bidenguns

KrisAnne Hall Radio Show

/in /by

KrisAnne speaks with the AUTHORITY and EXPERIENCE that many other hosts simply DO NOT HAVE. This Constitutional attorney with grassroots principles and bulldog tenacity will expose the attacks on Liberty being perpetrated by the government on both sides of the isle. Listen as she and her guests give SOLUTIONS and DIRECTIONS for restoring America and for saving our children from tyranny and bondage.

The KrisAnne Hall Show will give it to you straight. A scholar of the founders writings, a gifted teacher and a mother who is fighting mad, KrisAnne cuts through the bull and puts the truth on the bottom shelf. You will find out exactly what our founders wanted for us and exactly how we get it back.

You will not get this anywhere else. Not just talk. Not just complaints. No spin. As many in the grassroots movement all over the country already know, KrisAnne pulls no punches and is loyal to principles not parties. Not afraid to call out our celebrity politicians and point out tyrants wherever they are found. Listen and be armed with the truth, be empowered and learn how to FIGHT LIKE A GIRL!

Listen to the KrisAnne Hall Show Weekdays at 11:00 AM Eastern

Why We Must Celebrate July 2nd- America’s True Independence Day

/in /by

Why We Must Celebrate July 2nd– America’s True Independence Day
by KrisAnne Hall, JD

Most Americans mark July 4th as our nation’s birthday. But here’s a truth you likely weren’t taught in school:

  • America’s actual Independence Day is July 2nd – and the founders knew it.

It wasn’t the Declaration of Independence that created our freedom. It was our freedom that gave rise to the Declaration. And that freedom was made official on July 2, 1776, with the ratification of the Lee Resolution.

  • The Forgotten Resolution That Created a Nation

On June 7, 1776, Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee introduced a resolution to the Continental Congress. It was a bold, three-part legislative act declaring that the colonies were no longer subject to the British Crown:

“That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States…”

For nearly a month, this proposal was hotly debated. Then, on July 2, twelve of the thirteen colonies voted to ratify it (New York abstained, pending direction from their constituents). At that moment, the colonies legally became free and independent States.

There was no fireworks show. No flashy parchment. Just a clear legislative act—binding, final, and irrevocable.

Our independence was not a poetic flourish; it was a constitutional reality.

  • The Declaration Was Not the Cause – It Was the Announcement

Two days later, on July 4, the Declaration of Independence was approved, not signed, in order to publish and proclaim what had already happened:

“We… solemnly PUBLISH and DECLARE, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States…”

It even echoed the exact words of the Lee Resolution.

  • John Adams Knew the Truth

One day after the vote, on July 3, John Adams wrote to his wife, Abigail:

“I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more.”

Adams didn’t get the date wrong. He got the history right.

The Fourth only became a national holiday in 1870, almost a century later.

  • Why “Independence Day” Matters – Not Just “The Fourth of July”

It’s important that we don’t just call this holiday “the Fourth of July.” That’s just a date—and every country that uses the Roman calendar has a July 4th.

But only one country has our Independence Day.

Only one nation declared to the world that its people were not subjects of a king, but free by the laws of nature and of nature’s God. Only one nation formed a union of sovereign states based on liberty, not bloodlines or tyrants.

When we reduce it to a date, we detach from its meaning.
When we say “Independence Day,” we declare to the world and remind ourselves:

This was the day we chose liberty over submission.
This was the day we became a nation of self-governing people.
This is our deliverance day.

Let’s not forget what we’re really celebrating.

  • Why We Must Celebrate – Now More Than Ever

Today, some argue that we shouldn’t celebrate Independence Day at all. Some claim it’s a racist holiday. Others say we’ve lost too much liberty to celebrate what we no longer possess.

But here are three powerful reasons why we must celebrate—loudly, proudly, and truthfully:

  1. Because Truth Must Defeat the Lies

America’s founding has been smeared with false claims of racism and oppression. But the facts speak otherwise. The founders knew slavery was a moral stain and worked through compromise to keep the union together long enough to see it destroyed. The idea that America was “built on racism” is historically and intellectually dishonest.

📖 Read the historical truth about slavery and the Constitution

If we abandon this celebration, the lies go unchallenged, and unchallenged lies become accepted truth.

  1. Because We Must Remember What We’ve Lost

Yes, government overreach is real. Yes, much of the liberty we were gifted has eroded. But if we stop honoring that gift, how will the next generation even know it existed?

We didn’t go to war over tea. We went to war because we were done being ruled. Our founders had the courage to throw off kings. If they did it, we can do it again.

📖 Read the history: “Tyrannized Enough?”

  1. Because Their Sacrifice Deserves Our Honor

The signers of the Declaration—and the framers of the Lee Resolution—pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor. Many lost everything. Their bravery demands more than apathy. It deserves commemoration.

This holiday isn’t about how we feel about today’s government. It’s about who we were created to be.

  • Even Frederick Douglass Celebrated our Independence!

In 1852, Frederick Douglass, a freed slave and brilliant abolitionist, said this:

“The 4th of July is the first great fact in your nation’s history, the very ring-bolt in the chain of your yet undeveloped destiny…
The principles contained in that instrument are saving principles.
Stand by those principles, be true to them on all occasions, in all places, against all foes, and at whatever cost.”

Let that sink in. A man born into slavery, who fought tirelessly to end it, honored our Independence because he believed in the principles it proclaimed. — So should we.

  • So Today—Celebrate Boldly

The loss of liberty didn’t happen overnight. And we won’t reclaim it overnight either. But we begin by remembering.

We remember that we were once free by law, declared free by the authority of the people.

We remember that our rights come from God, not government.

And we remember that our union was not built by bureaucrats—but by bold men who put everything on the line for Liberty First.

So today, light the bonfires, ring the bells, teach your children, tell the truth, and laugh in the face of tyranny.

Because no other nation on earth has the potential for greatness like These United States of America.

  • Ready to Reclaim What Was Fought For?

If reading this stirred something in you—if you felt that spark of gratitude, that righteous resolve, don’t let it fade when the fireworks end.

Liberty was never meant to be inherited passively. It must be studied, understood, and defended, generation by generation.

That’s why we created the Constitutional Deep Dive series at LibertyFirstSociety.com—to take you step-by-step through the Constitution as it was intended, with the real history, real words of the founders, and real solutions for today.

Whether you’re a student, a parent, a pastor, or just a patriot hungry for truth—this course is for you.

Discover the power you already have as an American.
Learn the truth they never taught you in school.
Reclaim your role in preserving our Republic.

This Independence Day, don’t just celebrate our liberty—train to preserve it.

 Visit LibertyFirstSociety.com and start your Constitutional Deep Dive today.

Because if we don’t know what we had, we won’t even recognize when it’s gone.

Happy Independence Day.

TSA and Global PreCheck: A Legal Memorandum

/in /by

I recently appeared as a guest on Victory News, where I was asked to comment on a post I made on X (https://x.com/RealKahall/status/1926287781279506713) and Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/reel/DKCmTUiOyUk/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link) concerning the serious privacy and fundamental rights implications that arise when individuals sign up for TSA PreCheck or Global Entry.

These videos quickly went viral—prompting SNOPES to contact me directly to verify the accuracy of my statements.

In response, I provided SNOPES with a detailed legal memorandum, thoroughly substantiating every claim I made.

I am sharing that memorandum with you now, in the event SNOPES does not update their current post labeling my statements as “not verified.”

They are, in fact, verified.
And the memorandum I submitted proves it.

If you signed up for TSA or Global PreCheck and you want to try to withdraw your consent, please go to my letter posted to send to DHS putting them on notice you no longer consent to their access to your records: https://www.krisannehall.com/2024/10/01/tsa-precheck/

If you want to listen to the podcast I did on this subject: https://www.krisannehall.com/episode/how-tsa-precheck-violates-rights/

Legal Memorandum

To: Laerke Christensen, Snopes.com
From: KrisAnne Hall, JD
Date: June 17, 2025
Re: Legal Analysis of the Department of Homeland Security’s Discretionary Authority in Security Threat Assessments (STAs) and their application to Trusted Traveler Programs

  1. Introduction

This memorandum provides a legal analysis of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) and Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) Security Threat Assessment (STA) procedures, with a focus on the scope of discretionary authority, standards used to determine “national security concerns,” and the due process implications for affected individuals. This memorandum concludes that the statutory and regulatory framework governing STAs confers broad, subjective, and arguably arbitrary power to federal agencies, often without meaningful oversight or remedy.

The cornerstone of DHS and TSA’s authority to conduct Security Threat Assessments lies in the applicant’s consent: by applying, the individual expressly authorizes DHS, TSA, and any affiliated agency to access any record—public or private—that they may deem relevant under the broad and discretionary banner of national security.  Although DHS or TSA may claim they do not routinely review private records or digital activity, they do not deny that they possess the legal authority to do so at any time, for any reason they deem “reasonable” or “necessary” once consent is given…and there is no oversight to prevent absolute arbitrary application of their authority.

  1. Background and Statutory Authority

TSA and DHS conduct Security Threat Assessments as required by various credentialing and access programs, including:

  • Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC)
  • Hazardous Materials Endorsement (HME)
  • Aviation Security Identification Display Area (SIDA) credentials
  • TSA PreCheck
  • Global Entry (via U.S. Customs and Border Protection)

Primary statutory authorities include:

  • 49 U.S.C. § 114(f): Grants TSA authority to assess threats to transportation security.
  • Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.): Establishes DHS and its broad powers over national security functions.
  • 49 CFR Part 1572: Details the regulations for conducting STAs.

Each recipient of the above listed credentials is required to submit an application that includes giving TSA through DHS consent for broad and discretionary authority to conduct a STA to determine if applicant qualifies for said credentials.

TSA may determine that an applicant poses a security threat based on the analyses outlined in 49 CFR § 1572.107. Furthermore, TSA may deny, revoke, or invalidate credentials if it determines the applicant poses a “threat to transportation security, national security, or terrorism.” (See 49 CFR § 1572.5(b))

This standard is not based on the legal doctrine of ‘reasonable suspicion’ as understood in criminal law, but instead reflects a highly discretionary and subjective judgment by DHS or TSA individual personnel. Credential denials may be based on arrests, indictments, associations, unverified intelligence, or even completely arbitrary and fully discretionary judgement of DHS or TSA personnel—and is not limited to criminal convictions.

III. Breadth of Discretionary Authority

The DHS and TSA are not required to seek additional consent beyond the initial application once a national security interest is asserted. This is based on:

  • Initial consent agreements embedded in STA applications, which permit broad investigative access.
  • Privacy Act of 1974 exceptions, particularly for:
    • Law enforcement purposes (5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(7))
    • National security uses (routine use exemptions)

Although DHS or TSA may publicly state that they do not routinely access individuals’ banking records, medical files, online activity, or any other privately held information the agencies retain broad discretionary authority to do so at any time. If DHS or TSA decides that such access is “reasonable” for a national security concern, they may proceed without any further notice to the individual and without judicial or independent oversight. This authority extends to:

  • Financial and banking data
  • Medical and psychological records
  • Social media and internet activity
  1. The Subjectivity of “National Security Concern”

The definition of a “national security concern” is not statutorily fixed and is often interpreted through:

  • Internal agency policy
  • Interagency intelligence assessments
  • Discretionary judgment by TSA adjudicators

Terms like “may pose a threat” and “suspicion” are inherently vague and fall below traditional legal standards such as “preponderance of the evidence” or “probable cause.”

Because of this:

  • TSA may deny credentials based on classified or undisclosed evidence.
  • Affected individuals cannot confront or challenge the full scope of the allegations.

Courts have shown extreme deference to agency determinations involving national security (see Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988)), leaving little opportunity for judicial remedy.

  1. Extension to TSA PreCheck and Global Entry Programs

TSA PreCheck and Global Entry are DHS Trusted Traveler Programs that also require a Security Threat Assessment.

TSA PreCheck:

  • Administered by TSA directly.
  • Requires identity verification, criminal background check, immigration status verification, and terrorist watchlist screening.
  • Authorized under 49 U.S.C. § 114(f) and implemented through TSA vetting policies.

Global Entry:

  • Administered by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
  • Includes checks for criminal history, immigration violations, customs offenses, travel patterns, and public source information.
  • Governed by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 and CBP’s internal vetting procedures.

In both programs, DHS may deny access based on vague or discretionary criteria such as:

  • Arrests without convictions
  • Travel history
  • Online or social media behavior
  • Association with individuals under suspicion
  • Agency’s undefined determination of potential threat

Individuals denied participation may receive limited explanation and may not be entitled to full review if the denial is based on classified or sensitive security information.

  1. Patriot Act-Based Surveillance and Notice Exemptions

Although DHS or TSA is not required to seek a warrant once consent is given as part of the STA process, even if they do seek a warrant to obtain records related to medical care, financial transactions, phone or internet use, or other sensitive information, these warrants do not require notice to the subject. Under the USA PATRIOT Act.

  • Federal warrants under the Patriot Act, (called “Sneak and Peak” warrants) are granted in secret and their content is sealed and disclosure of the warrant to the subject “delayed” if it is a matter of national security.
  • National Security Letters: issued by the FBI (or other authorized agencies) without prior judicial approval, typically under:
    • 18 U.S.C. 2709 (for electronic communications and subscriber info)
    • 12 U.S.C. 3414 (for financial institutions)
    • 15 U.S.C. 1681u, 1681v (for credit reports)
  • Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a judge can order a warrant and its supporting materials to be sealed if disclosure would:
    • Jeopardize an ongoing investigation, or
    • Compromise national security
  • The subject of the investigation is not notified, and no adversarial hearing is conducted.
  • Warrants are served on third-party record holders (e.g., banks, ISPs, telecom providers), not the individual.
  • These third parties are typically bound by gag orders that prohibit them from informing the subject of the search.

This process allows DHS or its components to access highly personal data without any opportunity for the individual to challenge or even be aware of the surveillance.

VII. Real-World Consequences

  • Employment Loss: Individuals denied STAs are often terminated from jobs in transportation, aviation, or logistics sectors.
  • No Meaningful Appeal: TSA appeals or waiver procedures are limited and often rely on secret evidence.
  • Stigmatization: The label of “security risk” can damage professional and personal reputations.
  • Chilling Effect: Individuals may self-censor or avoid constitutionally protected activities (such as political speech) for fear of appearing suspicious.

VIII. Bottom Line

The current STA framework grants DHS and TSA expansive, largely unchecked power to define and act upon “national security concerns” with little transparency, no clear standards, and minimal accountability. The initial consent given by applicants opens the door to continuous and intrusive investigation, often without the individual knowing the full extent of the review.

Although DHS or TSA may claim they do not routinely review private records or digital activity, they do not deny that they possess the legal authority to do so at any time, for any reason they deem “reasonable” once consent is given.  This power may be exercised through internal procedures or through PATRIOT Act-based warrants, both of which are shielded from public oversight and judicial challenge.

The combination of vague standards, reliance on discretionary interpretation, and the cloak of national security has led to a system that can border on arbitrary enforcement, with limited constitutional safeguards.

 

  1. Sources
  • TSA STA Regulations
  • TSA TWIC Privacy Impact Assessment
  • 49 U.S.C. 114
  • Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988)
  • Privacy Act of 1974
  • 50 U.S.C. 1805
  • 50 U.S.C. 1861
  • ODNI FISA Summary
  • USA FREEDOM Act
  • USA PATRIOT Act
  • 8 U.S.C. 2709
  • 12 U.S.C. 3414
  • 15 U.S.C. 1681u, 1681v
  • Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 41

art supreme court

Beyond the Headlines: What Trump v. J.G.G. and A.A.R.P. v. Trump Really Mean for America

/in /by

by KrisAnne Hall, JD

In the recent Supreme Court Opinions surrounding the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act, the Supreme Court has sent a powerful and unified message—even amid its internal disagreements: the federal government is not above the Constitution or the rule of law. In both Trump v. J.G.G. and A.A.R.P. v. Trump, the Justices, including those often seen on opposite ends of the judicial spectrum, made one thing clear—due process is not optional, even in matters of national security.

The differences between the Justices are real—but they are not rooted in the principle of whether due process must be upheld. Rather, the disagreement lies in the mechanisms and timing of enforcement. Justice Alito, though dissenting in the emergency stay issued in A.A.R.P., joined the majority in J.G.G., affirming that individuals facing deportation are entitled to meaningful notice and the ability to challenge their removal through habeas corpus. Despite their differences, the majority of the Court agreed on a foundational truth: the federal government must respect and submit to the rule of law.

Yet in the court of public opinion, a troubling argument continues to echo—“But what about the victims?” It’s the idea that certain individuals—because of their group identity, immigration status, or mere proximity to wrongdoing—can or should be denied due process simply because others who look like them or followed the same path have broken the law. This line of reasoning is not justice—it’s guilt by association.  That is not Liberty, that is Marxist-communism.

We’ve seen this rationale before—always cloaked in urgency, always ending in tragedy.

  • During World War II, Japanese Americans were forced into internment camps without evidence of wrongdoing, without trial, and without basic legal protections—simply because others of their ancestry were deemed a threat.

  • In Dred Scott v. Sandford, the Court infamously ruled that Black Americans had no legal standing, no right to due process—not because of their actions, but because of who they were.

In both cases, the government denied due process by deciding who was and wasn’t “deserving” of legal protection.

We are watching it happen again in our time. Many Americans arrested in connection with January 6, 2021, have been held without trial for extended periods, denied bail, subjected to pretrial punishment, and in some cases, prosecuted not for violence, but for association. Regardless of what one believes about that day, we must not overlook the rule of law simply because we dislike the accused. The same system that denies one man a fair trial today can deny you one tomorrow.

Denying rights based on the misconduct of others turns justice into a tool of power, not a protection of liberty. It grants government the dangerous authority to judge not by evidence, but by assumption. The Constitution was not designed to be convenient—it was designed to restrain government, even when it feels inconvenient.

This is not a question of partisanship. It is a question of principle. The Constitution is a contract that binds the government, and when due process becomes a privilege granted by the federal government instead of a right guaranteed to the people, Liberty is no longer secure for anyone.

It’s easy to defend the rights of those we agree with. But the real test of Liberty is whether we’ll defend the rule of law for those we fear or dislike. As one Socratic question reminds us: Can we really say we have Liberty if the government decides who does and doesn’t get due process?

The Court has spoken—not with one voice, but with one conviction: the rule of law stands above the rule of men. The American people must be just as resolute. Because if we wait to defend due process until it’s our turn to need it, it may already be gone.

KrisAnneHall.com 2025

The Shot Heard Round the World: It Was Never About Taxes

/in /by

by KrisAnne Hall, JD

Today marks 250 years since the Shot Heard Round the World. On the morning of April 19, 1775, British troops—acting under orders to disarm the people—marched on Lexington and Concord. But they met resistance. Not from armies, but from fathers, farmers, pastors, and merchants who refused to surrender the one thing they could not live without: Liberty.

The Battle of Lexington was not provoked by a tax dispute. It was provoked by tyranny. The British had already passed a series of laws—the Coercive Acts, the Stamp Act, the Tea Act—each of which was just one symptom of a larger disease: the assumption of unlimited power by a distant government and the erosion of the people’s right to self-govern.

Let us be very clear: the founders were not incited to revolution over pennies. They were incited to action because their fundamental rights as Englishmen were violated. What the colonists faced then is what we are facing now—not excessive taxation, but lawless government power. Not the loss of comfort, but the loss of conscience, self-determination, and truth.

“If Taxes are laid upon us in any shape without our having a legal Representation… are we not reduced from the Character of free Subjects to the miserable State of tributary Slaves?”
— Samuel Adams, May 15, 1764

But Adams didn’t stop there. He made plain what was truly at stake—not money, but the eternal, unalienable rights of every person:

“Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature.”
— Samuel Adams, Nov. 20, 1772

Was it the money that caused our founders to demand independence? No. It was the erosion of Liberty. The violation of sound principles of government. One quick look at the Declaration of Independence will tell the tale:

“When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another… a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”
— Declaration of Independence

It was not about tax—it was about tyranny. It was the King consolidating all power, coercing Parliament, eliminating representative government, and ruling by fiat. It was the breakdown of the balance of powers. And when one man governs all, Liberty dies.

How does that compare to the government we see today?

Just as King George trampled the people’s rights through legislative manipulation and executive domination, America now has a Congress that is unwilling to fulfill its solemn oath to support and defend the Constitution. They invent crisis after crisis to deceive the people into believing that more government power and limitless spending are necessary.

“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”
— William Pitt the Younger, 1783

Our Congress shirks responsibility, evades accountability, and expands its own reach while failing to act with “manly firmness” as the Declaration demanded. The result? A Congress that has become the very tyrant our forefathers warned about—and a people slipping into the psyche of servitude.

“He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant… for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.”
“He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.”
“He has suspended our own Legislatures, and declared themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.”
— Declaration of Independence

America now has a Congress refusing to protect the people. One of the few legitimate powers delegated to the federal government is to provide for the common defense—yet they refuse to secure the border or address foreign and domestic threats. Instead, they use those threats as justification to limit our Liberty.

“He has refused for a long time… to cause others to be elected… the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.”
— Declaration of Independence

Time and again, hearings expose irrefutable evidence of lawlessness among government agents, yet nothing is done. No one is held accountable. The rule of law is replaced with the rule of political convenience.

“He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.”
— Declaration of Independence

Just as the King sent “swarms of officers” to harass the colonists, our federal government still operate with multiple regulatory agencies and task forces, who issue binding rules without legislative authority or accountability.

“He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.”
— Declaration of Independence

From the EPA ignoring due process to the prosecution of Americans under foreign regulatory laws—as in the case of Abner Schoenwetter—the parallels are undeniable.

“He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution… giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation.”
— Declaration of Independence

Trial by jury is increasingly denied or diluted through laws like the Patriot Act, NDAA, and Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. Due process is sacrificed on the altar of national security theater.

“For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury… For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences.”
— Declaration of Independence

And the rise of militarized federal agencies—immune from accountability and independent of civil control—would horrify our founders.

“He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.”
— Declaration of Independence

The truth is clear: our federal government has strayed far from its constitutional moorings. The very abuses that compelled our founders to separate from Britain are once again embedded in American governance. Our founders did not wait for the abuse to become total—neither should we.

“In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.”
— Declaration of Independence

A Call to Action

There is a growing number of Americans who feel we have been ignored too long. Tired of being silent while the liberties of our children are sacrificed at the altar of political pragmatism. But the courage to overcome that silence is growing. And when the need for true liberty and real self-governance overrides the desire for comfort, the people will recover their God-given rights from the clutches of a legislative body focused only upon power, personal wealth, and control. Then we will not quit until the task is complete. We will be resolved to give our last breath in the defense of Liberty.

It is time, America, to put Liberty FIRST.
It is time, America, to reclaim what truly makes America Great and what our founders sacrificed all to give to us.

“If ye love wealth better than liberty… may your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
— Samuel Adams

Do we want Liberty or do we want slavery? The choice is just that simple—because it has never been about the money. It has always been about the principle. About the truth. About the right of every person to be free.

Learn the Truth. Share the Truth. Live the Truth.

If this message stirs your heart, don’t let it end here. Share this truth with your family, your friends, and your community. Teach your children the real history—not the edited textbooks, but the truth that Liberty is a gift from God and a responsibility of the people. Visit LibertyFirstSociety.com to dive deeper into these truths, take our constitutional training courses, and equip yourself to stand boldly in defense of Liberty—just as our founders did 250 years ago.

Let the echo of that first shot in Lexington be heard in our generation—not through violence, but through knowledge, courage, and unwavering dedication to the cause of Liberty.

“Charting the Course for Liberty in the New Year”

/in /by

“Charting the Course for Liberty in the New Year”
By KrisAnne Hall, JD

As we begin this new year, let us light the flame of Liberty in our hearts and face the challenges ahead with courage and determination. These are not ordinary times—they are moments that call for greatness, for standing firm, and for fighting for the liberty that is our birthright. We carry a legacy built on sacrifice and resolve, and it is our duty to protect it with everything we have.
Mercy Otis Warren, one of the most respected founding women of America, reminds us how much strength is needed for such a cause: “I have my fears. Yet, notwithstanding the complicated difficulties that rise before us, there is no receding; and I should blush if in any instance the weak passions of my sex should damp the fortitude, the patriotism, and the manly resolution of yours.” Her bravery shows us that fear must not hold us back from fully committing to protect liberty. What we do now will echo for generations.

Liberty is no ordinary treasure; it is the foundation of everything we hold dear. The founders knew this and stood strong against tyranny even when the odds were against them. “The harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph,” wrote Thomas Paine. Their sacrifices remind us that the rewards of freedom are worth every effort, and we must face our challenges with the same spirit.

Liberty is not something we simply inherit; it is a responsibility we must act on, as Samuel Adams told us. “The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks,” he said. We must guard liberty as fiercely as a parent protects their child, because without it, everything else falls apart.

Liberty is not a gift to be taken for granted; it is a treasure, gifted to us by the Author of that Liberty and it must be fiercely protected. Benjamin Franklin once said, “I have lived, Sir, a long time and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth — that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without [H]is notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without [H]is aid?” These words remind us that the liberty we cherish is not only a human endeavor but one underpinned by divine providence. Every generation has the responsibility to safeguard this jewel with care and resolve. When liberty is threatened, we cannot stand by. We must face the threat head-on, because once freedom is lost, it is nearly impossible to regain.

Joseph Warren’s words challenge us even today: “Our country is in danger, but not to be despaired of. On you depend the fortunes of America. You are to decide the important question, on which rests the happiness and liberty of millions yet unborn. Act worthy of yourselves.” His message reminds us of the weight of our responsibility and the honor of our cause.

Great challenges make great people, as Abigail Adams wisely said. “These are the times in which a genius would wish to live. It is not in the still calm of life, or the repose of a pacific station, that great characters are formed. The habits of a vigorous mind are formed in contending with difficulties,” she declared. Her words inspire us to see hard times not as burdens but as chances to grow stronger and more committed.

But we cannot rely on elected officials to save America for us. The founders did not fight for liberty so that we could hand over its defense to others. They showed us how to be the leaders our country needs by standing firm in their beliefs and taking action. Liberty will only survive through our own courage and leadership.

Let us look to the founders, who believed that liberty was worth every hardship. “Let us contemplate our forefathers, and posterity, and resolve to maintain the rights bequeathed to us from the former, for the sake of the latter,” said Samuel Adams. “Instead of sitting down satisfied with small efforts, let us elevate our minds to the dignity of that glorious cause to which we are engaged.”

As we move into this year, let us reject mediocrity and complacency. Let us rise to meet the moment, drawing strength from the sacrifices of those before us and committing to a future of freedom and justice. The fight for liberty is not something of the past; it is a living, breathing mission that demands all our effort. Stand firm. Lead by example. Inspire others to join the cause. Together, we can keep the torch of liberty burning bright for generations to come.

Radio Program, Run to Win

/in /by

Join us on Dec. 27th at 4 PM ET on Run To Win’s weekday radio program, where KrisAnne will have a conversation with Janice Daniels, former Mayor of Troy. Don’t miss this engaging discussion!

Rugged Resilience

/in /by
Read more

Defending Home

/in , /by
Read more