Authored by Nicole James via The Epoch Times,

The 12 days of Christmas are sometimes also known as Twelvetide. Those are the days of drummers drumming and maids a milking (with cows, not almonds).

There’s a pretty heated debate around the first day of Twelvetide, with some saying it’s Christmas Day (Dec. 25), and others throwing their bets for Dec. 26.

If you roll with the 26th you hit Jan. 6 on the final day; the traditional Christian feast day of Epiphany. This is D-day for taking down Christmas celebrations, unless you want a year-long ticket on the bad luck train.

Back in 567 AD, someone decided to make this 12-day season official.

While we don’t know when the song first originated it was published around 1780 but could be centuries older.

Partridges in pear trees might have been the norm back then but in 2023, the government is not handing those out.

Here’s a look at what we might score this year depending on whether we’ve been naughty or nice (sung to the tune of the 12 days of Christmas if you are feeling particularly jolly).

Day 1

On the first day of Christmas my government sent to me another conspiracy theory.

The government’s been playing truth or dare with our minds again. They’ve been waving around conspiracy theories like it’s a bingo card, but guess what they dropped on us? Alien life.

Now, we’ve always had that itch in the back of our brains going, “What if E.T. is out there sipping space tea?”

But now that the suits have confirmed it, we’re a bit miffed. Like, seriously? We were happier not knowing, and now you’re telling us it’s legit?

So here we are, grappling with the reality that aliens might be cruising around in their cosmic convertibles, and it’s not just a late-night sci-fi binge-induced delusion. Government, you’ve officially blown our minds

Day 2

On the second day of Christmas my government sent to me two new wars.

Spin the war roulette wheel and see where we end up? Iran? Azerbaijan?

Or could the next war be against those reptilian creatures from Kepler 186f?

Day 3

On the third day of Christmas my government sent to me three cyber attacks.

I guess it only takes one big one. And according to the Nostradamus’s of the world (those who may not be named), we are cruising straight into cyber attack central.

Hold on to your mice (or mouses!) It’s about to get wild in the digital neighbourhood.

People gather to watch a fireworks display during the lighting of a Christmas tree at Martin Palace in Sydney, on Nov. 30, 2023. (Saeed Khan/AFP via Getty Images)

Day 4

On the fourth day of Christmas my government sent to me four Trump indictments

Who has lost count of the number of times Donald Trump’s been indicted. As Tucker Carlson says, each time his supporters get stronger.

Over the course of five months, ex-President Trump found himself in the legal hot seat not once, not twice, but four times.

In Washington, D.C., he’s dealing with four felony counts for trying to shake up the 2020 election.

Skip over to Georgia, and he’s got 13 felony counts for messing with their election scene. Now, in New York, things heat up with a whopping 34 felony counts tied to hush money payments involving a certain adult film star.

And down in Florida? Well, he’s got a solid 40 felony counts for holding onto some classified docs post-presidency and throwing a wrench in the government’s attempts to get them back.

It’s a legal rollercoaster folks, but one that we all hope will come to a positive end for the ex-pres.

Day 5

On the fifth day of Christmas my government sent me 5G towers.

The 5G network has a whole playground of possibilities. There’s the nefarious plot to control our minds. But more grounded theories include it being linked to various health and environmental risks.

Some say 5G networks emit harmful levels of radiation, which can lead to cancer and other illnesses.

Now, I’m not throwing shade or anything, just laying out the theories on the table.

Day 6

On the sixth day of Christmas my government sent to me 6,000 new genders.

According to Medical News Today, there are no fixed numbers of genders. They occur on a spectrum, which really means that the possibilities are infinite.

Sexualdiversity.org says that the most commonly known genders in 2023 number 107.

Day 7

On the seventh day of Christmas my government sent to me seven continents a-boiling.

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres just dropped a new phrase in global boiling—the era that has arrived and brought with it so much snow that the private jets were snowed in on the runway instead of arriving at Cop28.

That’s where the UAE’s Sultan Al Jaber said there was “no science” behind demands for the phase-out of fossil fuels and that phasing out coal, oil, and gas would take the world “back into caves.”

Talk about a hot take!

A Christmas decoration seen amid smoke from a bushfire at West Wallsend in Newcastle, Australia, on Dec. 14, 2023. (Roni Bintang/Getty Images)

Day 8

On the eighth day of Christmas my government sent to me eight visits by Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Ding Dong. President Zelenskyy calling.

Is it time to close that door on him? This guy’s clocking in his third visit to Washington, and wouldn’t mind having his frequent flyer points racked up after trips to 36 countries worldwide.

Day 9

On the ninth day of Christmas my government sent to me, nine nurses dancing.

During COVID, some doctors and nurses decided to throw “influencer” onto their resumes.

Now, don’t get me wrong, lots of nurses are absolute heroes, but it seems like a few are dreaming of trading their stethoscopes for TikTok dance-offs.

The world has plenty of aspiring dancers, but the shortage of top-notch nurses is a real deal.

So, let’s keep it real and practical. None of us really need or want to see more nurses busting moves on TikTok. Like ever.

Day 10

On the tenth day of Christmas my government sent to me ten COVID variants

We’ve had the whole Greek alphabet of variants and then when we arrive at Omicron unleashing more than 650 sub-lineages each rocking its combo of letters and numbers.

A man receives a dose of Comirnaty Omicron XBB 1.5 Pfizer vaccine for COVID-19 at a pharmacy in Ajaccio, on Oct. 5, 2023. (Pascal Pochard-Casabianca/AFP via Getty Images)

But they’re ditching the boring stuff and giving these new variants names like Kraken, basilisk, and gryphon? How cool is that?

I’m thinking; why not take it up a notch? Let’s have the next wave of sub-variants sponsored by some big-shot organisations. Talk about prime marketing opportunities right there!

Day 11

On the 11th day of Christmas my government sent to me 11 lizard overlords.

Conspiracy buffs just can’t get enough of the lizard people hype.

Imagine chilling out watching X when a world leader casually peels off their face like it’s a beauty mask, only to unveil the reptilian features of an otherworldly overlord. Talk about a wild gift, right?

The deal is, this belief rolls with the idea that sneaky reptilian aliens are pulling the strings from behind the cosmic curtain, low-key controlling Earth and playing puppeteer with human affairs.

According to this tale, these shape-shifting lizard-like creatures smoothly blend into human society, snagging power gigs in governments, corporations, and all the big shots. Fans of the Lizard Overlords plot often cite bits from ancient texts and myths.

Day 12

On the 12th day of Christmas my government sent to me 12 chemtrails spraying.

Are those chemtrails, not just composed of water vapour, but are deliberate releases of chemicals by the government or other evil beings (i.e. lizard people)?

According to some, chemtrails can modify weather, enact mind control, or even play puppeteer with the population.

People throw around terms like barium, aluminium, and strontium finding them in soil and water samples saying it backs up the chemtrail story.

Yet studies attribute these substances to natural sources or unrelated human activities.

Who knows whether fact or fiction but Epoch Times readers are keeping their minds open on this one.

Merry Christmas to all.

Progressives often pride themselves as the sole party focused on education, particularly in inner cities, and frequently criticize conservatives for being ‘heartless’ towards the future of young people. While Democrats advocate for unprecedented education funding, they tend to overlook actual performance metrics in inner-city public schools and label anyone ‘racist’ who even dares to question sliding test scores. 

In the case of Baltimore City Public Schools, the country’s fourth most funded school system, investigative journalist Chris Papst of Fox45 News’ Project Baltimore has been on a six-year crusade against corruption at the highest level in the school system, some of which includes a possible citywide grade scandal and coverup of test scores – all of which implies those running the show are more interested in their salaries than students’ futures. 

NEWS: @BaltCitySchools has a $1.7B budget. It spends more than $22k per student. Yet, nearly TWO-THIRDS of all city schools received the LOWEST possible ratings from the state this year. School CEO, who’s entering her 8th year, says she’s “working on it”. https://t.co/u1W5lGYKO7

— Chris Papst (@chrispapst) December 19, 2023

The latest data Papst has found should be absolutely shocking to residents and parents of the school system, along with lawmakers on Capitol Hill, and question why those in the school system and City Hall continue to rob the future of inner-city students. 

According to new data obtained by Papst and his team, nearly 65% of Baltimore City’s 148 rated schools earned one or two stars, the lowest possible rating, from the Maryland State Department of Education. 

For some context, in surrounding counties, Baltimore County only received 27.6% of schools that received one and two-star schools. Next was Anne Arundel County, with 11.2%, 4% in Howard County, and just 2.7% in Carroll County. 

Meanwhile, Baltimore City Schools had a $1.7 billion budget this year to educate 75,811 students, or about $22,424 per student, one of the highest amounts per student for a large school city nationwide. Despite high spending, nearly two-thirds of all schools had the lowest performance ratings in the state. 

Other data shows chronic absenteeism across the school system jumped 2.5x since 2016. 

These numbers out of Baltimore indicate a broader education decline nationwide – conveniently blamed on Covid. 

This evidence suggests that Democrats have destroyed public education in inner cities.

Maybe residents are catching on to the failures… Boycott Baltimore City Schools? 

New data shows Baltimore City Schools has again dropped in total enrollment. The good news is attendance across the district was up last school year.@FOXBaltimore @chrispapst pic.twitter.com/MxWVDMDxH2

— Project Baltimore (@Project_Bmore) December 19, 2023

However, the question remains as to why the Biden administration ignores the imploding futures of inner-city youth just 40 miles to the north. Maybe the Ukraine war is more important.  

Via The Cradle,

The French newspaper Le Monde published details this week of a Saudi document containing a plan to end the war in Gaza, which stipulates the transfer of Hamas’ military and security leaders to the Algerian capital.

The newspaper stated that the document was prepared by the head of the Gulf Research Centre, Abdulaziz bin Saqr, after a meeting on November 19 in Riyadh with the head of the North Africa and Middle East Department at the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Anne Greux. The document was then transferred to the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Le Monde pointed out that the evacuation of Hamas leaders to Algeria most likely refers to the leader of the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades, Muhammad Deif, and the leader of the movement in the Gaza Strip, Yahya Sinwar.

Algeria was reportedly chosen as a potential place of exile for the movement’s leaders because of the north African nation’s good relationship with Qatar and Iran, the main supporters of the Hamas movement, and because of its security capabilities that would allow it to tightly control their activities.

Le Monde contacted the Algerian ambassador in Paris, but he did not wish to comment on the matter.

The plan also calls for the deployment of an Arab peacekeeping force in Gaza under UN auspices and the establishment of a “joint transitional council,” including the main factions in Gaza, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and Fatah. The council would be responsible for managing the enclave for a period of four years, and for organizing presidential and parliamentary elections.

The newspaper noted it is unclear if the plan had been approved by the Saudi authorities, or whether it was a purely personal initiative of the Gulf Research Centre head.

The document stated only: “It appears that the search for a Saudi-French consensus could contribute to the crystallization of a common vision acceptable to all parties, and have an impact on the decision to end the war.”

Israel has long made it a mission to use targeted assassinations to kill Hamas leaders in Gaza and abroad https://t.co/IBZZKRSNJC

— Middle East Monitor (@MiddleEastMnt) December 20, 2023

Since October 7, the Israeli army has carried out vicious campaign against Gaza that has killed almost 20,000 people, the majority women and children. Israel’s bombing campaign and ongoing siege threaten to make the enclave completely uninhabitable.

Authored by John Cody via ReMix News,

The new EU migration pact will allow countries like Germany to dump their migrants on Hungary — or pay a massive fine. It’s a form of tremendous blackmail, and a clear sign that liberals do not believe their own open borders rhetoric…

Countries like Germany, which are largely responsible for Europe’s migration crisis, always like to virtue signal about being open to mass immigration and multiculturalism.

However, their rhetoric often collides with reality. Now, with Germany dealing with a record number of asylum applicants, the public and political mood is shifting against immigration, which has resulted in the ascendant rise of the Alternative for Germany (AfD).

Germany’s ruling government — and in fact the entire political establishment — is in a real bind. The same story of a rising anti-immigration right is playing out in a number of European countries, such as France and the Netherlands.

The EU asylum and migration pact, which is basically signed and sealed, is an attempt for the nations that supported open borders, such as France and Germany, to transfer the wonders of diversity to other nations that have rejected multiculturalism and mass immigration. In other words, the mantra that “diversity is our strength” was always built on lies and emotion rather than reality — and this new pact is just another piece of evidence that this is the case.

The new EU rules include a mandatory “solidarity mechanism,” which is a nice term for “forced migrant quotas.” The liberal West wants to force its migrants on countries like Hungary, which helps the Western political elite kill two birds with one stone. On one hand, they are able to threaten the homogenous nature of countries like Hungary and create migrant ghettos in these nations This will eventually create new voting blocs, chances for family reunification, and threaten conservatives in power by making them look weak. On the other hand, the new pact also relieves these Western countries of the burden of their own bad policies.

Hungary has already responded, saying it rejects the reform of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) “in the strongest terms.”

“We will not allow anyone to enter against our will,” Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjártó told journalists on Wednesday. “No one from Brussels or anywhere else can tell us who we let in, and we refuse in the strongest terms to be punished for it.”

The new rule says that up to 30,000 migrants can be redistributed across Europe from overburdened countries like Germany to countries like Hungary, which has traditionally rejected asylum seekers. Under the new system, governments will have to pay €20,000 for each migrant they reject.

Considering all of these migrants are supposed to save our pension systems and rejuvenate our economies, one has to wonder why the EU is attempting to foist them on other countries and making them pay a small fortune every time they reject them. Shouldn’t countries like Germany be fighting to keep its exploding migrant population?

The answer is that the entire liberal order is built on a pack of lies. It is so absurd that it is sometimes hard to comprehend.

The agreement still has to be confirmed by the plenary of the European Parliament and the EU member states, but these last steps are usually a formality. The pact does contain some provisions on stricter asylum procedures at the external borders. For example, those who are from countries deemed “safe” can be detained in harsh reception camps and supposedly quickly deported. However, as we already know, migrants can simply toss their passports, lie about their nationality, and say they are from Syria or Gaza.

In the end, the EU and its pro-migrant parties and NGOs will ensure there is no real let up in the amount of migrants entering Europe. The reality is that most on the left, except those few true believers, do not really buy into the progressive mantra around diversity and immigration. They send their children to private schools or live in homogenous school districts. They only see these migrants as a cheap labor workforce to be exploited and a voting bloc they can use to stay in power — forever.

Brussels and liberal EU leaders have followed this path for years, talking about the benefits of diversity while making billion-euro deals with Muslim countries like Turkey to keep migrants from crossing into Europe. It was always about managed demographic transformation, and it cannot happen too quickly, or parties like the AfD or the National Rally might gain power.

In the case of the new asylum and migration pact, our rulers see an opportunity to export their problem to other countries all while increasing legal immigration from countries like India and China. The question is whether Europeans will tolerate these deceptions or embrace true political change before demographic transformation drowns their voices and their vote.

Read more here…

Authored by Anita L. Sherman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

When I was a very small girl, one of my favorite places to be at Christmastime was underneath the pine tree that my father would erect in front of our picture window. The fragrance of those pine boughs filled my head as I would gaze upward. I’d see distorted images of myself in the galaxy of glass orbs that hung from the branches. The orbs always made me smile and, for me, was magical. The merriment of the season often got its start from those youthful orb observations. Those were nostalgic moments in long-ago Christmases.

Today, with so much commercialism and hyped marketing that started months ago, our enjoying a bit of seasonal nostalgia is challenging as Dec. 25 draws near. But I came upon this delightful collection of writings and drawings that, for the relatively short time it takes to read, will transport readers to another time and era when things were perhaps simpler and better appreciated.

A Beautiful Book

For those craving Christmastime nostalgia and for fans of J.R.R. Tolkien, this gorgeously illustrated volume will be one to cherish. Spanning more than two decades, from 1920 to 1943, the author, best known for “The Hobbit” and “The Lord of the Rings,” penned letters to his children each December.

His creative handwriting, beautiful drawings, and inventive tales from the North Pole first introduced a caring and humorous Santa to his eldest son, John, when he was 3 years old. As the years passed, Tolkien’s children increased to include Michael, Christopher, and Priscilla.

Each December a letter would arrive, often having a snow-dusted envelope bearing a polar postage stamp. Inside would be musings from Father Christmas, who was yearly preparing to make his late-night sleigh ride covering many countries with countless children on his list. The style of his writing often resembled calligraphy on steroids, with fanciful and inventive letters often wobbly (because he was very tired when he penned the letter) and usually accompanied by an illustration equally elaborate; it was produced to look like an etching.

With Tolkien’s future works in mind, Father Christmas’s household expanded over the years to include a cast of colorful and often mischievous characters including the North Polar Bear, his nephews Paksu and Valkotukka, Goblins, Red Gnomes, Snow-men, Cave-Bears, and an Elf named Ilbereth, to name a few.

His yearly letters grew in complexity with masterful storytelling, including goblin attacks and the search for the North Polar Bear who goes missing. He is eventually found in a labyrinth of caves.

Tolkien uses these letters as endearing communications to his children, but they are also subtly instructive. For example, when the North Polar Bear is lost in the caves, it gives Father Christmas an opportunity to share with his children the rich history and symbolism of cave paintings. This he does with words and illustrations.

Tolkien’s drawings are wonderful. They’re intricate and imaginative (like his creative handwriting) and invite the reader to explore them in detail, delighting when Santa dons a new pair of green pants, or when the North Polar Bear takes a tumble as an icy gale blows through the workshop.

As Children Grow

There are a few years when Father Christmas tells his children that their gifts may not be as plentiful since there are so many in need around the world, not just for books and toys but also for food and clothing. And then there are the war years, particularly when England is hard hit in the 1940s. Father Christmas is not immune to these global events.

He is always cognizant of the stages of the children’s academic and emotional development from year to year. John may not be as interested in the letters since he’s gotten older, Priscilla may be at the age when she can read for herself without help from her brothers, Christopher is getting over an illness; the letters reveal a creative and very caring father who would become a globally endearing author.

Christopher Tolkien was the literary executor of his father’s estate. He did much to keep his father’s legacy alive by editing many of his father’s works posthumously.

I thought it particularly noteworthy that in his letter of 1937 from the Cliff House near the North Pole, Father Christmas mentions that he thought of sending Hobbits to the children to add titles to the children’s Christmas lists. Tolkien’s children’s fantasy, “The Hobbit or There and Back Again,” was published in 1937 to critical acclaim. Recognized as a classic of children’s literature, it is one of the bestselling books for all ages with over 100 million copies sold.

There are several versions of “Letters From Father Christmas,” but this one is the Centenary Edition (2020) marking 100 years from when the first of his letters appeared in 1920. It includes copies of his original letters written in his notable shaky and stylistic manner, easy-to-read translations of those sensational scribblings, and the Goblin alphabet that the North Polar Bear deciphers from his time in the cave studying paintings, and all of Tolkien’s endearing drawings.

Tolkien died in 1973, so this year marks the 50th anniversary of his passing. It seems a fitting time to offer readers this collection of letters from a famous father to his children at Christmastime.

Christmastime nostalgia at its best. Readers young and old are sure to be charmed.

‘Letters From Father Christmas, Centenary Edition’ By J.R.R. Tolkien William Morrow, Oct. 27, 2020 Hardcover: 208 pages

This week the chief executive of Israel’s Eilat Port confirmed that Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping has had a devastating impact on the rate of goods coming into the country.

CEO Gideon Golber told Reuters “you close the main shipping artery to Eilat Port. And therefore we lost 85% of total activity.” However, Eilat – which mostly handles car imports on the one hand and exports of potash on the other – is much smaller than Israel’s two larger Mediterranean ports of Haifa and Ashdod. Cruise ships in better times also regularly make call there, as there are tourist spots in the region.

Still, the Houthi aim of inflicting harm on Israel’s economy and ability to import/export appears to be happening and could get worse. “We still have a small number of ships for exporting potash, but I believe that with a destination in the Far East they will no longer travel in that direction. So that will also go down,” Golber added in his statement.

What’s happening to Eilat’s traffic could be a sign of things to come for Israel’s bigger ports on the Mediterranean side. It’s Eilat’s location that most important and strategic, as it sits in the south on the Gulf of Aqaba, giving Israel a route to the East without having to navigate the Suez Canal.

Analysis in Al Jazeera has said traffic at Eilat has come to a halt:

Israel, the first direct intended target of the Houthis, has already felt an impact from the disrupted maritime trade. Traffic through its southern port of Eilat, located in the city which is also a tourist destination, has come to a halt, and the foreseeable future seems uncertain as the war rages.

Egypt, which was already facing an ailing economy before the war, could suffer heavily from the slowed trade, in addition to decreased transit fees for cargo going through the Suez Canal, something it is highly dependent on.

Europe and states in the Mediterranean are poised to suffer the most losses if the current situation persists in the long term, as many of the ships taking cargo to and from those countries have been affected.

And in more bad news a growing list of countries have rejected the US plan for a large naval coalition to secure Red Sea shipping against Houthi attacks, as we reported earlier. 

Reuters said about twenty countries have signed up for the Pentagon’s new operation. However, several countries, including Australia, Spain, Italy, and France, have rejected the Pentagon’s request to participate in the operation. 

Spain’s Defense Ministry said it would only participate in NATO-led missions or European-coordinated operations – not ones commanded by the Pentagon: “We will not participate unilaterally in the Red Sea operation.” And Italy’s Defense Ministry voiced similar concerns, indicating it would send naval frigate Virginio Fasan to the Red Sea but only respond to requests by Italian shipowners. 

On multiple fronts, we are seeing serious maritime escalation from Gaza
– Indian Ocean: new
– Red Sea: Houthis
– Gulf waters: Iran & Houthis
– Mediterranean: Iraqi militias

US presence already stretched in region, maritime traffic disrupted https://t.co/O5d6O6nBs3

— Joyce Karam (@Joyce_Karam) December 23, 2023

But it remains that if things get bad enough for European imports, some of the leadership in these countries may have a change of heart.

Authored by Petr Svab via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Supreme Court is likely to strike down a Colorado court ruling that removed former President Donald Trump from the state’s ballot. However, the conservative majority on the highest court is likely to do so in a narrow way that doesn’t get into the weeds of whether President Trump’s actions constituted insurrection, according to a constitutional law expert.

The Supreme Court may say the 14th Amendment’s disqualification clause doesn’t apply to the president, predicted Horace Cooper, senior fellow with the National Center for Public Policy Research, who formerly taught constitutional law at George Mason University.

The Colorado Supreme Court ruled on Dec. 19 that President Trump is to be barred from the state’s ballot because he “engaged in insurrection” by inciting his supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Because, under Colorado election law, only qualified candidates can be placed on the ballot, it would be “wrongful” for the secretary of state to allow on the ballot a candidate disqualified under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which bars from office anybody who has previously taken an oath of office and later engaged in an insurrection, according to the ruling.

Lawyers for the former president immediately announced that they intend to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“The Supreme Court is highly likely to take this case fairly quickly,” Mr. Cooper told The Epoch Times.

The Supreme Court doesn’t have to address the issue right away. It can put the state decision on hold and wait to issue a ruling until after the Colorado primary. But it’s unlikely that it would try to wait until after the next president is sworn in in 2025 and then declare the issue moot, he said.

“I don’t think they can get away with a 13-month delay,” Mr. Cooper said.

A major reason why the court is likely to step in quickly is because similar efforts are underway in other states, including New York, California, and Pennsylvania.

In Michigan, a district court struck President Trump’s name from the ballot, but the ruling was reversed on appeal. The case appeared to be over, but after the Colorado decision, the Michigan attorney general filed an appeal to the state’s Supreme Court.

“[It’s] not a question that you can just stall your way out of,” Mr. Cooper said.

The U.S. Supreme Court will probably reverse the Colorado court but will likely look for a narrow way to do so, he predicted.

“There are some who want the court to weigh in on the question of insurrection. They want the court to weigh in on the issue of whether or not the actions that some … or, maybe, many have observed of Donald Trump constituted insurrection—even if not charged and certainly not convicted,” Mr. Cooper said.

“The Supreme Court is highly unlikely to weigh in on that.”

The 14th Amendment doesn’t specifically list the presidency among the offices to which the disqualification clause applies, but the Colorado court argued that the reference to “any office, civil or military, under the United States” covers the presidency and that the historical record indicated that the amendment wasn’t meant to exclude it.

However, Mr. Cooper predicted that the Supreme Court may take the opposite side of that argument, as it would allow it to dissolve the issue without getting into the weeds of what President Trump did or didn’t do.

“A more conservative court often tries to resolve a matter in the most straightforward way possible with the minimum need for a deep engagement on the part of the court. So I would say it is actually highly likely that they simply say, ‘As a matter of statutory construction, the office of the presidency was never contemplated for this,’” he said.

Mr. Cooper pointed out that the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to exclude former Confederates from positions of power.

“Their target was specifically the Confederacy. Their target was not anyone who supported the French in the French-Indian War. Their target was not anyone who supported the British in the British-American War. Even though the language isn’t written in a way to limit those, the rationale was the Confederacy,” he said.

“The further away you get from a construction involving actual people who had engaged in military rebellion against the government, the more careful you’re going to have to be about your reading.”

The justices, particularly the conservative-leaning ones, will try to avoid passing judgment on the insurrection rhetoric applied against President Trump.

“The Supreme Court does not desire to own the question, ‘Does the behavior that people have seen of Donald Trump constitute insurrection?’ They do not wish to own that,” Mr. Cooper said, although he acknowledged that “there are some on the left who want that very question to be answered.”

Chief Justice John Roberts is particularly keen to keep the court away from political imbroglio, he said.

“If you look at a more conservative court, their typical response is always a more narrow construction. So here you’re going to have Chief Justice Roberts likely either writing the decision—which I predict—or deciding who will write the decision. In either case, his view is going to be that it be a simple and narrow way to overturn the case that Colorado has put forward,” Mr. Cooper said.

He speculated that even some of the justices in the left-leaning minority may join the decision, as it may allow them to keep the court less involved in the 2024 election.

Mr. Cooper recalled the 2000 election, when the Supreme Court felt compelled to issue a stop order to halt recounts in Florida, only to be accused of interfering with the election.

“Many of the justices say that they are very unhappy with what happened to their reputation because they did that. If you ask them, would they like to do this again? Most of the justices, including the chief justice, will tell you ‘no,’” he said.

In Mr. Cooper’s view, simply declaring that the disqualification clause doesn’t apply to the president would allow Chief Justice Roberts to minimize election entanglement.

“He’s going to try to do it in the narrowest way possible so that it is not a determination where I’ve decided who can be a candidate and who cannot be a candidate. I’m only deciding whether or not Colorado understood the law,” he said.

It would’ve been prudent for the Colorado Supreme Court to try to stay out of the election, too, Mr. Cooper suggested.

The Supreme Court building in Washington on June 7, 2023. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)

“The Colorado Supreme Court really took a risk that it might get smacked down by the U.S. Supreme Court. And yet it did not, when evaluating that risk, try to act in a way that demonstrated restraint,” he said.

Mr. Cooper noted that the state court decision was split 4–3, with the chief justice dissenting.

The dissent showed the proper reticence toward election meddling, presenting a narrow argument that “nothing in Colorado law gives this power” to the secretary of state to strip candidates from the ballot based on the disqualification clause, he said.

The dissenters avoided the insurrection issue and settled on saying that “our statutes never were intended to give us this authority,” according to Mr. Cooper.

“That was the way out,” he said.

In a fresh weekend report The New York Times says that President Vladimir Putin is ready to negotiate an end to the nearly two year-long ‘special operation’ in Ukraine, at a moment most of the territory which forms the four ‘annexed’ oblasts remains firmly under Russian military control.

However, to some degree, Putin has consistently held open the chance to negotiate… it’s just that “negotiate” in the Kremlin context would be on the basis of Crimea and the Donbass being fully recognized as Russian Federation territory. Until recently, the West considered this an impossibility, but US and European officials have more recently quietly admitted Moscow has more or less ‘won’. The NY Times quotes Putin in the following:

Buoyed by Ukraine’s failed counteroffensive and flagging Western support, Mr. Putin says that Russia’s war goals have not changed. Addressing his generals on Tuesday, he boasted that Ukraine was so beleaguered that Russia’s invading troops were doing “what we want.”

“We won’t give up what’s ours,” he pledged, adding dismissively, “If they want to negotiate, let them negotiate.” But in a recent push of back-channel diplomacy, Mr. Putin has been sending a different message: He is ready to make a deal.

The report cites Russian diplomatic sources who say Putin has for the first time been open to ceasefire which would include a freezing of all frontline fighting. American officials say the same, per the report: “In fact, Mr. Putin also sent out feelers for a cease-fire deal a year earlier, in the fall of 2022, according to American officials.”

“That quiet overture, not previously reported, came after Ukraine routed Russia’s army in the country’s northeast. Mr. Putin indicated that he was satisfied with Russia’s captured territory and ready for an armistice, they said.”

Very obviously, Ukraine’s leadership and society has been fracturing under the strain of the invasion and immense death toll, with Kiev officials recently admitting monumental problems with manpower and ammo supply.

But the reality is that Russian society is likely facing deep fractures and uncertainty too, though it’s far less evident. Countless mothers, fathers, and families are grieving and dealing with the loss of loved ones killed in action. Conservative estimates have said at least 50,000 Russian troops have died in the war (and that is based just on data as of mid-summer). US officials have claimed a figure in the hundreds of thousands, but there are reasons to be doubtful of this.

Angry families of fallen soldiers have increasingly formed the locus of a small but increasingly visible Russian anti-war movement, suggesting broader quiet societal angst concerning the direction of the war in Ukraine. They don’t want Ukraine to be Russia’s “endless war”. This discontent threatens to become much more out in the open, seen for example in the following:

Former TV journalist Yekaterina Duntsova was disqualified on Saturday from running against President Vladimir Putin in an election next March because of alleged flaws in her application to register as a candidate.

Video from a meeting of the central electoral commission showed members voting unanimously to reject the candidacy of Duntsova, who had wanted to run on a platform to end the war in Ukraine and release political prisoners.

Her disqualification was seized on by Putin’s critics as proof that no one with genuine opposition views will be allowed to stand against him in the first presidential election since the start of the 22-month war. They see it as a fake process with only one possible outcome.

According to more in the NYT report on Putin’s supposed new-found readiness for serious negotiations: 

Mr. Putin’s repeated interest in a cease-fire is an example of how opportunism and improvisation have defined his approach to the war behind closed doors. Dozens of interviews with Russians who have long known him and with international officials with insight into the Kremlin’s inner workings show a leader maneuvering to reduce risks and keep his options open in a war that has lasted longer than he expected. While deploying fiery public rhetoric, Mr. Putin privately telegraphs a desire to declare victory and move on.

“They say, ‘We are ready to have negotiations on a cease-fire,’” said one senior international official who met with top Russian officials this fall. “They want to stay where they are on the battlefield.”

🇷🇺 Ambassador Ilya #Rogachev:

💬 All talks and negotiations on the basis of the infamous Zelensky ‘peace plan’ have no future, because #Russia will never accept an outcome of a negotiation process in which it does not participate.

👉 Watch full interview https://t.co/nQvH4MHh8F pic.twitter.com/6WFYGLsZ5T

— Russia in South Africa 🇷🇺 (@EmbassyofRussia) December 22, 2023

So likely, Putin could be facing increased pressure even from Kremlin senior officials to wrap up Ukraine operations, especially given the Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions have already been declared part of Russia, and a firm military grip remains on them.

But it remains that Ukraine’s Zelensky has shut the door every time he’s so much as asked by the press about the possibility of negotiating. Simultaneously, he’s admitted time and again that things aren’t going well for Ukraine forces on the battlefield. Yet he still says he’ll never enter ceasefire talks with Moscow so long as Putin is still in power.

Authored by Thomas Buckley via The Brownstone Institute,

Deciding that a person who has not been charged with, let alone convicted of, insurrection is guilty of insurrection and therefore cannot run for president…that is “protecting our democracy” in action…

Whenever that term is used, one can be assured that the democracy they are referring to has no semblance to any actual democracy.

In this case, “ours” does not mean “all of ours” – it means “theirs.”

What they are protecting is their democracy; not a democracy of the people, but now merely a word used to fig leaf the ever-expanding slither of socialist socialite statism, the velvet fascism that is deftly hammering its way through the society and the culture.

The Colorado Supreme Court ruling disqualifying Donald Trump from the 2024 presidential ballot there is absurd, legally indefensible, and a direct attack on the entire constitutional premise of the nation.

It eviscerates the basic right of the people to choose – however one may think of their choice – their own leader.

It torpedoes the idea of the balance of powers between the three branches of government. Until yesterday, judges have almost always steered clear of most election-related cases, in part because of that issue. In fact, the mantra that “Trump lost every challenge he made in court to the 2020 election” is true because, three years ago, courts did everything they could to not hear the cases – issues of standing, issues of timing, and issues well, what do you what me to do? Order a new vote? Few – if any – were heard on their merits.

The United States Supreme Court even ruled that a group of states did not have standing to sue states they thought mishandled the 2020 election. One would think a state would have standing in court to challenge how another state ran their elections because who is president impacts every state, but still the Supremes passed on even hearing an argument.

That is yet another reason this ruling is so mind-boggling dangerous – the precedent set is catastrophic to the point that the President of El Salvador Nayib Bukele was right when he tweeted “The United States has lost its ability to lecture any other country about ‘democracy’.”

That is how degrading this ruling is to the actual rule of law, not the “rule of law” the statists trot out to stifle, intimidate, and destroy their opponents.

Even though it should not be necessary to refute the Colorado ruling point-by-point – for the same reason people don’t try to argue with sidewalk schizophrenics that there really aren’t people and plants and dogs yelling at him – here are the particulars (from a previous piece) as to why the Colorado judges are wrong.

• First, the events of January 6th were not an insurrection attempt. They were wrong and stupid and the greatest gift ever given to the Deep State and the Democrats, but they did not constitute an insurrection. When you try to overthrow the government, you tend to bring guns and you tend not to make sure to wrap it up in time to get back to the hotel for dinner.

• Second, to say Trump caused the problem is also not true. One could make the argument that Nancy Pelosi “caused” it because she point-blank refused to beef up Capitol security that day, thereby allowing bad actors to run wild, or that the FBI “caused” it via its embedded intelligence operatives.

• Third, Trump has not been found guilty of a crime…yet. Therefore the idea is legally premature and the position taken by those in favor that “we all know it was an insurrection and he did it so we don’t need a trial” is not quite – at least for the time being – how the American justice system works.

• Fourth, read the clause again – it says “elector of President,” not “president.” May seem like splitting hairs, but they’re really different. As to “officer,” even that is muddy as many legal scholars equate that with appointed personnel. Finally, Congress is specifically called out for the ban, but the presidency is not. So even if it ever gets to court it will not fly (unless, of course, that court is in the District of Columbia).

• Fifth, even if you twist yourself into believing Trump cannot serve as president, it does not in any way, shape, or form bar him from running for the office. That would be a gross and obvious violation of his first amendment rights…oh, wait.

• Sixth, to argue that insurrectionists are not allowed to serve in the federal government is patently false. A few years after the Civil War, Confederate soldiers were signing up for the US Army and Confederate veterans began serving in – wait for it – Congress. In fact, dozens of former Confederates – and not just privates but high officers – served in the House and Senate, no problem.

The last Confederate veteran to serve in Congress was Charles Manly Stedman of North Carolina, a major on Gen. Robert E. Lee’s staff – seriously – and he held his seat until 1930. 

And he was a typical southern Democrat racist, by the way, pushing to erect a “Mammy Memorial” statue on Washington. And yes, it really means what you think it means: a statue honoring mammies because, as Stedman put it: “The traveler, as he passes by, will recall that epoch of southern civilization [when] fidelity and loyalty” prevailed. No class of any race of people held in bondage could be found anywhere who lived more [freely] from care or distress.”

So, if people who signed up to specifically go shoot people as part of an actual intentional rather widely advertised bloody insurrection – and clearly remained committed to the underlying cause – were allowed to serve in Congress, I’m pretty sure that sets a precedent.

Leaving the particulars refuted and turning back to the core of what is meant by “protecting our democracy” we must face the lie that has become the undercurrent of American discourse. 

“Our democracy,” on its face, sounds reasonable, like “our constitution” or “our rights” as citizens. It seems inclusive, unifying, and based on a shared set of facts and beliefs. In other words, the “our” is meant to signify “everyone” and that’s good, right?

But in this case, the “our” specifically does not mean everyone but only some, as in “this is ours and not yours”.

The Romans called the Mediterranean Sea “Mare Nostra,” or “Our Sea” to connote power and exclusivity. The mafia is often referred to by its members as “Cosa Nostra,” or “Our Thing,” again to ensure a protective separateness from everything and everyone else.

Now, the organizations and people fetishizing “protect our democracy” mean it the same way the Romans really did and the mafia really do – “their democracy.” 

“Democratia Nostra” indeed.

This trope is an intentional attempt to quell discussion and debate, to “other” (to use a woke term) people who question the idea, and to define anyone who does not subscribe to their statist, elitist, technocrat, oligarchical version of democracy as being a danger to the very idea of democracy itself.

Examples of this hypocritical – but strangely alluring – linguistic perversion abound. From the “Protecting our Democracy Act,” which would have essentially federalized elections, pushed by progressive Democrats to countless “non-profit, non-partisan” groups started by those same totalitarian wokesters, the term can be found being used – and never falling under media judgment – throughout today’s political landscape.

Like so many other tech companies (and their leaders, see Zuckerberg’s Center for Tech and Civic Life), Microsoft has an effort called “Democracy Forward.” At a recent conference on digital campaign security, a member of the project, one Ethan Chumley, used a rather telling phrase when describing what Democracy Forward does as “supporting the institutions we think (emphasis added) are fundamental to a healthy democracy.”

And what institutions are included? Defending Digital Campaigns is one, a “non-aligned” organization funded by Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and others to, in theory, increase campaign data security. Its board of directors includes former NSA and current DHS officials, former Romney presidential campaign manager Matt Rhoades, Hillary’s campaign manager Robby Mook, and the chairman of a group called DigiDems, which itself in financially supported by the Democratic Party and, of course, the law firm Perkins Coie of “Russiagate” fame (a perfect example of the DC swamp rabbit hole, by the way).

Democracy Forward also partners with NewsGuard, the organization that calls itself a media fact-checker and trustworthiness monitor that consistently places sites like The Federalist on its naughty list and the Guardian on its nice list. NewsGuard also slammed outlets that tried to cover the Hunter Biden laptop scandal and announced in January a partnership with the American Federation of Teachers to combat misinformation in the classroom.

For more information on the absolutely non-partisan, completely fair minded Microsoft effort, you can visit the website.

The group “Protect Democracy” was founded by a pair of Obama White House lawyers, one of whom during his college days helped found “Law Students Against Alito,” also claims to be non-partisan. Here is how it defines “The Threat” to democracy on is website:

These global trends impacting the entire democratic world, when combined with our own governance structures and history of white supremacism, have resulted in an amplification of the power of an anti-democratic, illiberal, and bigoted faction in our society that has always existed. That faction, first through Trump’s presidency and now through the political party it has largely captured…

Non-partisan, indeed If you want, you can check out the website.

Then there is Securing our Digital Future, an effort of Foreign Policy magazine. With a contributor list that reads like a parody of internationalism, the policies suggested essentially espouse the idea of saving democracy by killing freedom. One writer, Matt Masterson of the Stanford Internet Observatory (that’s what it is actually called), states that the “onslaught of misinformation” that started in 2016 has caused people to mistrust institutions before noting that the 2020 election was the most secure in modern American history. 

To continue to protect democracy, Masterson suggests, in part, the following:

Accountability for those who knowingly spread disinformation to achieve their political or financial goals. Allies in democracy must identify, call out and collectively respond to adversaries’ attempts to destroy democratic institutions. This can encompass political accountability at the ballot box, as well as professional accountability, such as the loss of a law license for using the court to further disinformation, or the loss of financial support by refusing to do business with those funding the attacks.

The term was recently employed by the New York Times when announcing the hiring of Ken Bensinger to report on “conservative” media and ideas and such. Putting aside for the moment that he was the reporter that foisted the Fusion GPS Steele Dossier onto the public, the Times’ own reasoning for the hire is telling:

“…Ken’s new beat, filled as it is with people who reject mainstream narratives and question the institutions that hold up our democracy (emphasis added). Understanding the way information is developed, circulated and absorbed on the right is vital at this precarious moment…,” stated the Times in its announcement.

Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, MSNBC, AOC, CNN, Liz Cheney, etc., etc., ad infinitum have all used – may even be using it right now – the term “protect our democracy” and all, whether putatively right or left, mean it the same way – their democracy. But that is a democracy that, with apologies to the Washington Post, thrives in darkness and is protected by the prosperity and silence and loyalty of its members, a political code of Omerta that must be kept at all costs.

Our democracy, indeed.

The Colorado decision will almost certainly be overturned by the Supreme Court, but for “protectors of our democracy” that is not such a bad thing – it will give them an election hammer point: see, the Supreme Court bad, just like with abortion, and needs to be abolished…wait, reformed and expanded to include every proper viewpoint.

As the media will play along with this, it is yet another “Heads I win, tails you lose” political shell game being played to keep Trump – or anyone who threatens the Deep State, the “own nothing and be happy” drivers of the world, or the global nomenklatura – away from the levers of power,

It should not have happened, but what could happen has now happened.

And we will never be the same.

*  *  *

Republished from the author’s Substack