Tag Archives: Virginia

Money Doesn’t Always Win Political Races

Posted on by

A number of the Democrat victories in Virginia were heavily funded by George Soros. George Soros also poured $800,000 into a political campaign in New York to unseat Sandra Doorley, a Republican District Attorney in Monroe County, New York.

Yesterday Paul Mirengoff at Power Line Blog posted an article about Tuesday’s elections.

The article reports:

George Soros, the Hungarian billionaire, succeeded in toppling two fine Northern Virginia prosecutors this year in Democratic primaries. Pouring unheard of amounts of money into local prosecutor races in Arlington and Fairfax Counties, Soros was able to take down Commonwealth Attorneys Theo Stamos in Arlington and Raymond Morrogh in Fairfax. They will be replaced by prosecutors who are borderline qualified, if that, and who very likely will adhere to the radical, anti-law enforcement agenda of Soros, their money man.

The article concludes:

Add the amount Soros spent on the Monroe County race to what he spent in local prosecutor races in Virginia and elsewhere, and you see how badly the Hungarian billionaire wants to “decriminalize crime” (Lonsberry’s phrase) in the United States.

Fortunately, Monroe County voters don’t share Soros’s pro-criminal agenda. They reelected Doorley handily. She captured around 56 percent of the vote.

Afterwards, Doorley thanked Soros for his involvement. She declared:

The Republican Party in Monroe Country is not dead, and we are alive and well. And look at all the great people, here. We still have the energy and we will be back. And I am back for another four more years, so, thank you, George Soros!

Soros deserves to be taunted. However, I don’t buy the suggestion, other than in jest, that his large contributions to left-wing candidates in local races are counterproductive. Soros made a difference in Virginia, and I suspect that Doorley’s race was closer than it would have been without the Hungarian’s $800,000 contribution to her opponent.

Soros keeps probing for weaknesses in the opposition to his radical plans for America. He does so skillfully. Fortunately, Monroe County passed his “stress test” on Tuesday.

Money does not always win elections.

 

Suspended For Following The Law

Posted on by

The lack of respect for basic legal principles on the part of some of our elected officials is getting totally out of control. It used to be understood that if you broke the law, you got arrested, and possibly spent some time in jail. Now it depends on which law, which police department, and whether or not you are here illegally. There is no consistent rule of law anymore.

Yesterday Fox News posted an article about a Virginia police officer who has been suspended from his job.

The article reports:

A Virginia police officer was suspended after allegedly turning over a suspected undocumented immigrant to federal authorities following a traffic accident last month.

The Fairfax County Police Department didn’t identify the officer in a statement released Tuesday but said the incident occurred on Sept. 21 when an officer was dispatched to a car accident.

The officer discovered one of the drivers didn’t have a Virginia driver’s license and ran a check with the state Department of Motor Vehicles, police said. The check revealed the driver had a violation for failing to appear for a deportation hearing.

The officer verified the warrant and alerted officials with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

An ICE agent was close by and arrived at the scene. The officer cited the driver for not having a driver’s license and turned them over to the federal agent.

The Fairfax County Police Department enacted a 2007 policy that prohibits officers from confirming a person’s immigration status and detaining them solely based on civil violations of immigration law.

“This is an unfortunate issue where the officer was confused,” Police Chief Edwin Roessler Jr. said. “We have trained on this issue a lot. This is the first time we’ve had a lapse in judgment, and the officer is being punished.”

The article concludes:

The officer involved has been on the job for a few years, Roessler told The Washington Post. He added that the officer did not willfully violate the department’s policy with respect to cooperating with immigration officials.

He said the officer will undergo remedial training.

I think the people in charge need to undergo remedial training.

Did They Plan On A Backlash?

Posted on by

Townhall posted an article today about the consequences of the recent trend in some states to make abortion more available. The idea of aborting babies right up until birth has created a backlash resulting in growth in the pro-life movement.

The article reports:

A recent Marist poll commissioned by the Knights of Columbus shows a significant increase just over the past month in the number of Americans who identify as “pro-life.”

The survey found that Americans are now just as likely to identify as “pro-life” (47 percent) as “pro-choice” (47 percent). This is a large increase from a similar survey last month, when another Marist Poll found Americans “more likely to identify as pro-choice than as pro-life by 17 percentage points (55 to 38 percent).”

The poll marks the first time since 2009 that the same amount of Americans identified as “pro-life” as “pro-choice.”

The increase in pro-life identification occurred among Americans under the age of 45 and among Democrats.

The article continues:

Another key finding by Marist was that 80 percent of Americans supported limiting abortion to the first three months of pregnancy, a 5 percent increase in that view since last month’s poll.

“Current proposals that promote late-term abortion have reset the landscape and language on abortion in a pronounced – and very measurable – way,” Carvalho emphasized.

“Arguments in favor of late-term abortion are simply not convincing the American people,” Knights of Columbus CEO Carl Anderson remarked on the findings. “If anything, since these proposals have been unveiled, people are moving noticeably in the pro-life direction. It is now clear that these radical policies are being pursued despite the opposition of the majority of Americans of both parties.”

This trend is going to force Democrat candidates to choose between campaign money from Planned Parenthood PAC’s and actual voters. We should see that choice being made during the next year. Watch for members of Congress who realize the significance of these poll numbers to begin to distance themselves from the extreme position on abortion expressed in the New York law and attempted by the Virginia legislature. Other states are following suit on liberal election laws. It will be interesting to see how these new laws impact the election of state governors and legislators.

Does Anyone Actually Believe This?

Posted on by

Sometimes I wonder if our Congressmen (and Congresswomen) actually listen to their own words. Some of the logic coming from the people who are supposed to represent us is just amazing.

The Washington Free Beacon posted an article today about some recent comments by Representative Al Green, a Democrat from Texas.

The article reports:

Green said the refusal of Virginia’s governor and attorney general to resign after admitting to wearing blackface “is but a symptom of a greater syndrome that currently plagues our country as a result of not acting on President Trump’s bigotry,” the Hill reports.

Green added that Gov. Ralph Northam and Attorney General Mark Herring have been emboldened “to a great extent because the Trump presidency has sent a message that you can be immune to the consequences of bigotry, by daring those with the authority and power to constitutionally remove you from office.”

“Further, an argument that Governor Ralph Northam and Attorney General Mark Herring should resign will subject us to accusations of political hypocrisy if we refuse to take on a bigoted president,” Green continued in a statement.

The Democratic congressman introduced articles impeachment against the president in the last Congress, accusing Trump of fostering racial divisions in the United States.

Was President Trump a bigot when he fought city hall to open Mar-a-Lago to Jews and blacks? Was he a racist when he sheltered Jennifer Hudson and some of her relatives at the Trump International Hotel & Tower free of charge after her mother, brother and nephew were murdered in Chicago on Oct. 24 (article here)? There are countless other examples that show that the media’s attempt to portray President Trump as a racist are simply fake news.

The article concludes with a quick summary of the situation in Virginia:

Most Virginia Democrats, however, privately want Northam to stay in office until more information comes out about Herring and Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax, according to the Washington Post. Fairfax faces an allegation he sexually assaulted a woman in 2004. Should all three Democrats resign, the governorship would go to the state House Speaker, who is a Republican.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) suggested last month that Democrats would not try to impeach Trump without Republican support and noted that special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election has not reached its conclusion. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D., Md.) said an impeachment process was not inevitable and not what Democrats were focused on pursuing.

The remarks from Pelosi and Hoyer came days after freshman Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.) promised Democrats would “impeach the mother****er.”

This is another attempt to deflect attention from Govern Northam’s statement about abortion.

Avoiding The Truth By Changing The Subject

Posted on by

Television news and the internet are buzzing this weekend with news of a photo in Democratic Virginia Governor Ralph Northam’s medical school yearbook of a ku klux klan member and a person in blackface. The picture is from the mid-80’s, but the outrage is current.

The Daily Caller posted an article today that explains what the fuss is really about.

The article reports the response by Scott Jennings, who was a special assistant to former President George W. Bush, when asked on CNN ‘whether Republicans ought to “sit this one out” with regard to allegations of racism..’

This was Scott Jennings’ reply:

But I want to touch on a comment you made in the phrase human dignity because this is the second moment where Ralph Northam this week failed to respect human dignity. The first moment, of course, was when he made his ghoulish, horrific statements about abortion. This was his second PR debacle this week.

Previous to this blackface-KKK robe-moonwalking press conference he was on a radio show. He’s a pediatrician talking about — talking about aborting children at the moment of birth and then even after they had been delivered. I agree with you, Bakari. Human dignity matters and we ought to respect every human life of every race, especially these poor babies who are laying in delivery rooms when you have governors of states that think we should have a discussion about murdering them after they were born?

The article reports the response:

“OK, stop, stop stop!” Democratic commentator Karen Finney interrupted Jennings. “That’s a lie. What you’re saying is a ghoulish lie. I am on the board of NARAL Pro-Choice America. That is a lie that the right-wing has perpetuated … I heard what he said. I don’t agree with what he said and the way he said it. But what we’re talking about is making sure that, in those instances, it is a woman and a doctor — not anyone at this table or anyone in Congress — making the decision.”

Finney quickly spun the conversation back to “racism in America” without ever pointing out what exactly Jennings had said that was not true.

This is exactly what Governor Northam said:

“So in this particular example if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen, the infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother,” he said.

The entire purpose of this controversy was to take the Governor’s comments about abortion out of the news cycle. One commentator stated that he had the photo in October, but didn’t run with it because he couldn’t prove the source. If a conservative commentator had the pictures, it’s a pretty safe bet that the Democrats had them. Governor Northam committed the unpardonable sin in the Democrat party–he told the truth about abortion. I don’t think he will be asked to step down. The subject has been changed, and what has happened to him has warned other Democrats to avoid the subject. Mission accomplished for the Democrat party.

 

Priorities, People

Posted on by

The Daily Caller posted an article yesterday about the Virginia Democrat who sponsored a bill that would allow the termination of a pregnancy up to 40 weeks old. Just for the record, 40 weeks is a baby ready to be born. Democratic Virginia Delegate Kathy Tran has also introduced another bill– “House Bill No. 2495 – Fall cankerworm; spraying prohibited during certain months.”   That bill is to protect the lives of  fall cankerworms, gypsy moths, etc.

It is disturbing to me that Ms. Tran is more concerned about the survival of an insect that damages trees than she is about babies.

Choosing Winners And Losers

Posted on by

Fox5 is reporting today that Amazon has decided to open two new facilities–one in Alexandria, Virginia, and one in Long Island City, New York.

The article reports:

New York state is kicking in more than $1.5 billion in taxpayer-funded incentives for getting half of Amazon’s second headquarters located in a section of Queens.

The Seattle-based company made its long-awaited announcement Tuesday, saying Long Island City and Alexandria, Virginia, will each get 25,000 jobs. The online retailer also said it will open an operations hub in Nashville, creating 5,000 jobs.

…New York state’s incentives are nearly triple those of Virginia’s, while Tennessee’s are $102 million.

According to Amazon, the cost per job for New York taxpayers is $48,000, compared to $22,000 for Virginia and $13,000 for Tennessee.

In a statement released by Amazon, Cuomo called the agreement “one of the largest, most competitive economic development investments in U.S. history.”

I have a few questions. How many years will these tax incentives last? Will Amazon leave the state when the incentives end? If each job cost New York taxpayers $48,000, how much do these jobs pay? The company is getting tremendous tax breaks to come to New York and create jobs, can New Yorkers afford the increases in their taxes to pay for those jobs? Wouldn’t it be better to cut taxes for all businesses in New York and make the state more attractive to businesses looking for a place to relocate? Lowering taxes across the board actually increases revenue, choosing winners and losers simply makes people angry.

Does Voter Fraud Exist?

Posted on by

The Federalist posted an article yesterday with the following headline, “Voter Fraud Is Real. Here’s The Proof.”

The article cites the following examples:

This week, liberals have been repeating their frequent claim that voter fraud doesn’t exist. A recent Salon article argues that “voter fraud just isn’t a problem in Pennsylvania,” despite evidence to the contrary. Another article argues that voter fraud is entirely in the imagination of those who use voter ID laws to deny minorities the right to vote.

Yet as the election approaches, more and more cases of voter fraud are beginning to surface. In Colorado, multiple instances were found of dead people attempting to vote. Stunningly, “a woman named Sara Sosa who died in 2009 cast ballots in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013.” In Virginia, it was found that nearly 20 voter applications were turned in under the names of dead people.

In Texas, authorities are investigating criminals who are using the technique of “vote harvesting” to illegally procure votes for their candidates. “Harvesting” is the practice of illegally obtaining the signatures of valid voters in order to vote in their name without their consent for the candidate(s) the criminal supports.

These are just some instances of voter fraud we know about. It would be silly to assume cases that have been discovered are the only cases of fraud. Indeed according to a Pew Charitable Trust report from February 2012, one in eight voter registrations are “significantly inaccurate or no longer valid.” Since there are 146 million Americans registered to vote, this translates to a stunning 18 million invalid voter registrations on the books. Further, “More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters, and approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.” Numbers of this scale obviously provide ripe opportunity for fraud.

Our elections need to be above board and trusted by the voters. Voter fraud has always been part of the game, but in some ways electronic voting machines have made it easier. Voter identification will solve some of the problems, but the ultimate answer may be paper ballots.

The article included some suggestions on how the limit voter fraud:

So now that we know voter fraud is a serious issue, what are some solutions to this problem? States like Michigan have Poll Challenger programs, where observers from both parties may be present at voter check-in tables at precincts. They check each voter’s ID against a database of registered voters for that precinct to ensure the person attempting to vote is actually legally qualified to vote in that precinct. If there’s a discrepancy, the poll challenger may officially challenge the ballot. Other states should implement similar programs.

States should sponsor initiatives to remove dead voters and correct the registrations of people registered in multiple states (make them choose just one state). Since many local jurisdictions are reluctant to clean their voter rolls, federal or state oversight with teeth may be necessary.

Further, voter ID laws, such as the one implemented by North Carolina, but (wrongly) struck down by three liberal judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit— one appointed by Bill Clinton and the other two appointed by President Obama—are needed to ensure there’s no cheating with votes. States should continue to press the issue regardless of recent setbacks by liberal activist judges.

Finally, some have claimed that strong voter ID laws are racist, because they disproportionately impact minorities and would prevent minorities from voting. As a black person, I’m naturally interested in this claim. Thankfully, it turns out to be false. The Heritage Foundation has shown that black voter turnout actually increased after North Carolina passed its voter ID law.

An illegal vote cancels the vote of a legal voter. Let’s work together to make all legal votes count.

Grasping At Straws

Posted on by

The focus on the Mueller investigation seems to be Paul Manafort. Manafort is currently being held in solitary confinement in a Virginia jail because of alleged witness tampering. Does anyone doubt that this is an attempt to get him to make something up that Mueller can use against President Trump? Meanwhile, The Washington Examiner reported yesterday that Mueller has now revealed the relationship between the Trump campaign and Manafort.

Most of the 32 counts against Manafort in the Virginia case concern alleged crimes that took place long before there was a Trump campaign. Some go back as far as 2006. But four of the counts involve a pair of loans Manafort took out between April 2016 and January 2017. For a few months during that time period, Manafort worked for the Trump campaign.

The loans totaled $16 million and came from a financial institution Mueller refers to as Lender D. According to Mueller, Manafort lied to get the loans, overstating his income and understating his debts.

Mueller says that some workers at Lender D knew there was a problem with Manafort’s application, but that one top executive there, a man who wanted a place in the Trump campaign, granted the loan anyway. From the Mueller filing:

“The government intends to present evidence that although various Lender D employees identified serious issues with the defendant’s loan application, the senior executive at Lender D interceded in the process and approved the loan. During the loan application process, the senior executive expressed interest in working on the Trump campaign, told the defendant about his interest, and eventually secured a position advising the Trump campaign. The senior executive later expressed an interest in serving in the administration of President Trump, but did not secure such a position.”

The lending company and the senior executive are not identified in the indictment, but the loans appear to fit an episode reported in the New York Times involving a small bank in Chicago, the Federal Savings Bank, and its chief executive, Stephen Calk, who was named an economic adviser to the Trump campaign in August 2016 but did not join the administration.

The article concludes:

In May, the Wall Street Journal reported that Mueller is investigating whether the loans were “made as part of a quid pro quo arrangement to secure Mr. Calk a job in Mr. Trump’s administration.” Calk has denied any such arrangement.

In any event, Mueller has not suggested that Donald Trump was involved in any of the actions outlined in the Manafort charges. The two Lender D loans are, apparently, the only connection between the Trump campaign and the broad array of criminal activity, some of it more than a decade old, alleged in the Manafort indictments. And Trump himself played no role in it.

Was a special counsel needed for that?

If Mueller investigated every horse trade that took place in Washington, I am sure he would find an awful lot to keep him busy and nothing noteworthy!

 

Would You Vote For This Man?

Posted on by

On Saturday, The Washington Post posted a story about Nathan Larson who is running as an independent libertarian for the state’s 10th district, a swath of land across three counties in Northern Virginia outside the Washington suburbs.

Today The Daily Caller posted a story about Mr. Larson that stated:

Nathan Larson is the candidate, running in Virginia, and Democratic ex-Governor Terry McAuliffe is the man who allowed him to run by restoring voting rights to thousands of convicted felons in 2016, Larson among them. Larson landed himself in prison in 2008 after sending a letter to the Secret Service threatening to kill the president. That felony conviction would have made it impossible for him to vote or run for office for the rest of his life, but McAullife’s blanket amnesty changed that. Since his release from prison, Larson has revealed some horrifying things about his late ex-wife and his sexual preferences.

The Washington Post reports:

He believes in instituting a patriarchal system, with women under the authority of men; he supports abolishing age restrictions for marriage and laws against marital rape; he believes that white supremacy is a “system that works,” that Hitler was a “good thing for Germany,” and that incest should be legalized, at least in the context of marriage. And at one point in a conversation with The Post, he seemed to express admiration for the system run by the Taliban in Afghanistan, noting that the country’s birthrate fell as a consequence of increased opportunities for women after the United States’ more than decade-long intervention.

Mr. Larson was given the right to vote after Terry McAullife restored felons’ right to vote. Mr. Larson has taken it one step further and decided to run for office. I can’t imaging anyone voting for this man.

A Hate Group That Claims To Be Fighting Hate

Posted on by

Last week I posted an article about a donation given to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) by George and Amal Clooney. The donation was made in response to the events in Charlottesville, Virginia, and was given ‘to combat hate groups. As I explained in the article, according to the SPLC, a hate group is any group of people who do not share the same beliefs as the SPLC. That is the danger of designating hate groups–there may be a few we all agree on, but there is also a lot of room for disagreement.

PJ Media posted an article yesterday reporting that the SPLC is being sued by some of the groups it has designated as hate groups.

The article reports:

Now, some of the groups slandered by this organization have begun to fight back — and it’s not just Christian groups like D. James Kennedy Ministries and Liberty Counsel.

“The SPLC, who made their money suing the KKK, were set up to defend people like me, but now they’ve become the monster that they claimed they wanted to defeat,” Maajid Nawaz, a British politician and founder of the anti-Islamist organization the Quilliam foundation, declared in a video announcing his lawsuit against the SPLC for defamation.

“They have named me, alongside Ayaan Hirsi Ali, on a list of ‘Anti-Muslim Extremists,'” Nawaz said. “I am suing the SPLC for defamation and I need your help to win.”

The article notes:

In June, the charity navigation website GuideStar adopted the SPLC “hate group” list, marking each profile of the targeted organizations as a “hate group.” ABC and NBC  parroted the SPLC’s “hate group” label against Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) last month, and CNN published the group’s “hate map” online.

But the SPLC does not deserve this widespread trust, support, and publicity. The organization is a “cash-collecting machine” that spreads libels against religious organizations and has been connected to two domestic terror attacks.

There have been two domestic terror attacks that have connections to the SPLC. The first was the shooting of Representative Steve Scalise (R-La.) early this summer (James Hodgkinson had liked the SPLC on Facebook. The SPLC had attacked Representative Scalise for giving a speech to a white supremacist group.) The second attack occurred in 2012 when Floyd Lee Corkins III broke into the Family Research Council (FRC), aiming to kill everyone in the building. The article reports that during an FBI interrogation, the shooter said he targeted FRC because it was listed as an “anti-gay group” on the SPLC website.

The article at PJ Media centers on the lawsuit by Maajid Nawaz, a British politician and founder of the anti-Islamist organization the Quilliam foundation.

The article reports:

In the video announcing his lawsuit, Nawaz declared that “placing my name on a list like this not only smears my name, but also puts me in physical danger.” He noted that “the Left has descended into violence, whether that’s punching people on the street, throwing explosives and attacking people in protests and riots or assassination attempts on Right-wing politicians by leftist fans of the SPLC.”

Whatever their intention was at their inception, the SPLC has become a political hate group that has discovered a way to make money through lawsuits and gifts from people who want to feel good about ‘combating hate.’ It is my hope that a few lawsuits will convince them to find other ways of making a living.

Please follow the link above to the PJ Media article. It is chilling that an organization that claims to be fighting hate can be so misused by the political left. At the moment, the SPLC is being used as a weapon to stifle Christian beliefs and conservative speech. That is not a direction America should be moving in.

In What Universe Is This Logical?

Posted on by

The New York Daily News is reporting today that ESPN is changing its announcer for the Virginia–William & Mary football game this season. The announcer originally scheduled to cover the game was an Asian man named Robert Lee.

This is one explanation of the decision:

Are we so immature that allowing this man to announce a football game is a problem? Obviously he is not related to Robert E. Lee, nor should it matter if he were. Robert E. Lee lived more than a hundred years ago. He’s been dead a long time. How is he relevant to a football game?

I would have believed this story if it had been posted by The Onion, but it is hard to believe that it is true. What has happened to the maturity level of the average American?

Some Insight From Someone Who Understands What Is Behind The Unrest

Posted on by

David Horowitz is what is called a ‘red-diaper’ baby. His parents were admitted communists who taught in the New York City schools. He was one of the founders of the New Left in the 1960s and an editor of its largest magazine, Ramparts. In the 1990’s, after an incident during which he learned the true character of the Black Panthers, David Horowitz began moving toward more conservative thought. His story is told in his book Radical Son. Because of his involvement in leftist political causes as a young man, he understands how the political left works. Today he posted an article about the events in Charlottesville at Newsmax.

Here are a few of his observations from the article:

The tragedy in Charlottesville, Virginia, could have been an occasion to stop and consider how the tolerance for politically correct violence and politically correct hatred is leading the nation toward civil war.

Instead, the media and the political left have turned this incident into the biggest fake news story of the summer, transforming its real lessons into a morality play that justifies war against the political right, and against white people generally.

The organizers of the “Unite the Right” demonstration in Charlottesville were repellent racists.

But they came to defend a historic monument honoring a complex man and cause, and not to attack it or, presumably, anyone else.

They applied for a permit and were denied. They re-applied successfully in a petition supported by the local ACLU.

If they had come to precipitate violence, why would they have gone to the tedious trouble of applying for a permit?

Not unlike the Nazis who marched in Skokie, Illinois, years ago, they had the right to march. No one had to agree with them, but had they been left alone, they probably would not have even made the news.

The article further notes:

What “Unite the Right” actually demonstrated was that the assortment of neo-Nazis, pro-Confederates, and assorted yahoos gathered under the banner of the “Alt-Right” is actually a negligible group.

This supposed national show of strength actually attracted all of 500 people.

Compare that to the tens of the thousands who can readily be marshaled by two violent groups of the left — Black Lives Matter and Antifa — and you get an idea of how marginal “white supremacists” are to America‘s political and cultural life.

Yet “white supremacy” and its evils became the centerpiece of all the fake news reporting on the event, including all the ludicrous attacks on the president for not condemning enough a bogeyman the whole nation condemns, and that no one but a risible fringe supports.

Talk about virtue signaling!

Omitted from the media coverage were the other forces at work in precipitating the battle of Emancipation Park, specifically Black Lives Matter and Antifa, two violent left-wing groups with racial agendas who came to squelch the demonstration in defense of the monument.

Unlike the Unite the Right demonstrators, the leftist groups did not apply for permits, which would have been denied since there was another demonstration scheduled for that park on that day.

One major conclusion reached in the article:

Once the two sides had gathered in the same place, the violence was totally predictable.

Two parties, two culpabilities; but except for the initial statement of President Donald Trump, condemning both sides, only one party has been held accountable, and that happens to be the one that was in the park legally.

What is taking place in the media accounts and political commentaries on this event is an effort by the left to turn the mayhem in Charlottesville into a template for their war against a mythical enemy — “white supremacy” — which is really a war on white people generally.

The ideology that drives the left and divides our country is “identity politics” — the idea that the world consists of two groups — “people of color” who are guiltless and oppressed, and white people who are guilty and oppressors.

This is the real race war.

The media is playing a major role in tearing America apart. I can’t help but wonder if they will like the results if they are successful in separating us into warring groups and stealing our history and identity as Americans.

Who Is Antifa?

Posted on by

One way to subvert a political movement is to plant radical people in it to make the entire group look bad. This happens in political campaigns all the time when candidates are forced to return a donation from a fringe group they may have been unaware of or a candidate is invited to give a speech somewhere that turns out to be a questionable set-up. The alt-right is a name the media has associated with racism, hatred, and general radicalism. If you carefully watch the way the media uses the term, you can see an attempt to expand the term alt-right to anyone who opposes the liberal agenda of the media. The media would like to convince you that believing good things about America and its future is unacceptable, racist, and radical. Meanwhile, a group called antifa pretty much gets a pass on anything they do.

Who is antifa? Antifa was started after World War II in Germany to counter the fascism that Hitler had brought to the country.

A website called jacobinmag describes the roots of antifa as follows:

Yet despite its failure to stop Hitler in 1933 and veritable dismantling in subsequent years, Germany’s socialist labor movement and its decidedly progressive traditions outlived Hitler in the factories of its industrial cities, and began gathering up the fragments as soon as open political activity became possible.

These groups, oftentimes launched from the aforementioned housing estates, were generally called “Antifaschistische Ausschüsse,” “Antifaschistische Kommittees,” or the now famous “Antifaschistische Aktion” – “Antifa” for short. They drew on the slogans and orientation of the prewar united front strategy, adopting the word “Antifa” from a last-ditch attempt to establish a cross-party alliance between Communist and Social Democratic workers in 1932. The alliance’s iconic logo, devised by Association of Revolutionary Visual Artists members Max Keilson and Max Gebhard, has been since become one of the Left’s most well-known symbols.

Essentially antifa is a communist group.

The article goes on to discuss how antifa should “fight a resurgent far right in the Trump era.” Obviously I disagree with that statement. There is nothing ‘far right’ about wanting to preserve America‘s history. There is nothing ‘far right’ about wanting to preserve the values of our Founding Fathers. I don’t believe that America is destined to become a communist country despite the efforts of groups like antifa. However, if we don’t get back to teaching our children the heritage of America and the extraordinary character and wisdom of our Founding Fathers, we could be in danger of losing the freedoms so many Americans have fought and died for.

Not every American in Charlottesville protesting the removal of historic statues was a racist, neo-nazi, etc. I am sure there were some people there who simply objected to the removal and eventual rewriting of American history. Those people had a permit to allow them to march. Antifa did not. Violence is unacceptable, but protest marches are legal. Who brought the violence? The violent incident caused by a neo-nazi has been widely reported. Has anyone reported the violence on the part of antifa?

The news media has taken sides against political conservatism (and American history). They did that a long time ago. The reporting on Antifa and the trouble they have caused in recent years (Berkley, Charlottseville, various G20 summits, etc.) has been limited and will probably continue to be so. The reporting on any extremes on the political right has been put on the front pages above the fold. Americans need to understand that they are being played.

 

I’m Not Sure The News Is Reporting This Honestly

Posted on by

I need to say up front that I have no direct information on this incident. I am, however, very suspicious about the way it is being reported. There was a rally today in Charlottesville, Virginia, that turned ugly. The rally was sponsored by a group called #UniteTheRight. Basically the purpose of the rally was to protest the tearing down of statues that are part of American history that some people have decided are offensive. The people the statues represent may or may not be offensive, but these people are part of American history. Like most of the rest of us, they tried to do what they considered right within the circumstances of the time in which they lived. A little tolerance is in order. It is totally unfair to judge those who lived more than a hundred years ago by the standards of today. How do you think future generations will judge the black genocide in America that is the result of government policies regarding abortion? The media is reporting the rally as a white nationalist rally. First of all, since when is nationalism white?

The dictionary defines nationalism as follows:

loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially :  a sense of national consciousness (see consciousness 1c) exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups

Nationalism under normal circumstances is a good thing. Americans need to be proud of their country and its culture. We were pioneers in personal freedom and responsibility. We made mistakes, but there were many things we did right. Women vote, minorities vote, and in spite of what you have heard, when honestly calculated, women are paid as much as men. We still have equal opportunity in America, and we still have the freedom to voice opinions that may differ from the majority.

We need to ask why this rally turned violent. We also need to look at the way the rally is being characterized in the media. I am not sure that we will get any honest answers as to what actually happened from the media in the coming days, but as I said in the beginning of this article–I remain skeptical. I don’t see any difference between the Ku Klux Klan, the neo-Nazis and the antifa. I don’t agree with any of them, but all of them have the right to protest–none of them have the right to be violent.

It would be interesting to know where the protesters on both sides were from. How did they get there? Were they paid? Were any expenses paid for them? Who planned this rally? Who planned the protest? What were the instructions given to those attending? What is the news story that is not on the front page because this rally is taking center stage? It is time to be skeptical and assume that we are simply not being told the entire story and that the story we are being told may not be the truth.

The Real Threat To The Integrity Of Our Elections

Posted on by

On Monday, The Washington Times posted an article about research into the number of ineligible voters who are voting in our elections.

The article reports:

Just Facts’ conclusions confront both sides in the illegal voting debate: those who say it happens a lot and those who say the problem nonexistent.

In one camp, there are groundbreaking studies by professors at Old Dominion University in Virginia who attempted to compile scientifically derived illegal voting numbers using the Harvard data, called the Cooperative Congressional Election Study.

…On the other side are the professors who conducted the study and contended that “zero” noncitizens of about 18 million adults in the U.S. voted. The liberal mainstream media adopted this position and proclaimed the Old Dominion work was “debunked.”

The ODU professors, who stand by their work in the face of attacks from the left, concluded that in 2008 as few as 38,000 and as many as 2.8 million noncitizens voted.

Mr. Agresti’s analysis of the same polling data settled on much higher numbers. He estimated that as many as 7.9 million noncitizens were illegally registered that year and 594,000 to 5.7 million voted.

These numbers are more in line with the unverified estimates given by President Trump, who said the number of ballots cast by noncitizens was the reason he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton.

Last month, the president signed an executive order setting up a commission to try to find on-the-ground truth in illegal voting. Headed by Vice President Mike Pence, the panel also will look at outdated voter lists across the nation with names of dead people and multiple registrants.

For 2012, Just Facts said, 3.2 million to 5.6 million noncitizens were registered to vote and 1.2 million to 3.6 million of them voted.

There is real evidence that this is a problem:

There is hard evidence outside of polling that noncitizens do vote. Conservative activists have conducted limited investigations in Maryland and Virginia that found thousands of aliens were registered.

These inquiries, such as comparing noncitizen jury pool rejections to voter rolls, captured just a snapshot. But conservatives say they show there is a much broader problem that a comprehensive probe by the Pence commission could uncover.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation, which fights voter fraud, released one of its most comprehensive reports last month.

Its investigation found that Virginia removed more than 5,500 noncitizens from voter lists, including 1,852 people who had cast more than 7,000 ballots. The people volunteered their status, most likely when acquiring driver’s licenses. The Public Interest Legal Foundation said there are likely many more illegal voters on Virginia’s rolls who have never admitted to being noncitizens.

Every vote cast by a noncitizen cancels out the vote of a citizen. It is time for voter identification and proof of citizenship before people can register to vote.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. There are problems with our voter integrity, and those problems have nothing to do with Russia.

The Real Election Scandal Of 2016

Posted on by

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about illegal voters in Virginia.

The article reports:

When Maureen Erickson registered to vote in Prince William County, she listed her home address as a street in Guatemala, in what should have been a very strong indication that she wasn’t a regular Virginia resident.

Yet she remained on the voting rolls for years, and even cast ballots in 14 different elections, up through the 2008 presidential contest. She was only purged in 2012, just ahead of the election, after she self-reported as a noncitizen, according to a new report released Tuesday by the Public Interest Legal Foundation.

Ms. Erickson was one of more than 5,500 noncitizens who were registered to vote in Virginia this decade, and were only bumped from the rolls after they admitted to being ineligible. Some 1,852 of them even managed to cast ballots that were likely illegal, though undetected, the PILF, a conservative voter integrity group, said in its report.

 Just as troubling, the PILF said, was Virginia’s efforts to try to hide the information from the public — a problem foundation President J. Christian Adams said began at the very top, with Gov. Terry McAuliffe.

“At the instruction of Governor McAuliffe’s political appointees, local election officials spent countless resources to prevent this information from spilling into the open,” Mr. Adams said in a statement releasing the report. “From NoVa to Norfolk and all urban and rural points in between, alien voters are casting ballots with practically no legal consequences in response.”

You would think that the person checking Ms. Erickson in at the polling place might have noticed the address and called it to the attention of their supervisor.

The discovery of illegal voters is not something that the government has been actively involved in.

The article explains:

The new PILF report is meant to put some numbers behind the scope of fraud.

Fairfax County, Virginia’s largest jurisdiction, also notched the most reports of noncitizens who had to be kicked off the rolls, with more than 1,000. Prince William County was second with 523, and Virginia Beach City was third with 517.

The PILF said those numbers could be just a fraction of the problem given that they only cover noncitizens who somehow admitted to state officials that they weren’t legally able to vote.

It is time to clean up the voter rolls. Any vote cast by someone not entitled to vote cancels out the vote of an American who is entitled to vote.

When The Numbers Don’t Add Up And The Politicians Don’t Care

Posted on by

Today’s Washington Free Beacon posted an article about the Governor of Virginia, Terry McAuliffe, vetoing a bill that would require investigations of jurisdictions in the state whose voter rolls contain more registered voters than citizens who are eligible to vote. Now I don’t claim to be a genius at math, but it seems to me that a jurisdiction that has more registered voters than citizens who are eligible to vote might have a problem with its voter rolls.

The article reports:

The bill, first introduced by Republican state Sen. Mark D. Obenshain, was prompted by a report that shed light on eight Virginia counties that had more registered voters on their voter rolls than eligible voters.

Obenshain’s bill would require “the local electoral boards to direct the general registrars to investigate the list of persons voting at an election whenever the number of persons voting at any election in a county or city exceeds the number of persons registered to vote in that county or city,” according to its summary. “The Department of Elections is required to provide certain data to any general registrar conducting such an investigation for the registrar’s use during the investigation. The local electoral boards are required to make reports of the findings to the State Board. These reports are public documents.”

Why would any elected official of either party be okay with more registered voters in a jurisdiction than there are citizens eligible to vote? I would hope that all elected officials would support the idea of honest elections.

Governor McAuliffe made the following statement when he vetoed the bill:

“By requiring 133 individual general registrars to conduct an investigation of voters under undefined standards, this bill raises serious constitutional questions,” McAuliffe said in a statement. “It could expose eligible and properly registered Virginians to the risk of improper disenfranchisement.”

“Further, Senate Bill 1105 would increase the administrative burden on local election officials. Rather than imposing unnecessary investigative requirements on those officials, we should focus attention and resources on the Commonwealth’s proven and efficient methods of list maintenance, which serve as a national model.”

At some point we need to remind people that any illegal vote disenfranchises the vote of a legal voter. Keeping honest voting rolls is not an unnecessary investigative requirement–it is the job of the election officials.

The article reminds us of some discoveries during the last election:

The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF), an Indiana-based group that litigates to protect election integrity, released the report last year that sparked Obenshain’s bill.

PILF’s report found 1,046 aliens who were illegally registered to vote in a small sample of eight Virginia counties that responded to its public records requests.

Logan Churchwell, spokesman for the group, said it is reasonable to ask questions about voter rolls with more voters than citizens.

“It is entirely reasonable to ask questions when a voting jurisdiction has more registered voters than citizens,” Churchwell told the Washington Free Beacon. “The Justice Department for the past eight years refused to perform similar studies using powers it was already vested with. Virginia lawmakers and private parties like PILF were forced to pick up the slack. It’s astonishing to see a sitting governor calculate political blowback when voter roll integrity is at stake.”

“As PILF previously reported, these eight problematic jurisdictions had more than 1,000 alien voters removed from the rolls in years past with roughly 20 percent casting ballots before being caught.”

“There’s smoke, fire, and damage right in front of Governor McAullife’s eyes. When will he stop playing politics with Virginians’ voting rights?”

Honest elections are the backbone of our representative republic. We need to make sure our elections follow the basic rules of common sense. The number of registered voters in an area should not exceed the number of eligible voters. If it does, something is wrong.

Voter ID Would Solve This Problem

Posted on by

Investor’s Business Daily posted an editorial today about the charge by Donald Trump that non-citizens voted in the last presidential election.

The article lists a few examples:

  • Election officials in a Kansas discovered that about a dozen newly sworn citizens had already voted in multiple elections when they offered to register them in 2015.
  • An investigation into a 1996 California House race in which Loretta Sanchez defeated incumbent Rep. Bob Dornan found 624 invalid votes by noncitizens in a race where Sanchez won by fewer than 1,000 votes.
  • A September report from the Public Interest Legal Foundation found more than 1,000 noncitizens on Virginia‘s voter rolls, many of whom had cast votes in previous elections.
  • A district-court administrator estimated that up to 3% of the 30,000 people called for jury duty from voter-registration rolls over a two-year period were not U.S. citizens.

The article also quotes John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky, who have both tracked voter fraud extensively,. They made the following statement, “we don’t know how big of a problem voter fraud really is because no systematic effort has ever been made to investigate it.”

The only way to know how much of a problem voter fraud is would be to investigate it and to purge voter rolls of illegal or deceased voters.

I believe President Obama encouraged illegals to vote. Here are some quotes from an interview President Obama did with the Latin-oriented YouTube channel mitu, millennial actress Gina Rodriguez asked Obama:

“Many of the millennials, Dreamers, undocumented citizens – and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country – are fearful of voting. So if I vote, will Immigration know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?”

Obama responded: “Not true, and the reason is, first of all, when you vote, you are a citizen yourself. And there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, etc. The sanctity of the vote is strictly confidential.”

The video of that interview can be found here.

 

 

Who Will Vote In November?

Posted on by

Yesterday Lifezette posted an article about voters in Virginia. The Virginia Voters Alliance has released a report based on findings from the Public Interest Legal Foundation. The report shows that more than 1,000 aliens, or residents who are not U.S. citizens, have been free to vote illegally in Virginia.

The article reports:

The 1,046 Virginia voters may just be the tip of the iceberg, as it’s only the number found in eight Virginia localities, the report reads. The report found that the most illegal votes were cast in 2012, followed by 2008, the year President Obama was elected to his first term. In both years, Obama won Virginia.

It’s a felony for non-citizens to vote in Virginia. But in Virginia, no proof of citizenship is required when voters register.

…The Virginia Voters Alliance looked into the issue first with Alexandria, Virginia. The alliance noticed that the Northern Virginia city had more people registered to vote than eligible voters who lived there.

…”The problem is most certainly exponentially worse because we have no data regarding aliens on the registration rolls for the other 125 Virginia localities,” the report reads. “Even in this small sample, when the voting history of this small sample of alien registrants is examined, nearly 200 verified ballots were cast before they were removed from the rolls. Each one of them is likely a felony.”

It’s time we started prosecuting people who vote illegally. I suspect that would at least slow down the number of illegal votes fairly quickly. This is another example of why we need voter identification and proof of citizenship to register to vote.

What You Were Told vs What Happened

Posted on by

The media is going after Donald Trump with guns blazing. Why? Because he is a serious threat to the status quo. The first victim of this attack is truth. It has long since left the building. The latest example is pointed out in a PJ Media story posted yesterday. The story deals with the media reporting of a Trump rally in Loudoun County, Virginia, earlier in the week. The rally was held with only 24 hours notice, and approximately 2000 people were turned away because the crowd was so large. One attendee posted his observations on Facebook. Please read those observations and compare them to what you have heard on the media.

Here is the story as told by someone who was there:

Today I went to the Donald Trump rally in Ashburn, VA. Since I know good people can disagree over whether or not to support Trump, I am just going to post some candid thoughts below. I report, you decide!

Since I am the chairman of the Loudoun County Republican Committee, I was working with the campaign in advance of the rally. On Monday evening, a senior Trump staffer emailed me and asked me if I would be willing to give the invocation at the rally. I said I’d be happy to, but I also told him that as a born again Christian, I end my prayers with “I pray all of this in the name of Jesus.” Since I know that in this day and age mentionoing the name of Jesus can offend some people, I said I’d understand if they preferred that someone else give the invocation. His response to me was: “We know that’s how you pray, that’s why we asked you.”

After the welcome (by John Whitbeck), invocation (by yours truly), pledge (by Sheriff Michael Chapman), and National Anthem (by Briar Woods High School Teacher Nina Peyton), we waited back stage to get a photo with Donald Trump. And then – he was there, with a crowd of staff, Loudoun County Sheriff’s deputies, and Secret Service. I was immediately struck by his presence – he radiates confidence, but also I was struck by his soft spoken demeanor. He spoke softly and thoughtfully the entire time we were backstage.

The first person to get a photo with him was an older man. We had been chatting before-hand while all of us were waiting for Trump to arrive, and he introduced himself as Lieutenant Colonel Louis Dorfman and he had served in the 82nd Airborne. He shook hands with Donald Trump, and handed him his Purple Heart saying he wanted Trump to have it as thanks for standing up for wounded vets. Trump was surprised and said something like “I can’t take this!” We were all surprised and not expecting this. It was pretty cool to see the respect this veteran had for Trump.

Then it was my turn to shake hands with Trump and get my photo taken. I told Mr. Trump that I was the chairman of the Loudoun County Republican Committee and he immediately stopped and looked at me: “Will, how do I win Loudoun?” he asked me. We started talking and he called over one of his staffers. “George, these people here in Virginia know what we need to do to win Virginia.” And then – in a really cool turn of events – John Whitbeck, the GOP chairs of Prince William County and Arlington County, Trump’s campaign staffer, and me are all huddled in a corner, photos forgotten, strategizing on how Trump will win Virginia. Trump didn’t do a lot of talking. He listened to all of us, he made sure his staff had our emails, and he said that we would have everything we needed.

As we finished up the photos, Trump looked at all the Sheriff’s Deputies. “Let’s get them in the photo,” he said. And then he was taking group photos with all of the cops. They loved it. In fact, my favorite photo I took was all of the deputies with Trump (I’ll post it tomorrow). I was struck by how Trump didn’t forget the “little people.” Even though it was just a few of us and no media, he was relaxed and took the time to get photos with everyone.

The rally itself was super cool. Lots of energy, packed room (something like 2000 people had to be turned away because the auditorium was packed – and just on 24 hours notice!), everyone stood the entire time even though they all had seats. One thing I want to mention is the baby crying, because that has been national news. Contrary to news stories, it was a very funny thing, Trump was very supportive of the mom calling her and her baby “beautiful” and “wonderful”, and then when the baby kept crying he turned it into a joke. Everyone was laughing and it was actually very endearing and funny. Not at all anti mom or anti baby like the media has portrayed it to be.

Which brings me to the final point: I was there and saw and heard the entire event with the mom and baby. There was nothing to it. But then after I’m reading all the news coverage saying “Trump hates moms and babies!!!” I started to doubt myself. Did I really miss a huge story right in front of me? I started asking others who were there, including a husband and wife with young kids. And everyone in the room said the same thing: there was no story here. Trump was being funny and personable and going out of his way to make sure the mom wasn’t embarrased by making it a funny situation.

My conclusion is that the media is selling us a narrative. Be very skeptical of what the media is telling you, because I saw it with my own eyes and it was something very different.

The media has lost touch with integrity as they attempt to control the election. It’s time to ignore them.

Things That Make Elections Interesting

Posted on by

The Richmond Times-Dispatch reported yesterday that the Virginia Supreme Court struck down Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s executive order restoring voting rights to 206,000 felons.

The article reports:

The Supreme Court of Virginia on Friday struck down Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s executive order restoring voting rights to 206,000 felons, dealing a severe blow to what the governor has touted as one of his proudest achievements in office.

In a 4-3 ruling, the court declared McAuliffe’s order unconstitutional, saying it amounts to a unilateral rewrite and suspension of the state’s policy of lifetime disenfranchisement for felons.

The court ordered the Virginia Department of Elections to “cancel the registration of all felons who have been invalidly registered” under McAuliffe’s April 22 executive order and subsequent orders.

As of this week, 11,662 felons had registered to vote under McAuliffe’s orders. The court gave a cancellation deadline of Aug. 25.

This is not an article about whether or not convicted felons can vote, it is an article about whether or not a governor has the right to bypass the legislature and make that decision unilaterally.

The article states:

McAuliffe, a Democrat, took the sweeping action in April, saying he was doing away with an unusually restrictive voting policy that has a disproportionate impact on African-Americans. In a legal challenge, Republican leaders argued McAuliffe overstepped his power by issuing a blanket restoration order for violent and nonviolent felons with no case-by-case review.

The court majority found that McAuliffe did indeed overstep his authority.

“Never before have any of the prior 71 Virginia governors issued a clemency order of any kind — including pardons, reprieves, commutations, and restoration orders — to a class of unnamed felons without regard for the nature of the crimes or any other individual circumstances relevant to the request,” Chief Justice Donald W. Lemons wrote in the majority opinion.

“To be sure, no governor of this commonwealth, until now, has even suggested that such a power exists. And the only governors who have seriously considered the question concluded that no such power exists.”

In response, McAuliffe said he will “expeditiously” sign roughly 13,000 individual rights restoration orders for people who have already registered to vote. He said he’ll continue until rights are restored for all 200,000 people affected by the original order.

“Once again, the Virginia Supreme Court has placed Virginia as an outlier in the struggle for civil and human rights,” McAuliffe said in a written statement. “It is a disgrace that the Republican leadership of Virginia would file a lawsuit to deny more than 200,000 of their own citizens the right to vote. And I cannot accept that this overtly political action could succeed in suppressing the voices of many thousands of men and women who had rejoiced with their families earlier this year when their rights were restored.”

Make no mistake, the Governor is not simply filled with compassion for those convicted felons. For whatever reason, statistically convicted felons vote Democrat. Governor McAuliffe, a longtime friend and associate of the Clintons, wants to make sure he delivers Virginia in November. There is little doubt that Virginia will vote for Hillary (particularly with Tim Kaine as her running mate). Many northern Virginia voters depend on the Washington establishment for their jobs and won’t want to upset the status quo.

The article concludes:

The legal rebuke comes at an awkward time for McAuliffe, who is scheduled to speak at next week’s Democratic National Convention celebrating Clinton and her newly selected running mate, U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va.

Clinton praised McAuliffe after the order in April. When he was Virginia’s governor, Kaine declined to issue a blanket rights restoration order like the one pursued by McAuliffe, despite pressure from activists.

The Supreme Court ruling referenced Kaine’s position, saying Kaine “correctly understood” he did not have blanket restoration power.

Republicans In Virginia Are Suing To Preserve An Honest Election In 2016

Posted on by

On April 25, I posted an article about the Executive Order issued by Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe giving convicted felons the right to vote. The Executive Order would add approximately 200,000 votes to the voter rolls. The majority of the felons would be expected to register and vote as Democrats. Evidently, Virginia Republicans have decided to fight the Executive Order.

ABC News is reporting today:

Republican lawmakers in Virginia will file a lawsuit challenging Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s decision to allow more than 200,000 convicted felons to vote in November, GOP leaders said Monday.

Republicans argue the governor has overstepped his constitutional authority with a clear political ploy designed to help the campaign of his friend and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in the important swing state this fall.

“Gov. McAuliffe’s flagrant disregard for the Constitution of Virginia and the rule of law must not go unchecked,” Senate Republican Leader Thomas Norment said in a statement. He added that McAuliffe’s predecessors and previous attorneys general examined this issue and concluded Virginia’s governor can’t issue blanket restorations.

A National Review article posted on April 25th points out:

It is estimated that McAuliffe’s action will add 3.8 percent to the 5.4 million registered voters in Virginia. That may not seem like a lot, but McAuliffe knows very well that Virginia today is a swing state with recent statewide elections that have been decided by a very small margin. In 2013, the current attorney general, Mark Herring (D.), won his race by only 907 votes. Former Virginia governor Bob McDonnell (R.) won his prior post as attorney general by only 360 votes in 2005. Even the Washington Post, which applauded McAuliffe’s action, acknowledged there is “no doubt” about the “political dimension” in this move by “a Democrat and longtime friend and fundraiser for Bill and Hillary Clinton” — namely, that it “grant[s] Democrats a crucial edge in a swing state ahead of November’s presidential election.”

If the Republicans expect to survive in Virginia, they need to fight back.

Preparing To Steal An Election

Posted on by

Terry McAuliffe has long been associated with the Clinton family and their political aspirations. Now, as governor of Virginia, he is attempting to make sure that Hillary Clinton carries that state in November.

National Review posted an article today about Governor McAuliffe’s efforts.

The article reports:

In what is likely an unconstitutional state action seemingly calculated to ensure that the purple state of Virginia goes blue in the November election, Governor Terry McAuliffe (D.) signed an order on Friday restoring the voting rights of 206,000 ex-felons in Virginia, including those convicted of murder, armed robbery, rape, sexual assault, and other violent crimes. The order also restores their right to sit on a jury, become a notary, and even serve in elected office.

McAuliffe believes that ex-felons can be trusted to make decisions in the ballot booth and the jury box but apparently not to own a gun. He draws the line at restoring their Second Amendment rights; that would be a bridge too far.

So what is the problem with this? First of all, the Governor does not make the laws–the legislature does.

The article further explains:

Having a waiting period, examining each ex-felon’s application for restoration of rights carefully and individually, and differentiating between violent and nonviolent crimes is exactly the system that Virginia had — at least until Friday’s order. In a three-page summary released by the governor’s office, McAuliffe asserts that any claim that he doesn’t have the authority to grant a blanket restoration of rights is “far-outside the weight of constitutional authority across the nation and would read into the text of the Virginia Constitution words that simply are not there.” This is just legal gibberish — the weight of constitutional authority “across the nation” has no bearing on interpreting the Virginia constitution. McAuliffe is reading into that constitution authority he does not have.
The article goes on to explain that this action does not conform to the Virginia Constitution. It overturns a provision that has been in the Virginia Constitution since the Civil War-era. It will be interesting if the Virginia Legislature overturns his action.

A Wake-Up Call From Northern Virginia

Posted on by

Channel 5 in Northern Virginia reported last Tuesday that five arrests related to ISIS have been made in Northern Virginia in recent months.

The article reports:

ISISArrests2ISISArrests

The article also mentions Reza Niknejad of Prince William County. He was dropped off at Dulles International Airport last year with plans to join ISIS. No one has seen him since. I think it is time to start paying attention to what is being taught in the mosques of America. Terrorists in America are not materializing out of thin air. I realize that they have the internet, but I am inclined to think that they also have inspiration closer to home.

Most of the large mosques in America are built and funded by the Islamic Society of North America. This organization is named as a friend of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Exhibits in the Holy Land Foundation Trial. The exhibit which names the group is the Muslim Brotherhood document entitled, “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.” If you have never read this document, please google the exhibits and read it. It is chilling.