The Trump Indictments: Examining the Risks Associated with the Use of Prosecutions as Political Tools

The impartiality and integrity of our justice system are crucial to our governance, therefore employing prosecutions to target political adversaries yields far-reaching consequences. The politically motivated prosecutions of former President, and current candidate, Donald Trump, have a grave impact on our institutions and the overall stability of our republic.

These four separate indictments of former President Trump during this presidential campaign season provide an illustrative context for understanding the systemic risks. The repercussions of utilizing prosecutions for political purposes extend beyond legal outcomes for the former president and others accused in the indictments. The impact on individuals financially, the tarnishing of their public and political reputations, and the substantial time investment are immeasurable. Regardless of guilt, the financial toll of legal proceedings can be staggering, encompassing legal fees, court costs, and potential loss of income due to diverted focus and lost jobs. Moreover, the public perception of being indicted carries the potential to irreparably damage an individual’s reputation, casting shadows on their credibility and character. Even if charges are ultimately dropped or if Trump is acquitted, the stain on his public image may endure. Additionally, the time required to mount a defense against criminal charges is exhaustive and detracts from the campaign. This drain on time and resources, regardless of eventual outcomes, amounts to a victory for those who would use the system to target Trump. It is a no-lose situation for those politically motivated prosecutors, but our society is certainly losing.

The primary concern regarding the use of these prosecutions against Trump lies in the manipulation of the justice system to serve partisan objectives. The indictments, which appear selective and disproportionately aimed at Trump, disrupt the equilibrium of power and undermine the foundational principle of equal treatment under the law. Such manipulation exacerbates societal divisions and leads to heightened political unrest.

When the justice system is perceived as a political tool to target adversaries, the erosion of public trust in both the judiciary and broader democratic institutions is inevitable. This erosion threatens the institutions’ legitimacy and their ability to effectively serve their purpose in maintaining societal order. Diminished public confidence leads to the perception that the justice system is biased, eroding the rule of law and the foundations of democratic governance.

Central to our republic is the separation of powers, which ensures the independence of each branch of government. However, employing these prosecutions for political gain blurs these divisions, enabling the executive branch to misuse its influence over law enforcement to target rivals. This blurring weakens the system of checks and balances, jeopardizing the republic’s foundations.

The use of prosecutions against Trump during a presidential campaign heightens the potential for instability within our country. As political polarization continues to intensify, grievances escalate, raising the real likelihood we face civil unrest or even violence. The erosion of our founding principles, including due process and equal protection, alienates citizens from their government and creates an environment conducive to authoritarian tendencies.

To counter the systemic risks associated with prosecutorial manipulation during a presidential campaign, historically the media and civil society were vested with the responsibility to scrutinize and expose potential abuses of the system for political ends. However, media most often falter when their interests align with specific political outcomes, abandoning their role as democratic safeguards to further exasperate the problem.

This use of prosecutions and the judicial system against a candidate and former president during a presidential campaign is unprecedented and poses substantial systemic risks to our political stability. These indictments underline just how fragile our system is, and regardless of the eventual outcome of each case, our country will be nearer to faltering because of these indictments.

Navigating Turbulent Times: Restoring Liberty in the Face of Adversity

Things appear to be hard right now for our country. In fact, we may have never been so close to losing our gift of Liberty since our early days as a nation. What we do to correct course in the next few years could result in a return to liberty or sliding into tyranny. However, amidst the challenges we face, it is crucial to remember that the struggle for Liberty has always been tumultuous. We stand shoulder to shoulder with those who came before us, who weathered storms and fought against adversity to secure and preserve our freedom. As we celebrate our independence today, let us draw inspiration from the wise words of Thomas Jefferson: “The boisterous sea of liberty is never without a wave.” By recognizing the constant nature of turbulence in the pursuit of Liberty, we can choose to steer our nation towards a brighter future.

Undeniably, we find ourselves in a turbulent time. Political divisions, societal unrest, and numerous challenges both domestic and global have tested the resilience of our nation. It is disheartening to witness the erosion of the very principles upon which our nation was founded—principles that prioritize individual freedoms, equal rights under the law, and the pursuit of happiness. Yet, we must not succumb to despair, for history has shown that the path to Liberty is seldom smooth.

Throughout our history, have had other dark periods where the light of Liberty seemed to fade. However, the struggle for freedom has always persevered. From the American Revolution that birthed our nation to the Civil Rights Movement that fought for equality, these struggles were marked by turbulence. The road to liberty has never been without obstacles, and it is during these challenging times that the true strength of a nation is tested.

As we stand at this crossroads, it is essential to recognize that we are not alone in our journey. We have the collective wisdom of our founding fathers and the resilience of generations who fought for the ideals we hold dear. We must channel their spirit and use it as a guiding force to correct our course and restore our liberties.

To regain what we are losing, we must prioritize dialogue, empathy, and understanding. It is through constructive conversations and respectful debates that we can bridge the gaps dividing our nation. By focusing on common goals, shared values, and unchanging truths we can overcome the polarization that threatens to tear us apart.

Additionally, an informed and engaged citizenry is paramount in preserving Liberty. We must actively participate in our political processes, hold our elected officials accountable, and advocate for policies that uphold the principles upon which our nation was built. Education, awareness, and active involvement in civic affairs will empower us to shape the future we desire.

The journey back towards Liberty is a continuous one, with no final destination. We must accept that turbulence will always accompany our pursuit of freedom. However, it is through resilience, determination, and a united effort that we can prevail. We must reject the allure of complacency and remain vigilant in safeguarding our rights, while also ensuring the rights of others are respected.

On this day of celebration and reflection, let us remember that while things may seem difficult, we are not the first to face such challenges. The struggle for Liberty has always been tumultuous, but it is precisely during these times that the indomitable spirit of freedom shines brightest. By staying true to our principles, engaging in constructive dialogue, and actively working towards positive change, we can navigate through these turbulent waters and emerge stronger, ensuring that the wave of Liberty never ceases to crash upon our shores.

Lorie Smith’s Win today in 303 Creative v. Elenis Upholds the Rights of All Americans

In a groundbreaking ruling today, the Supreme Court delivered a resounding victory for freedom of speech and individual conscience in the case of 303 Creative v. Elenis. The court, in a decisive 6-3 ruling, held that the government cannot compel Americans to express messages that they do not believe in, marking a significant win for all Americans who value their right to express their thoughts and beliefs freely.

At the heart of the case was an attempt by the state of Colorado to force an individual, Lorie Smith, to speak in ways that directly contradicted her deeply held beliefs. The Court, recognizing the fundamental importance of the First Amendment, stood firmly against such government coercion, affirming the rights of individuals to maintain their own convictions, even when they clash with prevailing viewpoints.

Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch eloquently stated, “this Court has long held, the opportunity to think for ourselves and to express those thoughts freely is among our most cherished liberties and part of what keeps our Republic strong.” These words remind us that the freedom to think independently and express our ideas openly is a cornerstone of the American Experiment.

Justice Gorsuch went on to acknowledge that upholding the Constitution’s commitment to freedom of speech inevitably means encountering ideas that may be “unattractive,” “misguided,” or even “hurtful.” However, he emphasized that it is the virtue of tolerance, not coercion, that defines our nation’s response to such ideas. The First Amendment, as Justice Gorsuch highlighted, envisions the United States as a diverse and multifaceted society, where every individual is free to think and speak according to their own conscience, rather than being dictated by the government’s demands.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in 303 Creative v. Elenis underscores the importance of safeguarding the rights of individuals to express their beliefs, particularly when those beliefs clash with prevailing norms or government-imposed viewpoints. It establishes a clear precedent that the government cannot compel speech or force individuals to endorse messages that run contrary to their deeply held convictions.

This landmark decision serves as a reminder that freedom of speech is not only about protecting popular opinions or comfortable ideas; it is about upholding the principle that every person should have the liberty to express their thoughts, even when they diverge from the mainstream. It ensures that our nation remains a haven for diversity of thought, fostering robust public discourse and allowing for the free exchange of ideas that are crucial for the progress and vitality of a democratic society.

Lorie Smith’s victory in this case is not just a win for her as an individual, or her business; it is a win for all Americans who cherish their right to express their thoughts and beliefs freely. The Supreme Court’s recognition of the inherent value of individual conscience and its commitment to protecting the freedom of speech is a triumph that reverberates throughout the nation, reaffirming our collective dedication to the principles upon which our republic was founded.

In celebrating this ruling, we must also remain vigilant in safeguarding our fundamental rights and continue to champion the principles of free expression and individual conscience. This Court has once again demonstrated that it sees itself as a guardian of our constitutional freedoms, but it is now our duty as citizens to ensure that these rights are protected and upheld for generations to come.

Jacob Schriever: From Struggle to Triumph to Arrest - A Harrowing Journey of Faith

 

Jacob Schriever’s life has been marked by a tumultuous journey and a profound encounter with God. His quest for guidance and salvation ultimately led him to find solace and purpose through his faith in Christ. However, his recent experience during the Pride Parade in Hot Springs took a harrowing turn, exposing him to aggression, hostility, and, potentially, a criminal record. Let us delve into Jacob’s remarkable story of struggle and redemption, as well as the challenges he faces today.

On his 30th birthday, December 11^th 2007, Jacob experienced a spiritual awakening that shook him to his core. While working in Chicago, he felt the manifestation of God’s wrath upon him, a conviction of the Holy Spirit that served as a catalyst for his transformation. Seeking guidance, Jacob turned to his priest but found no relief from his fears and confusion. Instead, supernatural occurrences haunted him, intensifying his sense of guilt and impending doom.

Overwhelmed by his sins, Jacob saw a waking vision that cemented his belief in his destined damnation. Haunted by the belief that demons were closing in on him, he decided to dedicate his remaining time to warning others. Holding a sign on a street corner in Chicago that read, “Read the Bible, it will Save your Life!” he hoped to share the life-saving message he had neglected to believe.

It was on this momentous day that members of a local Baptist church discovered Jacob and extended their support. Embraced by their warmth and compassion, after hearing the simple plan of salvation by grace, Jacob accepted Christ as his Savior, underwent baptism, and dedicated himself to deepening his Biblical knowledge. Pursuing studies at Bible College and engaging in evangelism, Jacob relocated to Hot Springs, where he continued to spread the teachings of the Bible.

On June 10, Jacob Schriever found himself in a series of horrifying events during the Pride Parade in Hot Springs. Joined by his friend David Runyan, Jacob had been street preaching and holding a sign proclaiming the imminent return of Jesus for several months, hoping to win souls to Christ. They had learned about the Pride Parade just a week before the event and decided to attend to share their message of faith.

The previous year’s parade had been small and relatively peaceful, with only about 20 participants. So, Jacob and David didn’t anticipate any significant trouble. Little did they know that this year’s parade would be different. The day of the parade coincided with a biker event, attracting a larger crowd to downtown Hot Springs.

As Jacob preached near the fountain, he noticed an increasing number of hecklers and individuals with LGBTQ paraphernalia observing their activities. Among them were some people with professional camera equipment, filming their interactions. Despite the confrontational atmosphere, Jacob tried to maintain a loving and compassionate approach to his preaching.

As the parade drew nearer, Jacob and David positioned themselves to preach and hold up their signs. However, as soon as the parade reached them, Jacob was taunted and sprayed with silly string. Startled, he tried to defend himself but was tackled against a parked vehicle. Amid the chaos, he managed to retreat but found himself caught up in a scuffle.

As the parade progressed, Jacob encountered numerous individuals trying to block him, grab his sign, or physically confront him. He had to constantly maneuver to avoid being overwhelmed. At one point, he even directed his preaching towards federal park rangers leading the parade, whom he believed were using their authority to spread what he considered sexual deviancy.

The mob’s pushing and shoving continued, making it increasingly difficult for Jacob to navigate the crowd. Despite the hostilities, he remained determined to finish his preaching and protest. When the parade ended, he tried to find an exit but found himself surrounded by the mob. Amidst the chaos, he had some liquid thrown on him and he was pushed into the doorway of the Central Theater, falling face-first to the ground.

Though disoriented, Jacob managed to crawl to his feet in the theater entrance. People continued to push him from all directions, attempting to take his sign. In the midst of the commotion, he tried to establish distance without resorting to violence. In a desperate moment, he shouted at a young bodybuilder who was in his face, hoping to create space.

Suddenly, an officer intervened, shouting that Jacob was under arrest. Surprised, Jacob cooperated fully and was handcuffed. The crowd erupted in celebration, while Jacob defiantly shouted about the imminent return of Jesus.

David, who had been filming the arrest, had to flee from the mob that chased him, threatening harm. Jacob was eventually released from jail after a brief period, thanks to an anonymous person or persons who paid his bail.

Jacob’s trial for the charge of “Disorderly Conduct” is set for September 21^st at the District Court in Hot Springs. Bob Ballinger, the Director of Law and Policy for the National Association of Christion Lawmakers, is representing Jacob in his criminal case.  

In light of the legal challenges he faces, Jacob’s supporters have set up a GiveSendGo campaign to assist with his legal fees. If you feel compelled to help Jacob in his journey, you can find more information and contribute at the following link: Legal Fees

Jacob Schriever’s life has been a testament to the transformative power of faith and the love of Christ. From a harrowing journey of struggle and redemption, he found solace and purpose by sharing the life-saving message of the Bible. Despite the challenges he faces today, Jacob remains steadfast in his dedication to spreading God’s words and warning others of the eternal consequences of their actions. Let us remember Jacob’s story as a testament to the strength of faith and the resilience of the human spirit.

A video capturing some of the activity at the pride parade can be found at: Video

National Association of Christian Lawmakers Celebrates One-Year Anniversary of Dobbs Decision, Advocates for Life at Conception

Washington D.C., June 22, 2023 - The National Association of Christian Lawmakers (NACL), the first para-legislative organization in the country to pass a national model law protecting life from the moment of conception, proudly commemorates the one-year anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court ruling, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade. This momentous occasion marks a significant milestone in the ongoing battle to protect the lives of the unborn, prompting both celebration and introspection as we acknowledge the millions of lives lost since the legalization of abortion in 1973.

The overturning of Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs decision represents a resounding victory for advocates of the sanctity of life, reaffirming the intrinsic value and dignity of every human being. This pivotal decision signals a critical stride towards establishing a society that upholds the rights and well-being of the most vulnerable among us.

"The Dobbs ruling provides us with the opportunity to demonstrate our unwavering determination to uphold life by enacting protective measures in our laws that safeguard the rights of the unborn," declared Bob Ballinger, Director of Law and Policy for NACL. He further emphasized the proactive stance of NACL by stating, "NACL is not letting this opportunity pass by. In fact, we have already adopted model legislation which protects life at conception - we hope to see the legislation adopted in several more states in future legislative sessions."

Joining the celebration in Washington, D.C., Jason Rapert, the founder and president of NACL, expressed his enthusiasm. "I am excited to be here with Students for Life to celebrate this milestone and challenge the nation to abolish abortion in every state across the country," Rapert declared. He also underlined the organization's commitment to cultivating a culture that values and defends all life, stating, "We embrace the opportunity to cultivate a culture that esteems and safeguards life at all stages, and to reaffirm our commitment to abolishing abortion, which is a modern-day crime against humanity."

While rejoicing at the overturning of Roe v. Wade, it is essential to acknowledge the profound sorrow caused by the loss of countless lives to abortion since its legalization. Each life lost represents a unique and irreplaceable individual denied the chance to experience the wonders, challenges, and joys of existence. This heartbreaking reality resonates within our society, serving as a poignant reminder of the myriad of missed opportunities for love, growth, and contributions to our world, and motivates us to continue the fight unlit the right to life is protected for every person – no matter how small.

The National Association of Christian Lawmakers (NACL) remains dedicated to uniting federal, state, and local lawmakers in support of clear biblical principles. Through regular meetings, NACL members engage in meaningful discussions on crucial issues and propose model statutes, ordinances, and resolutions rooted in a biblical worldview to address major policy concerns. Established in 2020, the NACL has already established 33 state chairs, boasting members and supporters across all 50 states and Puerto Rico. As the first formal national association of Christian lawmakers in American history, NACL continues to steadfastly pursue its mission.

 For more information about the National Association of Christian Lawmakers, please visit: https://christianlawmakers.com/

The Housing Crisis: Burdens and Solutions

Statistics don't lie: our nation is in the midst of a housing crisis, and its impact is felt most profoundly by middle- and lower-income Americans. Regrettably, there appears to be no immediate relief in sight. To effectively address this crisis, we must confront its root cause head-on and implement viable solutions to increase housing supply. While zoning reforms promoting denser housing and multiple family dwellings offer hope, it is imperative that we take into account the diverse needs of families as we chart a path forward.

Thankfully, policymakers have begun actively engaging in zoning reforms that facilitate the construction of affordable housing. By loosening restrictions and regulations, the process of building denser residences and multiple family housing becomes more streamlined, thereby helping to alleviate the shortage. However, it is crucial to recognize that such housing options do not cater to the preferences of every family. The widely cherished “American Dream” often encompasses aspirations of home ownership or, at the very least, a stable place to rent that includes some space. Families may desire a home with a yard for their children to play in, a garage for their cars, or even a shop. Therefore, to address the housing crisis comprehensively, we must seek solutions that accommodate a diversity of housing preferences.

In this pursuit, collaborative efforts among local governments, developers, and communities play a vital role in creating a balanced approach that addresses the pressing need for housing while respecting the concerns of local residents.

Fortunately, there are companies that have long been committed to addressing this need. For instance, Rausch Coleman Homes boasts a rich legacy of over 65 years in building affordable new homes across multiple states, including Arkansas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas, Texas, and Alabama. By providing new homes for middle and working-class families, they not only fulfill the dreams of these families but also create opportunities for others to purchase or rent less expensive homes previously occupied by their customers. This not only helps alleviate the immense pressure caused by the housing shortage for their customers directly, but also increases the availability of more affordable housing options for lower and fixed-income individuals.

However, despite the commendable efforts of companies like Rausch Coleman Homes, they often encounter significant obstacles when striving to build affordable homes at scale. Local governments and communities, while claiming to understand the severity of the housing crisis, often resist the establishment of affordable housing in their neighborhoods. This resistance, commonly referred to as “NIMBYism” (Not In My Backyard), poses a significant hindrance to resolving the housing crisis and providing new homes for families in need.

To surmount this barrier, it is crucial for communities to recognize the urgent need for affordable housing and the far-reaching benefits it brings to society as a whole. Educational campaigns and awareness initiatives can help dispel misconceptions and foster understanding among residents. By demonstrating the positive impact of affordable housing on local economies, community cohesion, and the overall well-being of its inhabitants, we can garner support and mitigate resistance.

In conclusion, the housing crisis that currently afflicts our nation demands immediate attention and concerted efforts to find lasting solutions. While zoning reforms favoring denser housing and multiple family dwellings are crucial, we must also acknowledge and address the diverse needs of families seeking stable housing. Companies like Rausch Coleman Homes provide a glimmer of hope, but they face significant challenges due to the prevalence of “NIMBYism.” Overcoming this resistance necessitates educating communities and policymakers about the benefits of affordable housing while actively reforming zoning regulations. Only through collective action can we alleviate the burden on lower and fixed-income Americans, ultimately creating a more equitable and sustainable housing landscape.

Overcoming Dyslexia: The Potential Power of School Choice

 

As a child, I faced a formidable challenge that shaped my educational journey - dyslexia. While some students effortlessly grasp the skills necessary to learn to read, others, like myself, require explicit and unique instruction to grasp it, or they may never fully grasp it. For us, becoming skilled readers necessitates the type of instruction that historically is seldom implemented in the average elementary classroom. Unfortunately, like most students with dyslexia, I never received this instruction.

Dyslexia is not always apparent until students fall behind in reading, as was the case for me in second grade. The sad reality is that most students with dyslexia go undiagnosed and struggle within the education system. My teachers and parents used the tool most commonly employed when students fall behind - they held me back a grade. I do not place blame on anyone; it was the norm rather than the exception, especially 40 years ago when I was in second grade. Despite the difficulties, I managed to find ways to cope and eventually achieved academic success. But today, we have the opportunity to do better.

The number of students grappling with dyslexia is significant. According to Sonya Yates, Associate Policy Director for Early Literacy at ExcelinEd, dyslexia affects up to one in five students and does not discriminate based on socioeconomic status, zip code, ethnicity, or ability level.

I witnessed this firsthand. As a junior high history teacher, I encountered numerous challenges in the classroom. However, one particular difficulty stands out: educating students who, like me, had undiagnosed dyslexia. These students had struggled with reading and writing for years, but their condition had gone without intervention during their early education.

As an educator, I witnessed the frustration and self-doubt these students experienced. They often felt overwhelmed by the demands of the curriculum and struggled to keep up with their peers. Simple tasks like reading aloud or writing assignments became sources of anxiety and embarrassment. These students, who possessed immense potential and unique strengths, were dragged down by an education system that failed to identify and address their specific needs.

Thinking back, I cannot help but wonder how different their educational journey could have been had their dyslexia been identified earlier and had they received the support that is crucial in mitigating the negative impacts of dyslexia. Support necessary to empower students to develop effective reading and writing strategies.

Now, envision a world where children with dyslexia, like myself, had access to additional resources and support through an Educational Savings Account (ESA) program. ESAs could provide the necessary financial assistance for private tutoring, dyslexia-specific interventions, or assistive technologies, effectively leveling the playing field and empowering students to overcome the challenges that I faced as a child. It would enable them to achieve even greater academic success.

ESAs offer parents the freedom to choose educational resources and services that align with their child’s unique strengths, weaknesses, and learning preferences. By expanding school choice and affording families the opportunity to explore various intervention options, ESAs have the potential to bring about a transformative impact on the educational outcomes of students with dyslexia.

Every child, regardless of their learning differences, deserves an equal opportunity to succeed academically. ESAs represent a powerful tool in our arsenal to ensure that no child is left behind due to dyslexia. We should recognize and embrace the potential of ESAs in supporting students with dyslexia and advocate for their implementation. Let us work towards a future where all children have the opportunity to unlock their full potential and thrive in their educational journey.

The Damaging Impact of the FBI’s Behavior: Insights from John Durham’s Report

The recent release of John Durham’s report has shed light on the behavior of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and its potential impact on the foundations of our republic. The report highlights concerning actions taken by individuals within the FBI during the investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. These revelations rightfully raise questions about the integrity and impartiality of the nation’s top law enforcement agency, and their implications are far-reaching.

One of the fundamental pillars of our system is the requirement that our institutions adhere to the rule of law. The FBI’s actions, as outlined in Durham’s report, has eroded our ability to trust that our institutions adhere to that requirement. When law enforcement agencies act with bias, pursuing political agendas, or abusing their power, it undermines the faith citizens have in their government. A loss of public trust weakens the very fabric of our republic and can sow divisions that are difficult to mend.

The report exposes that members of the FBI were motivated by extreme partisan biases during the investigation. Regardless of political affiliations, it is crucial that law enforcement agencies remain neutral and independent, free from any favoritism or political motivations. Political bias undermines the core principles of justice and equality that our republic is built upon. It is imperative that the FBI addresses these concerns and takes steps to ensure its agents adhere to the highest standards of professionalism and impartiality.

The findings in the report also demonstrates egregious abuses of power within the FBI. The misuse of surveillance tools, misleading information, and the withholding of exculpatory evidence undermine the principles of due process and fairness. Such actions not only harm the individuals directly affected but also erode the trust citizens place in the justice system as a whole. Upholding the rule of law is crucial for the functioning of our democracy, and any abuse of power within law enforcement agencies must be thoroughly investigated and shutdown.

It is essential that the FBI takes swift and decisive action to address the issues raised in Durham’s report. Holding individuals accountable for their wrongdoing is necessary to restore public confidence in the agency. Transparent internal investigations, robust oversight mechanisms, and a commitment to upholding the principles of justice and impartiality are crucial for the FBI to regain its credibility. The findings presented in John Durham’s report have unveiled a toxic culture at the FBI that manifested itself in troubling behavior during the investigation into the false claim of “Russian interference” in the 2016 election. These revelations not only highlight individual misconduct but also point to a deeper issue—this toxic culture that has permeated the agency. The implications of such a culture are far-reaching, as it undermines the foundations of our republic, erodes public trust, and compromises the principles of justice and equality.

Addressing this negative culture within the FBI is of paramount importance. It requires a comprehensive evaluation of internal processes, a commitment to transparency, and a dedication to fostering an environment of integrity, professionalism, and impartiality. Such cultural transformation can only be achieved through strong leadership, rigorous training, and a steadfast commitment to upholding the highest ethical standards.

The FBI must prioritize the cultivation of a culture that values truth, fairness, and the unbiased pursuit of justice. By addressing the underlying noxious elements, the agency can begin the process of rebuilding public trust and restoring its reputation as a cornerstone of law enforcement. Only by rooting out this toxic culture can the FBI regain its credibility and ensure that its actions align with the principles that our republic is founded upon.

In conclusion, it is clear that the problems within the FBI extend beyond individual misconduct. They stem from a corrupted culture that has seeped into the very fabric of the agency. Recognizing and rectifying this issue is no small task but it is essential for restoring the integrity of the FBI and maintaining public confidence in our law enforcement institutions. It is a critical endeavor that demands unwavering commitment, transparency, and a dedication to upholding the principles that define our nation’s founding ideals.

Applying "Getting to Yes" Principles in Debt Ceiling Negotiations

 

I am a fan of the groundbreaking book “Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In,” by Roger Fisher, William Ury, and Bruce Patton. The principles in that book are not all inclusive of every method of negotiation, but they are the best.

Speaking of negations, the debt ceiling negotiations in the United States often lead to contentious debates and political standoffs. To overcome these challenges and reach mutually beneficial agreements, it is essential for lawmakers to adopt effective negotiation strategies. In this article I will explore how the principles outlined in “Getting to Yes” can be applied to debt ceiling negotiations, fostering collaboration and achieving successful outcomes.

1. Separate People from the Problem:

Debt ceiling negotiations are often charged with strong emotions and political ideologies. To create an environment conducive to productive discussions, it is crucial to separate the individuals involved from the problem at hand. Focus on the financial challenges, economic implications, and long-term consequences of not reaching an agreement, rather than engaging in personal attacks or blame games.

2. Focus on Interests, Not Positions:

Rather than getting fixated on rigid positions, negotiators should identify and understand the underlying interests driving each party. By uncovering the motivations and concerns of all stakeholders, common ground can be discovered. For example, Republicans may prioritize fiscal responsibility, while Democrats may prioritize social programs. Identifying shared goals and interests allows for creative solutions that address the concerns of all parties involved.

3. Generate Options for Mutual Gain:

Debt ceiling negotiations often become polarized due to a limited set of perceived solutions. However, by actively engaging in brainstorming and generating multiple options, negotiators can expand the possibilities for mutual gain. Encourage open dialogue and consider alternative approaches that address the concerns of each party. This may involve exploring revenue increases, spending cuts, or structural reforms that promote fiscal sustainability while protecting vital programs.

4. Use Objective Criteria:

In “Getting to Yes,” the authors emphasize the importance of using objective criteria to guide decision-making. In debt ceiling negotiations, it is beneficial to rely on economic indicators, expert analysis, and historical precedents to inform the discussions. Utilize data-driven arguments and trusted sources to support proposals and ensure fairness in decision-making. This approach helps depersonalize the negotiation process and provides a basis for reaching consensus.

5. Insist on Fair Process:

A fair and transparent negotiation process is vital for building trust and maintaining the legitimacy of the agreement. Ensure that all parties have an opportunity to express their concerns, share information, and participate in the decision-making process. Create mechanisms for open dialogue, such as regular meetings, briefings, and expert testimonies, to foster understanding and collaboration.

6. Maintain Open Communication:

Effective communication is key to successful negotiations. Encourage all parties to express their interests, concerns, and ideas openly and honestly. Actively listen to each other, seeking to understand rather than simply waiting to respond. Maintain ongoing communication channels throughout the negotiation process to address emerging issues and build rapport.

In Conclusion:

Debt ceiling negotiations can be highly contentious, but by applying the principles outlined in “Getting to Yes,” lawmakers could foster a collaborative environment and reach mutually beneficial agreements if that were their desire. By separating people from the problem, focusing on interests, generating options, using objective criteria, insisting on a fair process, and maintaining open communication, negotiators can transcend partisan divides and find innovative solutions. Embracing this principled approach to negotiation would enable policymakers to navigate the complex challenges of the debt ceiling while promoting the long-term financial stability and well-being of the nation.

The United States faces periodic debates and challenges over raising the debt ceiling, which refers to the statutory limit on the amount of debt the government can incur. These debates often raise questions about the relationship between the debt ceiling and the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution. While some argue that the 14th Amendment requires Congress to increase the debt ceiling to avoid default, a careful examination of the amendment suggests otherwise. This article aims to clarify the misconceptions surrounding the 14th Amendment and explain why it does not mandate an automatic increase in the debt ceiling.

The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 and primarily addresses issues related to citizenship, equal protection, due process, and the rights of formerly enslaved individuals. Section 4 of the amendment states, "The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."

While Section 4 of the 14th Amendment explicitly protects the validity of the public debt, it does not provide an independent mechanism for raising the debt ceiling. The purpose of this clause is to ensure the stability and credibility of the government's financial obligations. It affirms that the debts already incurred by Congress through legal means are valid and should be honored.

The 14th Amendment does not grant the President or any branch of government unilateral authority to bypass the legislative process and increase the debt ceiling. The power to raise or lower the debt ceiling lies firmly within the purview of Congress as specified in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, which grants Congress the authority to "borrow money on the credit of the United States."

The U.S. Constitution establishes a system of separation of powers, dividing authority among the three branches of government to prevent any single branch from becoming too powerful. Congress, as the legislative branch, holds the authority to make decisions on fiscal matters, including the debt ceiling.

The 14th Amendment, as a constitutional provision, does not supersede or override the explicit power of Congress to determine the debt ceiling. To interpret Section 4 as granting unilateral authority to increase the debt ceiling would undermine the fundamental principles of constitutional governance and upset the balance of powers.

The responsibility to address the debt ceiling lies with Congress. It is through the legislative process that Congress must deliberate, negotiate, and make informed decisions about raising or adjusting the debt ceiling. This process allows for a careful examination of fiscal priorities, weighing the potential consequences of increased debt against the need to meet existing financial obligations.

While Section 4 of the 14th Amendment emphasizes the importance of honoring the public debt, it does not confer a constitutional obligation on Congress to increase the debt ceiling and mortgage our children's future. The power to determine the debt ceiling resides within the legislative branch, as outlined in the Constitution's separation of powers. The debates surrounding the debt ceiling should be seen as an opportunity for Congress to engage in responsible fiscal deliberation and prioritize the nation's financial stability. By upholding the principles of the Constitution, maintaining the separation of powers, and engaging in prudent fiscal decision-making, the United States can effectively manage its debt while ensuring the credibility of its financial commitments. 

Ballinger of Ozark joins NACL

 Ballinger of Ozark joins NACL

Former State Sen. Bob Ballinger, R-Ozark, has become the Director of Law and Policy for the National Association of Christian Lawmakers, the group announced Monday.

The National Association of Christian Lawmakers is a nonprofit association founded by former state Sen. Jason Rapert, R-Conway, to support city, county, state and federal lawmakers across the nation, the association said in a news release.

Ballinger, an attorney, said working as the association's director of law and policy will be his primary job. He currently serves as the Arkansas state chair for the association and is a founding member of the association.

"I am humbled and blessed to have the opportunity to stay engaged in the battle alongside NACL," he said in the news release. "More than ever, our families and values are under attack. What has made our country great is actually under attack. It is a privilege to work with NACL to provide support to Christian lawmakers across the nation who are willing to stand in the gap."

-- Michael R. Wickline

Senator Bob Ballinger is proudly endorsed by the NRA and his A+ is the highest score of any candidate in any of the current legislative races.

 

The right to life is our first and most fundamental right. No other right matters if we fail to protect the right of a person to be born. I am humbled to be the only Arkansas Right to Life endorsed candidate in my race.

Endorsement from Lieutenant Governor Tim Griffin

"Senator Ballinger has a proven track record of fighting for conservative values. Whether it's defending the unborn, protecting our 2nd Amendment, or lowering our income taxes, Bob has been one of the most outspoken leaders in the legislature. He works hard to represent the people of his district." - Lieutenant Governor Tim Griffin

Endorsement from Senator Gary Stubblefield

 Senator Stubblefield is a real statesman and public servant. I am humbled to receive his endorsement for re-election to the State Senate.

“It is my pleasure to endorse my friend Senator Bob Ballinger for re-election to the State Senate. Over the years Bob has stood next to me as we fought to protect the rights of Arkansans and the values we hold dear. Bob is a leader who is willing to fight for his constituents even if that fight is unpopular with entrenched special interests. Senator Ballinger will stand strong regardless of the circumstances, and that is why I support him for re-election without reservation” - Senator Gary Stubblefield

Endorsement from Congressman Bruce Westerman

 I am humbled to have the support of my friend Congressman Bruce Westerman in my campaign for re-election. 

"Having served alongside Bob Ballinger in the State House, I quickly learned that he is a strong conservative that understands the issues and works hard on behalf of his constituents as well as all of Arkansas. I've also met Bob's family and know that he has done a good job as husband, father, and mentor. Residents in Senate District 28 will be well represented by Bob in the State Senate." - Congressman Bruce Westerman

 “But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.” 

Christmas is such an exciting time of year. My family loves the decorations, gifts, food, and family time that this season brings. It is a fun time of year, but we also try to remember why we celebrate. It is truly an amazing miracle that God became flesh, dwelt among us, and died in order to set us free and make us His children – that is worth celebrating!

Another State Recognizes the Right to Self-Defense

 by Brian McCombie - Tuesday, March 9, 2021

In Arkansas, “Stand Your Ground” legislation (S.B. 24) was recently passed by both houses of the Arkansas legislature and signed into law by Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R). This NRA-backed legislation removes the legal need for a citizen to retreat in the face of an attacker. The previous legal standard in Arkansas required that a person under attack or threatened with attack must first attempt to flee or retreat before the person could use deadly force against his or her attacker.

While there were some exceptions to the current Arkansas law, some form of retreat was generally mandated before the intended victim could legally defend themselves. Immediately resorting to force in the face of an attack could (and did) land intended victims in court with various criminal and civil charges.

“This allows the leveling of the field, so everyone gets the same consideration when you go to that court of law,” Rep. Marcus Richmond (R) told the Associated Press.

“That’s the purpose of this self-defense bill, to allow you to defend yourself and not necessarily go to jail when you had no choice because you only had seconds to make that decision.”

“Laws should favor victims—not criminals, as they do now,” said Matt Herriman, NRA state director for Arkansas. “When crimes occur, victims have little time to decide the best course of action for survival. They should not be required to run away or face prosecution for defending themselves. This measure is common sense. Anyone who opposes it puts the interests of the criminal above the interests of the victim.”

“This important legislation is a huge step forward for self-defense rights and law-abiding gun owners in the Land of Opportunity! Thirty-four other states have passed Stand Your Ground laws allowing their citizens to more effectively protect themselves, instead of forcing unnecessary risks upon them. Senate Bill 24 specifically uses language similar to that of Florida’s law, which is seen as the gold-standard,” the NRA Institute for Legislative Action said.

“It is time that Arkansas move past the politics and provide clarity for good citizens who just wish to protect themselves and others,” said Sen. Bob Ballinger (R), as S.B. 24 moved through the legislative process. “Over the last few years, a group of legislators went to work with prosecutors, self-defense advocacy groups and law enforcement to craft the right stand your ground legislation for Arkansas.”

In his 2001 book, Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control, Florida State Professor of Criminology Gary Kleck addressed the efficacy of armed self-defense. When citing crime victimization data, Kleck determined that “[v]ictims who used guns were less likely to be injured than crime victims who did not resist.”

The practical ability of average Americans to meet violent crime with armed self-defense has improved substantially since Professor Kleck first began his research, as more and more states have improved access to concealed-carry permits, have added “Castle Doctrine” laws (legal doctrines that grant certain immunities to persons defending themselves within their abodes), and addressed Stand Your Ground issues.

NRA-ILA summed it up this way: “When presented with a reasonable threat of death or grievous bodily harm, free individuals have the right to defend themselves with deadly force. This right is inherent to all people, preexists any government and is not dependent upon the Second Amendment, which codifies the right to armed self-defense in the U.S. Constitution.”

OPINION | EDITORIAL: Union labels Another bill lawmakers should pass

It's not hard to figure out why there is so much opposition to collective bargaining, specifically when that bargaining is being done by government employees’ unions. Imagine being able to elect your own bosses, and their jobs depended on making you happy in your job, and nobody is spending their own money. Regular civilian taxpayers don’t get that kind of deal.

A committee in the state Senate passed Senate Bill 341 by Bob Ballinger (R-Ozark) earlier this week. Michael Wickline’s story said the bill passed in a voice vote “with no audible dissenters.” Yesterday, it passed the full Senate almost as smoothly. Now it’s onto the Arkansas House.

Sen. Ballinger says the bill applies to state-level governments such as agencies, departments and universities. Also the courts and—note well—school districts. (It would not apply to cities or counties.) Frustrated taxpayers have long watched teachers’ unions elect school boards and then negotiate with the people who owe their positions to those very same unions. It’s like negotiating salaries and benefits with yourself. It’s a nice gig if you can get it. Most people can’t. But most people, being taxpayers, certainly foot the bill(s).

The executive director of the Arkansas Education Association spoke out against the bill, which surprised few people. She said SB341 “directly targets our educators who have shown up every single day at schools and in every way possible teaching students, transporting them and serving them meals since the beginning of the pandemic, knowing they are putting themselves and their families at risk. They should be respected, not attacked.” Put aside, if you can, all those stories about teachers who—well before the pandemic—were considered “chronically absent.” Pre-covid-19, the papers noted that a considerable number of core teachers at J.A. Fair, Hall High and others would miss five days or more in a single school quarter.

But put that aside. This bill doesn’t “target” educators, or even their unions. Only the power of collective bargaining, which smart school districts are getting rid of anyway: “They can have a union,” Sen. Ballinger said. “They have their association. But as far as collective bargaining, we are prohibiting it from a policy standpoint as a state.” That is, if the Arkansas General Assembly approves and the governor signs. And they should.

School districts should work for the students first, then the community as a whole. Teachers are an important priority, but collective bargaining too often makes them the first priority, if not the only priority.

It’s going to take bold, determined, courageous action to take on the unions, even now. But that’s the nature of leadership. And education. And life.

CORRUPTION, POLITICS, AND THE ART OF HEALING

I may be sleeping in the dog house for revealing this, but my wife has a medical fascination with grotesque pimples, boils, etc. She is not alone. “Dr. Popper” has 4.2 million subscribers on YouTube. Her videos commonly get more than 20 million views, and now she has her own TV show. I don’t get it, but for my wife and millions of others, it is entertaining and informative.

This somewhat unpleasant topic does provide a useful illustration for the corruption we recently uncovered in our State government.  A boil is a bacterial infection of the skin that if untreated will grow and fester over time. Boils are disgusting to behold (stay with me here, I’m going somewhere with this), but never more so than when they are treated and drained.

Our State was controlled by one political party for 138 years. Over time, accountability and transparency disappeared into a vacuum that reached its pinnacle during the Clinton administration here in Arkansas. Corruption permeated the entire system. Without some adversarial tension, without oversight, the path of least resistance, succumbing to temptation, became the norm.

The stench we are now experiencing is evidence that the system that created and sustained the boil of corruption has been lanced. Arkansans have responded with understandable revulsion. The healing process appears ugly, and it stinks, but it has begun. While perfection in unattainable, we would be fools not to learn from the painful experiences we have endured.

Unlike Dr. Popper’s fans who find value in the information she provides; the citizens of Arkansas experienced the revulsion of corruption without any compensatory benefits. If there is to be an upside to our recent governmental moral failures, it must be in our individual and collective responses. We let our guard down once and suffered a regrettable but predictable consequence.

I am reminded of an incident years ago. I met the brother of a good friend who had warned me, as an attorney, that his brother had “no use” for lawyers and politicians. When we shook hands, this stranger I had just met wiped his hand on his jacket. It was done in jest, but the gesture was not lost on me.

We know that power and money invite abuse. The neighbors we serve know that politicians and lawyers are often around both. It’s no mystery why constituents are angry, pundits are cynical, and partisans attack opportunistically with a broad brush. Dishonest players in State Government stink up the whole system and make us all seem guilty by association.

Recently I opined that “no one was benefiting from being in Little Rock.” It was my admittedly clumsy way of saying that in my experience, I have not found the legislators in Little Rock to be routinely corrupt.  Most are simply decent people trying to make a difference. Sadly, the dishonest few cast a shadow over all the rest.

These recent scandals do show us that honesty is not enough. The air of power and money that public servants breathe requires more than honesty. It requires a diligence that looks for signs of trouble. Politics is a minefield that can obliterate the most honest among us.

With the help of God, I am personally resolved to go beyond “merely” being an honest man. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. As public servants, we must be proactive. Civility and collegiality are important, but we must never forget that our first loyalty is not to fellow legislators. Our allegiance is to the standards we profess, the people we serve and the Constitutions we swear to uphold.