Tag Archives: November election

This Really Does Not Seem Right

Posted on by

On Monday, The New York Post reported that former President Obama visited No. 10 Downing Street for a meeting with British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.

President Obama is entitled to visit anyone he wants to, but considering that the current occupant of the White House does not seem to be firing on all cylinders and most of us believe that President Biden is not actually in charge, the visit seems odd.

The article reports:

The 44th president raised eyebrows Monday when he popped by No. 10 Downing Street for a meeting with British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.

Obama, 62, was tight-lipped about the reason for his surprise visit, but the British government said the sitdown had nothing to do with any royal family issues.

“The Prime Minister welcomed Barack Obama to No 10 this afternoon for an informal meeting, as part of the former President’s visit to London with the Obama Foundation,” a Downing Street spokesperson told The Post.

“They discussed a range of issues, including international affairs and AI.”

Obama, who founded his eponymous foundation along with wife Michelle in 2014, was seen entering Sunak’s home office via the back door at around 3 p.m. London time.

The former president remained for roughly one hour before departing alongside US Ambassador to the United Kingdom Jane Hartley, Sky News reported.

Reporters gathered outside No. 10 attempted to coax Obama over to take questions, to which the graying former leader responded, “I’m tempted” before walking back to a waiting motorcade.

Remember that one of the major players in the Russia Hoax used against President Trump was Christopher Steele, a British former intelligence officer with the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) from 1987 until his retirement in 2009, and that foreign intelligence services were used to create the Russia Hoax. As President Trump is currently leading in many of the Presidential polls (yes, I know it is very early), I wonder if another scandal is being planned to interfere with the November election. That is pure speculation, but it is unnerving to me to see former President Obama meeting with mucky-mucks in Britain.

Why Not To Elect Joe Biden

Posted on by

Dan Bongino shared an article on his website yesterday that lists 15 reasons not to vote for Joe Biden. Here is the list:

1) Joe Biden is 77 years old, seems to have difficulty working a full day, and has rather famously and significantly deteriorated mentally.

2) Joe Biden has been in politics since 1972. Do you think someone who has been in office that long without accomplishing much is going to sweep in and change everything for the better?

3) Biden has promised to halt all construction on a border wall, cancel the bilateral agreement with Mexico that stops many illegals from making it here, end deportations for anyone other than felons, and push through a massive amnesty for illegal aliens.

4) Joe Biden plans to ban the sale of new AR-15s and then demand that owners of AR-15s sell them to the government or sign up on a gun registry.

5) Biden has publicly said he no longer supports the Hyde Rule, which prevents federal money from being used for abortion.

6) Biden has noted that he is open to locking the country down again over Coronavirus.

7) Biden has said numerous times that he intends to ban fracking.

8) Biden is extremely liberal.

9) Joe Biden, who has a reputation for putting his hands all over women, was credibly accused of sexual assault by his former aide, Tara Reade.

10) Biden publicly admitted that he had advised Obama not to go through with the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden.

11) Electing Joe Biden after months of rioting by liberals in liberal cities will send a message that Americans are okay with that kind of behavior.

12) Both Biden and his VP, Kamala Harris, refuse to say whether they will attempt to add more justices to the Supreme Court.

13) Joe Biden has signaled that he’s open to getting rid of the legislative filibuster in the Senate, which is extremely dangerous and has the potential to destabilize our Republic.

14) Kamala Harris was arguably the single most liberal member of the Senate and Joe Biden, who seems too feeble to finish his term, made her his vice-presidential running mate.

15) Barack Obama and Joe Biden presided over the slowest post-war economic recovery in American history. Is that the guy you want shepherding the economy after the economic damage caused by Corona and the lockdowns?

Obviously there are more reasons not to elect Joe Biden, but that is one person’s list.

Information We Need NOW!

Posted on by

On Saturday The Federalist posted an article explaining why U.S. Attorney John Durham, the lead prosecutor looking into the origins of the Russia probe and the spying on the Trump campaign, should release the results of his investigation before November. I will admit that I am more interested in seeing those in the intelligence community who broke the law held accountable than I am in seeing a report.

The article reports:

As reported by the Washington Examiner, several sources have indicated that “Durham may end up waiting until after November to reveal what he has found or to hand down indictments” because Durham does not want his investigation or any decisions to be viewed as “political.” This would be a mistake. There is no question that he should release his findings and issue any necessary indictments before the November elections.

The voters need to know if the investigations that went on in 2015 and 2016 of the Trump campaign and people associated with it were warranted. If those investigations were not warranted, those responsible need to be held accountable before the election. Anyone who has been following the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) releases by Judicial Watch has a pretty good idea of what went on. Unfortunately, Americans who depend on the mainstream media for their information have no idea of the information in the documents so far declassified and made public. It is totally unfair to ask voters to make a decision in November without giving them the information they need to make an informed decision.

The article notes:

Historically, the Department of Justice has refrained from taking any action for partisan purposes. As reported in Just Security:

Department of Justice employees are entrusted with the authority to enforce the laws of the United States and with the responsibility to do so in a neutral and impartial manner. This is particularly important in an election year.

The Memorandum further states (emphasis added):

As Department employees … we must be particularly sensitive to safeguarding the Department’s reputation for fairness, neutrality and nonpartisanship.

Simply put, politics must play no role in the decisions of federal investigators or prosecutors regarding any investigations or criminal charges. Law enforcement officers and prosecutors may never select the timing of investigative steps or criminal charges for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party.

The article argues that that policy does not apply in this case:

While this policy makes sense overall, it does not make sense in this case for several compelling reasons. First, there is no evidence that Durham’s investigation is partisan in nature or that it is being conducted for partisan political purposes like the Michael Flynn and Roger Stone investigations. Durham’s investigation began long ago and well before Americans were seriously thinking about the 2020 elections.

Second, the purpose of Durham’s investigation appears to align with the department’s mission. Specifically, through his investigation, Durham is seeking to protect the integrity of the election process in the United States. More particularly, Durham is investigating whether one or more people were involved in a plot to sabotage a presidential candidate or to overthrow a duly elected president.

This is not a political issue that “benefits” one party or another. Rather, it is an investigation, the results of which will help Americans of all political leanings. Durham’s findings are vital for all Americans who care about democracy and the integrity of the election process. Americans deserve to know what happened leading up to the 2016 elections.

It’s time for Americans to learn the truth about what the Justice Department and the intelligence community did to undermine the campaign and presidency of President Trump.

A Test Of Mail-In Voting

Posted on by

PJ Media posted an article yesterday about a test CBS News did to determine how successful voting by mail would be this November. Please follow the link to read the entire article. I am simply going to post the test results here.

The article reports:

The parameters of the test were simple and straightforward. CBS mailed 100 ballots to locations across Philadelphia in an experiment to see how long it took the ballots to arrive. A post office box was set up to receive the returned ballots.

A few days later, another 100 ballots were mailed to another 100 locations in the city. The results should frighten Democrats who claim they are all about “every vote being counted.”

A week after initial ballots were sent, most ballots appeared to be missing from the P.O. box.

“I don’t see anything back there for you,” a postal worker told Dokoupil when he received the mail. “That’s all I have back there right now.”

After asking for a manager and explaining the situation to them, the votes were found.

“They had them somewhere else,” the postal worker said.

…Out of the initial batch mailed a week earlier, 97 out of 100 votes had arrived. Three simulated persons, or 3% of voters, were effectively disenfranchised by mail by giving their ballots a week to arrive. In a close election, 3% could be pivotal.

Four days after mailing the second batch of mock ballots, 21% of the votes hadn’t arrived.

According to Postal Service recommendations, “voters should mail their return ballots at least one week prior to the due date.”

However, nearly half of all states still allow voters to request ballots less than a week before the election.

Democrats who are pushing this notion that a mail-in election won’t be any different from an in-person election should listen to the voters who are far more grounded in reality.

“I’m scared that it might get lost in the mail,” potential voter Kim Tucker said. “I just want to make sure that my vote is submitted, like, I see that it’s submitted, that it actually counts.”

The November election is shaping up to be the mother of all clusterfarks. At every level — federal, state, and local — election officials are sounding the alarm. The system was not built to handle 120 million mailed ballots. Processing and protecting those ballots is beyond the abilities of almost every state.

The article concludes:

The concern is not only over the integrity of the ballot. The avalanche of legal challenges to the results will almost certainly run for years and may even delay state and local legislatures from sitting.

Democrats will bring all of this on themselves. It’s a shame that the rest of us are going to suffer for their stupidity.

Stay tuned.

The Five Questions That Will Determine The Presidential Election In November

Posted on by

The New York Sun posted an article yesterday by Conrad Black. The article lists the five things that will determine who wins the presidential election in November.

These are the five things listed in the article:

    • Can the President override the Democratic press’s thunderous campaign to terrorize the country over the coronavirus?

    • Can the president successfully connect Vice President Biden’s campaign to the hooligans, anti-white racists, and urban guerrillas who effectively are being encouraged by the corrupt Democratic mayors of many of the nation’s largest cities?

    • Will the economic recovery and the decline in the unemployment generated by the COVID-19 shutdown continue at its recent pace and strengthen the economy as a pro-Trump electoral argument?

    • Will the Republicans make adequately clear to the country the authoritarian and Marxist implications of the Biden-Sanders unity document?

    • Will special counsel John Durham indict senior members of the Obama Administration over their handling of the spurious allegation of collusion between Donald Trump and the Russian government in the 2016 election and Justice Department violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and how will Mr. Biden himself come through it?

The coronavirus has given us some insight into what unbridled government authority can do. Some of the regulations put in place by governors and mayors were based on common sense–things your mother told you when you were young like wash you hands, cover your mouth when you cough or sneeze, and don’t hang around with sick people. Other regulations were simply power grabs to prevent Americans from exercising their First Amendment rights–churches in Nevada restricted to a lower percentage of occupancy than casinos, protests to open businesses criticized and shut down while other protests (that included looting and riots) were allowed to continue. We have had a taste of out-of-control government in recent months. A vote for Joe Biden and whoever he chooses as his running mate will give us more of the same. Joe Biden has already stated that he wants to reassemble the Obama team–the group that gave us anemic economic growth, Benghazi where our ambassador was murdered followed by lying about it on television, ISIS, politicization of the Justice Department, and too many other scandals to mention.

The voters will choose. We need to pray for wisdom in voting and an honest election.