Tag Archives: The Federalist

What The Democratic Resistance To The Save Act Is Really About

Posted on by
Reply

On Wednesday, The Federalist posted an article about the SAVE Act, which has been stalled in Congress for more than a year (after passing the House of Representatives). Roughly 80 percent of Americans of both parties support the bill, but Congress does not seem to be listening to the voters.

The article reports:

So why has almost every Democrat in the House voted against it, and why is every Democrat in the Senate blocking the bill from reaching the floor for an up or down vote? 

Slotkin (Senator Elissa Slotkin, D-Michigan) explained what we’ve known for some time: Democrats are much more concerned about making it easier to vote than they are about making it hard to cheat. Democrats, as Slotkin unwittingly noted, lose elections when elections are secured. 

“The other thing that we blocked yesterday was the SAVE Act,” the liberal said to a burst of applause. “[The act] would literally allow this administration to rig our democracy so that it would be hard for any Democrat in any state to win an election.”

Why would insuring the legality of every vote make it hard for Democrats to win elections? Insuring that only American citizens vote in American elections is not rigging elections–it is insuring that the votes of legal citizens are not cancelled out by the votes of people who have no right to vote.

The article notes:

The Republican-controlled House has passed the SAVE Act on party-line votes on three separate occasions. The bill, however, has languished in the Senate thanks to a Democrat filibuster and some RINOs refusal to fight it. 

As an X account named Just Call Me Jaded summed it up, “If you vote for the people who think you are too dumb to get an ID you are proving their point.” 

The (false) argument is that married women would not be able to vote because their name was not the same as it was on their birth certificate. That’s really odd. I had no problem changing my name on my driver’s license or my social security account when I got married. I think I could prove who I am to the voter registration people.

This Makes My Head Hurt

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about a recent decision by D.C. District Court Judge Sparkle Sooknanan. The Judge is from Trinidad and Tobago.

The article reports:

D.C. District Court Judge Sparkle Sooknanan, who is from Trinidad and Tobago, blocked the Trump administration from using an updated database called the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system in order to ensure that only American citizens vote in American elections.

Sooknanan became a U.S. citizen in 2009, but seemingly still retains citizenship in Trinidad and Tobago, which she said she would only renounce “if required by law.” As Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., pointed out, “If judges can stop Presidents, they should not also be citizens of foreign nations.”

The judge argued that because the database can sometimes have outdated information — for example, if someone obtained citizenship more recently than the last available information — the whole enterprise of making sure noncitizens cannot vote in American elections should be thrown out.

The article concludes:

Before becoming a federal judge, Sooknanan was a key Biden Justice Department official who pressed to go after parents the Biden administration deemed “domestic terrorists” for being concerned about what their children were learning in public schools across the country.

“Import third-world people, put them in power, watch your country start resembling their homelands,” Greg Bovino, former commander-at-large of the U.S. Border Patrol, said of Sooknanan. “Mass deportations now, before the next 100 million illegals we have here have anchor babies lock it in.”

We already have proof that thousands of people who are not citizens have voted in our elections. If one person were not allowed to vote because of the time of the information, that would be unfortunate, but not as unfortunate as thousands of American voters having their votes cancelled out by illegal votes. We have an integrity problem with our elections. In some places it is worse than in others. This judge should be protecting election integrity–not protecting election fraud.

Saving Taxpayer Money By Educating Doctors

Posted on by

On June 15th, The Federalist posted an article about Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s push to prioritize nutrition education in medical training. You really are what you eat, and the American diet is anything but healthy.

The article reports:

Under the leadership of Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., nutrition education will now be prioritized in U.S. medical organizations through a new initiative to equip doctors to tackle America’s burgeoning health crisis. This joint effort of both the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education aims to raise the standards of nutritional education for a variety of the nation’s foremost medical organizations, including medical schools and hospitals. In addition to the 54 medical schools that have previously vowed to implement a minimum of 40 hours of nutrition education, 19 more schools voluntarily agreed to do so, signing the Nutrition Education Pledge, HHS announced Monday. This growing initiative will affect more than 52,000 medical students in 36 states.

Kennedy has spearheaded the initiative as a way to help combat America’s chronic disease crisis. America has a comparatively high rate of chronic illness, with conditions such as obesity, diabetes, and heart disease ranking among some of the nation’s leading causes of death. Many of these diseases are caused by a combination of factors, such as lifestyle choices and poor exercise. However, one of the major factors leading to chronic illness is poor nutrition.

“Poor diets are the primary driver of America’s chronic disease epidemic,” Kennedy stated Monday. “Today’s announcement reflects the shifting landscape toward placing nutrition and prevention at the core of patient health.”

The article notes:

Battling chronic disease won’t just save HHS money; it will also save on the entire nation’s medical costs, giving much needed relief to taxpayers. America spends about $5.3 trillion on health care per year. From the budget, more than $4.5 trillion goes to chronic diseases and mental health care. Cardiovascular diseases directly cost America’s healthcare system $223.2 billion annually, with that number slated to hit $2 trillion within the next 25 years.

It is going to be interesting to watch this play out. Secretary Kennedy is right, but Americans are addicted to fast food and unhealthy diets. It will be interesting to see if that addiction can be broken.

The Story Just Keeps Falling Apart

Posted on by

This week E. Jean Carroll was in the news again. She is the person who has accused President Trump of raping her in a department store dressing room although she can’t remember when. She claims the incident took place in late 1995 or early 1996. A defendant has no way of coming up with an alibi if the supposed victim can’t remember when the crime took place. If she could remember the date, the President could show the court his planner from that date. I suspect that is the reason she can’t remember the date.I am amazed that this case even made it to court. Why were there no store clerks or people near the dressing room that heard the commotion?

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about the case.

Here are a few highlights:

CNN reported that the investigation is centered on whether Carroll committed perjury. Prosecutors, CNN said, are focusing on a deposition Carroll provided in 2022 in which she said she received no outside funding for her lawsuit. Despite her testimony, it turns out billionaire Democrat donor Reid Hoffman paid some of her legal fees and expenses.

…Carroll accused Trump of raping her in a Bergdorf Goodman and then sued him for defamation when he denied it in 2019. Carroll notably declined to press criminal charges against Trump because, according to her, she “would find it disrespectful to the women who are down on the border who are being raped around the clock.” Carroll then filed a second lawsuit in 2022 after the state of New York temporarily changed a statute of limitations law.

…Ultimately, Trump was held liable for merely denying the allegation. After Carroll’s allegations went public in 2019, Trump released a statement in which he categorically denied even meeting Carroll.

“She is trying to sell a new book; that should indicate her motivation,” Trump said. “It should be sold in the fiction section. Shame on those who make up false stories of assault to try to get publicity for themselves or sell a book or carry out a political agenda.”

The article concludes:

To recap: A known anti-Trump Democrat mega-donor financed a lawsuit built on allegations by a woman who couldn’t remember the year of the purported assault, and a state changed its laws to facilitate the lawfare — all to assassinate the character of a sitting president who was punished for maintaining his innocence.

I hope at some point this case winds up in a court where the judge has some common sense and throws the whole thing out.

Fair And Needed

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Federalist posted an article about President Trump’s proposed 1776 Fund, which some Congressmen and some liberal judges are trying to block.

The article reports:

The Trump v. IRS settlement announced May 18 created a $1.776 billion compensation pool — already dubbed the “1776 Fund” — to provide redress for victims of the political weaponization of our government institutions. Drawn from the U.S. Treasury’s permanent Judgment Fund, the money will compensate Americans who believe they were targeted for political, personal, or ideological reasons. The fund is open to any U.S. person or entity with no partisan test, though President Trump, his sons, and the Trump Organization are explicitly barred from payouts. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has described it as a mechanism to hear claims from those subjected to “lawfare and weaponization” by the prior administration.

As the fund is being discussed, many of us are starting to realize the depth and scope of the Biden administration’s use of the government to destroy its political opponents.

The article notes:

The scale of the targeting is now public. The Senate Judiciary Committee has revealed that in then-Special Counsel Jack Smith’s “Arctic Frost” operation 197 secret subpoenas were issued to 34 individuals and 163 businesses seeking records on at least 430 Republican individuals and entities. Targets included election integrity analysts, private citizens, elected officials, and attorneys. Many subpoenas carried nondisclosure and gag orders, so victims often learned years later they had been placed under surveillance.  

…The roughly 430 Republican individuals and entities targeted in the Arctic Frost operation were placed under secret subpoenas and gag orders without their knowledge, often only learning years later that they had been swept up in the dragnet. Parallel civil litigation often amplified the toll. Defendants in cases like Fair Fight v. True the Vote and parallel voter-challenge lawsuits in Pennsylvania and Michigan faced massive defense costs and uncertainty while the Biden DOJ actively supported the opposing side. Those harms — financial, professional, and physical — cannot be dismissed as collateral damage. They are the predictable result of weaponizing government levers of power against lawful activity.

The article concludes:

Democrats established and defended the rules that allowed expansive use of the Judgment Fund. Republicans are now using those same rules to compensate victims of the weaponization those rules enabled.

Restitution today is necessary. Prevention tomorrow is imperative. Government power must never again be turned on lawful private citizens doing the work of democracy — challenging voter rolls, researching election integrity, or petitioning officials for redress of grievances. Only then will the machinery of justice serve all Americans equally.

Equal justice under the law used to be an American principle. It needs to be re-established.

Learning From Past Mistakes

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about the work requirements added to Medicaid in the One Big Beautiful Bill.

The article reports:

President Ronald Reagan famously embraced the Russian proverb “Trust, but verify” during negotiations with the Soviet Union over nuclear arms reductions. Reagan understood that when there are incentives to cheat, verification is essential.

That same principle applies to government welfare programs, including the forthcoming Medicaid work requirements. In the Working Families Tax Cut Act — also known as the One Big Beautiful Bill — Congress required able-bodied, working-age adults to work, volunteer, or participate in job training to receive Medicaid unless they qualify for an exemption. More than 80 percent of Americans support such requirements.

…Unfortunately, some states are gearing up to permit applicants (or intermediaries enrolling them on their behalf) to self-attest to meeting the requirements or qualifying for an exemption. These states would permit applicants to simply check a box without verification.

Failing to verify applicant information has led to widespread improper enrollment and fraud in other programs. The massive improper enrollment in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) proves that when the government weakens verification standards, including through self-attestation, improper enrollment rises dramatically.

The article concludes:

This year, the Trump administration has rightly targeted fraud and reversed Biden policies that enabled improper ACA enrollment to skyrocket. Allowing self-attestation in Medicaid would return us to the Biden administration’s policy failures. The American people overwhelmingly support commonsense work requirements for able-bodied adults receiving welfare benefits, not policies that can be so easily gamed. When spending other people’s money on other people, verification — not blind trust — is the prudent policy.

It does no good to pass a law with a work requirement if you don’t enforce the work requirement. Not verifying the work requirement will simply open the door for more of the massive fraud that has been uncovered by Vice-President J.D. Vance’s anti-fraud task force.

The Warning In The Vote

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Federalist posted an article about the results of the Indiana primary elections. Five of the seven state senators who opposed the redistricting of the state lost in their primary elections. One election was too close to call, and one of the senators who opposed redistricting won his election. The voters supported the candidates President Trump endorsed–not the establishment Republicans. This should be a lesson to all of the Republicans in the Senate–listen to the people–pass the SAVE Act.

The Federalist reports:

Indiana conservatives just sent a message to RINOs everywhere: FAFO. These voters are mad as hell and they’re not going to vote for spineless Republicans anymore.

Hopefully GOP senators performing in the failure theater production of “debating” the SAVE America Act heard Indiana’s message loud and clear.

Most of the Republican Indiana state Senate candidates endorsed by President Donald Trump won primary races Tuesday against incumbents who voted with Democrats to stop a congressional redistricting bill. As of late Tuesday evening, The New York Times election results showed challengers picked up at least five of the seven state Senate seats targeted by Trump and allied conservatives groups. Republican primary voters rejected politicians standing on “fairness” principles while Democrats employ every weapon in their political arsenal to wrest back control of the U.S. House. 

Indiana Sen. Jim Banks helped drive the campaign to oust the incumbents who helped kill a mid-decade redrawing of the red state’s congressional maps. The redistricting plan, urged by Trump, would have given Republicans two additional seats in a House of Representatives with a razor-thin GOP majority.

“Everyone in Indiana politics should have learned an important lesson today: President Trump is the single most popular Republican among Hoosier voters,” Banks said in a statement. “Indiana is a conservative state, and we deserve conservatives in our State Senate who have a pulse on Republican voters.” 

Ideally, the makeup of the Congressional delegation from each state should reflect the makeup of the voters in that state. Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the case. As much as I don’t like the Republicans redistricting to gain U.S. House seats, I don’t like what the Democrats have done with U.S. House districts in the past either. Why do the six New England states have no Republicans in the U.S. House? That is unfair. Until the Democrats stop creating districts in odd shapes to get Democrats elected, I am unwilling to condemn the Republicans for doing the same thing.

Sometimes A Big Tent Is Nothing More Than A Site For A Brawl

Posted on by

Establishment Republicans are always expressing their desire for a ‘big tent’ where everyone is welcome. Maybe they should consider who they are inviting in. Some of the Republicans are so offended by the fact that President Trump is President (he is not one of their club) that they are willing to throw the country to the wolves to get him out of office. We all understand that if the Democrats win Congress in the mid-term elections, President Trump will be impeached and all of the positive things that he has done for the average American will go away. Congress has not passed into law most of his Executive Orders, and those Orders will go away–energy independence will be one of them. But the Establishment Republicans don’t care about that, and they are working hard to make sure they lose the mid-term elections.

On Wednesday, The Federalist reported:

You almost have to admire how far some Republicans are willing to go to lose the 2026 midterms — and ultimately, the country.

Throughout their recent two-week vacation, several GOP lawmakers have been making the media rounds to tout “bipartisan” legislation they claim will finally solve America’s broken immigration system. There’s just one teensy-weensy important detail that somehow gets brushed aside: The bill would allow millions of illegal aliens to continue living in the United States.

Sponsored by Reps. Maria Elvira Salazar, R-Fla., Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., and other lawmakers, the so-called DIGNIDAD (Dignity) Act permits “certain long-term undocumented immigrants to earn legal status, without amnesty or a path to citizenship” so that foreign nationals who broke U.S. immigration law can have an “opportunity,” according to a Salazar press release. The measure would notably create a “Dignity Program,” which the Florida congresswoman’s office described as a “7-year earned legal status program allowing undocumented immigrants to live and work legally, with renewable status based on good conduct and restitution.”

The article notes:

Such a proposal isn’t just asinine because it cripples America’s sovereignty and long-term survival as a nation. It’s also incredibly moronic from a political standpoint.

Aside from the “One Big Beautiful Bill” that they never effectively sold to voters, Republicans have virtually nothing to show for their congressional majorities. The Senate GOP still hasn’t passed the SAVE America Act, rogue judges continue to go unpunished, many of Trump’s executive orders haven’t been codified into law, and other conservative priorities remain untouched.

So, exactly what are voters — including those who identify as Republicans — supposed to vote for this fall? Amnesty? More GOP obstruction of the conservative policies they were promised but are now told aren’t possible with Republican majorities?

The Grand Old Party doesn’t have an answer — and it shows.

I don’t know if the Republicans are stupid or just want to lose.

This Could Become A Dangerous Trend

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Federalist posted an article about Finland’s standards for ‘hate speech.’

The article reports:

In a decision released this morning, Finland’s supreme court voted 3-2 to convict a bishop and a member of parliament for publishing a pamphlet explaining Christian theology about sexual differences. The decision could tacitly ban orthodox Christianity in Finland by banning Christians from speaking about what the Bible clearly says.

Bishop Juhana Pohjola and Member of Parliament Paivi Rasanen face thousands of euros in fines and their challenged Christian speech “removed from public access and destroyed,” the court ordered, unless they successfully appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. If they appeal, the case could affect speech and conscience rights worldwide.

…The ruling is the latest in a growing pattern of anti-Christian speech repression spreading across formerly Christian European countries. England now jails more people per day for alleged speech crimes than Vladimir Putin’s Russia, according to a former U.S. ambassador, even imprisoning and prosecuting people for praying silently on public property.

The article concludes:

Last year, the Trump State Department tweeted that the prosecution of Rasanen was “baseless.” In 2021, members of Congress asked the U.S. Commission on International Human Rights to sanction Finland over this case, and human rights advocates asked the U.S. Treasury secretary to sanction Finland for violating human rights with this prosecution.

President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance have also publicly rebuked Europe over its increasing speech repression, but those policies have not abated.

The right to free speech in Europe has been eroding for a some time. In October 2018, I posted an article about Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff who was charged with hate speech for teaching a course about Mohammad that included identifying him as a pedophile (story here).

The policy of denying free speech will come to America unless we are alert enough to stop it. The concept of ‘hate speech’ is not compatible with the concept of free speech. The main problem is that ‘hate speech’ is in the eye of the beholder. What Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff said was true, but that did not stop it from being considered hate speech.

The Need For Orange Jumpsuits

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Federalist posted an article about Robert Mueller and Russiagate. Because of the declassification of records from that time period, we now know that Russiagate was simply a plan to kneecap the first Trump administration. We can also observe that although many laws were broken, no one has been held accountable. (for further information on the corruption of Robert Mueller, see here. Some of us in Massachusetts remember him well.)

The Federalist reports:

The recent passing of former FBI Director and Special Counsel Robert Mueller has spawned predictably fawning coverage from America’s broken media. But lost in this fetish fest is any real acknowledgement of the incalculable damage Mueller’s invasive Trump-Russia collusion scam did to the country — and more importantly, how none of its key players faced any accountability for it.

To better understand the egregiousness of it all requires delving back into the scheme’s origins.

At the time, a 2016 presidential matchup between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and real estate billionaire Donald Trump may have seemed a bit unorthodox when compared to the typical national elections Americans were accustomed to. Little did the public realize that this sentiment extended far beyond normal politics, and that the prospects of a Trump presidency were something the D.C. establishment was not willing to tolerate — not Clinton herself, and certainly not the U.S. intel apparatus.

The article concludes:

America cannot successfully move past the Russia collusion hoax until its founders and lawbreaking participants receive the legal reckoning they deserve. They and their antics did indescribable harm to the republic and the country’s democratic process that we’re still grappling with years later.

Mueller may be gone, but the destruction he left in his wake is beyond measure. Americans are right to demand justice for what he and his team did to the country. And until they get it, they have no reason to waiver in that desire.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. Unless the people who willingly broke laws and took away innocent people’s civil rights are brought to justice, equal justice under the law will not truly exist in America.

The Camel’s Nose Is Under The Tent

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about some of the changes Mayor Mamdani is making to New York City law.

The article reports:

At New York City’s Interfaith Breakfast last week, Mayor Zohran Mamdani did not merely criticize federal immigration enforcement — he reframed it as a religious and moral transgression. Invoking the Islamic doctrine of hijra, he urged New Yorkers to “stand alongside the stranger” in permanent, unqualified solidarity, elevating prophetic example above constitutional sovereignty. 

“Islam [is] a religion built upon a narrative of migration,” Mamdani declared. “The story of the Hijra reminds us that Prophet Muhammad … was a stranger too, who fled Mecca and was welcomed in Medina.” He then universalized the narrative into a binding civic command: “The obligation is upon us all … to look out for the stranger.” 

I have no problem looking out for the stranger who came to America legally and has committed any crimes.

The article notes:

In this framework, federal enforcement is not lawful authority but cruelty. Immigration officers become “masked agents, paid by our own tax dollars,” who “violate the Constitution and visit terror upon our neighbors.”  

“If these are not attacks upon the stranger among us, what is?” Mamdani asked. “There is no reforming something so rotten and base.” 

This is an inversion of moral authority. 

Mass migration is framed as a moral and civilizational imperative, demanding compassion and openness, while serious pushback on enforcement is recast as intolerant, unjust, or even xenophobic. This framing mirrors elements of the Muslim Brotherhood’s doctrine of tamkeen (institutional entrenchment) outlined in strategic writings such as the 1991 Explanatory Memorandum and the 1982 Project, which describe a phased civilizational strategy built on population presence, parallel institutions, resistance to full assimilation, and long-term influence over policy, law, and public narrative.  

The article concludes:

Mamdani’s speech illustrates that process in motion. The same pattern produced Europe’s parallel societies and no-go zones, where enforcement became politically untouchable. It is now visible in American cities, where sanctuary expansion renders borders symbolic and law selectively optional.

This is not compassion. It is the systematic replacement of citizenship with dependency, sovereignty with moral coercion, and a nation bound by law with tribes bound by grievance — abandoning the Naturalization Oath’s demand for “true faith and allegiance” to the Constitution.

Someone who supports Sharia Law cannot have an allegiance to the U.S. Constitution–the two legal codes conflict. There is also the issue of taqiyya which essentially says that is is permissible under Islam to lie to an infidel in order to advance the cause of Islam.

Wake up, America!

Missing?

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about a recent problem with the voter fraud investigation in Fulton County, Georgia.

The article reports:

A 2020 election scandal in Fulton County, Georgia’s most populous county, continues to grow with new details revealed in a State Election Board (SEB) meeting last Wednesday — and now, a week later, with an FBI raid seeking election documents from the county. 

Fulton County was notoriously plagued with issues like long lines and voting machine malfunctions in the 2020 primary election, problems The New York Times described as “a full-scale meltdown.” The problems continued through November’s Election Day and beyond, prompting concerns about votes being counted without proper supervision, among other things. The county’s repeated failures in 2020 so degraded trust in Fulton County’s ability to administer elections that the election director was forced to resign.

Now, members of the State Election Board have raised new concerns about the county’s administration of the 2020 election, revealing in last week’s meeting that the “tapes” used to verify that ballot counters started their counts at zero may be missing.

When a ballot scanner is used to count ballots, election officials must start the process by printing and signing a “zero tape,” which confirms the count started at zero. After counting ballots on the ballot scanner, officials must print and sign a closing tape, which confirms the final vote tally from that machine. In December, an attorney for Fulton County admitted that the county failed to sign off on more than 100 “tabulator tapes” — equivalent to about 315,000 votes — from early voting in the 2020 election. That admission was prompted by a complaint that was investigated by Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office.

The article concludes:

State law only requires the secretary of state to retain election documents for 24 months past the election, and local governments only retain “records related to the process of computing, tallying, and canvassing the vote” for two years, according to the Georgia Archives.

But, as Johnston noted in last week’s meeting, the complaint was submitted in early 2022, “well within the 24-month period.”

On Wednesday, a week after the SEB meeting, the FBI executed a search warrant at the Fulton County election office. According to election attorney Cleta Mitchell, the search warrant included “zero tapes” from the 2020 general election.

Meanwhile, the board is left with few answers. It’s unclear whether the tapes ever made it out of Fulton County, if they were signed, or even if they exist at all. If they do exist, they may have been handled properly but thrown away in the years since 2020. They could even still be filed away somewhere, where investigators have been unable to track them down. No one seems able to provide a paper trail.

The people responsible for the fraud probably figured that time would run out before their activities were discovered. Obviously, that is not the case. Hopefully, there will be enough trials and convictions to discourage anyone else from attempting to steal an election.

A Refusal To Admit The Obvious

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Federalist posted an article about the ongoing discussion of the integrity of the 2020 election in Fulton County, Georgia.

The article reports:

At the center of that effort in Georgia was Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. He repeatedly assured voters there were no problems — no violations, no misconduct, nothing to see — publicly stating there was “no sign of widespread fraud” during Georgia’s election process, refuting claims of irregularities in a letter to Congress, and again asserting that officials had not found systemic fraud.

…But just last month, Fulton County — Georgia’s most populous county — admitted that approximately 315,000 early ballots in the 2020 election were counted without the required poll worker signatures, a clear and direct violation of state regulations. County officials have further acknowledged they do not dispute that those ballots were improperly certified.

The article notes that Secretary of State Raffensperger has not cooperated with the investigation:

In December, the U.S. Department of Justice sued Georgia, seeking access to voter registration records amid concerns about whether the state is complying with federal election laws meant to prevent voter fraud and ensure only lawful votes are counted. According to the Justice Department, those records are necessary to evaluate compliance with the National Voter Registration Act, the Help America Vote Act, and the Civil Rights Act of 1960.

Raffensperger has refused to provide the records, arguing that doing so would require releasing sensitive personal information — a claim the Justice Department disputes, noting that federal law permits review of voter rolls with appropriate safeguards in place.

The article concludes:

Federal officials have been explicit about the consequences of refusing transparency. “At this Department of Justice, we will not permit states to jeopardize the integrity and effectiveness of elections by refusing to abide by our federal election laws. If states will not fulfill their duty to protect the integrity of the ballot, we will,” said Dhillon.

President Trump was right to demand answers. The American people were right to ask questions. And Georgia deserves accountability — which Raffensperger must finally face.

It seems like almost a give that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. We can’t undo that. The question is whether or not anyone will ever be held accountable.

Your Tax Dollars At Work

Posted on by

The level of fraud in government programs is astonishing. Every day we read about another scandal involving the government’s ‘safety net.’ Many of us are wondering how much of our tax dollars are funding fraud rather than a ‘safety net.’

On Wednesday, The Federalist reported:

The ongoing scandal regarding Minnesota’s welfare-industrial complex demonstrates the extent to which government-created graft has “hidden” in front of the nation’s noses for not just years but decades. Another report released just before Christmas illustrates the depths of those fraudulent payments.

Last summer, I wrote here about a report by Louisiana’s legislative auditor highlighting nearly $10 million in Medicaid payments that state made on behalf of deceased beneficiaries between February 2019 and last March. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the most recent report shows that this type of government waste and abuse — or, depending on one’s perspective, fraud by insurance companies, who receive payments for “covering” dead people — occurs with regularity nationwide.

The report came from the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Inspector General (OIG) and covered payments made to Medicaid managed care organizations from July 2021 through June 2022. The report arises because in most (but not all) cases, state Medicaid agencies do not directly administer benefits (i.e., pay doctors and hospitals who treat beneficiaries). Instead, they contract with managed care organizations and pay insurers a capitated (i.e., per-person) amount every month for that coverage. That dynamic represents a clear opportunity for fraud: If no one reports the beneficiary as deceased, the insurer will get paid to “cover” that person indefinitely.

The article notes:

A footnote in the report demonstrated how this type of abuse is a choice that states consciously make. OIG noted that “Connecticut, Maine, Mississippi, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Wyoming had no capitation payments with a service date after the month of the enrollee’s death.” In other words, these six states all imposed proper safeguards to ensure that Medicaid dollars did not go to dead beneficiaries, while 35 other states did not, leading to the improper payments. (The remaining states did not have significant amounts of capitated payments to managed care organizations and therefore would not face this type of fraud.)

It’s time for all states to put in place laws that protect taxpayer money. The government should not be paying money to dead people!

Holding The Line

Posted on by

On January 12th, The Federalist posted an article about the reaction to President Trump’s statement about being flexible about using federal funds to fund abortion. This may be an issue where Republicans actually demonstrate having a spine.

The article reports:

Less than one week after President Donald Trump appeared to encourage congressional Republicans to put the annually passed congressional restriction on taxpayer-funded abortion on the chopping block, the White House is walking back his comments and members of the Senate GOP who looked like they might cave with Trump are committing to holding the line on the Hyde Amendment.

For nearly 50 years, the legislative provision barring taxpayer-funded elective abortions, including through federal healthcare programs such as Medicaid, was a nonnegotiable for Republicans who claim to belong to the pro-life party. Congress’ latest fight over whether to extend Obamacare, however, put the Hyde Amendment in the line of fire from both Democrats, who have had it out for Hyde for years, and the GOP alike.

The first call from inside the house came last week, when Trump urged GOP representatives to “be a little flexible on Hyde.”

The article concludes:

The Federalist also asked the White House early last week to clarify Trump’s comments and position on the Hyde Amendment, especially considering his historic support for making it permanent, but did not receive a response. On Friday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt appeared to walk back Trump’s declaration. She told The Daily Signal that “The president did not change the administration’s policy” on prohibiting taxpayer-funded abortion and pointed to his 2024 executive order demanding Hyde Amendment enforcement.

“What the president was saying yesterday was Republicans, and frankly Democrats, too, need to show a little bit more flexibility so we can actually get something done with respect to the issue of health care,” Leavitt added.

Using federal funds to fund abortion is a bad idea. First of all, it devalues life. We have enough scientific evidence now to know that a baby is a baby when it is conceived–it is not a blob of tissue, it is not any other animal–it is a baby. I don’t think we will ever reach a point where abortion is illegal in all fifty states, but we can stop the federal government from funding it.

I Told You So Just Doesn’t Cut It

Posted on by

This post is based on an article posted at The Federalist on December 23. Obviously, I am a bit late to the game, but it is an important article.

The article reports:

Fulton County, Georgia, recently made an admission that should have commanded national attention. During a hearing before the Georgia State Election Board, county officials acknowledged that approximately 315,000 early ballots cast in the 2020 presidential election were unlawfully certified yet were nonetheless included in Georgia’s final, official results, in a race Joe Biden was officially declared to have won by just 11,779 votes.

The admission arose from a challenge filed by David Cross, an election integrity activist, who alleged that Fulton County violated Georgia election law in its handling of early voting. Under state statute, each ballot scanner is required to produce tabulation tapes at the close of voting, and poll workers must sign those tapes to certify the reported totals. These signed tapes are not merely an administrative safeguard. They are central to determining whether the vote count itself is legitimate.

So I guess that phone call from President Trump to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger was justified! However, that is not the point.

The article concludes:

Cross, whose persistence brought these revelations to light, has asked the State Election Board to decertify Fulton County’s 2020 advanced voting results for the historical record. His request is not aimed at changing past outcomes. We cannot undo the fact that for four years Joe Biden was president. But an official acknowledgment that Fulton County’s vote certification, and by extension the Georgia outcome, was invalid would place a permanent mark on the deliberate misconduct of those responsible and the institutional failure that enabled it, while reinforcing the principle that election law is not optional.

If the State Election Board declines to act, this episode may quietly fade from memory, leaving nothing to prevent it from happening again. Democracies do not fail when rules are broken. They fail when no one is held accountable.

Let’s put the people in jail who were responsible for this fraud, and let’s have an honest election this year and in 2028!

The Truth Comes Out

Posted on by

On December 23, The Federalist posted an article about the corruption in Georgia during the 2020 election.

The article reports:

Fulton County, Georgia, recently made an admission that should have commanded national attention. During a hearing before the Georgia State Election Board, county officials acknowledged that approximately 315,000 early ballots cast in the 2020 presidential election were unlawfully certified yet were nonetheless included in Georgia’s final, official results, in a race Joe Biden was officially declared to have won by just 11,779 votes.

The admission arose from a challenge filed by David Cross, an election integrity activist, who alleged that Fulton County violated Georgia election law in its handling of early voting. Under state statute, each ballot scanner is required to produce tabulation tapes at the close of voting, and poll workers must sign those tapes to certify the reported totals. These signed tapes are not merely an administrative safeguard. They are central to determining whether the vote count itself is legitimate.

I am not saying that all of the questionable ballots were case for Joe Biden, but isn’t it interesting that it took over 300,000 questionable votes to defeat President Trump.

The article notes:

On Jan. 2, 2021, Trump called Raffensperger (Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger) to discuss the irregularities in Fulton County, mentioning the county no fewer than 14 times during the call and stating flatly that it was “totally corrupt.” Trump cited estimates of “250 to 300,000 ballots” that had been “dropped mysteriously into the rolls,” repeatedly noting that Fulton County had never been “checked.” In light of what has now been formally admitted, those claims read less like hyperbole and more like an uncannily accurate description of what actually occurred.

Rather than taking those concerns seriously as questions of whether the law had actually been followed, Raffensperger dismissed them outright, insisting that “we do have an accurate election.” What he did not disclose was that his chief of staff, Jordan Fuchs, was secretly recording the conversation in violation of the law, as The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway reported last year. Immediately after the call, Fuchs leaked the tape to The Washington Post, where, the very next day, it was selectively framed to create the now-infamous narrative that Trump had pressured Raffensperger to “find 11,780 votes.”

The article concludes:

If the State Election Board declines to act, this episode may quietly fade from memory, leaving nothing to prevent it from happening again. Democracies do not fail when rules are broken. They fail when no one is held accountable.

The state needs to make restitution to all of the people who were financially destroyed by the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) case brought against the people who challenged the integrity of the Georgia election.

Should We Forgive The Student Loans Of People Who Don’t Exist?

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about another scandal in Minnesota involving government funds.

The article reports:

In Minnesota, home to the largest population of Somali immigrants in the U.S. and the site of numerous fraud investigations, fraudsters received $12.5 million in student loan and education grant money, according to a letter Education Secretary Linda McMahon sent to Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.

The letter calls on Walz to resign, and states that a new fraud prevention system at the department has found over $1 billion in “attempted financial aid theft,” including by international fraud rings and artificial intelligence (AI) bots.

“[Y]our careless lack of oversight and abuse of the welfare system has attracted fraudsters from around the world, especially from Somalia, to establish a beachhead of criminality in our country,” McMahon wrote. “As President Trump put it, you have turned Minnesota into a ‘fraudulent hub of money laundering activity.’”

It is disturbing to me that international bad actors are taking advantage of the lack of accountability in spending American taxpayer money.

The article concludes:

In June, the Department of Education announced a “nationwide effort to eliminate identity theft and fraud in the federal student aid programs for the fall 2025 semester,” and a requirement for institutions of higher education to verify “certain first-time applicants who are enrolled in the summer term,” as an immediate effort to combat fraud.

“Federal Student Aid (FSA) data indicates that the rate of fraud through stolen identities, particularly involving technologically advanced fraud rings, has reached a level that imperils the federal student assistance programs,” the department stated at the time.

Another obvious safeguard, also announced by the Education Department in June, required first-time student aid applicants to “present, either in person or on a live video conference, an unexpired, valid, government-issued photo identification to an institutionally authorized individual and the institution must preserve a copy of this documentation.”

As the department has noted, the Biden administration removed verification capabilities for student loans and “diverted resources from fraud prevention toward its illegal loan forgiveness efforts,” opening the door for massive fraud.

I think it is time to turn the student loan program back to the states and back to private banks. I suspect that will end a lot of the fraud. Private business will always do a better job than the government. Note that it is the people from private industry put in place by President Trump that are finding the fraud.

One Problem With ObamaCare

Posted on by

On Monday, The Federalist posted an article about the problem of fraud in the ObamaCare subsidies.

The article reports:

In recent months, these pages have recounted myriad reports of fraud in Medicaid and on the Obamacare Exchanges. The Congressional Budget Office and others have noted millions of potentially erroneous or fraudulent enrollees, who are receiving tens of billions of dollars in taxpayer-funded subsidies.

On Wednesday, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) added to the reports pouring in. Its preliminary analysis raised additional questions about fraud relating to Exchange subsidies, providing yet another reason for Congress not to extend the enhanced Covid-era subsidy regime that expires at the end of the month. 

…During the last plan year, GAO noted that “we either were not requested to provide the federal Marketplace [i.e., Exchange] with documentation or generally did not provide what was requested, yet our four fictitious applicants received subsidized coverage for November and December 2024.” In one example, the federal Exchange sent a letter that “confirmed the applicant’s income based on documentation we submitted,” even though GAO had not sent any such documentation.

This year, GAO said the Exchange “initially approved coverage for 19 of our 20 fictitious applicants,” with the only exception being “when the broker we were working with stopped responding to us.” In another case, the Exchange cut off coverage after the fictitious enrollee did not provide citizenship documentation. But in total, nine months into the plan year in September, “coverage for 18 [of 20] fictitious enrollees remained active,” totaling over $10,000 per month in taxpayer subsidies paid to insurers on behalf of nonexistent enrollees.

One example of fraud:

In 2023, a total of 58,000 Social Security numbers received subsidies yet also matched Social Security Administration death data. These instances included more than 7,000 numbers “where the reported date of death occurred prior to enrollment” in the Exchange, and more than 19,000 numbers where “matches had different names and dates of birth” between the Exchange database and the Social Security Administration database, a potential sign of “synthetic identity fraud.”

The article concludes:

Regardless, lawmakers should not spend another $350 billion (plus interest) throwing good taxpayer money after bad, even as one government report after another shows Exchange-related fraud remains out of control. After incurring more than $38 trillion in debt, Washington should finally realize it has run out of other people’s money to spend on such profligacy.

It is past time to make the subsidies go away and find a better way to do healthcare.

Where The Money Went

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about how Medicaid money was spent.

The article reports:

Five states and Washington, D.C., funneled more than $1.35 billion in federal taxpayer Medicaid funding to illegals, according to a preliminary audit of the program completed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

CMS Administrator Dr. Mehemet Oz posted the results of the preliminary audit on social media showing California, D.C., Illinois, Washington, Colorado, and Oregon spent millions each on illegals, with California spending the bulk, topping over $1.3 billion alone.

That money, according to Oz, was spent “just in the last few months.”

The left constantly claims this does not, or even cannot, happen because it is against federal law to use programs like Medicaid — something meant for Americans — for illegals, but that small sample of states shows that states are defrauding the American people out of their own programs to the tune of billions of dollars.

That claim is even more spurious considering the Democrats are only days away from breaking the all-time longest government shutdown record because they care more about funding health care for illegals than citizens of their own country.

“Some want to deny that illegal immigrants are receiving Medicaid. Others insist it’s illegal for Medicaid to cover illegal immigrants. And others accurately point out that hospitals can provide emergency services to illegal immigrants under the program,” Oz said, noting CMS is intending to have the money returned to them.

The article concludes:

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations seemed to have alleviated some of the pressure from certain emergency rooms notorious for being abused by illegal aliens, as The Federalist reported, but Dr. Jared Ross, an emergency room doctor, said that illegals being kicked off Medicaid from the OBBB could have the unintended consequence of turning them toward emergency rooms instead of going to general practitioners using insurance.

Reforms in the OBBB are necessary to stop American taxpayers and communities from having to deal with the burden illegal aliens put on their health programs and institutions, but another major avenue of reform will be altering EMTALA to limit illegal immigrants’ capacity to abuse the system.

American taxpayers cannot afford to continue to support people who are here illegally.

Allowing Space For Fraud In Obamacare

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about one aspect of Obamacare that is often unused and provides a gateway for fraud.

The article reports:

Obamacare failed to make health care more affordable. Every day the government shutdown lumbers on, more Americans are looking more closely at health care costs and learning just how damaging the impact of Obamacare has been.

The latest evidence comes from the Obamacare exchanges which have seen a spike in “zero-claim enrollees.” Because of irresponsible Biden-era policies, federal subsidies were increased during Covid. Health insurers received payments on behalf of 35 percent of enrollees—and 40 percent of fully subsidized enrollees—who did not use a single service for the time period they were covered. Zero-claim enrollment, which is more than double the rate in a typical health insurance market, is consistent with evidence of widespread fraud.

So the insurance companies were receiving money from the government on behalf of people who did not use the insurance. It is very possible widespread fraud was involved.

The article notes:

The main explanation for the rise in zero-claim enrollees is the tremendous amount of fraud and abuse endemic to Obamacare. The data does not lie. In 2025, there are more than 6.4 million ineligible people enrolled in a fully subsidized Obamacare plan—and in 15 states there are more than twice as many people enrolled in fully subsidized plans than are eligible. And the examples of the fraud are overwhelming, as a huge money-making apparatus from lead generators to unscrupulous agents and brokers to insurers made massive profits from the fraud. Millions have been enrolled without their consent or knowledge, falling victim to fraud schemes. 

Obamacare supporters and the health insurance industry cannot have it both ways. Those who downplay the fraud simply show that Obamacare is broken in other ways as the coverage does not translate into any care—not a single visit to the doctor, prescription filled, or lab test ordered. The reality is that both explanations indict the law. If millions of enrollees are fraudulent, taxpayers are being robbed. If such a large number of enrollees are real but not using any care, Obamacare’s central theory collapses—that generous subsidies and “free” preventive services would drive better health and savings. Either way, the system is failing on its own terms.

Sunsetting Obamacare subsidies is a good idea. The Democrats previously agreed to do that. Now the Democrats are trying to undo that (along with a number of other spending boondoggles) by shutting down the government. I would rather see the government continue to be shutdown than to ask American taxpayers to fund the Democrats’ list of demands.

The Real Roadblock

Posted on by

I am not a fan of Senator Thune. I firmly believe he only does the right thing when it is in his best interest. Otherwise, he is a tool of the Washington establishment. A recent article in The Federalist confirmed my opinion.

On Wednesday, The Federalist reported:

Senate Majority Leader John Thune wants GOP voters to believe that Senate Republicans have no ability to speed up confirmation of the more than 140 Trump nominees languishing in the upper chamber. But that isn’t entirely true.

After returning from Congress’s month-long August vacation, Thune took to the Senate floor on Tuesday to pin the blame for the continued confirmation delay of the president’s appointees squarely on the shoulders of Senate Democrats. Verbally wagging his finger at his leftist colleagues, the majority leader said that “their historic obstruction cannot continue.”

“All it takes is a little behavioral change and a willingness to acknowledge President Trump won an election, the American people voted for him, and they expect him to be able to populate his administration with the people that he wants to serve in many of these positions,” Thune said. “The Democrats can play ball — the way every Democrat and Republican Senate have, going back as far as we can find in the annals of history — or things are going to have to change around here. It’s as simple as that. And the ball, I would say, Mr. President, is in the Democrats’ court.”

Except, the ball is not in Democrats’ court — it’s in Thune’s. Contrary to his persistent narrative about Democrat obstruction, the Senate majority leader has always possessed the power to hold the upper chamber in session until confirmation of Trump’s nominees are complete.

The article concludes:

Of course, the key phrase in Bovard’s remarks is “willing.” Like when it comes to fulfilling issue-based promises they campaign on, many Republican senators have shown little to no appetite for doing what’s necessary to get the president’s nominees across the finish line. And that’s especially true for Thune, who has seemingly recanted on his pledge — which he made a day after Trump’s inauguration — that Senate Republicans “are ready to work as long as needed to confirm President Trump’s nominees,” including “Nights. Weekends. Recesses.”

The bottom line is that Thune and the Senate GOP are not going to act out of the goodness of their hearts. It’s going to take vocal, consistent, and continued pressure from Trump and Republican voters to get them to actually do their jobs.

The article explains that there are ways to break the logjam, but the Republican elites are not interested in breaking the logjam. Somehow the idea of Republican unity and working toward a common purpose was thrown out the window by the Republican establishment when President Trump was elected.

A Reality Check

Posted on by

On Monday, The Federalist posted an article about the ongoing negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. The article reminds us that neither Russia or Ukraine can actually win the war decisively.

The article reports:

President Donald Trump’s meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday didn’t yield the ceasefire deal Trump was hoping for, but there was apparently enough progress made that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and top European leaders are meeting with Trump in Washington today to discuss the possibility of peace negotiations and a deal to end to the war for good.

What might such a deal look like? Simply put, it would consist of territorial concessions in exchange for security agreements. Ukraine would cede portions of Russian-occupied territory in Crimea and the eastern provinces in exchange for a security alliance with the United States and European powers. Trump himself has alluded to this, mentioning “land swaps” ahead of his meeting with Putin on Friday.

Russia’s main goal has always been a warm-water port. The land Russia has currently seized from Ukraine would provide that port. If Ukrainian President Zelensky would make territorial concessions to give Russia a warm-water port, the war would end. However, the corruption that has provided a lavish lifestyle to the ruling class in Ukraine would also end. That is probably one of the major sticking points in the negotiations.

The article concludes:

And here we come to heart of the difference between Biden and Trump’s view of the war, and of foreign policy broadly speaking. The establishment foreign policy experts that ran things during Biden’s term (and Obama’s) think the world operates according to theories and abstractions rather than solid realities like history and geography. They thought they could simply invoke something like sovereignty, without grappling with the possibility that sovereignty and territorial integrity, given Ukraine’s history and its untenable borders, might be mutually exclusive.

That mindset is representative of an entire class of policymakers in Washington who fail to grasp that the outcome of a war — any war — is far more likely to be decided by something as unmovable as a mountain range or a warm-water port than vague invocations of sovereignty. Likewise, a common language or a shared 1,000-year history between warring peoples are going to be more important factors than the bureaucratic minutiae of a multi-lateral security agreement drafted in Brussels.

After years of attrition warfare between Ukraine and Russia, bankrolled largely by western powers, the underlying factors in the conflict have not changed — and they never will. An adjustment of Ukraine’s borders, together with security guarantees from the U.S. and Europe, is actually in everyone’s best interests, not just Russia’s. Ukraine as it’s currently constituted is indefensible, as events have shown. Lasting peace will require grappling with the history of Ukraine’s borders and adjusting them to reflect solid realities — not some hazy platitudes about democracy and sovereignty. Those kind of abstractions are a big reason we’re in this mess, and rejecting them is the only way we’re going to get out of it.

It’s time that western nations stop funding this carnage.

When The Loyal Opposition Is Not Loyal

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about one very specific thing the intelligence community did in their attempt to derail the first Trump administration.

The article reports:

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has released two emails that are significant not only for their content but for their timing, coming just two days before the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska. The emails reveal that in late 2016, then-DNI James Clapper pushed the fraudulent narrative that Russia had hacked the Democratic National Committee (DNC), overriding pointed objections from then-National Security Agency chief Admiral Mike Rogers.

The timing matters because this very narrative — the claim that Russia had hacked the DNC to help President Trump — was used to sabotage the 2018 Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki. Just three days before that meeting, Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicted 12 Russian nationals on charges of hacking the DNC. The indictment was designed to create political chaos. Mueller knew that the 12 Russians were located in Russia and would never stand trial, meaning he would never need to prove the case. The result of the indictments was exactly what Mueller, his team, and any yet-to-be-identified co-conspirators intended: to sabotage the summit and effectively criminalize diplomacy with Russia.

We all remember Helsinki, where, at the joint press conference standing next to President Putin, Trump addressed the alleged hacking directly:

“You have groups that are wondering why the FBI never took the server. Why haven’t they taken the server? Why was the FBI told to leave the office of the Democratic National Committee?”

What Trump meant was that no one could know what had happened because the key evidence — the DNC server — had never been examined by the FBI or any other U.S. government agency. Trump also noted that Putin had personally assured him, “It’s not Russia.” He then added his own assessment: “I will say this: I don’t see any reason why it would be [Russia].”

It has never been proven that the Russians hacked the DNC server. People who know such things point to an inside job, possibly with a memory stick. There is also speculation that there is a link between the leaked information from the DNC server and the death of Seth Rich, but so far there has not been any concrete evidence of that link.

Why President Trump Is Asking For A New Census

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Federalist posted an article explaining the need for a new census and the reason President Trump is asking that it be done before the mid-term elections.

The article reports:

President Donald Trump announced Thursday he instructed the Commerce Department to begin working on a census that does not include illegal aliens. It’s a long-overdue correction to a system that Democrats have exploited for years to tip the balance of power in Washington.

“I have instructed our Department of Commerce to immediately begin work on a new and highly accurate CENSUS based on modern day facts and figures and, importantly, using the results and information gained from the Presidential Election of 2024. People who are in our country illegally WILL NOT BE COUNTED IN THE CENSUS. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” Trump said.

Trump previously signed a memo in 2020 that barred illegal aliens from being counted in the census. The memo was challenged and made its way to the Supreme Court, which ultimately did not rule on the merits as to whether all residents — regardless of their legal status — must be counted and if the president has the authority to exclude nonresidents.

The high court however did rule in the 1976 decision Mathews v. Diaz, a case regarding the Social Security Act, that while illegal immigrants are entitled to due process protections under the Fifth and 14th Amendments, they are not entitled to the benefits of citizenship. 

The article concludes:

NBC News’ Alexandra Marquez says not counting illegal aliens would be “contrary to the Constitution.”

But that is a suspect conclusion drawn by the propaganda press. The Framers likely would not support the position that illegal aliens who invaded the nation should be counted in apportionment to determine representation. In fact, prior to the ratification of the Constitution, most northern states advocated for no slaves to be counted in the apportionment proceedings so that slaveholding states, some of which had slave populations as high as 43 percent of their total residents, would not have an unfair amount of representation compared to their actual voting weight.

Yet, we’re supposed to believe Axios, NBC News, and NPR that illegal aliens would have been counted in the census?

Counting illegal alien in the census skews congressional apportionment and the electoral college — and the American citizen pays the price in diluted representation and misallocated resources.

I would like to see some of the people who support rights reserved for American citizens being bestowed on illegal aliens go to another country and try to claim the rights of that country’s citizens. It would be interesting to see what happens next.