Make plans by seeking advice. If you wage war, obtain guidance. ~ Proverbs 20:18 If You Dislike Veterans, Stop Waging So Many Wars. Do you want a bonus army? Because this is how you get a bonus army. There’s a growing trend in American politics. It involves government spending and cutting benefits for disabled veterans, and it’s creating a firestorm of responses across the country. At $36 trillion and rising, one can easily make the argument that American politicians and the puppeteers who pull their strings have a spending problem. It is peak hypocrisy that the government imposes credit scores on the people when they themselves can’t even agree on a budget without shutting down every fiscal year. Perhaps it’s by design, but the fact remains that the United States, Inc. spends far more than it makes, with annual deficits in excess of $1.8 trillion last year. Deficits for fiscal year 2025 will likely exceed $2 trillion. Solutions for reigning in this excess spending range from auditing agencies like the Federal Reserve and IRS, to creating “Departments Of Government Sanctioned Handouts Trust,” which is an idea as terrible smelling as the acronym itself. Regardless, talking heads on all sides of the political spectrum are chiming in, with some taking aim at reducing costs within the Veterans Administration. Two recent examples include an article from The Economist,  titled “American Veterans Now Receive Absurdly Generous Benefits”  and Heritage Foundation’s “Project 2025”  that aims to redefine the basis of how VA disability claims are approved. Unfortunately, these calls for austerity have widespread support and a real chance of changing the law, with little appreciation of what creates so many disabled veterans in the first place: standing armies engaged in constant, endless war. It’s also reminiscent of the events leading up to the 1932 “Bonus Army” demonstrations in Washington, D.C. Over 40,000 protesters, including 17,000 World War I veterans, occupied the Capitol amid the ongoing Great Depression. They demanded early payment through the 1924 wartime compensation act and were forced to disperse at gunpoint by the Army and local police. Exact casualty figures from the protest are not clear, but Congress eventually approved an early payout in 1936. Today, you have a new generation of warriors taken for granted in society, lied to about why they fought, displaced from the workforce by foreign migrants, while struggling with homelessness, substance abuse, and suicide. It’s no wonder why so many veterans wonder why they served. It’s a carefully crafted, systemic beast that divides one group of people against another. We shouldn’t further such schemes by attacking journalists, denigrating veterans, or doxxing blackmailed politicians via social media. Focus on the real target: an unelected bureaucracy and their handlers who justify pointless wars every decade through false flag operations and media propaganda. Only when you identify the root cause are you able to fix the problem. Everything else is just layer upon layer of concealment, emotional manipulation, and distraction from the truth. God help our country. "When people do not accept divine guidance, they run wild."       -- Proverbs    29:18

Continued from the December 2024 issue... by Dr. Bruce Grandstaff How EMF exposure during the developing of their bodies has had catastrophic effects on the Millennial generation. Firstenberg writes: “Since the first edition of this book was written, the mountain of truth confronting every cell phone user has only grown larger. Millennials—the generation born between 1981 and 1996 and the first to grow up using cell phones—are experiencing an unprecedented decline in their health when they reach their late twenties. On April 24, 2019, the American health insurance company Blue Cross Blue Shield released a report entitled ‘The Health of Millennials.’  It showed not only that the health of this generation takes a sharp decline beginning at age 27, but also that the prevalence of many medical conditions had risen precipitously among millennials in just three years.” "The prevalence of eight of the top ten conditions among all millennials showed a double-digit increase in 2017 as compared to 2014: Major depression increased 31 percent. Hyperactivity increased 29 percent. Type 2 diabetes increased 22 percent. Hypertension increased 16 percent. High cholesterol increased 12 percent. Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis increased 10 percent. Substance use disorder increased 10 percent" “The decline in Millennials' health from 2014 to 2017 was not due to their being three years older.” “The only reasonable explanation for the alarming decline in health of the millennial generation is the life-long irradiation of their brains and bodies from their cell phones.” Cell Phone Usage and Its Implications: Cell phones did not work in most of the United States until 1997, and their use was not prevalent among teenagers until 2000. Millennials are the first generation that began using cell phones in their teenage years or earlier, when their brains and bodies were still developing. No other environmental factor changed so radically in just three years. “Microwave radiation is responsible for the tragic state of the millennial generation’s health compared to the health of every other generation that preceded them.” (P383, The Invisible Rainbow) "The incidence of stroke overall is steady or declining but it is rising in adults younger than 50, and shockingly so in very young adults, who are the heaviest users of cell phones. Studies out of France, Sweden, and Finland all say the same thing. A Danish study published in 2016 examined the rates of strokes in people aged 15 to 30—a population that never used to have strokes at all. The annual number of strokes in that age group in Denmark rose fifty percent between 1994 and 2012, and the annual number of transient ischemic attacks (mini strokes) in that age group tripled. Cell phones were marketed in Europe three years earlier than in America." Other Health Concerns Related to Cell Phone Usage: Breast Cancer:  Women in their twenties and thirties who keep their cell phones in their bras are getting a distinctive type of breast cancer directly underneath where they keep their phones. Hip Replacements:  Rates of total hip replacements have skyrocketed since cell phones began living in pockets. Between 2000 and 2010, the number of annual hip replacements in the United States more than doubled, and the rate of hip replacements among people aged 45 to 54 more than tripled. Sperm Counts:  An American study conducted from 2003 to 2013 found that young men had lower sperm counts than their elders for the first time in human history, and that men born between 1990 and 1995 had on average 40 percent lower sperm counts than men born earlier. Children and Brain Development: “Not only did the scientists at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center find that children who spent more time per day on a wireless device have poorer language and literacy skills, but MRIs of the children showed structural damage to the white matter of their brains.” (P384, The Invisible Rainbow) I know that this report is shocking and very uncomfortable to come to grips with. We have allowed big tech to poison us with EMFs and have mistakenly put our trust in regulatory agencies that are charged with protecting us from these kinds of dangers, but have been “captured” and are corrupt—literally in bed with the telecommunication agencies among others. However, if we continue to act as if we don’t know the dangers, and are unwilling to make some protective changes, we are contributing to and causing a lot of the inescapable damage to ourselves and our children who depend on us to protect them. As Ayn Rand, the author of Atlas Shrugged, said: “It is a moral sin to contribute to your own self-destruction.”

By Kevin D. Roberts ~  President, The Heritage Foundation The following is adapted from a talk delivered in Christ Chapel at Hillsdale College on October 23, 2024, as part of the Drummond Lectures in Christ Chapel series. The top-down, elitist brand of politics that has dominated the United States since the end of the Cold War—under Republican and Democratic administrations alike—has failed. Yes, we are materially richer than we were in 1991, and our largest corporations are more profitable. But we are militarily and strategically weaker, fiscally endangered, and spiritually enervated. As a result, public trust in the vaunted institutions that our elites control—political, scientific, journalistic, educational, religious—has evaporated. And populism—especially on the conservative Right—is on the rise. Although I will focus on the U.S., this rise of populism is widespread. From Argentina to Italy to France to the United Kingdom to Hungary, there are similarities. The new populism tends to be economically and politically nationalistic. It tends to be culturally patriotic and socially conservative. It tends to sympathize with workers over corporations. It is also self-consciously, defiantly—often mockingly—anti-establishment. It is not a coincidence that so many of the West’s populist leaders—Javier Milei, Jair Bolsonaro, Viktor Orbán, Giorgia Meloni, and Donald Trump—have, shall we say, colorful personalities. Their political swagger may threaten elite politicians almost as much as their policy agendas do, because it punctures the bubble of credentialed, institutional authority that insulates elite power from public scrutiny. With few exceptions, the Left as we know it today has rejected populism out of hand, embracing instead Big Government, Big Business, Big Banks, Big Tech, Big Pharma, Big Labor, Big Ag, Big Media, and Big Entertainment. For the most part, today’s Left is hard at work fortifying the power these institutions wield against the rigors of democratic accountability. Thus the only hope for a sustainable, democratically legitimate populist reform movement today is on the Right. The question is whether the leaders of the movement can harness the highly negative energy from which the populism emerges and channel it toward a coherent, positive politics of national renewal and reform. To see what today’s populists are reacting against, think back to 1991. The end of the Cold War appeared to be a great victory for the Washington establishment—never mind that most leaders of that establishment opposed Reaganism, which was instrumental in bringing down the Soviet Union. Regardless, this victory earned Western institutions a high level of public trust unimaginable today. In November 1989, for instance, when the Berlin Wall fell, President George H.W. Bush’s public approval rating hit 70 percent and would climb to 80 and even 90 percent in subsequent years. With the Cold War over, one would have expected a recalibration of American foreign and domestic policy. It should at least have been a time for a national debate about those topics. For four decades, we had strung tripwires for nuclear war around the world to contain a foe that suddenly no longer existed. Working families who had invested two generations of blood and treasure during what President John F. Kennedy called the “long, twilight struggle” were ready to focus on problems closer to home. But the Washington establishment had other ideas. President Bush himself, in the lead-up to the first Gulf War, pledged allegiance to a “New World Order” that would be governed by the United Nations and policed, at its behest, by the U.S. Between that tin-ear approach and his backtracking on conservative economic policies, Bush squandered his popular support so badly that he suffered an embarrassing electoral defeat in 1992. In 1993, Bush’s successor, President Bill Clinton, led the fight to ratify the North American Free Trade Agreement, which gutted America’s industrial Midwest and lit the fuse on an illegal immigration bomb still exploding today. In 1994, Congress passed a law submitting the U.S. to the World Trade Organization, surrendering America’s economic sovereignty to globalist bureaucrats. Soon thereafter, a bipartisan majority in Congress granted Most Favored Nation trading status to the People’s Republic of China, handing over working Americans’ multi-trillion-dollar peace dividend to our greatest international rival. Clinton also sent U.S. troops into Mogadishu to referee the Somali civil war—with infamous results in the Black Hawk Down debacle—and orchestrated a bombing campaign in the former Yugoslavia. The climax of the White House debate about the latter mission is illustrative—it came when future-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright snapped at General Colin Powell, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, “What’s the point of having this superb military that you’re always talking about if we can’t use it?” And, of course, this was before President George W. Bush led America into the successive catastrophes of Iraq, the global financial crisis of 2008, and the Great Recession. In the decade-and-a-half since then, America’s fiscal situation has deteriorated. Americans suffered under the Covid pandemic while government bureaucrats (aided by the media) censored and demonized anyone who challenged the official (and often provably false) pandemic narrative. The Supreme Court redefined marriage, establishing the legal predicate for the trans fanaticism now responsible for destroying women’s sports and mutilating children across the country. The Justice Department, including the FBI, has shown brazen political partisanship in support of the elites and against the populists. Our nation has been beset by an unprecedented border crisis, a mental health crisis, and historically low birth rates. The withdrawal from Afghanistan was a national embarrassment, wars rage on two continents, antisemitism is on the rise on college campuses, and China is financing its own cold war against the U.S. with money and technology American executives gave the Chinese in exchange for corporate profits. Our $35 trillion national debt is now equal to 124 percent of our gross domestic product. We spend more every year on interest payments on that debt than we do on national security. These are the conditions that have rightfully discredited the elites and given rise to conservative populism. Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such thing as public liberty without freedom of speech; which is the right of every man as far as by it he does not hurt or control the right of another; and this is the only check it ought to suffer and the only bounds it ought to know  Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freedom of speech, a thing terrible to traitors. - Benjamin Franklin

GhostGilbertMT and The Lone Gunman Black Mirror (noun): A powerful divination tool for looking into past lives, ritual magic, crying, and fortune telling. The reflective screen of a device such as a TV, computer, or tablet in standby mode. A dark representation of modern technology and the negative impact it has on society. Following the Montana Attorney General's attempted erosion of our fundamental rights in the Jesse Boyd case, Montanans now have yet another reason to distrust their own government at every level. The past few years have been tumultuous: the result of constant, ongoing revelations. COVID lockdowns, migrant invasions, election integrity, economic collapse— all of it contributing to the questioning of our own vulnerability. Then came the drones. The mysterious surge in unidentified sightings reinforced how little we actually do know. What are they? What is their purpose? Why isn’t anyone doing anything? How much of this growing awareness is manufactured by a carefully controlled, satanic technocracy? It’s almost as if the public is undergoing an initiation into a new world. Treasonous government officials expose their blatant disregard for rule of law with a two-tiered justice system, and it solidifies our total sense of disillusionment. Our ignorance, finally exposed, brings a lingering guilt—like we should have known better. Evil has a way of gaslighting victims into admissions of wrongdoing, especially when none of us are truly innocent. As we wake up and look in the mirror, we see drones, an acknowledgment of our own complicity in the state of our nation. In so doing, we take the first steps toward a new era of critical thinking and truth. Coming to terms with such truths isn’t easy. But it’s a weight that YOU carry, not your black-mirror reflection. Not the digital ones and zeroes of a social credit score, nor the impulses of light stored on a memory chip in some drone flying overhead. Not the digital ones and zeroes of a social credit score, nor the impulses of light stored on a memory- chip in some drone flying overhead. If we humble ourselves, turn from our wicked ways, pray, and seek His face, then God will hear us, forgive us, and heal our lands. Even when a swarm of black mirrors stare back at us, recording everything with a level of omnipotence that seeks to rival that of The Creator. Eventually, manufactured fear over the next false flag, UFO drones, or presidential transitions of power contends with a larger matrix of discernment. A new reality no longer accepts the propagandized narratives presented to us. There are signs of this positive change. Parallel systems in our economies, media, and education are springing up all over the country. People are questioning the status quo, abandoning lies in favor of what has been deliberately occulted. Then, drone sightings become a symptom of a different issue: manifestation of a growing unease within the powers-that-shouldn’t-be. The future of our nation depends on truth. As we stand at this historic threshold, armed with increasing awareness, let the drones in our skies serve as a reminder to never be programmed or controlled again. -- Arise, mankind! We have all the information needed to discern Truth and truly live free.

The Salvation Army in Ravalli County, located in Hamilton, MT, provides various services to assist community members in need. The organization has seen an increase in demand over the past three years and has expanded its facilities to accommodate this growth. The current director, Fidelis Temukum, has been working to enhance the services offered, including adding a washer and dryer, a comfortable lounge area with free Wi-Fi, showers, and electrical outlets. The expansion has more than doubled the size of the original space for the service center. (These new services help the over 150 homeless individuals in Ravalli County.) The Salvation Army in Ravalli County offers emergency financial assistance, which can include help with gasoline, emergency meals, food, prescriptions, diapers, and emergency rental assistance through the National Food Shelter Program/Winter Shelter and motel vouchers. They also provide a variety of seasonal programs, such as the Annual Back-to-School Backpack program. For after-hours emergency shelter, individuals should contact the Ravalli County Sheriff’s office. Office hours are from Mondays through Fridays, 9 AM to 2 PM. Walk-ins are allowed after 9:30 AM. To receive aid, it is recommended to make an appointment, dress appropriately, and bring all required documentation. The Salvation Army is currently seeking donation$ to help community members MEET their needs in any emergency or ongoing crisis. They have a local matching grant from an anonymous donor that doubles every amount donated through January. For more information, to donate, or to register for assistance, you can call The Salvation Army – Hamilton at 406-210-1453 from 9 AM to 3 PM. You can also visit their website at www.HamiltonRedKettle.org or their Facebook page at www.facebook.com/SalvationArmyHamiltonMT/ . c

On October 11, 1910, former President Theodore Roosevelt took to the skies above St. Louis, Missouri, aboard a Wright Company aircraft. This unprecedented event, which took place roughly 19 months after Roosevelt left office, made Roosevelt the first U.S. president to fly in an airplane. The decision to fly was off the cuff: Roosevelt was visiting Missouri to support state Republicans in their election campaign when he was invited to hop aboard the airplane by aviator Arch Hoxsey. He initially declined but then changed his mind and climbed aboard. The plane took Roosevelt to “a height of less than one hundred feet,” according to a New-York Tribune article, and covered 3 miles over the span of 3 minutes and 20 seconds. Roosevelt was described by a reporter from the United Press as having “defied death” in front of 10,000 breathless onlookers, and emerged saying, “That was the bulliest experience I ever had.” Teddy wasn’t the only Roosevelt to make aviation history. In 1932, his fifth cousin Franklin Delano Roosevelt flew from New York to the Democratic National Convention in Chicago to accept the party’s presidential nomination. FDR later became the first president to fly on a plane on January 13, 1943, when he flew to Morocco to meet with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. The journey was more than 15,000 miles total, as the plane made refueling stops in Trinidad, Brazil, and the Gambia on the way. The president would have normally taken a boat, but doing so was far too risky given the German submarine activity in the Atlantic Ocean at the time. A historic moment showing former President Theodore Roosevelt seated in an early Wright Company aircraft, accompanied by the pilot, Arch Hoxsey. This photograph is from October 11, 1910, at St. Louis, Missouri, marking Roosevelt as the first U.S. president to fly in an airplane.

Electromagnetic Frequencies and Their Impact on Health EMFs stand for electromagnetic frequencies, which are a major part of our world emanating from everything—from radio, television, electric blankets, cell phones, tablets, FitBit bracelets, routers, computer screens, and more. These frequencies have a definite effect on our health. As electric vehicles are being mandated in California and embraced by environmentalists, the safety of these devices and vehicles is not being discussed, although the deleterious effects are known and have been reported. There seems to be an effort to downplay or hide these reports. An incredible work of reporting on these dangers is in the book The Invisible Rainbow  by Arthur Firstenberg, who personally is very sensitive to the effects of EMFs. He documents the history of electricity and its effects on humans, animals, and plants from the first experimentation with crude static electricity devices in the 1700s in France, England, Germany, Holland, Italy, and the United States to primitive electrical generators that followed. Early Experimentation with Electricity At first, these experimentations were used as parlor tricks and entertainment, progressing to medical devices that were used to treat people who were suffering the ill effects that telegraph and electrical wires for lights and phones brought to an unsuspecting public. In 1746, Pieter van Musschenbroek, professor of Physics at the University of Leyden, had been using his usual friction machine consisting of a glass globe spun on its axis while he rubbed it with his hands, producing static electricity. However, electricity in those days was of limited use because it had to be produced on the spot, with no way to store it. Musschenbroek and his associates designed an ingenious experiment that would change the world forever: They sought to store electricity in a glass bottle partially filled with water. The experiment succeeded beyond their wildest expectations. “I am going to tell you about a new terrible experiment,” Musschenbroek wrote to a friend in Paris, “which I advise you never to try yourself, nor would I, who have experienced it and have survived by the grace of God, do it again for all the Kingdom of France.” He continued, “Suddenly my right hand was hit with such force, that my arm and whole body were affected more terribly than I can express. In a word, I thought I was done for.” The Hidden Costs of Progress Firstenberg explains: “But only half the message registered with the public. The fact that people could be temporarily or, as we will see, permanently injured or even killed by these experiments became lost in the general excitement that followed.” Musschenbroek’s experience was the direct effect of electrical current, but the effects of EMFs derived from that current would soon be felt—and the effect on our health would be catastrophic. In the prologue of The Invisible Rainbow , Firstenberg discusses EMFs found in nature and in our own bodies, stating, “The energy of our cells whispering in the radio frequency range is infinitesimal but necessary for life. Every thought, every movement that we make surrounds us with low-frequency pulsations, whispers that were first detected in 1875 and are also necessary for life.” He writes, “We live today with a number of devastating diseases that do not belong here, whose origin we do not know, whose presence we take for granted and no longer question. What it feels like to be without them is a state of vitality that we have completely forgotten.” EMFs and Modern Disease “Anxiety disorder,” afflicting one-sixth of humanity, did not exist before the 1860s when telegraph wires first encircled the earth. No hint of it appeared in the medical literature before 1866. Influenza, in its present form, was invented in 1889 along with alternating current. Doctors flooded with cases in 1889 had never seen the disease before. Prior to the 1860s, diabetes was so rare that few doctors saw more than one or two cases during their lifetime. Obese people never developed the disease. Heart disease was the twenty-fifth most common illness, behind accidental drowning. It was rare for anyone other than infants and the elderly to have heart issues. Cancer was exceedingly rare. Even tobacco smoking did not cause lung cancer before electrification. “These are the diseases of civilization, that we have also inflicted on our animals and plant neighbors, diseases that we live with because of a refusal to recognize the force that we have harnessed for what it is,” Firstenberg asserts. “The 60-cycle current in our house wiring, the ultrasonic frequencies in our computers, the radio waves in our televisions, the microwaves in our cell phones—these are the distortions of the invisible rainbow that runs through our veins and makes us alive. But we have forgotten. It is time we remember.” Be sure to read the rest of this story in January's issue!

The recent dismissal of the case against Jesse Boyd, the missionary arrested for defending his family in Cameron, Montana, should resonate with every Montanan concerned about the preservation of our rights. While Judge Luke Berger's decision prevented a dangerous precedent from being set, it also exposed a disturbing trend: the erosion of our fundamental rights, often at the hands of those entrusted to protect them. The Boyd case begs the question: how could such a blatant disregard for the law and the rights of the accused even occur? The answer, in part, lies in the missing piece of Montana's legal puzzle: the grand jury. The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that "no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury..." This fundamental right, designed to protect citizens from overzealous prosecution, is conspicuously absent in Montana. We once had a functioning grand jury system, but it was effectively dismantled in the mid-1970s, a casualty of a complex legal battle that ironically involved an Attorney General attempting to root out corruption, not perpetuate it. The Ironic Case of Kelly v. Gilbert The case that effectively neutered Montana's grand jury system, Kelly v. Gilbert (1977), presents a stark contrast to the Boyd case. In Kelly, the Attorney General, Robert L. Woodahl, and his assistant, Howard Gilbert, were investigating official misconduct and criminal acts within the state government. William T. Kelly, a key witness, was subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury. Kelly, however, resisted, claiming harassment and bad faith on the part of the prosecution. The irony is thick. In the Boyd case, the Montana Attorney General's office attempted to chip away at our rights, and the Fifth District Court stopped them. In Kelly v. Gilbert, it was the Attorney General attempting to uphold the law and address corruption, but the First District Court's handling of the case ultimately led to the demise of the grand jury system in Montana. A crucial detail in Kelly v. Gilbert is that Kelly had been granted transactional immunity before testifying. This meant he could not be prosecuted for any offenses related to his testimony. Theoretically, this removes the basis for invoking the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination. Yet, the court issued a preliminary injunction preventing the state from compelling Kelly's testimony, citing evidence of prosecutorial misconduct and harassment. A Cautionary Tale from New York One might point to the recent Daniel Penny case in New York, where a grand jury indicted Penny on manslaughter charges, as evidence that grand juries still function. However, a closer look reveals a different kind of problem. While grand juries still convene in New York, their independence has been significantly compromised. The prosecution acts as sole legal counsel to the grand jury, and they are not required to present exculpatory evidence. The defense has no right to participate, creating a system where indictment is almost guaranteed, leading to the cynical observation that a grand jury could "indict a ham sandwich." This is not the independent, citizen-led body envisioned by the Founders. Lessons from History: Rebuilding a Robust Grand Jury System If Montana is to reclaim its right to a functioning grand jury system, we must learn from the past. The Kelly v. Gilbert case demonstrates the danger of allowing judicial overreach to undermine the grand jury's independence. The New York example shows how prosecutorial control can transform the grand jury from a shield for the people into a tool for the state. What lessons can we glean from these examples, and how can we ensure a revitalized grand jury system in Montana truly serves its constitutional purpose? While protecting Kelly from potential abuse, the court's decision had far-reaching consequences. It opened the door for accusations of malicious prosecution against the grand jury itself, effectively painting the body intended to protect citizens as a tool of oppression. The case dragged on for years, and amidst the legal wrangling, the public's attention likely shifted away from the crucial issue at hand: the preservation of the grand jury system. The result? Montana lost a vital constitutional safeguard. Clearly Defined Scope and Authority:  The Kelly v. Gilbert case highlighted the need for clear legal boundaries for grand juries. Their powers must be explicitly defined to prevent overreach and accusations of malicious prosecution. This includes specifying the types of cases they can investigate, the limits of their subpoena power, and the procedures for judicial oversight. Independence from the Prosecution:  To avoid the "rubber stamp" effect seen in New York, Montana's grand jury system must be truly independent of the prosecution. This could involve appointing independent legal counsel to advise the grand jury, requiring the presentation of exculpatory evidence, and allowing limited defense participation to ensure a more balanced presentation of the case. Transparency and Accountability:  Grand jury secrecy, while intended to protect witnesses and investigations, can also shield misconduct. Montana should consider mechanisms for greater transparency, such as allowing public access to transcripts of grand jury proceedings (with appropriate redactions to protect sensitive information) and establishing clear procedures for reporting and investigating allegations of prosecutorial misconduct. Citizen Empowerment and Education:  The grand jury is meant to be the voice of the community. To fulfill this role, citizens must be educated about the grand jury process and empowered to participate effectively. This could involve public awareness campaigns, juror training programs, and clear guidelines for selecting grand jurors that ensure a representative cross-section of the community. Statutory Reform:  Montana's laws regarding grand juries need to be revisited and potentially revised to reflect these principles. This could involve amending existing statutes or enacting new legislation that clearly establishes the grand jury's role, powers, and limitations, as well as the procedures for its operation. The Jesse Boyd case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of constitutional safeguards. The grand jury, when functioning as intended, provides a crucial buffer between the state and its citizens, protecting individuals from unfounded prosecutions and ensuring that the power of the state is exercised responsibly. By learning from the past and implementing these reforms, Montana can reclaim this vital constitutional right and strengthen the foundations of justice for all its citizens.

The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, saith the Lord of hosts. - Haggai 2:8 (KJV) In our previous article, we explored current tax problems in Montana and possible avenues for reform. It should come as no surprise to our readers that a single article on the topic is insufficient to accurately portray how bad things have become. While taxation is definitely part of the problem, another lingering issue is with money itself. Even if enough politicians came together to pass tariffs on “out-of-state snowbirds,” without fixing the hidden tax of inflation wealth problems in our state and country will continue to spiral out of control. Far from being the root of all evil, the reason our dollar is worth less every year is because it is no longer exchangeable for gold or silver. But how did that happen? And what does the constitution say? Who Controls our Money? Article 1, Section 10 of the US Constitution explicitly states: “ No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.” (emphasis added) Our departure from a gold-backed currency in America spans centuries. As far back as the war of 1812, efforts to centralize American banking and financial control culminated in 1913 with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act. Ironically, the reason President Woodrow Wilson may have signed off on the Act over fears of rampant inflation. The gold rush in the late 1800’s led some economists to speculate that the discovery and mining of so much “new” gold would displace existing wealth held worldwide, leading to economic catastrophe. “I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.” -Woodrow Wilson By 1971, President Nixon fully suspended the dollar convertibility to gold. To fully illustrate what this did to our dollar, let’s examine purchasing power relative to gold and silver prices. In 1965 the minimum wage was $1.25, or five silver quarters. This contained a melt value slightly less than a single ounce of silver. Today, an ounce of silver is over $30, while Montana’s minimum wage in 2025 is a mere $10.55. Average housing prices in the 1960’s ranged from $12,000 to $20,000, depending on where you lived. Gold prices ranged from $35 to $40, depending on year. For a few hundred ounces, you could buy a home. Today the price of gold is over $2,600 per ounce, which means that for the same few hundred ounces, you could still afford a house in Montana’s insanely expensive real estate market. The comparison works on plenty of other metrics like gas, food, clothing, or car prices. Gold and silver beats the fiat dollar just about every time. No wonder younger generations are no longer willing to work. Our money is worth less every day, and employers aren’t willing to pay wages in silver quarters. Recognizing Gold and Silver as Legal Tender So, what can be done? A growing number of states in the U.S. have recognized gold and silver as legal tender, with more states either still in the process, or have tried and failed to do so legislatively. This move back to monetary metals effectively eliminates the capital gains tax incurred when selling or transacting in gold or silver. If every state were to succeed in such a venture, it would greatly hinder the federal reserve's ability to manipulate our money. Oro y Plata In Montana, legislation titled the “Establish the Legal Tender Act” was introduced in early 2023. By March of the same year, the bill was effectively “dead” after missing a deadline for bill transmittal. It remains to be seen if future efforts will fare any better, but it’s possible that international pressures from BRICS countries who are returning to a gold-backed standard may provide the catalyst. Trump and Tariffs President Donald Trump recently took to his Truth Social account to comment on the BRICS alliance, threatening the countries who are fleeing from the U.S. dollar: “The idea that the BRICS countries are trying to move away from the dollar while we stand by and watch is OVER. We require a commitment from these countries that they will neither create a new BRICS currency, nor back any other currency to replace the mighty U.S. dollar or, they will face 100% tariffs, and should expect to say goodbye to selling into the wonderful U.S. economy... There is no chance that the BRICS will replace the U.S. dollar in international trade, and any country that tries should wave goodbye to America.” If President Trump is serious about maintaining dollar dominance amid a resurgence in gold and silver money, he would be wise to do the same. Excessive tariffs would only result in Canada becoming a 51 st state, while a rapidly inflating fiat dollar wouldn’t be able to keep up with gold backed international currencies. It is often said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. History is full of examples of rampant inflation and fake currency destroying nations. Let’s avoid the same fate by turning back to gold and silver money, before it’s too late.

The following is adapted from a talk delivered on March 11, 2024, at the Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship on Hillsdale’s Washington, D.C. campus, as part of the AWC Family Foundation Lecture Series. Preamble We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. The writers of our Constitution placed their faith not in specific guarantees of rights—those came later—but in a system of checks on government power. Foremost is the separation of powers among the three branches of the federal government, as well as between the federal government and the states. For this system to work as designed, people in each branch of the federal government and in the state governments must do their jobs and stay in their respective lanes. But what happens when district attorneys—members of their states’ executive branches—refuse to execute the laws of the land? We are witnessing the results today in blue cities across America. Approximately 90 percent of criminal cases in the U.S. are handled by the 2,300 elected district attorneys spread across 3,143 counties. The rest are prosecuted by U.S. attorneys operating under the Department of Justice. Until recently, elected county district attorneys upheld their end of the social contract by firmly and fairly enforcing state criminal laws and protecting citizens’ rights. Regardless of party affiliation, these gatekeepers of the criminal justice system did their job. Over the last 30 years, they played a critical role in driving down crime rates, which peaked in 1992, by prosecuting violent criminals, while at the same time creating thousands of alternatives to incarceration, such as drug courts, domestic violence courts, mental health courts, and other highly successful programs. That changed in 2015 with the launching of the George Soros-funded “progressive prosecutor” movement. This movement is animated by two beliefs. The first is that the entire criminal justice system is systemically racist. The second is that the only way to fix the system is to dismantle it by replacing law-and-order district attorneys with pro-criminal and anti-police district attorneys. The sick irony of this movement is that in the areas where it has prevailed, the most harm has been done to the racial minorities whose interests it purports to represent. Origins of the Movement The progressive prosecutor movement—more accurately called the rogue prosecutor movement—is the predictable outgrowth of efforts by earlier Marxist radicals to alter or destroy the American way of life. At its root is the belief that our country and its institutions, including capitalism, are racist. One of the early leaders of the movement to abolish prisons is the infamous Angela Davis, now in her 80s, who in her 2003 book, Are Prisons Obsolete? , equated prisons to modern-day slavery. “The prison,” she wrote, “has become a black hole into which the detritus of contemporary capitalism is deposited”; throwing people into prison, she continued, “relieves us of the responsibility of seriously engaging with the problems of our society, especially those produced by racism and, increasingly, global capitalism.” Patrisse Kahn-Cullors and Alicia Garza (a.k.a. Alicia Schwartz), cofounders of Black Lives Matter, have also had an enormous influence. Cullors, a militant radical and convicted felon, is a protégé of the director of the Labor Community Strategy Center, whose purpose is to build an anti-racist, anti-imperialist, anti-fascist united front. Garza said at an international gathering of Marxists in 2015: “It’s not possible for a world to emerge where black lives matter if it’s under capitalism. And it’s not possible to abolish capitalism without a struggle against national oppression and gender oppression.” During a 2017 PBS interview, Garza heaped praise on Angela Davis for her work exposing the “carceral state”—i.e., a state in which people are incarcerated in prisons—and called for its dismantling. The involvement in this movement of billionaire George Soros, who had been funding liberal causes for years, can be traced to his hiring of attorney Whitney Tymas in 2015. Tymas, who had worked as a public defender and prosecutor, was connected to the Vera Institute of Justice, where she focused on “the role of prosecutors in perpetuating racial disparity.” There she met the ACLU’s Chloe Cockburn, who was working to end “mass incarceration,” and they discussed the role of prosecutors, the low visibility of elections for county district attorneys, and the fact that most people don’t even know who their local D.A. is. As opponents of the death penalty, Tymas and Cockburn hatched a plan to elect anti-death penalty prosecutors and persuaded Soros to give over $1 million to groups that were successful in electing such district attorneys in Louisiana and Mississippi. Eventually, that modest aim—to unseat pro-death penalty prosecutors—grew into a national movement with a more ambitious goal. Emily Bazelon, New York Times Magazine staff writer and Soros media fellow, summed up the goal in terms of “mak[ing] the system operate differently” by electing “prosecutors who will open the locks” of prisons. Rachel Barkow, a law professor and former member of the U.S. Sentencing Commission who supports the rogue prosecutor movement, summed up its goal as follows: “to reverse-engineer and dismantle the criminal justice infrastructure.” This well-funded and organized movement is not about liberal versus conservative, Democrat versus Republican, or black versus white. It is about power. From the start, the movement focused on the fact that prosecutors, not police, are the gatekeepers of the criminal justice system. District attorneys decide whether to file charges and which charges to file. By replacing traditional prosecutors with attorneys who see defendants as victims, it would be possible to “reverse-engineer” and “dismantle” the existing criminal justice system. It is no coincidence that Soros, the various political action committees that he controls or funds, and his wealthy far-Left allies have given huge financial support to rogue prosecutor candidates in deep blue cities. They target these cities because their electorates are not paying close attention to down-ballot races and can be misled through a bombardment of often misleading advertisements. Over the past decade, Soros has spent more than $40 million on campaigns to elect rogue prosecutors. One group has estimated that he has donated as much as $1 billion to the cause, if policy infrastructure, media relations, sponsored academic and think tank papers, lobbying campaigns, and grassroots organizing are taken into account. Other billionaires, like Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz and his wife Cari Tuna, and Patty Quillin, the wife of Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, have also generously contributed to the cause. The Playbook One of the hallmarks of the rogue prosecutor movement has been its usurpation of the constitutional role of state legislatures. Once elected, rogue prosecutors refuse to prosecute entire categories of crimes that are on the books in their states, justifying their refusal by claiming “prosecutorial discretion.” But in fact, their refusal to prosecute crimes violates the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government and distorts the entire legal system. Prosecutorial discretion is not limitless. The principle behind it requires the enforcement of laws except in cases when prosecutors believe in good faith that an applicable law is unconstitutional. It does not give prosecutors the power to redefine crime and punishment. By refusing to prosecute entire categories of crime, they are in effect repealing criminal statutes—acting in place of the legislature. This is prosecutorial nullification, not discretion. Valid prosecutorial discretion takes many forms, but when we allow for the chronic violation of law, we erode the foundation of our cities and civilization—and respect for the rule of law evaporates. Today, there more than 70 rogue prosecutors across the country. They represent more than 72 million people, or one in five Americans, and they proudly refuse to prosecute most misdemeanors, claiming that these are essentially harmless “quality of life” crimes that divert scarce resources. To take one example, Rachael Rollins, the former district attorney of Suffolk County (Boston), posted a list of 15 misdemeanors her office would not prosecute, including trespassing, shoplifting, larceny under $250, disturbing the peace, receiving stolen property, operating a vehicle with a suspended or revoked license, wanton or malicious destruction of property, and possession with intent to distribute illegal drugs. Other rogue prosecutors have followed suit. George Gascon, the district attorney of Los Angeles County, issued a written directive to his 1,000 prosecutors detailing the 13 misdemeanors that “shall be declined or dismissed before arraignment and without conditions” unless certain exceptions or other “factors” exist. In the same directive, he said it is not “an exhaustive list,” and that each prosecutor has the discretion to decline any of the hundreds of other misdemeanors in the California penal code that fall within the “spirit” of his directive.

Prioritizing your own needs and desires versus the needs and desires of others... Selfish vs selfless are two opposite personality traits that define how individuals prioritize their own needs and desires versus the needs and desires of others. Selfish individuals tend to prioritize their own interests above all else, often at the expense of others. Selfish  for instance: May harm others for personal gain Often driven by greed or self-preservation Short-term gain with long-term consequences One with these selfish traits may even act in a way that benefits themselves without considering the impact on others. Selfish individuals tend to exhibit behaviors that prioritize their own needs and desires above those of others. They may be unwilling to share resources, take credit for the work of others, or manipulate situations to their advantage. Selfish individuals may also lack empathy and consideration for the feelings of others, leading to strained relationships and conflicts. A selfless  individual demonstrates behaviors that prioritize the needs and well-being of others above their own. They are generous, compassionate, and willing to make sacrifices for the benefit of others. Selfless individuals are often seen as kind, caring, and empathetic, fostering positive relationships and creating a sense of community. Selfless  for instance: Benefits others at one's expense Driven by compassion and empathy Long-term fulfillment from helping others Selfish individuals may experience short-term gratification from achieving their own goals and fulfilling their desires. However, their focus on self-interest may lead to feelings of emptiness, loneliness, and dissatisfaction in the long run. Selfish individuals may struggle to form meaningful connections with others and experience a sense of isolation and alienation. Selfless individuals derive personal fulfillment from helping others and making a positive impact on the world. Their acts of kindness, generosity, and compassion bring them a sense of purpose, meaning, and connection with others. Selfless individuals may experience greater levels of happiness, satisfaction, and well-being as a result of their altruistic actions. Ultimately, the choice is ours. Selfishness or selflessness will greatly impact relationships and interactions with others on all levels: marriages, family, friends, socializing, work, governments. The question we must ask ourselves is what and who is behind our selfishness or selflessness. What's behind selfishness is darkness, and what is behind selflessness is light. Selfishness being darkness and darkness being of the flesh is the most destructive disease of the human soul. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption... Selflessness being light and light being of the Spirit, self-sacrifice increases the value of another life. But the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. Let each of you look not only to your own interest, but also to the interest of others. ~ Philippians 2:4

Jesus Is The Reason For The Season! The beauty of the season surrounds us. It's a time where people tend to be joyful, kind, and generous. Restaurants and stores have candles lit, beautiful green wreaths on their doors, some have manger scenes, Christmas trees, signs that say "Merry Christmas," and several restaurants offer a free meal to those who are hungry. And let's not forget the beautiful Christmas lights! Some homes go all out and include blow-up snowmen, reindeer, and beautiful manger scenes that are all lit up. You will find a variety of events for families; most include hot cocoa and hot cider. There are wonderful plays and concerts at various churches. Little kids play the wise men, and sometimes you will even find the woman who is playing Mary riding in on a real donkey to the place where she will give birth to Jesus. I find it absolutely beautiful to walk through a snowy town with hot cocoa in hand, looking at Christmas lights, seeing the manger scene on the sidewalk, and giving gifts when I can. The season brings much Joy, as it should! Christmas Time Brings Questions Christmas time also brings discussions regarding... "How did it come to be in the first place? Should Christians celebrate Christmas since Jesus was not born on December 25th?" When you do the research, you will find a lot of different resources and thoughts on those subjects. There is a lot there. I am just going to share some basics. How Did Christmas Come To Be? The early church focused on honoring the death and resurrection of Jesus. BUT the 4th century church started celebrating the birth of Jesus due to the fact that there was some conflict amongst Christians over the nature of Christ—who He was. They wanted to put emphasis on His birth, showing that when He was born, the Word became flesh and that He was, in fact, the Messiah, our Lord & Savior Jesus Christ! He was the ultimate gift to mankind and through Him our sins could be forgiven, and those who choose Him will have eternal life. They wanted to celebrate His life and the gift that He was. -- So Christmas came to be! When Was Jesus Born? It is true that Jesus was not born on December 25th. The theory is that He was born sometime in the spring, due to the fact that the Bible tells us in Luke 2:8-14 that when He was born the shepherds were watching their flocks by night. Shepherds did not spend time with their sheep in the field in the winter but rather in the spring. The Roman culture had pagan festivals celebrating the sun from December 17th - 24th. The belief of many is they chose December 25th to celebrate the birth of Jesus to counteract the influence of the pagan celebration. The Christmas Tree You will also find information regarding the Christmas tree. The evergreen tree was a symbol of everlasting life. Roughly around the 16th century, the Christmas tree came about. They would put stars on the top of the tree to remind them of the wise men who followed the star to see Jesus and bring their gifts. Some would put an angel on the top of their trees as a reminder of the angels that appeared to the shepherds on the night Jesus was born. Jeremiah 10 and Isaiah 44 are not warnings against Christmas trees. When you read them in the full context, you will find out that it was regarding the pagans making their trees idols. Yes, some pagans did worship trees. This was a time way before the birth of Jesus and way before Christmas trees came to be. Christians do not worship the Christmas tree. It reminds most of the everlasting life that Jesus gives to those who choose Him. How Did Santa Come To Be? In the 19th century, a cartoon artist named Thomas Nast, working for Coca-Cola marketing, created a picture for Harper's Weekly Magazine of Santa. It took off and became popular. It is believed that picture was inspired by the story of the real 4th century Bishop St. Nicholas of Myra. He was wealthy, very generous, and helped the poor. You will find many stories regarding St. Nicholas. One story being that one night, he dropped a bag full of gold down the chimney of a man's house so that his daughter could get married. The bag landed in a sock that was hanging on the fireplace to dry. From there, Santa took off, and the world has put a great emphasis on Santa and added a lot of other make-believe aspects of who he was supposed to be. The Beauty of Christmas Christmas is a beautiful season; you see the Fruits of the Spirit on display loudly. Surrounded by the beauty of the season, the lights and candles remind us that Jesus is the light of the world. We focus on what it truly means, celebrating the BEST gift ever given, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. And for many, including myself, the snow at Christmas is also a wonderful reminder of what Jesus has done for us, but that topic is for another time. From all of us to all of you...Have a wonderful Christmas!!!