It's become a long-recognized fact in boxing, 'You can run, but you can't hide'.
Giuliani found this out the hard way when he was served papers for his treasonous behavior when he tried to have Trump installed as President despite losing the election.
Now the rest of the chickens are coming home to roost.
One by one the despots of Arizona and their co-conspirators are being dragged into court to account for their crimes --trying to overthrow the government of the United States -- and so the judicial process continues.
These seditionists ran and hid behind lawyers, hid behind MAGA in the House of Representatives, hid behind the very tyrant, Trump, but to no avail.
There is no hiding from justice,
See below -- italics mine.
© Provided by The Associated Press
PHOENIX (AP) — Former Arizona Republican Party chair Kelli Ward and at least 11 other people are set to be arraigned in a Phoenix courtroom on conspiracy, forgery and fraud charges stemming from their roles in an effort to overturn Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Arizona to Joe Biden.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani also is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday, though it’s unclear whether he’ll seek a postponement. Arizona authorities tried unsuccessfully over several weeks to serve Giuliani notice of the indictment against him. Giuliani was finally served Friday night as he was walking to a car after his 80th birthday celebration.
Arizona authorities unveiled the felony charges last month against Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump, a Republican, had won Arizona. The defendants include five lawyers connected to the former president and two former Trump aides. Biden, a Democrat, won Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.
The indictment alleges Ward, a former state senator who led the GOP in Arizona from 2019 until early 2023, organized the fake electors and urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to declare them to be the state's true electors. It says Ward failed to withdraw her vote as a fake elector even though no legal challenges changed the outcome of the presidential race in Arizona.
Last week, attorney John Eastman, who devised a strategy to try to persuade Congress not to certify the election, was the first defendant in the case to be arraigned, pleading not guilty to the charges.
Trump himself was not charged in the Arizona case but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Arizona is the fourth state where allies of the former president have been charged with using false or unproven claims about voter fraud related to the election.
The 11 people who claimed to be Arizona’s Republican electors met in Phoenix on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign a certificate saying they were “duly elected and qualified” electors and asserting that Trump carried the state. A one-minute video of the signing ceremony was posted on social media by the Arizona Republican Party at the time. The document was later sent to Congress and the National Archives, where it was ignored.
Of eight lawsuits that unsuccessfully challenged Biden’s victory in the state, one was filed by the 11 fake Arizona electors, who had asked a federal judge to decertify the results and block the state from sending its results to the Electoral College. In dismissing the case, the judge concluded the Republicans had “failed to provide the court with factual support for their extraordinary claims.” Days after that lawsuit was dismissed, the 11 participated in the certificate signing.
Those set to be arraigned Tuesday are Ward; Tyler Bowyer, an executive of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA; state Sen. Anthony Kern; Greg Safsten, a former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party; Robert Montgomery, a former chairman of the Cochise County Republican Committee; Samuel Moorhead, a Republican precinct committee member in Gila County; Nancy Cottle, who in 2020 was the first vice president of the Arizona Federation of Republican Women; Loraine Pellegrino, past president of the Ahwatukee Republican Women; Michael Ward, an osteopathic physician who is married to Ward; attorneys Jenna Ellis and Christina Bobb; and Michael Roman, who was Trump’s 2020 director of Election Day operations.
Arraignments are scheduled for June 6 for state Sen. Jake Hoffman; on June 7 for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and on June 18 for Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn and for James Lamon, another Republican who claimed Trump carried the state.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-arizona-gop-chair-kelli-ward-and-others-set-to-be-arraigned-in-fake-elector-case/ar-BB1mKOp8?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=4e39c0e10de34740b2b3ded29dd45a85&ei=16

Real and practical advice for single men - this works
I originally shared this as a reply to someone's post, then felt like a separate post would help more single guys interested in couples. I've been the male 3rd enough times to be able to share what actually works and is a step beyond the more generic advice of "be charming" or "be respectful". For all the single guys out there, good luck and here goes.
Mindset - you are part of their fantasy and there for her pleasure as a priority. You win when both he and she walk out thinking "Wow" without any yellow or red flags from you.
Here's my advice

1. THE MOST IMPORTANT BIT OF ADVICE - Talk to and engage the M half of the couple. Let him know you know your place in the 3some (i.e. you're there to help them have fun together). It's also a great opportunity to ask him what their fantasy is, what she likes, what he would like to see, and more. Hopefully, they've both talked about this a bunch and he can tell you about that, including any limits. He might even share something special you can do that will blow her mind. By engaging him, with respect, you can find all the help you need in making this work out well for everyone. You don't have to become his best friend, but the more he is comfortable with you, the more they both can relax and enjoy the experience together.
   
2. Realize you are part of THEIR fantasy and you will can be invited back if this works out well. So focus on making it work out well for them, being aware and responsive to their needs, what they are looking for. Single, attractive, respectful men are not as common as you might think. Finding one couple that you get on well with and getting invited back will open many doors for you, especially if they have friends or want to invite you to a party. So, focus on giving her pleasure and fun, even if you don't finish yourself. This is really important to remember - focus on her enjoyment.
   
3. Sometimes a couple will have a specific fantasy and want you to play a role like being the Dom to her. If you find that out, read up on it, get an idea on what you can do in your own style to play that role. Some couples really enjoy when the woman gets to live out her fantasy with another man, whether she wants to be a sub, or a Dom herself, or even really simple almost vanilla things like, doing a strip tease or being playfully teased. You don't have to be perfect or an expert, but realize your role in this interaction is to help them have fun living out their fantasy.
   
4. It should go without saying, but impeccable hygiene is a must. Be trimmed, clean, smelling good, fresh breath, and whatever else you need to do so that she doesn't get distracted. A nice light amount of cologne will work. My advice on cologne is to ask a female friend to pick one for you and then be very subtle with how much you use. Women's noses seem to pickup cologne more than you realize. If you don't have a friend or don't trust cologne being fresh and clean smelling from a shower is great too.
   
5. If necessary, drink an energy drink or coffee so you are bursting with energy when you guys get to the bedroom. That new person energy and stamina goes a long way to having her feel good, appreciated, sexy, wanted etc. You might be tempted to drink alcohol before hand, even just to loosen up. My advice would be NOT to drink.
   
6. Realize they might be nervous or not sure where to start. That's okay if you gently take the lead and help her relax. Gentle kissing, caressing and laying her down on the bed for you to go down on her is a good start. Don't worry too much though, once you get the ball rolling, just let nature take over. You're all there for the same reason, so just let things flow.
   
7. If you are meeting at your place, have a pile of clean towels for them to use. Also of course clean up your place, clean sheets on the bed, etc. Make sure your bathroom and shower are sparkly clean and spray some air freshener around. If necessary, open the windows and air your whole place out just to make things fresher.
   
8. Have bottled water and some sugary snacks. The water will keep everyone hydrated and people feel more comfortable when they drink from a water bottle they open themselves. Gatorade is great too. Sugar snacks will give you a short recharge on your energy (saw this on a porn set). Notwithstanding what I said above about skipping alcohol, having a bottle of wine or other alcohol works well as an icebreaker when the couple shows up. Still, one drink max for everyone is my recommendation for your best evening.
   
9. Before meeting, send sexy chat notes to her (with him in the same chat) to help build excitement in her mind and between them. Keep things subtle, share how excited you are, be playful and easy about it. Too many texts, getting too heavy or too graphic can ruin the mood. And as a general rule, don't send a dick pic. Just don't. You might be tempted to show off, but she can enjoy it when you two are together in person.
   
10. Check in with him, getting his permission in a friendly way, for anything you want to do that you haven't already talked about. You might find things unfolding naturally in new directions and he(and then her) will feel better when they see you check in with them. Remember, he's sharing his girl with you, the more he and then she trust you the better things will turn out.
    
11. Always respect what she says. If she doesn't like something stop. If she wants more of something or asks for something you haven't already talked about, then check in with him to make sure it's okay. Interestingly enough, he may ask you to do something she doesn't want or like. You know how it is with guys, sometimes they can get carried away. If this happens, the best answer is to respect what she says, and suggest something else instead. She will be happier, trust you more for respecting her voice and overall, they will have a better time.
    
12. When things are winding down, look for their cues that it's time for you to leave (if you are at their place) or for them to leave (if they are at your place). This is a good time to make sure they know where the towels are, that they can shower, offer them water, etc. You know, all the "how to be a good host stuff".
    
13. As they are about to go, you can share with them how much you enjoyed the evening and checkin with them, to see if they enjoyed themselves. If they did, you usually don't have to ask. A nice sensual kiss and a hug for her works. Next, it's REALLY IMPORTANT that you thank him for sharing. If you stop and think for a moment, he just shared the most important person in his life with you in a very intimate and private way. You got a gift from him. Be respectful and say thank you with honesty and heartfelt integrity. This can help him and her see that you have character and understand your role.
    
14. Make sure you know, respect and follow THEIR rules about communicating. In general, you can avoid problems by making sure you always communicate with BOTH of them. Sometimes, either she or he will text or call you separately. Just make sure that you ask, know and follow their rules about this. Also, if they do say it's okay for you to talk to each of them separately, it's best to keep the other person involved and aware when you do. This shows simple respect for each of them as individuals and their relationship. The same goes for meeting up with them as individuals. Know, respect and follow THEIR rules.
    
15. Performance issues: if you need to, take a small dose of viagra or cialis to help get over anxiety issues. But don't over do it if you haven't taken it before. You don't want to get too much of a headache or other side effects. One side effect of these meds is that they can also make it harder for you to finish. But don't worry about that because you focusing on her this time is the big win for you.
    

EDIT: Cardio FTW - being in great cardio shape pays dividends all around. Beyond aesthetics for your potential partner, increased stamina means you get less tired during your play time and can choose when to stop vs having to stop because you are badly out of breath. It can also help with exhaustion based performance issues. Last point is that when you click with someone, it's nice to be able to keep going just for their pleasure.

1. Last note - If things work out for you to meet and then you all have a good time, you can be the fuel for new passion and excitement for them and their relationship. In the least you can give them good memories. Maybe it can even develop into something long term.
   
2. Additional note about follow-up: After you leave or they leave, a short polite text thanking them both for a great time is a nice thing to do. Keep it short, simple and don't worry about setting up your next play time, instead just thank them. This gives them feedback that you enjoyed them and opens the door for them to share back to you, as well as ask you later for another play date. Realize that they might not get back to your right away and that's okay. They may have moved family, work or other obligations to make space for this date, and then have to catch back up with all those things the next day. If they had a good time with you and want more, they'll reach out.
   

If anyone else has advice, pls feel free to add it. Everyone wins when you do.
EDIT/UPDATE: For all those that found this helpful. Great! For those who gave feedback on how this advice doesn't work for you, cool. I just shared to be helpful. For those who think I'm implying that the woman is a possession, that's not the point. I actually paused when writing the section about the guy sharing his girl, I thought someone will take this wrong. Maybe it's a guy respect thing, but it's certainly not to imply any sort of ownership. For the people who think this is icky, I'm just trying to help single guys. If it doesn't work for you, you can ignore it. :) Last thought: this isn't the only way for people to do things. I shared to be helpful. Nothing more. No agenda, no service, no sales pitch. Just giving back to the community.
Edit #2: Added the point about follow-up text. Edit #3: Added the point about cardio.

It's become a long-recognized fact in boxing, 'You can run, but you can't hide'.
Giuliani found this out the hard way when he was served papers for his treasonous behavior when he tried to have Trump installed as President despite losing the election.
Now the rest of the chickens are coming home to roost.
One by one the despots of Arizona and their co-conspirators are being dragged into court to account for their crimes --trying to overthrow the government of the United States -- and so the judicial process continues.
These seditionists ran and hid behind lawyers, hid behind MAGA in the House of Representatives, hid behind the very tyrant, Trump, but to no avail.
There is no hiding from justice,
See below -- italics mine.
© Provided by The Associated Press
PHOENIX (AP) — Former Arizona Republican Party chair Kelli Ward and at least 11 other people are set to be arraigned in a Phoenix courtroom on conspiracy, forgery and fraud charges stemming from their roles in an effort to overturn Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Arizona to Joe Biden.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani also is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday, though it’s unclear whether he’ll seek a postponement. Arizona authorities tried unsuccessfully over several weeks to serve Giuliani notice of the indictment against him. Giuliani was finally served Friday night as he was walking to a car after his 80th birthday celebration.
Arizona authorities unveiled the felony charges last month against Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump, a Republican, had won Arizona. The defendants include five lawyers connected to the former president and two former Trump aides. Biden, a Democrat, won Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.
The indictment alleges Ward, a former state senator who led the GOP in Arizona from 2019 until early 2023, organized the fake electors and urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to declare them to be the state's true electors. It says Ward failed to withdraw her vote as a fake elector even though no legal challenges changed the outcome of the presidential race in Arizona.
Last week, attorney John Eastman, who devised a strategy to try to persuade Congress not to certify the election, was the first defendant in the case to be arraigned, pleading not guilty to the charges.
Trump himself was not charged in the Arizona case but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Arizona is the fourth state where allies of the former president have been charged with using false or unproven claims about voter fraud related to the election.
The 11 people who claimed to be Arizona’s Republican electors met in Phoenix on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign a certificate saying they were “duly elected and qualified” electors and asserting that Trump carried the state. A one-minute video of the signing ceremony was posted on social media by the Arizona Republican Party at the time. The document was later sent to Congress and the National Archives, where it was ignored.
Of eight lawsuits that unsuccessfully challenged Biden’s victory in the state, one was filed by the 11 fake Arizona electors, who had asked a federal judge to decertify the results and block the state from sending its results to the Electoral College. In dismissing the case, the judge concluded the Republicans had “failed to provide the court with factual support for their extraordinary claims.” Days after that lawsuit was dismissed, the 11 participated in the certificate signing.
Those set to be arraigned Tuesday are Ward; Tyler Bowyer, an executive of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA; state Sen. Anthony Kern; Greg Safsten, a former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party; Robert Montgomery, a former chairman of the Cochise County Republican Committee; Samuel Moorhead, a Republican precinct committee member in Gila County; Nancy Cottle, who in 2020 was the first vice president of the Arizona Federation of Republican Women; Loraine Pellegrino, past president of the Ahwatukee Republican Women; Michael Ward, an osteopathic physician who is married to Ward; attorneys Jenna Ellis and Christina Bobb; and Michael Roman, who was Trump’s 2020 director of Election Day operations.
Arraignments are scheduled for June 6 for state Sen. Jake Hoffman; on June 7 for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and on June 18 for Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn and for James Lamon, another Republican who claimed Trump carried the state.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-arizona-gop-chair-kelli-ward-and-others-set-to-be-arraigned-in-fake-elector-case/ar-BB1mKOp8?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=4e39c0e10de34740b2b3ded29dd45a85&ei=16

It's become a long-recognized fact in boxing, 'You can run, but you can't hide'.
Giuliani found this out the hard way when he was served papers for his treasonous behavior when he tried to have Trump installed as President despite losing the election.
Now the rest of the chickens are coming home to roost.
One by one the despots of Arizona and their co-conspirators are being dragged into court to account for their crimes --trying to overthrow the government of the United States -- and so the judicial process continues.
These seditionists ran and hid behind lawyers, hid behind MAGA in the House of Representatives, hid behind the very tyrant, Trump, but to no avail.
There is no hiding from justice,
See below -- italics mine.
© Provided by The Associated Press
PHOENIX (AP) — Former Arizona Republican Party chair Kelli Ward and at least 11 other people are set to be arraigned in a Phoenix courtroom on conspiracy, forgery and fraud charges stemming from their roles in an effort to overturn Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Arizona to Joe Biden.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani also is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday, though it’s unclear whether he’ll seek a postponement. Arizona authorities tried unsuccessfully over several weeks to serve Giuliani notice of the indictment against him. Giuliani was finally served Friday night as he was walking to a car after his 80th birthday celebration.
Arizona authorities unveiled the felony charges last month against Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump, a Republican, had won Arizona. The defendants include five lawyers connected to the former president and two former Trump aides. Biden, a Democrat, won Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.
The indictment alleges Ward, a former state senator who led the GOP in Arizona from 2019 until early 2023, organized the fake electors and urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to declare them to be the state's true electors. It says Ward failed to withdraw her vote as a fake elector even though no legal challenges changed the outcome of the presidential race in Arizona.
Last week, attorney John Eastman, who devised a strategy to try to persuade Congress not to certify the election, was the first defendant in the case to be arraigned, pleading not guilty to the charges.
Trump himself was not charged in the Arizona case but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Arizona is the fourth state where allies of the former president have been charged with using false or unproven claims about voter fraud related to the election.
The 11 people who claimed to be Arizona’s Republican electors met in Phoenix on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign a certificate saying they were “duly elected and qualified” electors and asserting that Trump carried the state. A one-minute video of the signing ceremony was posted on social media by the Arizona Republican Party at the time. The document was later sent to Congress and the National Archives, where it was ignored.
Of eight lawsuits that unsuccessfully challenged Biden’s victory in the state, one was filed by the 11 fake Arizona electors, who had asked a federal judge to decertify the results and block the state from sending its results to the Electoral College. In dismissing the case, the judge concluded the Republicans had “failed to provide the court with factual support for their extraordinary claims.” Days after that lawsuit was dismissed, the 11 participated in the certificate signing.
Those set to be arraigned Tuesday are Ward; Tyler Bowyer, an executive of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA; state Sen. Anthony Kern; Greg Safsten, a former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party; Robert Montgomery, a former chairman of the Cochise County Republican Committee; Samuel Moorhead, a Republican precinct committee member in Gila County; Nancy Cottle, who in 2020 was the first vice president of the Arizona Federation of Republican Women; Loraine Pellegrino, past president of the Ahwatukee Republican Women; Michael Ward, an osteopathic physician who is married to Ward; attorneys Jenna Ellis and Christina Bobb; and Michael Roman, who was Trump’s 2020 director of Election Day operations.
Arraignments are scheduled for June 6 for state Sen. Jake Hoffman; on June 7 for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and on June 18 for Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn and for James Lamon, another Republican who claimed Trump carried the state.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-arizona-gop-chair-kelli-ward-and-others-set-to-be-arraigned-in-fake-elector-case/ar-BB1mKOp8?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=4e39c0e10de34740b2b3ded29dd45a85&ei=16

It's become a long-recognized fact in boxing, 'You can run, but you can't hide'.
Giuliani found this out the hard way when he was served papers for his treasonous behavior when he tried to have Trump installed as President despite losing the election.
Now the rest of the chickens are coming home to roost.
One by one the despots of Arizona and their co-conspirators are being dragged into court to account for their crimes --trying to overthrow the government of the United States -- and so the judicial process continues.
These seditionists ran and hid behind lawyers, hid behind MAGA in the House of Representatives, hid behind the very tyrant, Trump, but to no avail.
There is no hiding from justice,
See below -- italics mine.
© Provided by The Associated Press
PHOENIX (AP) — Former Arizona Republican Party chair Kelli Ward and at least 11 other people are set to be arraigned in a Phoenix courtroom on conspiracy, forgery and fraud charges stemming from their roles in an effort to overturn Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Arizona to Joe Biden.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani also is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday, though it’s unclear whether he’ll seek a postponement. Arizona authorities tried unsuccessfully over several weeks to serve Giuliani notice of the indictment against him. Giuliani was finally served Friday night as he was walking to a car after his 80th birthday celebration.
Arizona authorities unveiled the felony charges last month against Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump, a Republican, had won Arizona. The defendants include five lawyers connected to the former president and two former Trump aides. Biden, a Democrat, won Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.
The indictment alleges Ward, a former state senator who led the GOP in Arizona from 2019 until early 2023, organized the fake electors and urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to declare them to be the state's true electors. It says Ward failed to withdraw her vote as a fake elector even though no legal challenges changed the outcome of the presidential race in Arizona.
Last week, attorney John Eastman, who devised a strategy to try to persuade Congress not to certify the election, was the first defendant in the case to be arraigned, pleading not guilty to the charges.
Trump himself was not charged in the Arizona case but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Arizona is the fourth state where allies of the former president have been charged with using false or unproven claims about voter fraud related to the election.
The 11 people who claimed to be Arizona’s Republican electors met in Phoenix on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign a certificate saying they were “duly elected and qualified” electors and asserting that Trump carried the state. A one-minute video of the signing ceremony was posted on social media by the Arizona Republican Party at the time. The document was later sent to Congress and the National Archives, where it was ignored.
Of eight lawsuits that unsuccessfully challenged Biden’s victory in the state, one was filed by the 11 fake Arizona electors, who had asked a federal judge to decertify the results and block the state from sending its results to the Electoral College. In dismissing the case, the judge concluded the Republicans had “failed to provide the court with factual support for their extraordinary claims.” Days after that lawsuit was dismissed, the 11 participated in the certificate signing.
Those set to be arraigned Tuesday are Ward; Tyler Bowyer, an executive of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA; state Sen. Anthony Kern; Greg Safsten, a former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party; Robert Montgomery, a former chairman of the Cochise County Republican Committee; Samuel Moorhead, a Republican precinct committee member in Gila County; Nancy Cottle, who in 2020 was the first vice president of the Arizona Federation of Republican Women; Loraine Pellegrino, past president of the Ahwatukee Republican Women; Michael Ward, an osteopathic physician who is married to Ward; attorneys Jenna Ellis and Christina Bobb; and Michael Roman, who was Trump’s 2020 director of Election Day operations.
Arraignments are scheduled for June 6 for state Sen. Jake Hoffman; on June 7 for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and on June 18 for Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn and for James Lamon, another Republican who claimed Trump carried the state.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-arizona-gop-chair-kelli-ward-and-others-set-to-be-arraigned-in-fake-elector-case/ar-BB1mKOp8?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=4e39c0e10de34740b2b3ded29dd45a85&ei=16

It's become a long-recognized fact in boxing, 'You can run, but you can't hide'.
Giuliani found this out the hard way when he was served papers for his treasonous behavior when he tried to have Trump installed as President despite losing the election.
Now the rest of the chickens are coming home to roost.
One by one the despots of Arizona and their co-conspirators are being dragged into court to account for their crimes --trying to overthrow the government of the United States -- and so the judicial process continues.
These seditionists ran and hid behind lawyers, hid behind MAGA in the House of Representatives, hid behind the very tyrant, Trump, but to no avail.
There is no hiding from justice,
See below -- italics mine.
© Provided by The Associated Press
PHOENIX (AP) — Former Arizona Republican Party chair Kelli Ward and at least 11 other people are set to be arraigned in a Phoenix courtroom on conspiracy, forgery and fraud charges stemming from their roles in an effort to overturn Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Arizona to Joe Biden.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani also is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday, though it’s unclear whether he’ll seek a postponement. Arizona authorities tried unsuccessfully over several weeks to serve Giuliani notice of the indictment against him. Giuliani was finally served Friday night as he was walking to a car after his 80th birthday celebration.
Arizona authorities unveiled the felony charges last month against Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump, a Republican, had won Arizona. The defendants include five lawyers connected to the former president and two former Trump aides. Biden, a Democrat, won Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.
The indictment alleges Ward, a former state senator who led the GOP in Arizona from 2019 until early 2023, organized the fake electors and urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to declare them to be the state's true electors. It says Ward failed to withdraw her vote as a fake elector even though no legal challenges changed the outcome of the presidential race in Arizona.
Last week, attorney John Eastman, who devised a strategy to try to persuade Congress not to certify the election, was the first defendant in the case to be arraigned, pleading not guilty to the charges.
Trump himself was not charged in the Arizona case but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Arizona is the fourth state where allies of the former president have been charged with using false or unproven claims about voter fraud related to the election.
The 11 people who claimed to be Arizona’s Republican electors met in Phoenix on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign a certificate saying they were “duly elected and qualified” electors and asserting that Trump carried the state. A one-minute video of the signing ceremony was posted on social media by the Arizona Republican Party at the time. The document was later sent to Congress and the National Archives, where it was ignored.
Of eight lawsuits that unsuccessfully challenged Biden’s victory in the state, one was filed by the 11 fake Arizona electors, who had asked a federal judge to decertify the results and block the state from sending its results to the Electoral College. In dismissing the case, the judge concluded the Republicans had “failed to provide the court with factual support for their extraordinary claims.” Days after that lawsuit was dismissed, the 11 participated in the certificate signing.
Those set to be arraigned Tuesday are Ward; Tyler Bowyer, an executive of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA; state Sen. Anthony Kern; Greg Safsten, a former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party; Robert Montgomery, a former chairman of the Cochise County Republican Committee; Samuel Moorhead, a Republican precinct committee member in Gila County; Nancy Cottle, who in 2020 was the first vice president of the Arizona Federation of Republican Women; Loraine Pellegrino, past president of the Ahwatukee Republican Women; Michael Ward, an osteopathic physician who is married to Ward; attorneys Jenna Ellis and Christina Bobb; and Michael Roman, who was Trump’s 2020 director of Election Day operations.
Arraignments are scheduled for June 6 for state Sen. Jake Hoffman; on June 7 for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and on June 18 for Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn and for James Lamon, another Republican who claimed Trump carried the state.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-arizona-gop-chair-kelli-ward-and-others-set-to-be-arraigned-in-fake-elector-case/ar-BB1mKOp8?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=4e39c0e10de34740b2b3ded29dd45a85&ei=16

It's become a long-recognized fact in boxing, 'You can run, but you can't hide'.
Giuliani found this out the hard way when he was served papers for his treasonous behavior when he tried to have Trump installed as President despite losing the election.
Now the rest of the chickens are coming home to roost.
One by one the despots of Arizona and their co-conspirators are being dragged into court to account for their crimes --trying to overthrow the government of the United States -- and so the judicial process continues.
These seditionists ran and hid behind lawyers, hid behind MAGA in the House of Representatives, hid behind the very tyrant, Trump, but to no avail.
There is no hiding from justice,
See below -- italics mine.
© Provided by The Associated Press
PHOENIX (AP) — Former Arizona Republican Party chair Kelli Ward and at least 11 other people are set to be arraigned in a Phoenix courtroom on conspiracy, forgery and fraud charges stemming from their roles in an effort to overturn Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Arizona to Joe Biden.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani also is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday, though it’s unclear whether he’ll seek a postponement. Arizona authorities tried unsuccessfully over several weeks to serve Giuliani notice of the indictment against him. Giuliani was finally served Friday night as he was walking to a car after his 80th birthday celebration.
Arizona authorities unveiled the felony charges last month against Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump, a Republican, had won Arizona. The defendants include five lawyers connected to the former president and two former Trump aides. Biden, a Democrat, won Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.
The indictment alleges Ward, a former state senator who led the GOP in Arizona from 2019 until early 2023, organized the fake electors and urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to declare them to be the state's true electors. It says Ward failed to withdraw her vote as a fake elector even though no legal challenges changed the outcome of the presidential race in Arizona.
Last week, attorney John Eastman, who devised a strategy to try to persuade Congress not to certify the election, was the first defendant in the case to be arraigned, pleading not guilty to the charges.
Trump himself was not charged in the Arizona case but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Arizona is the fourth state where allies of the former president have been charged with using false or unproven claims about voter fraud related to the election.
The 11 people who claimed to be Arizona’s Republican electors met in Phoenix on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign a certificate saying they were “duly elected and qualified” electors and asserting that Trump carried the state. A one-minute video of the signing ceremony was posted on social media by the Arizona Republican Party at the time. The document was later sent to Congress and the National Archives, where it was ignored.
Of eight lawsuits that unsuccessfully challenged Biden’s victory in the state, one was filed by the 11 fake Arizona electors, who had asked a federal judge to decertify the results and block the state from sending its results to the Electoral College. In dismissing the case, the judge concluded the Republicans had “failed to provide the court with factual support for their extraordinary claims.” Days after that lawsuit was dismissed, the 11 participated in the certificate signing.
Those set to be arraigned Tuesday are Ward; Tyler Bowyer, an executive of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA; state Sen. Anthony Kern; Greg Safsten, a former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party; Robert Montgomery, a former chairman of the Cochise County Republican Committee; Samuel Moorhead, a Republican precinct committee member in Gila County; Nancy Cottle, who in 2020 was the first vice president of the Arizona Federation of Republican Women; Loraine Pellegrino, past president of the Ahwatukee Republican Women; Michael Ward, an osteopathic physician who is married to Ward; attorneys Jenna Ellis and Christina Bobb; and Michael Roman, who was Trump’s 2020 director of Election Day operations.
Arraignments are scheduled for June 6 for state Sen. Jake Hoffman; on June 7 for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and on June 18 for Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn and for James Lamon, another Republican who claimed Trump carried the state.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-arizona-gop-chair-kelli-ward-and-others-set-to-be-arraigned-in-fake-elector-case/ar-BB1mKOp8?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=4e39c0e10de34740b2b3ded29dd45a85&ei=16

It's become a long-recognized fact in boxing, 'You can run, but you can't hide'.
Giuliani found this out the hard way when he was served papers for his treasonous behavior when he tried to have Trump installed as President despite losing the election.
Now the rest of the chickens are coming home to roost.
One by one the despots of Arizona and their co-conspirators are being dragged into court to account for their crimes --trying to overthrow the government of the United States -- and so the judicial process continues.
These seditionists ran and hid behind lawyers, hid behind MAGA in the House of Representatives, hid behind the very tyrant, Trump, but to no avail.
There is no hiding from justice,
See below -- italics mine.
© Provided by The Associated Press
PHOENIX (AP) — Former Arizona Republican Party chair Kelli Ward and at least 11 other people are set to be arraigned in a Phoenix courtroom on conspiracy, forgery and fraud charges stemming from their roles in an effort to overturn Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Arizona to Joe Biden.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani also is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday, though it’s unclear whether he’ll seek a postponement. Arizona authorities tried unsuccessfully over several weeks to serve Giuliani notice of the indictment against him. Giuliani was finally served Friday night as he was walking to a car after his 80th birthday celebration.
Arizona authorities unveiled the felony charges last month against Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump, a Republican, had won Arizona. The defendants include five lawyers connected to the former president and two former Trump aides. Biden, a Democrat, won Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.
The indictment alleges Ward, a former state senator who led the GOP in Arizona from 2019 until early 2023, organized the fake electors and urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to declare them to be the state's true electors. It says Ward failed to withdraw her vote as a fake elector even though no legal challenges changed the outcome of the presidential race in Arizona.
Last week, attorney John Eastman, who devised a strategy to try to persuade Congress not to certify the election, was the first defendant in the case to be arraigned, pleading not guilty to the charges.
Trump himself was not charged in the Arizona case but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Arizona is the fourth state where allies of the former president have been charged with using false or unproven claims about voter fraud related to the election.
The 11 people who claimed to be Arizona’s Republican electors met in Phoenix on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign a certificate saying they were “duly elected and qualified” electors and asserting that Trump carried the state. A one-minute video of the signing ceremony was posted on social media by the Arizona Republican Party at the time. The document was later sent to Congress and the National Archives, where it was ignored.
Of eight lawsuits that unsuccessfully challenged Biden’s victory in the state, one was filed by the 11 fake Arizona electors, who had asked a federal judge to decertify the results and block the state from sending its results to the Electoral College. In dismissing the case, the judge concluded the Republicans had “failed to provide the court with factual support for their extraordinary claims.” Days after that lawsuit was dismissed, the 11 participated in the certificate signing.
Those set to be arraigned Tuesday are Ward; Tyler Bowyer, an executive of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA; state Sen. Anthony Kern; Greg Safsten, a former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party; Robert Montgomery, a former chairman of the Cochise County Republican Committee; Samuel Moorhead, a Republican precinct committee member in Gila County; Nancy Cottle, who in 2020 was the first vice president of the Arizona Federation of Republican Women; Loraine Pellegrino, past president of the Ahwatukee Republican Women; Michael Ward, an osteopathic physician who is married to Ward; attorneys Jenna Ellis and Christina Bobb; and Michael Roman, who was Trump’s 2020 director of Election Day operations.
Arraignments are scheduled for June 6 for state Sen. Jake Hoffman; on June 7 for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and on June 18 for Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn and for James Lamon, another Republican who claimed Trump carried the state.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-arizona-gop-chair-kelli-ward-and-others-set-to-be-arraigned-in-fake-elector-case/ar-BB1mKOp8?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=4e39c0e10de34740b2b3ded29dd45a85&ei=16

It's become a long-recognized fact in boxing, 'You can run, but you can't hide'.
Giuliani found this out the hard way when he was served papers for his treasonous behavior when he tried to have Trump installed as President despite losing the election.
Now the rest of the chickens are coming home to roost.
One by one the despots of Arizona and their co-conspirators are being dragged into court to account for their crimes --trying to overthrow the government of the United States -- and so the judicial process continues.
These seditionists ran and hid behind lawyers, hid behind MAGA in the House of Representatives, hid behind the very tyrant, Trump, but to no avail.
There is no hiding from justice,
See below -- italics mine.
© Provided by The Associated Press
PHOENIX (AP) — Former Arizona Republican Party chair Kelli Ward and at least 11 other people are set to be arraigned in a Phoenix courtroom on conspiracy, forgery and fraud charges stemming from their roles in an effort to overturn Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Arizona to Joe Biden.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani also is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday, though it’s unclear whether he’ll seek a postponement. Arizona authorities tried unsuccessfully over several weeks to serve Giuliani notice of the indictment against him. Giuliani was finally served Friday night as he was walking to a car after his 80th birthday celebration.
Arizona authorities unveiled the felony charges last month against Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump, a Republican, had won Arizona. The defendants include five lawyers connected to the former president and two former Trump aides. Biden, a Democrat, won Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.
The indictment alleges Ward, a former state senator who led the GOP in Arizona from 2019 until early 2023, organized the fake electors and urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to declare them to be the state's true electors. It says Ward failed to withdraw her vote as a fake elector even though no legal challenges changed the outcome of the presidential race in Arizona.
Last week, attorney John Eastman, who devised a strategy to try to persuade Congress not to certify the election, was the first defendant in the case to be arraigned, pleading not guilty to the charges.
Trump himself was not charged in the Arizona case but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Arizona is the fourth state where allies of the former president have been charged with using false or unproven claims about voter fraud related to the election.
The 11 people who claimed to be Arizona’s Republican electors met in Phoenix on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign a certificate saying they were “duly elected and qualified” electors and asserting that Trump carried the state. A one-minute video of the signing ceremony was posted on social media by the Arizona Republican Party at the time. The document was later sent to Congress and the National Archives, where it was ignored.
Of eight lawsuits that unsuccessfully challenged Biden’s victory in the state, one was filed by the 11 fake Arizona electors, who had asked a federal judge to decertify the results and block the state from sending its results to the Electoral College. In dismissing the case, the judge concluded the Republicans had “failed to provide the court with factual support for their extraordinary claims.” Days after that lawsuit was dismissed, the 11 participated in the certificate signing.
Those set to be arraigned Tuesday are Ward; Tyler Bowyer, an executive of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA; state Sen. Anthony Kern; Greg Safsten, a former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party; Robert Montgomery, a former chairman of the Cochise County Republican Committee; Samuel Moorhead, a Republican precinct committee member in Gila County; Nancy Cottle, who in 2020 was the first vice president of the Arizona Federation of Republican Women; Loraine Pellegrino, past president of the Ahwatukee Republican Women; Michael Ward, an osteopathic physician who is married to Ward; attorneys Jenna Ellis and Christina Bobb; and Michael Roman, who was Trump’s 2020 director of Election Day operations.
Arraignments are scheduled for June 6 for state Sen. Jake Hoffman; on June 7 for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and on June 18 for Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn and for James Lamon, another Republican who claimed Trump carried the state.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-arizona-gop-chair-kelli-ward-and-others-set-to-be-arraigned-in-fake-elector-case/ar-BB1mKOp8?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=4e39c0e10de34740b2b3ded29dd45a85&ei=16

Hi Guys,
Will try not to bore you. I was wondering if anyone has similar symptoms or if their progression sounds like mine.
So last year September, I woke up to this aching feeling when carrying my handbag on my right hand. Within a week, the whole hand was affected. I had pain lifting anything and I started using ibrupofen everyday to control the pain. It was that bad.
That same month, I noticed my vision became very blurry. I started having this shaky and tremor in my legs with slight cramps.
Somehow, my right leg was twitching uncontrollably too. I had shortness of breath when lying down (this has been on and off) with really bad fatigue. I was always tired.
September - Weak shoulder and arm, Painful hands
By October, noticed twitching in my neck and difficulty swallowing. Like I had to push the food down to swallow it properly. This time, I also noticed some cramps in my left fingers and hands. This continued on slowly. I still had strength.
October- Weak Left arm, swallowing issues.
November: I started twitching in my tongue. My tongue dances around. Soon, I would get mouth aches after talking for over an hour and my head felt weak, my neck could not hold itself up and would fall. I was using braces in my hands, legs and neck. This time, they did an EMG on all four limbs which came back clean. This was exactly two months since the symptoms started. I had a clean ANA profile as well.
November - Tongue twitching,neck collapse.
December - Nothing new, the symptoms just got worse. So, I decided to take a blood test. All came back ok except my iron which was extremely low and high copper.
So, I started supplementing iron. This somehow would stop the tongue dancing around for like an hour and soon it would return. This was too much to bear. So, I did the below treatments
Treatments
Feroglobin - 1 tsb per day Glu Scavenger - 1 Folic Acid - 1 Glutathione - 1 Vitamin E - 1 Vitamin D - 1 Ashwaghanda Lions Mane Lserine- 2x a day I also did a phospholipid exchange
Alas, the day I started Tudca mixed with fulvic and humic acid (omnyne on Amazon) , my life changed forever. My symptoms went down by over 90%. No longer had tongue twitching or facial weakness, I could not even notice the weakness. The pain almost went.
I have been on Tudca ever since. Realised the fulvic acid is what makes the Tudca effective so I bought Fulvic Acid separately and this was a game changer. Barely noticed any weakness. It helps with the pain and cramps too and I almost go by everyday without any pain or issues.
however, after a week of stress (I baked a lot and had a lot of guests so I had to be on my feet for close to 10 hours a day) I noticed my left leg has not become weak. The whole thing is all over my body now from head to toe. I am now experiencing similar symptoms as I did in Septembe October only this time, Tudca and acids are keeping it at bay and it did not get so bad like I had in September with my right side.
Problem is my next neuron appointment is in October and quite frankly w/o the Tudca, I think I would be in a much worse state by now. My legs are slowly better and my grip strength sometimes gets so bad but once I supplement with feroglobin, I get better.
I have asked every single person they seem not to even think this relates to the three big words or MS. MRI clean too.
Please help me.

It's become a long-recognized fact in boxing, 'You can run, but you can't hide'.
Giuliani found this out the hard way when he was served papers for his treasonous behavior when he tried to have Trump installed as President despite losing the election.
Now the rest of the chickens are coming home to roost.
One by one the despots of Arizona and their co-conspirators are being dragged into court to account for their crimes --trying to overthrow the government of the United States -- and so the judicial process continues.
These seditionists ran and hid behind lawyers, hid behind MAGA in the House of Representatives, hid behind the very tyrant, Trump, but to no avail.
There is no hiding from justice,
See below -- italics mine.
© Provided by The Associated Press
PHOENIX (AP) — Former Arizona Republican Party chair Kelli Ward and at least 11 other people are set to be arraigned in a Phoenix courtroom on conspiracy, forgery and fraud charges stemming from their roles in an effort to overturn Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Arizona to Joe Biden.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani also is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday, though it’s unclear whether he’ll seek a postponement. Arizona authorities tried unsuccessfully over several weeks to serve Giuliani notice of the indictment against him. Giuliani was finally served Friday night as he was walking to a car after his 80th birthday celebration.
Arizona authorities unveiled the felony charges last month against Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump, a Republican, had won Arizona. The defendants include five lawyers connected to the former president and two former Trump aides. Biden, a Democrat, won Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.
The indictment alleges Ward, a former state senator who led the GOP in Arizona from 2019 until early 2023, organized the fake electors and urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to declare them to be the state's true electors. It says Ward failed to withdraw her vote as a fake elector even though no legal challenges changed the outcome of the presidential race in Arizona.
Last week, attorney John Eastman, who devised a strategy to try to persuade Congress not to certify the election, was the first defendant in the case to be arraigned, pleading not guilty to the charges.
Trump himself was not charged in the Arizona case but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Arizona is the fourth state where allies of the former president have been charged with using false or unproven claims about voter fraud related to the election.
The 11 people who claimed to be Arizona’s Republican electors met in Phoenix on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign a certificate saying they were “duly elected and qualified” electors and asserting that Trump carried the state. A one-minute video of the signing ceremony was posted on social media by the Arizona Republican Party at the time. The document was later sent to Congress and the National Archives, where it was ignored.
Of eight lawsuits that unsuccessfully challenged Biden’s victory in the state, one was filed by the 11 fake Arizona electors, who had asked a federal judge to decertify the results and block the state from sending its results to the Electoral College. In dismissing the case, the judge concluded the Republicans had “failed to provide the court with factual support for their extraordinary claims.” Days after that lawsuit was dismissed, the 11 participated in the certificate signing.
Those set to be arraigned Tuesday are Ward; Tyler Bowyer, an executive of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA; state Sen. Anthony Kern; Greg Safsten, a former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party; Robert Montgomery, a former chairman of the Cochise County Republican Committee; Samuel Moorhead, a Republican precinct committee member in Gila County; Nancy Cottle, who in 2020 was the first vice president of the Arizona Federation of Republican Women; Loraine Pellegrino, past president of the Ahwatukee Republican Women; Michael Ward, an osteopathic physician who is married to Ward; attorneys Jenna Ellis and Christina Bobb; and Michael Roman, who was Trump’s 2020 director of Election Day operations.
Arraignments are scheduled for June 6 for state Sen. Jake Hoffman; on June 7 for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and on June 18 for Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn and for James Lamon, another Republican who claimed Trump carried the state.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-arizona-gop-chair-kelli-ward-and-others-set-to-be-arraigned-in-fake-elector-case/ar-BB1mKOp8?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=4e39c0e10de34740b2b3ded29dd45a85&ei=16

It's become a long-recognized fact in boxing, 'You can run, but you can't hide'.
Giuliani found this out the hard way when he was served papers for his treasonous behavior when he tried to have Trump installed as President despite losing the election.
Now the rest of the chickens are coming home to roost.
One by one the despots of Arizona and their co-conspirators are being dragged into court to account for their crimes --trying to overthrow the government of the United States -- and so the judicial process continues.
These seditionists ran and hid behind lawyers, hid behind MAGa in the House of Representatives, hid behind the very tyrant, Trump, but to know avail.
There is no hiding from justice,
See below -- italics mine.
© Provided by The Associated Press
PHOENIX (AP) — Former Arizona Republican Party chair Kelli Ward and at least 11 other people are set to be arraigned in a Phoenix courtroom on conspiracy, forgery and fraud charges stemming from their roles in an effort to overturn Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Arizona to Joe Biden.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani also is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday, though it’s unclear whether he’ll seek a postponement. Arizona authorities tried unsuccessfully over several weeks to serve Giuliani notice of the indictment against him. Giuliani was finally served Friday night as he was walking to a car after his 80th birthday celebration.
Arizona authorities unveiled the felony charges last month against Republicans who submitted a document to Congress falsely declaring Trump, a Republican, had won Arizona. The defendants include five lawyers connected to the former president and two former Trump aides. Biden, a Democrat, won Arizona by more than 10,000 votes.
The indictment alleges Ward, a former state senator who led the GOP in Arizona from 2019 until early 2023, organized the fake electors and urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to declare them to be the state's true electors. It says Ward failed to withdraw her vote as a fake elector even though no legal challenges changed the outcome of the presidential race in Arizona.
Last week, attorney John Eastman, who devised a strategy to try to persuade Congress not to certify the election, was the first defendant in the case to be arraigned, pleading not guilty to the charges.
Trump himself was not charged in the Arizona case but was referred to as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Arizona is the fourth state where allies of the former president have been charged with using false or unproven claims about voter fraud related to the election.
The 11 people who claimed to be Arizona’s Republican electors met in Phoenix on Dec. 14, 2020, to sign a certificate saying they were “duly elected and qualified” electors and asserting that Trump carried the state. A one-minute video of the signing ceremony was posted on social media by the Arizona Republican Party at the time. The document was later sent to Congress and the National Archives, where it was ignored.
Of eight lawsuits that unsuccessfully challenged Biden’s victory in the state, one was filed by the 11 fake Arizona electors, who had asked a federal judge to decertify the results and block the state from sending its results to the Electoral College. In dismissing the case, the judge concluded the Republicans had “failed to provide the court with factual support for their extraordinary claims.” Days after that lawsuit was dismissed, the 11 participated in the certificate signing.
Those set to be arraigned Tuesday are Ward; Tyler Bowyer, an executive of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA; state Sen. Anthony Kern; Greg Safsten, a former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party; Robert Montgomery, a former chairman of the Cochise County Republican Committee; Samuel Moorhead, a Republican precinct committee member in Gila County; Nancy Cottle, who in 2020 was the first vice president of the Arizona Federation of Republican Women; Loraine Pellegrino, past president of the Ahwatukee Republican Women; Michael Ward, an osteopathic physician who is married to Ward; attorneys Jenna Ellis and Christina Bobb; and Michael Roman, who was Trump’s 2020 director of Election Day operations.
Arraignments are scheduled for June 6 for state Sen. Jake Hoffman; on June 7 for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and on June 18 for Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn and for James Lamon, another Republican who claimed Trump carried the state.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-arizona-gop-chair-kelli-ward-and-others-set-to-be-arraigned-in-fake-elector-case/ar-BB1mKOp8?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=4e39c0e10de34740b2b3ded29dd45a85&ei=16

Tomorrow i wanted to take off my soft lenses, but one of them had stuck in the eye, I know it was still there because i was able to take with my finger only a tip of it, but when i tried to remove it all my eye started to hurt a lot and I wasn't able to move it, several times i tried to massage it and i used eye drops a lot, still didn't help. Then i slept with them, on morning my eye started to be red and blinking brings me pain, i wasn't able to lift the lense at all this time, it was like i didn't even have lense, so i went to place where i bought them, because women there told me to go there if i need help to take them on or off, they tried to remove it but then said that it's impossible, because i have no lense in the eye. They checked the upper eye lid and on the right and bottom area several times as well and said there's also nothing. So I asked them what happened to my lense, because it was still there on the evening and then after an hour of trying to take it off I just went to sleep with it. They said maybe I was scratching my eye while sleeping so lens just went out from my eye by itself and that my eye is red and it hurts for me to blink is because i tried a lot to remove it. I still don't believe that lense isn't there, but I don't know what else to do. I'm so frustrated, what if I will never take it off and it will just be there and then I will be blind? What if i go to the optometrist and he will say exactly that this woman said to me because i live in small town and our optometrist isn't quite good. What if i go to city to optometrist there and they also will say to me that there's nothing? Omg, I wish I had never wore this stupid lenses...

Since I already expect to be beaten by other fans, I will try to express this theory of mine in a very schematic way step by step
A) Apparently, although there are many nuances and even conflicting sources, we can say that the Jedi and the Sith have at their base two different motivations for acting: in theory, and i underline "in theory", Jedi are moved by altruism, by the idea to act for a greater good, are at the service of the community, give great importance to inner serenity, etc The Sith on the other hand, generally and i underline "generally", are driven by the desire to fully experience their emotions and satisfy their personal passions
B) However, this should not automatically lead all Sith to be evil: living following one's emotions and passions is not necessarily bad. Modern psychology would classify this type of behavior as "Dionysian", which is contrasted with the other classical behavior which is "Apollonian". But these two terms are in no way synonymous with good or evil. So why should a path based on emotions and passions, even emotions and passions of a personal nature, necessarily lead to evil ?
C) I'll give you some examples: a revolutionary who fights for freedom is driven by a great passion, the classic avenger of the night is often driven by a personal revenge against evil. A person who dedicates himself to becoming the greatest sportsman in the world or to becoming an excellent artist is dedicating his entire life to a personal passion and probably also has very strong emotional reasons for doing so but this does not necessarily make him a person evil. In short: there are not only negative personal desires and negative personal emotions, such as ambition, anger, etc Imagine if Anakin had simply killed the desert raiders who killed his mother, but without touching the women and children of that tribe. His act, driven by a strong emotion, would have been less negative and fit into the stereotype of the "avenger of the night": who is a dark hero, almost an anti-hero we could say, but certainly not a villain. The "road warrior" or the Punisher or the Gatsu model character from Berserk would fit perfectly into this category

D) I'll give a direct example of a popular character from another saga, who however has several points in common with a very famous Sith. The character I use as an example is Severus Snape from the Harry Potter saga: if we analyze Snape's motivations we can see that everything he does over the course of the seven books is driven by only two motivations, which are love for Lily and the desire to take revenge against Voldemort. Every single action of Snape, however cold he may apparently seem, is driven by these two reasons... which as you will notice are purely emotional in nature. At the beginning, and perhaps even at the end, Snape doesn't care much about the fact that Voldemort also kills Muggles or at least that isn't his main reason for fighting him: he wants to avenge Lily in the name of his Love for her. So Snape fits perfectly into the description of a Sith: he doesn't do what he does for a lofty reason of love for "community" and for an abstract ideal of the common good, he just does what he does because he is moved by emotion and passion. In this I notice a very strong parallel with Palpatine: both characters have a mask of cold and rational man, both are mentally disciplined enough to hide their true motivations and manage to hatch even very complex plans and plots BUT both are in reality driven by unbridled emotions and passions, simply in Snape's case we talk about love and revenge while in Palpatine's case we talk about ambition. Here we can notice another important thing: the Sith are "motivated" by emotions\passions but are not necessarily "dominated" by them. Not 24/7 at least: Palpatine has the galaxy believe he is a calm and rational politician, he has the clarity to make a very elaborate plan... all this despite being "moved/motivated" by ambition
E) So, having seen in the previous point that you can very well create a positive character who is driven by the desire to satisfy personal passions and fully experience your personal emotions, I return to my initial question: why no Sith is a positive character ? Now I don't pretend that all the Sith are Severus Snape but I can't even understand why they are all evil: I think that there could easily be some Sith who fight for a positive ideal... maybe they will fight in a violent and questionable way, maybe they will be similar to those who in Dungeons & Dragons are called "chaotic good", maybe someone will have a politically incorrect attitude like Deadpooll, but they should still exist
Possible Answer 1: the dark side just streams through emotions BUT the evilness is a Sith fault) I thought a possible answer might be not in the very nature of the light side and the dark side but in the training that the Jedi and Sith receive. In fact, we know that the Jedi are not the only users of the light side just as the Sith are not the only users of the dark side, so perhaps the fact that the Sith are always channeled towards negative emotions and negative passions could be due to the type of people who (by tradition) the Sith choose as students and because of the training they receive. However, if this hypothesis were true, then it would mean that it is not so much the dark side that is evil (at least not necessarily) but the Sith training! This would make a life based on emotion and passion dysfunctional. So there could be characters (who use the dark side and who are not Sith) who have an emotional & passionate but positive attitude. However, no such character comes to mind.

Possible Answer 2 : the dark side is evil BUT not necessarily streamed/link by emotions and desires) We might assume that the dark side is actually evil and corrupting, however you see it. The connection with emotions would derive from the fact that the Sith tradition has found a way of approaching the dark side in emotions and personal desires. However, if this hypothesis were true, then there would also be other ways of approaching the dark side that are not linked to desires and emotions, there could be users of the dark side who are calm, cold and thoughtful and not at all interested in their emotions : a sort of "monks" of the dark side or "jedi of the dark side" or "vulcans of the dark side". But I can't think of any example of a "dark side tradition" or "dark side order" that doesn't reference the Sith way in some way.

Possible answer 3: the dark side is a just a boogymen because the plot need villains) We could think that it is a structural problem of the dark side: dark side users must follow their personal emotions and desires but they will necessarily necome evil in doing this. The Jedi suggest many times that the dark side necessarily brings moral corruption, even if it is true that said by the Jedi it is a source a little biased. At this point my question becomes: if the dark side is necessarily evil & necessarily corrupts & necessarily based on emotion and passion, then honestly the very idea of ​​the dark side seems poorly structured to me. Because if this hypothesis were true it would make a strange and unfair comparison between emotionality and evil, between passion and self-destruction... This seems to me not only extremely bad narratively but also false. There are numerous historical examples of people who have saved lives, in some cases even many lives, simply by following their hearts, their emotions and their passions. It is obvious that even a Jedi has an emotionality that leads him to empathize with the evil suffered by other people, however even an emotionality focused on his own passions and deep emotions can be positive: I think for example of a Sith who fights evil not both because he thinks of the good of his community but because evil disgusts him or because he has revenge to carry out against a powerful evil organization. If you allow me another nerdy comparison I would say Gatsu from Berserk: especially at the beginning he is moved by very strong passions and powerful, very violent emotions, but we cannot say that he is the villain of the story because, even if with extremely harsh means, his aim is to eradicate a great evil... He doesn't do it to save the world: he does it for his personal revenge but his aim is still to stratify evil. Why was a Sith or a dark side user never conceived like this?
What do you think about my question ? Please be kind in the comments, thank you :)

On a rainy Saturday afternoon not so long ago when internet connection was fluctuating in most homes, the 80-year-old Cecile Guidote-Alvarez, widow of the late Senator Heherson Alvarez, carrying a mini iPad, hurriedly alighted from a three-wheeled pedicab Toktok and stormed her way into a popular coffee shop in a mall in Manila.

A senior citizen in panic mode, she told the stunned baristas she’s looking for a Wi-Fi connection because she was about to interview retired Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio Carpio via Zoom.
The coffee shop, a known world brand, has Wi-Fi exclusive to its employees, so the old lady was told to try other establishments. She went from one coffee shop to another only to be told the same, until a kind stranger led her to a well-known beauty salon with a free internet connection.
The lady salon attendant was very accommodating to the octogenarian, even typing the password on her IPad. Of course, she needed to avail herself of their salon services. Initially, she opted for a haircut, but since she needed to talk and hear clearly who she was talking to, she settled for a foot spa with pedicure.
“They lowered the volume of the piped-in music, and since there were less customers because it’s been raining all day, I was able to do my interview,” Guidote-Alvarez said.
For the next half-an-hour, the hair dressers and manicurists working with their scissors, nail clippers and cuticle removers on their customers’ hair and fingernails, listened to Carpio and Guidote-Alvarez discussed how Filipino fishermen and the Philippine Navy ships helplessly negotiate their ways in Scarborough Shoal amid the territorial disputes in the West Philippine Sea.
“They were all very nice to me. I was able to finish my interview, with newly pedicured nails,” she told The Diarist.
For those who’ve worked with Guidote-Alvarez, her steadfast, almost stubborn, nature to accomplish a task, is nothing out of the ordinary. She would improvise, find alternatives, call up friends and former students, wake them up from sleep, just to get things done.
But now, in her 80s, legally blind and nearly deaf, she has mellowed down.
Cecile Alvarez with her mentors, National Artist for Literature Alejandro Roces, Jr and Fr. James Reuter. SJ
In her twilight years, Guidote-Alvarez has been solely hosting the 57-year-old Radyo Balintataw on DZRH, one of the oldest radio stations in the Philippines, where she tackles a wide range of topics, from climate change, women’s health, theater, culture, dance, to current issues, apart from playing old recordings of classic radio plays she produced and directed, dating back to the late ‘80s.
She shared with TheDiarist.ph how she started and continues to host one of the longest running advocacy programs on AM Radio.
Theater on TV
After founding the Philippine Educational Theater Association (PETA) on April 7, 1967, or exactly 57 years ago, Guidote-Alvarez thought of the need to expose PETA’s members to television, so she started conceptualizing Balintataw, which in Filipino means the pupil of the eye, but in a larger context has something to do with having wild imagination, or what you might see if you have a third eye.

“I designed Balintataw as a bridge between cinema and the stage, where the youth being trained in theater skills can have a ready-made laboratory experience linked with the film and entertainment industry that would likewise have a natural on-the-job training and orientation regarding the theatrical discipline of working with a literary script, whether dramatic or comic—not the regular improvised script done on taping or copycat scripts from foreign themes,” Guidote-Alvarez wrote in her yet-to-be published Memoir of a Freedom Fighter’s Wife.
“A primary goal when I conceived PETA was to initiate and sustain artistic expression that draws meaning and power from the lives of the people, and sharing the literary gems with a greater number of audiences through a Broadcast Theater-Film Program with Balintataw on Channel 5,” she added.
“No matter how little the pay, at least it provided our local writers with a little honorarium. I sought permission for award-winning pieces of the Palanca Playwriting contest to be fleshed out to reach the masses. The much-awarded playwright Bert Florentino served as our literary manager, assisted by Mauro Avena. Eventually, Isagani Cruz took over when Bert left for the US,” she wrote.
“Writers need exposure and encouragement through a regular TV performance that will give them a sense of achievement and inspire them to keep on writing with some kind of honorarium. I was glad Lupita Aquino (now Kashiwahara) agreed to be TV director and Robert Arevalo as TV host.
She got members of the PETA Kalinangan Ensemble to serve as stage directors. “This is to undertake preliminary preparation with a rehearsal with the actors for character development and memorization and preliminary staging,” she wrote.
Five months after PETA was founded, Balintataw TV premiered on Channel 5 on Aug. 19, 1967, coinciding with the Buwan ng Wika birthdate of President Manuel Luis Quezon.
The first play, whose title escapes her now, featured Armida Siguion-Reyna and Maria Eva “Chingbee” Kalaw. She employed photo journalist and award-winning photographedocumentarist/cinematographer, Romy Vitug, to work with her in filming outdoor scenes for Balintataw.

In the pre-Martial Law Balintataw, among those initiated into television were Lino Brocka, Elwood Perez, Nick Lizaso, Maryo delos Reyes, Mario O’Hara, Joey Gosiengfiao, Behn Cervantes, and Frank Rivera.
Among the stage actors who crossed over to television were Lily Gamboa, Angie Ferro, Lorlie Villanueva, Jonee Gamboa, Joy Soler, Sherry Lara, Gardy Labad, Noel Trinidad.
Like with PETA, Guidote-Alvarez directed and managed Balintataw for five years. Because of Martial Law, she and husband Heherson went on exile in the US to escape a military shoot-to-kill order on Heherson, who was tagged as a subversive.
Post-Martial Law
Internationally acclaimed auteur Lav Diaz mentioned in several interviews how he learned writing radio and TV scripts in Balintataw.
This happened in the late 1980s, when the Alvarez couple returned from exile.
Despite its absence on the air in the Martial Law years, Balintataw was honored by Star Awards as among the 20 unforgettable outstanding broadcast programs in the Philippines.
“This encouraged me to consider reviving Balintataw on TV. Another blessing was a FAMAS award for having an important role in the development of cinema recognizing Balintataw as a bridge for synergizing cinema with the stage, providing a pathway of entry of our PETA artists into film and for movie stars to consider enriching their experience by acting on the legitimate stage,” Guidote-Alvarez wrote.
Though she didn’t return to PETA anymore because it had been surviving well and had its own set of officers led by Brocka, she just tapped some of its members for the return of Balintataw.
For 14 years, the Alvarez couple lived in the US as political exiles, shown here during a Ninoy Aquino Movement meeting. Cecile revived Radyo Balintataw upon their return in the late 1980s.
Channel 4 stint
“I arranged to revive TV Balintataw on Channel 4 in 1989. We began with a drama about a rebel returnee, title escapes me now, but I clearly remember it was written by Lualhati Bautista and directed by Maryo de los Reyes. We also had a good story series on the hazing of Lenny Villa, an Aquila Legis Frat neophyte,” she wrote.
At the time, Heherson had been elected senator after having served as Agrarian Reform Minister and eventually Cabinet Secretary during the first year of the Cory Aquino Administration.
“We were able to unravel the deadly hazing process from a fellow neophyte who broke the code of silence as we revealed graphically, acted the cruel process used. I had Jose Mari Avellana direct it. This presentation won all the awards. Lav Diaz was training with us and he started writing teleplays. We also had Nora Aunor in an adaptation of Bert Florentino’s The World Is An Apple, adapted by Frank Rivera, and I had Nick Lizaso direct.”

Emmy Awards
Balintataw TV was selected as one of five soaps for social change recognized by Emmy Awards. The Philippines was one of five countries cited, with Mexico, India, Brazil and Kenya.
“The nomination was made possible by the wonderful support from David Poindexter. It was a supreme honor for our country to be recognized in the Emmy Awards, to be cited among the five Third World countries using soap opera for social change.”
Poindexter was a Methodist minister and TV producer who founded the Population Communications International.
Surviving on radio
“In spite of the cry about how television can be deadening the minds of the people with copied themes with an eternal favorite love triangle story, there was really no funding for Balintataw,” she wrote.
“Sponsors would go naturally to the commercial stations where big stars were paid highly for the starring role. Balintataw may have substance but we could not afford payment of bankable stars,” she added.
“Financial stress forced me to drop TV and remain on radio because I didn’t want to kill Balintataw per se just because we didn’t have funds.”
Creative classroom
“We have focused on Balintataw as a creative classroom on the air. I was able to talk to Fred J. Elizalde of DZRH and the president of the network, Mr. Jun Nicdao,” she wrote.
In the ‘80s, the HIV/AIDS became a global epidemic and in the Philippines, the general populace was still clueless on how to deal with it.
“In order to get funding, the first series I did was about the explosive news regarding AIDS in Asia. I got the DOH Secretary at the time, Dr. Juan Flavier, to act as himself, providing the data. It was easier to start off with an AIDS radio serial.
They did a minimum of 13 episodes to raise awareness about the disease.
“From then on, some of our television scripts we transformed into a radio version. DZRH provided us with our initial production staff, so we used some from the network and some of its resident artists and drama talents. Our time slots were changing but always coming after the long-running horror drama, Gabi ng Lagim.
“We worked on the themes of overseas workers, the drug problem, corruption, aside from portraying contemporary and literary classics serving as social commentaries,” she wrote.
Women playwrights
“We dramatized the works of noted women writers and playwrights like Estrella Alfon, Genoveva Edroza Matute and Marilou Jacob, who is distinguished in being a founding president of Women’s Playwright International.
“Apart from our PETA staple of writers, we involved young, upcoming and budding university and community theater groups.
“We also had a lot of foreign plays, where we could feature theater festivals beyond borders. We could do Shakespeare, we could do Euripides but also the current playwrights in the Arab region we translated in our language.
“We brought in Chinese contemporary plays, Malaysian, Indonesian and from other women writers from ASEAN member countries.”
Virtual history book
“The significance of Balintataw is portrayed as a virtual history book on audio as it unveiled events in the country. Radio is fresh, instant and up-to date,” she added.
When the COVID-19 pandemic struck, Balintataw became Guidote-Alvarez’s outlet and therapy. Having lost her husband on the second month of the pandemic, a widow cocooned at home, she began hosting it six days a week, learning how to use an iPad and interviewing via Zoom.
The word “Balintataw” has been associated with her name.
Visual artist and editorial cartoonist Benjie Lontoc in casual meeting told us how in his younger days, when AM Radio was a national past-time, he was surprised to hear a Filipino adaptation of No Exit by Jean Paul-Sarte. This was when radio was airing soap, fantasy adventures targeting housewives and children.
Another was the airing of Larawan as a radio play in the 1990s, with Guidote-Alvarez as the voice of Candida Marasigan.
Leopoldo Salcedo (left) as Manolo in a confrontation scene with Dante Rivero as Tony Javier in PETA’s 1968 ‘Larawan’ directed by Cecile Guidote-Alvarez. (Photo from PETA archives)
In the 1960s, she directed Larawan, the first Filipino adaptation of Joaquin’s A Portrait of the Artist as Filipino for PETA’s second season. It ran from December 1968 to January 1969 at the Raha Sulayman Theater at Fort Santiago in Intramural. In the cast were Rita Gomez (Candida), Lolita Rodriguez (Paula), Leopoldo Salcedo (Don Manolo) and Dante Rivero (Tony Javier).
Guidote-Alvarez has a funny recollection of the radio play. It was Nick Joaquin himself who told her years ago how his pedicurist suddenly started a conversation about Larawan.

Joaquin was relaxing on the barber’s chair having a post-haircut pedicure and foot spa when the lady pedicurist asked him how the story would end. Joaquin was stunned because he didn’t want to be known in the barber shop as Nick Joaquin the famous National Artist for Literature, but just a regular customer.
“He told me he almost fell out from the chair. He was a very private person and the pedicurist recognized him as the playwright,” Guidote-Alvarez, laughing, told TheDiarist.ph.
When she was first diagnosed with breast cancer in 2000, she was given only three years to live. It’s been more than two decades since then. She has also conquered COVID-19 twice.
Over and beyond her work in theater and various advocacies, Guidote-Alvarez is among the few surviving practitioners of AM Radio broadcasting.
The beauty salon incident wasn’t a first for the octogenarian radio host. She occasionally went back there to interview guests and record her shows whenever Wi-Fi connections in her home fluctuated.
Despite all setbacks, man-made or otherwise, the steadfast Cecile Guidote-Alvarez’s voice continues to be heard in this mass media platform in an era that knows mainly Spotify. As Joaquin wrote, “to remember and to sing, that is her vocation.”
(Except Saturday, Radyo Balintataw airs daily on DZRH 666 Khz AM radio after ‘Gabi ng Lagim’, and live streamed on radio.org.ph. Some episodes have been uploaded on YouTube.)

"Why Did Jesus Die on the Cross?"

The main reason Jesus died on the cross was to defeat Satan and set us free from his oppressive rule. Everything else that Jesus accomplished was to be understood as an aspect and consequence of this victory (e.g., Recapitulation, Moral Influence, etc.).
This understanding of why Jesus had to die is called the Christus Victor (Latin for “Christ is Victorious”) view of the atonement. But, what exactly was Christ victorious from, and why? To find out the answers to these questions, we have to turn to the Old Testament, as that's what the apostles would often allude to in order to properly teach their audience the message they were trying to convey (Rom. 15:4).
The OT is full of conflict between the Father (YHVH) and false gods, between YHVH and cosmic forces of chaos. The Psalms speak of this conflict between YHVH and water monsters of the deeps (an ancient image for chaos) (Psa. 29:3-4; 74:10-14; 77:16, 19; 89:9-10; 104:2-9, etc).
The liberation of Israel from Egypt wasn’t just a conflict between Pharaoh and Moses. It was really between YHVH and the false gods of Egypt.
Regardless of whether you think the aforementioned descriptions are literal or metaphorical, the reality that the Old Testament describes is that humanity lived in a “cosmic war zone.”
The Christus Victor motif is about Christ reigning victorious over wicked principalities and Satan's kingdom, and is strongly emphasized throughout the New Testament. Scripture declares that Jesus came to drive out "the prince of this world” (John 12:31), to “destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8), to “destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14) and to “put all enemies under his feet” (1 Cor 15:25). Jesus came to overpower the “strong man” (Satan) who held the world in bondage and worked with his Church to plunder his "palace" (Luke 11:21-22). He came to end the reign of the cosmic “thief” who seized the world to “steal, and to kill, and to destroy” the life YHVH intended for us (John 10:10). Jesus came and died on the cross to disarm “the principalities and powers” and make a “shew of them openly [i.e., public spectacle]” by “triumphing over them in [the cross]” (Col. 2:15).
Beyond these explicit statements, there are many other passages that express the Christus Victor motif as well. For example, the first prophecy in the Bible foretells that a descendent of Eve (Jesus) would crush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). The first Christian sermon ever preached proclaimed that Jesus in principle conquered all YHVH's enemies (Acts 2:32-36). And the single most frequently quoted Old Testament passage by New Testament authors is Psalm 110:1 which predicts that Christ would conquer all YHVH’s opponents. (Psalm 110 is quoted or alluded to in Matthew 22:41-45; 26:64, Mark 12:35-37; 14:62, Luke 20:41-44; 22:69, Acts 5:31; 7:55-56, Romans 8:34, 1st Corinthians 15:22-25, Ephesians 1:20, Hebrews 1:3; 1:13; 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:11, 15, 17, 21; 8:1; 10:12-13, 1st Peter 3:22, and Revelation 3:21.) According to New Testament scholar Oscar Cullman, the frequency with which New Testament authors cite this Psalm is the greatest proof that Christ’s “victory over the angel powers stands at the very center of early Christian thought.”
Because of man's rebellion, the Messiah's coming involved a rescue mission that included a strategy for vanquishing the powers of darkness.
Since YHVH is a God of love who gives genuine “say-so” to both angels and humans, YHVH rarely accomplishes His providential plans through coercion. YHVH relies on His infinite wisdom to achieve His goals. Nowhere is YHVH's wisdom put more on display than in the manner in which He outsmarted Satan and the powers of evil, using their own evil to bring about their defeat.
Most readers probably know the famous story from ancient Greece about the Trojan Horse. To recap the story, Troy and Greece had been locked in a ten-year-long vicious war when, according to Homer and Virgil, the Greeks came up with a brilliant idea. They built an enormous wooden horse, hid soldiers inside and offered it to the Trojans as a gift, claiming they were conceding defeat and going home. The delighted Trojans accepted the gift and proceeded to celebrate by drinking themselves into a drunken stupor. When night came and the Trojan warriors were too wasted to fight, the Greeks exited the horse, unlocked the city gates to quietly let all their compatriots in, and easily conquered the city, thus winning the war.
Historians debate whether any of this actually happened. But either way, as military strategies go, it’s brilliant.
Now, there are five clues in the New Testament that suggest YHVH was using something like this Trojan Horse strategy against the powers when he sent Jesus into the world:
1) The Bible tells us that YHVH's victory over the powers of darkness was achieved by the employment of YHVH’s wisdom, and was centered on that wisdom having become reality in Jesus Christ (Rom. 16:25, 1 Cor. 2:7, Eph. 3:9-10, Col. 1:26). It also tells us that, for some reason, this Christ-centered wisdom was kept “secret and hidden” throughout the ages. It’s clear from this that YHVH's strategy was to outsmart and surprise the powers by sending Jesus.
2) While humans don’t generally know Jesus’ true identity during his ministry, demons do. They recognize Jesus as the Son of God, the Messiah, but, interestingly enough, they have no idea what he’s doing (Mark 1:24; 3:11; 5:7, Luke 8:21). Again, the wisdom of YHVH in sending Jesus was hidden from them.
3) We’re told that, while humans certainly share in the responsibility for the crucifixion, Satan and the powers were working behind the scenes to bring it about (John 13:27 cf. 1 Cor. 2:6-8). These forces of evil helped orchestrate the crucifixion.
4) We’re taught that if the “princes of this world [age]” had understood the secret wisdom of YHVH, “they would not have crucified the Lord of glory” (1 Cor 2:8 cf. vss 6-7). Apparently, Satan and the powers regretted orchestrating Christ’s crucifixion once they learned of the wisdom of YHVH that was behind it.
5) Finally, we can begin to understand why the powers came to regret crucifying “the Lord of glory” when we read that it was by means of the crucifixion that the “handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us [i.e., the charge of our legal indebtedness]” was “[taken] out of the way [i.e., canceled]” as the powers were disarmed. In this way Christ “triumph[ed] over” the powers by "his cross” and even “made a shew of them openly” (Col. 2:14-15). Through Christ’s death and resurrection YHVH's enemies were vanquished and placed under his Messiah's feet, and ultimately His own in the end (1 Cor. 15:23-28).
Putting these five clues together, we can discern YHVH's Trojan Horse strategy in sending Jesus.
The powers couldn’t discern why Jesus came because YHVH's wisdom was hidden from them. YHVH's wisdom was motivated by unfathomable love, and since Satan and the other powers were evil, they lacked the capacity to understand it. Their evil hearts prevented them from suspecting what YHVH was up to.
What the powers did understand was that Jesus was mortal. This meant he was killable. Lacking the capacity to understand that this was the means by which YHVH would ultimately bring about the defeat of death (and thus, pave the road for the resurrection itself), they never suspected that making Jesus vulnerable to their evil might actually be part of YHVH's infinitely wise plan.
And so they took the bait (or "ransom"; Matt. 20:28, Mark 10:45, 1 Tim. 2:5-6). Utilizing Judas and other willing human agents, the powers played right into YHVH’s secret plan and orchestrated the crucifixion of the Messiah (Acts 2:22-23; 4:28). YHVH thus brilliantly used the self-inflicted incapacity of evil to understand love against itself. And, like light dispelling darkness, the unfathomably beautiful act of YHVH's love in sending the willing Messiah as a "ransom" to these blood-thirsty powers defeated them. The whole creation was in principle freed and reconciled to YHVH, while everything written against us humans was nailed to the cross, thus robbing the powers of the only legal claim they had on us. They were “spoiled [i.e., disempowered]” (Col. 2:14-15).
As happened to the Trojans in accepting the gift from the Greeks, in seizing on Christ’s vulnerability and orchestrating his crucifixion, the powers unwittingly cooperated with YHVH to unleash the one power in the world that dispels all evil and sets captives free. It’s the power of self-sacrificial love.

Why Penal Substitution Is Unbiblical

For the sake of keeping this already lengthy post as short as possible I'm not going to spend too much time on why exactly PSA (Penal Substitutionary Atonement) is inconsistent with Scripture, but I'll go ahead and point out the main reasons why I believe this is so, and let the reader look further into this subject by themselves, being that there are many resources out there which have devoted much more time than I ever could here in supporting this premise.

"Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:"-1 Corinthians 5:7

The Passover is one of the two most prominent images in the New Testament given as a comparison to Christ's atonement and what it accomplished, (the other most common image being the Day of Atonement sacrifice).
In the Passover, the blood of the lamb on the door posts of the Hebrews in the book of Exodus was meant to mark out those who were YHVH's, not be a symbol of PSA, as the lamb itself was not being punished by God in place of the Hebrews, but rather the kingdom of Egypt (and thus, allegorically speaking, the kingdom of darkness which opposed YHVH) was what was being judged and punished, because those who were not "covered" by the blood of the lamb could be easily identified as not part of God's kingdom/covenant and liberated people.
Looking at the Day of Atonement sacrifice (which, again, Christ's death is repeatedly compared to throughout the New Testament), this ritual required a ram, a bull, and two goats (Lev. 16:3-5). The ram was for a burnt offering intended to please God (Lev. 16:3-4). The bull served as a sin offering for Aaron, the high priest, and his family. In this case, the sin offering restored the priest to ritual purity, allowing him to occupy sacred space and be near YHVH’s presence. Two goats taken from "the congregation” were needed for the single sin offering for the people (Lev. 16:5). So why two goats?
The high priest would cast lots over the two goats, with one chosen as a sacrifice “for the Lord” (Lev. 16:8). The blood of that goat would purify the people. The second goat was not sacrificed or designated “for the Lord.” On the contrary, this goat—the one that symbolically carried the sins away from the camp of Israel into the wilderness—was “for Azazel” (Lev. 16:8-10).
What—or who—is Azazel?
The Hebrew term azazel (עזאזל) occurs four times in Leviticus 16 but nowhere else in most people's canon of the Bible, (and I say "most people's canon," because some people do include 1 Enoch in their canon of Scripture, which of course goes into great detail about this "Azazel" figure). Many translations prefer to translate the term as a phrase, “the goat that goes away,” which is the same idea conveyed in the King James Version’s “scapegoat.” Other translations treat the word as a name: Azazel. The “scapegoat” option is possible, but since the phrase “for Azazel” parallels the phrase “for YHVH” (“for the Lord”), the wording suggests that two divine figures are being contrasted by the two goats.
A strong case can be made for translating the term as the name Azazel. Ancient Jewish texts show that Azazel was understood as a demonic figure associated with the wilderness. The Mishnah (ca. AD 200; Yoma 6:6) records that the goat for Azazel was led to a cliff and pushed over, ensuring it would not return with its death. This association of the wilderness with evil is also evident in the New Testament, as this was where Jesus met the devil (Matt. 4:1). Also, in Leviticus 17:1-7 we learn that some Israelites had been accustomed to sacrificing offerings to "devils" (alternatively translated as “goat demons”). The Day of Atonement replaced this illegitimate practice.
The second goat was not sent into the wilderness as a sacrifice to a foreign god or demon. The act of sending the live goat out into the wilderness, which was unholy ground, was to send the sins of the people where they belonged—to the demonic domain. With one goat sacrificed to bring purification and access to YHVH and one goat sent to carry the people’s sins to the demonic domain, this annual ritual reinforced the identity of the true God and His mercy and holiness.
When Jesus died on the cross for all of humanity’s sins, he was crucified outside the city, paralleling the sins of the people being cast to the wilderness via the goat to Azazel. Jesus died once for all sinners, negating the need for this ritual.
As previously stated, the goat which had all the sin put on it was sent alive off to the wilderness, while the blood of the goat which was blameless was used to purify the temple and the people. Penal substitution would necessitate the killing of the goat which had the sin put on it.
Mind you, this is the only sacrificial ritual of any kind in the Torah in which sins are placed on an animal. The only time it happens is this, and that animal is not sacrificed. Most PSA proponents unwittingly point to this ritual as evidence of their view, despite it actually serving as evidence to the contrary, because most people don't read their Old Testament and don't familiarize themselves with the "boring parts" like Leviticus (when it's actually rather important to do so, since that book explains how exactly animal offerings were to be carried out and why they were done in the first place).
In the New Testament, Christ's blood was not only meant to mark out those who were his, but also expel the presence of sin and ritual uncleanness so as to make the presence of YHVH manifest in the believer's life. Notice how God's wrath isn't poured out on Christ in our stead on this view, but rather His wrath was poured out on those who weren't covered, and the presence of sin and evil were merely removed by that which is pure and blameless (Christ's blood) for the believer.
All this is the difference between expiation and propitiation.

The Content of Paul's Gospel Message

When the New Testament writers talked about “the gospel,” they referred not to the Protestant doctrine of justification sola fide–the proposition that if we will stop trying to win God’s favor and only just believe that God has exchanged our sin for Christ’s perfect righteousness, then in God’s eyes we will have the perfect righteousness required both for salvation and for assuaging our guilty consciences–but rather they referred to the simple but explosive proposition Kyrios Christos, “Christ is Lord.” That is to say, the gospel was, properly speaking, the royal announcement that Jesus of Nazareth was the God of Israel’s promised Messiah, the King of kings and Lord of lords.
The New Testament writers were not writing in a cultural or linguistic vacuum and their language of euangelion (good news) and euangelizomai would have been understood by their audience in fairly specific ways. Namely, in the Greco-Roman world for which the New Testament authors wrote, euangelion/euangelizomai language typically had to do with either A) the announcement of the accession of a ruler, or B) the announcement of a victory in battle, and would probably have been understood along those lines.
Let’s take the announcements of a new ruler first. The classic example of such a language is the Priene Calendar Inscription, dating to circa 9 BC, which celebrates the rule (and birthday) of Caesar Augustus as follows:
"It was seeming to the Greeks in Asia, in the opinion of the high priest Apollonius of Menophilus Azanitus: Since Providence, which has ordered all things of our life and is very much interested in our life, has ordered things in sending Augustus, whom she filled with virtue for the benefit of men, sending him as a savior [soter] both for us and for those after us, him who would end war and order all things, and since Caesar by his appearance [epiphanein] surpassed the hopes of all those who received the good tidings [euangelia], not only those who were benefactors before him, but even the hope among those who will be left afterward, and the birthday of the god [he genethlios tou theou] was for the world the beginning of the good tidings [euangelion] through him; and Asia resolved it in Smyrna."
The association of the term euangelion with the announcement of Augustus’ rule is clear enough and is typical of how this language is used elsewhere. To give another example, Josephus records that at the news of the accession of the new emperor Vespasian (69 AD) “every city kept festival for the good news (euangelia) and offered sacrifices on his behalf.” (The Jewish War, IV.618). Finally, a papyrus dating to ca. 498 AD begins:
"Since I have become aware of the good news (euangeliou) about the proclamation as Caesar (of Gaius Julius Verus Maximus Augustus)…"
This usage occurs also in the Septuagint, the Greek translations of the Jewish Scriptures. For instance LXX Isaiah 52:7 reads, “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news (euangelizomenou), who publishes peace, who brings good news (euangelizomenos) of salvation, who says to Zion, ‘Your God reigns.'" Similarly, LXX Isaiah 40:9-10 reads:

"…Go up on a high mountain, you who bring good tidings (ho euangelizomenos) to Sion; lift up your voice with strength, you who bring good tidings (ho euangelizomenos); lift it up, do not fear; say to the cities of Ioudas, “See your God!” Behold, the Lord comes with strength, and his arm with authority (kyrieias)…."-NETS, Esaias 40:9-10

This consistent close connection between euangelion/euangelizomai language and announcements of rule strongly suggests that many of the initial hearers/readers of the early Christians’ evangelical language would likely have understood that language as the announcement of a new ruler (see, e.g., Acts 17:7), and, unless there is strong NT evidence to the contrary, we should presume that the NT writers probably intended their language to be so understood.
However, the other main way in which euangelion/euangelizomai language was used in the Greco-Roman world was with reference to battle reports, announcements of victory in war. A classic example of this sort of usage can be found in LXX 2 Samuel 18:19ff, where David receives word that his traitorous son, Absalom, has been defeated in battle. Euangelion/euangelizomai is used throughout the passage for the communications from the front.
As already shown throughout this post, the NT speaks of Jesus’s death and resurrection as a great victory over the powers that existed at that time and, most importantly, over death itself. Jesus’ conquest of the principalities and powers was the establishment of his rule and comprehensive authority over heaven and earth, that is, of his Lordship over all things (again, at that time).
This was the content of Paul's gospel message...

Justification, and the "New" Perspective on Paul

The following quotation is from The Gospel Coalition, and I believe it to be a decently accurate summary of the NPP (New Perspective on Paul), despite it being from a source which is in opposition to it:

The New Perspective on Paul, a major scholarly shift that began in the 1980s, argues that the Jewish context of the New Testament has been wrongly understood and that this misunderstand[ing] has led to errors in the traditional-Protestant understanding of justification. According to the New Perspective, the Jewish systems of salvation were not based on works-righteousness but rather on covenantal nomism, the belief that one enters the people of God by grace and stays in through obedience to the covenant. This means that Paul could not have been referring to works-righteousness by his phrase “works of the law”; instead, he was referring to Jewish boundary markers that made clear who was or was not within the people of God. For the New Perspective, this is the issue that Paul opposes in the NT. Thus, justification takes on two aspects for the New Perspective rather than one; initial justification is by faith (grace) and recognizes covenant status (ecclesiology), while final justification is partially by works, albeit works produced by the Spirit.

I believe what's called the "new perspective" is actually rather old, and that the Reformers' view of Paul is what is truly new, being that the Lutheran understanding of Paul is simply not Biblical.
The Reformation perspective understands Paul to be arguing against a legalistic Jewish culture that seeks to earn their salvation through works. However, supporters of the NPP argue that Paul has been misread. We contend he was actually combating Jews who were boasting because they were God's people, the "elect" or the "chosen ones." Their "works," so to speak, were done to show they were God's covenant people and not to earn their salvation.
The key questions involve Paul’s view(s) of the law and the meaning of the controversy in which Paul was engaged. Paul strongly argued that we are “justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law” (Gal. 2:16b). Since the time of Martin Luther, this has been understood as an indictment of legalistic efforts to merit favor before God. Judaism was cast in the role of the medieval "church," and so Paul’s protests became very Lutheran, with traditional-Protestant theology reinforced in all its particulars (along with its limitations) as a result. In hermeneutical terms, then, the historical context of Paul’s debate will answer the questions we have about what exactly the apostle meant by the phrase "works of the law," along with other phrases often used as support by the Reformers for their doctrine of Sola Fide (justification by faith alone), like when Paul mentions "the righteousness of God."
Obviously an in-depth analysis of the Pauline corpus and its place in the context of first-century Judaism would take us far beyond the scope of this brief post. We can, however, quickly survey the topography of Paul’s thought in context, particularly as it has emerged through the efforts of recent scholarship, and note some salient points which may be used as the basis of a refurbished soteriology.
[Note: The more popular scholars associated with the NPP are E.P. Sanders, James Dunn, and N.T. Wright. Dunn was the first to coin the term "The New Perspective" in a 1983 Manson Memorial Lecture, The New Perspective on Paul and the Law.]
Varying authors since the early 1900's have brought up the charge that Paul was misread by those in the tradition of Martin Luther and other Protestant Reformers. Yet, it wasn't until E.P. Sanders' 1977 book, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, that scholars began to pay much attention to the issue. In his book, Sanders argues that the Judaism of Paul's day has been wrongly criticized as a religion of "works-salvation" by those in the Protestant tradition.
A fundamental premise in the NPP is that Judaism was actually a religion of grace. Sander's puts it clearly:
"On the point at which many have found the decisive contrast between Paul and Judaism - grace and works - Paul is in agreement with Palestinian Judaism... Salvation is by grace but judgment is according to works'...God saves by grace, but... within the framework established by grace he rewards good deeds and punishes transgression." (Paul and Palestinian Judaism, p. 543)
N.T. Wright adds that, "we have misjudged early Judaism, especially Pharisaism, if we have thought of it as an early version of Pelagianism," (Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said, p. 32).
Sanders has coined a now well-known phrase to describe the character of first-century Palestinian Judaism: “covenantal nomism.” The meaning of “covenantal nomism” is that human obedience is not construed as the means of entering into God’s covenant. That cannot be earned; inclusion within the covenant body is by the grace of God. Rather, obedience is the means of maintaining one’s status within the covenant. And with its emphasis on divine grace and forgiveness, Judaism was never a religion of legalism.
If covenantal nomism was operating as the primary category under which Jews understood the Law, then when Jews spoke of obeying commandments, or when they required strict obedience of themselves and fellow Jews, it was because they were "keeping the covenant," rather than out of legalism.
More recently, N.T. Wright has made a significant contribution in his little book, What Saint Paul Really Said. Wright’s focus is the gospel and the doctrine of justification. With incisive clarity he demonstrates that the core of Paul’s gospel was not justification by faith, but the death and resurrection of Christ and his exaltation as Lord. The proclamation of the gospel was the proclamation of Jesus as Lord, the Messiah who fulfilled Israel’s expectations. Romans 1:3-4, not 1:16-17, is the gospel, contrary to traditional thinking. Justification is not the center of Paul’s thought, but an outworking of it:
"[T]he doctrine of justification by faith is not what Paul means by ‘the gospel’. It is implied by the gospel; when the gospel is proclaimed, people come to faith and so are regarded by God as members of his people. But ‘the gospel’ is not an account of how people get saved. It is, as we saw in an earlier chapter, the proclamation of the lordship of Jesus Christ….Let us be quite clear. ‘The gospel’ is the announcement of Jesus’ lordship, which works with power to bring people into the family of Abraham, now redefined around Jesus Christ and characterized solely by faith in him. ‘Justification’ is the doctrine which insists that all those who have this faith belong as full members of this family, on this basis and no other." (pp. 132, 133)
Wright brings us to this point by showing what “justification” would have meant in Paul’s Jewish context, bound up as it was in law-court terminology, eschatology, and God’s faithfulness to God’s covenant.
Specifically, Wright explodes the myth that the pre-Christian Saul was a pious, proto-Pelagian moralist seeking to earn his individual passage into heaven. Wright capitalizes on Paul’s autobiographical confessions to paint rather a picture of a zealous Jewish nationalist whose driving concern was to cleanse Israel of Gentiles as well as Jews who had lax attitudes toward the Torah. Running the risk of anachronism, Wright points to a contemporary version of the pre-Christian Saul: Yigal Amir, the zealous Torah-loyal Jew who assassinated Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin for exchanging Israel’s land for peace. Wright writes:
"Jews like Saul of Tarsus were not interested in an abstract, ahistorical system of salvation... They were interested in the salvation which, they believed, the one true God had promised to his people Israel." (pp. 32, 33)
Wright maintains that as a Christian, Paul continued to challenge paganism by taking the moral high ground of the creational monotheist. The doctrine of justification was not what Paul preached to the Gentiles as the main thrust of his gospel message; it was rather “the thing his converts most needed to know in order to be assured that they really were part of God’s people” after they had responded to the gospel message.
Even while taking the gospel to the Gentiles, however, Paul continued to criticize Judaism “from within” even as he had as a zealous Pharisee. But whereas his mission before was to root out those with lax attitudes toward the Torah, now his mission was to demonstrate that God’s covenant faithfulness (righteousness) has already been revealed in Jesus Christ.
At this point Wright carefully documents Paul’s use of the controversial phrase “God’s righteousness” and draws out the implications of his meaning against the background of a Jewish concept of justification. The righteousness of God and the righteousness of the party who is “justified” cannot be confused because the term bears different connotations for the judge than for the plaintiff or defendant. The judge is “righteous” if his or her judgment is fair and impartial; the plaintiff or defendant is “righteous” if the judge rules in his or her favor. Hence:
"If we use the language of the law court, it makes no sense whatsoever to say that the judge imputes, imparts, bequeaths, conveys or otherwise transfers his righteousness to either the plaintiff or the defendant. Righteousness is not an object, a substance or a gas which can be passed across the courtroom. For the judge to be righteous does not mean that the court has found in his favor. For the plaintiff or defendant to be righteous does not mean that he or she has tried the case properly or impartially. To imagine the defendant somehow receiving the judge’s righteousness is simply a category mistake. That is not how the language works." (p. 98)
However, Wright makes the important observation that even with the forensic metaphor, Paul’s theology is not so much about the courtroom as it is about God’s love.
Righteousness is not an impersonal, abstract standard, a measuring-stick or a balancing scale. That was, and still is, a Greek view. Righteousness, Biblically speaking, grows out of covenant relationship. We forgive because we have been forgiven (Matt. 18:21-35); “we love" because God “first loved us” (1 John 4:19). Love is the fulfillment of the law (Rom. 13:8, 10, Gal 5:14, Jam. 2:8). Paul even looked forward to a day when “we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad” (2 Cor. 5:10), and he acknowledged that his clear conscience did not necessarily ensure this verdict (1 Cor. 4:4), but he was confident nevertheless. Paul did in fact testify of his clear conscience: “For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation [i.e., behavior] in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward” (2 Cor. 1:12). He was aware that he had not yet “attained” (Phil. 3:12-14), that he still struggled with the flesh, yet he was confident of the value of his performance (1 Cor. 9:27). These are hardly the convictions of someone who intends to rest entirely on the merits of an alien righteousness imputed to his or her account.
Wright went on to flesh out the doctrine of justification in Galatians, Philippians, and Romans. The “works of the law” are not proto-Pelagian efforts to earn salvation, but rather “sabbath [keeping], food-laws, circumcision” (p. 132). Considering the controversy in Galatia, Wright writes:
"Despite a long tradition to the contrary, the problem Paul addresses in Galatians is not the question of how precisely someone becomes a Christian, or attains to a relationship with God….The problem he addresses is: should his ex-pagan converts be circumcised or not? Now this question is by no means obviously to do with the questions faced by Augustine and Pelagius, or by Luther and Erasmus. On anyone’s reading, but especially within its first-century context, it has to do quite obviously with the question of how you define the people of God: are they to be defined by the badges of Jewish race, or in some other way? Circumcision is not a ‘moral’ issue; it does not have to do with moral effort, or earning salvation by good deeds. Nor can we simply treat it as a religious ritual, then designate all religious ritual as crypto-Pelagian good works, and so smuggle Pelagius into Galatia as the arch-opponent after all. First-century thought, both Jewish and Christian, simply doesn’t work like that…. [T]he polemic against the Torah in Galatians simply will not work if we ‘translate’ it into polemic either against straightforward self-help moralism or against the more subtle snare of ‘legalism’, as some have suggested. The passages about the law only work — and by ‘work’ I mean they will only make full sense in their contexts, which is what counts in the last analysis — when we take them as references to the Jewish law, the Torah, seen as the national charter of the Jewish race." (pp. 120-122)
The debate about justification, then, “wasn’t so much about soteriology as about ecclesiology; not so much about salvation as about the church.” (p. 119)
To summarize the theology of Paul in his epistles, the apostle mainly spent time arguing to those whom he were sending letters that salvation in Christ was available to all men without distinction. Jews and Gentiles alike may accept the free gift; it was not limited to any one group. Paul was vehement about this, especially in his letter to the Romans. As such, I will finish this post off by summarizing the letter itself, so as to provide Biblical support for the premises of the NPP and for what the scholars I referenced have thus far argued.
After his introduction in the epistle to an already believing and mostly Gentile audience (who would've already been familiar with the gospel proclaimed in verses 3-4), Paul makes a thematic statement in 1:16: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” This statement is just one of many key statements littered throughout the book of Romans that give us proper understanding of the point Paul wished to make to the interlocutors of his day, namely, salvation is available to all, whether Jew or Gentile.
In 1:16 Paul sets out a basic theme of his message in the letter to the Romans. All who believed, whether they be Jew or Gentile, were saved by the power of the gospel. The universal nature of salvation was explicitly stated. The gospel saved all without distinction, whether Jew or Greek; salvation was through the gospel of Jesus Christ. Immediately after this thematic declaration, Paul undertakes to show the universal nature of sin and guilt. In 1:18-32 Paul shows how the Gentile is guilty before God. Despite evidence of God and his attributes, which is readily available to all, they have failed to honor YHVH as God and have exchanged His glory for idolatrous worship and self-promotion. As a consequence, God handed them over in judgment (1:18-32). Paul moves to denunciation of those who would judge others while themselves being guilty of the very same offenses (2:1-5) and argues that all will be judged according to their deeds (2:6). This judgment applies to all, namely, Jew and Greek (2:9-10). This section serves as somewhat of a transition in Paul’s argument. He has highlighted the guilt of the Gentiles (1:18ff) and will shortly outline the guilt of the Jew (2:17-24). The universal statement of 2:1-11 sets the stage for Paul’s rebuke of Jewish presumption. It was not possession of the Law which delivered; it was faithful obedience. It is better to have no Law and yet to obey the essence of the Law (2:12-16) than to have the Law and not obey (2:17-3:4). Paul then defends the justice of God’s judgment (3:5-8), which leads to the conclusion that all (Jew and Gentile) are guilty before God (3:9).
Paul argues that it was a mistaken notion to think that salvation was the prerogative of the Jew only. This presumption is wrong for two reasons. First, it leads to the mistaken assumption that only Jews were eligible for this vindication (Paul deals with this misunderstanding in chapter 4 where he demonstrates that Abraham was justified by faith independently of the Law and is therefore the father of all who believe, Jew and Gentile alike). Second, it leads to the equally mistaken conclusion that all who were Jews are guaranteed of vindication. Paul demonstrates how this perspective, which would call God’s integrity into question since Paul was assuming many Jews would not experience this vindication, was misguided. He did this by demonstrating that it was never the case that all physical descendants of Israel (Jacob) were likewise recipients of the promise. In the past (9:6-33) as in the present (at that time; 11:1-10), only a remnant was preserved and only a remnant would experience vindication. Paul also argued that the unbelief of national Israel (the non-remnant) had the purpose of extending the compass of salvation. The unbelief of one group made the universal scope of the gospel possible. This universalism was itself intended to bring about the vindication of the unbelieving group (11:11-16). As a result of faith, all (Jew and Gentile) could be branches of the olive tree (11:17-24). Since faith in Christ was necessary to remain grafted into the tree, no one could boast of his position. All, Jew and Gentile alike, were dependent upon the mercy and grace of God. As a result of God’s mysterious plan, He would bring about the vindication of His people (11:25-27). [Note: It is this author's belief that this vindication occurred around 66-70 AD, with the Parousia of Christ's Church; this author is Full-Preterist in their Eschatology.]

Kadillac Kirk had been a good friend of mine for several years. I had met him through friends from The Spring Stage; and he never had anything to do with The Imp, which is why he didn’t appear in the Married Mary saga. Mary would have totally thrown herself at him, and Kirk would have definitely “thrown it in her.” He loved the ladies and often remarked that there was no such thing as an unappealing woman, nor was there anything sweeter than finding the pearl of passion in an outwardly plain dame. Fortunately for Kirk, he never met Mary. This was probably fortunate for Mary as well, seeing as Kirk was a confirmed bachelor and his rakish nature might have broken her fat heart.
Kirk was an older guy. Not MOE old, though. He was in his early forties, but he easily passed for a carefree dude in his 30s... not that he lied about his age. I only mention this trait to juxtapose Kirk’s genuine youthful air with Moe’s unconvincing youthful farce. Kirk dressed normally, avoided stupid jargon, and never busted out gimmicks like tarot cards or spells. He just existed, behaved affably, and people liked him for it.
He drove a classic 1962 Cadillac El Dorado convertible with red leather interior, and he lived in a charmingly quaint (and ridiculously expensive) neighborhood. How he made his fortune remained a mystery, but he never bloviated about his wealth. He just threw spectacular parties and people showed up. And, to my knowledge, he never tried to lure women into bed with his money (although I’m sure he got his fair share of boom-boom thanks to his digs and his wheels, even if the gold-diggers denied their monetary agendas).
Kirk was legitimately handsome. He was a drummer, he had a full head of black hair, he was clean-shaven, he worked out, and he knew all the hidden gems in Wellsprings. So why hadn’t I tried... or even desired to date him? I don’t know. I just didn’t feel drawn to him like that. He felt like a cool uncle and he had, thus far, never done anything to change my perception. Plus, the age difference weirded me out a little. Kirk didn’t look forty; but knowing that he had so much more life experience than I did created a power imbalance that would have creeped me out if we’d been dating. As buddies, I just felt supremely cool riding in his Cadillac, smoking Fantasia cigarettes, and hitting the speakeasies and jazz clubs I would have never known about if it weren’t for Kirk’s connections.
And he had been a good person to talk to about my romantic woes. He never lecherously suggested that I should date him, and he gave the type of tempered advice that only comes with lived experience. But he often lightly mocked me for my crush on Dennis and he did a hilarious impression of Smegal popping too soon over his “precious.” So when Mary “got me back” by doing whatever she did with to Dennis, I called Kadillac Kirk and told him the drinks were on me if he’d be my designated driver for the night.
Why hadn’t I called Whisky??? Well, A) Kirk was way more fun to hang out with, at least from my past experiences up to that point. And B) I needed to bitch about a boy, something I couldn’t do in good conscience in front of a guy I was dating. So I put on the sexiest plunging halter dress I owned, applied heavy eye makeup and spikey accessories, braved a pair of stilettos, and sashayed out to Kirk’s convertible. I felt like a badass rock star. I probably looked like a try-hard hooker.
Kirk: Daaaaay-um! Somebody really did do a number on you, huh? I know you said you were upset, but the gents are gonna be writing thank you notes to that fat girl and that butt-fucking hobbit.
Me: I just need to feel pretty and numb. And I trust you to keep me from making a fool of myself.
Kirk squeezed my shoulder. “I’ve got you. You do whatever you need to do to get rid of these demons.”
He sparked up a J and offered me the first puff. I gladly accepted. He took one puff of his own, but said that the rest was mine since he didn’t want to drive stoned. See? He was responsible! Weed wasn’t legal in California yet, so I got a little bit baked before I stashed the sativa in the glove box and wrapped a scarf around my hair like a starlet from the Golden Age of Hollywood. Kirk sped out of the parking lot and said he was taking me to a downtown hotel that was hosting a party that night in their lush lobby.
Kadillac Kirk pulled up to the main entrance, paid the valet, and then opened my door. I was wobbly from the weed. And I had stupidly decided to wear heels. You can get high or you can wear high (heels). You can’t have both. Not if you’ve repeatedly injured both ankles (as I have). I had to take Kirk’s arm to keep from keeling over. “Can people tell I’m stoned?” I whispered. Kirk replied, “Nobody’s paying any attention to anyone else’s intoxication. I promise you that much.” I nodded, steadied myself, and strutted alongside my very cool friend, feeling a little more confident.
A live jazz orchestra was playing Cole Porter as we entered the lobby. Everything sparkled. The music was even more intoxicating than the spliff had been. “Just One of Those Things” brought tears to my eyes since the lyrics hit every raw nerve regarding the Dennis debacle. But I smiled. It might sound mental, but being distraught over a trash fire of a one-sided romance was exhilarating. Immature, for sure. But also exhilarating. You see, that kind of sadness doesn’t hurt. Not really. It stings. It leaves little bruises, but it’s very safe to wallow in because you haven’t actually lost anything. Melancholia over that which you never had is as sweet as it is bitter; and that type of twisted splendor is rivaled only by Stendhal.
“Here's hoping we meet now and then. It was great fun, but it was just one of those things.” I sang along with the band, and a fat tear rolled down past my melancholic smile and onto my chin. Kirk brushed it aside. “Too close to home?” I wiped away the remnants of the tear’s journey from eye to chin and smiled a more genuine smile. “The perfect distance from home. Shall we get drinks? Remember, I’m buying.”
Kirk: No, no. This is your time to heal. And I’m here as your pal, not your chauffeur. What would the lady like?”
I pretended to barf. Kirk knew I hated it when he got overly formal and overly attentive. So he did it just to mess with me. “Shot of vodka,” I replied.
Kirk: How many?
I thought briefly. “FIVE.”
Kirk: Five to one, baby. One in five...
Me: No one here gets out alive.
Kirk: Are you able to hold yourself upright, or should you come with?
I took a seat on an ornate, damask-upholstered chaise lounge. “I’ll be okay. And I was kidding about the five shots.”
I sat there lost in the music for a while. I thought very little about Dennis. Even less about Mary. And not at all about Whisky (whom I had shagged less than a week ago). My mind danced through the ornate lighting in the hotel lobby, and I suddenly felt the need to join the hoity-toity guests on the dancefloor!
Kirk returned with four shots of vodka. Two for him, two for me. That was quite reasonable of him. He knew damn well that I couldn’t handle five shots, but he also knew that I was in a... state. One that called for more than a single shot. I raised a both miniature glasses to “No more ninnyhammers or hairy-footed lovers.” Kirk did his hilarious Smegal impression, we double-toasted, and downed the shots. The band launched into “Let’s Misbehave,” and I kicked off my stilettos and made a beeline for the dance floor.
“There’s something wild about you child that’s so contagious. Let’s be outrageous! Let’s misbehave.” Kadillac Kirk swept me up, twirled me around, and dipped me as we both sang along with the lyrics. I wasn’t swooning for him, but I was enthralled by the moment. The music, the dancing, the combination of booze and bud... so I kissed him as he pulled me back to my feet. And he kissed back. In a way that Dennis never had. In a way that Whisky’s beard wouldn’t permit. I didn’t feel the visceral sensations that I’d felt when Dennis had kissed me, but it felt nice to feel desired. And then I noticed that other guests were watching us and applauding. Now, that was a dopamine rush if ever there was one!
I gently broke away from the embrace, high-fived Kirk and returned to the chaise lounge to put my stupid shoes back on. He followed me and smashed his face back onto mine. I pulled away and laughed. “It was a moment,” I told him. “I appreciate the dance, and that kiss was the perfect finale. But it’s not happening again.”
Kirk: Not to worry, Valerie. I know you. I knew all along that we were performing, and I was more than happy to be your scene partner.
Me: And dance partner! Those were some excellent moves! I didn’t know you had ballroom training.
Kirk: You name it, I’ve mastered it. Another drink for the lady?
I pretended to barf again. “Not yet. I’m not sad right now. Do you mind if I just sit here and enjoy the music?”
Kirk: Ah. My kisses do have healing properties...
I flipped my hand up at him. “Knock that shit off, bro. I wanted to hang out with you because I trust you not to get weird. Even if I get weird, I know you have the maturity to balance me out.”
Kirk: Are you calling me old???
Me: No. I’m calling you rational, responsible, and respectful.
Kirk: Well, now. If you can articulate an alliterative statement that fluently, then you clearly aren’t drunk enough!
I dismissed this comment as a joke. And he did indeed knock off the flirtation. We had a perfectly pleasant time chatting and dancing (no more kissing, though). And then I noticed a girl I knew from Into the Woods entering the lobby. She’d played Florinda and I’d played Little Red. I called her name and waved enthusiastically. She waved back. And then her date entered. It was D.E.N.N.I.S. I sank into the chaise. Kirk caught on immediately. “The hobbit???” he asked. I nodded silently. “You wanna make out again?” he enthused. I shook my head. I had to go say hello to Flo. And I had an idea...
I crossed the lobby, smiled, squealed, and hugged her.
Florinda: Lil’ Red! It’s been forever! So glad to see you!!! This is my friend, Denny.
From the corner of my eye. I could see Dennis shifting uncomfortably. I refused to look directly at him, neglected to acknowledge Flo's introduction and continued to converse only with her. "So glad to see you, too! What have you been up to since we left the woods?"
Dennis: C’mon, Val...
Florinda (appearing oblivious to the iciness between me and Dennis): Oh, I had some drama after the show closed. I'll have to tell you about it some other time... Have you seen Prince Big Bad (Scumbanger) lately?
I laughed. “Last time I saw him, he was hitting on some nasty fat chick at The Imp.”
Flo and I both scoffed at the pervy pest. Into the Woods was where I’d initially met Scumbanger. He played The Wolf/Cinderella’s Prince. Again... typecasting. There’s a whole essay in my brain about my first encounter with the pest, during which he quoted the song that he sang to me in the show, “Hello, Little Girl.” But it gets into some pretty uncomfortable territory because he made me feel... excited. Well, excited and scared. Nothing of note happened during Into the Woods, but our odd interactions did kind of set the stage for some extremely regrettable events during that Cats cast party.
I excused myself, saying that I needed to get back to my friend. And then I leaned in and said in a hushed voice to Flo, “Watch your ass with that one. If he’s the Denny I’m thinking of...” I gave her a look that only another female would be able to read. Her eyebrows shot up and she nodded. Dennis continued to shift as though he were trying to hold in a massive dump. “BABE! Uh...”
Flo apparently answered to that moniker as well. “What is it, Denny? Don’t worry. That was just telepathic girl talk. You apparently have a reputation...”
Dennis: Different Denny. I assure you I’m a pious gentleman.
Me: Ah. My mistake. Well, then. You guys have a good time! They’re playing Cole Porter, and the band is delovely. Great to see you, Flo!
I hugged Flo again, gave Dennis a curt nod, ignored the scent of mandarins and mountain air, and returned to Kirk.
I collapsed on the chaise lounge, exhausted from holding back the rage. I had no right to be mad at Florinda. I hadn’t seen her in three years, so how was she supposed to know that I’d had a thing with Dennis? Hell, I couldn’t even be mad at Dennis because the last time he and I had spoken in any meaningful way, I’d told him that I was no longer entertaining my crush on him. So why was I surprised to see him dating??? And why had he never taken ME out on a date like this??? And why wasn’t I smitten with Kadillac Kirk who HAD taken me out on a date like this, was an objectively excellent kisser, and a bona fide BALLER? What was wrong with me???
Kirk suggested going down the street to a quaint little bar and then sobering up at a diner closer to my apartment. I numbly nodded and followed him in silence for a few blocks. He assured me that I had “turned several heads” on the way to the new location, but I neither cared nor believed him. This wasn't the type of numbness I'd been aiming for. Now I needed to get schnockered. “Five shots of vodka, please.” Yes, I was serious.
Kadillac Kirk, my reliable designated driver, ordered only a beer and watched in something across between astonishment, concern, and delight as I slammed all five shots in rapid succession. I half expected to immediately retch all over the bar. But I felt fine. I half expected to immediately lose consciousness and wake up in the hospital. But I remained coherent. How I’d managed to take in that much hard liquor and suffer no direct consequences, I’ll never know.
I think I wanted to suffer. I wanted to either feel nothing at all or to feel a sickness bad enough to distract me from the scorching sting that pulsed through my being when I realized that I had lost the abstract notion I’d been addicted to this entire time. Hope. It wasn’t Dennis himself I couldn’t quit. It was that drug called hope. The hope that maybe, just maybe Dennis would give our romance a fair chance. The hope that maybe, just maybe he would make peace with himself, get his mind out of his crotch, and enjoy some agenda-free togetherness. The hope that maybe, just maybe he would stop bloviating about his admittedly impressive accomplishments for five fucking minutes and ask about my life. I had my own reasonably impressive accomplishments, even if they paled in comparison to his. A proper suitor would have enjoyed hearing about them.
But seeing him out with another woman, a woman who had no reason to parade her Dennis escapades before me as some means of revenge, a woman he was clearly courting of his own volition... My hope had died. It died before I’d had time to wean myself off it. Now I had to mourn the loss of hope, which is a very tricky brand of grief to navigate. Vodka wasn’t the answer, but it was what I had to work with. So it would have to do.
After enough time had passed without vomiting or collapsing, I asked Kirk to bring his car around to the bar so that I didn’t have to walk two and a half blocks drunk and in heels. He nodded and dramatically leaned in for a kiss. I recoiled. “DUDE! I told you. The moment has passed.”
Kirk: I beg your pardon. I misread your eyes. Thought I saw a green light...
Me: It’s fine. I just want to go home while I’m still feeling okay.
Kirk: Of course. Your chariot will be here soon.
He skipped off to fetch his Cadillac and I noticed that the lights in the bar were beginning to dance a bit. This should have been concerning. But then I realized that I was giggling. Wait... What? Oh shit. Sure, I was drunk from those shots. But what I was feeling in that moment wasn’t drunkery. It was stonery. Kirk probably misread my face because my pupils were dilated. Not from desire, but from drug use.
Some of you might be thinking that I was a bad friend for not introducing Lucy, an old dude connoisseur, to Kirk. Well... I did. Several years before the events of this story. He adored her. She, on the other hand, thought he was immature. And she wasn’t wrong. Lucy was astute when it came to sussing out a person’s true nature. Far more astute than I. Her initial assessment that Kirk was immature is about to be vindicated. Stretch those cringe muscles! It’s almost time for pie...
I somehow managed to get to his car. I honestly don’t recall how I got there. Did one of the bartenders carry me? Did some kind patron allow me to lean on him? Had Kadillac Kirk carried me out? I’m not sure. But my memory ceases to be fuzzy about halfway to the 24-hour diner. It might have been the very same 24-hour diner where Mary pulled her... shenanigans. I’ll never know.
Kirk: Would you say that you’re more drunk or more stoned?
Me: STONED. Definitely stoned.
Kirk made some sort of grunty noise and reached for my thigh. I slapped his hand.
Kirk: Stoned but not amorous? That’s rare.
I started laughing rather unkindly. “You’re a fucking horndog! I thought you were my safe straight male friend, dammit.”
Kirk: I solemnly swear that your safety is my primary concern, my stoned beauty.
I pretended to throw up.
Kirk: So... You’re not horny. But are you hungry? The diner I’m heading to makes this Maple Walnut Pie with the most sumptuous... sensual cream and exquisite drizzling of...
Me: Ew! Stop trying to bang the pie. Bro. Are YOU stoned? (Then I remembered the question.) Yes, I’m hungry. But I don’t like nuts. I’ll have banana cream.
Kirk made that repulsive grunty noise again. “Uhhhhh... Mmmmmm. Cream. Yessssss. Yes, we’ll be there in just a minute.” He was squirming in the driver's seat.
Me: GROSS, DUDE! If you’re gonna be like that I’ll just order HASH brows. Get it? Hash??? (I giggled.) You can’t make that sound nasty.
Kirk: Forgive my jokes. I think my blood sugar’s a bit low.
As Kirk parked, I began to wonder how I might get away with walking shoeless into the diner. The stilettos had to get off my feet. At least while I was walking. And Kirk was kind enough to give me his socks and wear his loafers “island style” into the establishment. Okay, that was gallant of him. Maybe he was going to behave himself for the rest of the evening.
I wasn’t terribly talkative as we sat down, and he expressed a bit of concern for my emotional well-being. I wasn’t coherent enough to explain what was happening to my emotions and I wasn’t sure I trusted him with my deep, dark secrets at that point. So I shrugged like a sulky teenager, ran my hands over my messy, windblown hair, and mumbled that I was “just hungry.” And right on cue, a very kind, slightly older waitress with a sweet southern accent stopped by to take our order.
Kirk: Ah, yes. We’ll have two cups of black coffee. And we’ll share a slice of that delectable Maple Walnut Pie.
Waitress: Oh, honey. That pie is scrumptious! I take it you’ve been here before?
Kirk: I have. This will be her first time to taste the splendor.
I hated to be a killjoy, but I interrupted and said to the waitress, “Ma’am? I’m sure the Maple Walnut is excellent, but could I please get a slice of Banana Cream? And a big glass of ice water?
Waitress: Sure, hon! Banana Cream’s just as yummy! I’ll be right back with those coffees and that big water.
Kirk was sucking on the tip of his forefinger and shaking his head a bit. “You’re passing up so many sensational... sensual...”
I put my forehead on the table and growled. “You swore you’d stop being nasty!” I held this #headdesk pose for quite some time before I finally lifted my head... only to see that Kirk was still sucking his fingertip and staring at me like a wild animal. “Pleeeeeease be normal,” I whined. “It’s been a really weird night for me.”
Kirk: Indeed. Many surprises. You know... You’re like titanium. Your flame burns so fast and so bright, if a guy doesn’t get in there while the iron is hot, he’ll never get another chance. I was too slow.
What the...? I was pretty sure he was wrong about titanium burning quickly. I’m no chemistry wiz, but my dad and my oldest brother are both big-brains when it comes to physics and chemistry. So I picked up some things just listening to them talk. Accurate or inaccurate, Kirk was being creepy again. He’d never been creepy towards me before, although I’d seen him act like this with other women. Usually with staggering success. Why????? His money. It had to be his money. Kirk was a nice-looking man, but holy shit... No amount of good looks could save this creep show
And then, our sweet waitress sat down our coffees, my water, and the two slices of pie. After I gulped down a whole bunch of water, I grabbed a fork, prepared to quell my munchies... and then I froze. Kirk was quickly flicking his finger back and forth across the top of his pie. And moaning. He noticed my wide-eyed stare, smirked, sucked the tip of his thumb, picked up the plate with both hands, and began flicking his tongue across the tip of the triangular pie slice. And moaning some more. Well, there went my appetite.
Kirk took his middle finger and jabbed it into the crustless vertex of the pie slice, then he began pumping it in and out like a piston, and flicking his thumb across the increasingly demolished top layer of whipped cream. He gasped this time. People were starting to stare. His pointer finger joined his middle finger in the piston action, and he replaced his thumb with his tongue. Between flicks of the tongue, he groaned, “Oh yeah, baby... Let me taste you,” but it was kind of hard to understand him.
And I was either about to run to the back office, tell them that I was in danger and needed a police escort home... OR I was about to burst out laughing at the spectacle. Kirk continued... He removed his fingers and gregariously licked pie filling off of them. "Ohhhhh," he groaned, "I got you soooo sticky. So sweet. So moist." And then he started sucking his fingertips again, switching from middle to pointer, middle to pointer and emitting a delighted little, “Mmmmmm” with every suck.
Finally, he jabbed his fingers back into the utterly destroyed pie, lowered his face into the mess and lapped loudly and passionately, moaning, grunting, and mumbling “Come on, baby. Come on. Mmmmmm. Come on.” I could see the waitress and some dude in a suit heading over to the table, so I sank down in my seat, partially covered my face, but continued to watch the train wreck. At last, Kirk shuddered violently as he splatted his entire hand onto the plate and rubbed furiously. And then he locked eyes with me. He sucked the tip of his thumb one final time and said, “You...” There was a long pause during which Kirk lovingly stroked the mess he’d made. “You... are the pie.”
I don’t hang out with Kadillac Kirk anymore. But he’s still a bachelor, ladies!