There is no putting it lightly: America is on the brink of Civil War. At this point, it really does not matter who is inaugurated as President on January 20, 2021. After the decision of the Supreme Court yesterday to throw out a Constitutional case, a dispute between the States, the divide between citizens and States is being driven to a point where the United States of America as we know it could come to an end.

For those unaware, earlier this week the State of Texas, under the leadership of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, filed a lawsuit against four States: Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. The suit, filed in the Supreme Court, was essentially based in one key area of the Constitution, that which surrounds the responsibilities of the State Legislatures. Constitutionally, the State Legislatures bear the responsibility of appointing electors to attend the Electoral College on December 14. Additionally, if any changes to Election rules and procedures are to be made in a State, they must go through and be approved by the Legislative Chambers in that State. In the cases of the four States Texas filed suit against, electoral changes were made by the Courts and/or the Secretaries of State. They were never approved by the State Legislatures. A similar occurrence took place in the 2000 Election of Bush v Gore, in which Florida came under dispute and was settled in the Supreme Court, who ruled that what had taken place was unconstitutional. The same was applicable to this case, backed by at least 17 other States and the President himself. Yet only two Justices, Justice Thomas Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas, were willing to hear it. The other seven, including Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, declined to even hear the case.

This case had two clear cut outcomes; 1. Upholding the Constitution of the United States of America, or 2. Tossing aside the Constitution and essentially declaring it just a piece of parchment that has no meaning. The Supreme Court chose option two. They chose cowardice. The Founding Fathers would be rolling in their graves.

In a case where there is a dispute between two or more States, the case bypasses all State and Federal Circuit Courts and is filed directly with the Supreme Court. There are generally two outcomes of a dispute between States. The first: The dispute is settled by the Supreme Court. However, in the case that it is not settled by the Supreme Court, the States may take matters into their own hands. Yesterday, the Supreme Court, in their weak decision to recuse themselves of responsibility in what is probably the most historical case that would ever front them, made a critical error. They chose to say the case had no “standing”, a doctrine brought in by the courts within the last century as a means of washing their hands of any cases they do not want to bear responsibility for. It is truly a coward’s way out. In not resolving the dispute themselves, they have practically just told the States to settle it themselves. Essentially, the Supreme Court just sanctioned a Civil War.

But before we get to that, there are still possible avenues. Indeed, according to lawyer Robert Barnes, who has had a multitude of wins in civil, criminal, and Constitutional law, “when law professors gamed out a 2020 election contest, they had this stage as only the half-way there. Other possibilities: VP not certifying contested electors; House and Senate contesting electors; 12^th Amendment challenge as to who contests electors, etc.”. He also stated that “after the Supreme Court ruled against Gore, the advice of the chief of his legal team was to take it to Congress. The 12^th Amendment does empower Congress to vote if electors are contested.” Barnes knows what he is talking about. But to understand exactly what this means, we must understand how the process works from here.

On the 14^th of December, Electors in each State (one for every Federal House and Senate Representative in the State) will vote, the Governors will certify their State Electors’ votes, and they will then transmit the slate of Electors from their State to Congress. That is, unless they are contested. Typically, in the case that things are uncontested, on January 6 the Electors will meet in DC at the US House in a joint session with the Vice President (in this case Mike Pence) presiding. Under the 12^th Amendment of the US Constitution “The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such a number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed.” However, in the case that there is, at this point in the process, still unresolved litigation, electoral slate issues, or investigations that cloud the outcome of a State or several States, objections may be raised to the Electors from these States. House Members and Senators can join together to make such objections and force a contingent vote in the House, whereby, under the 12^th Amendment, each State carries one vote. The exact phrasing in the 12^th Amendment of the Constitution is as follows:

“The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such a number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. ”

This all goes back to what Barnes said. If there are States contested in litigation or whatever else, their Electors may not be certified be that either by the Vice President himself, or by objecting Members of Congress, which would result in an immediate election in the House. It is pertinent to note that Representatives Mo Brooks, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Moore have already indicated that they will object to Electors from contested States. They would need a Senator to join them in doing so to make arguments. In this case, Senator Josh Hawley would be in the best position to present compelling arguments, given his history as a lawyer and former Attorney General, in addition to the time he has served as a member of both the Judiciary and Homeland Security committees. If a House election was to occur, it would likely be a victory for Trump, given Republicans hold the majority of States in the House, and thus Trump would be re-instated as President.

There is still ongoing litigation in multiple States, including Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Nevada. After the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday not to hear the Texas lawsuit, Trump’s legal team are filing similar lawsuits in each of the four States individually. Sidney Powell is also pursuing cases, with emergency filings made in the Supreme Court for Georgia, Michigan, and Arizona, with Wisconsin to follow. These cases also raise Constitutional issues and are being filed on behalf of the people of America. The fact of the matter is that, even though each State will submit its slate of Electors on Monday, while this litigation continues, these Electors may indeed be rendered moot. Legislatures may also take matters into their own hands and, under the Constitution, choose and send their own Electors. There is a reason the Trump legal team has been fronting hearings with State Legislatures in these swing States.

And there is one more thing that may yet strike from the darkness. On September 12, 2018 President Trump signed a little-known Executive Order (EO 13848). This Executive Order is entitled “Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election”. It covers everything from election interference derived from other nations to US Politicians and the media aiding in such interference. In fact, this Executive Order is so extensive, it is as if Trump knew there would be interference in the 2020 Election. Keep in mind, he had this all drawn up and signed just months after the 2018 mid-term Elections. He was able to view what occurred in the mid-terms and create an Executive Order to catch them out if they tried it again, which inevitably they would. But there is something truly extraordinary about this Executive Order that you would only know if you read it. At the very start of the EO, Trump states the following:

“In recent years, the proliferation of digital devices and internet-based communications has created significant vulnerabilities and magnified the scope and intensity of the threat of foreign interference, as illustrated in the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with this threat.”

Yes, you read that right. The United States of America has been under a State of Emergency since this Executive Order was signed back in September 2018. That State of Emergency was extended, and here’s the kicker: The 2020 Election was held under a State of Emergency. Further, Section 1(a) of the EO states:

“Not later than 45 days after the conclusion of a United States election, the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the heads of any other appropriate executive departments and agencies (agencies), shall conduct an assessment of any information indicating that a foreign government, or any person acting as an agent of or on behalf of a foreign government, has acted with the intent or purpose of interfering in that election. The assessment shall identify, to the maximum extent ascertainable, the nature of any foreign interference and any methods employed to execute it, the persons involved, and the foreign government or governments that authorized, directed, sponsored, or supported it. The Director of National Intelligence shall deliver this assessment and appropriate supporting information to the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security.”

This means that the Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, must submit a report on all election interference from foreign governments and those who have assisted in it. This report will be delivered to President Trump, the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, the newly instated Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller (it is no accident his predecessor Mark Esper was fired shortly after the Election), the Attorney General Bill Barr, and the Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf. Of course, there is a 45-day deadline. That deadline is the 18^th of December, this Friday. This Executive Order was designed and signed into law for a specific purpose. It stands to reason that this will play a major part, even if it be subtle, over the weeks to come. For those who wish to read the rest of EO 13848, here is a link to the official Government website with the EO written out in full: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-imposing-certain-sanctions-event-foreign-interference-united-states-election/.

As all these things continue forth, millions of Americans have been actively supporting the President. Just today, they turned out in force to the March for Trump and Jericho Marches, and heard from an incredible line up of speakers, including the recently pardoned General Mike Flynn. As Flynn spoke, Marine One flew overhead carrying Trump on his journey to the Army vs Navy game, where he was greeted with a thundering applause and cheers from the military. Meanwhile, a sea of Trump supporters marched around the Supreme Court of the United States in what are called Jericho Marches. The Jericho March originates from Biblical times, in which God gave Joshua an unusual strategy for the battle of Jericho. The Israelites marched around the city of Jericho once every day for six days, soldiers playing their trumpets while priests carried the Ark of the Covenant. On the seventh day, they marched around the walls of the city seven times, and, at Joshua’s order, let out a powerful roar. Then the walls of Jericho fell. In the modern day, a Jericho March is essentially a prayer walk by a group or congregation, the purpose being to pray for something and ask God to intercede. The Jericho Marches in the US persist to break down the walls closing in on democracy.

Americans are getting out there and making their voices heard. They are fighting for the President. But as I said at the outset of this piece, no matter what happens, the civil unrest occurring could easily tip over into a Civil War. And that is where this final interesting development comes in. After SCOTUS denied Texas a hearing, Texas GOP Chairman Allen West released the following statement, suggesting the possibility of secession:  

“The Supreme Court, in tossing aside the Texas lawsuit that was joined by seventeen States and 106 US congressmen, have decreed that a state can take unconstitutional actions and violate its own election law. Resulting in damaging effects on other states that abide by the law, while the guilty state suffers no consequences. This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable. This decision will have far reaching ramifications for the future of our constitutional republic. Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution. The Texas GOP will always stand for the Constitution and for the rule of law even while others don’t.”

For those unaware, secession is “the action of withdrawing formally from membership of a federation or body, especially a political state.” Essentially, the Texas GOP Chairman is suggesting that States who respect the Constitution should withdraw from the Union and form their own. The last time secession occurred in the United States was in 1860-61, when 11 States withdrew from the Union following the election of Abraham Lincoln. Interestingly, secession preceded the American Civil War.

If this were to occur again, the States would be truly divided. A second Union could form, thus splitting America. Tensions would likely rise and boil over to the point where a new Civil War is sparked. Even if there was not to be a secession, Civil War is still a significant possibility. But there is one thing that could prevent a destructive event from ensuing. Whilst many judicial and investigative bodies may be working against Trump, he has the all-important military on his side. And they might just be the only group he needs.

Make no mistake, this is not over yet. The only date that really matters at this point is January 20^th, Inauguration Day. Until then at least, the fight continues.

As the American author Napoleon Hill once said: “Victory is always possible for the person who refuses to stop fighting.”

As COVID-19 continues to remain a part of our lives, solutions continue to be sought. There are numerous vaccines in the works, some now approved and being administered to the public. As an elderly woman in the United Kingdom became the first member of the general public to receive the Pfizer vaccine this week, it once again became a major topic of conversation. However, opinion is divided over whether or not the vaccine is truly safe, even when the companies that produce it claim it is. But these companies have also made themselves non-liable for any issues and adverse effects from these vaccines, so can we really trust them?

Vaccines typically take 8-10 years to create. In this way, they are generally safe, and are unlikely to result in any major issues. Sure, those who have them may experience some minor side effects, but nothing that will be especially harmful to them. The vaccines being produced now for COVID-19 were created in less than one year. So what does that say about them? They were rushed. And when something is rushed, a multitude of things can go wrong.

You do not need to look far to see the problems with this. It is reminiscent of the thalidomide epidemic, where the drug was said to be safe, but ended up resulting in the deaths of around 80,000 babies worldwide and deformities of a further 20,000. It has also been associated with a higher occurrence of blood clots and nerve and blood disorders. Yet it is still approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of inflammation from Hansen’s disease and as a chemotherapeutic agent for patients with multiple myeloma.

Then there was the vaccine created by the World Health Organization (WHO) that was used to immunize people in less developed countries against tetanus. In reality, WHO researchers had conjugated the tetanus toxoid (TT) with human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG). This combination, when administered to a woman, results in the immune system attacking the pregnancy hormones. This led to two possible scenarios when administered to women. If the woman was pregnant, she would lose her baby. If she was not pregnant, she would become infertile. In 2014, it was found that this kind of “birth-control vaccine” was being used in Kenya. Although the WHO denied it, three accredited independent biochemistry laboratories in Nairobi tested samples from the vials of the WHO’s tetanus vaccine and found hCG was present when it should not have been. This was quite possibly an attempt at depopulation, something which seems to be on the cards again now.

Already, there are issues with the COVID-19 vaccine. For example, two UK nurses who received it within the first 24 hours of it being made public developed significant allergic reactions. As a result, the public were warned against getting the vaccine if they suffered from severe allergies. Yet this may only be one of the milder adverse effects of the vaccine. There were also four cases of Bell’s Palsy. The FDA have written up a “draft working list of possible adverse event outcomes” of the COVID-19 vaccines. These include: Guillain-Barré syndrome (which causes paralysis), acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, transverse myelitis, encephalitis, myelitis, encephalomyelitis, meningoencephalitis, meningitis, encephalopathy, convulsions, seizures, stroke, narcolepsy, cataplexy, anaphylaxis, acute myocardial infarction, myocarditis, pericarditis, autoimmune disease, other acute demyelinating disease, non-anaphylactic allergic reactions, thrombocytopenia, disseminated intravascular coagulation, venous thromboembolism, arthritis and arthralgia/joint pain, Kawasaki disease, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, pregnancy and birth outcomes, vaccine enhanced diseases, and death.

That is a lot of possible adverse outcomes for a vaccine that is supposed to be the world’s saving grace. Those adverse effects are no walk in the park either. Paralysis, heart attack, brain diseases, autoimmune diseases, problems with blood clots; all of these can have life-changing consequences and can even result in death. And then there are the pregnancy and birth outcomes. Already it has been made known that the vaccine may leak through when breastfeeding, and that it may have an effect on fertility. Keep in mind the WHO have done this before. And isn’t it interesting that those who have for years said that the world is overpopulated are now claiming they have a vaccine to save everyone from a virus that has been overhyped by governments, media, and “experts” and has a 99.9% recovery rate? Surely that raises skepticism in any rational human being.

Here are the other important things you need to know about the vaccine (and this is where I’m glad I studied biology). It uses MRC-5, which is code for the cells of an aborted foetus. This creates a significant moral dilemma for those who are against abortion, of which there are many. The Pfizer vaccine, which is already being distributed and administered to the public in the UK and is set to roll out in Canada within the week, also uses modified mRNA (messenger ribonucleic acid). RNA is complimentary to DNA. Messenger RNA, or mRNA, is a single stranded molecule of RNA which corresponds to the genetic sequence of a gene, read by a ribosome (a particle consisting of RNA and associated proteins found in large numbers in the cytoplasm of living cells) in the process of synthesizing a protein. Now mRNA can be encoded to create certain proteins, and thus in the case of the vaccine, the mRNA to be injected into people would be modified for the purpose of creating an immune response to COVID-19. However, just as mRNA can be modified for good, it can also be modified for malicious purposes. Some vaccines are even exploring the use of DNA, which is concerning, given either of these could result in changes to the genetic makeup of the human body, in turn amounting to any number of health problems, from mutations resulting in cancers to autoimmune diseases. Playing around with genetic material is a dangerous game.

Just to cap it off, there were 6 deaths in Pfizer’s late-stage trial of their vaccine. This was revealed just hours before the vaccine began being administered to members of the public in the UK. Four of these were on the placebo (control), but 2 were given the complete vaccine. The deaths are conveniently being blames on obesity and heart problems. What is interesting is that when it comes to COVID-19 itself, deaths are recorded as COVID deaths even when the patient had another condition that was responsible for their death (eg. Heart problems, cancer, obesity, Alzheimer’s, etc.), which are conveniently ignored. Thereby, it is highly likely that the COVID-19 death tolls are greatly inflated. But when it comes to deaths that are likely attributable to the vaccine, suddenly prior conditions are recognized again. It is highly suspect. Even the testing is off. PCR test kits being used can easily give false positives, so much so that the numbers pertaining to COVID-19 cases are also greatly inflated. This is, of course, to instill fear in the population, so that they will become more subservient to governments and elites.

The vaccine is taken in two shots, spread about 21 days apart, and only provides immunity for around six months. Yet those who get it can still contract the virus and transmit it. And even with the vaccine we are still being told to wear masks and social distance. If the vaccine truly worked well, and was as effective as it has been made out to be, why would these measures still be necessary after distributing it? It doesn’t add up.

So why would any reasonable, rational individual get a vaccine that is 95% effective against COVID-19 when the recovery rate without the vaccine is 99.9%? Why would you get a vaccine that can cause a multitude of debilitating and/or deadly health issues that could either kill you or leave you with a significantly reduced quality of life? Why would anyone who wants to have a family and kids allow a substance to be injected into them that could take away their very ability to do just that? Here is the short answer, they wouldn’t.

Many are already opposed to the vaccine, and with good reason. Many of us who oppose it are labelled as anti-vaxxers or the like. I have been labelled as such myself. Yet I have personally had many vaccines throughout my life thus far. Tetanus shots, annual flu shots, all the meningococcal vaccines, the list goes on. Immunization is important, and I am generally not opposed to it at all. But in the case of the COVID-19 vaccine, I’m concerned, and personally, I would rather wait 5-10 years to see if any adverse effects begin to show (that is how long it can take for some of the health conditions to occur, as it did in the case of the thalidomide epidemic). I would rather not put a rushed vaccine into my body and risk my own health and my future children.

The “cure” may just be worse than the disease.