RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.theepochtimes.com/project-veritas-leaks-clip-purportedly-showing-feds-intimidating-usps-whistleblower-hopkins_3575907.html

Investigative journalism nonprofit Project Veritas on Wednesday released a recording it claims shows federal agents pressuring a U.S. Postal Service (USPS) whistleblower in Erie, Pennsylvania, to go back on his allegations last week that he overheard superiors discussing a scheme to backdate mail-in ballots.

Mail carrier Richard Hopkins last week claimed that he heard a local postmaster at Erie Post Office, Rob Weisenbach, instruct USPS workers to collect mail ballots they receive after Nov. 3 and hand them over to him to be backdated.

Hopkins, 32, who has since been placed on non-pay status by the post office, signed a sworn affidavit, under the penalty of perjury, containing the allegations. It was received by Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Nov. 7.

He said that he is willing to testify under oath that he heard Weisenbach tell a supervisor that he was backdating ballots “to make it appear as though the ballots had been collected on November 3, 2020, despite them in fact being collected on November 4 and possibly later.”

Under state election rules, ballots can be counted up to three days after Election Day as long as they are postmarked as having been sent on Nov. 3.

A USPS spokesman told The Epoch Times it was aware of Hopkins’s claim and had referred the matter to the U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the Office of Inspector General. A USPS Office of Inspector General spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email, “The U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General does not comment on ongoing matters.”

https://issuesinsights.com/2020/11/12/memo-to-joe-covid-is-skyrocketing-in-states-that-already-have-mask-mandates/

Ever since the mainstream media declared Joe Biden the winner of the 2020 election, he’s been prattling on about how a nationwide mask mandate is vital to slowing the spread of the coronavirus. But has anyone noticed that the disease is spreading like wildfire in states that already have mask mandates?  

The day after he made up his “President Elect” signs, Biden declared that he would call on governors around the country to impose mask mandates. One Biden official told NBC News that “If a governor declines, he’ll go to the mayors in the state and ask them to lead. In many states, there is the capacity of mayors to institute mandates.”

“It’s time to end the politicization of basic, responsible public health steps like mask-wearing and social distancing,” Biden said on Monday. “The single most effective thing we can do to stop the spread of COVID: Wear a mask.”

Really? Let’s look at the data.

As it stands, 33 states already have statewide mask mandates. These states account for three-quarters of the nation’s population.

https://thenewamerican.com/heres-the-list-of-republicans-who-want-us-to-believe-biden-is-the-new-potus/

Lists can go both ways.

The media establishment and the political Left have taken it upon themselves to compile lists of lawmakers and regular Americans who rightly refuse to call Joe Biden the president-elect when the result of the 2020 election is far from conclusive. Naturally, they do this with the aim of shaming and intimidating the named individuals into submission.

The Left’s tactic of coercing is despicable; it is, nevertheless, useful to look at their “hit lists” and extrapolate the data to glean information about the stances of national figures and thus see which ones are interested in pursuing the truth and an honest election, and which are obediently heeding the call of the establishment’s propaganda mill.

When the next election season comes around, it will be useful to know who stood for integrity in America’s crucial moment and who didn’t. As noted by NBC News, the Republican members of Congress who have thus far broken with President Trump to definitively congratulate Joe Biden on his “victory” are:

Senator Lisa Murkowski (Alaska),Senator Mitt Romney (Utah), Senator Susan Collins (Maine),Senator Ben Sasse (Neb.),Representative Fred Upton (Mich.),Representative Francis Rooney (Fla.),Representative Will Hurd (Texas),Representative Paul Mitchell (Mich.), Representative Adam Kinzinger (Ill.).

Less vocal and more cautious but urging the President toward concession are: Senator Marco Rubio (Fla.),Senator Pat Toomey (Pa.),Senator Mike Rounds (S.D.),Representative Tom Reed (N.Y.).

PHOENIX—Arizona Congresswoman Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) said she believes President Donald Trump should not concede until every legal battle is resolved, as a number of her constituents have contacted her over perceived irregularities at voting places across the state. 

“I do not think that the president should concede until all of this has played out because it is not over yet,” she told The Epoch Times on Nov. 10. “I do totally believe that if the tables were turned and Biden was in this situation he would do the same thing.”

County officials said they expect to be done counting this week the remaining tens of thousands of ballots in Arizona. Trump is within 0.39 percent of Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, according to the latest unofficial results. An automatic recount will take place if the final margin is one-tenth of 1 percent, per state law.

“It’s still possible Trump could win Arizona,” she added.

The congresswoman felt it was irresponsible for the media to call Arizona for Biden early on in the race with many votes still left to be counted. Trump’s campaign early on predicted that the president would win the state and its 11 Electoral College votes.

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2020/11/two-videos-analysing-and-exposing-the-us-election/

Victor Davis Hanson speaks at length with former deputy prime minister John Anderson about the US election, fraud, misleading polls.

As the video is hosted by YouTube, those interested should watch now just in case the Google-owned platform adds the clip to the ever-growing list of things Big Tech doesn’t want you to see.From Mr Hanson’s helicopter view of the election, the culture war and the factors that determined its alleged outcome,  then listen to a surreptitiously recorded class in which Detroit poll workers are explicitly instructed how to produce the ‘votes’ Joe Biden needed.

https://www.scotusblog.com/election-litigation/

https://amgreatness.com/2020/11/10/could-these-court-cases-reveal-a-final-trump-victory/

It turns out, the American Founders forgot to include a clause granting CNN the power to decide close presidential elections. Supporters of President Trump’s reelection campaign have not yet been satisfied that Joe Biden’s campaign pulled off an Electoral College win. Indeed, the actual Electoral College votes are not due until December 23, 2020. The constitutional process set aside this lengthy period to resolve election tabulation disputes. 

Days ago, the media hysterically warned that President Trump might claim victory before “all the votes were counted.” But as soon as enough votes were counted to put Vice President Biden over the top, the networks immediately colluded to reverse their sanctimonious “every vote matters” position. What they really meant all along was that the votes should be counted until it looked like their guy was winning. 

The constitutional process allows challenges to irregularities in vote tabulation. The process allows courts, particularly state courts, to weigh whether the count includes ineligible votes such as double votes and votes received after election day. The website, SCOTUSblog, is tracking numerous election cases here. Could these court cases reverse Biden’s apparent victory? Let’s dig in and take a closer look at the cases that could still impact the final outcome.

Pennsylvania

The Trump campaign on Monday filed a massive lawsuit alleging voting and tabulation irregularities. Among other issues, the Trump campaign’s position is that Pennsylvania set a lower bar for accepting mail-in votes because those tend to go for Biden. Additionally, the complaint alleges that Biden-leaning counties allowed voters to “cure” defective ballots while the more rural Trump-leaning counties did not. Through this “cure” process, election officials would call select voters to give them the opportunity to correct mistakes in absentee ballots.

https://www.city-journal.org/biden-threat-to-law-enforcement

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were unambiguous throughout their presidential campaign: they believe that racism pervades policing and all other aspects of the criminal-justice system. Just a day before the networks declared Biden the president-elect, he claimed a “mandate” to eliminate “systemic racism.” He doubled down on that claim the next day, in his first speech as presumptive president-elect. During the campaign, Biden routinely announced that black parents were right to worry that their children would be shot by the police, an assertion formalized in his campaign plan for “strengthening . . . justice.”

Biden’s plan for “strengthening America’s commitment to justice” reads like a Black Lives Matter wish list; there is no reason to think that a Biden–Harris Justice Department will not implement it. Among its most consequential proposals, it calls for a return to the practice of imposing weakly-justified consent decrees on police departments. During the Obama years, career attorneys in the Justice Department regularly opened civil rights investigations into police departments (called “pattern or practice” investigations) without credible evidence that an agency was systematically violating citizens’ constitutional rights. Those investigations almost invariably resulted in settlements (called consent decrees) that placed police departments under the control of a nonelected federal monitor and a federal judge; monitors collected millions of dollars in taxpayer-funded fees while they held police departments to draconian deadlines and mindless paper-pushing mandates for years on end.

President Trump’s first attorney general, Jeff Sessions, reformed that practice. On the very day that Trump vindictively fired Sessions in November 2018, Sessions had signed a directive requiring that a high-level DOJ official approve each consent decree, that those decrees have a sunset date—usually no longer than three years—and that they specify what a department must do to terminate the decree. The directive stipulated that police agency’s alleged constitutional violations must be truly systematic and unlikely to be corrected absent a de facto federal takeover of the department. Justice Department attorneys must balance any expected benefits from the consent decree against its costs. High-paid monitors should be a last resort; Justice Department attorneys should ordinarily oversee the measures that they have imposed.