11 Comments

We have evidence that Hazel has been voting Democrat since at least 2008

Expand full comment

The cat is out of the bag, Hazel and father have been exposed. I am from another district and I am sure there are many more like me who are sick of deceitful and uncouth people playing with fear tactics and pushing an agenda to drive liberal or WEF motivated group think into ID. WE WILL NOT be intimidated! I'm happy to send financial support if you need to set up a GiveSendGo account.

Expand full comment

God Bless. Don't have much but will give what I can to help.

Expand full comment

Thank you for your toughness and dedication to truth and freedom.

Expand full comment

Re: PAC money being used to attack freedom legislators. What the PAC money is being used for - to target freedom legislators and print outright lies about them - is unlawful, isn't it? It's slander and attempts to influence an election! There must be legal consequences for Brad Little's PAC.

Expand full comment

The only solution to lawfare is: Loser Pays. Nothing else will solve this problem. Stand strong, keep you focus, and keep Ephesians 6:11-18 first and foremost in your mind. Continue exposing the truth. May God continue to bless you.

Expand full comment

Is it defamation if the information that was exposed about Ms. Hazel is true? Was she or was she not associated with Idaho Women for Biden? Was her father or was he not, involved in the Ruby Ridge debacle? It ought to be easy enough to prove if these allegations are true or not, without having to resort to intimidation tactics with a threatening letter from a lawyer.. If the meeting that Senator Zuiderveld was not allowed to attend was on the up and up, for the sake of transparency, it would be pretty simple to let the public know what issues were presented by Ms. Hazel. If nothing nefarious was going on, a simple statement would clear up any alleged conspiracies. Why were the attendees sworn to confidentiality or why do they have selective amnesia about what was discussed? Asking for a friend....

Expand full comment

Ms. Hazel should’ve left it alone… When she gets questioned under oath, she’ll be faced with telling the truth, potentially exposing herself; or lying and risking perjury. If it is fame she is seeking, she’s getting ready to find out who her “true” friends are. This should prove to be a defining, albeit interesting, moment for her.

Expand full comment

funny her lawyer doesn't specifically state which statements are false

Expand full comment

They never do. It’s the new modus operandi— Be vague, put a person on the defense and keep them guessing. The hope of the attorney is that the defendant will hand up more incriminating information to exploit. Thus, running up fees. CA-CHING!

Expand full comment