Displaying posts categorized under

ELECTIONS

A Victory for Sanity In the Battle Against Mail-In Ballot Madness By Stephen Kruiser

https://pjmedia.com/columns/stephen-kruiser/2022/10/10/the-morning-briefing-a-victory-for-sanity-in-the-battle-against-mail-in-ballot-madness-n1635772

Buried among the torrent of dreck I found a bit of good news in a post written by one of our new writers, Catherine Salgado:

The Delaware Supreme Court ruled on Friday that a state law enacting universal mail-in voting and creating same-day voter registration was in violation of the state constitution.

“The Vote-by-Mail Statute impermissibly expands the categories of absentee voters identified in Article V, Section 4A of the Delaware Constitution. Therefore, the judgment of the Court of Chancery that the Vote-by-Mail Statute violates the Delaware Constitution should be affirmed,” the Delaware Supreme Court decision said.

This accorded with a September opinion ruling against universal mail-in voting, but the new decision reversed its previous approval of same-day registration.

Delaware is a bit bluer than the other states that have been fighting for more election integrity, that’s what makes this news so interesting.

MEMORY LANE: THE CRITICAL DEBATE BETWEEN INCUMBENT PRESIDENT JIMMY CARTER AND CHALLENGER RONALD REAGAN

The old cliche: “The more things change the more they remain the same.” Ronald Reagan won by a landslide in 1980. This debate was critical in making the case for conservatism and the need for change.  Long but worth a read: rsk

“The candidates will debate questions on domestic, economic, foreign policy, and national security issues.

The ground rules for this, as agreed by you gentlemen, are these: Each panelist down here will ask a question, the same question, to each of the two candidates. After the two candidates have answered, a panelist will ask followup questions to try to sharpen the answers. The candidates will then have an opportunity each to make a rebuttal. That will constitute the first half of the debate, and I will state the rules for the second half later on.

Now, based on a toss of the coin, Governor Reagan will respond to the first question from Marvin Stone.

QUESTIONS

U.S. ARMED FORCES

Mr. Stone. Governor, as you’re well aware, the question of war and peace has emerged as a central issue in this campaign in the give-and-take of recent weeks. President Carter’s been criticized for responding late to aggressive Soviet impulses, for insufficient buildup of our Armed Forces, and a paralysis in dealing with Afghanistan and Iran. You have been criticized for being all too quick to advocate the use of lots of muscle, military action, to deal with foreign crises. Specifically, what are the differences between the two of you on the uses of American military power?

Governor Reagan. I don’t know what the differences might be, because I don’t know what Mr. Carter’s policies are. I do know what he has said about mine. And I’m only here to tell you that I believe with all my heart that our first priority must be world peace, and that use of force is always and only a last resort, when everything else has failed, and then only with regard to our national security.

Now, I believe, also that this meeting, this mission, this responsibility for preserving the peace, which I believe is a responsibility peculiar to our country, that we cannot shirk our responsibility as the leader of the Free World, because we’re the only one that can do it. And therefore, the burden of maintaining the peace falls on us. And to maintain that peace requires strength. America has never gotten in a war because we were too strong. We can get into a war by letting events get out of hand, as they have in the last 3 years under the foreign policies of this administration of Mr. Carter’s, until we’re faced each time with a crisis. And good management in preserving the peace requires that we control the events and try to intercept before they become a crisis.

$370 Billion in Taxpayer Dollars for WHAT? The Matching Funds Fairness Doctrine by Lawrence Kadish

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18967/370-billion-taxpayer-dollars

The recent Schumer-Manchin so-called Anti-Inflation Climate Bill and the actions of US President Joe Biden have seemingly resulted in a $370 billion slush fund in the hands of not a climate change expert, but a power broker, John Podesta, and will likely find its way into the 2022 and 2024 elections for Democrat candidates.

Accordingly, members of Congress must make a correction with a FAIRNESS DOCTRINE, allowing $370 billion in matching funds to be put into the hands of the Republican primary winners in order to level the playing field.

After all, if, in the run-up to the 2020 election, $419 million could swing votes to that extent, what will a thousand times that funding be able to buy?

Although private funding by Zuckbucks has been “banned or restricted” in quite a few counties or states, public funding has not been banned. And what do you know, thanks to Congress, here it is!

How it works, as Mollie Hemingway notes, is:

“Wisconsin [which Biden won by just 20,000 votes] is a prime example of how a supposed nonpartisan ‘get out the vote group’ really was a Democratic Party-aligned effort to flip a state back their way.

“The Center for Technology and Civic Life, funded by Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg and founded by three Democratic operatives, said their mission was to ensure voting could be ‘done in accordance with prevailing public health requirements’ to ‘reduce the risk of exposure to coronavirus.’

“But really they were infiltrating local election operations and pushing for as many Democrats as possible to vote by mail….

Democrats Run a Network of Fake News Sites Designed to Promote Liberal Candidates: Sarah Arnold

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. 

Red Wave? Democrats Forced to Abandon Key House Races: Spencer Brown

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.

Eleven Realities About Trump vs. DeSantis: Victor Davis Hanson

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?

New Documents Show 2020 Election Grants in Pa. Intertwined With Professional, Partisan Left Yet another disturbing discovery. by Todd Shepherd

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.

In stunning interview with Tucker Carlson last night, Tony Bobulinski explained how the FBI fixed the 2020 election By Thomas Lifson

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/10/in_stunning_interview_with_tucker_carlson_last_night_tony_bobulinski_explained_how_the_fbi_fixed_the_2020_election.html

Most readers already know that Tony Bobulinski was the business partner of Hunter Biden and his uncle, Jim Biden, the president’s brother, as they attempted to put together deals with foreign actors.  That partnership broke up, and Bobulinski has become a whistleblower.  But his efforts to interest the FBI in multiple Biden family felonies, including against him, have come to naught.

Last night, in a second sit-down interview with Tucker Carlson, Bobulinski laid out stunning details on how the FBI deep-sixed any public revelations, much less indictments, based on what Bobulinski says are thousands of pages of proof, including emails, text messages, recorded phone calls, and actual business documents.  Despite having possession of abundant evidence, the FBI sat on the investigation through the 2020 election, thereby depriving the public of information that almost certainly would have swayed enough votes to change the outcome and re-elect Donald Trump.

One key figure is Timothy Thibault, who was made the FBI’s point man on the information brought by Bobulinski, who never followed up.  Miranda Devine of the New York Post broke this story a month ago:

Timothy Thibault, the FBI agent alleged to have interfered with an investigation into Hunter Biden, was assigned by the Washington Field Office as “point man” to manage whistleblower Tony Bobulinski, the first son’s former business partner, before the 2020 election — but he suppressed his damning revelations, sources say.

Election Firm CEO Arrested for Storing Data in China One Day after NYT Reporter Dismissed Allegations as ‘Conspiracy Theory’By Isaac Schorr

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.”

When a ‘conspiracy theory’ turns out to be…not a theory by Byron York

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?