Remember When Patriots Ran Congress?

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about a recent vote taken in the Senate.

The article reports:

None of Democrats’ witnesses in a congressional hearing Tuesday could say resolutely that they believe only citizens should be able to vote in a federal election.

During a Senate Judiciary Hearing on the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee asked the witnesses to provide a basic “yes” or “no” answer to a series of questions about non-citizens voting.

“Do you believe that only citizens of the United States should be able to vote in federal elections?” Lee asked each of the witnesses.

“We don’t have a position about non-citizens voting in federal elections, we believe that’s what the current laws are, and so we’re certainly fighting for everyone who is eligible under current law to vote,” Executive Director of The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Damon T. Hewitt said.

“That’s a decision of the state law but I want to emphasize –” President of Southwest Voter Registration Education Project Lydia Camarillo said.

“It’s a decision of state law as to who should vote in federal elections?” Lee interjected.

“States decide who gets to vote in various elections, and in federal elections I believe that we should be encouraging people to naturalize and then vote,” Camarillo said.

“Okay but you’re saying that the federal government should have no say in who votes in a federal election?” Lee pressed.

“I don’t have a position on that,” Camarillo responded.

The article concludes:

The John Lewis Voting Rights Act seeks to federalize all elections by stripping states and local jurisdictions from making changes to their elections without approval from federal bureaucrats. If the legislation is passed, the U.S. Justice Department could essentially take over an election if its left-wing allies claim minority voters are being harmed by something as simple as requiring an ID or proving citizenship to vote.

A federal judge recently ruled Arizona’s law requiring individuals to prove U.S. citizenship in order to vote in a statewide election is not discriminatory and could proceed after leftists lodged a series of suits.

“Arizona’s interests in preventing non-citizens from voting and promoting public confidence in Arizona’s elections outweighs the limited burden voters might encounter when required to provide” proof of citizenship, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled.

The potential for mischief under the John Lewis Voting Rights Act is endless. Just for the record, there is no reason for non-citizens to vote in American elections–they have no skin in the game. If things go bad in America, they can simply go home.

Supporting Israel Publicly While Undermining Israel Privately

On Monday, Breitbart posted an article about the Biden administration’s efforts to undermine the Israeli government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the middle of the war on Hamas.

The article reports>

U.S. President Joe Biden is reportedly attempting to force the “collapse” of the Israeli government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the middle of a war against Hamas terrorists in Gaza and a potential war against Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Biden has been increasingly hostile to Netanyahu in his public remarks, recently saying that Netanyahu is “hurting” Israel more than he is helping it through his conduct of the war. (Netanyahu fired back, saying that Biden was “wrong.”)

Now, New York Magazine reports that the Biden Administration is actively looking for ways to force Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition, which has been remarkably unified, to fall apart, which would bring about early elections. It reported (original emphasis):

One Israeli expert frequently consulted by American officials says, “I have been asked by a serious administration figure what it is that will force the Netanyahu coalition to collapse. They were interested in the mechanics, what can we demand which will collapse his coalition.”

In the event the new American position over Netanyahu remained unclear, Vice-President Kamala Harris left no doubts in a Friday interview with CBS News, which asked “Are the Israelis at risk of losing U.S. aid if this continues?” Harris replied: “I think it’s important for us to distinguish or at least not conflate the Israeli government with the Israeli people.”

In other words: Israelis, we’re with you. Netanyahu, be gone.

I don’t understand how anyone can want a cease=fire and an end to the war after October 7. Israel did nothing to provoke that attack, yet Israel is being criticized for retaliating. That is simply upside down.

Using Your Tax Dollars To Influence An Election

This is an election year. When you consider everything that has gone on for the past four years, you realize that things were bound to get a little crazy. However, the craziness and dishonestly has reached levels very few of us ever realized they would reach.

On Thursday, Legal Insurrection posted the following headline:

Biden Admin to Use Tax Dollars to Pay College Students to Register Voters Ahead of 2024 Election

Does anyone want to guess the political leanings of college students?

The article reports:

The Biden administration is already facing accusations of trying to buy the votes of college student aged voters by ‘cancelling’ billions in student loan debt. Now they have announced that they will pay college students to register voters, and they’re doing this with tax dollars.

The corruption is right out in the open, for all to see.

The article quotes The Daily Caller:

Vice President Kamala Harris announced Tuesday that college students would be able to collect federally-funded work study for registering voters.

Harris’s announcement of the new policy was posted on X, formerly known as Twitter. The federal work-study program is intended to allow students to earn money for day-to-day expenses while at college, according to the Department of Education.

“We have been doing work to promote voter participation for students,” Harris said. “For example, we have under the Federal Work-Study program now allow students to get paid through Federal Work-Study to register people and to be non-partisan poll workers. As we know, this is important for a number of reasons. One, to engage our young leaders in this process and activate them in terms of their ability to strengthen our communities.”

Do you really think that college students are interested in registering conservative voters? Conservatives and patriots are going to have to come out to vote in very large numbers to overcome the cheating that the Democrats are already planning.

Why Should They Listen To The Voters?

On Saturday, John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog about one possible outcome of the 2024 election. It is becoming very obvious that as the powers that be work harder and harder to make sure that President Trump does not get a second term, more and more voters are deciding to support him–just to have their voices heard. This is going to make for a very interesting year.

The article reports:

In 2001, 2005 and 2017, some Democrat House members objected to the certification of electoral votes for the winning Republican presidential candidate. Those objections, while “denialist,” were only symbolic. But Democrat leaders in the House are now suggesting that if they control that body following November’s election–as they well might–they may refuse to allow a victorious Donald Trump to take office.

Notice that the objects to the electoral votes were not allowed in 2020–they were pre-empted by the events outside the Capitol and a parliamentary procedure was used to block them when the House reconvened.

The article concludes:

The Democrats have become so insane on the subject of Donald Trump that it is hard to know which of their mutterings to take seriously. But if Trump wins the election and a Democrat-controlled House refuses to certify his election on the ground that he is an “insurrectionist” under the 14th Amendment, we will be past the point of a constitutional crisis. If that happens, the only realistic path forward will be disunion, possibly accompanied by civil war, but preferably not.

This is one reason why the Supreme Court should put the 14th Amendment theory out of its misery, once and for all. It is obvious that the drafters of that amendment meant the just-concluded Civil War, in which 600,000 Americans lost their lives, when they referred to “insurrection or rebellion” against the United States. In contrast, the January 6 protest was not one of the 50 most destructive riots of the last few years, and the only person killed was Ashli Babbitt. Not a single participant in the protest was arrested in possession of a firearm. Some insurrection!

In the interest of preserving the Republic, the Supreme Court should rule definitively that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not apply to Donald Trump.

Stay tuned.

Why We Need Voter Identification Laws

As of January 2024, 34 states required voters to present identification in order to vote at the polls on Election Day. The states vary on exactly what that identification should be, but some identification is required.

On Tuesday, Hot Air posted an article that illustrates why requiring voters to show some form of identification is a good idea.

The article reports:

Here’s a story that shows a political prank can turn into a good case for the need for voter identification when registering to vote. It involves five recording artists and a house in Katy, Texas.

Katy is a city west of Houston, in the Houston metro area. Katy’s population at the time of the 2020 census was 21,894. The point is that it is a small city, most often thought of as a suburb of Houston. There is a story out today that recording artists  Drake50 Cent, Chris Brown, Trey Songz, and The Game are all registered to vote with the same address in Katy. 

The house is described as “a beige, $300,000 house in a modest new development in Katy.” The homeowner had no idea why the men were registered to vote at that address. Neighbors said they had not seen the performers. 

It’s a prank that uses a federal loophole in voter ID laws. 

…The apparent prank shines a spotlight on a potential loophole in federal voting registration law that allows virtually anyone to register friends, enemies or celebrities to vote. Whether the intent is malicious or not, experts say it is still illegal.

The article concludes:

What is this federal loophole that allows people to register to vote without an ID? It is the Help America Vote Act of 2002. Eligible voters without a driver’s license or a Social Security number are able to take advantage of it. There are some people who are eligible to vote but don’t have either. It might be someone born outside the United States who never applied for a Social Security number. 

When they go to vote, they have to show some other form of identity, like a utility bill. For example, Drake wouldn’t be able to do that. 

Don’t worry. This doesn’t pose a threat to the singers’ actual voter registrations if they are registered in Texas. 

This story, odd as it is, is a good example of the need to close the federal loophole that allows voter registration applications to be presented without identification. It invites shenanigans and creates extra work for election officials.

It is particularly urgent to get voter identification in place because of the number of illegal aliens currently in America that may be encouraged to vote.

A Very Obvious Solution

On Friday, Townhall posted an article about an American city that has actually seen a decrease in crime. The article notes that Atlanta, Georgia, has seen a 21% drop in year-over-year crime.

The article reports:

…The Mayor of Atlanta, Andre Dickens, faced with a secession effort in the northern wards of his city due to crime and violent protests from the far left over a police training facility, has deployed a novel trick in The City Too Busy to Hate. He actually pushed law enforcement to enforce the law.

Under Dickens and Atlanta Police Chief Darin Schierbaum, the city began aggressively cracking down on gun crimes and gang violence. Buckhead, the financial center of the South and Atlanta’s northern ward, began agitating for secession after crime spiked during COVID lockdowns. Random suburbanites were shot while jogging, home break-ins increased, carjackings increased, violence was on the rise after the former Mayor, Keisha Lance Bottoms, decided to side with rioters against the police.

Then-Mayor Bottoms and the former Fulton County District Attorney, in a series of high-profile cases, prosecuted police officers for policing. They targeted one officer for shooting a man who had attacked an officer, fled and attempted to tase the pursuing officer. That officer shot and killed the man and got prosecuted. After Dickens’ election, the charges were dropped. Other officers were disciplined for trying to get college students to stop their car during a riot. The result was a collapse of police morale, police leaving the force and difficulty recruiting.

There are a number of other major cites that have experienced the downward spiral of not supporting the police and having crime skyrocket as a result.

The article notes:

Dickens, upon taking office, had to do two things. First, he needed to calm Buckhead’s nerves. Its departure would have dramatically cut tax revenue for the city. Second, he needed to ameliorate police morale. He did both by letting the police actually police.

The results speak for themselves. Hotels in Buckhead no longer warn visitors not to go out past dark. It feels safe to go out, and the mass of people in Buckhead after dark suggests the feeling is reality. People are returning to malls and restaurants. Businesses are no longer loudly screaming for change, and much of the Buckhead secession movement has dissipated.

If you want your city to be a safe place, elect people who will support the police and enforce the law. We don’t need new laws–we just need people with the courage to enforce the laws we have.

The Department Of Justice Is Hoping No One Is Paying Attention

On Wednesday, The Federalist posted an article about Hunter Biden’s laptop. It seems that the Department of Justice has finally admitted that the laptop belongs to Hunter Biden and the information on it is valid.

The article reports:

Nearly four years after the damning evidence of Biden family corruption on Hunter Biden’s laptop was disclosed in 2020, President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice admitted in a court filing on Tuesday that the Mac and its contents are real.

If you’ve been following this story since it broke in October 2020, you know there was never any true reason to doubt The New York Post’s reporting or the word of the Delaware computer repair shop owner that the abandoned Mac belonged to Hunter. Yet truth was no defense. The Post was quickly banned from social media for spreading “disinformation” — a decision based on actual disinformation — and dozens of U.S. intelligence officials rushed to back the censorship. So did Joe Biden.

The DOJ’s confirmation the laptop’s contents came from Hunter arrives years after complicit media outlets quietly admitted the truth about the computer in 2022, and even longer after conservative media verified the laptop’s authenticity ahead of 2020 election day.

Does anyone actually believe that this was an honest mistake by the DOJ and that they were not trying to influence an election?

The article concludes:

To this day, Biden claims the hundreds of emailstexts, voicemailsbank recordsreceiptsWhite House visitor logsphotos, and sworn witness testimonies from Biden business associates proving his involvement in the family corruption business are a “bunch of lies.” He and everyone else who knew the laptop and its contents were legit faced zero consequences for their lying and treachery.

Election Day 2024 is fast approaching, and not one of the Americans who was lied to during the 2020 election will ever receive an apology from the FBI, corporate media, Big Tech, or the Bidens, because those institutions and people are not sorry. Getting away with dodging, deflecting, and burying what should have been the biggest corruption scandal story of the century was the plan all along.

Can you imagine how the scenario would have been different if the laptop had belonged to Donald Trump, Jr.?

As we go into this election season, don’t trust the mainstream media–do your own research.

What An Incredible Coincidence!

On Tuesday, The Daily Caller reported that Hunter Biden didn’t sell any paintings under his father was elected President.

The article reports:

Hunter Biden’s first art sale with a professional art dealer came shortly after his father, Joe Biden, was elected president, his art gallerist testified earlier this month.

Attorneys for Georges Berges, Hunter Biden’s New York City-based gallerist, provided a letter to the House Oversight and Judiciary Committees showing Hunter Biden sold his first piece of art with Berges on Dec. 11, 2020, according to a transcript reviewed by the Daily Caller.

The article notes:

“[W]hen did you first sell a piece of Hunter Biden’s art?”

“Gees, I don’t remember,” Berges said. One of his attorneys appeared to show him the letter with the date of Hunter Biden’s first art sale with Berges.

“Is this the–so, December 11th, 2020,” Berges stated.

“So according to your letter, the first sale of Hunter Biden’s art was on December 20th. Had you established anything in writing regarding your relationship with Hunter Biden at that time? Excuse me. December 11th,” Berges was asked.

“I believe so, yeah,” he replied. He recalled a 60% to 40% split between Hunter Biden and himself in the terms of the first contract. He believed the first contract was agreed upon around the 2020 presidential election but he could not recall a precise date.

Berges and Hunter Biden entered into a new contract in September 2021, and Hunter Biden received a slight commission increase in the new deal. The 60% to 40% rate for artists and gallerists is the industry standard, Berges said.

As part of the initial contract, Hunter Biden was allowed to learn the identity of his art buyers, and in the second contract Berges was required not to inform Biden of his buyers, the art gallerist testified.

The article also notes another strange coincidence:

On Feb. 17 2021, right after President Biden’s inauguration, Democratic donor Elizabeth Naftali purchased a piece of Hunter Biden’s art for $52,000, Berges stated. It took the art gallerist a year of persuasion to get Naftali to buy the piece.

President Biden appointed Naftali in July 2022 to a presidential commission tasked with preserving America’s heritage abroad. She bought another Hunter Biden art piece for $42,000 on Dec. 9, 2022. Berges confirmed that Naftali knew Hunter Biden and he believed she could have told him about her art purchases.

The art gallerist said he did not provide the White House with any records of Hunter Biden’s art sales or the patrons who bought his art.

Please follow the link to the article for further details. To say that this whole new art career on the part of Hunter is fishy is like saying water is wet.

Finding The Common Ground

On Wednesday, Townhall posted an article about a common factor among some  of the people attempting to remove President Trump’s name from the presidential primary ballot.

The article reports:

Maine’s Secretary of State Shenna Bellows claims to be unbiased when she ruled that Trump is disqualified from running in the state’s 2024 presidential race. But Bellows, the Democrat whose Dec. 28 ruling booted Trump off the Republican primary ballot in the northeasternmost U.S. state, previously cashed in on Soros family money.

According to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, during her doomed U.S. Senate bid against Republican incumbent Sen. Susan Collins in 2014, Bellows received a $2,600 donation from Andrea Soros, the daughter of billionaire investor George Soros, who notoriously spends his wealth influencing local elections across America by bankrolling the campaigns of Democrat picks.

The article notes:

Maine was the second state to officially declare Trump ineligible. In Colorado, the state Supreme Court decided on Dec. 19 to enforce Trump’s disqualification. Leading the charge in the Colorado case to ensure Trump’s removal is the Orwellian-named Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). Between FY 2017 and 2021, CREW was given more than $2.8 million in grants by the Foundation to Promote Open Society, which acts as one of Soros’s two chief grantmaking vehicles, for “general support” and “support[ing] political advocacy on ethics in government,” according to an Open Society Foundations database.

And another one…

Spurred by Colorado’s decision, California’s Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis followed suit, requesting in a Dec. 20 letter that the state’s Secretary of State Shirley Weber “explore every legal option” to remove Trump from the presidential primary ballot there.

Kounalakis, too, is a Soros recipient. According to campaign finance records, Soros and his wife Tamiko Bolton Soros, another Open Society Foundations board member, handed over a total of $45,400 to bolster Kounalakis’ successful 2018 campaign and 2022 re-election. Now, Kounalakis is gunning for the California governorship in 2026. Last year, Soros gave Kounalakis an additional $36,400, the maximum amount allowed, just a few months after she launched her bid to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom.

And in conclusion…

Free Speech for the People is the 501(c)(3)organization that filed a flurry of lawsuits across multiple states to bar Trump from the ballot by claiming that he violated the 14th Amendment’s little-used “insurrection” clause (Section 3). Dubbed the nationwide “14Point3 Campaign” in reference to the constitutional provision, the left-of-center nonprofit advanced 14th Amendment challenges in MinnesotaMichiganOregon, and Illinois as well as organized the most recent Massachusetts complaint.

…In the past, Free Speech for the People was partly funded through grants awarded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, which has received $1.5 million in funding from the Foundation to Promote Open Society, a primary Soros grantmaker. Between 2013 and 2017, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund gave Free Speech for the People $275,000 in grants, according to archived 990-PF forms.

See a pattern yet?

 

Compromise or Not? 

Author:  R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D    

Historically, the “spirit of compromise” has been touted as one of the elements of our Republic that has helped it survive for almost 250 years. The question arises as to whether compromise is always the best strategy. Given the circumstances, compromise may allow the country to move forward with each opposing side believe that they achieved some of their objectives but not all.  Knowing when to compromise and when not to is critical. Let’s look at some examples. 

Compromising makes the most sense, when both sides agree on the ultimate goal but disagree how to get there.  A good example was World War II.  Both the United States and Great Britain agreed that Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan both had to be defeated militarily.  Great Britain wanted the United States to focus almost exclusively on defeating Germany first. The United States, after the attack on Pearl Harbor, wanted to defeat Japan first, since in 1941 Japan appeared to be the most immediate threat to our country.  Churchill and Roosevelt came to a compromise which allowed the majority of focus on the war in Europe and a steady war against Japan, but with less resources. Clearly the compromise worked since both Axis powers were eventually defeated. 

Currently, the struggle between preserving our Republic as we have known it is incompatible with the Left’s desire to make this country Socialist.  Make no mistake about it, many if not all on the left, want exactly that.  Since these two forms of government are incompatible, it must be one or the other.  As they just decided in Brazil, socialism does not and never has worked for the people, and they elected a conservative leader to go back to freedom and capitalism.  Either the people retain the power to run their own lives, or we turn governance over to a few elected leaders and the bureaucrats. The outcome of the elections in 2024 will once and for all determine whether we preserve our Republican form of government or not. 

Let’s take another example:  Climate Change.   Short of an all-out war, this issue has the greatest potential to completely destroy our country. We all want a clean environment, but the goal of the Left is to eliminate all fossil fuels without which no modern civilization can survive.   Look what is happening in Europe–their energy costs have sky rocketed and  they have had to re-open coal fired electrical plants.  The Left’s unverified  belief that climate change is caused by mankind and not natural forces is being used to justify their goal of zero carbon emissions while China, India and other countries are not only building more coal fired plants, but are using coal from our country to do it.  Meanwhile, the United States only contributes 13% of carbon emissions worldwide.  Instead of fighting against this, many of our so-called conservative elected officials compromise and go along with outlandishly expensive subsidies for the wind and solar developers and electric vehicles.   Seventeen Republicans voted for Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which was a cover up for billions of dollars in support of so-called green energy programs.  Compromisers! 

Another area is saving our public schools from the socialist indoctrination being advanced by the Left.  Instead of coming out and stopping Critical Race Theory, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, and transgender indoctrination, our Boards of Education have shown a strong tendency to compromise instead of prohibiting these things.   

Compromising with evil should never be allowed to happen.  We need to elect candidates that have clear, strong values and beliefs, and are not afraid to stand up and fight for what is right.  It is the only way to save this country. 

This Really Isn’t What I Wanted To Hear

On Sunday, Fox News posted an article about a statement made by Chinese leader Xi Jinping during his year-end address on Sunday.

The article reports:

Chinese leader Xi Jinping promised the reunification of Taiwan with mainland China during his year-end address on Sunday.

Tensions between China and Taiwan remain high, and Taiwanese voters are set to participate in the island’s elections on Jan. 13. Xi has repeatedly affirmed China’s stance that Taiwan is a part of China and that it must be reunified, by force if necessary.

“All Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait should be bound by a common sense of purpose and share in the glory of the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation,” Xi said in Sunday’s address.

“The motherland will surely be reunified,” he added.

The speech was the second time in a matter of days that Xi addressed the Taiwan issue. Xi also vowed to reunify Taiwan on Tuesday during a symposium in Beijing commemorating the 130th anniversary of the birth of Mao Zedong, the founding father of Communist China.

…Taiwan split from mainland China in 1949, when democratic forces fled there after losing a civil war against the Chinese Communist Party.

Knowing all of the money that has flowed from Communist China to the Biden family, I seriously doubt that President Biden would interfere in a communist takeover of Taiwan. However, if President Trump is elected next year, I don’t think China would move on Taiwan. That would make it in China’s interest to prevent another Trump Presidency. Because China is a major financial player in America’s mainstream media, I expect to see a lot of hit pieces on President Trump in the coming months. Those stories will be proven false after they have done their damage.

 

 

About That Fourteenth Amendment Thing…

I am not a lawyer, nor do I claim to be one. However, I am concerned about the lawfare being conducted against President Trump.

In the January 2024 issue of Newsmax Magazine, Hans von Spakovsky wrote a commentary about the use of the 14th Amendment to keep President Trump off of the primary ballot in several states.

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment states:

Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Note that Congress may remove such disability.

The article in Newsmax notes:

In 1872, Congress passed an Amnesty Act providing that the “political disabilities” imposed by Section 3 “are hereby removed from all persons whomsoever” except for members of Congress who had served just before and during the Civil War, as well as a limited number of other officials.

In 1898, Congress passed a second Amnesty Act getting rid of these remaining exceptions, providing that the “disability imposed by section 3…heretofore incurred is hereby removed.”

That sounds to me like using the 14th Amendment to keep President Trump off of the ballot does not agree with the laws Congress has passed since the 14th Amendment.

Also, doesn’t there have to be a trial and a conviction?

It should also be noted that the removal of President Trump from the ballot represents taking away the right of the American people to vote for whoever they choose. This sounds like something that happens in dictatorships. The only reason to remove someone from the ballot is if they do not have enough support to run for election. Obviously that is not the problem with President Trump.

 

The Insurrection Did Not Happen On January 6th

On Thursday, American Greatness posted an article putting into perspective the events of January 6th. Now that the videos are being released and new information is coming out, it is obvious that not only was January 6th not an insurrection (an insurrection by people who were not armed?), but served another purpose.

The article reports”

All sides will acknowledge the fact that then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi refused to have extra security on January 6. However, there is a bigger question that no one, Left, Right or Center, seems to be asking:

Why?

Why wouldn’t Pelosi want to be sure that “Democracy was secure” so that Vice President Mike Pence could certify the Electoral College vote? Making sure that the Capitol was safe and sound would mean that Joe Biden’s presidency would be assured. After all, the election of 2020 was “the most secure in American history,” so why wouldn’t you want that obvious fact certified and rubber-stamped by Congress?

The only obvious answer to why Pelosi wanted to guarantee a riotous breach of the Capitol was what she knew would be the actual results of the Electoral College vote if the process were allowed to run its course. Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley, among others, had previously made noise about challenging election results in several swing states. And despite what many have debated, there was tangible potential for Pence to delay the certification for a couple of weeks to look into the evidence of significant vote-tampering and fraud.

How do we know that the vice president had the authority to stop the certification? Well, because the ability for the position of vice president to do just that was changed by a vote of Congress relatively recently after the events of January 6. Why would you change something that did not need to be changed?

Since the election of 2020, a lot of evidence has come out to justify the claims of fraud–stuffing of outside ballot boxes with illegal ballots, transporting ballots across state lines, blocking observers from seeing the vote counting, strange voting machine malfunctions, etc. Unless the people responsible for these actions are held responsible, we can expect the same fraud in 2024.

The article concludes:

Unless the country itself can see that the narrative presented by the Left regarding January 6, 2021, was a smoke screen for the real insurrection of November 3, 2020, America will need to brace itself for a repeat performance of that nefarious action on November 5, 2024.

Stating The Obvious

Posting this article is going to get me in trouble with some of my friends who believe that recreational drug use is no big deal, but it’s time to look at the bigger picture.

On Sunday, The Western Journal reported:

Not only did last week see the election of a libertarian fan of former President Donald Trump to the presidency of Argentina, another new South American leader much closer to the border just overturned a policy in his own country that U.S. leftists have been pushing for years.

Maybe progressives can learn something from the neighbors to the south.

On Friday, according to Agence France-Presse, Ecuadorean President Daniel Noboa dumped a policy of decriminalizing possession of small amounts of drugs, declaring that it  “encourages micro-trafficking in schools and creates a whole generation of addicted children.”

It applies to “up to 10 grams of marijuana, 2 grams of cocaine paste, 1 gram of cocaine, 0.10 grams of heroin, and 0.04 grams of amphetamine” for personal use, according to the Washington Examiner.

The policy was instituted a decade ago by the country’s then-president, socialist Rafael Correa, according to AFP.

The article notes what happened when Oregon decriminalized drugs:

The idea was, ostensibly, to”transform addiction by minimizing penalties for drug use and investing instead in recovery,” the Post reported.

But in a result that should have surprised literally no one with any sense, things haven’t worked out quite that way. Drug use has grown, gotten worse, and gotten more deadly.

As the Post (The Washington Post) reported, “even top Democratic lawmakers who backed the law, which will likely dominate the upcoming legislative session, say they’re now open to revisiting it after the biggest increase in synthetic opioid deaths among states that have reported their numbers.”

Even the leftist publication The Atlantic has been compelled to report the results of Oregon’s experiment as a failure.

A population that has clear mental facilities will always result in a better society.

The Future If President Trump Is Elected In 2024

If you are a government worker, you should probably work very hard to make sure President Trump does not become President again. The changes he is planning to make will be good for the country, but not necessarily appreciated by government employees.

On Tuesday, Newsmax posted an article about what is being planned if President Trump is elected. President Trump is a much greater threat to the deep state than he was in 2016–he has a much better idea of who the goods guys are and who the bad guys are. That is one of many reasons there will be a desperate attempt to stop him from being elected.

The article reports:

Project 2025, a well-funded effort that is essentially a transition team orchestrated by the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation, has already begun recruiting and screening potential candidates who would be in place for the next Republican administration.

More specifically, a second Donald Trump administration.

The goal, according to a report by Axios, is to have 54,000 like-minded Trump loyalists ready to be hired and placed across every level of the federal government in January 2025.

The article notes:

In order to install 54,000 federal workers hand-picked by this effort, Trump has said he would reinstate Schedule F, a personnel policy to erase employment protections for tens of thousands of federal workers through reclassification, which makes them easier to fire.

And with the army in place, Trump in the early days of his second administration can revamp the Justice Department, FBI and intelligence community, swiftly move on deporting illegals “by the millions per year,” and eradicate woke ideology from the military, according to Axios.

“And the goal is that we are just like a snowball rolling downhill. It keeps building momentum and whoever the nominee is, whoever the next president is, we’re going to be ready on Day One,” Chretien said.

Sweeping reform is what is needed. The question is whether or not we can have an honest election to allow that reform to happen.

When Our Government Works Against The Interests Of The Voters

On November, The Washington Examiner posted an article about the partnership between an agency in the Department of Homeland Security and several university centers to identify online content worthy of censorship. Why is our government working with universities to censor free speech? Might that be part of the reason our colleges have become indoctrination centers?

The article reports:

An agency within the Department of Homeland Security partnered with several university centers to identify online content worthy of censorship, according to a new report from the House Judiciary Committee.

The report, a project of the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, detailed how the federal government formed a partnership with the Stanford Internet Observatory, the University of Washington Center for an Informed Public, and other groups. Titled the “Election Integrity Partnership,” the consortium aimed to identify election-related content that needed to be censored.

The report said the partnership was established in July 2020 by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, a small agency within the Department of Homeland Security. The partnership then worked with social media companies to throttle content that questioned the integrity of the election process.

“The federal government and universities pressured social media companies to censor true information, jokes, and political opinions,” the report said. “This pressure was largely directed in a way that benefited one side of the political aisle: True information posted by Republicans and conservatives was labeled as ‘misinformation’ while false information posted by Democrats and liberals was largely unreported and untouched by the censors.”

The article also notes:

The report named several prominent politicians, people, and conservative news outlets that had been targeted for censorship, including former President Donald Trump, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), the Babylon Bee satire site, and Newsmax.

“Stanford and others, in collaboration with the federal government, established the EIP for the express purpose of violating Americans’ civil liberties: Because no federal agency ‘has a focus on, or authority regarding, election misinformation originating from domestic sources within the United States,’ there is ‘a critical gap for non-governmental entities to fill.’ CISA and Stanford created the EIP to bridge this ‘critical gap’ — an unconstitutional workaround for unconstitutional censorship,” the report said.

The report contained numerous screenshots of emails between government officials and employees of Twitter, Facebook, and the university “misinformation” centers, many of which included direct requests to censor content.

One of the things that was censored was any reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop. Government agencies knew the laptop was real and probably anticipated the information on it being reported before the election. The letter from the retired intelligence agents came out in October 2020, just before the election. Any valid information on the laptop was censored. At some point, American voters are going to realize that they have been manipulated and lied to by their own government. That will be interesting to watch.

A Second Chance?

The elections last week did not go well for Republicans. There were a lot of reasons for this, some real and some made up by non-Republicans. One state that had disappointing results was Virginia–the Democrats retained control of the Senate and retook the House of Delegates. Well, that may not be the end of the story.

On Saturday, Townhall reported:

We have reports that some funny business with a Virginia Democratic state senator might give control of the upper chamber to the Republicans. The Daily Wire’s Luke Rosiak wrote that there might be serious questions regarding the validity of Sen. Ghazala Hashmi’s residency. You must live in the district you’re representing, and multiple sources say Hashmi’s paperwork is inaccurate. Hashmi represented Senate District 10 but opted to run for the 15th district this cycle post-redistricting. The reason is apparent: this is a slam-dunk blue district encompassing parts of Richmond and Chesterfield County

On Saturday, The Daily Wire reported:

…Hashmi filed candidacy paperwork saying she lived in an apartment on Boulder Lake Drive in North Chesterfield in Senate District 15.

But four neighbors filed a complaint saying she actually lives outside the district on Bosham Lane in Midlothian, and they provided a spreadsheet saying they had driven by the house 62 times during the month of October to document her residency. The notes include her car being there late at night and early in the morning, and her leaving the house shortly after 8 a.m. It also includes photographic evidence.

Putting Hashmi in a particular bind, if she did live in the Chesterfield apartment, then she may have committed a felony by concealing her ownership of the Midlothian home on sworn election forms.

The Certificate of Candidacy Qualification, which she signed March 14, 2023, says, “I now reside at the address shown below in the district in which I seek office,” under which she listed the North Chesterfield apartment.

The form also asks, “Do you or a member of your immediately family, separately or together, hold an interest valued at more than $5,000 in real property? DO NOT INCLUDE your principal residence.” She checked “no,” and did not list the Midlothian home. Real estate records show that she and her husband have owned that — worth nearly $600,000 — since 1999.

Stay tuned.

 

When Citizens Have Good Computer Technology

On Tuesday, The Gateway Pundit posted an article about the use of  Fractal technology to identify anomalies in voter rolls.

The article reports:

For the first time in history, citizens have better computer technology than their government.

Today’s video of Minnesota voter rolls shows, using Fractal technology, that citizens can identify anomalies in government voter rolls that existed for over 100 years – eluding all the obsolete technology Minnesota could bring to bear.

The article includes the following graph:

 

The graph illustrates some of the problems with people on the voting rolls. How many people can live in one boarding house?

The article notes:

Voters living in UPS offices. Voters living in convenience stores. Voters living in an 800 square foot house with 15 other adult voters – which the health regulations would never allow – we show these in video after video.

In 2021, voter integrity teams in 12 states started using Fractal – and as you can see in today’s video – Minnesota – Fractal makes a mockery of the Minnesota voter rolls.

We now have in our grasp, the first example of citizens with far better technology – than their government.

We are embarking on a journey where in state after state, the Fractal team, joined by legislator groups – is showing the dreadful official voter roll pollution – with Fractal technology.

Mr. Secretary of State, you have 2,400 year old voters on your voter roll. Everyone knows it is dirty data or fraud. And when Fractal uncovers it, you lose your credibility if you continue to claim that you do not have dirty data.

If you, Ms. Secretary of State, deliver official records claiming active, registered voters voting from warehouses, convenience stores and vacant lots – you lose your credibility.

You cannot claim there is not fraud in your system – because you are blind to what your voters are discovering with Fractal.

Election integrity is a key issue for 2024.

The article includes the following video:

Minnesota from Omega 4 America on Vimeo.

There are move videos being produced about similar problems in other states.

Please take the time to listen to what has happened to our election process. This needs to be fixed before the next election.

All Politics Is Local

On Friday, The Patriotic News posted an article about the recent elections in Green Charter Township in Michigan. The voters there were not happy with the actions of their governing board, so they voted ALL of them out of office.

The article reports:

The good people of Green Charter Township, a small rural community north of Grand Rapids, ousted all five of the board members in a special election held Tuesday. They swapped the five, all Republicans, for candidates who ran without party affiliation. To show they meant business, the townspeople immediately called in locksmiths to change the locks on the main government building. 

The residents took such drastic action in opposition to the construction in their town of a $2.3 billion EV plant by a company, Gotion, that has links to China

Voters were angered that the now-ousted board moved forward with the project despite severe backlash from the community. At a hearing last year, one resident remarked, “My family members fought communism, and you’re bringing it right here.”

Another resident, Harry King, said, “Right now, we are not on friendly terms with China. They are threatening us. I consider them the enemy. I don’t want them here, either.”

The plan for the Michigan plant, and another targeted for Illinois, has reportedly caught the attention of congressional Republicans, who have called on the Treasury Department to investigate Gotion. In response, the company remarked, “We are a multinational company and don’t believe in political posturing and are still committed to bringing thousands of jobs to the state of Michigan.”

The residents realize that their fight is not yet over, but they are prepared to continue their opposition to the plant.

The article concludes:

Political newcomer Corri Riebow, who ran for the clerk position in the special election and won, said of the town’s brand new government, “We just plan on making it as difficult as possible for them to continue their process. They don’t even have a sight planned, they don’t have permits yet, so, we’re not their friend.”

This is what can happen when voters understand the issues and get involved.

Keeping Elections Honest

On Wednesday, The Connecticut Examiner posted an article about the results of a Bridgeport, Connecticut, primary election being overturned by a judge due to voter fraud.

The article reports:

A judge ruled on Wednesday to overturn the city’s Democratic primary election, initially won by incumbent Mayor Joe Ganim, following claims of absentee ballot fraud by his opponent, John Gomes.

After two weeks of evidentiary hearings for Gomes’s absentee ballot fraud lawsuit, Judge William Clark ordered a new Democratic primary based on 180 pieces of evidence presented by Gomes’s legal counsel.

In the 37-page ruling, Clark said the video footage presented by Bill Bloss – Gomes’s attorney – was particularly alarming.

“Mr. Ganim was also correct to be ‘shocked’ at what he saw on the video clips in evidence that were shown to him while he was on the witness stand,” Clark wrote. “The videos are shocking to the court and should be shocking to all the parties.

Ganim was one the many city officials called to the Fairfield Judicial District Superior Courthouse for questioning, along with Wanda Geter-Pataky, vice chair of the Bridgeport Democratic Town Committee and operations specialist for the city, and Eneida Martinez, a former City Council member accused by Gomes of stuffing ballot dropboxes.

At the witness stand, Ganim told the court he was “shocked” by an 18-minute video – subpoenaed by Gomes from Bridgeport police – that appeared to show 12 instances of Geter-Pataky either depositing stacks of ballots herself or handing ballots to others from behind her reception desk, and four instances of Martinez dropping off ballots.

Asked about the footage during the hearings, both Geter-Pataky and Martinez asserted their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination . Ganim, who appeared to win the primary by 250 votes after a count of absentee ballots, denied any involvement in the alleged fraud.

There needs to be serious consequences for voter fraud. That is the only way that it will be stopped. This was a primary election where the Democrat party wanted to make sure their candidate won. Is there any doubt that they would do this is a major election?

Getting The Job Done–Even When You Have To Do It Alone

One America News reported yesterday that President Trump has signed four executive orders designed to alleviate some of the economic disruption caused by the coronavirus.

The article reports:

On Saturday, he signed a payroll tax initiative, which will defer payroll tax to those making less than $100,000 a year until the end of 2020.

…The president has renewed supplemental unemployment benefits at $400 a week. This new amount came in just below the previous $600 extra, which Americans were receiving before the enhance benefits expired earlier this month.

…He also provided assistance to renters by imposing a partial moratorium on evictions and suspended mandatory student loan payments through the end of the year.

…The president has expressed he had to step in because Democrats in Congress have not stepped up to the plate.

“Democrats have refused these offers,” said President Trump. “What they really want is bailout money for states that are run by Democrat governors and mayors, which have been run very badly for many, many years.”

This is a stroke of genius. The bill that the House of Representatives put forth included a lot of things that have nothing to do with the coronavirus, and they refused to negotiate on anything less. We don’t need national mail-in voting–we stand in line at the grocery store, at Home Depot, and at WalMart almost every day. We don’t need to bail out badly-run states–they need to clean up their own budgets first (and Washington also needs to do some serious spending reduction).

The Democrats are unhappy. They might take this to court, but if they do, they will be fighting a President who signed an executive order to help Americans while Congress could not come to agreement on doing anything. Even if they won in court, they would lose in the court of public opinion, and the election is less than three months away.

This was a brilliant move on the part of the President.

Elections Have Consequences

Yesterday The New York Post posted an article about the recent Democrat primary races in New York State.

The article reports:

A half-dozen insurgent candidates in Brooklyn and Queens — some backed by the Democratic Socialists of America — toppled veteran incumbents in Democratic primary races, including close allies of Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie (D-Bronx).

With Heastie’s backing, the Democratic Assembly Campaign Committee poured more than $400,000 combined to prop up 46-year veteran Joe Lentol, Felix Ortiz and Walter Mosley in Brooklyn and Aravella Simotas, Michael Den Dekker and Michael Miller in Queens.

They all lost.

Insurgent Zohran Mamdani, who defeated four-term incumbent Simotas in the 36th Assembly District covering Astoria, said in a tweet: “Socialism won.”

He was endorsed by the DSA.

The DACC donated $125,000 to Simotas’ re-election campaign.

So what does this mean for the State of New York? Emily Gallagher, one of the socialists elected stated, “I’m ready to get to work.” She has already stated that she would push to raise income taxes on the “top one percent” to preserve services, adding, “We need the revenue to survive.” Someone needs to tell her about the Laffer Curve.

The article concludes:

Meanwhile, five other progressive Democrats backed by the WFP (Working Families Party) and other progressive groups are expected to win open Assembly seats.

The newcomers are expected to raise hell, but Albany watchers said the jury is out on how much impact they will have in a body with more than 100 Democrats — including many moderates representing suburban and upstate districts.

“Clearly the candidates who won have a more liberal, progressive agenda,” said University of Albany political science professor Bruce Gyory.

He said he believes Heastie’s position as speaker is secure.

Heastie personally called all the winning insurgents to congratulate them.

All the candidates are running in heavily Democratic districts and are expected to prevail in the general election.

There is actually some good news here. A group is arising out of the Democrat party that will eventually form a third party (to the left of traditional Democrats). As the results of their policies become obvious, they will lose votes. If any of the tax increases and other policies of these recently elected Democrats are put in place, I predict that New York State will lose its tax base.

According to a Forbes Magazine article in January 2020, New York was already leading the nation in the number of people leaving the state:

Actually, I am surprised that California did not make the top ten states losing population.

 

A Different Perspective On The Riots

Many of us have looked at the Marxist roots of Black Lives Matter (as well as the fact that they freely funnel money into Democrat coffers) and considered the current riots as a push toward social disruption that will usher in socialism as a means of equity. What is not mentioned by those who espouse socialism is that it totally eliminates the middle class and leaves two classes–the elites in charge and the equally poverty stricken. Unfortunately our schools are not teaching the lessons of history regarding socialism. However, there is another take on the current unrest that is very interesting.

On July 1st, Sohrab Ahmari posted an article at The Spectator about the current riots.

The article notes:

America is not in the middle of a revolution — it is a reactionary putsch. About four years ago, the sort of people who had acquired position and influence as a result of globalization were turfed out of power for the first time in decades. They watched in horror as voters across the world chose Brexit, Donald Trump and other populist and conservative-nationalist options.

This deposition explains the storm of unrest battering American cities from coast to coast and making waves in Europe as well. The storm’s ferocity — the looting, the mobs, the mass lawlessness, the zealous iconoclasm, the deranged slogans like #DefundPolice — terrifies ordinary Americans. Many conservatives, especially, believe they are facing a revolution targeting the very foundations of American order.

But when national institutions bow (or kneel) to the street fighters’ demands, it should tell us that something else is going on. We aren’t dealing with a Maoist or Marxist revolt, even if some protagonists spout hard-leftish rhetoric. Rather, what’s playing out is a counter-revolution of the neoliberal class — academe, media, large corporations, ‘experts’, Big Tech — against the nationalist revolution launched in 2016. The supposed insurgents and the elites are marching in the streets together, taking the knee together.

I believe the following is the most important paragraph in the article:

They do not seek a radically new arrangement, but a return to the pre-Trump, pre-Brexit status quo ante which was working out very well for them. It was, of course, working out less well for the working class of all races, who bore the brunt of their preferred policy mix: open borders, free trade without limits, an aggressive cultural liberalism that corroded tradition and community, technocratic ‘global governance’ that neutered democracy and politics as such.

The rioters do not understand that they are being used by the very people who choose to keep them in poverty by shipping jobs overseas and undercutting wages by opening  borders.

The article continues:

Does anyone seriously believe the American establishment — Walmart, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, the trustees of Ivy League universities, the major sports leagues, even Brooks Brothers, for God’s sake — would sign on to a movement that genuinely threatened its material interests? And yet these and many other firms and institutions are falling over themselves to express solidarity with the ‘uprising’, some going so far as to donate millions of dollars to Black Lives Matter, an outfit that lists among its objectives the abolition of the nuclear family.

Over the past four years, every trick in the book has been used to end the ‘nightmare’ of national conservatism and populism. The methods deployed by the elite reflect its tendencies and preferences as a class. Just think of recent skirmishes. A decisive majority of British voters resolved to leave the EU and then had to spend three years fighting a political establishment that marshaled all its vast resources to thwart Brexit. It failed. In America the liberal establishment tried harder, failed harder, but learned more. From the minute Trump won the presidential election, Democrats, elements of the security apparatus, and their media allies set out to undo the result. The marquee events were the ‘collusion’ probe and an impeachment push that was perhaps the single biggest insult ever to the intelligence of the American people. There were also countless smaller attempts to unseat Trump and destroy his entourage.

The article concludes:

Which social class most excels at politically correct manners? That would be the professional-managerial class, the laptop class. Its children learn the patois for discussing ‘issues of race, gender and sexuality’ from an early age. They’re expected to have mastered it by the time they take their entry-level jobs. It’s a skill that private schools are doubtless teaching already.

Working-class people, meanwhile, are most likely to struggle with this language. Even when they mean well they don’t always get it right, not least because the rules constantly shift with the vagaries of critical race theory and LGBTQ acronyms. By fortifying the requirements to speak and think correctly — and raising the stakes for failures — the neoliberal class has now built a repressive new mechanism for staying at the top and keeping the oiks down. Especially those who voted the wrong way in 2016.

So whatever you do, don’t call it a leftist revolution. With the flags, the protests, the kneeling and the new language, it’s a counter-revolution. The outcome remains uncertain, but the class war is well and truly under way.

This is a very interesting perspective.

Is The Destruction Related To The Cause?

Destruction of other people’s property is not constructive, whatever the cause. In recent weeks we have seen total insanity in terms of the destruction of our history. It really doesn’t accomplish much–it simply gives vandals a chance to vent their general anger. We all agree that the killing of George Floyd was awful. Most of us don’t agree with much of what happened next. Protest is legal. When the first brick is thrown or the first person attacked, it is no longer a protest.

John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog today about some recent actions by the rioters that simply betray what they claim is their cause.

The article reports:

So much for the idea that “Confederate monuments” are under attack. Last night in San Francisco, left-wingers pulled down a statue of Ulysses Grant, the man who did more than anyone except Lincoln to preserve the Union and abolish slavery. Grant also, as President, did all he could to enforce Reconstruction and protect blacks in the South. He sent the military after the Ku Klux Klan in South Carolina, worked to ensure passage of the 15th Amendment, and signed the Civil Rights Act of 1875.

Of course, the Left knows little and cares less about any of this. Leftists hate the Union and hate men like Lincoln, Grant, Sherman and Sheridan for preserving it. Slavery is only a pretext. The United States and our constitutional democracy are the targets.

The article notes that Grant at one point was given a slave and was so against the idea of slavery that he freed the slave within a year. It seems as if Grant would be someone they would approve of. The fact that they tore his statue down gives weight to the fact that the riots have a deeper purpose than protesting racism.

The article concludes:

Every four years it is said that the current election is the most important one in our lifetimes. This time, it is actually true. Not a single Democratic Party official, to my knowledge, has condemned the anti-American madness that is sweeping across the nation. Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are fully on board with the extremist elements in their party–I am starting to wonder whether there is any Democratic Party apart from the extremist elements–and the Democrats’ presidential nominee is a senile nonentity who, in office, would be controlled by the radicals. It is absolutely essential to our country’s future that Donald Trump be re-elected.

One Problem With The Relief Bill Passed By Congress

Issues & Insights posted an article today about the impact of one item that was included in the CARES Act.

The article reports:

Buried in a story about the overly generous unemployment “bonus” that Democrats added to the CARES Act is the reason why they insisted on it in the first place — and why it will drag down the recovery once the lockdown ends.

While lawmakers were hammering out the massive $2 trillion bill, a key focus of which was to keep workers connected to their jobs through a loan guarantee program — Democrats insisted on a huge increase in unemployment benefits.

The result was a $600 a week bonus. New York Sen. Chuck Schumer was right to call this “unemployment on steroids.”

Well, guess what?

“The $600 payment aligns with working full time at $15 an hour – the minimum-wage level many Democrats in Congress support,” notes the Wall Street Journal.

The Journal reports that – thanks to this bonus – workers will get an average of $978 in unemployment benefits. What’s more, “Labor Department statistics show half of full-time workers earned $957 or less each week in the first quarter of 2020.”

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham had it exactly right when he said that: “You’re literally incentivizing taking people out of the workforce at a time when we need critical infrastructure supplied with workers. If this is not a drafting error, then it’s the worst idea I’ve seen in a long time.”

The article includes comments from an employee who states that she will not go back to work unless she gets a raise–she likes unemployment at $15 an hour.

The thing to remember here is that the Democrats are all about the November election. If they can manage to pass bills that include things that will prevent the economy from returning to a growth mode after the coronavirus is past, they believe they can win the election. President Trump’s strong point has been his handling of the economy. If the democrats can destroy the economy, they have a better change of getting elected. There is no concern here for the well being of the American people–the Democrats simply want to be back in power. That is not a good thing for America.