Tag Archives: Hatch Act

Government Intrusion Into The Election Process

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Daily Signal posted an article about the collaboration between the federal government and left-leaning get-out-the-vote organizations.

The article reports:

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is working with a left-wing advocacy group to boost voter turnout as part of President Joe Biden’s executive order directing federal agencies to get involved in elections.

The USDA worked directly with Demos, a New York-based group that helped draft Biden’s Executive Order 14019, according to records obtained by The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project. (The Daily Signal is Heritage’s news outlet.) 

Biden signed his order on agencies and voter registration in March 2021. On Aug. 9, 2021, Demos’ Adam Lioz emailed USDA officials, many in the office of Secretary Tom Vilsack, under the subject line: “Demos Meeting on Voting Rights EO.”

“Team USDA, with apologies for the delay, I wanted to follow up and thank you all for all your time and a productive conversation,” wrote Lioz, who was Demos’ senior counsel and political director before departing in September 2021. “As we noted, we’ll have our ‘best practices’ slides ready in the next 1-2 weeks and in the meantime, y’all had asked for data on voter registration at the state level, which I’ve pasted below.” 

Just for the record, the Hatch Act of 1939 prohibits civil servants in the Executive Branch of government (except the President and Vice-President) from engaging in some forms of political activity. The goal of the law is to stop the federal government from affecting elections or going about its activities in a partisan manner.

The article concludes:

Biden’s initiative includes the Department of Homeland Security’s registration of voters during naturalization ceremonies, the Department of Education’s promotion of voting at high schools and colleges, and agencies’ work with private, nonprofit organizations to increase voter turnout. 

Many congressional Republicans have joined government watchdog groups in expressing concern about agencies’ engaging in partisan political activity under Biden’s executive order, in violation of laws such as the Hatch Act. 

The records obtained by Heritage’s Oversight Project include the USDA’s directions to employees on how to avoid violating the Hatch Act. 

Neither the Department of Agriculture nor Demos responded to inquiries from The Daily Signal before publication of this report. 

The effort to steal the 2024 election has already begun.

A Forgotten Precedent

Posted on by

Recently I have heard members of the mainstream media opine that President Trump’s acceptance of his party’s nomination from the White House would be against the law (Hatch Act). Yesterday The Washington Examiner posted an article that might shed some light on that opinion. An acceptance speech from the White House would not be something that has not happened before.

The article notes:

Even the media are piling on the outrage. An Aug. 6 piece by Deb Riechmann of the usually reliable Associated Press wrote, “Using the Rose Garden, the Executive Mansion or even the Oval Office as the backdrop for his speech capping the Aug. 24-27 convention would mark an unprecedented use of federal property for partisan political purposes.”

Except it wouldn’t be unprecedented at all.

Just past midnight on a muggy Thursday night in July 1940, Franklin Roosevelt was wheeled into the Diplomatic Reception Room on the White House’s ground floor. His chair was placed before a large, silvery microphone. Roosevelt felt comfortable speaking in that particular spot. It was where he had delivered many of his famous “fireside chats” and where, four years later, he would lead people in prayer on the evening of D-Day.

But Roosevelt wasn’t performing an official duty at the moment. Sitting in his shirt sleeves, he thumbed through the papers in his hands, scanning the words typed on them one last time. At 12:14 a.m., a producer pointed a finger toward him indicating that it was time to talk. Franklin Roosevelt took a quick breath and spoke these words: “Members of the Convention — my friends …”

He then spent the next half-hour accepting the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination for the third time and laying the groundwork for his upcoming reelection campaign. And he did it inside the walls of the White House.

The article explains why Roosevelt gave the speech from the White House:

While the party machinery was firmly in Roosevelt’s control, Democratic leaders were jittery. Would rank-and-file delegates vote to make it official? Outgoing Vice President John Nance Garner had sought the nomination, giving them an alternative. And Roosevelt himself had been coy all spring and summer about running for a third term. The president’s advisers had him stay home in Washington, just to be on the safe side. But in the end, there was nothing to worry about. Roosevelt was easily nominated on the first ballot.

Which was how Roosevelt became the first (and to date, only) candidate to ever deliver this most political of all speeches from the White House.

Those condemning President Trump for considering the idea might want to take a look at their own history!

Is There Anyone In Washington Who Is Not Part Of The Swamp?

Posted on by

It just seems as if every agency in our government has been infused with political operatives. We were supposed to be protected from that by the Hatch Act, but somehow it hasn’t worked that way. Washington has become a sea of people with subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) political alliances that have nothing to do with the good of the country.

The Federalist Papers posted an article yesterday about the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. It is my personal opinion that this investigation will continue until the political left finds someone they can accuse of something. Since they have been throwing accusations around for six months and have found nothing, this may take a while. It may cost us a lot of money to go after some person who did something so horrible as to forget a phone call he made a year ago.

The article states:

As the investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election continues, we see yet another potential issue; this time, it appears that the investigators, the acting FBI director at that, may have personal conflicts of interest that could taint the integrity of the investigation.

The story was revealed by Sara Carter and John Solomon of Circa. They revealed that Senator Chuck Grassley is demanding the DOJ Inspector General investigate the acting FBI director for potential conflict of interest violations.

The article goes on to explain that the U.S. Office of Special Counsel is investigating FBI Director Andrew McCabe for violating the Hatch Act, which prohibits certain federal employees, including the FBI, from engaging in political campaign activity. The news source Circa revealed that McCabe was engaging in political campaigning for his wife in a Virginia state senate race.

The latest problem with Director McCabe is his involvement in an FBI matter involving General Flynn.

The article at The Federalist Papers reports:

The Chairman (Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley) is also asking the Inspector General to investigate the ongoing sexual discrimination lawsuit filed by former FBI Special Agent Robyn Gritz, which named McCabe and other FBI officials, who she accused of impeding her work within the bureau.

Gritz’s complaint was supported by then former Defense Intelligence Agency director Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn. Flynn, who went on to become President Trump’s National Security Advisor, was subsequently fired after highly classified information regarding a conversation he had with Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyac was leaked to the media.

There is definitely a question as to whether Director McCabe has a conflict of interest regarding the Russian investigation.

The article at The Federalist Papers concludes:

The question now, is does the acting FBI director need to recuse himself from presiding over the Russia investigation because of the plausible conflict of interest? Not to mention the fact that McCabe is under investigation for a potential violation of the Hatch Act, it seems that something is very amiss in the acting FBI director’s discretion, going all the way back to 2015 (that is, what we have on record at least).

Is there any untainted, apolitical person we can put in charge of the FBI?

Should We Take Up A Collection To Buy The Federal Government New Computers?

Posted on by

The Blaze posted a story today about another federal government agency whose hard drive crashed in the middle of an investigation by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. This is getting comical.

The hard drive in question belongs to April Sands, a former employee at the Federal Election Commission who resigned in the spring after admitting to violations of the Hatch Act. The Hatch Act limits political activities of federal employees, specifically prohibiting them from engaging in political activity while on the job or from government offices.

The article reports:

Issa (Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)) noted that while Sands admitted to violating the law, the FEC just recently told Congress that it could not recover her hard drive, which made it impossible to seek criminal charges against her.

“Recent information obtained by the committee suggests that the FEC OIG could not pursue criminal prosecution for the misconduct because the attorney’s hard drive had been recycled by the FEC,” Issa’s letter said.

As a result, Issa asked the FEC to provide information to his committee by July 28. That includes all documents related to the hard drive loss, and documents detailing the FEC’s practices for retaining information on computers.

The FEC is an independent agency, but Sands’ emails clearly indicated she favored Obama’s re-election in 2012. Before the election, she tweeted things like:

“Our #POTUS’s birthday is August 4. He’ll be 51. I’m donating at least $51 to give him the best birthday present ever: a second term.” In another tweet, she said anyone supporting Republicans is her “enemy.”

“The bias exhibited in these messages is striking, especially for an attorney charged with the responsibility to enforce federal election laws fairly and dispassionately,” Issa wrote.

The article includes a letter written by Issa to Federal Election Commission Chairman Lee E. Goodman, which shows some of the tweets sent by April Sands during regular work hours. There is also a document showing how and when information requested by the Oversight Committee was to be submitted. Unfortunately, because of the computer crash that information seems to be lost.

The federal government would probably have fewer computer crashes if there were more honest people in the current administration.