Tag Archives: Bob Casey

Law Don’t Mean Anything Unless They Are Enforced

Posted on by

On Friday, Hot Air posted an article about the ongoing vote counting in the Senate election in Pennsylvania. So far those counting the votes have ignored court decisions regarding which ballots can be counted.

The following screenshots are part of the article:

The article reports:

The board’s legal team suggested the commissioners reject the ballots because the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had given clear guidance about signatures being required for votes to count.

There were approximately 124 ballots that would not count because of missing signatures.

Republican Sen.-elect David McCormick won 48.93% of the vote and Democratic incumbent Bob Casey captured 48.50% of the vote, thus triggering a recount. 

However, as of Wednesday, there are approximately 80,000 left to be counted, including 20,000 mail-in and absentee ballots and around 60,000 provisional ballots. 

Counties must begin their recount on Nov. 20 and have until Nov. 27 to report their results to the Secretary of the Commonwealth. 

Casey, the third-term Senator, has not yet conceded the race. 

Philadelphia City Commissioners also voted to count a “relatively small number of undated and incorrectly dated mail ballots.”

“Republicans filed a petition to the PA Supreme Court against all counties to attempt to stop all counties from counting these ballots,” Philadelphia City Commissioners said in a statement to Fox News. “They also filed a statutory appeal challenging Bucks County’s decision to count undated and incorrectly dated mail ballots. We are reviewing the filings.”

An RNC official told Fox News that the decisions made by the county election boards were “ridiculous.”  The GOP has filed two lawsuits against Bucks County and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to stop the counting of these ballots.

The article concludes:

Post-election legal maneuvering is hardly unusual in close races, and most of the time, Republicans do a piss-poor job of fighting against the sophisticated tactics the Democrats and lying scumbags like Marc Elias use to snatch victory out of the jaws of defeat.

This year, though, Lara Trump and her crack team were prepared for the fight and won some big battles. In return, Democrats are now defying court decisions openly and on camera.

If you are a Democrat, do you support lawlessness? Should the rules for counting votes be applied evenly to both political parties?

Why The Internet Is A Valuable Tool During The Election Season

Posted on by

The Internet is not perfect. It’s search engines are generally skewed, and pop-up ads are a pain in the neck. However, the Internet is very useful during the election season.

On Tuesday, The Daily Caller reported:

Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign has said she no longer endorses a ban on fracking, but political strategists and energy experts say the sudden policy shift will do little to move the needle with key voters in November.

Harris said in 2020 there is “no question” she would end fracking if elected president, but her campaign recently told The Hill she no longer wants to outlaw the practice after videos of her endorsing a ban resurfaced following President Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 race. The campaign can walk back Harris’ old fracking position as it pleases, but it likely won’t be enough to allay the concerns of crucial voting blocs — particularly more rural, blue-collar voters in Pennsylvania — that Harris may wage war on the industry or otherwise escalate Biden’s climate agenda to their detriment if elected, political strategists and energy experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The video of Kamala Harris stating that she will ban fracking is easily found on YouTube. There are also other videos that either contradict what she is saying now or simply show her saying things that don’t make sense. The Internet is a valuable tool for election research.

The article concludes:

Dave McCormick, the GOP candidate for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania, is already running an advertisement attacking Harris’ energy positions and tying together the vice president and his opponent, incumbent Democratic Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey.

Some pundits have suggested that Harris could mitigate risks she may face in Pennsylvania by picking Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro as her running mate. However, selecting Shapiro could cause problems for Harris in other states and isolate voting blocs she needs to win due to his support of Israel and criticisms of pro-Palestinian activists, McHenry told the DCNF.

“Bob Casey and Kamala Harris have opposed Pennsylvania energy every step of the way, and their anti-fossil fuel agenda would be disastrous for our commonwealth and the 600,000 workers who rely on the energy sector for a paycheck,” McCormick said in a statement shared with the DCNF. “Banning fracking and abolishing the filibuster to pass a Green New Deal may be popular among the far-left, but here in Pennsylvania these radical proposals are radically out of step with the needs of working families.”

The Harris and Casey campaigns did not respond immediately to a request for comment.

Do your homework before you vote!

What Would You Do ?

Posted on by

Yesterday ABC News reported the reaction from Senater Charles Schumer to Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin‘s statement that he is renouncing his American citizenship in order to avoid taxes on his Facebook profits. Mr. Saverin is a thirty-year old with an estimated net worth of about $2 billion and has lived in Singapore since 2009.

The article reports:

At a news conference this morning, Sens. Schumer and Bob Casey, D-Pa., will unveil the “Ex-PATRIOT” – “Expatriation Prevention by Abolishing Tax-Related Incentives for Offshore Tenancy” – Act to respond directly to Saverin’s move, which they dub a “scheme” that would “help him duck up to $67 million in taxes.”

The senators will call Saverin’s move an “outrage” and will outline their plan to re-impose taxes on expatriates like Saverin even after they flee the United States and take up residence in a foreign country. Their proposal would also impose a mandatory 30 percent tax on the capital gains of anybody who renounces their U.S. citizenship.

The plan would bar individuals like Saverin from ever reentering the United States again.

There are some basic problems with this proposal (other than the fact that it is strictly for show). The text of the Constitution, Article I, Section 9; Clause 3 is “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed”. Aside from the fact that this law is aimed at one specific person, Senator Schumer is making something illegal after it has been done and attempting to make a law retroactively apply to that action. There is no way that should happen under the Constitution.

Frankly, I don’t blame Mr. Saverin for renoucing his citizenship–he doesn’t live in America to begin with, and he wasn’t born here. Why should he let the U. S. Government take upwards of a third of the money he worked hard to earn? If Congress lowered taxes, more people would be willing to pay them instead of avoid them.

Enhanced by Zemanta