On February 17th, the New Hampshire Senate Finance Committee held a hearing on HB 104 — the Defend the Guard Act.

The bill had already passed the New Hampshire House by a 23-vote margin. Public testimony was overwhelmingly in support: 51 in favor, 2 opposed.

And then, after the hearing concluded, the committee entered executive session.

Ninety-six seconds later, the bill was dead.

No debate.
No discussion.
No visible review of written submissions — despite assurances at the beginning of the hearing that those submissions would be considered.

In this episode, I play the hearing in full and provide real-time commentary.

We break down:

• Claims about federal supremacy and the Governor’s role
• Misstatements about the 2001 AUMF and Congress’s war powers
• The misuse of 10 U.S.C. §12301(f) (the Montgomery Amendment)
• Funding scare tactics and how the POM process actually works
• The difference between Title 32 readiness funding and Title 10 foreign combat deployments
• What it means for states to assert their constitutional authority before Guard troops are federalized

This isn’t about refusing lawful orders.

It’s about insisting that the highest law in the land — the Constitution — be followed before citizen-soldiers are sent into foreign wars.

For the first time in a New Hampshire Senate committee, we now have a recorded roll call vote. Eight senators are officially on record opposing Defend the Guard.

Now the real work begins.

If you believe Congress — not the President — has the authority to declare war, and that National Guard troops should not be deployed into foreign combat without that declaration, join us.

Support the movement at:
bringourtroopshome.us
defendtheguard.us

Follow us on social media @TroopsHomeUS and @DefendTheGuard.

Live Free or Die isn’t just a motto.

It’s a responsibility.