‘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.

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.

Richard Edward in the Garden of Politics

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Mabel Amber, who will one day from Pixabay

I am on my second cup of coffee and I still can’t face the day (sorry Mr. Lightfoot). Why? I am scheduled to witness, firsthand, the premier of manual labor, a play I would rather not attend. Since the fourth First Lady’s acquisition of an unusually large garden plot, the task of clean-up and planting preparation has been hanging over my head. I run through my mental checklist before leaving for the plot …

Irrigation? Check. Not designed and installed yet, but those soaker hoses and that timer you bought yesterday should work. At least there is a hose bib with running water.

Planter beds? Check. Not installed yet, but those raised bed kits that you bought yesterday shouldn’t take too much effort to assemble and fill with steer poop.

Crop cage? Check. Framework installed and in relatively good shape, except for all those places where the chicken wire overlaps and needs to be secured.  Those zip ties and wire clips you purchased should come in handy.

Oh well, glance at the watch, it’s not quite yet gotten to be 100° before noon, so it could be worse.

As I run through my checklist, I notice that my cat awakens from her nocturnal slumber, perched upon the counter-height chair, visions of rogue mice beginning to fade from her cat brain. She glances my direction, slow blinks, jumps from her perch and immediately begins her morning routine of cat yoga….assuming her favorite position of downward feline.

Mr. Narrator (interrupts): “Richard Edward, it’s not getting any cooler outside. Quit stalling, get your tools together and get on with the garden site prep.”

Richard Edward: “You’re right Mr. Narrator. I’ve been putting this off. There really is so much work to be done, even before the actual work of planting and harvesting, that the reward of organic vegetables appears diminished. Anyway, I’ll grab the rakes and hoes and meet you and the fourth first at the car.”

As I step into my garage, the lizard portion of my cortex lights up. Rakes and hoes, why does that seem so familiar? Then I realize that the ‘rakes and hoes’ tools that I seek now are in reality, those very political actors that I loathe so much. Now I understand why I don’t want to do this; these tools of the garden are simply representations; its really about the bogeymen of my political awareness — professional politicians.

Mr. Narrator (interrupts again): “Richard Edward, stop! Not all politicians are rakes and hoes. While I do see some similarities with the current administration’s leadership, many of those political actors are not solely consigned to behave like the ‘lower tools’ in life’s garden. Rakes and hoes may be basic tools, but it doesn’t mean that they are base. There are some honest folks in Washington.”

I hate when Mr. Narrator makes word play.

Richard Edward: “Ok, I’ll play your garden word game. You just might be correct. But even so, in the garden that is D.C., there really are tools, rakes, hoes and more than a few weeds that need to be removed.”

“Rakes? I’d nominate Slick Willy, Hunter Biden and yes, even Joey Robinette in his younger days. John Kennedy was also reputed to be something of a rake, no?”

“Hoes? Well, there are far too many to mention in gentlemanly conversation, but how many pols have you seen that will do anything for a (lobbyist) buck? While its not the world’s oldest profession (navigators will tell you that someone first had to lead the customer to find them), it appears that many legislators and those in the administration have decided that selling one’s integrity is a profitable enterprise. I mean, how many folks on the CDC staff are eligible for royalties from drug patents?”

“Tools? The list is long Mr. Narrator. Crazy Nancy Pelosi, Fang Fang Swalwell, ‘Guam” Johnson and that shifty, bug-eyed dude from CA who always has the ‘goods’ on everyone but just never delivers, Mitt Romney and then any Democrat member of any oversight committee. So many tools they could open a big box garden store. C’mon man, name one Democratic legislator who is smarter than a hand trowel?”

“Weeds? Don’t get me started! Toxic, strangling the life out of legitimate political endeavors. … The weeds could be the worst of the bunch in the political garden; spreading poison amongst the legitimate programs that are trying to bear fruit. Weeds compete with good crops for water, soil, sunlight, nourishment and yet they produce nothing. (Looking at you AOC, Bernie Sanders, Auntie Maxine, Ilhan Omar.)”

Mr. Narrator: “Okay, Richard Edward, enough.  You’ve made your point. We obviously need a new master gardener in D.C.”

Richard Edward: “Yes, Mr. Narrator, I knew in my knower that you’d see my point of view. Good gardeners help create life-sustaining environments, tend and care for both seedlings and mature plants, ensure access to water and food, make sure every plant in their garden has its own space and place to grow, and they keep the weeds from choking the good plants.”

“Good legislators do kind of the same things for their constituents. They help create lawful and peaceful environments, promote legislation and administrative programs that benefit the young and the old, help their constituents stay employed, stay in school and ensure that they have access to programs that are designed to promote personal and/or professional growth. As always, the good ones try to keep the weeds from showing up in their districts.

If you think about who represents you, maybe its time to pull a few weeds and if you have to, hire a new gardener.”

“If you think that good gardeners might make good legislators, please let Richard Edward and Mr. Narrator know why you think so. … And if you have one, happy gardening!

— Richard Edward Tracy

No, Actually the 2020 Election Has NOT Been Resolved

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by heblo from Pixabay

While reading an article about Liz Cheney in The Spectator earlier, I came across the following:

“Liz Cheney erred neither in condemning the riot nor in castigating Trump’s Ahab-like obsession over his loss but in remaining stuck in January 6 as the calendar moved on for the rest of us. Cheney’s position that Joe Biden legitimately beat Donald Trump, as readers of this column and the Spectator A.M. newsletter know, found endorsement here back in November. Trump lost by 74 electoral votes, after all, not seven. But that argument took place in the media, in courts, and in Congress more than four months ago. Cheney, perhaps more so than Trump, needs to get over this as a resolved question.”

It is not a resolved question. In fact, it’s far from a resolved question. The argument took place in the media and for about five minutes in Congress, but former President Donald Trump was never given his day in court.

The anomalies in the days following the election quickly multiplied. Over 1,000 election observers signed affidavits stating they had witnessed wrongdoing. Judges refused to hear their cases. No court would hear Trump’s cases. Not even the Supreme Court.

Immediately, the media set the narrative that the election was settled. When over 90 percent of the media unites around the same narrative, a phenomenon we witnessed repeatedly during the Trump years, the power is overwhelming.

Before too long, anyone who questioned Biden’s legitimacy was labeled as a conspiracy theorist. Then it simply became taboo to mention it.

But it still wasn’t settled.

In reporting a February Quinnipiac poll which revealed that 76 percent of Republicans believed widespread fraud had occurred in the election, CNN’s Chris Cillizza wrote “three quarters of Republicans believe a lie about the 2020 election.”

Stealing the presidency is a pretty audacious thing to do.

But, after watching the Democrats orchestrate the Russia Collusion hoax, a bogus impeachment, then a second impeachment against Trump, and turn Gen. Michael Flynn’s life into a living hell for four years to further their political goals, it’s not crazy to believe they would steal a presidential election.

In November 2020, over 2.1 million people voted in Arizona’s Maricopa County. These votes represent over 60 percent of all ballots cast in the state. The Republican-controlled state Senate is currently conducting a thorough forensic audit of all ballots cast in the County which has put the election back into the national headlines.

Almost eclipsing the story of the intensive audit that’s been underway for two weeks is the Democrats’ fury over it. (I posted about those efforts here.)

One of the first to cover the topic again was Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo, host of “Sunday Morning Futures.”

Bartiromo spoke to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton about the issue. “Let me switch gears and ask you about election integrity. This is a subject that has become taboo. We’re not allowed to question the 2020 election. We’re not allowed to question what is going on in Arizona or in Georgia. What do you say to what is going on in Georgia and how Texas is similar to that situation around election 2020?”

“Yeah, so if you look at election results from four years ago, Georgia and Texas were very similar,” the Republican responded. “We fought off 12 lawsuits. We were sued 12 times over mail-in ballots. It was Harris County, it was Travis County, these big urban counties that wanted to mail out all of these mail-in ballots in violation of state law. Clearly what was not allowed by the state legislature. And so, we fought these off.

“They didn’t want signature verification. We were told by a federal judge that was unconstitutional. So we had state lawsuits, different counties, federal lawsuits, we had 12 of them. We won every single one of them.

“Had we not won every single one of those lawsuits, I’m convinced that those ballots would have gone out and we would have been just like Georgia, who decided to capitulate and sign consent decrees and say, ‘It’s OK. We’re going to let these mail-in ballots go out. We’re going to allow no signature verification. We’re going to allow drop boxes.’

All of those things had an impact, and instead of Georgia and Texas having similar results this time because we defended those lawsuits, Trump won. We’re able to have a Republican legislature here, and in Georgia, it was completely turned.”

“So, are you saying that, because of what we saw in mail-in ballots in Georgia, you’re questioning the results?” Bartiromo asked.

“I absolutely am questioning,” Paxton replied. “I know what would have happened here. They would have stopped counting, just like they did in those states, and they would have been counting mail-in ballots until they get the right number of votes and suddenly Trump loses and we lose the state House here. We lose some of our Supreme Court justices. And it wouldn’t have been a legitimate count because we wouldn’t have followed state law.”

“So are you questioning what happened in the 2020 election?” she said.

“Absolutely,” he said. “They didn’t follow state law in these states. It’s clear. Whether you think there was fraud or not … we do know they didn’t follow state law.”

(The clip can be viewed here.)

Democrats to Biden: Illegal Immigrants Are ‘American Heroes’ Who Deserve Amnesty

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by WikiImages from Pixabay

A group of 22 Democratic members of Congress sent a letter to President Joe Biden on Tuesday requesting that he include H.R. 1909/S. 747, the Citizenship for Essential Workers Act, as part of the administration’s legislative package on jobs and infrastructure. The lawmakers claim these “essential workers are American heroes — and they have earned the right to become American citizens.” So, they are asking Biden to grant amnesty to at least five million illegal immigrants.

The letter is signed by Reps. Joaquin Castro of Texas and Ted Lieu of California, Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Alex Padilla of California in addition to 18 other Democrats.

“For the past year, essential workers have further proven themselves to be a truly important part of our nation’s critical infrastructure and crucial part of the backbone of our society,” the lawmakers opine. “The U.S. Department of Homeland Security even designated essential workers as part of our nation’s critical infrastructure. … Over five million of these workers are undocumented immigrants.”

“The Citizenship for Essential Workers Act directly relates to the priority of rebuilding America’s economic infrastructure and aligns entirely with the administration’s priority on defeating COVID-19. If Republicans continue to refuse to advance immigration legislation supported by the overwhelming majority of the American people, the next reconciliation package on jobs and infrastructure should include citizenship for essential workers.

“Speaker Pelosi has already indicated her support for including immigration legislation in legislative packages advanced through budget reconciliation given the clear “case about the budget implications of immigration,” while the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and 100 members of the Democratic Caucus have also urged the inclusion of a pathway to citizenship for essential workers in COVID-19 relief legislation. The upcoming legislative package on jobs and infrastructure is the best opportunity to recognize and reward the sacrifices and labor of essential workers.”

There are so many things wrong with this letter, I don’t quite know where to begin.

The economy picked up steam in March. The pace of vaccinations has increased and businesses are opening up again. The Labor Department reported that the U.S. added 916,000 (nonfarm payroll) jobs last month and the unemployment rate fell to 6 percent, according to CNBC data. However, as of April 2, the date of the jobs report, there were still 8.4 million more unemployed Americans than there were in February 2020, before the effects of the pandemic put us into a recession.

The idea of granting amnesty to over five million illegals at this stage in our economic recovery is about as wise as raising taxes.

Democrats tried to add an increase in the minimum wage to the $1.9 trillion bloated boondoggle of a COVID-19 relief bill they passed without a single Republican vote in March. Fortunately, the Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, objected to its inclusion. She ruled that “the inclusion of the $15 minimum wage hike in a reconciliation bill violated Senate rules.”

If raising the hourly wages of unskilled, low-income American workers were truly important to them, they wouldn’t be lobbying for an influx of new, cheap labor which will compete with lower income earners and depress hourly wages even further.

Illegal immigrants are not American heroes. They are neither American nor are they heroes. They have broken U.S. laws by coming into the country unlawfully. But they know that once they arrive, they need only register with immigration officials and ultimately, they will be given food, shelter, medical care and education for their children. They will become economic parasites of the United States for life.

I suppose one might call them heroic for making the arduous journey to the border, but that was not the context lawmakers were referring to in their letter.

If only the Biden Administration and the Democrats in Congress were as interested in the health and prosperity of U.S. citizens as they are about the well-being of illegal aliens.

Why are Democrats pushing so hard to bring as many illegals into the country as they possibly can?

I’ve never heard anyone explain it better than conservative commentator Candace Owens did during an appearance on Fox News’ “Life, Liberty and Levin” last month. (Note: This episode of Life, Liberty and Levin originally aired on March 28. It can be viewed here. Owen’s segment begins at 17:30.)

Owens believes it’s all part of the administration’s plan to import a new class of voters.

An examination of the Democrats’ historical strategy with black Americans provides a clue into their current objectives.

Owens begins with an explanation of how the Democratic Party, which claims to help blacks through all of their social programs, has actually suppressed them. While it may appear on the surface that Democrats have supported blacks by providing for them financially and rhetorically, their “largesse” has actually been a mechanism designed to hold them back, preventing them from taking the reins and succeeding, from breaking out of the cycle of poverty. Most blacks see only that Democrats are more generous than Republicans and have loyally supported them at the polls for decades. Many of us have known this for a long time.

Owens larger point, however, is that the black population has not grown fast enough for the Democrats. So, they are now “importing” a new class of voters. Democrats will ensure these people receive health care and that they are housed, fed and even educated. The party will see to it that the illegals now flooding into the U.S. from Central and South America in record numbers will become completely dependent on them for their survival.

Just as the majority of blacks continue to vote Democratic, so too, will the Hispanics. The cycle of poverty will repeat itself.

“Everyone keeps calling this a border crisis Mark. This isn’t a border crisis, this is a border plan,” Owens tells Levin.

“They are trying to import a new class of voters. They are trying to say to the Mexican-Americans, to the South-Americans … ‘we will help you, we’ll give you free stuff like we gave black Americans free stuff after Jim Crow ended. We’re gonna welfare-ize you. We’re gonna give you handouts, we’re gonna marry you to the government like we married black Americans to the government.’ It’s pure evil.”

Levin spoke about the media’s coverage of last month’s mass shooting in Atlanta, Georgia, that left eight people dead (including six Asians) and the Boulder, Colorado grocery store shooting that left 10 ten dead. In each case, the media racialized the stories. Levin says, “They’re racializing these issues. Of course, they’re only racializing it in one direction. These people in the media, these people in the Democrat Party are tearing this country apart, don’t you think?”

“With intention, with pure evil intention, they are tearing this country apart because they realize that race gives them power. Because people get emotional about race, right? They don’t even know the facts of the story, but if they say, ‘this was a white supremacist attack,’ they know that black Americans will instantly get angry and that’s how they need them. They rely on emotion, because it suspends rationality,” replied Owens.

“They don’t want people thinking rationally, they don’t want them thinking clearly, they don’t want them actually pursuing the facts,” she said. “They don’t want them looking at the data.”

This culture of racism, Owens explained, “was not created by black Americans, that culture was created by Democrats. Systematically created by Democrats – by Lyndon Baines Johnson who is hailed as a hero in textbooks when he was anything but. He was an avowed racist who sought to make sure that black Americans were programmed, that their families were destroyed and that they turned to the government for every single answer. And that is why we have a rotten culture in black America today. It was orchestrated by the people that always were the racists and continue today to be the racists and that is the Democrat Party.”

Biden and Harris are very well aware of conditions at the border. From their perspective, everything is moving ahead according to plan. They knew it would be a little “messy” in the beginning. But as always with Democrats, and this is especially true for today’s Democrats, the end justifies the means. The (roughly) two million illegal immigrants who will likely flow into our country this year will be added to the millions more who preceded them.

(Note: No one knows how many illegals are currently residing in America. I have seen figures ranging from 11 million to 29 million. My guess is the true number is closer to the latter,)

Democrats are hoping to preside over a repeat of the same cycle of dependency that worked so well for them with black Americans from the 1960s on. They will meet their every need and taxpayers will foot the bill. They will grant amnesty and provide a path to citizenship for them.

They expect members of this demographic group to become loyal Democratic voters who will help cement their power for as long as possible. In the end, the story may play out differently with Hispanics than it did for blacks, but that’s fodder for a different post. The point is that this is all part of the Democrats’ larger strategy to ensure one-party rule in America for generations to come.

Over the Top: 100 Corporate Leaders Join Zoom Call to Build Strategy to Fight ‘Restrictive Voter Laws’

Advertisements
Photo by Element5 Digital on Pexels.com

I guess we knew it was never really about thirsty voters in hours-long lines. But it is pretty stunning that over 100 corporate leaders joined a Zoom call on Saturday to “brainstorm” on how they can penalize states for requiring voter ID.

All right Captains of Industry, enlighten us. First, did you finally settle upon an acceptable reason why asking voters to show identification before casting their ballot is racist? Because it’s important that you’re all on the same page. And did you decide on what form this punishment will take?

CBS News’ Ed O’Keefe reported on this astonishing phone call today on “CBS This Morning.”

Before turning it over to O’Keefe, the show’s host said, “In a first of it’s kind gathering, more than a hundred leaders from some of the most powerful companies met virtually on Saturday to talk about efforts by Republicans nationwide to overhaul voting laws. All this comes after a bill passed in Georgia led to allegations of racism and threats of retaliation against companies that oppose it.”

“Threats of retaliation against companies that oppose it?” Did that come out of nowhere? Oh, he must mean the decision by many Republicans to boycott Major League Baseball after its commissioner pulled the All-Star Game out of Atlanta over the law. And the big three airlines, who came out like dominos last week to denounce the Georgia State Legislature for passing the bill.

Anyway, O’Keefe told viewers: “The high-powered Zoom meeting signals a larger move among U.S. companies to oppose voter suppression and signals they won’t fear reprisals by politicians or others when speaking out. It’s something we haven’t seen of this magnitude to date. Attendees included top bosses from WalMart, United Airlines, LinkedIn and AMC Theatres, with some CEOs even chiming in from Augusta, Georgia, the site of the Master’s Golf tournament. The head of our parent company, Viacom CBS, also attended. …”

“The nonpartisan Brennan Center, which tracks proposals across the country today, found lawmakers in 24 states are moving at least 55 bills through state legislatures that would restrict voting access.”

“Keep in mind, many of these bills are based on the lie that the presidential election was stolen. The executives discussed several ways to respond to these restrictive bills including cutting donations to politicians who support them and holding off on investments in those states.” O’Keefe said.

“The meeting came together extraordinarily fast,” he noted. “Organizers tell us they invited 120 CEOs with about 50 hours notice and 90 of them opted to attend. The next test of the voting rights debate will be in Texas where legislators are going to be considering two proposals that observers might ultimately go farther than the new Georgia law.”

This Zoom call signals a new and more dangerous phase in the Democrats war on America. The left is actively organizing against Republicans to throttle us into submission.

O’Keefe made several false and/or uninformed statements.

First, the Brennan Center is one of America’s most far-left think tanks.

Next, the refusal of judges and elections officials to even hear any of the evidence doesn’t mean the election was not stolen.

I would ask what Washington, D.C. attorney Marc Elias, who commissioned the Steele dossier on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC in 2016, is currently doing in Arizona. The Arizona state Senate was poised to begin an in-depth ballot by ballot audit of the results in Maricopa County, which accounts for nearly two-thirds of the votes in the state. Elias, backed by the Democratic machine is trying to prevent it from happening.

As for “holding off on investments in those states,” at a certain point, CEOs need to remember they are charged with maximizing shareholder value. Shareholders will quickly become angry, for example, by a CEO’s political decision to avoiding doing business in, say Texas, opting instead for a less business-friendly state, whose only attraction is that they don’t require voter ID, and will quickly force them out of a job.

It’s an unwise strategy for many reasons. These business leaders are forcing Americans to pick a side. Considering that voter ID laws are supported by over 70 percent of Americans, it will be an uphill battle.

People know why Democrats oppose voting reform. Because it handed victory to the pathetic, feeble politician who now occupies the White House. Even in his heyday, he never gained any traction in either of the presidential primaries he participated in. He never even made it into the top tier of candidates. In 1988, Biden was pressured to withdraw from the race after he’d been accused of plagiarizing a speech by Neil Kinnock, then-leader of the British Labour Party. It was also reported at the time that he had been accused of plagiarism while a student at the Syracuse University School of Law in the 1960s.

Few, if any, have ever regarded Biden as a strong leader. He was a gaffe-prone buffoon who had simply remained in Washington for so long that people grew used to him, comfortable with him.

His 2020 candidacy was on life support after coming in fifth in the New Hampshire primary. Fortunately for him, the Democrat machine decided that the socialist senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, could not lead the ticket and went into high gear.

The explosion in mail-in voting afforded by the pandemic and the lax standards of verifying ballots and I believe, the outright fraud committed by Democratic elections officials, and even some Republicans, delivered the White House to Biden.

Democrats know there is no valid reason to oppose voter ID requirements. It doesn’t matter that voting in some states is the only thing that can be done without an ID today in America.

But they also know that their ostensible reason doesn’t matter. However ludicrous it is, politicians will keep repeating it, Democratic PACs, think tanks and the media will repeat it and now it appears that corporate CEOs have hopped aboard the train.

I don’t see how this fight can end well for them.

Despite the Indignation From the Left, New AP Poll Shows 72% of Americans Approve of Voter ID Laws

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by chayka1270 from Pixabay

Democrats have beclowned themselves this week over the passage of voter reform measures by the Georgia State Legislature. Despite the theatrics from the left, you might be surprised to hear that a strong majority of Americans support voter ID laws. The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that 72 percent of respondents believe photo identification should be required in order to vote.

The poll showed that only 13 percent opposed voter ID laws and 14 percent neither supported nor opposed them.

Even among Democrats, 56 percent favored photo identification requirements, 24 percent opposed and 20 percent took no position.

As you would expect, 91 percent of Republicans supported these measures.

The poll, conducted March 26-29, surveyed 1,166 adults and has a margin of error of 3.6 percent.

The AP/NORC results bolster the results of a Rasmussen telephone and internet survey conducted last month, which found that 69 percent of black voters and 75 percent of overall voters supported photo ID requirements. Only 21 percent were opposed.

Rasmussen reported that support for voter ID laws “has actually increased since 2018, when 67% said voters should be required to show photo identification such as a driver’s license before being allowed to vote.”

And the Rasmussen results were extremely close to the newly reported AP/NORC poll. According to Rasmussen, 89 percent of Republicans, 60 percent of Democrats and 77 percent of independents believe voters should be required to show photo ID.

Nevertheless, Democrats are working feverishly to find a way to pass the ironically named “For the People Act of 2021,” (H.R. 1/S. 1). If this unfortunate bill becomes law, it will nullify the voting reform measures recently passed by state legislatures. So much for federalism.

Described as the “Democrats’ only chance to stop the GOP assault on voting rights” by The Atlantic’s Ronald Brownstein, it is designed to nearly guarantee one-party rule in the U.S. for generations to come.

Brownstein writes, “If the party doesn’t pass new protections, it could lose the House, Senate, and White House within the next four years.” He sums up the hyperbole of the left in one paragraph.

It’s no exaggeration to say that future Americans could view the resolution of this struggle as a turning point in the history of U.S. democracy. The outcome could not only shape the balance of power between the parties, but determine whether that democracy grows more inclusive or exclusionary. To many civil-rights advocates and democracy scholars I’ve spoken with, this new wave of state-level bills constitutes the greatest assault on Americans’ right to vote since the Jim Crow era’s barriers to the ballot.

Not even the far-left Washington Post believes the recent measures taken by state lawmakers to bolster photo ID requirements bear any resemblance to Jim Crow voting laws. When we start sending out snarling attack dogs and go after minorities with fire hoses, Democrats can start making those comparisons. But until then, Brownstein just sounds like a liar and his editors, fools.

We can only hope that Democrats have crossed the line so unequivocally over the last few months, that maybe even some within their own party will recognize it and wake up.

After the massive amount of damage the Biden Administration has already inflicted on this country, Democrats don’t deserve to ever hold power again.

Truth and (Unintended) Consequences: New York State Legislature Plans to Give $20,000 Checks to Illegals and Ex-Convicts

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by mohamed Hassan from Pixabay

I am diligently ingesting my daily intake of news, and what passes for news, in 2021 America. Since January 20, the range of news stories seems to have broadened from the simple, ‘Its Trump’s Fault’ to ‘Why everything bad that is happening now originated with Trump.’

Leaning back in my office chair, I close my eyes and let them rest, taking a momentary reprieve from the hard-news assault on my delicate, pearl-clutching conservative sensibilities.

Okay Richard Edward, back to work. You have a responsibility to stay informed and up to date on the issues of the day. My eyes land on a story in The Western Journal, a potpourri of news and information. The following headline stops me in my tracks. State Finalizing Plan to Immediately Give Illegal Immigrants Checks of Over $20,000. Have lawmakers in the New York State Legislature lost their minds?

I read the headline again and immediately check my calendar.

Mr. Narrator (interrupts): “I know Richard Edward, it’s April Fool’s Day, but this is real.”

Richard Edward: “It can’t be Mr. Narrator. I am reading a headline that absolutely must be from the Babylon Bee or it’s someone’s idea of a grotesque April-fool joke. No sane governmental entity in the US would simply hand cash out to illegal aliens, more money than most of our homeless non-criminal citizens collect in a year, would they?”

Mr. Narrator: “Before you completely lose it Richard Edward, try reading the remainder of the article.”

Okay, a deep breath and I begin to let my eyes and brain start down the page, left to right, just like they taught me in school.

Democrats in New York are working on creating a fund that would give some illegal aliens and ex-convicts more than $27,000 apiece in direct payments for financial hardships related to the coronavirus pandemic.

Again, I am stopped in my intellectual tracks.  Illegal aliens AND ex-convicts? Why, what the…..? Another deep breath.

Richard Edward: “Why? What could these folks possibly have in common and what makes them so special that they deserve this much of our tax dollars?”

Mr. Narrator: “Richard Edward, Democrats posit that these folks have been adversely impacted by the pandemic. What do they have in common?  All of them have broken the laws of the USA; the illegal aliens in arriving here and the ex-convicts when it was convenient for them to do so.”

Mr. Narrator points to the apologetic, outlined in the article, for the proposed law:

Under the state Senate’s plan, illegal immigrants and people who have been released from prison since October 2019 would be eligible for the big payouts, as Democratic lawmakers believe these individuals were not able to establish a requisite work history that would make them eligible for unemployment benefits.

Some illegal immigrants and ex-convicts could see an immediate payment of $20,700, with an additional $6,600 coming later.

Vanessa Agudelo of the New York Immigration Coalition praised the proposition.

“This level of investment is absolutely historic for our communities,” Agudelo told Politico. “It’s the biggest investment any state has made to provide this level of relief to those workers who have been excluded from those unemployment benefits as well as what’s been passed in the stimulus package.”

Richard Edward: “Mr. Narrator, Agudelo called them ‘workers’, but then goes on to say they weren’t working and that’s why the need help. Even if they did work, they (or their employers) didn’t pay into the unemployment system. What about those folks who lost their legitimate jobs or who had to quit because their kids had to stay home from school?”

Mr. Narrator: “Richard Edward, don’t you understand anything about woke politics? Illegals and ex-cons will someday be granted the right to vote, such laws to be passed and forced down the collective throat of the residents of NY by that state’s majority Democratic Party. Those ‘new’ votes will keep the Democrats in office. What a great narrative, right? The disenfranchised, unprivileged and rehabilitated given the same rights as law abiding citizens. What a winning narrative! And what about those real, normal, law abiding New Yorkers who lost their jobs or had to quit cause their kids couldn’t go to school? Dude, they got a $600 or $1200 check here and there. At least some of them did. Like they should be bold enough to ask for more?”

I am stunned. Hardworking American citizens are intermittently getting Nancy Pelosi’s ‘crumbs’ and those who came here sans invitation, worked (maybe) in an underground economy, most likely have taken advantage of Medicaid, SNAP, Section 8 and other government handouts are now hitting the NY State Democrat Lotto?  Oh yes, accompanied by those who have been felonious enough in their own neighborhoods to have served time….

Mr. Narrator (interrupts again): “Richard Edward, now that you’ve been enlightened, tell the folks about the Democrats’ new gameshow, “Truth and Unintended Consequences.”

Richard Edward (reverting to gameshow mode): “With pleasure. Well Mr. and Mrs. New  York, where do we begin? This is a simple game. You just give away large sums of citizens tax dollars to people who have not earned them, and then wait and see what happens. What could be more fun? What if anything, could possibly go wrong?

“Let’s start with the unintended consequence of these hand-outs. How much will even stay in NY, let alone the USA? Can’t you just imagine the rush at the Western Union counter when the checks arrive, all those overseas money transfers made to the mother countries of origin? Any bets on how much local, struggling New York businesses will benefit?”

“Yes, Mr. Narrator, we realize not everyone getting a large check will send it overseas, in fact, some of our lucky recipients will most assuredly cash that check and re-invest it back into the same criminal enterprises that landed then in jail in the first place. C’mon man, what’s more American than giving back?”

“Speaking of (not) giving back, let’s speculate on what could have been done if that much money were directed into the unemployment system, where tax paying citizens may have gotten some additional, much needed assistance, too.”

“And of course, let’s not forget the psychological and emotional consequences to the unfortunate, the homeless, the poor American citizens. Nothing like a good slap in the face when they see illegals and ex-cons with ‘walking-around money,’ flush with government fiat, right Mr. and Mrs. New York?”

Mr. Narrator:  “Thanks Richard Edward. You do sound like you feel a little bitter, a little racist and a little America first-ish. But that may become an unintended consequence of how many New York citizens might start to feel, too.”

If you think government handouts to illegal aliens and recently released convicts could become an American Crisis (or at least a NY State crisis), please leave a comment for us to ponder.

— Richard Edward Tracy

Dems Think They Found a Senate Loophole to Bypass Filibuster, Pass Radical Agenda Without GOP

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by JamesDeMers from Pixabay

H. L. Mencken, a well-known writer and journalist of the early twentieth century, is likely best remembered for the following quote: “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.”

If, as we’re told, 81 million Americans voted for President Joe Biden, they are indeed getting it good and hard. In just over two months, the Democrats have already radically transformed the United States of America.

Via a parliamentary procedure called budget reconciliation, which allows the Senate to pass “certain tax, spending, and debt limit” bills by a simple majority vote, the Biden Administration recently rammed through a bloated and unnecessary $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill without a single Republican vote. Reconciliation, however, has its limits. It can only be used twice each fiscal year.

Like a kid in a candy store, limitations simply will not do for Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. Knowing that the filibuster, which requires at least 60 votes to pass legislation, would otherwise prevent him from passing his socialist agenda, he has been desperately searching for a way to change the rules.

Unfortunately, he may have just found one.

Specifically, Schumer and his aides have been eyeing Section 304 of the Budget Reconciliation Act of 1974 which covers “Permissible revisions of concurrent resolutions on the budget,” according to The New York Post.

You won’t be surprised to hear that their “interpretation” of the language is that they are entitled to use reconciliation to pass at least one additional spending bill.

According to Axios’ Mike Allen, “Top policy aides to Schumer recently argued to the Senate parliamentarian that revising this year’s budget resolution could ‘trigger an additional set of reconciliation instructions,’ which would allow for further 50-50 votes that are decided by Vice President Harris.”

“If the Senate parliamentarian upholds Schumer’s interpretation, Democrats can pass more pieces of the party’s agenda without having to bust the filibuster rule, which requires at least 60 votes — and therefore 10 Republicans in the 50-50 Senate.”

“It’s not clear how many additional reconciliation opportunities this theory would open up,” Allen writes. “But the conventional wisdom is that Democrats have just one more shot at reconciliation this year, and this route would give them at least one more.”

One of Schumer’s aide’s told Axios that “no final decision has been made on the legislative strategy. Schumer wants to maximize his options to allow Senate Democrats multiple pathways to advance President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda if Senate Republicans try to obstruct or water down a bipartisan agreement.”

So, based upon the parliamentarian’s decision, Democrats may be able to use reconciliation to pass at least one more budget busting bill this year than they had anticipated.

There is hope, however. Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough has disappointed Schumer before. The Democrats had hoped to slip a $15 minimum wage hike into the COVID-19 relief bill and according to CNBC, MacDonough ruled that its inclusion would violate Senate rules.

Immediately, some Democrats wanted MacDonough fired, as The Washington Post reported.

At the time, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley wrote, “The Parliamentarian’s role is key to a system of orderly legislative process. To simply disregard such rules (and fire those who seek to maintain them) is yet another example of the rage that has replaced reason in our current politics.”

Turley is right about that.

Additionally, I don’t think Republicans in the Senate would simply take this on the chin. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell promised to go “scorched earth” if Democrats were to abolish the filibuster. During a floor speech to his colleagues last month, he said: “Let me say this very clearly for all 99 of my colleagues: Nobody serving in this chamber can even begin — can even begin to imagine — what a completely scorched earth Senate would look like.”

This is nothing but a power-play. Democrats would do well to remember when then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid nuked the filibuster for executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments in November 2013. His bold move backfired spectacularly when Republicans won back the Senate majority in 2016.

In 2017, then-Senate Majority Leader McConnell nuked the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations allowing former President Donald Trump to confirm three of his nominees to the court by a simple majority in the Senate.

Although it feels impossible at this point, Republicans may take back control of the Senate in 2022 and Democrats may be setting a precedent they will regret.

Democrat Trying to Steal Iowa House Seat Withdraws Bid, Cites Republicans’ ‘Toxic Campaign of Political Disinformation’

Advertisements
Photo by Element5 Digital on Pexels.com

I’ve written endlessly about the race for the open seat in Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District which was one of the tightest House races in recent memory. In the weeks following the Nov. 3 election, the lead changed hands several times as uncounted ballots were discovered and other issues were resolved. Ultimately, a statewide recount was conducted and the Republican candidate, Mariannette Miller-Meeks, was declared the winner. She had defeated her Democratic opponent, Rita Hart, by six votes, and the state certified the results on Nov. 30. Miller-Meeks was sworn into Congress in January.

Lo and behold, the Hart campaign found 22 uncounted ballots, which she claimed would put her ahead of Miller-Meeks by nine votes. Rather than going through the traditional channels which would have meant an appeal through the Iowa court system, Hart’s team went on to file a “Notice of Contest” with the U.S. House Administrative Committee.

You may recall House Speaker Nancy Pelosi making headlines last week for insisting she had the right to seat or unseat any member of Congress.

Republicans were surprised that Pelosi would support Hart’s attempt to overturn a certified election result after the Democrats’ acrimonious shaming and blaming of President Trump for doing the same. Even some Democrats saw the irony in the situation.

Hart should have taken her dispute to the Iowa courts. She chose not to, likely because she knew her case was weak.

Republicans found the whole idea of a House committee overturning a certified state election result to be despicable.

Over the last three months, the conservative media has pulled out all the stops to expose the irony and the indecency of what Hart, with the full support of Pelosi, was trying to do. I wrote four or five posts about this race myself.

On Wednesday afternoon, Hart surprisingly announced her decision to withdraw her “contest.” She cited “the toxic campaign of political disinformation to attack this constitutional review of the closest congressional contest in 100 years has effectively silenced the voices of Iowans. It is a stain on our democracy that the truth has not prevailed and my hope for the future is a return to decency and civility.”

If you take away her rancor, she blames the Republicans’ “toxic campaign of political disinformation” for her withdrawal. I call it a concerted effort to point out the truth of this despicable and dishonest attempt to steal an election.

This is a rare win for the conservative media. Instead of writing about it once or twice and simply watching the Democrats roll over us again, we went all out and it worked. We need to remember our winning formula here. We need to keep pounding and pounding and pounding the Democrats as they do to Republicans.

Next project, the border crisis.

Hart’s full statement can be viewed in the tweet below.