Tag Archives: The Federalist

Why Is (Was) President Trump Such A Threat?

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about recently released documents relating to the RussiaGate controversy.

The article reports:

Nellie Ohr isn’t a new name in the Russiagate saga, but newly released documents from Sen. Chuck Grassley’s office shatter the fiction that she was just a low-level researcher and reveal her as a key conduit between Clinton operatives, the DOJ, and the FBI. The documents also pull back the curtain on a darker truth: an internal black hole FBI system designed not just to restrict access to sensitive Russiagate documents, but to bury them so completely that even FBI agents tasked with finding them wouldn’t know they existed.

According to the newly released document from Sen. Grassley’s office, a previously unseen 43-page FBI analysis from 2019, Nellie Ohr was involved in many aspects of the Russia collusion hoax, including in the drafting of the Steele Dossier. The FBI analysis was initiated after then-Congressman Mark Meadows filed a criminal referral, alleging that Ohr had lied to Congress during her 2018 testimony about her role in producing supposed research that helped trigger the Trump-Russia investigation. Meadows had good reason to be suspicious.

As the analysis concluded, Nellie Ohr repeatedly lied under oath. The FBI found that despite her denials, she contributed directly to the writing of the Steele Dossier. One telling clue was an identical analytical error that appeared both in her research and in the dossier itself. Even more damning, the FBI recovered a deleted “FSB report” from a thumb drive which Fusion owner Simpson had given to Bruce Ohr to give to the FBI in December 2016. That same fictitious report had already appeared as part of the dossier given to the FBI by Steele two months earlier, in October 2016. The FSB report bore all the hallmarks of Nellie Ohr’s work, which likely explains why Simpson, or whoever created the thumb drive, deleted the report just four minutes after uploading it, before eventually giving it to Bruce Ohr to pass to the FBI. What they didn’t realize was that what they tried to hide was still recoverable.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It is interesting to see how much the Washington establishment feared President Trump. He was an outsider with a reputation for being a bull in a china shop and demanding efficiency. The federal government has never been known for efficiency. Considering all of the fraud, waste, and abuse that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has found, they were right to fear President Trump. I just hope that any money that flowed from the treasury back to Congress members will result in severe punishment for those Congress members.

When You Don’t Think Something All The Way Through

Posted on by

This is a picture of a landfill with used windmill turbine blades. Note the size of the tractor in comparison to the size of the blades.

The picture is from an article posted at The Federalist on Friday.

The article reports:

While green advocates commonly use the terms renewable, sustainable, and net zero to describe their efforts, the dirty little secret is that much of the waste from solar panels and wind turbines is ending up in landfills. 

The current amounts of fiberglass, resins, aluminum and other chemicals — not to mention propeller blades from giant wind turbines — pose no threat currently to local town dumps, but this largely ignored problem will become more of a challenge in the years ahead as the 500 million solar panels and the 73,000 wind turbines now operating in the U.S. are decommissioned and replaced.

…“Nobody planned on this, nobody had a plan to get rid of them, nobody planned for closure,” said Dwight Clark, whose company, Solar eWaste Solutions, recycles solar panels. “Nobody thought this through.”

The discussion about what to do with worn-out solar and wind equipment is another topic usually elided in net zero blueprints, which often focus on the claimed benefits of projects while discounting or ignoring the costs. As RealClearInvestigations previously reported regarding the lack of plans for acquiring the massive amounts of land for solar and wind farms needed to achieve net zero, the math can get fuzzy, and the numbers cited most frequently are those rosiest for renewables.

The article concludes:

What’s more, bankruptcies among European companies have begun to mar the renewable wind landscape as surely as the towers, a trend that could continue or accelerate as the Trump administration stops the federal spigot.

“The government has let them off the hook by shaping their policies around climate activism,” Shaffer said. “They’re not putting down escrow money for decommissioning and someone’s going to have to come along and remove them, or we’ll be staring at these rotting towers in the ocean.”

The blades are so big that they are usually broken into three pieces when decommissioned, and the giant chunks of fiberglass, resin, and composite materials go to landfills or warehouses.

Already, horror stories exist of municipalities faced with decommissioning problems. Towns like Sweetwater, Texas, which for many years has been the leading state for wind power, have seen turbine recycling contracts ignored. Global Fiberglass Solutions, one of the companies handling such contracts, did not return requests for comment.

“You can’t reuse turbines, and there are now thousands upon thousands of blades just sitting there in warehouses already,” Isaac said. “It’s an environmental disaster we’re looking at.”

This article was originally published by RealClearInvestigations.

There is nothing environmentally friendly about either wind or solar energy when you look at the bigger picture–how it is manufactured and how it has to be disposed of.

Protecting Women’s Health

Posted on by

This is not an article to debate abortion. I believe abortion is wrong for a number of reasons, but that is not what this article is about. The link between Planned Parenthood and Margaret Sanger is troubling at best. The fact that the majority of abortion clinics are located in low-income neighborhoods is also troubling, but more troubling is the fact that the dangers of the abortion pill are being overlooked.

On Thursday, The Federalist reported:

More than 100 pro-life, pro-women, and pro-family organizations sent a letter to President Donald Trump’s top drug and health agencies asking them to “put the safety of women first” by reinstating the abortion pill safeguards stripped away by the Obama and Biden administrations.

“The danger this drug poses to women and girls is clear,” the letter states.

In the request to U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Martin Makary and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the coalition of concerned advocates warned that data shows “chemical abortion is neither safe nor effective.”

“In short, the FDA’s purpose is to safeguard the health and safety of Americans. In the case of mifepristone, these bedrock principles—necessary not only for the trust of Americans, but also for the safety of women—have been undermined by political whims that obscured the growing evidence of mifepristone’s harm,” the letter continues.

The letter highlighted a new landmark study, which determined that mifepristone, a key part of the drug regimen used to complete more than half of the nation’s abortions, has a rate of life-threatening or serious complications that is at least 22 times higher than what the FDA and the pill’s manufacturer suggest.

Corporate media tried to blackout and undermine the study with smears that it is “bogus,” relies on “bad data,“ and amounts to “junk science” because it was not peer reviewed. The Washington Post even claimed that the discovery of mifepristone’s high injury rate is no big deal because it has a warning label.

Researchers Ryan Anderson and Jamie Bryan Hall told The Federalist they were careful to exclude certain data, including 72 percent of emergency room visit diagnoses, to avoid overstating the risks of the drug. Even with that added caution, they found “11 percent of women who have a chemical abortion suffer a serious adverse event.”

Obviously, pregnancy is a natural reaction to a certain activity. It is a natural function of a woman’s body–it is not a disease that needs to be cured, and it is not simply a lump of cells to be destroyed. When you use a drug to interfere with the body’s natural function, there are going to be consequences. When that drug kills something that is attached to the body, there may be complications.

It’s time that the Food and Drug Administration actually worked for the benefit of Americans rather than for the benefit of drug companies. We have seen the scandals with tobacco, Oxycontin, the Covid-19 vaccine, and now the abortion pill. The agency needs either to go away or to change its paradigm.

Asking The Right Question

Posted on by

One of the cases before the Supreme Court this week dealt with whether or not district judges have the authority to make rulings that impact the entire nations. On Thursday, The Federalist posted an article about a question asked by Justice Thomas.

The article reports:

In Thursday’s hearing, Thomas asked Sauer (U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer) — who represented the Trump administration — about the history of nationwide injunctions and when courts first started issuing such orders. The solicitor general answered by citing Thomas’ concurring opinion in Trump v. Hawaii, a 2018 case that resulted in SCOTUS reversing “a lower court’s decision to uphold a nationwide injunction on Trump’s travel ban,” according to The Federalist’s John Daniel Davidson.

In his concurrence in that case, Thomas noted how nationwide injunctions by lower courts “did not emerge until a century and a half after the founding.” He further observed that these injunctions “appear to be inconsistent with longstanding limits on equitable relief and the power of Article III courts.”

“These injunctions are beginning to take a toll on the federal court system — preventing legal questions from percolating through the federal courts, encouraging forum shopping, and making every case a national emergency for the courts and for the Executive Branch,” Thomas wrote.

In his response to Thomas, Sauer highlighted several examples of universal injunctions that he said began emerging in the early 1960s.

“So we survived until the 1960s without universal injunctions?” asked Thomas, to which Sauer replied, “That’s exactly correct.”

Sauer added, “In fact, those [injunctions] are very limited and very rare even in the 1960s. It really exploded in 2007 in our cert petition in Summers v. Earth Island Institute, we pointed out that the Ninth Circuit had started doing this in a whole bunch of cases involving environmental claims.”

The article concludes:

During one exchange with Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Sauer attempted to answer the Obama appointee’s inquiries regarding executive compliance with injunctions handed down by the judiciary. Instead of permitting Sauer to address her concerns, Sotomayor cut off the solicitor general, prompting Chief Justice John Roberts to interject and subtly suggest that the associate justice allow Sauer to answer.

“Can I hear the rest of his answer?” Roberts asked.

A decision in the case is not expected until the final weeks of the Supreme Court’s current term, which will end in late June-early July.

Nationwide injunctions are simply the latest tool in the effort to prevent President Trump from implementing his agenda. President Trump was elected. He needs to be allowed to run the country.

One Of Many Examples

Posted on by

America First Legal is a 501 nonprofit conservative public interest organization founded in 2021 by Stephen Miller. They have filed numerous lawsuits in an attempt to curb the activities of the “resistance” that is trying to stop the policies the voters asked for when they voted for President Trump. Unfortunately, the lawfare that has been used against President Trump is now being used to halt his agenda.

On Thursday, The Federalist reported:

In March, congressional Republicans formally called for the impeachment of Rhode Island Federal Judge John McConnell Jr. This week, America First Legal (AFL) filed a judicial complaint against him, asking Chief Judge David Barron of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to investigate McConnell.

The AFL complaint describes “apparent conflicts of interest and violations of judicial ethics requirements.” The Federalist has previously detailed some of those concerns.

McConnell presides over the New York v. Trump case in which 22 states and the District of Columbia complained that it was unconstitutional for the Trump administration’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to place a temporary pause on funding, grants, loans, and other financial assistance programs while OMB assessed the programs to make sure taxpayer money was not used to foster diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).

They wanted the money unfettered, no questions asked, and McConnell sided with the states by ordering the administration to keep the money flowing.

McConnell didn’t mention that he is a long-time board member and leader at the $31 million nonprofit Crossroads Rhode Island, which gets over half its funding from federal money, largely filtered through state programs. It is a low-income housing developer that aims to address homelessness and dabbles in real estate.

…That is a conflict of interest, AFL says, and judges, by law, must avoid even the “appearance of impropriety.” But AFL argues that it goes beyond appearance for McConnell. Judges must also recuse themselves from a case when they have any interest that could be affected by their decisions.

Already in 2025, Crossroads has received $4.5 million from the state in money that likely came through the federal government.

Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. With a small amount of research, you can find many relatives of Congressmen and judges whose wives or family members sit on boards or organizations funded by USAID or other government entities. This is part of the corruption that fills the Washington swamp. It needs to stop.

Why Some Imported Products Are Cheaper

Posted on by

There are a lot of reasons for the decline of manufacturing in America. Many of those reasons are related to trade deficits and the desire for cheap goods, but some are related to the cost of doing business in America. For better or worse, corporations in America who choose to operate within the law are required to pay their employees a minimum wage. We can debate over what that wage should be, but the fact of the matter is that a minimum wage exists. Some other countries have no qualms about employing slave labor or paying people very low wages. The Chinese have used Muslims as slave labor for years. So why would a manufacturing company want to locate in America? There are a number of incentives (in addition to the lowering of the corporate tax rate). America has dependable energy and is moving toward lowering the cost of energy. America protects property rights–the state cannot come in and simply take your business away. Innovation is also protected by patent and copyright laws. America represents a stable environment in which to do business. Changing the structure of tariffs also has moral component.

On May 12, The Federalist reported:

…But Trump’s tariffs were not just economic, they were moral. Rather than relying on foreign countries, particularly China, that benefit from abusive labor practices, Trump put America first by deciding the U.S. must stop pretending inexpensive products come with no human cost. 

…During Trump’s first term, his administration repeatedly highlighted human rights abuses abroad, especially in regions like China’s Xinjiang province, where the Chinese Communist Party is running forced labor camps filled with Uyghur Muslims. More than a million Uyghurs and other Muslims have been detained by China and sent to reeducation camps in what is called the “Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Zone” for a range of reasons, including attending religious services, having more than three kids, or texting verses from the Quran. 

China forced many of its religiously and ethnically targeted workforce to toil away in factories, making products distributed and sold across the globe. Muslim slaves in China produce countless store shelves worth of goods, according to the U.S. Department of Labor, such as textiles, hair products, and aluminum, among many other things. They get extremely low pay, can’t contact or visit their families (unless, in some circumstances, they are heavily surveilled by the government), and they can’t leave. 

The article concludes:

Yes, U.S. prices may go up a bit in the short term. Maybe American girls will find two dolls under the Christmas tree instead of 30, as President Trump suggested Sunday on Meet the Press. Maybe U.S. students will sharpen five pencils instead of hoarding 250 like mini office supply tycoons. But maybe underpaid workers in China won’t have to literally slave away making those dolls or pencils for someone else’s kid in a distant Land of the Free. 

President Trump believes temporary price fluctuations are a trade-off worth making in the interim, and he is doing what no other president had the guts to do. There is short-lived pain before lasting progress, and Trump is willing to take the heat now to put human rights and American prosperity over easy profits. 

Another Award Bites The Dust

Posted on by

I am old enough to remember when the Pulitzer Prize meant something. In recent years it has been given to news outlets for being part of the Russia hoax with no intention of returning it after the hoax was revealed. I didn’t think it could go lower, but it has.

On May 6th, The Federalist reported:

On Monday The Washington Post announced that it won a Pulitzer Prize in the breaking news category for its coverage of the July 13, 2024, attempted assassination of Donald Trump.

The “coverage” in question?

That Trump was “taken away after loud noises at rally,” according to a July 13 headline.

According to the Post’s self-congratulatory write-up on its award, WaPo’s “live-updates file” — from which the aforementioned headline came — earned the paper what was once journalism’s top honor, the Pulitzer.

“The Post’s first report from Butler published almost immediately, at 6:21 p.m., in a live-updates file,” the article reads. “The source of the loud noises was not immediately clear.”

But they weren’t just “loud noises.” They were gunshots that ripped through Trump’s ear and killed firefighter and father Corey Comperatore, who died shielding his family from the assassin’s bullet. In fact, the Post knew the gravity of the situation because it published that headline with the featured photo showing blood pouring down the side of Trump’s face.

Yet, the Post still went with — and won an award for — that angle. Two days later, the paper’s Paul Farhi defended the media’s coverage that deliberately downplayed the horrific event, saying media outlets “reported cautiously about what had occurred” since “it wasn’t immediately clear what was unfolding.”

If you saw President Trump being rushed off the stage, then you saw the picture of the President with blood running down his face. How stupid does the Washington Post think Americans are?

Paying The Price For Challenging The Status Quo

Posted on by

Recently, some Pentagon officials were fired for leaking to the press. Another official resigned after allegedly not getting the position he wanted. Then, even more recently, there were calls for the Secretary of Defense to step down. Is it too much to assume that all of these events are related?

On Tuesday, The Federalist reported:

Within hours of one another, The New York Times and Politico dropped hit pieces on Sunday against the Pentagon chief. The pieces were apparently aimed at undermining his leadership of America’s military. While the former used anonymous sources to try and revive the media’s “Signalgate” dud, the latter ran an op-ed from a former Defense Department spokesman — who resigned last week after evidently failing to get the Pentagon job he wanted — alleging “total chaos” at the agency under Hegseth’s direction.

NPR decided to join the pile-on, publishing a piece on Monday containing allegations from an unnamed “U.S. official” that the White House “has begun the process of looking for a new leader at the Pentagon to replace Pete Hegseth.” The White House quickly shot down the claim.

The articles were published on the heels of a major shake-up at the Pentagon last week, which saw the dismissal of several high-level advisers over claims of unauthorized leaking. The officials have since denied the allegations.

The article notes:

Democrats and their buddies in the corporate press spent the entirety of last week fomenting outrage about the Trump administration’s deportation of a Salvadoran national with alleged ties to MS-13 back to El Salvador. Without a drop of shame, these propagandists characterized this alleged wife-beater as just a “Maryland man,” with Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., even going as far as to travel to El Salvador to meet the deported noncitizen.

For a party with record-low favorability ratings among the American people, running to the defense of an illegal alien credibly accused of being affiliated with a deadly gang isn’t exactly great optics. It’s clear Democrats needed a narrative change fast, and their media allies’ new anti-Hegseth blitz represented the perfect off-ramp.

Second, and more important, the D.C. establishment’s continued campaign to oust Hegseth comes from its fervent opposition to the much-needed change he’s bringing to the Pentagon.

For years, the Defense Department has operated within the best interests of the agency’s higher-ups and D.C.’s notorious defense-industrial complex. While high-ranking officials used their coveted positions of influence to advance neo-Marxist ideologies throughout the Pentagon and defense contractors got rich off of America’s military involvement in nonsensical overseas conflicts, rank-and-file service members’ needs were ignored, the country’s military infrastructure crumbled, and the priority of winning wars went out the window.

The article lists the accomplishments of Secretary Hegseth:

Since taking over the reins at the DOD, Hegseth has overseen a noticeable rise in military recruiting, eliminated divisive and destructive DEI ideology, restored standards to military service, scrapped the Pentagon’s immoral and illegal Biden-era abortion policy, ended racist affirmative action policies at U.S. military academies, directed military assets to protect America’s borders, carried out strikes on Houthi terrorists, and more.

Secretary Hegseth is where America needs him to be.

More Lies From The Mainstream Media

Posted on by

Reading the headline on a recent article in The New York Times is not only misleading, it’s inaccurate.

On Monday, The Federalist reported:

The New York Times continues to cover up government corruption, on April 11 hitting FBI Director Kash Patel for suspending analyst Brian Auten nearly a decade after Auten helped Democrats frame Donald Trump as a Russian asset. The NYT headline reads, “F.B.I. Suspends Employee on Patel’s So-Called Enemies List,” not something accurate such as “FBI Suspends Employee Who Illegally Abused Government Power To Protect Democrat Presidential Candidates.”

Predictably, other corporate media outlets took the same corrupt angle, notably an April 12 NBC article by “Fusion Ken” Dilanian and Alexandra Marquez.

Actually, that is not what actually happened. Evidently Brian Auten pushed the use of the Steel dossier as a justification for surveillance of the Trump campaign despite being aware that the dossier was verified. The spying and inappropriate behavior by the Justice Department that surrounded the Trump campaign, Trump transition team, and Trump administration makes Watergate look like child’s play. Those responsible for the illegal surveillance need to be held accountable.

The article concludes:

Yet the same NYT that helped the FBI and other intelligence agencies lie to Americans about Spygate, Biden corruption, and numerous other items of public importance clownishly claims in its April 11 article that “The reasons for the suspension [of Brian Auten] remain unclear.” It further alleges Auten’s suspension is political retaliation rather than the potential beginnings of bringing justice to those who dangerously sought to turn the United States into an intelligence dictatorship.

The reporter bylining this article, Adam Goldman, is a Times national security reporter who “has been a journalist for more than two decades.” He cannot not know all of this background or he wouldn’t have this job, and he still wrote a ridiculously idiotic story claiming Auten’s firing is only explainable by political retribution.

This means Goldman is a paid shill for the world’s worst people, not a reporter of any kind. He’s not just a hack; he has no morals at all. New York Times, delenda est.

Hopefully the firing of Auten is only the beginning of holding people accountable for their misdeeds.

States Need To Protect Children–Not Participate In Harming Them

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist reported that the Colorado legislature has introduced a bill that would consider whether a parent affirmed a child’s sexual identity in child custody cases.

The article reports:

Far-left members of the Colorado state House advanced a bill on Tuesday evening that would direct courts considering child custody cases to favor parents who push radical gender ideology and penalize parents who do not “affirm” their child’s identification as “transgender.”

The bill, introduced last Friday night, passed out of the Colorado House Judiciary Committee in a 7-4 vote on Tuesday and heads to the floor for a second reading on April 4.

“House Bill 1312 is an egregious step towards solidifying Colorado as a Trans Sanctuary State. This bill requires a court to give priority consideration for custody to the parent that affirms a child’s gender dysphoria,” Republican state Rep. Jarvis Caldwell told The Federalist. “The parent who disagrees and tries to get the child actual help is now guilty of committing child abuse, referred [to] in the bill as ‘coercive control.’ The bill also ignores other state[s’] court rulings if one parent brings a child to Colorado for gender-affirming care; directly violating Article IV, Section 1, known as the Full Faith and Credit Clause, of the U.S. Constitution.”

These are children. There are reasons we do not allow children to drive, smoke, or drink until they are adults. Children can’t even get their ears pierced without parental consent in some states until they are 18. Some of the medical procedures involved in the transgender process are irreversible. What do you say to a 20-year old woman who joined the trans movement and transitioned as a 10-year old and now realizes she wants to be a woman and be a mother? Becoming a Trans Sanctuary State means that you are codifying child abuse into law.

America Is Becoming The Last Outpost Of Free Speech

Posted on by

On April 2nd, The Federalist posted an article about the death of free speech in Europe.

The article reports:

It’s been a banner week for authoritarians in Europe, and it’s only Wednesday.

On Monday, a French court banned Marine Le Pen, the leader of the right-wing National Rally party and the frontrunner in the 2027 presidential election, from seeking public office for the next five years. The same day, The Telegraph reported that a toddler had been booted from a U.K. preschool for being insufficiently supportive of LGBT politics. Over the weekend, a British couple revealed they had been arrested based on complaints they expressed in a WhatsApp chat about their daughter’s public school.

This is exactly the kind of crackdown on free expression that Vice President J.D. Vance chastised complicit European leaders about in February, in an address at the Munich Security Conference. This week’s insanity further proves Vance’s dire warnings were right.

The article notes:

France isn’t the first country to bar political opposition candidates from its elections. In December, Romania’s highest court suspended its presidential election, blaming Russian interference. (Where have we heard that one before?) Calin Georgescu, who cast himself as a Trumpy “Romania first” candidate, took the lead in the country’s first round of voting before the court canceled the election and then barred Georgescu from running again.

In Brazil, former President Jair Messias Bolsonaro is going to be put on trial for supposedly staging a coup. The politicians who oppose populist candidates are taking notes on how President Trump has been treated and attempting to duplicate those efforts in their own countries.

The article concludes:

The European Union’s Digital Services Act, which took effect last year, ensures speech that authorities deem “hateful” can be punished across the continent. Trump’s Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr blasted the law as “incompatible” with the “free speech tradition.”

Jailing citizens for the expression of ideas and barring political candidates from elections are two sides of the same authoritarian coin. Neither is compatible with self-government.

“[S]hutting down media, shutting down elections, or shutting people out of the political process,” as Vance told European leaders in February, “is the most surefire way to destroy democracy.”

He was right. Unfortunately, European leaders appear to have taken his statement as an instruction manual instead of an urgent warning.

This censorship would have come to America if Kamala Harris had been elected.

Who Is Supposed To Govern America?

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about the federal judges who seem to think it is their job to run the country.

The article reports:

On March 7, I argued in The Federalist that President Donald Trump should ignore a Supreme Court that would allow lower courts to refuse to uphold the Constitution and instead encroach on executive authority. Recent new encroachments prove my point. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan has blocked the EPA from terminating $14 billion in climate grants awarded by the Biden administration, funds now sitting in a Citibank account. Judge Ana Reyes has ordered the military not to enforce Trump’s ban on trans-identifying service members.

These rulings are not mere disagreements, as Chief Justice John Roberts claimed last week when he rejected Trump’s call to impeach a judge who ruled against his deportation policy. They are direct assaults on the president’s constitutional power. I urged Trump to defy such orders then, and I stand by that now — Trump must confront the courts!

Since Jan. 20, a pattern of politically motivated judicial overreach has emerged. Chutkan’s decision overrides Trump’s executive authority to redirect the EPA, preserving Biden-era spending. Reyes’ ruling interferes with his control over military policy, a domain the Constitution assigns to the president and the president alone. In February, a Rhode Island judge forced the release of frozen federal funds, and multiple courts blocked Trump’s efforts to end funding for so-called “gender-affirming care” for minors.

These single district judges, often appointed by past Democrat administrations, issue nationwide injunctions that halt the president’s agenda. This is not judicial review — it is judicial governance. Roberts’ call for “normal appellate review” ignores the reality: Unelected judges are hijacking executive policies in the name of judicial review, and while appeals wind through the courts, executive action stalls, sometimes for years.

This is simply a continuation of the lawfare that has been directed at President Trump since he declared that he was running for President. It is amazing that the judge who is complaining about flying criminals who are here illegally out of the country never said a word when President Biden was flying illegal immigrants into cities around the country. The courts need to go back to being courts–not try to be governing bodies.

Something Every State Should Do

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Federalist posted an article about ranked-choice voting. This is a method of voting where voters choose three candidates in the order they prefer them.

The article explains it this way:

Often referred to as “rigged-choice voting” by its critics, RCV is a system in which voters rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives more than 50 percent of first-choice votes in the first round of voting, the last-place finisher is eliminated, and his votes are reallocated to the voter’s second-choice candidate. This process continues until one candidate receives a majority of votes.

The article notes that a few more states have outlawed this practice:

West Virginia and Wyoming took major steps toward securing their elections by passing prohibitions on the use of ranked-choice voting (RCV).

On Tuesday, West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey signed into law SB 490, which stipulates that “[n]o state, county, or local elections office may use ranked choice voting or instant runoff voting to conduct an election or nomination of any candidate in this state for any local government, statewide, or federal elective office.” Any “existing or future ordinance” adopted by a local government promoting the use of such a system would be declared void under the measure.

Every state needs to do this.

The Result Of Losing Accountability

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about President Trump’s recent firing of a number of  high-ranking military officers.

An article posted at Military.com in August 2020 reported:

…In April 1945, when we had four five-stars and 13 four-stars…

Wikipedia states:

There are currently 38 active-duty four-star officers in the uniformed services of the United States:

We won a major war with 17 generals. We haven’t won one since.

The article at The Federalist points out:

An “Appeal to Congress” from five former secretaries of defense warns that Donald Trump is firing flag officers, which is unprecedented and an assault on American political norms. This letter is an appalling package of dangerous claims and dumber than a box of rocks. But let’s take a helpful detour before we get into the details.

An essay Thursday from a professor at the U.S. Naval War College makes a similar argument and perfectly represents the moment:

…The president does have the authority to remove these officers; three- and four-star officers hold that rank only while they possess the position of importance and responsibility to which they have been specifically nominated by the president, and they serve at the pleasure of the president. But just because something is legal does not make it wise.

The article summarizes problems with the case made by the generals protesting their firing:

  1. These measures constitute a crisis;
  2. The president does have the authority to remove these officers… and they serve at the pleasure of the president.

It’s a crisis that the president of the United States is exercising authority that he has.

The article at The Federalist concludes:

Ricks (Thomas Ricks, who wrote A History of American Generals) asked three important questions as he noted the sharp trend away from the view that generals can be fired: “How and why did we lose the longstanding practice of relieving generals for failure? Why has accountability declined? And is it connected to the decline in the operational competence of American generals?”

The current president’s decision to fire flag officers isn’t a break with American law and tradition. The “Appeal to Congress” from former secretaries of defense certainly is. The warning about a crisis is the crisis. This dangerous argument needs to be hammered into its grave, quickly and forcefully.

It is time to clean house ALL through the government.

Something To Consider

Posted on by

On February 3rd, The Federalist posted the following headline:

If Presidents Can’t Control Executive Agencies, Elections Are Fake

That seems to be where we were until 2024. We had the situation described by Carroll Quigley in 1966:

“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.”
― Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time

That seems to have abruptly changed in the past two weeks.

The Federalist reports:

Amid the hundreds of substantive executive actions President Donald Trump has taken in his first two weeks back in the White House, perhaps none matter more than his efforts at bureaucracy-busting. That notably includes what Julie Kelly calls a “Friday night massacre” days ago of the Department of Justice’s January 6 prosecutorial staff, which erased 30-40 temporary positions Biden’s DOJ had attempted to make permanent.

Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, “arguably, he has done more in two weeks than Trump’s entire Department of Justice did during his first term,” Kelly said in a Saturday video. So has acting D.C. U.S. Attorney Ed Martin, both while the Senate confirmation of U.S. attorney general nominee Pam Bondi remains pending.

The article concludes

If the executive cannot control his own personnel, agencies, and funding lawfully given to him by a duly elected Congress, elections mean nothing. If the executive is not actually an executor, then the entire bureaucracy is an autocratic, self-licking ice cream cone. It runs the country, not any elected official. And Congress is complicit, because it allows the distribution of opium funds to Afghanistan and queer “safe spaces” in Kenya without ever having to take a public vote on any of this garbage, so long as these taxpayer-provided slush funds slather their retirements and relatives with “nonprofit” and “contractor” lard.

Whatever you want to call unelected bureaucrats and “nonprofit” grifters distributing funds obtained from American citizens against our consent as expressed in elections and line-item votes, it is not a republic, nor a democracy. If Trump can’t fire his own employees and redistribute public funds the executive branch has been given by law, he’s not really the president, and elections are fake.

All this means Trump isn’t “weaponizing” or “politicizing” these agencies. He’s fighting their inherent weaponization. Firing and investigating people who abuse public power, and ending the theft of American labor to fund evil international patronage schemes — that isn’t retribution, it’s justice.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. We live in amazing times. The voters may actually be getting their country back.

Misplaced Priorities

Posted on by

There are a lot of reasons for the inferno that is currently happening in California. Many of them have to do with decisions made by the political leaders in California. The fires were not a surprise to many people in and around the state who had been warning the state to take precautions for a number of years.

On Wednesday, The Federalist posted an article about some of the decisions that have led to the disaster.

The article reports:

The Los Angeles County Fire Department shipped equipment to Ukraine in 2022, and now the Biden administration is working overtime to send the country millions more in handouts as wildfires devastate California.

Perhaps ABC 7 put it best in 2022 when it declared that “all over southern California people are finding ways to keep Ukraine front and center and it’s no different for the Los Angeles County Fire Department.”

The fire department donated its own “surplus” supplies to help a foreign regime and is now caught flat-footed without the capacity to respond to the Pacific Palisades wildfire, which continues to cause deaths and untold damage to thousands of acres of land, including countless homes.

Far-left Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, who is missing in action because she is busy attending an event in yet another foreign country, Ghana, also slashed the Los Angeles Fire Department’s budget by $17.6 million for the 2024-2025 fiscal year. Her initial proposal was $23 million.

…“Governor Gavin Newscum refused to sign the water restoration declaration put before him that would have allowed millions of gallons of water, from excess rain and snow melt from the North, to flow daily into many parts of California, including the areas that are currently burning in a virtually apocalyptic way,” Trump posted on social media. “He wanted to protect an essentially worthless fish called a smelt, by giving it less water (it didn’t work!), but didn’t care about the people of California. Now the ultimate price is being paid. I will demand that this incompetent governor allow beautiful, clean, fresh water to FLOW INTO CALIFORNIA! He is the blame for this. On top of it all, no water for fire hydrants, not firefighting planes. A true disaster!”

The article concludes:

This week, Defense Department officials were preparing another massive giveaway of cash to Ukraine, to be announced Thursday, but were seemingly dejected that they would not be able to send all $4 billion left in the Ukraine coffers to the country before President-elect Donald Trump takes office.

“There will be more than a couple of billion dollars remaining in PDA assistance for future use after Jan. 20,” a Pentagon official said. “What we are focused on right now, especially at the Pentagon, is providing Ukraine with the defense capabilities that we can provide in the time we have, including putting things on contract that will be delivered throughout 2025 and into 2026 in order to build that capability so that Ukraine can be in the strongest possible position if it comes to a negotiation.”

Is anyone negotiating for Western North Carolina and California?

Gradually Changing The Population Of America

Posted on by

On January 3rd, The Federalist posted an article about the number of anchor babies born in America in 2024.

The article reports:

A report by an immigration-centric think tank reveals that nearly 400,000 illegal births of so-called “anchor babies” occurred in the United States in the year 2024.

As reported by Breitbart, the data from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), the total includes 300,000 anchor babies born to illegal aliens, while another 72,000 were born to foreigners in the country as tourists, on worker visas, or on student visas.

The report highlights the ongoing threat of demographic displacement due to the practice of birthright citizenship, a misinterpretation of the Constitution which says that anyone simply born on American soil is to automatically be considered an American citizen. President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to end the practice in his upcoming second term.

…The debate over birthright citizenship comes down to the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which has never been properly argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. The practice of automatic birthright citizenship is only used in a handful of nations, including the U.S. and Canada, whereas most European countries have laws prohibiting such a practice.

Polls have found that either a majority or a plurality of Americans agree with President-elect Trump’s proposal to end birthright citizenship. President-elect Trump and Vice President-elect J.D. Vance are to be sworn into office on January 20th.

Part of the problem with this number is the fact that the U.S. birthrate has been declining for several years and now is at 1.6 births per woman for year 2022, which is considerably below replacement levels. The birthrate in 1960 was 3.5. Americans are not having enough children to continue to grow the country. The solution to this is not to import people who may or may not assimilate, but to make it more economically friendly to have children. The current economic and inflation situation make having children a real economic challenge. The lack of children also has a lot to do with the idea that having things is more important than having children. Children are an expensive 18+ year commitment, and in a rather self-centered, ‘microwave’ society, that is not always an attractive idea.

Exactly What Is The Solution?

Posted on by

America is drowning in debt, and is also drowning in a flood of people who have entered the country illegally without any vetting. The solution to both problems may be the same.

On Monday, The Federalist reported:

In testimony before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, American Immigration Council (AIC) Senior Fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick remarked last week that mass deportations would cost “at a minimum” $316 billion.

The AIC estimates that there is an annual cost of $88 billion to deport one million illegal aliens each year. That breaks down to $7 billion for arrests, $66 billion for detentions, $12.6 billion to go through the legal process, and $2.1 billion to transport deportees out of the country. It works out to $88,000 per deportee, but the council claims this is a “highly conservative estimate.” They conclude there is “a total cost of $967.9 billion over the course of more than a decade.”

…The AIC’s estimates depend on a lot of assumptions. Take their estimated costs of detention, which account for three-quarters of their total estimate. To deport one million people in a year doesn’t mean that you have to have enough detention facilities to house one million people for an entire year. Even if you take AIC’s claim that people will be detained for a little under two months on average, that means you would only have to house about 167,000 at any point in time. Others put the average detention time at around a month, so you only have to build facilities to house 83,000 and, according to AIC, we already have the facilities necessary to house 41,500.

The AIC assumes each facility holds 500 beds, so 83 new facilities will have to be built. With each facility costing $35.91 million, that comes to a cost of $3 billion, a fraction of the $66 billion.

The problem with the AIC numbers is even worse than that because they must rebuild 216 completely new facilities each and every year, but that isn’t necessary as these facilities will last for years.

The article concludes:

In September, the Deputy Director for ICE noted that of the 7.4 million “non-detained” noncitizens with pending cases that were released into the United States, 662,566 have a criminal record. Our estimates indicate that it would cost about $8 billion to arrest and deport these criminals.

By contrast, if these illegal aliens commit a crime resembling the most serious crime that they have previously been convicted or charged with, the victimization costs amount to at least $166.5 billion. The National Institute of Justice estimated the costs to victims by including medical bills, lost wages, social/victim services, property loss/damage, police/fire service costs, and pain and suffering.

The costs of crime are roughly at least 21 times higher than deportation costs.

When the AIC cost estimates are six to seven times larger than the per deportee costs that we have actually observed over the last decade, you would hope people would be skeptical. Unfortunately, the news media was only too willing to uncritically repeat their claims.

Also, how much money are states spending on feeding and housing people who are breaking the law by being here?

Media Propaganda In 2024

Posted on by

On December 30th, The Federalist posted a list of the top ten hoaxes perpetrated by the mainstream media in 2024.

Here is the list:

1. Bloodbath – President Trump’s comments about the auto industry were totally taken out of content

2. War on SCOTUS – Smear attacks from ProPublica and The New York Times

3. Hiding Biden’s Cognitive Decline – When videos showcasing Biden’s senility went viral on social media over the summer, media hacktivists adopted the White House’s baseless claim the clips were “cheap fakes.”

4. Project 2025 – Claims that President Trump would institute Project 2025 if elected were not rooted in facts.

5. What’s a Border Czar? – To hide Harris’ incompetence from voters, left-wing journos pretended Biden never tapped her to oversee the invasion at the U.S.-Mexico border

6. Trump’s Arlington Cemetery Visit – Attacking President Trump for pictures taken when he visited Arlington National Cemetery

7. Show Me the Garbage! – Legacy media propagandists had their hands full in the closing days of the 2024 election after Biden referred to the tens of millions of Americans who support Trump as “garbage.”

8. Trump’s Liz Cheney Comments – In the wake of Biden’s “garbage” smear, the media rushed to distort Trump’s comments to make it appear as if he was calling for Cheney to be executed via firing squad. The disinformation operation represented a clear attempt to smear Trump ahead of the election and boost Harris’ prospects.

9. What Assassination Attempts? – After a longtime Democrat donor allegedly tried to kill the incoming president on his Palm Beach golf course in September, left-wing propagandists at NBC News and The Washington Post downplayed the attempted murder as nothing more than an “incident.”

10. The Atlantic’s Hitler Hysteria – In a last-ditch attempt to salvage Kamala Harris’ flailing presidential bid, The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg — who ran the debunked 2020 “suckers” and losers” smear — published an anonymously sourced October hit piece with claims that Trump said he wanted “the kind of generals that Hitler had.” It also contained accusations that Trump expressed anger about paying for the funeral services of a murdered Army soldier.

All that the media accomplished was to educate Americans on how dishonest the American press can be.

When The Insurrectionists Aren’t Really The Insurrectionists

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Federalist posted an article about some recent information that has come out about January 6th. Why should we still care about January 6th? Because the riot (that’s what it was–a protest that got out of hand) prevented the necessary scrutiny of the votes that were certified on that day (story here). Without that riot, a number of states would have been forced to examine closely their vote totals (some of which were higher than the number of registered voters). As more information comes out about the events of that day, the more obvious it becomes that the problem was not Trump supporters who were simply protesting the vote.

The article at The Federalist reports:

More than two dozen confidential human sources (CHS) were in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021, according to a new report the Justice Department inspector general released on Thursday.

Twenty-six CHSs were present in total, and the inspector general said that 11 of these “entered the restricted area around the Capitol.” At least one informant entered the Capitol amid the riot, and the FBI reimbursed that individual’s travel expenses.

While the Justice Department confirmed the FBI’s deployment of confidential sources at events related to Jan. 6, the inspector general denied “any CHS [was] directed by the FBI to encourage others to commit illegal acts on January 6.”

The presence of FBI informants at the Capitol had long been dismissed by legacy media as another conspiracy of independent media. In December last year, CNN’s Abby Phillip tried to fact-check then-Republican presidential contender Vivek Ramaswamy at a network town hall when the candidate brought up the existence of FBI informants at events related to Jan. 6.

Another conspiracy theory bites the dust.

The article notes:

Senior leadership at the FBI meanwhile repeatedly stonewalled House and Senate lawmakers’ questions related to the FBI’s use of informants on Jan. 6.

“How many FBI agents or confidential informants actively participated in the events of Jan. 6?” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, asked Jill Sanborn, the executive assistant director for the FBI’s National Security Branch, a year after the riot.

“I can’t go into the specifics of sources and methods,” she said.

More recently, FBI Director Christopher Wray, who announced on Wednesday that he will step down next month, refused to answer similar questions.

I don’t really care if anyone goes to jail for this, but I hope voters will pay attention and evaluate this information before they vote in future elections.

Getting Back To Where We Started

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Federalist posted an article by John Eastman talking about how we can get government spending under control.

The article reports:

President Donald Trump is determined to tame the bloated bureaucracy beast. To that end, he has appointed, in spectacular fashion, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to head up a new “Department of Government Efficiency” (“DOGE”). In their pathbreaking op-ed in The Wall Street Journal on Nov. 20, Musk and Ramaswamy laid out their mission: “We won’t just write reports or cut ribbons, We’ll cut costs.”

With the nation now $36 trillion in debt — or about $100,000 for every man, woman, and child in America — that mission is long overdue. But judging from the hyperbolic reaction even the mention of budget cuts has generated in the deep state and among its sycophants in the corporate media, Musk and Ramaswamy will face enormous headwinds.

One of those will undoubtedly be the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Enacted in the wake of President Richard Nixon’s attempt to “drain the swamp” a half century ago, the act requires the president to seek and obtain Congress’s approval before declining to spend appropriated funds — which kinda defeats the purpose of impounding excessive spending that Congress itself enacted. Section 1012 of the act voids any presidential rescission of funding unless Congress votes on a rescission bill within 45 days of being notified of the president’s intent to rescind funds.

Because several court decisions dating back to the 1970s and 1980s ordered presidents to spend appropriated funds unless Congress approved of the impoundment — rejecting claims that the act unconstitutionally intruded on the president’s authority — one might be tempted to think that the act is more like a brick wall than a headwind for DOGE’s mission. But that would be wrong. None of those cases addressed the key constitutional issue, namely, whether the president could refuse to expend funds that exceeded Congress’s authority under the “spending power,” as that power was originally conceived.

The article notes that eliminating spending that serves local interests but not national interests would help.

There is a story about Senator Davy Crockett and something he learned about welfare payments from the government during his time in office. That story can be found at hushmoney.org. I strongly suggest you follow the link and read it.

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.