Wayback Machine Reveals Last Known Status of Georgia Republican Party, “Before the Corporation”

When I was a kid, there was a clever car­toon series enti­tled,Mr. Peabodys Improb­a­ble His­to­ry.Mr. Peabody, an eru­dite car­toon canine, had a boy named Sher­man, revers­ing the roles one might nor­mal­ly expect, the two effec­tive­ly becom­ing, a dog and his boy.

Mr. Peabody was a self-pro­claimed aver­age genius, a pup­py prodi­gy he would tout. At age 3 (15 to 18 in human years), Mr. Peabody received his car­toon wagna-cum laude degree from Har­vard, spoke eight lan­guages flu­ent­ly, all at once, per­formed secret gov­ern­ment research, and made a for­tune on the stock mar­ket becom­ing known as the Wolf of Wall Street. One day, Mr. Peabody res­cued a boy, Sher­man, who he found in an alley attacked by oth­er stray boys, even­tu­al­ly adopt­ing Sher­man as one might a pet. Need­less to say, Sher­man had much to learn, being the boy of Mr. Peabody, and Mr. Peabody suf­fered Sher­mans lack of brain capac­i­ty, how­ev­er eager dis­po­si­tion, attempt­ing to teach his pet boy all he would need to know to suc­ceed in the world. After all, I sup­pose, dogs dont live as long as boys.

As the premise devel­ops, not­ing that boys need room to play, liv­ing in an apart­ment only large enough for one dog-genius, Mr. Peabody invent­ed a machine which would allow Sher­man to get his exer­cise and teach his young pet boy valu­able knowl­edge of his­to­ry at the same time. Mr. Peabody called it, the Way­back Machine. The Way­back Machine could trans­fer the two back to any pre­vi­ous moment and place in his­to­ry, at which time Sher­man could get his exer­cise while wit­ness­ing his­tor­i­cal events as they occurred. And because Mr. Peabody was a dog teach­ing his­to­ry to chil­dren, rather than an adult, each car­toon was much more enter­tain­ing than it would be oth­er­wise, an attribute which helped to devel­op and main­tain child­hood inter­est in learn­ing his­to­ry.

Cartoon Series Inspires the Name of a Powerful Internet Research Tool

Now, I told you about Mr. Peabody and Sher­man as a sort of segue for you to under­stand from where some of the fol­low­ing infor­ma­tion derives. It comes from the Inter­nets Way­back Machine, obvi­ous­ly a take-off on the car­toon. Im no author­i­ty on how it works, no more than Sher­man would be, but, if one desires to find rem­nants, or copies, in whole or in part, of pre­vi­ous Inter­net pages, dat­ing back many years, the place to go would be theInter­net Archive Way­back Machineweb­site. One might not find exact­ly what one is look­ing for, but then again, one might.

Recent­ly, fel­low researcher, Sarah Thomp­son, ven­tured to the Way­back Machine web­site where she dis­cov­ered cer­tain pages relat­ing to sub­jects I have broached in the past. The infor­ma­tion she uncov­ered pro­vides valu­able insight with respect to a false pre­tense main­tained by cer­tain exec­u­tive offi­cers of the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty (such as it is), that through some process or pro­ce­dure pre­scribednowhere in law, the Geor­gia par­ty of Lin­coln some­how incor­po­rat­ed itself. I have dis­cussed this sub­ject many times, that no one is at lib­er­ty to incor­po­rate ones self. As they say, to incor­po­rate ones self is not a thing. There is no way to accom­plish such a feat, no process, no pro­ce­dure, no forms to fill out, no fee to pay, etc. It can­not be done. To illus­trate this, lets say I drop in on the Geor­gia Sec­re­tary of States web­site, and fol­low the process of cre­at­ing a Geor­gia cor­po­ra­tion by the name of Hank Sul­li­van, Inc. Accom­plish­ing that goal does not mean that I, Hank Sul­li­van, a liv­ing, breath­ing indi­vid­ual, a nat­ur­al per­son, born of a nat­ur­al moth­er, simul­ta­ne­ous­ly adopt the iden­ti­ty of a cor­po­ra­tion I cre­ate sim­ply by using my name, a cor­po­ra­tion in exis­tence sole­ly by virtue of cer­tain acts by the Geor­gia Leg­is­la­ture and my check­ing a few box­es on a web­site. No, I would still be me, and only me, a legal per­son, my iden­ti­ty ful­ly intact. The prod­uct I cre­ate with the help of the Sec­re­tary of States web­site would be a cor­po­ra­tion, an enti­ty sep­a­rate and dis­tinct from myself. Where­as I could nev­er sell myself, at least not these days, I could indeed sell Hank Sul­li­van, Inc. should I, as its own­er and a will­ing pur­chas­er agree to a price.

And the same truth is applic­a­ble to legal enti­ties cre­at­ed under dif­fer­ent codes of law. One legal enti­ty, a cor­po­ra­tion for exam­ple, in exis­tence sole­ly due to pro­vi­sions in law found in Title 14 of the Geor­gia Code, can nev­er skip or morph across code titles and become an enti­ty exist­ing by virtue of pro­vi­sions of a dif­fer­ent Geor­gia code title, such as Title 21. There is no pro­ce­dure in law to do that. Title 14 gov­erns the cre­ation and reg­u­la­tion of CORPORATIONS. Title 21 gov­erns the cre­ation and reg­u­la­tion of ELECTIONS and POLITICAL PARTIES. Those two Geor­gia code titles, have dif­fer­ent require­ments, dif­fer­ent pur­pos­es, and dif­fer­ent out­comes. They are like apples ver­sus oranges. Can an apple become an orange? I dont have to answer that for most of you, but in case some of the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty exec­u­tives are read­ing this and find them­selves puz­zled by the ques­tion, the answer is NO, an apple can­not become an orange. An apple can­not even evolve and become an orange. And nei­ther can a cor­po­ra­tion defined under Title 14 evolve and become a polit­i­cal par­ty as defined under Title 21. Those require­ments are DIFFERENT. They have dif­fer­ent DNA in law. They are dif­fer­ent col­ors of law. That means those legal enti­ties are DIFFERENT from each oth­er, for­ev­er. They can nev­er come togeth­er and become a sin­gle enti­ty, with a match­ing DNA or col­or of law.

But cer­tain exec­u­tive offi­cers of the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty to whom I refer, elect­ed to their posi­tions by virtue of pro­ceed­ings at the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Con­ven­tion last June, want you to believe that the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty, exist­ing sole­ly via author­i­ties con­veyed many years ago under Title 21, has through some mag­ic not iden­ti­fied or writ­ten in law, meld­ed, or per­haps mor­phed, or evolved into some hybrid ani­mal unde­fined in law, becom­ing one with a cor­po­ra­tion of the same name sim­ply by typ­ing Inc. at the end of the par­ty name in a par­ty rules doc­u­ment, arriv­ing into exis­tence under the aus­pices of Title 14 and Title 21 simul­ta­ne­ous­ly.

Secretary of State Office Cooperating with GRP, Inc. Scam

And all that I describe is appar­ent­ly being orches­trat­ed in con­cert and coop­er­a­tion with the office of Sec­re­tary of State Raf­fensperg­er, whose gen­er­al coun­sel stat­ed her sup­posed belief below thatGRPs cur­rent rules,sat­is­fy thepar­tys fil­ing require­ments under OCGA 21–2‑110 and 111.

Ms. McGowan alludes to the require­ment that, accord­ing to the above ref­er­enced code, a polit­i­cal par­ty must AMEND its reg­is­tra­tion state­ment any time a change in offi­cers, or a change in rules, occurs. That require­ment is laid out in sec­tion 21–2‑110(d) below:

Such a change occurred dur­ing last Junes Repub­li­can State Con­ven­tion.

But, heres the prob­lem. As you will notice, sub­sec­tion (f), refer­ring to sub­sec­tions (a) and (b), requires that a par­ty reg­is­tra­tion state­ment, includeThe names, home address­es, and titles of the per­sons com­pos­ing its gov­ern­ing com­mit­tee and exec­u­tive offi­cers,and it must be filedat least 60 days before any pri­ma­ry or elec­tion at which it shall seek to have can­di­dates on the bal­lot.

Sub­sec­tion (a) also requires sub­mis­sion of cer­ti­fied copies of the par­ty RULES (see below).

Now, if you search the Inter­net for Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty Rules, you will be direct­ed to thegagop.orgweb­site, where you will find apage asso­ci­at­ed with the rulesyou seek. When you click on the link to the RULES page, how­ev­er, you will not find the Rules of the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty, a polit­i­cal par­ty under Title 21 of the Geor­gia Code. Instead you will find the rules of a cor­po­ra­tion by the same name (just add Inc.), which exists under Title 14. As I have shown over and over in past Sub­stacks, GRP and GRP, Inc. are not the same enti­ties and there­fore can­not fall under the same rules doc­u­ment. The rules or bylaws of some cor­po­ra­tion, regard­less its name, do not suf­fice for the rules of a polit­i­cal par­ty, as required under OCGA 21–2‑110, and vice ver­sa.

Thus, when Gen­er­al Coun­sel McGowan writes she believes the receipt of the rules to which I refer sat­is­fy the require­ments of OCGA 21–2‑110, her belief is imme­di­ate­ly called into ques­tion by the fact thatno Geor­gia law empow­ers a cor­po­ra­tion to become a polit­i­cal par­ty, nor a polit­i­cal par­ty to become a cor­po­ra­tion. If you dis­agree, please find the law and put it in the com­ments. All author­i­ties for both enti­ties are PRESCRIBED into law. There are no author­i­ties NOT PRESCRIBED in law. Author­i­ties NOT PRESCRIBED, such as the author­i­ty to morph into a dif­fer­ent type of enti­ty, there­fore DO NOT EXIST. In oth­er words, if Gen­er­al Coun­sel McGowan wrote the above state­ment rely­ing on the cor­po­rate doc­u­ment you see on the gagop.org web­site, she appears to have made a mis­take believ­ing as she por­trays.

Why is any of this impor­tant? It is impor­tant because, should the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty be out of com­pli­ance with the require­ments of OCGA 21–2‑110, that fact could mean that the can­di­dates it places on the bal­lots, not only in the upcom­ing pri­maries, but also the Novem­ber gen­er­al elec­tion, could be dis­qual­i­fied by a court. That is because the Repub­li­can Par­ty, por­tray­ing itself as a cor­po­ra­tion, would not be in com­pli­ance with par­ty reg­is­tra­tion require­ments of 21–2‑110 at least 60 days before any pri­ma­ry or elec­tion at which it shall seek to have can­di­dates on the bal­lot.It also means that the asso­ci­at­ed can­di­dates would have been nom­i­nat­ed by, and under the rules of Title 14 cor­po­ra­tions, rather than Title 21 polit­i­cal par­ties, cor­po­ra­tions not endowed the law­ful right to bal­lot access.

And why is that impor­tant? It is impor­tant because if a polit­i­cal par­ty is not in com­pli­ance, accord­ing to sec­tion (f), the names of its can­di­dates willnot be placed on any nom­i­na­tion peti­tion, bal­lot, or bal­lot label.

And as you can see, time has now slipped to with­in the 60-day time frame with­in which a non-com­pli­ant polit­i­cal par­ty could have its can­di­dates dis­qual­i­fied.

Oh, but accord­ing to for­mer Geor­gia Repub­li­can Chair­man David Shafer every­thing is fine because, as he con­tends, the penal­ty for not main­tain­ing a cur­rent reg­is­tra­tion only per­tains to the orig­i­nal reg­is­tra­tion, as far back as the year 1964.

Is the for­mer Chair­man cor­rect? If he is, then there would be no com­pelling moti­va­tion for any polit­i­cal par­ty to ever get around to main­tain­ing its reg­is­tra­tion state­ment. But think about it even deep­er.An inac­cu­rate par­ty reg­is­tra­tion state­ment is no reg­is­tra­tion state­ment at all.And at best, the ques­tion whether there would be any reper­cus­sion should a polit­i­cal par­ty fall out of com­pli­ance with­in the time frames estab­lished by 21–2‑110, could only be resolved in court after a suit would be filed by an aggriev­ed par­ty, pos­si­bly one ques­tion­ing the out­come of a gen­er­al elec­tion. Why would any respon­si­ble par­ty chair­man, such as present Chair­man McK­oon, neglect the sim­ple duty to main­tain a valid, cur­rent reg­is­tra­tion state­ment know­ing that oppos­ing polit­i­cal par­ties could bring suit to dis­qual­i­fy win­ning Repub­li­can can­di­dates in the Novem­ber elec­tion­in­clud­ing, for exam­ple, Don­ald Trump, should the 45th pres­i­dent become the Repub­li­can nom­i­nee.

Wayback Machine Revelations

And this is where we begin to look at Ms. Sarahs dis­cov­ery in the Inter­net Way­back Machine. In my Octo­ber 8 Sub­stack enti­tled,Where, Oh Where Has the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty Gone? State of Geor­gia has no records-Take a hint,I demon­strat­ed that pri­or to the 2014 incor­po­ra­tion of Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty, Inc. (GRP Inc.), the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty (GRP) was duly reg­is­tered and in com­pli­ance with the Sec­re­tary of State. We know that among oth­er ways rec­og­niz­ing that the par­ty was sued that year, its name and descrip­tion list­ed as a defen­dant in the suit.

I also doc­u­ment­ed for you that nei­ther the Sec­re­tary of State, nor the Geor­gia Archives would recent­ly admit pos­sess­ing any infor­ma­tion what­so­ev­er per­tain­ing to the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty. I wrote:

[I]t appears that for some rea­sonall ref­er­ences to the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty have been wiped clean from pub­lic access by the State of Geor­gia.Yes, the State of Geor­gia appears to have dis­ap­peared the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty from its pub­lic records. When asked under Open Records Requests to pro­vide any reg­is­tra­tion state­ment for the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty dat­ing back to 1964, includ­ing reg­is­tra­tion state­ments by like-named orga­ni­za­tions or cor­po­ra­tions, also to include any fil­ings or arti­cles of incor­po­ra­tion, bylaws, and rules for the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty and the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty, Inc., the Sec­re­tary of States ORR records staff ulti­mate­ly answered the fol­low­ing:

In the end, nei­ther the Geor­gia Sec­re­tary of State nor the Archives would pro­vide any infor­ma­tion to fill the open records request.

Thank You Mr. Peabody!

But now, thanks to the Inter­net Way­back Machine and some dili­gent search­ing by Ms. Thomp­son, any­one can step along­side Sher­man into Mr. Peabodys con­trap­tion and view the2013 Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty web­site, such as it exist­ed pri­or to the incor­po­ra­tion of GRP, Inc., which occurred the fol­low­ing year. Here is a linked screen­shot of the home page, as it exist­ed in 2013.

Sight­ing down the par­ty home­page, the 2013 Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty Rules, along with an Excel spread­sheet list­ing the 2013 gov­ern­ing state com­mit­tee, can be accessed by click­ing on the Down­load­able Resources but­ton as it appears here:

There you will find a true, down­load­able dupli­cate of the lastGeor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty Rulespre­sum­ably in exis­tence, rules which were in effect pri­or to the incor­po­ra­tion of GRP, Inc. The rules you will find are authen­tic, as filed with the State of Geor­gia, signed by the par­ty chair­man at the time, John Pad­gett, and stamped RECEIVED by the Elec­tion Divi­sion of the Geor­gia Sec­re­tary of State, May 24, 2013, six days fol­low­ing the amend­ing date of May 18. These were the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty Rules in effect dur­ing the 2014 law­suit. These were the rules in effect on the day, and indeed fol­low­ing the day, and every day after the GRP, Inc. incor­po­ra­tion doc­u­ments were filed. In fact, in the absence of any Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty Rules to super­sede it, the rules you see below and which you can down­load,ARE STILL THE RULES OF THE GEORGIA REPUBLICAN PARTY TODAY, rather than the rules the cor­po­ra­tion pub­lished on its web­site.

When Did the Attempted Incorporation Occur?

Now, some­time between May and July of 2015, Geor­gia Repub­li­can Trea­sur­er Mansell McCord advised the Fed­er­al Elec­tion Com­mis­sion in writ­ing of a name change of the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty, the new name becom­ing, Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty, Inc.

The rea­son offered for the name change, giv­en the FEC in August of that year was sim­ply, We have incor­po­rat­ed.

Because there are no pro­ce­dures empow­ered or pre­scribed in law for a polit­i­cal par­ty to become a cor­po­ra­tion, my best guess is that a Repub­li­can State Com­mit­tee meet­ing was called, at which time the issue of mor­ph­ing the par­ty into a cor­po­ra­tion, as if doing so might be pos­si­ble, was dis­cussed and put to an up or down vote. Frankly, I have no idea what pro­ce­dures or machi­na­tions may have been pro­posed or under­tak­en to attempt that pur­pose, but what I describe makes sense. But I do know one thing, and that is that what­ev­er means those run­ning the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty under­took at the time, those means were not fit for the pur­pose intend­ed. The pur­pose they under­took, when­ev­er or wher­ev­er they did it, can­not be done law­ful­ly. If it could, there would be pro­vi­sions in Titles 14 or 21 explain­ing how to do it.

How to Fix the Problem

Yet, here we are, going on nine years and almost three pres­i­den­tial elec­tions lat­er, these cer­tain peo­ple at the top of the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty, in coop­er­a­tion with the Sec­re­tary of State, con­tin­ue to push the ruse, or per­haps the scam, that the par­ty is a cor­po­ra­tion and vice ver­sa. Even so, should they even­tu­al­ly choose to reform their ways, there does seem to be a straight­for­ward path out of this cha­rade. So, lets see if we can rea­son that path to rem­e­dy the prob­lem.

First we must suc­cinct­ly state the prob­lem. The biggest prob­lem is that cor­po­ra­tions in Geor­gia do not have bal­lot access. Go ahead, look through Title 14 and tell me where you see that a cor­po­ra­tion cre­at­ed under the Geor­gia Sec­re­tary of State has the right and means to place can­di­dates on a legal bal­lot. Youre not going to find it. Its not there. Thus, if a cor­po­ra­tion tries to place a can­di­date on a bal­lot in Geor­gia, even if the Sec­re­tary of State is com­plic­it, a court chal­lenge by an aggriev­ed par­ty would like­ly be upheld and deny it.

Sec­ond­ly, lets rec­og­nize that at long last, Ms. Thomp­sons arche­o­log­i­cal work has suc­cess­ful­ly unearthed the true Rules of the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty, effec­tive­ly buried and dor­mant over the past nine years, rules which appar­ent­ly have nev­er been law­ful­ly amend­ed, and which are there­by still in force. Those rules are the ones from 2013, which Ms. Sarah dug up while con­duct­ing research at Mr. Peabodys Way­back Machine.

Third­ly, lets also agree that, regard­less the pro­ce­dures or machi­na­tions par­ty exec­u­tives may have under­tak­en in 2015, activ­i­ties designed to morph the par­ty into a cor­po­ra­tion, those activ­i­ties were unsuc­cess­ful. All that means that the Repub­li­can Par­ty is still the same law­ful enti­ty it was in 2013, oper­at­ing under the 2013 Rules. We con­firm that because polit­i­cal par­ties can­not be destroyed or dis­solved. That is because polit­i­cal par­ties are cre­at­ed under law and there­fore can only be dis­solved under law. But there are no laws offer­ing the pos­si­bil­i­ty of dis­solv­ing a polit­i­cal par­ty, and no pro­ce­dures even pre­scribed to do it. If we accept the premise that the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty did come into exis­tence law­ful­ly at some moment in the dis­tant past, then it is still there today, albeit out of com­pli­ance with Geor­gia Code.

Share

Final­ly, assum­ing all that to be true, all that must be done to bring the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty back into com­pli­ance would be to amend the 2013 par­ty reg­is­tra­tion fil­ing the fol­low­ing with the Sec­re­tary of State:

1. The address of its prin­ci­pal office; and
2. The names, home address­es, and titles of the per­sons com­pos­ing its gov­ern­ing com­mit­tee and exec­u­tive offi­cers.

Those require­ments are spelled out under OCGA 21–2‑110.

And so that no one gets con­fused, the par­ty should also refile the 2013 Rules.

Why Wont They Fix the Problem?

But, Hank, thats real­ly so sim­ple. Why wont par­ty exec­u­tives do what is nec­es­sary to avoid the very real pos­si­bil­i­ty that the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Pres­i­den­tial Pri­ma­ry and the Novem­ber gen­er­al elec­tions might be chal­lenged in races should Repub­li­cans win?

Okay, now we are get­ting down to the crux of all this, the rea­son no one in posi­tion to fix this is inter­est­ed in restor­ing the law­ful sta­tus of the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty. All I can do is tell you what I see, which has not changed since I began writ­ing on this sub­ject months ago. I see an attempt by the Geor­gia Repub­li­can estab­lish­ment, the Old Guard if you will, to cor­po­ra­tize our state polit­i­cal sys­tem. I do not think any of them can deny it. What I just wrote is right in front of us. So what do I mean by cor­po­ra­tize?

Put it this way, how would you like a polit­i­cal sys­tem which allows cor­po­ra­tions to use cor­po­rate wealth and influ­ence to place can­di­dates direct­ly onto pub­lic bal­lots? Think about what I just asked for a minute. In 2014, Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty Chair­man John Pad­gett cre­at­ed a cor­po­ra­tion with a like name of the Geor­gia Repub­li­can Par­ty, a cor­po­ra­tion which along with the coop­er­a­tion of Geor­gias sec­re­tary of state, the gov­er­nor, and even the state attor­ney gen­er­al, has since tak­en over the oper­a­tion of plac­ing can­di­dates on a statewide bal­lot. If this cor­po­ra­tion, sep­a­rate and dis­tinct from any law­ful polit­i­cal par­ty, can do that, then why not Delta Air­lines? Why not Geor­gia-Pacif­ic? Why not Lib­er­ty Media, own­er of the Atlanta Braves? Why not Toy­ota or some Chi­nese cor­po­ra­tion? Why not the Clin­ton Foun­da­tion?? Sound crazy? Its not crazy giv­en that there is no dif­fer­ence between John Pad­gett and his suc­ces­sors doing as I describe, and any of those cor­po­ra­tions doing the same thing.

County Republican Coalition Corporations Competing Against County Republican Parties

Take a look at the fol­low­ing web­site,https://cherokeerepublicans.org/

A new­com­er to Chero­kee Coun­ty might look at the URL and believe this web­site, cherokeerepublicans.org, is that of the Chero­kee Coun­ty Repub­li­can Par­ty. Its not. It is the web­site of acor­po­ra­tionestab­lished by crony oper­a­tives of Gov­er­nor Bri­an Kemp. Why did they do that? They did that in Chero­kee Coun­ty, and have incor­po­rat­ed sis­ter Repub­li­can Coali­tion cor­po­ra­tions in at least 22 oth­er Geor­gia Coun­ties where RINO estab­lish­ment con­trol over local polit­i­cal levers have shift­ed to Amer­i­ca First, MAGA Repub­li­cans, the Old Guard mem­bers now out­num­bered to the extent that they have become dis­af­fect­ed. In coun­ty after coun­ty, all over Geor­gia, the Old Guard com­prised of estab­lish­ment, glob­al­ist, RINO Repub­li­cans is being replaced. The num­bers to keep the estab­lish­ment par­ty chiefs in pow­er are no longer there.

So where do all of those dis­af­fect­ed, Old Guard Repub­li­cans go? Bri­an Kemp has giv­en them a place to land, and calls them, Repub­li­can Coali­tion CORPORATIONS. In Chero­kee Coun­ty, one of Kemps Coali­tion can­di­dates won a board of elec­tions appoint­ment over the Amer­i­ca First true Repub­li­can Par­ty nom­i­nees, the Kemp can­di­date being select­ed by a Kemp-sym­pa­thiz­ing coun­ty com­mis­sion. Do you see how this works?

In times past, there would be no way an elect­ed sec­re­tary of state in Geor­gia, Repub­li­can or Demo­c­rat, would have allowed a cor­po­ra­tion to pose as a polit­i­cal par­ty with bal­lot access in Geor­gia elec­tions. But now we have had the same famil­iar faces, start­ing with Bri­an Kemp, now Brad Raf­fensperg­er, in con­trol of that seat since 2010, 14 years ago. We have had two extreme­ly-ques­tion­able-to-fraud­u­lent elec­tions while those offi­cials serve in the high­est offices of Geor­gia Gov­ern­ment. The natives are rest­less. Anti-RINO Repub­li­cans are show­ing up to take seats in coun­ty Repub­li­can Par­ties all over Geor­gia. The Old Guard is des­per­ate to remain in con­trol. With­out coun­ty par­ties to sup­port them, Old Guard pow­er is steadi­ly dimin­ish­ing in the par­ty. And that is the rea­son the pow­ers-that-be are cor­po­ra­tiz­ing our polit­i­cal sys­tems. They are tak­ing steps to pri­va­tize con­trol first over bal­lot access, and then over access to these pri­vate, cor­po­ra­tized polit­i­cal par­ties.

Dont believe me?

Take a look at this. If you desire to become a mem­ber of the Chero­kee Coun­ty Repub­li­can Coali­tion, essen­tial­ly a PRIVATE polit­i­cal par­ty, you cant just walk in and join like you can the Repub­li­can Par­ty. Absolute­ly not. To join the CCRC (Looks like CCCP does­nt it?), you must pass the fol­low­ing tests of wor­thi­ness:

These tests are rem­i­nis­cent of those you would expect to join the par­ty in the old USSR, or maybe the Axis com­bat­ants pri­or to and dur­ing World War II. When the cor­po­ra­ti­za­tion of Geor­gias polit­i­cal sys­tems would be com­plete, your vot­er reg­is­tra­tion would also be severe­ly scru­ti­nized, vet­ted as above to ensure that you will vote as they desire (require). After all, these are pri­vate cor­po­ra­tions vying to decide what can­di­dates can run for office. Because they are pri­vate cor­po­ra­tions, they can law­ful­ly exclude any­one from their pro­pri­etary elec­tion process­es. We are wit­ness­ing CORPORATE FASCISM in its infan­cy in Geor­gia. Allowed to grow, one would end up with a state of affairs akin to Mus­soli­n­is Italy. Chi­na oper­ates a very sim­i­lar polit­i­cal sys­tem, one in which oppres­sive cor­po­ra­tions pro­vide the eco­nom­ic engine and wealth nec­es­sary to cre­ate and main­tain a com­mu­nist con­trol sys­tem over the coun­try. And that is what a cor­po­ra­tized polit­i­cal sys­tem nat­u­ral­ly evolves toward, that is of course, as long as Geor­gians allow it to con­tin­ue.

Kemp Makes Annual Pilgrimage to Davos

Just for kicks, ask your­self why Gov­er­nor Bri­an Kemp is short­ly to take his sec­ond trip to the World Eco­nom­ic Forum (WEF) in Davos, which, of course, Geor­gians will pay for. The state of affairs I describe above, per­va­sive cor­po­rate fas­cism, is exact­ly the polit­i­cal world the WEF of Klaus Schwab pro­mote. Take a freak­ing hint, friends.

Is the state of affairs I describe pre­des­tined? No. In fact, those work­ing to cor­po­ra­tize Geor­gias polit­i­cal sys­tems are vast­ly out­num­bered. Many dis­af­fect­ed Old Guard RINO Repub­li­cans are reach­ing an age at which they will retire from active polit­i­cal roles. You will not find many Amer­i­ca First, MAGA Repub­li­cans dark­en­ing the door of the CCCP, oopssor­ry againC­CRC.

In a cer­tain respect, Repub­li­can coali­tion cor­po­ra­tions around Geor­gia remind me of a place por­trayed in those old black-and-white Tarzan movies of the 1940s, a des­ti­na­tion to which aged ele­phants would jour­ney as life grows short. Ivory hunters called this place the Ele­phant Grave­yard. Well, friends, that is what Repub­li­can Coali­tion cor­po­ra­tions and oth­ers like them real­ly are, ele­phant grave­yards where Old Guard estab­lish­ment RINO Repub­li­cans, and their pol­i­tics, go to die.