RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2022/10/08/democrats-run-a-network-of-fake-news-sites-designed-to-promote-liberal-candidates-n2614169?utm_campaign=rightrailsticky3

Democrat operatives are running a scheme to convince people in battleground states to vote Left. 

According to a shocking discovery by Axios, 10 swing states are being flooded with more than 50 local media outlets designed to promote liberal candidates. 

Each news outlet has a non-partisan sounding name such as the Milwaukee Metro Times, the Tri-City Record, and the Mecklenburg Herald, which all push a heavy Democrat message while bashing Republican candidates. 

The report reveals that the sites have just enough stories on local crime and sports to make them look like real local news outlets, however, the real mission is to hide subliminal messaging favoring Democrats. 

“Each follows a similar template: aggregated local news content and short write-ups about local sports teams and attractions — interspersed with heavily slanted political news aimed at boosting Democratic midterm candidates and attacking Republican opponents,” Axios said. 

The sites are reportedly run by a one-year-old Florida-based company called “Local Report,” and according to Axios, the sites may also be run by a progressive media company owned by a Hillary Clinton-affiliated investment firm called True Blue Media.

According to its “About Us” page, six American Independent (a progressive news outlet) writers have contributed to almost all of the articles on the sites. 

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/spencerbrown/2022/10/07/cash-strapped-democrats-to-abandon-key-house-races-n2614127?utm_campaign=rightrailsticky3

With barely more than one month remaining until the midterm elections, the leading entities tasked with helping Democrats win and retain seats in the House of Representatives say they are running out of money and scrambling to decide which Democrats get the remaining cash available to try and dampen the expected red wave heading for Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s gavel. 

Whining to The Washington Post, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) Executive Director Tim Persico said there “are places that I don’t know if we are going to be able to get to” in order to help Democrats. “We are just getting outspent everywhere, so it is just a question of how much can we withstand.”

That makes the DCCC one of several groups WaPo said Friday morning were discovering they “lack the funds needed to fully contest all of their potentially winnable House races this cycle,” leading to “tough decisions about where to spend on television ads” as Democrats get outspent by GOP groups.

“The relative shortfall in outside spending is likely to leave some Democratic incumbents in contested races at sharp advertising disadvantages, while restricting the party’s ability to compete in open seats or to unseat Republican incumbents,” concluded The Post based on conversations with Dem groups.

https://victorhanson.com/eleven-realities-about-trump-vs-desantis/

Most think it likely that Florida Governor Ron DeSantis will run against a probable candidate Donald Trump for the Republican nomination. If so, we can expect the following:

1) DeSantis will run on the Trump MAGA agenda. There will be no challenge on the major issues. There will be no Never Trump return, no Romneyism redux, no Liz Cheney-like recalibration of the Republican Party.

2) DeSantis cannot argue that his superb governorship gives him superior executive experience over Trump, given that Trump’s four years saw historic successes. And vice-versa. Instead, the race will hinge on two considerations: Trump will argue that DeSantis is his own copied automaton (e.g., “I made him”) and yet lacks Trump’s fire-in-the-belly combativeness, so necessary to challenge the leftwing destruction of our institutions. DeSantis will fire back that he will “get even not mad.” That is, his attacks on Disney or Martha’s Vineyard are laser-focused, shorn of puerile put-downs, cul-de-sac extraneous tweets, and narcissistic fixations with past grievances and hurts.

3) Trump will assert charisma; DeSantis competence. Each will try to combine both as Reagan did. But can Trump run or govern without the psychodramas of being surrounded by shysters like the Mooch or Omarosa, or the volatility of a Bannon or Roger Stone?

4) Alternatively, can DeSantis turn out 40,000 in an open-air rally in early February?

5) We know Trump from his presidency, but will we know him at age 78-79? Is he as alert and savvy and cunning as he was nine or ten years earlier? And in the debates, will DeSantis prove dazzling or more a 2016 Scott Walker, a figure with a similarly superb record of state governance, a willingness to take on the teacher unions and the Left, and someone who exuded executive competence—before he melted down on the debate stage?

https://www.frontpagemag.com/new-documents-show-2020-election-grants-in-pa-intertwined-with-professional-partisan-left/

Visit BroadandLiberty.com.

Months after the 2020 election was complete and weeks after Joe Biden had been inaugurated, one of the leading principals who managed the selective distribution of election grants in Pennsylvania embarked on a post-game analysis to see “what worked and what did not” with the money doled out to county election offices throughout the commonwealth.

That person, Marc Solomon, didn’t do the analysis himself, however. Instead, he hired Fernandez Advisors, according to emails obtained by Broad + Liberty.

Fernandez Advisors, based in New York City, caters to some of the most influential and deep-pocketed leftwing organizations in the world, including John Podesta’s Center for American Progress, George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, and the Tides Foundation.

The discovery is yet one more link of how deeply the Pennsylvania grant effort was intertwined with the professional, partisan left.

The Chicago-based nonprofit Center for Tech and Civic Life distributed the grants to about two dozen Pennsylvania counties as well as to the Department of State totalling more than $25 million in the runup to the 2020 election.

Solomon, a paid political consultant with a New York City-based firm, was not contracted to work on behalf of the CTCL, however. As Broad + Liberty has previously established and reported, Solomon was working on behalf of the Center for Secure and Modern Elections, even though the CSME was never officially announced as any kind of partner in the project to the public.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/election-firm-ceo-arrested-for-storing-data-in-china-one-day-after-nyt-reporter-dismissed-allegations-as-conspiracy-theory/

A sympathetic profile of Eugene Yu and his election-logistics software firm, Konnech, was published by the New York Times on Monday. Stuart Thompson, a technology reporter specializing in “misinformation” and “disinformation,” declared that Konnech had been accused of giving the Chinese government “backdoor access” to the personal information of poll workers based on “threadbare evidence,” or even “none at all.”

A day later, Thompson reported that Yu had been arrested, as Los Angeles County district attorney George Gascón put it in a statement, “as part of an investigation into the possible theft of personal identifying information” of Los Angeles County poll workers.

According to Gascón, “information was stored on servers in the People’s Republic of China,” a breach of the county’s contract with Konnech.

“Data breaches are an ongoing threat to our digital way of life. When we entrust a company to hold our confidential data, they must be willing and able to protect our personal identifying information from theft. Otherwise, we are all victims,” said Gascón, a progressive Democrat who survived a recall effort earlier this year.

The district attorney emphasized that “the alleged conduct had no impact on the tabulation of votes and did not alter election results,” but did note that “security in all aspects of any election is essential so that we all have full faith in the integrity of the election process.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/when-a-conspiracy-theory-turns-out-to-be-not-a-theory

On Monday, the New York Times published a story about Konnech, a small election software company that has just 27 employees, 21 based in Michigan and six in Australia. The paper reported that Konnech has been the target of “election deniers” who have made it the focus of “a new conspiracy theory about the 2020 presidential election.”

“Using threadbare evidence, or none at all,” the New York Times’s Stuart A. Thompson reported, the “election deniers” said Konnech “had secret ties to the Chinese Communist Party and had given the Chinese government backdoor access to personal data about two million poll workers in the United States.”

In the last two years, the New York Times added, “conspiracy theorists have subjected election officials and private companies that play a major role in elections to a barrage of outlandish voter fraud claims.” But now, “the attacks on Konnech demonstrate how far-right election deniers are also giving more attention to new and more secondary companies and groups.”

Konnech officials assured the New York Times that “none of the accusations were true.” Thompson reported that employees “feared for their safety” from right-wing violence and that “Konnech’s founder and chief executive, Eugene Yu, an American citizen who immigrated from China in 1986, went into hiding with his family after receiving threatening messages.”

Any reasonable reader would come away with the conclusion that Konnech, an innocent company that makes products to deal with “basic election logistics, such as scheduling poll workers,” has been the target of crazy, and possibly dangerous, conspiracy theories. To press the point, the New York Times used the phrase “conspiracy theory” or “conspiracy theorists” nine times in the article, once in the headline — “How a Tiny Elections Company Became a Conspiracy Theory Target” — seven times in the body of the story, and once in a photo caption. Got it?

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/biden-team-shrug-stacey-abrams-georgia-election-lawsuit-over-jim-crow-2-0-rejected-judge

“Jim Eagle” has landed… with a thud. President Joe Biden famously (and somewhat bizarrely) used the name “Jim Eagle” to characterize the Georgia election law. 

It was not enough to call it “Jim Crow on steroids” and “sick,” President Biden wanted the public to know that the law was flagrantly unconstitutional. Some of us disagreed, but the view that counted was that of U.S. District Judge Steve Jones, an Obama appointee who heard the challenge to the law. This week, Jones found the law to be entirely constitutional. 

After being declared the “new confederacy” and subjected to a costly boycott, Georgians could be forgiven if they view Biden’s claim as more foul and fowl.

Given the exhausting media coverage and condemnations of the law, one would expect the legion of legal experts out in force on a judge upholding the allegedly “modern Jim Crow law.”  Instead, it has been crickets . . . almost as if the earlier coverage was knowingly exaggerated for public consumption.

Georgia Democratic candidate for governor Stacey Abrams tweeted  “It’s Jim Crow in a suit + tie.” Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., called the laws “anti-American, racist, and a betrayal of our Constitution.” Democratic attorney Marc Elias (who allegedly hid the Clinton campaigns funding of the infamous Steele dossier) said in an interview that “democracy was assaulted with a pen” in the new law. Liberal publications like Vanity Fair called it “a broad, profoundly undemocratic assault on voting rights.”

Now that such claims were actually subjected to judicial review and rejected, there is little discussion of Jim Crow. The group that lost before the district court is closely associated with Abrams, who previously refused to concede the election of Gov. Brian Kemp in the last election.

https://cnav.news/2022/09/29/editorial/guest/voter-fraud-only-issue-2022-election/

Voter fraud happened in 2020 and could happen this time

A friend recently reminded me of an article I had written on October 5, 2020, just before the presidential election that found all TV networks reporting that President Donald Trump was crushing Joe Biden across the board—including in the all-important battleground states—and then that coverage mysteriously stopped cold, disappeared for over three hours, and reappeared to report that the exact opposite was true, that Joe Biden had magically become the Crusher in Chief, ultimately “winning” the 2020 election.

“Remember the title of your article?” my friend asked me. In fact, I did, since it was the only time in decades of writing that I had capitalized a word in the title. It read like this:

The ONLY Issue in the 2020 Election is Voter Fraud.

Well, it’s election time again, and sure enough the same thing is true. And after viewing Dinesh D’Souza’s jaw-dropping “2000 Mules,” which documents the massive fraud that indeed took place in 2020, and after reading dozens of reports about audits that were done in the battleground states and others which uncovered overwhelming voter fraud, including thousands of dead voters, it appears that voter fraud is once again the ONLY issue of concern. Great concern.

The reality factor

When you peel back all the layers of the onion of a human being’s psychology, our species is really not that complicated. Whether man or woman, black or white, rich or poor, from whatever background, religion, or culture, we all have similar if not identical needs.

https://issuesinsights.com/2022/09/30/if-this-is-the-dems-winning-message-they-deserve-to-lose-bigly/

Democrats have been trying to scare voters for months. A Republican victory, they shout, will mean the rise of semi-fascism! Women will be shackled to their birthing beds! Democracy itself is at stake!

None of it has worked. Despite endless news reports about how Democrats’ chances in the midterms were improving, the needle just isn’t moving.

So, will they try to run on their record of “accomplishment”? Brent Budowsky, a columnist for The Hill, says they should. In a piece headlined: “A closing message for Democrats to win,” he says they just need to ask voters: “Do you want to build on, or reverse, the achievements of Biden and the Democratic Congress?”

What achievements? Budowsky lists them. Democrats, he says:

lowered prescription drug costs,
created tens of millions of high-wage jobs,
made “dramatic” improvements in veterans’ health care,
“important” progress to combat gun violence, and
“historic” progress climate change,
strengthened the Violence Against Women Act,
passed the American Rescue Plan,
expanded Child Care Tax Credit,
and got a bipartisan infrastructure law passed.