Audit Fever! Pennsylvania Sends Delegation to Tour the Maricopa County, AZ Audit Site

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Clker-Free-Vector-Images from Pixabay

Reporting from the floor of the Maricopa County, Arizona forensic audit on Tuesday, OANN’s Christina Bobb told viewers a delegation from Pennsylvania had arrived on Tuesday and for a tour of the audit on Wednesday.

“They’ve expressed interest in the Arizona audit and possibly replicating this in Pennsylvania. … They are getting a behind the scene tour tomorrow. … They’re going to get to hear from the auditors exactly what is happening,” Bobb said.

“Of course, there’s been a lot of criticism of this audit. So, they have concerns that they want to see addressed, namely, is voter integrity maintained? Is the secret ballot maintained? Is there any way the audit could be disparaging to any demographic?”

“So, this is going to be an opportunity for them to get out exactly what’s happening in Arizona. If they like what they see, take it back to Pennsylvania.”

“I’ve heard a lot of rumblings,” she said. “We’ve heard from the senators that they are getting accolades from around the country and many other states are reaching out to them congratulating them on the work that they’re doing and thanking them for continuing the fight and staying in the fight. And I think that they realize the Senate was honest and real when they said, hey, we welcome any states to come look at this.”

This is good news indeed.

 

There were many allegations of election fraud in Pennsylvania. For starters, there were 202,377 more ballots cast than voters who voted statewide, and 170,830 more ballots cast than voters who voted in the presidential race.

Source: Pennsylvania State Rep. Russ Diamond’s website.

 

An organization called Audit the Vote PA, whose statistics I could not verify, presented some alarming irregularities including:

1,823,148 mail-in ballots were sent out and 2,589,242 were sent back

21,000 confirmed dead voters

Over 300,000 voter registrations removed from the SURE system after November 3

Canvassing effort in Montgomery County found 78,000 phantom votes

Over 10,000 people voted by mail whose ID doesn’t exist in the SURE system

Over 29,000 Duplicate Registrations

7,857 Registrations whose DOB changed in 2020

55,823 voters backfilled into the SURE system

15,000 mail-in ballots sent out of state

These are the same types of irregularities that have been reported in other swing states.

On November 25, 2020, a hearing was held before the Pennsylvania State Senate and President Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to hear the stories of election observers who had allegedly witnessed fraud over the course of their service. It’s 3.5 hours long. I actually watched the whole video at the time and found it riveting.

If you have time to listen to only one testimony, listen to Gregory Stentstrom whose testimony begins at 46:45 in the video below.

Justin Kweder: attorney, Philadelphia (testimony starts at 31:20)

Kim Peterson: Philadelphia (testimony starts at 38:15)

Leah Hoopes: Delaware County (testimony starts at 40:50)

Gregory Stentstrom: data scientist, retired Naval officer, security expert, Delaware County (testimony starts at 46:45)  ***

Black Leaders Take Aim at Sens. Sinema, Manchin Over Refusal to Nix Filibuster; ‘They Are, in Effect, Supporting Racism’

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by mjimages from Pixabay

The Senate website defines the filibuster as an “informal term for any attempt to block or delay Senate action on a bill or other matter by debating it at length, by offering numerous procedural motions, or by any other delaying or obstructive actions.” This device is meant to prevent the party in the Senate minority from being completely overpowered by the majority party.

Prior to the election, the Indivisible Project, a movement dedicated to advancing the election of progressive candidates, explained why the filibuster is bad news for Democrats:

“It’s simple: none of the progressive issues that Democratic candidates and congressional leaders are discussing today will become law unless we do something about the filibuster.”

“If [Senate Minority Leader] Mitch McConnell expects to be the Grim Reaper of progressive policies, the scythe he’ll use is the Senate filibuster. Unless we change the rules.”

With a 50-50 balance of power in the Senate, Democrats control the upper chamber by the slimmest margin possible.

Current Senate rules require a minimum of 60 votes to pass legislation. Some Democrats have hoped to abolish the filibuster so that only a simple majority of 51 votes (50 Democratic senators plus Vice President Kamala Harris’ tie-breaking vote) would be necessary to advance their progressive agenda.

Their latest challenge is that two Democratic Senators, Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, have both quite strongly announced their opposition to abolishing the filibuster.

Just two months ago, a representative for Sinema told The Washington Post’s White House reporter, Seung Min Kim, that “Kyrsten is against eliminating the filibuster, and she is not open to changing her mind about eliminating the filibuster.”

Up until then, conservatives had been counting on Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia to save us from being overrun by leftist lesiglation. Manchin won re-election in 2018 in a state that went overwhelmingly for former President Donald Trump by nearly 40 points in 2020 and over 41 in 2016.

Shortly after the announcement from Team Sinema, Politico reported that Manchin was “emphatic” that he “will not vote to kill the filibuster.” Asked if there were any scenario in which he would change his mind, the senator replied: “None whatsoever that I will vote to get rid of the filibuster.”

Protecting the filibuster is essential to protecting us from the tyranny of the majority.

Even with the filibuster in place, Democrats can do and have already done a lot of damage. But their major radical initiatives, such as the Election Reform bill which passed the House earlier this month, granting statehood to Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico, and stacking the Supreme Court, can be blocked by the Republicans.

Naturally, Democrats are trying to exert maximum pressure on Sinema and Manchin to change their minds.

Politico has interviewed several black civil rights leaders to find out what they plan to do about this. According to Politico, “top [civil rights] officials framed the choice as existential for a party that depends on Black and brown voters — and they are planning pressure campaigns privately and publicly to make that clear.”

Rev. Al Sharpton plans to hold town halls and rallies in Sinema’s and Manchin’s home states. He said, “The pressure that we are going to put on Sinema and Manchin is calling [the filibuster] racist and saying that they are, in effect, supporting racism. Why would they be wedded to something that has those results? Their voters need to know that.”

Sharpton cautioned Democrats that if they fail to end the filibuster, then “civil rights leaders might have less reason to help generate enthusiasm and turnout in the 2022 midterm elections without being able to point to actual laws Democrats passed.”

Sounds like a threat.

He added, “Many of us, and certainly all of us in the civil rights leadership, are committed to policies and laws and causes, not to people’s political careers. We’re not into that. We want to change the country. And if there is not feasible evidence that we’re doing that, it is not in our concern to be aggressively involved.”

Sinema and/or Manchin may yet flip, but I would be willing to bet it wouldn’t be because Al Sharpton and his merry band of civil rights leaders come to their states and call them racists.

Although politicians are famous for flip-flopping, after putting out such a strong statement of opposition as her representative did in conversation with the Washington Post reporter, I would be surprised if Sinema caved. Sharpton’s actions might just make her dig in her heels a little deeper.

Manchin, on the other hand, strikes me as less resolute than Sinema. However, he did say he was “emphatic” he wouldn’t vote to end the filibuster.

There is another option. The Senate could potentially create a carve-out specifically for voting rights legislation, a measure they’ve taken before. The Senate has created exceptions to the filibuster in the past for confirmations of Supreme Court nominees and for budget reconciliation (which is how the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill was passed).

Manchin is currently the only Senate Democrat who is not a co-sponsor of the voting reform bill known as S. 1.

On Wednesday, Manchin told reporters, “I think all of us should be able to be united around voting rights, but it should be limited to voting rights.”

But if the bill were to be limited to votings rights, according to CBS News, “it would strip provisions related to campaign finance and ethics reform, which are key priorities for progressives.”

In a Tuesday statement, “Manchin expressed concerns about S. 1, and said that he would support bipartisan legislation on voting rights.” The statement said:

As the Senate prepares to take up the For the People Act, we must work toward a bipartisan solution that protects everyone’s right to vote, secures our elections from foreign interference, and increases transparency in our campaign finance laws. Pushing through legislation of this magnitude on a partisan basis may garner short-term benefits, but will inevitably only exacerbate the distrust that millions of Americans harbor against the U.S. government.

He issued another statement on Thursday in which he reiterated his opposition to creating a carve-out to the filibuster rule specifically for voting rights. He noted that would be “like being a little bit pregnant.” You either kill the filibuster or you keep it.

Let’s hope that both he and Sinema stand by their pledges not to abolish the filibuster. All Republican senators, even those whose votes can’t always be counted on, such as Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, are unanimously opposed to ending the filibuster. They are also opposed to the voting reform bill.

Sinema and Manchin are the only thing standing between us and the enactment of the Democrats’ entire radical agenda.  Let’s hope they stand strong.

Former DOJ Prosecutor Wants Every U.S. Business Owner to Sign Document Stating Biden Won Election ‘Fairly’

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by 愚木混株 Cdd20 from Pixabay

At the top of his blog, Front Page Magazine founder and editor David Horowitz highlights the following quote: “Inside every progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out.”

This true statement is reaffirmed on a daily basis by America’s increasingly intolerant, irrational left.

Over the weekend, the far-left Huffington Post published a story about a former DOJ prosecutor, Glenn Kirschner, who seeks to have every business owner in America sign what he refers to as a “Democracy Pledge.”

According to the Huffington Post’s S.V. Date, Kirschner “has launched a campaign to press American businesses to openly reject the core assertion that former President Donald Trump and many in his party continue to make, that the 2020 election was somehow illegitimate.”

Here are several excerpts from the article:

“The 2020 presidential election was free and fair, and produced accurate, reliable results,” reads the explanation behind the “Democracy Pledge” that  hopes to put before “every company in the country” in the coming months. “Those who sought to undermine or otherwise refused to acknowledge these results, share responsibility for the civil unrest after the election, culminating in violence at the United States Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.”

The pledge includes a declaration of “valuing, affirming and supporting democracy,” and of affirming “that the election of Joseph R. Biden and Kamala Harris was free, fair and legitimate.”

The final piece asks companies to “not support, donate to or endorse politicians, political campaigns or political action committees that promoted false conspiracy theories surrounding the 2020 presidential elections (or otherwise acted in ways contrary to a representative democracy).”

“What we’re trying to do is force companies’ hands so they can’t be agnostic,” Kirschner said.

Yet Trump and many top Republicans have never apologized for spreading the lies about the “stolen” election and “massive voter fraud” that fueled his followers’ anger in the first place.

Kirschner told Date that business owners who do not respond will be placed on a list. “And then we’re going to provide that information to consumers. And they can make their purchasing decisions accordingly.”

The fact that this man spent 24 years as a prosecutor in the District of Columbia’s U.S. attorney’s office is astonishing and terrifying.

There’s more:

As to what would constitute spreading conspiracy theories: having signed onto the lawsuit filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton that tried to overturn the election by claiming fraud in other states would be a good qualifier, Kirschner said. A total of 18 state attorneys general and 126 Republican lawmakers supported that effort. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz even volunteered to argue the case before the U.S. Supreme Court, which, in the end, summarily rejected it instead.

Even more GOP members of Congress voted, just hours after their lives had been put in danger by Trump’s violent mob, to reject the Electoral College vote tally showing that Biden had won. But Kirschner said that vote, by itself, would not consign someone to the anti-democracy list. Members of Congress had made similar arguments in previous elections, and it would be unfair to punish the 147 Republicans who did the same this time, he added.

He said he could also understand a company wanting to add its own language into the pledge to clarify statements to their satisfaction. “We’re not trying to be jerks about it,” he said. “Let’s not make the perfect the enemy of the good.”

Supporting Trump himself now, though, is another matter, Kirschner said. “You can’t support Donald Trump and argue that you are in favor of free and fair elections. … If you’re supporting him, you’re just not supporting democracy.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but the substance of Kirschner’s “Democracy Pledge” is the opposite of democracy. He’s attempting to coerce business owners into agreeing with a statement they may or may not believe or else they will be put on an anti-democracy list that could potentially harm their livelihoods. Good job, Kirschner. That’s the American way!

Is he out of his mind?

I suppose I should save my outrage because this isn’t a proposal from the Biden Administration, but only the pipe dream of a far-left Democrat.

I wouldn’t sign the pledge. Democratic judges and intimidated or anti-Trump Republicans refused to give the Trump campaign the opportunity to present their considerable evidence of improprieties that took place on and around Election Day. Not even the Supreme Court has allowed them to make their case.

None of this means that the charges have been settled as they would have you believe. The Democrats won’t allow the evidence to see the light of day which makes it impossible to know the truth.

On Sunday, my colleague Richard Edward Tracy, reported (here) that the Arizona state Senate, will be conducting a thorough audit of 2.1 million votes from the Grand Canyon State’s Maricopa County, absentee ballots included. That’s a start.

There are too many allegations of fraud outstanding – including over 1,000 sworn affidavits from poll observers – for this matter to be settled.

And Kirschner’s democracy pledge is the type of totalitarian tactic one might expect in Russia. And anyone who supports it opposes democracy.

Biden Signs Executive Order to ‘Expand Voting Access’ on Anniversary of ‘Bloody Sunday’

Advertisements

President Joe Biden is contemptible. Just as he chose the anniversary of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting several weeks ago to introduce gun control laws, he used the anniversary of “Bloody Sunday” to announce his latest power grab executive order to expand voting access.

As The War Room’s Steve Bannon said on his podcast last week, Biden’s eyes look dead.

He slurs his way through the words that appear on the teleprompter before him.

“The blood of [the late congressman and civil rights icon] John Lewis and so many other brave and righteous souls that was spilled in Selma on this Sunday in 1965 sanctified a noble struggle,” Biden says.

“But there are those [us] who will do anything they can to take that power away. Today we have a hailstorm, not a rainstorm, a hailstorm. In 2020, our very democracy … on the line, in the midst of a pandemic, more Americans voted than ever before.”

He’s right about that. In fact, in the state of Pennsylvania, so many people voted that there were 200,000 more ballots than people who voted!

“Multiple recounts in states and decisions of more than 60 cases from judges appointed by my predecessor, including at the Supreme Court, upheld the integrity of this historic election.”

That is not true. Those judges refused to review the cases brought by former President Trump’s legal team. They wouldn’t even look at the 1,000 affidavits of election observers who swore, under the penalty of perjury, that they had witnessed fraud.

“We’ve seen an unprecedented insurrection in our Capitol and a brutal attack on our democracy on January 6th.”

I would argue that we saw a brutal attack on our democracy on November 3.

He continues, “A never before seen effort to ignore, undermine and undo the will of the people. And to think of that and yet it’s been followed by an all-out assault on the right to vote in state legislatures all across the country.”

“You know, during the current legislative session, elected officials in 43 states have already introduced over 250 bills to make it harder for Americans to vote. We can … not … let … them … succeed.”

Biden emphasizes the importance of H.R. 1 which would make permanent all of the chicanery that handed him the presidency. He hopes that it passes the Senate.

“I also urge Congress to fully restore the Voting Rights Act named in John Lewis’ honor.

“Today, on the anniversary of “Bloody Sunday,” I’m signing an executive order to make it easier for eligible voters to register to vote and improve access to voting.”

Yes, because it’s so onerous to travel to our local precincts, show our drivers’ licenses and cast our ballots.

Then, he discusses words he exchanged with John Lewis shortly before he passed. Lewis had told him to “finish the work.” And that’s what our noble president has vowed to do.

He is a disgrace.

 

Elizabeth is the founder and editor of The American Crisis. She is also a contract writer at The Western Journal and a previous contributor to RedState, The Dan Bongino Show, and The Federalist. Her articles have appeared on HotAir, Instapundit, RealClearPolitics, MSN and other sites. Elizabeth is a wife, a mom to three grown children and several beloved golden retrievers, and a grandmother!

Here’s The Good News About the House’s Passage of The Biggest Democratic Power Grab in History

Advertisements

Before shuttering the Capitol building on Wednesday night due to threats of “danger” from unhinged Trump supporters on Thursday (sarcasm), the House passed H.R. 1, the ironically named “For the People Act,” by a vote of 220-210. It is impossible to overstate the damage this legislation, if it were to pass the Senate, would do to this once-great nation.

The stated purpose of H.R. 1 is:  “To expand Americans’ access to the ballot box, reduce the influence of big money in politics, strengthen ethics rules for public servants, and implement other anti-corruption measures for the purpose of fortifying our democracy, and for other purposes.” The full text of H.R. 1 can be viewed here.

The real purpose of the bill is to make permanent many of the changes made to state voting systems and procedures ostensibly to facilitate voting in the age of COVID-19.

One of the most notable features of H.R. 1 is that it strips states of the right to set their own standards for how elections are to be conducted. Election laws would be determined at the federal level.

Under this bill, states would be required to promote the use of mail-in voting, to offer online applications for voter registration, and to provide automatic and even same-day voter registration.

H.R. 1 would all but eliminate voter ID laws. It would prohibit states from “requiring identification as a condition of obtaining a ballot.”

Another provision, Section 1621, would require the “uniform availability of absentee voting to all voters.” Every voter will have the option of casting an absentee ballot by mail. A state may not attach any conditions to this right.

In addition, “ballot harvesting” would be allowed in every state.

In other words, all of the practices that handed victory to the Democrats in the 2020 election would become law.

If this legislation passes, it will be difficult, if not impossible, for Republicans to ever win another election.

Suffice it to say, the passage of H.R. 1 would radically change the way the U.S. conducts elections. The implementation of these practices will be a recipe for massive fraud.

Election fraud, as we’ve learned the hard way over the past several months, is relatively easy to perpetrate, but difficult to prove.

I said there would be some good news and there is indeed!

Unless the Senate votes to abolish the filibuster, 60 votes would be required for this bill to pass the upper chamber. That would mean that ten Republicans would have to vote for it – which is not going to happen.

I don’t even think Sens. Mitt Romney (R-UT) or Susan Collins (R-ME) would go for this.

Oddly, ending the legislative filibuster would only require a simple majority, or 51 votes, to pass. There are currently 50 Democratic senators in addition to Vice President Kamala Harris who would be available to cast the deciding vote.

(Note: Please scroll down for an explanation of the filibuster.)

The extremely good news is that two Democratic senators, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, have both publicly and unequivocally stated their opposition to ending the legislative filibuster.

Shortly after H.R.1 was introduced in the House, a representative of Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema told The Washington Post’s White House reporter, Seung Min Kim, that “Kyrsten is against eliminating the filibuster, and she is not open to changing her mind about eliminating the filibuster.”

Up until now, conservatives have been counting on Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia to save us from being overrun by leftist lesiglation. Manchin won re-election in 2018 in a state that went overwhelmingly for former President Donald Trump, by nearly 40 points in 2020 and over 41 in 2016.

In the past, Manchin has expressed his opposition to ending the filibuster, but recent statements have left Republicans wondering.

However, Politico reported (on the same day Sinema’s spokesperson made the announcement above) that Manchin was “emphatic” that he “will not vote to kill the filibuster.” Asked if there were any scenario in which he would change his mind, the senator replied: “None whatsoever that I will vote to get rid of the filibuster.”

Perhaps he had gotten wind of Sinema’s announcement by that time.

Either way, the Arizonan’s remarkable decision came as welcome news to all of us who have feared the radical agenda now being promoted by the left.

Sinema’s and Manchin’s opposition to abolishing the filibuster will not save us from the Democrats’ entire agenda, but it should stop the most radical parts of it.

Free and fair elections are the cornerstone of democracy. If H.R. 1 were to become law, voter fraud will become easier than ever and the U.S. may never hold an honest election again. This bill represents a clear and present danger to the integrity of U.S. elections.

Brief Explanation of the Filibuster:

The Senate website defines the filibuster as an “informal term for any attempt to block or delay Senate action on a bill or other matter by debating it at length, by offering numerous procedural motions, or by any other delaying or obstructive actions.” This device is meant to prevent the party in the Senate minority from being completely overpowered by the majority party.

Currently, with a 50-50 balance of power in the Senate, Democrats control the upper chamber by the slimmest margin possible.

Current Senate rules require a minimum of 60 votes to pass legislation. Some Democrats have hoped to abolish the filibuster so that only a simple majority of 51 votes (50 Democratic senators plus Vice President Kamala Harris’ tie-breaking vote) would be necessary to advance their progressive agenda.

Prior to the election, the Indivisible Project, a movement dedicated to advancing the election of progressive candidates, explained why this is bad news for Democrats:

It’s simple: none of the progressive issues that Democratic candidates and congressional leaders are discussing today will become law unless we do something about the filibuster.

If [Senate Minority Leader] Mitch McConnell expects to be the Grim Reaper of progressive policies, the scythe he’ll use is the Senate filibuster. Unless we change the rules.