Rightwinggranny is adding some guest writers to the website this year. The opinions expressed by these writers are not necessarily the opinions of rightwinggranny.
Reply
From my friends at Townhall:
Voting With Your Feet
Americans (and corporations and businesses) have the freedom to move where the cost of living or the cost of doing business is favorable to their desired lifestyle or business. That has resulted in a migration from blue states to red states. The most popular destination in that migration seems to be Texas.
On Sunday, Fox News posted an article about that migration.
The article reports:
The race to become America’s next economic heavyweight may already have a frontrunner.
The latest Internal Revenue Service (IRS) migration data show billions of dollars in taxpayer wealth flowing into Texas, while Census figures show the state’s largest metropolitan areas continue to outpace much of the country in population growth, strengthening a decades-long shift in America’s economic center of gravity.
What’s more, Texas isn’t relying on a single boomtown. Dallas-Fort Worth added more residents than any metropolitan area in the country over the past year, while Houston, Austin and San Antonio also ranked among the nation’s fastest-growing metros.
…While Florida attracted the nation’s largest influx of taxpayer wealth and South Carolina posted the strongest inbound migration rate, Texas stood out by combining billions in new taxable income with rapid growth across Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, Austin and San Antonio.
Economists say that combination matters because higher-income households bring spending, investment, entrepreneurship and tax revenue that can accelerate job creation, fuel commercial development and attract even more businesses. Over time, those forces can transform fast-growing metros into some of the nation’s most influential economic hubs.
The article concludes:
Supporters of Texas’ economic model argue its lack of a state income tax, relatively affordable cost of living and business-friendly climate continue attracting both employers and workers, reinforcing the state’s long-term growth.
California and New York remain among the nation’s largest and most influential economies.
But the latest Census, IRS and federal economic data suggest Texas continues gaining ground by attracting people, taxpayer wealth and economic output simultaneously, an uncommon combination that could reshape where businesses invest, jobs are created, and economic influence grows over the coming decade.
Elections have consequences and economic policies have consequences.
Who Is On Our Voter Rolls?
On Sunday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article about the number of ineligible voters being discovered on our voter rolls. Why is this being discovered just now?
The article reports:
Reviewing lists of disqualified non-citizen jurors is now taking place in many counties led by citizen inquiry. The disqualification records, “non-juror” lists are public records in many states and counties. These reviews are turning up tens-of-thousands of non-citizens who are on juror lists, which means they are also on voter rolls.
The article quotes The New Jersey Globe:
About 75,000 noncitizens are summoned for jury duty in New Jersey each year, based on data from three state government agencies, including the Motor Vehicle Commission — a stunning figure that widens the scope of a growing controversy over government databases that may incorrectly identify noncitizens as eligible voters and jurors.
While the number is alarming, there’s no indication that noncitizens have served on a jury since the judiciary implemented additional guardrails to prevent it.
“Prospective jurors are asked about their citizenship and other qualifications when they complete the mandatory juror qualification questionnaire,” said Pete McAleer, a spokesman for the New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts. “Those who advance are reminded of the eligibility requirements during jury orientation and are directly questioned about their citizenship during jury selection by the judge and, as permitted, the attorneys.”
In between, potential jurors watch a training video that includes the citizenship requirement.
The revelation of noncitizens making their way into jury pools comes three days after Gov. Mikie Sherrill disclosed that an alleged software glitch at motor vehicles led to the inclusion of roughly 6,600 noncitizens on New Jersey’s voter rolls; Sherrill blamed the vendor, IDEMIA, and said less than 400 noncitizens have voted in recent elections.
The article at The Conservative Treehouse concludes:
That 75,000/yr number are just those summoned people who disqualified themselves by being truthful about their status. I firmly believe the average non-pretending American will soon to realize/admit that many non-citizens actually remained on juries and passed judgement during trial.
Illegal aliens voting in elections is happening, we all know it and even though the media is still trying to retain their lies, you can tell that stance is softening against the reality. However, illegal aliens sitting as jurors in trials, will create a big-time constitutional mess that is something the communist left and media will never admit.
We have no idea how many of those 75,000 people voted. We also have no idea who registered them to vote.
Saving America: Wisdom
Author: R. Alan Harrop,Ph.D.
As we celebrate the 250th Anniversary of America, the future and preservation of this great country depends on the wisdom of the people. As President Washington correctly stated in his inaugural address, the country’s survival depends on having wise, patriotic, and principled citizens who are able to recognize threats to freedom. Sadly, we are at a time when for several reasons many of our citizens have become victims of scams and misinformation that threaten us from within. Let’s examine one of those scams to see how it was brought about and how we can prevent a recurrence.
The most recent and impactful scam has been that climate change is caused by mankind. This scam perpetrated by the Left has been devastating in many ways. Much of this scam can be traced to the writings and preaching of Vice President,
Al Gore. His book, “An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming,” was published in 2006. This was followed by a documentary that was shown to millions of school children, provoking fear. As a result of this indoctrination, most of the younger generations are confirmed climate alarmists. The message was so carefully and fully implemented, that the Obama and Biden administrations instituted policies and regulations that have been destructive to this country.
There never was a rational public debate on the facts and merit of the man-made climate change hoax. It was presented as “settled science.” There was instead a rush to implement programs based on the fear of devastating climate warming that would destroy our world. Some even preached that the world as we have known it would cease to exist in 12 years if fossil fuels and other toxins were not eliminated! The fact that the earth’s climate has gone through several extreme cooling and warming cycles that were not influenced by man’s activities was completely ignored, and anyone questioning the activists was labeled as a “climate change denier.” This is typical Marxist strategy to silence opposition.
The outcome of this scam was an enormous expenditure of taxpayer money over the past twenty years. It is estimated that over $700 billion federal, state, local, and private funds have been spent on solar and wind energy, research into climate change, tax incentives, electric vehicle rebates, and energy efficiency regulations on homes and industries in the past ten years alone. In addition, as a result of Obama and Biden having the United States join the Paris Climate Accords, the United States has spent over $130 billion funding climate change projects in foreign countries. Meanwhile, who benefited from this spending? You got it–Communist China since they were the major exporter of solar panels and wind turbines as well as lithium batteries.
What was the outcome of all this spending and burden on the U.S. taxpayer? There has been no positive outcome since the climate has essentially remained the same. Older citizens, who were wiser and not duped by this Leftist propaganda, finally fought back and elected President Donald Trump. He has reversed most of the climate change agenda, allowing our country to expand energy production and grow our economy.
The lesson here is very clear. Social media, the fake news outlets, and indoctrination of our youth by gullible left leaning teachers, gave the climate extremists the tools to delude some of our citizens. Instead of teaching students how to think; they were taught what to think. Wisdom is the ability to rationally examine the facts and draw conclusions consistent with the truth–something the climate extremists are unable to do. Learning to be skeptical of propaganda is critical to preserving this country. Preserving the country also requires the intelligence to recognize misinformation and the courage to resist. As far as the indoctrination of our children is concerned, I have little trust in the majority of teachers since most are left-leaning. This is why I strongly advocate the use of video cameras in all public-school classrooms so that parents can monitor and be aware of what their children are being taught. If there is nothing to hide, why would a teacher object? Accountability is necessary.
The Story From Someone Who Knows
I apologize for the length of the following article. It was sent to me by someone I recently met who had escaped from Communist China. The Communist Chinese are harvesting organs from political and religious prisoners. This is being done without the consent of the prisoners.
Here is the article:
Former New York Times reporter’s testimony to the China Tribunal into Forced Organ Harvesting Berlin, 23.02.2019
Dear Judges of the Independent Tribunal into Forced Organ Harvesting from Prisoners of Conscience in China,
Please note the some half a dozen stories I wrote about human organ transplant while working as a journalist in China (at the New York Times.) My research began without any preconceived idea about the situation. It was prompted by a report that Chinese airlines were not cooperating in getting organs to recipients in time. I followed where the reporting took me – the result was this series of articles.
I would also like to submit the following observation, and four additional points:
Observation: While I personally believe there is an illegal organ trade, I remain unsure of its scale and the sources of organs. I think probably these are not “only” death row prisoners and prisoners of conscience but may also include e.g. missing persons, victims of murder gangs, mental health patients, otherwise healthy victims of accidents whose relatives are paid for the organs, soldiers who desert, and others. As for numbers: | don’t know.
Additional Points:
-
- In early April 2016 I attended a Red Cross Society of China event at Beijing Hospital 4t4¢ ZS, where senior state health officials spoke about organ donation in China and commemorated organ donors. April 5th is Qing Ming, China’s day of the dead. Following the morning event I went to lunch with Dr. Chen Jingyu, a lung transplant surgeon from the Wuxi People’s Hospital whom I had written about previously. Dr. Chen brought along a friend of his from Beijing Hospital, a lung surgeon called Dr. Tong (Dr. Tong said he had previously conducted lung transplants but was not doing so at that time as his hospital had stopped doing the procedure.) Also present were a Chinese journalist from Global Times and a postgraduate student at Tsinghua University who said he was the head of a student organization there, researching medical issues. We were a party of 5.
During the lunch Dr. Chen accused me of causing him a lot of trouble with my reporting. Recently organizers at a major heart and lung transplant conference in Washington D.C. had rejected a poster of his after initially accepting it, on the grounds that the research was based on death row prisoners. Dr. Chen did not deny this but said it was my fault for having caused him “trouble” with my articles. I said, | had nothing to do with the poster, and if it was rejected due to involuntary donors such as death-row prisoners then that was his responsibility, not mine.
Dr. Chen asked, “But what are we supposed to do?” I replied, “Don’t submit findings gathered from before you said you stopped using involuntary donors” (i.e. Dec. 2014.) He looked at me as if to say, “that’s impossible,” but said nothing further to me on the topic. During this conversation Dr. Tong was listening carefully. He turned to Dr. Chen and the following is a verbatim record of their brief conversation, from
memory, which I wrote down immediately afterwards (the lunch was not a reporting event.)
Dr. Tong: “Prisoners can’t be used?” [“ILIAA AEA?)
Dr. Chen: “No (we) cannot use (them).” [“Afe}4”. J
Dr. Tong: “What about prisoners of conscience?” [“ t»48″4?”]
Dr. Chen: “Can’t use any of them.” [“#@8 7 A8/H.”]
Dr Tong looked down at the table and said nothing further. Dr.Chen also fell silent.
I drew three – analytical – conclusions from this conversation:
e The use of prisoners of conscience for organ transplant has taken place (the state has itself admitted the use of death row prisoner organs.) It is common knowledge, at least among some medical specialists. The Dec. 2014 ban on using death row prisoner organs may not be effective or even real, since even a lung surgeon like Dr. Tong was apparently unaware of the ban. If it was a real ban it might be reasonable to assume he would know, since the state and party through their propaganda and information systems are able to transmit messages of importance very fast.
Point 2: Soon after the publication on Nov. 16, 2015, of a story in which I reported the use of death row prisoner organs was ongoing, a defamation campaign against me was quickly organized by the state. It went like this: the office of Dr. Huang Jiefu contacted me (they had not responded to previous requests for an interview,) and, surprisingly, agreed to allow me to interview Dr. Huang. When I arrived at the interview location there were already two journalists present from Chinese media. During the 2-hour long interview these people barely spoke but observed the interview with Dr. Huang and took notes. The next day many identical reports began to appear in the Chinese media accusing me of erroneous reporting.
Point 3: About a year later, I was required to go the Foreign Ministry for a warning, about an unrelated matter. While there I asked my interlocutor about the organs reporting, how the state viewed it. She replied, “You can do that reporting.” I was a little taken aback and asked, “Don’t you find it too sensitive?” She responded, “Just be sure you make clear that the leaders are going to deal with this” (within the context of our conversation I took this to mean Xi Jinping.) I asked her about the military hospital system and organ transplant practices there and she froze, saying only, “I know nothing about that.”
Point 4: Finally, I’d like to say that it was my impression the New York Times, my employer at the time, was not pleased that I was pursuing these stories, and after initially tolerating my efforts made it impossible for me to continue. The newspaper made a hash of the edit of my story of Nov. 16 2015, substantially changing its sense through an unfortunate cut at the end, and a senior colleague in Beijing attempted to pin the blame on me. The subsequent correction, which was not delayed due to needing to check anything (as it says) but simply due to inattention
or overwork on the part of editors, shows that there were two editing errors only, not reporting errors. More broadly, I conducted several conversations in person or by email with senior editors but essentially my requests to continue this line of investigation – for which I’d need time – were ignored. Editors appeared to believe the organ donation issue in China had been solved by the state’s admission that they had used prisoner organs and its promise of Dec. 14 they no longer were doing so. I was told there was “nothing new’ to the story. Another editor commented, when I tried to broaden the investigation from death row prisoners to prisoners of conscience, based on my conversation with Dr. Chen and Dr. Tong described above, that people who believed that prisoner of conscience organs were being used were on “the outer fringes of advocacy” – that is, not rational. The usual arguments were presented, for example that Falungong are irrational and unreliable, and so on. It was Clear to me the issue was unwelcome. I cannot be sure, but I suspect that this series of articles contributed to a decision by headquarters in February 2017 not to promote me, against the advice of regional editors. I left the paper in June 2017.
I hereby declare this all to be true and exactly as happened, according to the best of my memory and based on notes taken at the time.
Didi Kirsten Tatlow
There are a few things about this article that are extremely important. The first is that this practice is continuing. The second is that most of world is aware of this practice. The Third is what this practice says about the Communist Chinese regime’s regard (or lack of regard) for human life. Israel has blocked its medical insurance programs from funding Chinese organ transplants for Israelis. (article here) I think the rest of the world needs to follow that example.
When You Don’t Follow The Recommendations
On Friday, Just the News posted an article about the fraud in the federal government and the reluctance of the federal government to follow the recommendations of the Government Accountability Office.
The article reports:
The federal government continues to lose an estimated $233 billion to $521 billion each year to fraud, while most agencies overseeing the nation’s largest federally funded programs have yet to implement one of the Government Accountability Office’s top recommendations for preventing those losses, according to a new GAO report.
The report, Managing Risks in Federally Funded, State-Administered Programs, reviewed the 20 largest federally funded, state-administered programs, which accounted for approximately $1.1 trillion in federal obligations in fiscal year 2025.
The GAO found in the report released Thursday that most agencies have not completed documented fraud risk assessments. The assessments are instrumental in identifying where fraud is most likely to occur and how to prevent it.
“Federal and state agencies can better manage fraud risks and prevent fraud by applying GAO frameworks for managing fraud risks and improper payments, as well as other leading practices; leveraging available federal analytic resources, such as Do Not Pay, to verify recipient identity and eligibility before issuing federal funds; and implementing recommendations from GAO and other oversight entities that would address existing program vulnerabilities,” the report read.
The watchdog said there are currently 22 open recommendations that are focused on enhancing fraud prevention practices across the programs covered in the report.
The watchdog urged federal agencies to implement them to better safeguard taxpayer funds, particularly in state-administered programs.
The article concludes:
Among the examples cited were a consultant convicted of submitting falsified permits tied to a $4.3 million airport improvement project, landlords receiving housing-assistance payments for vacant units while tenants underreported income, and an alleged student financial aid fraud scheme involving more than 1,200 applicants at over 100 schools across 24 states.
GAO said that the consequences of fraud extend beyond financial losses.
“Every dollar or resource diverted to fraudsters hinders the federal government’s ability to achieve its goals and provide needed services,” the report said.
Fraud in federal spending impacts all Americans. We pay a price in higher taxes and less services. Government agencies who do not follow effective anti-fraud guidelines need to be penalized.
How Significant Is Lying To Congress?
On Thursday, The Western Journal reported that House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan of Ohio criminally referred Jack Smith to the Justice Department Wednesday, alleging the former special counsel made false statements during congressional testimony last year.
The article reports:
Fox News reported on Wednesday, “Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, released documents last week showing Smith’s team read the text messages of 44 members of Congress from both parties and White House staff during its investigation.”
Smith was overseeing the prosecution of Trump for allegedly interfering in the 2020 election results and mishandling classified documents.
…According to the criminal referral letter sent by Jordan to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on Wednesday, Smith, when asked during testimony before the House Judiciary Committee last December whether his probe had read lawmakers’ text messages, replied, ‘No.’
…Jordan wrote Blanche in his referral letter, “All individuals have an obligation to comply with a duly authorized congressional inquiry. Mr. Smith, a former public servant, is no different. Yet his testimony included intentionally false statements designed to obstruct the Committee’s oversight.”
“His conduct can only be understood as an effort to thwart the Committee’s inquiry by intentionally making false statements and representations before Congress,” Jordan added, noting his committee believes sufficient evidence exists to criminally charge Smith under federal law.
Jordan further elaborated on Fox News Thursday, recounting, “[Smith] said he didn’t get contents, when in fact he did for 44 members of the United States Congress.”
The article concludes:
“When you ask the special counsel, hand-picked by the Garland-Biden Justice Department, to go after President Trump. Mr. Jack Smith … When you ask him, ‘Did you get the contents of members of Congress’s communications and he says, ‘No,’ that is not telling the truth. Because, in fact, he did,” Jordan said.
He further asserted that Smith’s prosecutors told the telephone carrier not to notify him or other targeted lawmakers that they had obtained access to their texts.
Jordan concluded, “It’s always worse than we thought when we start these things. The amount of information, the number of people he went after.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top-ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, argued in a Wednesday news release that Smith’s answers in December were responsive to the questions posed to him.
What Jack Smith did (surveilling Congressmen’s phones) was illegal. Lying about it was also illegal. If he were a Republican, he would have be in jail years ago.
From my friends at Power Line Blog:
Two Much-Needed Reforms
On Wednesday, The Daily Caller posted an article about H.Res. 500, introduced in 2025, would require criminal background checks for House employees by the Capitol Police and public disclosure of recent foreign government payments, contracts, or citizenship. Not surprisingly, it remains stalled in committee despite repeated calls for a floor vote.
The article reports:
Since its founding, the U.S. Congress, the institution that writes the laws governing the world’s leading superpower, has operated with shockingly lax standards.
Republican Florida Rep. Kat Cammack and House Speaker Mike Johnson are debating whether members’ staff should undergo routine criminal background checks and whether lawmakers should be barred from romantic or sexual relationships with the very people who draft, research, and shepherd the vast majority of legislation that shapes American life. While the two aren’t running their issues as a combined package, they should be because together they make up a glaring national security and institutional integrity failure.
The article notes:
Former Democratic California Sen. Dianne Feinstein employed a staffer for nearly 20 years as her San Francisco driver and Asian-American community liaison. He even attended Chinese consulate functions on her behalf. The FBI eventually informed her that he was reporting to China’s Ministry of State Security. She chaired the Senate Intelligence Committee at the time. Investigators concluded he passed no classified material. Even journalist James O’Keefe, with zero access to classified information, has found out more just from fake dates in D.C. Americans are just supposed to accept that there was a breach in security that lasted two decades, but nothing important was ever relayed to China. He was apparently a very terrible spy.
Former California Rep. Eric Swalwell infamously fell victim to the classic “honeypot” situation with Fang Fang, a suspected Chinese intelligence operative, who assisted him with fundraising, helped place an intern in his office, and maintained close personal contact. Swalwell denied any wrongdoing after the FBI issued a defensive briefing in 2015, and she allegedly fled back to China.
More recently, a staffer on the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party was reportedly offered cash for insights on sensitive topics like rare-earth minerals and Venezuela. Separately, reports of declassified files have highlighted a former member allegedly placing interns acting as foreign agents into other offices.
This needs to be corrected as soon as possible.
Where Was The Investigation?
On Wednesday, Townhall posted an article about a young lady named Katie, who was visiting friends at the University of Illinois when the vehicle she was riding in was struck from behind at nearly 80 miles per hour by an intoxicated driver. Two young women were killed. Three others suffered devastating injuries.
The article reports:
According to court records, the driver had previously been removed from the United States, illegally reentered the country, and ultimately obtained an Illinois driver’s license before the crash.
Whether one supports or opposes Illinois’ immigration policies is beside the point.
Those facts alone should have prompted obvious questions inside state government.
How did someone previously removed from the United States obtain an Illinois driver’s license?
Were Illinois’ credentialing standards adequate?
Were existing safeguards followed?
If they were, should they now be strengthened?
If they weren’t, why not?
Should Illinois review the policies that made this possible?
Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request concerning the death of Katie.
The article notes:
According to Judicial Watch’s review of the Governor’s FOIA response, there was virtually no evidence that Katie’s death prompted that kind of inquiry.
The most revealing part of the Governor’s files wasn’t what they contained. It was what they appeared to lack: any meaningful curiosity about how Illinois might prevent another family from experiencing the same loss.
That absence speaks louder than any press release.
The article concludes:
Every aviation disaster is investigated.
Every bridge collapse is examined.
Every major industrial accident is reviewed so future lives can be saved.
Government should hold itself to the same standard.
Its first responsibility is not to defend an ideology.
Its first responsibility is to pursue the truth, even when that truth is politically inconvenient.
Especially then.
Every morning I wake up knowing my daughter never will.
I have accepted that my grief is mine to carry.
What I cannot accept is the possibility that Illinois government moved on before it ever stopped to ask what happened—or whether another family could be spared.
Katie deserved more than condolences.
She deserved a government curious enough to ask how this happened…
courageous enough to examine whether its own policies played a role…
and humble enough to change them if they did.
Every Illinois family deserves that.
Katie’s death was not investigated because the questions it would expose would reveal how warped our past immigration and deportation policies have been.
Equality vs. Equity
- Equality means providing the same resources or opportunities to everyone, regardless of their individual circumstances.
- Equity involves recognizing individual differences and providing resources or opportunities based on specific needs to achieve fair outcomes.
As soon as you move the goalposts to “achieve fair outcomes” you are no long acting with equality. If I work 20 hours a week and my boss works 50 hours a week, should we both be paid the same amount to insure a “fair outcome”? But if I have children at home and can only work 20 hours a week, under equity, shouldn’t that be considered in providing a “fair outcome”? Should I have the same opportunity for promotion as the person who works 40 hours a week? So where am I going with this?
On Thursday, The Daily Signal posted an article about a new policy by te Education Department regarding school discipline.
The article reports:
The Department of Education is rescinding several regulations that justified racial quotas in school discipline, the Daily Signal can first report.
Disparate impact is an approach to civil rights enforcement that claims a neutral policy that does not discriminate on its face can still constitute illegal racial discrimination if it has a “disproportionate” statistical effect on different racial and ethnic groups.
“We should be making decisions based on meritocracy,” Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Kimberly Richey told the Daily Signal in an interview. “We should be making decisions based on qualifications. This is just one additional important step, where we are demonstrating that any inclusion of race in any decision that is made within a school has to stop.”
The Obama administration used disparate-impact policy to require schools to make race a factor when considering disciplinary actions. Under Democrat administrations, the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights found schools guilty of violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 on race-neutral policies if data showed the school disciplined more minority students.
Thursday’s deregulatory action aims to ensure equal education opportunities and treatment for students, according to the Education Department. The move is in line with President Donald Trump’s executive order last April titled “Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy,” which made it the policy of the United States to eliminate all uses of disparate-impact liability.
Quotas are racist, regardless of how they are supposed to be beneficial.
Where Is The Money Actually Coming From?
On Wednesday, The Michigan Enjoyer posted an article about one of the donors to the campaign donors to Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic Socialist running for Michigan’s U.S. Senate seat.
The article reports:
Milan — Out in the country on a rutted dirt road lined with corn lives an old woman and her dog.
Elizabeth Waffle, 88, was forced to move into a shabby trailer two years ago after her house burned down. She owns an old pickup truck but no computer.
Nevertheless, Waffle, who lives on a modest pension, is a true believer in liberal causes and continues to make small political donations by way of ActBlue—the Democrat online fundraising platform.
But somehow, those few dozen small donations she has made over the past five years have transmogrified into 14,696 donations totaling more than $150,000—the equivalent of eight donations a day, every day for the past five years, averaging $9.18.
“One hundred and fifty thousand?” Waffle said with real surprise. “Hell no. I don’t have that kind of money.”
She says she has contributed to Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic Socialist running for Michigan’s U.S. Senate seat, but not 47 times spanning the last two years, as federal filings show.
The article notes:
The subject of multiple investigations, the fundraising platform (Act Blue) is accused of “rinsing” foreign money and massive private donations by using the stolen names and addresses of real, often elderly Americans to fabricate hundreds of small-dollar donations. Names like Elizabeth Waffle.
ActBlue CEO Regina Wallace-Jones recently invoked her Fifth Amendment rights 22 times during a congressional hearing regarding foreign contributions.
According to FEC campaign contributions compiled by Bob Cushman, ActBlue shows Waffle donating from her trailer, even though she has no computer and spotty internet access. It also shows her donating from an apartment she rented in town two years ago after her house burned down. Sometimes it shows Waffle donating from both the trailer and the apartment on the same day. It shows her donating to out-of-state candidates she’s never heard of.
“This is very abnormal,” said Waffle, who sat in the trailer threshold looking over the paperwork I had brought. “I think it’s wrong, and I think there’s something in there that’s off.”
This is the money in politics that needs to be shut down!
Misplaced Blame?
When thousands of non-citizens were found on New Jersey voter rolls, New Jersey Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherril blamed a software glitch for the problem. Well, not so fast.
On Wednesday, The Gateway Pundit reported:
The recent news of illegal aliens registering in mass in NJ, and then voting, is not a surprise and is almost expected.
New Jersey is one of many States that DO NOT use the free Federal SAVE system to check for illegal aliens in their voter registrations or existing voter rolls.
SAVE is an online service administered by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) that provides immigration status and U.S. citizenship information. SAVE only returns verification information. The decision to register or remove a voter remains with state or local election officials.
As of June 30th, there are 26 states using SAVE for voter-registration or voter-list-maintenance purposes. It processed 198 million cases in 2025.
The article includes the following map:
The article notes:
New Jersey joined the non-profit ERIC in August of 2022 to help clean their voter rolls. Secretary of State Tahesha Way said, “ERIC is a powerful step to strengthen New Jersey’s elections by increasing our ability to support eligible voters while also improving the accuracy of our voting rolls.”
Obviously, this isn’t working.
Their agreement (Section B, pg. 17) with the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) does not allow NJ, or any other members of ERIC, to communicate or notate to ERIC that a person is a non-citizen.
The article explains:
This supposed sophisticated voter cleaning operation has in its by-laws that they do not want information that a person is a non-citizen. What’s even more bizarre, ERIC doesn’t use the SAVE system.
After President Trump was elected, he mandated enhancements to the SAVE system. There were several major changes. You could now bulk process voter lists. It now uses SSA data during citizenship verification. It now allows searches by Name, DOB, and last four of SS# instead of just the Alien Registration Number or I-94 number.
The SAVE system used to cost $1 per transaction. If you wanted to check, let’s say, 40,000 voters on your rolls, you would get a bill for $40 grand. These kinds of fees prevented many election administrators from using the system in bulk. Trump made it free and encouraged bulk processing.
The article concludes:
New Jersey isn’t alone with the recurring problem of registering anyone, even illegals. Many other States have had to disclose they are registering non-citizens automatically.
As we mentioned above, members of ERIC are hamstrung with bylaws that restrict the use of tagging non-citizens.
So, was the ERIC system purposely designed to hide illegals among our American citizen voter rolls?
So why would any American want to keep illegals on the voting rolls?
Looking At The Platform Of The Democratic Socialists Of America
On Wednesday, Issues & Insights posted an article about how well the items in the Democratic Socialists Of America platform resonate (or don’t resonate) with Americans.
Here are some of the highlights from the article:
First, I&I/TIPP asked about DSA’s proposal for the “abolition of jails and prisons.”
Only 26% agreed either strongly (10%) or somewhat (16%) with this plan, while 62% disagreed strongly (47%) or somewhat (15%).
…Next up: “Defunding the Defense Department.” On this, overall 33% agreed either strongly (15%) or somewhat (18%), while a majority of 54% disagreed strongly (17%) or somewhat (37%).
…For a third question, voters were asked to agree or disagree with “amnesty for all illegal immigrants.”
This time, 34% agreed strongly (14%) or somewhat (19%), while a slim majority of 52% disagreed strongly (19%) or somewhat (33%).
…On the fourth question, respondents were asked about “getting rid of the U.S. president and U.S. Supreme Court to be replaced by a chief executive and high court selected by Congress, not the people.”
An overall 27% agreed either strongly (13%) or somewhat (14%) with this proposal, while a more than 2-to-1 majority of 57% disagreed either strongly (42%) or somewhat (14%).
…Finally, the fifth proposal of the DSA’s plan: “Government ownership of the largest corporations and important industries.”
Again, about a third — 33% — agree with the idea either strongly (13%) or somewhat (20%), while 52% disagree strongly (34%) or somewhat (18%).
If Americans actually read the platform, it doesn’t sound like the Democratic Socialists of America will get a lot of votes. The question is whether or not Americans read the platforms or just react to the personalities of the candidates.
The article notes:
Other polls find the same level of acceptance for socialism, which is what “control or own” clearly implies.
In a June survey, for instance, Economist/YouGov found that 34% of Democrats said socialism was a “better” economic system than capitalism, while only 22% said capitalism was better. Among all Americans, 44% preferred capitalism versus 19% choosing socialism. And overall, a third of all Americans said they’d vote for a socialist candidate.
Why is this?
One big reason could be age. In the I&I/TIPP Poll, 44% of respondents were in the 18-to-44 year age range. So even the oldest among this group would have only the vaguest of memories of the collapse of communism and the subsequent debunking of socialist ideas as economically workable.
Meanwhile, in recent decades formal public education has become saturated with leftist indoctrination, well documented in numerous studies, reports and first-hand accounts.
No surprise, then, that in the I&I/TIPP Poll, 46% of those 44 years and younger supported the takeover of major U.S. industries, while just 22% of those 45 years and older did. It’s a generational thing.
Inevitably, today’s students become tomorrow’s voters. This, perhaps as much as anything, explains the current positive feelings that many younger voters seem to harbor for socialist candidates and the ideas they espouse.
Please follow the link to read the entire article. Americans need to educate themselves on what socialism actually means and what the results of embracing it are.
Preventing Fraud Before It Happens
On Wednesday, American Greatness posted an article about the federal government’s efforts to end Medicaid fraud in blue states.
The article reports:
The Trump administration moved Tuesday to withhold more than $1 billion in federal Medicaid dollars from California and Minnesota, the latest step in the campaign to root out fraud and waste in blue-state health programs.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) said it is deferring roughly $867.5 million in payments to California and $199 million to Minnesota after financial reviews turned up claims the agency could not verify, particularly in in-home care programs.
The decision extends a pattern of federal scrutiny aimed squarely at Democrat-led states that critics say have long been lax about policing how taxpayer money moves through their Medicaid systems. Minnesota in particular has already drawn federal attention this year, after the administration pointed to the state’s failure to control fraud as one justification for last year’s ICE enforcement surge there.
CMS said its review of California’s claims was triggered after officials noticed spending growth in certain in-home care programs that outpaced national trends, along with a broader set of claims the agency said simply lacked adequate documentation. In Minnesota, CMS flagged claims across 14 service areas, including payments tied to providers previously identified through the state’s own program integrity reviews, a detail that raises questions about why those payments continued at all.
The article notes that officials have also imposed a six-month moratorium on enrolling new hospice and home health providers into Medicare nationwide, citing those sectors as persistent hotspots for fraudulent billing. These are our tax dollars that are paying for lavish lifestyles for dishonest people. We need to improve our screening process before we give out any more money.
Is Pickaxe Mountain Next?
An article posted at Breitbart on Tuesday reports that Israeli intelligence believes that Iran moved its nuclear centrifuges into the underground Pickaxe Mountain facility near Natanz last fall. President Trump is still determined to end Iran’s nuclear program.
The article reports:
President Donald Trump declared Tuesday that the United States is “not finished at all” with Iran, warning U.S. forces would strike the regime’s heavily fortified Pickaxe Mountain nuclear site “pretty soon” while signaling his administration was prepared to expand military operations rather than return to negotiations.
Trump made the remarks while meeting Lebanese President Joseph Aoun at the White House after being asked about a Wall Street Journal report that Israeli intelligence believes Iran moved thousands of advanced centrifuges into the underground Pickaxe Mountain facility near Natanz last fall.
“I think that they may have,” Trump said when asked about the reported transfer, while stressing that the centrifuges alone would not allow Iran to revive its nuclear program.
“It doesn’t mean anything unless they have the material. They don’t have it. We follow the material. That’s where the action is.”
“We’ll be hitting that area probably pretty soon. There’s not a thing they can do about it,” he said. “Normally, I wouldn’t say that. If I thought they could do something about it, I would never say that. But we’ll be hitting that area pretty soon, and very heavily.”
It is quite possible that what is left of the rulers of Iran believe that the existence of nuclear capabilities (or at least the illusion of that existence) may be the only thing keeping them in power and keeping their country from being destroyed.
The article notes:
Trump’s remarks came as U.S. forces continued striking Iranian military infrastructure, with U.S. Central Command announcing additional operations targeting missile and drone capabilities, military command centers, maritime assets, air defense systems, and other facilities tied to Tehran’s efforts to disrupt commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. Trump has repeatedly argued the campaign is intended to prevent Iran from rebuilding its nuclear program while maintaining military pressure on the regime.
Asked about Iran’s remaining capabilities, Trump maintained the administration would continue applying military pressure while monitoring Tehran’s nuclear assets.
“We’re degrading them at levels that nobody thought was possible,” he said, adding that U.S. officials continue to track Iran’s nuclear material rather than focusing solely on centrifuges or infrastructure.
We need to end this quickly, and the current regime of Iran needs to leave the country!
From my friends at Townhall:
Getting The Money Back
On Monday, Open The Books posted an article about the fraud involving Covid payments and the efforts by the government to get back the money.
The article reports:
COVID-19 programs to help families and businesses stay afloat inadvertently diverted hundreds of billions to scammers who spent thousands on wish-list items like luxury cars and plastic surgery.
The actual amount of pandemic-related fraud, however, is unknown not only to us but also to the federal government. What’s more, the amount that the federal government has recouped makes up a scant 0.47% of the government’s fraud guestimate.
The difficulty of recouping these ill-gotten gains makes it even more critical that government programs are designed with far better guardrails in place. Scrutiny on the front end, even at some added investment, is imperative; the Covid era demonstrated that once money has left public coffers, it’s incredibly challenging to recover all or even much of it.
…Congress authorized about $4.6 trillion in emergency COVID-19 relief between 2020 and 2021 for vulnerable businesses and struggling families, but fraud was identified in at least 19 different pandemic-relief programs, according to an April 2025 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report. If the government’s $300 billion fraud calculation is correct, then 6.5% of all pandemic aid was incorrectly distributed. What we have compiled is just a fraction of the hundreds of charged cases and undetected schemes.
The last update from the Department of Justice regarding how much stolen COVID-19 relief funds were seized or forfeited — over $1.4 billion — was in April of 2024. While this is described more broadly as “stolen COVID-19 relief funds” by the DOJ, the COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force classifies the figure as Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) funds seized or forfeited. This means that the federal government has only recovered $10.55 per household. That leaves the remaining fraud tab nearly untouched.
Please follow the link to read the entire article. The government may have had good intentions, but they messed up royally. Their efforts to help people they hurt by shutting down the government only provided avenues for dishonest people to get rich quick. The federal government is not the best vehicle for helping people in need. Local organizations have a much better idea of which needs are real.
Stopping Fraud Before It Happens
On Tuesday, The New York Post posted an article about a government-wide payment verification process implemented last year.
The article reports:
The Treasury Department has blocked nearly $100 million in taxpayer money from going to dead people since implementing a government-wide payment verification process last year, The Post has learned.
The department’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service discovered the money set to go to ghosts after a review of an eye-popping 885 million payments worth a total of nearly $2.7 trillion.
Since March 2025, the screening has identified more than 4,900 disbursements, worth approximately $99 million, associated with deceased payees, according to the Treasury.
The $99 million figure is a tiny fraction (0.0036%) of the $2.7 trillion the department reviewed as part of the Trump administration’s crackdown on waste, fraud and abuse — but more than triple what Treasury discovered going to the deceased in the days before President Trump took office last year.
“Treasury has delivered on a key promise of President Trump’s mandate to stop improper payments and fraud before money leaves the Treasury, and strengthen the integrity of the federal payment system,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement.
The article concludes:
In February, Trump signed the Ending Improper Payments to Deceased People Act into law, which allowed Treasury permanent access to the death file.
The department has projected a gain of $330 million in net benefits through the reduction in improper payments to dead people.
I am thrilled that the payments to dead people are being stopped, but is there any effort made to prosecute the people who spent the money?
How They Did It
We have heard a lot lately about Chinese interference into American elections. We have not necessarily heard the specifics about how they did it. PJ Media posted an article on Monday that provides some clues.
The article reports:
A year ago, Brooke Singman published a lengthy piece on the Fox News website that detailed just how the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) executed its TikTok data theft scheme. Her primary source for the story was the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is chaired by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).
The Senate Judiciary Committee launched its own investigation into this after the FBI had announced its own investigation in July 2025. As Singman reported, the CCP allegedly worked to get “fake driver’s licenses to Chinese sympathizers in the U.S. who would cast a vote for candidate Biden.”
It is not clear how successful the CCP was in getting its ballots for Biden to count.
In July 2025, a Grassley spokesperson told Fox News, “Chairman Grassley is in receipt of an FBI document (response) to a request he made based on legally protected whistleblower disclosures…. The document alleges serious national security concerns that need to be fully investigated by the FBI.”
As stated in that document, the intent of the alleged scheme was for the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to produce and export fraudulent U.S. driver’s licenses to Chinese sympathizers in the U.S., so as to create “tens of thousands of fraudulent mail-in votes for US Presidential candidate Joe Biden, in late August 2020.”
According to the document at the center of these investigations, by August 2020, “the Chinese government had produced a large amount of fraudulent United States driver’s licenses that were secretly exported to the United States,” Fox News reported.
The fraudulent drivers licenses would allow tens of thousands of Chinese students and immigrants sympathetic to the Chinese Communist Party to vote for US Presidential Candidate USPER Joe ((Biden)), despite not being eligible to vote in the United States… China had collected private US user data from millions of TikTok accounts, to include name, ID and address, which would allow the Chinese government to use real US persons’ information to create the fraudulent driver’s license, the document states.
Please follow the link to the article for further details.
This illustrates the need for a provision in the SAVE Act to require voters to show proof of citizenship when registering to vote.
Sometimes The Double Standard Is Amazing
Last week, President Trump made a speech about Chinese interference in the 2020 election and provided links to the evidence. Two networks refused to air the speech and one network only aired the criticism. It was as if it was no big deal to have another country interfere in our elections. The mainstream media worked hard to play down the importance of the interference. Just for the record, it wasn’t always this way.
On Monday, Just the News reported:
When the Biden Justice Department announced that Chinese hackers had gotten their hands on Great Britain’s publicly available voter files in 2024, American news media clamored with stories claiming it was a “dangerous” breach. The same, too, when U.S. officials announced Russia and Iran had hacked small numbers of U.S. voter files in 2020 and 2021.
The reason was simple: U.S. intelligence agencies believe the targeting and acquisition of voter registration files is an act of election interference. “Election interference is a subset of election influence targeted at the technical aspects of the election, including voter registration, casting and counting of ballots and reporting of results,” an October 2020 National intelligence Council report on election interference explains.
In other words, the compromising of election voter registration data, is, by the definition of intelligence agencies, an act of election interference.
When President Donald Trump presented confirmed evidence last Thursday night that China had compromised and obtained 220 million American voter registration files, the news media swung 180 degrees in the opposite direction. They argued it was old news (it was not) and not a big deal because you can buy limited data in America related to voter registration commercially. According to security experts, that limited data accessibility is not the same thing.
…In 2021, the Biden Justice Department indicted two Iranian hackers for accessing just 100,000 voter files from a single state where it is also commercially available. They were charged with criminally interfering in the 2020 election even though voter files are commercially available in limited form.
Hopefully the people who actually see the double standard outnumber the people who still either have their eyes closed or suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Free Speech Rights For Lawyers
On Monday, The Federalist posted an article written by Jay Sekulow and Jordan Sekulow about the disbarment of conservative lawyer John Eastman. John Eastman has an impressive background–he is a former professor and deal at Chapman University School of Law. He has run for political office in California, and he is a former law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
The article reports:
Shortly after our personal representation of President Trump in his impeachment acquittal before the U.S. Senate, we warned about what we saw coming. The left was preparing to go after conservative lawyers. Now that unfortunately has come to pass, and it’s exactly what the American Center for Law and Justice is preparing to challenge at the U.S. Supreme Court.
The ACLJ is representing Professor John Eastman, a former Trump attorney, in a forthcoming cert petition to the Supreme Court of the United States challenging his disbarment by the state of California.
In the wake of the 2020 election, Eastman, a constitutional scholar and former law school dean, represented President Trump in a number of election-related challenges involving issues upon which no court had weighed in. He was thereafter disbarred by the California Bar following disciplinary proceedings arising from his legal advice, public advocacy, court filings, and speeches regarding the 2020 presidential election. That decision was erroneously upheld by the California Supreme Court.
No court sanctioned Eastman for any of his legal positions, yet the California Bar disbarred him anyway. In essence, Eastman was disbarred for exercising his free speech rights and providing legal counsel to President Trump in the aftermath of the election.
If a state can disbar a conservative attorney for his advocacy — his free speech — by retroactively labeling that advocacy as professional misconduct, then the left will be empowered to wage lawfare against every conservative attorney with whom they disagree.
The article notes:
The implications extend far beyond Eastman. Every attorney who represents a controversial client, advances a novel constitutional theory, or challenges prevailing legal orthodoxy has an interest in ensuring that professional discipline is not used to chill protected advocacy. Today’s unpopular argument may become tomorrow’s accepted precedent. The Constitution protects the freedom to make those arguments in the first place.
Free speech is protected by the U.S. Constitution. Some of the people on the political left need to remember that.
Protecting The Health Of Americans
On Monday, The Epoch Times reported that Coca-Cola will be suspending its production of Fairlife milk in America after a cyberattack.
The article reports:
Dairy company Fairlife LLC, owned by the Coca-Cola Company, suffered a cyberattack and has ceased its U.S. operations.
A portion of Fairlife’s systems was accessed by a third party, “including its production-related systems, in connection with a ransomware event,” Coca-Cola said in a July 16 statement. “After detecting the issue, the company promptly activated its incident response and business continuity protocols,” it said.
Although product quality and safety were not affected, production operations at Fairlife have been temporarily suspended, with the company clarifying that its Canadian operations are operating as usual.
The article notes:
Globally, the critical manufacturing sector faced the highest number of attacks, accounting for 22.7 percent of such incidents. This was followed by commercial facilities, IT, healthcare and public health, financial services, and legal sectors.
The U.S. government is taking action to tackle cyber threats. On June 2, President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled “Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security.”
The order directed the establishment and expansion of federal programs and cybersecurity services that result in enhancing AI-enabled defensive tools. It called for prioritizing the cyber defense of information systems under the federal government to protect the country’s vital functions.
This is growing problem. Rightwinggranny was hacked in June of this year, and it was a mess to get it up and running again. This is a small blog and generally runs between 40,000 and 60,000 hits a day, and it got hacked. It’s a shame that people who are smart enough to hack into other peoples’ property can’t put their talents to better use!
Misdirection To Promote Socialism
On Sunday, Jonathan Turley posted an article at his website about the lies being told about Scandinavian socialism.
The article notes:
This week, Darializa Avila Chevalier was asked if there has ever been a “successful model of socialism anywhere in the world outside the United States in terms of both human rights and widespread economic justice.” The member of the Democratic Socialists of America responded by citing Sweden and Norway. It is a common false claim made by socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders and others. I address the claim head-on in Rage and the Republic.
The article quotes Rage and the Republic:
‘Leaders such as Senator Bernie Sanders have heralded the alleged success of “democratic socialism” in Europe, a pitch that is obviously taking hold with many younger Americans. Sanders and others often refer to the prosperity of Scandinavian socialism, including Sweden and Norway. It is a dangerous myth that is promulgated by many in the media. The question is not whether Scandinavian socialism can work in the United States (it cannot) but whether Scandinavian socialism can work in Scandinavia. Sweden is a particularly curious choice as a model for democratic socialism. In reality, Sweden shows not only the success of capitalism but also the limits of socialism even in a relatively small nation. Sweden turned away from the type of socialist theories increasingly in vogue in the United States.
…
The Scandinavian countries also differ from the United States in other key ways. For example, Norway has largely sustained large public welfare systems through oil revenues. The country imposes a corporate income tax rate of 78 percent on extractive activities to fund its public welfare programs…
Countries like Denmark and Sweden are strong adherents to capitalist principles and are listed among the most capitalist nations on Earth. Indeed, leaders often express surprise by American references to their socialist principles. In 2015, the Danish Prime Minister Lars Rasmussen observed, “I know that some people in the U.S. associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore, I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.” Likewise, Social Democratic Minister of Finance Kjell‐Olof Feldt stated “That whole thing with democratic socialism was absolutely impossible. It just didn’t work.”
Right now America is not a true capitalist economy. Unfortunately we have drifted into crony capitalism and quasi socialism in some areas. True prosperity for everyone will occur when we get back to the free market economy our Founding Fathers envisioned.
Border Crossings Are Down, Drug Seizures Are Up
On Sunday, Just the News posted an article citing the results of the Trump administration’s border policies. The numbers are definitely moving in the right direction.
The article reports:
Illegal border crossings remained historically low in June, continuing a trend under the Trump administration.
Last month, 31,626 illegal border-crossers were apprehended nationwide, according to the latest U.S. Customs and Border Protection data. The number is up by 6,500 from last June and down by more than 173,000 from June 2024, according to the data.
The total excludes “gotaways” – those who illegally enter between ports of entry to evade capture. Similar to the Biden administration, the Trump administration is not publicly releasing gotaway data. It remains unclear how many are still illegally entering the country.
Apprehensions at the southwest border states of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas totaled 12,901 last month, according to the data.
Between ports of entry, Border Patrol apprehended 9,848 last month, another record low. That’s 94% less than the monthly average during the Biden administration and 96% less than during the peak reported at the southwest border in December 2023.
The article notes the increase in drug seizures:
While apprehensions remained low, drug seizures increased last month.
CBP seizures of cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, fentanyl and marijuana (combined by weight) increased by 49% from June 2024, according to CBP data.
By fiscal year, drug seizures increased by 57% from fiscal 2024. The fiscal year goes from Oct. 1 through Sept. 30.
Cocaine seizures increased the most last month – by 71% from May. CBP officers seized 6,242 pounds of cocaine nationwide. Heroin and fentanyl seizures also increased by 49% and 42%, respectively, over the same time period. CBP agents seized 68 pounds of heroin and 1,072 pounds of fentanyl last month.
The article also cites the number of illegals released into the country:
The Department of Homeland Security again announced June was the 14th consecutive month “of zero releases at the border.”
CBP data contradicts this claim. Every month, unaccompanied alien children (UACs) are released into the country. Fiscal year to date, at least 1,000 UACs were reported illegally entering the country, according to CBP data.
According to federal data, 1,796 UACs were in federal care in June, down from 2,460 in January. More than 1,200 have been released to sponsors this fiscal year through the beginning of June, with the majority sent to California and Texas, according to the latest data.
In fiscal 2025, more than 24,200 UACs were sent to sponsors in the U.S. instead of being returned to their family in their home country.
That total is down from more than 99,000 UACs sent to live with sponsors in the U.S. in fiscal 2024 and more than 113,000 in fiscal 2023.
The program allowing UACs to enter this country needs to end. There is too much danger of child exploitation in the program.