Powell Releases Massive 270 Page Document Detailing Alleged Election Fraud

Biden will never be President.

BREAKING: Sidney Powell Releases Massive 270 Page Document Detailing Alleged Election Fraud

By Collin Rugg,  Trending Politics, December 27, 2020:
Pro-Trump attorney Sidney Powell recently released a massive 270 page document to Zenger News including affidavits, evidence and testimony from many witnesses and sources detailing alleged fraud in the 2020 election.
Powell has been on the frontlines of fighting the alleged fraud in the 2020 election, bringing many serious accusations to the table.
Pro-Trump attorney Sidney Powell recently released a massive 270 page document to Zenger News including affidavits, evidence and testimony from many witnesses and sources detailing alleged fraud in the 2020 election.
Powell has been on the frontlines of fighting the alleged fraud in the 2020 election, bringing many serious accusations to the table.
The document details “errors” found in the Election Management logs.
The document details “errors” found in the Election Management logs.
“Offshore leaks database” involving Dominion Voting Systems.
Part 13: “Swiss and Aussies find a critical flaw in Scytl software that the US ignores.
These were just a few of the many issues touched on in the bombshell report.
Check out the 270 page document via Zenger News here.

Mathematician Bobby Piton Finds More Than 500,000 Unique Last Names in Pennsylvania: ‘Sophisticated State Actor Was Able to Optimize Desired Outcome’
Dominion Voting Machines Are Related to Smartmatic/Sequoia Machines and They Do Have Functionality to Switch Votes Between Candidates
Trump joins White House historian in blasting media for not appreciating Melania
Democrat Bombings: Far-Left Journalist Among Four Charged in BLM FIREBOMBINGS in Arkansas
US to Label Products From Parts of Judea and Samaria as ‘Made in Israel’
Love To See It! NBA Christmas Day Ratings Tank ‘Massively’
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

ISIS Calls for Christmas Jihad: ‘Coldly Kill Them With Hate And Rage’

And so it was no surprise when International Christian Concern reported Wednesday that “security forces in Pakistan reportedly stopped a major terror attack planned to take place on Christmas Day in Peshawar. In a raid on a house in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s Khyber district, four terrorists, including the leader of a banned militant outfit, were arrested.” Among those arrested was Zakir Afridi, the commander of the jihad terror group Lashkar-e-Islam.
“Along with the terrorists,” International Christian Concern reported, “security forces seized three suicide jackets and six improvised explosive devices.”
If this plot wasn’t inspired by a call from the Islamic State to murder Christians on Christmas Day, it certainly had the same goal in mind. The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) reported that “on December 12, 2020, online supporters of the Islamic State (ISIS) distributed an audio clip of a new nasheed (Islamic religious chant) titled ‘Coldly Kill Them With Hate And Rage.’” The jolly folks who “released the song on Telegram included a poster featuring a Christmas tree with a bomb attached to it, and the caption: ‘Just Terror 2020. Here are their holidays at your doorsteps, and we are here too! And we are about to enter them with you!’ The post also includes the hashtag #MerryChristmas, suggesting it be used on social media to disseminate the song.”

The charming ditty includes these lyrics: “They fought Islam day and night/Killed many Muslims all in one time/Vengeance fill the hearts and minds/Coldly kill them with hate and rage/Stab them, shoot them or a blast/Make their media cry and broadcast/The khilafah [caliphate].” Well, it ain’t exactly “The First Noel,” but at least they tried.
Meanwhile, OpIndia reported Monday that an old video from the renowned Islamic apologist Zakir Naik has gone viral this year. In it, Naik, who has been accused of ties to jihad terror activity, answers a young man’s question about whether or not it is permissible for Muslims to wish Christians a merry Christmas: “To reach your goals, you cannot use wrong means, brother. What is Haram [forbidden] to them is also Haram to you. When you are wishing Merry Christmas to them, you are agreeing that he is the son of God and that is Shirk [the grave sin of associating partners with Allah in worship]. Because they believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God. Irrespective of whether they are practising Christians or not, they celebrate the day because of His birthday…Is saying Merry Christmas wrong? I am telling you it is wrong. It is 100% wrong according to me….If you don’t know what Christmas stands for and happen to wish someone, Allah may forgive you. If you drink alcohol, mistaking it for Pepsi, Allah may forgive you. But if you are doing it to build a relationship after knowing what Christmas stands for, you are building your place in Jahannam (Hell). Therefore, for reaching good means, you never have to follow bad means. You have to follow the guidance of the Quran and the Sunnah (literature based on life and deeds of Prophet Muhammad).”
In a similar vein, the German-language site Philosophia Perennis reported Saturday that another old video has gone viral there, featuring a Muslim preacher, Abu Maher, declaring: “Christmas is an insult to Allah!” The video was published by the Deutschsprachige Muslimische Gemeinschaft e.V. (“German-speaking Muslim Community, DMG) which describes itself as “an association in Braunschweig that has existed for many years” and states that “we represent Islam according to the understanding of the first three generations after the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) and want to convey Islam – based on the Qurân and Sunna (path of the Prophet) and its pure message – to our fellow human beings and society. It is important to us to enable all interested parties to get to know the values ​​and norms that Islam imposes on people.” The DMG adds: “As a Muslim community, we represent a part of the local society. We respect the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany, but at the same time insist on our basic rights, such as freedom of religion and freedom of expression, and want like every citizen and let every citizen live and live in peace and mutual tolerance.”
In light, however, of its denunciation of Christmas, its call for peace and tolerance appears to be in reality a call for peace and tolerance on the basis of the submission of non-Muslims to Muslims.
None of this is new, or surprising, particularly ISIS’ call for violence. It’s just another Christmas in the age of jihad.
Khamenei: ‘When Islam dominated non-Muslim regions, the followers of other religions were grateful to Muslims’
Somalia: Muslim teens attack and hospitalize seven-year-old boy because his father left Islam for Christianity
India: Muslims including women and children pelt Hindus with stones, ten people seriously injured
Sweden: Interpreter tells migrant not to ‘tarnish Islam’
Somalia: Jihad terror group al-Shabaab collects $15 million a month in taxes, more than the Somali government
Sweden gives ISIS leader who returned from Syria a protected identity and welfare benefits
UK: Court orders gay asylum seeker who fled to Britain after family threatened to kill him to return to Algeria
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column  is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

CFACT “Green New Wheel” teaches facts at TPUSA conference

America’s high school and college students are continually battered with misinformation from celebrities, “news” organizations, and social media.
Amid the COVID lockdowns and election controversies, this Left-wing indoctrination is at an all-time high.
That’s why CFACT cosponsored Turning Point USA’s Student Action Summit (SAS) in West Palm Beach, FL, this past week – to reach young people directly with facts, not hysteria.
CFACT debuted the “Green New Wheel” table game; an actual, spin-able wheel that CFACT developed to engage the public on the folly behind the Green New Deal.
It “spun up” quite the buzz among hundreds of students, the media, and even a celebrity or two, all while operating under the COVID restrictions put in place by county officials for the conference.
Kirk Cameron, the Christian actor and movie star, and Alex Clark, host of TPUSA’s “POPlitics” show, both took a spin. Unfortunately for Ms. Clark, she landed on Joe Biden and the Green New Deal, which meant she lost. Mr. Cameron, however, landed on free market energy, which gave him the chance at a prize.
Chandler Wysocki, a freshman at the Ohio State University, was very enthusiastic about CFACT’s message after spinning the Green New Wheel. “I love the message, and I am really looking forward to getting plugged in to the CFACT chapter on campus,” Chandler said. “There are tons of events I think we can do. A hike and litter clean up would be great to show that we as conservatives care about the environment, despite what the Left says about us.”
CFACT’s mission also attracted the attention of national media. Both CFACT’s Houser and Bob Knee, CFACT’s National Field Coordinator, were interviewed by America’s Voice TV about their mission on college campuses. Additionally, Bob sat down with Cindy Drukier, host of The Nation Speaks, a news program with NTD.com, to discuss the growing threat of China to freedom. Bob explained how China is using environmental issues as a political chess piece to gain influence and power on the world stage.
“With the Paris Climate Accord specifically, the Chinese Communist Party is using that agreement to gain a serious edge economically,” Knee explained. “In that deal the West has to slash emissions, but China gets to keep building as many coal plants as they want. It’s ridiculous.
In addition to CFACT’s presence, there were many big-name speakers who took the stage at the Summit, including Tucker Carlson, Governor Kristi Noem, Dinesh D’Souza, Jude Jeanine Pirro, and more.
“These students were fired up. They love freedom, and they understand that it is capitalism, not socialism that brings prosperity and helps the environment,” Houser said. “Look for big things from these new CFACT activists next semester and beyond.”
EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Smart Toilets,’ Afghan Book Clubs, and Lizard Treadmills: Rand Paul’s Report Exposes $55 Billion in Government Waste

Everybody celebrates the holiday season in their own way. Each year, Senator Rand Paul invokes the spirit of the fictional grievance-airing holiday “Festivus” from Seinfeld to release an annual taxpayer waste report—and boy, is this one a doozy.
The libertarian-leaning Kentucky lawmaker’s report for 2020 finds an astounding $54.7 billion wasted by the federal government this year. (That’s not even an exhaustive figure for the federal government, nor does it account for the vast levels of waste by state and local governments.)
To put the nearly $55 billion wasted in context, Paul’s office explains that this is equivalent to wasting the taxes of more than 5.4 million Americans. It’s enough money to build a two-lane road that wraps around the entire Earth—18 times over. It’s enough money to buy every American a 40-inch flat-screen TV.
Yes, seriously.

Paul’s report cites far too many examples to list in one article, but even a cursory glance at some of its most prominent revelations will leave any honest taxpayer infuriated.
According to the senator’s report, the National Institutes of Health spent millions studying if people will eat bugs and millions more trying to invent a “smart toilet.” The federal agency also spent millions trying to reduce hookah smoking rates among Eastern Mediterranean youth and $31.5 million to fund an allegedly faked study linking e-cigarettes to heart attacks.
Yet perhaps the most bizarre examples of how politicians spend our taxpayer money come from how the government uses it overseas.
We spent $8.6 billion on anti-drug efforts in Afghanistan, the report finds. Hundreds of thousands went to art classes for Kenyans, Afghan and Pakistani book clubs, and funding for Sri Lankan think tanks. In a truly baffling example, tens of millions were spent to combat truancy… in the Philippines.
Oh, and of course, we spent taxpayer money to put lizards on treadmills and study the results.

The military wasted lots of taxpayer money too, Paul’s report reveals.
It allegedly lost $715 million worth of equipment that was intended for Syrians to use to fight ISIS. Meanwhile, $174 million went to lost drones in Afghanistan, and we spent $3.1 million on a police complex that now sits unused.
So what can be done to stop all this waste? It would simply require voters to hold Congress’s feet to the fire and force them to actually hold agencies accountable for how taxpayer money is spent.
“Congress has every tool it needs to fight and end government waste,” Paul said. “It’s just a matter of finding the willpower to use them.”
Unfortunately, fiscally responsible politicians like Paul are the exception, not the rule. As Nobel-prize-winning economist Milton Friedman famously explained, government spending is inherently prone to waste. Why?
You can spend your money on yourself, in which case you’ll be quite judicious with it. You can also spend your money on someone else, or someone else’s money on yourself. In either case you’ll still have a strong incentive to spend the money responsibly.
Yet Friedman identified a fourth scenario.
“If I spend somebody else’s money on somebody else, I’m not concerned about how much it is, and I’m not concerned about what I get,” the economist wrote. “And that’s government.”
So, there’s only one way to truly limit government waste of taxpayer dollars. We have to limit the scope of government itself.
RELATED ARTICLE: The Many Glaring Problems with the New COVID Stimulus Package
EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Prove That You Love Me

The Christmas season has traditionally been a time for hopefulness. Families gather with hopes of joyful reunion. Christian families celebrate the birth of Christ with food, wine, laughter, gift giving, and religious services. But you don’t have to be a Christian to enjoy Christmas. The Christmas season delights us all with its music, twinkling lights, messages of peace on earth, and the holiday spirit of giving. Businesses reward their employees with company parties and bonuses. Retail shops and government offices close in observance of the holiday. Not this year.
The coronavirus has changed everything. Christmas in the time of coronavirus portends the future. The final outcome of the 2020 presidential election will determine if we celebrate Christmas past, or if Christmas present will be our Christmas future. Let me explain.
The fearmongering campaign of political medicine that deliberately terrified the American public into submission has served its purpose. Fear of COVID19 was used as the rationalization for Democrat swing states to unconstitutionally mail out millions of unsolicited ballots. We all know by now that only legislators have the constitutional authority to change election laws – not governors, not mayors, not city councilmen, and not secretaries of state.
Unverified mail-in ballots were the insurance policy used in conjunction with the massive election fraud executed by Dominion machines and Smartmatic software. Patrick Byrne, entrepreneur and tech billionaire assembled a cyber intelligence team to analyze the U.S. voting system. In a stunning December 16, 2020, Epoch Times article Byrne explains that election fraud is the secret “assassin’s mace” of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
“Byrne says that stealing the national election doesn’t require cheating across the board. ‘There are six counties that you need to steal. If you steal these six counties around the country, that flips the six states they’re in, which flips the electoral college votes that come with them, which flips the nation,’ he said. ‘You’ve got to take six places and cheat like crazy there.’”
The country has been convulsed by the Democrat attempt to steal the 2020 election. But there’s more.
A stolen election requires public acceptance of the outcome. While we wait for the final decision, the politically motivated social engineers are busy trying to persuade us that the election was legitimate, and that we must “follow the science” to understand the necessity for lockdown even if it means no Christmas because, after all, we are submitting for the good of our loved ones.
In an extraordinary November 19, 2020, article, “Do or Die,” Judd Garrett explains the psychodynamics of the sinister manipulation, and how politicians use love to control us. Garrett writes:
In the movie, The Green Mile, when the bad guy “Wild Bill” Wharton breaks into a house to rape and kill the two young girls, he keeps the girls silent by telling them, “You love your sister? You make any noise, … I’m gonna kill her instead of you.” As the protagonist of the movie John Coffey observed, “He killed them with their love.” The killer used their love against them. Neither girl wanted to be responsible for their sister’s death, so both girls remained silent, and complied. And their silence allowed him to kill them both. That is the way evil works. Evil uses good people’s love against them, to control them, and to even kill them.
Since the start of the pandemic, when people have told us that we must wear masks, they would say, ‘you are not doing it to protect yourself, you are only doing it to protect other people’. I never understood the logic of that. Does the corona-virus only penetrate the blue side of the mask, and not the white side? Couldn’t we just flip our masks over? If the mask protects other people, it only follows that it would also protect the wearer. But we are told wearing the mask only protects the other person because the people who want to control us are using our love against us. They are using our love of our families or our fellow man to force us to comply with their wishes. They know if people were told that the mask protected the wearer, many people would say, ‘I’m not wearing it, I’ll take my chances of getting sick’. And there would be no guilt because other people would be protected by their own masks.
So it is in families today. Adult children are told they are protecting their parents and grandparents, parents are told they are protecting their children and parents. Love for each other is being used against them to end family gatherings, Christmas gatherings, business parties. Family love and loyalty is being manipulated to splinter families. What??
I will repeat, family love and loyalty is being used to splinter families. Consider the parents who reject the fearmongering of political medicine, and who realize its destructive political purpose. These parents are diametrically opposed to the views of their indoctrinated adult children whose source of information is the mainstream media and big-tech social media. The leftist media propaganda is reinforced by the anti-American educational curricula K-12 and university which undermines the nuclear family and supports loyalty to the state.
Parents are offered the choice of conforming to their children’s philosophical demands, or suffering family rupture. It is a childish demand to “Prove that you love me.” The choice is a lose/lose dilemma for the parents. The parents love their children but are being pressured to surrender their integrity to have a relationship with them. Emotional extortion is not love. The irony, of course, is that the children present themselves as tolerant. The left tolerates every variation of appearance – tall, short, thin, fat, white, black, brown, yellow, rich, poor, gay, straight – anything and everything except opposing thoughts or opinions. Leftist tolerance is all form and no content.
Today’s indoctrinated adult children are so fragile that they are unwilling to agree to disagree. Some even require safe spaces and distance to protect themselves and their young children from the toxic ideas of conservative grandparents. The generation gap is no longer defined by race or religion. The generation gap is defined by politics, and dramatized by the 2020 presidential ticket.
America’s indoctrinated adult children have become ideological warriors. What they have not yet understood is that they are participating in their own destruction. The objective of political medicine is social control, submission, and centralized global governance. Parents must ask themselves, is it more loving to surrender to your children’s demand to wear masks and social distance? Or is it more loving to reject their demands for conformity and stand for freedom? What is a lose/lose dilemma for parents is a win/win situation for the cunning social engineers.
The pillars of Americanism are loyalty to family, faith, and flag. A Biden administration rejects them all and embraces leftism and China-centric globalism. The enemies of America understand that the only way to defeat America is from within, and the best way to collapse America from within is to destroy the American family.
Political medicine is not about public health. Our indoctrinated adult children do not understand the malevolence and pathology of those who seek absolute control. Wearing masks and social distancing will not protect them, their parents, or grandparents any more than the sisters could protect each other from Wild Bill in The Green Mile.
“Prove that you love me” persuades many parents to accept their adult children’s destructive demands for conformity. The political social engineers can just sit back and watch virtue-signaling American families capitulate or implode. The precious individual freedoms our ancestors fought and died for are being surrendered in the name of love.
©Linda Goudsmit. All rights reserved.

PERFIDY: DIRTY GOP ‘Leaders’ Oppose Tuberville Objecting to Biden’s Electoral Fraud

Contact your Senators and especially contact that spineless opportunist McConnell and make as much noise as you can. Call, write, go down to their office with a picket sign. FIGHT! Public servants serve we the people.



GOP leaders oppose Tuberville objecting to Biden’s electoral count

By The Wiz on December 25, 2020 •
Senate Republicans say Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) will reach out to Sen.-elect Tommy Tuberville (Ala.) in an attempt to avoid a nasty fight next month over certifying the results of the Electoral College, the Hill reports.
Senate Republican Whip John Thune (S.D.) told the Hill that GOP leaders will tell Tuberville that voting to suspend the tally of the Electoral College vote next month is pointless and politically damaging.
“Ultimately every senator will have to make their own decision about that but I think there will be people, yeah, reaching out to him just to kind of find out” what he’s going to do, Thune said of Tuberville’s intentions about the Electoral College tally on Jan. 6.
Earlier this month, Tuberville strongly hinted at plans to objected to Biden’s electoral count on Jan. 6.


RELATED ARTICLE: Trump Urges GOP Senators to ‘Step Up and Fight for the Presidency’
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Poland to Pass Law Protecting Online Free Speech Against Big Tech Censorship

‘Act for the Freedom to Express One’s Views and Obtain and Disseminate Information on the Internet’ will give social media users a statutory right to appeal bans and content removals on social media platforms such as Facebook on Twitter, which they will be able to escalate to a new Court for the Protection of Freedom of Speech in a streamlined, all-digital process.
Poland on the cutting edge of individual rights and liberty. Who’d a thunk it?

Poland to Pass Law Protecting Online Free Speech Against Big Tech Censorship

Poland’s national conservative government has detailed a new law protecting free speech online against Big Tech censorship, backed by a new court and big fines.
By, Jack Montgomery, Andrew Breitbart News, 26 Dec 202027
Minister of Justice Zbigniew Ziobro has announced the draft ‘Act for the Freedom to Express One’s Views and Obtain and Disseminate Information on the Internet’ will give social media users a statutory right to appeal bans and content removals on social media platforms such as Facebook on Twitter, which they will be able to escalate to a new Court for the Protection of Freedom of Speech in a streamlined, all-digital process.
If the new court rules that the tech censors have removed accounts or deleted posts for speech which is legal under Polish law, they must be restored — or the social media firms involved will face fines of as much as 1.8 million euros, enforced by the Slavic country’s Office of Electronic Communications, according to reports.
“In Germany, the Minister of Justice may arbitrarily decide what content needs to be eliminated from the Internet. This is the introduction of censorship. We want to balance the freedom of public debate,” Ziobro explained of the planned legislation recently.
“We want to regulate the relationship between social media users and their owners… It is primarily about censorship when expressing opinions that are consistent with Polish law”, added deputy minister Sebastian Kaleta elsewhere.
Many on the right in the United Kingdom and the United States have suggested that, while they are not happy with what Ziobro has described as “ideological censorship” by tech giants, they prefer the status quo to “the government getting involved” in the affairs of private businesses.
From the Polish government’s perspective, however, such so-called interference is a constitutional duty: “The Constitution… guarantees full freedom of expression… Therefore, any manifestations of limiting it must meet with the reaction of the state to enable protection against interference with this freedom,” Kaleta insisted.

Omar, Tlaib and AOC demand Facebook remove 100% of ‘anti-Muslim content’
YouTube Censors U.S. Senate Testimony on Voter Fraud in Nevada
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Rep. Brooks: ‘Baffled’ by Senate Hesitancy to Challenge 2020 Outcome


We are already there if America stands by while the Democrat criminal syndicate gets away with the biggest theft in human history.

Mo Brooks: ‘Baffled’ by Senate Hesitancy to Challenge 2020 Outcome — U.S. Elections Could Reach a Point Akin to North Korea, China, Iran, Soviet Union

By Jeff Poor, December 25, 2020:

With less than two weeks to go until Congress certifies the Electoral College results that will officially make Joe Biden the next U.S. president, Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) says he is “baffled” by the reluctance of any member of the U.S. Senate to participate in his challenge of the results.During an interview with Mobile, AL radio’s FM Talk 106.5, Brooks maintained the manner some states had handled their elections was in violation of Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, which he said made “millions upon millions” of the ballots cast in the November 3 election illegal.Partial transcript as follows:I was relatively confident that this would be the way things would progress. When you’re looking at a crystal ball and trying to guess how things are going to play out, there’s always some degree of uncertainty. But the law is clear. Congress has the ultimate decision on any kind of election dispute involving election of the president of the United States. The question became what the facts are, and to me, having done the study, done the research, examined the facts — I have found the evidence to be compelling and completely overwhelming that there is one conclusion that can logically be reached, and that is the socialist Democrats engaged in massive voter fraud on a level never seen before in the history of the United States of America. Millions upon millions of illegal ballots were cast in direct conflict with Article I, Section 4 of the United States Constitution, the election clause, and statutes passed by Congress and legislatures pursuant to that clause, and that this has been an election theft like we’ve never seen.
I came to that conclusion, perhaps, earlier than others. But I came to the firm belief that if we just get the evidence out to the public and congressmen and senators, they would come to the right conclusion. Now the one misjudgment I had made was the hesitancy of the United States Senate to do their homework. They seem to want to be spoon-fed the evidence of voter fraud and election theft whether than engaging in their own investigative efforts, their own research, and reaching their own proper conclusion based on the results of that investigation and research. It has been baffling that the Senate has wanted to duck and hide and not do what needs to be doing in order to protect the foundation of any republic, which is whether you have an honest and accurate election system. It’s quite clear in America right now, we don’t. That’s not just me saying it. There have been studies and reports before that have reached the exact same conclusion that I have reached and that have gone so far as to warn the American people that we are going to have an election catastrophe unless we fix some of these systemic flaws.”
Perhaps the most notable warning was by Democrat President Jimmy Carter and Republican White House chief of staff James Baker in 2005, where they identified the same systemic flaws in our election system that the socialist Democrats successfully exploited and took advantage of and to engage in massive voter fraud and election theft. I don’t know what we can do with the senators. I’m baffled. I’m disappointed that at least as of this moment, there is not at least one that has stood strong for our country and said, ‘I’m going to take the lead. I’m going to co-sponsor this object, so we can have this floor debate auditing the problems associated with our election system so that the American people can get it first-hand and better understand what needs correcting, or else we’re going to go through this again and again and again.”

And ultimately, in my judgment and in my fear, we’re going to reach a point akin to the kinds of elections they have in North Korea, Iran, Communist China, the Soviet Union, Venezuela — where people can go vote, but there’s no way that the election results reported are going to reflect the truthfulness of the votes that were cast.

RELATED ARTICLE: PERFIDY: DIRTY GOP ‘Leaders’ Oppose Tuberville Objecting to Biden’s Electoral Fraud
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Rudy Giuliani: “Starting After Christmas This Is Really Going to Blow Up”

“You’re going to find out all at once. It’s going to be very shocking to the country.”

Rudy Giuliani: “Starting After Christmas This Is Really Going to Blow Up”

Christmas is not cancelled. We all know President Trump won the 2020 election. Rudy Giuliani offers his thoughts to date.
By Gateway Pundit, December 26, 2020:
Rudy Giuliani in his most recent ‘Common Sense’ discussion shared the following:
\You’re going to find out all at once. It’s going to be very shocking to the country.

The people at “WeLoveTrump.com” share this about the current state of the 2020 Presidential race:

Let’s put 2 + 2 together.
The White House has instructed Trump staff to STOP packing…
The Pentagon has stopped giving Joe Biden intelligence briefings…
More Republican representatives are on the record claiming they will contest the electoral votes…
Dan Scavino has been posting increasingly cryptic messages on Twitter…
And Kamala Harris STILL hasn’t left her Senate seat!
Now, Rudy Giuliani has given an explanation on the voter fraud:
“You’re going to find out all at once. It’s going to be very shocking to the country.”
There is hope.  We must continue to fight and pray for Trump and our country.  President Trump crushed Joe Biden in the 2020 election.


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

Omar, Tlaib and AOC demand Facebook remove 100% of ‘anti-Muslim content’

Two of the most notorious bigots in the House of Representatives signed a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg demanding that he “eradicate anti-Muslim bigotry from Facebook”.
The three-page letter signed by Rep. Ilhan Omar, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, as well as 28 other left-wing House members, spends a great deal of time demanding the removal of what it calls “anti-Muslim content” without ever specifically defining it. That’s convenient considering Omar and Tlaib’s own history of racism and antisemitism, and support for the sorts of Islamic bigotry and violence that groups like CAIR, which supports the letter, have become known for.
The letter spotlights one violent incident, but then goes on to call for a ban on “anti-Muslim content”, “anti-Muslim animus”, “anti-Muslim bigotry”, and finally, “anti-Muslim content and organizing” on the platform, without ever explaining what exactly they want to ban.
Considering the letter’s call for, “100 percent proactive detection and removal of anti-Muslim content”, the safe assumption would be that they want to ban everything critical of Islam.
That’s a disturbing attack on the First Amendment coming from 30 House members.
If House Democrats were serious about removing hate, they would have removed Rep. Omar.
Democrats have repeatedly pressured Facebook and other social media companies to remove speech they politically disapprove of, whether by President Trump or other conservatives, eroding the thin line between private companies acting on their own initiative and government officials conspiring to violate the First Amendment by banning certain kinds of political speech.
After multiple hearings, legal proposals, and legislative threats, it’s no longer possible to view Facebook’s censorship of political speech as anything other than government censorship. When enough pressure by government officials has been applied to a company to censor certain kinds of speech, the company’s decision to censor speech becomes government censorship.
30 House members would now like Facebook to censor criticism of Islam and political protests against Islamic terrorism. One of the few examples of anti-Muslim content in the House letter was a political protest against the Islamic Society of North America’s 2019 conference.
That was the conference which included an appearance by two Democrat presidential candidates, Bernie Sanders and Julian Castro, whose forum was moderated by Salam Al-Marayati, the head of MPAC, who had defended Hamas and Hezbollah. Also participating in a round table at the conference was Imam Siraj Wahhaj, an unindicted co-conspirator in the World Trade Center bombing, who has defended the Islamic mandate to kill gay people.
This is the sort of information that AOC, Omar, and 28 other House Democrats, want banned.
House Democrats trying to shut down protests targeting their own candidates is a blatant violation of the First Amendment which was meant to prevent exactly that kind of thing.
And the party of social justice wants to stop Americans from protesting against an Imam who says things like, ”Brothers and sisters, you know what the punishment is, if a man is found with another man? The Prophet Mohammad said the one who does it and the one to whom it is done to, kill them both.”
What happens when ‘anti-Muslim content’ meets anti-gay content?
The 30 House Democrats don’t want to talk about any of this which is why their letter doesn’t.
Omar and Tlaib can’t quite openly call for blasphemy regulations for social media, but they conveniently leave terms like “anti-Muslim content” undefined and then demand that Facebook outsource the suppression protocols to “senior staff focused on anti-Muslim bigotry issues” backed by diversity training on “civil rights issues and common words, phrases, tropes or visuals used by hate actors to dehumanize and demonize Muslims”.
And if that’s not enough, there’s an independent third-party review of Facebook’s compliance.
CAIR and other Muslim Brotherhood groups would be brought in to define what “anti-Muslim content” is and then senior staff, approved of by CAIR and its allies, would set moderation policies to suppress “tropes” used by “hate actors” words like Jihad, Sharia, Taqiyya, and terrorism.
Cartoons of Mohammed, mentions of blasphemy, hate, and terrorism would all be censored.
It’s not hard to spot what sort of content they’re after.
The House Democrat blasphemy and terror letter has been endorsed by CAIR and the Islamic Networks Group, but beyond these traditional Islamist groups, it has the backing of pro-terror groups like Code Pink and JVP, and assorted anti-war organizations. These groups are less concerned with blasphemy, but very focused on preventing America from fighting terrorists.
CAIR had demanded the removal of Mohammed’s image from the Supreme Court, and more recently compared magazines publishing cartoons of Mohammed to ISIS. A board member of the Muslim Brotherhood group had insisted that, “[t]he right to free speech is not absolute.”
The Founding Fathers and the Constitution disagreed.
The letter also cites a Muslim Advocates report which listed examples of “anti-Muslim content” that they wanted Facebook to censor that included President Trump’s call for a ban on migration from Islamic terror nations, and a Trump campaign ad which described AOC, Omar, Tlaib, and Pressley as socialists who had made “anti-Israel, anti-American, and pro-terrorist remarks”.
AOC, Omar, Tlaib, and other Democrats have signed a letter demanding that Facebook censor political speech critical of them. That’s a grotesque assault on the First Amendment.
Another example of “anti-Muslim content” from the Muslim Advocates report was an Israeli Facebook user who had written negatively about Omar, Trudeau, and Corbyn.
Omar responded to this by ranting that “foreign interference – whether by individuals or governments – is still a grave threat to our democracy” and that “malicious actors operating in a foreign country, Israel”, were “spreading misinformation and hate speech to influence elections in the United States.” Even though there’s no evidence that elections were actually influenced.
But, once again, the kind of “anti-Muslim content” that Omar and her political allies seem to want to ban involves criticism of her and of them. The “grave threat” here is coming from Rep. Omar.
The letter claims that its signers also want Facebook to remove “any hate content directed at a religious or ethnic group”, but Rep. Ilhan Omar, one of the letter’s signers, has been the House’s worst offender, tweeting antisemitic content, including her infamous “Benjamins” tweet.
If House Democrats were serious about removing hate, they would have removed Rep. Omar.
Facebook already engages in extensive monitoring and censorship. This isn’t about taking down bigotry, but about removing political speech and content that Islamists consider blasphemous. It’s also about suppressing the political organizations that combat Islamist hate and violence.
It has the backing of pro-terror groups like Code Pink and JVP, and assorted anti-war organizations. These groups are less concerned with blasphemy, but very focused on preventing America from fighting terrorists.
It’s no coincidence that the type of political speech that Omar, Tlaib, Carson, and other House members want to censor casts a negative light on their own political alliances with Islamists, their bigotry, and their ugly views. And they would like Facebook to do the censoring for them.
The more Democrat officials lay out the kind of censorship they would like internet platforms to perform, the more the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech becomes a dead letter. And this letter, signed by 30 House Democrats, is a new threat to our freedom of speech.
America does not have blasphemy laws. And politicians are not allowed to ban speech they don’t like. The letter to Facebook makes it more urgent than ever that our elected officials find ways to protect the marketplace of ideas from political censorship by Democrats and Facebook.

NYC: Man Murders ‘Americanized’ Daughter Who Didn’t Want to Wear Hijab
‘As a Muslim we should not celebrate other religions‘ – UK soccer star enrages some Muslims with Christmas photos
Australia: Doctor bombarded with abuse for ‘excluding Muslims’ by saying ‘Merry Christmas’
India: Man converts from Islam to Hinduism, now ‘people from Muslim community are threatening to kill me’
ISIS: ‘If they keep you from acquiring lethal weapons, a sharpened pencil can be used to shed a Kaffir’s blood’
Pakistan: Sindh High Court releases jihad terrorists convicted of beheading Daniel Pearl
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

YouTube Censors U.S. Senate Testimony on Voter Fraud in Nevada

On December 16, Attorney Jesse Binnall testified before the U.S. Congress on what his team alleges were instances of voter fraud in Nevada. His five minute testimony is packed with details; it is a must-watch video for anyone wanting to learn more about what may have really happened during the 2020 presidential election, not only in Nevada, but across America.
Apparently YouTube agreed. Click here to get the message “This video has been removed for violating YouTube’s Community Guidelines.”
What guidelines?
Online videos of Binnall’s testimony can still be found, undoubtedly with suppressed views, on the Facebook page of the Nevada Republican Party, as well as probably on this C-Span archive if you’re willing to rut around until you find it, and even HERE – get this, on a sparsely viewed YouTube channel – 116 subscribers – called “Jazz Rock Fusion & Synthesizer Music.” Apparently this lover of music loves freedom as well, because this is the channel’s only political video among scores of soundscapes and jams and assorted tunes. Thank you!
Binnall’s road to the U.S. Senate passed through the courthouses of Nevada, where the cards were stacked and rigged against his team at every stage, from factfinding to getting a fair hearing. Here’s a transcript of Binnall and his team’s Nevada appearance before a Nevada judge on December 3. But what was a labored, obstructed and ultimately fruitless effort in Nevada was distilled into five minutes of some of the most damning testimony you will every hear on December 16 before a U.S. Senate committee.
Which is why YouTube banned it back when it was hot, back when it was going viral. This is a key strategy of online censors today – they stamp out the fire when it’s hot and spreading fast, but they let the embers of truth burn on the obscure sites and platforms. If a fire ever reaches critical mass, they turn back on the fire hose. And sadly, it’s working.
For those who won’t forget, or who don’t want to pretend that nothing happened, find these embers of truth. Find these source videos. And find the transcripts. A transcript of Binnall’s testimony can also be found on an official U.S. Senate website, but only in the less searchable PDF format. For that reason, Binnall’s five minute’s of remarks, in their entirety, are written here:
Jesse Binnall’s Opening Statement – U.S. Senate Hearing on Election Fraud – December 16, 2020:

Thank you Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Peters, and members of the committee.
This year thousands upon thousands of Nevada voters had their voices canceled out by election fraud and invalid ballots. Here’s how it happened:
On August 3, 2020, after a rushed special session, Nevada legislators made drastic changes to the state’s election law by adopting a bill known as AB 4. The vulnerabilities of this bill were obvious. It provided for universal mail in voting without sufficient safeguards to authenticate voters or ensure the fundamental requirement that only one ballot was sent to each legally qualified voter. This was aggravated by election officials’ failure to clean known deficiencies in their voter rolls.
Because of AB 4, the number of mailed ballots rocketed from about 70,000 in 2016 to over 690,000 this year. The election was inevitably riddled with fraud and our hotline never stopped ringing. While the media and the Democrats accused us of making it all up our team began chasing down every lead. Our evidence came both from data scientists and from brave whistleblowers. Here’s what we found:
Over 42,000 people voted more than once. Our experts were able to make this determination by reviewing the list of actual voters and comparing it to other voters with the same name, address, and date of birth. This method was also able to catch people using different variations of their first name such as William and Bill and individuals who registered both under a married name and a maiden name.
At least 1,500 dead people are recorded as voting as shown by comparing the list of mail voters with the Social Security death records.
More than 19,000 people voted, even though they didn’t live in Nevada. This does not include military voters or students. These voters were identified by comparing the list of voters with the US Postal Service’s National Change of Address database, among other sources.
About 8,000 people voted from non-existent addresses. Here we cross-reference voters with the coding accuracy support system [CASS], which allowed our experts to identify undeliverable addresses.
Over 15,000 votes were cast from commercial or vacant addresses. Our experts found these voters by analyzing official US Postal Service records that flag non-residential addresses and addresses vacant for more than 90 days.
Incredibly, almost 4,000 non-citizens also voted as determined by comparing official DMV records of non-citizens to the list of actual voters in the2020 election.
The list goes on. All in all, our experts identified 130,000 unique instances of voter fraud in Nevada, but the actual numbers are almost certainly higher. Our data scientists made these calculations not by estimations or statistical sampling, but by analyzing and comparing the list of actual voters with other lists, most of which are publicly available.
To put it simply, they explain their methods, so others can check their work. Our evidence has never been refuted, only ignored.
Two Clark County Technical employees came forward, completely independent of each other, and explained that they discovered that the number of votes recorded by voting machines and stored on USB drives would change between the time the polls were closed at night and when they were reopened the next morning. In other words, votes were literally appearing and disappearing in the dead of night.
When we attempted to verify the integrity of these voting machines, we were only allowed a useless visual inspection of the outside a USB drive. We were denied a forensic examination.
Finally, our investigation also uncovered a campaign to illegally incentivize votes from marginalized populations, by requiring people to prove that they voted in order to receive raffle tickets for gift cards, televisions, and more.
Our determined team verified these irregularities without any of the tools of law enforcement such as grand jury, subpoenas, or FBI agents. Instead, we had less than a month using critical thinking and elbow grease to compile our evidence. We tried to obtain testimony or documents from Clark County officials, but they obstructed and stonewalled. When we filed suit, state officials and even courts delayed proceedings for days, but then offered us merely hours to brief and argue our cases.
In wrapping up Mr. Chairman, these findings are disturbing, alarming, and unacceptable in a free society. Our free and fair election tradition is a precious treasure that we are charged with protecting. Government by the consent of the governed is hard to win and easy to lose. Every single time a fraudulent or illegal vote is cast, the vote of an honest citizen is canceled out. Thank you.

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

VIDEO: President Trump Demands an Honest Election in a Tweet — Watch!

In an Epoch Times column titled “Trump Shares Video Calling on Supporters to Contact Legislators to ‘Demand an Honest Election’ reporter Tom Ozimek wrote:

President Donald Trump shared a video on Thursday urging his supporters to contact state legislators with regard to allegations of voting irregularities in the Nov. 3 election and “demand an honest election and an honest count.”

Ozimek conclude with:

Peter Navarro, an adviser to Trump, last week released a detailed report summarizing election irregularity allegations in six battleground states, concluding that they are serious enough to warrant an urgent probe and substantial enough to potentially overturn the results.
Since Election Day, Trump and third-party groups have pursued legal challenges to the outcome of the election in the six battleground states. None of the efforts have so far borne fruit.

©President Donald J. Trump. All rights reserved.
RELATED VIDEO: Rudy Giuliani Speaks Out During Christmas Address ‘This is Really Going to Blow Up’

VIDEO: Congressman Ted Budd — What I’m doing in rejecting electoral votes on January 6th is ‘totally Constitutional’

Another member of Congress Rep. Theodore Paul “Ted” Budd (R-NC) joined the Republican led effort to reject electoral votes from states with rampant fraud. One American News Networks’ John Hines spoke with the lawmaker to learn more about his decision.


Ted Budd represents North Carolina’s 13th Congressional District and is serving his second term in the 116th United States Congress.

Ted brings an outsider’s perspective to Washington, having never held elective office. When an opportunity presented itself after redistricting opened up North Carolina’s 13th Congressional District in 2016, Ted decided to run and bring a businessman’s outlook to our nation’s capital.

Ted sits on the Financial Services Committee, where he uses his real world experience to roll back the restrictive regulations that strangle job creation in our country. Working at a young age on his family’s cattle and chicken farm and for their janitorial and landscaping business, Ted learned the importance of work ethic and common sense decision making. He brings his strong belief in God, family, and country to his job each and every day.

Ted and his wife Amy Kate have three children and live in Davie County, NC. He holds an MBA from Wake Forest University and a Masters in Educational Leadership from Dallas Theological Seminary.
©One America News Network. All rights reserved.

VIDEO: FL State Senator Joe Gruters’ bill would prohibit businesses from discriminating against a customers’ COVID vaccination status

Florida’s State Senator Joe Gruters (R-District 23) has introduced legislation that would prohibit businesses from requiring customers to show proof of having been vaccinated against covid and/or from discriminating against would be customers who cannot and/or will not show such proof.
Watch the Cape Coral TV news blurb:

What you say? I do not support government intrusion into how a private business is operated.

  1. This bill would stop, in its tracks, attempts by Government to require the general citizenry to show proof of being vaccinated during the course of their normal day-to-day activities.
  2. This bill would stop, in its tracks, attempts by Government to, “under the color of law”, force businesses to become the “vaccination police”

That said, I would rather see legislation that prevents the State of Florida from imposing ANY sort of “must show proof” requirements and let businesses make their own decisions on the matter.
Then, again, when I walk into a bank lobby and some minion tells me I must wear a mask and then, using their bare hands (God only knows where their hands have been), from an open box (God only knows where it has been), hands me an unsealed mask (God only knows who has handled them) and demands that I put it on my face?
Let’s just say that we need something along the lines of Gruters’ bill and we need it damn soon.
Read the Bill here:https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2021/364
©Tad MacKie. All rights reserved.

150 House Democrats sign letter backing Biden to reenter Iran Nuclear Deal

Totally frightening. The JCPOA guarantees that Iran will be able to build a nuclear arsenal in the next few years. In addition, the JCPOA provides Iran with billions of dollars in sanctions relief, that Iran will use to finance HezbollahHamasIslamic Jihad, the Houthis in Yemen, and Assad’s brutal regime in Syria. There is no reason to do this. The economic sanctions that President Trump has imposed on Iran have been working beautifully. Why re-enter an agreement that would guarantee death, destruction, and war in the Middle East?

150 House Democrats sign letter backing Biden to reenter Iran nuclear deal

“We strongly endorse your call for Iran to return to strict compliance with the nuclear deal, the United States to rejoin the agreement, and subsequent follow-on negotiations.”
By Jerusalem Post, December 24, 2020
A letter backing President-elect Joe Biden’s plan to reenter the Iran nuclear deal without any new conditions has garnered 150 signatures from House Democrats — enough to block any congressional bid to block the move.
The sentiments in the letter are in direct contradiction to the urgings of the Israel lobby group AIPAC, others in the center-right pro-Israel community and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Those groups want Biden to at least renegotiate components of the deal, if not forge a new one, before rejoining the 2015 pact. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action relieved sanctions on Iran in exchange for restrictions, monitored by outside observers, on the country’s nuclear program.
“We strongly endorse your call for Iran to return to strict compliance with the nuclear deal, the United States to rejoin the agreement, and subsequent follow-on negotiations,” says the letter, which concluded its signature-gathering phase on Wednesday and is set to be sent to Biden.
The intended effect of the letter is to reassure Biden, who was vice president under President Barack Obama when the deal was negotiated by the United States and others, that he can rejoin the agreement without fear of pushback. The letter surpasses 146 names, the number needed to break the two-thirds majority that opponents of reentering the deal would need to override Biden’s veto of any legislation aimed at blocking reentry.
Biden says he wants to renegotiate some components of the deal once the US is back in, including the dates when restrictions on Iran’s uranium enrichment lapse. He also wants to negotiate limits on Iran’s missile development and its adventurism in the region while addressing Iran’s concerns about the actions of American allies.

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

New Legal Memo Outlines Path to Victory For Trump Supporters

Christmas gift or miracle, joy to the world.

New Legal Memo Brings Hope to Trump Supporters This Christmas

The Western Journal is presenting this memorandum, written by two prominent conservative legal scholars, essentially verbatim, with only enough editing to format it for the Op-Ed section of our website. This is the second memo by Messrs. Olson and McSweeney to be published exclusively by The Western Journal, and it, like the first, outlines a possible legal strategy for the Trump campaign to follow in the coming weeks. Prior to its publication here, it was sent to President Trump. — Ed. note

Overcoming the Court’s Abdication in Texas v. Pennsylvania

William J. Olson & Patrick M. McSweeney, December 24, 2020
In refusing to hear Texas v. Pennsylvania, the U.S. Supreme Court abdicated its constitutional duty to resolve a real and substantial controversy among states that was properly brought as an original action in that Court. As a result, the Court has come under intense criticism for having evaded the most important inter-state constitutional case brought to it in many decades, if not ever.
However, even in its Order dismissing the case, the Supreme Court identified how another challenge could be brought successfully — by a different plaintiff. This paper explains that legal strategy. But first we focus on the errors made by the Supreme Court — in the hopes that they will not be made again.

Texas v. Pennsylvania

The Supreme Court declined to hear the challenge brought by the State of Texas against four states which had refused to abide by Article II, § 1, cl. 2 — the Presidential Electors Clause, which establishes the conditions and requirements governing the election of the President of the United States. In adopting that provision, the Framers vested in each State legislature the exclusive authority to determine the manner of appointing Presidential electors. The Framers’ plan was shown to be exceedingly wise, because we have now learned that allowing other state and private actors to write the election rules led to massive election fraud in the four defendant states. Individuals can be bought, paid for and corrupted so much easier than state legislatures.
In refusing to hear the case, the sole reason given was that Texas lacked “standing.” In doing so, all nine justices committed a wrong against: (i) Texas and the 17 states that supported its suit; (ii) the United States; (iii) the President; and (iv) the People.

The Court’s Many Wrongs in Texas v. Pennsylvania.

As Alexander Hamilton explained in Federalist No. 78, courts have “neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment.” As such, in deciding cases courts have a duty to explain their decisions so the rest of us may know if they constitute arbitrary exercises of political power, or reasoned decisions of judicial power which the People can trust. In Texas v. Pennsylvania, all that the justices felt obligated to do was to state its — “lack of standing” — supported by a one sentence justification: “Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its election.” Resolving a case of this magnitude with one conclusory sentence is completely unacceptable.
The Supreme Court docket consists primarily of only those cases the High Court chooses to hear. However, just like when it agrees to decide a case, and in disputes where the original jurisdiction of the Court is invoked, it has a duty to decide cases properly brought to them. Two centuries ago, Chief Justice John Marshall construed the obligation of contracts clause in a decision where he wrote: “however irksome the task may be, this is a duty from which we dare not shrink.” Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518 (1819). Courts have a duty to resolve important cases even if they would prefer to avoid them. In Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803), Marshall described “the duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is” because “every right, when withheld, must have a remedy, and every injury its proper redress.” Abdication in a case of this sort is not a judicial option.
The Supreme Court’s reliance on standing as its excuse has had one positive result — provoking many to study the origins of that doctrine who may be surprised to learn that the word “standing” nowhere appears in the Constitution. There is compelling evidence to demonstrate it was birthed by big-government Justices during the FDR Administration to shield New Deal legislation, and to insulate the Administrative State from challenges by the People. Those who favored the Texas decision argue that standing is a conservative doctrine as it limits the power of the courts — but the true constitutionalist uses only tests grounded in its text. The true threshold constitutional test is whether a genuine and serious “controversy” exists between the States that could be resolved by a court.
The only reason given by the Supreme Court was: “Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its election.” In truth, Texas did make such a showing. When Pennsylvania violated the exclusive authority bestowed on state legislators in the Constitution’s Electors Clause, it opened the door to corruption and foreign intrigue to corrupt the electoral votes of Pennsylvania, and as Alexander Hamilton explained in Federalist 68, that is exactly why the Framers created the Electoral College. During the 2020 election cycle, changes to the election process in Pennsylvania were made by judges, state office holders and election officials which would never have been made by its state legislature.
If the process by which Presidential Electors are chosen is corrupted in a few key states, like Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin by rigging the system in favor of one candidate, it becomes wholly irrelevant who the People of Texas support. That political reality presents a real “judicially cognizable interest” no matter what the Supreme Court decided. What happens in Pennsylvania does not stay in Pennsylvania, as electors from all States acting together select the President of the United States.
In the Federalist Papers, both James Madison and Alexander Hamilton recognized the need to combat “the spirit of faction” and the tendency of each State to yield to its immediate interest at the expense of national unity. They reasoned that the Constitution provided a solution to this centrifugal pressure while reserving a measure of sovereignty to each State. When differences arise between States that threaten to lead to disunion, the Republic can be held together, as Hamilton observed, either “by the agency of the Courts or by military force.” A constitutional remedy to enable the States to resolve their differences peacefully is the provision that permits any State to invoke the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to address and settle their differences.
In the vernacular, the Supreme Court blew it, threatening the bonds that hold the union together.

Round Two:  The United States Must Enter the Fray

Fortunately, that might have been only the first round in the fight to preserve the nation. A strategy exists to re-submit the Texas challenge under the Electors Clause to the Supreme Court in a way that even that Court could not dare refuse to consider. Just because Texas did not persuade the Justices that what happens in Pennsylvania hurts Texas does not mean that the United States of America could not persuade the justices that when Pennsylvania violates the U.S. Constitution, it harms the nation. Article III, § 2, cl. 2 confers original jurisdiction on the Supreme Court in any case suit brought by the United States against a state. Thus, the United States can and should file suit against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin. Like the Texas suit, that new suit would seek an order invalidating the appointment of the electors appointed by those four defendant States that refused to abide by the terms of the Presidential Electors Clause. That would leave it to the state legislatures in those four states to “appoint” electors — which is what the Constitution requires.
When those four States violated the Constitution by allowing electors who had not been appointed in the manner prescribed by the state legislature, the United States suffered an injury. Indeed, there could hardly have been a more significant injury to the nation than that which corrupted its Presidential election.
The United States has a vital interest and a responsibility to preserve the constitutional framework of the Republic, which was formed by a voluntary compact among the States. As with any contractual relationship of participants in an ongoing enterprise, no party is entitled to ignore or alter the essential terms of the contract by its unilateral action.
The President who has sworn to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution has the right and the duty to order the U.S. Department of Justice bring such an action in the Supreme Court — and should do so quickly.

Reasons for Great Hope at Christmas

In rejecting the invocation by the State of Texas of the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to resolve the dispute between Texas and four other States that refused to abide by the terms of the Presidential Electors Clause, for now, a majority of the Justices foreclosed the use of that constitutional safeguard by Texas to provide a peaceful means of resolving the controversy that has deeply divided States and the citizens of this Republic as at no time since the 1860s.
That consequence is too dangerous to be allowed to stand.
If the same case previously brought by Texas were now brought by the United States of America, there is every reason to believe that the Supreme Court would be compelled to understand it must hear it and decide it favorably.
Although outcomes are never certain, it is believed and hoped that a majority of the Supreme Court could never take the position that the United States has no business enforcing the process established in the Constitution by which we select the one government official who represents all the People — The President of the United States.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

150 House Democrats sign letter backing Biden to reenter Iran nuclear deal

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

U..S. Sanctions Iran’s International Network of Islamic Seminaries, Accuses them of Jihad Recruitment

As the West continues to be duped by Muslim Brotherhood-linked lobbies, pushing the “Islamophobia” subterfuge which serves as a cover to advance the jihad, Iran continues to expand its operations worldwide via its proxies, and is eager for a Biden administration to further facilitate its ambitions.
Some background about Al-Mustafa International University:

In February 1979 Ayatollah Khomeini and a group of clergymen attached to him, seized the power in Iran. From the onset, Khomeini’s regime utilized all the means and tools in its disposal to establish and fortify its brand of fundamentalism in Iran and export it throughout the Islamic world….Al Mustafa international university founded in 2007 is one of the most important among these organizations.”

Aside from Islamic indoctrination at the university, thousands of “high value individuals” from Pakistan and Afghanistan were courted by the regime’s elite Quds Force to be recruited as jihadists, and “multiple students from the university have been killed fighting in Syria.” In a characteristic deception, the university earlier in December claimed that “it promoted “peace, friendship, and brotherhood among nations” and “slammed the U.S. decision as ‘hegemonic.’”
“U.S. Sanctions Put Spotlight On Iran’s International Network Of Religious Seminaries,” by Frud Bezhan, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty,December 22, 2020 (thanks to Henry):

Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Iran’s clerical establishment has used religious organizations to expand its clout abroad.
Key among them is the Al-Mustafa International University, a network of religious seminaries based in the Shi’ite holy city of Qom that has branches in some 50 countries.
The university claims to teach Shi’ite Muslim theology, Islamic science, and Iran’s national language, Persian, to tens of thousands of foreign students across Asia, Europe, Africa, and South America.
But Tehran’s adversaries say the university has been involved in espionage and recruited foreign fighters for Iran’s proxy war in Syria.
For years, experts have documented the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps’ (IRGC) recruitment, training, and deployment of thousands of Shi’ite fighters to Syria to defend the country’s president, Bashar al-Assad, Tehran’s key ally in the brutal civil war that erupted in 2011.
‘Recruitment Platform’
The United States imposed sanctions on the massive university network on December 8, alleging that it was involved in the recruitment of Afghan and Pakistani students to fight in the Syrian conflict.
The U.S. Treasury Department said Iran’s elite Quds Force, the overseas operations arm of the IRGC, used the university’s foreign branches as a “recruitment platform” for “intelligence collection and operations,” including recruitment for pro-Iranian militias.
The Treasury Department alleged that the Quds Force used the Al-Mustafa International University as a “cover” to recruit Afghans for the blacklisted Fatemiyoun Brigade, a pro-Iranian militia that fought in Syria.
Moreover, Treasury said the Quds Force also used Al-Mustafa’s campus in Qom “as a recruitment ground” for Pakistani students to join the blacklisted Zeynabiyoun Brigade, a militia that consisted of Pakistani Shi’a.
Treasury added that “multiple students from the university have been killed fighting in Syria.”
In a statement on December 9, the university said it promoted “peace, friendship, and brotherhood among nations” and slammed the U.S. decision as “hegemonic.”
‘High-Value Individuals’
Ali Alfoneh, a senior fellow at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington who has closely monitored IRGC activity in Syria, said that, according to his database from January 2012 to December 2020, 3,059 Iranian and allied foreign fighters were killed in combat in Syria.
Alfoneh says of those, only three were students or graduates of the Al-Mustafa International University — known as Jamiat al-Mostafa University in Iran.
“This indicates that Jamiat al-Mostafa has never served as the primary recruitment ground for the IRGC’s war effort in Syria,” he says.
The IRGC recruited thousands of Afghan migrants and refugees within its own borders and covertly drafted hundreds of Shi’a inside Afghanistan. The same strategy was used to recruit Pakistanis.
Alfoneh says the “three individuals identified appear to have been in command, intelligence, or political-ideological indoctrination positions.”
That means, he said, that the IRGC perceived the graduates or students of the Al-Mustafa International University as “high-value individuals.”…


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

Book Criticizing Cancel Culture Gets Canceled Because Author Criticized Islam

You may have thought the public discourse couldn’t get any more absurd. Think again. Apparently oblivious to the titanic dimensions of the irony, the publisher Little, Brown just canceled a new book, Welcome to the Woke Trials: How #Identity Killed Progressive Politics by British journalist Julie Burchill because of an “Islamophobic” twitter exchange Burchill had with Muslim writer Ash Sarkar. So you see, it’s fine to stand up for freedom of speech, but some lines must not be crossed. And what was Burchill’s crime? Did she use racial slurs? Did she call for genocide or violence against innocent Muslims? No, apparently all she did was note the readily demonstrable fact that according to Islamic tradition, Muhammad married a child. But telling the truth is a dangerous enterprise these days.
According to The National, the Hachette group, which owns Little, Brown, announced that Burchill’s book “has been scrapped by her publisher for what it said were Islamophobic comments.”
The book, according to the report, “was promoted as a ‘characteristically irreverent and entertaining’ indictment of the ‘outrage mob.’” But the outrage mob was not outraged by anything in the book itself. It was evidently outraged because Burchill asked Sarkar, “Can you please remind me of the age of the Prophet Mohammad’s first wife?”
Burchill is clearly speaking about Muhammad’s child bride Aisha, not his first wife, Khadija, who was fifteen years older than he was. But that’s just a detail. Commenters raked Burchill over the coals for her supposed hypocrisy for ignoring child marriage in British history and claiming that Mary was a child when she married Joseph. Yet none of that was on point. No one would care about Muhammad’s child marriage were his behavior not normative for Islamic law and imitated by all too many Muslims even today. So what Burchill said, aside from mixing up the order of Muhammad’s wives, was entirely based on fact.
Now, there is a possibility that Burchill’s child marriage remarks were not the “Islamophobic comments” in question. It may be that there were other exchanges between Burchill and Sarkar that Twitter has deleted. The National fastidiously refrains from telling us what egregious thing Burchill is supposed to have said. But it is bitterly ironic that Burchill’s book on cancel culture has now been canceled for whatever it is she said. That rather proves her point, doesn’t it?
Sarkar egged on the outrage mob, writing: Ms. Sarkar tweeted: “Julie Burchill, who once I suppose was a well-regarded journalist, has quite openly subjected me to Islamophobia on here. I’m a big girl – it’s not going to upset me – but I do find it strange that none of her colleagues or friends in the industry seems to have a problem with it.”
“Her colleagues and friends in the industry” accordingly jumped to show how broad-minded and non-Islamophobic they were, and quickly threw Burchill under the bus. Little, Brown’s statement is a repugnant stew of self-contradiction, self-righteousness, and hypocrisy: “We will no longer be publishing Julie Burchill’s book. This is not a decision we have taken lightly. We believe passionately in freedom of speech at Little, Brown and we have always published authors with controversial or challenging perspectives – and we will continue to do so.”
No, Little, Brown, you don’t believe in the freedom of speech. Clearly there are controversial or challenging perspectives you don’t dare publish. Claiming to believe in the freedom of speech while canceling a controversial book is like claiming to be a little bit pregnant. You either believe in the freedom of speech or you don’t. And you don’t.
Little, Brown continued: “While there is no legal definition of hate speech in the UK, we believe that Julie’s comments on Islam are not defensible from a moral or intellectual standpoint, that they crossed a line with regard to race and religion, and that her book has now become inextricably linked with those views.”
What race is Islam again? I keep forgetting. The charge of “hate speech” is a tool of the powerful to silence the powerless. This ugly incident shows vividly how it is used to stifle dissent. Burchill’s question should have sparked a debate about child marriage, and about Sharia and its relationship to British law. Instead, Burchill’s book is canceled, signaling that such discussions are not to be tolerated. Little, Brown’s action shows how much the West has already accepted and internalized the Sharia prohibition of criticism of Islam. Britain’s protracted demise as a free society continues apace.
France: Muslim migrant ‘already known for acts of violence’ stabs man in random knife attack
France: Muslim migrant who stabbed 9, killing one, because ‘they do not read the Qur’an’ may not stand trial
Germany: ‘Moderate’ migrant imam recommends removal of women’s clitorises to reduce their sexual desire
France: Muslima tells hospital staff, ‘I will burn everything, on the Qur’an. I’m going to cut off your head’
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

GOP Blocks $2,000 Stimulus Payments, House To Hold Roll Call Vote On Proposal Monday

“Congress found plenty of money for foreign countries, lobbyists and special interests while sending the bare minimum to the American people who need it. It was not their fault.”  – President Donald J. Trump

House Republicans blocked legislation Thursday that would have sent $2,000 in direct payments to Americans, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said.
House Democratic and Republican leaders met early Thursday morning in a pro forma session and held a unanimous consent vote on the direct payments proposal, according to CNBC. Republican leadership voted the measure down, which required all lawmakers present to unanimously vote in favor for it to pass.
“Today, on Christmas Eve morning, House Republicans cruelly deprived the American people of the $2,000 that the President agreed to support,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a statement. “If the President is serious about the $2,000 direct payments, he must call on House Republicans to end their obstruction.”

Pelosi said during a press conference that the House would hold a recorded roll call vote on the measure Monday, Fox News correspondent Chad Pergram reported. If succesful, the measure would alter the the omnibus bill Congress passed Monday night by changing stimulus checks sent to Americans from $600 to $2,000.
Virginia Republican Rep. Rob Wittman attempted to get the House to vote on reconsidering the much-criticized foreign aid included in the omnibus bill, according to CNBC. Democrats blocked that proposal.
“Speaker Pelosi tried to use the American people as leverage to make coronavirus relief contingent on government funding – which includes billions of foreign aid at a time when there are urgent needs at home,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said in a statement Wednesday night.
The coronavirus stimulus relief bill hangs in the balance after President Donald Trump announced Tuesday he wouldn’t sign the bill Congress passed. Trump criticized both the $600 direct payment, saying they were too small, and the foreign aid, saying it was wasteful.
“Congress found plenty of money for foreign countries, lobbyists and special interests while sending the bare minimum to the American people who need it. It was not their fault,” Trump said.
Trump Didn’t Make The Pardon A Political Tool, It Always Has Been
Trump Says He Won’t Sign Coronavirus Stimulus Into Law Without Major Changes On Direct Payments And ‘Wasteful Items’
Feds Say Latest US Government Hack ‘Poses A Grave Risk’ To National Security. How Might They Respond?
Trump Already Has A Successful Model For ‘MAGA TV’ — And It Might Give Him A Run For His Money
‘The High Priest Of The COVID Cult’: Tucker Carlson Pans DC Mayor’s ‘Dr. Anthony S. Fauci Day’ Declaration
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.

VIDEO: How the 2020 Election was Presented to Us vs. How It Really Was

A demonstrator stands with supporters of President Donald Trump outside the Pennsylvania Convention Center where votes are being counted, on Nov. 6, 2020, in Philadelphia.

WATCH: How the election was presented to us vs. how it was.

RELATED ARTICLE: POLL: 78% Of Republicans Believe Presidential Election Was Fraudulent
EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog entry was posted in Leftist election rigging by Eeyore. ©All rights reserved.