Thursday, November 21, 2024
Facebook Instagram RSS Twitter Youtube
Home Blog Page 2

CNN, Media Lavish Praise On Fox News’s Neil Cavuto For Cutting Off White House Press Secretary

By
Gustavo
-
0

Journalists at CNN and other mainstream media outlets praised Fox News’s Neil Cavuto for cutting off White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany during her press conference on alleged voter fraud in certain states.

“Whoa, Whoa, Whoa. I just think we have to be very clear what she’s charging: The other side is welcoming fraud and welcoming illegal voting.” Cavuto said Monday afternoon. “Unless she has more details to back that up, I can’t in good countenance continue showing you this.”

“I want to make sure that maybe they do get something to back that up. But that’s an explosive charge to make: ‘The other side is effectively rigging and cheating.’ If she does bring proof of that, of course, we’ll take it back,” Cavuto added. “So far she has started saying right at the outset, ‘Welcoming fraud, welcoming illegal voting.’”

Cavuto’s decision to cut off the presser was commended by many including Oliver Darcy, a senior media reporter for CNN.

“This from Cavuto, who has been more outspoken than his colleagues on Trump’s lies, is good,” Darcy said. “But it’s also him clearing the lowest of low bars — and yet it will spawn a bunch of “Fox turning on Trump” chatter when network is still carrying his water.”

CNN’s Brian Stelter also noted the abrupt programming change. “Another sign of the Murdoch media world tug-of-war I’ve been describing: Neil Cavuto cut off Kayleigh McEnany on his show while OTHER Fox shows are promoting the same kind of B.S. she was pushing.”

Other journalists from CNN, NPR, Washington Post, MSNBC, Financial Times, and others retweeted and echoed Darcy’s praise of Cavuto’s decision to cut away from the press secretary.

Some countered, noting that the Fox News anchor preventing people from hearing McEnany’s words is not the proper way to fact-check information.

Despite the media navel-gazing surrounding his decision, Cavuto has a history of expressing his criticism of the Trump Administration. In July, Cavuto pivoted his coverage in the middle of the president’s speech to fact-check his comments on the economy. Weeks later, Cavuto reprimanded Trump for attacking Fox News.

Detroit Poll Challenger Witnessed Election Workers Counting Ballots For ‘Non-eligible’ Voters, Then Kicked Out For Noticing

By
Gustavo
-
0

An affidavit from a Republican poll challenger in Detroit, Michigan confirms there may be voter fraud in the state.

Former Michigan Assistant Attorney General Zachary Larsen testified that at the convention center in downtown Detroit, election officials appeared to be processing a “majority” of mail-in ballots from ineligible voters that were not listed in the poll book of eligible voters, nor Larsen’s scanned list. Larsen confirmed in the affidavit that he had heard similar reports from other concerned poll challengers as well.

When Larsen tried to shift positions to get a better visual on the poll book on the computer screen and the mail-in envelopes to confirm his suspicions, he was “loudly and aggressively” scolded for not social distancing by standing at least six feet away from the election official.

Larsen protested the election official’s reprimands saying that he couldn’t see to verify the eligibility of the voters’ ballots which were being counted, but the worker told him he had to stand with the computer screen out of his view.

Despite being allowed to observe from an “equivalent distance from poll books” on Election Day in other precincts such as both Lansing and East Lansing, Larsen was asked to leave the premises after the official summoned their supervisor who demanded he stand six feet away.

The documents also notes that, despite their insistence about social distancing, the supervisor was sitting approximately three feet away from the other officials, thus breaking their own social distancing rule.

Larsen left to fill out a challenge and talk with an another attorney. Shortly after he left, the document states that no new poll challengers were allowed in the counting room and he was also prohibited from re-entering.

“Election officials never allowed Mr. Larsen to re-enter the counting room to fulfill his duties as a poll challenger after he had discovered the fraud which was taking place,” the affidavit said.

Detroit has had other allegations of election violations brewing since Election Day. On Monday, the Trump Campaign filed a lawsuit alleging that election workers were “told to backdate ballots received after election day.”

Last Wednesday, the Trump administration announced it was filing a lawsuit in Michigan saying Republicans were denied access to observe and oversee the opening and counting of ballots in the state. State law requires participation by both major parties in vote counts as a fraud prevention measure.

Another election observer in Detroit, Trisha Nesbitt, confirmed the Trump Campaign’s allegations to The Federalist on Friday.

“The election workers were not letting anyone in at the time,” Nesbitt explained, saying that she along with other Republican volunteers were told by officials that “the election hall was full.”

After Crying About Trump For Four Years, Russia Hoaxer Jake Tapper Says Republicans Must Concede Defeat…Or Else

By
Gustavo
-
0

CNN’s Jake Tapper has some thoughts on accepting the results of a presidential election.

“I truly sympathize with those dealing with losing — it’s not easy — but at a certain point one has to think not only about what’s best for the nation (peaceful transfer of power) but how any future employers might see your character defined during adversity,” Tapper wrote on Twitter.

It’s a bizarre statement.

It’s particularly bizarre given that Tapper, CNN’s 4 p.m. EST anchor, spent the last four years leading the media crusade to delegitimize the Trump presidency by perpetuating conspiracy after conspiracy for Trump’s crime of winning the 2016 election. Yet Tapper, with seemingly no self-awareness, has the audacity to characterize conservatives as conspiracy-ridden rivals of democracy for raising concerns over voter fraud in key states.

From alleging Trump is an agent of the Russian government operating to subvert American interests, to hyping claims that Justice Brett Kavanaugh was a “serial gang-rapist,” Tapper has some self-reflection to do before demonizing how others might conduct themselves during “adversity.”

Meanwhile, it is far from an assault on the democratic process to acknowledge the probability of widespread voter fraud in an election year with historic turnout in the form of mail-in ballots, the ripest method of fraud, even according to the New York Times. There’s a reason most nations today ban mail-in voting.

While the courts will ultimately determine the validity of Republican claims alleging fraud, the Trump campaign deserves the space to make its case using institutions built for this exact moment, just as former Vice President Al Gore had 37 days in 2000 before he officially conceded.

Recounts and litigation are getting underway in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, Wisconsin, and Michigan.

In Michigan, Republican election observers were reportedly kicked out of polling locations, and a software glitch in one county reportedly tallied 6,000 Republican votes for Democrats. Complicating things further, the same software was used across 47 different counties. Outlets have currently called the state’s 16 electoral votes for Democratic candidate Joe Biden by fewer than 150,000 votes.

Biden And Harris Declare Victory In Race For The Presidency

By
Gustavo
-
0

Despite pending litigation and election results in states around the nation, former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) addressed a crowd on Saturday night, declaring their presidential victory and thanking the American people for their votes.

“I’m humbled by the trust and confidence you placed in me. I pledge to be a president who seeks not to divide but unify, who doesn’t see red states or blue states, sees the United States,” Biden said.

Harris took the stage first, proclaiming the Biden-Harris administration would be productive and act on its agenda.

“For four years, you marched and organized for equality and justice for our lives and our planet, and then you voted,” she told a cheering crowd. “And you delivered a clear message. You chose hope and unity. Decency, science, and, yes, truth.”

Harris also congratulated her running mate, expressing hope that he would bring the country together with his “big heart.”

“Joe is a healer. An uniter. A tested and steady hand. A person whose own experience of loss gives him a sense of purpose that will help us as a nation reclaim our own sense of purpose,” she said. “And a man with a big heart who loves with abandon.”

Harris, who would be the first female vice president, continued to praise Biden for his leadership and “audacity to break one of the most substantial barriers that exist in our country and select a woman as his vice president.”

“While I may be the first woman in this office, I will not be the last,” she said.

Before Harris exited the stage, she reaffirmed her promise to move forward with Biden’s agenda, specifically addressing the COVID-19 pandemic, racism, and climate change.

“Now is when the real work begins. The hard work. The necessary work. The good work. The essential work to save lives and beat this epidemic,” she said. “To rebuild our economy, so it works for working people, to root out systemic racism in our justice system and society. To combat the climate crisis. To unite our country and heal the soul of our nation.”

“The road ahead will not be easy. But America is ready. And so are Joe and me,” she added.

Biden echoed his running mate’s words, saying that he is committed to furthering an agenda based on “the forces of decency, the forces of fairness, the forces of science, and the forces of hope.”

“Folks, I am a proud Democrat. But I will govern as an American president,” he said. “I will work as hard for those who didn’t vote for me as those who did. Let this demonization in America begin to end here and now.”

Biden also claimed with confidence that he was the definite winner of the presidential race, despite the pending litigation and recounts in certain key states, promising to restore the soul of America” through his time in the White House.

“I sought this office to restore the soul of America,” Biden explained, thanking his family, including his son Hunter Biden for supporting him on the campaign trail. “To rebuild the backbone of this nation, the middle class, and to make America respected around the world again. To unite us here at home.”

The Democrat, who once told people that “you ain’t black” if you cast a vote for Trump, also expressed gratitude for his campaign and the people who supported him.

“I’m proud of the coalition we put together—the broadest and most diverse coalition in history,” he said. “Democrats, Republicans, progressives, moderates, conservatives, suburban, rural, gay, straight, transgender, white, Asian, Native Americans. Especially those moments when this campaign was at its lowest ebb, the African-American community stood up. You always had my back, and I will have yours.”

While votes in key states such as Georgia are still being counted, CNN, NBC News, CBS, and the Associated Press announced earlier on Saturday that Biden’s growing lead of at least 35,000 votes in Pennsylvania secured his spot in the White House.

Shortly after the media projected a Biden victory, people took to the streets of the nation’s capital in Black Lives Matter Plaza to celebrate, crowding around each other despite the pandemic and social distancing guidelines to pop champagne bottles.

Saturday’s Media Declaration Is A Naked Attempt To Silence Republicans, And Nothing Has Changed

By
Gustavo
-
0

Nothing has changed since Friday night.

You might find that strange, given the media stampede to certify the election results for their man, but it’s crucial. The calls made Saturday morning are as arbitrary as they were last Tuesday, could just as easily have waited for Monday, and fly in the face of massive evidence of voter irregularities that, at minimum, should be heard in court before anyone considers calling the election.

Add pending lawsuits and official recounts in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and the conclusion is an attempt by the American media to pick our president and decide our election. The danger comes now when in concert with Silicon Valley censors they use their own decree to dismiss and silence anyone who says otherwise.

For large swaths of the corporate media, the work to elect a Democratic president never ended. From before he even took office, attempts to delegitimize President Donald Trump’s administration employed tools ranging from innuendo to foreign disinformation, and from partisan conspiracies to laughably labeled “anonymous senior officials.” They did not stop Tuesday, holding calls on Republican wins like Florida for hours, and North Carolina for days, while recklessly rushing calls on states like Arizona for Team Blue.

Since Election Day itself, the irregularities have piled up. There were quick and continuing examples of Democratic Pennsylvanian cities illegally barring Republican poll watchers from watching polls from even as far as six feet away. There are multiple allegations of the long-dead voting in 2020. And on Friday, evidence was released that vote-counting software Dominion Voting Systems switched thousands of votes from Trump to former Vice President Joe Biden in just one county. While this software was rejected three times by the Texas election board for noticeable security vulnerabilities, it was used across Georgia and Michigan—two of the states subject to Republican lawsuits and, in Georgia, a recount.

None of this is proof the Democrats didn’t win the election, even if it strongly suggests illegal and undemocratic activity in states across the union. But it is a naked corporate attempt to exert control over what is happening in the United States. If just one thing, remember this: Corporations don’t get to pick our president—and they don’t decide our elections.

Donald Trump’s entire presidency is an affront to the media. His victory was an assertion that they are not in charge, we are. That’s why they hate him; that’s why they have to destroy him, and that’s what this power grab is about. It isn’t an election result, it is media elites reminding the people who is really in charge, and who gets to make the rules.

Nothing has changed since America went to bed Friday evening. There is a fight coming: After over a century of rule, the corruption of the big city Democratic machines will finally be examined in court. Every day, the media is going to call you crazy for demanding it.

Buckle up.

First-Hand Account Of Election Fraud In Detroit: ‘They Did Not Want Us To See What Was Happening’

By
Gustavo
-
0

Earlier this week, Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson denounced the lawsuit filed by President Trump’s campaign as “frivolous,” designed to spread “misinformation” and “sow seeds of doubt among our voters about the integrity of our elections process.”

The lawsuit alleges that Republican election observers, known as “poll challengers,” had been denied access to counting stations to observe the opening of absentee ballots, as required under state law.

Benson denied the allegation. Poll workers, she said, had been “following every rule meticulously” as they counted the vote “transparently with people from both sides of the aisle—both looking on.”

But that’s not what one Republican observer says she saw at the Detroit convention center on Wednesday, where she volunteered to be an official GOP poll challenger. Instead, she saw—and experienced—exactly what the Trump campaign says has been happening in Michigan and elsewhere: GOP observers are being kept away from counting tables, expelled, harassed, and prevented from doing the job of ensuring ballots are counted fairly.

Trisha Nesbitt, 31, is the Van Buren County Treasurer in southwest Michigan and has volunteered as an observer in past elections. When she heard the local GOP needed volunteers in Detroit, she drove to the city after work, went to the Republican meeting room at the convention center, and got her credentials as a poll challenger. That’s when things started to get shady.

“The election workers were not letting anyone in at the time,” Nesbitt told The Federalist on Friday. The workers told her and the other GOP volunteers that “the election hall was full.” So they waited. Eventually, they managed to get in by tagging along with a large group of union members who were being admitted to the hall where ballots were being counted—despite previous claims the hall had been “full.” Nesbitt and the others signed in, giving their names and Republican Party affiliation, and indicating the time they arrived. Then things got tense.

“When I was in the room it was very clear that we were outnumbered, I would say three to one,” Nesbitt said. Republican and Democrat poll challengers have different types of credentials, making it easy to tell how many Democratic challengers there were compared to Republican. Nesbitt estimates there were about 1,200 people in the hall but only about fifty or sixty GOP poll challengers—not enough to cover all of the tables where ballots were being counted.

Even so, when these Republican poll challengers came into the hall, the ballot-counting stopped. “It wasn’t too long after I got into the room that it became very apparent that there was no rush to be counting anything,” Nesbitt said. “For about four hours, over ninety percent of the counting boards had no activity.”

Asked why they stopped, Nesbitt replied, “I believe that they were trying to wait for us to leave because we had an influx of volunteers who came into the room following the union members.”

The waiting seemed to work—if only because city election workers would not allow credentialed Republican poll challengers back into the hall if they left for any reason. “Once we left we were not allowed to return. So if you left for a water break or to go get a meal you were not allowed, Republicans were not allowed to be replaced.”

Not only did the city election workers refuse to replace GOP observers who left, they also began expelling them on trumped-up infractions. “The first person I became aware of that was removed, was an attorney who was observing and he adjusted his face mask,” Nesbitt said. “And the election workers cited that as grounds for removal.”

That wasn’t all. When election workers expelled a Republican poll challenger, the ballot counters erupted in cheers. “That was the first one that I had heard very large cheers for,” Nesbitt said. “I’ll admit, at first I had no idea what was going on. I didn’t know why the election workers would be so boisterous over something. But he was escorted out by the police.”

Other GOP observers were kicked out for doing their job and challenging ballots, which election workers claimed was “hindering the process,” according to Nesbitt. She went on:

So what many poll challengers were actually seeing was that when the ballots were scanned and it did not match a voter in the electronic poll book, and it did not match a voter in the supplemental paper poll book, which was provided due to Michigan’s law that allows for same-day registration, they were still allowing those ballots to go through and be counted. And that is when the GOP poll challengers were issuing those challenges. So they were either being ignored or kicked out when they were doing that.

The ballot-counters were also not allowing Republican poll challengers to observe the ballot supplication process. If an absentee ballot can’t be read by the machine for whatever reason, the counters get out a blank ballot and fill it out with the information from the damaged ballot. This is supposed to be observed by poll challengers from both parties to make sure the counters aren’t changing anything from the original ballot.

But whenever Republican observers were present, said Nesbitt, “They would position their bodies in the way, and other election, workers at that counting board would position their bodies in the way, to prohibit us from being able to witness what was happening. Some would complain. And, you know, require the pole challenger to move farther away, you know, move six feet away because of COVID. It was very clear that they did not want us to see what was happening.”

If a GOP observer raised a concern about this, they were kicked out.

During this time, explained Nesbitt, it wasn’t entirely clear who was in charge or who was calling the shots. “It was very hard to see the hierarchy in the room.”

As Republican poll challengers kept getting kicked out for trying to do their jobs, Nesbitt took out her phone to record it. She sent a short video clip to her husband, state Sen. Aric Nesbitt, who posted it on Twitter.

Nesbitt says she never saw a Democratic poll challenger be removed the entire time she was there, only Republicans, even though Democrats were doing the same kinds of things—leaving to get food or water, adjusting their masks, observing the process, and challenging ballots. Some of the Democratic poll challengers, adds Nesbitt, were wearing Joe Biden campaign shirts and “Medicare for All” masks

Every time the Republican poll challengers tried to meet up to discuss what was going on, they were harassed by the city workers, the ballot-counters, and the Democratic poll challengers, “because of social distancing.”

“It was very clear that they were targeting us and finding any reason to get us removed.”

Nesbitt finally decided to leave after ballot-counters flatly refused to process military ballots in her presence. There were approximately 5,000 military ballots that all had to be transposed onto a blank form because the vice president had been omitted from them, Nesbitt explained. “When they started to distribute those ballots I was at a table to observe, and they would not begin the processing while I was standing there, despite all of the workers being at the table.”

“I’ll admit I felt very defeated and like our efforts were almost futile. At that point, that is when I decided to leave.”

Software Glitch In Michigan County Tallied 6,000 Republican Votes As Democrat

By
Gustavo
-
0

A glitch in software used to tabulate ballots in Antrim County, Michigan caused at least 6,000 Republican votes to be counted as Democrat, according to Michigan GOP Chairwoman Laura Cox.

The miscalculation, Cox said in a press conference, was first reported by a county clerk. A short investigation revealed that 47 counties in Michigan may have also suffered from a similar glitch with the same software, which could have caused some red counties to rake in a higher number of Democrat votes than usual.

“Antrim County had to hand count all of the ballots, and these counties that use the software need to closely examine their results for similar discrepancies,” Cox said. “The people of Michigan deserve a transparent and open process.”


Michigan, a battleground state worth 16 electoral points, was called for Biden on Wednesday by many news outlets. This win surprised some because President Donald J. Trump won the state in 2016.

National GOP Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel also spoke at the press conference shedding light on election issues in the key state, saying that 2,000 Republican ballots were marked as Democrat in Oakland County due to a “clerical error” which wrongly gave the race to the Democrat candidate.

“The American people need to have confidence in our elections, right now we don’t have that because, across the country, Democrat officials are shutting down the transparency, especially here in the state of Michigan,” she said. “Democrats are damaging the country in the process of a smooth transition of power by not allowing a transparent process.”

McDaniel also said that Republican poll watchers in various locations were denied their ability to monitor the counting of ballots, that Wayne County alone has over “100 incident reports of irregularities,” and that a whistleblower came forward to confirm that some election workers were asked to illegally date certain ballots as received on or before election day.

“We need to pursue these irregularities and we need people to be patient and give us the time to investigate,” McDaniel said. “These are serious allegations of changing the date on balance and refusing to let people observe in a meaningful way an election of this magnitude.”

These newly surfaced reports of potential election fraud and violations merely add to the credibility of other reports of suspicious activity in Michigan surrounding the 2020 election such as election officials expelling Republican poll challengers from counting rooms, illegally filling out ballots, and in Detroit, and covering up windows into counting rooms to prevent legal peering and observation.

“We have confirmed evidence that Democratic election officials have violated state law,” Phill Kline, former Kansas attorney general and now an attorney for the nonprofit Amistad Project, previously told The Federalist, explaining that his organization filed a lawsuit over reported voter fraud in Detroit.

The Trump campaign also filed a lawsuit in Michigan on Wednesday, making similar claims that Republican election observers were stopped from overseeing ballot-counting despite state laws ensuring otherwise.

Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution

By
Gustavo
-
0

Article II, Section 1, Clause 2

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, several Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress:  but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

Each State shall appoint . . . a Number of Electors . . . .

On November 4, 2008, Americans went to the polls and expressed their preferences among Barack Obama, John McCain, or other candidates. Many Americans probably thought that they were actually casting ballots for one of these men: We have gotten used to thinking of presidential elections as ones in which we vote directly for the candidates. Yet that is not really how American elections work. In reality, the only people elected on Election Day are representatives, called electors, whose sole duty is to represent their states in a subsequent election among states. This latter election—the real presidential election—determines the President of the United States’ identity.

Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 provides the boundaries for the appointment of these electors.

The Constitution provides that each state is to decide, for itself, how its electors will be chosen. During the first presidential election, states relied upon a wide range of methods. Several state legislatures appointed electors directly, on behalf of their citizens. No presidential election, as we think of it, was ever held in those states. Other states relied upon popular votes, but in different ways. For instance, Maryland directed that certain numbers of electors were to be elected from designated parts of the state. Virginia created 12 districts specifically for the election of electors; these districts were separate from the ten districts created for the election of Congressmen.

Today, every state relies upon a popular election among its own citizens. Most states then allocate their electors in a winner-take-all fashion based upon the outcome of these elections. For instance, when most Californians expressed their preference for Obama in 2008, these votes were translated into votes for a slate of 55 Democratic electors. If McCain had won the election, an alternate slate of 55 Republican electors, committed to McCain, would have been appointed to represent California instead.

The state’s authority to choose its own method for appointing electors is not in doubt. However, a few other issues remain unresolved:

First, may Congress step in if there is controversy regarding which of two slates of electors rightfully represents a state? Congress has taken such action in the past, and it claimed authority to act in the Electoral Count Act of 1887 and subsequent measures. However, some scholars argue that such federal laws impinge on the states’ authority, as outlined in Article II, Section 1, Clause 2.

Second, is a state’s discretion truly unlimited? An anti-Electoral College movement (National Popular Vote) hopes so. This group asks states to change their manner of elector allocation: Instead of allocating electors to the winner of state popular votes, participating states would allocate their electors to the national popular vote winner. These states would sign an interstate compact (a contract) to this effect. If enough states sign, the Electoral College would be effectively eliminated. NPV supporters reject the claim that their compact is an end-run around the Constitution. Still, the question will ultimately be tested in court. NPV could be enacted with as few as 11 states, whereas 38 states are required for a constitutional amendment. Such a process seems questionable, to say the least. Justice Thomas once observed, “States may establish qualifications for their delegates to the electoral college, as long as those qualifications pass muster under other constitutional provisions.” NPV may not satisfy this test.

In such Manner as the Legislature, thereof may direct. . . .

Another open legal question exists regarding the meaning of the word “Legislature” in Article II, Section 1, Clause 2. Does this use of “Legislature” refer specifically to the lawmaking body, or does it refer to a state’s entire lawmaking process? In the latter case, the legislature and governor must act together to determine the manner for appointing electors. Also, voter referendums would be able to trump the legislature in some circumstances. The Supreme Court has not directly addressed the question, but it has come down on both sides of the issue in other contexts.

The question may seem purely academic, but it has particular importance today because of NPV. In three states, the legislature has approved NPV’s legislation, only to be vetoed by the state’s governor. Will these vetoes stand, or will they be deemed irrelevant?

Equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress . . . .

States are allocated one elector for each of their representatives in Congress—both Senators and Congressmen. Therefore, each state automatically receives a minimum of three votes, as it is entitled to at least two Senators and one Congressman in Congress, regardless of population. Puerto Rico and the Island Areas are not given electors, as they are not states. The District of Columbia did not initially receive votes because it is not a state; however, the adoption of the 23rd Amendment in 1961 provided it with at least three electoral votes.

This method of allocation is consistent with the rest of the Constitution and echoes the states’ representation in Congress. A portion of a state’s congressional representation is based on population (the House of Representatives; one person, one vote). A portion is based on one state, one vote philosophy (the Senate).

But no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

Some scholars believe that electors were meant to independently deliberate: The Founders wanted a body of wise men, entrusted with the power to select the President at a time when communication was slow and unreliable. Other scholars maintain that the role of elector was created only because the delegates to the Constitutional Convention left it to states to determine how their electors were to be chosen. Either way, the creation of an independent electoral body was thought to provide special benefits in the presidential selection process.

In Federalist No. 68, Alexander Hamilton wrote that the election process should minimize the opportunity for “cabal, intrigue, and corruption” in the selection of the President. Article II, he believed, accomplished this. Electors could not be bribed or corrupted because their identities would not be known in advance. Presidents would not be indebted to (potentially biased) legislators for their elections, thus reinforcing the separation among government branches. Separating the meetings of the electors (one in each state) would make these individuals less susceptible to a mob mentality. Finally, the selection of electors was tied to the people of a state, reminding the President that he owed his office and his duty to the people themselves.

Some of Hamilton’s logic has perhaps become less applicable, given the advent of mass communication and decreasing expectations that electors are to deliberate independently. But the state-by-state presidential election system created by Article II continues to provide many benefits for a country as large and diverse as America. The White House can only be won by a candidate who wins simultaneous victories across many states; thus, candidates must appeal to a broad range of voters in order to succeed. Successful candidates bring a diverse citizenry together, building national coalitions that span regional and state lines. Such a system is as healthy now as it was in 1787.

Blaming White Supremacists For The Riots Is Nonsensical Gaslighting

By
Gustavo
-
0

I can’t believe they even tried it. On Saturday morning Minnesota officials came out with an audacious and absurd explanation for the looting and arson that struck Minneapolis this week. Apparently it was white supremacists from out of state who pretended to be actual protestors in an attempt to discredit the protest. The evidence? A vague claim and a lie. It turns out that most of those arrested were actually Minnesota residents.

The hypocritical mental gymnastics from the liberal media in the past 72 hours were amazing enough to earn a perfect 10 from the stingiest East German judge. First, we watched tens of thousands of people hold mass gatherings across the country, which just last week we were told would kill everyone, and the media suddenly didn’t care. It’s like the Chinese virus just went away by magic.

Next, we were informed that the looting and arson we witnessed from the protesters was simply the language of the oppressed and how could we even comment about it when another black man was killed by the police. Celebrities posted bail for the heroes of Minneapolis. And yes, the brutal killing of George Floyd is an occasion for outrage.

Now, and this is subject to change by the time this paragraph is over, these horrible acts of looting and arson were mainly done by Right-wing white supremacist interlopers. That’s right. Some shadowy organization of neo-Nazis apparently sent false flag psyop operations all over the country to foment a race war. Or something.

The good news for the racists is that famous Hollywood celebrities bailed them out of jail apparently. It is absolutely the most wrongheaded, astounding, ridiculous lie the media has latched onto during the Trump administration. And that’s a hell of a competitive category.

The tweets from pundits at CNN, MSNBC, and The Washington Post came flooding in. Why hadn’t Attorney General William Barr mentioned the white supremacists they insist are the real people to blame here? He didn’t do it because it’s a flaming garbage pile of lies. President Trump made clear exactly who the outside agitators are. It’s Antifa. It’s obviously Antifa, it has been Antifa for over two decades.

So why would Democrats and their lackeys in the big-time press not want to say it’s Antifa? Because for years they have insisted that Antifa is a basically harmless group that conservatives have turned into a boogeyman. Remember when Chris Cuomo compared them to Allied forces storming Normandy?

No. Some other narratives had to be established. Somehow, someway, this had to be the fault of racist Trump supporters, because everything is the fault of racist Trump supporters. But how? Easy. Just lie about most of the people arrested being from out of state and claim some had ties to white supremacist groups. Is it an obvious lie that a three-year-old could see-through? Yeah.

But maybe, just maybe if enough chattering nincompoops parrot the absurd claim in their Trump obsessed outlets that once were the home of competent journalists, the lie might stick. No. There are limits. Laying the destruction and crime, justified or not, that have been associated with these protests on the feet of some KKK conspiracy is so outlandishly absurd that it will not, cannot, stand.

If white supremacists, not progressive rioters were responsible for the chaos in the last few days in America and around the country, let’s see the evidence now. All of it. It’s a huge claim, that doesn’t just strain credulity, it frappes it. It is very hard to believe that those in the news media who stood up this nonsense were not aware that at best they were wildly exaggerating the role these mysterious Nazis were playing.

The blatant lying by news outlets is getting dangerous. During the coronavirus, it helped spur panic that devastated countless lives. Now that they have decided the lockdown is over and massive gatherings are all of a sudden fine. They are pretending that black people looting flat screens on video have no agency, and white supremacists made them do it. It has to stop.

I call on every journalist who amplified this insanity to put up or shut up. Prove that most of the criminal actions were committed by white supremacists. For once hold yourself accountable to the people you claim to serve with your work. And do it now.

Explosive New Flynn Documents Show FBI Goal Was To ‘Get Him Fired’

By
Gustavo
-
0

Handwritten notes from the FBI that had been withheld from Michael Flynn and his defense team show that the FBI’s goal in investigating and ambushing Flynn was ‘to get him fired.’

New documents filed under seal last week by the Department of Justice provide the clearest evidence yet that the investigation and subsequent prosecution of former White House National Security Adviser Michael Flynn was a set-up from the beginning. Handwritten notes from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that had been inappropriately withheld from Flynn’s defense team for years show that a key goal of the agents investigating Flynn was “to get him to lie so we can prosecute him or get him fired.”

In early 2017, FBI agents planned to question Flynn under false pretenses and without his attorneys present regarding his conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. At the time of those conversations, Flynn was the top foreign policy adviser of the president-elect of the United States. By the time of the ambush FBI interview, Flynn had already been appointed as the White House national security adviser.

In the handwritten FBI notes, the note-taker, whose identity was not made clear in the document production, wrote that an alternate goal is to “get [Flynn] to admit breaking the Logan Act,” a reference to a 1799 law restricting communications between private citizens and foreign governments. The law is widely viewed as unconstitutional and has never been used to successfully prosecute a single American citizen. The previously secret notes do not explain that Flynn was not a private citizen, but rather the incoming national security adviser at the time of his conversations with world leaders.

Handwritten FBI Notes on M… by Gustavo-May Frias on Scribd

Accusations that Flynn was a traitor to his country who violated the 1799 law gained steam following the criminal leak of top-secret information to Washington Post columnist David Ignatius. Ignatius’ sources suggested the routine conversation between a top incoming White House adviser and his foreign counterparts might be a Logan Act violation. As absurd as the suggestion was, Ignatius dutifully parroted it.

News reports indicate U.S. Attorney John Durham is currently investigating the sources of those criminal leaks of top-secret national security information to Ignatius. Although the agents who interviewed Flynn initially stated they believed Flynn told them the truth during the Jan. 24 interviews, Special Counsel Robert Mueller nonetheless charged Flynn in late 2017 with making false statements to FBI investigators in the interview.

Flynn pleaded guilty to the charge at the time but is currently trying to withdraw that plea, citing ineffective counsel and government corruption in the conduct of his case.

The explosive new documents support Flynn’s latest claims that the Obama-era Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI officials had conspired to set him up from the beginning and that they never had any legitimate basis for investigating him.

The author of the handwritten notes filed under seal last week also wrote, “We have a case on Flynn and Russians,” and “our goal is to resolve the case.” Despite those claims of treasonous Russian collusion, Mueller found, after a sprawling, multi-year, multimillion-dollar investigation, that there was zero evidence of illegal collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government to steal the 2016 election from Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.

In reality, the only Russian collusion that happened during the 2016 campaign was between the Clinton campaign and a subcontractor it funded, who was at the time working on behalf of a sanctioned Russian oligarch. That agent, former British intelligence operative Christopher Steele, created for the Clinton campaign the entire basis for charges of illegal collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. That document, known as the Steele dossier, has been thoroughly debunked since it was first released in early January 2017. The Clinton campaign, in cooperation with the Democratic National Committee, secretly funded the creation of that document and its distribution throughout the media. To date, none of its key collusion claims has been corroborated.

Steele’s operation became a primary basis for the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation of the Trump campaign. The false allegations contained in the dossier were also used by FBI and DOJ officials to justify four separate spy warrants against Carter Page, a Trump campaign affiliate. The FBI also investigated Flynn as part of this operation.

The FBI notes also show that the author of the document had misgivings about the FBI’s conduct in interviewing Flynn.

“I agreed yesterday that we shouldn’t show Flynn [REDACTED] if he didn’t admit,” the FBI author wrote. “I thought [about] it last night, [and] I believe we should rethink this.”

“We regularly show subjects evidence, with the goal of getting them to admit wrongdoing,” the notes said. “I don’t see how getting someone to admit their wrongdoing is going easy on him.”

The redaction portion of the notes is believed to reference transcripts of phone calls between Flynn and other foreign officials. Those transcripts have never been publicly released, making it impossible to independently assess whether Flynn lied about those conversations.

The handwritten FBI notes end with a prophetic line, given the voluminous evidence of misconduct by FBI and DOJ officials in their investigation of Trump and their attempt to oust him from office.

“If we’re seen as playing games, [the White House] will be furious,” the author wrote. “Protect our institution by not playing games.”

Flynn is awaiting a ruling on his motion to have the entire case dismissed. You can read the documents unsealed and made available on the public court docket earlier this evening here.

123...16Page 2 of 16
- Advertisement -

RECENT POSTS

© Website Created by Gustavo Frias