If Republicans Win On Tuesday, Thank The Election Integrity Movement thumbnail

If Republicans Win On Tuesday, Thank The Election Integrity Movement

By Mollie Hemingway

If Republican candidates do as well as expected on Tuesday, they can credit the new, widespread, and coordinated effort to begin securing U.S. elections, helping give candidates the best opportunity possible to win a fair fight in the new voting environment of mail-in balloting.

The Republican National Committee, other party entities, and dozens of public interest election nonprofit groups built over the last two years a multimillion-dollar election integrity infrastructure that passed laws improving voter ID and other election security measures, defended those laws from legal attacks by Democrats, and sued states and localities that failed to follow the law. They also recruited, educated, trained, and placed tens of thousands of new election observers and other workers throughout the long midterm voting season.

And they did it all in one of the most hostile propaganda environments on record.

2020’s Wake-Up Call

The 2020 election was a massive wake-up call for many Americans on the right. In the months leading up to it, Democrats forced through changes to hundreds of laws and processes governing how elections are conducted.

The rule-change scheme was run by Marc Elias, a Democrat election attorney who also ran his party’s Russia collusion hoax, which falsely claimed Donald Trump stole the 2016 election by colluding with Russia. Sometimes Democrats’ 2020 changes were instituted legally. Frequently, though, they were effected by other means, such as getting a friendly state or local official to change the rules unilaterally.

The 2020 election plan, some of which was admitted to in a flattering Time magazine story, sought to flood the zone with tens of millions of unsupervised mail-in ballots, historically understood to be riper for fraud and other election irregularities than supervised, in-person voting. The plan also involved the private takeover of government election offices to run Democrat-focused get-out-the-vote operations. Mark Zuckerberg, one of the world’s wealthiest and most powerful men, financed the project, doling out $419 million to two left-wing groups that focused grants and assistance to government offices in the Democrat areas of swing states.

This radical change — “practically a revolution in how people vote,” as Time put it — included the widespread practice of placing ballot drop boxes predominantly in Democrat areas of the country, mailing out unsolicited mail-in ballots or applications for mail-in ballots, using well-funded teams of ballot harvesters both inside and outside of government, lowering and changing the standards for mail-in ballot acceptance, and fixing or “curing” ballots that were improperly filled out.

Corporate media and other Democrats claimed the election was the best-run in history. In reality, it was a mess. Big Tech and the media ran coordinated disinformation campaigns to benefit Democrats by suppressing news that hurt the party. Big Tech also deplatformed effective conservative voices and media outlets, suppressed fundraising emails from Republicans, and elevated certain information to help Democrats.

There were other problems. Candidate debates occurred long after mail-in and early balloting began. Poll observers were sidelined under the guise of a Covid “emergency.” The counting of ballots cast via unsupervised, mail-in voting resulted in curious and confusing results. It took days and sometimes weeks to find out how many ballots were cast, much less for whom. In the end, Americans learned that Joseph Biden, who had spent most of his campaign at home, had become the most popular American president in history, collecting an astounding 81 million votes.

Many Republican voters wondered how things were allowed to get so bad with elections.

Republicans Spent 40 Years on the Sidelines

Part of the reason Republicans hadn’t more effectively fought the election integrity battle before now is somewhat shocking. The 2020 contest was the first presidential election since Ronald Reagan’s first successful run in 1980 in which the Republican National Committee could play any role whatsoever in Election Day operations. For nearly 40 years, the Democratic National Committee had a massive systematic advantage over its Republican counterpart: The RNC had been prohibited by law from helping with poll watcher efforts or nearly any voting-related litigation.

Democrats had accused Republicans of voter intimidation in a 1981 New Jersey gubernatorial race. The case was settled, and the two parties entered into a court-ordered consent decree limiting Republican involvement in any poll-watching operation. But Dickinson Debevoise, the Jimmy Carter-appointed judge who oversaw the agreement, never let them out of it, repeatedly modifying and strengthening it at Democrats’ request.

Debevoise was a judge for only 15 years, but he stayed 21 years in senior status, a form of semi-retirement that enables judges to keep serving in a limited capacity. It literally took Debevoise’s dying in 2015 for Republicans to get out of the consent decree. Upon his passing, a new judge, appointed by President Obama, was assigned the case and let the agreement expire at the end of 2018.

The effect of this four-decade hindrance on GOP poll-watching cannot be overstated. Poll watchers serve many functions. They deter voter fraud, but they also help with getting out the vote. Poll watchers can see who has voted, meaning campaigns and political parties can figure out which areas and voters to call and encourage to vote. They also can observe who was forced to vote provisionally or who was turned away at the polls.

“Without poll watchers, the RNC would have no good way to follow up with its voters to help ensure a provisional ballot is later counted, direct confused voters to their correct polling place and document irregularities, such as voting equipment malfunctions and other incidents that are important flash points in a close election or recount,” RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel has explained.

For decades, Democrats built up expansive coordination efforts that the Republicans were prohibited from developing. Republican candidates and state parties could do things on their own, but not with help from the national party. In 2012, the Obama-Biden campaign bragged about recruiting 18,000 lawyers to be poll watchers, providing more than 300 trainings to ensure the observers understood election law. The volunteers would collect more than 19,000 problematic incidents at polling locations that were resolved with or without legal intervention.

The consent decree also meant the RNC was kept out of almost any litigation related to Election Day. In fact, one main part of the RNC’s legal efforts was training staff to stay away from Election Day operations, including recounts, and fending off litigation that arose from the consent decree.

It paralyzed the RNC’s political operations, as the slightest misstep would result in getting sued by Democrats. For example, when former Trump Press Secretary Sean Spicer said in an interview with GQ magazine that he’d watched 2016 returns in an oversized utility room on the fifth floor of Trump Tower, Democrats deposed him to show he’d violated the order by being on the wrong floor, one tied to Election Day outreach.

The Democrats used that trivial fact to try, unsuccessfully, to get the new judge to extend the limitation on their political rivals for another decade. Even though the decree was finally lifted after nearly 40 years, it didn’t mean Republicans were on even footing with Democrats in 2020. Democrats had spent decades perfecting their Election Day operations and litigation strategy while everyone at the RNC walked on eggshells, knowing that if they so much as looked in the direction of a polling site, there could be another crackdown.

Thus there was no muscle memory about how to watch polls or communicate with a campaign. They had spent decades not being able to organize or talk to presidential campaigns, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, or the National Republican Congressional Committee about any of these efforts.

What a change, then, when McDaniel announced in early 2020 her “intention to be the most litigious chair in history.”

But First, Election Reforms

Before mounting successful lawsuits, however, better laws had to be passed — a difficult task in the immediate aftermath of the 2020 election, when Democrats claimed any criticism of how that election had been run was unacceptable and possibly criminal. That campaign, designed to suppress efforts to bolster election security, continues to this day. Nevertheless, Republican lawmakers in dozens of states began pushing for election reforms.

For example, bans on so-called Zuckbucks, the private takeover of government election offices, were passed and signed into law in Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and West Virginia.

Six Democrat governors vetoed attempted bans, understanding how key Zuckerberg’s funding was to Democrat success in 2020. The governors of Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin all vetoed the bans. Wisconsin’s governor, currently in a tight election, vetoed twice. The Kansas legislature overrode the veto.

The resulting contrast between election integrity in some of these battleground states could not be clearer. Take Pennsylvania, for instance, a pivotal swing state where the Democrat governor vetoed the legislature’s attempted reforms. Its partisan Supreme Court meanwhile issues conflicting guidance, resulting in disparate treatment of ballots depending on the county they’re cast in. Elections here are high in irregularities and low in voter trust.

Not so in Georgia. Recall that despite tremendous pressure from Democrats who alleged massive GOP-led voter suppression, including Biden who smeared election integrity efforts as “Jim Crow 2.0,” Georgia passed much-needed reforms related to voter ID, mail-in voting, and drop boxes, in addition to the Zuckbucks ban. The result has been record-breaking early, in-person voter turnout, across demographicssurpassing 2 million voters this week.

Meanwhile, the Foundation for Government Accountability worked with states to make policy changes to clean voter rolls, ban ballot trafficking, secure ballot custody, roll back Covid waivers, enact penalties for election lawbreakers, require chains of custody, secure drop boxes, pre-process absentee ballots, improve absentee voter ID, and dozens of other types of reforms.

Florida has been working steadily to improve its election system since the disastrous 2000 election. Last year, that meant banning Zuckbucks. This year, those changes included “requiring voter rolls to be annually reviewed and updated, strengthening ID requirements, establishing the Office of Election Crimes and Security to investigate election law violations, and increasing penalties for violations of election laws.”

Incidentally, the Center for Renewing America filed a complaint with the IRS over the tax break that Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan received for their 2020 election meddling.

Litigate, Litigate, Litigate

While the RNC and the Trump campaign did achieve some legal successes in the lead-up to the 2020 election, it was nowhere near sufficient against the well-funded and coordinated Democrat effort. Republican donors and grassroots demanded more.

The RNC got involved in 73 election integrity cases in 20 states for the midterms, with plans to expand. They won a lawsuit against Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson for restricting the rights of poll challengers; got Maricopa County, Arizona, to share key data about its partisan breakdown of poll workers; won an open records lawsuit against Mercer County, New Jersey, for refusing to share election administration data; won a lawsuit against the North Carolina State Board of Elections for restricting the rights of poll watchers; and reached a favorable settlement against Clark County, Nevada, in which the county agreed to share information about its partisan breakdown of poll workers on a rolling basis.

“I’m so grateful the RNC is back in the system after 40 years. They’re so needed,” said Minnesota State Senator and former Minnesota Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer.

Ken Cuccinelli, the former Virginia attorney general and acting deputy DHS secretary who now runs the Election Transparency Initiative, agreed. “They’ve been a game changer in the litigation arena to keep elections clean.”

The RNC wasn’t the only big change in the litigation battle. Hotelier Steve Wynn, strategist Karl Rove, former Attorney General Bill Barr, and top Republican election lawyers launched an election litigation groupRestoring Integrity and Trust in Elections (RITE), in July 2022, and within three months chalked up several major victories.

For instance, RITE sued over controversial Wisconsin Elections Commission guidance that conflicted with state law, telling election clerks to accept ballots that had been spoiled, and won the case. It was also part of the group that successfully sued Pennsylvania over whether ballots that failed to be dated, as required by state law, could be counted.

“It goes to show what responsible and tireless lawyering can do for election integrity,” said Derek Lyons, the president and CEO of RITE.

Groups with lengthier histories of battling for election integrity, such as the Public Interest Legal Foundation, also had successes. A Delaware court ruled that the state’s newly passed mail-in balloting scheme violated its constitution.

Monitoring Polls

U.S. elections used to occur on one day, requiring just one day of poll observations. Now that elections can spread out over days, weeks, or even months, many more workers are needed to monitor the casting of ballots.

The RNC hired 17 in-state election integrity directors and 37 state-based election integrity counsels in key states. They conducted more than 5,000 election integrity trainings, recruited more than 70,000 poll watchers and workers, and worked with more than 110,000 unique volunteers nationwide. They set up an issue reporting system and distributed copies of Poll Watcher Principles for states. If voters encounter election issues, they can file a report, and attorneys will be dispatched to resolve the issues. Sites were set up in ArizonaCaliforniaFloridaGeorgiaIowaMaineMichiganMinnesotaNevadaNew HampshireNew JerseyNorth CarolinaOhioPennsylvaniaTexasVirginia, and Wisconsin.

Congressional Republicans also got in on the action. Rep. Rodney Davis, the top Republican on the House Administration Committee, notified all 50 states that he would be deploying dozens of specially trained election observers to protect the integrity of the ballot box.

The move occurred after Democrats nearly seized a seat won by Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks of Iowa in 2020. She won her election by just six votes, leading Democrats to attempt to unseat her using parliamentary shenanigans. The Republicans of the House Administration Committee just released a mini-doc about Democrats’ attempt at literal election denialism.

With tens of millions of voters newly concerned about election integrity, other groups also took part in massive training operations. The Election Integrity Network, which started with a podcast on election integrity issues hosted by longtime election lawyer Cleta Mitchell, grew into state summits, which then built out into coalitions in states, attracting people to weekly meetings. The network has trained 76,000 poll workers.

The network’s North Carolina Election Integrity Team covers 95 percent of that state’s priority areas with poll observers. It has more than 30 local task forces, with representatives in 75 of 100 counties. More than 2,000 North Carolinians were individually trained. The group has established a strong working relationship with the state General Assembly to overhaul legislation and built relationships with local election officials. Similar groups are operating in Georgia, Virginia, Arizona, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and other states.

The Vulnerable Voters Working Group meets to develop and implement ideas to protect nursing homes from left-wing ballot harvesting. The American Constitutional Rights Union is one coalition partner working to protect seniors from illicit activities.

Part of the benefit of an aggressive legal strategy is that it incentivizes election bureaucrats and officials to follow the law, which helps restore trust in elections, Election Integrity Network Director Marshall Yates says. “What these people do is provide transparency and accountability to the system that was previously just run by unaccountable bureaucrats. They may or may not see something but just their presence is a check on making sure there is some accountability to the system, and it should restore confidence in seeing how elections were administered.”

What Remains

While reforms were passed in more than two dozen states, key lawsuits were filed and won, and poll workers are being deployed nationwide, many problems remain. Even with the recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court victory, that state remains essentially lawless when it comes to election integrity. North Carolina, Nevada, Wisconsin, and other battleground states retain problematic election processes and guidance. And inflated voter rolls, combined with unsolicited mail-in ballots, are a recipe for disaster.

The new election integrity groups have much work to do in the years ahead. But many Americans, from establishment Republicans to grassroots conservatives, have poured themselves into restoring integrity to elections nationwide. They have begun to achieve major successes in lobbying for election security, litigating against a well-funded activist opposition, and training poll watchers. And they did it all in the face of a hostile propaganda press that maliciously disparaged them as election deniers.

*****

This article was published by The Federalist and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

How Not to Vote in Arizona

Election Day is tomorrow – Tuesday, November 8th. The system for voting in Arizona is predominantly by mail-in ballots (around 80% of all ballots – 90% in Maricopa County).

If you have not submitted your mail-in ballot yet, DO NOT MAIL IT IN OR ‘DROP IT OFF’  ON TUESDAY AT YOUR POLLING STATION. It won’t be counted on Tuesday and may not be counted for many days or at all. 

If you have failed to ‘mail-in’ your ballot yet, surrender the ballot at the polling station on Tuesday, show your driver’s license and actually fill out a new ballot and vote in person. Your vote will be tabulated and counted for the evening announcement of election results.

Google Skewing Search Results For Arizona’s Gubernatorial, Secretary of State Races thumbnail

Google Skewing Search Results For Arizona’s Gubernatorial, Secretary of State Races

By Corinne Murdock

Editor’s Note [AZ Free News]: Since our story published, search results for Kari Lake now show her campaign website on Google’s first page.

Google appears to be skewing search results of Arizona’s gubernatorial candidates to favor the Democratic candidates over the Republicans. AZ Free News monitored search results over the past week and discovered indications of a consistent bias for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Katie Hobbs and secretary of state candidate Adrian Fontes, over their respective Republican opponents Kari Lake and Mark Finchem.

It’s likely the latest in Google’s history of attempting to sway election outcomes. The Big Tech giant historically referred to their technique of manipulating search results as “ephemeral experiences.” Google has admitted to manufacturing this information in order to change people’s attitudes and behavior concerning politics.

A search of “Katie Hobbs” brings up Hobbs’ website as the first result, followed by top news portraying Hobbs favorably. A sample of articles featured over the weekend: an MSNBC interview that she’s the sane candidate, a Fox News report that she has “Republicans” campaigning for her, a KTAR report that former President Barack Obama will stump for her and Senator Mark Kelly, and an Insider report on Fox News mistakenly screening mock election results of a Hobbs victory.

After those articles, it’s Hobbs’ secretary of state website, her Twitter feed, her Wikipedia page, an endorsement by pro-abortion group Emily’s List, her Ballotpedia, her Facebook, and various coverage of the burglary of her campaign office.

Then there’s the results of a search on “Kari Lake.” Her campaign website doesn’t appear on any of the first 11 search result pages, and doesn’t appear even when omitted results are included. Lake’s website appears sporadically via ads, alongside which there are usually ads asking voters to donate to Hobbs.

Search results for Lake yield a Wikipedia page first, followed by top news portraying Lake unfavorably. Here were some of the articles featured over the weekend: multiple outlets’ coverage of “Saturday Night Live” mocking Lake and other Trump-backed candidates, multiple outlets’ reports on former congresswoman Liz Cheney’s millions and latest ad to defeat Lake, an Arizona Republic report detailing Attorney General Mark Brnovich accusing Lake of running a “giant grift,” and a Politico report on Lake using “MAGA star power.” After those articles, it’s Lake’s Ballotpedia, her Twitter feed, several YouTube videos, a Washington Post article, her Instagram feed, and her Facebook page.

Something similar occurs when voters look up the secretary of state candidates. A search for “Mark Finchem” yields his state legislator profile first, not his website, followed by his Wikipedia page and a collection of “top stories” characterizing Finchem as an “election denier” and target of Cheney’s PAC. Whereas a search for “Adrian Fontes” yields his campaign website first, followed by his Ballotpedia profile, endorsements, social media profiles, and two individual links to news coverage detailing Fontes’ campaign platform. Absent from the first page of results are “top stories” portraying Fontes in any negative light.

The same can’t be said for other races. Google search results for attorney general candidates Abraham Hamadeh (R) and Kris Mayes (D) yield their websites first, followed by Ballotpedia and social media accounts — no top news stories aggregated near the top.

The same is true for the search results for Maricopa County attorney, superintendent, treasurer, and state legislative candidates. U.S. House and Senate races don’t reflect that bias, either.

Google has a history of political favoritism of the left. Evidence of their role in elections became evident following the 2016 presidential election.

In last Thursday’s episode of Fox News “Tucker Carlson Today,” acclaimed psychologist and researcher Robert Epstein said that Google modifies its search results to influence voters. That’s in addition to the fact that Google is one of the top surveillance entities in the world.

Epstein, a Biden voter, said that his research confirmed whistleblower testimonies of Google’s election influence. Throughout the 2016 election, Epstein monitored Google activity using 1,735 voters across four swing states. In all, Epstein gleaned around 1.5 million ephemeral experiences across not only Google, but Bing, YouTube, and Facebook.

Epstein asserted that the biggest issue in elections wasn’t fraud but the Big Tech companies’ unchecked influence.

“I was nauseated that our data were [sic] telling us that this election was in the hands of private companies, Google in particular. Literally, that there is no more democracy, there is no more free and fair election, it’s just an illusion,” stated Epstein.

Epstein said that Google and YouTube influenced search results to favor far-left ideology. He estimated that Google’s influence in search results affected around 6 million votes in 2020.

“What we found was extreme liberal bias on Google — which is the only real search engine that counts — and hardly any bias on Bing and Yahoo,” said Epstein.

Arizona doesn’t appear to be the top priority for the Big Tech giant this year, despite evidence of their handiwork in the gubernatorial and secretary of state races. According to Epstein’s research, Google’s current primary focus is Wisconsin.

Earlier this month, the Republican National Committee (RNC) sued Google over claims of censorship. The RNC provided research indicating that the Big Tech giant sends its campaign emails to spam folders automatically to suppress its fundraising and get-out-the-vote messages.

****

This article was published by AZ Free News and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

How Not to Vote in Arizona

Election Day is tomorrow – Tuesday, November 8th. The system for voting in Arizona is predominantly by mail-in ballots (around 80% of all ballots – 90% in Maricopa County).

If you have not submitted your mail-in ballot yet, DO NOT MAIL IT IN OR ‘DROP IT OFF’  ON TUESDAY AT YOUR POLLING STATION. It won’t be counted on Tuesday and may not be counted for many days or at all. 

If you have failed to ‘mail-in’ your ballot yet, surrender the ballot at the polling station on Tuesday, show your driver’s license and actually fill out a new ballot and vote in person. Your vote will be tabulated and counted for the evening announcement of election results.

Herschel Walker Leads Georgia Senate Race In Final Poll thumbnail

Herschel Walker Leads Georgia Senate Race In Final Poll

By The Daily Caller

Republican candidate and former football star Herschel Walker is leading incumbent Democratic Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock in the final round of polling before Election Day.

Walker leads Warnock by 3.2 points, with the support of 49.7% of respondents, in a Trafalgar poll released Monday. That poll, taken between Nov. 4 and Nov. 6, surveyed 1,103 respondents and had a 2.9% margin of error.

If no candidate in Georgia wins more than 50% of the vote, the top two candidates will enter a runoff election for the seat. The race between Walker and Warnock has been close, with Walker maintaining a steady lead in recent weeks, at an average of 0.5% per RealClearPolitics, a statistical tie.

It’s a great day in Georgia!

If you want a leader who is tough on crime, puts parents in charge of their kids’ education, and knows the value of a dollar, send @HerschelWalker to the Senate! Let’s get out the vote! #GASen 🇺🇸♥️ pic.twitter.com/NnYRVZTLBn

— Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) November 6, 2022

The race between Walker and Warnock has been closely watched as Republicans seek to retake a seat they lost in 2020 when Warnock, a novice politician and pastor, defeated appointed Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler in a special runoff election by 2 points.

Walker’s campaign had earlier faced a scandal after a woman alleged that he conceived a child with her in 2009 and paid her to abort the pregnancy, despite calling himself “100% pro-life” on the campaign trail. Though some polls immediately after the news showed Walker trailing Warnock by double digits, he quickly rebounded.

The Senate race is quite unlike the state’s gubernatorial campaign between incumbent Republican Gov. Brian Kemp and Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams. Per the same Trafalgar survey, Kemp, with 52.6% support, is expected to win outright, defeating Abrams for a second time with an increased margin of victory following his win against her in 2018.

Other Senate races across the country polled by Trafalgar show GOP challengers leading their Democratic incumbents. In Ohio, Republican J.D. Vance leads Democratic Rep. Tim Ryan by 11.4% while, in North Carolina, Republican Rep. Ted Budd is leading the Democratic candidate, former North Carolina Chief Justice Cheri Beasley, by 6.4%.

Trafalgar polls have an “A-” rating from FiveThirtyEight for reliability.

Walker and Warnock’s campaigns did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

AUTHOR

ARJUN SINGH

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Legal Immigrants Are More Patriotic’ — Nikki Haley Says We Should ‘Deport’ Warnock At Herschel Walker Rally

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

When We Win Tuesday thumbnail

When We Win Tuesday

By Royal A. Brown III

Great advice from CS Bennet.

By CS Bennett

We need to get rid of this social credit scoring system the Chinese have imposed on their people and want to bring to our shores. Any US politician that supports this punitive system is a traitor to our republic and is a threat to our rights, freedoms, and liberties.

We need to restore all Americans’ right to display their guns in their gun racks in the back of their pickup trucks. We regain our liberties and freedoms by reversing the restrictive policies of the Left.

We need to abolish political correctness in the workplace, in our schools, in the halls of government, and in our places of worship.

We need to return civic classes to our school curriculum and prayer for those who ask for it.

We need to abolish Critical Race Theory (CRT) by any name the left gives it, in our school systems

We need to stamp out this woke movement by any means necessary

We need to establish what I would call Legal Layman Specialists, who are professionals trained to put into layman’s terms, all of that legal jargon you find on the amendments printed on voter ballots when you vote and haven’t a clue what is being said.

We need to keep politics out of sports, at the school level, and at the professional level. Let people relax and be entertained…

We need to restore election integrity and stop extending our elections past the general election day.

We need to hold our leaders accountable and true to the oath they swear, or affirm, when taking office.

We need to stop the out-of-control influx of illegal aliens across our borders and stop calling them undocumented immigrants. They are invaders.

We need to put a halt to this anti-American, anti-capitalist, anti-second amendment and freedom of speech movement by socialist and Marxist who live within our borders.

We need to continue to use cash, not digital money, so that the government has no way to account for every penny we spend. That’s our business, not the governments.

We need to put more emphasis on the rights of the Children of God, and less on what the LGBTQ wants to promote and change.

We need to vote into power those who understand that we have a US Constitution for the purpose of limiting government power and overreach and we need to vote people in who have the backbone to defend our rights and freedoms and protect and preserve our beloved US Constitution.

We need to do these things now, not later, and with conviction… As for those who win this Tuesday, you have got your work cut out for you. Let’s hit the ground running…

©CS Bennett. All rights reserved.

Who Authorized the Department of Homeland Security to Police Online Speech? Not Congress thumbnail

Who Authorized the Department of Homeland Security to Police Online Speech? Not Congress

By Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

Newly published documents obtained by the Intercept show the US government is actively shaping online discourse and policing speech. This invites a question: who gave them this authority?

When George W. Bush signed the Homeland Security Act in 2002, the goal was to improve national security by strengthening government at various levels and helping them identify and respond to threats, particularly terrorism.

”The continuing threat of terrorism, the threat of mass murder on our own soil, will be met with a unified, effective response,” said Bush. ”Dozens of agencies charged with homeland security will now be located within one cabinet department with the mandate and legal authority to protect our people.”

The law contained “severe privacy and civil liberties problems,” the ACLU argued, but the legislation enjoyed broad bipartisan support. Only nine Senators voted against it (eight Democrats and one Independent).

Bush tapped Tom Ridge as the first secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, but public policy experts admitted it was unclear precisely what the new department would do.

”The first challenge is to lower expectations,” Paul C. Light of the Brookings Institution told The New York Times. ”People should think they will be safer, but remember we have a long way to go.”

One thing not mentioned in the Homeland Security Act is free speech. The word “speech” does not appear on even one of the law’s 187 pages.

Nevertheless, newly-published documents published by The Intercept show the extent to which the DHS is now actively involved in using the power of the US government to shape online discourse and police speech by pressuring private platforms behind closed doors.

“In a March meeting, Laura Dehmlow, an FBI official, warned that the threat of subversive information on social media could undermine support for the U.S. government,” The Intercept wrote of one message. “Dehmlow, according to notes of the discussion attended by senior executives from Twitter and JPMorgan Chase, stressed that ‘we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable.’”

According to a copy of the DHS’s capstone report outlining top priorities in the coming years, the department intends to hold media accountable by targeting “inaccurate information” on a range of controversial topics such as “the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, racial justice, U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine.”

That DHS was seeking to police speech and shape online discourse was not in itself a revelation. In April 2022, the Biden administration announced the creation of a Disinformation Governance Board, but the initiative was paused after just three weeks over widespread public outcry after the board was dubbed “the Ministry of Truth” by critics.

What the Intercept’s story reveals is the overt pressure the government was exerting on private companies to censor speech. For example, the Intercept described a “formalized process” government officials used to flag content on platforms such as Instagram and Facebook to throttle or remove problematic content.

The story also shows how the revolving door between government and the corporate world created enthusiasm for DHS initiatives.

“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official said to DHS official Jen Easterly in a February text message, according to the Intercept.

Though the most overt government attempts to shape and censor online discourse began under the Biden administration, the road to DHS’s “Ministry of Truth” project began under the Trump administration.

In November 2018, following a series of high-profile cyber attacks, Trump signed into law legislation known as the CISA Act, which created the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), a standalone federal agency dedicated to fighting cyberterrorism.

Like the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the word “speech” doesn’t appear anywhere in the legislation. Nor do the words “misinformation” or “disinformation.” However, one line in the sprawling law (Section 318) contains these four words: “Social media working group.” It is presumably this line that led CISA to boast of its “evolved mission” to, in the words of the Intercept, “monitor social media discussions while ‘routing disinformation concerns’ to private sector platforms.”

In 2018, to respond to election disinformation, DHS created the Countering Foreign Influence Task Force and began flagging voting-related “disinformation” that appeared on social media platforms—even though the words “election” and “vote” appear nowhere in the CISA Act. By the following year, DHS was employing fifteen full- and part-time staff tasked with “disinformation analysis,” and in 2020 the department’s disinformation focus had expanded to include Covid-19.

In 2021, CISA created a “Misinformation, Disinformation and Malinformation” team—replacing the Countering Foreign Influence Task force—and disinformation agents were now focused on domestic transgressions as well foreign.

A law that had been passed to protect critical infrastructure in the US from cyber attacks was now being used to censor Americans on social media.

The mission creep of DHS is breathtaking. Nowhere in the Homeland Security Act or the CISA Act is the department authorized to police speech, yet since 2018 it has led the broadest and most dangerous assault on free expression in modern American history.

The newly published documents vindicate those who’ve argued the true threat to speech and online discourse is not “misinformation”—as many progressives contend—or woke tech companies—as many on the right have argued—but the government itself.

The reality is, the government is not uniquely benevolent, knowledgeable, or honest. In fact, governments are arguably the most dishonest organizations in history, and the US government is no exception, as some have noted.

“Our government produces lies and disinformation at industrial scale and always has,” journalist Jack Shafer wrote in Politico after the White House unveiled its disinformation board in April. “It overclassifies vital information to block its own citizens from becoming any the wiser. It pays thousands of press aides to play hide the salami with facts.”

To find evidence that government is not in the truth business, one need look no further than the DHS, who for the better part of a year targeted online “disinformation” that explored the possibility that the virus may have originated from a leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

While the origins of Covid-19 remain uncertain, government officials, media, and social media administrators treated the lab leak theory as a crackpot conspiracy unfit for discussion. For the better part of a year, people who speculated about the lab leak theory on platforms such as Facebook faced censorship and suspension, because of the DHS’s active role.

That the federal government—which had been funding the Wuhan lab and gain-of-function research—might have motives beyond altruism to suppress this narrative was conveniently ignored, as were pertinent facts. This included a US intelligence assessment in early 2020 that acknowledged the virus may have been released accidentally from an infectious diseases lab, as well as reports that State Department officials had previously acknowledged concerns about safety protocols in Wuhan.

By mid 2021 the White House itself had acknowledged the credibility of the lab leak theory, but only after DHS had waged a prolonged disinformation campaign against it.

Twenty years ago when the Department of Homeland Security was created, Democratic Senator Russ Feingold was one of the few Senators to vote against the Homeland Security Act.

“We have to protect both the people and their freedoms,” said Feingold while speaking of his broader opposition to the Bush administration’s War on Terror policies.

It’s now clear that Feingold was right when he said the laws failed to strike “the right balance between law enforcement and civil liberties.” In their effort to make people more safe, federal lawmakers created a bureaucracy that is now trampling the very rights it was created to protect, a fact that would not have surprised the 19th Century economist Frédéric Bastiat, who noted the state’s tendency to grow and become an oppressor of rights.

“Instead of checking crime, the law itself [has become] guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!” wrote the author of The Law.

The American Founders, in their quest to create a limited government to prevent this evil, created the First Amendment. It plainly states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…”

We now know the DHS has now been working quietly for years to abridge free speech, and it has done so with no explicit legal authority; the laws Congress passed speak not a whisper about regulating speech.

The Department of Homeland Security needs to be put in check, and it reminds us of an ancient question: quis custodiet ipsos custodes (who guards the guardians)?

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

Lions, Tigers, and Polar Bears – Oh, My! thumbnail

Lions, Tigers, and Polar Bears – Oh, My!

By The Daily Skirmish – Liberato.US

The 27th annual U.N. climate change conference (COP27) got underway in Egypt today.  This time, they promise to get down to business, but it doesn’t have anything to do with the climate.  It has to do with poor nations shaking down rich nations for money.

More on that in a moment, but we start with the fact the United Nations, which organized the conference, has a very bad track record on climate predictions.  It predicted in 1989 entire nations would be wiped off the face of the earth if global warming was not stopped by the year 2000.  It said global warming would be irreversible after that year.  Last week – 33 years later – it said we are very close to irreversible changes in the climate.  Ah yes, climate change is the fake religion of the future – and always will be.

But a bad track record of predictions didn’t stop the climate change crowd from cranking up the propaganda machine for this year’s conference.  The past eight years were the hottest on record, the U.N. screamed.  Except there was a 20-year pause in the rise of the global mean surface temperature of the earth ending in 2019 that the climate change crowd can’t explain.  Now we’re in a New Pause.  They don’t want to talk about that, either.  They also don’t want to talk about another one of their great deceptions – rising temperatures killing more older people than ever before.  The fact of the matter is that heat deaths among the elderly are not up significantly after you adjust for population growth.

But the glaciers are disappearing, we were told in the run-up to the conference.  They say the glaciers will all be gone by 2050, but in 1923 it was predicted the glaciers in Glacier National Park would be gone by 1950.  It didn’t happen.  So they changed their prediction to 1961, then to 2000, then to 2020.  Still didn’t happen. In fact, the glaciers in the park have actually gotten bigger in the last 30 years.  You can put the disappearing glaciers right next to the disappearing coral reefs and polar bears.  They didn’t happen, either.  You know, the climate liars really should give it a rest, especially after NPR let the mask slip last month and revealed recycling is a huge fraud on a gullible public.

But let’s get down to business – there’s money to be made.  Despite repeated failures by many nations to live up to past promises, this year’s conference will extract new promises from rich nations to redistribute wealth to poor nations in the name of climate change.  ‘Loss and damage funding’, they call it.  Rich nations must pay their fair share for causing the climate change that didn’t happen or wasn’t caused by human activity, you see.  How much money are we talking about?  As much as ten times the amount rich nations are forking over now.  Poor nations will need half a trillion dollars by 2050, the U.N. says.  But why be so miserly, and why wait?  Developing countries are demanding a trillion dollars a year right now.  We feel so guilty – how can we not give it to them?

Germany is knocking down wind turbines to make way for coal mining, and the leftist finance minister there now supports fracking to boost natural gas supplies.  Climate whiz kid Greta Thunberg won’t be happy until the entire capitalist system is overthrown.  Well, that puts the true agenda right out there, doesn’t it?  The whole phony climate agenda is continually being shown as unsustainable and for the fraud it really is.

But I’ll make you a deal:  I’ll agree to a new carbon tax on fossil fuels IF you’ll agree to child and slave labor taxes on the minerals in your electric car batteries, AND a tax on Chinese influence and Russian funding of American green groups, AND a data tampering tax.  Let’s call the last one the ‘hockey stick’ tax.  It should bring in a lot of money because the climate crowd keeps cooking the books.  I’d propose a failed predictions tax, but the U.N. couldn’t afford it.

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

RELATED ARTICLE: New research undermines Biden’s rhetoric on climate change

Colorado elementary school officials hid student gender transition from parents, emails show thumbnail

Colorado elementary school officials hid student gender transition from parents, emails show

By The Geller Report

There was a time, not too long ago, when the school nurse couldn’t give your child an aspirin or Tylenol without parental permission. This cannot stand. Whatever it takes to take back our children, regain our freedom must be done.

Colorado elementary school officials hid student gender transition from parents, emails show

By Jeremiah Poff, Washington Examiner, November 04, 2022:

Officials at an elementary school in Colorado discussed how to defy the wishes of parents who did not want the school to accommodate their child’s request to transition to a different gender socially.

According to internal emails obtained through a public-records request by the parent activist group Parents Defending Education, an official at Laurel Elementary School in Fort Collins, Colorado, asked administrators if they should disregard a parent’s request that their child be addressed by their legal name and pronouns corresponding to their biological sex.

“I’m wondering about what to do when an elementary school student has expressed their pronouns and chosen name but their parents directly tell school staff not to call the student by those pronouns,” the unnamed official said in an email dated April 4, 2022. “I feel very strongly about supporting the student but have heard that we legally have to follow the parents’ direction due to the age of the child (elementary school).”

The Laurel Elementary School administrator’s request for information was forwarded to a Poudre School District official, who directed the administrator to follow the student’s wishes for what name to be called but use the student’s legal name in conversations with the child’s parents.

“The school should use the student’s affirming name and pronouns at school and use their legal name and corresponding pronouns when talking with the family until they are supportive of the student’s new name and pronouns,” the email says.

Poudre School District did not respond to a request for comment.

Over the past year, school districts across the country have faced the ire of parents for facilitating so-called “social gender transitions” for students of all ages without the permission or knowledge of the child’s parent. The practice has led to several lawsuits and has prompted some elected officials to explore ways to ban the practice.

In a statement to the Washington Examiner, Parents Defending Education’s director of outreach, Erika Sanzi, blasted the school officials’ discussions as “unconscionable.”

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Left Destroyed Everything, and Now They Want A Free Pass

Watch these videos calling out Democrats as Racists, Pornographers, Groomers of Children and Unhinged

If You’re White and Fork Over $85,000, This Prestigious University Will Teach You to Hate Yourself

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

Google Is Shifting Votes On A Massive Scale, But A Solution Is At Hand thumbnail

Google Is Shifting Votes On A Massive Scale, But A Solution Is At Hand

By The Daily Caller

My research team is currently monitoring online political content being sent to voters in swing states through more than 2,500 computers owned by a politically-diverse group of registered voters (our “field agents”), and we are concerned about what we’re seeing.

We are aggregating and analyzing search results on the Google and Bing search engines, messages displayed on Google’s home page, autoplay videos suggested on YouTube, tweets sent to users by the Twitter company (as opposed to tweets sent by other users), email suppression on Gmail, and more.

We have so far preserved more than 1.9 million “ephemeral experiences” – exposure to short-lived content that impacts people and then disappears, leaving no trace – that Google and other companies are able to use to shift opinions and voting preferences, and we expect to have captured more than 2.5 million by Election Day. 

In emails leaked from Google to The Wall Street Journal in 2018, Googlers (that’s what they call themselves) discussed how they might be able to use “ephemeral experiences” to change people’s views about Trump’s travel ban. The company later denied that this plan was ever implemented, but leaked content (including multiple blacklists) and startling revelations by Tristan Harris, Zach Vorhies, and other whistleblowers show that Google is indeed out to remake the world in its own image. As the company’s CFO, Ruth Porat, said in a November 11th, 2016 video that leaked in 2018, “we will use the great strength and resources and reach we have” to advance Google’s values.

Since early 2016, my team has been developing and improving Neilsen-type monitoring systems that allow us to do to Google-and-the-Gang what they do to us and our children 24/7: to track their activity, and, specifically, to preserve that very dangerous and persuasive ephemeral content.

Since 2013, I have been conducting rigorous controlled experiments to quantify how persuasive that kind of content can be. I’ve so far identified about a dozen new forms of online manipulation that make use of ephemeral experiences, and nearly all these techniques are controlled exclusively by Google and, to a lesser extent, other tech companies. 

These new forms of influence are stunning in their impact. Search results that favor one candidate (in other words, that lead people who click on high-ranking results to web pages that glorify that candidate) can shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by up to 80 percent in some demographic groups after a single search. Carefully crafted search suggestions that flash at you while you are typing a search term can turn a 50/50 split among undecided voters into a 90/10 split with no one knowing they have been manipulated. A single question-and-answer interaction on a digital personal assistant can shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by more than 40 percent.

In 2020, the 1.5 million ephemeral experiences we aggregated from the computers of our 1,735 field agents showed us manipulations that were sufficient, in theory, to have shifted more than six million votes to Joe Biden (whom I supported) – again, without people knowing they were being manipulated. Among other findings: Google was sending more go-vote reminders to liberals and moderates than to conservatives; that’s a brazen and powerful manipulation that would go completely undetected unless someone was monitoring. 

Our preliminary analyses of the data we have collected so far in 2022 are equally disturbing. In swing states, and especially in Wisconsin, Arizona, and Florida, we are finding a high level of liberal bias in Google search results, but not in search results on Bing (the same pattern we have found in every election since 2016). In several swing states, 92 percent of the autoplay videos being fed to YouTube users are coming from liberal news sources (YouTube is owned by Google). Unless Google backs down, it will shift hundreds of thousands of votes on Election Day itself with those brazen targeted go-vote reminders – and we will catch them doing so.

That brings me to some surprisingly hopeful news. Just before the November 3, 2020 Presidential election, I was so unnerved by the extreme bias we were seeing in our data that I decided to go public. Ebony Bowden at the New York Post wrote a powerful story about election rigging that might have made the front page, but on October 30, after a phone call between an editor and a Google official, the piece was killed – no doubt because the Post was getting 45 percent of its online traffic from the company in question. 

On November 5, however, three U.S. Senators sent an intimidating letter to the CEO of Google summarizing my preliminary findings, and the company instantly turned off all manipulations in the Georgia Senate races.

We were monitoring those races through more than a thousand computers owned by a diverse and undetectable pool of real voters in Georgia, and not one received a go-vote reminder. Even more striking, political bias in Google search results dropped to zero. I had thought that such a feat would be impossible, but Vorhies explained that Google can turn bias on and off “like flipping a light switch.” He also pointed me to leaked company documents such as the manual for the company’s Twiddler software, used for “re-ranking” search results. 

Will the article you are now reading change the course of history? Will it cause Google to take its digital thumb off the scales in our midterm elections? Whatever Mr. Pichai, its CEO, decides to do, we will know, and we will preserve the evidence.

And this time, we will continue to expand the monitoring system, and we will be monitoring content going not just to voters but also to America’s children. By late 2023, we will have a digital shield in place – a panel of more than 20,000 field agents in all 50 states – and we will shame Big Tech into staying clear of our elections and our kids for many years to come.

AUTHOR

ROBERT EPSTEIN

Robert Epstein, Ph.D. (@DrREpstein), former editor-in-chief of Psychology Today, is senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology. A Ph.D. of Harvard University, he has published 15 books and more than 300 articles on AI and other topics. His 2019 Congressional testimony on Big Tech’s threat to democracy can be accessed at https://EpsteinTestimony.com. You can learn more about his research on online influence at https://MyGoogleResearch.com.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Democrat Political Violence Rages Against Republican Candidates, Staffers, Volunteers

‘Suspicious White Powder’ Sent To Kari Lake’s Campaign HQ, Prompting Police Response

George Soros Behind The Attacks on Musk and Free Speech

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

Former DOD Contract Translator Arrested for Alleged Ties to ISIS thumbnail

Former DOD Contract Translator Arrested for Alleged Ties to ISIS

By Michael Cutler

The ongoing threat of Jihad.


A former Department of Defense (DOD) contract interpreter, Mohammad Rafi Mohammadi has been arrested for allegedly having lied about his connection to ISIS in his application for a security clearance in conjunction with his employment by the DOD.

The arrest of this defendant is of great significance however, while information about this case has been published in several news reports but, incredibly, has not been reported by the Justice Department or any other federal agency.

Mohammadi is being prosecuted by the federal government and is alleged to have worked to assist ISIS, the group behind the bombing in Afghanistan that killed 13 American soldiers and grievously wounded many others.

Additionally, the news reports neglected to provide important insight into just how the alleged actions of the defendant may have done significant harm to U.S. national security or ask what should be obvious questions about the way that Mohammadi is being charged.

I will address these issues shortly, but first, let’s begin by reviewing information about this case that Rolling Stone’s article about the arrest provided in its October 18, 2022 report under the title:

CAUGHT

Feds Charge Pentagon Contractor With Lying About Ties to ISIS

Mohammad Rafi Mohammadi worked for the U.S. in Afghanistan. He was also allegedly helping the terrorist group behind a bombing that killed 13 American troops.

The Rolling Stone article began with this excerpt:

FEDERAL PROSECUTORS SAY a translator hired by the U.S. to work in Afghanistan lied about his contacts with recruiters for the terrorist group behind a notorious bombing that killed 13 American troops in August 2021.

In a federal criminal complaint filed in Kansas on Monday, the government says Mohammad Rafi Mohammadi communicated with, funded, and, in one case, sought to secure the release of recruiters for ISIS-Khorasan (ISIS-K) both before and after he worked for the U.S. as a linguist in Afghanistan.

Mohammadi allegedly denied “ever associat[ing] with anyone involved in activities to further terrorism” while filling out a security clearnace form for his linguist work in 2019. But FBI agents investigating him in the wake of the 2021 U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan say a trail of Facebook messages, social media posts, and the testimony of an informer contradict that account.

Experts say that, while lying on security clearance forms is illegal and subject to criminal penalties, prosecutions tend to be rare and reserved only for extreme cases. The case comes as thousands of interpreters, soldiers, and employees who fought ISIS-K and the Taliban beside the U.S.-led coalition are still struggling to find refuge inside the U.S. after Taliban rule.

This next excerpt is utterly impossible to understand:

The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment in time for publication. Rolling Stone was unable to reach Mohamaddi or an attorney representing him.

The Rolling Stone article also reported on Mohammadi’s alleged support of two recruiters for ISIS-K in this excerpt:

The Defense Department deployed Mohammadi to Afghanistan as a contract linguist in October 2019. Unbeknownst to the Pentagon, Mohammadi allegedly had a history of support for an ISIS-K recruiter prior to his travel to Afghanistan.

Investigators say he had been in contact with “Individual 1,” a man arrested by Afghanistan’s National Directorate of Security (NDS) for “recruiting militants for ISIS-K and deploying them to a specific province within Afghanistan” in February 2019.

Prosecutors didn’t name the alleged recruiter, but the description of him as the subject of a publicly announced arrest by NDS aligns with Abu Obaidullah Mutawakil, a jihadist preacher arrested in Kabul in February 2019. Mutawakil’s arrest was the only publicly announced arrest of an ISIS-K recruiter that month.

Mohammadi’s relationship with the individual appears to date at least to early January 2018, when the Kansas man Facebook messaged a friend in an attempt to get the recruiter’s phone number. Months later, Mohammadi allegedly sent the recruiter $400 via Western Union and published a video featuring him on his Facebook page in the wake of the recruiter’s February 2019 arrest.

Once deployed to Afghanistan in October 2019, Mohammadi appears to have raised little suspicion except for a brief incident when “he attempted to sneak back onto the military base, as he left the base without permission,” according to investigators.

While in the country, Mohammadi allegedly tried to help a second ISIS-K recruiter, referred to in court documents as “Individual 2,” after an arrest. Afghanistan’s NDS arrested Individual 2 for “recruiting students to join ISIS-K and encouraging them to carry out terrorist attacks” in July 2019. Mohammadi allegedly told an FBI informant that he had tried to help secure the man’s release while working as a linguist in Afghanistan

Now let’s dig deeper into the serious implications that this case has for America’s national security.

Generally the arrest and prosecution of an individual associated with a known terrorist organization would be the subject of a Justice Department (DOJ) news release and likely a well-attended news conference.  However, as I noted in the beginning of my article today, the has, to date, not made any public announcements about this case.  Here the DOJ was not even willing to respond to a direct question and provide information to a news organization about the arrest of an alleged affiliate of ISIS-K.

It is also hard to understand why Mohamaddi was only charged with lying on his application for the security clearance required for his employment as a translator for the DOD but has not been charged with providing material support to a terrorist organization.

Another issue that should be addressed is Mohamaddi’s immigration status.  If he was born in the United States he would certainly be a United States citizen.  However, if he entered the United States as an alien, then his applications to secure entry into the United States must be scrutinized to see if he lied on his immigration applications, just as he alleged to have lied in his security application.  This is of great importance, because if he committed fraud in his immigration applications and that fraud can be proven, he would be subject to deportation (removal) from the United States after his criminal prosecution is completed and he completes his prison sentence, presuming he is found guilty.

If he is found guilty of assisting ISIS, his continuing presence in the United States would clearly pose a clear and present danger to national security and public safety.  His deportation would eliminate that threat.

Translators hold positions of extreme sensitivity.  This is a fact that I am intimately familiar with, as an INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) special agent I frequently worked with translators.

Translators, of necessity, serve as the eyes, ears and mouths of the agents and intelligence officers who work with them and also act in the eyes ears and mouths of the individuals who are interviewed.  Translators may be given access to sensitive documents.

Translators are able to identify agents and potential informants, putting their lives at risk.  The information that is discussed is highly sensitive and provides the translator with sensitive information that has potential national security implications.

A rogue translator may lie about the responses being given by an individual who is being interviewed.  This would undermine the integrity of the vetting process that is vital to prevenient terrorists from entering the United States by concealing their association with terrorist organizations or other derogatory information.

The arrest of this alleged affiliate of ISIS is a bit of positive news, however, how many more such individuals have succeeded in infiltrating our agencies that are charged with protecting America and Americans?

In the days, weeks and months after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 politicians from both political parties and at all levels of government demanded to know why no one had “connected the dots” to anticipate that America was vulnerable to a massive terror attacks.

Ultimately the 911 Commission was formed to conduct an extensive and in-depth investigation into how the terrorists were able to successfully target the United States an the worst terror attack ever carried out on U.S. soil.

In point of fact, I provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission.

It did not take long for the 9/11 Commission to determine that multiple failures of the immigration system enabled terrorists, and not only the 19 hijacker terrorists who carried out the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, to easily enter the United States by various means, most often by committing immigration fraud, that enabled them to embed themselves in communities around the United States as they made their deadly preparations.

In addition to providing testimony to the 9/11 Commission and testifying before numerous hearings in the House and Senate I have written a number of articles in which I attempted to “Connect the dots”-

Here are five such articles:

The Biden administration must now order an audit of every case that involved Translator Mohammad Rafi Mohammadi’s “services.”

However, I am not optimistic that this will happen under the “leadership” of Joe Biden or DHS Secretary Mayorkas .  My recent article, For the Biden Administration, National Security is ‘Mission Irrelevant’ explored some of the vulnerabilities that have been exacerbated by the Biden administration.

We The People must contact our Senators and Congressional Representatives and make it clear that they must act on behalf of national security and the safety of all Americans.   This is not a “Left” issue or a “Right” issue but an American issue.

The clock is ticking and time is not on our side!

©Michael Cutler. All rights reserved.

Watch these videos calling out Democrats as Racists, Pornographers, Groomers of Children and Unhinged thumbnail

Watch these videos calling out Democrats as Racists, Pornographers, Groomers of Children and Unhinged

By Dr. Rich Swier

Well this is the Monday before Tuesday, November 8th, 2022 Midterm Elections.

We decided to do a compilation of video clips to show the difference between the Republican and Democrat agendas.

First here are two political ads about Democrats and their anti-white racism and grooming of underaged children in public schools.

This Anti-Racist Ad Running In Georgia Is Driving the Left INSANE

Racist Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez Perpetuates the Anti-White Narrative

New Ad Calls Out Democrats for Putting Pornographic Groomer Content In Classrooms

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on the plan to deal With “Violent Republicans”

And finally, we have a deranged transgender who believes ‘He’ can prove boys and girls are the same

Thanks for watching these videos. Please vote RED or America is DEAD.

Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

If You’re White and Fork Over $85,000, This Prestigious University Will Teach You to Hate Yourself

Biden Shouts “No More Drilling. There is no more drilling!” at New York Rally

‘Truly sick and demented’: NPR trounced for airing ‘nauseating’ audio of an abortion, comparing procedure to childbirth

Alert: Hazmat Responds to Possible Terror Situation at Kari Lake Campaign HQ

RELATED VIDEO: Republican Congressman Jim Jordan Reveals Judiciary Committee Agenda if GOP Wins Midterms

Border Numbers Worsened in October, Including Historic Number of ‘Known Gotaways’ thumbnail

Border Numbers Worsened in October, Including Historic Number of ‘Known Gotaways’

By Federation for American Immigration Reform

Washington, D.C. — Border Patrol agents apprehended nearly 210,000 illegal aliens at the southern border last month, according to preliminary numbers obtained by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). The numbers, first reported by The Washington Times, show yet another rise in the level of chaos triggered by Biden administration policies.

The numbers obtained by FAIR reveal that Border Patrol agents apprehended approximately 209,664 illegal aliens at our southern border in October. Agents tallied another 86,796 “known gotaways” — migrants that they spotted crossing, but were unable to apprehend due to a focus on processing. This is believed to be the highest number of “known gotaways” ever detected and paints an even grimmer picture of a crisis that is a direct result of the Biden administration’s deliberate sabotage of our nation’s immigration laws.

While these numbers are preliminary, 209,664 illegal border crossers amounts to a 30% increase compared to October 2021, when agents tallied 159,113 apprehensions. The numbers also trounce the last few years of the Trump administration, when roughly 69,000 were caught in October 2020, and just 35,000 were nabbed in October 2019.

What is even more alarming is the fact that these preliminary numbers do not reveal how many of the nearly 210,000 illegal aliens who were apprehended last month were released into American communities. However, based on past trends, the figure is likely to be more than half. Even worse, the 86,796 “gotaways” are particularly worrisome because agents have reason to believe those who have criminal records or are on the terror watch list are among those sneaking through.

“We are quickly approaching the end of a catastrophic two years for border security, and consequently, for the American people. The primary responsibility of the federal government is to protect Americans and our interests. President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas have knowingly, willfully, and consistently violated that responsibility,” said Dan Stein, president of FAIR. “We have never seen such numbers in our history, and the Biden administration’s open-borders policies are solely to blame.”

“These are numbers the American people have a right to see within what was once a traditional time window, and we are glad to assist,” Stein continued. “The Biden administration cannot continue to cover up what is happening by waiting until after business hours in the second half of the following month to release its data.”

“Working in partnership with the White House, Secretary Mayorkas continues to purposefully ignore our nation’s immigration laws while abandoning policies of the previous administration that were designed to keep our borders secure and the American people safe,” charged Stein. “On that basis alone, Mayorkas must be brought up on impeachment charges in the next Congress. The fact is this: Nothing will improve until there is a public servant leading DHS who believes in borders—and secure ones at that.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Long-Distance Migrants Hit High Water Mark at Southern Border … With More to Come

EDITORS NOTE: This FAIR report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Federal Judge Orders School to Announce Conservative Student’s Statement on Proposal 3 thumbnail

Federal Judge Orders School to Announce Conservative Student’s Statement on Proposal 3

By Thomas More Law Center

ANN ARBOR, MI — Finding that Skyline High School sought “to silence Plaintiffs’ appropriate speech as to Proposal 3,” Federal District Court Judge, Paul D. Borman, on November 4, ordered the school to read the conservative senior and Republican Club President’s statement “over the Skyline High School’s public address service during ordinary announcements on Monday, November 7, 2022.”  The Court granted the Plaintiffs’ request for a Temporary Restraining Order once the announcement was modified to meet the Court’s concern.  Nevertheless, despite Skyline’s continued objection to the modified announcement, the Court ordered the following announcement to be read:

Attention Students

Are you interested in joining our efforts to protect the health of women and children.

If proposal 3 is passed it would eliminate health and safety regulations, legalize late term and partial birth abortion, no longer require physicians to perform abortions, and eliminate informed consent laws.

If so, email us at skylinerepublicanclub@gmail. com

On November 1, the Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), a national nonprofit public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed the federal lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan against the Ann Arbor Public Schools and officials of Skyline High School located in Ann Arbor, Michigan.  The lawsuit, claiming blatant discrimination, alleging several violations of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the Equal Access Act, was filed on behalf of David Nielsen and his minor son, (“Plaintiff”), a senior and president of the Republican Club and the Republican Club as a separate plaintiff.

Erin Mersino, TMLC’s Chief of Supreme Court and Appellate Practice is handling the case.  She commented, “The Constitution protects a student’s right to have a different viewpoint from others and share it within the walls of a public school.  How else will students learn tolerance toward opinions to which they disagree or how to thrive in our pluralistic society?”  The Supreme Court cautioned against viewpoint discrimination in the schools, warning it creates “enclaves of totalitarianism.”

Richard Thompson, TMLC President, stressed that one of TMLC’s main goals is defending students’ rights: “Public schools across our nation are stifling the free speech of conservative students and organizations.  We are working to defend their constitutional rights — rights which the Supreme Court so famously said, they do not lose by merely entering the schoolhouse gate.”

Skyline High School officials routinely have allowed students and student groups to share pro-choice and left leaning viewpoints over its public address system to promote abortion, Roe v. Wade, and Planned Parenthood.  The school has also allowed student clubs to promote the Black Lives Matter movement, express views on the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin trial, promote the idea of climate change, and promote the visit of a democratic congresswoman seeking re-election.  In short, Skyline High School’s record shows it does not hesitate to share certain viewpoints over the morning announcements.

After Plaintiffs submitted their announcement, they received an email from the school stating that “your announcement is not going to be read or posted due to its political nature.”  That same day, Plaintiffs met with the principal’s secretary who rejected the announcement and confirmed that the announcement was not read because, in his opinion, it was “political.”  Given the school’s history of allowing other viewpoints to be shared freely, the school’s process and decision did not appear fair.

TMLC then sent a letter to the Ann Arbor Public Schools on behalf of Plaintiffs, requesting that the announcement be read.  A few days later, they responded to TMLC but denied wrongdoing, while continuing to censor Plaintiffs’ speech.  The next day, on November 1, TMLC filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.  The lawsuit, which claims blatant discrimination, alleges that the school violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and the Equal Access Act.

On November 2, TMLC filed a motion for a temporary restraining order, asking the Court to require that the announcement be shared over the school’s public address system at the earliest possible time.  The Court held a hearing on November 4.  The hearing lasted approximately 1.5 hours.  At the end of the hearing, Judge Borman announced that the motion would be granted and published his ruling shortly afterward.

In his ruling, Judge Borman found that the “Plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their First Amendment claim” and further that “Defendants seek to silence Plaintiffs’ appropriate speech by refusing to broadcast it with their morning announcements.” 

Judge Borman’s order respects the idea that all students and student clubs should be treated equally, and none favored.

TUNE IN TO AUN-TV’s Election Night ‘The Uncensored 2022 Election Results’ Show thumbnail

TUNE IN TO AUN-TV’s Election Night ‘The Uncensored 2022 Election Results’ Show

By Conservative Commandos Radio Show

Please join me Tuesday night at 7:00 p.m. EST on the AUN-TV network for my take on the 2022 election results. 

Please go to www.AUN-TV.com for the “Watch Live” links.


The AUN-TV Network broadcasts on 11 TV stations in California and Nevada.

Our live stream web site is, www.AUN-TV.com

For our viewers and listeners who are not near one of our broadcast towers, we are directing everyone to go to our website for the “WATCH LIVE” links on Youtube and Facebook.

We are broadcasting the national election returns on the “Watch Live” links on Youtube and Facebook from 7:00 PM to 2:00 AM Eastern Standard Time on Tuesday night November 8th, 2022 on the AUN-TV Network and live streaming on Youtube and Facebook.

Please help us to publicize this unique Midterm 2022 Uncensored Election Night Coverage appearance and share our broadcast by posting it on your social media as much as you can.

Again, please direct your family and friends to our web site, www.AUN-TV.com for the watch live links on Youtube and Facebook.

©AUN-TV. All rights reserved.

Islamic Republic of Iran: Youths knocking off turbans of Muslim clerics as part of anti-regime protests thumbnail

Islamic Republic of Iran: Youths knocking off turbans of Muslim clerics as part of anti-regime protests

By Jihad Watch

This may seem at first glance to be gratuitous, rude, juvenile, etc. But it must be seen against the backdrop of 40 years of women being harassed, threatened and imprisoned for not wearing hijab.

These days I’ve been receiving many videos from inside Iran where schoolgirls & boys knock turbans off clerics as part of anti regime protests.

Removing the turbans of clerics has turned into an act of protest after regime killed hundreds of innocent protesters. #MahsaAmini pic.twitter.com/guoOrwIhca

— Masih Alinejad 🏳️ (@AlinejadMasih) November 2, 2022

If you really want to know why knocking off turbans of clerics has become a sport in Iran, just watch this video, then you will understand their anger the teenagers. For years clerics have been harassing women in the streets for hijab.#MahsaAmini

pic.twitter.com/vbbAjr0Avy

— Masih Alinejad 🏳️ (@AlinejadMasih) November 6, 2022

#Iran: Following the “Knock the turban off” trend, Iranian Shiite clerics started appearing in public without their turbans

I see a lot of symbolism here – the ongoing protests started because demonstrators wanted to fight for a woman’s right to walk in public without… (1/2) pic.twitter.com/cYuBLGJtw1

— AbuAliEnglish (@AbuAliEnglishB1) November 6, 2022

Youths in Iran hit and strike turbans of Islamic clerics in protest against hijab, videos viral

OpIndia, November 6, 2022:

Visuals of young Iranians knocking clerics’ turbans off their heads have gone viral on social media as protests over the execution of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini in Iran intensify. As part of the ongoing protests against the authoritarian government that makes hijabs obligatory, many videos of schoolboys and girls striking clerics’ turbans and running away have gone extremely viral on social media.

In one video that has gone viral, a young lady can be seen approaching a man wearing a traditional robe from behind and striking his white turban hard enough to cause it to fall to the ground. The Muslim preacher bends down to pick up his headpiece as the woman departs without turning around.

International anxiety over Iran’s response to the protests has increased, prompting a new form of protest. Iran’s authorities warned demonstrators to leave the streets, yet demonstrations nonetheless took place. Social media users posted videos demonstrating that the protests are still going strong.

The public’s worries about Iran’s response to the demonstrations are growing as a result of this unique display of contempt for the nation’s religious establishment. According to reports, hundreds of people were killed by Iranian security forces during the protests that broke out when Mahsa Amini, 22, died while being held by Iran’s morality police after being arrested for improperly donning her headscarf….

It is worth emphasising that women in Iran are forced to wear a hijab, which covers the head and neck and hides the hair, under Islamic law, which has been in place since the 1979 revolution. While Iranian women battle to be emancipated from the restrictions of headscarves, the hijab is used to further the Islamic agenda across the world.

AUTHOR

ROBERT SPENCER

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden: Afghanistan is ‘a godforsaken place. It’s a godforsaken place.’

Sweden: Five Muslim migrants rape young Swedish woman on a playground

Germany: After knife attack by Somali Muslim migrant, public broadcaster fires journalist for criticizing Somalia

Why the Jihadist Hebron Mayor Is Paying Palestinians to Kill Dogs

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

In Final Arizona Push, Blake Masters Blasts The Washington Establishment thumbnail

In Final Arizona Push, Blake Masters Blasts The Washington Establishment

By Tristan Justice

‘My job is to win with or without Mitch McConnell’s money, and I think we’re on track to win without,’ Masters told The Federalist.

PHOENIX — Arizona Republican Senate nominee Blake Masters, a political novice who has never run for elected office, is in a statistical tie with Democrat incumbent Mark Kelly heading into Election Day, and he’s done it without much help from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

“My job is to win with or without Mitch McConnell’s money, and I think we’re on track to win without,” Masters told The Federalist in an exclusive interview on the first day of his finalé bus tour this past weekend.

Two months ago, McConnell’s super PAC to reclaim the majority in the upper chamber opened September with an axe to the rest of its planned spending against Kelly. With Masters down 6 points in the polls against a Democrat who narrowly captured the seat just two years ago, the Senate Leadership Fund gutted $18 million from the race. Kelly won by fewer than 80,000 votes in 2020 and tied himself to an unpopular president over his two years as a senator, voting 95 percent of the time with the Biden White House agenda. Instead, McConnell bankrolled the defense of GOP Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, spending more than $5 million in a race between two Republicans.

“I try not to feel entitled to other people’s money,” Masters told The Federalist on Saturday. “That’s a left-wing value. I’d be like [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] if I felt entitled to other people’s money. So when Mitch McConnell cut funding for Arizona, I could have gotten mad, I could have just started throwing bombs at him in the media, but I didn’t.”

Masters didn’t need to. Where McConnell has chosen to spend money this cycle speaks for itself. Instead of throwing support and funding behind Masters to flip a seat to the GOP, he has bent over backward to protect old-guard Republicans from insurgent GOP candidates who have pledged not to support the octogenarian lawmaker for another term in leadership, even if it means sacrificing chances to reclaim a Senate majority.

If Masters prevails on Tuesday without McConnell’s aid, it will be yet another sign of the new era of Republican politics, in which young, populist outsiders forge a new GOP without asking the establishment for permission.

Masters, who announced during the crowded state primary that he would cast his vote for a more conservative alternative for leader should one arise, never bowed to McConnell in order to garner the Republican Senate chief’s approval and the money that comes with it. McConnell made clear this fall that his money comes with strings attached, and Masters was willing to cut them.

“I’ve said I’m going to vote for the most conservative person running,” Masters told The Federalist, maintaining a posture of defiance to the party establishment that has come to define his campaign.

A New Generation of Republican Leadership

As far as McConnell is concerned, the threat Masters poses is about more than a vote for Senate leadership. It’s also about the generational change Masters represents: a new brand of bold, conservative populism that the candidate pledges to bring to the upper chamber, undermining old-guard Republicanism altogether.

In many ways, Masters is a traitor to his class. A privileged elite from Silicon Valley with degrees from Stanford and Stanford Law, Masters left the fortune of California’s lucrative tech industry to run as a conservative populist for the Arizona Senate seat held by Kelly, an astronaut. Like Ohio’s J.D. Vance, who is also running as a first-time candidate this cycle, Masters is a protégé of billionaire venture capitalist Peter Thiel, a rare conservative operating in the belly of left-wing America. Thiel pumped $15 million into each campaign through the primaries. If Vance, 38, and Masters, 36 — both of whom rail against Big Tech as a menace to democracy — prevail on Tuesday, they will represent ex-Silicon Valley insiders working to reshape conservatism and the Republican Party itself.

Their message has clearly picked up steam among a Republican base energized to turn out for their respective candidates in the midterms, which are historically hostile to the president’s party. During the final days of the primary campaign in Arizona, Masters maintained the momentum he built over the contest with a double-digit lead in the polls: He beat the runner-up by 12 points for the nomination.

Activists Energized by Masters’ Appeal

Vincent La is a 27-year-old software engineer from California who moved to Arizona in May of last year, alienated by the far-left takeover of the Golden State. As the sun set over the Arizona desert Friday night, La was preparing to canvass for the Republican slate of candidates in the Phoenix suburbs with local congressional candidate Kelly Cooper and several activists. None looked older than 30.

La said this year is the most involved he’s ever been in an election. He pointed to Masters as his favorite candidate, even during the primary.

“I thought he knew what time it was,” La told The Federalist, saying Masters’ antagonism of Big Tech’s empire motivated his vote. “I thought he knew what Republicans needed to do.” Others cited the candidate’s contagious energy.

Ariane Buse also recently fled California for Arizona, disillusioned by the former’s downward spiral under left-wing leaders. Asked in the packed auditorium of Scottsdale’s Dream City Church, the last leg of Masters’ bus tour on Saturday, if she trusted Masters considering his background as a first-time candidate coming from California, Buse was unconcerned and complimented his intensity.

“I think he’s young, he’s excited to do something, he’s from Tuscon, he knows what this state needs. I think he’s got great energy,” Buse told The Federalist.

If Masters was tired on the sixth and final stop of just day one of a three-day bus tour, it was hardly noticeable. On stage, he attacked inflation, the media, and the border crisis, particularly highlighting the fentanyl flooding the country as “poison.”

“I’m refusing the term ‘overdosing,’” Masters said, describing victims of the crisis as being “poisoned,” while he blasted “limousine liberals” and “champagne socialists” as apathetic to the problems their policies create.

It’s the kind of forceful rhetoric Republican voters have come to expect of their leaders, and it’s why Masters has resonated with grassroots conservatives in Arizona.

Ashley Earle is a mother of three children who lives in Scottsdale with her husband. She grew up in Arizona, married her high school sweetheart, and moved their family to the Virginia Appalachians before recently returning home. She homeschools the kids while her husband runs a small business, coping with inflation as they cling to the American dream they’ve found in the Grand Canyon state. Americans everywhere are struggling with rising prices, but Central Arizona is suffering the highest rate of inflation in the entire country.

Earle didn’t hesitate when asked outside the Dream City Church auditorium the first thing that comes to mind when she hears the name “Blake Masters.”

“I love his passion,” she said with a smile, comparing their families, which both have three young children. “He understands what it’s like to be a parent in our age group.”

When asked her thoughts about Republican leadership, Earle’s smile dissipated.

“I feel like they’re afraid of Blake,” she said.

When pressed backstage on what his success thus far, without support from the top elected Republican in the country, means for the party, Masters said it shows what voters are looking for.

“I think it kind of shows I’m more in touch with what people want right now,” Masters said. “I’m running on this very bold but very commonsense America First agenda. It’s not complicated.”

It also shows that the America First agenda, which was put forth by President Donald Trump six years ago and dubbed “Trumpsim,” has begun to transcend that label and become a larger movement beyond the man himself. Kari Lake, a local charismatic news anchor who left her nearly 30-year television career to run for governor, was greeted at the final stop as a rock star after campaigning on a Trump-inspired “Arizona First” agenda.

The state’s Republican Senate and gubernatorial candidates are running as a ticket, encouraging Arizonans to vote “Lake and Blake.”

The Tide Is Already Turning in Washington

Masters has been able to capitalize on the few D.C. institutions and individuals who are responsive to the grassroots activists who make up the Republican base, betting that the way to win elections moving forward is to cater to the people and not the pundits.

Kelli Ward, the chairwoman of the Arizona Republican Party, explained over lunch in south Phoenix that this year’s slate of candidates aligned against the coastal establishment was a directive for Washington to heed the shift in mood.

“The politicians have to remember who they work for, and I think that in Arizona we sent that message,” said Ward.

After McConnell pulled $18 million from Masters’ competitive contest only to dump $5 million into Alaska, other groups such as Heritage Action for America began jumping in to fill the gap. The Sentinel Action Fund, a project of Heritage Action to support candidates with widespread support among the grassroots, has put more than $8 million behind Masters and against his well-funded opponent, who is battling for re-election with nearly $80 million. The group did the same for Gen. Don Bolduc in New Hampshire, pumping more than $2.15 million into the GOP bid to unseat incumbent Democrat Sen. Maggie Hassan after McConnell axed $5.6 million for the Granite State. Last month, Bolduc joined Masters in maintaining opposition to McConnell for another term as Senate leader.

Florida Sen. Rick Scott, the National Republican Senatorial Committee chairman, has spent more on Masters’ race than on any other candidate this cycle. Scott, who publicly admonished McConnell in September when the minority leader trashed the quality of this year’s candidates, has put nearly $10 million from the NRSC behind the Arizona effort to bring down Kelly.

After months of campaigning tied the polls against the odds, local GOP leaders worry that Masters still might lose over low turnout brought by complacency and that a revolution in the Republican Party might fail. If Republicans want to win — and they want to win with generational change in Washington — they will need to show up to the voting booth.

*****

This article is published at The Federalist and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

How Not to Vote in Arizona

Election Day is tomorrow – Tuesday, November 8th. The system for voting in Arizona is predominantly by mail-in ballots (around 80% of all ballots – 90% in Maricopa County).

If you have not submitted your mail-in ballot yet, DO NOT MAIL IT IN OR ‘DROP IT OFF’  ON TUESDAY AT YOUR POLLING STATION. It won’t be counted on Tuesday and may not be counted for many days or at all. 

If you have failed to ‘mail-in’ your ballot yet, surrender the ballot at the polling station on Tuesday, show your driver’s license and actually fill out a new ballot and vote in person. Your vote will be tabulated and counted for the evening announcement of election results.

Biden’s Family Got “Interest-Free,” “Forgivable” Loan From China, New Evidence Reveals thumbnail

Biden’s Family Got “Interest-Free,” “Forgivable” Loan From China, New Evidence Reveals

By The Editors

President Joe Biden has made waves this fall with his plan to forgive hundreds of billions of dollars of student loans, shifting the burden to taxpayers. Five years earlier, his family cashed in on a zero-interest, forgivable loan of its own from an energy company in communist China, according to evidence in the possession of the FBI.

The loan arrangement, confirmed in documents obtained by Just the News and also new information released by Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), shows the Chinese energy firm CEFC Beijing International Energy Company Limited understood the transaction would benefit Joe Biden’s family (referred to as “BD family” in the emails), but it also was creating heartburn with its own compliance/risk management officers.

The Chinese company’s leaders “fully support the framework of establishing the JV (joint venture), based on their trust on BD family,” stated a July 26, 2017 email from a CEFC official to Tony Bobulinski, a Hunter Biden business partner at the time. The email was written in part to explain why there had been a delay in getting the money to a firm called SinoHawk associated with the future president’s son and brother, Hunter Biden and James Biden, respectively.

“The delay of wire is caused by the details on the JV building, as follows: 1) the positioning and strategy of the JV are not made fully clear to CEFC 2) 5 million is lent to BD family in the 10 million charter capital. How will this 5 million be used (or the 10 million as a whole)? This 5 million loan to BD family is interest-free,” the email stated…..

*****

Continue reading  this article at Just the News.

TAKE ACTION

How Not to Vote in Arizona

Election Day is tomorrow – Tuesday, November 8th. The system for voting in Arizona is predominantly by mail-in ballots (around 80% of all ballots – 90% in Maricopa County).

If you have not submitted your mail-in ballot yet, DO NOT MAIL IT IN OR ‘DROP IT OFF’  ON TUESDAY AT YOUR POLLING STATION. It won’t be counted on Tuesday and may not be counted for many days or at all. 

If you have failed to ‘mail-in’ your ballot yet, surrender the ballot at the polling station on Tuesday, show your driver’s license and actually fill out a new ballot and vote in person. Your vote will be tabulated and counted for the evening announcement of election results.

We Must Have Accountability thumbnail

We Must Have Accountability

By Editorial Staff

By Justin Hart / Brownstone Institute

The failures and harms from our pandemic public policies are legion!

Fauci-endorsed lockdowns were ineffective (and damaging!); risks from COVID-19 are not uniform for the entire population but directly aligned to your age; the mortality impact on children is almost immeasurable but we burdened them with mandates and school closures; mask mandates have shown zero impact on quelling the spread of the virus; denied by Fauci and Co., natural immunity offers strong protection; and vaccines (designed for a 2-year-old variant) have proven ineffectual at stopping the current crop of feared COVID variants.

Dr. Fauci and his cadre of unelected health officials were on the wrong side of every one of these outcomes. They were made aware of every data point above but their one-size-fits-all policies have not changed in the face of the evidence. In their minds, there is only the panic.

Recently, Professor Emily Oster of Brown University, admits in a recent article that interventions like social distancing “were totally misguided” but begs for amnesty for the serious damage wrought by health overlords like Dr. Fauci.

*****

This article was published by Brownstone Institute and is reproduced with permission.

Photo credit: DonkeyHotey

TAKE ACTION

How Not to Vote in Arizona

Election Day is tomorrow – Tuesday, November 8th. The system for voting in Arizona is predominantly by mail-in ballots (around 80% of all ballots – 90% in Maricopa County).

If you have not submitted your mail-in ballot yet, DO NOT MAIL IT IN OR ‘DROP IT OFF’  ON TUESDAY AT YOUR POLLING STATION. It won’t be counted on Tuesday and may not be counted for many days or at all. 

If you have failed to ‘mail-in’ your ballot yet, surrender the ballot at the polling station on Tuesday, show your driver’s license and actually fill out a new ballot and vote in person. Your vote will be tabulated and counted for the evening announcement of election results.

Trump is right DeSantis is ‘sanctimonious’ because he is filled with ‘religious devotion, piety & righteousness’ thumbnail

Trump is right DeSantis is ‘sanctimonious’ because he is filled with ‘religious devotion, piety & righteousness’

By Dr. Rich Swier

The legacy media always looks for a way to demonize, denigrate and divide Republicans. The latest attempt was to use President Trump’s off handed comment calling Florida Governor Ron DeSantis “DeSanctimonious.”

As Raw Story reporter Bob Brigham wrote,

Chris Brennan of the Philadelphia Inquirer reported, “Trump is now 40 minutes into his Latrobe rally and has spent far more time talking about Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Mitch McConnell (and his wife), Adam Schiff, Hunter Biden and others than he has about the guys he endorsed on Tuesday’s ballot, Mehmet Oz and Doug Mastriano.”

Trump then turned his attention to a poll of the competition to be the GOP 2024 nominee and had the numbers put on the big screen.

“We’re winning big, big, big in the Republican Party for the nomination like nobody has ever seen before,” Trump said.

“There it is, Trump at 71%, Ron DeSantimonious at 10%, Mike Pence at 7% — oh, Mike’s doing better than I thought,” Trump said.

What is most telling is that’s exactly what Governor DeSantis is sanctimonious.

Ron DeSantis is filled with piety, righteousness and is religiously devoted to those that he serves as governor of the Sunshine state. Ron DeSantis puts God and family first. His service to the nation in the U.S. Navy, in the Congress and now as Governor of Florida have one thing in common, duty to others over oneself.

Governor DeSantis is anything but hypocritical, rather he’s as honest and forthright as Abe Lincoln.

He has come to be know as TopGov because of what he has done for the people of Florida since his election.

DeSantis has made Florida pro-parent, pro-life, safe, secure, a great place to move to and start a business. He stands on his record and rightly so.

DeSantis has also turned Florida from a swing state into a deep RED state.

Floridians are set to reelect Governor DeSantis on November 8th, 2022.

President Trump, who lives in Florida at Mar-a-Lago understands this. President Trump has endorsed Governor DeSantis.

This comment has been both overblown and used to hammer DeSantis and Trump. It’s what Democrats do today. Why? Because they cannot run on their record, so they lie about their opponents.

It is becoming clear that President Trump 45 will run to become President Trump 47.

The question is not if, but what, position Ron DeSantis will hold in the Trump 47 administration.

Vice President? Secretary of Defense, after all DeSantis is a Navy SEAL. Secretary of State? The options are endless.

Or will Governor DeSantis stay in Florida for his full 4-year term and then run for President of the United States?

Governor Ron DeSantis is devoted to the 3 “Fs”—Faith, Family and Freedom.

We can envision a President Ron DeSantis 48 and 49.

How about you?

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

BREAKING REPORT: DeSantis camp crushes claims he met with Kevin McCarthy / Paul Ryan in effort to plot a 2024 primary against Donald Trump, calls them ‘completely false’…

— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) November 6, 2022

The States With the Best [and Worst] Business Tax Climate thumbnail

The States With the Best [and Worst] Business Tax Climate

By Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

Here’s the map showing how states rank. The best states are blue and the worst states are dark grey—VIEW MAP


Because I dedicated last week to European fiscal policy, I didn’t get a chance to write about the Tax Foundation’s latest version of the State Business Tax Climate Index, which was released October 25.

Last year, the top-4 states were Wyoming, South Dakota, Alaska, and Florida. This year’s report, authored by Janelle Fritts and Jared Walczak, says the top-4 states are… (drum roll, please) …exactly the same.

Here’s the map showing how states rank.

The best states are blue and the worst states are dark grey.

Coincidentally, the bottom-4 states also stayed constant. New Jersey is in last place, followed by New York, California, and Connecticut.

But there were some very interesting changes if you look at the other 42 states.

Thanks to pro-growth tax reforms, Arizona and Oklahoma both jumped 5 spots in the past year.

The state of Washington suffered a huge fall, dropping 13 spots thanks to the imposition of a capital gains tax (the state constitution supposedly bars any taxes on income – and voters last fall overwhelmingly voted against the capital gains tax – but it appears the state’s politicians and a negligent judiciary may combine to put the state on a very bad path).

It’s also interesting to look at long-run trends. If you compare this year’s Index with the original 2014 Index, you’ll find that three states have jumped by at least 10 spots and three states have dropped by at least 10 spots.

Oregon            -15       North Carolina   +21

Washington   -15       Kentucky             +17

Virginia          – 10      Tennessee            +10

Since I’m a Virginia resident, this is not encouraging news.

P.S. As I’ve noted before, the rankings for Alaska and Wyoming are somewhat misleading. Both states have lots of energy production and their state governments collect enormous amounts of taxes from that sector. This allows them to keep other taxes low while still financing bloated state budgets.

This International Liberty blog was republished with permission.

AUTHOR

Daniel J. Mitchell

Daniel J. Mitchell is a Washington-based economist who specializes in fiscal policy, particularly tax reform, international tax competition, and the economic burden of government spending. He also serves on the editorial board of the Cayman Financial Review.

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

Why the Rise of Intersectionality in Medicine Will Have Serious Consequences thumbnail

Why the Rise of Intersectionality in Medicine Will Have Serious Consequences

By Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

School standards have fallen for the sake of political correctness over effective and dependable education. That is dangerous.

In early October, my alma mater made headlines after it decided to fire chemistry professor Dr. Maitland Jones Jr. after 82 of his students signed a petition noting that his organic chemistry class was “too hard.” The students accused Jones of purposely making the class difficult, citing that their low scores negatively impacted their “well-being,” and their chances of getting into medical school. Instead of evaluating the rigor and substance of Jones’ curriculum, NYU justified its hasty action by noting the class’s unfavorable student reviews. This type of judgment would never pass in the fields of architecture, aerial engineering, or even the food service industry; why is it permissible here?

In response to the disciplinary action, former medical humanities professor and bioethicist Dr. Alice Dreger blasted the move in a tweet, saying it “made her skin crawl.”

“We aren’t going to end up with good doctors by letting undergrad pre-meds pass organic chem because universities want to protect their US News rankings,” she wrote.

The reaction is justified considering how standards for pre-med programs and even medical schools have shifted in the direction of equity and social justice. It seems that even professors cannot hold the line on academic performance, when the institutions they teach at make it a secondary importance to accommodating students’ sensitivities on the basis of how faulted or victimized they feel while learning in the highly competitive and demanding field of medicine.

The rise in efforts to increase diversity in medical schools can be seen as coming from a place of good intentions: to create an academic environment which promotes minority doctors, especially those who come from underserved communities. Having a diversification of medical practitioners is beneficial, especially if said doctors use their skills and talents to give back to communities that drastically need medical attention, such as inner cities and remote rural communities.

Advocates for broader outreach cite studies such as the AAMC’s report titled, “Altering the Course: Black Males in Medicine” which notes how the number of black male applicants dropped from 1,410 in 1978 to 1,337 in 2014. They could also point to a Yale-led study that found minority students are less likely to get placed in residency programs than their white and Asian colleagues.

These seem to be pressing issues which must be addressed if medical schools wish to increase black and brown students’ success rates. However, instead of working towards expanding tutoring, learning programs, and outreach initiatives, it seems as if universities and medical schools want to focus strictly on the intersectional aspects of this research.

The leader of the aforementioned Yale study, Mytien Nguyen, MSc, stated,

“In previous studies, we’ve really only looked at one dimension of identity, but there’s intersectionality and the compounding of multiple marginalized identities…we wanted to see how these identities came into play in the application process…there is a clear compounding effect of being a student underrepresented in medicine and lower income…there is a double whammy in terms of how medicine is classist and racialized.”

Nguyen states that it is unclear what is contributing to lower placement rates among marginalized students, and yet failed to consider how a plethora of other factors, such as lack of mentors in medicine, limited financial resources, and differing cultural perceptions of working in medicine, may contribute to this phenomenon. Looking back at AAMC’s report, it is important to note that while the number of black male applicants did decrease over the decades, the report also shows how the overall number of black medical students actually rose from 933 in 1978 to 1,227 in 2014—a 32 percent spike.

This is a welcoming statistic which can be improved if schools provide marginalized communities with greater access to high school and pre-med opportunities.

Unfortunately, institutions like NYU have taken it upon themselves to lower the bar of admission through intersectional incentives, rather than enforcing academic standards—which we all agree are needed in order to have dependable and safe future doctors.

The shift in a medicine-based education to an emphasis on race and social concern was highlighted by former University of Pennsylvania Medical School Dean Stanley Goldfarb, who stated:

“…Today a master’s degree in education is often what it takes to qualify for key administrative roles on medical-school faculties. The zeitgeist of sociology and social work have become the driving force in medical education. The goal of today’s educators is to produce legions of primary care physicians who engage in what is termed ‘population health.’”

Medical schools’ administrations seem to have become taken over by sociologists and critical race theorists—if not in title, then certainly in practice.

Most recently in the news, the University of Minnesota Medical School conducted a white coat ceremony for its Class of 2026, where each student had to recite a modified Hippocratic Oath which—on top of pledging to do no harm and to help the sick whenever possible—would “honor all Indigenous ways of healing that have been historically marginalized by Western medicine…white supremacy, colonialism, and the gender binary.”

The politicization of medicine has greater effects than just this sort of political white-knighting. Instead of focusing on promoting preventative care and treatment based on actual medical effectiveness, the impetus behind these medical schools’ actions seems to be entirely race-based. For example, Georgetown University is funding the study and formation of courses to prevent ‘microaggressions’ in medicine.

Likewise, the Association of American Medical Colleges released a new standard for teaching medicine which requires students to achieve ‘competencies’ in ‘white privilege’ or risk failing. It also seeks to do away with the ideas of gender and race, the latter of which the AAMC describes as “… a social construct that is a cause of health and health care inequities, not a risk factor for disease.” If this is the case, then how will doctors address the pervasiveness of Sickle-Cell Anemia and Multiple Myeloma in African-American communities, the prevalence of diabetes in Asian groups, or the largely unknown effects of hormonal therapies in minors?

This dramatic shift from upholding course standards to molding medicine in a racial lens is concerning. Though proponents of such measures would argue this is critical to improving race-relations in medicine and to deconstructing students’ “implicit biases,” saving lives and providing exceptional preventative care supersedes that.

A 2016 BMJ analysis found that medical errors in health-care facilities are actually incredibly common and may even be the third-leading cause of death in the US. Medical malpractice accounts for about 251,000 deaths every year—this is more than accidents, stroke, Alzheimer’s, and respiratory disease:

CLICK HERE: To view the National Center for Health Statistics Death in the United States chart

A doctor’s most important duty to his or her patient is to do no harm—this includes preventing negligence, refraining from superfluous procedures, and ensuring every avenue of care is addressed prior to conducting invasive surgery. From shoddy hospital conditions to inexperienced nurses to just bad doctors, healthcare resulting in patient harm is a much more pressing issue than the alleged microaggressions resident doctors give off during their rotations.

The race and gender of a practicing physician should not matter as long as they are skilled, capable, and reasonable in their practice. It is therefore the universities and medical schools’ responsibility to uphold the rigorous standards they once had in order to ensure their students are prepared to work in high-stress, highly complicated medical scenarios—above all else. We need capable and skilled doctors, period.

AUTHOR

Connor Vasile

Connor Vasile is a first-generation American and writer who wishes to raise awareness about classical liberal ideas which empower every individual, no matter their background or experience, to live their best lives and fulfill their goals.

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