Election Fraud: The Jig Is Up

UPDATE: Texas Democrats Paid Homeless Man to Falsify Ballots | Police Body Camera Footage Charles Jackson


There’s so much Democrats believe about elections that just ain’t so.  They yap all the time about election deniers, but never seem to worry about the election deniers in their own party.  The list of Democrat election deniers includes Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Stacey Abrams, Al Gore, Senator Patty Murray, and countless others who questioned election results.  One journalist compiled a list of 82 Democrat election deniers.  Republican researchers found 150.  So spare me the phony narrative about Republicans being election deniers.

And spare me the whole mythology Democrats have built up that election integrity laws are Republican attempts to suppress the vote.  The fact of the matter is election integrity laws were passed in 2021 in Arizona, Georgia, Texas, Florida, and Iowa.  Voter turnout went UP, not down, in all five states in subsequent elections compared to 2018.

The Democrats are bitter clingers when it comes to election denier and voter suppression mythology.  This whole charade is meant to deflect attention away from Democrat attempts to rig elections.  The Democrat Secretary of State in Michigan is in court trying to keep dead people on the voter rolls.  You gotta ask yourself why she would want to do that.  Because it makes it easier to steal elections.  When the votes are counted, you have to match up fraudulent votes for Democrat candidates with records of voters who haven’t voted.  The dirtier the voter rolls are, the easier it is to find people who haven’t voted – like dead people.  The easier it is to commit election fraud.

But ordinary people have had enough of Democrat cheating.  Ordinary people just want free and fair elections back, and they’re working hard to achieve it.

One group discovered how easy it is to forge signatures on mail-in ballots. Just circulate a petition – ‘Mr. President, Save the Whales’ – scan the signatures, and drop them into real mail-in ballots you grabbed from apartment buildings or got from your Democrat buddies who work for the Post Office.  Automate the process and, viola!, you have thousands of fake ballots you can drop into any old drop box, which the Democrats justified creating in the name of preventing COVID transmission  but, somehow, we still have.  When the people who signed the petition go to vote, they’ll be told they already voted.  Folks, that’s how easy it is to steal your vote and how loose the Democrats want our elections to be.

A citizens group in Florida examined voter rolls and found thousands of instances where people did not live at the stated address, many addresses that weren’t residences, and hundreds of dead people on the rolls.

An activist in Wisconsin brought a criminal complaint against a Milwaukee election official for setting up a tent in a back alley to accept ballots from cars, no questions asked and no poll watchers present.

Republican and conservative groups filed suit in Pennsylvania over Democrat counties contacting voters to cure defects in their mail-in ballots in violation of state law.

After an activist in East Lansing, Michigan found nonexistent addresses, votes from closed college dorms, and other problems with the voter rolls, the County Clerk and willing accomplices in the media tried to discredit the work.  Not a good look, resisting the cleaning of voter rolls.  Don’t you Democrats realize how suspicious you look when you do that?

You also look suspicious when you defy laws that require the appointment of an equal number of Republican and Democrat poll workers.  Kalamazoo hired 132 Democrats but only 60 Republicans for the August primary despite more than enough Republican names being submitted for consideration.  In Flint, the ratio was even worse. [details here]

Connect the dots and the picture is unmistakably clear: Democrats try to rig the game and steal elections.  So forgive me when I look at Democrat election so-called ‘reform’ proposals and see attempts to rig elections on steroids.  One proposal – recently rejected by the Arizona Supreme Court for failing to collect enough signatures to put it on the ballot – would have gutted voter ID, eliminated safeguards against noncitizen voting, removed constraints on mail-in balloting, and facilitated vote trafficking by political operatives.  A similar super-scam is pending in Michigan.

The Democrats, predictably, claimed the Arizona court was “suppressing democracy”.  That’s all the Democrats have – empty rhetoric.  But the jig is up.  We see right through you.  And we’ll go right on challenging election results and passing election integrity laws until every election in this country is free and fair, again.

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Delaware State Supreme Court Rules Two Major Voting Methods Are Unconstitutional

New York’s Voter Matrix: An Alternate Structure Within ‘Weaponized’ Voter Rolls, Hundreds of Thousands of Cloned Voter Records

IRS Gave Tax-Exempt Status to Soros-Backed Group That Targets Trump Republicans

RELATED TWEET:

Fearing Fed, Stocks Tumble And Major Investor Slashes Expectations

All three major U.S. stock indices fell Friday morning as investors worried that the Federal Reserve’s ongoing campaign of aggressive interest rate hikes would weaken the economy.

With Friday poised to be the fourth day in a row of slumping stocks, the Dow Jones Industrial average fell by 1.36%, the S&P 500 by 1.7% and the Nasdaq Composite fell by 2%, according to CNBC. Investors’ fears followed a late Thursday announcement by Goldman Sachs analysts, who slashed their year-end expectations for the S&P 500 by 16%, according to Reuters.

“Based on our client discussions, a majority of equity investors have adopted the view that a hard landing scenario is inevitable and their focus is on the timing, magnitude and duration of a potential recession and investment strategies for that outlook,” David Kostin, an analyst at Goldman, wrote in the note, according to Reuters.

This follows a Goldman Sachs note released earlier this week, which warned that the Fed was unlikely to relent from its pace of interest rate hikes, even in the event of a so-called “soft landing” where inflation is managed without inducing a recession. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has been clear that the agency will continue rate hikes until inflation is brought under control, and is well on its way to the Fed’s target of 2% annually.

Goldman’s earlier note predicted that the Fed would continue raising rates at least through the end of the year, with a 0.75% interest rate hike in November and a 0.5% interest rate hike in December. Central banks around the world, even some that previously had negative interest rates, have been aggressively pursuing rate hikes as inflation hammers economies worldwide, according to The Wall Street Journal.

AUTHOR

JOHN HUGH DEMASTRI

Contributor.

RELATED VIDEO: Clay Travis: 1.4% to 8.3% inflation under President Biden

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Until Something Goes Wrong’: Goldman Sachs Warns Investors High Rates Are Here To Stay

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.

Survivor-Leader Teresa J. Helm joins the NCOSE Law Center

The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) welcomes Teresa J. Helm to its team as the new Survivor Services Coordinator. Teresa will assist survivor clients seeking justice through civil litigation against major corporations who have profited from their abuse

Teresa is a lived-experience expert who survived being sexually assaulted and trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein and his network of exploiters, at the age of twenty-two. She is also a survivor of child sexual abuse. Teresa emerged from these daunting obstacles as a powerful voice, advocate, and expert in the movement for human dignity. She struggled through years of self-doubt, but eventually came to understand that speaking about her abuse helps both her and others in their healing journeys. Teresa has fought hard to bring justice to those who exploited her through Jeffrey Epstein’s network, through litigation and criminal investigations, and has ultimately become an inspiration to countless victims, families, and the community at large.

In recent years, Teresa has joined forces with various national and international organizations, law enforcement, other community leaders, and legislators. Her efforts have helped educate and prevent sex trafficking by helping others identify the signs of grooming and by equipping them with proper tools to defend, self-advocate, and fight back. Additionally, Teresa strives to provide a platform for those that may not otherwise have the opportunity to come forward and bring their story to light.

Powerful Survivor-Leader @teresajhelm is joining @NCOSE as the new Survivor Services Coordinator. Teresa will assist survivor clients seeking justice through civil litigation. Thank you Teresa for your important work!CLICK TO TWEET

As Survivor Services Coordinator with the NCOSE Law Center, Teresa will walk with survivors interested in bringing civil lawsuits against corporations and individuals who profited from and facilitated their exploitation. She will also work with survivors who partner with NCOSE to pass legislative and corporate policies that promote human dignity.

The NCOSE Law Center and Public Policy Team use the law to shift social norms to respect human dignity, punish sexual exploiters, and give justice to survivors. The Law Center has already filed nine ground-breaking lawsuits against mainstream entities who facilitate massive sexual exploitation, and will not stop until hundreds of such lawsuits are filed. Civil litigation is the most historically effective tactic to create change – for example, it was a flood of litigation that ultimately brought down the tobacco industry. Through partnering with survivors, the same can be done to bring down the sexual exploitation industry.

Given Teresa’s lived experience expertise of having herself pursued litigation against her exploiters, she is uniquely qualified to help survivors walk through the difficult but often rewarding process of civil litigation and public policy advocacy. NCOSE is committed to being guided by survivors in our work to end sexual abuse and exploitation. We know that survivors are lived-experience experts with key insights that must lead policy, advocacy, and education efforts. For these reasons, we are beyond thrilled to have Teresa join our team.

Teresa is committed to abolishing human trafficking, and aims to help facilitate the healing that is so crucial and fundamental to regaining one’s sense of self in the aftermath of sex trafficking and sexual abuse. It is with this goal in mind that Teresa looks forward to working with survivors at NCOSE.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Teresa J. Helm Joins NCOSE to Assist Sexual Abuse Survivors Seeking Justice

The Stories Behind the NCOSE Law Center’s Lawsuits

Lawsuits Are the Linchpin in the Fight to End Sexual Exploitation

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

DOJ Tramples on the Constitution

The United States under the Biden administration is using the force of government to harass the late Phyllis Schlafly’s group in Alabama.

In recent months, the Eagle Forum of Alabama has helped write legislation in that state to protect children with gender confusion from receiving “treatment” that could permanently damage them.

In his End of Day Report (9/9/22), Gary Bauer writes, “After Alabama banned transgender surgeries on children, the Biden Administration sued the state in federal court to block the law. But they’re not just arguing against the constitutionality of the law. They are also going after a conservative public policy group that lobbied on behalf of the law.” Of course, that group is the Eagle Forum of Alabama.

The United States’ Department of Justice issued a subpoena in August demanding records from the Eagle Forum of Alabama, stating: “Several public statements suggest that Eagle Forum of Alabama staff may have had some involvement in drafting the legislation or its predecessor bills. As a result, the United States is issuing the enclosed subpoena for certain records in the Eagle Forum of Alabama’s possession from January 1, 2017 through the present.”

The official subpoena demands: “any draft legislation, proposed legislations, or model legislation.” This included all their communiques on the subject, e.g., “any social media postings.”

Eagle Forum of Alabama responded to this “unprecedented request”: “This should cause every single advocacy group or individual in America engaged in the legislative process to pause and consider the potential ramifications if any part of this subpoena is allowed to stand.” Becky Garritson, the executive director of the organization, explained more to me on a radio segment.

Kristen Ullman, president of Eagle Forum (nationally), comments on the wider issue here: “If the Department of Justice doesn’t like your viewpoint it may target you next.”

What is the government alleging was illegal? Certainly it’s not illegal for an organization to be involved with crafting legislation?

The Biden Administration’s action is particularly astounding because we do not yet fully grasp the long-term deleterious effects of the puberty blockers and body-part-removal surgeries to “cure” gender dysphoria.

In her eye-opening book, Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters (2020), Abigail Shrier chronicles the incredible harm being foisted on so many children in our society today, especially girls, because of this current fad of transgender mania.

Shrier, a writer for The Wall Street Journal, notes, “In 2016, natal females accounted for 46 percent of all sex reassignment surgeries in the United States. A year later it was 70 percent.”

She adds, “Some small proportion of the population will always be transgender. But perhaps the current craze will not always lure troubled young girls with no history of gender dysphoria, enlisting them in a lifetime of hormone dependency and disfiguring surgeries….No adolescent should pay this high a price for having been, briefly, a follower.”

The left is imposing on this country a form of mental insanity. Both God and science teach us that we are either male or female. God said He has created us male or female in His image. Science teaches us that we have trillions of cells in the human body, and virtually every one of them provides a marker that you are either male or female.

No one denies gender dysphoria, where some children feel confused. “Am I a girl trapped in a boy’s body?” they wonder. But experts say that about 95% of these children with gender dysphoria will grow out of this by around puberty—if the process is not interrupted along the way.

Tragically, there are many people in high places that are interrupting this process all too often.

And then when children go through with some form of transition, very often deep depression follows, as documented at www.sexchangeregret.com, a ministry to help the hurting.

Dr. Ryan T. Anderson, author of When Harry Became Sally, writes: “The most thorough follow-up of sex-reassigned people—extending over 30 years and conducted in Sweden, where the culture is strongly supportive of the transgendered—documents their lifelong mental unrest. Ten to 15 years after surgical reassignment, the suicide rate of those who had undergone sex-reassignment surgery rose to 20 times that of comparable peers.”

The founders gave us the First Amendment to enshrine in the Constitution the right to freely practice religion and by extension, the right of conscience. We also have free speech rights and the right to petition our government in case of grievances. That would include lobbying for legislation for the good of society.

But the Biden administration is steam rolling over conscience rights, despite the Constitution.

Phyllis Schlafly herself once told me in a 2004 television interview: “The Constitution is not out of date.  It’s just as good today as when it was written.” Would that it was being followed today by the Biden administration.

©Jerry Newcombe. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

POLL: 41% Of Hispanics Approve GOP Governors Sending Illegal Migrants To Liberal Cities

The majority of Hispanic voters surveyed approve of the migrant relocation policies enforced by some Republican governors, a Politico/Morning Consult poll found Wednesday.

The poll surveyed 223 Hispanics and asked them if they believe the transporting of migrants to liberal enclaves by Republican Govs. Greg Abbott of Texas and Ron DeSantis of Florida are appropriate. Forty-one percent of Hispanics surveyed approved of the relocation policies, according to the poll.

Just over one-third of those surveyed, 35%, disapproved of the governors’ transporting of migrants, according to the poll. The numbers resembled the answers of the white voters surveyed, finding that 46% approved and 39% disapproved.

Among the total number of registered voters, the opinion was almost entirely cut in half with 42% approving and 41% opposing the relocation policy put forth by the Republican governors. The poll surveyed 2,005 registered voters between Sept. 16-18 with a 2% margin of error.

The governors’ actions sparked outrage among some liberal figures, such as The Nation’s justice correspondent, Elie Mystal, who accused DeSantis of “human trafficking” the 50 illegal migrants who were recently sent to Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts. Sheriff Javier Salazar of Bexar County, Texas, announced an investigation Monday into allegations that migrants were “lured” onto the planes.

“The allegations that we’ve heard, it’s absolutely distasteful, it’s disgusting. It’s an abuse of human rights. But, I would like to find out sooner rather than later what charges if any are going to apply and to whom,” Salazar said. “I believe there’s some criminal activity involved, but at present, we’re trying to keep an open mind and we’re going to investigate to find out, to determine what laws were broken, if that does turn out to be the case.”

Taryn Fenske, a spokesperson for DeSantis, said in a statement received Tuesday by the Daily Caller that the migrants voluntarily chose to board the two planes chartered to Massachusetts. The Florida governor also confirmed Friday that the migrants voluntarily traveled to the upper-class New England island.

Migrants received brochures informing them of their destination before boarding the flight to Martha’s Vineyard, according to documents viewed Friday by the Daily Caller. The brochures showed migrants where they were headed and offered a variety of resources on job opportunities and community services areas on the island.

Three Venezuelan migrants — Yanet Doe, Pablo Doe and Jesus Doe — filed a class action lawsuit Tuesday against DeSantis, alleging they were “manipulated” and stripped of their constitutional rights protected under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.

AUTHOR

NICOLE SILVERIO

Media reporter. Follow Nicole Silverio on Twitter @NicoleMSilverio

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Illegal Migrants ‘Voluntarily’ Went To Martha’s Vineyard, Thanked DeSantis, Florida Gov Office Says

Most Americans Believe Migrants Should Be Sent To Sanctuary Cities

‘They’re Not Even Here Legally’: Sen. Marco Rubio Calls Out Migrants’ Lawsuit Against Gov. DeSantis

‘Is It Secure?’: DCNF Reporter Breaks Down Border Crisis, Record Illegal Immigration

‘It’s A Humanitarian Crisis’: Daily Caller’s Jorge Ventura Calls Out Liberal Towns’ Outrage Over Migrant Transports

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: Martha’s Meltdown Model

House Republicans Introduce Legislation To End Catch And Release

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

Video Clips of Sean Hannity’s Interview with President Donald J. Trump on Mar-a-Lago raid, Special Master, New York’s AG and more…

President Donald J. Trump sat down with Fox News’ Sean Hannity and talked about a series of topics. Here are video clips of key segments of that interview listed by topic for the convenience of our readers.

Sean Hannity comments before beginning his exclusive interview with President Donald J. Trump titled “Do we have equal justice under the law?”

President Trump recalls when he first learned of the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago

There Doesn’t Have to Be a Process on Declassifying Documents

I Have Very Little Debt and Have a Lot of Cash

President Trump reacts to New York attorney general’s civil lawsuit

New York’s A.G. Is Defending Banks That Have Been Paid Off

On Releasing Mar-a-Lago Security Footage of the FBI raid

Sean Hannity to President Trump: Why Did You Approve of a Special Master that Signed One of the FISA Warrants?

President Donald J. Trump: We were soon going to be energy ‘dominant’

©Fox News Channel. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: A Nation in Decline

Another ‘Open Letter’ Warning to Americans

We now have another “Open Letter” – claiming America is “an exceptionally challenging civil-military environment” — signed by 8 former U.S. defense secretaries and 5 former chairmen of the joint chiefs of staff. The letter is published by “War on the Rocks” a website advertising itself as “National Security. For insiders. By insiders.”  The September 6, 2022 commentary is titled, “To Support And Defend: Principles Of Civilian Control And Best Practices Of Civil-Military Relations.”

Why a letter like this and why now?  Who instigated the effort to make this pronouncement? Are we supposed to believe the letter was just “spontaneous?” Was the Open Letter coordinated with the General Mark Milley at the Pentagon or maybe the Biden White House? Cui bono?

The letter comes five days on the heels of President Biden declaring, “MAGA Republicans do not respect the Constitution. They do not believe in the rule of law,” and condemning half the American electorate as “represent[ing] an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic.”

Does anyone believe this is a coincidence?  Just happenstance?

Such an “Open Letter” is typically used by the elites in the national policy arena as a public signal for something to come. Something bigger. Perhaps even something a lot weirder than normal. “Thought leaders” are framing the public debate. The authors are trying to make a point, and their effort is so extraordinary and unprovoked that it arouses suspicion.

It is a reasonable suspicion. Do you remember how the National School Board Association “actively engaged”with the White House before asking the feds to investigate outspoken parents as domestic terrorists?  Yes, that is exactly the sort of coordination we should consider.  Journalists should pursue that line of questioning, but they will not.

Remember another instance when a group of former U.S. government “experts” got together for an Open Letter. That was when 51 former intelligence officials lied to the entire country about the validity of all the lurid, corrupt details on Hunter Biden’s laptop saying it was all Russian disinformation. All 51 were wrong.  The contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop were even worse than originally described, but the “experts” had already unlawfully influenced the outcome of an election.

The September 2022 Open Letter reads largely like a West Point or ROTC lesson plan for first-year cadets. It is essentially a civics lesson with an introduction and 16 enumerated points. Strong emphasis is placed on the legality of orders. There are a few interesting observations by the experts that require our attention to fully understand the subtext.

  • “… the U.S. military must simultaneously come to terms with wars that ended without all the goals satisfactorily accomplished…”

Analysis: The U.S. has not achieved a clear, decisive war victory in 77 years.  The military leaders authoring this letter are largely responsible for that record and would like you to come to terms with their failures.

  • “Politically, military professionals confront an extremely adverse environment characterized by the divisiveness of affective polarization that culminated in the first election in over a century when the peaceful transfer of political power was disrupted and in doubt.”

Analysis: The peaceful transfer of power was never legitimately in doubt.  That claim is an overwrought, hyperbolic canard advanced for political purposes.  The authors’ message is that Trump supporters are the problem. Remember:  No Trump supporters, no problem. Understand?

  • “Looking ahead, all of these factors could well get worse before they get better.”

Analysis: The groundwork is being laid for the public acceptance that there are a number of other disruptive factors caused by the Biden administration’s failing policies that could get worse: inflation, energy costs, the border crisis, record murder and crime rates, etc.

  • “Mutual trust … that civilian leaders will rigorously explore alternatives … regardless of the implications for partisan politics … that the military will faithfully implement directives that run counter to their professional military preference — helps overcome the friction built into this process …”
  • “There are significant limits on the public role of military personnel in partisan politics … Members of the military accept limits on the public expression of their private views … Military and civilian leaders must be diligent about keeping the military separate from partisan political activity.”

Analysis: Ironically, these two paragraphs should serve as an indictment of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Mark Milley, whose egregious subversion is the most treasonous conduct since Benedict Arnold. Unfortunately they will be twisted to justify and bolster his unlawful conduct.

What is the real message conveyed by this Open Letter from former senior military leaders?

What is their warning and what do they want?  Write and speak plainly. Have the guts to “just say it out loud.” Are they worried Trump will be reelected in 2024? Are they as worried about the sustained, extreme, militant, violence and destruction of Antifa and BLM as they are the January 6th protests? What about Milley’s phone calls to his Communist Chinese counterpart?  Does that meet their civics lesson test? The “Open Letter” is anything but “open.”

AUTHOR

Chris Farrell

Judicial Watch Director of Investigations

RELATED ARTICLE: Air Force Academy Diversity Training Tells Cadets: “Don’t Say Terrorist,” “Include All Genders​”‘ Drop ‘Mom and Dad’

RELATED VIDEO: A Nation in Decline

RELATED TWEET:

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

The FBI Ungrounded

The once-venerated Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which prided itself on being a field-driven law enforcement agency, has increasingly become centralized political police.

A whistleblower recently warned the House Judiciary Committee that the FBI’s powerful Washington Field Office (WFO) was directing agents in field offices where alleged J6 participants resided to open cases, only to have the actual investigation conducted inside the beltway by the WFO.

Washington also instructed field agents to ignore child sexual abuse cases in favor of hunting down allegations of “white supremacy,” even as FBI agents tell the Washington Times the demand for white supremacy far outstrips the supply.

The WFO is often confused with FBI headquarters (FBIHQ). FBIHQ is supposed to support and oversee field office investigations. The WFO is supposed to function as any other field agency but has long been notorious inside the FBI as a place where careerists and accomplished bureaucrats manipulate their way into deputy director positions. Dedicated agents who joined the FBI to catch bad guys have said they would rather be transferred anywhere in the world than the WFO, because of the poisonous politicized culture the office exudes.

In a way we should not be surprised. At its most fundamental, law enforcement is about the prevention and investigation of crimes, which by their nature take place at specific real-world locations which are very different from one another. The law enforcement environment, including the type and nature of offenses, and of perpetrators, will never be the same nationwide. Omaha and Pittsburgh don’t have the same food or musical tastes, why would they have the same criminals?

As the FBI’s own website says regarding its field offices, “Our local FBI offices are all about protecting your communities.” But protecting local communities isn’t something that can be centrally directed from within the Beltway by bureaucrats operating on a narrative drafted in the White House.

Is it possible that there are areas within the United States where individuals motivated by white supremacy represent the greatest threat of political violence? Of course, although conversations with local law enforcement in many areas confirm claims by FBI whistleblowers that it just isn’t as large a threat as some in academia and the media insist. But any assessment of threats should be done locally and regionally and should consider the views of state and local officers, who know best the streets they patrol.

If the FBI as an institution wishes to survive the growing backlash against its politicization, a future director would need to permanently sever the unhealthy grip the WFO has on the careers and advancement of good agents and stop incentivizing administrative double-dealing over solid law enforcement work. FBI field offices should again be directed locally to address the federal crimes most impacting their areas. Congress should consider making field office Special Agent-in-Charge positions Senate confirmable, similar to U.S. Deputy Marshals who oversee a particular region. A future president might even consider appointing accomplished local or state law enforcement officers to those positions, instead of politicized apparatchiks.

As with much else ailing the United States, the solution to FBI politicization is to be found in a new and strengthened federalism, which recognizes the uniqueness of the country’s different states and regions.

Having squandered its institutional cache as the country’s premiere law enforcement agency, the FBI should get back to being a “field-driven” investigative service, one that exists to help local law enforcement crack the difficult cases.

If they can’t or won’t, the new incoming Congress should make clear that their replacements will.

AUTHOR

Kyle Shideler

Director and Senior Analyst for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden’s “America last” UN agenda

Open-Source Intelligence

We are not prepared if China attacks our Pacific bases

How powerful is Iran’s army?

Securing America – Col. John Mills on the upcoming film “Innovation Race”

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

California Governor Newsom’s Pick for ‘Hate Commission’ Called Republicans ‘Domestic Terrorists’

 

Recently, the California governor signed a bill into law that would force companies to report on their dealings with what the leftist supermajority calls “hate speech” and “disinformation.”

Not satisfied with that, Tyler O’Neil of the Daily Signal reports on Newsom’s radical Commission on the State of Hate.

According to O’Neil, author of “Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center,” the commission includes Brian Levin, a former SPLC staffer that the Freedom Center had its own run-in with. Other members include, “Cynthia Choi, a co-director of Chinese for Affirmative Action and co-founder of Stop Asian-American Pacific Islander Hate; Bamby Salcedo, a transgender activist and president and CEO of the TransLatin@ Coalition; Shirin Sinnar, a professor at Stanford Law School; and Erroll G. Southers, associate senior vice president of safety and risk assurance at the University of Southern California.”

Choi had falsely blamed President Trump for attacks on Asians.

Southers was a controversial figure whose nomination by Obama to head the TSA had to be pulled.

Questions have also been raised about a reprimand that Southers received for running background checks on his then-estranged wife’s boyfriend two decades ago.

Southers wrote a letter to lawmakers earlier this month acknowledging that he had given inconsistent answers to Congress on that issue.

In an October affidavit for the Senate Homeland Security committee, Southers initially said he asked a San Diego police employee to run a background check on his then-estranged wife’s boyfriend and was censured by his FBI superiors 20 years ago for what he said was an isolated instance.

But a day after the committee approved his nomination and sent it to the full Senate, he wrote to the senators and told them that he was incorrect, that he had twice run background checks himself.

He had since urged that Republicans should be treated as “the domestic terrorist party.”

This is what Newsom’s extreme Commission on the State of Hate.looks like. And you can imagine what its recommendations will be.

Tyler O’Neil also kindly quoted me warning about the danger of more political censorship and deplatforming.

Daniel Greenfield, Shillman Journalism fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center (which the SPLC brands an “anti-Muslim hate group”), told The Daily Signal that he “would strongly agree” with conservatives’ concerns about the California commission. He cited “California’s new law monitoring so-called hate speech” and the state’s “previous role in reporting social media so-called disinformation to social media companies for censorship.”

“Newsom and the California Democrat supermajority have cultivated a culture of censorship and political intimidation that is targeted at conservatives,” Greenfield added. “Every Californian and American who cares about the Constitution should be worried.”

What starts in California doesn’t end there. And the State of Hate is coming from Newsom.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

DHS says 78 people on terror watch list caught at border this year, up from 15 in all of 2021

Will court ruling that Big Tech has no ‘right to censor’ restore the freedom of speech?

African Feminist Slave Traders vs. White Male Slave Liberators

Washington Post: ‘Britain’s new head of state is a loud admirer of Islam,’ ‘detests Islamophobia’

Canada: Intel agency CSIS tight-lipped on whereabouts of spy accused of smuggling girls for ISIS 

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

Border Patrol Increasingly Encounters People On Terror Watchlist

U.S. Border Patrol has seen a massive spike in southern border encounters with people on the U.S. terror watchlist between ports of entry, according to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) statistics.

CBP personnel came across individuals on the watchlist 78 times in those areas between October and August, the data reveals. There have been more than 2,000,000 migrant encounters on the southern border so far this fiscal year, a record-breaking surge.

CBP reported only fifteen southern border encounters with people on the watchlist between ports of entry in FY2021. No such incidents were recorded in FY2019.

President Joe Biden appointed Vice President Kamala Harris to address migration’s root causes early last year, and she did not visit the southern border until more than 90 days later. Harris insisted in a “Meet the Press” interview released Sept. 11 that the border was “secure,” admitting, “We also have a broken immigration system and particular[ly] over the last four years before we came in and it needs to be fixed.”

Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz conceded under oath in late July that the southern border was in crisis. Texas Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar said Sept. 9 that the border was not closed, arguing the administration was “not on the same page” when it claimed otherwise.

The White House and CBP did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

TREVOR SCHAKOHL

Legal reporter. Follow Trevor on Twitterhttps://twitter.com/tschakohl.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLE: Texas Sheriff Investigating Martha’s Vineyard Flights Hits Back At Kamala Harris For Saying Border Is Secure

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.

Sen. Marco Rubio Calls Out Migrants’ Lawsuit Against Gov. DeSantis: ‘They’re Not Even Here Legally’

The Florida senator criticized the class action lawsuit filed by three Venezuelan migrants Tuesday over the flight to Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts. Alianza Americas, a Chicago-based network of migrant-led organizations and the migrants — Yanet Doe, Pablo Doe, and Jesus Doe — argued they were used “for the sole purpose of advancing their own personal, financial, and political interests.”

“Think about this, okay? People came into this country illegally, violating our laws and the first thing they do is get lawyers and use our laws to sue an elected governor, to sue a state,” the senator said. “I mean, just think about that. They just got here, they’re not even here legally, they didn’t enter the country the proper way, and they’re immediately in court demanding rights and claims under our laws. This is outrageous. What other country in the world would that even be allowed? What other country in the world would even tolerate that?”

“This is not immigration, what we’re seeing,” he continued. “This is mass migration. That’s a very different thing. But to just think about the fact that somebody just came here illegally and within a week they’re in court and they have lawyers representing them in court suing the American government whose laws they just violated is unbelievable. It’s outrageous. It angers me and it should anger everybody.”

The migrants alleged that accomplices acting on behalf of DeSantis and his administration “manipulated” and “stripped” them of constitutional rights protected under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The accomplices allegedly pretended to be individuals offering the migrants humanitarian assistance.

“Defendants manipulated them, stripped them of their dignity, deprived them of their liberty, bodily autonomy, due process, and equal protection under law, and impermissibly interfered with the Federal Government’s exclusive control over immigration in furtherance of an unlawful goal and a personal political agenda,” the lawsuit stated.

Taryn Fenske, a spokesperson for DeSantis, said in a statement received by the Daily Caller Tuesday that the migrants voluntarily chose to board the two planes chartered to Massachusetts.

“The transportation of the immigrants to Martha’s Vineyard was done on a voluntary basis,” Fenske said. “The immigrants were homeless, hungry, and abandoned – and these activists didn’t care about them then. Florida’s program gave them a fresh start in a sanctuary state and these individuals opted to take advantage of chartered flights to Massachusetts. It was disappointing that Martha’s Vineyard called in the Massachusetts National Guard to bus them away from the island within 48 hours.”

Migrants received brochures informing them of their destination before boarding the flight to Martha’s Vineyard. The packets showed the location and offered a variety of resources on job opportunities and community services areas.

AUTHOR

NICOLE SILVERIO

Media reporter. Follow Nicole Silverio on Twitter @NicoleMSilverio

RELATED ARTICLES:

DeSantis Keeps White House, Delaware And Media Guessing On Migrant Flights

‘Not In My Vineyard!’ Liberals Scream As DeSantis Air Flies On The Wings Of Their Hypocrisy

Will DeSantis Be Convicted For Kidnapping Over Martha’s Vineyard Flights? Experts Say It’s Unlikely

Border Patrol Released Illegals Into The US And Didn’t Track Them, Watchdog Finds

‘Take The Politics Out Of This’: Dem El Paso Mayor Outlines Situation At Border

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

It’s ‘Unreasonable’ for Banks to Share Your Financial Info With the Government, 8 in 10 Americans Say

About a fifth, 21%, think it is reasonable.


hat if your bank shared what you spent your money on with the federal government? By law, banks and other financial institutions (like car dealerships, jewelers, pawn shops) are required to report certain types of purchases people make to financial regulators. What do Americans think of this?

new Cato Institute national survey of 2,000 U.S. adults conducted by YouGov finds that 79% of Americans believe it is “unreasonable” for your bank to share your financial records and bank transactions with the federal government. About a fifth, 21%, think it is reasonable.

Instead, and overwhelming majority—83%—think that the government should first obtain a warrant to access your financial records, while 17% think a warrant shouldn’t be needed.

Even in an era of hyper‐​partisanship, Democrats, Republicans, and independents agree on this issue. Majorities of Democrats (68%), independents (83%), and Republicans (89%) think it’s unreasonable for your bank to share your financial records with the government. Similarly, overwhelming majorities of Democrats (82%), independents (76%), and Republicans (87%) think a warrant should be needed first.

The issue somewhat divides a portion of the Democratic coalition. Americans who identify as “very liberal” were the most likely (41%) group to think it’s reasonable for banks to share customers’ records with the federal government compared with 26% of mainline liberals.  Nevertheless, strong majorities of both strong liberals (59%) and moderate liberals (74%) believe sharing what people buy with the federal government is unacceptable. Furthermore, the same percentage (86%) of both say the government should need to obtain a warrant before reviewing purchases people make.

The Cato Institute 2022 Financial Privacy National Survey was designed and conducted by the Cato Institute in collaboration with YouGov. YouGov collected responses online August 17 to 23, 2022, from a national sample of 2,000 Americans 18 years of age and older. Restrictions are put in place to ensure that only the people selected and contacted by YouGov are allowed to participate. The margin of error for the survey is +/- 2.39 percentage points at the 95% level of confidence.

The topline questionnaire and survey methodology can be found here. If you would like to speak to Dr. Ekins on the poll’s results please contact pr@​cato.​org or 202–789-5200.

This Cato Institute article was republished with permission.

AUTHOR

Emily Ekins

Emily Ekins is a research fellow at the Cato Institute.

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

I’m D.J. Trump and I Approve This Border Security Message by Bill Clinton

A reader sent us a video on then Democrat President Bill Clinton addressing a joint session of Congress on his steps to secure our borders.

Oh, my! Please watch and share this with everyone you know.

WATCH:

WB wrote,

In 1995 Bill Clinton outlines his plan, in just 1-minute, to stop illegal immigration!

My, how things have changed!

Donald Trump should just televise this Bill Clinton speech from 1995 and then simply state “I’m Donald Trump and I approve this message.”

Please make this video go viral. Not one word of commentary needs to be added.

So, we decided to title this article I’m D. J. Trump and I Approve This Border Security Message by Bill Clinton.

©D.J. Trump and Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED VIDEO: Abbott: If Biden, Kamala Would Not Go to the Border, ‘We’re Taking the Border to Them’

RELATED ARTICLES:

Venezuela Empties Prisons, Sends Violent Criminals to U.S. Border, Says DHS Report

Report: Agents Claim Biden Regime Pressuring FBI To Fabricate “Extremist” & “White Supremacist” Cases

McDonald’s CEO Warns Chicago Mayor Lightfoot that Soaring Crime is Leaving its Corporate Staff Too Terrified to Return to HQ

Mayor Lori Lightfoot has allowed criminals to take over the once great city of Chicago. As such, we are now seeing a corporate exodus out of the Windy City. How long before McDonald’s follows Boeing, Citadel, the Chicago Bears and others out of Chicago? Not very long at this rate. The city of Muddy Waters, John Belushi, John Hughes, and Michael Jordan is dying before our eyes. Little to no media coverage on Lightfoot’s willful incompetence. Shameful.

McDonald’s CEO warns Chicago Mayor Lightfoot that soaring crime in burger giant’s home city is leaving its corporate staff too terrified to return to its HQ

  • Chris Kempczinski spoke last and says the violence has been a problem when trying to convince employees to come back
  • He said: ‘Everywhere I go, I’m confronted by the same question: ‘What’s going on in Chicago? There is a general sense out there that our city is in crisis’ 
  • Crime is up 37 percent from this point in 2021, according to the city’s own data 
  • Murders and shootings are down double digits but thefts are up a shocking 64 percent
  • Previously, Kempczinski appeared to blame parents of two children who were shot and killed in a McDonald’s drive-thru in Chicago to Mayor Lori Lightfoot 
  • Kempczinski – who lives in the city with his family – pledged to not only keep the golden arches headquartered in Chicago but build a new innovation center 

By DailyMail.co.uk, Sept 16, 2022

The CEO of McDonald’s is speaking out about the crime crisis in Chicago and believes the lack of safety is keeping employees from returning to the fast food giant’s Windy City HQ in a warning to Democrat Mayor Lori Lightfoot.

Chris Kempczinski spoke last Wednesday at the Economic Club of Chicago, where he says the violence has been a problem when trying to convince employees to come back.

He said: ‘Everywhere I go, I’m confronted by the same question: ‘What’s going on in Chicago? There is a general sense out there that our city is in crisis.’

View Chicago Crime Statistics Here.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot Suffers Enormous Defeat: Chicago Bears DENY Her Proposal To Stay In The City Of Chicago

Judge Overrules Despotic Democrats, ‘Vote-By-Mail Statute Is Unconstitutional’

Watchdog To Probe IRS After Hundreds Of Employees Failed To Pay Taxes

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

Federal Court Upholds Texas Social Media Bill, Rules Corporations Do Not Have ‘Right’ To Censor

The U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals preserved Texas state law Friday that would stop large social media platforms from restricting particular opinions.

Texas’ HB 20 was signed last year and generally prohibits platforms with over 50 million monthly U.S. users from censoring them based on their viewpoints. The Computer Communications Industry Association (CCIA) and the NetChoice organization, representing social media companies, argued that aspects of the law were unconstitutional but failed to convince the court.

“In urging such sweeping relief, the platforms offer a rather odd inversion of the First Amendment,” the court’s majority decision said. “That Amendment, of course, protects every person’s right to ‘the freedom of speech.’ But the platforms argue that buried somewhere in the person’s enumerated right to free speech lies a corporation’s unenumerated right to muzzle speech.”

The appeals court must give the district court that previously decided the case written instructions for the law to become effective, according to Politico. A 5-4 May U.S. Supreme Court ruling had halted the law from going into force after an emergency request by the CCIA and NetChoice.

Appealing Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton celebrated the circuit court’s decision Friday, tweeting, “#BigTech CANNOT censor the political voices of ANY Texan! The 5th Circuit ‘reject[s] the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say.”

CCIA President Matt Schruers decried the ruling, stating, “Forcing private companies to give equal treatment to all viewpoints on their platforms places foreign propaganda and extremism on equal footing with decent Internet users, and places Americans at risk,” according to The Hill.

The Supreme Court could still be asked to directly consider the law’s validity, the outlet reported.

In May, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a block on enforcing parts of Florida Senate Bill 7072, which would require social media platforms to explain the reasons for individual acts of supposed censorship, deplatforming and shadow banning and stop them from censoring a “journalistic enterprise based on the content of its publication or broadcast,” according to The National Law Review.

“We are disappointed that the Fifth Circuit’s split decision undermines First Amendment protections and creates a circuit split with the unanimous decision of the Eleventh Circuit,” NetChoice Vice President and General Counsel Carl Szabo said in a Friday press release. “We remain convinced that when the U.S. Supreme Court hears one of our cases, it will uphold the First Amendment rights of websites, platforms, and apps.”

NetChoice declined the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment. The CCIA did not immediately respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

TREVOR SCHAKOHL

Legal reporter. 

RELATED ARTICLE: Facebook Spied On Conservative Users’ Private Messages, Fed ‘Leads’ To The FBI: REPORT

EDITORS NOTE: The 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.