Tag Archives: The Federalist

A Preview Of Things To Come?

Posted on by

On December 2nd, The Federalist posted an article about a terrorist attack in Chicago by someone who entered America illegally and was freed by the Border Patrol.

The article reports:

Surprisingly little news coverage followed America’s first terror attack by an illegal border-crossing immigrant on U.S. soil. On Saturday, 22-year-old Mauritanian Sidi Mohamed Abdallahi was found dead of an apparent hanging suicide in his Cook County, Illinois jail cell. America must learn from this to prevent the next attacks on U.S. soil by border-infiltrating jihadists.

Abdallahi illegally jumped the border from Tijuana to San Diego in March 2023 and was freed by U.S. Border Patrol. Under orders from the Biden-Harris Department of Homeland Security, Border Patrol has released millions of illegal entrants into the United States in the last four years.

On October 26, Abdallahi allegedly hunted down and shot in the back an identifiably Orthodox Jewish man walking to synagogue, then tried to up the body count by attacking responding police while shouting “Allahu Akbar!” Abdallahi still didn’t quit shooting even after police wounded him. Somehow he, the police, and the victim all survived.

This benchmarking story of America’s first terror attack by a border-crossing jihadist was largely ignored by national news media even though it came just before the brewing political war between pro-illegal immigrant Democrats and an incoming Trump administration promising an illegal immigration crackdown largely on national security grounds.

The article explains Abdallahi’s method:

Abdallahi had mapped out the locations of two Chicago synagogues and a Jewish community, the conservative Chicago Sun-Times reported November 21. The search history also included “Jewish Community Center” and a gun store in suburban Lyons.

Once he shot the man in the back, Abdallahi displayed a relentless desire to increase his body count and seemed tactically aware of how to take out hard human targets like police officers. For example, his gun apparently jammed after shooting the Jewish victim, prosecutors said. He reportedly had the presence of mind to retreat to cover, fix the jam, then return to finish off the victim, but then retreated to cover again as first responders approached.

Abdallahi drove a few blocks around them, then returned on foot from a new direction and opened fire on four police officers and two paramedics tending the wounded man, prosecutors alleged. He then allegedly fired on the ambulance, hitting it twice as a fifth police officer returned fire.

Antisemitism is increasingly becoming a problem in America. Some Jewish students on our college campuses are harassed or attacked just for going to classes. We have no control right now over who is coming across our borders. If we don’t deal with illegal immigration, we are going to become like some European countries where Jews are told not to wear anything that identifies them as Jewish because of the influx of Muslims who believe that Antisemitism is required by their god.

Parents Want The Best For Their Children

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Federalist posted an article about a trend in American education.

The article reports:

The growth of classical education schools is astonishing. The numbers keep rising; there is no sign that the movement is beginning to plateau. Schools open, networks are created, charters are authorized, and kids fill the seats. One would think that as more spaces are available the (supposedly) small number of parents who favor the classical way would be satisfied and demand would diminish.

How many Americans want their children to study Latin, read the Old and New Testaments, and appreciate the High Art of the Renaissance? Couldn’t be too many, say intellectuals and educators on the left. Those enlightened practitioners can’t help assuming that a classical curriculum should turn people off, given the half-century of multiculturalist criticism of Western civilization and American exceptionalism, but apparently the long campaign to kill respect for the old lineage hasn’t succeeded.

The article notes two particular school networks, Valor Education and Alberta Classical Academy:

A prime example: Valor Education is a network of five schools in Texas. The first one opened in Austin in 2018, a charter school squarely in the classical mode. Two years later, school leaders saw enough local interest to open another school in Austin, then in 2022 a school in Kyle, and in 2023 schools in Leander and San Antonio. The numbers now: 4,200 enrolled in the five campuses and 5,500 on the waitlists.

Part of the attraction of Valor campuses is the free tuition, to be sure, but public schools are free too. Valor doesn’t screen students for background or ability, so anyone can apply and have an equal chance of admission. The real draw, however, is the curriculum, which is certainly not geared to a no-child-left-behind attitude that ends up lowering standards so that, indeed, no child is left behind.

…Another example is Alberta Classical Academy in Calgary, which was authorized as a charter school in January 2022 and started in August of that year. Caylan Ford, one of the founders, says that they had to pass out fliers, circulate at the Calgary Stampede, and reach out to local churches in order to recruit because the idea of a charter classical school was unknown in the region. The building could handle 280 kids, and in the spring Ford worried that they wouldn’t reach nearly that number.

But on day one, 294 students had signed up, many of them Nigerian Christians worried about safety and wokeness in the public schools. In its second year, a campus opened in Edmonton and enrollment tripled, with 2,000 kids on the waitlist. This year, Alberta Classical has 1,300 students. The curriculum shows the same rigorous classical focus as Valor. Mandatory Latin begins in 5th grade, there’s an Ancient Greek Club and a Mandarin Club, and 9th grade readings include Shakespeare, George Orwell, and Marcus Aurelius.  

The monopoly that public education has held in America for generations had not worked to our benefit. It’s time to end the monopoly and fund schools that actually educate our children.

The Need To Enforce Citizenship Only Voting In America

Posted on by

The Fifteenth Amendment protects the rights of citizens of the United States to vote. It does not allow for non-citizens to vote. The Nineteenth Amendment allows women who are citizens of the United States to vote. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that non-citizens have the right to vote. The fact that non-citizens are counted in the census is the result of a court case–not a law passed by any legislature.

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article illustrating how one state is not complying with the Constitution in its voting practices.

The article reports:

The Oregon Department of Motor Vehicles has directed its employees to process the voter registration of those with “unknown citizenship” status, simply requiring that they claim eligibility, The Federalist has learned.

“If you don’t prove that you’re not a U.S. citizen, then you will be asked if you want to self-attest to being a citizen, and they will assist you with registering to vote,” Republican state Rep. Ed Diehl told The Federalist.

Early last month, Democrat Gov. Tina Kotek paused Oregon’s “motor voter” program as the state began a cursory investigation into how the system had registered more than 1,500 potential noncitizens to vote, as The Federalist previously reported.

In response to this discovery, Diehl met with state DMV leaders on Oct. 21. He said the DMV has reverted to only registering voters with a form that relies on attestation to prove citizenship.

“I​​nstead of being optional — a side track basically for voter registration — it’s right now the only way,” Diehl said. 

Though the “motor voter” process that Kotek paused allowed more than 1,500 individuals to vote without proof of citizenship, that process theoretically required some level of documentary proof of citizenship, in contrast with the current registration method Diehl described.

The article concludes:

After discovering noncitizens on the voter rolls, Kerns [Griffin-Valade’s (Oregon’s Secretary of State) Communications Director Laura Kerns] said the secretary of state took steps to hire a “motor voter oversight” position in the Oregon Elections Division” to establish a process with the DMV of “regular data checks and review processes” with the elections division and update administrative rules.

Jeff Eager, former mayor of Bend, Oregon, who writes on state politics, told The Federalist he has been trying to obtain public records regarding the “motor voter” program placing noncitizens on the rolls. The DMV postponed releasing records until after the election.

“It looks to me like they’re playing games with the response by continually delaying it,” Eager said. “The concern here is that it’s the tip of the iceberg, because you have the majority of voters in Oregon having registered to vote without providing proof of citizenship at all.”

It’s time to require all states to comply with the law limiting voting in federal elections to citizens or their Representatives and Senators should not be seated and their Electoral College votes not counted.

States Matter Too!

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about what happened in various state elections on November 5th. Unfortunately, the elections in North Carolina did not go as well for conservatives as they did in some other states. Much of of the North Carolina Council of State went Democrat. Although the Democrats won the governorship, the lieutenant governorship, the Attorney General, the Secretary of State, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction, the Republicans won the positions of State Auditor, Treasurer, Commissioner of Agriculture, Commissioner of Labor, and Commissioner of Insurance. They lost their veto-proof  majority in the North Carolina House of Representatives, but gained a veto-proof majority in the North Carolina Senate.

The article at The Federalist shares the results from some other states:

In Arizona, Republicans are on track to maintain their majorities in the state House and Senate, preliminary election results from the New York Times suggest. Republicans could potentially expand their majorities in both chambers as well. The outcome marks a huge defeat for leftists, who spent millions of dollars to flip or “reach ties” in state legislatures including in Arizona, as The Federalist previously reported, where a slim GOP legislative majority separates the state from a Democrat trifecta takeover.

In South Carolina, unofficial results indicate Republicans won a veto-proof supermajority in the state Senate and held onto their supermajority in the state House of Representatives. Similar trends are also reflected in Iowa’s preliminary results, which show the state GOP is already projected to expand its majority in the state House.

In New Hampshire, Republicans are on track to maintain trifecta control of state government, according to early results. The GOP is projected to win the governor’s mansion and a supermajority in the Senate and could also expand its majority in the House compared to 2022 results.

Many Americans are unhappy with the impact our open southern border is having on cities and states. Crime has skyrocketed, housing has become more expensive and harder to find, and the cost of providing food and housing to people who are not here legally has been enormous. Many of the states that have been hit the hardest by the unlimited migration of people who have not been vetted voted for change.

Who Really Lost In The 2024 Election?

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Federalist posted an article about the losers in the 2024 election. Obviously, Vice-President Kamala Harris lost, but there was another bigger loser.

The article reports:

In the early hours of Wednesday morning, legacy news networks were already sliding toward 2016 levels of melting down about the increasingly definite prospect of a presidential victory by Donald J. Trump. For them, Harris’ stinging defeat is personal — because it’s just as much a defeat for them as it is for her.

The corporate media industrial complex has spent Donald Trump’s entire political career trying to destroy him. Hand-in-hand with triple-letter government agencies and Democrats, they ran a hoax painting Trump as a Russian stooge based on ridiculous rumors commissioned by his opponent’s campaign in 2016. They continued to spread the lie for the duration of his presidency, awarding each other Pulitzers for it. And they’ve only ramped up their efforts since then.

The problem they’re reckoning with tonight is this: those efforts didn’t work. They’re no longer able to control Americans by controlling their information intake, because their credibility is farther deep-sixed than the Clinton family’s enemies list.

It is a sad day when media members who lie are awarded Pulitzer Prizes and not forced to return them when it is revealed that they lied.

The article notes:

Since the last presidential election, the media have screeched incessantly about Trump “inciting an insurrection” at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. They made documentaries comparing Trump to the Ku Klux Klan. They portrayed Trump as the ringleader of a terrorist attack and not as a president who gave a speech and urged his supporters to protest peacefully.

Tuesday night’s results are a resounding indication that Americans didn’t buy it.

With help from a debunked story planted in The Atlantic, the media made Trump out to be a “fascist” and routinely compared him to Hitler. When Trump held a gangbusters rally at Madison Square Garden, they screeched that he and his supporters were obviously Nazis because they gathered at the same venue that Nazi sympathizers once rented — along with Frank Sinatra, the Rolling Stones, Elton John, Billy Joel, Beyoncé, Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter.

The article concludes:

If the past eight years — and the first few hours of cope-streaming from TV Wednesday morning — are any indication, the legacy press isn’t planning on repentance. They don’t feel obligated to represent Americans; they feel entitled to control them. The loss of that control is making them apoplectic.

Kamala Harris is only the second-biggest loser of the night. Her media shills are nursing wounds that will take far longer to recover from. After all, they were always the ones fighting the hardest to bring Trump down — and after eight years of it, they’re skulking away weaker and more humiliated than ever.

Why should anyone trust anything the mainstream media says after the way they have behaved for the past nine years?

A Level Playing Field Would Be Nice

Posted on by

On September 24th, The Hill reported:

The Senate on Tuesday approved a bill to boost former President Trump’s level of Secret Service protection, putting it one step away from becoming law less than two weeks after he was the subject of a second assassination attempt. 

The bill, which was proposed by Reps. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) and Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) in the House days after the first assassination attempt, would require the Secret Service to “apply the same standards” to figure out how many agents should be used to protect the president, vice president, and those running for offices granted such protection. 

On Friday, The Federalist reported:

Former President Donald Trump was recently forced to cancel a campaign rally in Wisconsin because the federal task force in charge of safety denied him adequate protection resources.

On Tuesday, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., sent a letter to the acting director of the Secret Service detailing the allegations of a whistleblower who said the event was canceled because the nation’s premier security agency lacked “sufficient assets” to keep the Republican presidential nominee safe.

“Other whistleblowers with knowledge of Secret Service planning protocols allege that failure to provide protection for a major public event is highly unusual and that a sitting president would never be denied resources in this way,” Hawley wrote.

This is disgusting. The entrenched bureaucracy is doing everything it can to elect Kamala Harris. They don’t care about her abilities or qualifications–they just want to make sure President Trump doesn’t get elected and actually drain the swamp.

A Campaign Based On Lies

Posted on by

One of the main issues in the Democrat party campaign for the presidency is abortion. Unfortunately, they have decided that rather than fight their fight on the merits, they are simply going to lie about the issue. First of all, Roe v. Wade was overturned because it violated the 10th Amendment. A federal ban on abortion would also violate the 10th Amendment and would also be overturned by the courts. President Trump has already said he would oppose a federal ban on abortion, but that is not what the Kamala Harris campaign is reporting. The campaign is also lying about what constitutes an abortion and what medical care should be available to women who miscarry.

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article explaining how a recent claim by the Harris campaign is a lie.

The article reports:

Democrats and their corporate media allies are so desperate to get rid of pro-life laws that they’ll fabricate stories to wrongly smear them as not only bad for women but deadly.

The latest is ProPublica’s story of a Georgia woman who died after a North Carolina abortionist gave her chemical abortion pills — which, contrary to Democrat narratives, are unsafe. The article, however, pretends the death was caused by Georgia’s pro-life laws. The author of the story repeatedly attempts to conflate a procedure used to treat miscarriages, dilation and curettage (D&C), with elective abortion.

In ProPublica’s telling, 28-year-old Amber Nicole Thurman had ingested the chemical abortion pill regimen, which consists of the drugs mifepristone and misoprostol. Mifepristone ends the life of the developing human being; misoprostol helps achieve complete expulsion of the embryo.

It’s worth noting that the FDA’s 2000 approval of mifepristone acknowledged its risks and enacted safety requirements, including a seven-week gestational limit, requiring women to see a physician in person, and a mandatory one-time post-abortion appointment to confirm that the uterus was empty and that bleeding had subsided. The FDA also required manufacturers of the abortion pill to report all adverse health events that were reported to them, such as infection or excessive bleeding — not just patient deaths. 

But thanks to Democrat efforts to relax safety requirements for abortion pills, important safeguards no longer apply. When Thurman experienced “complications” from the abortion, which ProPublica wrongly asserts are “rare,” she went to the hospital for a D&C.

While ProPublica claims, “Thurman had told doctors her miscarriage was not spontaneous — it was the result of taking pills to terminate her pregnancy,” Thurman was not experiencing a miscarriage. She had undergone an abortion. Her unborn twins had already died, and she had retained parts of their bodies or the placenta — a known complication of abortion pill use and one of the very reasons for the FDA’s requirement for a post-abortion follow-up visit with a doctor. 

The article concludes:

Amber Thurman did not die because of Georgia’s abortion law, which was enacted to protect the lives of mothers and preborn children. She died from complications of medical abortion. Perhaps, had the FDA decided not to remove its mandatory requirement for a doctor’s follow-up visit from abortion pill labeling, and had she received more appropriate care, she might have survived.

ProPublica says, “Thurman’s case marks the first time an abortion-related death, officially deemed ‘preventable,’ is coming to public light.” But what about the death of Alexandra Nunez? Or Rebecca Charland, Tonya Reaves, Jennifer Morbelli, Maria Santiago, Lakisha Wilson, Jamie Lee Morales, Cree Erwin Sheppard, Keisha Atkins, Tia Archeiva Parks, or April Lowery — all of whom died during or shortly after their abortions?

Were their deaths preventable? Or is maternal death associated with elective abortion acceptable, even though such abortions are performed on healthy mothers with healthy babies?

Abortion has risks. I have friends who as a result of legal abortions were not able to have children when they wanted to have them. There was also a study in Japan in the 1970’s linking abortion to an increased risk of breast cancer. This is not a safe procedure whether it is done with drugs or other methods.

Preventing Voter Fraud Before It Happens

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Federalist reported that Arizona has found 100,000 non- citizens on its voting rolls.

The article reports:

In Arizona, voters need to provide documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in statewide elections. Those who do not provide proof are registered as “federal-only” voters, which allows them to cast a ballot only in federal elections. But the state says it discovered nearly 100,000 voters on the rolls who did not provide documentary proof of citizenship when registering to vote but were nonetheless tagged as eligible to vote in both state and federal elections.

Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer flagged an “erroneous voter registration record” to Democrat Gov. Katie Hobbs on Sept. 7. A green card holder who, as a noncitizen, is legally prohibited from voting, had ended up on the voter rolls as a full-ballot voter, according to VoteBeat.

Why are non-citizens being allowed to vote in federal elections?

According to ballotpedia:

…in 1996, the U.S. Congress passed a federal immigration enforcement bill called the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA). Section 611 of IIRAIRA criminalized noncitizen voting in federal elections, but the law did not explicitly prohibit noncitizens from voting in state or local elections in accordance with state constitutions and local ordinances.

…In 2018, North Dakota became the first of several states to ban noncitizen voting by changing their constitutions. North Dakotans for Citizen Voting, the group that sponsored Measure 2, supported the ballot measure in posts on its website

The Federalist reports:

Hobbs says her team “identified and fixed an administrative error that originated in 2004, and affects longtime residents who received a driver’s license before 1996” but that “out of an abundance of caution, [the secretary of state’s office and the motor vehicle division] will be implementing an independent audit to ensure that MVD systems are functioning as necessary to support voter registration.”

One hundred thousand votes are enough to make a difference in an election. All states need to clean up their voter rolls.

About Those Geese

Posted on by

The influx of illegal aliens through America’s open southern border has made every state a border state. It has been a serious problem for some small communities that have been overrun by illegal immigrants. One such town is Springfield, Ohio, a town of 60,000 people that has had 20,000 illegal aliens move in. On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about one consequence of this invasion of people who do not share the same culture as the town they have moved into.

The article reports:

A recording of a police phone call obtained by The Federalist reveals a local resident reporting a group of Haitian migrants carrying four geese in Springfield, Ohio two weeks ago.

“I’m sitting here, I’m riding on the trail, I’m going to my orientation for my job today, and I see a group of Haitian people, there was about four of ’em, they all had geese in their hand,” the caller tells the public services dispatcher in the audio recording of the call.

According to a police report reviewed by The Federalist, the call was placed on Aug. 26, before the Columbus suburb located roughly 50 miles from the state capital became nationally known this week for epitomizing the nation’s migrant crisis. The caller told the dispatcher he saw four migrants in total, two men and two women, each carrying a single goose.

There have also been stories from towns where household pets are being slaughtered and eaten. Some of these stories are questionable, but some have been documented. Is this how we want to live in America? Is it time to send some of these people home?

If You Are Looking For Facts, Don’t Look To The Democrat Convention

Posted on by

Thursday afternoon, The Federalist posted an article about the lies being told at the Democrat Convention. They probably should have waited until the convention was over–I suspect their current list will expand greatly by the end of the night. Many of the lies have been told before, but I believe the theory is that if they tell a lie often enough, people will believe it.

The article lists some of the propaganda the convention is spewing:

The Harris-Walz campaign branding of “joy”—repeated this week ad nauseum by the propaganda press—is obviously fake and forced. By running a campaign almost completely devoid of policy substance or any real interaction with the news media, consisting mostly of staged videos of Harris and Walz yukking it up on the campaign trail or delivering speeches via teleprompter at highly controlled rallies, Democrat Party leaders are essentially running a psy-op on the American electorate. 

A big part of that psy-op is to lie and mislead brazenly about everything. On the opening night of the convention, Biden repeated the infamous “very fine people on both sides” hoax and the “suckers and losers” hoax, both of which anyone can easily look up in 30 seconds. He also claimed that 500,000 new electric vehicle charging stations have been created under his administration (the actual number is seven), among many other blatant falsehoods.

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker repeated the “injecting bleach” line about Donald Trump and Covid. Former President Barack Obama lied about Trump’s tax cuts, claiming they only benefited the wealthy, and about how many jobs have been created under the Biden-Harris administration.

Michelle Obama falsely claimed Trump wants to outlaw IVF. Tim Walz was introduced as a “Command Sergeant Major,” a rank he never achieved. Capitol Police Officer Aquilino Gonell claimed he “almost died” on January 6, when in fact he suffered no injuries. On and on, lie after lie—and of the most lazy and obvious kind.

The sad part of this is that the mainstream media will not challenge any of this garbage. Many Americans will continue on their merry way completely unaware that they have been lied to. According to the Democrats, Bidenomics is working. Anyone who has read the recent revision to the jobs numbers or gone to the grocery store or put gas in their car understands that is not true. The question remains whether voters will remember this in November.

Why Would Anyone Want To Prevent This?

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about the Department of Justice wanting to block a law from taking effect in Arizona.

The article reports:

The Biden-Harris Department of Justice (DOJ) on Friday requested the U.S. Supreme Court “deny” Republicans’ bid to enforce an Arizona law requiring individuals to prove they’re U.S. citizens when registering and voting in elections.

Arguing on behalf of the administration, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar requested that the nation’s highest court instead allow a lower court decision — one prohibiting the implementation of provisions of the statute in question — to remain in effect for the November election.

The article notes:

As The Federalist previously reported, the 2022 law mandated residents to show documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) when registering via state voter registration forms. The statute also required such proof for individuals submitting mail-in ballots and voting in presidential contests.

(In Arizona, individuals who do not provide DPOC when registering to vote are permitted to do so as “federal-only voters” and cast ballots in federal elections).

…According to AZ Free News, more than 11,600 individuals voted via “federal-only” ballots during the Grand Canyon State’s 2020 election. That’s larger than Joe Biden’s margin of victory (10,457 votes) over Donald Trump.

The strategy here is very simply. Many illegal aliens are coming across the border with “Biden” t-shirts. It is obvious how they will vote. Every vote case by a person voting illegally cancels out the vote of an American voting legally. Considering the number of people who have crossed our borders since President Biden took office, it would be very easy for the votes of illegal aliens to overpower the votes of American citizens.

How Many Non-Citizens Are Currently On America’s Voting Rolls?

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Federalist posted an article about one aspect of Virginia’s government that has been impacted by the election of Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin.

The article reports:

In an executive order directing state agencies to undertake election security efforts ahead of the November election, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin revealed on Wednesday that the commonwealth’s Department of Elections (ELECT) has removed more than 6,300 noncitizens from its voter rolls since his administration took office.

“All data collected by the DMV that identifies noncitizens is shared with ELECT, which uses it to scrub existing voter rolls and remove noncitizens who may have purposefully or accidentally registered to vote,” Youngkin wrote. “According to data from ELECT, between January 2022 and July 2024, records indicate we removed 6,303 noncitizens from the voter rolls.”

Virginia is one of only three states to require individuals “provide their full 9-digit Social Security number” when registering to vote, according to Youngkin.

Virginia may be one of the few states that will have an honest election in November.

The article concludes:

Youngkin further directed the state DMV to “expedite the interagency data-sharing with [ELECT] of noncitizens by generating a daily file of all noncitizen transactions, including addresses and documents.” As noted by the governor, registrars are required by Virginia law to cancel the registration of an individual who registered to vote “by falsely claiming that they are a citizen,” and must report such cases to their local commonwealth’s attorney.

“Our election security model is designed to prevent illegal votes and guarantee legal votes are accurately counted,” Youngkin wrote. “However, security procedures can only be as strong as the state and federal law which governs voting. Further strengthening of Virginia’s election security system will rely on strengthening state and federal law.”

All states need to follow this example.

Where Our Money Is Going

Posted on by

It would be really nice to have people in Congress who understand basic budgeting. If you have the money to buy something, it’s okay to buy it. If you don’t have the money to buy something, it isn’t okay to buy it. It’s called fiscal responsibility.

On August 5th, The Federalist posted an article detailing how some of our taxpayer money is being spent.

The article reports:

With its July 22 announcement that it is disbursing $4.3 billion in taxpayer-funded grants for an assortment of climate projects around the country, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) secured the loot for grateful recipients before President Joe Biden leaves office in January.

The money will go to 25 projects across 30 states (some will cross state borders) and will target greenhouse gas emissions from “transportation, electric power, commercial and residential buildings, industry, agriculture/natural and working lands, and waste and materials management,” the EPA said in a press release. Funds for the grants were provided from the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants Program anchored in the 2022 misnamed Inflation Reduction Act, the Biden administration’s landmark climate law.

That was the law that Joe Manchin said he would not vote for and was bribed to vote for with some concessions on fossil fuel exploration that were later reneged on.

The article lists some of the people receiving taxpayer dollars:

Among the projects receiving the federal largesse are statewide decarbonization initiatives in Pennsylvania targeting cement, asphalt, and other materials; $307 million for measures in Nebraska to promote “climate smart” practices ostensibly to reduce emissions from agriculture and waste; and an effort to install EV chargers for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles along a highway on the East Coast.

An air management district in Southern California will receive $500 million to help decarbonize the region’s transportation and freight sectors, including at the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles. EPA’s grants to the region will provide funding for “electric charging equipment, zero-emission freight vehicles and conversion of cargo handling equipment to lower emissions.”

The article concludes:

The ruling class repeatedly claims to protect the masses from whatever “existential threat” suits their purposes. Time and again, their follies blow up — usually not in their faces, but in the faces of ordinary people who bear the brunt of their hubris. The billions EPA is spreading around will have no effect on the climate, but it will ensure more precious resources are wasted.

I agree.

The Cord That Holds Us Together Is Fraying

Posted on by

On July 10th, The Federalist posted an article about the current disunity in America. The title of the article is, “America’s Conflicts Are Not Primarily Political Or Ideological, But Religious.” That is an interesting premise.

The author observes:

Because America, like all nations, is founded on religious claims, and relies on those claims for its coherence. We’ve long been accustomed to talking about America as a “propositional nation,” a phrase taken from Abraham Lincoln’s famous line in the Gettysburg Address that America was “dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”

The idea is that America is fundamentally different from the ethnic nation-states of Europe, which were based on blood and soil and religion. America supposedly transcended all that. It was based instead on an idea — a proposition. Anyone could become an American if he agreed to the proposition. 

And this is true. But nearly everyone who says America is a propositional nation is wrong about what the proposition is. America is not a collection of Enlightenment tropes at the intersection of Locke and Rousseau, a grab bag of philosophical sentiments about the rights of man. America is the creation of Christian civilization.

The proposition at the heart of America, undergirding our nation’s existence, is not just “all men are created,” but Christianity and all that comes with it. Without Christianity, you don’t get free speech, liberty, equality, freedom of conscience. All of it relies on the claims of the Christian faith, none of it stands on its own.

The article goes on to explain the problems with accepting the trappings of Christianity without accepting the basics of the faith–the deity and sacrifice of Jesus.

The article notes:

Some will acknowledge the Christian inheritance of America but insist that it’s a point of departure, that once the American experiment was launched, it could be safely separated from the religion that launched it. They think it’s possible to take the “best” parts of the Christian faith without the need to continually affirm Christ. “Christless Christianity,” you might call it.

But it doesn’t work like that. A few months ago the famous atheist Richard Dawkins wondered aloud in an interview why his own country, England, could not just go on having “cultural Christianity” without actual, believing Christians. He said he liked the cathedrals and the Christmas carols, and would like to enjoy them without the bother of actual Christianity. He wants fewer believing Christians and more cultural Christians.

It never occurred to Dawkins that you don’t get to keep the culture without the cult. The sad spectacle of modern England should suffice to prove the point. If there is no one to worship in the cathedrals, they will become concert halls or, in England’s case, mosques. If no one really believes what the Christmas carols proclaim, eventually people will stop singing them.

Please follow the link to read the entire article.

 

IRS Audits For Thee, But Not For Me

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about how the extra money given to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the last budget passed by Congress is being used.

The article reports:

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is using a new army of tax collectors to conduct mass audits of middle-income earners after Democrats promised additional resources would only be used to target the rich.

On Thursday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., celebrated the federal government’s collection of more than $1 billion in taxes from “high-wealth taxpayers” as a triumph for the agency’s radical expansion under President Joe Biden.

…A columnist for the paper trumpeted by Warren, however, pointed out that “Buried deep in the same story: Two-thirds of IRS audits initiated last year were on taxpayers making less than $200,000.”

The article notes:

“It should also be noted that nearly two-thirds of audits initiated in 2023 were on those making less than $200,000,” Brady told the paper.

In April, The Wall Street Journal editorial board reported on a review of the federal tax agency’s auditing practices, which found 63 percent of new government inquiries were to middle-income earners who made less than $200,000.

“Only a small overall share reached the very highest earners, while 80% of audits covered filers earning less than $1 million,” wrote the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal. “Don’t forget to save those charitable-giving receipts.”

It has been reported that nearly half of American Congress members are millionaires. Why would the people who write the laws write them so that their activities would be closely watched?

The Problem Really Isn’t President Biden

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article reminding us that the inflation, lack of border security, and rising crime rates are not solely the responsibility of President Biden. President Biden represents (and his policies represent) the platform of a particular political party.

The article notes:

CNN spent the hour after Thursday’s presidential debate in an emotional tailspin. But at the heart of their desperate “analysis” was speculation about whether the fumbling Biden should step down to let another Democrat jump in to carry the torch of “DEMOCRACY.”

The jig is up. Here’s what disillusioned Democrats and independents and moderates need to know. What all the blue-state refugees who now live in Texas and Florida instead of California and New York City need to admit. What all the fed-up middle-class families and forgotten nonwhite voters in the suburbs need to remember: These aren’t just Joe Biden policies that are disastrous. They’re Democrat policies.

Abortion. Economy. Crime. Immigration. Lawfare. Foreign policy. Health care. It doesn’t matter what pet issue has voters down in the dumps. Democrats are in lockstep on the losing side. And anywhere they aren’t in lockstep — like on whether Israel is a victim of terrorism or a group of oppressive “colonizers” — they tow the radical line.

The article concludes:

And our two-tiered system of justice — led by the deep state, rogue state prosecutors, and a leftist executive — wouldn’t stop just because Biden isn’t on the ticket. The same people who raided the homes of pro-lifers while seeking immunity for the Biden family; prosecuted one man for “classified documents” while letting other worse offenders go free; and made up novel legal theories and new statutes of limitations to gag, fine, and ultimately imprison their chief political opponent are beholden to a party, not just the sitting president.

So when the Democrat armchair class suddenly gets weepy about Biden’s decline, saying Democrats “‘HAVE A PROBLEM’ AFTER BIDEN’S DEBATE PERFORMANCE,” don’t buy the spin that a shiny new Democrat could bail America out.

It isn’t just Biden that’s ruined America. It’s his party.

It’s very easy to focus on personalities instead of party platforms. I suggest that voters read each party’s platform before they vote. Which platform best represents your views? The answer to that question is as important as the individual candidate.

Are You A Terror Suspect Because You Attend Church?

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about documents  obtained by America First Legal (AFL).

The article reports:

President Joe Biden’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) brainstormed about infiltrating local communities to spy on Americans, and suggested being “religious” or “in the military” was an “indicator of extremists and terrorism,” excerpts of documents obtained by America First Legal (AFL) purportedly show.

These excerpts, released Thursday by AFL, purport to show how in 2023, the DHS’s newly created “Homeland Intelligence Experts Group” looked for ways to expand their spying on American citizens, including by trying to “get into local communities in a non-threatening way” to get fellow Americans to tattle tale on their neighbors.

The committee, on which John Brennan and James Clapper — both notorious for their participation in the Russia-collusion hoax as well as for falsely claiming Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation — sat, also suggested religious Americans, members of the military, and Trump supporters were possible security threats, according to segments of the documents released by AFL.

The article notes:

Not only did the FBI expand its “anti-government or anti-authority violent extremists” (AGAAVE) classification to include the “furtherance of political and/or social agendas,” but it also created a new terrorism category, “AGAAVE-Other,” in October of 2022.

“[Y]es, in practical terms, it refers to MAGA, though the carefully constructed language is wholly nonpartisan,” an FBI officer told Newsweek.

The article concludes:

This is a top-down ideology, exemplified by Biden himself espousing the baseless yet inflammatory claim that “MAGA Republicans are a threat to the very soul of this country.”

But the real threat is Democrats’ unabashed use of law enforcement agencies to target political dissidents. The FBI, for example, used a document from the left-wing extremist group, Southern Poverty Law Center, to target Catholics for beliefs like opposing abortion and holding orthodox views on sex. The FBI labeled these individuals as “racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists,” as reported by The Daily Signal.

As you read this, there are people in our government making plans to limit any free speech opposing their agenda and using government force to silence those who continue to speak. We need to vote very carefully in November. Any politician at any level who opposes free speech or talks about jailing people who disagree with him needs to lose his election by a wide enough margin so that he can’t cheat.

Clearing The Way For Deportations

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about the Supreme Court’s decision regarding a loophole that allowed foreigners to avoid deportation proceedings by citing a paperwork technicality. The decision was 5-4. That is not surprising.

The article reports:

The case centered on three illegal immigrants: Moris Esmelis Campos-Chaves, an El Salvador native who entered the country illegally in 2005 through Texas; Varinder Singh, a man from India who illegally entered the U.S. in 2016 by “climbing over a fence” in California; and Mexico-native Raul Daniel Mendez-Colín, who illegally entered the U.S. in 2001 in Arizona.

The trio argued that their deportation notices did not meet the criteria for a proper notice as prescribed by the law.

Title 8 USC § 1229 (a) describes two types of notices. The first is a general initial notice to appear that shall include, among other specificities, a “time and place” for the proceeding. The second notice regards a “change or postponement in the time and place of such proceedings.” The Supreme Court previously ruled in 2021 that “this information must be provided in a single document in order to satisfy [the law].”

If an alien does not appear at his removal proceeding, the government has the authority to remove him. If the alien, however, can prove he did not receive the notice, he can seek to have the removal order rescinded.

The Supreme Court was technically hearing three separate cases, as one case stemmed from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that ruled in favor of the government while the other two, from the 9th Circuit, ruled in favor of the illegal immigrants.

The trio were ordered to be deported after they failed to appear at their deportation hearings. But the three illegal immigrants argued that the notices they received were improper since they initially lacked a specific date and time.

The article concludes:

Surely the burden is always on the government when dealing with the rights of citizens. But to claim that noncitizens — in this case people who knowingly broke the law and entered the country illegally — deserve the same right as an American to absolve themselves of the burden of proof is ludicrous.

Millions of illegal immigrants have flooded our border and overwhelmed not only Border Patrol, but the court system. The idea that these “noncitizens” should be allowed to stay in the country if the overwhelmed court system fails to provide a single document notifying them of their hearing is insanity.

The justices in the majority opinion were Justice Alito, Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Thomas, Justice Kavanaugh, and Justice Barrett. The justices in the minority were Justice Brown Jackson, Justice Sotomayor, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kagan.

Coincidence?

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about the arrest of Dr. Eithan Haim. Dr. Haim is a whistleblower who exposed his Houston children’s hospital for secretly continuing a child transgender mutilation program.

The article reports:

A Texas-based general surgeon who exposed his Houston children’s hospital for secretly continuing a child transgender mutilation program faces four felony counts from President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice for speaking out.

Shortly after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott ordered his state’s Department of Family and Protective Services to investigate the transing of children as abuse in 2022, Texas Children’s Hospital — the largest children’s hospital in the U.S. — claimed that it would no longer offer chemical castration and other body-butchering services to pediatric patients.

As 33-year-old whistleblower Dr. Eithan Haim soon discovered, however, at least three Texas Children’s physicians continued to castrate children as young as 11 years old after the program was allegedly halted. The hospital also promoted procedures to cut off the breasts and genitals of physically healthy people.

A report, which Haim claims to have sourced, from the City Journal’s Christopher Rufo detailed these findings. Around that same time in May 2023, the Texas legislature passed a law banning gender experimentation on minors.

One month after that, federal agents made a “highly atypical, unexpected, and aggressive show of force” at Haim’s apartment door. They announced in a letter signed by U.S. Attorney Tina Ansari of the Southern District of Texas that he was being investigated over his presumed role in the leak of “medical records.”

The article concludes:

Don’t you dare try to pray in front of an abortion facility because you believe babies in the womb deserve a chance at life or run over the perversion of a symbol created by God or tell your local school board that parents get the final say in what their child hears, sees, reads, and studies or insist there are only two sexes and they aren’t interchangeable by even the cruelest, mutilative means.

People like Haim who dare to indulge in such anti-regime thoughts and actions can and will be punished beyond the bounds of the law to send a message: your dissidence will not be tolerated here.

This is where we are, folks. I only hope we can make it to November and change the paradigm.

Rejecting Ranked-Choice Voting

Posted on by

Ranked-choice voting is the new tool of those attempting to rig elections. Right now ranked-choice voting is used for elections in Maine and Alaska. It provides a way for a candidate that is not really the first choice of anyone to win an election.

Ballotpedia explains how ranked-choice voting works:

How ranked-choice voting works

Broadly speaking, the ranked-choice voting process unfolds as follows for single-winner elections:

    1. Voters rank the candidates for a given office by preference on their ballots.
    2. If a candidate wins an outright majority of first-preference votes (i.e., 50 percent plus one), he or she will be declared the winner.
    3. If, on the other hand, no candidates win an outright majority of first-preference votes, the candidate with the fewest first-preference votes is eliminated.
    4. All first-preference votes for the failed candidate are eliminated, and second-preference choices on these ballots are then counted as first-preference.
    5. A new tally is conducted to determine whether any candidate has won an outright majority of the ballots.
    6. The process is repeated until a candidate wins a majority of votes cast.

The article includes a chart illustrating the process:

I realize the chart is hard to read, but the bottom line is that the candidate who actually got 22.9 percent of the vote beat the candidate who got 31.3 percent of the vote. It is too easy to skew the results of an election with ranked-choice voting.

On Friday, The Federalist reported:

Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry signed legislation Tuesday prohibiting the use of ranked-choice voting (RCV) in elections.

SB 101 stipulates that a “ranked-choice voting or instant runoff voting method shall not be used in determining the election or nomination of any candidate to any local, state, or federal elective office in this state.” The bill would not apply to “all votes cast by military and overseas voters by special absentee by mail ballots in accordance with the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act.”

SB 101 originally passed the Senate in a 29-9 vote in March. An amended version of the bill was passed by the House (73-23) on May 15 and subsequently concurred with by the Senate (29-8) last week.

SB 101 was sponsored by GOP Sen. Blake Miguez, a member of the Louisiana Freedom Caucus. Miguez also sponsored Louisiana’s recently enacted constitutional amendment banning “Zuckbucks.”

The article concludes:

RCV has also produced election results that contradict the desires of voters. Some of these examples include the aforementioned special congressional election in Alaska and a 2018 Maine congressional contest. The Democrat candidates won both races despite Republican candidates receiving more votes in the first round of voting.

SB 101’s implementation makes Louisiana the 10th state to prohibit the use of RCV in its elections. Other states to prohibit the system this year include Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Oklahoma.

Meanwhile, a constitutional amendment proposal prohibiting the use of RCV in Missouri elections will appear on the state’s fall ballot.

This is one step in the direction of making sure our elections reflect the will of the voters.

 

 

The Obvious Contrast

Posted on by

President Trump gave a speech in the Bronx on Thursday.

Here are a few notes about that speech (from The Federalist):

“I was thrilled to be back in the city I grew up in, the city I spent my life in, the city I HELPED BUILD, and the city WE ALL LOVE — THANK YOU!” Trump said on Truth Social. Trump grew up in Queens but officially moved to Florida in 2019. His effusive praise for New York shows a remarkably positive attitude from the former president, given that the city and state are currently part of a Democrat campaign plot to bankrupt and imprison him.

…“It doesn’t matter whether you’re black or brown or white or whatever the hell color you are — it doesn’t matter. We are all Americans, and we are going to pull together as Americans!” Trump said.

The Federalist also reported:

The contrast with President Joe Biden couldn’t be starker. In three decidedly non-raucous speeches within the last week or so, Biden leaned into racial grievance politics. At a speech at the National Museum of African American History and Culture last Friday, Biden claimed America was beset by “forces trying to deny freedom of opportunity for all Americans.” He claimed there was an “insidious” resistance and an “extreme movement” led by his political opponent to hurt black people. In another disaster of a speech to the NAACP, the White House later had to make 10 corrections to it.

The same day as the NAACP speech, Biden gave the commencement address at Morehouse College, a historically black men’s school in Georgia. In a self-centered speech riddled with some of his familiar falsehoods about his life and family, Biden painted a picture of a racist and evil country.

He said the country was under the “poison of white supremacy” and falsely claimed Americans were trying to put forth a national book ban to harm black people.

It’s “natural to wonder if democracy” actually works, he said. “What is democracy if black men are being killed in the street? What is democracy if a trail of broken promises still leave black — black communities behind? What is democracy if you have to be 10 times better than anyone else to get a fair shot?”

We are not a perfect country. However, I would rather be led by someone who wants to see equal opportunity rather than equal outcome and who doesn’t sow division by claiming we are still playing by 1950’s rules.

Adding To The Circus

Posted on by

Most Americans have figured out at this point that the New York City trial of President Trump is actually a campaign donation to the Biden campaign. No one seems to be quite sure exactly what the President is charged with, and a lot of the testimony doesn’t really seem to have anything to do with the case. Well, now there is a new twist.

On May 13th, The Federalist reported the following:

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s paralegal testified on Friday that his office deleted from their evidence three pages of phone records between convicted liar Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels’ lawyer Keith Davidson without notifying former President Donald Trump’s legal team, according to reports.

Trump attorney Emil Bove questioned paralegal Jaden Jarmel-Schneider on Friday about three pages of 2018 phone records between Davidson and Cohen that Bragg’s office had deleted, according to CNN. Additional phone records between Daniels manager Gina Rodriguez and then-National Enquirer editor Dylan Howard regarding Daniels’ claim about her alleged affair were also deleted, according to The Epoch Times.

The altered call records were submitted into evidence, but Bragg’s office did not tell Trump’s team that three pages were missing, The Epoch Times reported.

The article also notes:

Trump’s defense also made a motion for a mistrial, which Judge Juan Merchan denied. Merchan also kneecapped Trump’s team from defending the former president by limiting what former Federal Election Commission Chairman Bradley Smith could say when testifying about campaign finance-related issues, noted Steve Roberts and Oliver Roberts in The Federalist Friday.

Is there an honest person somewhere in the New York State legal system that will end this travesty?

Is There Anyone Honestly Doing Their Job In Washington?

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about fprmer National Intelligence Council analyst Eric Ciaramella. Eric Ciaramella was the person who triggered the first impeachment of President Trump. It has recently come to light that Mr. Ciaramella was equally aware of the Ukrainian corruption involving the Biden family.

The article reports:

The “whistleblower” who sparked Donald Trump’s first impeachment was deeply involved in the political maneuverings behind Biden-family business schemes in Ukraine that Trump wanted probed, newly obtained emails from former Vice President Joe Biden’s office reveal.

In 2019, then-National Intelligence Council analyst Eric Ciaramella touched off a political firestorm when he anonymously accused Trump of linking military aid for Ukraine to a demand for an investigation into alleged Biden corruption in that country.

But four years earlier, while working as a national security analyst attached to then-Vice President Joe Biden’s office, Ciaramella was a close adviser when Biden threatened to cut off U.S. aid to Ukraine unless it fired its top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, who was investigating Ukraine-based Burisma Holdings. At the time, the corruption-riddled energy giant was paying Biden’s son Hunter millions of dollars.

Those payments — along with other evidence tying Joe Biden to his family’s business dealings — received little attention in 2019 as Ciaramella accused Trump of a corrupt quid pro quo. Neither did subsequent evidence indicating that Hunter Biden’s associates had identified Shokin as a “key target.” These matters are now part of the House impeachment inquiry into President Biden.

It’s interesting that his conscience only required him to object to President Trump’s questioning the corruption in Ukraine.

The article concludes:

A spokeswoman for the House Oversight Committee, which is leading the Biden impeachment inquiry, declined to say whether Ciaramella is on the witness list. “I don’t have anything for you on this at this time,” said House Oversight Communications Director Jessica Collins. However, Comer has publicly described the “whistleblower” impeachment of Trump as a “cover-up” operation for the alleged Biden blackmail scheme in Ukraine involving U.S. aid and the Burisma corruption probe.

What Ciaramella witnessed and what he documented in notes he took during high-level Biden-Ukraine meetings could now be relevant to the active impeachment inquiry of President Biden. The House may have little choice but to hold the kind of hearings the Democrats blocked during the earlier impeachment by keeping Ciaramella’s identity — and his own potential conflict — secret.

As the catalyst for Trump’s impeachment, Ciaramella could now be a reluctant witness for Biden’s.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It provides a lot of insight to the lawfare that President Trump has had to deal with since he walked down the elevator in 2015.

Preparing For The Planned Cheating

Posted on by

There  are a number of people in high places who have admitted that the 2020 election results were seriously flawed. The sudden spike for Biden the morning after the counting was suspended is a statistical anomaly. There are also ballots trucked into Pennsylvania from other states and other strange events. Somehow the Department of Justice chose to overlook these things. Many of these things have not been corrected nor the people responsible held accountable. Therefore, we can expect them to occur again. Get ready.

On Friday, The Federalist reported:

The Associated Press (AP) admitted Friday that this week’s indictment of 18 Arizona Republicans is “part of a campaign” to “deter” Republicans from raising challenges and concerns about the integrity of the 2024 election.

Democratic Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes indicted 18 individuals, 11 of whom she claims acted illegally when they convened as alternate electors to certify the Arizona election in favor of Donald Trump while challenges to the tight election’s initial results were ongoing.

Under the headline “Charges against Trump’s 2020 ‘fake electors’ are expected to deter a repeat this year,” AP’s Nicholas Riccardi wrote the indictment of 18 people “could help shape the landscape of challenges to the 2024 election.”

“The indictment issued Wednesday is part of a campaign to deter a repeat of 2020, when Trump and his Republican allies falsely claimed he won swing states, filed dozens of lawsuits unsuccessfully challenging Democrat Joe Biden’s victory and tried to get Congress to let Trump stay in power,” Riccardi wrote.

The article concludes:

Even more analogous to the alternate Trump electors in 2020 was the situation in Hawaii during the 1960 presidential election between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, as noted by The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland.

The outcome of Hawaii’s election was debated for weeks, and even though the acting governor certified the election in Nixon’s favor in late November 1960, Democrats challenged the result. In December, both Democrat electors for Kennedy and Republican electors for Nixon cast separate votes for their respective candidates. Eventually, a judge determined Kennedy had won the election. As Cleveland noted, the judge “stressed the importance of the Democrat electors having met on Dec. 19, as prescribed by the Electoral Count Act, to cast their ballots in favor of Kennedy,” who ultimately ascended to the White House.

There are many of us who believe that the 1960 election was stolen due to the efforts of Joe Kennedy, but that remains for history to sort out. I expect there to be enough computer manipulation to give Joe Biden a victory in 2024 if he is the candidate. The question is whether or not Americans will believe that he actually won the election. The other missing piece of the puzzle is whether or not the Democrats will somehow put in a different candidate at their convention. Either way, this is going to be an interesting year.

 

Preventing Government Interference In Voting

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about an interesting request from the Department of Justice.

The article reports:

Florida and Missouri refused requests from the Department of Justice (DOJ) to place federal election monitors inside polling locations during the 2022 elections, arguing doing so would be tantamount to federal voter intimidation. The Federalist inquired with other Republican-led states whether they would take a similar stance should the DOJ make the same requests — but not all appeared willing to stand up to Biden’s weaponized agency.

The DOJ announced in 2022 it would send election monitors to 64 jurisdictions across the nation to monitor alleged voter intimidation and threats. Several Florida counties were included in the DOJ’s list, but Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis refused DOJ election monitors to enter polling sites in South Florida, arguing DOJ’s involvement would be “counterproductive” and “potentially undermine confidence in the election.”

“Florida statutes list the people who ‘may enter any polling room or polling place,’” Chief Counsel for the Florida Department of State Brad McVay wrote in a letter. The Department of State is overseen by DeSantis. “Department of Justice personnel are not included on the list.”

Are these election monitors like the New Black Panthers who stood outside the polling places in Philadelphia with billy clubs and were never prosecuted for voter intimidation?

The article concludes:

West Virginia’s secretary of state office said “only election officials, voters appearing to vote, local law enforcement responding to an emergency inside a polling place, and members of the public entering a location for other official business, such as paying property taxes” are permitted inside polling locations.

“No person who is not an election official, voter appearing to vote, or local law enforcement responding to an emergency is permitted inside a polling location.”

The communications director for New Hampshire’s secretary of state told The Federalist, “The area outside of the guard rail in a polling place is open to the public, which includes election monitors.”

“We do not have any laws or policies that exclude the public from observing our elections from public areas in the polling place,” the statement continued.

The following states either provided no response or redirected The Federalist to a different office than the governor’s, such as the secretary of state, which also did not respond by publication time: Alaska, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Nebraska, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming.

The states are in charge of their elections, and it needs to stay that way!