Theft, Embezzlement, and Outright Fraud Against the American People

by | May 14, 2021 |

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

When our Founding Fathers declared independence in 1776, they created thirteen free and independent states. When they joined together under the Constitution of the United States, the states delegated some of their power to the new union. In Federalist Papers #45, James Madison said, “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” Yet today, we see the federal government exercising numerous and indefinite powers against the consent of the American people. What can be done about it?

We’ll talk to Trent Loos from the Arise USA Resurrection Tour about how important it is to have a constitutionally minded sheriff, and how we can support them. We’ll also look at just a few of the ways the Biden Administration is committing theft, embezzlement, and outright fraud against the American people.

Big Bat USA:
Trent Loos Blog:

Subscribe to

Or subscribe with your favorite app by using the address below

Paul Engel

Author and speaker Paul Engel has spent more than 20 years studying and teaching about both the Bible and the U.S. Constitution. That experience helps Paul explain difficult concepts in a way most people can understand. As one manager described, “Paul can take the most complex idea and explain it in a way my grandmother can understand.” Freely admitting that he “learned more about our Constitution from School House Rock (a Saturday morning cartoon) than in 12 years of school,” he says that anyone can be a constitutional scholar. Since 2014 I have been helping everyday Americans read and study the Constitution of their country and teaching the rising generation to be free. Using news and current events as a springboard, I explain the Constitution and encourage others to stand up and secure the blessings of liberty for themselves, their children, and the nation.

Notify of
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
1 year ago

Great interview. I have, via a friend, been listening to Trent.

And I have been working at a local level to turn things around for 7-8 years now. I volunteer for the Convention of States, which is working at the local levels to use the Constitution to help save this nation from the communists and other nefarious anti-Liberty factions.
This works perfectly with everything that was discussed in this podcast.
To learn more:
In just 15 enlightening minutes, learn why and how we are invoking Article V of the Constitution to call a Convention of States and restore America, just as the Founders intended

Sign Petition 

And it aligns with George here:
George Washington:got it right. And we need either term limits (and other limits) or the abolishing of political parties.

“However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”
Farewell Address | Saturday, September 17, 1796

1 year ago

Absolutely agree, Biden is exceeding his Constitutional authority in his foreign dealings. And national politicians will not fix this, the Framers knew that.
Worse yet, Congress is not only in on it, but are semi-permanent parties to the crime.

The Framers did give us the Constitutional means to fix it, codified in Article V.

Paul Engel
Paul Engel
Reply to  Jerry
1 year ago

If Biden is exceeding the Constitution his Constitutional authority, and in fact governments at all levels are ignoring the Constitution, how does change the Constitution fix the problem?

Don’t get me wrong, I see no problem with amending the Constitution through an Article V convention. But if the document you wish to change is the very one being ignored, I don’t see how it fixes the problem.

Reply to  Paul Engel
1 year ago

The first issue with your statement is that “If Biden is exceeding the Constitution his Constitutional authority, and in fact governments at all levels are ignoring the Constitution,”

is actually not correct overall. Now bear in mind, evil lurks in the minds of all men… there will *always* be some trying to push the limits. And the Biden is getting by with this by the collusion of the other two branches.

IF the branch known as Congress is reinvigorated by several means such as term limits and an amendment that gives the states the right to overturn Congressional law by a majority such as 3/5, then it might get the idea that a POTUS cannot MAKE law via EO.

And a SCOTUS might also get that idea. Meanwhile, term limits for SCOTUS as well as states rights via an amendment to overturn SCOTUS by 3/5 th’s would also put them on notice.

Add to that an amendment to give the 9th and 10th amendment teeth by providing a procedure to enforce them both, would also be a big mover. Right now, the 9th and 10th are statements of purpose and have not direct enforcement means.

Article V conventions can provide all of that and more, and in fact what I just mentioned were in the sample amendments in Mark Levin’s book, The Liberty Amendments,
The Liberty Amendments by Mark R. Levin | May 13, 2014

And that was SEVEN years ago.
And I fully believe we could come up with even better ideas now, after having seen the worst of government to date.

Also, bear in mind the government is following as best they can (who can know all of this???) the Constitution in use, the annotated, with all the SCOTUS decisions for 200+ years.

So what needs to be realized here is that the Feds are following the Constitution. The question should be WHICH Constitution?

The answer is the Annotated Constitution, which is the original plus 230+ years of changes by courts etc.

So for instance, the Commerce clause meaning was changed by interpretation.
And so then how do we get it back to original intent?
Article V amendments by the States is the ONLY way that is going to happen.

If you reject State Sovereignty over the Feds given in Article V then you by default ACCEPT the Feds current usage of the Commerce Clause.

See “Wickard v. Filburn – Wikipedia” for an example; but there are so many.

Article 1 Section 8
Commerce Clause (3)
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Constitution Annotated

Reply to  Paul Engel
1 year ago

I’ll break this response up into different comments. That makes it easier to track what I am responding to, since you hit on several areas in one long comment.

You say that my statement that both Washington, D.C. and the states are ignore the Constitution is wrong, but you give no examples. The body of evidence of the corruption of state politics is actually quite large.Focusing on the states, how many are following regulations from federal departments and agencies that are exercising powers not delegated to the United States and therefore a violation of the Tenth Amendment? Depts. of Transportation, Education, Energy, Agriculture are just a few of these agencies. If the states won’t stand up against federal regulations that violate the supreme law of the land, why should we believe they would vote to overturn illegal laws or executive orders? Especially when the federal government threatens to withhold funding if they do?

OK, more detail on your first paragraph.
We have the Constitution as the Framers gave, plus amendments, and it fits in a pocket.
However, it has essentially been “amended” by SCOTUS over 200+ years by their court decisions, which “define” current understanding of the Constitution. Also, SCOTUS has allowed law made by Congress, and likely Presidential actions that they -should- have ruled on and chose no to.
The Constitution made the most powerful branch Congress, next, POTUS, and finally the Courts last in power. Yet SCOTUS now is the most powerful, able to decide law by the majority of a single judge.
Thus, they changed the Commerce clause from one which limited the Feds, to giving them virutally unlimited regulative powers. (Wickard v Filburn).
Meanwhile, the states, which have the power through Article V to fix all that nonsense, sat by and did absolutely nothing, thus abdicating their Constitutional duty.

Generally, the Feds are following the Constitution, but it is the Annotated Constitution, which is the gold standard (to them). Now, it is not likely they follow it 100% since they are human and want to break the law and expand their powers. And also, the Annotated Constitution is 3000 pages or so, and NO ONE can know all of that in order to “keep or follow” it.

Constitution Annotated. You can buy one for $150 or so from GPO.

You see, I agree with you on the INTENT of the Framers and the Original, BUT that is not where we are.
So the question is how do we get back to that? The ONLY answer is Article V, by which anything the Courts, POTUS, or Congress screws up can be fixed.
Nothing else can do that.

And BTW, amendments could GET RID of the EPA, Dept of Education, etc. Amendments ARE the means of standing up to these things.

The Article V Solution and the Absurdity of Inaction

Why Do We Need to Call a Convention of States?

Reply to  Paul Engel
1 year ago

You talk about Congress being reinvigorated by term-limits, yet term-limits don’t just limit how long someone can serve. First, they empower the political parties. If people tend to vote for one party or the other now, what happens when the party party doesn’t have to defend the voting record of the incumbent, but simply promote the next person in line? Then, more than ever, almost the only way to win a seat in a higher office will be to sell your soul to the party. Second, term-limits don’t just limit who can run, but who the people can vote for. Term-limits basically say that the American people are to stupid to vote properly, so someone must put limitations on them. Lastly, since, for the most part, the people elect people to those offices, how does playing musical chairs on the deck of the Titanic fix anything?

On your second paragraph:
Term Limits empower parties?
I really do not believe that. The Parties are ALREADY empowered. Through various means, the RNC and DNC get LOTS of money for campaigns. The MONEY wins the elections, and not really the people/voters. That fact really shows when you compare a primary race without an incumbent to one with an incumbent. The incumbent gets money, a lot of it, from the party. And the incumbent – rarely – loses. Once they are in office, they have to be awful to get remove by an election. Usually they are gone when the die if office or retire. Name recognition plus campaign cash seals the deal. Then it is just a contest at the General between the RNC pick and the DNC pick. And in some cases, the parties may even agree on ‘territories’ which get protected and never lose for that respective party.

And there is that nasty process where a Congressional member has to PAY to get the various committee positions etc, to the party. And that is recycled back into the funding of the party’s elections process.
It isn’t about legislating as much as electing.

And please do not defend the voting record of the incumbents. Go to and check the ratings. The vast majority of Republicans are worthless. The RNC props them up because they can get them elected, and know they will comply with party wishes.
INCUMBENTS have largely sold their soul to the parties. It is incumbents that are the problem.

Congress gets about an 11% rating and gets re-elected at an over 90% rate. It is not working.
The Truth About Elections

You said:
| “Second, term-limits don’t just limit who can run, but who the people can vote for. “

No, the RNC and DNC limit who the people can vote for. We have people on the ground who can attest to that, including me. AND, if WE get someone in who beats an incumbent (rare), the party does NOT like that, and may fail to support the victor in the General causing a loss.
Also saw that happen.
The people in the General ONLY get to choose between 2 parties, and do NOT get to vote for Each person EACH of the voters really want anyway, so that is a false argument.
It is MORE true that the people can vote and perhaps get what they want in the Primary IF there is NOT an incumbent.

Checkout my state of Indiana here:

This is an out year, no elections, so not all are shown.
BUT note the sorry ratings on Republicans, some of which are at or below a 50% rating (IE, are really a Democrat). Few are at or near the 100% mark.
Those LONGEST in office are the worst. Period. This alone seems to justify shorter terms of office.
And Indiana is a RED state.

Now, I am NOT necessarily a proponent of term limits IF there are NO other limitations imposed. That is why there are three areas to the COS application. It is the multi-pronged approach that is most useful to restrain the Feds.

The three areas: Application for a Convention of the States under Article V of the Constitution of the United States

And I believe we must ALSO have limits on staffers, lobbyists, etc, that tend to keep the DC swamp rolling despite who is in office.

Reply to  Paul Engel
1 year ago

You talk about term-limits on SCOTUS, but have you looked at the actual opinions of the new justices? They are just as bound to precedent above the Constitution as their predecessors. And since those in governments at all levels believe the SCOTUS rules from the bench rather than offering opinions, we’re stuck in the same loop, more or less, regardless of who ends up on the court. And since the Senate approves justices on their political presences rather than their fidelity to the Constitution, why should we believe we would get any better justices as they are forced off the court? Sure, as the two parties vie for control of the Senate the individual justices may or may not be more likely to follow the Constitution, but as a whole we’re still being ruled by oligarchs not the consent of the people.

The most powerful branch was listed first in the Constitution, and are elected by the people (House), and before the 17th, the Senate was elected by the State legislatures.
They are now out of control. They are not being limited by the President, NOR are they limited as they should be by the courts. SCOTUS in fact, helped Congress with Obamacare TWICE when they should have struck it down.

Then the President, to enforce those laws from Congress, was the 2nd in power. He was NOT to make law, but just enforce it. And POTUS is making law (that belongs to Congress) via EOs.
POTUS is out of control.

Then we have SCOTUS and the Federal courts. They can and do make law. The made abortion legal (thus a law), when it had literally nothing to do with the Constitution.
There are several problems here with the courts. One is that the courts were not intended to be all powerful. Yet this group of NINE, with often a near match up in sides, means ONE judge can decide the law, the fate of the nation.

So looking at the three branches and what they are supposed to be doing, it becomes apparent that we have a problem with “structure”. The borders between the branches have become fragmented, and each of them are doing things they should not be doing.
This problem with structure, weak borders between the branches, cannot be fixed by elections. A structural change must be made.

And besides term limits on the courts, some innovation to bring power back to the states is needed. One idea that could get some traction is up the SCOTUS count to 50, one per state. And have the stated each choose their judge. OR some variation thereof. That would most likely make SCOTUS more conservative and originalist than it has been for a very long time.

Reply to  Paul Engel
1 year ago

You talk about giving the Ninth & Tenth Amendments teeth, but they are already the supreme law of the land, (Article VI, Clause 2), and are routinely ignored. Are you talking about making them super-duper supreme law? Both Alexander Hamilton (Federalist Paper #78) and the Supreme Court (Marbury v. Madison) states that any law made contrary to the Constitution is void, yet they are not only followed but used as justification for further infringements every day.

The 9th and 10th ARE part of the Constitution certainly. But ignored? Many in the states would like to do something to change what goes on, but how? You say that “any law made contrary to the Constitution is void” but HOW is that decided? Because you or I say so? No, that wouldn’t be right. There is NO mechanism, no procedure to decide that except Article V, and that is too cumbersome to use frequently. We have this issue and need a procedure to decide:

1. Whether and infraction has occurred BY some majority of the states and
2. How to fix the issue.

This problem can be fixed by a simple amendment. Like this sample:

Hamilton finished the Federalist papers with #85, in which he fully supported Article V amendment proposal conventions.

FEDERALIST No. 85 [but read it all]
“We may safely rely on the disposition of the State legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority.”

Federalist 85 and Article V

Reply to  Paul Engel
1 year ago

And through all this, you still haven’t answered my fundamental question. If the Constitution is ignored today, how does changing it make things better? I have not issue with an Article V convention, as long as it is help constitutionally. But I have seen no evidence that it will fix much of anything, especially in the long term.

The first issue with your statement is that the Constitution isn’t being followed. But they are following the annotated Constitution, with all the Court decisions for over 200 years.
Constitution Annotated

The problem is then to cut that down to size, and amendments can do that.

The other issue is the *approach*. What do I mean by that?
All the means being used thus far, elections, marches, protests, letters, all of it, is -reactive-. Those means respond to some situation as a reaction. And most likely, do not get any results. Even when they do get results, the end is less is changed to the positive than was changed to the negative.
We *always* lose.

But a COS process to propose, then later ratify amendments, is *proactive*. It gets *ahead* of the ball, and stops the issues from happening, rather than try to undo them after the fact.
We just cannot win and reverse the course of the nation by being *reactive*. And that is why this process given by the Founders themselves is so important.

And in fact, these fix things in the LONG TERM. Now sure, we will probably have to add more amendments as time goes on, since men in government will try to figure out another way around the new limits. I expect them to do that. And that is why there *should* have been amendments conventions every 10-20 years since 1789. If we had, we may have avoided a civil war, and many other issues since, including the issues we have now.

The Lamp of Experience: Constitutional Amendments Work

Reply to  Paul Engel
1 year ago

Since the people elect those in both state and federal legislatures, and in many cases it is members of those legislatures that approve of justices, who is more at fault, those in office or those who hire them? As James Garfield said: “Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness and corruption.” The ultimate problem with governments at all levels is the responsibility of the American people. To quote Thomas Jefferson. “I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves: and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their controul with a wholsome discretion, the remedy is, not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. this is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”

Yes, the people do that. But when were they (the people OR the legislators) informed of their power to stop the Feds, put limits on them, and curb the corruption via Article V? We will NEVER stop all corruption; they even had it in 1789. It has existed for the entire history of mankind.
But we have a governmental system that can curb it, if we would only use it. ALL of it, including Article V.
So do we, instead, just throw up our hands and keep on trying the *reactionary* means of slowing the decline, OR implement the *proactive* means we were given.

Jefferson supported Article V also, and dismissed the notion it should not be used.

The Jefferson Memorial and Article V

Since there is quite a bit of evidence that the people are not exercising their power enlightened by the Constitution, the answer is not to take it away from them, of even to limit their ability to exercise it, but to educate them. Otherwise, we will simply replace one group of corrupt officials with another,

Here you refer to elections I presume. Nothing here in a convention takes anything away overall. The voter votes for the state legislators, who have the MOST powerful positions in the government, since they can control the Federal government. Please note that in 1789 the average lifespan was about 35. There was no pressing need for term limits since death took care of that, on the average.

IF WE DO NOT let the voters and state legislators use that power as the Founders intended, we HAVE taken the power away from the people. Of all the things the voter can do, a COS is the MOST grassroots controlled and empowered event possible.

When a convention is held, it will be covered LIVE by every venue that can afford it, certainly CSPAN and will do so. THIS will be the MOST educational event on the US Constitution every held. AND to get there, COS had to go to every state legislature with volunteers at every turn educating the legislators on the Constitution and Article V, with all the attending *needs* that must be covered by amendments proposals.

You want education? You can’t do better than this.
Just look at what has gone on here on your website with just this discussion. And take that times millions, for all the COS supporters spreading the word.

2,028,464 petition signatures, over 5 million supporters, aiming for 40 million.

Reply to  Paul Engel
1 year ago

I will also add what I missed saying:

Here are the sample amendments. All there, but the link does point to the 10th suggestion first.

I do not expect Amendments to fix *everything*. They won’t fix the states that are broken, although they would be a push to get that done.

And one way is the convention itself, which I think would be the *biggest* event in history to educate the American public about the Constitution, about how the Feds have overstepped, about how the States have let it happen by NOT holding a COS every 5-20 years after 1789.

There was indeed a first step by Virginia in1789 to call for a COS to get the Bill of Rights because Congress had promised to do it and the states were getting impatient.

Article V’s Convention Mechanism is _THE_ Tool Given to the States to Check Federal Power. It is Not Controlled by Congress.

On November 14, 1788, the Virginia General Assembly filed the first application for an Article V Convention to propose a bill of rights, using this language:

The anxiety with which our countrymen press for the accomplishment of this important end, will ill admit of delay. The slow forms of Congressional discussion and recommendation, if, indeed, they should ever agree to any change, would, we fear, be less certain of success. Happily for their wishes, the Constitution hath presented an alternative, by admitting the submission to a convention of the States. To this, therefore, we resort as the source from whence they are to derive relief from their present apprehensions.

We do, therefore, in behalf of our constituents, in the most earnest and solemn manner, make this application to Congress, that a convention be immediately called, of deputies from the several States, with full power to take into their consideration the defects of this Constitution that have been suggested by the State Conventions, and report such amendments thereto as they shall find best suited to promote our common interests, and secure to ourselves and our latest posterity, the great and unalienable rights of mankind.

This document makes it abundantly clear that an Article V Convention is a “convention of the States,” to be composed of “deputies from the several States.”
[read more at the link]

Article V’s Convention Mechanism is _THE_ Tool Given to the States to Check Federal Power. It is Not Controlled by Congress.

Reply to  Paul Engel
1 year ago

I know all about the CRS report, having responded to this probably 6-7 years ago.
First, though, who does CRS work for? (one guess only).
Who butters their bread, pays their salary, etc. (still, one guess only).

Then you can probably figure out where the bias might be.

Congress has NO power over a Convention of STATES. It is a convention of STATES, and THEY decide how it is run. All Congress does is count to 34 and rent a room for the meeting. And the States can use that room OR rent another one somewhere else. Congress was given the job of a secretary, who is the person that takes care of those things in many businesses. That is ALL they have to do as far as the convention goes. But even on the convention, the states have had at least 40 conventions in the past. They know how to do it.

And there is plenty of proof that is true, besides just a casual reading of Article V itself.

In addition to the information below, Robert Natelson, the expert on Article V, has written a book on Article V, in ebook or paper; your choice. It answers this and a lot more.

The Law of Article V: State Initiation of Constitutional Amendments

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) Report on Article V

Can Congress Block a Convention of States?

Article V says Congress “calls” the Convention. Doesn’t this mean Congress will control the Convention?

What if Congress Refuses to Call an Article V Convention? (founders intended co-EQUAL power to propose amendments)

The Congressional Role in Calling the Convention

We Know the Rules: Congress Does Not Control a Convention of States

What If Congress Refuses to Call a Convention?

Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is for educational, general information, and entertainment purposes only and is never intended to constitute medical or legal advice or to replace the personalized care of a primary care practitioner or legal expert.

While we endeavor to keep this information up to date and correct, the information provided by America Out Loud, its website(s), and any properties (including its radio shows and podcasts) makes no representations, or warranties of any kind, expressed, or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability, or availability with respect to its website(s) or the information, products, services or related graphics and images contained on the website(s) for any purpose.

The opinions expressed on the website(s), and the opinions expressed on the radio shows and podcasts, are the opinions of the show hosts and do not necessarily represent the opinions, beliefs, or policies of anyone or any entity we may endorse. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

At no time, nor in any event, will we be liable for any loss, or damage, including without limitation, indirect or consequential loss of data or profits arising out of, in an association of, or connection with the use of this website.

Through this website, users can link to other websites that may be listed. Those websites are not under the control of America Out Loud or its brands. We have no control over the nature, content, or availability of those sites. America Out Loud has no control over what the sites do with the information they collect. The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation, nor does it endorse the views expressed with or by them.

Every effort is made to keep the website up and running smoothly. However, America Out Loud takes no responsibility for, nor are we, and will not be liable for being temporarily unavailable due to technical difficulties beyond our control. America Out Loud does not sell, trade, nor market email addresses or other personal data.

Use the code ‘OUTLOUD’ and receive your 20% discount on your first order.
Physicians Must Assert Their ‘Independence’ Against Misinformation Claims

Physicians Must Assert Their ‘Independence’ Against Misinformation Claims

America Out Loud PULSE with Dr. Marilyn Singleton – No free thinker is immune from tyranny. Physicians are being silenced by proposed laws such as California’s AB 2098. This bill threatens doctors with the loss of their license for spreading “misinformation,” defined as any “false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus.”

Science Now Has a Chance For Truth, Thank You SCOTUS for EPA Ruling

Science Now Has a Chance For Truth, Thank You SCOTUS for EPA Ruling

The Prism of America’s Education with Host Karen Schoen – Is America becoming sane again? “Supreme Court Ruling Limiting EPA’s Power to Regulate Carbon Dioxide Emissions Is Good for the Nation,” Says The Heartland Institute. “The Supreme Court ruled definitively that EPA cannot subvert our democracy and assert restrictive powers that were never given to it by Congress. This is a huge win for our vibrant democracy.”

Tribute To Dr. Zelenko & American Heroes Everywhere

Tribute To Dr. Zelenko & American Heroes Everywhere

Energetic Health Radio with Dr. Henry Ealy – Dr. H pays tribute to Dr. Zev Zelenko, a fearless and faithful American Hero Patriot that has made his transition into the glory of God. Listen in as we talk about Heroes, saying ‘NO!’ to discrimination, and saying ‘YES!’ to fasting for people who no longer wish to be genetically modified…

War, Intelligence, Energy and Elections – a Discussion with Senator Bob Kasten

War, Intelligence, Energy and Elections – a Discussion with Senator Bob Kasten

The Other Side of the Story with Dr. Jay Lehr and Tom Harris – Should we stand up to Putin even if it means nuclear war? What is the proper role of NATO in Ukraine and the rest of Europe? Who will the Democrats select to be their 2024 presidential candidate? Who really pulls the strings in the Biden administration?  Former senator and congressman Robert Kasten, Jr., an aid to both Reagan and Trump…

Jan 6 Committee and Supreme Court Rulings Spotlight the American Divide on Viewpoint This Sunday

Jan 6 Committee and Supreme Court Rulings Spotlight the American Divide on Viewpoint This Sunday

Viewpoint This Sunday with Malcolm Out Loud – 64% think the January 6 attack on the Capitol was planned, reports a Quinnipiac poll. Lt. Col Tony Shaffer joins us as America marks the 246 year birth of our great nation. We’ll have an extended interview with Congressman Byron Donalds on the Supreme Court Ruling that Biden can end the ‘Remain in Mexico’ Policy. And what are the Biggest Concerns to Americans coming into the Midterm Elections…

“If they mean to have war, let it begin here!”

“If they mean to have war, let it begin here!”

The Constitution Study with Host Paul Engel – When the British marched on Lexington, MA, they were met by the Massachusetts Militia. When the British commander ordered the militia to drop their weapons and disperse, the Militia commander, Captain John Parker, said these famous words. “Stand your ground. Don’t fire unless fired upon. But if they mean to have war, let it begin here!”

The Naaman Lesson

The Naaman Lesson

FAITH IS… with Pastor Rick Stevens – At some time in our lives, most of us will come face to face with a problem we cannot solve. It won’t matter how much power we have or how much money we can throw at the problem. We will discover that we are powerless. When you get to that place, remember God is powerful…

Civil Discourse In An Uncivil World

Civil Discourse In An Uncivil World

The Voice of a Nation with guest host Ilana Freedman – How can we communicate with people who disagree vehemently with our beliefs and refuse to talk about the issues? Well, Rabbi Jacobson, Chabad Rabbi in Des Moines, Iowa, has found a way to do just that, and in my conversation with him, I found out that there’s a lot we can…

Choosing Life Over Death

Choosing Life Over Death

After Dark with Hosts Rob & Andrew – It’s been barely a week since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and already many left-wing politicians are devising plans to keep children from being born. Celebrating life used to be the mantra of the left, but that is long gone. Even the idea of promoting the family institution is becoming a draconian…

Use the code ‘OUTLOUD’ and receive your 20% discount on your first order.
America Out Loud 6 years

Celebrating 6 incredible years fighting to restore liberty and justice to our beloved America.

Your Source for Free Speech, Talk Radio, Podcasts, and News.


Here we take on the challenges of our generation so that we can preserve future generations. Please consider making a contribution in the fight for liberty!


The APPS are free; the mission is priceless!

Free APP

Podcast Networks

Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts

Subscribe and Listen on Your Favorite APP

Our Columnists and Show Hosts

Truth For Health

Apple Podcasts

COVID Solution Summit

Apple Podcasts

Evacuating Americans & fully-vetted Afghan's at Risk - Help Us!

Apple Podcasts

Empowering and mentoring conservative trailblazers from Generation Z to win!

Apple Podcasts

Turning Point Action is Recruiting Precinct Chairs - Become a Grassroots Warrior Today!

Apple Podcasts

Please join us to protect the Supreme Court:
Sign the Petition!

Apple Podcasts

The LATINO USA EXIT from the Democrat Party, click for details...

Apple Podcasts

Fighting corporate censorship and ensuring voter integrity...

Apple Podcasts

Support wounded and fallen police officers. The Wounded Blue.

Wounded Blue
Share via
Copy link