Sovereignty Coalition: THE NEXT PRETEXT FOR “GLOBAL GOVERNANCE” – AN IMPENDING AVIAN FLU PANDEMIC: COVID-19 2.0?

Monday's Second "Sovereignty Summit" to Assess the Facts, Push Back on Fresh Tyranny

Sovereignty Coalition Jul 28

READ IN APP

July 28, 2024     

REGISTER TO WATCH

WASHINGTON, D.C. – In recent days, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra took steps to reprise the official response to the COVID-19 pandemic by declaring that, pursuant to his authority under the so-called PREP Act, "there is a significant potential for a public health emergency arising from an Avian Flu pandemic. That declaration clears the way for the Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to issue Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) for Avian Flu vaccines with no liability for the manufacturers.

In anticipation that such EUAs will be forthcoming, the American Medical Association published on July 19 a Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code that will allow doctors to be reimbursed for administering Bird Flu vaccines. All other things being equal, it seems reasonable to expect that these measures will be followed once again by mandates for those "jabs" and possibly for masks, social distancing and lockdowns, as well.   

That is especially the case if the World Health Organization's Director General, Tedros Ghebreyesus, declares Avian Flu to be "a public health emergency of international concern." That would enable him to bring to bear powers conferred on him by the recently adopted agreement amending the WHO's International Health Regulations. He may also seize this pretext for hastily completing a sweeping new and even more problematic Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response Treaty.

Globalists intent on using these public health-related accords to promote what they call "global governance" will surely justify similar surrenders of national sovereignty and individual freedoms in case of other emergencies to the UN Secretary General at the upcoming "Summit of the Future" in September.

All of these prospects will be the subject of informed scrutiny and, if possible, agreement on concerted joint action during the Sovereignty Coalition's Second Sovereignty Summit to be held virtually on from 9:00-11:00 a.m. on Monday, July 29^th.  Participants will include: U.S. Congressmen Ralph Norman and Bob Good; parliamentarians in the European Parliament and national legislatures, notably, UK Member of Parliament Nigel Farage; Italian Senator Claudio Borghi, Israeli Member of the Knesset Ariel Kallner and Romanian Deputy Sorin T Muncaciu; front-line medical doctors like Drs. Peter McCullough, David Bell and Kat Lindley; constitutional and other attorneys like Mat Staver, Stefano Gennarini and Reggie Littlejohn; and American and foreign public policy advocates like Kris Ullman, Andrea Nazarenko and Peter Mcilvenna.

Register here to watch the Summit and follow the work of the Sovereignty Coalition at SovereigntyCoalition.org and on Substack.

WHAT: Sovereignty Summit 2

WHEN: 9:00 to 11:00 a.m. ET, Monday, July 29, 2024

WHO:

Co-Moderators:

Frank Gaffney and Reggie Littlejohn, Co-Founders of the Sovereignty Coalition

Summit Remarks by:

U.S. Congressmen Ralph Norman and Bob Good; UK Member of Parliament Nigel Farage; Italian Senator Claudio Borghi; Israeli Member of the Knesset Ariel Kallner; Romanian Deputy Sorin T. Muncaciu; Doctors Peter McCullough, David Bell and Kat Lindley; attorneys Mat Staver, Stefano Gennarini, and Reggie Littlejohn; Public Policy Advocates Kris Ullman, Andrea Nazarenko and Peter Mcilvenna; and others

HOW: Register to watch at https://sovereigntysummit.org/the-sovereignty-summit-2/

CONTACT:  To interview representatives of the Sovereignty Coalition, contact Matthew Franklin at MFranklin@SecureFreedom.org.

Gary Bauer: End Of Day - 7-25-24

Wray's Turn

Yesterday, it was FBI Director Christopher Wray's turn to testify about the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. His testimony was better than that of former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle. But he still wasn't entirely forthcoming, in my opinion.

There are only a couple of fundamental questions. One is: Why was Trump allowed to go out on the stage? The whole reason the Secret Service is there is to protect the high-profile official they are assigned to.

When Wray was asked about this, he replied, "We don't know the answer to that."

How is that possible? That should be one of the first things to get nailed down.

Wray couldn't answer that critical question, but here's what he did share with the committee: FBI officials discovered that the shooter had researched how far away Lee Harvey Oswald was when he shot John F. Kennedy. There was a lot of murmuring in the room when Wray said that.

What does that have to do with anything?

I believe that "revelation" was just "candy" for the rest of us. It was a total distraction that was totally irrelevant to the crisis we are in. It's of no consequence whatsoever!

Wray wanted to make headlines, and he did. It made the front page of today's Washington Post: "Shooter Looked Up Killing Of Kennedy."

I don't need to hear about the shooter's interest in the JFK assassination to believe he was an evil individual. But I am having a hard time believing that he was able to pull this off by himself.

Even if we accept a degree of incompetence in the Secret Service, the magnitude of this incompetence strongly suggests intentionality.

Debbie Wuthnow, iVoterGuide: The Role of the Secretaries of State

When you hear "Secretary of State" do you picture federal officers such as Henry Kissinger or Hillary Clinton? I think of a person who represents the United States to nations around the world, but did you know that there are 47 (yes, 47) other secretaries of state? If they don't represent their state to the world, what do they do?

 

iVoterGuide believes that informing voters of the often-overlooked offices of government can be a driving point of change in elections. Every election matters. And so does every race on the ballot because they ALL represent you and me! So today, let's look at the role of secretaries of state.  

 

In 35 states, the secretary is elected. In the 12 remaining states, the governor or state legislature appoints them. Every state has their own secretary excluding Alaska, Hawaii, and Utah. In these states, the Lieutenant Governor fulfills the role the secretary would hold. You may also hear the secretaries of state in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia are referred to as the Secretary of Commonwealth. 

   

Secretary of State vs. Secretaries of State 

 

It can be hard to differentiate the federal secretary of state from the other secretaries of state within the nation. It is easier to simply remember that amongst other jobs, the federal secretary of state serves as the president's chief foreign affairs officer. However, the responsibilities of the state's individual secretaries of state vary widely across the nation.   

 

Job of Secretaries of State 

 

The secretaries of state within each state mostly fulfill administrative roles such as keeping state records. They oversee certain committees and are also involved in legislative bills, keeping public records, and some even serve as Board Members for Museums. Perhaps the most important role of the secretaries of state is that of chief election officer. In this role, the secretaries will oversee and supervise elections, so who serves in this role is vital to election integrity!

 

As a chief election officer, the Secretary of State controls almost every aspect of voting. They determine how elections are run and how they are certified. They even control how the voter registration databases are kept and publish election manuals, including the maintenance of the voter rolls for when people move, die or in any other way no longer meet the requirements to vote. A critical role of the chief election officer is that of investigator. When allegations of wrongdoing in elections are made, it is the job of the secretaries of state to investigate the claim. 

 

Why Does it Matter 

 

The Heritage Foundation has found approximately 1,513 instances of recent voter fraud. It's as sad as it is true—America's election integrity has drastically declined. While the media often portrays voter fraud as an evident, blatant crime, the truth is, fraudulent voting can easily go unrecognized as it can simply be an election official overlooking a duplicate vote. We have all overlooked duplicate words in our sentences or missing letters in our words, but how bad would it be to make that mistake when reviewing votes? 

 

How do the secretaries of state tie in with election fraud? Remember, they are the chief election officers. Secretaries of State have the potential to affect every single election in a state and can be one of the main lines of defense against voting fraud. And in 35 states, you get to vote directly for them.

 

Biblical Voting 

 

How do you know who to pick? Who can you trust to maintain the integrity of your state's elections? Exodus 18:21 says to,  

"…select capable men from all the people- men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain- and appoint them as officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens." 

 

America needs help. Our nation needs men in office who fear God and are trustworthy and honest. What better place to start electing godly, honest leaders than your own state's chief election officer. The influence of this position spreads into administrative roles, campaigns, and more. Vote for a candidate whose influence will be trustworthy, honest, and God-fearing!  

Virginia Faith & Freedom Coalition: Faith and Freedom Statement on Harris Candidacy and Sadly Virginia is the Capitol of Abortion in the South

"Kamala Harris has mastered the art of failing upwards. Despite ending her disastrous 2020 presidential campaign before primary voting even began, Joe Biden chose her to be his running mate. Now, Biden and the rest of the Democratic Party are poised to nominate Harris for president despite her spectacular failure as border czar, her radical support for painful late-term abortions, and her history of ignoring anti-Christian violence while supporting DOJ efforts to prosecute pro-life Americans and target people of faith.

"Harris has consistently rejected widely popular protections for unborn babies and endorsed abortion through all nine months of pregnancy – even proudly campaigning at an abortion clinic earlier this summer. On immigration, unprecedented levels of illegal border crossings continued long after Harris was tasked with solving the 'root causes of immigration' as Biden's border czar. Instead of devising solutions, Harris demonized congressional efforts to secure our southern border – allowing tens of millions of illegal immigrants to cross, human smuggling to flourish, and violent crime against U.S. citizens to skyrocket.

"By the time ballots are cast in November, Faith & Freedom Coalition will ensure every voter of faith is familiar with Harris' failure to secure our border and protect America's most vulnerable and voiceless."

Tim Head / Executive Director

National Faith & Freedom Coalition

Thomas D. Klingenstein: America Is Not a Racist Country: An Interview with Charles Murray

Tom Klingenstein's Interview with Charles Murray Charles Murray has been one of this country's most controversial public intellectuals ever since the publication of The Bell Curve in 1994. For his open discussion of apparent differences across population groups, Murray has been dismissed as a 'racist' and a 'pseudoscientist' by much of polite society. He argues, however, that these conversations are essential to debunking the left-wing narrative that America is "systemically racist" — at once the explanation for any difference in group outcomes and the justification for correction by group quotas. Whatever one thinks of Murray's position, it is a carefully considered and potentially valuable insight into one of the most pressing challenges facing our country today: how we respond to the charge of "systemic racism." For that alone, he is well worth listening to. Tom recently spoke with Dr. Murray about college admissions, merit vs. quotas, the future of America, and more. Read the full interview at TomKlingenstein.com.

Read More

Gary Bauer - AVA: End of Day - 7-23-24

A Reminder

 

This is a good time to remind people about who Kamala Harris is and what she believes.

• Harris is an extremely left-wing San Francisco Democrat. In the Senate, she was ranked as the most liberal senator – more Marxist than Bernie Sanders!

• Harris co-sponsored the socialized healthcare scheme, Medicare For All.

• She endorsed the radical Green New Deal.

• Harris co-sponsored legislation calling for reparations for slavery.

• She compared ICE agents to KKK terrorists, and viciously smeared our Border Patrol agents.

• She also supports giving free healthcare to illegal aliens.

• Harris had a 100% pro-abortion voting record with Planned Parenthood and has led the Biden administration's efforts to ensure there are as many abortions as possible.

• Harris immediately accepted Jussie Smollett's absurd claim that he was attacked on the streets of Chicago at 3:00 AM in subfreezing temperatures by Trump supporters.

• She supported a fund that bailed out the rioters who were destroying businesses in Minneapolis.

• Harris has undermined Israel in its war against Hamas.

Thomas D. Klingenstein: Our Elections Are More Vulnerable Than Ever

By Brian T. Kennedy At no time during the Cold War with the Soviet Union was it imagined that the Russians could manipulate a United States presidential election in favor of their preferred candidate. Hollywood's portrayal of a "Manchurian Candidate" aside, American elections were held in person, using paper ballots, counted by human beings, with other human beings watching them. And, however vicious and corrupt the normal partisan interplay of American politics may have been, this practice insured that a fair enough election could be held. Today that is no longer the case. Regardless of who the nominees are in 2024, just as in 2020, much of America will hold their elections in the least transparent, most vulnerable method possible: absentee ballots. Because of this, a free and fair election cannot be assured. It matters not that President Trump is ahead in all the polls and in ways that some pollsters believe cannot be overcome. Citizens should expect that, since America is in a war with Communist China, November's election will be the target of a massive intelligence operation to decide the next president. It should be noted that America's election system was not built to stop the Communist Chinese or any nation state, or for that matter any dark money group, with the capacity and the interest in deciding an American presidential election. The United States is made vulnerable by being the only developed country in the world to allow for this wide-spread use of absentee ballots. Every other advanced democracy conducts their elections in person, with identification shown, on paper ballots counted by large groups of people transparently tallying vote totals with the results available the same day of the election. In states around America, Secretaries of State have allowed or been part of the development of elections systems that would appear to be designed to allow for fraud. So whether or not an election is stolen, a free and fair election system has been stolen from the American people.

Read More

National Vaccine Information Center

Congress Orders Research to Assess COVID Shot Injuries Among U.S. Military Personnel July 22, 2024 | Risk & Failure Reports

In the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2024, the U.S. Congress is requiring the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to study and report on poor health conditions that active duty members of the Armed Forces developed after administration of COVID-19 shots. The NDAA was passed in late 2023 and calls for "a study to assess and evaluate any...

Read More >

The Family Foundation: Another Legal Victory for Religious Freedom!

Victoria Cobb, President Tuesday, July 23, 2024   Our legal team continues to rack up wins for clients who have lost their jobs because of their faith. Just recently, the Founding Freedoms Law Center (FFLC) secured a settlement on behalf of our client, Mrs. Charmain Fougnie, with her former employer after she was fired for not taking the COVID shot against her religious convictions. While the specific terms of the settlement are confidential, FFLC and Fougnie view this as an important victory in vindicating her religious freedom.

According to Michael Sylvester, Litigation Counsel for FFLC: "This resolution does not change the past. No legal action could. But achieving this settlement allows Mrs. Fougnie to recuperate some of what was lost, while also providing accountability for her former employer's actions. We were very pleased to represent Mrs. Fougnie through this entire process." Fougnie, a devoted wife, mother, and grandmother was terminated by her employer for not taking the COVID shot even after she communicated that it violated her religious beliefs. She had worked 100% remotely and had a long and stellar employment history with that employer prior to her termination. The strength of Fougnie's case was recently bolstered by the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Groff v. DeJoy last year, which significantly reinforced employees' federal rights against religious discrimination under "Title VII," the law at issue here. If you or someone you know in Virginia is experiencing religious discrimination of any kind, please feel free to reach out to our attorneys, or visit our website to access and share our free legal resources.

Chris Braunlich , Thomas Jefferson Institute: The Jefferson Journal: Don't Politicize Cell Phone-Free Education

By Chris Braunlich

7/23/2024 -- Governor Glenn Youngkin's Executive Order for developing policies restricting or eliminating cell phones in schools – a concept garnering widespread support among parents, with 61 percent favoring requiring students to leave their phones in secured locations during the day – responds to a clear and rising mental health, academic and behavioral problem.            Seventy-two percent of high school teachers say cell phones in the classroom are a major distraction. Ninety percent of principals support restrictions on middle and high school cell phone use during the day. And 68 percent of all American adults believe that smart phones should not be allowed in school.   The reasons for this level of support is self-evident: More than 80 percent of American adults – young and old – are concerned about the impact of social media on today's children. This concern is supported by the evidence.   According to the American Psychological Association, 41% percent of teens with the highest social media use rate their overall mental health as poor or very poor, compared with 23% of those with the lowest use. Ten percent of the highest use group expressed suicidal intent or self-harm in the past 12 months compared with 5% of the lowest use group, and 17% of the highest users expressed poor body image compared with 6% of the lowest users.   These figures have risen rapidly – not just because of the pandemic (being shut out of classes was surely a factor) but since teenage ownership of smartphones passed the 50 percent mark in 2012 (the iPhone was not released until 2007). The evidence for overwhelming increases in self-harm, clinical depression, adolescent anxiety, and suicide is clear.

But it's not just teen mental health. Learning and grades have also dropped dramatically during this period of time as well. Over at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, President Mike Petrilli tracked test score changes on the National Assessment of Educational Progress with distracting smartphone usage: The more cell phones were used during the school day, the more test scores dropped. Virginia is no exception.

Elsewhere, policies to establish cell phone-free education have attracted bipartisan support. Governors from New York's Kathy Hochul (D) to California's Gavin Newsome (D) are proposing restrictions on cell phones in schools.   Here in Virginia, at least 16 school divisions have already taken steps to restrict cell phones in their schools. Governor Youngkin's Executive Order is merely a smart way to accelerate this trend.    Because politics in Virginia are ever present, and perhaps finding intolerable the notion that a Republican Governor might have a good idea, Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell (D-Fairfax) immediately leapt to the fore to drag the issue into the wonderful world of partisan politics. Saying he "appreciated" the Youngkin Executive Order, Surovell promptly created a "working group" of legislators to formulate a "consensus solution" through state legislation. He appears to define "consensus" as "only Democrats need be involved."   Republicans are uninvited and persona non grata, including Senator Bill Stanley (R-Franklin) who this year introduced a bill clarifying that local school boards explicitly have the power to enact cellphone restrictions during school hours. Only three Senators voted against it, so Stanley may have some idea of how to develop genuinely bipartisan legislation.    One of the three Senators to vote "no" is Senator Stella Pekarsky (D-Fairfax), a former school board member and also one of three Democrats appointed to Surovell's working group. One suspects that if she found empowering her former colleagues on local school boards unacceptable, her real objective may be simply to write the law herself, her way.   It's not as if Youngkin's order is writing the specifics.   It doesn't even "ban" cell phones. It simply makes the point that the objective of school is the education of children, that ubiquitous social media has been harmful to the mental health and academic advancement of children, and steps need to be taken to eliminate distracting and negative influences in the classroom.   It doesn't dictate details, but instead directs the Virginia Department of Education to facilitate listening sessions with the public (eight are scheduled so far), utilize the feedback to develop and publish draft guidance and implementation plans for local school boards (meaning that they are options localities can choose … or not), establish definitions, and ensure any such guidelines preserve for parents the ability to communicate with their children – especially in emergencies.   What Senator Surovell finds objectionable in that is hard to see. The Executive Order leaves the implementation of any local policies up to … localities. Fairfax County is not Richmond City. Prince William County is not Amherst County. The diversity of Virginia's school systems and population – in culture, technology, and resources – can't be written in a single document applicable to all.   Which is not to say there won't be obstacles finding solutions.   Prime among them will be the natural desire of parents to reach their children (and have their children reach them) in an emergency. That's understandable and parents will need to feel secure about that ability, although school security consultants warn that student access in an emergency can worsen a situation by distracting children's attention from safety and emergency response directions or overwhelm a school's limited Wi-Fi capacity or draw parents to run into an already chaotic situation adding complexity to first responders and staff.   The other issues will be administering and enforcing any restrictions and financing additional costs. Teachers want to teach, not be the "cell phone police" and take time away from teaching. If there are consequences, they need to be determined and made clear. If phones are locked up and released each day, more time will be required to process students in and out of school. And mere locked pouches may not work: It doesn't take long for students to figure out ways around them.   All of those are issues best worked out at local jurisdictions, and the Youngkin Executive Order encourages that. Legislation, on the other hand, traditionally tries to impose a "one-size-fits-all" solution (or directs the state Board of Education to impose a "one-size-fits-all" solution. That won't work.   This is not something that can be solved immediately or without difficulty. But the devastating effects of social media on our children and its negative impact on learning make cell phone access in the classroom worthy of debate and an eventual solution.   And to do so by leaving partisanship at the schoolhouse door.   Interested Virginians can sign up to attend the "Commonwealth Conversations" on Cell Phone-Free Education or submit their opinions by clicking here.

Aaron Kheriaty, MD from Human Flourishing: Speaking: Parental Empowerment Event in Southern Cal

---

Immigration Info - NumbersUSA.com: The Biden-Harris "Root Causes" Approach Has Failed!

Immigration Reform Law Institute: Why is Critical ICE Division Focused on ‘Political Theater?’

IRLI sues over HSI being "rebranded" to placate sanctuary jurisdictions

WASHINGTON—The Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), seeking the agencies' emails about the decision to "rebrand" its Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) component.   Since its founding in reaction to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, ICE has been, and remains, one law enforcement agency with two law enforcement components: Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) tasked with detaining and removing illegal aliens from the United States, and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), responsible for enforcing a large number of federal statutes, chief among them the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).    But in April, DHS and ICE leadership rolled out a "rebrand" of HSI in an attempt to abandon its statutorily assigned immigration enforcement mission. HSI managers claimed that enforcing the INA had rendered the organization "toxic" in certain cities and states, namely sanctuary jurisdictions whose policies already undermine ICE's chief purpose of enforcing our country's immigration laws.   The move appeared to come from Acting ICE Director Patrick Lechleitner, who worked at HSI in 2018 and signed a letter at the time calling on then-DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen to "rebrand" HSI due to ICE's supposed "toxicity."   In a leaked internal email, ERO Executive Associate Director Daniel Bible aptly described the HSI rebrand as "political theater."    In April, IRLI submitted Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to DHS and ICE seeking internal communications relating to the rebrand. Under FOIA, federal agencies are legally required to provide public records within twenty working days of a request. However, to date DHS and ICE have still failed to furnish any responsive information, making the lawsuit necessary to compel production.     "This is typical of permanent Washington's view of law enforcement," said Dale L. Wilcox, executive director and general counsel of IRLI. "Instead of doubling down on its mission when our borders are under siege, HSI appears more concerned with the feelings of sanctuary politicians who are triggered at the mention of ICE. These politicians will not support HSI regardless of any cosmetic rebranding. The American public deserves to know how their public servants arrived at the decision to enact this superfluous move."   According to IRLI Director of Investigations Matt O'Brien, "Congress assigns federal law enforcement agencies responsibility for enforcing specific laws. And no agency is free to unilaterally refuse to enforce laws they simply don't like. Instead of protecting the American public, like it is supposed to, HSI has usurped Congress' power and undermined the effectiveness of federal immigration enforcement efforts."   The case is Federation for American Immigration Reform v. Department of Homeland Security et al., No 1:24-cv-02108 (D.D.C.).