JIMMY CARTERS LAST GREAT LEGACY.

 ANOTHER REASON WHY JIMMY CARTER HAD MORE MORAL COURAGE, INTELLECTUAL INTEGRITY, AND A DESIRE TO SAVE OUR REPUBLIC THAN VIRTUALLY THE ENTIRE DEMOCRAT LEADERSHIP, NEWS MEDIA, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT. HE REALIZED WHAT TRUMP AND HIS GANG OF TRAITORS HAD DONE.

IT'S A SHAME 2024 WAS A REPLAY.

BLAST FROM THE PAST- HOW DO YOU PREVENT ANOTHER STOLEN ELECTION, SUCH AS 2016 AND 2024?

NATURALLY, THE FASCIST PARTY OF AMERICA/GOP WOULD HATE SUCH A LAW. 

FASCISTS, NAZIS, TRUMPIANS, MISOGYNISTS, HOMOPHOBES, RACISTS, etc, AND ALL  SUCH HATERS OF DEMOCRACY AND OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC WILL FIGHT TO THE END TO STOP ANY SUCH LEGISLATION. OF COURSE A CORRUPT AND COWARDLY DEMOCRAT LEADERSHIP DOESN'T HELP.

*************************************************************************************************************************

Democrats introduce an election security bill that proposes paper trails and mandatory audits

The new bill, known as the Protecting American Votes and Elections Act, proposes two significant measures. First, because not all digital voting systems produce a paper trail, it would require all state and local elections to ensure that their equipment produces voter-verified paper ballots that can be cross-referenced. Second, for all federal elections regardless of outcome, state and local governments would be required to conduct audits comparing digital ballots to a random selection of paper ballots. The latter policy would cover the 22 states that currently don’t require audits following elections.

“Leaving the fate of America’s democracy up to hackable election machines is like leaving your front door open, unlocked and putting up a sign that says ‘out of town.’ It’s not a question of if bad guys get in, it’s just a question of when,” Oregon Senator Ron Wyden said in a statement accompanying the bill.

Voting integrity is one of Wyden’s pet issues and the senator has pressed for his home state of Oregon’s vote-by-mail system to be adopted nationally.

Wyden is joined by Democratic Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Ed Markey, Jeff Merkley, Patty Murray and Elizabeth Warren on the legislation. Congressman Earl Blumenauer plans to introduce a corresponding bill in the house.

“We know that Russia hacked into American voter systems to influence our election – and we know they’ll try to do it again,” Sen. Warren said. “Our national security experts have warned us that the country’s election infrastructure is vulnerable – this bill will take important steps to help secure it.”

While the bill isn’t a bipartisan proposal — yet, anyway — these same measures are widely supported by election security experts as well as the Department of Homeland Security and a Senate Intelligence Committee report offering recommendations for securing the vote from earlier this year.

The full text of the bill is embedded below.

THE CONSTITUTION IS MORE THAN JUST THE 2ND AMENDMENT.- REPOST.

 Just a reminder to the vast Majority of Americans who have not bothered to read, or try to understand the CONSTITUTION OF THE U.S, OF WHAT WE COULD BE LOSING. TRUMP AND HIS FASCIST ALLIES ON THE U.S. SUPREME COURT ARE DOING THEIR BEST TO DESTROY IT, SO LET US REMEMBER WHAT IT REALLY WAS FOR OVER 200 YEARS.

********************************************************************************************************************************

THE CONSTITUTION IS MORE THAN JUST THE 2ND AMENDMENT.- REPOST.

 

In a recent article Titled; "BY DEFINITION: GUN CONTROL, AND THE 2ND AMENDMENT," I began an analysis of the Meaning contained in the TERMINOLOGY used in the 2ND AMENDMENT. To complement that line of reasoning, I have decided to use this post to look at other parts of the BILL OF RIGHTS, and see if that can aid us in properly interpreting the true meaning contained in the 2nd Amendment. 

To do this, we must understand the following: THAT THE BILL OF RIGHTS CONTAINS TWO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF RIGHTS THAT WERE CREATED AND DRAFTED BY THE FOUNDING FATHERS, AND INTERPRETED BY SUBSEQUENT JUDICIAL REVIEW AND PRECEDENT.

ABSOLUTE RIGHTS- RIGHTS THAT CAN NEVER BE LOST OR TAKEN AWAY BY THE STATE. (ALTHOUGH THEY MAY BE GIVEN UP VOLUNTARILY.) ALSO, THAT THEY ARE NOT DEPENDENT UPON SPECIFIC EVENTS OR CIRCUMSTANCES.

 

For Example:

   Amendment VI- INCLUDES SEVERAL EXAMPLES OF ABSOLUTE RIGHTS.

  "All criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense."

    

CONTINGENT RIGHTS- RIGHTS EXTENDED TO THE INDIVIDUAL THAT ARE SUBJECT TO POSSIBLE LIMITATION OR TERMINATION DEPENDING ON THE INDIVIDUALS ACTIONS AND/OR INTENT IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS OR SPECIFIC EVENTS. 

    For Example:                                                                                                                        

The First Amendment reads as follows: 

""Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

FROM THE FIRST AMENDMENT, WE FIND THE FOLLOWING CONTINGENT RIGHTS.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH-  DOES NOT ALLOW US TO SAY ANYTHING 

WE WANT, ANYWHERE WE WANT, AT ANY TIME, AND USE "FREEDOM

OF SPEECH" AS A UNIVERSAL DEFENSE TO AVOID SANCTIONS OR 

PUNISHMENTS.

FREEDOM OF RELIGION-  DOES NOT ALLOW POLYGAMY, PHYSICAL

ABUSE, CONSUMPTION OF CERTAIN DRUGS, DISCRIMINATION IN THE

EMPLOYMENT SECTOR...AMONG OTHER THINGS, TO BE COVERED 

BY CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

FOR OUR PURPOSES, WHEN DISCUSSING THE 2ND AMENDMENT, CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:

THAT EVEN IF YOU HOLD TO THE OPINION THAT EVERY CITIZEN HAS A "RIGHT" TO OWN OR POSSESS A GUN OR FIREARM, IT DOES NOT FOLLOW THAT THE STATE CANNOT SET GUIDELINES OR RULES TO:

-  RESTRICT THE FIREPOWER OR DESTRUCTIVE POTENTIAL OF EACH FIREARM.

-  SET A MINIMAL STANDARD OF INTELLECTUAL AND/OR

MENTAL COMPETENCE OF THOSE OBTAINING SUCH A WEAPON.

-  MAINTAIN STANDARDS OF MORAL CHARACTER (CRIMINAL) OF THE INDIVIDUAL.

BEFORE THEY ARE ALLOWED TO LEGALLY POSSESS A GUN.

HISTORY HAS SHOWN US THAT UNRESTRICTED SPEECH AND UNINHIBITED RELIGIOUS PRACTICES, IN THE HANDS OF UNSCRUPULOUS AND SELF- CENTERED INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS, CAN CAUSE SUCH DESTRUCTION THAT IT COULD CONTRIBUTE TO THE DESTRUCTION OF WHOLE SOCIETIES AND CULTURES. THIS IS WHY EVEN OUR MOST REVERED "RIGHTS" MUST BE CAREFULLY EXAMINED FOR POSSIBLE ABUSE.

SO, SHOULD WE CONTINUE TO SUBJECT EVERY AMERICAN TO A LEGAL SYSTEM WHERE "RIGHTS" OF FREE SPEECH AND FREEDOM OF RELIGION ARE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE "RIGHT"  TO POSSESS AN AUTOMATIC WEAPON WITH AN AMMO CLIP THAT COULD KILL SCORES OF PEOPLE IN ONE OR TWO MINUTES?

To find a reasonable solution, or compromise,

we must ask the following questions.

Question #1-  Do we Agree that there are certain Individuals and/or Groups

that SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED ACCESS TO FIREARMS. If so, who and why?

Question #2-   Have Previous Judicial Decisions and Legislative Actions set

 PRECEDENTS as to what ACTIONS ARE PERMISSIBLE and COVERED BY THE

"BILL OF RIGHTS" SET FORTH IN THE U.S. CONSTITUTION?

WHAT MANY AMERICANS SEEM TO FORGET IS THE FOLLOWING:

YES, IT SEEKS TO PREVENT UNREASONABLE GOVERNMENT

INTRUSION INTO LIVES OF ITS CITIZENS, BUT IT ALSO...

...CREATES GUIDELINES THAT THOSE SAME CITIZENS DO NOT USE

THE "BILL OF RIGHTS" TO ABUSE AND HARM OTHER CITIZENS WITH

UNREASONABLE, MALICIOUS, AND UNJUSTIFIED WORDS AND ACTIONS.

Question #3- CAN ANY PROPOSED LIMITATIONS ON THE 2ND

AMENDMENT BE...

-   ...UNACHIEVABLE, OR WILL NOT

   PRODUCE DESIRABLE RESULTS?

-  ...AN UNREASONABLE BURDEN 

   ON THE LAW ABIDING GUN OWNER?

-  ...A PUNISHMENT ON HONEST GUN OWNERS, INSTEAD OF

   REINFORCING THE RESPONSIBLE DECISIONS THEY

   ALREADY MAKE?

TRUMPS "GREATEST HITS." A LOOK BACK AT 8 YEARS OF TREASON, SOCIOPATHY, AND ANTI-INTELLECTUAL MINDLESSNESS. VOLUME 4.

ASSOCIATED PRESS HEADLINES: Jury finds Trump liable for sexual abuse, awards accuser $5M.

NEW YORK (AP) — A jury found Donald Trump liable Tuesday for sexually abusing advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in 1996, awarding her $5 million in a judgment that could haunt the former president as he campaigns to regain the White House.

The verdict was split: Jurors rejected Carroll’s claim that she was raped, finding Trump responsible for a lesser degree of sexual abuse. The judgment adds to Trump’s legal woes and offers vindication to Carroll, whose allegations had been mocked and dismissed by Trump for years.

She nodded as the verdict was announced in a New York City federal courtroom only three hours after deliberations had begun, then hugged supporters and smiled through tears. As the courtroom cleared, Carroll could be heard laughing and crying.

Jurors also found Trump liable for defaming Carroll over her allegations. Trump did not attend the civil trial and was absent when the verdict was read...

The verdict comes as Trump faces an accelerating swirl of legal risks.

He’s fighting a New York criminal case related to hush money payments made to a porn actor. The state attorney general has sued him, his family and his business over alleged financial wrongdoing.

Trump is also contending with investigations into his possible mishandling of classified documents, his actions after the 2020 election and his activities during the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Excerpts from an Article Published on May,9th,2023 by the ASSOCIATED PRESS.