La Paz County Chairman Russell Sias today made public a complete revamp of the Arizona Republican Party (AZGOP) Bylaws (Click on AZGOP PROPOSED BYLAWS here or in navigation bar above). It is unusual for one person to perform this arduous task, but Russell did it in order to call attention to the fact that the bylaws amendments the party leadership will present for a vote at January's annual meeting of the party state committee is ineligible for a vote!
Anyone following Arizona Republican Party politics is aware that the Bylaws Committee called by the leadership of the AZGOP has been working throughout 2017 on a series of amendments to the current party bylaws.
What they found out, today, through an item on the newsletter Republican Briefs was that the "official" bylaws committee was formed in contradiction to the current bylaws, and is therefore out of order.
The committee, chaired by RINO Kathie Petsas, has been fraught with controversy from day one. Petsas has insisted on absolute secrecy to all discussions of bylaws changes, whereas this is a process that should be totally transparent. Petsas has even refused to allow committee members--who come from all corners of the state--to share email and phone contact information. She has forbidden them to discuss what goes on in the meetings with anyone--even each other! Petsas also refused to accept the substitute member named by Russell Sias, when he left to work outside Arizona for the summer. When Sias returned, Petsas expelled him from the bylaws committee altogether.
In response, Sias decided to take definitive action to call attention to the fact that the Petsas-run committee was formed in contradiction to the current bylaws, thus its work product is ineligible to be voted on at the annual meeting, in January. The labor is not lost, as it's long been the conventional wisdom that a revamp is necessary.
To see the proposed revamped bylaws, click on "AZGOP PROPOSED BYLAWS" in the navigation bar above. Russell Sias says he doesn't expect this rewrite to be perfect, as it stands, but sees it as an important starting point. He is anxious to receive your suggestions, in the space below this article. The community of active AZGOP PCs and SCs could certainly use a fullsome discussion of something so important to the functioning of a state party that many agree is currently mired in a horrific state of dysfunction.
The patterns have become too familiar, now. It is becoming difficult to believe any individual accusation, when so many people are being accused. Such scenarios make it all too easy to bring down a good man with false accusations.
But there is far more than just skepticism of the Left's tactics on my mind, right now. Yesterday, I forced myself to watch one of the five segments of Megyn Kelly's interview with the three newest female accusers who are now claiming sexual misconduct by President Trump. The five segments were posted separately down the page. I picked the second one at random, in which Rachel Crooks very believably tells a story of being sexually harassed by Donald Trump. At first, I was taken aback. She sounded very credible! Until I got further along in the video, and it seemed to me that Rachel had just made a huge verbal slip, by inadvertently revealing an untruth told by all three women, earlier in the same segment.
Right at the beginning of the video, just at the 9-second mark, Megyn interrupts her introduction to ask all three if they have ever seen or met each other before. In the space between the 9-second and 14-second marks, all three assure Megyn that they have never met before. Later in the same video, however, in the course of answering Megyn's question as to how she felt after a certain incident with Donald Trump, Rachel pauses. She looks pointedly to her left, directly at Samantha Holvey, as if seeking corroboration for what she is about to say, and says, "We were kinda talking about it last night, too..."
When I heard it, I had to go back and watch both clips, to be sure I had heard correctly. I had heard correctly. See for yourself. Go to 9 seconds and hear the first comment. Then go to the 3:47 minute mark and start watching. The second comment occurs at the 3:52 or 3:53 minute mark. But the exchange is more meaningful if you start at 3:47 and watch through 3:58. See if you agree that the women lied when they said they had never met. Clearly, they had spent some time--perhaps the previous evening--discussing the subject in question at length! For all we know, they were sharing a hotel room!
The whole scenario surrounding the sudden avalanche of accusations and firings of iconic, mainly leftist, media types has had me wondering, almost from its beginning. I have long become accustomed to the eerie feeling, when things like this happen so fast, that none of it is happening by accident. Now, having seen 16 different women brought forward, in waves, one after the other, to accuse Trump, I have that feeling more strongly than usual. What tips me off is not only the suddenness, but the rhythm of it. They send out x number of women. It doesn't work. They send the next wave. Finally, they create a chaotic context of wholesale firings, all caused by sexual misconduct by a series of very successful males. So the third wave--or is it already the fourth?--comes forward in a different context: They are just one small part of a now fully developed avalanche of vanquished male sexual predators who also happen to be iconic leftist media figures. At this point, I'm beginning to be convinced that the whole thing was planned.
And what a bold plan it is, if I am right. I am flabbergasted by it--flabbergasted to absorb conceptually the likelihood of the Left being willing to destroy the careers of so many high achievers, not to mention high political donors, in hopes of manufacturing sufficient credibility to bring down the elusive Trump. It is a measure, not only of how difficult an adversary they see in Trump and of their desperation, but also of how very low they are willing to go, to win. Yes. I believe that's what is unfolding, and it grieves me to envision the ocean of misery that people are apparently willing to artificially and unnecessarily cause, just to feed what they see as the necessities of their purposes. If my feelings and mental calculations are correct, then we have a massive amount of cleansing to do, in our beleaguered nation.
Roy Moore Doesn't Talk Like a Candidate
He Talks Like A Patriot
He Talks About What He Believes In...
And Will Stand For.
He Says He Knows the Swamp Creatures Don't Want Him in Washington.
His answer: "I Can't Wait!"
Roy Moore will win the Senate race in Alabama. But, whether he wins or loses, We, the People, will still win. We will win, because this race has given us the knowledge that we have the energy, and the enthusiasm, AND we also have RIGHT on our side. It will not stop the movement to save the nation.
But Roy Moore is going to win this race. I say that because I have just watched a video of a speech Roy gave, today or yesterday. It was nothing like any campaign speech I have ever heard.
Roy's words went far beyond asking for votes. He did something that I find myself doing often, these days. He likened what we are going through, today, to what Americans faced in the days before the revolution was declared.
Roy quoted the words of Patrick Henry, and I realized that these were words that many of us are saying, today, given that we find ourselves in exactly the quandary that the American settlers did in that time of decision, before our revolution began. Roy made the point that our situations are equivalent, because our very way of life is being threatened. He said he knows the the people up in Congress don't want him. But, he said, "I can't wait." It was an unforgettable speech.
Some proof of what I'm saying came, today, at Breitbart.com. It's a video of pollster extraordinaire, Frank Luntz, caught on camera trying to force some Alabama conservatives to change their minds about Roy Moore.
He tried very hard. he went way beyond the limits of good journalism. But, he couldn't do it, and it was pitiful to watch. Or, if you're a conservative, it was great fun to watch, as you will see in the second video below.
You Can't Call THIS A Conspiracy Theory:
IT'A OFFICIAL: The UN Wants a Borderless World
and Free Migration Throughout
It's called the UN Compact on Global Migration, and its plan is very simple. There shall be absolutely NO restrictions whatsoever to stop anyone from migrating anywhere. The implication of the plan is pretty simple, too: It means that no nation will have any control whatsoever over who migrates to live in their country.
Like everything the UN does, this program recognizes NO national borders, NO national rights, which succinctly defines the bases of the whole UN agenda. The UN was invented and created by globalists. it's entire purpose is to eradicate the concept of the nationstate and to impose a despotic world government over all peoples. How could it be otherwise? It would have absolute power over every human on earth. And we well know the old saying: "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely."
People often have a hard time believing that it's the UN really doing this. But you can't quarrel with hard proof, in the form of the UN website reporting on this very program. (see this link): http://refugeesmigrants.un.org/migration-compact Note the benign tone of their description of this massive interference with nations worldwide, which I took directly from that link:
"The global compact for migration will be the first, intergovernmentally negotiated agreement, prepared under the auspices of the United Nations, to cover all dimensions of international migration in a holistic and comprehensive manner."
Love that! When they say, "in a holistic and comprehensive manner," they mean that literally, because holistic means "whole," as in "the whole world," and "comprehensive," well, that means "across the board," as in "no one escapes."
It is important to realize what's being done, here. They are agreeing to give the United Nations total control over who migrates, how many, and where. No nation will ever again have the right to say "No" to any of it. The world will have officially become one huge nation. And who, then, is the government? Well, government-in-waiting would be more accurate. For this takeover of control over national borders is just one piece of the entire effort to control all. Admittedly, it is a very large piece, and we need to see that as a signal that they are getting very close to the endgame.
That is why I am glad to report that our President Trump made this announcement at his Pensacola rally, yesterday: “I recently withdrew the United States from the United Nations plan for global governance of immigration and refugee policy, “I heard about this recently … no borders, everyone can come in! If you don’t mind, I rejected that plan, is that OK?”
"Hey, when did we get into that," you might ask.
Answer: The Obama administration pledged the United States participation last year (2016). Talks began this week in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, on the massive United Nations (U.N.) plan to create “safe, regular and orderly migration,” from the third world to wealthy countries in Europe and North America. On the eve of those talks, however, Trump reversed Obama’s decision and pulled U.S. negotiators." (quoted from): http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/12/08/trump-touts-rejection-of-u-n-plan-to-force-mass-third-world-immigration/
We were told