thelibertydaily--2020-12-04--Pastor John Piper Tries to Defend Marxist Critical Race Theory (Part 2)

In Part 1 , I discussed how John Piper treats Critical Race Theory as an abstract academic philosophy that is not actively being taught in churches .
Therefore , Piper argues it is slanderous to use Critical Race Theory in the pejorative against a teacher teaching this ideology .
I argue that Piper 's Part 1 was designed to combat discernment and to maintain that Critical Race Theorists are not false teachers but brethren that we simply disagree with .
With the abstract view of Critical Race Theory established , John Piper sheds more light on this in his part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue of Critical Race Theory , stemming from his assumption in part one that CRT/I is not presently being taught in the church .
John Piper summarizes his critique of Critical Race Theory here .
In essence , his criticism of Critical Race Theory is that it is not Christianity , in that it can not bring salvation .
This seems as though his reason for beginning his argument with Christian truisms and downplays the necessity of dividing over this issue .
Piper claims that on paper Critical Race Theory does not sound @ @ @ @ @ @ @ definition to define CRT .
Note that this definition assumes that there is presently systemic racism and that race is a social construct .
Piper continues to delve into a history lesson on Critical Theory , about how it analyzes group power dynamics etc .
John Piper actually states the logical conclusion of Critical Theory 's vast array of application .
It invents oppressive categories , but he never states that the purpose is to expand the proletariat class .
His observation stops midway through .
Instead Piper pulls back his criticism of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ words , John Piper is saying Critical Theory can be a useful analytical tool .
John Piper does however go on to elaborate his two greatest criticisms of CRT .
John Piper uses two phrases of woke people as a launching pad to dive into their ideology .
The first ties into sexual ethic as Critical Theory is applied to promote the homosexual and transvestite agenda .
The second deals with the view of the inerrancy of Scripture .
It 's important to note that Piper 's main criticisms for CRT are because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really a critique of Critical Theory or CRT .
Perhaps this is a critique of postmodernism , but this is really a critique of materialism , the belief that this world is all that there is .
If someone ascribes to an atheistic worldview other than Buddhism , Piper could very well be describing them .
Mankind 's rebellion against God was because we wanted to be God in Genesis 3 .
Piper 's words here could be taken to describe any unsaved person , which ultimately makes it a useless critique of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to argue against CRT 's support for transgenderism before returning to a larger critique of materialism .
There was a time when Marxism did not tolerate homosexuality , but Cultural Marxism is willing to upend biblical sexuality .
The expediency of Critical Theory should not be the main focus of a critique of the ideology , just like materialism should not be the main critique of Classical Marxism .
These are ideologies built on theft , murder , pride , envy , greed , and covetousness .
Piper goes on to address the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Critical Race Theory is its mainstream expression , not the ideology in and of itself .
While he is correct to state that Critical Race Theory denies 2 Timothy 3:16 , this is not a criticism unique to CRT .
This is , once again , true of the overwhelming majority of people who are unsaved , for it is possible for someone to believe in the inerrancy of Scripture and to not be saved because acknowledging truth is not what saves people .
The view of a Christian belief being used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CRT at all .
It 's true of people suspicious of organized religion .
It 's true of people in places of mass cultural conflict where white missionaries are preaching the Word .
Piper has gone into great detail criticizing the manifestation of CRT by actually critiquing materialism .
He does not attack the root of CRT which he refers to as the generic definition .
WE have all heard this argument before : `` Communism is good on paper . ''
or `` Communism is good , in theory . ''
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forcefully stealing private property .
John Piper is basically arguing that Critical Race Theory is good , in theory .
Typically , the beginning of an article will focus on a problem and the end will focus on a solution .
And critical race theory in its more essential definition , including its mainstream assumptions and conclusions , is a manifestation of the age-old enslavement of the fallen human heart to self-deification ( “ I will be my own god ” ) , and self-definition ( “ I will define my own essential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I will decide my own truth and my own morality , without deference to any authority outside myself ” ) .
And therefore , to try to make progress in racial justice and racial respect and racial harmony by absorbing the assumptions and categories and conclusions and strategies of critical race theory is a dead-end street .
Out of context , the latter sentence here sounds like a scathing critique , though it is really a climax of Piper talking about a materialistic worldview .
Piper may actually be trying to divorce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the core teachings of the ideology because the assumptions and categories he is referring to are its denial of the authority of Scripture and its categories of sexual deviance .
He still uses woke buzzwords like `` racial justice '' and `` racial harmony '' which are straight out of White Fragility , not the Bible .
John Piper goes to great lengths to argue that Critical Race Theory is a materialist ideology , but ultimately articulates that it can be a useful analytical tool .
The `` Critical Race Theory is good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ using will ultimately manifest itself as a means to continue using this sinful ideology in the church divorced from its materialism and perhaps also its support for sexual sin .
This ultimately provides cover for false teachers to merge Christianity to a heretical worldview , like they are already doing because they are not technically manifesting Critical Race Theory according to John Piper .
Therefore John Piper 's criticism of Critical Race Theory is inadequate at best as it does nothing to address it being taught in the church .
Consider supporting The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which will get you access to the recording of the Destroy Social Justice Conference featuring speakers such as Pastor Greg Locke , Mychal Massie , Dr Mike Spaulding , Pastor Ken Peters and all of your favorite GK podcasters .
You 'll also get the recordings from our monthly episode of Connected , a weekly devotional and 30 % off of everything in The GK Store .
Pastors , students , military and first responders can join at half-price .
For more information or to join , please visit

In Part 1, I discussed how John Piper treats Critical Race Theory as an abstract academic philosophy that is not actively being taught in churches. Therefore, Piper argues it is slanderous to use Critical Race Theory in the pejorative against a teacher teaching this ideology. I argue that Piper's Part 1 was designed to combat discernment and to maintain that Critical Race Theorists are not false teachers but brethren that we simply disagree with.
With the abstract view of Critical Race Theory established, John Piper sheds more light on this in his part two.
In my understanding, critical race theory is worth talking about not only because it is causing divisions among Christians at points where I don’t think divisions need to exist
Piper begins by downplaying the issue of Critical Race Theory, stemming from his assumption in part one that CRT/I is not presently being taught in the church.
Even more specifically, I want to establish us in these convictions, over against the core philosophical convictions of critical race theory, because I believe with all my heart that these convictions, not those of critical race theory, will serve the cause of racial harmony, racial justice, and the flourishing of a joyful, respectful, Christ-exalting racial and ethnic diversity in the body of Christ. In other words, critical race theory is not a problem because it raises the challenge of racial justice, and racial harmony, and racial respect, and racial glory, but because it fails us as we try to take up these challenges in a hopeful, Christ-exalting way.
John Piper summarizes his critique of Critical Race Theory here. In essence, his criticism of Critical Race Theory is that it is not Christianity, in that it cannot bring salvation. This seems as though his reason for beginning his argument with Christian truisms and downplays the necessity of dividing over this issue.
If we stay at the generic level for a moment, critical race theory will not sound controversial because it will overlap with the legitimate goals and concerns of many Christians.
Piper claims that on paper Critical Race Theory does not sound controversial and then uses Purdue University's definition to define CRT.
CRT [critical race theory] scholars attempt to understand [1] how victims of systemic racism are affected by cultural conceptions of race and [2] how they are able to represent themselves to counter prejudice.
Note that this definition assumes that there is presently systemic racism and that race is a social construct.
Now, if we don’t read more into some of those words than we should, there are many Christians who would say, rightly, “Those are some of my big concerns!”
Piper continues to delve into a history lesson on Critical Theory, about how it analyzes group power dynamics etc.
Even though critical theory may have started with a concern about the relationships of privilege and oppression between classes, like rich and poor, white-collar and blue-collar, educated and less educated, professional and tradesmen, blue bloods and commoners, etc., the theory now has given rise to an array of focuses (theories, disciplines, studies) from queer theory to fat studies. The reason for this spawning of so many oppositional studies is that, as soon as you focus on groups and power dynamics, you see them everywhere: women–men, heterosexual–homosexual, fixed gender–transgender, old–young, Western–non-Western, American–Canadian, able-bodied–disabled, short–tall, slender–obese. On every one of these pairs, you can find books and studies more or less shaped by critical theory — a focus on the identity of the group and a challenge of the power or the privilege of one group over the other.
John Piper actually states the logical conclusion of Critical Theory's vast array of application. It invents oppressive categories, but he never states that the purpose is to expand the proletariat class. His observation stops midway through. Instead Piper pulls back his criticism of Critical Theory to say:
Now, it’s true that the focus on groups, while minimizing the individual, and the focus on power, while minimizing other relational dynamics (like love and humility and graciousness), can skew our understanding and yield unhelpful strategies. Nevertheless, those very focuses, misleading as they might be in some ways, can also reveal insights that may be strategically helpful in moving toward greater justice.
In other words, John Piper is saying Critical Theory can be a useful analytical tool. John Piper does however go on to elaborate his two greatest criticisms of CRT. John Piper uses two phrases of woke people as a launching pad to dive into their ideology. The first ties into sexual ethic as Critical Theory is applied to promote the homosexual and transvestite agenda. The second deals with the view of the inerrancy of Scripture. It's important to note that Piper's main criticisms for CRT are because of its manifestations.
Here is my answer, and my deepest problem with critical race theory. They arrive at this conclusion because at root they believe a person’s essential identity is self-chosen, self-constructed, not God-designed or God-given. Or another way to say it would be that, when it comes to our own identity, we are our own god. We do not acknowledge or submit to any divine truth or morality as above us, constraining or limiting our own self-definition, self-construction. So, if I choose to be a woman though God made me a man, I am right to do so. No God, no morality, no religion, no ideology can replace me as the self-determining, self-defining, self-deifying sovereign of my own identity.
This is not really a critique of Critical Theory or CRT. Perhaps this is a critique of postmodernism, but this is really a critique of materialism, the belief that this world is all that there is. If someone ascribes to an atheistic worldview other than Buddhism, Piper could very well be describing them. Mankind's rebellion against God was because we wanted to be God in Genesis 3. Piper's words here could be taken to describe any unsaved person, which ultimately makes it a useless critique of Critical Race Theory. He goes on to argue against CRT's support for transgenderism before returning to a larger critique of materialism.
When God is out of the picture, what’s left to determine right and wrong, and what our true identity is, is personal autonomy (self-definition, self-determination). And if you reject such personal autonomy as the final arbiter of right and wrong, then within the framework of God-evicting critical race theory, the only explanation left for your behavior is your own will to power. Therefore, if you reveal your rejection of human autonomy — self-determination, self-definition — in regard to homosexual behavior or attempts at sex change, you show yourself guilty of governing all your relationships by a will to power rather than a respect for autonomy. For those are the only two options in a “theory” where God and his word are not supreme.
There was a time when Marxism did not tolerate homosexuality, but Cultural Marxism is willing to upend biblical sexuality. The expediency of Critical Theory should not be the main focus of a critique of the ideology, just like materialism should not be the main critique of Classical Marxism. These are ideologies built on theft, murder, pride, envy, greed, and covetousness. Piper goes on to address the inerrancy debate.
The root issue is that the claim to have an infallible Bible undermines the fundamental assumption of critical race theory in its mainstream expression. That fundamental assumption is that human identity is self-constructed, not God-given. Any group, therefore, that claims to have access to an infallible word of God that dictates human identity and human right and wrong is a manifest threat to human autonomy. Within the framework of critical race theory, the claim of biblical authority can be understood only as a group trying to seize power — in this case, white power, since most of the confessions of faith in the history of the church that espouse biblical infallibility have been written by white men.
Again Piper's issue with Critical Race Theory is its mainstream expression, not the ideology in and of itself. While he is correct to state that Critical Race Theory denies 2 Timothy 3:16, this is not a criticism unique to CRT. This is, once again, true of the overwhelming majority of people who are unsaved, for it is possible for someone to believe in the inerrancy of Scripture and to not be saved because acknowledging truth is not what saves people.
The view of a Christian belief being used to seize power is not unique to CRT at all. It's true of people suspicious of organized religion. It's true of people in places of mass cultural conflict where white missionaries are preaching the Word.
So, in conclusion and summary: critical race theory, in its generic definition as a quest for understanding the history of oppression in race relations, and the present attitudes and structures that continue that oppression, is a worthy quest.
Piper has gone into great detail criticizing the manifestation of CRT by actually critiquing materialism. He does not attack the root of CRT which he refers to as the generic definition. WE have all heard this argument before: "Communism is good on paper." or "Communism is good, in theory." But it's not. Communism is about forcefully stealing private property. John Piper is basically arguing that Critical Race Theory is good, in theory.
Typically, the beginning of an article will focus on a problem and the end will focus on a solution.
And critical race theory in its more essential definition, including its mainstream assumptions and conclusions, is a manifestation of the age-old enslavement of the fallen human heart to self-deification (“I will be my own god”), and self-definition (“I will define my own essential identity”), and self-determination (“I will decide my own truth and my own morality, without deference to any authority outside myself”). And therefore, to try to make progress in racial justice and racial respect and racial harmony by absorbing the assumptions and categories and conclusions and strategies of critical race theory is a dead-end street.
Out of context, the latter sentence here sounds like a scathing critique, though it is really a climax of Piper talking about a materialistic worldview. Piper may actually be trying to divorce the term CRT and its manifestations from the core teachings of the ideology because the assumptions and categories he is referring to are its denial of the authority of Scripture and its categories of sexual deviance. He still uses woke buzzwords like "racial justice" and "racial harmony" which are straight out of White Fragility, not the Bible.
Conclusion
John Piper goes to great lengths to argue that Critical Race Theory is a materialist ideology, but ultimately articulates that it can be a useful analytical tool. The "Critical Race Theory is good on paper" argument that Piper is using will ultimately manifest itself as a means to continue using this sinful ideology in the church divorced from its materialism and perhaps also its support for sexual sin. This ultimately provides cover for false teachers to merge Christianity to a heretical worldview, like they are already doing because they are not technically manifesting Critical Race Theory according to John Piper. Therefore John Piper's criticism of Critical Race Theory is inadequate at best as it does nothing to address it being taught in the church.


thelibertydaily--2020-12-05--Beijing Biden Taps Chi-Com Tech Mogul for “Trade Transition”

President-elect Joe Biden tapped a businessman and lobbyist with ties to Chinese Communist Party-run technology firms to help lead a trade agency review team .
Ted Dean joined Biden ’ s agency review team for the Office of the United States Trade Representative in November .
A former Obama administration bureaucrat , Dean also worked for multiple organizations that dealt with the business and technology arms of the Chinese Communist Party .
Dean served as the principal and president of a large Chinese tech consulting firm , as well as the chairman of a China-friendly business lobbying organization .
From @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roles at BDA China Limited , a company focused on `` advising on investments in China ’ s consumer sector , '' according to the company ’ s website .
BDA scrubbed details from its site describing how the company was founded following a conference hosted by the Chinese government .
While BDA has not publicly disclosed its Chinese clientele , a 2016 New York Times report said BDA helped raise capital for state-owned enterprises including China Unicom , China Telecom , and China Mobile .
China Unicom and China Telecom were named @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` to the exploitation , influence , and control of the Chinese Communist Party , '' according to Federal Communications Commission chairman Ajit Pai .
Congress moved Tuesday to punish China Mobile for its noncompliance with American regulatory policies .
The Biden transition team did not respond to requests for comment about Dean 's business activities .
Rep. Jim Banks ( R. , Ind . )
panned Dean ’ s selection , saying it indicates a Biden administration would take a less aggressive approach to America 's chief geopolitical rival .
`` There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with China would disqualify them from working in a normal administration .
But this administration ’ s stance towards China isn ’ t normal , '' Banks said .
`` Joe Biden is poised to undo consensus U.S. foreign policy which treats China as our foremost global adversary .
Why ?
I ’ m not sure .
But I do know Biden ’ s financial ties to China predate his recent cabinet picks and involve people a lot closer to Joe Biden than any cabinet appointee . ''
BDA hired multiple other figures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and tech giants during Dean 's tenure , which ended when he joined the Obama administration in 2013 .
Duncan Clark , the chairman and founder of BDA , touted his association with Jack Ma , a Chinese Communist Party member and founder of Chinese e-commerce supergiant Alibaba .
Clark wrote a fawning biography of Ma and his approach to Chinese industry titled Alibaba : The House That Jack Ma Built , published in 2016 .
BDA managing director Lei Shi joined the consulting firm by way of Chinese telecom giant Huawei in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on projects in the Middle East and China .
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called Huawei and other Chinese companies `` Trojan horses for Chinese intelligence '' in February .
Several Western nations have banned Huawei from operating within their borders because of national security concerns .
BDA did not respond to requests for comment .
Dean ’ s ties to China do not end with BDA .
He was appointed chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in the People ’ s Republic of China ( AmCham China ) in 2011 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ working to promote commercial ties with China and foreign investment in Chinese industry .
Its efforts helped bring billions of dollars in American capital to China .
`` China continues to represent one of the best opportunities for the U.S. to expand exports , '' Dean said in 2011 .
`` A healthy bilateral economic relationship between the U.S. and China is good for AmCham-China member companies and good for the U.S .
economy . ''
Derek Scissors , a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute , said unfettered trade and investment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s most grave national security threats .
He estimates that American private and public investment in China likely exceeds $ 1 trillion , with much of the capital being funneled to institutions that challenge American security .
`` This is China ’ s peak time , '' Scissors said .
`` If [ the Chinese Communist Party is ] subsidizing a sector that ’ s either a threat to us or in direct competition with us and our money is going over there to take advantage of those subsidies , we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our own industries , and the national interest . ''
The selection of Dean , an Obama administration appointee , could be a measuring stick for how Biden sets his own trade agenda .
According to Scissors , if the Biden administration repeats the policies of the Obama years , it could lead to ruin .
`` Xi Jinping took over early in the second term of the Obama administration , they knew what he was like , and they wanted no part of responding , '' Scissors said of Obama ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suspicious of the Biden administration because of their track record . ''

President-elect Joe Biden tapped a businessman and lobbyist with ties to Chinese Communist Party-run technology firms to help lead a trade agency review team.
Ted Dean joined Biden’s agency review team for the Office of the United States Trade Representative in November. A former Obama administration bureaucrat, Dean also worked for multiple organizations that dealt with the business and technology arms of the Chinese Communist Party. Dean served as the principal and president of a large Chinese tech consulting firm, as well as the chairman of a China-friendly business lobbying organization.
From 1999 to 2013, Dean held leadership roles at BDA China Limited, a company focused on "advising on investments in China’s consumer sector," according to the company’s website. BDA scrubbed details from its site describing how the company was founded following a conference hosted by the Chinese government. While BDA has not publicly disclosed its Chinese clientele, a 2016 New York Times report said BDA helped raise capital for state-owned enterprises including China Unicom, China Telecom, and China Mobile. China Unicom and China Telecom were named in April as companies that are vulnerable "to the exploitation, influence, and control of the Chinese Communist Party," according to Federal Communications Commission chairman Ajit Pai. Congress moved Tuesday to punish China Mobile for its noncompliance with American regulatory policies.
The Biden transition team did not respond to requests for comment about Dean's business activities.
Rep. Jim Banks (R., Ind.) panned Dean’s selection, saying it indicates a Biden administration would take a less aggressive approach to America's chief geopolitical rival.
"There are already several potential appointees whose coziness with China would disqualify them from working in a normal administration. But this administration’s stance towards China isn’t normal," Banks said. "Joe Biden is poised to undo consensus U.S. foreign policy which treats China as our foremost global adversary. Why? I’m not sure. But I do know Biden’s financial ties to China predate his recent cabinet picks and involve people a lot closer to Joe Biden than any cabinet appointee."
BDA hired multiple other figures with links to the Chinese Communist Party and tech giants during Dean's tenure, which ended when he joined the Obama administration in 2013. Duncan Clark, the chairman and founder of BDA, touted his association with Jack Ma, a Chinese Communist Party member and founder of Chinese e-commerce supergiant Alibaba. Clark wrote a fawning biography of Ma and his approach to Chinese industry titled Alibaba: The House That Jack Ma Built, published in 2016. BDA managing director Lei Shi joined the consulting firm by way of Chinese telecom giant Huawei in 2008. At Huawei, Shi worked on projects in the Middle East and China. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called Huawei and other Chinese companies "Trojan horses for Chinese intelligence" in February. Several Western nations have banned Huawei from operating within their borders because of national security concerns.
BDA did not respond to requests for comment.
Dean’s ties to China do not end with BDA. He was appointed chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in the People’s Republic of China (AmCham China) in 2011. AmCham China is an influential lobbying organization working to promote commercial ties with China and foreign investment in Chinese industry. Its efforts helped bring billions of dollars in American capital to China.
"China continues to represent one of the best opportunities for the U.S. to expand exports," Dean said in 2011. "A healthy bilateral economic relationship between the U.S. and China is good for AmCham-China member companies and good for the U.S. economy."
Derek Scissors, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, said unfettered trade and investment in China is one of America’s most grave national security threats. He estimates that American private and public investment in China likely exceeds $1 trillion, with much of the capital being funneled to institutions that challenge American security.
"This is China’s peak time," Scissors said. "If [the Chinese Communist Party is] subsidizing a sector that’s either a threat to us or in direct competition with us and our money is going over there to take advantage of those subsidies, we’re undermining congressional allocations, the competitiveness of our own industries, and the national interest."
The selection of Dean, an Obama administration appointee, could be a measuring stick for how Biden sets his own trade agenda. According to Scissors, if the Biden administration repeats the policies of the Obama years, it could lead to ruin.
"Xi Jinping took over early in the second term of the Obama administration, they knew what he was like, and they wanted no part of responding," Scissors said of Obama’s China team. "I’m suspicious of the Biden administration because of their track record."


thelibertydaily--2020-12-05--Radical Soros Nonprofit President Departs, Fueling Speculation About a Biden Appointment

The president of George Soros 's vast nonprofit network is leaving his position to potentially join President-elect Joe Biden 's administration , according to reports .
Patrick Gaspard is stepping down as president of Soros 's Open Society Foundation , Axios reported Friday .
The move has fueled speculation that Gaspard may be Biden 's pick for Labor secretary .
`` I write to share with you that I will leave Open Society at the end of the year , '' Gaspard wrote to people within the organization .
`` After four profound years of service to this extraordinary institution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the democracy that is my home , I am compelled to charge once more unto the breech in a new political moment . ''
Soros , who poured a personal record of $ 70 million into the 2020 elections , has loomed large over the transition .
The Washington Free Beacon reported that a number of individuals in Soros 's network received seats on Biden 's transition team .
Sarah Cross , an advocacy director at Soros 's Open Society Foundations , is on Biden 's State Department team .
Michael Penn , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Open Society Foundations , is on the United Nations team .
Diane Thompson , a Leadership in Government Fellow at the Open Society Foundations , was tapped for Biden 's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau transition team .

The president of George Soros's vast nonprofit network is leaving his position to potentially join President-elect Joe Biden's administration, according to reports.
Patrick Gaspard is stepping down as president of Soros's Open Society Foundation, Axios reported Friday. The move has fueled speculation that Gaspard may be Biden's pick for Labor secretary.
"I write to share with you that I will leave Open Society at the end of the year," Gaspard wrote to people within the organization. "After four profound years of service to this extraordinary institution, and at a critical juncture for the democracy that is my home, I am compelled to charge once more unto the breech in a new political moment."
Soros, who poured a personal record of $70 million into the 2020 elections, has loomed large over the transition. The Washington Free Beacon reported that a number of individuals in Soros's network received seats on Biden's transition team.
Sarah Cross, an advocacy director at Soros's Open Society Foundations, is on Biden's State Department team. Michael Penn, a special adviser in the executive office of the Open Society Foundations, is on the United Nations team. Diane Thompson, a Leadership in Government Fellow at the Open Society Foundations, was tapped for Biden's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau transition team.


thelibertydaily--2020-12-05--Arizona House Speaker Claims They Can’t Enforce the U.S. Constitution, Won’t Commit to Calling Legis

Arizona House Speaker Claims They Can’t Enforce the U.S. Constitution, Won’t Commit to Calling Legislative Hearing

It what can only be seen as an effort to keep the facts from coming to light ...

Last Updated on December 5, 2020
Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers claims the state cannot enforce the Constitution regarding Electors, and won’t commit to calling a legislative hearing.
Speaker Bowers was one of the top Arizona legislators who on Friday called for an immediate and “expeditious” forensic audit of the Dominion voting machines and software used in Maricopa County, due to concerns that the machines may have been used to assist in massive voter fraud.
However, following the publication of that statement, Bowers came out with one of his own, claiming that “the rule of law” forbids the overturning of certified election results, which Arizona has already done, even if there was clear evidence of voter fraud.
“The Trump team made claims that the election was tainted by fraud, but presented only theories, not proof,” Bowers said in the statement. “If such evidence existed, the Arizona Legislature simply couldn’t do what is being asked,” referring to calls for the Arizona Legislature to take control of the state’s Electoral College votes, claiming it would require a bipartisan supermajority to even call a special session to begin to contest it.
ARIZONA: GOP Chair Kelli Ward Calls for Immediate Legislative Hearing Into Voter Fraud
He argued that current Arizona law gives the power to voters to decide who wins the election. “The law was aimed at ensuring that Arizona’s electors would remain faithful to the vote of the people,” Speaker Bowers claimed, saying that “nothing in the US Constitution or the decisions of the US Supreme Court even suggests that the Arizona Legislature could retroactively appoint different electors who would cast their ballots for different candidates.”
He noted that Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis, Trump’s legal team, cited the Supreme Court Case McPherson vs Blacker [1892] during the previous election integrity hearings, which argues that the legislature “can resume the power to appoint [electors] at any time.” Ellis told Pennsylvania legislators that due to delegation of authority to the legislature via the Constitution, they can take that back:
You also have an instance here that the law was completely ignored, so even though you have a manner in which your electors are generally selected in Pennsylvania, and that’s worked for the past presidential elections since the statutes were authorised and gone through the legislature, this is an election that has been corrupted, so you can’t go through that method. Those laws were violated. The general assembly here, the legislature, is the authorised entity in the constitution that selects the manner. You can take that power back at any time.
Bowers disagreed, claiming that Bush vs Gore [2000], overrules this. He cited this passage from the decision: “When the state legislature vests the right to vote for President in its people, the right to vote as the legislature has prescribed is fundamental.”
“No election is perfect, and if there were evidence of illegal votes or an improper count, then Arizona law provides a process to contest the election: a lawsuit under state law,” Bowers continued. “But the law does not authorise the Legislature to reverse the results of an election”:
As a conservative Republican, I don’t like the results of the presidential election. I voted for President Trump and worked hard to reelect him. But I cannot and will not entertain a suggestion that we violate current law to change the outcome of a certified election. I and my fellow legislators swore an oath to support the US Constitution and the constitution and laws of the state of Arizona. It would violate that oath, the basic principles of republican government, and the rule of law if we attempted to nullify the people’s vote based on unsupported theories of fraud. Under the laws that we wrote and voted upon, Arizona voters choose who wins, and our system requires that their choice be respected.
Statement from the Speaker addressing calls for the Arizona Legislature to overturn 2020 certified election results. #AZLeg https://t.co/S7R7IQcA3w pic.twitter.com/25Nui7wXkQ — AZ House Republicans (@AZHouseGOP) December 4, 2020
ANALYSIS: After 100 Votes Sampled, Biden’s Arizona Lead May Diminish to 0.19% of Total Vote, Disappear Entirely
However, there is seemingly clear evidence to suggest that Speaker Bowers’s interpretation of the law, and therefore the Constitution, on what the Arizona Legislature can or cannot do is completely wrong. Firstly, Article VI, Clause 2, is the “Supremacy Clause,” which means that any state-level law that violates the Constitution (in this case, saying the legislature cannot take back the power to issue Electors) is nullified.
https://twitter.com/kelliwardaz/status/1334988938772160513
As noted in an analysis piece by Revolver News, federal law also requires state legislatures to have chosen their Electors by the second Wednesday in December (December 14th this year). If they have “failed to make a choice on the day prescribed by law,” then “the electors may be appointed on a subsequent day in such a manner as the legislature of such State may direct,” clearly showing the power that the legislature has.
In fact, the case that Bowers cites to argue his own point, Bush vs Gore, includes a section that re-emphasises the power highlighted in McPherson vs Blacker:
The State legislature’s power to select the manner for appointing electors is plenary; it may, if it so chooses, select the electors itself. … The State, of course, after granting the franchise in the special context of Article II, can take back the power to appoint electors. See id., at 35 (“[T]here is no doubt of the right of the legislature to resume the power at any time, for it can neither be taken away nor abdicated”)
Bret Roberts, an Arizona State Representative, replied to the intital statement put out by Bowers. “Several members [of the legislature] attended a Zoom meeting last evening with Constitutional Scholar Rob Natelson of approximately 30 years who refuted pretty much everything in this press release,” Roberts tweeted.
I'm sorry but I have to respectfully disagree. Several members attended a zoom meeting last evening with Constitutional Scholar Rob Natelson of approximately 30 yrs who refuted pretty much everything in this press release. https://t.co/nrrqdvZpbR — Bret Roberts (@BretRbrts) December 5, 2020
VIDEO: Trump Alludes to SharpieGate in Bombshell Speech, Says Damaged Arizona Ballots Were Tossed Out
By saying that the Arizona Legislature cannot take back the power to issue their own Electoral College votes, Speaker Bowers is not only ignoring the Constitution, but also the rule of law himself which he seems to care so deeply about.
He is already facing a phone campaign from Ali Alexander, one of the organisers of #StopTheSteal, among other angry constituents, who are threatening to primary him if he continues to ignore the Constitution.
https://twitter.com/ali/status/1334985122668490755
https://twitter.com/Maximus_4EVR/status/1333784101531181059
Bowers is also refusing to commit a legislative hearing with subpoena power that could investigate the results of the election. This is something that Arizona GOP Chair Kelli Ward has repeatedly called for, following the news about the audit of the Dominion machines in Maricopa County.
https://twitter.com/kelliwardaz/status/1334964218781724672
As National File reported:
[Senate Speaker] Fann and Bowers, in their current positions, are the ones who have the powers to call a full legislative hearing, something Ward made clear on her Twitter. “Be proud when leadership (Fann or Bowers) calls a FULL hearing,” Ward said in response to Arizona State Senator-Elect Wendy Rogers praising the call for the audit. “A legislative hearing does NOT interfere with any legal cases happening now. #DoYourJob, legislature!” The hearing that took place in Arizona last week featuring Trump’s legal team, Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis, was not a full, official legislative hearing. A full hearing would include the power to subpoena anyone to speak, and would also require witnesses and participants to swear under oath during the proceedings. This would be a major step to take towards a significant investigation into the irregularities that occurred during this election.
National File contacted Bowers to ask for his stance on calling for a legislative hearing, and whether he believed he was robbing Republicans in Arizona of the ability to have their concerns assuaged by an investigation from legislators, and did not receive a reply by the time of publication.


Welcome to Micromobility

A piece in the trade journal Automotive News talks about something styled “ micromobility ” – which translated means an American take on the Chinese concept of mobility .
.
.
circa 1970 , when most Chinese used pedal power to get wherever they were headed .
Which was necessarily not very far – and thus they were more readily corralled .
The American take on this concept 50 years later is the electric pedal bike , the so-called “ e-bike.
” You can see these things in urban areas all over the country – as they are being heavily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who profit from a corollary campaign to kick cars out of urban areas via “ road diets ” ( the reducing of traffic lanes , as from two to one each way so as to make traffic worse ) and even by the outright elimination of asphalt for cars , replaced by “ walkable ” ( and electric-pedal-bike-able ) downtown cores .
It ’ s easier to corral the cattle this way .
Note that none of this is organic – the result of market forces , of people freely choosing that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being forced on the people , to thwart their free choice – of a piece with the “ mandates ” to wear the Holy Rag and ( soon ) the “ mandate ” to submit to a vaccination .
To several vaccinations – as there will be more than just one , once the principle is normalized that it is acceptable to force people to submit to this injection .
To believe it will be limited to just this injection is to believe that allowing the government to tax one thing won ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But the cattle have difficulty seeing this , their vision being limited by the sight of the rear-end of the cow ahead of them .
These e-bikes , like pedal bikes , can only go so far – and not very fast .
Most are limited to a speed about as fast a man can run – about 15 MPH – and have a range of about 20 miles .
This makes it hard to run away on one .
They also have the “ advantage ” – from a certain perspective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weather due to the exposure of the rider to the cold and wet and the inherent danger of riding anything on two wheels on the snow and ice .
But sssssssaaaaaaaaaaaafety isn ’ t the point .
Getting people out of cars – which enable them to escape the corral – is .
The way this is being done is indirect and for that reason , ingenious .
The car is not to be outlawed ; much too noticeable , that .
Instead , they are to be made so expensive and so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the bipedal cattle .
You can not drive what you can not afford .
This includes a house far away from the urban core cattle pen , which requires an income sufficient to be able to afford it , as opposed to the renting of a small apartment in the urban core cattle pen .
The WuFlu hysteria has made it very difficult for millions of people – most especially the young – to be able to afford anything more than a small apartment in the urban core cattle pen .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are debarred from working Because Corona .
Actually – accurately – because of the totalitarian measures imposed using the pretext of Corona .
These measures – not “ the virus ” - are the cause of the economic ruination of the nation , though not of the big corporations who have massively benefitted from the economic ruination , which has served to enrich them while enserfing the population .
A majority of the young – which encompasses those pushing 40 – have never left home .
Their parents ’ home .
They can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parents no longer can .
Then they will need “ housing ” – which will not be a house at all but rather an apartment , probably shared with others , in the urban core cattle pen .
They will still need to get to their neo-feudal job , of course .
And so they will share – not own – a community bike , electrically powered – because many are so obese they can not pedal one the distance .
They will pay each time they use it .
Or rather , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their Universal Basic Income each time they use it .
Which they will be permitted to do so long as they are good bipedal cattle , obediently “ masked ” and vaccinated .
If not , their UBI will be withdrawn and they will have to walk .
If they ’ re allowed to do that .
If there ’ s anywhere they ’ re allowed to go .
If there ’ s anything they ’ re still allowed to do .
This is the micromobility of Chinese America 2030 .

A piece in the trade journal Automotive News talks about something styled “micromobility” – which translated means an American take on the Chinese concept of mobility . . . circa 1970, when most Chinese used pedal power to get wherever they were headed. Which was necessarily not very far – and thus they were more readily corralled.
The American take on this concept 50 years later is the electric pedal bike, the so-called “e-bike.”
You can see these things in urban areas all over the country – as they are being heavily nudged via sweetheart contracts with the providers, who profit from a corollary campaign to kick cars out of urban areas via “road diets” (the reducing of traffic lanes, as from two to one each way so as to make traffic worse) and even by the outright elimination of asphalt for cars, replaced by “walkable” (and electric-pedal-bike-able) downtown cores.
It’s easier to corral the cattle this way.
Note that none of this is organic – the result of market forces, of people freely choosing that it makes sense. Instead it is being forced on the people, to thwart their free choice – of a piece with the “mandates” to wear the Holy Rag and (soon) the “mandate” to submit to a vaccination.
To several vaccinations – as there will be more than just one, once the principle is normalized that it is acceptable to force people to submit to this injection. To believe it will be limited to just this injection is to believe that allowing the government to tax one thing won’t mean it will tax other things.
But the cattle have difficulty seeing this, their vision being limited by the sight of the rear-end of the cow ahead of them.
These e-bikes, like pedal bikes, can only go so far – and not very fast. Most are limited to a speed about as fast a man can run – about 15 MPH – and have a range of about 20 miles.
This makes it hard to run away on one.
They also have the “advantage” – from a certain perspective – of being largely unusable in poor weather due to the exposure of the rider to the cold and wet and the inherent danger of riding anything on two wheels on the snow and ice.
Cars slide. Bikes topple over.
But sssssssaaaaaaaaaaaafety isn’t the point. Getting people out of cars – which enable them to escape the corral – is. The way this is being done is indirect and for that reason, ingenious. The car is not to be outlawed; much too noticeable, that. Instead, they are to be made so expensive and so inconvenient as to be no longer viable for the bipedal cattle.
You cannot drive what you cannot afford. This includes a house far away from the urban core cattle pen, which requires an income sufficient to be able to afford it, as opposed to the renting of a small apartment in the urban core cattle pen.
The WuFlu hysteria has made it very difficult for millions of people – most especially the young – to be able to afford anything more than a small apartment in the urban core cattle pen. It is hard to earn anything when you are debarred from working Because Corona. Actually – accurately – because of the totalitarian measures imposed using the pretext of Corona.
These measures – not “the virus”- are the cause of the economic ruination of the nation, though not of the big corporations who have massively benefitted from the economic ruination, which has served to enrich them while enserfing the population.
A majority of the young – which encompasses those pushing 40 – have never left home. Their parents’ home. They can afford that . . . until their parents no longer can. Then they will need “housing” – which will not be a house at all but rather an apartment, probably shared with others, in the urban core cattle pen.
They will still need to get to their neo-feudal job, of course. And so they will share – not own – a community bike, electrically powered – because many are so obese they cannot pedal one the distance.
They will pay each time they use it. Or rather, a certain sum will be deducted from their Universal Basic Income each time they use it. Which they will be permitted to do so long as they are good bipedal cattle, obediently “masked” and vaccinated. If not, their UBI will be withdrawn and they will have to walk.
If they’re allowed to do that. If there’s anywhere they’re allowed to go. If there’s anything they’re still allowed to do.
This is the micromobility of Chinese America 2030.
. . .


Transgenderism Is Orwellian

It ’ s been a long few days for the Ministry of Truth .
On Wednesday , Ellen Page announced that she is , in fact , a “ he ” and that her name is not Ellen at all , but “ Elliot.
” Wikipedia immediately sprang into action to rectify Elliot Page ’ s article , changing every instance of her name and her pronouns to conform to her new truth .
Netflix did the same across its platform and the media reported the story using the newly approved name and pronouns with only a quick note—to avoid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ellen .
But even that wasn ’ t enough for some activists .
An article in Newsweek argued that even a single use of Elliot Page ’ s “ deadname ” ( the name she was assigned at birth ) was a problem .
By this logic , any reference anywhere to the name Ellen Page—even in old articles , interviews , and films made prior to her decision that she is he—is problematic .
As a transexual activist and ACLU lawyer put it in another article , any mention of someone ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will “ never have the authority to claim the truth ” of who he is and “ cedes that authority to a structure of power and discrimination.
” And so we are left with an Orwellian prospect where the entire world constantly will have to be updating itself to ensure that the past is consistent with the present .
Articles will insist that Elliot Page was always Elliot Page and was always a man .
Even the term “ deadname ” has a certain newspeak quality to it of the B vocabulary variety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fits right in .
And there ’ s no reason these words shouldn ’ t .
A moment ’ s reflection will reveal that the current gender-bending theory shares the same metaphysics which undergirds the dystopian framework of Orwell ’ s Nineteen Eighty-Four .
In both conceptions , reality “ exists in the human mind , and nowhere else.
” In fact , it is lunacy to believe that reality is something objective , external , existing in its own right .
This belief is cognitively dissonant with belief in an everyday experience @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and society hammer themselves home with shattering force .
But learning to reconcile these two seemingly irreconcilable beliefs is a principal exercise in the subtle art of doublethink .
The first belief lends itself to solipsism .
The second belief suggests objectivity .
But the synthesis of the two leads to a perilous equilibrium where the only real goal is power .
Because there are no objective truths , one can make whatever reality he pleases .
But because one has to contend with other thinking beings , in order to have true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control them .
There is no objective standard to which one can appeal—only one ’ s ability to control everyone else and force them to accept your truth .
Summed up in another Orwellian maxim : GOD IS POWER .
And as with all such maxims in Nineteen Eighty-Four , the maxim is reversible : POWER IS GOD .
Power typically is the ability to make people do things they otherwise would not do .
And for power to be meaningful , one must in fact make people do things they otherwise would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it simply would be the confluence of people ’ s desired actions .
But in collective solipsism , it is not enough to make people do things .
You must make them believe things—as much as one can believe in something they know to be false .
So in this system , you have to force people to believe things that they otherwise would reject .
Without doing so the objective world still has primacy .
A woman will announce that she is a man and you will have to believe it , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Reams of papers generated by minds said to be the brightest of our generation , enraptured by their own sociological brilliance as they deconstruct everything , are shoved down our throats on a daily basis .
Their angry wails display their hatred of the things that deep down they know to be true and beautiful .
Their hatred stems from their knowledge that an objective standard would force them to face their own inadequacies , a task that is nearly unendurable without some sense of salvation .
It is hatred because an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far less significant than their egoistic upbringing suggested .
As prescient as Orwell was , even he didn ’ t have the foresight to see that a major battle would be fought over the truism that women can not become men .
But if we cede this battle—claiming that it is irrelevant or a distraction—we will have tacitly repudiated objectivity , one of the cornerstones of our civilization .
While our brave new world has a slightly brighter patina than Orwell ’ s dystopia and has closer and closer approximations to soma in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we are in the fight of our lives over epistemology .
The consequences of failure would make Nineteen Eighty-Four look mild .
Already , we see the news and social media practicing for the day that they institute Minitrue .
They ’ re looking forward to it .
It remains to be seen when the New York Times will revise every old article with a reference to Ellen Page to ensure that the past is consistent with the present .
But we shouldn ’ t be surprised if somewhere , deep within the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , three cylinders of paper are flying through a pneumatic tube to a “ journalist ’ s ” desk , carrying the messages : That last one will require rewriting an entire crossword puzzle that has a word puzzle embedded within it that uses her prior name .
Oof .
Winston is going to have a hard time with that one .

It’s been a long few days for the Ministry of Truth.
On Wednesday, Ellen Page announced that she is, in fact, a “he” and that her name is not Ellen at all, but “Elliot.”
Wikipedia immediately sprang into action to rectify Elliot Page’s article, changing every instance of her name and her pronouns to conform to her new truth. Netflix did the same across its platform and the media reported the story using the newly approved name and pronouns with only a quick note—to avoid confusion—that Elliot previously had been known as Ellen.
But even that wasn’t enough for some activists. An article in Newsweek argued that even a single use of Elliot Page’s “deadname” (the name she was assigned at birth) was a problem.
Though the deadnaming of Page in an article may not have any negative repercussions on the actor (bar any mental health effects from seeing a name he no longer identifies with), it does propagate a system that has led to transgender people (particularly trans women of color) disproportionately being the victims of hate crimes.
By this logic, any reference anywhere to the name Ellen Page—even in old articles, interviews, and films made prior to her decision that she is he—is problematic. As a transexual activist and ACLU lawyer put it in another article, any mention of someone’s “deadname” ensures that he will “never have the authority to claim the truth” of who he is and “cedes that authority to a structure of power and discrimination.”
And so we are left with an Orwellian prospect where the entire world constantly will have to be updating itself to ensure that the past is consistent with the present. Articles will insist that Elliot Page was always Elliot Page and was always a man.
Oceania was at war with Eastasia: Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia. A large part of the political literature of five years was now completely obsolete. Reports and records of all kinds, newspapers, books, pamphlets, films, sound tracks, photographs—all had to be rectified at lightning speed.
Sound familiar?
Even the term “deadname” has a certain newspeak quality to it of the B vocabulary variety.
The B vocabulary consisted of words that had been deliberately constructed for political purposes: words, that is to say, which not only had in every case a political implication, but were intended to impose a desirable mental attitude upon the person using them . . . the B words were a sort of verbal shorthand, often packing whole ranges of ideas into a few syllables, and at the same time more accurate and forcible than ordinary language. The B words were in all cases compound words. They consisted of two or more words, or portions of words, welded together in an easily pronounceable form.
Doublethink. Deadname. Goodsex. Fits right in. And there’s no reason these words shouldn’t. A moment’s reflection will reveal that the current gender-bending theory shares the same metaphysics which undergirds the dystopian framework of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four.
In both conceptions, reality “exists in the human mind, and nowhere else.” In fact, it is lunacy to believe that reality is something objective, external, existing in its own right.
This belief is cognitively dissonant with belief in an everyday experience in which the truths of the world and society hammer themselves home with shattering force. But learning to reconcile these two seemingly irreconcilable beliefs is a principal exercise in the subtle art of doublethink.
The first belief lends itself to solipsism. The second belief suggests objectivity. But the synthesis of the two leads to a perilous equilibrium where the only real goal is power. Because there are no objective truths, one can make whatever reality he pleases. But because one has to contend with other thinking beings, in order to have true control over reality, one must also control them.
There is no objective standard to which one can appeal—only one’s ability to control everyone else and force them to accept your truth. Summed up in another Orwellian maxim: GOD IS POWER. And as with all such maxims in Nineteen Eighty-Four, the maxim is reversible: POWER IS GOD.
Power typically is the ability to make people do things they otherwise would not do. And for power to be meaningful, one must in fact make people do things they otherwise would not do. For absent that, it simply would be the confluence of people’s desired actions.
But in collective solipsism, it is not enough to make people do things. You must make them believe things—as much as one can believe in something they know to be false. So in this system, you have to force people to believe things that they otherwise would reject. Without doing so the objective world still has primacy.
In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make the claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it.
A woman will announce that she is a man and you will have to believe it, no matter the lunacy of the statement.
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer.
Reams of papers generated by minds said to be the brightest of our generation, enraptured by their own sociological brilliance as they deconstruct everything, are shoved down our throats on a daily basis. Their angry wails display their hatred of the things that deep down they know to be true and beautiful. Their hatred stems from their knowledge that an objective standard would force them to face their own inadequacies, a task that is nearly unendurable without some sense of salvation. It is hatred because an objective standard shows them that they are far less significant than their egoistic upbringing suggested.
And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right. The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true, hold on to that! The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall towards the earth’s center.
As prescient as Orwell was, even he didn’t have the foresight to see that a major battle would be fought over the truism that women cannot become men. But if we cede this battle—claiming that it is irrelevant or a distraction—we will have tacitly repudiated objectivity, one of the cornerstones of our civilization.
While our brave new world has a slightly brighter patina than Orwell’s dystopia and has closer and closer approximations to soma in the form of media and drugs, we are in the fight of our lives over epistemology. The consequences of failure would make Nineteen Eighty-Four look mild. Already, we see the news and social media practicing for the day that they institute Minitrue. They’re looking forward to it.
It remains to be seen when the New York Times will revise every old article with a reference to Ellen Page to ensure that the past is consistent with the present. But we shouldn’t be surprised if somewhere, deep within the recesses of the New York Times building, three cylinders of paper are flying through a pneumatic tube to a “journalist’s” desk, carrying the messages:
times 29.11.20 reporting deadnames elliot page
times 8.11.20 reporting doubleplusungood deadnames misgenders elliot page
times 23.5.20 crossword deadnames elliot page rewrite fullwise upsub antefiling
That last one will require rewriting an entire crossword puzzle that has a word puzzle embedded within it that uses her prior name. Oof. Winston is going to have a hard time with that one.


thelibertydaily--2020-12-05--Megazilla: Ford Hints at High-Performance Version of Its 7.3-Liter Godzilla Crate Engine

Much of the automotive industry is focusing on downsizing its engines for better fuel economy and packaging .
However , Ford is flying in the face of that idea with the 7.3-liter truck engine that it 's fitted to the current Super Duty trucks .
The engine -- nicknamed Godzilla -- is also available from Ford Performance as a crate engine .
This is exciting for performance enthusiasts for several reasons , but the Godzilla is still a standard truck engine at the end of the day .
Ford 's working on something that could change that , and it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ video published by Performance Racing Industry in November .
Ford is n't giving up any details on the Megazilla project , but based on what we know about the standard version , we can guess how the engineers at Ford Performance will improve upon it .
The first area we 'd expect to see changed would be the cast-iron block .
Sure , that 's great for longevity , but it also weighs a lot ( the engine by itself is a porcine 580 pounds ) .
An aluminum-blocked Megazilla makes more sense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ give GM 's LS-series of engines a run for their money .
We would n't be surprised to see Ford add forced induction in the form of a supercharger to the motor .
This would be a great answer to FCA 's wild Hellephant crate engine and its 1,000 horsepower out of the box .
Aside from the Megazilla news , Ford is also working on a manual transmission version of Godzilla 's control pack that would allow you to run whatever transmission you saw fit behind the engine , rather than be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as it is now .
We asked Ford Performance for more details but did n't hear back in time for publication .
Ford 's standard Godzilla engine is available for sale now from Ford Performance for a surprisingly reasonable $ 8,150 ( not including the control pack that makes all the electronics work ) .
What would you put a Godzilla engine in if you had your druthers ?

Much of the automotive industry is focusing on downsizing its engines for better fuel economy and packaging. However, Ford is flying in the face of that idea with the 7.3-liter truck engine that it's fitted to the current Super Duty trucks.
The engine -- nicknamed Godzilla -- is also available from Ford Performance as a crate engine. This is exciting for performance enthusiasts for several reasons, but the Godzilla is still a standard truck engine at the end of the day. Ford's working on something that could change that, and it's called Megazilla, according to a video published by Performance Racing Industry in November.
Ford isn't giving up any details on the Megazilla project, but based on what we know about the standard version, we can guess how the engineers at Ford Performance will improve upon it. The first area we'd expect to see changed would be the cast-iron block. Sure, that's great for longevity, but it also weighs a lot (the engine by itself is a porcine 580 pounds).
An aluminum-blocked Megazilla makes more sense from a performance perspective and would certainly give GM's LS-series of engines a run for their money. We wouldn't be surprised to see Ford add forced induction in the form of a supercharger to the motor. This would be a great answer to FCA's wild Hellephant crate engine and its 1,000 horsepower out of the box.
Aside from the Megazilla news, Ford is also working on a manual transmission version of Godzilla's control pack that would allow you to run whatever transmission you saw fit behind the engine, rather than be stuck with the truck's automatic transmission, as it is now.
We asked Ford Performance for more details but didn't hear back in time for publication.
Ford's standard Godzilla engine is available for sale now from Ford Performance for a surprisingly reasonable $8,150 (not including the control pack that makes all the electronics work).
What would you put a Godzilla engine in if you had your druthers?


thelibertydaily--2020-12-05--Democrat Michigan Secretary of State Issues Order to Delete Election Data Amid Audit Calls

The woman exposed as part of the unsupervised overnight Georgia vote count solicited donations on Facebook after ...

Last Updated on December 4, 2020
It what can only be seen as an effort to keep the facts from coming to light in the face of problematic issues with Michigan’s 2020 General Election process, a memo has been issued from Michigan’s Secretary of State to destroy data.
The Michigan State Republican Party Friday sounded an alarm about an ethically questionable memo authorized by Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson that “is pushing for the mass deletion of election data.”
Michigan Republican Party Chairman Laura Cox in a statement Friday, said that Benson’s office issued orders to clerks in Michigan counties to “delete Electronic Poll Book software and associated files” even as calls to audit the election persist.
Secretary Benson’s move to delete this data before an audit raises a serious question, what are the Democrats hiding? https://t.co/49umKx4kAV — Laura Cox (@LauraCoxMI) December 4, 2020
Cox was referring to a December 1, 2020, memo from the Michigan Bureau of Elections, an agency overseen by Benson’s office, that read, “[Electronic Poll Book] software and associated files must be deleted from all devices by the seventh calendar day following the final canvass and certification of the election (November 30, 2020) unless a petition for recount has been filed and the recount has not been completed, a post-election audit is planned but has not yet been completed, or the deletion of the data has been stayed by an order of the court or the Secretary of State.”
The order targeted data contained in Electronic Poll Book software and in files contained on laptops and USB drives using during the election.
“Secretary Benson’s move to request the deletion of election data amidst bipartisan calls for an audit is just another example of her putting partisan politics over what’s best for Michigan,” Cox said in the Friday statement.
“With election irregularities rampant across the state,” Cox added, “it is vital that we have this audit before any election data is deleted. Secretary Benson’s move to delete this data before an audit raises a serious question, what are the Democrats hiding?”
This week, witnesses, including a poll worker in Detroit and GOP poll challengers, testified at a Michigan State Legislature hearing into the myriad complaints of vote fraud and ballot tampering throughout the state on Election Day and afterward.
Michigan’s Secretary of State told reporters that there is no evidence of vote fraud, ballot tampering, or irregularities that would overturn the election, despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary.


thelibertydaily--2020-12-05--Amistad Project: Electoral College Deadlines are Not Set Set in Stone

The Amistad Project of the non-partisan Thomas More Society released a white paper on Friday making the case that current Electoral College deadlines are arbitrary and not set in stone , contrary to what most news outlets have reported .
The white paper says that these deadlines — Dec. 8 for disputes to be resolved and Electors to be determined , and Dec. 14 for the Electoral College to meet in person and vote in their respective states — are a `` direct impediment to states ' obligations to investigate disputed elections . ''
According to the Amistad Project press @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Electoral College deadlines , which `` are not only elements of a 72-year old federal statute with zero Constitutional basis , but are also actively preventing the states from fulfilling their constitutional — and ethical — obligation to hold free and fair elections .
Experts believe that the primary basis for these dates was to provide enough time to affect the presidential transition of power , a concern which is fully obsolete in the age of internet and air travel . ''
Phill Kline , the director of the Amistad Project , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 8 `` safe harbor '' deadline does not apply when there have been `` flagrant violations of state election laws '' that have `` affected the outcome of the popular vote . ''
The Amistad Project has filed litigation in several of the swing states , where they argue that `` more than 1.2 million potentially fraudulent ballots '' were the result of illegal conduct by state and local officials .
They say that in each of the disputed swing states `` the number of potentially fraudulent ballots far exceeds the margin separating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the white paper , the only date in the election process set by the Constitution is `` the assumption of office by the President on January 20 . ''
`` Because the U.S. Constitution places ultimate authority for designating presidential Electors in the hands of state legislatures , '' the paper argues , `` it is the responsibility of the people 's elected representatives to judge the relevant facts and appoint an appropriate slate of Electors , subject only to the sole deadline set forth in the U.S. Constitution — 12:00 noon @ @ @ @ @ @ @

The Amistad Project of the non-partisan Thomas More Society released a white paper on Friday making the case that current Electoral College deadlines are arbitrary and not set in stone, contrary to what most news outlets have reported.
The white paper says that these deadlines — Dec. 8 for disputes to be resolved and Electors to be determined, and Dec. 14 for the Electoral College to meet in person and vote in their respective states — are a "direct impediment to states' obligations to investigate disputed elections."
According to the Amistad Project press release, the paper examines the history of Electoral College deadlines, which "are not only elements of a 72-year old federal statute with zero Constitutional basis, but are also actively preventing the states from fulfilling their constitutional — and ethical — obligation to hold free and fair elections. Experts believe that the primary basis for these dates was to provide enough time to affect the presidential transition of power, a concern which is fully obsolete in the age of internet and air travel."
Phill Kline, the director of the Amistad Project, argues in this paper that the Dec. 8 "safe harbor" deadline does not apply when there have been "flagrant violations of state election laws" that have "affected the outcome of the popular vote."
The Amistad Project has filed litigation in several of the swing states, where they argue that "more than 1.2 million potentially fraudulent ballots" were the result of illegal conduct by state and local officials. They say that in each of the disputed swing states "the number of potentially fraudulent ballots far exceeds the margin separating the leading presidential candidate."
According to the white paper, the only date in the election process set by the Constitution is "the assumption of office by the President on January 20."
"Because the U.S. Constitution places ultimate authority for designating presidential Electors in the hands of state legislatures," the paper argues, "it is the responsibility of the people's elected representatives to judge the relevant facts and appoint an appropriate slate of Electors, subject only to the sole deadline set forth in the U.S. Constitution — 12:00 noon on January 20, 2021."


thelibertydaily--2020-12-05--Thread About Who Lockdowns Benefit Turns Ted Cruz Into Fact-Checker

Some states in the U.S. have ramped up their lockdown measures ( not counting some of the hypocrites who support @ @ @ @ @ ) , and Joe Biden has indicated in the past that he ’ d be @ @ @ @ @ Dr. Fauci and others recommended shutting down the economy again .
With that said , @ @ @ @ @ thread about who lockdowns help and harm : Ted Cruz wants SCOTUS to hear the @ @ @ @ @ election challenge ‘ Breathtakingly sinister ’ : Nancy Pelosi just admitted that she was willing @ @ @ @ @ and livelihoods to get Joe Biden into the WH ; UPDATED

Some states in the U.S. have ramped up their lockdown measures (not counting some of the hypocrites who support them for everybody but themselves), and Joe Biden has indicated in the past that he’d be willing to support them if Dr. Fauci and others recommended shutting down the economy again.
With that said, @ComfortablySmug has a mini thread about who lockdowns help and harm:
Lockdowns have basically been the government choosing multinational corporations to succeed while gutting small businesses, and using the full force of the state to enforce that edict — Comfortably Smug (@ComfortablySmug) December 4, 2020
Amazon sells cheap made in china garbage all day long with no resistance, while Americans who spent a lifetime building a business of their own have seen the govt order them to shut down and go broke Lockdowns are outsourcing entrepreneurship and punishing small business owners — Comfortably Smug (@ComfortablySmug) December 4, 2020
And Sen. Ted Cruz’s fact check rating is…
Exactly.
Why do you think @washingtonpost promotes lockdowns so forcefully! Who benefits? Bezos! — Michael Watson (@MichaelWatsonDC) December 4, 2020
100% — Bob H (@bubbafoxboro) December 4, 2020
***
Related:
Ted Cruz wants SCOTUS to hear the emergency appeal on the Pennsylvania election challenge
‘Breathtakingly sinister’: Nancy Pelosi just admitted that she was willing to risk Americans’ lives and livelihoods to get Joe Biden into the WH; UPDATED


thelibertydaily--2020-12-05--MyPillow Guy Mike Lindell Says Trump Will ‘100 Percent’ Be President For ‘Next 4 Years’

( OPINION ) – Mediaite – MyPillow founder Mike Lindell claimed President Donald Trump would continue to serve as president for “ the next four years , ” despite losing to Joe Biden , during a bizarre interview on Fox News , Friday .
Live from a protest outside Republican Georgia Governor Brian Kemp ’ s house , Lindell told Fox News , “ I want the word to get out that Donald Trump will be our president for the next four years.
” “ I talked to Sidney Powell about three , four days ago , so I know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ When I go all in like I did for the president in 2016 , I do my due diligence and I get out there , and I could sit here and tell you , 100 % .
Not 98 , 100 % .
” “ We are going all the way across the country , I sponsored this , and we are going to end up in D.C. , ” Lindell continued .
“ I want people to have the awareness of what went on because the mainstream media is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corruption , by the time it ’ s all opened up here and they see it , even the Democrats are going to go , ‘ Wow , at least my party tried to steal it.
’ ” READ MORE

(OPINION) – Mediaite – MyPillow founder Mike Lindell claimed President Donald Trump would continue to serve as president for “the next four years,” despite losing to Joe Biden, during a bizarre interview on Fox News, Friday. Live from a protest outside Republican Georgia Governor Brian Kemp’s house, Lindell told Fox News,
“I want the word to get out that Donald Trump will be our president for the next four years.” “I talked to Sidney Powell about three, four days ago, so I know firsthand,” he explained, adding, “When I go all in like I did for the president in 2016, I do my due diligence and I get out there, and I could sit here and tell you, 100%.
Not 98, 100%.” “We are going all the way across the country, I sponsored this, and we are going to end up in D.C.,” Lindell continued. “I want people to have the awareness of what went on because the mainstream media is not showing you this, but all the corruption, by the time it’s all opened up here and they see it, even the Democrats are going to go, ‘Wow, at least my party tried to steal it.’” READ MORE
Advertisement


thelibertydaily--2020-12-05--Celebrity Chef Unloads on Gruesome Newsom: ‘I’m Not an A**hole, the Governor Is’

' I 'm not an a**hole , the governor is ' : Celebrity chef torches Gavin Newsom for ban on @ @ @ @ @ says he is keeping his restaurants open , despite California governor 's order

Celebrity Chef Andrew Gruel is making headlines after going viral for posting a video on social media blasting California Gov. Gavin Newsom's lockdown order banning outdoor dining.
In his message, Gruel — a former Food Network judge who owns seafood franchise Slapfish — vowed to keep his restaurants open for outdoor business despite the governor's order, arguing that there is no scientific basis for the ban and that Newsom is the "a**hole."
What are the details?
On Thursday, Gov. Newsom announced renewed coronavirus lockdowns across several regions in the state, forcing bars, salons, and other businesses to close up and go without income in an effort to stave off the spread of COVID-19. Restaurants in the affected areas would also have to shut down indoor and outdoor dining, after many owners made steep investments to provide outdoor dining areas in reaction to previous orders.
In reaction to Newsom's new lockdown order, Gruel tweeted, "What did I say yesterday? I will not comply." He also noted that he had "just spent thousands" on outdoor heat lamps, joking that he would "be dropping these off at my local gov office for a full refund plus 10% interest."
Some of the chef's followers gave him heat over his defiance of the order, so he followed up with a video message to all the "haters" he says were calling him "a grandmother killer" and accusing him of not taking the coronavirus seriously.
"Here's the situation," Gruel said. "Do we take the pandemic seriously? Of course we do. Am I saying that we shouldn't close outdoor dining? Yes I am."
He explained, "At every single juncture along the way here, from the beginning shutdown to today, we've listened to all of the advice from government officials, only to be shut down over and over and over again and then not compensated for the elements that we put in place in our businesses in order to protect our customers."
Gruel argued, "There is zero scientific evidence that proves that outdoor dining is contributing to a rise in cases related to this, alright—I'm only saying we're going to continue dining outdoors."
He noted that people can still fly on airplanes and go to stores like Walmart.
In closing, the chef told his critics, "Outdoor dining does not lead to any of that. Therefore, screw that, we're staying opened outdoors. It's that simple. I'm not an a**hole. The governor is."
Newsom already faced heavy criticism leading up to his most recent crackdown, after he was busted weeks ago defying his own guidelines by dining with several people at a swanky restaurant to celebrate the birthday of a lobbyist. The governor apologize after his actions were exposed.


thelibertydaily--2020-12-05--ABC Democrat Operative George Stephanopoulos Pushes Georgia Democrat Senate Fundraiser — On the Air!

Friday morning on Good Morning America , ABC ’ s George Stephanopoulos heavily promoted a far-left group trying to elect Democrats in the Georgia Senate runoff .
Stephanopoulos pushes Dems Senate fundraiser .
In an interview with Julia Louis-Dreyfus pushing America Votes , a 501 ( c ) ( 4 ) , “ the coordination hub of the progressive community , ” Stephanopoulos abandoned any shred of journalistic integrity .
ABC 's George Stephanopoulos has Julia Louis-Dreyfus on # GMA to promote a VEEP table read to benefit a progressive group trying to elect Democrats in Georgia .
Stephanopoulos even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pic.twitter.com/wO2c9Iff0Z take our poll - story continues below Has There Been Voter Fraud in the 2020 Election ?
• None Has There Been Voter Fraud in the 2020 Election ?
• None Has There Been Voter Fraud in the 2020 Election ?
• None This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged .
Completing this poll grants you access to The Lid updates free of charge .
You may opt out at anytime .
You also agree to this site 's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use .
Stephanopoulos ends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of you at home can get tickets for VEEP live virtual table read happening Sunday .
Go to showupforGeorgia.com .
ShowupforGeorgia.com redirects to an ActBlue fundraising page that demands a donation .
At least the page was honest .
It is completely egregious , but sadly not surprising , that a mainstream media organization will give an uncritical platform to a group focused on flipping Senate control by telling viewers to , in effect , to donate to Democratic Party candidates .
George Stephanopoulos has a more direct connection with liberal Democrats than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He was a Democratic Party operative and communications director for Bubba Clinton ’ s 1992 presidential campaign , Bubba ’ s White House communications director , and eventually his senior advisor for policy and strategy , before departing after the 1996 election .
But even after he moved to ABC , Stephanopoulos continued to advocate for the Democratic Party .
For example , Stephanopoulos was the co-moderator of a 2012 Republican primary debate featuring Mitt Romney , Ron Paul , and Rick Santorum .
During the debate , Stephanopoulos repeatedly asked the leading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. Supreme Court should overturn a 1965 ruling that a constitutional right to privacy bars states from banning contraception .
Romney kept answering that y said it was a preposterous question .
During the fall presidential campaign , the Obama campaign used the question and answer to claim there was a GOP War on Women .
In both 2013 and 2014 , Stephanopoulos made a $ 25,000 donation to the 501 nonprofit founded by former president Bill Clinton , the Foundation ’ s records show .
Stephanopoulos never disclosed this information to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Peter Schweizer ’ s about his book Clinton Cash , which disclosed Hillary ’ s pay for play Clinton Foundation operation with the State Department .
Schweizer was interviewed by Stephanopoulos about his book on ABC ’ s This Week in April 2015 .
From the very beginning of the interview , George Stephanopoulos attacked Schweizer , not on the merits of his research but in an attempt to damage Schweizer ’ s credibility .
For example , he asked , “ As you know , the Democrats have said this is — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interest .
They say you used to work for President — President Bush as a speechwriter .
You ’ re funded by the Koch brothers .
How do you respond to that ?
” What was unknown till the Wikileaks John Podesta email dump Stephanopoulos was fed his questions by the Clinton campaign ?
On the day of the Stephanopoulos/Schweizer interview , Josh Schwerin , a Clinton campaign spokesman , sent the interview transcript to the campaign ’ s rapid response team list .
Jesse Ferguson , another Clinton campaign spokesman , replied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ team , “ great work everyone .
This interview is perfect .
He [ Schweizer ] lands nothing , and everything is refuted ( mostly based on our work ) ” That certainly sounds like they did the research that Stephanopoulos used to attack the author .
Oren Shur , the campaign ’ s director of paid media , responded to Schwerin with , “ nice work here.
” As additional proof , the ABC host was fed his questions–three days before the “ This Week ” interview .
Hillary campaign press secretary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Becker and Mike McIntire of the NY Times because they covered Clinton Cash .
Fallon used many of the same arguments word for word that Stephanopoulos would use on Schweizer .
Along with his history of ignoring journalistic scruples , George Stephanopoulos ’ interview pushing campaign donations to the Georgia Democratic Party Georgia Senate candidates leaves no doubt about his political bias .
Additionally , it solidifies the American people ’ s lack of trust in the mainstream media .
After doing their best to elect Joe Biden , the MSM picked a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As part of the MSM , the Disney-owned ABC is putting the full weight of their “ news ” division to funnel money to the Democrats through ActBlue .
This is absolutely appalling and proves that ABC News is a Mickey-Mouse operation .

Friday morning on Good Morning America, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos heavily promoted a far-left group trying to elect Democrats in the Georgia Senate runoff. Stephanopoulos pushes Dems Senate fundraiser.
In an interview with Julia Louis-Dreyfus pushing America Votes, a 501(c)(4), “the coordination hub of the progressive community,” Stephanopoulos abandoned any shred of journalistic integrity.
WATCH: Egregious media bias in action: ABC's George Stephanopoulos has Julia Louis-Dreyfus on #GMA to promote a VEEP table read to benefit a progressive group trying to elect Democrats in Georgia. Stephanopoulos even encourages viewers to get tickets.https://t.co/W4XCSc7IUE pic.twitter.com/wO2c9Iff0Z — Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) December 4, 2020
Stephanopoulos ends the interview telling voters, “All of you at home can get tickets for VEEP live virtual table read happening Sunday. Go to showupforGeorgia.com. ShowupforGeorgia.com redirects to an ActBlue fundraising page that demands a donation.
At least the page was honest.
Your donation to America Votes directly supports the Georgia-based groups working to educate and turn out voters for January’s critical US Senate runoff elections. Join us to #ShowUpForGeorgia.
It is completely egregious, but sadly not surprising, that a mainstream media organization will give an uncritical platform to a group focused on flipping Senate control by telling viewers to, in effect, to donate to Democratic Party candidates.
George Stephanopoulos has a more direct connection with liberal Democrats than much of the liberal-controlled mainstream media. He was a Democratic Party operative and communications director for Bubba Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign, Bubba’s White House communications director, and eventually his senior advisor for policy and strategy, before departing after the 1996 election.
But even after he moved to ABC, Stephanopoulos continued to advocate for the Democratic Party.
For example, Stephanopoulos was the co-moderator of a 2012 Republican primary debate featuring Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, and Rick Santorum. During the debate, Stephanopoulos repeatedly asked the leading candidate, Mittens, whether he believes the U.S. Supreme Court should overturn a 1965 ruling that a constitutional right to privacy bars states from banning contraception. Romney kept answering that it was a preposterous question. During the fall presidential campaign, the Obama campaign used the question and answer to claim there was a GOP War on Women.
In both 2013 and 2014, Stephanopoulos made a $25,000 donation to the 501 nonprofit founded by former president Bill Clinton, the Foundation’s records show. Stephanopoulos never disclosed this information to viewers. Not even when he interviewed Peter Schweizer’s about his book Clinton Cash, which disclosed Hillary’s pay for play Clinton Foundation operation with the State Department.
Schweizer was interviewed by Stephanopoulos about his book on ABC’s This Week in April 2015. From the very beginning of the interview, George Stephanopoulos attacked Schweizer, not on the merits of his research but in an attempt to damage Schweizer’s credibility. For example, he asked, “As you know, the Democrats have said this is — this is an indication of your partisan interest. They say you used to work for President — President Bush as a speechwriter. You’re funded by the Koch brothers. How do you respond to that?” What was unknown till the Wikileaks John Podesta email dump Stephanopoulos was fed his questions by the Clinton campaign?
On the day of the Stephanopoulos/Schweizer interview, Josh Schwerin, a Clinton campaign spokesman, sent the interview transcript to the campaign’s rapid response team list. Jesse Ferguson, another Clinton campaign spokesman, replied to Schwerin with an email to the team, “great work everyone. This interview is perfect. He [Schweizer] lands nothing, and everything is refuted (mostly based on our work)” That certainly sounds like they did the research that Stephanopoulos used to attack the author. Oren Shur, the campaign’s director of paid media, responded to Schwerin with, “nice work here.” As additional proof, the ABC host was fed his questions–three days before the “This Week” interview. Hillary campaign press secretary Brian Fallon sent an email to Jo Becker and Mike McIntire of the NY Times because they covered Clinton Cash. Fallon used many of the same arguments word for word that Stephanopoulos would use on Schweizer.
Along with his history of ignoring journalistic scruples, George Stephanopoulos’ interview pushing campaign donations to the Georgia Democratic Party Georgia Senate candidates leaves no doubt about his political bias. Additionally, it solidifies the American people’s lack of trust in the mainstream media. After doing their best to elect Joe Biden, the MSM picked a side in the Georgia Senate runoff. As part of the MSM, the Disney-owned ABC is putting the full weight of their “news” division to funnel money to the Democrats through ActBlue. This is absolutely appalling and proves that ABC News is a Mickey-Mouse operation.
Stephanopoulos pushes Dems senate fundraiser
Https://lidblog.com


thelibertydaily--2020-12-05--Nearly 20% of Cadillac Dealers Drop Cadillac Label Over All-Electric Future

Detroit — About 150 Cadillac dealers are choosing to take buyouts from General Motors Co. rather than invest thousands to support electric vehicles , the Wall Street Journal reported Friday .
Cadillac 's 880 U.S. dealers were told in September they needed to invest $ 200,000 to transition dealerships for coming electric vehicles .
The dealer network had until Nov. 30 to make the decision if they wanted to take a buyout .
About 17 % of Cadillac dealers took the buyout offer , the Journal reported Friday citing anonymous sources .
Cadillac , GM 's flagship electric brand , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by electricity than by fossil fuels by the end of the decade .
The electric Lyriq crossover will kick off the transition for the luxury brand , arriving in the first quarter of 2022 , nine months ahead of schedule .
`` Cadillac will have a very exciting and comprehensive EV portfolio moving forward as demonstrated by the initial reveal of the LYRIQ , '' Rory Harvey , vice president , Cadillac sales , service and marketing , said in a statement .
`` This forward product offering needs to be combined with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requirements are a logical and necessary next step on our path towards electrification to ensure our dealers are prepared to provide customers an exceptional experience .
We see Cadillac ’ s dealer network as a business advantage , and they will remain a critical part of the retail and relationship chain with customers.
” Many of the buyouts offered ranged from $ 300,000 to $ 500,000 , the Automotive News reported first in November .
Most of the dealers opting for the buyout are smaller-volume operations .
There are still discussions taking place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Michael Albano said : `` We hope to wrapped up by the end of the year . ''
David Butler , chairman of the Cadillac National Dealer Council and executive manager at four Cadillac dealers , says the organization approached GM about the transition to electric vehicles .
“ We said you have 900 Cadillac dealers , some of whom are in more rural areas that may not share the vision with you , ” Butler said .
“ We asked that they meet with dealers , explain what the future looks like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be on board , be able to exit the business gracefully.
” Cadillac reached out to every dealer to talk about the buyout , Butler said .
He did not know what exactly the offer was , though he said it was well north of the roughly $ 100,000 the company offered a number of years ago in a similar offer .
The investment GM is asking for would cover charging stations , training of employees and lifts that can carry the heavy batteries powering the vehicles .
“ Electric vehicles are really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Butler said .
“ It ’ s just a question of how quickly the adoption rate is .
Regardless , it ’ s still coming .
We ’ re prepared to jump on the future.
” The company called Inder Dosanjh , dealer principal at the California Automotive Retailing Group that owns four Cadillac retailers , about the offer , but he ’ s opting in for the brand ’ s profitability because of its full lineup of SUVs — and because California is requiring dealers only sell new zero-emission vehicles by 2035 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are selling under 75 , under 50 cars a year , it won ’ t make sense to them , ” he said about making the tens of thousands of dollars in investments .
“ It ’ s not anything that other manufacturers aren ’ t requiring .
They did the same thing .
Volkswagen , Infiniti , they all are requiring the same .
It ’ s nothing crazy .
You have to change . ''

Some Cadillac dealers choose not to invest for EV future
Detroit — About 150 Cadillac dealers are choosing to take buyouts from General Motors Co. rather than invest thousands to support electric vehicles, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday.
Cadillac's 880 U.S. dealers were told in September they needed to invest $200,000 to transition dealerships for coming electric vehicles. The dealer network had until Nov. 30 to make the decision if they wanted to take a buyout. About 17% of Cadillac dealers took the buyout offer, the Journal reported Friday citing anonymous sources.
Cadillac, GM's flagship electric brand, is aiming to sell more vehicles powered by electricity than by fossil fuels by the end of the decade. The electric Lyriq crossover will kick off the transition for the luxury brand, arriving in the first quarter of 2022, nine months ahead of schedule.
"Cadillac will have a very exciting and comprehensive EV portfolio moving forward as demonstrated by the initial reveal of the LYRIQ," Rory Harvey, vice president, Cadillac sales, service and marketing, said in a statement. "This forward product offering needs to be combined with exceptional customer experience. The future dealer requirements are a logical and necessary next step on our path towards electrification to ensure our dealers are prepared to provide customers an exceptional experience. We see Cadillac’s dealer network as a business advantage, and they will remain a critical part of the retail and relationship chain with customers.”
Many of the buyouts offered ranged from $300,000 to $500,000, the Automotive News reported first in November.
Most of the dealers opting for the buyout are smaller-volume operations. There are still discussions taking place with some dealers, but Cadillac spokesman Michael Albano said: "We hope to wrapped up by the end of the year."
David Butler, chairman of the Cadillac National Dealer Council and executive manager at four Cadillac dealers, says the organization approached GM about the transition to electric vehicles.
“We said you have 900 Cadillac dealers, some of whom are in more rural areas that may not share the vision with you,” Butler said. “We asked that they meet with dealers, explain what the future looks like, and if they chose not to be on board, be able to exit the business gracefully.”
Cadillac reached out to every dealer to talk about the buyout, Butler said. He did not know what exactly the offer was, though he said it was well north of the roughly $100,000 the company offered a number of years ago in a similar offer.
The investment GM is asking for would cover charging stations, training of employees and lifts that can carry the heavy batteries powering the vehicles.
“Electric vehicles are really a part of the future,” Butler said. “It’s just a question of how quickly the adoption rate is. Regardless, it’s still coming. We’re prepared to jump on the future.”
The company called Inder Dosanjh, dealer principal at the California Automotive Retailing Group that owns four Cadillac retailers, about the offer, but he’s opting in for the brand’s profitability because of its full lineup of SUVs — and because California is requiring dealers only sell new zero-emission vehicles by 2035 anyway.
“For small dealers who are selling under 75, under 50 cars a year, it won’t make sense to them,” he said about making the tens of thousands of dollars in investments. “It’s not anything that other manufacturers aren’t requiring. They did the same thing. Volkswagen, Infiniti, they all are requiring the same. It’s nothing crazy. You have to change."
khall@detroitnews.com
Twitter: @bykaleahall


thelibertydaily--2020-12-06--Signs That We Are Living In Very Strange Times [VIDEO]

( OPINION ) ETH – Then He said to them , “ Nation will rise against nation and kingdom against @ @ @ @ @ be great earthquakes in various places , and famines and pestilences ; and there will @ @ @ @ @ signs from heaven .
– Luke 21:11-12

(OPINION) ETH – Then He said to them, “Nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be great earthquakes in various places, and famines and pestilences; and there will be fearful sights and great signs from heaven. – Luke 21:11-12
Advertisement