DeSantis From Florida, Lake From Arizona . . . Two Republicans Ready To Boost Their Impact Around Nation

By DEXTER DUGGAN

PHOENIX — Within a day an elected Republican governor and a possibly elected one from opposite sides of the nation both announced their big plans to shake up the country.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis made it official that he’s in the GOP presidential race on May 24. One day earlier, Arizona’s Kari Lake, who says bold cheating deprived her of the governor’s chair here last November, told of her plans to be “at the tip of the spear” for election integrity around the nation.
Although DeSantis strongly was re-elected as the assertively conservative governor of the diverse Sunshine State only last November, he had been under considerable pressure to get into the 2024 presidential race to snatch the GOP nomination away from the already-announced candidate and 45th President Donald Trump, who has entrenched foes.
Lake surprised some people on May 23 when she dismissed the idea of entering Arizona’s U.S. Senate race for 2024 after a Superior Court judge again declined to recognize evidence that she’d been cheated in 2022. She said she remained determined to stand up for ordinary people in Arizona and around the nation.
At an outdoors news conference lasting nearly an hour, Lake said, “We’re gonna turn this around, then we’re gonna turn every other state where they’re rigging elections around.”
The Wanderer asked two of its sources for their opinions of DeSantis running. Shortly before he confirmed his candidacy on May 24, northern California commentator Barbara Simpson said, “That DeSantis is in the race against Trump is nothing but good. It will force each candidate to campaign on their best points and finally give voters a CHOICE!”
The day before the strongly pro-life DeSantis made it official, Mary Ann Kreitzer, who runs the Virginia-based Catholic blog Les Femmes — the Truth, took a different view, saying that conservative governors are needed in the states.
Kreitzer said: “I hope he doesn’t run. We need good, strong governors to push back against the federal government. If the rumor that he plans to ask Sarah Huckabee Sanders to be his running mate [is true], that would be a double whammy to the red states. I hope he stays in Florida, continues to be courageous and defends parents who are trying to protect their children from the gender insanity.
“These governors could do the country a great blessing by uniting and forming a governors’ association to stand strong for a godly America,” Kreitzer said. “Personally, I think that’s our only hope. Presidents are surrounded by a bureaucracy that’s dug in for generations.
“Reagan promised to shut down the Department of Education. He didn’t and probably couldn’t,” she said. “What can DeSantis do to gut a weaponized DOJ, FBI, and CIA? Not much. Stay in Florida and fight for freedom at the state level. And leave Sanders in Arkansas!”
One hopes that DeSantis doesn’t end up being a sacrificial lamb to anti-Trumpers’ opposition to that president. For whatever polls are worth at this early date, they show billionaire developer Trump, who often achieved conservative goals while governing the entire nation, opening up a lead over DeSantis, who conceivably could end up weakened as just one state’s governor.
Trump plays hard and for keeps. That’s energy better spent against left-wing Democrats than a prominent conservative of his own party. Trump’s campaign has been blasting out dozens of emails ripping DeSantis. Within about three hours on DeSantis’ announcement day, my inbox received 13 Trump emails slashing DeSantis.
On Twitter, “DC Draino” said on May 24: “This is honestly so bizarre, to listen to DeSantis’ announcement. Trump made you governor. Trump is crushing the polls. WHY would you enter this race now and divide the GOP?!”
However, DeSantis hardly is the only other Republican in the presidential race, although he is reckoned as the most popular behind Trump. Already announced as of May 24 were Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy, Asa Hutchinson, and Tim Scott, with others weighing an entry, including Mike Pence, Glenn Youngkin, and Kristi Noem.
DeSantis’ presidential website says that U.S. decline isn’t inevitable, but sanity, normalcy, and integrity must be restored. He says, “I am running for president of the United States because I want to lead Our Great American Comeback. Our country is going in the wrong direction. We see it with our eyes and we feel it in our bones.”
On May 24 the Just the News website said that DeSantis “is poised to make generational change a centerpiece of his White House bid. ‘The tired dogmas of the past are inadequate for a vibrant future. We must look forward, not backwards,’ he declared.”
A New York Post story said, “DeSantis said last week he feels he has a much better chance than Trump of winning the election, and that ‘When we say we’re going to do something, we do it, and get it done’.”
At Lake’s Phoenix news conference on May 23, the veteran TV news anchor said she intended to appeal her case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
After a tightly restricted two-day trial last December, on Christmas Eve Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson refused to recognize her evidence. The state Court of Appeals affirmed his opinion, but in March the Arizona Supreme Court sent one count of Lake’s case back to Thompson for renewed consideration.\
However, after a three-day May trial, he quickly ruled against her again on May 22 on the issue of the county’s failure to count the votes properly.
During national conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s May 23 livestreamed radio program, Kirk, a Phoenix-area resident, said the problem for Lake is that the other side just floods the system with mail-in ballots that aren’t verified.
Noting Arizona’s key swing-state role in 2020’s presidential election and presumably in 2024, Kirk pointed to untrustworthy activists supposedly verifying votes in Maricopa County’s election process but actually just pressing the button quickly time and again to give votes to Biden.
At her news conference, Lake was firm and determined to continue with her own case and the rights of voters around the nation.
Lake began by noting speculation that she was there to announce a race for the U.S. Senate. “Well, um, not today,” she said, adding that she had the “strongest election case in the entire country” with her 2022 race for governor. “. . . We proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that our elections are a mess. . . . The good people of Arizona have been disenfranchised. . . . We’re the laughingstock of elections here in Arizona.”
However, “it will not deter me, not at all,” Lake said. “The system is corrupt from top to bottom,” with no proper chain of custody of ballots.
Referring to the voting problems she was exposing, Lake said, “They want to call it a hiccup. It’s like projectile vomiting.”
Lake said Thompson’s court decision wasn’t what she hoped for, but she wasn’t shocked at all. “What they’re doing is so wrong to the people of this state….We did everything right. The people showed up in droves to vote, only to have their sacred vote trampled upon.”
She said she has been working nonstop to launch the largest “ballot-chasing” operation in Arizona, and maybe in U.S. history, to make sure that everyone gets a ballot and gets it returned.
“The courts just ruled that this corrupt election was fair,” Lake said. “. . . The courts have ruled that anything goes. Well, we can play by those same rules, okay?. . .
“We will not allow them to steal another election from we the people. We want our government back,” she said, asserting that there are people sitting in Arizona government offices today “who are not duly elected.”
Lake said she openly answers reporters’ questions, while Katie Hobbs actually runs from reporters.
Left-wing pro-abortion radical Democrat Hobbs, who supposedly narrowly defeated Lake last November after staying in her basement, refused to debate any and all gubernatorial opponents and kept quiet as much as she could.
However, Hobbs has gone on a veto spree against Arizona’s Republican-majority legislature unlike anything ever seen in the Grand Canyon State’s history.
The previous “veto queen,” also a left-wing Democrat facing a majority-Republican legislature, was Janet Napolitano, who set a record for casting 58 vetoes during the entire legislative session of 2005.
However, Hobbs was headed for 100 vetoes while the current session of the legislature continued. She vetoed popular bipartisan bills and bills for election integrity as well as pro-life, pro-mother legislation and bills popular with the Republican side.
On May 19 Phoenix television Channels 3 and 5 reported that in less than six months in office, Hobbs was getting close to the number of vetoes cast by some governors during their entire terms in office.
“Former Republican Gov. Jane Dee Hull served from 1997 to 2003. She vetoed 88 bills during her whole term,” Channels 3 and 5 reported.
They added: “Among the bills [Hobbs] vetoed on Friday [May 19] were election-related measures, including HB 2305, which would have allowed representatives from both political parties to observe each stage of the signature verification process for early ballots. Hobbs said in her veto letter that it would create ‘unnecessary burdens’ for election officials and raises too many privacy concerns.
“Hobbs also rejected HB 2308, which would have forced the secretary of state to recuse themselves from election duties during an election they are running,” the TV report said.
In fact, Hobbs was the incumbent secretary of state in 2022, supervising her own election race against Lake. When Lake’s campaign had asked Hobbs in June of 2021 to recuse herself from this role, Hobbs refused.

Gila Monsters

Lake told the May 23 news conference that there are “millions of dollars committed” to the “ballot-chasing” operation she announced, and “thousands of volunteers who are dedicated” to helping. “We’re going to show up to a knife fight with a gun, not a knife, okay?”
The plans are to register to vote “every man, woman, child, dog, saguaro, Gila monster,” Lake exaggerated, citing some Arizona desert denizens and drawing laughter. “I’m being facetious. I’m sure that’ll be a headline. . . .
“We’re not stopping with one judge in Mesa [Thompson] who has ruled against us time and time again,” Lake said. “We’re going to keep going. And we know that the people of this great state want me to stay in this fight.”
Some people in state government offices “know they’re frauds. They absolutely know they’re frauds, and we all do,” she said.
Lake said that on Election Day 2022 in Maricopa County, 75 percent voted “to put America first,” but 60 percent of the polling locations weren’t working. “We cannot trust Maricopa County to give our voters a fair chance. We can’t trust the buffoons running our elections in Maricopa County anymore, so we cannot leave any vote on the table.”
She named Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Chairman Bill Gates and County Recorder Stephen Richer, both of whom supervised voting, as men who openly scorned “America first” candidates and raised money against them for the Pro-Democracy Republicans of Arizona PAC.
Being personally involved in a partisan PAC while also overseeing elections was an eyebrow-raiser, but it didn’t appear to trouble the establishment that agreed with its goals.
On the morning of May 23, the Kari Lake War Room tweeted that Judge Thompson “said that the statute merely requires the county recorder to be satisfied with the signature review. Since Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, an election-fraud denier who started a PAC for other GOP election-fraud deniers, was fine with the signature-review process, Thompson said that was all that mattered.”

Get Involved

Meanwhile, radio news reported that the toughies at the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office were seeking sanctions against Lake and her attorneys for having dared to pursue their case.
On May 24 KTAR Radio news (92.3 FM) aired County Recorder Richer saying, “These people need to suffer consequences for these continued lies and these continued attacks at important institutions.”
In other words, for daring to displease the establishment’s Richer and his fellow corruptocrats.
At her news conference, Lake announced that Merissa Hamilton, a former Phoenix mayoral candidate and defender of ballot integrity, would head the “ballot-chasing” project.
Hamilton told the conference that wherever she has travelled around the nation, everyone asked how to do what the people in Arizona are doing.
Taking questions from reporters, Lake said that her case included evidence of roughly 300,000 ballots each “approved in less than three seconds” for signature verification, even though it takes one second just to get the image up on the computer screen.
She said an expert witness testified this was impossible to do accurately.
One video of two Maricopa County signature verifiers, seated side by side, showed one of them rapidly clicking along to approve 62 signatures while the person on the right in the same time period verified only eight.
Lake said her team also discovered there were an additional 99 people authorized to do signature verification behind closed doors, at their offices, or even at home sitting in their underwear on the sofa.
She said the letters she receives from some people concerned about their own elections “move me to tears.”
Lake recommended the websites savearizonafund.com and karilake.com.
She said she wasn’t asking for donations when people find it hard enough to afford to put food on the table due to Joe Biden. Instead, “I’m asking for people to get involved.”
Instead of worrying over “really negative, nasty” media stories about her, Lake said, “I care about what God thinks about me.”
In an article posted May 23 at the Arizona Sun Times website, reporter Rachel Alexander, who also is an attorney, picked apart Thompson’s rushed decision. Here is a portion: “Thompson asserted that Lake had to prove that election boards’ misconduct affected the outcome of the election, citing Miller v. Picacho Elementary School District No. 33. However, that case did not state that a showing of misconduct was required.
“Instead,” Alexander wrote, “the Arizona Supreme Court looked at the violations of the statutes on their face to invalidate the election. ‘We therefore hold that a showing of fraud is not a necessary condition to invalidate absentee balloting,’ the court stated. ‘It is sufficient that an express non-technical statute was violated, and ballots cast in violation of the statute affected the election.’
“Thompson next claimed that Lake relied on the case Reyes v. Cuming as a ‘purposeful concession’ because she wouldn’t be able to ‘cast doubt on a specific number of ballots’,” Alexander said. “However, Lake named specific numbers of ballots in her case that she cast doubt on.
“For example, her legal team showed through an expert how the signatures on 274,000 ballots were reviewed in less than two seconds each. Although the defense had advance notice of the expert, they provided no expert to refute his testimony,” she said.

Proof Is Needed

On the other hand, Arizona-based GOP political consultant Constantin Querard warned on May 23 against assuming that a rapid signature verifier wasn’t doing his job properly.
“As far as how long it takes to verify a signature, I think someone who does it a lot is going to be very fast. Keep in mind that the overwhelming majority of signatures match,” Querard told The Wanderer. “The vast majority of people who vote by mail sign their own envelopes with a signature that is largely unchanged from whenever they registered. There will be a small number of people who have suffered a stroke or broken a wrist or had some sort of an issue that alters their signature, but most signatures match.
“Which means when you see the signature from the envelope on screen next to the exemplar from the file, you will be looking at two very similar signatures, and you will mark them as a match,” he said. “It is not unreasonable that this process might only take a second or two seconds or three seconds, where you pause and take a longer look at the occasional signature that seems different or is different.
“The point that the judge will make is that the process is not in the law, the process is left up to the people who run the elections, so it makes no difference what you or I think of the process, so long as there is a process and so long as that process occur,” Querard said.
“Do you or I really want judges to start writing the rules for things? No, on the contrary, we have spent years campaigning against the idea of activist judges. We just want them to read the law and apply it as written, and that is what this judge did,” he said. “Or did I miss something?”
Querard added later in the day that “if we’re in court, how I ‘feel’ about how long I ‘think’ the job should take to do right has no significance. The law as written has no such instructions or minimums. I need to be able to PROVE that they didn’t do their job, and that’s a much higher standard.”

A Beacon Of Light . . . Your Light Must Shine Before Others

By FR. RICHARD D. BRETON, JR.

Last week we began our study on the parables of Jesus. We were reminded of their importance and how they help us in living our faith well. Today we will begin by looking at the Parable of the Lamp. This parable can be found in all three of the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Here are the parables from each of the Gospels.
The Gospel of Luke says: “No one, when he has lit a lamp, puts it in a cellar or under a basket, but on a stand, that those who come in may see the light. The lamp of the body is the eye. Therefore, when your eye is good, your whole body is also full of light; but when it is evil, your body also is full of darkness. Therefore, see whether the light that is in you isn’t darkness. If therefore your whole body is full of light, having no part dark, it will be wholly full of light, as when the lamp with its bright shining gives you light” (Luke 11:33-36).
In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus says: “Nor do they light a lamp and then put it under a bushel basket; it is set on a lampstand, where it gives light to all in the house. Just so, your light must shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your heavenly Father” (Matt. 5:15-16).
In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus says: “Is a lamp brought in to be placed under a bushel basket or under a bed, and not to be placed on a lampstand? For there is nothing hidden except to be made visible; nothing is secret except to come to light” (Mark 4:21-22). Here in Matthew’s Gospel the explanation of the lamp is a continuation of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, and the discourse on salt and light.
Looking at each of the passages above we see the importance that “light” plays in our lives, so much so that each of the Gospel writers says the exact same thing. For us as Catholics, however, this should not be seen as out of the ordinary, considering our Faith is centered around this very theme. In the Parable of the Lamp, Jesus explains that “light” is to be revealed, not concealed. Thus, Jesus Himself, as the light of the world was revealed at the Incarnation and this revelation of “Divine Light” must always be revealed.
The use of light is not done so in a figurative way, the “light” being referred to is a reality to which we are called to live. In the infancy narrative of Luke’s Gospel, this theme of light is revealed through the star that shone in the sky alerting the shepherds and the Magi of the birth of Christ and that illuminated their way to Bethlehem. The light of the star stopped right over the Author of Light Himself, who is Jesus the Christ.
Not only did this light illuminate the way to Bethlehem, but it is also the same light that lights the path to eternity. The light of the Incarnation is a gift we receive in Baptism. The Rite of Baptism includes a specific moment whereby we receive this light. After the water is poured over our foreheads, and after we are anointed with Chrism denoting that we are sharers in Christ’s dignity of being Priest, Prophet, and King, we receive the Light of Christ.
During this moment our souls are illuminated with the “light” that directs us to Heaven. Here is what the ritual says: “Parents and godparents, this light is entrusted to you to be kept burning brightly. This child of yours has been enlightened by Christ. He (she) is to walk always as a child of the light. May he (she) keep the flame of faith alive in his (her) heart. When the Lord comes, may he (she) go out to meet Him with all the saints in the heavenly Kingdom” (Rite of Baptism).
So, if we are permeated with this “divine light” which is a gift from God the Almighty, then it would seem that there exists an obligation to let that light shine. I think we all remember that little catchy tune “this little light of mine, I’m gonna let it shine.” Well, this catchy tune is precisely what we are called to do. In the parable, Jesus is urging us to allow the “light of Christ” within us to shine into a world that is covered in darkness.
The darkness of today is very similar to the darkness experienced during Jesus’ time. In fact, the same message Jesus spoke over two thousand years ago regarding loving God and our neighbor is still relevant today. Unquestionably, that message is even more necessary today. Today’s darkness has been ratcheted up several notches.

Total Confusion

The darkness of today includes issues pertaining to morality, the dignity of the person, and more important, a total lack of the knowledge of God. When we discuss issues of morality, we are talking about how the sexual revolution of our time has infiltrated all aspects of society. This revolution has caused a total confusion regarding the gift of human sexuality. The “life-giving” nature of sexuality has been replaced by a mere objective and, frankly, false understanding. What were once considered sacred actions devoted to the act of love have been transformed into an action of selfish love. True conjugal love, united between a man and a woman, is by its nature unitive; meaning, together they bring about the gift of new life. Society, however, has introduced a false sense of the “life-giving” nature of sexuality. This is most visible through the confusion that exists in the LGBTQ agenda of our times. The misguided LGBTQ agenda contributes greatly to the darkness of our times because it snuffs out the “light of Christ” through a corrupt sense of sexuality.
In discussing the dignity of the human person, the issue predominantly needing our attention are the countless abortions of our time. Sadly, the darkness of this issue has even infiltrated the Church’s hierarchy. So many of our bishops, the successors of the apostles, will not take a stand in doing what is morally right.
We see this most visibly in our so-called “catholic” president of the United States. Here is an elected official who consistently supports legislation that denies the dignity of the innocent person and promotes the murder of these babies, and yet nothing is done by our many bishops to reprimand these horrific actions. Sadly, there exists a rupture in the ranks of our bishops regarding the reception of Holy Communion for those who support and promote abortion.
In our own nation’s capital, the cardinal archbishop of Washington, D.C., His Eminence Wilton Gregory, has stated he has no problem with giving Holy Communion to the so-called catholic President Joe Biden.
In another scenario, when the archbishop of San Francisco, the Most Rev. Salvatore Cordileone, reprimanded and forbade Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi from receiving Holy Communion, also because of her stance on supporting abortion legislation, what did Pelosi do? She went to the Vatican and participated in the celebration of Holy Mass and received Communion. When even our bishops, who represent the apostles, treat the truths and tenets of the faith as political pawns so as not to lose face, then we have a major problem. Something is wrong with this picture!

Stand Up And Defend The Faith

Returning to the parable above and the need to let the light of the lamp, who is Christ, shine, requires courage. All of the parables are an opportunity for us to reflect on where we need to grow. One of the areas needing growth today is our ability to stand up and defend the truths of our faith. Each of us needs to be the beacon of divine light that will disrupt the darkness of our times. This requires followers who are willing to let the light of baptismal grace shine forth brightly in today’s world.
We can destroy the darkness and restore it to the beauty that is Christ our Light!

Forcing Abortions On Women

By DEACON MIKE MANNO

The Democrats in Colorado have enacted a new law that prohibits the use of the drug progesterone to offset the tragic effects of the abortion bill.
Just a little background. Progesterone is produced naturally and is used regularly to assist pregnant women at risk for miscarriage or pre-term birth. Progesterone assists the mother’s body to produce nutrients for the developing fetus — nutrients without which the fetus would die and be expelled from the mother’s body.
Thus, for decades progesterone has been used to prevent the loss of the fetus.
Now when a woman seeks a non-surgical abortion by use of the abortion pill, the medications work to undo what progesterone does. The abortion pill is a two-step process. In the first step the woman takes mifepristone, a pill that blocks progesterone receptors, blocking the delivery of nutrition and oxygen to the developing child which results in its death. A second pill, misoprostol, is taken 24 hours later which causes the expulsion of the dead child.
Crisis pregnancy centers around the nation have found that women using progesterone after having taken the first abortion pill, mifepristone, can serve to re-establish nutrition and oxygen to the fetus, thus saving the pregnancy. In fact, in several states the use of progesterone to reverse the effects of the abortion is required information that must be given to abortion-minded women seeking a non-surgical abortion.
But not in Colorado where the baby-killers in charge determined that informing pregnant women of this option is a deceptive trade practice which should subject medical personnel and their clinics to heavy fines and the revocation of their licenses.
In April the overwhelmingly Democrat legislature passed SB23-190 which prohibits the use of progesterone for only one thing — to prevent women who have changed their mind about the abortion pill to step back, reassess their status, and to continue their pregnancy.
In other words, in Colorado women are not free to change their minds about abortion, but must continue to kill their offspring regardless of the reason why. So ardent are these pro-abortion politicians that any medical measure to reverse an abortion must be outlawed.
Into this comes a set of mother-daughter Catholic nurse practitioners who operate an independent health care facility, Bella Health and Wellness, offering “life affirming” care. It has successfully used progesterone to save pregnancies from the final effects of the abortion pill regime. But, of course, saving babies is not in the best interest of the politicians who run the state so Bella Health and Wellness found itself subject to enormous fines and the nurses a loss of their professional licenses.
With the help of Becket Law (formerly the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty), Bella Health filed suit in federal court against the state and its administrative agencies tasked with enforcing the law.
“Although Colorado claims to recognize the ‘fundamental right to continue a pregnancy,’ its new law, SB 23-190, actively thwarts women from making that choice, and makes it illegal for nurses and doctors to assist them or even inform them about their options,” said the lawsuit.
The suit argues that the law advances no public health goal and irreparably harms pregnant women that could be helped by the clinic.
“Indeed, mere hours before SB 23-190 took effect, a woman contacted Plaintiffs, requesting their help in reversing an abortion after taking mifepristone. Under Bella’s care, she received an initial dose of progesterone to reverse the effects of mifepristone and is now under follow-up care. SB 23-190 would deprive this woman of the ability to exercise her fundamental right to continue her pregnancy, leaving her at risk of being forced to undergo an abortion she no longer desires,” the suit alleges.
“It also forces Plaintiffs to imminently choose between exercising their sincerely held religious beliefs by offering this woman and her child life-affirming health care — or facing the loss of their licenses and severe financial penalties,” it said.
The lawsuit alleges that the law was based on anti-religious animus, citing its legislative history and statements of its sponsors, one of which is mentioned here:
“The debate surrounding SB 23-190 shows that it targets religious organizations in Colorado that offer alternatives to abortion. Sen. Janice Marchman, one of the bill’s sponsors, stated that the bill’s reference to ‘anti-abortion centers’ referred to ‘faith-based organizations’ that offer alternatives to abortion in Colorado. She labeled these organizations ‘fake clinics’….
“Marchman lamented that ‘Colorado has more than 50 religious-based’ organizations ‘that encourage women to keep their babies or link them with adoption agencies,’ and she accused these ‘ideologically driven’ religious organizations of ‘trad[ing] on the goodwill of legitimate medicine to defraud patients’ by ‘us[ing] disinformation, intimidation, shame, and delay tactics to withhold essential and time-sensitive reproductive healthcare’ and by ‘lur[ing] people in and steer[ing] them away from abortion.
“Marchman also stated that these ‘fake clinics’ were the ‘only ones that can prescribe abortion pill reversal.’ And she argued that these ‘fake clinics’ must be stopped from offering this ‘life threatening’ procedure,” the suit argued [cites omitted].
Of course, the naming of names didn’t end there. The suit continued to quote anti-religious language from several of the other sponsors of the bill.
The suit alleges that the law violates the Free Expression Clause of the First Amendment, in several respects; violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses; and the law was void for vagueness.
It asked that the law be declared unconstitutional, for damages and attorney’s fees.
On April 14 this lawsuit was filed. On April 24 the court held a hearing during which state officials promised that it would not in any way try to enforce the law until the matter could be tried in court. On April 28 the court entered the stipulation in a separate order and further ordered that the state must file a status report within two days of any “material action” that occurs in the rulemaking process as set forth by the law in question.
Since this is coming out of Colorado I have few hopes that it will be resolved quickly. The state is deep blue and has administrators who will keep at it until they have their way. For example, Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop won his truffle with state administrators at the Supreme Court over refusing to bake a cake for a same-sex marriage. So, what did the state do? It went after him for refusing to bake a “transition” cake, celebrating an individual’s sexual transition.
There’s another case from Colorado in front of the High Court right now, 303 Creative, in which graphic designers offer designs and websites celebrating traditional marriage, but are restricted in doing so because of the state’s interpretation of its public accommodations law. That’s what you get when you paint your state so blue that it loses all common sense.
The state has been turned over to people who are so single-minded and who will not back down or accept a loss. This may take years followed by Progesterone II, III, and possibly IV.
(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every weekend on Faith On Trial or podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/)

Has America Reached The Point Of No Return?

By DONALD DeMARCO

I have been to Niagara Falls several times and have never tired of experiencing both its power and its beauty. What I find especially captivating, however, is that locus in the Niagara River which is called “the point of no return.” Until one reaches that point the option of turning back is still available. But the distance between staying alive and plunging into the abyss is just a few inches.
Those few inches of water, though not different from any other part of the river, when crossed, spell doom. The Great Cataract, like all things powerful and beautiful, offers us a warning that we should take to heart.
In life, a point of no return can be reached without our realizing it. We continue to hold onto our lifestyle until that point is reached and then all is lost. We felt safe for a long time and then everything suddenly became irretrievable. Has America reached that point of no return without realizing it? Can she be convinced of the peril that awaits her if she does not turn back?
Each day brings news that is increasingly discouraging. We are informed of Catholic churches being vandalized, pregnancy centers being damaged, pro-lifers being assaulted, children being subjected to dangerous and unnecessary surgery. At the same time, suicide, euthanasia, and drug abuse are on the increase, and leadership is leading us in the wrong direction.
Furthermore, the perpetrators of this litany of horrors are deaf to legitimate criticism! Truth becomes a form of “hate speech.”
Discouragement, however, is an enemy of hope. And if hope is lost, the motivation to turn things around is lost along with it. In this regard, St. Augustine offers us some sound advice.
“Hope,” he writes, “has two beautiful daughters, their names are anger and courage: Anger at the way things are, and Courage to see that they do not remain as they are.” Discouragement, which is the absence of courage, can lead us only to that fateful point of no return.
Discouragement is two pronged. First, we are discouraged by what we see. Next, we are discouraged when we are laughed at when we make our feeble attempts at correction. It is very much as C.S. Lewis said, when he was faced with the same temptation toward discouragement.
“When the whole world is running towards the cliff,” he wrote, “he who is running in the opposite direction appears to have lost is mind.”
The orthodox Catholic, to be sure, has not lost his mind. He has a work to do, and God is at his side. At the core of America’s extensive list of iniquities is moral lassitude. America can be justifiably proud of its immense technological achievements. Yet, technological sophistication is morally neutral. It can be used for evil purposes as well as for the good of society. Science and technology are not inherently linked to morality. In fact, they often oppose each other. Recent history of American society shows that as technology becomes more advanced, morality grows weaker. Therefore, reform becomes increasingly problematic.
This leads those who would like to see a more morally healthy society to discouragement. Yet, even if secular America is doomed, the Catholic still has eternity in front of him.
The breakdown of the moral order in society is a prelude to the breakdown of civilization. What is at stake when society loses its sense of the importance of morality is, indeed, very great. This breakdown is usually accompanied by a certain blindness to the truths inscribed in the Natural Law. The employment of common sense in the moral order is seen as an imposition, an attempt to foist one’s personal morality on others. Morality based on the Natural Law, of course, is for everyone and certainly not an attempt on the part of one person to force his opinions on others. Individualism and the lust for ego-satisfactions are, without doubt, injurious to the spiritual welfare of society, not sensible suggestions for reform.
The conscientious Catholic must understand that he is not called to save the world (and most assuredly not to “save the planet”). Trying to do too much, more than one can possibly achieve, leads to even greater discouragement. God grants each individual special gifts. These gifts may seem paltry in comparison with what is needed, but personal integrity and doing what is within the range of the individual person should be of primary concern.
The Catholic historian Christopher Dawson has expressed this well in his book, The Crisis of Western Education: “We may not be able to build cathedrals like the Catholics of the thirteenth century, or write epics like Dante, but we can all do something to make man conscious of the existence of religious truth and the relevance of Catholic thought, and to let the light into the dark world of closed secularist culture.”
Whether or not America has reached the point of no return should not concern a Catholic as much as what he can do to convey this light. St. Teresa of Calcutta has famously said that God does not require us to be successful, but to be faithful. And fidelity to the Church and her moral teaching is within reach of each Catholic.
This virtue is the only armament we need in order to carry out God’s Will. Its value is twofold, removing discouragement and restoring hope.

“You Can Only Quit Once”

By CHRISTOPHER MANION

“This government will crush you and your family if you try to expose the truth about things that they are doing that are wrong” — Garret O’Boyle, FBI Whistleblower, Testimony before House Judiciary Committee, May 18, 2023.
The Durham Report exposed the entire game plan behind the greatest electoral scandal in our country’s history. In the wake of its release, folks are wondering, “How did they get away with it for so long?”
Obama, Hillary, Biden, Comey, Mueller, McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, John Brennan, Susan Rice, Michael Sussmann, Kevin Clinesmith . . . they all knew.
And yet, not one went to jail. Instead, the Deep State and its PR agents in the media allies celebrate them.
But for truthtellers, it’s another story.
When FBI whistleblower Garret O’Boyle testified last week, Cong. Kelly Armstrong (R., N.D.) asked what he’d recommend to FBI employees who wanted to blow the whistle on wrongdoing in the agency.
“I would advise them not to do it,” O’Boyle replied.
O’Boyle had told the truth, and he had paid.
“In weaponized fashion, the FBI allowed me to accept orders to a new position halfway across the country,” he testified. “They allowed us to sell my family’s home. They ordered me to report to the new unit when our youngest daughter was only two weeks old. Then, on my first day on the new assignment, they suspended me; rendering my family homeless and refused to release our household goods, including our clothes, for weeks.”
Telling the truth is dangerous in Washington, and that’s why it’s so rare.
And it’s been dangerous for a long time.
Over forty years ago, a State Department employee called me on the sly to report some shady business going on in his bureau.
He asked me to have the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where I worked, to investigate it.
“But leave me out of it,” he said.
When I suggested that he knew more about the issue than anyone, he said:
“Chris, you can only quit once.”
Forty years later, Mr. O’Boyle learned that lesson the hard way.
The Deep State protects his own. And Mr. O’Boyle had betrayed them.
Did patriotic FBI “professionals” stand up and cheer? No. He was right, the FBI is rancid with corruption. Cross the corruptos, and they “will crush you and your family.”
Even though federal government agencies are desperately recruiting sexual deviants as we speak, there are still many loyal employees like Mr. O’Boyle who are married with children. And instead of honoring their devotion to family and country, the Deep State uses the family to silence the breadwinner.
Silence? Silence about what?
They used to call it “waste, fraud, and abuse,” but now it’s outright criminal activity. The good guy sees it. He knows it. He hates it.
But tell the truth, and he could lose his pension — one of the most generous in the country, guaranteed by the taxpayer in perpetuity.
Tell the truth, and he will lose his professional future. Many government employees become “consultants” to their old agencies when they retire, while they continue to draw their full pensions.
If you go along, you get along. That s how the system works. Tell the truth once — quit once — and you lose it all.

The Scourge Of
The Clinton Curse

A look at the record confirms just how brave the FBI whistleblowers were to come forward and testify last week. They are up against a chain of command as powerful as it is permanent.
In 1993, Hillary Clinton instituted a secret “White House Task Force on Health Care Reform” to write her version of nationalized health care (HR 3600, 103rd Congress).
When Task Force director Ira Magaziner was referred to the Justice Department for perjury, District of Columbia U.S. Attorney Eric Holder, a Bill Clinton appointee, refused to prosecute him.
Business as usual? Sure. But it pays.
For his loyalty, Bill Clinton appointed Holder as Deputy U.S. Attorney General in 1997, where he remained until Republicans took the White House in 2001. A posh D.C. law firm then took him in until Obama took office in 2009, when he made Holder U.S. Attorney General.
Holder hadn’t changed. In fact, his corruption found new ground in 2010, when Lois Lerner, an IRS official, used her position to blacklist several conservative groups, a move — and possibly a crime — which prevented them from attaining tax-exempt status.
The rise of the Tea Party in 2010 bode ill for Obama’s reelection, and many observers credited Lerner’s criminal efforts with guaranteeing Obama’s re-election in 2012.
When Lerner was accused of abusing her authority, she took the Fifth Amendment before Congress. Attorney General Holder once more came to the rescue of the Deep State’s own, and refused to prosecute her. The arrogant Holder was then held in contempt by the Congress, the first sitting presidential cabinet member in history to earn that distinction. Lerner was held in contempt as well, but of course, with Justice in the helpful hands of Holder, both had nothing to fear. Holder stayed on the job and announced in 2015 that Lerner wouldn’t be charged, and neither would anyone else at the IRS.

How About A Shakeup?

When Alan Mulally took over Ford Motor Company in 2006, it was running on empty.
As the saying goes, “the only way you can coast is downhill,” and that’s where Ford was going when he took over.
A seasoned executive, Mulally quickly put a weekly meeting with senior executives on the schedule. As the story goes, that first meeting was uncomfortable at best.
Mulally went around the table, asking each senior exec to recount any serious problems going on in his division.
If past was prologue, every one of them was afraid that admitting how bad things were would get him fired. One after the other, they said that things were going well. No big problems at all.
Finally, Mark Fields, Executive VP in charge of the Americas, spoke up. Yes, there were problems — big ones, he said.
Everybody cringed. “Goodbye, Mark,” they thought.
“Great!” Mulally said. Uh-oh.
Many of those sitting around the table that day left the company shortly thereafter, but Mark Fields succeeded Mulally as CEO eight years later.
Can we do this at the FBI? At the Department of Justice? Can we fire the liars while we find the truthtellers and promote them?
Well, as we pointed out, it’s been going on for a long time. We’d have a mountain to climb. Not only does the Deep State protect its own, it persecutes its enemies. It also prosecutes them. The FBI is sending spies into Catholic churches here in Virginia, into school board meetings, into pro-life demonstrations. Sure, many agents on the ground are “just following orders,” but threaten to fire senior executives at the FBI like Mulally did at Ford Motor Company and they’ll break down your door in a heartbeat.
Well, if we can’t reform them, what can we do?
The FBI has asked Congress for a billion dollars to build a new headquarters building twice the size of the Pentagon. Hmmm.
Say — instead of putting old guys in a new building, how about putting new guys in the old building?

The Great Left-Wing Disinformation Operation Against The Supreme Court

By JOSH HAMMER

The past five weeks has seen a flurry of media activity, clearly coordinated, against the right-of-center U.S. Supreme Court.
First, the outlet ProPublica began publishing a series of pieces “exposing” the well-known fact of Justice Clarence Thomas’ long-running friendship with billionaire real estate tycoon Harlan Crow, and alleging ethical improprieties pertaining to the justice’s purported failure to disclose certain information.
Second, Politico alleged a conflict of interest for Justice Neil Gorsuch in an old real estate transaction in his native Colorado that involved the CEO of a major law firm. Third, Business Insider relied on a “whistleblower” to allege corruption on the part of Jane Roberts, the wife of Chief Justice John G. Roberts, due to her being a well-compensated legal recruiter. Fourth, The New York Times ran a lengthy and meandering front-page story about the at-times coziness between George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School and some of the Court’s right-of-center justices.
Each and every one of these collusive “gotcha” pieces is left-wing disinformation at worst, and grossly misleading at best.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a Supreme Court justice having a long-running friendship with a wealthy political activist — and Justice Thomas did not actually fail to disclose anything for which extant canons of judicial ethics mandate disclosure, as The Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto and others have painstakingly detailed. As for Justice Gorsuch, his stake in the underlying Colorado property was via an LLC, so he too did not skirt any mandatory disclosure rules. As for Jane Roberts, it is not exactly a state secret that prominent legal recruiters, and headhunters more broadly, can rake in lucrative commissions. And the Times’ polemic against Scalia Law is little more than a pitiful lament that the Left does not unilaterally control every single top-50 law school in America (although it is perilously close to doing so).
Nonetheless, despite these glaring factual omissions, misrepresentations, and the misleading natures of these hit pieces, the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee still deemed it necessary to hold a hearing last week on “ethics reform.” To any reasonable observer not inebriated from that most potent stew of MSNBC chyrons and New York Times editorial headlines, it should be clear that Democratic elected officials are working hand in glove with the Beltway journalist establishment. That particular revolving door, after all, has a long and inglorious history.
It is incumbent upon sober elected officials, and the American people at large, to reject this obtuse, sprawling Democrat-media disinformation operation. The operation, for all its pompous bluster and ginned up faux hysteria, has one goal and one goal only: to delegitimize the U.S. Supreme Court, and to pave the way for ruinous policies that would irreparably damage, and ultimately destroy, that venerable institution.
In the year 2023, the Left has nearly completed its century-plus-long “march through the institutions”: The forces of wokeism and civilizational arson are now firmly ensconced in the corridors of power in Fortune 500 boardrooms, K-12 public school classrooms, Hollywood, Silicon Valley, academia, and myriad other traditional centers of American cultural clout.
The last remaining bulwark for the Right, and for the forces of civilizational sanity more broadly, is the political arena: Republicans currently occupy 26 out of the 50 governor mansions, and have 22 state-level “trifectas” of consolidated gubernatorial/state legislative control (compared with only 17 for Democrats). At the federal level, Republicans retain a slim majority in the House of Representatives and, most important, conservatives control the Supreme Court. In 2022, moreover, the Court had an impressively conservative term, most prominently including its ruling to devolve to the democratic process all regulation of the Left’s favored pagan sacrament, abortion.
The current disinformation operation thus amounts to one big, crass intimidation tactic — a flexing of muscle by what the late Andrew Breitbart famously called the “Democrat-media complex.” The goal is to browbeat the justices into ruling the Left’s way in this term’s marquee cases — including the potentially imminent end of America’s sordid affirmative action regime in the twin pending cases out of Harvard and the University of North Carolina — or else feel Democrats’ political wrath. That wrath could come in numerous forms, including judicial impeachment, jurisdiction-stripping legislation, or, perhaps most harrowing, the ever-looming threat of court-packing.
Let us be clear: That is the end goal here. “Ethics reform” is simply a convenient smokescreen — and not a particularly clever one, at that.
Supreme Court justices do not typically make a habit of speaking for themselves, Justice Samuel Alito’s recent electric interview with the Journal notwithstanding. It is thus necessary for those of us who can speak up to do so, and to defend the integrity, independence, and institutional durability of what Alexander Hamilton famously called, in The Federalist N. 78, the “least dangerous” branch of the federal government. With any luck, the Democrat-media complex’s disinformation operation will fail miserably.
(To find out more about Josh Hammer and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.)

The Monastic Church Of Cluny . . . Building On An Epic Scale For The Glory Of God

By JAMES MONTI

When Our Lord was transfigured on Mount Tabor, St. Peter was so enraptured by the divine glory of Christ that he was filled with a desire to build for his Master a fitting habitation: “Lord, it is good for us to be here: If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles, one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias” (Matt. 17:4 — Vulgate/Douay-Rheims trans.).
Across the centuries, it has been the burning desire of the human heart enraptured with the love of God to raise up for the Creator a house of glory, a dwelling place for the Almighty to set His throne on Earth, a fitting temple with which to fill His praises from the lips of His grateful creatures. This desire to build on an epic scale for God got underway in earnest with the construction of the Constantinian basilicas in the fourth century.
By the early twelfth century, this longing to aim high architecturally for the greater glory of God had wrought the completion of what was to be for over four centuries the largest church in all Christendom, the third monastic church of Cluny, known as “Cluny III.”
In the French town of Cluny, a bell tower atop a short section of a transept and the lower stonework of two western towers are about all that remains of what was in its day one of the great architectural wonders of medieval Europe. The story of the vast abbey church that once stood there begins in AD 910 with the founding of the monastic community of Cluny by the French nobleman Duke William of Aquitaine, who donated his hunting grounds for the monastic site and entrusted the direction of the new Benedictine community to St. Berno, who served as Cluny’s first abbot. It was Berno who built the monks’ first church of their own, “Cluny I,” begun in 915 and completed in 927. The monastery of Cluny became the motherhouse of a network of monasteries that by the end of the eleventh century had spread across Europe to as far west as Spain and England.
Around 955, St. Maiolus (Mayeul), who became abbot of Cluny in 954, undertook to replace the monastery’s fairly small original church with one on a larger scale, one better suited to the liturgical functions of a growing monastic community, “Cluny II” (955- ca. 1040), with a total length of over 140 feet.
It was in 1088 that St. Hugh I of Cluny, the monastery’s sixth abbot, undertook the greatest building project in monastic history, the construction of “Cluny III,” an abbey church that when completed would attain a length of over 614 feet, with vaults rising 97 feet within a high nave of eleven bays and 121 feet within the central crossing, and seven towers, the tallest of which reached a height of 175 feet.
So what was it that motivated Hugh and his brother monks to raise up a monastic church that was four times the size of their previous church? It began with a dream, a dream that one of the monks in the infirmary, named Gunzo, recounted to the abbot, in which the Apostles Saints Peter and Paul and the deacon St. Stephen all appeared, instructing the infirm monk that they wanted a new and larger church to be built for Cluny according to the specific measurements and proportions that they showed to him in the dream. Gunzo was told to memorize what they were showing him and to convey their message to the abbot Hugh; as a proof of the dream’s supernatural origin, Gunzo was instantaneously cured of his illness.
Acting upon what Gunzo told him, Hugh envisioned having a church large enough to accommodate within its walls all the monks of every Cluniac house then in existence across Europe. This however was only a symbolic motivation, as there was no plan to put all these monastic communities under one roof. What Hugh was really seeking was to give the utmost glory to God both by the sheer grandeur of the church itself and by the greater splendor and decorum of the sacred liturgical rites that could be celebrated in this decidedly more cosmic setting. Hugh was aiming high, reaching for the stars, as it were, pursuing the seemingly “impossible dream” of raising up a house of God truly worthy of its Divine Occupant.
Five centuries after its completion, Cluny III was still able to awe its visitors, as attested by the seventeenth-century Benedictine historian Dom Jean Mabillon (1632-1707): “If you see its grandeur a hundred times, every time you are astounded” (quoted in Carolyn Carty, “The Role of Gunzo’s Dream in the Building of Cluny III,” Gesta, volume 27, nn. 1-2, 1988, p. 113).
Moreover, this house of God was to be a house of prayer to rival any other in Christendom, with an almost continuous cascade of sacred offices prayed by the monks throughout the day and night. A detailed picture of Cluny’s rich liturgical life can be drawn from two eleventh century customaries of Cluny, the Liber Tramitis, dating from about 1043, and the Ordo Cluniacensis of the monk Bernard, dating from about 1075. The latter tells of a huge triangular lamp stand fitted with 120 lamps that was lit for the greater solemnities, including Easter. The virtually ceaseless oblation of divine praises offered by the Cluniac monks constituted the very essence of their vocation in the Church, as the Benedictine writer on Cluny Dom Joseph Warrilow explains:
“. . . for the monks of Cluny the choral Office, the daily round of prayer and praise, was the core of their life. It was the most important though by no means the only occupation of their busy days. It was carried out seven times a day and once at night. It was not only the basis of their spiritual life and the source of their strength, but the raison d’etre and the inspiration… of their wide artistic achievement in many media” (Joseph Warrilow, “Cluny: Silentia Claustri,” in David Hugh Farmer, ed., Benedict’s Disciples, Leominster, England, Gracewing, 2002, pp. 128-129).
Cluny’s “artistic achievement” found expression not only in the vast enterprise of building Cluny III but also in the music with which the monks of Cluny offered their almost ceaseless supplications, as the writer Edwin Mullins observes:
“From the earliest days under Abbot Odo music was always considered at Cluny to be something sacred, a projection of a divine spirituality capable of reaching the souls of those who practiced it as well as those who listened – hence its importance in the daily liturgy” (Edwin Mullin, Cluny: In Search of God’s Lost Empire, New York, Blue Bridge, 2006, p. 125).
The stones of Cluny III were built upon the foundation of a traditional monastic spirituality most perfectly articulated by their second abbot, Saint Odo of Cluny (ca. 878-942). He saw the Cluniac way of life as a spiritual return to the innocence of the Garden of Eden and as an anticipation of life in Heaven, of the blessed peace and quiet of Heaven, a sharing in the life of the angels. Expanding upon what Saint Odo had to say about monastic silence as a foretaste of the silence of Heaven, the Benedictine monastic scholar Dom Kassius Hallinger observes:
“To keep silence is to remain in the presence of the Son of Man… In the Apocalypse the opening of the seventh seal ushers in a permanent state. A great silence reigns, the silence of every creature before the Son of Man” (Dom Kassius Hallinger, OSB, “The Spiritual Life of Cluny in the Early Days,” in Noreen Hunt, ed., Cluniac Monasticism in the Central Middle Ages, Hamden, CT, Archon Books, 1971, pp. 39-40).
It is worth noting here that this perception of the purpose and value of silence can be applied to the question of silence in the sacred liturgy. The times of sacred silence, found in both the Novus Ordo and the Traditional Latin forms of the Roman Rite, albeit to a considerably greater extent in the latter, summon the worshipper to keep himself spiritually and mentally “in the presence of the Son of Man.”
The very intense liturgical life of Cluny has often been criticized as excessively demanding, seemingly giving the monks little time for private prayer or anything else. But the monastic scholar Dom Jean Leclercq, OSB clarified this issue by noting that the only way to interpret the liturgical directions of Cluny in a logical and realistic manner is to see the monks as having taken turns in this continual daily rhythm of liturgical prayer (“Prayer at Cluny,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion, volume 51, n. 4, December 1983, pp. 651-665).

The French Revolution

The French monastic historian Dom Mabillon whom we cited earlier could have scarcely imagined that little more than a century after he gazed with rapt wonder upon the majestic beauty of Cluny III, some of his own countrymen would undertake the hate-driven destruction of this awesome house of God. In October 1793 troops of the French Revolution’s rabidly anti-Catholic Jacobin regime were sent to Cluny to destroy whatever they could of the monastery and its church by means of fire and gun powder. The church edifice, however, was so massive and well-built that much of it withstood this initial assault.
But in 1798, the monastic grounds of Cluny, having been confiscated by the government, were sold to three rapacious opportunists, who spent the next two decades dismantling the church stone by stone to make a huge profit by selling the stones as building supplies. It was only after ninety percent of the great monastic church had been eviscerated in this manner that the French government acceded to protests against this criminal destruction and ordered the preservation of what was left — just one wing of Cluny III’s great transept with its southern tower, plus the bases of the church’s two western towers.
This physical annihilation of Cluny III did not succeed in annihilating the spiritual and cultural legacy of the abbey church. No enemy of the faith could destroy the many centuries of Masses and prayers that had been offered within its hallowed walls, nor the salutary influence it had exerted upon the architecture of other churches built in imitation of its beauty and grandeur.
Abbot Hugh’s “impossible dream” of building as glorious a house of God as he could and filling it with continual praises to the Almighty can serve to inspire us to do the same in our own everyday lives, to aim high by striving as best we can to direct all our daily words, thoughts, and actions to the greater glory of God.

So, The Deep State Is Real? So What?? That’s Old News!!!

By CHRISTOPHER MANION

“The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity” — W.B. Yeats, The Second Coming (1919)

• + + On Monday, the Justice Department released the Special Counsel’s report on the “Crossfire Hurricane” Investigation.
  In one sense, the document revealed what everybody already knew. Donald Trump was right. “Russia!!” was indeed a hoax. It was all lies, conjured up by the Clinton campaign, cleared by Hillary Clinton, and approved by Barack Obama.
  Like many lies, “Russia!!” had a long life. It was first used to defeat Trump in 2016 (it failed), to bring down his presidency after 2017 (with mixed results), and to defeat him in 2020 (it worked).
  When a liar accuses an innocent person of a crime, at least two people immediately know the truth: the accuser and the accused. But others might not know it, and the target is often left “twisting slowly in the wind,” as Nixon aide John Ehrlichman put it fifty years ago.
  Regarding “Russia!!”, everybody already knew long before last Monday. And by “everybody,” we mean not only the perpetrators, their fellow conspirators, and their political bedfellows, as well as their targets, but the public at large.
  In another sense, however, Durham’s report revealed something that many of us didn’t know.
  If we didn’t know then, we know now. The FBI is corrupt, possibly beyond repair. And it thrives amidst a corruption of spirit that has befouled our nation’s permanent political institutions.
  And it’s not just the FBI leadership. When agents were told to spy on the Catholic faithful attending Mass according to the Old Rite, pro-lifers praying on sidewalks, or fathers objecting to boys who rape their daughters in Loudoun County Virginia public school girls’ restrooms, agents on the ground did as they were told.
  After all, they were “just following orders.”
  Meanwhile, the “Russia!!” hoax perpetrators will continue undaunted. Cong. Dan Goldman (D., N.Y.) spoke for them on Wednesday in an interview on MSNBC. Goldman ignored Durham’s findings, called the investigation an “abomination,” claiming that Durham, not the FBI, was guilty of an “abuse of power.”
  Think Nashville: There, a transgender terrorist bigot carried out a carefully planned massacre of six innocent Christians.
  The Left immediately responded: “Transgenders are threatened!” The mob, the media, and Joe Biden agreed.
  And on Thursday that threat became the shot heard round the world enshrined in U.S. foreign policy, as Biden’s Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, chimed in to declare war on “Homophobia, Biphobia, Interphobia, and Transphobia.”
  The FBI, aping Orwell’s Ministry of Truth, agrees as well. The Nashville killer’s manifesto and the Durham report will both disappear down the Memory Hole.

Why The Left Won’t Quit

Donald Trump represents for the Left a nagging but inescapable obstacle to their total dominance: the Deplorables.
We constitute an unruly pack of proles who refuse to be grateful for all that our betters, the anointed elites, have done for us.
We must be destroyed.
But those designated as “Enemies of the State” must first be tortured, then converted, in Room 101, then beg for forgiveness at our show trials in the Ministry of Truth, and only then be shot.
George Orwell knew totalitarians well. His “Homage to Catalonia” recounts his experiences in the Spanish Civil War that opened his eyes to the danger posed by the insatiable lust for power.
And he was right. History reveals that the Left kills those who stand in its way. Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Castro — all of them eliminated opponents so casually that many on the Left might even envy them as they survey our own defiant Deplorables with unctuous disdain.
And the attacks on Donald Trump, who represents those unlettered ingrates, will continue because, in the language of classical political theory, he has become a mythical symbol. He represents the millions whom the Left wants to lock down for good next time.
Big Brother had his daily “Two Minutes Hate” — target: Emmanuel Goldstein. Today the Left has Donald Trump — “The Sum Of All Evils.”
They don’t just hate him. They envy him.
Envy is a Deadly Sin. To explain its gravity, Helmut Schoeck helpfully explains the distinction between envy and jealousy.
The jealous man sees his neighbor’s new car and says, “Hey, I like that car. I’m going to emulate my neighbor’s good habits, work hard, and soon I’ll be able to earn enough to buy a nice car like his.”
But the envious man grovels in spite. He is lazy and slanderous. He knows he will never work hard, and he knows his neighbor is the better man. So, he fumes. “I know I’ll never have a nice car, but I don’t want my neighbor to have his nice car either.”
But he can’t just steal his neighbor’s car, right?
So, he tells the government to steal it for him.
You know, “Equity” and all that.
The FBI agent who goes along to get promoted might well envy his colleague who refuses to sell out. On May 18, the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government heard testimony from three agents who refused. A report published by the Committee the same day details how “FBI supervisors retaliated against agents blowing the whistle on corruption and partisan misconduct.” Suspended Agent Garrett told the Committee how the FBI “destroys their careers, suspends them under false pretenses, takes away their security clearances and pay with no true options for real recourse or remedy.”
So, when it comes to truthtellers, the Deep State envies and punishes. But at times, it can also be jealous. And today, its operatives are jealous indeed of their counterparts in tyrannical countries.
The Chinese Communist Party’s security forces can simply “disappear” those miscreants identified by the “Social Credit System” as opponents of “Great Leader” Xi Jinping.
If the FBI and the CIA could only do that to their Deplorable critics!
No, they don’t want to destroy the totalitarian enemies of the United States. They want to emulate them.

Where Gratitude Is Due . . .

And last . . . Hey, there’s a war going on! And as it accelerates, the United States is closer to the risk of a war with a nuclear power than it has been in sixty years.
By February 2022, everyone knew that “Russia!!” was disinformation. But the Left had successfully integrated the slander into their arsenal in their war with Trump. Durham or no Durham, it was now indelible.
So, it was no surprise that Democrats, usually the prideful party of peaceniks, jumped at the chance to support U.S. involvement in the Ukraine war primarily for domestic reasons: to perpetuate their war with Trump.
Question Biden’s “proxy war” and you were a “Putin Stooge” or a “MAGA Republican.”
Whatever the foreign policy merits of our involvement, the Left used the war to distract Americans from the disasters that Biden had wrought on the country.
And it worked. The predicted Republican “Red Wave” all but disappeared by November.
Today there is a wide range of opinion regarding U.S. involvement and its possible escalation into direct U.S.-Russia military hostilities in Ukraine. As that prospect increases in coming weeks, the Durham report’s exposure of the “Russia!!” lies could well allow that discussion to seek a more sober level.
On one side of that broad and necessary conversation are many who have advocated a greater role for the United States in support of Ukraine for legitimate reasons of national interest.
They might take a moment to reflect on the irony: “Russia!!” was perpetrated to destroy Trump, and the country with him. And yet, while the Left manipulated it for domestic gain, the hoax and its significant staying power also made it easier for the United States, with virtually no debate, to get involved in another undeclared foray that has brought us perilously close to the prospect of a hot war with Russia.

A Beacon Of Light . . . Parables And The Message Of Salvation

By FR. RICHARD D. BRETON, JR.

Have you ever thought of how the birth of Christ has changed the world? With the Incarnation, or birth of Christ, God becomes man and lives among us. The sole purpose of living among us was to prepare us to participate in the gift of our own redemption. During His time on Earth, Jesus embarked on a public ministry that forever changed the world. At the heart of this message of salvation was the need to love God first, thus allowing that divine love to trickle into our love for others. Loving God first is the only way we can then love our neighbor. Through Jesus’ example and teaching, humanity underwent a spiritual transformation that positioned every human being on the path that leads to Heaven.
Even though the public ministry of Jesus lasted only three years, those years were filled with an abundance of wealth and knowledge that would lead us into eternity. It started at Cana in Galilee where there was a wedding feast. During this feast Jesus demonstrates for the first time His divinity by changing the water into the best of wine. As the first miracle unfolds, the Mother of Jesus, tells the servants, as she tells us all, to do whatever Jesus tells them to. This message of Mary calls us to listen very carefully to the words of her son, because His words are filled with lifesaving advice.
Like every time and place, there were also challenges during Jesus’ time that had to be overcome. Among these challenges was the inability of the people to think beyond the meaning of the law. The lack of education among the simple-minded people of Jesus’ time made it difficult to teach the people. Overcoming this obstacle, and teaching in a way that would bring the people to a new understanding, Jesus used stories or parables as the way to reach them.
Using parables allowed Jesus to craft the message of salvation in a way that was easy to understand. Because salvation is such a mystery, it was necessary to make connections between the divine and supernatural, with the ordinary and mundane. The parables also challenged the conventual wisdom of the time, by demonstrating servant leadership, calling on the followers to live a radical love in building up the Kingdom of God.
Throughout Sacred Scripture, God spoke in various ways. In the beginning God speaks, and creation happens. In the times of Abraham, Noah, and Moses, God speaks, and covenants are created. Through the prophets, God proclaims the way to conversion. Through the Angel Gabriel, God proclaims the news of our salvation in the birth of Jesus Christ, born of the Virgin Mary. With Jesus’ birth, the “Word Became Flesh” and dwelt among us, preparing the way for the voice of God to be truly heard in our times.
The parables make up a large part of the words Jesus spoke in the Gospels. Some of the most memorable preaching of Jesus regarding the Kingdom of God happened through the use of parables. Parables like the Good Samaritan and the Prodigal Son have transcended religious boundaries and have become stories of life’s lessons all faiths recognize. For us as Catholics, however, parables are not merely stories of the Bible we learned as children they are for us dynamic lessons that continue to influence our lives even today in this everchanging world.
If you were to look up the definition of a parable in the dictionary, you would find its definition to be “a short allegorical story designed to teach a truth, principle of religious belief, or a moral lesson.” For Jesus, this is precisely what He did. Jesus’ teachings were Truth, they included religious principles, and they always taught a moral lesson. And yet, Jesus uses parables to teach the important elements of everyday life.
So, how many parables did Jesus teach during His time on Earth? In total there are forty-two recorded parables Jesus used to teach the people about the Kingdom of God and other aspects of religious life. There are some biblical scholars, however, who break them down into as many as fifty. For our purposes we will stick to the number forty-two. Where do we find these forty-two parables? These are contained within the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
In the Gospel of Matthew Jesus offers twenty-two parables. In Matthew’s Gospel we find the parables of the lamp, the speck and the log, the new cloth on an old garment, the divided kingdom, the sower, the weeds among the wheat, the mustard seed, the leaven, the hidden treasure, the pearl of great price, the net, the heart of man, the lost sheep, the unforgiving servant, laborers in the vineyard, the two sons, the tenant farmers, the marriage feast, the budding fig tree, the faithful versus the wicked servant, and the ten talents.
In the Gospels of St. Mark and St. Luke, they each present us with ten parables. In the Gospel of St. Mark, we hear about the parable of the lamp, new cloth on an old garment, the divided kingdom, parable of the sower, parable of the growing seed, parable of the mustard seed, parable of the heart of man, the tenant farmers, the budding fig tree, and the faithful versus the wicked servant. In the Gospel of St. Luke we are introduced to the parables about the Good Samaritan, the friend at midnight, the rich fool, the barren fig tree, the invited guests, the lost coin, the prodigal son, the rich man and Lazarus, the persistent widow, and the Pharisee and the tax collector. Even though it may seem like there are duplicates in these lists, each of the Evangelists present them in the way they experienced the parables.
Why did Jesus need to use parables? In Jesus’ ministry it was likely that He would have encountered so many different people. These encounters would have included the disciples, the Pharisees, and large groups of people who may have been listening to Him for the very first time. Jesus had to engage this wide group of different people, the educated and ordinary, so He used the parables to engage them all, whomever he was speaking to. Through the parables Jesus revealed to them all the mystery of the Kingdom of God, while challenging their ordinary, and often ancient held view, forcing them to think beyond earthly things.
The ordinary things referenced to in the parables like plants, vines, seeds, and sowers, were simple aspects of life that the people understood. He also spoke about what we would now call family dynamics, dinner parties and weddings, again because these were events that resonated with the ordinary lives of the people. In all, the parables touched on life themes including: love, forgiveness, God’s Kingdom, prayer, our redemption, and the end times.
What is interesting in all of the parables, was that Jesus intentionally leaves out key details and people’s names. Why? Well, possibly to allow us to place ourselves in the situations He is talking about. This allows us to consider, prayerfully, the moral of the parable as it pertains to our own lives and circumstances. The parables of Jesus are as important now, just as they were then. If we take the parables seriously, not as fables, but as opportunities of conversion, then they have the potential to teach us something about ourselves. Parables never celebrate the status quo because they always celebrate the individual dignity of the person.
Over the next few weeks, we are going to delve into the public ministry of Jesus and see what we can learn from the parables. At first they may seem like stories that are out of touch with today’s reality. Some people might think that, but if we look beneath the surface, they are filled with teaching that transcend time and place. The parables Jesus taught are lifelong lessons that will lead us to eternity.

They Seen Their Opportunities And Took ’Em

By DEACON MIKE MANNO

There was once a political machine that controlled New York City and much of New York State as well. It was formed in 1786 and became the repository of all the notable political leaders of the day, as well as their henchmen. It was a place where the local Democrats ruled and, if you wanted to get ahead, you joined and worked your way up.
It was called The Tammany Society, taking its name from Tamanend, a tribal leader of the Lenape Tribe, and using American Indian names to designate their leaders, such as the Great Sacherm, for its leader. Of course, we know it today from history as Tammany Hall.
In 1842 in a shanty town outside of what is now Manhattan, a baby was born and given the name George Washington Plunkitt. Young George grew up in rough times, working as a butcher’s apprentice before starting a construction business. Being attracted to politics he joined the Tammany Society and ultimately was elected to several terms in both the New York Assembly and Senate, where he amassed a fortune.
At the turn of the last century, he sat down with a reporter, William L. Riordon, for a series of articles on his life and political thoughts. Those articles were later published in a popular book, Plunkitt of Tammany Hall, in 1905. That book was recommended to me by my graduate political science professor, and later I assigned it to my political science students in my State and Local Government classes.
If you can find the book, buy it, download it, borrow it, but read it. It will put a smile on your face and questions in your head, and you won’t forget it.
But there was one chapter in the book you should read first, which isn’t hard since it is the first chapter on “Honest Graft and Dishonest Graft.” In it, Sen. Plunkitt explains how he became wealthy during his numerous terms in office.
“Everybody is talkin’ these days about Tammany men growin’ rich on graft, but nobody thinks of drawin’ the distinction between honest graft and dishonest graft. There’s all the difference in the world between the two. Yes, many of our men have grown rich in politics and I’m gettin’ richer every day, but I’ve not gone in for dishonest graft — blackmailin’ gamblers, saloonkeepers, disorderly people, etc. — and neither has any of the men who have made big fortunes in politics,” he said.
He then went on to explain what honest graft is, using example after example. In the first he tells of the city planning a new park at a designated place. He, of course, is tipped off about the plan and its location and, before any public notice is given, he goes out and buys the land at rock-bottom prices and after the park announcement is made he sells it for a nice profit.
“Ain’t it perfectly honest to charge a good price and make a profit on my investment and foresight? Of course, it is. Well, that’s honest graft,” he says.
Other examples he used, including hiring practices and pay raises for city employees, buying up land for a bridge before public notice, then selling it when plans are announced; buying up old granite bricks dug up from a street re-paving project and manipulating the bidding so that he was able to purchase the lot for pennies; swamp land that would be needed to complete a park — all examples of honest graft, famously saying, “I seen my opportunities and I took ’em.”
This, he says is, how he got rich from honest graft and how most other politicians get rich the same way, they never steal a dollar from public coffers, they just seen their opportunities and took ‘em.
“That is why, when a reform administration comes in and spends a half-million dollars in tryin’ to find the public robberies they talked about in the campaign, they don’t find them.
“The books are always all right. The money in the city treasury is all right. Everything is all right. All they can show is that the Tammany heads of departments looked after their friends, within the law, and gave them what opportunities they could to make honest graft.”
Now you might wonder why I bring this matter to you.
In the past few weeks, a House committee has reported on some rather questionable cash payments to Biden family members, including several grandchildren of the president. While the specific origin and purpose of the monetary transfers remain hazy, the origins appear to be mostly foreign, and the money was delivered through at least twenty different corporations, all formed by a Biden family member in Delaware and Washington, D.C.
Now I am not a criminal lawyer, nor have I ever investigated an operation such as this, but my colleagues who have described this as classic money laundering. Empty corporations are formed as a device to obscure the source of said funds and to make it more difficult to connect the source of the money to the eventual recipient. That was plainly shown by the House committee.
What is important here is the response by Biden political defenders in the Democratic Party and in the media
“Nothing here,” they shout, claiming that there is no direct link to the president as a recipient. Some party loyalists claim that while this may look bad for the president, it is not illegal. The media have for the most part taken up a similar defense. The New York Times headline was: “House Republican Report Finds No Evidence of Wrongdoing by President Biden.”
It reported that, “After months of investigation and many public accusations of corruption against Mr. Biden and his family, the first report of the premier House GOP inquiry showed no proof of such misconduct.”
And Time Magazine reported: “[The House] Investigation of Biden Relatives Swings and Misses on Allegations of Influence Peddling.”
And so, the question arises: Is this the Twenty-First Century version of honest graft? Perpetuated by successors of the original Tammany men? Or is the Biden Bunch just victims of an overzealous political witch-hunt?
Either that or we have a new political family living by the motto: We seen our opportunities and we took ’em.

• + + (You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every weekend on Faith On Trial or podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/)