In Part 1 I made the case that there may come a time when conservatives and republicans will need the “troops” to show up and respond: and they might not. Myriad lawfare actions in 2019 and 2020 and in the wake of 6 Jan have largely gutted the manpower and the groups who stood up when it counted.
Groups like the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, 3%ers, Praetorian Guard, during the skirmishes around the country and particularly in the swamp-Wash DC-, these groups stepped up when the DC Capital Police would not and fought for the rights of citizens to be left alone when going about their daily lives.
Many don’t see it this way, accepting the narrative that these are racist groups akin to the KKK. Nobody stuck up for these groups-and why do you need them? Well, if ANTIFA and the Black Liberation Revival Movement show up to intimidate, terrorize events, places and people-and the police don’t stop them-what are you going to do?
This is not my story for today, but here is a story involving Senator Rand Paul and also Dan Bongino that shows why politics in America now require a form of shock troops to protect non-popular political movements, that is, any challenge to the left, socialist, communist democrats.
The case can be made based on emerging evidence that the swampy govt and deep state-aided by the LSMBTGA-is plotting to do the flipperoo after the 2024 election by deploying a shock force to do exactly what’s been alleged of Trump. Only in this case it will be to protect the steal-but that is a story for another day.
Tina Peters has been sentenced to 9 years in prison. The evidence that she secured that cost her freedom when she disclosed it to the public, remains compelling but largely unseen by anyone who is in a position of power to act on the information.
Our justice system is funny these days in that if somebody put their reputation and life on the line in a matter such as this, knowingly doing something that would ruin their life, you would think our system of justice (just us) would give that person a fair shake in court by at least considering the evidence.
In this case where there were baffling computer actions and data base manipulation that happened through outside forces, Peters had the courage to expose it and pursue resolution: but that is not our justice system.
The court never considered any mitigating circumstances that Peters was taking action to protect Colorado-Mesa County in particular-election integrity.
It reminds me of government disciplinary cases I’ve seen over the years where there is a misbehaving or nonperforming employee, but the supervisor makes some trivial mistake like swearing in the midst of mandatory counseling. And-oh my panties-now that becomes the issue.
We haven’t seen a public scandal on such an important issue-the election of the President of the United States of America-since the assassination conspiracy and coverup-by our government-of JFK.
This issue is particularly important in Colorado-Denver-the headquarters of the Dominion Voting System-and the strange results we’ve had in our elections that turned Colorado blue in 2018-and it has been a wasteland of malfeasance ever since.
Speaking of wastelands and malfeasance, the case of Jack Philips “the Cake Baker” has been a torturous and cringy mess for a dozen years.
It started innocently enough when a gay couple who was getting married happened upon Philips’ shop in July 2012 and asked him to make a wedding cake to support their marriage. At the time there was no affirmation in federal or Colorado law recognizing same sex marriages-that would come about in 2014.
Philips refused to create a cake celebrating their union, citing his religious beliefs and the law, and offered the couple any of the existing products in the bakery.
Colorado is one of 21 states that include sexual orientation as a “protected class.” Problems arise whenever these arbitrary and mostly made-up determinations are added in law as “feel good” social issues that have not been reconciled with existing law.
The complaint resulted in a lawsuit, “Craig V Masterpiece Cake Shop,” with the court ruling for the plaintiffs and declaring:
the cake shop was ordered not only to provide cakes to same-sex marriages, but to “change its company policies, provide ‘comprehensive staff training’ regarding public accommodations discrimination, and provide quarterly reports for the next two years regarding steps it has taken to come into compliance and whether it has turned away any prospective customers”.
Religious beliefs and control over artist expression be damned! The Colorado Court of Appeals upheld the decision, and the Colorado Supreme Court refused to hear it.
The case ultimately made its way to the Supreme Court in late 2017. The court issued its decision in June 2018, reversing the lower court in a finding that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission was guilty of religious hostility that biased both their processes and required neutrality.
Jack won, but it was a short-lived and bittersweet victory, as the court had not made any definitive statements regarding religious and artistic rights.
And sure enough, within hours of the decision in June 2018, more madness started (from the above piece;)
Masterpiece Cakeshop became involved in a similar case in 2018. In June 2017, on the same day the Supreme Court agreed to hear Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, the bakery had refused to bake a birthday cake with a pink interior and blue exterior for Autumn Scardina, a transgender woman and Colorado lawyer. Phillips stated later that he had refused based on his Christian beliefs that a person does not get to choose their gender.[54] According to Scardina, Phillips initially accepted the order for the pink-and-blue cake but then refused after learning the cake was to be used to celebrate Scardina’s gender transition.[55][56] Scardina stated that she had placed her order at Masterpiece Cakeshop with the intent to “challenge the veracity” of Phillips’s assertions that he would serve LGBT customers under circumstances other than those of the earlier case.[
There was also a request for a cake with a devil depicted on the cake smoking marijuana that was refused, but that information quickly fell out of the story.
The complaint to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission was upheld, although the case was later dismissed by the Colorado system as being “ill-suited” for resolution with the recommendation to proceed-if desired-in civil court.
In June 2019 the case was brought for discrimination in federal court. In April 2020 a second suit was brought in a separate court against Philips seeking damages, lawyer and court fees.
In June 2021 Denver District Court Judge Bruce Jones found Philips guilty of violating Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Law by refusing to bake the cake and fined him $500.
In October 2022 the Colorado Appeals Court heard the case and ruled in January 2023 that a blue and pink cake was not a protected form of speech and did not violate Philips’ religious beliefs.
In June 2024 Philips appealed the decision in Oral Arguments to the Colorado Supreme Court, who later dismissed the case in a lack of standing determination;
In October 2024, the Colorado Supreme Court dismissed the case in a 4-3 ruling, saying that Scardina had lacked standing to sue as she had not exhausted her options to seek redress through another court before filing her lawsuit. The Court did not rule on whether Phillips had discriminated against Scardina or whether Phillips’ First Amendment rights had been violated. Justice Melissa Hart wrote “We express no view on the merits of these claims” in the majority opinion.
So as of this writing it appears that Philips dozen years of lawfare attacks are finally done, but don’t count on it. It is ironic that the seemingly singular issue at the heart of this case-whether an individual has the right and freedom of religion to express their beliefs without the government infringing on that ability-whether those beliefs are in pursuit of daily life, business, whatever the case may be-has not yet been addressed in Philips’ case, notwithstanding all the hours, days and years in court.
Philips would be a broken man without the help of organizations and individuals that have contributed to paying his legal bills.
One suspects we have not heard the last of these lawsuits. It is incumbent on the Colorado legislature-which is currently strongly in the hands of left, looney democrats-to remove some of the ambiguity that has been introduced by careless statutes and laws that are more “aspirational” than lawful.
Six years into democrat rule in Colorado, it is very clear they do not care about the difference.
17 October 2024
LSMBTGA: Lamestream media echo chamber (LMEC-L,) social media (SM,) big tech tyrants (BT,) government (G,) and academia (A)
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN
Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
Parler: https://parler.com/AFNNUSA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA