Democrats are Laying the Foundation for Their Next Major Propaganda Campaign Against the GOP

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Tayeb MEZAHDIA from Pixabay

Although the Democrats always maintain a steady stream of anti-Republican messaging, some efforts are more strategic and require more preparation than others. These are the major propaganda campaigns that truly move the needle.

We’ve seen the Democrats execute a handful of them since President Donald Trump first arrived on the scene. They all begin with a well-defined objective and a coordinated plan of action. The party works together and sticks together.

Because we’ve witnessed several of these from start to finish over the past six years, we’ve become adept at recognizing the signs that one has begun. You might read an article that sounds a little “off” in the New York Times, or hear an unusual remark from a Democratic politician. Then a week later, a pundit may refer to it on a cable show, and within a couple months, the entire American left is focused on it. This pattern has grown very familiar.

This strategy comes from the late communist/community organizer Saul Alinsky’s book “Rules for Radicals,” which says, “Accuse your opponent of what you are doing, to create confusion and to inculcate voters against evidence of your own guilt.” Alinsky drew heavily from the writings of Karl Marx and from the tactics used by Nazi Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels. Goebbels famously pointed out that a lie, repeated a thousand times, becomes the truth.

Every propaganda campaign directed against the GOP has followed the same formula. The effort to portray then-candidate Donald Trump as a Russian asset began with Yahoo writer Michael Isikoff’s late September 2016 report that U.S. Intelligence officials were investigating ties between Trump foreign policy advisor Carter Page and the Russians. Shortly afterward, a second article appeared in Mother Jones. Just before Election Day, The New York Times published another damaging story.

The questions surrounding then-President Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky which ultimately led to his first impeachment originated in the same way.

The Democrats are in the early stages of advancing a new narrative and it goes like this: Republications are undermining our democracy and pose the greatest existential threat to America’s future as a democracy.

Aside from the fact that America is not a democracy, but a democratic republic, these remarks are breathtaking. Hypocrisy comes to mind. The Democrats are accusing Republicans of what they themselves are doing.

An early reference to this narrative came in a March Vox article, which was entitled, “The Republican revolt against democracy, explained in 13 charts.” Its lede states, “The Trump years revealed a dark truth: The Republican Party is no longer committed to democracy. These charts tell the story.” Author Zack Beauchamp writes:

The Republican Party is the biggest threat to American democracy today. It is a radical, obstructionist faction that has become hostile to the most basic democratic norm: that the other side should get to wield power when it wins elections.

A few years ago, these statements may have sounded like partisan Democratic hyperbole. But in the wake of the January 6 attack on the Capitol and Trump’s acquittal in the Senate on the charge of inciting it, they seem more a plain description of where we’re at as a country.

But how deep does the GOP’s problem with democracy run, really? How did things get so bad? And is it likely to get worse?

On Tuesday, an article by far-left economist Robert Reich topped the page over at RealClearPolitics. Reich was terribly upset about Joe Manchin’s decision to vote against the For the People Act. The title of the piece? “American democracy is fighting for its life – and Republicans don’t care.” After glancing at the title, I thought a conservative must have written it. I was wrong.

Referring to the voter reform laws recently passed in Georgia and Florida, he wrote: “Then came the post-Trump deluge of state laws making it harder for likely Democrats to vote, and easier for Republican state legislatures to manipulate voting tallies.” Reich is living in an alternate universe.

Also on Tuesday, The New York Times editorial board member Mara Gay, the one who found the dozens of American flags she saw on pickup trucks in Long Island to be so intolerable, appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” I posted about her remarks here.

She told the panel: “Trump flags, and in some cases, just dozens of American flags, which is also just disturbing, because essentially the message was clear, ‘This is my country. This is not your country. I own this.’”

“Because, you know, the Trump voters who are not going to get onboard with democracy, they’re a minority. You can marginalize them, long-term. But if we don’t take the threat seriously, then I think we’re all in really bad shape,” Gay said.

Brzezinski “totally” agreed – naturally.

Conservative commentator Dinesh D’Souza joined Fox News’ Laura Ingraham to discuss the Democrats’ latest propaganda campaign on Monday night.

Ingraham was outraged. “The idea Dinesh that the Republicans are anti-democratic? They’re the most anti-democratic people out there. They shove these mandates down. They want us all scared. They don’t want our freedoms to be protected. In the end, they’re the oppressors.”

D’Souza said, “The left uses the rhetoric of democracy, but in reality, they don’t really believe in it. They believe that public opinion is something to be moulded from above. And this is why they’ve created this coordinated set of institutions from education to the media, ultimately to tell the public what to believe.”

Ingraham played a clip of Rep. Jim Clyburne (D-SC) who was upset that H.R. 1’s chances of passage are all but dead. His words illustrated the point perfectly. Clyburne said,  “If we’re not careful, the greatest democracy on the face of the earth will go the way of the Roman Empire.”

The Democrats want to take away all vestiges of democracy so they can maintain power for the long-term. Then, they’ll blame it on the Republicans.

Mark my words.

 

Please follow me on Twitter.

Biden Fails to Recognize D-Day, Tweets About 1921 Tulsa Massacre Instead

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by jacqueline macou from Pixabay

Sunday, June 6, was the 77th anniversary of D-Day, the most significant date in the history of World War II. The Allied invasion of Normandy was the largest amphibious assault ever carried out. It marked the start of the two month long Battle of Normandy which ultimately liberated France from the German occupation.

Historians have calculated the number of confirmed Allied fatalities on that first day alone to be 4,415, according to the National D-Day Memorial. Total Allied casualties are estimated at nearly 10,000. Codenamed “Operation Overlord,” the D-Day landing involved “over 5,000 ships, 11,000 airplanes, and over 150,000 service men.”

Allied heads of state have traditionally marked this day of remembrance by honoring the brave men who sacrificed so much on the shores of Normandy so that we may enjoy freedom today.

Two years ago, then-President Donald Trump delivered one of the most powerful speeches of his presidency on the anniversary of D-Day. He even drew praise from critics such as MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough and CNN’s Jim Acosta.

Not so for President Joe Biden, who neglected to acknowledge the momentous occasion at all. Instead, he chose to pay tribute to the survivors of the 1921 Tulsa Massacre.

My intention is not to minimize the atrocity which occurred on May 31, 1921 in Tulsa, Oklahoma. It is arguably the single most tragic day in the history of racial violence in the U.S. I posted about the National Black Power Convention held last weekend in Tulsa to mark this sad chapter in history here.

For those who may be unfamiliar with this event, in the early 1900s, a large number of African Americans settled in the Greenwood district of Tulsa.

According to History.com, the neighborhood “grew and flourished as a Black economic and cultural mecca—until May 31, 1921. That’s when a white mob began a rampage through some 35 square blocks, decimating the community known proudly as ‘Black Wall Street.’ Armed rioters, many deputized by local police, looted and burned down businesses, homes, schools, churches, a hospital, hotel, public library, newspaper offices and more. While the official death toll of the Tulsa race massacre was 36, historians estimate it may have been as high as 300. As many as 10,000 people were left homeless.”

The events that took place 100 years ago in Tulsa were heinous. No one is denying that.

But Biden had already acknowledged the anniversary. He traveled to Tulsa last Tuesday to commemorate the occasion.

He spoke to survivors. His comments ranged from the ludicrous to the downright dangerous. Please read my post “Biden Managed a Trifecta of Stupid in His Tulsa Massacre Speech” to see for yourself just how disturbing his remarks really were.

The Tulsa Massacre anniversary rated a trip to Oklahoma, but the memory of D-Day, a date that changed the course of world history, didn’t elicit even a mention from the President of the United States.

Biden’s failure to recognize D-Day tells us, and our foreign adversaries, a lot about his and his administration’s priorities.

During his speech last week in Tulsa, Biden said, “According to the intelligence community, terrorism from white supremacy is the most lethal threat to the homeland today. Not ISIS, not Al Qaeda, white supremacy. That’s not me. That’s the intelligence community.”

On Sunday night, former Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, now a Fox News contributor, concluded his new Fox News program by posing a question to those who can’t answer, those who sacrificed their lives on D-Day. A visibly emotionally Gowdy asked: “Was it worth it?”

“Was it worth it to the men and the women who were killed serving, protecting and defending this country?, Gowdy asked. ” … You might frame the question differently, you may ask, ‘Are we worth it?’ Are we now, as a country, what you sacrificed for us to be? Are we worth, as a country, worth what you gave up? … ”

He continued: “I do wonder sometimes what those women and men who died on behalf of this country would say. … When we reflect on the state of our politics, was it worth dying for? When we reflect on what has become of our first amendment, was it worth losing your life over? When we reflect on the divisions in our country, these divisions that seem so intractable at times, was it worth dying for? … ”

“Have we become the country you imagined we would be when you fought and fell for us? Is this the America you dreamed of when you were taking your last breath? … ”

If you were an eighteen-year-old boy traveling aboard a “Higgins boat” headed for Normandy, nauseous from the rough seas, frightened out of your mind because you knew you might lose your life in the next few hours, would it be worth it?

Perhaps five months ago, when we had a patriotic president who loved America, the answer might have been yes. But what if they were shown a clip of Biden or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spewing their stupidity? Desperately trying to take away our liberties for the sake of political power? Or Dr. Anthony Fauci conspiring with his cronies in the world scientific community to turn the lab leak theory into a conspiracy theory? What if they were shown a clip of Rep. Adam Schiff trying to impeach a president over what he knew to be lies? What would they think about H.R. 1, the Democrats’ latest attempt to consolidate power for years to come?

The answer might be no. Because they would see that the most dangerous threat America faces today is our own government.

Joe Manchin Delivers the Hurt to Chuck Schumer

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by David Bailey from Pixabay

Filibuster or no filibuster, the For the People Act is not going to become law.

In an op-ed published in the Charleston Gazette-Mail late Saturday night, West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat in a bright red state, announced that he will vote against the For the People Act.

Since this legislation has no Republican support, Manchin’s decision pretty much kills the bill. Democrats will certainly reintroduce it in a future Congress, but hopefully Republicans will control either the House or the Senate or both chambers by then.

Manchin wrote, “The right to vote is fundamental to our American democracy and protecting that right should not be about party or politics. Least of all, protecting this right, which is a value I share, should never be done in a partisan manner.”

He recognizes that this legislation has become “overtly politicized” and took a swipe at the Republican legislatures in Georgia and Florida for passing laws that will require all voters to show an ID, writing that they “seek to needlessly restrict voting.” But he also criticized the Democrats “who ignore the need to secure our elections.”

If sweeping changes are made to election laws “in a partisan manner,” the Senator said it will guarantee that “partisan divisions continue to deepen.”

He points out the Democrats’ plan to eliminate the filibuster to pass this bill and reminds them of how important the filibuster has been “to protecting the rights of Democrats in the past.”

As a reminder, just four short years ago, in 2017 when Republicans held control of the White House and Congress, President Donald Trump was publicly urging Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster. Then, it was Senate Democrats who were proudly defending the filibuster. Thirty-three Senate Democrats penned a letter to Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. and Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., warning of the perils of eliminating the filibuster.

It has been said by much wiser people than me that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Well, what I’ve seen during my time in Washington is that every party in power will always want to exercise absolute power, absolutely. Our founders were wise to see the temptation of absolute power and built in specific checks and balances to force compromise that serves to preserve our fragile democracy. The Senate, its processes and rules, have evolved over time to make absolute power difficult while still delivering solutions to the issues facing our country and I believe that’s the Senate’s best quality.

Yes, this process can be frustrating and slow. It will force compromises that are not always ideal. But consider the alternative. Do we really want to live in an America where one party can dictate and demand everything and anything it wants, whenever it wants? I have always said, “If I can’t go home and explain it, I can’t vote for it.” And I cannot explain strictly partisan election reform or blowing up the Senate rules to expedite one party’s agenda.

The truth is there is a better way – if we seek to find it together.

And he concludes:

I believe that partisan voting legislation will destroy the already weakening binds of our democracy, and for that reason, I will vote against the For the People Act. Furthermore, I will not vote to weaken or eliminate the filibuster. For as long as I have the privilege of being your U.S. senator, I will fight to represent the people of West Virginia, to seek bipartisan compromise no matter how difficult and to develop the political bonds that end divisions and help unite the country we love.

On Thursday, Manchin told NBC News’ Capital Hill correspondent Garrett Haake that he’s not interested in passing an infrastructure bill with only Democratic support. “Basically, we need to be bipartisan,” Manchin said.

This is excellent news for Republicans and we can even forgive him for disagreeing with us on the voter ID requirement.

This is the second blow in less than a week for Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. The first came from the Senate Parliamentarian. The majority party is allowed to use reconciliation twice in one year. The Democrats have used it once to pass the $1.9 trillion Covid relief bill and have one opportunity left. Schumer believed he had found a way to get an extra shot, however, the parliamentarian ruled that it can’t be used to avoid a filibuster. Which is precisely how he had intended to use it. I posted about this story here.

Memo to Democrats: Most European Governments Require Voter ID and Ban Absentee Voting

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by amberzen from Pixabay

The pandemic provided Democrats with the perfect excuse to loosen voting laws and to expand mail-in voting across the U.S. They were so delighted with the result, they’ve been on a crusade to make these dangerous measures permanent ever since.

The left claims the voting reform laws recently passed in Georgia and Florida to curb the abuses that many of us believe led to widespread fraud in the November 2020 election, as racist.

President Joe Biden has referred to Georgia’s requirement of voter ID for absentee ballots as an “atrocity.” He called the law “Jim Crow in the 21st Century” and “a blatant attack on the Constitution,” according to the BBC.

RealClearInvestigations‘ John R. Lott, Jr. is the president of the Crime Prevention Research Center. His organization recently put together a database of worldwide voting rules which quite clearly shows that U.S. voting requirements are among the most lenient. He summarized his findings in an article entitled, “America the Outlier: Voter Photo IDs Are the Rule in Europe and Elsewhere.”

Contrary to what the Democrats would have us believe, most countries require voters to show identification before casting a ballot. Lott found that “election integrity measures [voter ID requirements] are widely accepted globally, and have often been adopted by countries after they’ve experienced fraud under looser voting regimes.”

Furthermore, Lott learned that, in some countries, a driver’s license is deemed to be an insufficient form of ID. “The Czech Republic and Russia require passports or military-issued IDs and others use national identity cards. Others go even further: Colombia and Mexico each require a biometric ID to cast a ballot.”

“Of 47 nations surveyed in Europe — a place where, on other matters, American progressives often look to with envy — all but one country requires a government-issued photo voter ID to vote.” Lott notes that “The exception is the U.K., and even there, voter IDs are mandatory in Northern Ireland for all elections and in parts of England for local elections. Moreover, [UK Prime Minister] Boris Johnson’s government recently introduced legislation to have the rest of the country follow suit.”

In fact, Lott cites a recent comment from the deputy leader of the Scottish National Party, Kirsten Oswald, that sounds remarkably familiar to the attacks lobbed at Republicans in the U.S.

Oswald claimed that “Boris Johnson’s Trump-like plans to disenfranchise thousands of voters across Scotland and the UK are an act of blatant Tory voter suppression – and must be stopped.” She opined, “There is a very real danger that many lower income, ethnic minority and younger people will be prevented from voting to fix a problem that doesn’t exist. These laws are designed to suppress votes among groups that traditionally vote against the Tories. It’s a disgrace.”

And, like many progressives in the U.S., she would like to open up voting to 16 and 17-year-olds, “refugees and foreign nationals with leave to remain.”

The rest of the world views the practice of mail-in voting even more harshly than the U.S. Lott discovered that “74 percent of European countries entirely ban absentee voting for citizens who reside domestically. Another 6% limit it to those hospitalized or in the military, and they require third-party verification and a photo voter ID. Another 15% require a photo ID for absentee voting.”

Although voter IDs are not required in Japan, Lott explains the Japanese government “provides each voter with tickets that bear unique bar codes. If the voter loses the ticket or accidentally brings the ticket for another family member, polling staff verifies the voter’s name and address using a computer with access to the city’s database.” In that case, the voter would be required to show “government-issued photo identification.”

As I see it, having to present a ticket with a unique bar code is a variation on a voter ID requirement. It’s simply a different way to ensure that one citizen gets one vote.

New Zealand also provides its citizens with a unique code.

According to Lott, “Australia has by far the loosest rules. …  a photo ID is required to register to vote” only.

I would be willing to bet that before too long, after witnessing the problems created in the U.S. by lax voter ID requirements, the Australians tighten up their rules.

Most developed countries, Lott says, did not enact emergency voting measures because of the pandemic. Poland was an exception. They allowed universal mail-in ballots. “Poland’s rushed plan played out so poorly it dissuaded other countries from following suit.”

The Democrats’ argument that asking a voter to show ID is racist, as I see it, is itself racist, and I’m surprised that minorities don’t criticize them for it. It implies that minority voters are too dumb and too incapable to obtain an ID. How racist is that?

Asking a voter to prove that they are who they say they are is essential for election integrity. Those who oppose voter ID laws do so only because it opens up the opportunity for voter fraud. I am convinced that the unprecedented expansion of mail-in voting and the loss of accountability that followed, cost former President Donald Trump the presidency.

Democrats often point to the super progressive governments of European countries as something the U.S. should emulate. With the exception of the U.K. which is in the process of passing voter ID legislation, all European governments require voters to show IDs at the ballot box. There’s a reason for that – Europe values secure elections.

Next time a liberal begins criticizing voter ID requirements, show them Lott’s article.

Biden Managed a Trifecta of Stupid in His Tulsa Massacre Speech

Advertisements

 

Image by Alexey Hulsov from Pixabay

President Joe Biden traveled to Tulsa Oklahoma on Tuesday to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the 1921 Tulsa Massacre. His comments ranged from the ludicrous to the downright dangerous. We’ll start with the ludicrous.

In the clip below, Biden says: “You turn on the stations… I don’t know many commercials you see … two to three out of five have mixed race couples in them. That’s not by accident. They’re selling soap, man.”

Maybe he meant to say “hope” and mistakenly said “soap.” Perhaps I’m being overly critical and should have compassion for an old man who suffers from dementia. But can America really afford to have a leader with dementia?

This man is going to face Russian President Vladimir Putin in two weeks. And at some point, he’ll meet with the most dangerous, ruthless man on the planet, Xi Jinping.

Moving on, Biden said, “According to the intelligence community, terrorism from white supremacy is the most lethal threat to the homeland today. Not ISIS, not Al Qaeda, white supremacy. That’s not me. That’s the intelligence community.”

Well, if that’s what the intelligence community really concludes, they should all be fired and replaced.

Our President continues: “Look around at hate crimes against Asian Americans and Jewish Americans. Hate never goes away. Hate only hides. … My administration will soon lay out our broader strategy to counter domestic terrorism and the violence driven by the most heinous hate crimes and other forms of bigotry.”

I’m not denying that white supremacy is an evil ideology, but it is far from the most lethal threat we face. The most deadly threats to the U.S. are currently China, Russia, and the violence caused by gangs and the drug cartels which the Biden Administration’s open border policy has just exacerbated. Any threat assessment that leaves out all of the above is disingenuous.

The President needs to take a closer look at the statistics which show that black Americans commit, both proportionately and in number, far more hate crimes against Asian Americans than any other race.

And it’s not only white supremacists who are behind the recent spate of anti-Semitic attacks in the U.S. The flag-bearing, pro-Palestinians we’re seeing in the news don’t look all that white to me.

Consider the blatant anti-Semitic statements coming from Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives and the tolerance of those remarks by a large portion of other party members. And, in case Biden was wondering, the world noticed his own rather tepid support of Israel during the recent hostilities with Hamas.

Anti-Semitic sentiment in the U.S. is NOT coming from the Republican Party that Biden’s comments were targeting.

Biden leaves out the Democrats’ war against whites. I would argue that the party’s embrace of wokeism might be the most serious threat of all. It’s certainly done more to divide Americans than anything else.

Biden then makes a very racist, insulting remark, although he won’t be called out for it. He said, “…young black entrepreneurs are just as capable of succeeding given the chance as white entrepreneurs are, but they don’t have lawyers, they don’t have accountants …” This comment is similar in substance to the Democrats’ argument that requiring voters to present ID suppresses the minority vote. This Democratic narrative is based on the assumption that blacks aren’t as smart or as capable as whites. I’ve never understood why blacks aren’t offended by that.

Biden, whose administration has done more to subvert America in less than five months than white supremacists could ever do, should not be lecturing us on what great nations do.

I’ll tell you what great nations don’t do. They don’t try to punish their citizens for atrocities that happened long before they were born. They don’t try to rewrite history. They don’t try to persecute their political enemies. Nor do they base their policy decisions on what will cement their power for generations to come.

The most dangerous threat we face today is our current government.

Crazytime: 950 Military Ballots in Georgia Audit Sample – 100 Percent Went to Biden

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by OpenClipart-Vectors from Pixabay

Steve Bannon spoke to John Fredericks, host of radio show “Outside the Beltway,” on Monday about the audit of 147,000 mail-in ballots cast in the state of Georgia during the November 2020 election.

Out of an analysis batch of 950 military ballots, Fredericks told Bannon, “Joe Biden got 950 votes, Trump zero. That’s 100 percent. That is virtually impossible.”

Fredericks said he’d had Georgia state Sen. Burt Jones as a guest on his show earlier and that Jones and a second state senator are now calling for the Georgia Bureau of Investigation to get involved and work side by side with the forensic audit team.

Auditors are trying to determine if any of the ballots cast are counterfeit, he explained.

He noted that “six affidavits of veteran election officials are alleging that up to 30,000 of these 147,000 ballots are fake. Somebody printed them up on a machine and ran them through the vote counting machines.”

First, he tells Bannon, “they’re on different paper.”

Second, “they’re not folded.” These ballots are presumed to have come through the mail or from a dropbox making it inconceivable they haven’t been folded.

Third, “You’ve got the same exact bubble mark on the ballot – the same one for upwards of 30,000 ballots.”

Stunningly, “97 percent of them voting for Joe Biden, 97 percent voting for John Ossoff.”

Fourth, “the affidavits say that the bubble marks are not made by an ink pen or pencil, that they’re made by a machine. These are the things that they’re going to look at.”

Bannon laughs and Fredericks adds, “Not only that, but they were in sequential order. That means that every ballot that came in, in the mail is somehow in exact sequential order?”

Pivoting back to his earlier interview with Sen. Jones, Frederick said, “If Judge Amero [the judge who approved the audit to move forward] makes a declaratory judgement that counterfeit ballots were there, that some of them were counted twice, that’s the other possibility here, he’s going to demand that Gov. [Brian] Kemp call a special session and they’re going to start decertifying elections.”

In addition to the presidential race, these ballot anomalies may have affected down ballot races as well.

Fredericks pointed out that Sen. David Perdue, a Republican, may have won in the first ballot. (Perdue was required to win by a minimum of 2 percent in November in order to avoid the January 5 Georgia run-off. His margin of victory over his Democratic opponent, Jon Ossoff, wound up to be only 1.8 percent. Current Sen. Jon Ossoff prevailed in January by 1.2 percent, flipping the seat.)

Close House races and state House and Senate races were likely affected as well.

These are some pretty shocking revelations. Perhaps what is most astounding is, assuming this is all proven, that the fraudsters weren’t more careful. Absentee ballots in sequential order? Different paper? One hundred percent of the sample military ballots and 97 percent of the others going to Joe Biden?

It’s possible that they’d underestimated Trump’s strength and had to work very fast to make up the deficit.

At any rate, there were additional irregularities that took place on election night that were never satisfactorily explained.

Early on Election Night, it was reported that a pipe had burst at the State Farm Arena and that it would be necessary to stop counting the votes temporarily. It turned out that a urinal had overflowed early in the morning on Election Day.

We all remember the rather remarkable videos of election workers pulling several cases of ballots out from under a table with a tablecloth after the election supervisor had dismissed most of the workers on Election Night.

If ever there was a smoking gun, that video was one. No rational explanation was ever given for that episode. The news cycle simply moved on and it was forgotten.

Fran Watson. Where have we heard that name before?

Watson spoke to then-President Donald Trump on December 23 and briefed the deputy secretary of state, Jordan Fuchs, afterward.

Fuchs later misrepresented the phone call in a conversation with a Washington Post reporter who printed a story about the lies. It went viral.

When the Wall Street Journal published an audio recording of the call which revealed the actual words that had been said, The Post was forced to issue a rare and embarrassing correction.

For nearly three months, knowing that the original Washington Post story misquoted the President, Fran Watson and Jordan Fuchs remained silent. House Democrats even used the words Trump had not uttered in that phone call as evidence in his second impeachment trial.

The Trump legal team challenged thousands of votes they believed were fraudulent. Below is a list published by The Federalist.

  • 2,560 felons
  • 66,247 underage registrants
  • 2,423 people who were not on the state’s voter rolls
  • 4,926 voters who had registered in another state after they registered in Georgia, making them ineligible
  • 395 people who cast votes in another state for the same election
  • 15,700 voters who had filed national change of address forms without re-registering
  • 40,279 people who had moved counties without re-registering
  • 1,043 people who claimed the physical impossibility of a P.O. Box as their address
  • 98 people who registered after the deadline, and, among others
  • 10,315 people who were deceased on election day (8,718 of whom had been registered as dead before their votes were accepted)

Although anti-Trumpers inside the Georgia Secretary of State’s office have repeatedly tried to end speculation surrounding events that occurred at the Fulton County State Farm Arena ballot-counting center on Election Night, they’ve never completely succeeded.

I bet no one is more surprised about this latest turn of events than the secretary of state himself, Brad Raffensperger. It couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

 

‘Rural Oregon Wants Out of Oregon’; 5 Counties in the State Vote to Join Idaho

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Pexels from Pixabay

Secession was on the menu for five rural counties in Oregon in Tuesday’s election. Voters in Malheur, Sherman, Grant, Baker, and Lake counties would like to become part of Idaho, according to The Epoch Times.

The Times explains the odds of this actually happening are long because of the numerous hurdles involved. Here’s what it would take:

It would require a formal vote in the Democratic-controlled Oregon legislature. If that goes through, Oregon and Idaho would have to come up with a deal, which would then have to be ratified by the U.S. Congress.

Throughout the history of the United States, changing state lines has been a rare occurrence—all taking place before the 20th century. In 1792, Kentucky was created from Virginia’s territory, Maine was created from Massachusetts in 1820, and West Virginia in 1863 was admitted into the United States when Union states and counties separated themselves from the Confederate ones during the Civil War.

Oregon’s Jefferson and Union counties voted last year to leave the state and the measure will be on the ballot for two additional counties, Harney and Douglas, in an upcoming election, the report said.

The group behind this effort is called “Move Oregon’s Border for a Greater Idaho.” Unhappy with the liberal government in Oregon, they’d rather be part of a freer, more conservative state.

Mike McCarter, president of Citizens for Greater Idaho, told a local media outlet, “This election proves that rural Oregon wants out of Oregon. If Oregon really believes in liberal values such as self-determination, the Legislature won’t hold our counties captive against our will. If we’re allowed to vote for which government officials we want, we should be allowed to vote for which government we want as well.”

McCarter also said that Republican Idaho state Reps. Barbara Ehardt and Judy Boyle “plan to introduce legislation to move toward possible relocation of the Idaho/Oregon border next January.”

Who could possibly blame these voters for wanting to leave the insanity that defines Oregon’s leadership for the conservative governance of Idaho? Last month, Idaho’s Republican Gov. Brad Little signed legislation banning Critical Race Theory from being taught in public schools. Idaho is the first state in the U.S. to do so. I posted about this here.

This morning, I wrote about the passage of two constitutional amendments in Pennsylvania on Tuesday that will reign in the emergency powers of the state’s Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf.

Are Americans starting to fight back against the massive Democratic power grab? I certainly hope so.

Pennsylvania Votes to Restrict Governor’s Power; Bring it Back to the Legislature

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by PublicDomainPictures from Pixabay

In one of the first signs that American citizens are cognizant of the country’s dangerous descent into one-party rule, residents of Pennsylvania sent a powerful message to those responsible on Tuesday: Stop!

The pandemic provided governors, mayors and other local leaders with extraordinary opportunities to expand their influence over the citizens in their states. Nowhere were these emergency powers more egregiously abused than in states, cities and towns governed by Democrats. By all measures, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf was one of the worst offenders.

WHYY-TV reports that two constitutional amendments passed statewide referenda that will provide the state’s General Assembly with “more power to block emergency declarations.”

The amendment to Article III, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, grants the legislature the ability “to terminate or extend a disaster emergency declaration without needing the Governor’s approval.”

Prior to this amendment, measures passed by both the state House and Senate required the approval of the Governor. Needless to say, all of the Republican-controlled legislature’s attempts to end or minimize Wolf’s orders ended in vetoes which required a two-thirds vote in both chambers to override.

With the passage of this resolution, a simple majority vote in the House and the Senate is all that is necessary. Veto power is no longer available to the Governor.

Under the old law, the Governor had the authority to issue an emergency order which would remain in effect for 90 days, at which point he or she could either renew it or end it.

The new amendment stipulates that a “disaster emergency declaration will expire automatically after 21 days, regardless of the severity of the emergency, unless the General Assembly takes action to extend the disaster emergency.”

WHYY notes that a COVID-19 emergency order is currently in effect and is set to expire on Memorial Day. If the Governor chooses to renew it, a simple majority vote in the state House and Senate could end it in 21 days.

Democrats are worried that the legislature will act “to cancel COVID-19 emergency declarations without considering public health or consulting with the Governor’s office.”

House Majority Leader Kerry Benninghoff and Speaker Bryan Cutler, both Republicans, sought to reassure them in a joint statement which said, “We stand ready to reasonably and responsibly manage Pennsylvania through this ongoing global pandemic, the scourge of opioid addiction, and other long-term challenges that may come to face this Commonwealth.”

Senate Majority Leader Kim Ward and Senate President Jake Corman were more direct. In a joint statement, they wrote, “This decision by the people is not about taking power away from any one branch of government. It’s about re-establishing the balance of power between three equal branches of government as guaranteed by the constitution.”

Gov. Wolf, unsurprisingly, vehemently opposed these amendments. According to The Morning Call, “in January he said that Republicans were injecting partisan politics into emergency disaster response in a ‘thinly veiled power grab.’ Just last week, he warned that the provisions were a threat to a functioning society that must respond to increasingly complicated disasters.”

A thinly veiled power grab? I’m practically speechless. What stunning hypocrisy.

Anyway, the Governor held a news conference on Wednesday in Pottstown, Pennsylvania. He said he’d spoken to leaders of both parties in the legislature to discuss “the path forward,” the Morning Call reported.

“We’re starting that conversation. You can’t just flick a switch and make the change,” he told reporters. “But the voters have spoken, and we’re going to do what I think the voters expect us to do and make the best of it.”

The Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency expressed their disappointment with the election results in a statement which read, “The constitutional amendments have the potential to politicize future disasters and their management. PEMA always stands ready to respond to any situation but we’re extremely disappointed that our efforts, and the efforts of our other state agencies, could be constrained by partisan politics, which has no place in emergency response efforts.”

The passage of these amendments was a victory for those whom the principles of liberty and freedom still have meaning.

In an email provided to The Western Journal, Commonwealth Foundation President and CEO Charles Mitchell reacted to the passage of these amendments with tremendous joy and relief. He called Tuesday a “momentous day in the history of Pennsylvania and the United States” and wrote that, “voters have defended some of our most important founding principles, including the separation of powers between branches of government and the fundamental importance of each citizen’s liberty.”

Many governors “saw their emergency powers laws as a vehicle for them to act in contradiction to their own state constitutions and the U.S. Constitution for as long as they’d like.” Most of us would agree with that statement.

Mitchell quotes James Madison in Federalist Paper No. 51: “But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department, the necessary constitutional means, and personal motives, to resist encroachments of the others…it may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government.”

“Two hundred and thirty-three years after Madison wrote that statement, voters in Pennsylvania reaffirmed its truth,” Mitchell concluded.

May Pennsylvania voters be the first of many states in the nation to impose restrictions on a governor’s authority under an emergency disaster declaration.

 

A version of this article was originally published by The Western Journal.

Has it Become ‘Partisan’ and ‘Anti-Democratic’ to Choose Freedom or to Defend the Constitution?

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by StudioLabs from Pixabay

When I launched this blog a couple of months ago, WordPress recommended the addition of a tagline. I wrote that it was the winter of 1776 in America today. I quickly deleted it thinking it might sound overly dramatic.

But as the missteps of the Biden Administration pile up, and Americans’ liberties are under assault as never before, I find myself reconsidering that statement.

I was reminded of the tagline again last week after reading the open letter signed by a group of 124 retired generals and admirals (reprinted below) which lays out the “full-blown assault” on our Constitutional rights since the start of the Biden Administration. The signers also question the integrity of the election that brought us this administration.

The missive begins as follows: “Our Nation is in deep peril. We are in a fight for our survival as a Constitutional Republic like no other time since our founding in 1776.”

Far from recommending revolution in the streets, the retired commanders write that the problems we face “must be countered now by electing congressional and presidential candidates who will always act to defend our Constitutional Republic.”

Unable to argue against the truth contained in their message, the left is up in arms over the group’s politicization of the military.

Left wing media outlet Politico immediately called out the letter in an article entitled, “‘Disturbing and reckless’: Retired brass spread election lie in attack on Biden, Democrats.” They cite several former and current members of the military who strongly condemn this effort.

One serving Navy officer, who did not want to be identified publicly, called it “disturbing and reckless.”

Jim Golby, an expert in civil-military relations, called it a “shameful effort to use their rank and the military’s reputation for such a gross and blatant partisan attack,” while a retired Air Force colonel who teaches cadets at the Air Force Academy, Marybeth Ulrich, labeled it “anti-democratic.”

“I think it hurts the military and by extension it hurts the country,” said retired Adm. Mike Mullen, a former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, describing it as replete with “right-wing Republican talking points.”

Has it become “partisan” to want Americans to embrace freedom and liberty, the principles upon which our nation was founded? Is it really “disturbing and reckless” to ask that the Biden Administration obey and enforce our founding document, the Constitution? Is it “anti-democratic” to ensure our elections remain free and fair? Or to encourage Americans to elect candidates who will defend the Constitution?

There is nothing radical in this letter.

As for members of the military remaining apolitical, did they forget Pentagon chief Lloyd Austin’s hyper-political crusade to root out radical extremists (aka Trump supporters) from the military? Or his highly partisan fight against what the Biden Administration considers the newest threat to national security, climate change?

How about the rabid efforts of retired Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, Obama’s top commander in Afghanistan, to derail President Trump’s reelection?

Trump’s former Defense Secretary James Mattis resigned because he disagreed with his commander in chief’s decision to withdraw troops from Syria. Mattis, Mr. Integrity, has accused Trump of dividing Americans and referred to him as a threat to the Constitution.

Examples of former military brass speaking on behalf of Democrats and/or to denigrate Trump abound and are entirely acceptable. It’s only the reverse that is taboo.

Questioned by Politico, retired Army Maj. Gen. Joe Arbuckle, who organized the letter, responded by email. He wrote “retired generals and admirals normally do not engage in political actions, but the situation facing our nation today is dire and we must speak out in order to be faithful to our oath to support and defend the Constitution of the US against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

“We are facing threats greater than at any other time since our country was founded … many of these threats flow directly from policy positions and actions of our own government. It is critical that the threats to our national security be brought to the attention of the American people and that is the main purpose of the letter. To remain silent would be a dereliction of duty,” he added.

It would indeed.

Fellow Americans, it is the winter of 1776.

Please read this important letter.

 

Open Letter from Retired Generals and Admirals: May 11, 2021

“We are in a fight for our survival as a Constitutional Republic like no other time since our founding in 1776. The conflict is between supporters of Socialism and Marxism vs. supporters of Constitutional freedom and liberty.

“During the 2020 election an “Open Letter from Senior Military Leaders” was signed by 317 retired Generals and Admirals and, it said the 2020 election could be the most important election since our country was founded. “With the Democrat Party welcoming Socialists and Marxists, our historic way of life is at stake.” Unfortunately, that statement’s truth was quickly revealed, beginning with the election process itself.

“Without fair and honest elections that accurately reflect the “will of the people” our Constitutional Republic is lost. Election integrity demands insuring there is one legal vote cast and counted per citizen. Legal votes are identified by State Legislature’s approved controls using government IDs, verified signatures, etc. Today, many are calling such commonsense controls “racist” in an attempt to avoid having fair and honest elections. Using racial terms to suppress proof of eligibility is itself a tyrannical intimidation tactic. Additionally, the “Rule of Law” must be enforced in our election processes to ensure integrity. The FBI and Supreme Court must act swiftly when election irregularities are surfaced and not ignore them as was done in 2020. Finally, H.R.1 & S.1, (if passed), would destroy election fairness and allow Democrats to forever remain in power violating our Constitution and ending our Representative Republic.

“Aside from the election, the Current Administration has launched a full-blown assault on our Constitutional rights in a dictatorial manner, bypassing the Congress, with more than 50 Executive Orders quickly signed, many reversing the previous Administration’s effective policies and regulations. Moreover, population control actions such as excessive lockdowns, school and business closures, and most alarming, censorship of written and verbal expression are all direct assaults on our fundamental Rights. We must support and hold accountable politicians who will act to counter Socialism, Marxism and Progressivism, support our Constitutional Republic, and insist on fiscally responsible governing while focusing on all Americans, especially the middle class, not special interest or extremist groups which are used to divide us into warring factions.

“Additional National Security Issues and Actions:

• Open borders jeopardize national security by increasing human trafficking, drug cartels, terrorists entry, health/CV19 dangers, and humanitarian crises. Illegals are flooding our Country bringing high economic costs, crime, lowering wages, and illegal voting in some states. We must reestablish border controls and continue building the wall while supporting our dedicated border control personnel. Sovereign nations must have controlled borders.

• China is the greatest external threat to America. Establishing cooperative relations with the Chinese Communist Party emboldens them to continue progress toward world domination, militarily, economically, politically and technologically. We must impose more sanctions and restrictions to impede their world domination goal and protect America’s interests.

• The free flow of information is critical to the security of our Republic, as illustrated by freedom of speech and the press being in the 1st Amendment of our Constitution. Censoring speech and expression, distorting speech, spreading disinformation by government officials, private entities, and the media is a method to suppress the free flow of information, a tyrannical technique used in closed societies. We must counter this on all fronts beginning with removing Section 230 protection from big tech.

• Re-engaging in the flawed Iran Nuclear Deal would result in Iran acquiring nuclear weapons along with the means to deliver them, thereby upsetting Mideast peace initiatives and aiding a terrorist nation whose slogans and goals include “death to America” and “death to Israel”. We must resist the new China/Iran agreement and not support the Iran Nuclear Deal. In addition, continue with the Mideast peace initiatives, the “Abraham Accords,” and support for Israel.

• Stopping the Keystone Pipeline eliminates our recently established energy independence and causes us to be energy dependent on nations not friendly to us, while eliminating valuable US jobs. We must open the Keystone Pipeline and regain our energy independence for national security and economic reasons.

• Using the U.S. military as political pawns with thousands of troops deployed around the U.S. Capitol Building, patrolling fences guarding against a non-existent threat, along with forcing Politically Correct policies like the divisive critical race theory into the military at the expense of the War Fighting Mission, seriously degrades readiness to fight and win our Nation’s wars, creating a major national security issue. We must support our Military and Vets; focus on war fighting, eliminate the corrosive infusion of Political Correctness into our military which damages morale and war fighting cohesion.

• The “Rule of Law” is fundamental to our Republic and security. Anarchy as seen in certain cities cannot be tolerated. We must support our law enforcement personnel and insist that DAs, our courts, and the DOJ enforce the law equally, fairly, and consistently toward all.

• The mental and physical condition of the Commander in Chief cannot be ignored. He must be able to quickly make accurate national security decisions involving life and limb anywhere, day or night. Recent Democrat leadership’s inquiries about nuclear code procedures sends a dangerous national security signal to nuclear armed adversaries, raising the question about who is in charge. We must always have an unquestionable chain of command.

“Under a Democrat Congress and the Current Administration, our Country has taken a hard left turn toward Socialism and a Marxist form of tyrannical government which must be countered now by electing congressional and presidential candidates who will always act to defend our Constitutional Republic. The survival of our Nation and its cherished freedoms, liberty, and historic values are at stake.

“We urge all citizens to get involved now at the local, state and/or national level to elect political representatives who will act to Save America, our Constitutional Republic, and hold those currently in office accountable. The “will of the people” must be heard and followed.”

Signed by:

RADM Ernest B. Acklin, USCG, ret.
MG Joseph T. Anderson, USMC, ret.
RADM Philip Anselmo, USN, ret.
MG Joseph Arbuckle, USA, ret.
BG John Arick, USMC, ret.
RADM Jon W. Bayless, Jr. USN, ret.
RDML James Best, USN, ret.
BG Charles Bishop, USAF, ret.
BG William A. Bloomer, USMC, ret.
BG Donald Bolduc, USA, ret.
LTG William G. Boykin, USA, ret.
MG Edward R. Bracken, USAF, ret.
MG Patrick H. Brady, MOH, USA, ret.
VADM Edward S. Briggs, USN, ret.
LTG Richard “Tex’ Brown III USAF, ret.
BG Frank Bruno, USAF, ret.
VADM Toney M. Bucchi, USN, ret.
RADM John T. Byrd, USN, ret.
BG Jimmy Cash, USAF, ret.
LTG Dennis D. Cavin, USA, ret.
LTG James E. Chambers, USAF, ret.
MG Carroll D. Childers, USA, ret.
BG Clifton C. “Tip” Clark, USAF, ret.
VADM Ed Clexton, USN, ret.
MG Jay Closner, USAF, ret
MG Tommy F. Crawford, USAF, ret.
MG Robert E. Dempsey, USAF, ret.
BG Phillip Drew, USAF, ret.
MG Neil L. Eddins, USAF, ret.
RADM Ernest Elliot, USN, ret.
BG Jerome V. Foust, USA, ret.
BG Jimmy E. Fowler, USA, ret.
RADM J. Cameron Fraser, USN, ret.
MG John T. Furlow, USA, ret.
MG Timothy F. Ghormley, USMC, ret.
MG Francis C. Gideon, USAF, ret.
MG Lee V. Greer, USAF, ret.
RDML Michael R. Groothousen, Sr., USN, ret.
BG John Grueser, USAF, ret.
MG Ken Hagemann, USAF, ret.
BG Norman Ham, USAF, ret.
VADM William Hancock, USN, ret.
LTG Henry J. Hatch, USA, ret.
BG James M. Hesson, USA, ret.
MG Bill Hobgood, USA, ret.
BG Stanislaus J. Hoey, USA, ret.
MG Bob Hollingsworth, USMC, ret.
MG Jerry D. Holmes, USAF, ret.
MG Clinton V. Horn, USAF, ret.
LTG Joseph E. Hurd, USAF, ret.
VADM Paul Ilg, USN, ret.
MG T. Irby, USA, ret.
LTG Ronald Iverson, USAF, ret.
RADM (L) Grady L. Jackson
MG William K. James, USAF, ret.
LTG James H. Johnson, Jr. USA, ret.
ADM. Jerome L. Johnson, USN, ret.
BG Charles Jones, USAF, ret.
BG Robert R. Jordan, USA, ret.
BG Jack H. Kotter, USA, ret.
MG Anthony R. Kropp, USA, ret.
RADM Chuck Kubic, USN, ret.
BG Jerry L. Laws, USA, ret.
BG Douglas E. Lee, USA, ret.
MG Vernon B. Lewis, USA, ret.
MG Thomas G. Lightner, USA, ret.
MG James E. Livingston, USMC, ret.
MOH MG John D. Logeman, USAF, ret.
MG Jarvis Lynch, USMC, ret.
LTG Fred McCorkle, USMC, ret.
MG Don McGregor, USAF, ret.
LTG Thomas McInerney, USAF, ret.
RADM John H. McKinley, USN, ret.
BG Michael P. McRaney, USAF, ret.
BG Ronald S. Mangum, USA, ret.
BG James M. Mead, USMC, ret.
BG Joe Mensching, USAF, ret.
RADM W. F. Merlin, USCG, ret.
RADM (L) Mark Milliken, USN, ret.
MG John F. Miller, USAF, ret.
RADM Ralph M. Mitchell, Jr. USN, ret.
MG Paul Mock, USA. ret.
BG Daniel I. Montgomery, USA, ret.,
RADM John A. Moriarty, USN, ret.,
RADM David R. Morris, USN, ret.
RADM Bill Newman, USN, ret.
BG Joe Oder, USA, ret.
MG O’Mara, USAF, ret.
MG Joe S. Owens, USA, ret.
VADM Jimmy Pappas, USN, ret.
LTG Garry L. Parks, USMC, ret.
RADM Russ Penniman, RADM, USN, ret.
RADM Leonard F. Picotte, ret.
VADM John Poindexter, USN, ret.
RADM Ronald Polant, USCG, ret.
MG Greg Power, USAF, ret.
RDM Brian Prindle, USN, ret.
RADM J.J. Quinn, USN, ret.
LTG Clifford H. Rees, Jr. USAF, ret.
RADM Norman T. Saunders, USCG, ret.
MG Richard V. Secord, USAF, ret.
RADM William R. Schmidt, USN, ret.
LTG Hubert Smith, USA, ret.
MG James N. Stewart, USAF, ret.
RADM Thomas Stone, USN., ret.
BG Joseph S. Stringham, USA, ret.
MG Michael Sullivan, USMC, ret.
RADM (U) Jeremy Taylor, USN, ret.
LTG David Teal, USAF, ret.
VADM Howard B. Thorsen, USCG, ret.
RADM Robert P. Tiernan, USN, ret.
LTG Garry Trexler, USAF, ret.
BG James T. Turlington, M.D., USAF, ret.
BG Richard J. Valente, USA ret.
MG Paul Vallely, USA, ret.
MG Russell L. Violett, USAF, ret.
BG George H. Walker, Jr. USAR Corp of Engineers, ret.
MG Kenneth Weir, USMCR, ret.
BG William O. Welch, USAF, ret.
MG John M. White, USAF, ret.
MG Geoffrey P. Wiedeman, JR. USAF, ret.
MG Richard O. Wightman, Jr., USA, ret.
RADM Denny Wisely, USN, ret.
LTG John Woodward, ret.

Ted Cruz Calls Out Democrats’ ‘Corrupt Politicians Act’ for the Horror It Is

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by OpenClipart-Vectors from Pixabay

A Senate committee took up debate on the Democrats’ sweeping voting reform package on Tuesday. Best known as H.R.1, the name of the bill is the “For the People Act.” It should really be called the “For the Democrats Act” because if this bill were to become law, America would be governed by one-party rule for generations to come. The House passed H.R. 1 in early March.

H.R. 1 represents the Biden Administration’s biggest power grab yet. This bill is unpopular across the board with the GOP.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a Republican, denounced the bill, which some call the “Corrupt Politicians Act,” in no uncertain terms on Tuesday.

In the video below, Cruz tells his colleagues this bill is “profoundly dangerous.”

“The reason it suppresses millions of votes is by allowing millions of people to vote illegally, and that is the intended effect and that would be the actual effect of this bill. It dilutes the legal votes of American citizens.”

Senator Schumer spoke of “the stench of oppression when Democrats drafted Jim Crow the last time. Well, the stench of oppression is here again. Sen. Schumer said ‘the eyes of history are on you.’ The eyes of history are on you as well, and let me point out something. It was just a few years ago that the Republicans had control of the White House, the Senate and the House. We didn’t do this. We didn’t try to change the election rules so that Democrats could never be elected. We didn’t engage in the corruption to say, ‘We’re gonna rig the game.’ So, if the voters decide to throw the bums out, the voters don’t get to do that, because we’re going to put our thumb on the scale so that only our party wins. To my knowledge, not a single Republican suggested doing that.

“This bill doesn’t protect voting rights. It steals voting rights from the American people.”

Republican strategist Karl Rove joined Fox News’ Bill Hemmer on Tuesday to give a summary of just how bad this bill would be for the party. He said “it federalizes elections and has a bunch of bad things in it.”

The first point is that taxpayers would be paying for congressional campaigns. The federal government will match contributions by a multiple of six. Rove said, for example, “if you gave a $200 contribution,” the government (with taxpayer dollars) would contribute up to $1,200.

“No voter ID laws. Every state voter ID law in the country is wiped out.”

It makes it difficult to keep accurate voter registration lists. “States can’t check people at the polls against the registration lists. People can show up and change their name and their address at the polls and that’s not set aside as a provisional ballot to be further checked. It’s thrown into the big batch. You can’t check with other states. You can’t remove people from the voter list even if they’ve not voted, you’ve sent them a postcard, and the postcard has come back and says that person no longer lives at the address. But you have to leave them on the rolls,” Rove explained.

“Everyone gets a ballot mailed to them. And no ID, no notary, no witnesses,” he noted. “They mail them out and anybody can fill them out and send them back in.”

“It bans outside observers at the polls. The only people who can challenge a voter or somebody who shows up at the polls is an election official, not an observer representing either the Democrat or Republican parties.

Please click here to continue reading article.