President Trump Will Not Concede this Election for One Very Important Reason


The 2020 Election was the left’s ultimate cancel-culture ploy.
In a sign of desperation, they went for broke and used massive, systemic fraud to cancel the votes of nearly 73 million Americans. Poof. Gone. They did it with the help of a corrupt voting software company and tens of millions of unsolicited mail-in ballots with no requirement in many states for legitimate signatures.
When the 73 million cried foul, the Democrats and their media lapdogs told them to shut up and accept the outcome.
When up to 1 million turned out to rally in the nation’s Capital on Saturday, Nov. 14, the media propagandists either ignored them or tried to paint them as violent troublemakers. The Democrats sicced their paramilitary brownshirts on these flag-waving patriots in the form of Antifa and BLM, who harassed them, shouted obscenities at them, and attacked them and their children.
Ann Corcoran, the venerable blogger and truth teller, was there Saturday and gives us a first-hand account of what happened.
Continue reading President Trump will not concede this election for one very important reason
EDITORS NOTE: This LeoHohmann.com column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Dominion Voting Employees: Screenshots of Their Scrubbed LinkedIn Accounts


GR reader has done some research on Dominion. Let’s have a look at two employees among the Dominion insurgents who hijacked the election. These screenshots were taken before Dominion panicked and shutdown their LinkedIn sites.
Why would most Dominion employees shut down their LinkedIn professional pages?

PAUL CHAVEZ-CASANOVA

Paul Chavez-Casanova is a software developer at headquarters with exMarine Sam, a network engineer who is clearly obsessed with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez; he clicked the ActBlue donate button over 70 times. [view key pages here, here, here and here]

SAMUEL MCGRAW

And then there’s Samuel McGraw, another multiple contributor to ActBlue, as well as to the Bernie Sanders campaign.
View Samuel McGraw’s key pages here, here, here, here, here, here and here.

CHICAGO DOMINION DAVID ORR

The infamous David Orr, who ran Chicago for 28 years from the inside, gave Dominion a 10-year contract, breaking state rules below. This was his big FU to Republicans just before he retired in December 2018. DVS was awarded the $32 million contract before their new 5.5 program was finally approved by EAC in 2018. No wonder ES&S filed a federal complaint suit.
View David Orr’s key pages here, here, here and here.
Also:
Corrupt Chicago/Cook County, led by infamous Obama cohort David Orr, awarded Dominion the $32 million contract in a fake RFP bid, causing ES&S to sue for awarding the contract long before they were certified. City project Excel spreadsheet shows award given to dominion same day as RFP deadline.
Page 26 notes Dominion Ownership change disclosure, hidden in private equity firm Staple Street – now the website has been mostly shut down.

Staple Street Capital Acquires Cyberlink

Headquartered in Dallas, TX, Cyberlink provides a robust suite of managed IT services that allow enterprise customers to simplify their technology infrastructure, seamlessly scale operations and improve their IT responsiveness. The Company’s value proposition and high service levels have resulted in a long-tenured, diversified customer base spanning more than 800 customers across more than 10 end markets. With a presence in 46 states, Cyberlink’s flexible, cloud-agnostic delivery model enables the Company to efficiently serve customers across the U.S.
Cyberlink’s Founder and CEO, Christopher Lantrip, said “We are excited to partner with Staple Street on the next phase of growth for Cyberlink. This new partnership will provide additional resources and support to help us continue to expand our service capabilities for new and existing clients.”
The partners from Staple Street Capital said “Cyberlink is a highly attractive platform opportunity given the Company’s established market position, entrenched customer relationships and seasoned management team. We look forward to partnering with Chris and the entire Cyberlink team to build upon this foundation to support continued growth.”
Staple Street was advised by McDermott Will & Emery LLP. Cyberlink was advised by Focus Strategies Investment Banking and Jones & Spross, PLLC.
Cyberlink
Founded in 1999, Cyberlink is a Dallas-based managed IT services firm providing cloud, managed application, network, storage, desktop and security services on a 24×7 basis to customers across the U.S. Cyberlink serves clients in a range of industries, including healthcare, financial services, legal, logistics and other end markets. For more information, visit www.cyberlinkasp.com.

Staple Street Website page with description of owned companies is now shut down… Ivy technology International and CyberLink were purchased within the past 18 months with Dominion acquired in 2018

Staple Street Capital Acquires iQor’s International Logistics and Product Service Assets
Ivy Tech
NEW YORK, NY — June 3, 2019 – an affiliate of Staple Street Capital L.L.C. (“Staple Street Capital”), a leading middle market private equity firm, has acquired certain logistics and product service assets in a corporate carve-out transaction from affiliates of iQor Holdings Inc. (“iQor”). The acquired businesses include iQor’s operations located in Europe, Asia, South America, Canada and certain facilities located in the United States (the “Company”). In conjunction with the acquisition, the Company will be renamed Ivy Technology.
Built on a foundation of executional excellence and innovation, Ivy Technology is a leading provider of aftermarket lifecycle solutions for electronic equipment. With approximately 2,900 employees across the globe, the Company provides electronic product repair services to many of the world’s leading computer, electronic, telecommunications and medical device companies.
The partners of Staple Street Capital said, “We are excited to partner with Ivy’s management team to provide the strategic and capital resources to enable a long term growth strategy that will now be purely focused around meeting the objectives of our newly formed standalone company. We look forward to further investing in Ivy Technology in order to meet the highest standards of customer care and quality, and to further innovate new value-added services and solutions for customers.”
Kirkland & Ellis served as legal advisors to both Staple Street Capital and iQor Holdings in this transaction.

RELATED ARTICLES:
Dominion Voting Systems shared office with “Soros entities”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Andy Ngo Thrown Off PayPal, Other Payment Platforms May Follow


One of the most daring and honest journalists in America is Andy Ngo. Either filming himself or aggregating video clips from his network of mostly clandestine collaborators, Ngo does the work mainstream journalists ignore either out of fear or ideological bias. If you watched Ngo’s videos over the past several months, you would know, without any doubt, that America’s mainstream “journalists” were biased cowards, unwilling to report what’s really happening in American cities because they thought it might harm the Biden campaign.
For his trouble, Ngo has been assaulted and demonized. But his level headed attention to facts and evidence, and nothing else, has meant he has survived online. Suppressed and demonetized, he nonetheless persists on all major platforms.
Until now. Yielding to pressure from the Left, PayPal has thrown Ngo off their payment platform. As he tweeted earlier today, pressure is building to get Ngo off of Patreon and SubscribeStar as well.
Expect to see this tactic amplified in the coming months and years, especially if Biden becomes president. The big tech platforms already act with near impunity, but with their allies running the federal executive branch, they’ll have no inhibitions whatsoever.
When people are deplatformed from YouTube, for example, they go to BitChute or Rumble or elsewhere, typically losing about 90 percent of their viewers. Most of them never recover more than a fraction of their former audience, and lose almost all access to new viewers. And as long as they survive on a major platform like YouTube, they are demonetized. But taking away the ability of an online content provider to collect donations on the payment platforms, to-date, has been relatively infrequent.
That’s changing fast. In the wave of deplatformings immediately prior to the election – mostly done to stop “Q conspiracy” websites (translation: people who were posting videos documenting the Biden laptop scandal and other embarrassments to the anti-Trump establishment) – several of those who were thrown off YouTube also had their bank accounts and payment platforms cancelled. In this video, of the victims, Polly St. George (aka “Amazing Polly“), explains how this happened to her.
One of the first victims of deplatforming, Henrik Palmgren and Lana Lokteff (aka “Red Ice TV“), not only were thrown off YouTube and other major platforms, and were not only thrown off all donation platforms, but they were added to the so-called “MATCH List.” MATCH stands for “Member Alert To Control High-risk merchants.”  It’s a list, shared by all banks, of what used to be called the “Terminated Merchant File.” If you get added to this list, it is almost impossible to open or maintain a credit card account with any bank.
People may criticize any of these content providers, but understand what’s happening. These “undesirables” are not merely being silenced, they are being completely destroyed economically. The MATCH list used to be reserved for terrorists and drug cartels. Now it’s being used to silence free speech.
RELATED TWEET:


EDITORS NOTE: This Winston84 column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Arizona Prop 208 Passed: An Economic Rabbit Hole

Arizona voters have some serious ‘splaining to do about the passage of Proposition 208, which raised education funds by boosting income tax rates by up to 98% for high income filers. How could this have happened?

Arizona schools have already received over one billion dollars in new sustainable monies over recent years, with more coming. More importantly, Arizona public schools, without receiving much credit, have become a remarkable success story.

Academic achievement gains for minority students are among the highest in the nation. Arizona charter schools excel in competitive rankings.

But voters apparently weren’t focused on educational outcomes. Prop 208 was marketed as a way to get other people, “the rich”, to pay the freight. Even though it’s one of the oldest tricks in the tax-and-spend playbook, Arizonans fell for it while voters in 17 other states thought better.

California voters rejected the removal of a cap on commercial property taxes that would have been the largest tax increase in state history. Voters in Illinois, Washington and Colorado were among those who defeated reckless taxation proposals.

Many may not know that Arizona once was a high tax state, with a 7% top rate for individuals and a 9% top rate for corporations. It was considered regionally uncompetitive until the 1990s when income tax rates were cut 35% and deductions were expanded.

The result, according to data from the Arizona Tax Research Association, was 145% more income tax revenue, inflation adjusted, in 2017 than in 1991, a rate of growth that exceeded population growth by 60%. More importantly, Arizona’s real GDP increased 176% from 1987 to 2016, while the US GDP grew 100.4%. Clearly, Arizona’s relatively low income tax rates produced abundant tax revenues while attracting capital and capitalists.

No longer. The strategy of sound tax policy is to establish broad-based, fair taxes with the lowest possible rate where they are the least likely to do economic harm. Prop 208 fails on all counts.

It’s singles out a small group and whacks them hard. Unfortunately, the sector being picked on includes many small business owners who pay their business taxes through the individual income tax system.

These just happen to be the entrepreneurs who drive much of the employment and economic growth in the state. A 100% tax rate increase for them will be enough to discourage further investment in Arizona businesses and to encourage those who can to file elsewhere. Arizona will rank in the top five nationally for income tax rates, a radical change sure to generate impacts which won’t be pretty.

The schools and teachers who have been promised salary increases aren’t so lucky either. Unfortunately for them, Prop 208 provides a highly volatile funding source, while teacher salaries require a stable, reliable revenue stream.

High wealth income taxes are notoriously subject to downturns in the business cycle. In 2008, following the great recession, tax collections from high income filers dropped 32% or $1 billion. School authorities who peg permanent salary increases to this income source are almost assuring a future crisis.

Although Republicans may have dodged a bullet, the election of 2020 continued the trend for Arizona voters to reverse their historical support for prudent, limited government. It’s not likely that Arizonans have change their mind. But who they are have changed.

Migrants from California and other failing states seem to have brought their old voting habits with them, oblivious to the reasons Arizona offers an attractive, affordable quality of life.

Here’s what the spenders can’t seem to grasp. Editorialists and interest groups will never run out of worthy spending projects that a more “enlightened” government would surely fund. But high tax rates, especially on those who don’t need it” is a giant rabbit hole.

Once you start down it, you’re sunk. Government benefits, once conferred, automatically become permanent entitlements which can never be reduced. Meanwhile, high tax rates seldom produce as much revenue as projected, due to tax avoidance behavior. Eventually, basic obligations like public safety and pension funding can’t be met. The answer is… higher taxes on the economically productive. They eventually get fed up and leave.

A growing number of state and local governments are facing economic desperation from this vicious cycle. Let’s hope Arizona isn’t among them.

**********

Thomas C. Patterson, MD is a retired Emergency Medicine physician, Arizona state Senator and Arizona Senate Majority Leader in the ’90s. He is a former Chairman, Goldwater Institute.

VIDEO: Who is behind Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic?


I discusses Dominion and Smartmatic with Bob Sellers and Heather Childers on NewsmaxTV. Smartmatic Chairman was investment partner of George Soros.

©Kenneth R. Timmerman. All rights reserved.
RELATED VIDEO: ‘Drop and Roll’ – How The 2020 Election Was Stolen From Donald Trump.

RELATED ARTICLES:
Taking a Closer Look at the Trump Campaign’s Battle to Recount Legal Votes
Proof Democrats Caught With Vote Fraud

WITNESS AFFIDAVIT: How Smartmatic Voting Machines Were Designed To Steal US Elections

INVESTIGATION: Did Crown Agent Dominion Voting Systems Rig The US Elections 2020

6 Big Claims by Trump’s Lawyers About Overturning Election Results

Here Are 9 Key Points from Trump Campaign Press Conference on Challenges to Election Results


Below is an outline of President Trump’s case.
WATCH: Trump Campaign Legal Team Holds Press Conference in Washington, D.C. on 11/19/20.

“We are not going to be intimidated. We are not going to back down. We are going to clean this mess up now. President Trump won by a landslide. We are going to prove it and we are going to reclaim the United States of America for the people who vote for freedom.” Sidney Powell
The live stream:


https://twitter.com/PamelaGeller/status/1329482878409994244?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1329482878409994244%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2020%2F11%2Fteam-trump-election-fraud-press-conference-president-donald-trump-won-by-a-landslide-and-we-are-going-to-prove-it.html%2F

Per Sidney Powell: Dominion Executives are now MIA. There offices are being abandoned and moved. — Major Patriot (@MajorPatriot) November 19, 2020

https://twitter.com/alexbruesewitz/status/1329491815309979651?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1329491815309979651%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2020%2F11%2Fteam-trump-election-fraud-press-conference-president-donald-trump-won-by-a-landslide-and-we-are-going-to-prove-it.html%2F
https://twitter.com/JPMediaBoss/status/1329490664187314177?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1329490664187314177%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2020%2F11%2Fteam-trump-election-fraud-press-conference-president-donald-trump-won-by-a-landslide-and-we-are-going-to-prove-it.html%2F
https://twitter.com/TeamTrump/status/1329488417747578881?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1329488417747578881%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2020%2F11%2Fteam-trump-election-fraud-press-conference-president-donald-trump-won-by-a-landslide-and-we-are-going-to-prove-it.html%2F


https://twitter.com/culttture/status/1329469485032513537?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1329469485032513537%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2020%2F11%2Fteam-trump-election-fraud-press-conference-president-donald-trump-won-by-a-landslide-and-we-are-going-to-prove-it.html%2F
https://twitter.com/PamelaGeller/status/1329486407761600513?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1329486407761600513%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2020%2F11%2Fteam-trump-election-fraud-press-conference-president-donald-trump-won-by-a-landslide-and-we-are-going-to-prove-it.html%2F


https://twitter.com/PamelaGeller/status/1329478452941033480?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1329478452941033480%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2020%2F11%2Fteam-trump-election-fraud-press-conference-president-donald-trump-won-by-a-landslide-and-we-are-going-to-prove-it.html%2F


https://twitter.com/TeamTrump/status/1329475868029317122?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1329475868029317122%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2020%2F11%2Fteam-trump-election-fraud-press-conference-president-donald-trump-won-by-a-landslide-and-we-are-going-to-prove-it.html%2F
RELATED ARTICLES:
6 Claims by Trump’s Lawyers About Overturning Election Results
Trump campaign lawyer in Philadelphia withdraws from federal election suit because of threats of violence
Team Trump Election Fraud Press Conference: “President Donald Trump won by a landslide and we are going to prove it“
BREAKING: Michigan state lawmakers have brought articles of impeachment against Governor Whitmer
2020 Election: Invoking the 12th Amendment
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Ilhan Omar Quotes ‘Mathew 6:24’ to Claim Christians Can’t Serve in U.S. military


Omar was coming to the support of the radical Leftist Georgia Senate candidate Raphael Warnock, who says explicitly that one cannot serve God and the military in the video embedded in the tweet. While there was a controversy in the early days of Christianity about whether a Christian could serve in the military of the Roman Empire, it was settled centuries ago, and no Christian sect with the exception of the small groups that are strictly pacifist has ever said that it was un-Christian to serve in the U.S. military.
This is yet another indication of where Ilhan Omar’s sentiments truly lie, for were her words heeded and Christians streamed out of the military of this country, our armed forces and the country as a whole would be drastically weakened. Apparently that is what she wants.


RELATED ARTICLES:
The Disputed Election of 2020 Could Make America Into Venezuela
Ritchie Torres an Unheard-Of First in Congress
Detroit: Imam calls Trump and Biden ‘puppets of the Zionists’ and says Muslims are ‘targets of these viruses’
State Department says al-Qaeda is on the ropes, nearly eight years after Obama said it was on the ropes
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister condemns Pompeo’s planned visit to ‘settlement’ as ‘dangerous precedent’
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Cost of Lockdowns: A Preliminary Report

In the debate over coronavirus policy, there has been far too little focus on the costs of lockdowns. It’s very common for the proponents of these interventions to write articles and large studies without even mentioning the downsides.

Here is a brief look at the cost of stringencies in the United States, and around the world, including stay-at-home orders, closings of business and schools, restrictions on gatherings, shutting of arts and sports, restrictions on medical services, and interventions in the freedom of movement.

Continue reading at: https:/www.aier.org/article/cost-of-lockdowns-a-preliminary-report

*********

This column from American Institute for Economic Research was published on 11/18/20 and is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. The opinions expressed may not necessarily reflect the views of The Prickly Pear or of our sponsors.

Founded in 1933, the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER) is one of the oldest and most respected nonpartisan economic research and advocacy organizations in the country. With a global reach and influence, AIER is dedicated to developing and promoting the ideas of pure freedom and private governance by combining advanced economic research with accessible media outreach and educational programming to cultivate a better, broader understanding of the fundamental principles that enable peace and prosperity around the world.

 

POST-ELECTION VIDEO SPECIAL: Trump’s Trap

Ensnaring the Marxists?

Claims that Trump is allowing the Swamp to totally expose itself are increasing in volume.
WATCH:

RELATED TWEET:
https://twitter.com/SatoshiMed/status/1328537623967772672?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1328537623967772672%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fsteadfastclash.com%2Fthe-latest%2Fbombshell-joe-biden-officially-wanted-on-class-a-felony-charges%2F
EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Attorney Lin Wood Outlines Case for Rampant Voter Fraud and Georgia Vote Corruption.


John Fredericks interviews Lin Wood on if the Georgia election will be nullified.
WATCH:

ABOUT THE JOHN FREDERICKS RADION NETWORK
The John Fredericks Radio Network is America’s Godzilla of the TRUTH! On the John Fredericks Radio Network, we’re #TRUCKINGTHETRUTH all across America with uncompromising broadcast coverage from the Nation’s Capital! The John Fredericks Radio Network is the most unique political news-talk show focused on the most important issues that impact the daily lives of everyday Americans and America comes to talk here on the truth line! We’re #TRUCKINGTHETRUTH weekday mornings from 6-10 am all across the nation…and we’re either making news or breaking news! The John Fredericks Radio Network broadcasts live weekdays 6am-10am and 24/7 stream. Listen 24/7 on our available apps.
©John Fredericks Show. All rights reserved.
RELATED TWEET:
https://twitter.com/jamesokeefeiii/status/1329433748014850049?s=11
RELATED ARTICLES:
Arizona Governor Won’t Accept Election Results Until All Lawsuits Are Settled
Rep. Jim Jordan: Congress Needs to Investigate 2020 Election
Megyn Kelly Says She’s Leaving New York City, Has Pulled Sons Out of ‘Far-Left’ Schools

Election Will Be Overturned Based On GROSS VIOLATIONS of President Trump’s 2018 Executive Order On Election Interference


https://twitter.com/RossFairchild/status/1329074441561640961?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1329074441561640961%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2020%2F11%2Felection-will-be-overturned-based-on-gross-violations-of-president-trumps-2018-executive-order-on-election-interference.html%2F
RELATED ARTICLES:
GEORGIA: Numerous Boxes of ‘PERFECTLY PRINTED OFF” Ballots That Were 100% Biden
Georgia Audit Catches Third Batch Of Uncounted Votes Favoring Trump, Emergency Motion for Injunctive Relief FILED
Michigan Democrat Doxxes Children Of Wayne County Election Official
Meet the Hacker Who Rigged/Hacked Elections
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) (NEA), section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,
I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, find that the ability of persons located, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States to interfere in or undermine public confidence in United States elections, including through the unauthorized accessing of election and campaign infrastructure or the covert distribution of propaganda and disinformation, constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. Although there has been no evidence of a foreign power altering the outcome or vote tabulation in any United States election, foreign powers have historically sought to exploit America’s free and open political system. In recent years, the proliferation of digital devices and internet-based communications has created significant vulnerabilities and magnified the scope and intensity of the threat of foreign interference, as illustrated in the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with this threat.
Accordingly, I hereby order:
Section 1. (a) Not later than 45 days after the conclusion of a United States election, the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the heads of any other appropriate executive departments and agencies (agencies), shall conduct an assessment of any information indicating that a foreign government, or any person acting as an agent of or on behalf of a foreign government, has acted with the intent or purpose of interfering in that election. The assessment shall identify, to the maximum extent ascertainable, the nature of any foreign interference and any methods employed to execute it, the persons involved, and the foreign government or governments that authorized, directed, sponsored, or supported it. The Director of National Intelligence shall deliver this assessment and appropriate supporting information to the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security.
(b) Within 45 days of receiving the assessment and information described in section 1(a) of this order, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the heads of any other appropriate agencies and, as appropriate, State and local officials, shall deliver to the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Secretary of Defense a report evaluating, with respect to the United States election that is the subject of the assessment described in section 1(a):
(i) the extent to which any foreign interference that targeted election infrastructure materially affected the security or integrity of that infrastructure, the tabulation of votes, or the timely transmission of election results; and
(ii) if any foreign interference involved activities targeting the infrastructure of, or pertaining to, a political organization, campaign, or candidate, the extent to which such activities materially affected the security or integrity of that infrastructure, including by unauthorized access to, disclosure or threatened disclosure of, or alteration or falsification of, information or data.
The report shall identify any material issues of fact with respect to these matters that the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security are unable to evaluate or reach agreement on at the time the report is submitted. The report shall also include updates and recommendations, when appropriate, regarding remedial actions to be taken by the United States Government, other than the sanctions described in sections 2 and 3 of this order.
(c) Heads of all relevant agencies shall transmit to the Director of National Intelligence any information relevant to the execution of the Director’s duties pursuant to this order, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law. If relevant information emerges after the submission of the report mandated by section 1(a) of this order, the Director, in consultation with the heads of any other appropriate agencies, shall amend the report, as appropriate, and the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall amend the report required by section 1(b), as appropriate.
(d) Nothing in this order shall prevent the head of any agency or any other appropriate official from tendering to the President, at any time through an appropriate channel, any analysis, information, assessment, or evaluation of foreign interference in a United States election.
(e) If information indicating that foreign interference in a State, tribal, or local election within the United States has occurred is identified, it may be included, as appropriate, in the assessment mandated by section 1(a) of this order or in the report mandated by section 1(b) of this order, or submitted to the President in an independent report.
(f) Not later than 30 days following the date of this order, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence shall develop a framework for the process that will be used to carry out their respective responsibilities pursuant to this order. The framework, which may be classified in whole or in part, shall focus on ensuring that agencies fulfill their responsibilities pursuant to this order in a manner that maintains methodological consistency; protects law enforcement or other sensitive information and intelligence sources and methods; maintains an appropriate separation between intelligence functions and policy and legal judgments; ensures that efforts to protect electoral processes and institutions are insulated from political bias; and respects the principles of free speech and open debate.
Sec. 2. (a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any foreign person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security:
(i) to have directly or indirectly engaged in, sponsored, concealed, or otherwise been complicit in foreign interference in a United States election;
(ii) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, any activity described in subsection (a)(i) of this section or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or
(iii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property or interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.
(b) Executive Order 13694 of April 1, 2015, as amended by Executive Order 13757 of December 28, 2016, remains in effect. This order is not intended to, and does not, serve to limit the Secretary of the Treasury’s discretion to exercise the authorities provided in Executive Order 13694. Where appropriate, the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, may exercise the authorities described in Executive Order 13694 or other authorities in conjunction with the Secretary of the Treasury’s exercise of authorities provided in this order.
(c) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the date of this order.
Sec. 3. Following the transmission of the assessment mandated by section 1(a) and the report mandated by section 1(b):
(a) the Secretary of the Treasury shall review the assessment mandated by section 1(a) and the report mandated by section 1(b), and, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security, impose all appropriate sanctions pursuant to section 2(a) of this order and any appropriate sanctions described in section 2(b) of this order; and
(b) the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the heads of other appropriate agencies, shall jointly prepare a recommendation for the President as to whether additional sanctions against foreign persons may be appropriate in response to the identified foreign interference and in light of the evaluation in the report mandated by section 1(b) of this order, including, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, proposed sanctions with respect to the largest business entities licensed or domiciled in a country whose government authorized, directed, sponsored, or supported election interference, including at least one entity from each of the following sectors: financial services, defense, energy, technology, and transportation (or, if inapplicable to that country’s largest business entities, sectors of comparable strategic significance to that foreign government). The recommendation shall include an assessment of the effect of the recommended sanctions on the economic and national security interests of the United States and its allies. Any recommended sanctions shall be appropriately calibrated to the scope of the foreign interference identified, and may include one or more of the following with respect to each targeted foreign person:
(i) blocking and prohibiting all transactions in a person’s property and interests in property subject to United States jurisdiction;
(ii) export license restrictions under any statute or regulation that requires the prior review and approval of the United States Government as a condition for the export or re-export of goods or services;
(iii) prohibitions on United States financial institutions making loans or providing credit to a person;
(iv) restrictions on transactions in foreign exchange in which a person has any interest;
(v) prohibitions on transfers of credit or payments between financial institutions, or by, through, or to any financial institution, for the benefit of a person;
(vi) prohibitions on United States persons investing in or purchasing equity or debt of a person;
(vii) exclusion of a person’s alien corporate officers from the United States;
(viii) imposition on a person’s alien principal executive officers of any of the sanctions described in this section; or
(ix) any other measures authorized by law.
Sec. 4. I hereby determine that the making of donations of the type of articles specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in this order, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 2 of this order.
Sec. 5. The prohibitions in section 2 of this order include the following:
(a) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; and
(b) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.
Sec. 6. I hereby find that the unrestricted immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of such persons. Such persons shall be treated as persons covered by section 1 of Proclamation 8693 of July 24, 2011 (Suspension of Entry of Aliens Subject to United Nations Security Council Travel Bans and International Emergency Economic Powers Act Sanctions).
Sec. 7. (a) Any transaction that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.
(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.
Sec. 8. For the purposes of this order:
(a) the term “person” means an individual or entity;
(b) the term “entity” means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization;
(c) the term “United States person” means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person (including a foreign person) in the United States;
(d) the term “election infrastructure” means information and communications technology and systems used by or on behalf of the Federal Government or a State or local government in managing the election process, including voter registration databases, voting machines, voting tabulation equipment, and equipment for the secure transmission of election results;
(e) the term “United States election” means any election for Federal office held on, or after, the date of this order;
(f) the term “foreign interference,” with respect to an election, includes any covert, fraudulent, deceptive, or unlawful actions or attempted actions of a foreign government, or of any person acting as an agent of or on behalf of a foreign government, undertaken with the purpose or effect of influencing, undermining confidence in, or altering the result or reported result of, the election, or undermining public confidence in election processes or institutions;
(g) the term “foreign government” means any national, state, provincial, or other governing authority, any political party, or any official of any governing authority or political party, in each case of a country other than the United States;
(h) the term “covert,” with respect to an action or attempted action, means characterized by an intent or apparent intent that the role of a foreign government will not be apparent or acknowledged publicly; and
(i) the term “State” means the several States or any of the territories, dependencies, or possessions of the United States.
Sec. 9. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render those measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in this order, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 2 of this order.
Sec. 10. Nothing in this order shall prohibit transactions for the conduct of the official business of the United States Government by employees, grantees, or contractors thereof.
Sec. 11. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may re-delegate any of these functions to other officers within the Department of the Treasury consistent with applicable law. All agencies of the United States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of this order.
Sec. 12. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to submit the recurring and final reports to the Congress on the national emergency declared in this order, consistent with section 401(c) of the NEA (50 U.S.C. 1641(c)) and section 204(c) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1703(c)).
Sec. 13. This order shall be implemented consistent with 50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(1) and (3).
Sec. 14. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
DONALD J. TRUMP
THE WHITE HOUSE,
September 12, 2018.

They Want to Shut You Up


This week, Abigail Shrier, author of the new book “Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters,” found herself at the center of a firestorm.
Her great crime: writing an assessment of the psychological phenomenon known as rapid onset gender dysphoria, where groups of psychologically vulnerable young girls begin to self-diagnose as transgender after one member of a peer group does so.
The book is sober and evenhanded. Nonetheless, all hell broke loose after one person on Twitter—one!—tweeted at Target, prompting the retailer to pledge not to make Shrier’s book available (a decision it later reversed).
This wasn’t Shrier’s first turn in the barrel. When the book first came out some months back, Amazon quickly moved to prevent her from advertising it, although books openly stumping for hormone treatment for minors suffering from gender dysphoria have met no such ban. This time, however, the publicity began to rage out of control.


The left is actively working to undermine the integrity of our elections. Read the plan to stop them now. Learn more now >>


A transgender Berkeley professor called for burning the book, arguing, “all you’re doing is removing a commodity from circulation—much as one might destroy a contaminated crop.”
Chase Strangio, deputy director for transgender justice at the American Civil Liberties Union, decided to abandon any pretense about defending civil liberties, tweeting, “stopping circulation of this book and these ideas is 100% a hill I will die on.”
Meanwhile, the email service Mailchimp, which handles mass emails on behalf of organizations, announced it would no longer work with the Northern Virginia Tea Party, stating that it was promoting “potential … misinformation” by holding a rally calling for a vote recount. Similarly, Facebook has reportedly been suppressing all information related to the possibility of voter fraud; so has Twitter.
Such niceties aren’t reserved for the political right. Matthew Yglesias, co-founder of Vox, left his own publication this week for Substack after explaining that there was a “damaging trend in the media” toward treating “disagreement as a source of harm or personal safety.” That trend, Yglesias stated, made it “very challenging to do good work.”
Those who refuse to abide by prevailing leftist norms often find alternative outlets. But such avenues of escape are then attacked as well.
This week, the Columbia Journalism Review ran a piece targeting Substack for the great sin of hosting material that might be deemed unworthy among leftist thinkers.
It questioned whether Substack would “replicate the patterns of marginalization found across the media industry,” condemning the company’s founders for their view that many viewpoints ought to be given access to the system.
And CNN found time to attack Parler, a conservative answer to Twitter, with Brian Stelter lamenting that “people are going more and more into their own echo chambers.” Which is somewhat ironic, given the enormous echo chamber CNN represents.
The goal here isn’t a freer discussion. It’s precisely the reverse. Conservatives have known this for a long time, which is why they’ve had to operate using unconventional media such as talk radio and podcasting and startup websites.
But the future of the country rests largely on a simple question: Will traditional liberals go along with the left, which seeks to silence, in order to achieve their favored policy prescriptions? Or will they walk away from the left and choose instead to engage in open conversation with conservatives, preserving freedom of thought and discussion but risking the possibility that their favorite policies will become more difficult to achieve?
That question remains unanswered for now. But time to answer it is running out. If we hope to have a country together moving forward, we’d better have an open conversation now.
COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM
COMMENTARY BY

Ben Shapiro

Ben Shapiro is host of “The Ben Shapiro Show” and editor-in-chief of DailyWire.com. He is The New York Times best-selling author of “Bullies.” He is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School, and lives with his wife and two children in Los Angeles. Twitter: .
RELATED ARTICLES:
Meet One of Congress’ Youngest New Members
5 Key Takeaways From Justice Samuel Alito’s Speech to the Federalist Society
Amid Election Recount, 4 Things to Know About Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger
How Mayflower Compact Influenced the American Concept of Rule of Law


A Note for our Readers:

Election fraud is already a problem. Soon it could be a crisis. But election fraud is not the only threat to the integrity of our election system.

Progressives are pushing for nine “reforms” that could increase the opportunity for fraud and dissolve the integrity of constitutional elections. To counter these dangerous measures, our friends at The Heritage Foundation are proposing seven measures to protect your right to vote and ensure fair, constitutional elections.
They are offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free today.
Get the details now when you download your free copy of, “Mandate for Leadership: Ensuring the Integrity of Our Election System.

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW »


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Founders Outsmarted the Presidential Election Fraudsters

Who chooses the President of the United States?

This question is by no means rhetorical.  For example, the mass disinformation media has chosen Joe Biden as the winner of the 2020 election.  Many people liked this news, but I must disappoint them – the television broadcasters have, according to the U.S. Constitution, nothing to do with who will live in the White House for the next four years.

Maybe the Supreme Court chooses the President? No, the Constitution does not provide for this.  Could it be that the citizens of America choose their President? Following the U.S. Constitution, no.  So, who then chooses the President?

Before answering this question, let us note that, contrary to popular misconception, the President of the United States is not a representative of the American people.  State legislators and governors are representatives of the people, and at the federal level so are the members of the House of Representatives of the United States Congress.  (Currently, senators are also representatives of the people, but before the ratification of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution in 1913, they were appointed by state legislators).  So, who does the President of America represent?

The President of the United States of America, according to the Constitution, represents state legislators’ interests and no one else.

In general, the federal government’s structure in America reflects the numerous attempts of the Founding Fathers of the United States to introduce a system of effective state control over the federal government.  The fact is that the main difference between our country and all other countries, without exception, is that it was organized “from the bottom up,” that is, individual colonies voluntarily united against a common enemy – the British Empire.  All other “republics” on the planet were created “from the top down,” when the already existing provinces were graciously granted some independence by the already existing central government.

In building the American state, the fundamental principle was state control over the newly created federal power structure.  Therefore, from the Founding Fathers’ point of view, the federal government in Washington should consist of both representatives of the people (congressmen) and representatives of the state leadership – the federal President and senators.  This is how the institution of the Electoral College was invented and implemented.  The electors are appointed by the state legislatures, and they are the ones who elect the President of the country.

Continue reading at American Thinker

Gary Gindler, Ph.D., is a conservative columnist at Gary Gindler Chronicles and the founder of a new science: Politiphysics. Follow him on Twitter and Quodverum.

Escape the Censorship Cartel — Join and Follow us on these great ‘Alternative’ Social Media Sites


As you know Facebook has unpublished me. But I am on many other great Alternative Social Media Sites along with many other patriotic Americans. Time to dump Facebook, Twitter and Google. They have become the “Censorship Cartel.”
If you wish you may want to join me on them and if you do please let me know and follow me on them. Also follow the many other patriots on these nouveau social media sites that promote and encourage freedom of speech.
Here are links to our pages on other social media sites:

MeWe: https://mewe.com/i/richardswier

Spreely: https://www.spreely.com/51048

GAB: https://gab.com/DrSwier

Mumblit: https://www.mumblit.com/drswier

Parler: https://parler.com/profile/Drswier/posts

Thanks for your continued support of President Donald J. Trump and our defense of the U.S. Constitution.
Here is a list of media sites that aren’t mainstream because they tell the truth:

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.
RELATED ARTICLES:
Top 131 Conservative Websites: The Best Right Wing Sites In 2020
WordPress Deplatforms Conservative Treehouse, NOT the First and Won’t be the Last!
REALATED VIDEO: Big Tech’s coordinated suppression amounts to a ‘censorship cartel’

Most States Reject Higher Taxes at the Ballot Box: Arizona is the Lone Exception

While public attention has been on the highly charged speculations of the Presidential race, voters in 17 states throughout the country were asked to vote on a variety of tax measures at the ballot box.

The results of these measures were fascinating to say the least, especially the results in typically blue states that are generally favorable to higher taxes.
Despite Biden’s incessant promise to undo Trump’s tax cuts, voters in the country’s most liberal states rebuffed proposals to increase taxes across the board.

It is a well-known fact that these traditionally high-tax states have driven droves of citizens and businesses to lower-tax states such as Arizona, Texas and Utah in the past decade.  Except for measures to increase taxes on marijuana, tobacco, and other drugs, ironically, Arizona is the only state this election to pass the same economically ruinous policies blue states are now trying to undo.

Illinois voted on a measure to eliminate their Constitutional flat income tax system and institute a progressive, soak the rich system, which failed by a wide margin of 10 points.  Opposition to this change was realistically much higher than even 55 percent because in Illinois a Constitutional amendment can be ratified with a simple majority and voters who leave the question blank count as an affirmative for the measure!

California too, asked voters to increase taxes in the form of removing a cap on property taxes for commercial owners.  Like Arizona’s Prop 208, California’s Proposition 15 would have constituted the largest tax increase in California’s history.  Surprisingly, the measure has failed, leaving intact one of the shelters for California’s businesses.
Despite an oppositional education lobby and the proponents being outspent almost 2:1, Colorado’s voters
passed a REDUCTION in their income tax by a margin of 15 PERCENT!  Colorado’s flat tax system protects taxpayers from class warfare at the ballot box.

Even in Washington state that does not have an income tax – cutting taxes is popular.  The legislature repealed four separate onerous taxes on businesses including a plastic bag tax. These changes were on voters’ ballots as “advisory votes” which allow the electorate to affirm or oppose tax changes made by the legislature – all were supported by the majority of voters.

One of these measures was a repeal of a tax targeted at the aerospace industry which has threatened to send Boeing out of the evergreen state.  Alaskan voters too saw the wisdom of not killing the golden goose, where voters could have passed a measure to raise a $1Billion by sticking it to the oil industry, but the proposal failed by an almost 30 percent spread.

These results are astounding.  State and local economies have been pounded by the COVID19 shutdowns and there is almost universal acceptance that lower taxes on individuals and businesses will encourage growth and recovery.  The failure of the left’s tax policies is apparent to even the die-hard leftists in the bluest states in the country.  Their uncompetitive tax systems have driven away businesses and job-creators and hamstrung economic growth and they are now changing course.

After a decade of climbing out of the Great Recession, Arizona has rebuilt its economy by controlling spending, adopting competitive tax policies, and limiting regulatory burdens on businesses.  That has led to thousands of new jobs, a more diversified economy and prosperity in the state which has allowed for over a $1 billion of new sustainable monies to flood the education system.

Proposition 208 undoes all this progress.  Despite our state’s success story and liberal states trying to adopt our playbook, it looks like Arizona will have to learn the hard way

 

This Blog from the Arizona Free Enterprise Club was originally published on November 11. 2020 and is republished with permission. The opinions expressed may not necessarily reflect the views of The Prickly Pear or of our sponsors.

 

Alternative News Sources – The New Honest Mainstream


Winston84 features a directory where every single profile we’ve included has something valuable to offer. Even those we find controversial are included for a reason – within the content they produce are ideas and facts you cannot find anywhere in the establishment media. And they have a right to be heard.
According to conservative columnist David Goldman, writing for PJ Media, Google is on the verge of completely eliminating content they find “offensive.” What may give offense? As we know, anything considered “hate speech,” as well as anything deemed “misinformation.” Expect that to include not just reasons why police are not systemically racist, or examples of alternative COVID-19 therapies, or corruption in the Biden family, or video and testimonial evidence of election fraud. No, expect far broader classifications of “offensive” material.
Imminent, for example, is complete suppression of anything that questions the “climate crisis.” The only reason that hasn’t happened already is because, at least during 2020, it wasn’t useful. The race riots supposedly triggered by the death of George Floyd, plus the COVID-19 pandemic, provided ample crises with which to remake and reset society (including elections). But the “climate crisis” will take banishment of “misinformation” to the next level.
Censorship over the past four years has been expanding logarithmically. In the last few weeks prior to the election it became blatant and brazen; its practitioners became indifferent to exposure. And everyone is in on it – the press, the establishment media, big tech, and powerful factions within the federal government and the intelligence community. The First Amendment hangs by a thread.
So to dig deep, really deep, browse through the many content providers on Winston. To just get reliable daily news, consider these six sources; they are as honest as we’re going to find:
Live online video feeds can be found on the website links for NewsMaxOne America News, and The National Pulse. NewsMax and One America can also be found on cable television channels across the U.S.
For an anthology of links, updated daily, along with original reporting, don’t miss a visit to Revolver News.
Investigative reporting of unparalleled depth and honesty can be found at The Epoch Times.
And investigative videos exposing, day after day, the activities of BLM and Antifa can be found thanks to one of the last courageous journalists in America, Andy Ngo.
EDITORS NOTE: This Winston84 column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Lessons from the Election

We have now confirmed what it takes for a Democrat to get elected President in this country. There must be either a national crisis or an international pandemic occurring concurrent with the election. In 2008, Barack Obama won because the Republicans’ inept candidate mishandled the reaction to the loan crisis. Without an international pandemic, Joe Biden does not defeat Donald Trump.

For years we have been told that the MSM, educational institutions and the Entertainment community are turning out Left-wing robotons destined to give control of the country to socialist fanatics too stupid to understand their political philosophy is an international failure. The American people once again rejected that thinking. Republicans will hold the U.S. Senate, picked up seats in the House and added a Governorship. The Republicans added control of state legislatures despite over $50 million being spent by Eric Holder’s operation to attempt to win control there. Even if Joe Biden becomes president, he will have a narrow lane from which to operate.

No matter what happens, Donald J. Trump woke up many Americans to the reality that our government seems to not be operating in our best interest. The government here in California acts and votes for their self-interest, not ours (the residents.) The public employees spend hundreds of millions of dollars to elect officials who will act for their best interests, not ours. They put forth propositions that will raise taxes which will go to pay for their inflated salaries, pensions and lifetime gold-plated health insurance. They stood by as businesses were crushed in the pandemic, but no public employees were laid off. Their jobs are “essential” – ours are not.

The same exists in Washington D.C. Virginia, a formerly reliable Republican state, has turned Democrat based on the ever-expanding federal workforce taking over the Northern suburbs that adjoin D.C. They do not have our interests at heart. Rather, they have their own interests, especially the interest of expanded rule over us. Mr. Trump exposed that as never before. Even our national security apparatus nakedly operates for its own self-interests.

We Republicans will never go back.

As for those Never-Trumpers, I was speaking with an involved Republican who told me “I did not believe much in John McCain, but I went out and worked for him because he was our nominee. I did not care for Romney, but I worked hard to get him elected. Now these Never-Trumpers tell us they cannot support Trump because they are too high-minded.” Let it be made clear to all you people such as John Kasich, Bill Kristol, the Lincoln Project leeches and the rest – Adios. See you later. We don’t need you or want you back. If you can support a guy backed by Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and all the AOCs of the world then you are too deeply confused to be on our team.

We should all thank the Lincoln Project because they spent over $60 million trying to turn Republicans against President Trump. Yet 93% of registered Republicans voted for Trump in 2020 versus 90% in 2016. These people were harmful to the Republicans they worked for in the past and thankfully they do not work for them anymore.

We want the Hispanic gardener who understands American values and work hard every day for themselves and their family. We want the Black person who realizes Democrats are only trying to keep them on a modern-day plantation and they will never get a piece of the American dream listening to the trash Dems throw out to them.  These Americans have far greater wisdom than Never-Trumpers will ever achieve. You Never-Trumpers are dead to us.

You are probably thinking this next one:  Can we get rid of the pollsters?  I am reading a book entitled The Death of Expertise. The author questions why we are giving such little credence to “experts.” Maybe because they are so inept. More importantly why do we need these people to tell us what is going to happen? Why do news reporters feel compelled to tell us what a person is going to say while we are waiting for that person to come to a microphone? We have ears, we can listen to what they say and we don’t need a preview. Everything seems to need a preview today. Why?  When they are so defective like our polling industry, it is particularly curious. The candidates can hire their own pollsters and use that data for their campaign. The rest of the polls should just go away. If anything, they are harmful.

One has to wonder if polls like the Washington Post/ABC in Wisconsin which had Biden up 17 points less than a week from the election was an active attempt at suppression of Republican voters. What other explanation is there for a discrepancy of this magnitude? Even these two operations cannot be that incompetent.

Can we stop with the lies about the Republicans being the party of the rich? Chuck Schumer repeatedly tells us that while he is lining his campaign war chest with Wall Street dollars. Nancy Pelosi carrying on about the “working guy” while she has lived the life of the rich and famous for decades and then goes to expensive fundraisers with wealthy contributors. Most of the top ten wealthiest people in this country are Democrats. Biden lied in the debate and told us his average contribution was $43.  Maybe this is from someone who gives him monthly contributions of $30 that add up to $300. You do not raise $1.6 billion from $25 per person. That would be over 20 million contributors. The Dems have become the party of the rich and intellectually arrogant. They care about feathering their own nests and the only workers they care about are public employee union members. Are there successful Republicans? Damn right there are. That is because we want every hard working American to become fabulously wealthy. Even Democrats.

We have been told that Donald Trump was the problem. Whether Mr. Trump ultimately prevails or not we will have different Republicans running for president. We will see whether the likes of potential candidates like Mike Pence, Nikki Haley or Tom Cotton will be treated in a respectful way. Based on history they will be attacked for a litany of supposed misdeeds. Whoever wins the Republican nomination will be assailed in a malicious manner validating that was not all about Trump. It is just the manner of our political opponents

If Joe Biden is our President, the Democrats will have given us a cognitively challenged president who will be in charge for up to four years.  His skills and energy will dissipate. It will all be worth it in their eyes because they believe the ends justify the means.

Bruce Bialosky is a nationally  known columnist. He was appointed by President Bush to the U.S. Holocaust Commission and is the Founder of the Republican Jewish Coalition of California. This article first appeared 11/8/20 in Flash Report  and is reproduced herein by the permission of the author. Comments can be directed to Bruce@Bialosky.biz.

WATCH: BLM Attacks Pro-Trump Black Woman Pushing Stroller after D.C. Rally


Awful.

WATCH: BLM Attacks Pro-Trump Black Woman Pushing Stroller after D.C. Rally

By Breitbart, November 14, 2020

Black Lives Matter protesters harassed a black woman wearing a Trump jacket and pushing a stroller through BLM Plaza. The attack led to a fight and left two little girls in tears.

A group of anti-Trump protesters began harassing a black woman wearing pro-Trump clothing while she pushed a baby stroller through Black Lives Matter Plaza near the White House on Saturday. The family had just left the Million MAGA March.

A video tweeted by Daily Caller journalist Shelby Talcott shows the woman and her young daughter walking down a street in Washington, DC, pushing a baby stroller. A woman to the right can be seen taking cell phone pictures of the family.
“Get the f**k away from my family,” the mother says as others begin to crowd around her. The mother continues yelling as a man and a woman approach her family from behind.
A man with a Don’t Tread on Me flag steps in and attempts to intervene in the conflict, the video shows. The woman attempts to steal the flag from the man and a fight breaks out.
Another Daily Caller video shows the danger the BLM protesters put the family in. During the fight, the man with the flag is pushed backward and falls on a young girl.

D.C. Metro police officers quickly moved in from where they had been observing the situation develop and attempted to separate the group.
As the fight develops, the mother moves her kids to a safe position and yells at police to arrest the woman involved. Police can be seen placing a man in handcuffs who started throwing punches at the man with the flag.
The videos end showing the pre-teen girls screaming in terror as they watched the scene unfold.
In a video showing the aftermath, a man wearing a “F**k Racism” shirt yells at the Black woman, “Why did you bring your kid here?”

RELATED ARTICLES:
Democrat Protesters Stomp on Trump Supporter’s Head, Attack Elderly After D.C. Rally
President Trump Makes Appearance At ‘Million MAGA March’ In D.C.
Lin Wood Files Lawsuit Challenging Georgia’s Secretary of State’s Dark Unconstitutional Agreement with Hillary Attorney Marc Elias
In Georgia the Difference In President-Only Ballots Between President Trump and Biden Is Statistically Impossible Indicating Obvious Election Fraud
Election Data Team to Call 1.25 Million Voters Over Anomalies in 6 Contested States
Scytl Company Website Crashes – Company Reportedly Released Statement, Refuting Reports of US Raid in Germany
Wisconsin Voters File Lawsuit to Exclude Over 792,000 Votes in 3 Counties
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Trump Loss and the Role of Libertarians

As the after-action reports filter in for the most recent Presidential election, for those who lost (which at this writing is still undetermined), high on the list must be the treachery of the mainstream media, the big tech companies and voter fraud.

Not getting sufficient attention yet is the role played by the Libertarian Party and its associated think tanks and publications.

Although final numbers are not yet available in all key swing states, it would appear that the Libertarians have delivered to the nation, the most pro-socialist, big government group of Democrats, ever to walk the earth. It would appear that Trump lost PA, GA, WI, and perhaps AZ because of the Libertarian vote.

Critically, it also likely forced the run-off race for the Senate in Georgia (the Purdue race.) It is the U.S. Senate that must prevent the loudly declared leftist agenda of the Democrats with a Biden Presidency.

It stretches the word irony that a small party that proclaims its dedication to liberty and limited government would willingly deliver such a result. It should cause these merry mischief makers to reflect carefully on what they have done.

And who was the Libertarian candidate? Can you name her? Did you know it was a her? Was she even on your political radar?

Libertarians are supposedly socially liberal and fiscal conservatives. They are supposed to believe in liberty and advance its prospects. But they have been drifting to the left for some time. Libertarians of recent vintage believe in open borders, drug legalization, personal sexual liberty and generally are agnostic or atheists as it relates to the function and role of religion. We say “recent vintage” because many earlier Libertarians endorsed more traditional, religious based morality. If not, they tended to be followers of Ayn Rand, who developed a fairly strong morality based on reason. Neither type of earlier Libertarian endorsed situational ethics.

To have a limited government, people must largely control themselves via some internalized moral system. They must be responsible for their own lives and their own support, except in the gravest failures. And even then, private charity and local support should come before federal intervention and largess. Thus, the attack on morality and the family must necessarily make big government more likely. Do Libertarians understand that?

In theory, open borders promoting the free flow of capital and people, would be ideal. However, when you have that coupled with the welfare state and identity politics which destroys the functioning of the “melting pot”, it falls dangerously short of ideal in terms of sustaining and protecting liberty.

But most Libertarians oppose constant foreign wars, excessive paper money creation, judges that legislate from the bench and the Administrative State. They favor school choice, believe in religious liberty, oppose national healthcare, believe in capitalism usually to an extreme and oppose identity politics because they believe in treating people as individuals as opposed to racial categories. The also strongly support the Second Amendment and federalism with its dispersion of power so important to the American founding. In most ways, they share common ground with Conservatives.

Personally, I like Libertarians. They often produce stimulating arguments and challenging views that make one think and reflect on first principles, like non-aggression, peaceful commerce and social harmony. But when if comes to practical politics, Libertarians are unrealistic and naïve to the point of foolishness. Also, they tend to see little connection between cultural trends and those of politics (it is often said that “politics is downstream from culture”.)

It is hard to see why a Libertarian could vote for a Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

You might say, they did not and they might believe that. But in a close election, not voting for the Republican means Democrat victory. Get it?

Some might argue it is a sophisticated way of creating divided government. We doubt such careful calculation is in the equation. More likely, it is their own sense of self-importance and their joy in teasing the major parties that pay insufficient attention to them. But the record of Libertarians often electing Democrats is pretty clear. Besides divided government is paralyzed government, which does not work well in crisis. If you want the government to shrink, would you not want to elect or influence the party mostly likely to shrink it?

Likewise, dealing with the Chinese threat to liberty requires greater unification of the parties.

It would seem electing Libertarian leaning candidates within an existing party would be time better spent than sabotaging the party pushing for a smaller, less intrusive government.  The Republican party is often a leaking vessel carrying the ideas of liberty. Isn’t that good enough reason for Libertarians to be within the Republican party, fighting to hold the party of less government accountable for failing the cause rather than helping elect the party of massive government and decreased liberty?

Instead, Libertarians may be responsible for costing Trump the election and put the forces of limited government in a position where recovery could be difficult if not impossible. Trump after all, was NOT an establishment Republican.

While Trump no doubt rankled them for his positions on immigration, abortion, his personality quirks and lack of fiscal conservatism, he was the candidate that started to deregulate, nominated strict constructionist judges, defended the Second Amendment, the First Amendment, promoted school choice, opposed national healthcare, attempted to scale down our endless foreign wars and protected religious liberty. He also endorsed prison reform, enterprise zones, cut tremendous amounts of regulation and cut taxes. He even attempted to appoint Judy Shelton, a pro-gold standard economist to the Federal Reserve.

He was moving his party in a more limited government direction, not perfectly, but substantially.

Whatever his failings, he clearly was better than the weak and confused Biden who already is being besieged by left-wing elements demanding payback for their loyalty.

Trump himself, is the victim of “deep state” machinations that should be opposed by all friends of limited government. Do Libertarians really like the CIA and FBI interfering in elections?

Do Libertarians think the Democrats will deliver fiscal conservatism and sound money?

On some key Libertarian social issues, Trump was largely silent on pot. He largely respected federalism through the Covid pandemic and let the states do their thing, giving us at least a range of public policy choices valuable to future research for what works.

But is pot legalization really more important than the Bill of Rights?  Even if one supports legalization, the priorities are all wrong.

In terms of sexual issues, Trump moved to decriminalize homosexual behavior in foreign countries.

On abortion, Trump is pro-life. Libertarians themselves differ on abortion but all would agree it should not be subsidized by the state. If Roe is overturned, the states will determine abortion policy which should not be offensive to Libertarians.

Neither candidate ran on fiscal conservatism, but the Democrats have openly embraced socialism, free college education, the Green New Deal, racial reparations, Modern Monetary Theory, climate change regulation, harsh Covid lockdown – all of which would make Trump the relative fiscal conservative.

So, if our calculations are right, Trump supported due process for males on college campus, opposed the violence of Antifa and Black Lives Matter, opposed the teaching of critical race theory, reduced foreign wars, reduced our dependence on international organizations, reduced the regulatory state, defended the Bill of Rights. And Libertarians voted against him because of WHAT?  Immigration policy? Marijuana legalization? Failure to balance the budget? His tweets?

With a huge expensive state, how can you balance the budget?  Smaller government means smaller budgets. By defeating Trump, now what are the chances of balancing the budget?

If our analysis of Libertarians is correct, they will rightfully go down as one of the most foolish political movements ever to pretend they support liberty.

In politics, you never get all that you want. The choices are basically who on balance moves the country in the direction you seek. Perfection is not part of the political equation and, frankly, is not part of the human condition. This advice is applicable to Conservatives as well, who often find the Republican Party just as frustrating.

If Libertarians felt their “independence” of either major party signals their moral purity on key issues, they have succeeded in putting in power the least likely party to advance liberty.

That, my friends, is a poor calculation. It is virtue signaling of the worst kind. It is making a moral statement that not just has little meaning. Rather, it actually succeeds in getting the opposite of what your supposed virtue supports.

It goes beyond being childish and ventures into the self-destructive. Pay attention to me, it seems to say, or I will burn down the house.

What is the solution?

Perhaps serious self-examination by Libertarians is in order. As far as Republicans are concerned, the GOP needs to reach out to fellow liberty lovers and make them feel more welcome within the party.

 

Lockdown Despotism and the “Control Panel” Delusion: Why the Biden-Harris COVID-19 plan is so ominous.

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris recently updated their “plan to beat COVID-19.” One passage is worth examining for the dangerous mentality it betrays:

“Social distancing is not a light switch. It is a dial. President-elect Biden will direct the CDC [Centers for Disease Control] to provide specific evidence-based guidance for how to turn the dial up or down relative to the level of risk and degree of viral spread in a community, including when to open or close certain businesses, bars, restaurants, and other spaces; when to open or close schools, and what steps they need to take to make classrooms and facilities safe; appropriate restrictions on size of gatherings; when to issue stay-at-home restrictions.”

The passage brings to mind a warning given to America long ago.

The warning was delivered in 1835 by Alexis de Tocqueville, the famous French observer and admirer of the young republic. In his classic book Democracy in America, de Tocqueville included a chapter called, “What Sort Of Despotism Democratic Nations Have To Fear,” in which he warned the American people of:

“…an immense and tutelary power, which takes upon itself alone to secure their gratifications, and to watch over their fate. That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident, and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent, if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks on the contrary to keep them in perpetual childhood…”

Does the Biden/Harris “plan to beat COVID-19” represent the kind of despotic power that de Tocqueville warned us about? Let’s see.

Is the power “absolute”? Well not yet, at least, since it refers to CDC “guidance” as opposed to federal mandates. But governors and mayors have proven to be quite deferential to the CDC, so its “guidance” has translated into state and local-level mandates before and likely will again.

Is the power “immense”? Clearly. It covers the opening and closing, not only of restaurants and bars, but of all businesses. Thus, it claims sway over the country’s entire in-person economy and commercial life, regardless of private property and self-ownership.

The plan covers, not only businesses, but all spaces: that is, everything about the coming and going of Americans, again irrespective of individual rights.

The plan also encompasses all gatherings wherever they may occur, thus violating “the right of the people peaceably to assemble,” as enshrined in the First Amendment.

The plan entails “stay-at-home restrictions,” meaning the power to imprison at will Americans in their own homes, violating the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, according to which neither the federal government nor any state is allowed to “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

So, yes, the plan is very immense, both in its scope and impact.

Is the power “minute”? Yes, the plan expressly distinguishes itself for promising much more “specific” guidance. That is what the “dial” metaphor is all about. Rather than a lockdown “light switch” to turn society off and on, the plan promises to use the CDC as a social distancing “dial” to scientifically fine-tune social proximity on a community-by-community basis.

Not only that, but within each community, it reserves the discretion to open or close certain businesses and spaces. We have already seen such discretion in action throughout the period of lockdowns, as certain political protests and celebrations have been allowed and even encouraged by officials even as they shutter nearby businesses and prohibit private gatherings, including funerals, marriages, parties, concerts, games, festivals, and religious services.

de Tocqueville famously observed that the strength of America rested in its vibrant civil society, consisting of a rich proliferation of non-governmental associations and institutions. That, and not merely “voting,” is what he meant by American democracy. He wrote:

“The political associations that exist in the United States form only a detail in the midst of the immense picture that the sum of associations presents there.

Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds constantly unite. Not only do they have commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but they also have a thousand other kinds: religious, moral, grave, futile, very general and very particular, immense and very small; Americans use associations to give fêtes, to found seminaries, to build inns, to raise churches, to distribute books, to send missionaries to the antipodes…”

What we seem to be seeing in the lockdowns is the state using its “minute” and “discretionary” power to cripple all physical manifestations of civil society other than its own.

Is the power “tutelary,” as in denoting the relationship between guardian and dependant?

Incredibly so, although it only accelerates something that has been long underway. The public has been so spooked by the government and media’s alarmist and distorted claims about the disease, that they have offered up a childlike deference to officialdom, abjectly following its lead, even after its “guidance” has often proved to be vacillating and wrong.

As de Tocqueville warned, the state has taken upon itself sole responsibility for our “fate.” And the public has eagerly acquiesced to this government tutelage, abdicating the responsibilities of free adults and letting our “guardians” keep us in “perpetual childhood.”

de Tocqueville wasn’t the only European to warn America of an all-encompassing, kindly despotism “for our own good.” Ludwig von Mises warned of central planners who, in the name of giving us everything we want, would take away everything we have—even everything we are.

As Mises wrote:

“Planning other people’s actions means to prevent them from planning for themselves, means to deprive them of their essentially human quality, means enslaving them.

The great crisis of our civilization is the outcome of this enthusiasm for all-round planning. There have always been people prepared to restrict their fellow citizens’ right and power to choose their own conduct. (…) What is new and characterizes our age is that the advocates of uniformity and conformity are raising their claims on behalf of science.”

Indeed, in its plan to beat COVID-19,” the Biden-Harris team boasts that their administration will “listen to science” and that the CDC’s “dialing” up and down of lockdowns throughout the country will be “evidence-based.”

This deference to “science” is meant to sound humble, but it is used to justify the extreme arrogance of the social engineer. As Mises wrote:

“It is customary nowadays to speak of “social engineering.” Like planning, this term is a synonym for dictatorship and totalitarian tyranny. The idea is to treat human beings in the same way in which the engineer treats the stuff out of which he builds his bridges, roads, and machines. The social engineer’s will is to be substituted for the will of the various people he plans to use for the construction of his Utopia. Mankind is to be divided into two classes: the almighty dictator, on the one hand, and the underlings who are to be reduced to the status of mere pawns in his plans and cogs in his machinery, on the other. If this were feasible, then of course the social engineer would not have to bother about understanding other people’s actions. He would be free to deal with them as technology deals with lumber and iron.”

However, such a grandiose undertaking is not feasible. As Mises and F.A. Hayek demonstrated, society is far too complex to be centrally planned.

Central planners, no matter how informed they are by “the science,” cannot access or process anywhere near the amount of knowledge that would be required to balance all the myriad trade-offs that are relevant to any decision impacting millions upon millions of unique individuals.

This inescapable fact makes no exception for central planners charged with “public health.” To shut down a business, to lock down a community, to isolate a human being, etc., has manifold unintended consequences that ripple like waves in a pond. Central planners cannot anticipate such ramifications, especially because so many of them involve human valuation and choice.

The Biden-Harris “dial” is pitched as an improvement on the “light switch” approach to lockdowns. But it doesn’t matter how many switches, dials, buttons, meters, and gauges that central planners cram onto their “control panel.” It’s all hubris and folly, because human beings are not and can never be cogs in a machine. And the more we let them treat us so, the more human lives will get crushed and torn asunder in the social engineer’s infernal contraptions.

As Mises and Hayek explained, the only way that human beings can navigate the sea of complexity that is life in society, including such multifaceted concerns as public health and pandemics, is through free cooperation among planning individuals (including individual scientific experts who earn the voluntary trust of others). Mises made an important distinction:

“The alternative is not plan or no plan. The question is: whose planning? Should each member of society plan for himself or should the paternal government alone plan for all? The issue is not automatism versus conscious action; it is spontaneous action of each individual versus the exclusive action of the government. It is freedom versus government omnipotence.”

To save our freedom, livelihoods, and long-term health from omnipotent government, we must defy the central planners and social engineers, scoff at their “scientific” switches and dials, and reclaim our responsibilities as a free and courageous people.

Dan Sanchez is the Director of Content at the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) and the editor-in chief of FEE.org.

This column  from Foundation for Economic Freedom  (FEE) is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. The opinions expressed may not necessarily reflect the views of The Prickly Pear or of the sponsors.