Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Voting’

Op-ed: Vote to defend faith, family, life and freedom


By James Dobson and Gary Bauer | Monday, September 26, 2022

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/voices/vote-to-defend-faith-family-life-and-freedom.html/

Voters cast ballots at the Fairfax County Government Center on November 02, 2021 in Fairfax, Virginia. | Getty Images/Chip Somodevilla

I’ve asked my colleague, Gary Bauer, to write the following letter to our constituents in these final days before the midterm elections. I consider this to be one of the most important votes in American history. It may be our last opportunity to restore a balance of power to the three branches of government in time to save us from tyranny and moral collapse. Does that sound alarmist to you? I think not. I believe the danger facing this country cannot be overstated. Read on to understand the peril we are facing and what God-fearing citizens can do to help save this nation, the greatest in the history of the world.

America is in deep trouble. Our country is experiencing skyrocketing crime, racial division, political and economic corruption, disrespect for life, failing schools, and a growing drug epidemic. Many of our problems are a reflection of growing moral relativism and the breakdown of reliable standards of right and wrong. Our founders believed that only virtuous people could remain free. We appear to be intent on testing that proposition.

The only hope for our country is for Christians to rise up and let our voices be heard. To save the country, America’s churches must boldly speak the truth to a hurting nation. Millions of individual Christians, like you, must fulfill their responsibilities of Christian citizenship.

We are blessed to live in a country where we have enjoyed a level of religious liberty that’s rare in human history. But now powerful forces in government, the universities, and mass media are threatening religious liberty as well as our other freedoms. No solutions to the American crisis are possible without the participation of millions of American Christians leading the way. We must participate in the halls of government, in the public square, and lead the national debate. It is essential that we are in the pews on Sunday and first in line to cast our votes on Election Day.

At the federal level, this election will determine who has the majority in the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives. At the state level, dozens of governorships and state legislatures are at stake. At the local level, new mayors, city councils, and school boards will be elected. At all three levels of government, the men and women we elect will pass laws that will determine the kind of country we pass on to our children and grandchildren.

The U.S. Senate is divided today 50 to 50. Tie-breaking votes are cast by Vice President Kamala Harris. Thirty-five of these U.S. Senators are up for election. The new Senate that takes office in January will confirm hundreds of new judges to all the federal courts during the next two years. They will also fill any Supreme Court vacancy that may occur. The sanctity of life, religious liberty, your Second Amendment rights, freedom of speech, and much more will all be at risk if a new Senate majority rejects the Judeo-Christian values that are the foundation of the United States. Polling indicates over a dozen of the Senate races are so close that the winner may very well be determined by only a few percentage points. Think of the impact we can have on Election Day if just a few more Christians will vote in each precinct in America.

Not all issues in an election are of equal importance. As a Christian voter, it is imperative that you zero in on those matters with a moral basis and give them the highest priority. And remember this: behind every candidate is the party platform that he or she stands on and the policies he or she will promote.

Here are three of the key issues every Christian voter must consider when supporting or opposing a candidate this November.

The right to life

After years of prayer and hard work, the Supreme Court decided this year that there is no constitutional right to abortion. This is a tremendous victory that could save countless lives. The court sent the abortion issue back to the people of each state to debate and reach a consensus.

Planned Parenthood and radical pro-abortion forces have launched an all-out multi-million-dollar campaign to defeat pro-life members of Congress, state legislators, and governors. A recent effort in Congress to make abortion on demand, without any restrictions, the law of the land actually passed the House 219 to 210. Thankfully, it failed in the Senate, as it could not clear the chamber’s 60-vote filibuster threshold.

The vote was strictly along party lines. All but two Democrats voted pro-abortion. All Republicans voted pro-life. In both cases, this reflected the position of each party’s platforms.

Religious liberty

Our fundamental right to the “free exercise of religion” in the First Amendment of the Constitution has recently come under sustained legal and political attacks. Thankfully, this year we scored another major victory in the Supreme Court when Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, and Neil Gorsuch, all appointed by then-President Donald Trump, voted in the majority to strengthen the guarantee of religious liberty.

The battle rages on, however. At every level of government, we must elect men and women who unambiguously support religious freedom. Because the Senate confirms nominees to the Supreme Court, it is particularly important to elect senators who strongly support this basic constitutional liberty.

Protecting children

All candidates claim they are pro-child. But the devil is in the details. There is a well-financed powerful movement dedicated to exposing America’s children in the classroom to the radical LGBT agenda, inappropriate explicit sexual education material, and transgender ideology at the earliest ages.

In some schools, so-called “critical race theory” is dividing our children by race. It teaches white children that they are genetically racist and tells minority children they are oppressed and cannot accomplish their dreams. These are unfounded and deeply damaging doctrines.

Even in more traditional, conservative areas of the country, parents have been shocked to find out their child’s school may be promoting these corrupt agendas. Make sure local school board candidates, from rural communities to Washington D.C., support parental rights in the education and upbringing of our children. Look for candidates who are also pro-school choice and support faith-based Christian schools. Elect candidates who are willing to stand with you against the transgender agenda that is deceiving and harming an increasing number of our children. Parents have the divine calling to raise their kids, not the government or some radical agency that has no regard for the welfare of our youth.

The sanctity of life, religious liberty, and protecting children are all issues that should guide the vote you cast. But there are many more policies to also consider. Our southern border is being overwhelmed with millions of people entering illegally. Among them are drug smugglers, human traffickers, and even some on the terrorist watch list. Vote for candidates who will restore the rule of law at the border. Vote for candidates who support racial unity, stand with law enforcement, and are committed to helping our veterans. Vote for candidates who support the Second Amendment and who are working against voter fraud.

Our country desperately needs Christian men and women to stand up now for faith, family, life, and freedom. Please join us in praying for a revival to sweep our land and for God to bless us with courageous leaders. And pray that millions of Christians will fulfill their civic and moral responsibility to vote on November 8th to restore our sweet land of liberty before it’s too late.

Dr. James Dobson is a celebrated psychologist, Christian leader, and founder and president of the Dr. James Dobson Family Institute (JDFI), which is dedicated to preserving the biblical institutions of marriage and family by encouraging, inspiring, supporting, and leading parents and children to build their lives on God’s Word.

Gary Bauer is Senior Vice President of Public Policy at the Dr. James Dobson Family Institute and President of American Values, a public policy organization promoting Judeo-Christian values.

5 factors Christians should consider when casting their vote


By Jason Mattera, Op-ed contributor| Monday, August 01, 2022

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/voices/5-factors-christians-should-consider-when-casting-their-vote.html/

Voters leave a polling station after casting their votes during the U.S. presidential election in Olmsted Falls, Ohio, November 8, 2016. | Reuters/Aaron Josefczyk

Politics can be a messy business.

From the varied special interests wielding influence behind the scenes to the undeniable fact that we’re often left with candidates who exhibit demonstrable character defects, the idea of voting our values as Christians can seem like a daunting enterprise.

This reality is one reason why the proverbial phrase “the lesser of two evils” has become a go-to expression each election cycle. It’s an acknowledgment that both political parties fall short of our biblical standards in some way — embodying worrying degrees of corruption, bad ideas, and problematic leadership.

But that phrase is also an acknowledgment that Christians shouldn’t just throw up their hands in surrender, even if our choices are less than ideal. As best we can, we should pursue the application of biblical principles to every area of life, which includes the domain of politics.

How, then, should Christians weigh upcoming elections as they assess who to support at the ballot box?

Thanks to the recent slate of excellent Supreme Court rulings, we at least have a practical blueprint to help inform us as we make our decision.

Here are five areas to sharpen our focus during election season.

Ally to the pro-life community

Protecting unborn life in the womb should be one of the primary motivating factors for any serious Christian. The ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization undid the horrors of Roe v. Wadeturning the abortion battle from the national to the state level.

Which politician, Christian or not, will be an ally to the pro-life community?

That’s the question we must ask.

The ones who are hostile to the pro-life community will make it obvious.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., for instance, demanded that the feds shut down crisis pregnancy centers by force while her colleagues in the House blocked a congressional resolution to condemn the violence and vandalism directed at faith-based organizations in the aftermath of Dobbs.

Meanwhile, abortion fanatic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, D, ghoulishly vetoed millions of dollars from the budget that was allocated by the Michigan legislature to “encourage adoption and support pro-life pregnancy facilities.”

Like I said, they make it obvious.

Religious liberty

What good is religious liberty if you can’t exercise it in a public place? Not good at all, the Supreme Court concluded in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District.

Coach Joe Kennedy, if you’ll recall, was canned by his employer, a public school district, for leading a voluntary prayer on the field after each game. The district ridiculously argued that this voluntary prayer, which players from both teams participated in, was a de facto establishment of religion by the school.

It was not.

It was an American citizen exercising his God-given right to praise his Creator free from government interference.

Which politician will rigorously protect the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty and free speech?

This question is all the more important to sort out after we witnessed megalomaniac governors and local officials exploit the coronavirus pandemic to shutter churches and limit attendance capacity for almost a year, even as they allowed abortion clinics and pot shops to remain open and accessible.

Put differently, will the politician be a friend or foe to the Church?

Lest you think such a query is too abstract, remember that Beto O’Rourke, who is currently running for governor in Texas, previously told a CNN townhall audience in 2019 that, if elected president, he would rescind the tax-exemption status of any Christian nonprofit that opposed same-sex marriage.

School choice

In Carson v. Makin, the Supreme Court ruled that the state of Maine, if it is going to subsidize tuition costs for private schools, cannot freeze out faith-based schools from receiving funds as well.

“That is discrimination against religion,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.

Three of Roberts’s colleagues objected to the decision, which means three Supreme Court justices believed that Maine was justified in explicitly barring tax dollars from going toward religious instruction even as the State made tax dollars available to other private institutions.

“Discrimination” is the right word choice.

For voting purposes, any program or law — charters, vouchers, home school protections — that aids Christians in removing their children from the public school system is a win.

Government schools are not values-neutral venues for education. They are temples of worship for humanism, where a secular worldview is at the core of what is taught. If that agenda wasn’t evident already, the relentless reporting by Christopher Rufo exposing the radical gender ideology showcased in the classroom should leave no doubts.

Separation of powers

Civil government isn’t the only form of government, biblically speaking. It’s one form among many.

God also instituted self-government (Proverbs 16:32), family government (Genesis 2:23-24), and church government (1 Timothy 3:1-15), along with civil government (Romans 13:1-6).

And throughout Scripture He places different emphases and assigns different roles to each of these jurisdictions. Under this design, tyranny is averted because power is not centralized in any one form of government; it’s decentralized, or it should be anyway.

That’s the road to freedom. But that’s not how Washington, D.C., has functioned lately.

Americans have lost a great deal of their freedoms to unelected bureaucrats who populate the administrative state. No-name pencil pushers are imposing vast regulations on American society by decree, making a mockery of our Constitution’s commitment to “checks and balances.”

A seismic correction, however, could be in the works, thanks to the ruling in West Virginia v. EPA. Here the Supreme Court blocked the Environmental Protection Agency, and, by extension, other government agencies, from snatching power that was never delegated to them by Congress in the first place. As Neil Gorsuch underscored in a concurring opinion, any federal agency endeavoring to regulate “‘a significant portion of the American economy’” must be given an overt mandate by the legislative body. The same determination applies if an agency is trying to “require ‘billions of dollars in spending’ by private persons or entities,” the justice added.

It’ll now be more difficult for some Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez fanboy you’ve never heard of to micromanage your life from the windowless office of his D.C. cubicle.

While defanging the administrative state may not be as flashy as the other Supreme Court opinions handed down this term, West Virginia v. EPA is nonetheless a crucial part in upholding the biblical precept of separation of powers. Christians should be suspicious of any politician who doesn’t respect these constitutional boundaries.

One last thing…

This next topic wasn’t addressed in the Supreme Court’s most recent docket, but it remains an indispensable part of how Christians should assess who to back for political office. And that topic surrounds this question: What kind of people will the candidate staff his administration with?

That question is critical because who an elected leader hires to implement his policies reflects that administration’s beliefs and priorities. It’s not a one-man operation, after all.

Which brings us to President Joe Biden.

He appointed a man pretending to be a woman to a key healthcare role at the White House. Admiral “Rachel” Levine, formerly known as Richard Levine, is the assistant secretary for health at the Department of Health and Human Services. During an MSNBC interview not too long ago, Mr. Levine said he remains dedicated to empowering “trans youth” to get “gender-affirmation treatment in their state,” which is the euphemistic way of saying he supports pumping adolescents full of puberty blockers and recommending “sex” reassignment surgery if these “youth” convey discontentment about their gender.

Any politician or party who defends mutilating children over feelings they’ll eventually grow out of has tilted the “evil” in “the lesser of two evils” balancing act unequivocally to one side of the electoral scale … which means that balancing act no longer exists.

The Biden administration has similarly made news by hiring a guy at the Department of Energy’s nuclear waste division who shows up to work in stilettos, a dress, lipstick, and goes by the pronoun “they.” The same dude reportedly brags about his bizarre sexual fetish that involves animal role-playing. It’s called “pup-play,” if you’re interested.

What this means in the context of voting is that we may not like the candidate at the top of the ticket and may even find his personality obnoxious, but that should not automatically be a dealbreaker.

If the candidate is going to hire personnel who champion the unborn, who respect religious liberty and Christian education, who seek to scale back the size and scope of civil government, and who aren’t trying to subvert the biological differences between men and women and castrate kids in the process, then these are all strong factors to consider before casting a ballot.

In other words: Personnel is policy.

Remember that when Election Day rolls around.


Originally published at Standing for Freedom Center. 

Jason Mattera is a New York Times bestselling author and Emmy-nominated journalist. Follow him on TwitterFacebook, or Instagram.

Thousands of ‘Ballot Mules’ Delivered Tens of Thousands of Votes for Biden? NY Post Publishes Devastating Claims


Reported By Jack Davis | April 25, 2022

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/thousands-ballot-mules-delivered-tens-thousands-votes-biden-ny-post-publishes-devastating-claims/

A new report that analyzed the forthcoming movie from conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza warns that based on the 2020 election, Democrats have a “cunning plan” for the future.

After previewing the documentary “2,000 Mules,” New York Post columnist Miranda Devine wrote that “pesky evidence is starting to emerge of systematic schemes to subvert the electoral process — which must not be allowed to happen again if we are to restore faith in elections.”

Devine called the movie — which debuts next month — “the most compelling evidence to date” concerning the race between then-President Donald Trump and Democrat Joe Biden and said research conducted by the election integrity group True the Vote reveals what appears to be “suspicious ballot harvesting.”

The Western Journal reached out to the Biden White House for comment but did not immediately receive a response.

The research Devine cited relied on sophisticated tracking and surveillance video to reach its conclusions.

True the Vote acquired 3 trillion geo-location signals from cellphones that were near ballot drop boxes and election nonprofits in the weeks leading up to the Nov. 3, 2020 vote.

“Then they went searching for ‘mules,’ operatives who picked up ballots from election NGOs — such as Stacey Abrams’ outfit, ‘Fair Fight Action’ — and then carried them to different drop boxes, depositing between three to 10 ballots in each box before moving to the next,” Devine wrote.

Catherine Engelbrecht, founder of True the Vote, said she chose the term “mule” for the people involved in the operation because “it felt a lot like a cartel, it felt like trafficking … This is in its essence ballot trafficking … You have the collectors. You have the stash houses, which are the nonprofits. And then you have the mules that are doing the drops.”

Devine wrote that the network included individuals in battleground states who collected ballots from organizations that were ostensibly out to help everybody vote and then put them in drop boxes, a few at a time.

“The extent of the operation is jaw-dropping,” she said.

“When a mule is matched with video, you can see the scheme come to life,” she wrote.

Devine noted one snippet from the film.

“A car pulls up at a drop box after midnight. A man gets out, looks around surreptitiously, approaches the box, stuffs in a handful of ballots and hightails it out of there. Then he goes to the next box, again and again,” she wrote.

D’Souza said the efforts of the mules could have swung the election based on his contention that at least 380,000 potentially fraudulent votes were tracked by the project.

“Shockingly, even this narrow way of looking at just our 2,000 mules in these swing states gives Trump the win with 279 electoral votes to Biden’s 259,” he said.

Devine said that’s hard to prove. “There is no way to scrutinize those ballots now and see if they are fraudulent but if we must have drop boxes at election time, they need to be secure and under 24/7 surveillance,” she said.

She said Republicans cannot spend all of their time on the 2020 election because it “makes them look like sore losers.”

However, she also noted an interview with Trump in which he compared the election to a diamond theft at Tiffany’s.

“There’s no getting the diamonds back now. But we can stop the store being robbed again,” Devine wrote.

Jack Davis

Contributor, News

Jack Davis is a freelance writer who joined The Western Journal in July 2015 and chronicled the campaign that saw President Donald Trump elected. Since then, he has written extensively for The Western Journal on the Trump administration as well as foreign policy and military issues.

What Are You Hiding, Joe? Biden Admin Begs Court to Bury Bombshell Report on Dominion Voting Machines


Reported By Jack Davis | February 15, 2022

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/hiding-joe-biden-admin-begs-court-bury-bombshell-report-dominion-voting-machines/

The Biden administration is urging a federal judge not to issue any form of a report about potential flaws in the Dominion Voting Systems’ equipment used in Georgia, even though both sides in a court case over the machines want at least a version of the report to get out.

U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg is considering releasing a redacted version of a report from J. Alex Halderman, a University of Michigan computer science professor, according to Just the News.

Totenberg shipped the full, unredacted report to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency, which is part of the Biden administration’s Department of Homeland Security, and has indicated she wants to give the public a redacted version of what Halderman wrote, Just the News reported.

CISA opposes that step, even though Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger supports the report becoming public, if only to prove his argument that the report isn’t credible.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the case have suggested Totenberg release a redacted version of the report within 30 days of when it was sent to  CISA, according to The Associated Press.

However, in a filing last week, CISA attorneys urged that the court hold off giving anything to anybody until the agency decides what should be released based on its Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure process.

The filing states that “premature disclosure of Dr. Halderman’s report, even in redacted form, could, in the event any vulnerabilities ultimately are identified, assist malicious actors and thereby undermine election security.”

The filing states that CISA will let the court know when that review might be completed, and how much information the public ought to have.

The filing also warns that “CISA typically would not release a report such as Dr. Halderman’s at the conclusion of the CVD process; it would, however, disclose necessary information about any vulnerabilities and associated mitigations.”

Even the idea of releasing a redacted version did not find favor with CISA.

“CISA is particularly concerned about dissemination of potential vulnerabilities—even in redacted form—before CISA and the vendor have been able to address them through appropriate mitigation action. Such premature disclosure increases the risk that malicious actors may be able to exploit any vulnerabilities and threaten election security. CISA respectfully submits that, in order to best promote the security of the nation’s critical infrastructure, any vulnerabilities should be disclosed,” the filing said.

The agency said it will offer a timeline at a later date but suggested nothing would happen quickly.

“CISA is thus committed to taking these steps expeditiously and will seek to complete the process as promptly as possible. But the timeline also depends on the actions of a range of other actors outside CISA’s control. A 30-day timeline may be impractical in this situation, despite best efforts and prioritization of this work,” the filing said.

“CISA understands the urgency given the upcoming elections in which this voting equipment is presently planned to be used. Yet CISA can neither control how quickly any necessary mitigation measures are developed, made available, and implemented, nor at this time can CISA anticipate with any degree of reasonable certainty how long the process may take,” the filing said.

In the filing, CISA said that part of its review it must “coordinate between and work with the reporting source of the potential vulnerabilities (here, Dr. Halderman) and the vendor (here, Dominion), to analyze the potential vulnerabilities, including the risk they present; develop mitigation measures to mitigate the risk of the potential vulnerabilities, as needed; facilitate sufficient time for affected end users to obtain, test, and apply any recommended mitigation measures prior to full public disclosure of the potential vulnerability; and strive to ensure accurate and objective disclosures by the vendors.”

The report in question is part of a long-running lawsuit that seeks to change Georgia’s system for voting. More importantly, it is a piece of the wider discussion about potential election fraud in the 2020 presidential election.

To date, no one has produced any evidence or documentation that proves the machines were tampered with in 2020. Dominion, which was the target of multiple post-election allegations, has fought back, suing several of those who claimed its machines were part of an election fraud conspiracy.

In its reporting, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has indicated that the Halderman report, completed last year, describes how someone could, in theory, hack the system to change votes, without saying whether or not this was ever accomplished.

“Georgia voters face an extreme risk that [ballot marking device]-based attacks could manipulate their individual votes and alter election outcomes,” Halderman declared in a signed statement filed with the court last year, as The Daily Beast reported in January.

In a news release posted to the Georgia Secretary of State Office website on Jan. 27, Raffensperger called for releasing the report — to show that its criticisms of the state’s voting methods is unwarranted.

The report is “not an objective, academic study by a non-biased actor. It is assertions by an individual who is paid to espouse opinions supporting the elimination of electronic voting systems to help a lawsuit brought by liberal activists, including one funded by Stacey Abrams’ Fair Fight Action,” the news release stated.

“Sensationalized media articles and misleading reports from paid activists notwithstanding, Georgia’s election system is safe and secure,” Raffensperger said in the release.

The release included a statement from Dominion President and CEO John Paulos, criticizing the Halderman review.

“Security assessments of any system, including voting systems, should always include a holistic approach of all safeguards in place, including procedural and technical safeguards,” Poulus said in the release.

“There is a reason why U.S. voting systems rely on bipartisan election officials, poll-watchers, distributed passwords, access controls, and audit processes,” Poulus said, adding that Halderman’s review “did not take this approach.”

“Dominion supports all efforts to bring real facts and evidence forward to defend the integrity of our machines and the credibility of Georgia’s elections.”

Jack Davis

Contributor,

Jack Davis is a freelance writer who joined The Western Journal in July 2015 and chronicled the campaign that saw President Donald Trump elected. Since then, he has written extensively for The Western Journal on the Trump administration as well as foreign policy and military issues.

How No-Excuse Absentee Voting Allows Special Interests To Manipulate Voters


REPORTED BY: WILLIAM DOYLE | FEBRUARY 15, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/02/15/how-no-excuse-absentee-voting-allows-special-interests-to-manipulate-voters/

ballots

Signs outside every physical polling place forbid electioneering. Each state has some form of restriction on political activities near polling locations when voting is taking place. These restrictions are usually on the display of signs, handing out campaign literature, attempting to influence voters, or soliciting votes within a predetermined distance (typically 50 to 200 feet) of a polling place. A list of the specific electioneering prohibitions adopted by each state can be found here.

Opposition to electioneering is the main reason election integrity advocates oppose allowing political activists to provide food and water to voters waiting in line at polling places. What has been portrayed as a measure to starve and dehydrate suffering voters is really a commonsense prohibition against electioneering. Allowing such practices would allow anybody with a few water bottles or a bag of sandwiches an opportunity to harangue, harass, or otherwise intimidate voters who are waiting in line to cast their ballots.

But nobody has yet come to terms with a new type of electioneering that goes hand in hand with universal absentee voting. We call it “remote electioneering” and define it as an attempt to influence or solicit votes among absentee voters between the time they receive their absentee ballot and the time they submit it to their election office. Obviously, the opportunities for what in normal circumstances would qualify as illegal electioneering multiply considerably with absentee voting, since there is no way of knowing the extent to which partisan activists attempt to influence the behavior of absentee voters.

CTCL’s Goal Was to Influence Absentee Voters

But we have a glimpse of the attitudes of Democrat election activists toward electioneering with absentee ballots through Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL) documents, which outline the actions that the major recipients of their Covid-19 Response Grant Program would have to fulfill as conditions of keeping their grant money. By the admission of the activist election officials in Wisconsin who were funded by CTCL in 2020, absentee ballot electioneering was one of their major goals. Grant recipients were required to “Encourage and Increase Absentee Voting (By Mail and Early, In-Person),” mainly through providing “assistance” in their completion and the installation of ballot drop boxes. They were also to “dramatically expand strategic voter education & outreach efforts, particularly to historically disenfranchised residents” in states such as Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, which in 2020 were flooded with no-excuse absentee ballots for the first time ever.

We know that absentee ballot electioneering occurred in areas in these states where CTCL had a substantial presence because it was part and parcel of CTCL’s requirement that absentee voting be promoted, assisted, and increased. Ongoing contact between activist election officials and millions of new absentee voters was not only encouraged in areas that received big CTCL money, it was required.

Wisconsin Illustrates Extravagant Plans

The Wisconsin Safe Voting Plan, which served as the basic template for CTCL’s nationwide efforts during the 2020 election, provides documentation of their extravagant plans to use key election offices to electioneer the absentee vote that they were so intent on promoting.

Election officials in Wisconsin who were “on the street” had enough contact with voters to bemoan the fact that “countless [individuals]” in their municipalities attempted to submit cell phone “selfies” as valid photo ID. Explaining to them that this was not a valid form of photo ID and instructing them on how to properly submit valid ID reportedly “took considerable staff time and resources.”

If election officials had such knowledge, they must have had extensive contact with such low-information absentee voters while they were in the process of completing and submitting their ballots. If this were at the polling booth, it would qualify as illegal electioneering because election officials had “extensive contact” with in-person voters who were completing and submitting their ballots.

A great deal of concern was expressed about “Voters who, understandably, were completely confused about the timeline and rules for voting in the midst of a pandemic and required considerable public outreach and individual hand-holding to ensure their right to vote.” Figuratively “holding someone’s hand” as they cast a vote — whether absentee or in person — seems to be the very definition of electioneering.

The city of Green Bay planned to spend $45,000 to employ bilingual “voter navigators” to help residents properly upload valid photo ID, complete their ballots, comply with certification requirements, and offer witness signatures.  But it would be illegal for poll workers to help voters complete their ballots when voting in person. Why should it not be illegal for partisan activists to help people complete their absentee ballots?

The city of Racine wished to create a corps of “vote ambassadors.” Racine officials said they would recruit, train, and employ such paid ambassadors to set up at the city’s community centers to assist voters with all aspects of absentee ballot requests. But how do we know that the diplomatic efforts of such “ambassadors” would not be exercised exclusively on behalf of their own partisan interests when “assisting” in the completion of absentee ballots?

Violating Voting Booth’s Sanctity

The sanctity of the voting booth used to be considered one of the sacred traditions of American democracy, as it protects the right of individuals to determine who will represent them in government. But the kind of Democracy™ that involves the indiscriminate mass mailing of no-excuse absentee ballots is a top-down endeavor, where most of the power, initiative, and agency is on the side of Democrat politicians and leftist election activists rather than voters.

Their plan is to influence, cajole, and incentivize the least civically engaged, least informed, most apathetic individuals within their jurisdictions to fill out absentee ballots in a way that validates the consolidation of Democratic Party power. Absentee ballot electioneering is the key to a more modern way of “stuffing the ballot box” in an era where activists have convinced a significant number of people that their voting rights have been fatally compromised if they are not permitted to cast a ballot in whatever way is most effortless for them.

The fact that opportunities for electioneering are so few at the polling place, and so plentiful during the time that elapses between the receipt of absentee ballots and their submission, suggests another reason those who wish to find new ways to interfere in legitimate elections are the most strident advocates of universal mail-in voting. It also provides yet another reason why people who believe in free and fair elections should spare no effort to resolutely oppose no-excuse absentee voting in 2022.


William Doyle, Ph.D., is principal researcher at Caesar Rodney Election Research Institute in Irving, Texas. He specializes in economic history and the private funding of American elections. Previously, he was associate professor and chair in the Department of Economics at the University of Dallas. He can be contacted at doyle@rodneyinstitute.org.

Exclusive: Systemic Voting Issues In Pennsylvania County Even More Extensive Than Previously Known


REPORTED BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | FEBRUARY 15, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/02/15/exclusive-systemic-voting-issues-in-pennsylvania-county-even-more-extensive-than-previously-known/

Pennsylvania elections press conference

The video (and audio) hits just keep on coming from Delaware County, Pennsylvania, where a whistleblower secretly taped the aftermath of the chaos from the 2020 presidential election. Two recent recordings exclusively obtained by The Federalist from a source with knowledge of the recordings provide further evidence that systemic problems plague the large Pennsylvania county. The newest recordings provide some of the frankest discussion on how bad the behind-the-scenes situation was, with one election worker describing a part of the post-election situation as “abominable” and the attempt to do the impossible—reconcile some precincts’ voter sheets—as “a nightmare.”

The whistleblower, Regina Miller, began recording conversations involving Delaware County officials after she became concerned with what she saw as a contract worker assisting election employees. A source familiar with the videos explained that Miller made the recordings as election workers scrambled to find—and in some cases create—documentation in response to a “Right to Know” request that sought copies of the paperwork that would confirm the accuracy of the vote tallies certified for the 2020 election.

To date, the videos have exposed a wide array of problems with election integrity, including on-tape admissions that the election laws were not complied with, that 80 percent of provisional ballots lacked a proper chain-of-custody, that there were missing removable drives for some of the voting machines, and that election workers “recreated” new drives to response to the Right to Know request.

The most recent video, however, reveals a new area of concern related to the reconciliation of the voting totals in the precincts. Captured on film in this video was a conversation between one election worker and the whistleblower. With boxes of voting sheets lining the basement floor of a Delaware County building, the election worker tells Miller, “There were six precincts in one location and all of the machines were, all of the scanners were, programmed to accept any ballot of those six precincts.”

“It was a nightmare,” the Delaware County official explained, adding that “you couldn’t, there’s no way you could reconcile” the results.

The Pennsylvania Department of State checklist for the November 2020 election explained how the reconciliation process was to proceed. According to the Department of State, each precinct was required to compare the numbered list of voters created at the poll on election day to the number of votes recorded on the voting machines that appeared on the result tapes from the machines at the close of the polls. But with ballots from one precinct scanned into the voting machine of another precinct, as the Delaware County official noted happened, it would “be impossible to reconcile.”

The Pennsylvania election code required the election board to investigate any discrepancies or irregularities among the records. But, again, an investigation could not resolve any discrepancies because the ballots of six separate precincts were improperly comingled. More detail on the widespread problem of missing and comingled machine tapes was also revealed in a second conversation, with this discussion captured only on audio. That discussion began with the whistleblower again noting the chain-of-custody issues previously reported, where provisional ballots were transferred in unlocked bags.

This conversation added more insight to the potential risk caused by the lack of a chain of custody by exposing the number of hands the unsecured ballots passed through, each time providing a new opportunity for fraud. The unsecured ballots went from the “poll workers’ hands, then to return locations, then to the police officers, and then to us,” the whistleblower explained.

Miller then moved on to the issue of the machine tapes and inquired on the best way to have them returned to the county from each precinct. In response, an election worker is heard saying, “They have to be attached to the return sheet and they weren’t.” “We literally have two boxes that we got from the county of tapes,” the unnamed county official continued, “but they didn’t go with any ballot sheet.” Other machine tapes never made their way into the box, however, with the Delaware County official exclaiming: “It was abominable.” “When the community service people cleaned out the cages, they were finding tapes in there because someone just didn’t know what to do,” the election official noted in reference to the locked areas where the election machines are stored after the election. Then “we all panic, is that the fifth tape or the first tape?” he added. Some precinct workers thought if they just sent the tapes back, we’d figure out where they went, the recording continued. “You know, we couldn’t,” he told the whistleblower. When the whistleblower asked if it is a legal requirement or just the practice to staple the tapes to the return sheet, the election official said, “I think it’s a combination of both.”

He’s right. Under Pennsylvania’s election code, the return board must carefully review the tally papers and machine tapes and reconcile them with the general return sheets, but if the tapes are missing, such a reconciliation is impossible. That wasn’t the only reconciliation problem, however, as the undercover recording made clear. “We haven’t even talked about reconciling used and unused ballots,” the election worker noted, which Pennsylvania law also requires to be reconciled.

So now, added to the previous evidence of systemic defects in the 2020 Delaware County Pennsylvania election, we have additional details indicating the county’s mishandling of the last presidential election made it impossible for the county to fully reconcile the recorded votes to the number of votes cast and the number of ballots used and unused. Yet the county certified the election results.

What other counties in what other states likewise certified their election results notwithstanding similar, or worse, problems? We may never know, because what goes on in the canvasing of elections apparently stays in the basements and warehouses dotting every county in our country.

Without video evidence confirming cases of election malfeasance or fraud, politicians on both sides of the aisle will continue to put allegations—even from insiders—down as mere conspiracy theories. Sadly, even when there is video evidence such as here, the story is largely ignored by the corrupt press—or it will be until Democrats next take a beating at the polls.

Given the disaster Joe Biden has been, that is likely imminent.


Pennsylvania Court Strikes Down Mail-In Voting Law As Unconstitutional


REPORTED BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | JANUARY 31, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/31/pennsylvania-court-strikes-down-mail-in-voting-law-as-unconstitutional/

hands holding paper mail in ballot

On Friday, a Pennsylvania court declared the state’s statute authorizing no-excuse mail-in voting was unconstitutional. Within hours, Pennsylvania officials filed a notice of appeal with the state Supreme Court, putting on hold the lower court decision and thereby leaving in place the vote-by-mail option until the state’s high court rules.

With Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices elected on a partisan ticket and Democrats currently holding a 5-2 majority on the state’s high court, Democrats are predicting the no-excuse mail-in voting law will be upheld. That forecast seems accurate given the hyper-partisan approach to legal analysis seen since the 2020 election. It’s unfortunate because yesterday’s opinion in McLinko v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania reached the proper conclusion as a matter of constitutional analysis and controlling precedent.

The McLinko case consisted of two lawsuits consolidated by the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. Both cases challenged the constitutionality of no-excuse mail-in voting. Doug McLinko, a member of the Bradford County Board of Elections, was the plaintiff in one case, and Timothy Bonner and 13 additional members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives were the plaintiffs in the second case.

At issue in the consolidated case was Act 77, which, as the court explained in Friday’s opinion, “created the opportunity for all Pennsylvania electors to vote by mail without having to demonstrate a valid reason for absence from their polling place on Election Day.” The plaintiffs argued that provision violates Article VII, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.

Article VII, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution provides (emphasis added):

Every citizen 21 years of age, possessing the following qualifications, shall be entitled to vote at all elections subject, however, to such laws requiring and regulating the registration of electors as the General Assembly may enact.

1. He or she shall have been a citizen of the United States at least one month.

2. He or she shall have resided in the State 90 days immediately preceding the election.

3. He or she shall have resided in the election district where he or she shall offer to vote at least 60 days immediately preceding the election, 10 except that if qualified to vote in an election district prior to removal of residence, he or she may, if a resident of Pennsylvania, vote in the election district from which he or she removed his or her residence within 60 days preceding the election.

The key language in Section 1, the plaintiffs argued, and the court held, was “shall offer to vote,” which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had previously interpreted in Chase v. Miller, a case from 1862. At issue in Chase was whether 420 votes received from Pennsylvania soldiers fighting in the Civil War, who had cast their ballots by mail, were valid. While Pennsylvania’s legislature had authorized absentee ballots for military members, the state Supreme Court held the Military Absentee Act of 1839 violated the state’s constitution because “offer his vote” required in-person voting, explaining:

To ‘offer to vote’ by ballot, is to present oneself, with proper qualifications, at the time and place appointed, and to make manual delivery of the ballot to the officers appointed by law to receive it. The ballot cannot be sent by mail or express, nor can it be cast outside of all Pennsylvania election districts and certified into the county where the voter has his domicile.

We cannot be persuaded that the constitution ever contemplated any such mode of voting, and we have abundant reason for thinking that to permit it would break down all the safeguards of honest suffrage. The constitution meant, rather, that the voter, in propria persona, should offer his vote in an appropriate election district, in order that his neighbours might be at hand to establish his right to vote if it were challenged, or to challenge if it were doubtful.

In other words, “to offer his vote,” required a qualified elector to “present oneself. . . at the time and place appointed” and to make “manual delivery of the ballot.” The fuller discussion in Chase, however, provides a helpful reminder of the long-understood danger of absentee voting: “a break down” of “the safeguards of honest suffrage.”

Pennsylvania’s constitution was later amended to permit electors in military service to vote by absentee ballot. Then in 1923, the state legislature again attempted to expand absentee voting to allow non-military citizens, “who by reason of his duties, business, or occupation [are] unavoidably absent from his lawfully designated election district, and outside of the county of which he is an elector,” to cast an absentee ballot in the presence of an election official.

Another election dispute, however, resulted in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 1924 In re Contested Election of Fifth Ward of Lancaster City, declaring the 1923 Absentee Voting Act unconstitutional. The Lancaster decision again concluded that the “offer to vote” language of the Pennsylvania state constitution requires in-person voting. Because at that time the constitution only authorized absentee voting for individuals absent by reason of active military service, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held the 1923 Absentee Voting Act unconstitutional.

“However laudable the purpose of the [1923 Absentee Voting Act], it cannot be sustained,” the Pennsylvania Supreme Court explained, adding: “If it is deemed necessary that such legislation be placed upon our statute books, then an amendment to the Constitution must be adopted permitting this to be done.”

In Friday’s decision in McLinko v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the three-judge majority opinion found Chase and Lancaster City controlling and struck down Act 77’s authorization of no-cause mail-in voting. In holding Act 77 unconstitutional, the McLinko court rejected the acting secretary of state’s argument that Article VII, Section 4 of the Pennsylvania Constitution granted the state legislature authority to allow mail-in voting for any reason. That constitutional provision provides: “All elections by the citizens shall be by ballot or by such other method as may be prescribed by law: Provided, That secrecy in voting be preserved.”

The court rejected Pennsylvania’s argument, noting that when Lancaster City was decided, the Pennsylvania high court had quoted the entire text of Article VII, Section 4, and yet held that the “offer to vote” language required in-person voting unless the constitution expressly authorized absentee voting. Friday’s decision explained that Section 4 merely authorized the state to allow mechanical voting, as opposed to voting by ballot. (Two judges dissented from the McLinko decision, reasoning that mail-in voting is not a subset of absentee voting but a new method of voting the legislature may be approved under Section 4.)

Pennsylvania’s acting secretary of state’s argument that Section 4 of the state constitution authorizes the legislature to permit no-fault mail-in voting defies logic. As the McLinko court explained, if Section 4 gave the legislature that power, then there was no need for the state’s constitution to be amended in 1997, to add as a permissible basis for absentee voting, “observance of a religious holiday or Election Day duties.”

While concluding it was bound by Chase and Lancaster City, the majority in Friday’s decision in McLinko added that “no-excuse mail-in voting makes the exercise of the franchise more convenient” and that, “if presented to the people, a constitutional amendment to end the Article VII, Section 1 requirement of in-person voting is likely to be adopted.” “But a constitutional amendment must be presented to the people and adopted into our fundamental law,” the court in McLinko concluded, “before legislation authorizing no-excuse mail-in voting can ‘be placed upon our statute books.’”

The majority’s detailed analysis in McLinko was correct, both as a matter of constitutional interpretation and precedent. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, however, will not be bound by its decisions in Chase and Lancaster City, even though the principal of stare decisis should caution the justices against overturning that precedent.

That prudential principle is especially relevant here, where the “offer to vote” language “has been part of the Pennsylvania Constitution since 1838 and has been consistently understood, since at least 1862, to require the elector to appear in person, at a ‘proper polling place’ and on Election Day to cast his vote.”

A decision by the Democratic-controlled Pennsylvania Supreme Court abiding by that precedent and reminding its citizens that the constitution controls notwithstanding the passions of the day would also go a long way toward healing a divided populace.

Further, striking Act 77 now, when no votes have been cast and no citizens would be disenfranchised, would do no harm to Pennsylvanians. That was the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s justification in Kelly v. Commonwealth, for refusing to consider the constitutionality of Act 77 as part of a challenge to the results of the November of 2020 based on the equitable doctrine of “laches.”

“At the time this action was filed on November 21, 2020, millions of Pennsylvania voters had already expressed their will in both the June 2020 Primary Election and the November 2020 General Election,” the state Supreme Court explained in Kelly v. Commonwealth and striking the state statute at that point, “would result in the disenfranchisement of millions of Pennsylvania voter.”

There is no such danger, now, however. So, will the constitution control or will the partisan interests of the Democratic-majority of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court supplant the rule of law? Sadly, that latter danger is everpresent.


No, Requiring Voter ID Is Not ‘Jim Crow 2.0’ And It’s Offensive to Say That


REPORTED BY: CURTIS HILL | JANUARY 24, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/24/no-requiring-voter-id-is-not-jim-crow-2-0-and-its-offensive-to-say-that/

Joe Biden talking about voting rights

Whether Mitch McConnell’s boneheaded distinction between African Americans and “Americans” was a misstatement or something more sinister, the fact remains: America will not benefit from federalizing its elections.

The narrative that continues to be stoked by the radical left is that states all over the country are actively denying blacks the right to vote and only the federal government can stop it. At the center of this controversy is the “oppressive” requirement that all voters be required to produce a valid ID, which will disparately affect black voters because everyone knows blacks are more likely than whites to not have an ID.

Joe Biden’s risible claims about voting rights are true to what Malcolm X described as the “trickery” of the white liberal: “The history of the white liberal has been nothing, but a series of trickery designed to make Negroes think that the white liberal was going to solve our problems.” The trickery for today’s white liberal is to manufacture racism by creating the narrative that voter ID is racist and will disproportionately harm blacks. Or that limiting the amount of early voting and other measures that increase ballot vulnerability is inherently racist because blacks won’t vote unless the federal government prods them to the polls because blacks are so dependent on the federal government.

Not only is this narrative unsupported by facts, this lie covers the truth that Democrats don’t want any election laws passed that might catch or stop from voting illegally people Democrats believe will vote Democrat—including voters who don’t want to prove they haven’t voted twice in the same election.

Every black person I know has an ID. Can any supporters of the Freedom To Vote Act or the John Lewis Voting Rights Act produce black people who tried to vote but were turned away because they did not have a valid photo ID? That’s the rap on Georgia and other states’ laws requiring all prospective voters to prove who they claim to be as a protection against claims of voter fraud.

The big deal with these state legislatures tightening security measures is allegedly not that the measures are unnecessary, but that they are discriminatory, racist, and targeted to keep blacks from voting. Democrats must believe that blacks aren’t smart or interested enough to get a photo ID, the central security measure being added to state voting protocols.

For the past year, Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi have been “Jim Crowing” that the Georgia law and others like it are racist since black people are more likely than their white counterparts to not have an ID and therefore be denied their vote (for Democrats—because, according to Joe Biden, you ain’t black if you don’t vote Democrat). Really?

What is it about being black that makes one less likely to have identification? Seems like a racist sentiment. Assuming that there is a black adult without identification, we are supposed to presume that black voters without IDs would be so intimidated by a requirement to present an ID that they would rather not vote than stop by the local license branch and get an ID for the cost of a Big Mac and a Coke? Most states like Indiana will waive the minimal fee if necessary.

But if Democrats are right, and requiring identification is indeed racist, why are they only making noise about required ID voting? Shouldn’t they complain about driving, which would be racist because an ID is required to drive? What about opening a bank account, credit application, or ordering a cell phone, cable and ordinary utilities?

All these would have racist implications daily rather than just on Election Day. Yet there’s not a peep about blacks not being able to get a cell phone or cable TV, because that doesn’t get the Democrat his votes.

This all leads to the Democrat solution: kill the Senate filibuster. Of course, we are reminded that the filibuster was the procedural tool used by Democrats and Republicans to oppose civil rights legislation. But the use of the tactic that may have been used against what is now viewed as popular legislation does not make the tactic itself racist in its application.

The filibuster has evolved from its initial incarnation to a procedure that provides the minority party or position the opportunity to be heard. Since both parties have often been in the minority, both parties have benefited and suffered from its deployment.

I know it might be painful for them, but perhaps Democrats should open up their playbook and remember what they did to intimidate and suppress black voters in the first half of the 20th century.

It is unnerving that the Democrat Party draws comparisons to its champions of segregation Bull Connor and George Wallace suggesting that voter ID is a discriminatory tool, the same as the poll tax or the literacy test, that actually prevented blacks from voting in a notoriously humiliating manner. Such comparisons are a disgrace to the honored memory of all who fought and won victories in securing the right to vote.

In the continued invocation of Jim Crow, the euphemism for the abhorrent laws that legally sanctioned segregation, discrimination, and brutality, Biden and his race-baiting big government aim to racialize the filibuster so that all who support its continued use are brandished racist forevermore. I hope blacks in this nation are wearing thin to the leftist patronization that denigrates the proud history of black and white patriots who fought, bled, and died for freedom, independence, and our opportunity to vote.


Curtis Hill is the former attorney general of Indiana.

Mollie Hemingway Op-ed: GOP’s Old Guard Out of Touch with Their Voters on Election Integrity


Commentary BY: MOLLIE HEMINGWAY | JANUARY 13, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/13/gops-old-guard-out-of-touch-with-their-voters-on-election-integrity/

President Trump and Mitch McConnell

On Tuesday, President Joe Biden gave a speech asserting that people who oppose his plan for a federal takeover of elections are domestic enemies and racists.

“Do you want to be on the side of John Lewis or Bull Connor? Do you want to be on the side of Abraham Lincoln or Jefferson Davis?” Biden asked in his speech falsely claiming that the “right to vote” was in doubt throughout the country.

Biden is lobbying to end the Senate’s legislative filibuster in order to push through his plan for a radical takeover of elections. The election bill would unconstitutionally empower the federal government to control state election procedures, and help make permanent the decreased election safeguards that caused so many problems throughout the country in 2020.

The response of the old guard of the Republican Party this week has been to wholeheartedly endorse the media narrative that the 2020 election had no significant problems, while also opposing Biden’s plan to run elections. It’s a politically insane approach.

The 2020 election was riddled with problems. Voters know this. Republican voters know this very well. Time Magazine described what happened with the election as “a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information.” They added that it was a “revolution in how people vote.”

The rigging of the election included changes to hundreds of laws and processes in the months prior to election day, flooding the system with tens of millions of mail-in ballots even as scrutiny of those ballots was decreased. Mark Zuckerberg spent $419 million to finance the private takeover of government election offices — primarily focused on the blue areas of swing states — to enable Democrats to run their Get Out The Vote operations from government offices. The funding was significant enough to affect the outcome of races, independent analysts have concluded. And that’s to say nothing of Big Tech’s election meddling in the form of censorship and algorithmic persuasion nor of corporate media’s move into straight-up propaganda.

On Sunday, George Stephanopoulos — formerly President Bill Clinton’s press secretary — asked in his usual biased way for Republican Sen. Mike Rounds to opine against election integrity:

STEPHANOPOULOS: You voted to certify the election last year. You condemned the protest as an insurrection. What do you say to all those Republicans, all those veterans who believe the election was stolen, who have bought the falsehoods coming from former President Trump?

Even the dumbest Republican should have been able to answer this question without accepting the premise of the biased Democrat reporter. Knowing that the filibuster and election integrity are on the line, even a lowly, distracted Republican precinct person should have been able to respond by talking about fighting the federal takeover of elections, fighting the private takeover of government election offices, fighting the unconstitutional changes of voting laws, and fighting the second-class treatment of Republican voters by the media and Big Tech.

Instead, Rounds made bizarre claims about looking at “accusations” in “multiple states,” saying that while there were “some irregularities,” none were significant. Then he claimed — ludicrously — “The election was fair, as fair as we have seen.”

I mean, heck, if the election was as fair as any in history, why not join with Democrats in their push for a federal takeover of elections to make permanent the “revolution in how people vote”? But also, why say something that is not true?

The 2020 election was not the fairest in history, not by a long shot. It was riddled with problems, whether it’s the Zuckerberg funding or the coordinated Democrat campaign to weaken election security. The man who ran that coordinated effort was Marc Elias, the same man who ran the 2016 Russia collusion hoax. His partner was recently indicted by John Durham for just some of his lies associated with that hoax that did so much damage to the country and which itself was an attack on the 2020 election’s fairness.

As soon as Rounds showed himself subservient to Stephanopoulos, the Democrat media went wild. They amplified his comments, knowing how helpful they were to their cause of decreased election security and opposition to Republican victories.

One corrupt media outlet that excitedly amplified Rounds’ comments and used them to advance their political agenda was CNN. Russia hoax co-conspirator Manu Raju, known for pestering Republicans to get them to support Democrat narratives, wrote an article gleefully headlined “Top Republicans stand up for Rounds after Trump’s attack: He ‘told the truth’.” Some lowlights:

  • “I think Sen. Rounds told the truth about what happened in the 2020 election,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told CNN on Tuesday. “And I agree with him.”
  • Sen. Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican who contended Democrats took advantage of more voting rules eased during the pandemic. “I’ve moved on a long time ago, and most members of Congress have, including Mike.”
  • Other Republicans said it was time to focus on something other than 2020. “I say to my colleague, welcome to the club,” Sen. John Thune, the senior South Dakota Republican, said of the Trump attack on Rounds — something he has endured himself in the past. “I don’t think re-litigating or rehashing the past is a winning strategy. If we want to be a majority in 2023, we’ve got to get out and articulate what we’re going to do with respect to the future the American people are going to live and the things they’re going to care about when it comes to economic issues, national security issues.”

It is absolutely charming that Cramer has the luxury of “moving on” from the important election integrity battle, but Biden sure hasn’t moved on. Pelosi hasn’t moved on. Chuck Schumer hasn’t moved on. The entire corporate media hasn’t moved on. Why has Cramer moved on?

North Dakota is a state that voted for Trump in 2020 by 33 points. Its senator should probably be able to use some of his political capital to tackle the top issue of the week for American voters.

Thune says the politically wise thing to do is to not relitigate the past but work on issues people are going to “care about.” Someone should tell him that one of the top issues Republican voters care about is … election integrity.

The Washington Post this month reported that at least 69 percent of Republicans are seriously concerned about the 2020 election. Perhaps the worst thing a party could do if it cared about serious political power would be to signal that the issue means so little to them. This pathetic cowardice and incompetent weakness are exactly what Republican voters are sick to death of.

In previous months, Biden has falsely claimed that the country is experiencing “Jim Crow” resistance to the right to vote. He asked corporations to boycott the state of Georgia after Georgia’s legislature passed a bill to mildly improve its election security. Some of them bowed to the pressure. Major League Baseball, for instance, pulled its All-Star Game from Atlanta in response to Biden’s request, causing untold economic damage to the Peach State.

All of this is clearly an effort to keep Republicans from stopping Democrats’ 2020-style assault on election security. It works precisely because too many Republicans are too scared to fight. What if instead of Stephanopoulos easily pressuring Rounds into spouting Democrat talking points, Rounds had instead fought hard against these attacks on election security? What if he knew the facts about what actually happened enough to speak knowledgeably about what Republican voters want their leaders to advocate for?

What if establishment Republican politicians put away literally any thoughts about Trump — much less their anger or petulance about him — for a minute to think about the importance of election integrity and how to obtain it?

What if Republicans stopped running interference for what Democrats did in 2020 at the same moment that Dems are trying to take over the entire country’s election system? This isn’t merely academic. Old-guard Republican cowardice and fecklessness could lead to Pelosi becoming America’s election czar.

In general, Republican voters deserve a far better class of politician than what the old guard of their party has been forcing on them.


Mollie Ziegler Hemingway is a senior editor at The Federalist. She is Senior Journalism Fellow at Hillsdale College. A Fox News contributor, she is a regular member of the Fox News All-Stars panel on “Special Report with Bret Baier.” Her work has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, the Los Angeles Times, the Guardian, the Washington Post, CNN, National Review, GetReligion, Ricochet, Christianity Today, Federal Times, Radio & Records, and many other publications. Mollie was a 2004 recipient of a Robert Novak Journalism Fellowship at The Fund for American Studies and a 2014 Lincoln Fellow of the Claremont Institute. She is the co-author of Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court. She is the author of “Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats Seized Our Elections.” Reach her at mzhemingway@thefederalist.com

Senator Marco Rubio Op-ed: Democrats’ Voting Rules Takeover Is a Threat to Democracy


Commentary BY: Sen. MARCO RUBIO | JANUARY 12, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/12/democrats-voting-rules-takeover-is-a-threat-to-democracy/

Chuck Schumer

When Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., announced Senate Democrats’ New Year’s resolution to abolish the filibuster and ram through a partisan federal takeover of election administration, he framed it as an attempt to protect “free and fair elections,” the “foundation of our democracy,” from state governments. In reality, it is the leftist elites and their corporate allies, not the states, that pose the greatest threat to our constitutional system.

Free and fair elections are the foundation of our democracy, but the Democrats’ concerns about election rights are totally baseless. Progressives from all over the country — from President Joe Biden to Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams and Schumer  claim that Republicans are passing “voter suppression laws” to exclude their political opponents from the vote.

In reality, it is easier to vote in 2022 than it ever has been. Voter registration has been streamlined, and record turnouts show that Americans of all backgrounds are freely exercising their rights.

The left’s proposed reforms would restrict Americans’ freedom, not expand it. Legalizing ballot harvesting, for instance, would present more opportunities for corruption.

More generally, taking election administration powers away from the states and handing them to the federal government would not eliminate the potential for abusing those powers, it would just make it easier for officials in Washington, D.C., to abuse them — and it would further undermine our system of federalism.

In 2020, when election integrity fears swept other parts of the country, the state of Florida conducted its elections with peace, security from interference, and respect for all citizens, all in the midst of a worldwide pandemic. This is proof that with strong leadership, state governments are perfectly capable of holding the responsibility of election administration. Ironically, this year will be the first time that the president’s home state of Delaware allows in-person early voting, whereas Florida has had it for years. 

Left’s Broader Effort to Consolidate Power

Democrats’ campaign to centralize elections is part of a broader effort to consolidate power in the hands of a leftist elite class. This class wants to use that power to silence and disempower anyone who dissents from their radical progressive agenda.

Case in point: the very same people who said in 2005 that restricting the filibuster would mean losing to “the passions of the moment” and spell “doomsday for democracy” — Biden and Schumer  — want to eliminate the rule now that they are in power.

This power grab masquerading as democracy reform is bigger than just what goes on in the Senate. In 2020, leftist politicians closed churches and restricted in-home religious services while they let political protests, and eventually full-scale riots, go unnoticed. In 2021, critical race theory advocates indoctrinated our children and tried to remove parents from our schools. And this year, the Biden administration will begin forcing millions of Americans to get a Covid-19 vaccine to keep their jobs.

Collaboration from Communists and Corporations

In this movement, the political left has been aided by social media giants and mega-corporations. To gain favor with the Marxists in Washington, D.C., Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter censor dissenting voices, labeling unpopular views as “misinformation.” Amazon blacklists conservative authors. And banks that taxpayers bailed out in 2008 cancel accounts based on Orwellian “reputational risk.”

Of course, behind closed doors many of these same companies are in bed with a genocidal regime, the Chinese Communist Party. While they are eager to appear human rights champions, they lobby for trading goods made with slave labor and protect communist propaganda from negative customer reviews. It makes sense that corporations comfortable with totalitarianism abroad would be happy to silence dissent in the United States.

Those of us who are not on board with the progressive agenda should take note. America is still a free nation, and it will take some time before the situation here begins to resemble the dystopia that is communist China. But if it can happen anywhere, it can happen here, and censorship and consolidation of power are two important steps on the road to tyranny.

Americans need to remember where the greatest threats to our democracy really lie. If we focus our attention on exaggerated problems and imaginary fears, rather than the leftist elite power grab unfolding before our very eyes, we do so at our own peril.


Democrats’ Top Priority Before Fall Elections Is Rigging U.S. Voting Rules


Commentary BY: JONATHAN S. TOBIN | JANUARY 07, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/democrats-top-priority-before-fall-elections-is-rigging-u-s-voting-rules-2656251008.html/

U.S. Capitol after the insurrection

Have Democrats found the issue on which they can break what’s left of Senate traditions and parlay a 50-50 split into partisan domination? It’s far from clear that anything will be enough to move the two recalcitrant members of their caucus — Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., — to change their minds about voting to change the chamber’s rules that require a majority of 60 in order to invoke cloture and end filibusters. But if anything will do it, it might be the claim that passing their game-changing federal voting rights bill is the only way to defend American democracy against Republican insurrectionists.

Manchin and Sinema’s opposition was the rock on which the Biden administration’s effort to pass their trillion-dollar “Build Back Better” spending bill broke in December. The pair felt comfortable resisting presidential pressure as well as a storm of abuse from leftists on legislation that would likely sink an already shaky economy and fuel record inflation.

But with their ambitious spending plans blocked, Democrats are pivoting in the new year to a renewed effort to pass something that is likely even dearer to the hearts of their left-wing base: changing voting laws to make it easier for Democrats to win elections. They are tying the “nuclear option” on the filibuster and passage of voting bills to their attempt to turn the one-year anniversary of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot into a festival aimed at demonizing all Republicans as “insurrectionist” traitors who present a threat to democracy.

With their cheering section in the corporate media treating “Insurrection Day” observances as if it were a new national holiday and more important than 9/11, they’ve created more leverage that could shift their two holdouts. If it does, that would allow Vice President Kamala Harris’ tie-breaking vote to transform the electoral landscape in a manner that will end federalism for all intents and purposes and give federal bureaucrats unprecedented power to help Democrats win elections.

Democratic Holdouts Could Be On Board This Time

The crucial point here is that, unlike “Build Back Better,” Manchin and Sinema have already endorsed both the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and the even more far-reaching “Freedom to Vote Act.” So this will be a far sterner test of their principled opposition to a move that would essentially seek to make the Senate, like the House of Representatives, a purely majoritarian institution.

The Senate was designed by the republic’s Founders to act as a brake on the will of marginal majorities seeking to use a temporary advantage to enact laws that would transform the country with unknowable and potentially dangerous consequences.

The John R. Lewis Act would allow the federal government to intervene anywhere in the country to overrule local or state authorities whenever the left alleges that changes in the laws could theoretically disadvantage minority voters. That would override the U.S. Supreme Court 2013 ruling in Shelby County v. Holder that held that it was no longer legal for activist lawyers in the Department of Justice to act as if the country hadn’t been transformed since the Voting Rights Act of 1965 forced the end of de jure racial discrimination.

Legislation Would Federalize Elections

The “Freedom to Vote Act” would, in effect, federalize all elections. Along with turning Election Day into yet another national holiday, the act would impose early voting rules everywhere and allow voting by felons and attempts to influence those waiting to vote with gifts of food and water. It would make automatic voter registration, same-day registration, and online registration mandatory. It would also end partisan gerrymandering while still protecting often bizarrely shaped minority-majority districts that were created to ensure specific racial groups would dominate them.

Even more importantly, it would hamstring any efforts to ensure the integrity of the vote by preventing actions like the cleaning of voting rolls to ensure that people who have moved or died aren’t still registered. It would also ban widely popular voter ID rules, expand mail-in ballots, restrict efforts to ensure that their signatures are valid, and legalize vote harvesting. It would also impose new rules on campaign contributions in an attempt to override the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United v. FEC decision that protected political speech.

Taken as a whole, the bill would make every future election resemble the chaos that affected the 2020 pandemic voting, removing guardrails that ensure fairness. Even if 2020 didn’t produce a fraudulent result, the election still undermined the credibility of the system (with Big Tech internet companies and the corporate media tilting the election against former President Donald Trump).

This Is Not Defending Democracy

But like their claims that the actions of a few hundred disorderly rioters was the moral equivalent of al-Qaida terrorism or the Confederates firing on Fort Sumter, the idea that these voting laws will defend democracy is nothing but gaslighting.

Harris recently claimed the “biggest national security challenge” facing the country was the alleged “threat to democracy” presented by Republicans enacting laws in various states to strengthen voter integrity measures. The House’s Jan. 6 Committee is a partisan kangaroo court in which Democrats, along with two GOP turncoats (Reps. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., and Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill.), are attempting to mainstream conspiracy theories about Trump and the GOP. Their efforts to delegitimize opposition to President Joe Biden and leftist woke doctrines as “insurrection” continue, and the room for even moderate Democrats to oppose the left’s impulse to crush all opposition is growing smaller.

A vote to end the filibuster and pass these voting laws would be far from a defense of democracy or an appropriate answer to “insurrection.” This would be a stunning blow to the way the Senate has always ensured that slim majorities can’t enact legislative revolutions.

The essence of American democracy has always been the way the Constitution created a system that preserved order while allowing incremental rather than wholesale change. Belief in that concept used to have bipartisan consensus. But not for today’s Democratic Party. It is led by an aging president who is held captive by a leftist base that wants to create a legislative revolution now, before Democrats’ razor-thin majorities are erased in the 2022 midterms. That means changing the rules to get their way by any means possible is an imperative.

Some radical Democratic provocateurs are claiming that if they don’t get their way, Republicans will never allow another fair election. Although a Republican counter-claim along the same lines may sound like hyperbole, it would be closer to the truth to assert that ending the filibuster and passing the Democrats’ voting laws would be a genuine threat to the integrity of American democracy.

It may be that after the Democrats’ conspiracy-mongering about Russian collusion in 2016 and Trump’s “stop the steal” claims about 2020, neither side will ever fully accept any election loss in the future. But if Manchin and Sinema don’t stand their ground, the system will be changed in a manner that will make cynicism about rigged voting more a matter of common sense than tinfoil-hatted extremism.

Corporate Media’s Jan. 6 Anniversary Coverage Is All About Silencing Republicans


Reported BY: JOHN DANIEL DAVIDSON | JANUARY 04, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/04/corporate-medias-jan-6-anniversary-coverage-is-all-about-silencing-republicans/

Alengthy New York Times editorial over the weekend has set the stage for this week’s Jan. 6 anniversary coverage. “Every Day Is Jan. 6 Now,” declare the Times editors, warning that Republican lawmakers in 41 states “have been trying to advance the goals of the Jan. 6 rioters — not by breaking laws but by making them.”

The argument itself, that tweaking state election law is somehow a subversion of democracy, is absurd and incredibly lazy. But it’s important to note, if only because it will serve as the baseline narrative for the entire corporate media’s Jan. 6 coverage this week. Their message — they will all have more or less the same message — is simple: all Republicans are insurrectionists, the GOP is the enemy of the people, and the only way to preserve American democracy is to ensure that only Democrats can win elections.

To make this case, the Times’ editors had to stage a kind of linguistic insurrection. Lawful, constitutional efforts by elected representatives to change state election laws amount, in the Times’ telling, to a “bloodless, legalized” insurrection that “that no police officer can arrest and that no prosecutor can try in court.”

That’s no different than saying “speech is violence.” It’s nonsensical. By definition, there’s no such thing as a “bloodless, legalized” insurrection, any more than there could be a “mostly peaceful” riot. That said, the Times editors are wrong about one thing: state laws, including state election laws, can and often are challenged in court. 

But the nonsense here serves a purpose. If the Jan. 6 riot can be conflated with perfectly valid GOP-led efforts to shore up state election rules, then perhaps those efforts can be wholly undermined, regardless of what voters in red states want. The irony is that it isn’t GOP lawmakers trying “to wrest control of electoral votes from their own people,” as the Times editors charge; it’s the Democrats and their media allies.

Consider that last year, 44 states enacted some 285 bills related to elections. In blue states, those bills tended to loosen certain election rules and requirements, especially for mail-in and absentee ballots. That makes sense given that Democrats tend to vote by mail-in ballot far more often than Republicans. Making mail-in and absentee voting easier is merely a way to boost Democratic votes in any given state. It’s simple.

By contrast, Republican-led states tended to pass laws limiting or more strictly defining the rules for mail-in and absentee voting, on the theory that absentee balloting is inherently less secure and more susceptible to fraud, especially when paired, as it often is, with practices like ballot-harvesting.

Republican lawmakers’ motivation here was to prevent a repeat of the free-for-all of the 2020 election, which saw a raft of last-minute changes to mail-in and absentee voting rules, justified on account of the pandemic. Many Republicans rightly felt that judges who overruled state legislatures and re-wrote state elections laws by fiat (as happened in Pennsylvania), undermined the integrity of the election.

By passing such reforms, Republican lawmakers were responding to actions taken by Democrats, unelected public health officials, and Democrat-friendly judges to overhaul state election rules ahead of 2020. If you wanted to be disingenuous about it, you could argue that Democrats staged a “bloodless, legalized” insurrection before the 2020 election even took place.

That’s why the Times and the rest of the corporate press want so badly to talk about Jan. 6 instead of getting into the nitty gritty of what these Republican-passed election reforms actually do. You’ll notice the media always describe these laws as “restricting voter access,” even when they do no such thing. The entire conversation is a bit of legerdemain, nothing more. That’s why you’ll never read a piece in the corporate press about how Georgia’s new election law, which President Joe Biden called “Jim Crow on steroids,” actually makes voting easier than it is in Biden’s home state of Delaware.

Remember that when you read breathless remembrances of the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol this week. Yes, the riot was bad and should have been put down with overwhelming force — just as the riots all throughout the summer and fall of 2020 should have been.

But the actions of a relatively small group of rioters that day have absolutely nothing to do with the perfectly valid efforts of GOP lawmakers to ensure that election rules are not changed at the last minute by unelected judges or public health officials. Equating the two, pretending they share a common cause and motivation, is a way to discredit the valid arguments of Republicans, smear them as “insurrectionists,” and eventually justify efforts to silence them.


John Daniel Davidson is a senior editor at The Federalist. His writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, National Review, Texas Monthly, The Guardian, First Things, the Claremont Review of Books, The New York Post, and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter, @johnddavidson.

Democrats Are Using The Same 2020 Election Shenanigans To Overtake Virginia This Year


Reported By Hayden Ludwig | NOVEMBER 1, 2021

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2021/11/01/democrats-are-using-the-same-2020-election-shenanigans-to-overtake-virginia-this-year/

Virginia’s hotly contested gubernatorial race is just days away, and with Republican Glenn Youngkin and former Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe tied in the polls, the professional left isn’t leaving anything to chance. A McAuliffe defeat is largely considered a bellwether for congressional Democrats in the 2022 midterms.

So how do Democrats plan to ensure a McAuliffe win and a subsequent retention of power in the state and U.S. Senate? By using the same tactic they used in the 2020 national contest: profligate mail-in voting and fake grassroots get-out-the-vote efforts funding by philanthropies and wealthy leftists, a strategy revealed through Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s gift to the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL).

And it’s a smart strategy. Joe Biden voters were twice as likely as Donald Trump voters to vote by mail in 2020, for example; and we know the effect of Zuckerberg’s millions on the 2020 election. The Capital Research Center specializes in exposing the activists behind these efforts. Here’s what we’ve discovered about the funding and activists behind them.

Getting Out the Vote for Democrats

Vote Forward is one of the get-out-the-vote (GOTV) groups swamping Virginians with a letter practically begging them to vote early. Here’s my copy:

Vote Forward is ostensibly nonpartisan—until you look at its original website from 2018, which reads “Flip the House Blue: Send letters to unlikely voters.” Elsewhere, the group admits it was founded to send “get-out-the-vote” mailers to “traditionally underrepresented communities,” code for Democrat-leaning constituencies.

The New York Times praised Vote Forward’s goal of boosting Democrat turnout just one week before the 2020 election. An old FAQ states that many of its campaigns “typically target low-propensity voters who we believe are likely to vote for Democrats when they do cast a ballot.”

In 2020, that target was 10 million voters. To make that happen, Vote Forward sued the U.S. Postal Service, accusing Postmaster General Louis DeJoy—a Trump nominee—of “undermin[ing] USPS’s ability to ensure the on-time delivery of mail ballots” in the 2020 election. The details of their settlement remain unclear, but USPS agreed to deliver mail-in ballots in time for Georgia’s January special election, the result of which ultimately handed Democrats control of the U.S. Senate.

Like many organizations that present themselves as more interested in voting than election outcomes, Vote Forward is part of the Left’s Voting Machine: A massive web of interconnected GOTV nonprofits commanding tens of millions of dollars, mostly gifted by ultra-wealthy institutions like the Ford, Gates, and Rockefeller Foundations.

We’ve traced more than $600,000 flowing to Vote Forward from the Hopewell Fund, part of a $731 million “dark money” network run by the consultancy Arabella Advisors in Washington, DC. After studying this network for years, it’s become clear to us that wherever Arabella is involved, one is sure to find the left’s top operatives as well.

For example, Vote Forward’s board includes Ezra Reese, a partner at Perkins Coie and its Marc Elias-led spin-off (the Elias Law Group) “focused on electing Democrats, supporting voting rights, and helping progressives make change”—a fact you won’t find advertised on the “nonpartisan” group’s website. Perkins Coie is the left’s law firm of choice. Elias was general counsel to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and a partisan operative whose past dealings include George Soros-funded efforts to abolish voter ID laws.

A Flood of Mail-In Ballots

In September, I reported on a new wave of 2 million applications for Virginians to register for absentee ballots in 2021. These applications weren’t sent out by state or local elections officials, but by politically active nonprofits: the Voter Participation Center and Center for Voter Information (collectively “the center”). An internal memo details the spots they planned to cover most aggressively, many of which parallel Biden’s performance in 2020.

The center explicitly targeted the “New American Majority,” another code for likely Democratic voters that they define as “young people, people of color and unmarried women.” That bloc contains 73 percent of all unregistered voters nationwide, which is why the left-wing strategists at the Democracy Alliance consider their turnout “central to progressive long-term success.”

The IRS requires all nonprofits be officially nonpartisan in order to be tax exempt. In the center’s case, nonpartisanship comes in the shape of a fig leaf—as liberal journalist Sasha Issenberg explains in his 2012 book, The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns: “Even though the group was officially nonpartisan, for tax purposes, there was no secret that the goal of all its efforts was to generate new votes for Democrats” (emphasis added).

The center sent out 15 million vote-by-mail applications in 2020 and registered 4.6 million new voters. Time credits the center’s partisan registration efforts as central to the “shadow campaign that saved the 2020 election” for Biden. No surprise that the center is heavily funded by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), AFL-CIOSierra ClubLeague of Conservation Voters, and Tides Foundation.

Will Zuck Bucks Continue?

We were among the first to report in-depth on how billionaire Zuckerberg and the little-known Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) spent $350 million to effectively privatize the 2020 election in battleground states, helping turnout for Biden in the name of COVID-19 “relief.”

Overnight, this little nonprofit’s revenues grew by more than 12,000 percent from $2.8 million thanks to Zuckerberg’s cash injection—fueling its “nonpartisan,” “charitable” façade to elections officials and helping Democrat turnout in precisely the spots Biden needed to win the presidency.

Across nine states, our data shows that CTCL’s grants consistently ignored Trump counties in favor of big, Democratic-leaning spots like Philadelphia, Maricopa County, and Houston—all essential to Biden’s victory. In Georgia, for instance, Biden counties were two-and-a-half times more likely to receive CTCL funding than Trump counties.

Virginia received close to $4 million in Zuck Bucks, more than one-third of which went to populous Fairfax County to support in-person early votingand “vote by mail.” Fairfax County was Biden’s biggest vote-haul in the state and is the linchpin to McAuliffe’s strategy.

Nearly $970,000 paid for “temporary staffing support” to bolster Fairfax County’s elections agency. That may sound innocuous, but as CTCL expert William Doyle recently wrote at this site, that funding “supported the infiltration of election offices by paid Democratic Party activists.”

[CTCL] funded self-described ‘vote navigators’ in Wisconsin to ‘assist voters, potentially at their front doors, to answer questions, assist in ballot curing … and witness absentee ballot signatures,’ and a temporary staffing agency affiliated with Stacey Abrams called ‘Happy Faces’ counting the votes amidst the election night chaos in Fulton County, Georgia.

Fairfax County applied for an extension to its CTCL grant in January, but ultimately returned its remaining $187,709 in April, spokesman Brian Worthy told me. To his knowledge, the county has not applied for another grant for the 2021 election. That’s a good start, but to save the integrity of our elections, Zuck Bucks need to be banned. No exceptions.

There’s no faster way to destroy what remaining trust Americans have in their elections than by giving them to the highest bidder. Private funding of elections would take us back to the worst of the 19th century robber barons, when rich political machines won elections by buying public officials and intimidating voters. It also presents opportunities for foreign interests to manipulate our politics and undermine American sovereignty.

It’s unknown how much CTCL money remains in Virginia or if the group has continued to make grants here. Neighboring Fairfax City reports $14,175 in CTCL funds leftover for the 2021 election.

CTCL has been surprisingly mum about the ongoing election considering how loudly it advertised open-ended grants to Georgia counties in January. It’s possible that the dozens of exposés, hundreds of critical news articles, flurry of state Zuck Buck bans, and an inquiry from furious congressional Republicans silenced the leftists running CTCL.

Or maybe not. A recent CTCL statement calls lawsuits against its grants program “frivolous” and its funding “equitable,” particularly in small counties with small elections budgets.

Today’s left has cynically embraced Zuck Bucks out of short-term thinking, believing like NPR that “private money from Facebook’s CEO saved the 2020 election.” That’s a losing hand. Americans can see that the same leftists who’ve now embraced plutocracy were just yesterday crying eat the rich and abolish billionaires.” Close to a dozen states have already banned Zuck Bucks and grassroots groups are leading a national movement to audit the 2020 election and save the country.

Leftists believed the country would overlook their desperate indiscretions, claiming—as CTCL does—that Zuckerberg’s unprecedented spending spree somehow made 2020 “the most secure election in U.S. history.” We’ll know even more in December, when CTCL releases its IRS Form 990 filing to the public. If coming revelations are anything like observers expect, that claim will age about as well as milk.

Hayden Ludwig is an investigative researcher for the Capital Research Center in Washington, DC.

Wisconsin Elections Commission ‘Shattered’ Laws By Telling Nursing Home Staffers To Illegally Cast Ballots For Residents


Reported By Kylee Zempel | OCTOBER 29, 2021

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2021/10/29/wisconsin-elections-commission-shattered-laws-by-telling-nursing-home-staffers-to-illegally-cast-ballots-for-residents/

Racine County, Wisconsin law enforcement blew the 2020 election integrity question wide open on Thursday after an investigation into one nursing home. It revealed not only that state election officials flagrantly broke the law and ordered health-care employees to help them, but that the problem likely runs much deeper throughout the swing state’s other 71 counties.

An “election statute was in fact not just broken, but shattered by members of the Wisconsin Elections Commission,” Sheriff Christopher Schmaling said during a Thursday press conference in which he and Sgt. Michael Luell detailed the findings of an investigation into Ridgewood Care Facility. The investigation came about when a woman named Judy signed a sworn affidavit with the Wisconsin Elections Commission after she discovered that her mother, who had died on Oct. 9, 2020 after a period of severe cognitive decline, had voted in the 2020 presidential election. The affidavit was later passed along as a complaint to the county district attorney. Judy alleged that her mother Shirley’s mental state had deteriorated so far that she was having hallucinations and wasn’t able to recall what she had eaten during a day or even what day it was. According to Judy, her mother couldn’t see — her glasses were broken, and she couldn’t even recognize her own daughter — so even if she were of a sound mind, she wouldn’t have known whether someone assisting her with a ballot had voted according to her wishes.

Luell, who led the investigation at the request of the district attorney, found an unusual spike in voting at this care facility: 42 people had voted in the 2020 presidential election. That number is usually 10. Furthermore, in 2020, 38 people had requested absentee ballots, up from the usual 0-3 in normal years.

When Luell attempted to contact the families of these voters to check whether their loved ones had the cognitive capacity to cast a vote, seven replied no, and almost all of them hadn’t voted since 2012. One of the family members said his mother would ask him who he was, meaning she didn’t recognize her own son. She hadn’t voted since 2012 — yet MyVote Wisconsin revealed she voted twice in 2020.

This surge in voting was the result of Wisconsin Elections Commission officials breaking state law. The commission — which is made up of six commissioners, including three Democrats and three Republicans, who are appointed by legislative leaders or the governor and serve as an agency in the executive branch under the governor — authorized nursing home employees to help residents vote, which Luell noted “is a direct violation of law.” According to Luell, employees would ask residents how they voted in the past and then vote according to that party. In other words, if Judy’s mother “could only recall JFK,” staff would vote Democrat for her.

According to state law, however, nursing home staff can’t assist residents with voting. In fact, nobody can help the voter other than a relative or “special voting deputies,” which are people appointed by municipal clerks or elections boards to conduct absentee voting at care facilities. In March, however, the Wisconsin Elections Commission sent out a letter mandating that municipalities should not use the “special voting deputy process.”

“Ladies and gentleman, it’s not a process. It’s the law,” Luell said, citing state Statute 6.875.

The original letter was issued under the guise of COVID guidelines. Nevertheless, in September, after the governors’ lockdown orders had expired and the initial shock of the pandemic had passed, the Wisconsin Elections Commission sent a letter to all residential care facilities telling the workers how to help residents vote, including even marking the ballot for them, in direct violation of state law. Racine law enforcement looked at 2020 visitor logs and found that other visitors were let into the nursing home throughout the pandemic, about 900 times between the decision in March not to use special voting deputies and November 2020. Those visitors included someone to clean the fish tanks and birdcages and even DoorDash delivery people.

“Those people were allowed into the Ridgewood Care Facility, but heaven forbid we make an exception for special voting deputies,” Luell said.

Under Wisconsin state statute 12.13, breaking these laws about special voting deputies constitutes “election fraud,” which is a felony.

“We’re just one of 72 counties, Racine County,” Schmaling noted. “Ridgeland is one of 11 facilities within our county. There are literally hundreds and hundreds of these facilities throughout the entire state of Wisconsin. We would be foolish, we would be foolish to think for a moment that this integrity issue, this violation of the statute, occurred to just this small group of people at one care facility in one county in the entire state. I would submit to you that this needs the attorney general’s investigation,” the sheriff said, calling for the AG to launch an immediate probe into the Wisconsin Elections Commission.

This bombshell investigation is only the latest in the long list of malfeasant actions by the Wisconsin Elections Commission, especially regarding the 2020 election. As Wisconsin radio host and lawyer Dan O’Donnell put it, the commission “was downright derelict in its duty to fairly and impartially oversee an election.”

As O’Donnell documented, the commission unlawfully allowed clerks to “cure” ballots, illegally permitted clerks to go home on election night and return to finish counting in the morning, and illegally told clerks they could relocate polling locations in the weeks before the election.

Furthermore, the commission failed to issue relevant laws and rules for training municipal election workers, special voting deputies, and election inspections. Worse, it failed to investigate voter rolls for the hundreds of thousands there incorrectly, including more than 45,000 first-time voters whose names didn’t match Department of Transportation records, among other issues.

As The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway outlines in her new book “Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats Seized Our Elections,” the Wisconsin Elections Commission also wrongly kept third-party candidates off the ballot, including Kanye West and the Green Party’s Howie Hawkins. Third parties can significantly affect elections in the Dairy State.

“Following the [Legislative Audit Bureau] report, what Sheriff Schmaling has uncovered + disclosed might only be tip of the iceberg of fraud in the 2020 election. The Legislature must be given the time, resources, and cooperation of election officials to conduct a complete investigation of allegations,” tweeted Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin following the Racine press conference. “Using elderly residents with cognitive decline to commit election fraud is reprehensible, and should concern every Wisconsinite and American.”

Johnson continued: “If Democrats will stoop this low to impact elections, one can only imagine what else they’re willing to do.”

Kylee Zempel is an assistant editor at The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter @kyleezempel.

Virginia Democrats Claim ‘Free And Fair’ Election While Rigging It Again


Reported By Stella Morabito | OCTOBER 28, 2021

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2021/10/28/democrats-claim-free-and-fair-election-in-virginia-while-rigging-it-again/

A lot of roadside signs for Virginia’s Democrat gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe include a special message: “Vote in Free and Fair Elections beginning September 17.” Odd. Shouldn’t “free and fair” go without saying? Why include it on a campaign sign?

This is especially odd since the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors recently asked Virginia’s current governor, Democrat Ralph Northam, to waive the legally required witness signature for absentee ballots, as well as the last four digits of the voter’s Social Security number, both statutory requirements. They asked this about a month after voting began.

For me, the gratuitous addition looks like an attempt to cover up the left’s belief that fair elections are below its paygrade. McAuliffe’s operatives can’t possibly believe it, especially as they work to change and ignore rules in the middle of the game. But they sure want you to believe the electoral changes they enacted for 2021 in Virginia—including expansions of mail-in balloting, conditions for ballot harvesting, no requirement for photo ID, etc.—somehow add up to “free and fair.”

On top of that, the huge ballot drop box in front of Fairfax County is supposed to have 24/7 surveillance, but Director of the Fairfax County Office of Elections Scott Konopasek says the camera feed will never be available to the public.

As Mollie Hemingway’s investigative work in her recent bestseller “Rigged” shows, the 2020 elections added a lot of moving parts to the machinery of election rigging. In addition to inviting fraud, there are now more ways to disguise irregularities and to render election results unverifiable. Such chaos-by-design has been in the works for many years. It reached a tipping point when the oligarchical triad of Big Tech, Big Gov, and Big Media used the Wuhan virus shutdowns to vastly expand mail-in voting while relaxing controls on it during the 2020 presidential election.

Obviously, their first order of business was to prevent President Trump from winning re-election. I imagine the second order of business is to entrench these processes for other elections so that a permanent one-party state can cross all state lines.

At the moment, there seems to be just enough pretense—such as the continued existence of in-person polling places and polling officials who request some form of identification—to create an illusion of propriety. The idea is to keep actual voters clutching their ballots with the same persistent trust as Charlie Brown holding onto Lucy’s football every time she offers him a “free and fair” chance to kick it. McAuliffe, a heavily seasoned Democratic National Committee (DNC) operative, is joined at the hip to all that machinery. Yet Democrats in Virginia are acting as though they’re “nervous” that McAuliffe might lose.

Granted, if we’re operating on a level playing field, he should be nervous. For example, his callous assertion during a debate that parents shouldn’t be involved in what their children are learning in school caused a great backlash among his presumed base. It led to lifelong Democrat voters in Virginia openly campaigning for McAuliffe’s opponent, Glenn Youngkin. So, yes, it looks like McAuliffe should be in deep doo-doo. My guess, however, is that he isn’t really worried about “winning.”

Consider that he actually doubled down on excluding parents from their children’s education. He’s just fine with the idea of the FBI investigating concerned parents as domestic terrorists. He even walked away from a televised interview because he didn’t like the questions. This is the sort of behavior I’d expect from someone who believes he has it all locked up, kind of like the Biden campaign’s extreme confidence despite the candidate’s pathetic low energy and gaffe-prone appearances, of the snoozer of the DNC convention.

So if the McAuliffe campaign feels nervous, it’s likely only over the slight possibility of not generating enough fraud. So it looks like a two-track strategy. First, make sure enough leftist operatives (like that guy in Fairfax County) are taking care of the business of generating unverifiable fraud. Second, keep propping up the illusion of “free and fair.”

Maybe that’s how you get a CYA dog-and-pony show with Stacey Abrams stumping for McAuliffe by warning against voter suppression. Maybe that’s the point of Vice President Kamala Harris’s video to 300 black churches during Sunday morning services to get out the vote for McAuliffe. The in-your-face illegality of Harris’s Souls to the Pollsaction adds to the hubris.

I’ll still mark a ballot on Election Day in Virginia (if I’m not told that I already voted.) Assuming McAuliffe ends up in Richmond again, I’ll expect to see local polling places disappear in Virginia in the future. And I’ll continue to have contempt for fake elections in 2022 and beyond.

Stella Morabito is a senior contributor to The Federalist. Follow Stella on Twitter.

AZ Auditors Say Over 17,000 Duplicate Ballots Found in Maricopa County, 1.5 Times What Biden Won By


Reported By Michael Austin | September 24, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/az-auditors-say-17000-duplicate-ballots-found-maricopa-county-1-5-times-biden-won/

On Friday, Arizona state Republicans announced the findings of the Arizona Senate audit of the 2020 presidential election results in Maricopa County. Among the audit’s many findings was that over 17,000 total duplicate ballots — meaning ballots submitted by individuals who voted more than once in the election — were found.

As much was revealed by Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, an expert in pattern recognition and classification of diverse signals and signatures who has four degrees from M.I.T. The Arizona Republicans conducting the audit enlisted Ayyadurai and his team of experts to aid in the audit by investigating mail-in ballot envelopes used in the election. The team reported it found 17,322 duplicate ballots in the election.

As noted by Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake on Twitter, Maricopa County itself had reported no duplicate ballots.

“Maricopa reported ZERO duplicate ballots. Real total is 17,322,” Lake wrote on Twitter.

“This is more than enough to change the election result.”

Other conservatives went to Twitter to react to the shocking findings as well.

The Western Journal is following the Arizona audit results closely.

If you want to stay informed on the investigation’s many findings, stay tuned.

Michael Austin

Michael Austin joined The Western Journal as a staff reporter in 2020. Since then, he has authored hundreds of stories, including several original reports. He also co-hosts the outlet’s video podcast, “WJ Live.”

@mikeswriting

Capitol Police Arrest Democratic Congresswoman for Storming Federal Building


Reported by Jack Davis | July 16, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/capitol-police-arrest-democratic-congresswoman-storming-federal-building/

The chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus celebrated her arrest Thursday after leading an incursion of protesters into the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill. Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty of Ohio said that breaking the law was an important way to illustrate her belief that voting reforms passed by state legislatures will disenfranchise black voters.

“I stand in solidarity with Black women and allies across the country in defense of our constitutional right to vote. We have come too far and fought too hard to see everything systematically dismantled and restricted by those who wish to silence us,” Beatty said in a statement on her website.

She said more protests will follow.

“Be assured that this is just the beginning. This is Our Power, Our Message,” the congresswoman in the statement.

“You can arrest me. You can’t stop me. You can’t silence me,” Beatty said on Twitter.

NBC News reported that the protesters who joined Beatty in the incursion demanded passage of the so-called For the People Act, a Democrat bill that would largely put elections under the thumb of the federal government instead of the states.

Capitol Police said the demonstrators were arrested after refusing to disperse.

“This afternoon, nine people were arrested for demonstrating in a prohibited area on Capitol Grounds,” the department said in a statement on Thursday.

“At approximately 3:30pm, the United States Capitol Police responded to the Atrium in the Hart Senate Office Building for reports of illegal demonstration activity. After officers arrived on the scene, they warned the demonstrators three times to stop. Those who refused were arrested for D.C. Code §22-1307. Two males and seven females were transported to USCP Headquarters for processing,” Capitol Police said.

Unlike the coverage of the Jan. 6 incursion of the U.S. Capitol by supporters of then-President Donald Trump, there was no hue-and-cry in the media about Beatty and the other protesters staging an “insurrection” or “threatening our democracy.”

Many Republicans have said the fight over election reform legislation is an attempt by Democrats to use their current congressional majority as a means to cement leftist rule in America.

“Democrats want to rig every election going forward to make it nearly impossible for a conservative to win again,” Fox News host Laura Ingraham said Wednesday.

“They’re now effectively arguing that the very voting rules that delivered two two-term victories for Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are essentially just like Jim Crow 2.0,” she said.

“So this leaves them really with only one option in their mind, which is to promote racial fear-mongering in pretty much everything around them. We already know what they’re doing in our schools, to our workplaces, the military, even to now our system of voting,” Ingraham said.

Fox News host Sean Hannity said the left’s fuss over voting rights is part of a strategy to sway the 2022 elections.

“So what does this really all about? We all know there’s nothing racist about integrity in elections. Democrats are obviously worried. Chances are they now believe they probably will lose in 2022 and maybe even 2024,” he said Thursday on “Hannity.”

“Mark my words, if Democrats suffer huge losses in 2022, they will blame racist right-wing voter suppression. … The truth isn’t important to the Democratic Party or the media mob, for that matter. Power is all that matters,” Hannity said.

Jack Davis, Contributor,

Jack Davis is a freelance writer who joined The Western Journal in July 2015 and chronicled the campaign that saw President Donald Trump elected. Since then, he has written extensively for The Western Journal on the Trump administration as well as foreign policy and military issues.

Breaking: AZ Auditors Reveal Massively Disturbing Results in 2020 Election


Reported by Michael Austin July 15, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/breaking-az-auditors-reveal-massively-disturbing-results-2020-election/

On Thursday, Arizona Republicans issued a major announcement related to the audit of Maricopa County’s 2020 general election results. During the proceedings, Arizona state Senate President Karen Fann, along with state Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Warren Petersen, gave the floor to auditors who announced that as many as 74,000 absentee ballot mail-in records are missing in addition to a great many vote irregularities found by the audit.

“… as many as 74,000 absentee ballot mail-in records are missing in addition to a great many vote irregularities found by the audit.

Fann began the hearing by introducing three individuals who played key roles in the state audit.

Lead auditor Doug Logan first introduced a video clip that detailed the process and emphasized the security measures that were taken to ensure the audit could proceed safely.

Former Arizona Secretary of State and Arizona Senate liaison Ken Bennett then provided specifics of the audit, including how many ballots were received and examined, how data was collected and examined from voting equipment and which security protocols were enforced while the audit took place.

The liaison noted that the examination of duplicate ballots was a particularly strenuous process. Duplicate ballots are typically produced when a ballot becomes damaged or is improperly marked.

“It has created great difficulty to try to match up a duplicated ballot to its duplicate,” Bennett said, noting that some serial numbers were completely missing from duplicated ballots, ……….. READ THE REST OF THIS IMPORTANT REPORT AT https://www.westernjournal.com/breaking-az-auditors-reveal-massively-disturbing-results-2020-election/

Pennsylvania County Will Refuse to Submit Voting Machines for Audit After Threat from Democratic Official


Reported by Jack Davis | July 14, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/pennsylvania-county-will-refuse-submit-voting-machines-audit-threat-democratic-official/

With threats from a top official in Pennsylvania’s Democratic-dominated administration ringing in their ears, officials from one Pennsylvania county have refused to participate in an audit of the state’s 2020 election results. Although Tioga County is led by Republicans, county solicitor Christopher Gabriel said cooperating with the audit proposed by state Sen. Doug Mastriano would in effect be operating with a sword over the heads of county officials, according to KDKA-TV.

Last week, Acting Secretary of State Veronica Degraffenreid, an appointee of Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf, issued an order ensuring counties could not cooperate with an election audit even if they wanted to.Advertisement – story continues below

“County Boards of Elections shall not provide physical, electronic, or internal access to third parties seeking to copy and/or conduct an examination of state-certified electronic voting systems, or any components of such systems, including but not limited to: election management software and systems, tabulators, scanners, counters, automatic tabulating equipment, voting devices, servers, ballot marking devices, paper ballot or ballot card printers, portable memory media devices (thumb drives, flash drives and the like), and any other hardware, software or devices being used as part of the election management system,” the order said.

And if any county were to be so bold as to defy the Democratic state administration and provide its voting machines for an election audit, it would pay the price. The order threatened that if a county were to allow an outside agency to audit its machines, “the Department of State will withdraw the certification or use authority for those pieces of the county voting system.”

Then came the hammer.

“The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania will not reimburse any cost of replacement voting equipment for which certification or use authority has been withdrawn pursuant to this directive,” the order said.

Gabriel said that left Tioga County with very little wiggle room.

“We can’t be in a position where we don’t have the election machines, because we have to run the next election, these are extremely expensive machines and our position is we need to follow the direction that the secretary has given us,” Gabriel said.

Allegheny County Executive Rich Fitzgerald additionally implied that, if asked, his county will also not participate, noting that such a move would “cost the taxpayers of Allegheny County millions of dollars and potentially have the machines that we bought invalidated in which we can’t use them again.”

TO READ THE REST OF THIS REPORT GO TO https://www.westernjournal.com/pennsylvania-county-will-refuse-submit-voting-machines-audit-threat-democratic-official/

‘Bombshell’ Document from Georgia Investigator Reveals ‘Massive’ Election Integrity Problems


Reported by Erin Coates | June 18, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/bombshell-document-georgia-investigator-reveals-massive-election-integrity-problems/

A 29-page memo from a Fulton County, Georgia, election monitor outlined “massive” election integrity failures and mismanagement, according to a new report.

Just the News published what it described as a “bombshell report” that cited problems including double-counting votes, insecure storage of ballots and the removal of election material at a vote collection warehouse.

“This seems like a massive chain of custody problem,” Carter Jones wrote in his memo.

The time stamp on the notation was at 4 p.m. on election day and Jones said he observed absentee ballots arriving at the scanning center at Atlanta’s State Farm Arena “in rolling bins 2k at a time.”

“It is my understanding is that the ballots are supposed to be moved in numbered, sealed boxes to protect them,” he wrote.

“Too many ballots coming in for secure black ballot boxes.”

In another instance, he noted that he observed someone taking the wrong suitcase of poll pads.

“Seems to be a mystery who this person was,” he wrote. “Should have chain of custody paperwork!! That means that a stranger just walked out with sensitive election materials?”

Jones also appeared concerned about workers from a firm called Happy Faces. He reported the workers could be heard saying they were ready to “f*ck sh*t up.”

“I must keep an eye on these two,” he wrote.

“Perhaps this was a bad joke, but it was very poorly timed in the presence of a poll watcher.”

YOU CAN READ THE REST OF THIS REPORT AT https://www.westernjournal.com/bombshell-document-georgia-investigator-reveals-massive-election-integrity-problems/

Journalist Tests Nevada Voter Signature Verification, Discovers Whopping 89% Failure Rate


Reported By Jack Davis | Published November 16, 2020 at 8:19am

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/journalist-tests-nevada-voter-signature-verification-discovers-whopping-89-failure-rate/

Man Shows How Easy It Is To Rig a Dominion Voting Machine

A journalist who tested Nevada’s signature verification process for mail-in ballots found that the state is wide open for fraud. Columnist Victor Joecks of the Las Vegas Review-Journal conducted his experiment noting that the issue is deeper than any single contest.

“Leave aside the presidential race. Even small amounts of fraud can swing results,” he wrote, pointing to a race where a state senator won an election by 24 votes.

Joecks said in his piece Thursday that he proved a voter could vote many times.

Clark County election officials accepted my signature on eight ballot return envelopes during the general election. It’s more evidence that signature verification is a flawed security measure,” he wrote, saying the assurances from elections officials that the process was secure were so much puffery.

Joecks noted that among the “facts” assembled on a state website was this gem: “All mail ballots must be signed on the ballot return envelope. This signature is used to authenticate the voter and confirm that it was actually the voter and not another person who returned the mail ballot.”

Given the vast amount of reporting that has shown images of ballots dumped here, there and everywhere, the assertion intrigued Joecks.

“I wanted to test that claim by simulating what might happen if someone returned ballots that didn’t belong to him or her,” he wrote.

Joecks had nine co-conspirators. He wrote their names for them to then copy, trying to imitate his handwriting. The citizens had to sign the ballots to ensure there was no fraud perpetrated while conducting the test.

Clark County Registrar Joe Gloria told Joecks that if ballots signed by someone else “came through, we would still have the signature match to rely on for identity,” he said.

Queried about his confidence in his office’s ability to pluck a fake ballot out of a sea of the documents, he told Joecks, “I’m confident that the process has been working throughout this process.”

“He was wrong,” Joecks wrote. “Eight of the nine ballots went through. In other words, signature verification had an 89 percent failure rate in catching mismatched signatures.”

READ THE REST OF THE REPORT BY GOING HERE https://www.westernjournal.com/journalist-tests-nevada-voter-signature-verification-discovers-whopping-89-failure-rate/

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Reports Of Election Fraud Keep Piling Up In Michigan. What’s Going On?


Reported By John Daniel Davidson NOVEMBER 5, 2020

It appears that Democrats in Detroit, a city with a long history of election fraud, are tampering with absentee ballots and breaking state law. As absentee ballot counting continues in a handful of key states across the country, reports of voter fraud, ballot tampering, and the illegal removal of Republican election observers are cropping up in Michigan, especially in Detroit, a Democratic stronghold which has a long history of voter fraud.

On Wednesday, the Trump administration announced it was filing a lawsuit in Michigan over what it claims are systematic efforts to prevent Republican election observers from monitoring the ballot counting process as allowed under state law. The lawsuit comes as video clips continue to surface on social media showing election officials denying access to authorized GOP poll watchers.

Aric Nesbitt, a Michigan state senator, posted a video on Twitter Wednesday afternoon of election workers at the convention center in Detroit, where absentee ballots are being counted. The video shows workers cheering every time an official election observer with the Michigan GOP is ejected from the counting room. Apparently this has been happening frequently, in violation of state law. Democratic observers, says Nesbitt, now outnumber Republicans observers at the convention center 3 to 1.

Here’s why that’s a problem. When an absentee ballot is unreadable for whatever reason, a ballot counter takes out a blank ballot, lays it on the table next to the unreadable ballot, and transposes the vote so it can be filed and tallied. Republican and Democratic “poll challengers,” as they’re called, are supposed to observe this process as it happens and make sure that the vote is transposed accurately. In addition, Michigan state law requires that a Republican and a Democratic official sign off on every voting precinct where absentee ballots are cast in this manner.

Phill Kline is a former Kansas attorney general and now an attorney for the nonprofit Amistad Project, which filed a lawsuit Wednesday alleging that tens of thousands of ballots in Detroit have been illegally filled out by election officials and Democratic election observers. “We have confirmed evidence that Democratic election officials have violated state law,” he told The Federalist, “and have opened the door for fraud involving tens of thousands of ballots.”

Kline confirmed Republican officials have been barred from observing the counting of absentee ballots, and that transposed absentee ballots are being certified without a GOP official signing off on them. The law, Kline says, states that an official from both parties must sign off “if possible,” and that Democratic election officials are claiming they can’t find a Republican to sign off—even though they are also kicking Republican officials out of the counting rooms.

I also spoke by phone to one GOP poll challenger who asked to remain anonymous and told me the election officials at the convention center are not letting Republican poll challengers remain in the room where absentee ballots are being counted, saying there’s “too many” of them. Asked how many people were in these rooms, the officials in charge could not say, according to this person, who added that the rooms in question are enormous, the size of a football field (remember this is at the convention center, where the Detroit auto show is held).

After kicking out Republican poll challengers, election officials began covering up the windows of the counting rooms with cardboard to block the view of Republican observers. “It was pretty chaotic,” the poll challenger said.

News reports are starting to reflect the chaos at the convention center. The Detroit Free Press reported Thursday morning that a lawyer, Jessica Connarn, who was working as a Republic poll challenger, filed an affidavit saying she was told by someone counting absentee ballots that workers in Detroit were “changing the dates the ballots were received” so they would be considered valid.

“When I approached the poll worker, she stated to me that she was being told to change the date on ballots to reflect that the ballots were received on an earlier date,” Connarn says in the affidavit. The Free Press goes on to report:

Connarn states when she tried to get additional information later from this poll worker, she was “yelled at by the other poll workers working at her table, who told me that I needed to go away and that I was not allowed to talk to the poll worker.”

In that interaction, the poll worker slipped Connarn a note, she states.

The note says “entered received date as 11/2/20 on 11/4/20.”

In Michigan, only ballots received by 8 p.m. on Election Day, this year Nov. 3, are valid.

No One Should Trust The Election Process In Detroit

None of this is new for Detroit, which has been plagued by corrupt election officials for years. In 2005, federal officials launched an investigation after the November election and state officials took over the handling of absentee ballots in Detroit after the Detroit News reported that “legally incapacitated nursing home residents were being coaxed to vote and Detroit’s voting rolls were inflated with more than 300,000 names of people who had died or moved out of the city.” A post-election audit found that nearly 30 percent of precincts showed discrepancies in vote totals.

Despite reform efforts over the years, these problems have persisted. Back in December, a public interest group sued the city in federal court, claiming its voter rolls are “replete with typos, dead people, duplicate registrations and mistakes about gender and birth: One Detroit voter is listed as being born in 1823—14 years before Michigan was annexed into the Union,” according to the Detroit Free Press.

In the 2016 presidential election, voting machines in more than a third of all voting precincts in Detroit registered more votes than the number of voters tallied by poll workers. The irregularities meant that more than half the city would be ineligible for a statewide presidential recount that was eventually called off by the Michigan Supreme Court. Here’s what Detroit News reported at the time:

Overall, state records show 10.6 percent of the precincts in the 22 counties that began the re-tabulation process couldn’t be recounted because of state law that bars recounts for unbalanced precincts or ones with broken seals.

The problems were the worst in Detroit, where discrepancies meant officials couldn’t recount votes in 392 precincts, or nearly 60 percent. And two-thirds of those precincts had too many votes.

But these problems persisted. In the August primary, ballot counts in 72 percent of Detroit’s absentee voting precincts didn’t match the number of ballots cast, and in 46 percent of the city’s precincts the combined vote counts for Election Day and absentee voting were out of balance. Even Democratic election officials admitted that something had gone wrong in tracking ballots by precinct.

According to Michigan state law, precincts whose poll books don’t match up with the number of ballots cast can’t be recounted. That might present problems for any eventual presidential recount in the state, as it did in 2016.

For now, it seems clear that credible evidence of election fraud has surfaced in Detroit, which is not surprising given Detroit’s troubled history of election fraud. But it’s also deeply disturbing. The Trump campaign’s lawsuit to halt what appears to be a corrupt process is, in this case, entirely appropriate. We need to get to the bottom of what’s going on in Detroit.

John is the Political Editor at The Federalist. Follow him on Twitter.

Yes, Democrats Are Trying To Steal The Election In Michigan, Wisconsin, And Pennsylvania


Reported John Daniel Davidson By NOVEMBER 4, 2020

In the three Midwest battleground states, vote counting irregularities persist in an election that will be decided on razor-thin margins. As of this writing, it appears that Democratic Party machines in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania are trying to steal the election.

As reporters and commentators went to bed early Tuesday morning, all three states were too close to call, but President Trump led former Vice President Joe Biden by comfortable margins—far beyond what had been predicted in the polls. None of the networks called these states because enough mail-in ballots remained uncounted that it could swing either way, but Trump’s position looked good.

Then, something strange happened in the dead of the night. In both Michigan and Wisconsin, vote dumps early Wednesday morning showed 100 percent of the votes going for Biden and zero percent—that’s zero, so not even one vote—for Trump.

In Michigan, Biden somehow got 138,339 votes and Trump got none, zero, in an overnight vote-dump.

When my Federalist colleague Sean Davis noted this, Twitter was quick to censor his tweet, even though all he had done was compare two sets of vote totals on the New York Times website. And he wasn’t the only one who noticed—although on Wednesday it appeared that anyone who noted the Biden vote dump in Michigan was getting censored by Twitter.

Others were quick to note the partisan censorship from Twitter and raise concerns over how 100 percent of a vote dump could possibly go to Biden. But the social media giant has maintained its crackdown on sharing this information. Twitter users could not like or share a tweet from the Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh noting the 138,339-vote dump.

Buzzfeed later reported that according to a spokesperson at Decision Desk HQ, the votes for Biden were the result of a “data error” from a “file created by the state that we ingested.” When the state noticed the “error” it updated its count, which somehow gave 138,339 votes to Biden and zero to Trump.

It turns out, the vote dump was the result of an alleged typo, an extra zero that had been tacked onto Biden’s vote total in Shiawassee County, Michigan. It seems the error was discovered only because Davis and other Twitter users noted how insane and suspicious the vote totals looked, and demanded an investigation that uncovered what was either a typo or an incredibly clumsy attempt to boost Biden’s vote count.

There was also something suspicious about the vote reporting in Antrim County, Michigan, where Trump beat Hillary Clinton by 30 points in 2016. Initial vote totals there showed Biden ahead of Trump by 29 points, a result that can’t possibly be accurate, as plenty of journalists noted.

After the strange results caught national attention, election officials in Antrim County said they were investigating what they called “skewed” results, working with the company that provides their election software to see what went wrong. The county clerk said they plan to have an answer by Wednesday afternoon.

Then another mysterious all-Biden vote dump happened in Wisconsin. Biden miraculously overcame a 4.1-point Trump lead in the middle of the night thanks to vote dumps in which he got—you guessed it—100 percent of the votes and Trump got zero.

Note the vertical lines in both graphs below:

On Wednesday, the Trump campaign demanded a full recount in Wisconsin, citing “reports of irregularities in several Wisconsin counties which raise serious doubts about the validity of the results.”

In Pennsylvania, the Democratic scheme to steal the election is a bit different. Rather than vote dumps that impossibly go 100 percent to Biden, Pennsylvania is relying on the Democratic Secretary of State’s plan to count indisputably late mail-in ballots as though they were received on Election Day—even if they have no postmark.

This plan was of course rubber-stamped by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which cited the need for “equitable relief” to address mail delays amid the pandemic.

Note that this isn’t just about ballots that come in after Election Day, but about ballots that come in after Election Day that don’t even have a postmark—that is, there is no way to tell when the ballots were mailed, or from where.

Although it’s true that the long delays we’ve seen for absentee ballot counts are due in part to state laws in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania that prohibit the counting of absentee ballots before Election Day, which is not the case in most other states. But the cumulative circumstances under which these absentees ballots are now being tallied is highly suspicious.

Unless election officials in Michigan and Wisconsin can explain the overnight vote-dumps and, in Michigan, the “typo” that appeared to benefit Biden, and Pennsylvania officials can explain their rationale for counting ballots with no postmark, the only possible conclusion one can come to right now is that Democrats are trying to steal the election in the Midwest.

John is the Political Editor at The Federalist. Follow him on Twitter.

Tony Evans says gov’t dividing Church, vitriol of Christians on social media is embarrassing


Reported By Anugrah Kumar, Christian Post Contributor 

Pastor Tony Evans, the pastor of Oak Cliff Bible Fellowship in Texas, talks about God and conscience. | YouTube/Tony Evans

Two days before the general election, Pastor Tony Evans lamented that Christians “have allowed government to divide the Church.”

“What we are seeing today especially among Christians is us building walls against one another because of government. We’ve allowed government to divide the church and that is an agenda from Hell,” Evans said Sunday during his message on “God and Conscience” at Oak Cliff Bible Fellowship in Dallas.

“We’ve made government God or made it bigger than God because it can do something God wouldn’t do.”

Evans denounced the vitriol he often sees on social media as Christians argue over political issues.

Referring to Romans 15: 7, Evans said, “Therefore accept one another just as Christ also accepted us to the glory of God.”

“When your political vote causes you to reject, demean, ridicule, curse, cuss others who differ from you but are not abandoning Scripture to do so, they just have a different set of priorities … Everybody may not feel the same about Democrats and Republicans or this candidate versus that candidate. But … don’t let that issue get in the way of your fellowship in the program of God,” the pastor told the congregants.

“It is embarrassing, I mean, downright embarrassing, to read social media and see the vitriol, the hatred, the evil, the downright hellishness of Christians going at each other. We have become more pagan than the non-Christian world and how we talk to one another just because people are disagreeing politically. When you can have good on both sides and bad on both sides, … do not disregard one another because to do that is an embarrassment to God.”

When Christians are “going at each other, what do you think the world thinks when they see the hatred in the Body of Christ as though one candidate came from Heaven and another candidate came from Hell, one party came from Heaven and another party came from Hell?” he asked.

It’s not wrong to disagree or to vote differently, but it is wrong “to be contemptuous,” Evans emphasized.

“Democrats, you’re going to have to accept Republicans. Republicans, you’re going to have to accept Democrats because God has accepted them so when you attack another person in the family of God because they voted differently, you have attacked God,” he noted. “The Bible says that the mouth reflects the heart … The way you know how Christian you are is not about how you wave your hand or how you praise the Lord or how you flip a pew or how you sing a song, but what comes out of your mouth when you’re not in church, when you’re on social media.”

The Dallas pastor urged fellow believers to “allow for differences within the boundaries of Scripture when there is room for those differences.”

He pointed out that God allows Christians to “make your own play call” within biblical boundaries “because every Christian doesn’t start in the same place.”

“Some Christians vote the way they vote because of the experiences they’ve had. … That has colored how they perceive things,” he said. “Others are based on their perception of life … and that perception has colored their priority. Both are legitimate.

“Some families were taught one way, another family was taught another way … They’re operating off of their upbringing.”

For African-American Christians, they may have “extra sensitivity” when it comes to injustice and the dignity of life, while for Anglo Christians, they may be most concerned about the moral agenda and what their children are being taught in school, the pastor noted.

“Neither is wrong … but they’ve been affected differently,” he said.

He also emphasized, “You can’t cut them down, Scripture says. You can’t disregard them.”

“You don’t look down on one another because we belong to another King and another Kingdom.”

During the sermon, he explained the role of one’s conscience when it comes to voting.

“You are free to vote. Your conscience and everybody’s conscience won’t vote the same way when you’ve got two legitimate or two illegitimate forces at work.”

Evans then asked, “But what happens when there’s some right, some wrong…? Which way do you go?” He added that an issue may not be “perfectly biblically clear.”

“Your conscience is your heart regulator. It is the thing that regulates between right and wrong, good and bad, up and down. It’s the beeper that goes off when somebody comes into your house and the front door goes beep… It is the signal that God has built into every human being to govern and guide them if the conscience has been properly informed,” he explained.

But the Bible says “the heart is deceitfully wicked, so you can have uninformed consciences that make uninformed decisions but they’re still operating on wrong consciences.”

“That’s why, it is critical that your conscience gets the right data in order to make the wisest possible decision, but everybody’s consciences won’t register equally to every circumstance because every Christian is not at the same spiritual level.”

He called on Christians to be informed “of what God expects.”

“God expects you to be a Kingdom voter, not a cultural voter.”

And what a Kingdom voter does is: vote, pray, examine issues based on the Word of God, seek unity, look at both policy and personality, and look at how one’s decision will affect not only oneself but others, the pastor explained.

In the end, he said that “God’s going to decide the outcome … But it’s a partnership. He takes into consideration our choices. Your choice matters.” 

“God has a conditional will. These are the things He decides to do in concert with whether we do what we’re supposed to do or not. But He has a sovereign unconditional will. Those are the things He’s going to do regardless of whether you do your part or not,” he added.

The sermon was part of a series on “Kingdom Voting” that kicked off in September. At that time, he said that one may decide to vote for a Republican or a Democratic or a libertarian candidate, but “every Christian should be a Kingdom independent.”

God does not want to take sides, he stressed. He is there to “take over” because He rules the nations.

Twitter Censors Audio of Detroit Poll Workers Being Trained to Lie to Voters, Destroy Ballots, Stop Challengers


Reported by

Twitter is censoring the raw audio of Detroit poll workers being trained by state election officials to lie to voters, destroy ballots, disenfranchise poll challengers, and perform other tasks that put next week’s vote in jeopardy in the key battleground state of Michigan.

Big League Politics received the following notice on Sunday from Twitter, along with a suspension from posting on the platform for several hours:

For the past week, Big League Politics has been posting audio from poll worker trainings in the city of Detroit. They have made national news, spreading virally to tens of thousands of people across social media. Twitter is stepping into action to stop these revelations from being widely understood so action can be taken in the next week to prevent electoral fraud.

Unfortunately for Big Tech, the issue is already being taken up by the courts, as Big League Politics has noted:

State representative candidate Stephen Carra and whistleblower Bob Cushman, who observed electoral fraud first hand in August, are filing a lawsuit against Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson over findings revealed in the #DetroitLeaks.

Carra and Cushman are filing a lawsuit against Benson as well as Jonathan Brater, who is Director of the Michigan Bureau of Elections. They claim that their rights as a political candidate and an election challenger are being violated due to Benson’s directives.

The complaint filed in the Court of Appeals on Friday alleges that Carra’s “special and substantial interest” in election integrity stems from his race for state representative in Michigan’s 59th district. Carra is running as a Republican to serve in the state legislature. The complaint also alleges that Cushman has a “special and substantial interest in the subject matter” due to his history as an electoral challenger, which will continue during next month’s election.

The lawsuit claims that Benson and Brater are breaking election law by enforcing social distance guidelines to disenfranchise poll challengers.

“Directly contrary to that duty, BENSON and/or BRATER have directed that local election officials can strictly require and enforce “social distancing” and face masking requirements upon election challengers as a condition of entry and performance of their duties,” the complaint alleges.

The lawsuit notes that there is no law on the books mandating these social distance requirements. They are based off of a Michigan Department of Health and Human Services directive that was issued in direct contradiction to an order from the Michigan supreme court.

“In summary, BENSON and/or BRATER have directed local election officials to condition the presence of election challengers upon wearing a face mask. Even while wearing a mask, an election challenger may not get closer than six feet to any election worker,” the complaint alleges.

In the explosive #DetroitLeaks series, it was revealed by Big League Politics earlier this week that poll workers were cackling after they were informed by their instructor that they could disenfranchise poll challengers using social-distancing rules as an excuse.

Thanks to outlets like Big League Politics, the public is becoming aware of the vote steal that is to come next week. There still may be time to protect democracy from the color revolution coup that is being attempted by the globalists to undermine democracy and oust President Trump from office.

Batches of discarded mail, including voter ballots, stolen from mailboxes and dumped in California


Reported by Andrew Mark Miller, Social Media Producer | October 09, 2020 09:59 AM

Discarded ballots were also found this week next to an ATM in nearby Los Angeles.

“You know, is this intentional?” the woman who found the ballots told the local news. “Is this meant to suppress the vote? I don’t know.”

Questions about the security of mail-in ballots have also risen in other parts of the country, including Pennsylvania, where discarded military ballots were found — the majority of which contained votes for President Trump, according to the Department of Justice.

A letter carrier in New Jersey was arrested this week for allegedly intentionally discarding as many 99 mail-in ballots into dumpsters.

Trump and fellow Republicans have criticized the push for mail-in voting, citing concerns about the integrity of the process, while Democrats have insisted that mail-in voting is necessary to protect voters from the spread of the coronavirus.

Second Video with Major Ilhan Omar Voter Fraud Allegations Released as Minneapolis Police Investigate


Reported By Jack Davis | Published September 29, 2020 at 7:48am

The drumbeat of voter fraud allegations against Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota grew stronger Monday with the release of a second video from Project Veritas purporting to show ballot harvesting being conducted.

The release of the second video in two days came as Minneapolis police said they were investigating the situation.

“The MPD is aware of the allegations of vote harvesting. We are in the process of looking into the validity of those statements. No further information is available at this time on this,” the department tweeted Monday.

On Sunday, Project Veritas released a video allegedly exposing an apparent sophisticated ballot-harvesting scheme targeting mostly Somali-born seniors in Minneapolis.

Those who spoke in the video alleged there are exchanges of cash for mail-in ballots in many cases.

In response to the initial video, Omar’s senior communications director, Jeremy Slevin, told Newsweek: “The amount of truth to this story is equal to the amount Donald Trump paid in taxes of ten out of the last fifteen years: zero. And amplifying a coordinated right-wing campaign to delegitimize a free and fair election this fall undermines our democracy.”

Then on Monday, Project Veritas released a second video:

“Your focus is winning, no matter what you do. You ignore the rules and regulations,” Omar Jamal, a Somali community member, said in the new video. “There’s no moral and ethics here. It’s just the end will justify the means.”

“I think Ilhan Omar is one of the people behind all this mess,” he said. “And they have a lot of people that work for them that make sure that tasks get carried out, ballots collected. This is the cash money exchanging hands.”

“It’s an open secret that everybody knows it but they don’t talk about it.”

Advertisement – story continues below

“Nobody would say that Ilhan Omar isn’t part of this,” Jamal added in an accompanying news release on the Project Veritas website. “Unless you’re from a different planet, but if you live in this universe, I think everybody knows it.”

The video showed a source appearing to link Omar to the alleged ballot harvesting operation.

READ THE REST OF THE REPORT AT https://www.westernjournal.com/second-video-major-ilhan-omar-voter-fraud-allegations-released-minneapolis-police-investigate/

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Fauci Just Proved Trump Is Right About Mail-In Voting, Dems Will Lose Their Minds


Reported By Erin Erhardt | Published August 14, 2020 at 5:36pm

The votes are in: Both Dr. Anthony Fauci and President Donald Trump support in-person voting this fall. With the 2020 presidential election rapidly approaching in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, there has been much debate about whether it will be safe to gather in person at polling locations. That debate should now be over. Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, has said safe in-person voting is possible, as long as proper precautions are taken.

Fauci spoke with ABC News Correspondent Deborah Roberts for “Stopping Pandemics,” an exclusive National Geographic event that aired on Wednesday. During the interview, Roberts asked Fauci if it would be safe for people to go out and vote in person this November.

“I think if carefully done, according to the guidelines, there’s no reason that I can see why that not be the case,” Fauci said.

“For example, when you look at going to a grocery store now in many regions and counties and cities that are doing it correctly, they have ‘X’s every six or more feet. And it says, Don’t leave this spot until the person in front of you left their spot. And you can do that, if you go and wear a mask, if you observe the physical distancing, and don’t have a crowded situation, there’s no reason why you shouldn’t be able to do that.”

Fauci did provide a caveat that people who are high-risk should take advantage of mail-in or other vote-from-home options, options that have been available for years.

“I mean, obviously if you’re a person who is compromised physically or otherwise, you don’t want to take the chance,” he said.

“There’s the situation of mail-in voting that has been done for years in many places. So there’s no reason why we shouldn’t be able to vote in person or otherwise.”

For months we’ve been told that we should listen to the “experts” and the “science” on coronavirus. Now that the nation’s top expert and the president agree that in-person voting is safe, the debate should be over.

Unfortunately, that seems unlikely.

The left has been pushing for universal mail-in voting for months — almost since the beginning of the pandemic. Trump has been pushing back just as long, arguing that mail-in voting presents a greater opportunity for fraud and would place a heavy burden on the already struggling United States Postal Service. The Postal Service has already sent letters to 46 states warning it cannot guarantee all mail-in ballots for the November election will be delivered early enough to be counted.

There is a legitimate debate to be had about alternative voting methods. Even without the fear of a pandemic, issues like hours-long lines and lack of transportation discourage potential voters. Some states already utilize robust mail-in voting systems. For example, Colorado sends mail-in ballots to every registered voter and reports very little fraud in the process, according to KCNC-TV. However, Colorado’s system was implemented over time and with great consideration.

Additionally, it was first fully implemented during the 2014 midterm elections, not made mere months before a hotly contested presidential election. In fact, there are already plenty of examples of mail-in ballot issues this year alone and test runs of mail-in processes aren’t looking particularly promising.

Moreover, election rules and regulations are generally made at the state and local levels.

A nationwide mail-in voting mandate would overstep the bounds of federalism, taking control out of the hands of state and local governments and putting it in federal hands.

The president just wants a fair election. Now, Fauci agrees with him that there is no reason in-person voting should not go ahead as scheduled. Everyone should be happy about this, as established voting procedures are likely more secure than hastily implemented pandemic procedures.

Unfortunately, the left hates to see Trump proven right, so the push for mail-in voting this fall is likely to continue.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

FRAUD: Numerous People in New Jersey Claim “Mail In” Ballots Cast In Their Name Without Their Knowledge


Reported by   | Published 

A resident of Passaic County, Ramona Javier made the same complaint.

“We did not receive vote by mail ballots and thus we did not vote,” she stated in Spanish. When she was presented with an official list of some of the people who voted in her neighborhood – where her name was also on that list —, Javier stated ”This is corruption. This is fraud.”

According to Javier, there are eight relatives and immediate neighbors she knows that were listed as having voted but who sustain that they never received ballots. One of Javier’s relatives says she had been in Florida for weeks.

The local councilman, Luis Velez, acknowledged that a dozen of similar cases have taken place in his ward.

“Where is the democracy in this? Where is the fair process?” Velez stated.

Corruption continues to be a major issue regarding vote-by-mail election taking place across Paterson, New Jersey — the third largest city in the state.

NBC New York highlighted some questionable video footage that surfaced of voters carrying multiple ballots:

Videos are surfacing online of a single voter carrying numerous ballots. Postal workers were seen leaving some ballots sitting out in building lobbies. And hundreds of filled out ballots were found by postal workers in single mailboxes in Paterson, suggesting a possible vote bundling operation which election experts say is a crime. In one case, officials said more than 300 Paterson city ballots were found in a single mailbox in an entirely different town: Haledon.

According to a county spokesperson, more than 800 mail-in votes were cast in one of New Jersey’s largest cities.

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy did not cover the specific problems taking place in Paterson during his Wuhan virus news briefing on May 13, 2020. When asked about corruption issues when dealing with the statewide vote-by-mail election, Murphy said, ”It is too early to give you a full answer.”

One candidate in the area, Ramon Joaquin, said that the Board of Elections was not being transparent about how officials were going about in eliminating votes. “The 800 votes should be counted or the names of the people whose votes were suppressed should be released.”

NBC New York also noted the following:

Paterson Mayor Andre Sayegh has voiced concern ballot-stealing operations may have been underway in some wards, and he said so-called ballot stuffing appeared to be a big problem. The mayor called on law enforcement authorities to investigate. Also calling for a criminal investigation was council candidate Frank Filippelli. He said he was also aware of voting problems he believed were criminal across the city.

Republicans should make noise on this issue and point out how mail-in-votes are teeming with corruption, especially during the Wuhan virus pandemic where resources are tight.

Americans Just Sent Democrats a Loud and Clear Message About Impeachment: Don’t Do It


Reported By Karista Baldwin | Published April 28, 2019 at 8:01am

Democratic leaders are in a tough spot as their base pushes for the president’s impeachment while most Americans oppose it.

A recent Washington Post/ABC News poll found that the majority of Americans are against impeaching the president following the publication of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report. According to the poll, around 37 percent of Americans are pro-impeachment, a slightly lower figure than last month. Meanwhile, 56 percent of Americans oppose impeachment.

Breaking the results into parties: 62 percent of Democrats responded to the poll in support of impeachment, while 87 percent of Republican respondents opposed to it. Among independents, 36 percent support impeaching the president, showing a drop in the group’s support for impeachment since before the release of the Mueller report, according to January’s Washington Post/ABC News poll. Poll respondents who strongly oppose impeachment also outnumber those who strongly support, with strong opposition at 49 percent and strong support at 29 percent.

According to ABC News, this shows a 10-point rise since August in those strongly opposed to impeachment. It also reflects an 11-point decrease since August in those strongly in favor of impeachment.

The results reveal a dilemma for Democratic politicians at the moment: keeping their increasingly leftist base happy without alienating the majority of Americans who are against impeachment. The impeachment issue has already shown itself to be divisive within the Democratic party. Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris, both Democratic presidential nominee contenders, are placing their bets on pro-impeachment voters. Both senators have publicly urged Congress to initiate impeachment proceedings against Trump.

“I believe Congress should take the steps towards impeachment,” Harris said, reported by CNN. “I believe that we need to get rid of this President.”

Warren has also taken a firm stance in support of impeaching Trump.

“The severity of this misconduct demands that elected officials in both parties set aside political considerations and do their constitutional duty,” Warren wrote on Twitter last week. “That means the House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States.”

Meanwhile, old-school Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has taken it upon herself do damage control for her party. Her more pragmatic approach to impeachment has shown itself to be at odds with her younger Democratic colleagues.

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country,” Pelosi told The Washington Post in March. “And he’s just not worth it.”

The public’s views on impeachment may be backing Democrats into a lose-lose situation. While Pelosi is working to appeal to the largest group of Americans on the issue of impeachment, she’s risking angering more leftist Democrats.

And while Harris and Warren cite the Mueller report as grounds for impeachment, 58 percent of Americans say that the results of the report had no effect on their view of the Trump administration, according to the Washington Post/ABC poll. In fact, 46 percent of the poll respondents said they won’t be taking the report into consideration when they vote in the 2020 presidential election.

Democratic nominee hopefuls may have to choose between upsetting their more extreme leftist supporters or alienating the general populace, who obviously aren’t eager to initiate impeachment. Either way could cost Democratic contenders their party’s nomination.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

Karista Baldwin studied constitutional law, politics and criminal justice at the University of Dallas and the University of Texas at Dallas.

‘Ballot harvesting’ – a sure-fire way for Dems to win


Reported by Chad Groening, Jody Brown (OneNewsNow.com) | Monday, December 3, 2018

California mail-in ballotsA conservative columnist agrees with House Speaker Paul Ryan in questioning the legitimacy of California’s vote-counting process.

It’s called “ballot harvesting” – and it’s illegal in most states. But the practice was legal for the first time in California this year. It allows a third party to collect completed “vote by mail” ballots from voters and then hand them over to election officials. The legislation states that:

“… A vote by mail voter who is unable to return the ballot [by mail or in person] may designate any person to return the ballot to the elections official who issued the ballot, to the precinct board at a polling place or vote center within the state, or to a vote by mail ballot dropoff location within the state ….” (Assembly Bill 1921)

What’s your reaction to ‘ballot harvesting’?
Just another page in Democrats’ playbookNot familiar with it but sounds legitCalif. deserves it cuz Dems are in chargeThere’s a reason it’s illegal in most statesLeaves door wide open for voter fraudEnsures all votes are counted

That new law has caused Ryan, the outgoing Speaker of the House, to question the legitimacy of several California congressional races last month, adding to the contention of many Republicans that the state’s election procedures are flawed. “We had a lot of wins that night, and three weeks later we lost basically every contested California race. This election system they have? I can’t begin to understand what ballot harvesting is,” Ryan told The Washington Post.

Robert Knight, a conservative columnist for The Washington Times and OneNewsNow, says Ryan has legitimate concerns. “There’s long been a clear pattern across the country that when ballots are counted after a close election, the Democrats invariably win. Somehow they come up with the ballots,” he points out.

Robert KnightThe most suspicious case in California, according to Knight, was in the 39th Congressional District, where Republican Young Kim was vying to become the first Korean-American woman elected to Congress.

“She was up by 14 percent on election night – and then they started all the ballot counting,” he describes. “And a week later they declared the Democrat the winner, Gil Cisneros, by 3,000 votes.

“Now I’m just wondering why it always goes this way. It never goes the other way. Whenever you see a ballot counting, the Democrats always seem to harvest enough votes to get over the top. And so when Paul Ryan suspects something fishy, a lot of us feel the same way.”

Washington Times columnist Shawn Steel puts it this way regarding the ultimate result of the Kim-Cisneros race: “There’s no evidence of ballot box shenanigans. No need. Democrats know it’s easier to erode voter integrity laws than to stuff ballot boxes …. Merciless and unsparing, California Democrats have systematically undermined California’s already-weak voter protection laws to guarantee permanent one-party rule.”

Steel argues his case by detailing how California Democrats have expanded voter eligibility for non-citizens, inmates, and felons, and instituting “motor voter” registration, pre-registration for 16- and 17-year-olds, automatic mailing of absentee ballots to every voter, conditional ballots, ballots accepted up to a week after Election Day, and second chance for rejected ballots.

Dear America: It’s Called ‘BALLOT HARVESTING’ And It’s How The Left STOLE Several Elections

Ever heard of ‘ballot harvesting’? Here’s what you need to know. Notice that a whole bunch of seats that were tilting Red on election night flipped blue a week or so later? What’s up with that? And why was that trend only in one direction?

Carmine Sabia of The Federalist Papers had some interesting things to say about that. Here’s a taste.

California’s most staunchly ‘red’ district went blue in at the Midterms. But why? Was it the ‘blue wave’? Did Republicans stay home? Was there any ‘funny business’ behind the scenes? (Heaven forbid anyone call it ‘monkey business’ anymore.)

This is where ‘ballot harvesting comes into play’.

As the polls closed on election day last month, six California Republican House candidates, including Representatives Dana Rohrabacher, Steve Knight, and Mimi Walters, were ahead in their respective races. However, as the absentee and provisional ballots rolled in over the intervening weeks, all six lost to their Democratic opponents.

The case of Korean-American GOP candidate Young Kim was one of the most prominent examples. On election night, Kim held an 8,000 vote lead over her Democratic opponent Gil Cisneros, and even attended freshman orientation in Washington, D.C. before watching her lead, and her victory, slowly evaporate over the subsequent weeks.

What is it?

“We beat Republicans on the ground, fair and square,” said Katie Merrill, a Democratic consultant deeply involved in November campaigns. “Many of the field plans included (ballot harvesting) as an option to deliver voters or their ballots” to the polls.

Those efforts involved identifying voters who might support Democratic candidates and ignoring those who wouldn’t.

In one Orange County household, for example, both the husband and wife were longtime Republicans, said Dale Neugebauer, a veteran Republican consultant. Democratic volunteers came by the house four times, each time asking to speak only with their 18-year-old daughter, a no-party-preference voter, and asking if she wanted them to pick up her signed and completed ballot.

That’s a perfect example of the “thorough and disciplined” ground game the Democrats used, said Merrill.

“We were not wasting time talking to people who weren’t going to vote for Democrats,” she said.
Source: DailyCaller

It’s not just an offer to drive the voters to the polls, it’s an offer to drop off their ballots. Nope, no way THAT could be misused, is there? There’s no way you could misplace the ‘wrong’ party’s ballots on the way to the polls, right? Or slip in a few dubious ones with the stack of legitimate ones?

So, was this a slick way to make those ‘grey areas’ work in their favor that our side has to implement? Or is it something that needs to be nipped in the bud?

Millennials’ struggle with the faith-politics mix


Reported by Bill Bumpas, Steve Jordahl (OneNewsNow.com) | Monday, November 5, 2018

millennials votingEvangelical Millennials are grappling with how to integrate their faith and their politics, as highlighted by a recent article in The New York Times.

Six young Christians, all raised in evangelical homes and now breaking with their parents over how to deal with issues such as same-sex “marriage,” immigration, and race. Those are the profiles the Times chose to highlight out of about 1,500 responses when young evangelicals were asked about the relationship between their faith and their politics:

“Here’s what we learned,” says the Times. “Young evangelicals are questioning the typical ties between evangelicalism and Republican politics. Many said it had caused schisms within their families. And many described a real struggle with an administration they see as hostile to immigrants, Muslims, L.G.B.T.Q. people, and the poor. They feel it reflects a loss of humanity, which conflicts with their spiritual call.”

Evangelical apologist Dr. Alex McFarland says those same discussions are going on in tens of thousands of Christian home across the country.

“[These young evangelicals] do love Jesus. I don’t dispute that,” says McFarland. “But they don’t understand that Christian love doesn’t mean having open borders. Christian love does not mandate that we have universal healthcare. Christian love does not mean that we allow a secular government – or any government – to redistribute wealth.”

McFarland

And he says it certainly doesn’t mean questioning clear biblical teaching on sexuality.

McFarland – founder and president of Truth for a New Generation – says if these young people want to wear the evangelical mantle, they have to have a high view of scripture. “Young people also need to have maybe a little bit more robust understanding of the fine delineations between church and government, personal piety, and the responsibility of good, ordered civil government,” he adds.

Having spoken in more than 1,500 different churches in North America and internationally, he says churches could be doing more to teach these young people what it means to honor God with both their faith and their politics.

“Seventy-four percent of parishioners want their clergy to speak to moral, social, political issues and how does the Word of God speak about today’s issues,” he notes. “In evangelical churches, roughly only 12 percent do.”

Faith fuels voting decisions

If McFarland is right that churches could be doing more to educate young voters, some of that slack is being picked up by groups attempting to educate Millennials on college campuses. As part of this election season, a campaign has been under way on more than 100 Christian college campuses to encourage hundreds of thousands of students to cast a ballot.

The “Because I Care” voting initiative was collaboratively launched by two organizations with the same goal of encouraging Christians to vote: Im2moro and My Faith Votes.

Audrea Decker, president of Im2moro, says the effort provided Christian universities and Bible college students with all they need to register to vote, request an absentee ballot, and access a full non-partisan sample ballot and candidate information to be fully informed of each candidate’s positions.

Decker tells OneNewsNow that “Because I Care” is the message they want to send to the next generation.

“You don’t need to vote because you like a particular candidate or a particular party,” she shares. “You vote because of your faith and because you care about your community, your nation, and bringing God’s truth, his proven biblical principles, into the public square – because that is where it’s best for our society and our culture and our world today.

“And so it’s really our faith that fuels our political involvement – and we do it not for ourselves, but for others in the way that policies affect people in our country today.”

Decker says 117 Christian colleges have utilized the “Because I Care” materials on campus, reaching a student population of 325,000. In 2016, the group’s materials made in onto 41 campuses and reached 135,000 students.

 

Rigged for Democrats? Voters Purged from Rolls Will Get Ballots Counted Anyway


Reported By Kara Pendleton | November 1, 2018 at 2:21pm

One of the wonderful things about the United States is the right to vote. Because people move and die, voter rolls need to be purged from time to time to help keep things honest and accurate. In some places, to help with this, voters who haven’t been to the polls in a number of years will be purged from the voter rolls. But a federal court ruling just made that more difficult.

According to The Associated Press, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court on Wednesday ordered election officials in the crucial swing state of Ohio to accept provisional ballots from those purged from the voting rolls between 2011 and 2015 if they show up to cast a ballot for this year’s midterms — either as part of early voting or on Election Day itself.

The voters were purged only after failing to vote for six years, and failing to respond to a notice informing them they would be taken off the rolls for inactivity if they didn’t answer.

However, the AP reported, the appeals court agreed with advocacy groups challenging the purge on the grounds that the letters informing voters about it “were too vague on letting recipients know the consequences of not responding.”

According to the Washington Examiner, “the ruling will allow provisional ballots submitted by voters purged from the rolls between 2011 and 2015 to be taken into account in the state’s early voting — as long as they still live in the same county of their last registration and have not been disqualified from voting due to felony conviction, mental incapacity, or death.”

It’s nice to know death is still a disqualifier from voting. Still, the ruling means that, despite the fact they had made no effort to respond to the letter or vote in six years, voters who were purged from the rolls now can vote anyway. Rules don’t matter. It might not come as a surprise to know that, according to the Washington Examiner, the groups challenging the purge included liberal outfits like the Ohio chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and the progressive “public policy organization” Demos.

With that kind of context, it’s not hard to guess which party is likely to benefit the most from low-information, low-engagement voters suddenly deciding to take an interest in the political life of their country. The ruling is a win for Democrats.

In essence, the liberals’ appeal was pushing the narrative that voters who were purged lacked the intelligence to understand the letters that were sent out or to inquire about them. This is the same kind of argument liberals have pushed about voter ID laws: That some groups are too low-I.Q. to know how to do what everyone else does, which is to get identification to function in modern American society.

So what is the big deal if purged voters can now vote? Tom Fitton, president of legal watchdog group Judicial Watch weighed in on the other aspect of the Ohio process that the 6th Circuit’s ruling did approve of — the basic principle that voter rolls need to be purged for accuracy.

His statement answers that question.

“Great news: another federal court turned aside a leftist attempt to dirty up the voting rolls and undermine clean elections,” Fitton stated. “Dirty voting rolls can mean dirty elections.

“We will keep pushing in the courts to make sure other states take reasonable steps to make sure the names of dead people and people who have moved away are removed from election rolls. After comparing national census data to voter roll information, Judicial Watch estimates that there are 3.5 million more names on state voter rolls than there are citizens of voting age.”

Even though the court ruled that the purge itself was not the problem, you’d never know that based on a statement from the Demos, which claimed Ohio voters who were purged from the rolls had been “unlawfully disenfranchised.”

So if voting in prior elections, a rule that has been upheld as constitutional, suddenly doesn’t matter, and if failing to respond to a notice that states you may be removed from the voting rolls if you don’t vote or respond also doesn’t matter, what exactly is the criterion for voters in the mind of Democrats? Breathing? Apparently, following the rules everyone else can follow isn’t a requirement.

The elephant in the room, of course, is that the left fighting this hard to get around the rules may indicate a belief on their part that the voters who were purged would vote Democrat. By getting those ballots accepted regardless of the rules, this ruling opens the door for the kind of dirty election the voter purge rules were meant to prevent.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Specializing in news, politics and human interest stories, Kara Pendleton has been a professional writer and author since 2002. One of her proudest professional moments was landing an interview that even mainstream media couldn’t get.

Dems Hate GA Voter Law Because They Don’t Think Minorities Can Write Own Names: Hunter


Reported By Bryan Chai | October 15, 2018 at 11:10am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/dems-hate-ga-voter-law-dont-think-minorities-can-write-names-hunter/

Two women, one white and one black, vote at voting booths. An effort to crack down on potential voter fraud in Georgia is being criticized by Democratic groups as “voter suppression.” (Shutterstock)

The Democratic party, and the far left in general, like to paint themselves as the party of tolerance and enlightenment. Obviously, we all know that’s not the case. But every once in a while, the Democratic Party reminds us of just how hypocritical they truly are. The best part is, they don’t even realize they’re doing it.

Case in point, just look at the hysteria surrounding Georgia’s “exact match” law.

According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the “exact match” law simply states that to be acceptable, a voter’s registration application must exactly match a driver’s license, state ID card or Social Security records.

That hardly seems controversial. After all, voting is such an important American right which helps shape our country, it’d make sense to make sure that all information is accurate and legitimate.

Democrats and the left don’t see it that way. They essentially find that law racist, apparently.

“Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp has been a driving force behind multiple voter suppression efforts throughout the years in Georgia,” said Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law said in a statement through Common Dreams.

It didn’t take long for Clarke to throw in a veiled accusation of racism.

“If there is one person in Georgia who knows that the ‘Exact Match’ scheme has a discriminatory impact on minority voters, it’s Brian Kemp because we successfully sued him over a mirror policy in 2016,” Clarke said.

Kemp, who is running for Georgia governor in the upcoming midterms in November, has frequently heard similar complaints from his Democratic opponent Stacey Abrams.

Abrams recently called Kemp “a remarkable architect of voter suppression” according to the The Associated Press.

Apparently, it’s now racist to try and safeguard our Constitutional Republic from voter fraud.

Clarke and Abrams seem to be glossing over the little fact that voters who have been flagged by the “exact match” law can still vote, as the Journal-Constitution notes. Oftentimes, the hold-ups when it comes to “exact match” issues stems from something simple like a missing hyphen, discrepancies between married and maiden names or even clerical government errors.

Even while those issues are pending, flagged voters can vote. Assuming a voter is not actively trying to commit voter fraud, the “exact match” law is a minor inconvenience at worst.

Not only are Democrats being intentionally misleading about the severity of the impact of “exact match,” think about the message they’re sending.

Derek Hunter, an author and contributor to The Daily Caller, summed it up best.

“Georgia Democrats are complaining that the state’s ‘exact match’ law, meaning people have to write their own name accurately on registration forms, is racist,” Hunter wrote on Twitter. “In other words, liberals don’t think minorities can write their own names. That’s pretty racist.”

That scathing take couldn’t be more true. Democrats are no strangers to racial double-standards, but these particular claims of racism go beyond that. At best, it shows a distinct misunderstanding of law, which is a damning sign for a political party. At worst, it shows a distinct willingness to lie and manipulate racial minorities no matter the cost, which should be even more damning.

Based on the Democrats’ track record, I’m inclined to believe the latter.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

If I could have two television shows and two movies on a desert island, they’d be “The Office,” (the American version) “Breaking Bad,” “The Dark Knight,” and “Die Hard.” I love sports, video games, comics, movies and television. And I guess my job, too.

The Value of the Vote


waving flagAuthored by 

URL of the original posting site: http://ipatriot.com/the-value-of-the-vote/

people-vote-hands-raised-crowd

Why is it so important to vote, and is it a moral decision? Sort of.

The constitution declares that this is a nation under the watchful eye of the Creator of the universe. As the author of all creation, He established this nation as a representative republic composed of a free and independent people, and as such, He gave us the right to choose who will represent us through our voting. As a free people, we have a right to choose not to fulfill this responsibility to our government, be disobedient to God, and to suffer the consequences. If we do not vote, then we can not complain about the outcome.

In the past, we have elected a crook and a cheat (Nixon), two Philanderers (Kennedy and Clinton) and none of the presidents for the last century have been particularly religious or even moral, and we have elected them to be leaders and presidents, and not priests or prophets. Our obligation, this election is to determine who will best represent all the people. Let us look at only four major issues that we are all concerned with, the preservation of our form of government, the preservation of our sovereignty, the preservation of our security, and the preservation and advancement of our economy.

Preservation of our form of government – The third branch of our government, The Judiciary, needs to be composed of strict constitutionalists who are not trying to be legislators as well. If we need to change laws, we have The Legislative branch, voted in as representatives of the people to do this. Changing laws is not the judge’s mandate. We do not need to change or reinterpret the framework, and it does not need to be modernized. It works perfectly well the way it is.

Preservation of our sovereignty – Immigration is out of control, and it has been since way before Ronald Reagan. Why are we the only nation on earth that doesn’t even try to control who comes here? Just try to go to Mecca. The solution is simple. Close the borders, then control who we want in. Implementing that is not so simple, but it is necessary to try.

Preservation of our security – Throughout history, there has never been a less imperialistic country than the US. Americans have a desire for peace and a distaste for war, but it is insane not to fight like we are at war with those who war against us. As the most powerful country in the world, we need to fight to win and fight to eliminate future wars. The war in the Middle East has cost the lives of over 370,000 people, over 7million have lost their homes, and we have spent over 61 billion dollars. It is about time to put an end to this swiftly and decisively.

Preservation and advancement of our economy – For the past 8 years the economy has slumped along as the worst recovery in modern times and the government has had no effect on a recovery that naturally would bounce back after all this time, without the government interfering. The do-nothing political posture needs to stop regulating businesses to death and chasing them out of the country with oppressive taxes. Stop this “fair share” mantra and do what is necessary for us all to prosper. If we are arguing about splitting up a piece of pie, bake more pies and we will all have more.

Yes, there are more concerns, but if any candidate will even attempt to tackle just these four issues that the present government has ignored and done nothing about, then it doesn’t matter if they are a saint or a sinner, a professional politician or a novice, or even if you like them. We need to get rid of the do-nothing government we have and elect someone who will at least try to bring this country back on a winning track, winning for all Americans.

ABC News Interview Goes All Wrong… Dem Delegate Goes Rogue on Live TV


waving flagBy: John Falkenberg on July 27, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativetribune.com/watch-abc-news-interview/

In a massive embarrassment to Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton, a delegate to the Democrat National Convention announced on the air that he would not be voting for Hillary come the fall because of her dishonesty.

Speaking with ABC reporter Jonathan Karl in Philadelphia, where the convention was being held, he dropped the bombshell: “As far as president, I will not be voting for Hillary Clinton.”

As you can imagine, Karl was shocked.

“You are a delegate to the Democratic National Convention and you are not going to be voting for Hillary Clinton. Why?” he asked.

And as one might expect, the delegate mentioned her gross mishandling of her private email server scandal as evidence of her dishonesty and impetus for voting against her.

“Well, it’s really just as simple as I feel as if she hasn’t been honest with us, and the fact of the matter is, she said for over a year there (was) no classified information sent or received on her private email server, and the FBI said that’s not true,” he said.

“She wouldn’t even call it an investigation,” he added. “She called it a security review. If she’s not even going to be honest about the nature of that investigation, what else can we expect? I have no love for (GOP nominee Donald) Trump, but I also have no love for Hillary.”

It’s nice to see some delegates with a sound head still on their shoulders, even at the Democrat convention.

Should he be able to withstand the pressure to vote for Hillary Clinton, and if GOP nominee Donald Trump isn’t an option, he will almost certainly fall to one of the two significant party candidates — Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party nominee Jill Stein.

Or, he might just stay home. We’re OK with any of those options.

fight Picture1 true battle In God We Trust freedom combo 2

New Politically INCORRECT Memes


waving flag teenagesr if illegal Picture1 true battle Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

 

 

HORROR: Terror Group Rallies American Muslims In Effort To End Donald Trump


waving flagBy: Davis on March 26, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativetribune.com/terror-group-muslims

While billionaire businessman Donald Trump has enjoyed a large amount of popularity among Republicans and independents, many groups, and even a few countries, have been working hard to stop his rise.

The New York Times reported that the Council on American-Islamic Relations and other radical Islamic groups in America are attempting to register Muslims as voters in the hope of stopping Trump at the ballot box. CAIR, which according to Breitbart has been linked by the FBI to several terror groups, has decided that rather than condemn the actions of the Islamic State terror group, they would prefer to stop the man speaking out against radical Islamic terrorism.

“The fear and apprehension in the American Muslim community has never been at this level,” Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for CAIR, stated. “The anti-Islamic tidal wave is spurring civic participation.”Bull

America Never Forget

That supposed “anti-islamic tidal wave,” to the degree that it exists at all, would be actually the result of the population getting sick and tired of radical Islamic terror attacks occurring on a regular basis. But let’s not worry about little things like truth and logic when there is political hay to be made.

Bigotry, we’re afraid, will never die. But perhaps if the Muslim community would stand up, accept that their religion has a problem, and work to fix that problem, they wouldn’t have to be treated with as much fear and suspicion.

“The community is very anxious and afraid about our security with all the rhetoric that we hear,” said Ghazala Salam, the president of the American Muslim Democratic Caucus of Florida.culture of deceit and lies

Americans are afraid about their security and safety because radical Islamic terrorists have been trying to infiltrate our country — with some success already — and trying to kill all of us. Somehow being “afraid” of hurtful words doesn’t seem on the same level as being afraid of hearing “Allahu Akbar” and then gunshots or a massive explosion.

If only CAIR would work as hard at eliminating radical Islamic terrorism as they do fighting Republicans. If they put that kind of effort into it, we wouldn’t need to even talk about them anymore.

H/T Breitbart

Die true battle Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

LESSER OF TWO EVILS? Statement on Christian Voting


MId Term drawing

Posted on November 2, 2014

by Pastor Calvin Lindstrom, Pastor John Kirkwood, Pastor James Pittman

URL of Original Posting Site: http://clashdaily.com/2014/11/lesser-two-evils-statement-christian-voting/

two cherriesStatement on Christian Voting from the Christian Emergency League

The decision to vote for a candidate is a weighty duty. Exodus 18:20, though not directly speaking about voting for candidates, specifies that those invested with political authority should be men who fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness. The Apostle Paul in Romans 13 describes those who serve in government as ministers of God. Those who serve must know that they will one day give account to Jesus Christ, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. All those who vote also must recognize that they are equally responsible to King Jesus. Voters must not compromise principles they hold outside of the voting booth on Election Day.

Often conservative voters are conflicted when a race leaves only the lesser of two evils. The Christian Emergency League encourages a different mindset than just voting for the lesser of two or three or more evils. Rather than just asking which candidate is the lesser of two evils, should you not rather ask, does a candidate truly deserve your vote?

Sometimes Christians are accused of being single-issue voters. What fools we are if we think the pro-life position is a line that cannot be crossed. But what fools we are if we think supporting candidates who will not speak for the voiceless, will be your voice in Springfield or Washington. Can we expect God to bless a vote for someone who will not seek to protect innocent life?

It must be freely admitted voting based on principles may lead to additional years of incompetent and corrupt rule under someone like Gov. Quinn in the state of Illinois.

The Christian Emergency League is well aware that social conservative Christians may be singled out for blame. This we submit is a small burden in defense of principle and truth. We further submit that the damage to truly conservative and Christian principles caused by a compromised politician like Mr. Rauner is greater than what Gov. Quinn can bring. Let us hope and pray that Rauner becomes a byword in Illinois politics save his repentance.

In Service to King Jesus and His Truth

Pastor Calvin Lindstrom Pastor John Kirkwood Pastor James Pittman

Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/miamism/7336918780/


New WhatDidYouSay Logo

It is abundantly clear from Jesus teaching that He desires for His followers to be “Salt and Light” in this corrupt world. “Salt is a preservative that slows the putrefaction process. “Light” exposes the truth hiding in the darkness, because as Jesus taught in John 3:19-21, that men love darkness instead of light because they know that their deeds are evil.

One of the greatest ways a Christian can be “Salt and Light” is to vote. Staying home, doing nothing, plays into the hands of the Prince of Darkness’ rule. One reason our country is in such a mess is that 40%, or more, of Evangelical Christians stay home on voting day. That is abundant sin. That stands diametrically opposed to God because He created this country to be a source of spreading the Gospel worldwide. He gave us this nation, founded by His appointed men, to create a nation of freedoms that is based on His Word, God’s administration in Heaven, and His purpose for our religious freedom opposing any and all forms of oppression.

As a Christian, I am often ashamed the Church in America. While our brothers and sisters in Christ are suffering unspeakable suffering in persecution around the world, we have become so apathetic and listless. I hear supposed Christians say that they don’t want to make people turned off from the Gospel by expressing a political opinion, or standing for righteousness and holiness. That is a lie right out of the pit of hell. The human fallen spirit hates the light because it exposes everything they hold to be dear. They know their wrong. They know their sinners. With Adam’s fall, came the knowledge of good and evil, right and wrong, as Paul said to the Romans in chapter one, all men are without excuse before God because all men are born with that knowledge. That is the reason that the persecution of the Church worldwide, is growing in intensity here in America. We will see more persecution than ever before in history. Jesus said that they will kill us thinking they are doing God a service. However, a vast majority of American Christians have no idea that the persecution they are trying to avoid, will eventually trigger the falling away of believers Jesus foretold would happen, just before the end of days, and His return.

Hopefully you can feel my heart as I write this. I am torn up inside knowing what is about to happen. The question remains, what are YOU going to do?

Jerry Broussard of WhatDidYouSay.org

Article collective closing

Christians May Be Unwittingly Hastening America’s Transformation


Obamacare

Susan Calloway KnowlesOctober 11, 2014

Read more at http://joeforamerica.com/2014/10/christians-may-unwittingly-hastening-americas-transformation/

It’s a bold statement to make that Christians may be unwittingly hastening America’s transformation but it needs to be said.

Most Christians would be shocked to think that they had anything to do with negatively impacting the country that they love so much and have, in many cases, even fought to protect.

However, it needs to be discussed because America as we know it is being changed beyond recognition on a daily basis.

As state primaries occur and as the 2016 elections draw near, it is high time that Christians recognize their invaluable potential in changing the course of our country.

For far too long now, many Christians have chosen to stay home instead of getting out to vote in national, state, and local elections. The reasons vary for their apathy, but commonly there are two factors which keep Christians home.

Either Christians believe that there is no one worth electing because the candidate does not hold their same Biblical beliefs or Christians wonder if they, pursuant to Biblical principles, should even vote at all.

While I am not a Biblical scholar, I know one thing for certain and that is the Bible is not filled with a lot of indifference or the absence of actions taken by Christians.salt and light

David didn’t slay Goliath by staying home. Joshua didn’t bring down the walls of Jericho by refusing to obey God’s direction to join in the battle.

Certainly, Christ didn’t raise Lazarus from the dead by choosing not to travel to Bethany. Christ was anything but apathetic. He stood for truth and continued to speak out until the day He was crucified. He was and is a model for Christians to follow.

Christians have many modern day battles that call for them to respond. Every day in the news there are stories about Planned Parenthood and their continuing efforts to abort unborn children. Christians can effectuate positive change in this area by opposing congressional, presidential, or even state and local candidates who are in favor of abortion.

By not voting, Christians are tacitly showing their approval or at least not voicing their opposition to this highly controversial issue.

Additionally, problems involving the education of Christian children are at the core of Biblical principles and need the support of Christians everywhere. Issues regarding how children are raised and the principles they are taught are at the forefront of importance to most parents or guardians. Only parents or guardians should determine what is ultimately appropriate for their children to learn or eat in school, not the government. Parents or guardians need to attend local school board meetings, extracurricular school activities, and other important school meetings concerning their children to ensure that moral principles are being taught. Christians standing up and speaking out in local school districts is a reminder to government that parents, not government, are ultimately in charge of their children’s education.

Parents may also have to consider changing school districts, enrolling their child into charter schools, searching for faith-based programs, or looking at the benefits of homeschooling in order to remain in control. Recently, it was discovered, that while spending less toward each child’s education, charter schools, produce far better educational results than do traditional public schools. Charter schools, typically do not get extensive funding that traditional public schools receive from the federal government. What charter schools do receive, however, appears to be used more efficiently. In addition, because charter schools are not heavily funded by the government, they appear far more receptive to parent decision-making in their programs.

You may recall earlier this year, that New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, moved to prevent three charter schools from using public space. His actions caused some charter schools to close. His unilateral decision, took the issue out of the hands of parents and placed it solely in the hands of government. De Blasio only began to backtrack on his decision when those who had helped him get elected, began to voice their displeasure because their children attended the very charter schools he closed. Had proponents not raised concerns, de Blasio’s plan to rid New York City of charter schools may have succeeded, leaving parents with one less excellent choice.

To paraphrase, Christians are the salt of the earth and the light of the world, according to Matthew 5:13-14. Remaining complacent, when it comes to the important issues in this country that impact our children and our constitutional rights, surely is not what God envisioned for Christians when He said those words.salt and light

Freedom of choice allows all of us to continue to shape this country and this world. This does not mean taking away the rights of others in the process. What it does mean, however, and what history has shown us is that we are obligated to be preservers of the truth and freedom until the very end.

Christians may hold the key to stopping or at least slowing the transformation of this country into an unrecognizable nation. Taking no action guarantees that we will continue to see our constitutional rights eroded and our right to speak out as Christians eventually suppressed.

Choose this election season to make a difference for yourself, your children, and others! Get out and vote

Article collective closing

Top 10 Reasons to Vote Democrat in 2014



http://allenbwest.com/2014/04/top-10-reasons-vote-democrat-2014%e2%80%a8%e2%80%a8/#uDuWYK7mhhLhKHwj.99

Written by Allen West on April 18, 2014

Slide1

10. I’ll vote Democrat because I can’t wait for college football season to be delayed or cancelled because the student athletes are union employees.

9. I’ll vote Democrat because I believe oil company’s profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t.

8. I’ll vote Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.

7. I’ll vote Democrat because Freedom of Speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.

6. I’ll vote Democrat because I’m way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves. I am also thankful that we have a 911 service that get police to your home in order to identify your body after a home invasion.

5. I’ll vote Democrat because I’m not concerned about millions of babies being aborted so long as we keep all death row inmates alive and comfy.

4. I’ll vote Democrat because I think illegal aliens have a right to free health care, education, and Social Security benefits, and we should take away the Social Security from those who paid into it.

3. I’ll vote Democrat because I believe that businesses should NOT be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as the Democrats see fit.

2. I’ll vote Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.

And the Number One reason I’ll vote Democrat is:

1. I’ll vote Democrat because I think that it’s better to pay billions for oil to people who hate us, but not drill our own because it might upset some endangered beetle, gopher, fish or frog.


Get Your Head Out of The Sand: Why You Need to Care About Politics


http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/2014/03/get-head-sand-need-care-politics/#Wv8DXO4sO1yY248u.99

By Kada / 30 March 2014

Get Your Head Out of the Sand

“I don’t care to keep up with politics.” Ever heard that before? I’ll bet you have. This statement should strike the heart of every American, yet what’s even more appalling is someone who doesn’t care, and votes in the major elections. Politics are the driving force of your country that has the power to change every aspect of your life, and you’re telling me you don’t care?! I bet I can guess who you voted for in the presidential election…

When people don’t care about politics, they don’t care about who is representing them and their community to the nation.

Being involved in politics is the best, and cheapest, way to really make an impact on the world. It’s free for your wallet since no body expects monthly payments, and there is no contract. You get out what you are willing to put in to it.

When you are up to date on all the politicians’ values and their voting record, come Election time, it’s less likely that you will be swayed by a catchy campaign phrase that’s paired with cool graphics and smooth words. You will know the real candidate and the truth behind their improbable promises, and free phones.

You should care about politics as much as you care about your finances. As often as you check your budget, you should check what your government is budgeting. Whenever you make a payment towards credit card interest, take a look at what your government is paying towards their interest. Why? Because that’s your money too, and right now your great grandkids are going to be getting the bill.

“It’s a lot of work, though.” Yeah, yeah it is. Anything that’s worth anything is gonna be hard to get. If the truth were easy to find, do you think half the politicians in office today would be there? If you’re ready to begin your search, subscribing to newsletters of people or patriotic sites is a great place to start. Personally, I am subscribed to Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Herman Cain, Girls Just Wanna Have Guns, Clash Daily, and the Morning Briefing by The Red State. It’s also helpful to subscribe to a couple members of the other Party to see what they are sending to their readers.

It’s also important to browse the Internet for multiple sources and references on a variety of topics. If you are getting all your information on the happenings of the Political Realm from only one source, there’s no way to gauge how accurate the story may be.

The moral of this story is to stop complaining, and start cramming! You are equally responsible for the state of the Nation as much as the politicians representing your district are. Can you name your governor? Your state’s House Representatives? How about your Members of Congress?

And that ladies and gentlemen, is why we all need to be involved in politics.

WE MUST NEVER FORGET

Freedom at Stake: Would You Vote If Your Liberty Depended On It?


http://clashdaily.com/2014/02/vote-liberty-depended/#Yksys08IGiBLX24T.99

By / 25 February 2014

Liberty_Bell_2

There is no such thing as an American disinterested in liberty.  America is all about liberty. No other word is more closely associated with the idea of America as the word “liberty”.

The Liberty Bell is engraved with a passage taken from Leviticus 25:10:  “ . . . proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.”

Every U.S. coin bears the word liberty, along with the words “In God We Trust,” and “E. Pluribus Unum.

The word liberty is found in The Pledge: “ . . . with liberty and justice, for all.”

It is foremost in our founding documents.

The Declaration of Independence boldly states:  “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The Preamble to the Constitution:  “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

The Declaration states liberty is unalienable, a God-given right.  Flowing out of the Declaration, the Constitution was established to “secure the Blessings of Liberty.”  That same Constitution prescribes terms for representative government, voting rights, citizenship duties, the rule of law, and the consent of the governed.

The U.S. government is “of, by and for the people,” according to Abraham Lincoln, echoing original principles.  If the people do not control the government, the government will control the people.

Citizenship duty in America is a privilege and an honor and a duty, because preserving liberty is our aim.   Reading up on the issues and candidates of the day is a duty.

Voting every election is a duty, a sacred duty.

As believers we have a duty to be salt and light in all aspects of our lives.  We have a duty to speak the truth in love.  We have a duty to contend for righteousness in the public square, and we have a duty to protect and defend the sacred rights of others, especially the weak and the dispossessed.  We have a duty to protect and defend the liberty of everyone, even those who oppose us, even those who may even seek our political destruction.    Unless citizens hold politicians accountable by voting, liberty is lost.  Politicians given free reign tend to ignore the consent of the governed, trending toward tyranny.

A true American citizen is interested in preserving liberty, and understands that citizen participation is absolutely essential to its preservation.   For many decades in the community of faith, voter turnout has declined.  There are 58 million evangelicals in our country eligible to vote.  In the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections, only 33 million actually voted.  In 2012 it was worse.  Only 30 million voted:  28 million stayed at home.

We have the power of the vote, and we have the right to use that power to preserve liberty “for ourselves and for our posterity.”   Asking people to vote does not seem like much to ask, especially when you consider that more than 2 million people made the ultimate sacrifice to give us that right.

Register and vote to honor their sacrifice.  Register and vote to protect liberty.  Register and vote to secure the blessings of liberty for our children and grandchildren and great grandchildren.   Register and vote because it’s your sacred duty.

When Benjamin Franklin appeared in public at the end of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, it is said a woman asked him, “What have you given us, a republic or a monarchy?”

Mr. Franklin replied, “A republic, madam – if you can keep it.”

Image: Courtesy of: http://gallery.moeding.net/AroundTheWorld/NorthAmerica/NorthEast/ Philadelphia/

About the author: Allan Erickson

Allan Erickson enjoyed an 11-year career in radio, television and print journalism as a reporter, talk show host, and operations manager. He then turned to sales and marketing for a decade. Ten years ago he started his own training and recruitment company in the Pacific Northwest. Allan & wife Jodi have four children and live in California. He is also the author of “The Cross & the Constitution in the Age of Incoherence,” Tate Publishing, 2012. He is available to speak in churches addressing the topics of faith and freedom.
To contact him, email: allanlerickson@gmail.com

THANKS A LOT SANDY


The aftermath of Sandy defies description.

  • Three feet of Snow in West Virginia;
  • Several inches of sand covering everything several miles inland in New Jersey;
  • The front of a building in New York City completely blown off;
  • A wind-blown fire wiping out 80 homes;
  • Millions of people without power, safe drinking water and uncertain sewers;
  • Transportation interrupted, especially flights.

I have prayed, and I hope you have been too, for the victims of this historic storm. Such devastation boggles the mind and the cost of recovery will be staggering, especially because we’re broke as a nation.

However, Americans have always rallied behind our fellow citizens who are suffering and in need. We will respond again. Already all the forces of good and caring are at work meeting needs and bring comfort. No, I am not including the government.

I have no doubt that needs will be met, rebuilding will happen and “normal” will one day be reestablished. However, I am extremely concerned about a disaster no one is talking about, and “normal” may never be realized again has a result of that disaster. I am referring to the Presidential Election coming up next Tuesday. The storm has opened wider that opportunity for Leftist voting shenanigans.

With all the arguments over Voter Registration, Voter I.D. and Voter Fraud, this natural disaster has provided and added opportunity to make the corrupt more powerful. Consider the national debate;

  • The Left opposes Voter I.D. because they curry the favor of people who are here illegally. I.D.s exposes the fraud.
  • In Florida, over 50,000 people that are on the voting registration rolls are deceased. How many do you think will rise from the dead and vote?
  • The introduction of early voting has given the Left more time to encourage fraud by multiple votes from some people.
  • The Left has already manipulated the Military Vote into nonexistence because they know the Military votes predominately Republican.
  • California has already announced they will not be counting the mailed in ballots, as they did in 2008, because they claim it won’t make a difference in the outcome.
  • The U.N. has been invited again to “observe” our voting because the U.N. has been told that Republicans repress the vote in certain areas prohibiting poor and elderly people from voting.
  • With the power off, some areas will have to go to paper ballots opening the doors for screams of voting irregularity should the Left loose. Yes, it has been reported that the lawsuits have already been drawn up and ready for filing should Mitt Romney win. You’ve also heard how the Left has already arranged riots in strategic areas should Mitt Romney win. That will open the door for Marshall Law to be established, and the election deemed null and void.
  • Like in California, the Registrar of Voters has admitted that many citizens are registered in multiple cities and can’t do anything about that person from voting in each location.
  • There is no way to determine the number of illegal votes in the States that have not passed Voter I.D. laws.
  • Like I said, opened doors more even more voting shenanigans, especially should the election be extended because of Sandy’s destruction.

For conservatives in California elections are becoming a farce. For over 50 years the Left files lawsuits if measures don’t go their way. The courts are so corrupt and Left, that most of the time the Left wins. More and more I hear people say, “Why vote when the Democrats go to court and get the election overturned.” And here the Left is the one always screaming about voter repression. California leads the nation in voter repression because the Left always wins in court when we do not vote their way.

For my house and me, we will vote. We refuse to give up. The drums of revolutionary war are getting louder every day. Will we see a revolution in our day? I’m not sure anymore. I am not armed, and that worries me.

Hopefully God is hearing our prayers asking Him to forgive our sins and heal our land. However, our nation has reached levels of inequity that dwarfs Biblical Israel. They were rightly judged for their turn from God. America deserves the same. Is there a remnant of believers big enough for God to withhold His hand? I don’t know. I am praying He heals instead of punishes. What are you praying for?

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: