. Democratic voters are much more likely to buy electric cars but are more likely to object to Musk. The Ethical Consumer reports you can now buy a bumper sticker for a Tesla which reads “I bought this before we knew Elon was crazy.” And there’s an international dimension to the boycott. The New York Post reported Tesla sales in France plummeted 63% in January compared to the same month a year earlier.   In Germany, the decline was nearly as sharp, with sales falling 59.5%.   In the UK, Tesla sales have also slipped, while Scandinavian markets, where electric vehicles have been widely adopted, are seeing similar patterns.   In Sweden, new Tesla registrations were down 44% from last year, while Norway recorded a 38% drop in the same period.   Perhaps more concerning for Tesla is the downturn in China, one of its most critical markets. January sales fell 11.5% compared to the previous year — while local competitor BYD reported a nearly 50% surge in sales.   In the last month, shares of Tesla have fallen 13% — though its stock is still up more than 86% in the last 12 months. Now, the Leftwing activists attacking Elon Musk have been joined by Far Left Members of Congress, including Red Diaper Baby Communist Democrat Rep. Jaime Raskin of Maryland. Raskin at a rally to oppose DOGE’s work at USAID said, “Elon Musk, you didn't create USAID. The United States Congress did for the American people … like Elon Musk did not create USAID, he doesn't have the power to destroy it. And who's going to stop him? We are.”   “This is a constitutional crisis that we are in today,” he added. Far Left Massachusetts Democrat James McGovern at the same rally went even further claiming without evidence, "This is a brazen attempt by a billionaire who nobody voted for, to illegally and unconstitutionally steal from taxpayers so he can give himself a tax break." The vitriol being heaped on Elon Musk by Democrats is even more hypocritical given that it was Democrat President Franklin Delano Roosevelt who set the precedent of using wealthy “dollar-a-year” industrialists and entrepreneurs to help America win World War II. However, now that Republican President Donald Trump is using a patriotic billionaire to root out waste, fraud, grift and graft in the government it is somehow a constitutional crisis. 2024 Election Elon Musk DOGE government shutdown Democrats DOGE Department of Government Efficiency FACA Deep State Mass deportation tariffs U.S. trade trade partners trade agreements free trade labor and environmental practices foreign subsidies manufacturing goods