Disconnect: While Trump Is Banned for Questioning Election, Obama Claims GOP Is ‘Rigging the Game’

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by chayka1270 from Pixabay

Remember the charismatic, young African-American senator from Illinois who electrified crowds with his rhetoric, who called for a new kind of politics that would heal the United States? Unfortunately, the audacity of hope quickly devolved into the audacity of bitter partisanship and division following his historic victory.

The Honorable Barack Hussein Obama, the 44th President of the United States, spoke at an event sponsored by The Economic Club of Chicago on Friday where he sharply condemned the new voting reform laws passed recently in Georgia and Florida and currently under consideration in the state of Texas and elsewhere.

Republicans are “rigging the game,” Obama declared. “That’s the kind of dangerous behavior that we’re going to have to push back on.” (Time stamp: 31:42)

Addressing what he called the Jan. 6 “insurrection,” he said, “And you had one of the major American political parties not only fail to condemn some of that behavior, but embrace a patently false narrative about the election being stolen that is being still perpetuated and now that same major political party being willing to initiate legislative – you know – actions across the country – you know – where they’re saying we’re going to let partisan legislatures decide whether or not to certify an election, uh, and institute voter suppression measures directly targeted at cities in those states, so there’s a different set of rules for how votes are counted in Atlanta versus how they’re counted in the rest of Georgia.” (Time stamp: 30:30)

“I think the corporate community has a responsibility to at least call folks out on that. Because that transcends policy. …  Do the basic rules by which we all have agreed to keep this diverse, multiracial democracy functioning.” (Time stamp: 31:50)

“Are we going to stick to those rules or are we going to start rigging the game in a way that breaks it?,” he asked rhetorically? “And that’s not going to be good for business, not to mention not good for our soul.” (32:10)

 

 

Memo to Obama: What was “not good for our soul” was watching the chaos that ensued last November after Democrats changed the rules. Unprecedented numbers of absentee ballots overwhelmed the system resulting in major chain of custody issues in all of the swing states, providing a gaping opportunity for both voter and electoral fraud.

Regarding the Republicans’ failure to condemn the “behavior” on Jan. 6, my recollection is a bit different. To an almost nauseating degree, every Republication politician and pundit prefaced virtually every comment uttered about the Capitol riot with strong condemnation. It was as if they were required to issue a disclaimer before any discussion could begin.

The former president is gaslighting when he says that asking voters to show an ID is “rigging the game.” He and every other Democrat are well aware that if only legal votes had been counted, former President Donald Trump would have been reelected.

During an interview last week with New York City WABC 770 AM radio’s “The Cats Roundtable,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said, “The only reason you don’t want people to have a photo ID is that people can cheat. That’s the only rational answer as to why certain people want no photo ID requirements.”

In a Friday interview with The War Room’s Steve Bannon, Paxton claimed that, had his office not blocked several Texas counties from mailing out absentee ballots to every registered voter as they had planned, Biden would have won Texas in November.

“… [C]ertainly critical to my state and that’s why we fought off these twelve lawsuits. We had them in Houston, we had them in San Antonio, we had them in Austin, we had them in the counties where you’d have the most liberal judges,” Paxton told Bannon.

“And it was a concerted effort, nationally, with lots of money going into it, and just knowing that we had twelve lawsuits that we had to win, and if we lost one of them, like if we lost Harris County (home to Houston). Trump won by 620,000 votes in Texas. Harris County mail-in ballots that they wanted to send out were 2.5 million, those were all illegal and we were able to stop every one of them.”

“Had we not done that,” Paxton explained, “we would have been in the very same situation—we would’ve been on Election Day, I was watching on election night and I knew, when I saw what was happening in these other states, that that would’ve been Texas. We would’ve been in the same boat. We would’ve been one of those battleground states that they were counting votes in Harris County for three days and Donald Trump would’ve lost the election.”

 

 

There were too many “irregularities” in each of the swing states to count. Everyone knows that. Why else would the Democrats have fought tooth and nail to stop the forensic audit currently underway in Maricopa County, Arizona?

Now that what I call “audit fever” is starting to catch on in other swing states such as Georgia and Pennsylvania, liberal heads are exploding.

The bigger issue is the epic double standard between Democrats and Republicans. Based on the allegations made in over 1,000 sworn affidavits from poll watchers in all of the swing states, Trump questions the results of November election and so do the majority of Republicans. He is ridiculed by the press and has been banned from social media platforms.

Obama claims that by asking voters to show an ID in order to cast their vote, Republicans are trying to rig the next election. An adoring press agrees with him.

Voters around the world are asked to provide identification. I posted about voting requirements in other parts of the world on Friday here.

Identification is required for everything we do in today’s world. Why should our most sacred right as U.S. citizens be treated differently?

I know, because then Democrats can’t cheat. And if they can’t cheat, they won’t win.

Additionally, contrary to the left’s narrative, the legitimacy of the November 2020 election is not settled. In the same way that Democrats and the media worked feverishly to take the lab leak theory off the table in the early days of the pandemic, they’re trying to kill “The Big Lie” theory. It just may turn out to be “The Big Truth,” as I wrote about last week.

Please spare us your drama, Obama.

 

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

Another MSNBC Lunatic Criticizes Sen. Tim Scott, Yet No One Will Answer the ONLY Question That Matters

Advertisements
Photo by Element5 Digital on Pexels.com

The host of MSNBC’s “Cross Connection,” Tiffany Cross, became the latest liberal lunatic to express her outrage over Republican Sen. Tim Scott’s rebuttal to President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address on Wednesday night. Scott, as the world already knows, had the temerity to say that America is not a racist nation.

(Note: Please scroll down for a video and a transcription of Cross’ remarks.)

On her Saturday morning show, she insinuated that Sen. Scott was so intimidated by white people, he would say whatever they wanted him to say. “When you speak uncomfortable truths, like Nikole Hannah Jones (the creator of the 1619 project), the party that Scott claims is not racist gets big mad and tries to silence you.”

She said that it wasn’t worth arguing with an individual “Harriet Tubman would have left behind.”

“Perhaps this was merely Senator Scott’s audition to be Sam Jackson’s understudy in the film Django,” she told her audience.

Although she had clearly put some time into what she likely hoped sounded like an impromptu monolog, she needn’t have bothered. It was a mere repeat of all of the tired liberal talking points about voter ID.

I have one big burning question to ask every Democrat who disapproves of asking a voter to prove that they are who they say they are.

HOW is it racist?

Affordability is not an option because most, if not all, states provide free photo IDs for any resident who requires one. So, what is the reason?

Do they believe that blacks and other minorities aren’t smart and/or competent enough to figure out how to obtain an ID?

Because by constantly repeating that this requirement will suppress the votes of people of color, that’s essentially what you’re saying.

The position that requiring an ID in order to cast an absentee ballot is too onerous or too complicated for blacks and other minority groups to navigate is itself racist.

Am I wrong? Then please explain why I’m wrong.

The real reason is that an ID requirement makes it more difficult to commit voter fraud. Each eligible voter receives one vote. Ineligible voters receive zero votes.

The provision of a state issued number on a ballot limits that voter to one vote, rather than two or more votes.

So, do us all a favor Tiff and sit down, huh? Because you’re just another lying liberal hack who’s bummed out that Democrats won’t get away with the same chicanery they got away with in 2020.

 

Transcription of Cross’s Remarks

The Root’s Michael Harriot: Can anyone name a political social or economic institution in America where widespread disparities and discrimination does not exist? Don’t worry, I’ll wait.

MSNBC’s Tiffany Cross: Such a great question from my friend, The Root’s Michael Harriot. And I actually have an answer: The hollow institution that resides inside Republican Senator Tim Scott’s head. No racism there. And apparently no sense either.

This week, the sole Black Republican in the Senate sounded a stone fool when he said this: “Hear me clearly, America is not a racist country.”

Okay let’s be clear. Tim Scott does not represent any constituency other than the small number of sleepy slow-witted sufferers of Stockholm Syndrome who get elevated to prominence for repeating a false narrative about this country that makes conservative white people feel comfortable.

Because when you speak uncomfortable truths, like Nikole Hannah Jones, the party that Scott claims is not racist gets big mad and tries to silence you. Just this week, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell asked Education Secretary Miguel Cardona to stop teaching the 1619 Project in schools because it would “reorient the view of American history.”

Lucky for McConnell, he has his own tap dancer to try and reorient the view of America for him.

There were so many contradictions in the senator’s speech that it was clear not even Scott believed the words he was speaking. I could go into great detail refuting each of his asinine points, but he did that for me.

And moreover, a lesson I’ve learned: Don’t argue with people Harriet Tubman would have left behind.

And sure, Tim Scott has spoken out about his encounters with law enforcement and he co-sponsored the anti-lynching bill in the Senate, but there are two sides to every token.

So thirsty for white approval, this dude actually stood on the national stage to defend the voter suppression law in Georgia even though, as of last month, 361 bills were being introduced in 47 states to keep people who look like him out of the ballot box.

The ability to shame the ancestors and appease the oppressors all in one speech, that’s extreme. Though not quite like the domestic violent extremism that the Department of Homeland security is investigating within its own ranks, mind you. But please senator, say more about how unracist the country is while you trot out that tired line about going from cotton to Congress to clown.

Perhaps this was merely Senator Scott’s audition to be Sam Jackson’s understudy in the film Django, because as a descendant of the enslaved, and damn near a daily survivor of institutional racism, I can assure you the question “Is America a racist country?” is one that has been asked and answered many times over.

Yet we still love America, not for what it was, but for what it could be.

On this one, you’re not only in the wrong side of the aisle, Senator Scott, but you’re embarrassingly on the wrong side of history as well.

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.

United Airlines’ Diversity Pledge: ‘50% of the 5,000 pilots we train in the next decade to be women or people of color’

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Dirk Daniel Mann from Pixabay

Who’s the wokest of them all? United Airlines believes “Our flight deck should reflect the diverse group of people on board our planes every day. That’s why we plan for 50% of the 5,000 pilots we train in the next decade to be women or people of color.”

Last week, Delta Airlines’ CEO Ed Bastien denounced Georgia over their recently passed voter reform legislation. On Saturday, America Airlines followed suit by announcing their opposition to similar legislation proposed in Texas.

United Airlines was the last of the big three to weigh in. On Monday, the airline released a statement which read:

Some have questioned the integrity of the nation’s election systems and are using it to justify stricter voting procedures, even though numerous studies have found zero credible evidence of widespread fraud in U.S. elections.

Legislation that infringes on the right to vote of fellow Americans is wrong. We believe that leaders in both parties should work to protect the rights of eligible voters by making it easier and more convenient for them to cast a ballot and have it counted.

On Tuesday, the company took it a bit further with a diversity pledge.

Today, United has one of the most diverse pilot populations of any U.S. carrier with nearly 20% of our pilot group made up of women and people of color. We are working toward raising that number even higher by partnering with diversity-led organizations and continuing to remove gender and racial barriers. And we’re going one step further with plans for 50% of United Aviate Academy students being women and people of color to ensure our students reflect the diversity of the customers and communities we serve.

United announces they are continuing to remove gender and racial barriers. Yet, that is precisely what they are doing by putting quotas in place to guide their hiring decisions.

Considering that the safety of millions of passengers is at stake, why not be colorblind when making your hiring decisions? Why not choose your pilots on the basis of competence, experience and training rather than on gender and race?

A novel concept for the wokest among us, I know. But perhaps best from a safety point of view.

There are Two Reasons Why Democrats Claim ID Requirement for Mail-in Voting Is Racist; Neither is Admirable

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

Every politician, journalist and CEO who makes the claim that it’s racist for a state to require an ID from mail-in voters must answer the following question: HOW is it racist?

Affordability is not an option because most, if not all, states provide free photo IDs for any resident who requires one. So, what is the reason?

Do they believe that blacks and other minorities aren’t smart enough to figure out how to obtain an ID?

The position that requiring an ID in order to cast an absentee ballot is too onerous or too complicated for blacks and other minority groups to navigate is itself racist.

Am I wrong? Then please explain why I’m wrong.

The second, and far more likely reason, is that an ID requirement makes it more difficult to commit voter fraud. Each eligible voter receives one vote. Ineligible voters receive zero votes.

The provision of a state issued number on a ballot limits that voter to one vote, rather than two or more votes.

Many of us recall a video recorded late on Election Night at State Farm Arena in Fulton County, Georgia. After most of the poll workers had been dismissed for the night, a small group of workers are seen pulling cases of ballots out from under a table (with a floor-length tablecloth). This video went viral in early December.

Attempts by Democrats to debunk this video failed, but unfortunately, the issue faded from the news before it was ever resolved.

“At that time, Georgia State Republican Chairman David Shafer and President Donald Trump had filed a criminal complaint in state court regarding tens of thousands of votes that they say were fraudulent.

The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway published a list of those problematic votes:

Trump and Shafer allege, for example, that votes came from:

  • 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).”

Biden won the state of Georgia by just under 12,000 votes. It’s not crazy to think that, had voter ID laws been in place and/or not broken, that President Trump may have prevailed.

Issues over who was eligible to vote, and more importantly, who was not, arose in all of the swing states after the election.

Did these issues affect the final outcome of the National election? Very possibly.

For as long as the debate over voter-ID has persisted, Democrats have labeled those of us who believe every voter must show an ID as racists.

This week, the CEO of Delta Airlines offered his opinion on this issue. On Friday afternoon, American Airlines weighed in. Can we expect to hear from the CEO of United later today?

These men seem to think their opinion matters. If they feel the need to involve themselves in this debate, they too, should be asked to explain.

It’s not enough to declare that voter-ID laws are racist. The question is how are they racist?

And the answer boils down to one of two possibilities. Either they doubt the intelligence or the initiative of minority voters or because voter ID laws limit fraud. I am strongly convinced it’s the latter.

Watch: Fox Reporter Grills Psaki on Georgia Voting Law, Responds by Doubling Down on Lies

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by mohamed Hassan from Pixabay

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki is a terrible liar.

During last week’s press conference, President Joe Biden was asked about efforts by numerous state legislatures to pass voting reform bills intended to prevent the widespread “irregularities” that have led so many of us to question the results.

“What I’m worried about is how un-American this whole initiative is. It’s sick. It’s sick … deciding that you’re going to end voting at five o’clock when working people are just getting off work,” replied the President.

The next day, Biden attacked Georgia’s new legislation again in a statement which said, “Among the outrageous parts of this new state law, it ends voting hours early so working people can’t cast their vote after their shift is over.”

A fact check of these obviously false remarks performed by The Washington Post earned the President “Four Pinocchios.”

At Thursday’s White House briefing, Fox Business News reporter Ed Lawrence summarized what Georgia’s new voting law actually requires and asked Psaki, “Is there going to be a correction? … Is the tone going to change out of the White House?”

She repeated the lies that Biden had just been publicly rebuked for and added, “The tone for a bill that limits voting access? That makes it more difficult for people to engage in voting in Georgia?”

Lawrence pushed back. “No, that’s actually not what the governor of Georgia has said.”

“Well, I think that is not based in fact, what the governor of Georgia has said,” Psaki replied. “So, no, our tone is not changing. We have concerns about the specific components of the package including the fact that it makes it harder and more difficult to vote by limiting absentee options, by making it not viable, not possible for people to provide water to people who are in line, by not standardizing longer hours, so if you’re making it harder to vote, no we don’t support that.”

The only item on Psaki’s list the left is truly upset about are the limitations on absentee ballots, because the explosion in mail-in voting (arguably) handed Biden the White House.

The “Election Integrity Act of 2021,” as the new Georgia law is called, requires applicants for absentee ballots to provide their state ID number. The state offers a free ID Card to those who cannot afford one. In order to verify their ballots, voters will be required to provide either their state ID number or the last four digits of their Social Security number.

This measure will go a long way to ensuring election integrity, something that was sorely lacking last November.

In the following clip, conservative commentator Ben Shapiro, in his inimitable style, eviscerates an article written by liberal Jemelle Hill in The Atlantic in which she attacks Georgia’s new law as voter suppression. She runs through all of the Democrats’ talking points and Shapiro expertly bats each one down.

“‘Jim Crow explicitly created a separate system of law for black Americans and treated them as inferior.’ There’s nothing in the law like that. That’s not only an overstatement. It’s an outright lie.

But, says Jemelle Hill … ‘The law imposes new voter identification requirements for absentee ballots.’ Well, clearly that’s racist. I mean you really have to show that you are who you say you are when you vote absentee? If you can explain to me how that’s racist, I’m willing to hear it. Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

‘It limits the use of ballot drop boxes.’ Oh, you mean like ballot drop boxes where people could just stuff the ballot box or take ballots out of the ballot box?

‘It hands the state officials more power over local elections. Even before the legislation passed, many voters of color in Georgia faced hours long queues at the polls.’ By the way, voter suppression doesn’t involve long lines, any more than long lines at Disneyland are ride suppression. You know what voter suppression is? Voter suppression is where you don’t get to vote.

‘Making those waits even more arduous, the new law makes giving food and water to people in line to vote.’ That’s not even true. It bans giving any gift to people in line when they are within 150 feet of the polling place. You can bring water with you, there are people outside who can give you water. It’s just not true.”

Biden, Psaki, Hill and the rest know what they are saying is false. They also know that the new law will address many of the problems encountered in November with duplicate voting, dead or otherwise ineligible voters, and custody issues; in other words, much of the chicanery that went unchecked in November.

Democrats oppose anything having to do with election integrity. They do not want secure elections. And they will lie about whatever they need to, to advance their agenda.

New Emails Raise Big Questions About Overnight Ballot Counting in GA

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

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 succeeded.

Over the weekend, Just the News’ Daniel Payne obtained several internal emails from Fulton County election workers via an open records request which appear to raise even more questions about what actually took place that night.

Two poll workers, both of whom have signed sworn affidavits, claim that at approximately 10:30 p.m. on Nov. 3, a county official “told workers to stop working for the night” and to return the following morning at 8:30 a.m. to resume counting ballots, according to Payne.

He informs readers that “nearly half a dozen local and national media outlets, meanwhile, reported being told that absentee ballot-counting had ceased at around 10:30 p.m. and would resume the next day. Several reports cited county spokeswoman Regina Waller for that information.”

JTN contacted Waller in December, who confirmed that counting had continued after most workers had left. Waller told JTN that she had “stated to all media … that although several workers were released to go home, a small team remained behind to assist with scanning ballots.”

Payne said it’s “unclear why no media outlets” have reported this.

One of the emails Payne received last weekend was sent by Waller to Jessica Corbitt, the Director of Fulton County External Affairs, State Farm Arena spokesman Garin Narain, and two other officials at 10:22 p.m. on Nov. 3. It can be viewed here.

Contrary to Waller’s admission to JTN in December that a small team had continued working after 10:30 p.m., Payne’s take on this email is that Waller “appears to indicate that the ballot-counting team had dispersed by around 10:30 p.m.”

Waller wrote: “The workers in the Absentee Ballot Processing area will get started again at 8 am tomorrow.” Waller addresses logistics for the press in the remainder of the email.

Upon viewing this email, Payne emailed Waller to ask for clarification. Waller wrote that the email “was in response to a question received asking when all workers would return.” He asked her if she would provide the email she was responding to, but she did not reply.

The second email obtained by Payne was written at 11:15 p.m. by Fulton County Interagency Affairs Manager Fran Phillips-Calhoun to Corbitt, Waller and two others. This email also throws the “timetable of ballot-counting on Election Night” into question.

Phillips-Calhoun writes, “FYI –  SOS [the Secretary of State’s office] just sort of threw the team under the bus stating that ‘we had a great day, but we decided to throw in the towel for the night even though the public is waiting…’ on results.”

Payne notes that “Phillips-Calhoun did not specify what message from the Secretary of State’s office she was referring to. The county worker did not respond to requests for comment.”

The sworn affidavits of the two poll watchers mentioned above confirm “some controversial aspects of the news reports from that night.”

The first statement is from Michelle Branton, a Georgia Republican Party Field Organizer. She claims that at approximately 10:30 p.m., “a woman [in the ballot-processing room] yelled to everyone to stop working and to return the next day at 8:30 a.m. … “Nearly all of the staff workers” left the State Arena. The statement says that Regina Waller and a “small number of workers” remained.

The other sworn statement belonged to Mitchell Harrison, who was from the Georgia Republican Party as well. He had worked with Branton that night and he also reported hearing the official, believed to be Waller, instruct workers to stop working “sometime after 10 o’clock,” and said that “all but 4 election employees” left the facility.

According to Payne, “both Branton and Harrison said they had been directed by a GOP supervisor to obtain the number of ballots scanned and the number remaining to be scanned. Both claimed to have asked Regina Waller for that information three separate times; Waller eventually told them to find the information on the state’s website.”

Payne reports, “the two left State Farm Arena ‘shortly after 10:30 p.m.’ and said that some time after returning to the Fulton County Board of Elections Warehouse, they became aware that ballot counting was still continuing at the arena.” He adds that “Harrison said he and another worker eventually returned to to the Arena ‘just before 1:00 a.m.,’ upon which ‘we were told counting had been going on, but had just ended in the last few minutes.'”

The conflicting statements of Regina Waller are far from the only “irregularities” that have come to light since 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 Waller had dismissed workers on Election Night.

If ever there was a smoking gun, that video was one. The media came to the rescue and collectively reported that the video had been debunked.

It had not been debunked. The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway found what the media, including The Washington Post, was calling a “Big Tech-backed “fact” “checking” outfit.”

Hemingway wrote, “…a  group called Lead Stories published a ‘hoax alert’ falsely claiming to have debunked the security video. The Washington Post, Newsweek, and other outlets followed along, criticizing non-leftist journalists for giving the video traction. In fact, none of the claims made by the Republicans were debunked.”

“Lead Stories’ “fact” “check” says government officials told them everything was fine with the counting, that the ballots were in “containers — not suitcases,” and that “party observers were never told to leave because counting was over for the night,” she added.

No problem. Fox News joined other establishment media outlets that afternoon to report that the incident had been “immediately dismissed, however, after Fran Watson, the chief investigator from Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office “filed a sworn statement in federal court claiming that video presented last week at a state Senate meeting does not show voter fraud, as was alleged by President Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani.”

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.

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.

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)

Nearly five months have passed since the November election. Memories may have faded. Records may have been shredded. People have had time to cover their tracks and get their stories straight.

But it’s possible that if investigators keep digging they just might come across something that’s been overlooked, something that someone forgot to “take care of.”

Judge Considers Unsealing Absentee Ballots In Fulton County, GA Following Credible Allegations of Fraud

Advertisements

In the age of technology, it’s almost impossible to get away with a crime. There are 100 ways to get caught and a criminal may think of 99 of them. But somewhere in the paper or the digital trail, resides the one item that was overlooked. And a diligent, persistent investigator will find it.

In the wake of the 2020 presidential election, over 1,000 poll watchers in swing states signed sworn affidavits stating they had witnessed irregularities on and in the days immediately following Nov. 3.

One of the complainants, Garland Favorito, is the co-founder of the Voters Organized for Trusted Election Results in Georgia, a conservative government watchdog group.

RealClearInvestigations‘ Paul Sperry recounted Favorito’s story. “A curious thing happened as Fulton County, Ga., election officials counted mail-in ballots at Atlanta’s State Farm Arena in the days after the election. In the early hours of Nov. 5, a surge of some 20,000 mail-in votes suddenly appeared for Joe Biden, while approximately 1,000 votes for President Trump mysteriously disappeared from his own totals in the critical swing state.”

Favorito observed this “suspicious shift in votes while monitoring the interim election results on the Georgia secretary of state website.”

In the affidavit Favorito had filed with the secretary of state’s office, he wrote, “I concluded from looking at these results that this was an irregularity, since there was no obvious reason for President Trump’s totals to have decreased while former Vice President Biden’s totals increased dramatically.”

Favorito’s claims, along with virtually all of the other allegations were quickly dismissed by the Georgia Secretary of State’s office.

Refusing to be rejected so easily, he filed a lawsuit in Fulton County Superior Court. At a court hearing held on Monday, Henry County Judge Brian Amero appeared to take his case seriously.

According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, “Amero may unseal absentee ballots in Fulton County so a government watchdog [Favorito’s group] can investigate allegations of voting fraud in the November election.”

Amero said he’s “inclined to order the ballots to be unsealed and reviewed by experts hired by Favorito.” The ballots are currently under seal in the Fulton County Superior Court Clerk’s Office.

AJC reported:

At Monday’s hearing, Amero said he’s willing to order the absentee ballots to be unsealed if he’s assured their security will not be compromised. He requested a detailed plan, including who would review the ballots, how they would analyze them and how they would secure them.

The judge also discussed a protective order that would prohibit Favorito’s experts from disclosing their work without permission from the court. And he plans to appoint a special master — perhaps a retired superior court judge — to oversee the analysis. If Amero allows it, the review of ballots could begin in late April.

“I can’t sign an order until such time as I’m satisfied that the manner and method (of review) proposed by the petitioners is reasonable,” the judge said.

“We want to do this in such a way that dispels rumors and disinformation and sheds light,” Amero said at the hearing. “The devil’s in the details.”

Favorito is seeking to review absentee ballots in Fulton County. He says county workers fabricated ballots and counted some ballots multiple times on election night. As evidence, his lawsuit cites video of the counting, as well as sworn statements from people who were present.

The observers were suspicious of ballots that were printed on a different stock of paper than regular ballots, appeared to have been printed instead of marked by ink in a voter’s hand or were not creased, indicating they had not been placed in an absentee ballot envelope and mailed.

Naturally, state and county election officials dispute Favorito’s allegations. According to the AJC, these officials have explained that many ballots had been damaged and had to be duplicated before their scanners would process them. The scanners sometimes jam and when that happens, officials said, all of the ballots from a particular batch must be rescanned.

AJC quotes Gabriel Sterling, chief operating officer for the secretary of state’s office, who declared that “the witness statements in the lawsuits are wrong.”

Sterling told a reporter last week that, “It’s not people who are lying, they don’t understand what they’re saying.”

Of course.

Obviously, none of us know what happened with the ballots. But there seems to be too much smoke here for there to be no fire. And taking the Georgia election officials at their word is akin to taking the word of your teenager who swears he didn’t have a party when you were away, even though several bags of beer bottles were found and there’s a huge cigarette burn in the carpet.

Except that the stakes are exponentially greater. In fact, they have already changed the course of America’s future.

The majority of Trump voters, including myself, believe that fraud occurred in the election. We need to pursue each and every one of the allegations made in the sworn affidavits.

I am convinced that somewhere there exists that one detail that was overlooked. We need to find it.

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

Advertisements

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

He is a disgrace.

 

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

20 States Send Letter to Congressional Leaders Promising Swift Consequences if HR1 Passes

Advertisements

Democratic leaders no longer even try to hide their real objectives. All of the bills introduced by Democratic lawmakers have been undisguised power grabs.

Having been well pleased with the flexibility in voting methods the pandemic allowed them, and certainly with the result of the election, party leaders decided to make these changes permanent. The result was the passage of H.R. 1, the “For the People Act of 2021,” (the Act), by the House of Representatives on Wednesday.

Noting the gross overreach by the federal government in the bill, the attorneys general of 20 states penned a letter to Congressional leadership which can be viewed here.

This group of top law enforcement officers write that “it is difficult to imagine a legislative proposal more threatening to election integrity and voter confidence.” They make the case that H.R. 1 strips the state legislatures of their constitutionally granted authority to determine how elections will be held in their states.

Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, the leader of this group and the first signer of the letter, issued a statement to Fox News which read in part, “This monstrosity of a bill betrays the Constitution, dangerously federalizes state elections, and undermines the integrity of the ballot box. As a former chief election officer, and now an Attorney General, I know this would be a disaster for election integrity and confidence in the processes that have been developed over time to instill confidence in the idea of ‘one person, one vote.’”

The letter begins: “As introduced, the Act betrays several Constitutional deficiencies and alarming mandates that, if passed, would federalize state elections and impose burdensome costs and regulations on state and local officials. Under both the Elections Clause of Article I of the Constitution and the Electors Clause of Article II, States have principal — and with presidential elections, exclusive — responsibility to safeguard the manner of holding elections. The Act would invert that constitutional structure, commandeer state resources, confuse and muddle elections procedures, and erode faith in our elections and systems of governance.”

It states further that “the Act regulates ‘election for Federal office,’ defined to include ‘election for the office of President or Vice President.’ The Act therefore implicates the Electors Clause, which expressly affords ‘Each State’ the power to ‘appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,’ the state’s allotment of presidential electors, and separately affords Congress only the more limited power to ‘determine the Time of chusing the Electors.’  That exclusive division of power for setting the ‘manner’ and ‘time’ of choosing presidential electors differs markedly from the collocated powers of the Article I Elections Clause, which says that both States and Congress have the power to regulate the ‘time, place, and manner’ of congressional elections.”

“That distinction is not an accident of drafting,” the group maintains. “After extensive debate, the Constitution’s Framers deliberately excluded Congress from deciding how presidential electors would be chosen in order to avoid presidential dependence on Congress for position and authority.”

They cite a Supreme Court ruling in the case of McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1, 27 (1892) in which the court upheld “a Michigan statute apportioning presidential electors by district.” The court “observed that the Electors Clause ‘convey[s] the broadest power of determination’ and ‘leaves it to the [state] legislature exclusively to define the method’ of appointment of electors.”

“The exclusivity of state power to ‘define the method’ of choosing presidential electors,” write the attorneys general, “means that Congress may not force states to permit presidential voting by mail or curbside voting, for example.”

The group notes the Act’s “regulation of congressional elections” which includes “mandating mail-in voting, requiring states to accept late ballots, overriding state voter identification (“ID”) laws, and mandating that states conduct redistricting through unelected commissions [gerrymandering], also faces severe constitutional hurdles.” Rather than “acting as a check,” Congress is “seizing the role of principal election regulator.”

The letter excoriates the Democrats’ proposal to eliminate voter ID laws which the group writes is “perhaps” the “most egregious” feature of the bill. It also cites the Act’s attempt to put limitations on how states can purge voter rolls of those who have left the state.

“The Act would dismantle meaningful voter ID laws by allowing a statement, as a substitute for prior-issued, document-backed identification, to “attest [ ] to the individual’s identity and . . . that the individual is eligible to vote in the election.” This does little to ensure that voters are who they say they are.”

Identification is required for everything in modern life. I went to a Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles facility several months ago to renew my driver’s license. In Connecticut, a trip to the DMV requires several hours. Finally working my way to the front of the line, I presented my passport, social security card, even my birth certificate – complete with a raised seal. I had forgotten, however, to bring two pieces of mail from my address of the last 27 years, so I would not be allowed to receive a “REAL ID,” one that could be used to board an airplane. Unless I wanted to do all of this over again, I would be issued a “standard” license that stated “Not for Federal Identification” on its face. Deciding that I’d rather stick needles in my eyes than repeat this exercise anytime soon, I opted for the standard license.

Voting is one of the most sacred privileges of a U.S. citizen. There is only one reason for waiving the voter ID requirement. And that is because it facilitates voter fraud. It’s that simple.

The attorneys general conclude with the following message. “Despite recent calls for political unity, the Act takes a one-sided approach to governing and usurps states’ authority over elections. With confidence in elections at a record low, the country’s focus should be on building trust in the electoral process. Around the nation, the 2020 general elections generated mass confusion and distrust — problems that the Act would only exacerbate. Should the Act become law, we will seek legal remedies to protect the Constitution, the sovereignty of all states, our elections, and the rights of our citizens.”

In their quest for absolute power, Democrats have forgotten that the United States is a constitutional federal republic. Our government “is based on a Constitution which is the supreme law of the United States. The Constitution not only provides the framework for how the federal and state governments are structured, but also places significant limits on their powers.” (Emphasis added.)

Finally, “‘federal’ means that there is both a national government and governments of the 50 states.” Under the federal system of government, state legislatures are granted the power to determine election laws in the state.

Blinded by their lust for power, Democrats are ignoring the Constitution and showing complete disregard for the rule of law. The fact that 20 attorneys general have come forward to threaten “legal remedies” to protect the Constitution, the sovereignty of all states, our elections, and the rights of our citizens,” if this bill becomes law, speaks volumes.

The National Constitution Center, a left-leaning think tank, provides the weak counter-argument to the belief that states have the right to set their own regulations concerning elections. They claim that the Elections Clause “vests ultimate power in Congress.” They write that the Framers “were concerned that states might establish unfair election procedures or attempt to undermine the national government by refusing to hold elections for Congress.”

The NCC website states: “Although the Elections Clause makes states primarily responsible for regulating congressional elections, it vests ultimate power in Congress. Congress may pass federal laws regulating congressional elections that automatically displace (“preempt”) any contrary state statutes, or enact its own regulations concerning those aspects of elections that states may not have addressed. The Framers of the Constitution were concerned that states might establish unfair election procedures or attempt to undermine the national government by refusing to hold elections for Congress. They empowered Congress to step in and regulate such elections as a self-defense mechanism.”

I am not a lawyer, but I believe the opposite is true, that the Framers were more concerned with endowing the states with sovereignty.

A final decision on this case may ultimately require an interpretation of the Tenth and Eleventh amendments by the Supreme Court.

So far, however, perhaps because they feel vulnerable over Democrats’ threats to pack the court, the justices have repeatedly rejected attempts to get pulled into political disputes. Rather than being mere “political disputes,” I see them as questions requiring constitutional interpretation. And isn’t that why we have a Supreme Court?

This bill may never need to be settled by the Supreme Court. Hopefully, it will fail in the Senate. In March 2019, then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell blocked an earlier version of the “For the People Act.”

(Note: After the new version was introduced in January, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson addressed the features of this proposed legislation on his show. He concluded that if H.R. 1 were to become law, it would “enshrine fraud.” A video of Carlson’s excellent analysis can be viewed here.)