Blog

A Brief History of the Freedom of Speech

“I disagree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it.”
— Voltaire (1694-1778)

When Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, he included in it a list of the colonists’ grievances with the British government. Notably absent were any complaints about infringement upon speech.

In those days, speech was as acerbic as it is today. If words were aimed at Parliament, all words were lawful. If they were aimed directly and personally at the king — as Jefferson’s were in the Declaration — they constituted treason.

Needless to say, Jefferson and his 55 colleagues who signed the Declaration would all have been hanged for treasonous speech had the British prevailed.

Of course, the colonists won the war, and, six years afterward, the 13 states voluntarily ratified the Constitution. Two years after ratification, the Constitution was amended by adding the Bill of Rights.

James Madison, who drafted the Bill of Rights, insisted upon referring to speech as “the” freedom of speech, so as to emphasize that it preexisted the government. He believed the freedom of speech was one of the inalienable rights Jefferson wrote about in the Declaration.

Stated differently, each of the ratifiers of the Bill of Rights manifested in writing their unambiguous understanding that the freedom of speech is a natural right — personal to every human. It does not come from the government. It comes from within us. It cannot be taken away by legislation or executive command. It does not require a permission slip.

Yet, a mere seven years later, during the presidency of John Adams, Congress enacted the Alien and Sedition Acts, which punished speech critical of the government.

How could the same generation — in some cases, the same human beings — that prohibited congressional infringement upon speech have enacted a statute that punished speech?

To some of the framers — the Federalists, who wanted a leviathan central government as we have today — infringing upon the freedom of speech meant only silencing it before it was uttered. Today, this is called prior restraint, and the Supreme Court has essentially outlawed it.

To the anti-federalists — who believed the central government was a limited voluntary compact of states — the First Amendment prohibited Congress from interfering with or punishing any speech.

The Adams administration indicted, prosecuted and convicted anti-federalists — among them a congressman — for their critical speech.

When Jefferson won the presidency and the anti-federalists won control of Congress, the Federalists repealed three of the four Alien and Sedition Acts on the eve of their departure from congressional control, lest any be used against them.

During the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln locked up hundreds of journalists in the North — including a congressman — who were critical of his war efforts. During World War I, President Woodrow Wilson arrested students for reading the Declaration of Independence aloud at draft offices or singing German beer hall songs.

Keep reading

MI Republican Lawmakers Send Letter to AG Pam Bondi—Ask For Investigation Into GBI Strategies and Other Voter Registration Groups

MI Speaker Pro Tempore Rachelle Smit and Chair of the MI House Election Integrity Committee has sent a letter to the United States Attorney General Pam Bondi calling for an investigation into fraudulent voter registration efforts and electioneering by partisan voter registration groups who have accepted donations from 501(c)(3) organizations in violation of IRS regulations that prohibit them from engaging in partisan activities.

The letter was signed by Smit and 21 additional Michigan Representatives. Not a single Democrat lawmaker from Michigan signed the letter. Is it possible that the Democratic state representatives don’t care about protecting the sanctity and integrity of elections in Michigan? Would it be wrong to assume that Democrat lawmakers in Michigan especially don’t want GBI Strategies, an organization that was caught by the Michigan State Police, MI Secretary of State’s office and Michigan Attorney General’s office, delivering fake registrations to clerks across the state of Michigan, in person and by mail from a hotel in Auburn Hills, MI, to be investigated? Could they be concerned by the Michigan State Police investigation that began one month before the hotly contested 2020 election?

Perhaps they’re worried that if an investigation is opened into GBI Strategies, the DOJ may question why Senator Gary Peters, who recently and unexpectedly announced his retirement, and then-presidential candidate Joe Biden each paid $242,133 to GBI Strategies.

Keep reading

Who Will Be The Next President of Ukraine?

Apresidential election was supposed to be held in Ukraine on March 31, 2024. However, due to the extension of martial law for 90 days in February 2025 (until May 9, 2025), the scheduled election was postponed for the 14th time.

Ukrainian citizens are well aware that, in fact, Ukraine is currently led by an illegitimate President Volodymyr Zelensky, who was elected in 2019 for a term of five years. And although, on February 26, 2025, after the previously postponed vote, the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament of Ukraine) was still able to pass a resolution that presidential elections should not be held yet, the Ukrainian people understand that, due to the end of Zelensky’s term of office in 2024, the laws he signs and decisions he makes are illegitimate and can be challenged in court over time.

On February 19th,U.S. President Donald Trump called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky a “dictator”[1] and warned that he needed to act quickly to secure peace or he risked losing his country. This intensified the animosity between the two leaders, which alarmed European officials. Washington suspended military aid and intelligence-sharing with Kyiv. Meanwhile, Donald Trump also said that Ukraine requires presidential elections and territorial concessions for further talks.

Keep reading

Unhinged Tennessee Democrat Lunges at GOP Colleague After Gun Control Bill Fails

Chaos erupted in a Tennessee House Criminal Justice Subcommittee meeting Wednesday when far-left State Representative Justin J. Pearson (D-Memphis) lunged at a Republican colleague in a fit of rage, hurling insults and pointing fingers—literally—after his anti-gun bill went down in flames.

The showdown started when Pearson pushed his latest gun-grabbing scheme, HB 1392, a bill that would’ve gutted Tennessee’s permitless carry law—a hard-won victory for Second Amendment patriots.

Under current law, law-abiding Tennesseans can carry firearms without jumping through bureaucratic hoops, a right Pearson wanted to strip away.

Thankfully, the committee saw through the nonsense and crushed the bill in a 7-2 vote, according to NBC39.

“We have a responsibility to protect our kids and our communities,” Pearson whined from the podium, trotting out tired liberal talking points about “gun violence.” But when State Representative Andrew Farmer (R-Sevierville) dared to call him out, all hell broke loose.

Farmer said, “I know every member in this committee has been here this year, working, during committee, during session, voting on bills. And I know that you may have some things going on, but you have not. So, I don’t think it’s fair for you to come here before this committee and lecture us on hard work and convictions and hard work for our committee.

Farmer continued, “So, while I understand where you’re at and what you’re doing and why, but at the end of the day, we’ve been here working. We’ve been on the House floor voting on bills. We’ve taken the tough questions. We’ve taken the tough votes, and we’re doing so. So I just don’t think it’s fair for you to come in here and lecture this committee on hard work when we’ve been up here doing the hard work.”

That’s when Pearson lost it. Pearson said that Farmer’s remarks made him “very, very angry.” The Memphis Democrat then explained that he had been absent because his brother died by suicide last December.

Keep reading

The Stablecoin Trap: The Backdoor To Total Financial Control

The walls are closing in on your financial freedom—but not in the way most Americans believe.

While the debate rages over the future threat of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), a far more insidious reality has already taken hold: our existing financial system already functions as a digital control grid, monitoring transactions, restricting choices, and enforcing compliance through programmable money.

For over two years, my wife and I have traveled across 22 states warning about the rapid expansion of financial surveillance. What began as research into cryptocurrency crackdowns revealed something far more alarming: the United States already operates under what amounts to a CBDC.

  • 92% of all US dollars exist only as entries in databases.
  • Your transactions are monitored by government agencies—without warrants.
  • Your access to money can be revoked at any time with a keystroke.

The Federal Reserve processes over $4 trillion daily through its Oracle database system, while commercial banks impose programmable restrictions on what you can buy and how you can spend your own money. The IRS, NSA, and Treasury Department collect and analyze financial data without meaningful oversight, weaponizing money as a tool of control. This isn’t speculation—it’s documented reality.

Now, as President Trump’s Executive Order 14178 ostensibly “bans” CBDCs, his administration is quietly advancing stablecoin legislation that would hand digital currency control to the same banking cartel that owns the Federal Reserve. The STABLE Act and GENIUS Act don’t protect financial privacy—they enshrine financial surveillance into law, requiring strict KYC tracking on every transaction.

This isn’t defeating digital tyranny—it’s rebranding it.

Keep reading

Tulsi Gabbard Speaks Out Against Persecution of Christians and Hindus in Bangladesh, Warns of “Islamic Caliphate” after Bloody Biden Color Revolution

The massive attacks against Hindus, Christians, Sikhs and Buddhists in Bangladesh continue (Gateway Pundit reported), the government had to admit. There have been at least 1,234 incidents of political violence in Bangladesh since the Biden Regime’s insurrection against the elected Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina had to flee the country on August 5, 2024. Visiting India in March, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard warned against an “Islamic Caliphate”.

The Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Unity Council claimed there had been 2,010 incidents of “communal violence” since prime minister Sheikh Hasina fled the country on August 5 after a color revolution orchestrated by the Biden Regime, NED and USAID. According to the installed government of Muhammad Yunus, 1,452 of those incidents took place on August 5, 2024, when Hasina was ousted from power, Indian Express reported.

Visiting New Delhi, India, on March 17, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said the US was deeply concerned about the persecution of minorities in Bangladesh, saying the Trump administration was committed to defeating “Islamist terrorism” globally.

“The long-time unfortunate persecution, killing and abuse of religious minorities, Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Catholics and others has been a major area of concern for the US govt and President Trump and his administration,” Gabbard told NDTV World.

“The threat of Islamist terrorists and the global effort of different terror groups are rooted in the same ideology and objective – which is to rule and govern with an Islamist Caliphate. This obviously affects people of any other religion, other than the one that they find acceptable, and they choose to carry this out with terror and very violent and terroristic means. President remains committed to identifying this ideology that drives Islamist terrorism and helping to defeat that ideology.”

Keep reading

If Everything Is Going To Be Okay, Why Are The U.S. And The EU Feverishly Preparing For World War III?

If there is going to be peace in the Middle East, why has the Pentagon sent 25 percent of our entire fleet of B-2 stealth bombers to the region? And if there is going to be peace in Europe, why is the European Union telling all of their citizens to store up food and water for a war with Russia?  We keep being told that everything is going to be okay, but meanwhile western officials continue to make moves that indicate that more war is coming.

According to Newsweek, the United States has “significantly increased its military presence” in the Middle East during the past couple of weeks…

The U.S. has significantly increased its military presence in both the Gulf and Indian Ocean, deploying B-2 stealth bombers, cargo planes, and aerial refueling tankers, alongside key assets like the USS Carl Vinson and USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carriers.

I am particularly concerned about the deployment of highly advanced B-2 stealth bombers to the region.

It is being reported that “at least five” B-2 stealth bombers have been deployed to the island of Diego Garcia…

The US military has sent at least five B-2 Spirit stealth bombers to highly strategic island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean.

These heavy bombers can obliterate targets with their huge 25 tonne bomb payload per jet.

This means the US’s deadly fleet of five could carry an astounding 125 tonnes of bombs.

For those that do not know, Afghanistan was relentlessly bombed by U.S. air assets based in Diego Garcia during the invasion of that nation in 2001, and Iraq was relentlessly bombed by U.S. air assets based in Diego Garcia during the invasion of that nation in 2003.

Keep reading

Putin Says No Peace Possible With Zelenskiy, Suggests UN Govern Ukraine In Near Term

Russian President Putin declared peace is next to impossible with Ukrainian President Zelenskiy in power. He questioned yesterday how Russia could negotiate with an illegitimate government that is not legally elected.

Putin suggested in the speech that the United Nations could be brought in to govern Ukraine, as there is precedence for this action.

Zelenskiy recently said Putin will die soon as negotiations are ongoing with Washington and Ukraine. These are not the actions of a Ukrainian leader who wants peace.

The EU and Zelenskiy, as well as elements within the U.S. government, are working to sabotage any effort by the Trump administration to secure a peace deal in Eastern Europe.

Keep reading

How To Destroy High-Trust Societies

In a better world, people would cultivate virtue and develop habits of right action, practicing them regardless of external pressures. But we don’t live in that world. For most, concepts like honor and morality emerge from community, not individual will. These vital, pro-social behaviors rely on constant reinforcement by others. When daily life consists of anonymous, disconnected interactions, it becomes easier to justify selfishness. But when people must live among and depend on those who observe and remember how they behave, accountability shapes conduct.

Social norms depend heavily on the expectation of repeated interactions — what game theorists call “iterated games.” A functioning society requires widespread cooperation. When people believe they benefit more by acting selfishly than by cooperating, social cohesion begins to unravel. In one-time interactions, the incentive to cheat or defect rises sharply. One can gain an immediate advantage with little risk of social or material consequences.

Carnival workers and traveling merchants were once known for scamming customers. Sailors and touring rock musicians were infamous for defiling the honor of the daughters of the town. These groups operated without accountability because they never had to face the communities they affected. Their minimal connection to others reduced the costs of antisocial behavior and encouraged defection.

Today, we see a broader breakdown of communal life. We’ve fragmented communities, commodified identity, and isolated individuals. In doing so, we’ve eroded shared moral standards and stripped away even the basic incentives to cultivate virtue.

As a colleague recently observed, communal gatherings used to serve as informal “wellness checks.” Church, for example, grounded both cultural norms and moral expectations. It also required people to present themselves before others. Even atheists or agnostics often showed up on Sunday mornings — not for faith but to signal solidarity and demonstrate their role as contributing members of the community.

Churches noticed what others missed. Underfed or unwashed children caught someone’s eye. A hungover woman felt the weight of disapproval. An unfaithful man encountered the quiet judgment of those around him. These small acts of social accountability reinforced a shared moral order.

For most of history, individual independence was difficult, if not impossible. People relied on their communities for safety, food, education, goods, and entertainment. In many ancient societies, exile was tantamount to a death sentence. Some preferred suicide to being cast out. Reputation and honor mattered more than money because survival depended on others’ trust. A man’s worth reflected the number of relationships he had managed honorably over time.

Today, people can meet most of their basic needs without relying on others. That shift creates the illusion of freedom, but in reality, it has replaced dependence on community with dependence on the state.

Now, instead of interacting face-to-face within tight-knit communities, we operate as isolated individuals within anonymous digital spaces. Functions once performed by churches and neighborhoods have shifted to malls and bureaucracies. But social correction — once a communal responsibility — has become taboo. Attempting to help or intervene risks public shaming as a so-called “Karen” on social media.

The best social worker, no matter how dedicated, cannot match the quiet authority of vigilant grandmothers. And as that kind of local, relational accountability fades, the consequences grow harder to ignore.

Keep reading

BREAKING STUDY — COVID-19 mRNA Injections Dangerously Reprogram the Immune System, Increasing Infection Risk

Last month, I reported on the sixth study that demonstrates negative efficacy of COVID-19 mRNA injections, solidifying their role as infection-promoters.

A new study titled, Post-vaccination IgG4 and IgG2 class switch associates with increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infections, marks the seventh study to show an increased risk of infection after mRNA injection while also revealing the likely underlying mechanism behind this phenomenon:

Objectives

Repeated COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations increase SARS-CoV-2 IgG4 antibodies, indicating extensive IgG class switching following the first booster dose. This shift in IgG subclasses raises concerns due to the limited ability of IgG4 to mediate Fc-dependent effector functions.

Keep reading