News Blog for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited "smaller" government, free markets, lower taxes, due process of law, liberty & individual freedom. Content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for or by this "Blog" - no paid ads - no payments for articles.Fair Use Doctrine is posted & used. Blogger/Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year] Contact: editor@arranewsservice.com (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home PageFollow @arra
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
(429-347 BC)
Friday, November 06, 2020
White House Hangs in the Ballots
by Tony Perkins: If you want to feel better about the election, here's an idea: turn off the news! We've become so conditioned to listen to the media in situations like this, thinking only they can update maps and color in states. But here's the reality: No one -- not even Fox News's Decision Desk -- can change the fact that there are actual processes and laws in place that will settle this election. Not Pennsylvania's anti-Trump secretary of state. Not the exploding heads at CNN. Not even the uncertified statewide counts. As much as we want instant results, our Founders understood that there needed to be a system that could withstand the kind of political divisions we have today. Thankfully, despite the media's insistence that they call the shots, that's not how it works. There is a process for close and uncertain elections, and we need to let the process work.
Of course, in the meantime, Mark Levin said, the press will keep trashing the president for challenging any statewide irregularities. "'This Trump, he's a dictator,'" liberals tell the American people. The reality is, "Trump's trying to uphold the federal Constitution. Trump's trying to [protect] these state statutes -- not the state supreme courts, not the state boards of elections. Trump and his people are trying to uphold the rule of law." Because once the rule of law is gone, you can kiss fair and free elections goodbye.
And that's exactly what the far-Left wants. It's why, months before the election, billionaire George Soros started plotting a sophisticated campaign to subvert the election process. The plan, outlined in a paper by the Transition Integrity Project he funds, hinged on dragging out the ballot counting long enough for liberals on the ground to manipulate the vote totals they needed to win key states. Is that happening? There's no way for us to know. What we do know is that the strategy involved multiple states and an infusion of "insecure" (mail-in) votes. They talked about going to court to weaken local election rules (check), public misinformation campaigns if Trump was ahead (check), and ramped-up social media censorship (check). It's called "war-gaming," the New York Times explained. Except "the game" was to keep Trump from being reelected on November 3rd.
I'm not suggesting we subscribe to a conspiracy theory about liberals stealing the election. What I am saying is that there are radical forces out there who will do whatever it takes to stop Donald Trump from winning a second term. Maybe there isn't widespread fraud taking place, but there are enough anomalies to warrant questions being ask and answers being attained. Take the success Republicans had on Tuesday in the state legislatures, for example. In one of the most unreported storylines of 2020, conservatives had a huge night locally. Despite outspending Republicans three-to-two on statehouse races, Democrats didn't pick up control of a single legislature (so far, only Arizona is too close to call). That means that Republicans kept their historic lead of controlling 29 state legislatures to the Democrats' 18.
In other words, Republicans had banner wins in the House, possibly the Senate, and the states -- but the president of the same party didn't? Something doesn't add up. That's what the White House and other conservatives want to get to the bottom of. Even House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) agreed that all of these indicators point to a different outcome than we're seeing on the electoral map. "Republicans will not back down" on defending this election's integrity, he vowed.
That's great, you're thinking, but what happens now? Well, there are several scenarios. On the Left, the goal is to keep driving this narrative that any of Trump's reasonable complaints are his attempt to steal the election. On social media and the news outlets, Americans are going to be bombarded with the message that this president has no legitimate claim to victory. It's the slow creep of misinformation -- or, on platforms like Twitter -- the outright silencing of information (like we're seeing with the shutdown of Stop the Steal).
On the president's side, the legal fight marches on. In the crosshairs, David Horowitz explains, are "a mix of illegal administrative actions taken by Democrat administrations in the key states and [lower courts] overriding long-standing state election laws." No state official should be allowed to just waltz in and change the way elections are handled -- pandemic or not. That's what creates the kind of chaos we're seeing right now. In too many places, Democrats just flat-out rewrote the laws on late voting, ballot harvesting, and even voter verification.
But the states could have their revenge. What most Americans don't realize is that when they go to the polls, they aren't voting for Joe Biden or Donald Trump. They're voting for state electors who cast the final ballots for president and vice president. (In some states, those electors' names are even listed next to the candidates.) It's their 538 votes that make up the Electoral College. On December 14th, they'll meet for a formal vote -- and 270 of them will decide the presidency. Now, some states force those electors to cast their ballot based on which candidate won their state. In others, there's no such rule, and electors can choose -- although they rarely do -- to vote for a different candidate. In 2016, 10 electors broke with their states -- but it wasn't enough to change the outcome of the election. This time, 10 electors could be more than enough to alter the result.
In that case, the road to the White House would run right through the state legislatures. They -- not the secretary of state or governor or board of elections -- have the final say in who their electors are, based on the U.S. Constitution. And if the Republican legislatures believe there's evidence of fraud or other extenuating circumstances, they could, as Horowitz warns, "reclaim their authority over the Electoral College and rectify the [corruption] that has upended our election process."
Or, say on December 14th that neither candidate gets to the magic 270. In that instance, the House elects the president, and the Senate elects the vice president. That's happened twice in American history, once in 1825 and once in 1837. The 50 state delegations in the House and the individual members of the Senate becomes the determining factor. So let's look again at what happened on Tuesday night. If everything holds, we'll have 25 Republican states, 21 Democratic states, and four ties (which don't count here) deciding who's president -- which, if party lines hold, would favor Donald Trump. In the Senate, if the Republicans hold their leads, America would have 52 Republican states deciding the next vice president.
No wonder the Left is trying to rush this process through. Any scenario that pushes the outcome into mid-December makes a Biden presidency more uncertain. In 2000, we took our time, Tucker Carlson insisted. Americans waited 36 days for a winner to Bush v. Gore. It was painful, he reminded everyone, but in the end it was worth it. "Our system works," he urged. "It has worked before." So it's time for the media to stop shaming Donald Trump, censoring information from the states, and declaring premature winners. Back then, "almost everyone in the media was a partisan Democrat. But... they understood that preserving the public's faith in the system... was more important than getting Al Gore or anyone else into the White House."
That's changed, and Donald Trump knows it. This time around, the Republican in the race doesn't have the media's support for a fair resolution -- he has their scorn. In not 36 days, but three, commentators have demanded everything from Trump's concession to his arrest. They are no longer allies in the pursuit of democracy -- but enemies. Trump will fight, because he doesn't fear them. And because he knows that this is more about protecting our country and its processes than it is about protecting his job. If the American people throw in the towel early, it will be as much their fault as the Left's that the social trust is broken. Because at the end of the day, we don't all have to want Donald Trump to win -- but we should all hope the rule of law does.
---------------------- Tony Perkins (@tperkins) is President of the Family Research Council.Tags:Tony Perkins, White House, Hangs, in the BallotsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
What to Know About Litigation Being Waged Across US to Preserve Trump Presidency
by Hans von Spakovsky: We all knew Election Day 2020 wouldn’t be normal. And yet it still seems remarkable that we don’t know yet who will be the president of the United States on Jan. 20.
And we may not know for some time if we’ll have four more years of President Donald Trump or a newly inaugurated President Joe Biden.
Even if news organizations declare a winner in the close presidential race, that’s not the official result. States have until Dec. 8 to settle any election disputes and certify their results before the meeting of state electors in every state Dec. 14, when they cast their Electoral College votes for president.
While knowing who won a presidential election usually doesn’t take this long, it isn’t unprecedented if it does. Think back to Bush v. Gore. There, the race between Texas Gov. George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore wasn’t decided until December, when the U.S. Supreme Court stepped in to end any further vote recounts in Florida because of the mistakes made by state courts and election officials.
Everyone hopes it won’t come to that again, but election-related litigation is already underway at a dizzying pace and could play a key role in deciding what has morphed into an incredibly tight race.
Pennsylvania
The litigation in Pennsylvania started well before Election Day. An evenly divided U.S. Supreme Court deadlocked 4-4 and left in place a ruling by Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court requiring officials to count absentee ballots received by Friday, Nov. 6.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court had also ruled that state officials could not reject late-received ballots unless they could produce evidence that the ballots were mailed after Election Day—and that they could not reject ballots due to mismatched voter signatures. That’s a basic ballot integrity procedure used in many jurisdictions.
The U.S. Supreme Court also declined a subsequent request to rule on the merits of the dispute before the election, and may now have put itself in the unenviable position of ruling on the merits of the dispute after the election—which could, in effect, decide the outcome. Presumably recognizing this fact, President Donald Trump’s campaign filed a motion Wednesday to intervene in the case.
Still, that’s not the only pending litigation in Pennsylvania. It gets messy, so hold on.
Also on Wednesday, the Trump campaign filed a lawsuit seeking to allow observers to be close enough to actually observe the counting of ballots in Philadelphia. A Pennsylvania state trial court rejected the request, but the next day, a Pennsylvania appellate court reversed the ruling.
The appeals court said that “effective immediately … all candidates, watchers, or candidate representatives [shall] be permitted to be present for the canvassing process … and be permitted to observe all aspects of the canvassing process within 6 feet, while adhering to all COVID-19 protocols, including, wearing masks and maintaining social distancing.”
The Philadelphia Board of Elections filed an emergency petition that same day (Thursday) with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, asking it to overturn the appellate court’s decision. The petition remains pending there.
But that’s not the end of this particular saga.
After the Pennsylvania intermediate appellate court issued its order, the Trump campaign filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Philadelphia claiming that the Board of Elections is “nonetheless continuing to count ballots, without any observations by any representatives or poll watchers of President Trump and the Republican Party.”
Clearly, this issue remains to be resolved, given that Philadelphia is apparently refusing to comply with the court order.
The Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee also filed a lawsuit where they argued that the Pennsylvania secretary of state wrongly extended the deadline from Nov. 9 to Nov. 12 for absentee and mail-in voters to provide missing proof of identification.
A Pennsylvania state court judge ordered that “the county boards of elections shall segregate ballots for which identification is received and verified on November 10, 11, and 12, 2020, from ballots for which identification is received and verified on or before November 9, 2020,” pending resolution of the matter.
Republican candidates and officials also filed a lawsuit challenging Montgomery County officials’ decision to notify voters whose ballots are defective and give them a chance to “cure” the defects—something not authorized under state law.
Other outside groups, such as the Public Interest Legal Foundation, have also filed lawsuits. The foundation specifically filed a suit against the Pennsylvania Department of State for failing to maintain accurate voter rolls and remove individuals who have died, moved out of state, or otherwise become ineligible to vote.
Georgia and Michigan
Trump’s campaign lost legal challenges in both Georgia and Michigan on Thursday.
In Georgia, the Trump campaign filed a lawsuit after a GOP observer said he had observed Chatham County (Savannah) election officials comingling late ballots with on-time ballots. Absentee ballots in Georgia must be received by the end of Election Day. After hearing testimony from both sides of the dispute, a Georgia state court judge dismissed the case.
In Michigan, like in Pennsylvania, the Trump campaign filed a suit against the secretary of state, asking to be allowed to “meaningfully participate and oversee” the vote-counting process.
However, because the vote counting, done primarily by local officials, had already been completed, the judge denied the request. She said that in her view, there was no meaningful relief left to provide.
Other claims were also raised in Georgia and rejected. What is unexplained is why election officials refused to comply with a state law that requires qualified poll watchers to be able to observe every aspect of the voting and ballot-counting process.
Just like in Philadelphia, one has to wonder—what were they trying to hide?
Nevada
The Trump campaign has also teased, but hasn’t yet filed, a lawsuit in Nevada where it alleges that many ineligible voters—some deceased, some nonresidents—cast votes.
The significant problems with Nevada’s voter rolls have been well documented, including by the Public Interest Legal Foundation, which recently produced a video showing voters illegally registered at commercial businesses such as casinos and pawn shops, as well as vacant lots.
Arizona
In Arizona, the Public Interest Legal Foundation has also filed a lawsuit against Maricopa County on behalf of voters who claim they were unable to cast a ballot due to errors by election officials.
They allege they were given Sharpies to complete their ballots, even though the computer scanners used with opti-scan paper ballots cannot process such ballots.
Now What?
Clearly, this election has generated significant litigation. We can’t help but wonder if a lot of it could have been avoided if election officials had heeded our warnings about the dangers of mail-in voting and changing election procedures too close to an election without their state legislature’s approval.
We might also have avoided some of these problems if election officials had complied with their state laws guaranteeing candidates and political parties complete access to the process. Failure to do so damages the transparency essential to maintaining public confidence in the integrity of elections.
Two things should be kept in mind.
First, gathering the evidence of misconduct, fraud, and other problems that may have compromised an election is extremely difficult and expensive.
As an Indiana state court pointed out in an election fraud case in 2004, “the time constraints that govern election contests, primarily designed to serve important interests and needs of election officials and the public interest in finality, simply do not work well in those elections where misconduct” is widespread and multifaceted.
Second, courts are usually very reluctant to overturn election results even with substantial evidence of possible problems that raise questions about the legitimacy of the outcome. Thus, no matter what the merits are of the claims being made by the Trump campaign, they face an uphill battle in the courts.
Here’s what’s clear at this point: Every legally cast ballot should count and be counted. Those that were not legally cast should not.
Hopefully, this litigation will be a reminder that clear election rules established by state legislatures well before an election can avoid delays and problems after an election. The same is true if election officials comply with the law instead of defying it.
In other words, as Benjamin Franklin wisely advised in 1736: “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”
------------------- Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. More ARRA News Service articles by or about Hans von Spakovsky.Tags:Hans von Spakovsky, What to Know About, Litigation Being Waged, Across US, to Preserve Trump PresidencyTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
A Colossal Embarrassment, Time For Unity, More Jobs
Gary Bauer
by Gary Bauer: A Colossal Embarrassment
For decades, the United States has pressured former rogue nations that want to be taken seriously by telling them, "You must have fair and transparent elections. That is how you get taken seriously as a country. We would like to monitor your upcoming election."
We tell them that U.S. observers will examine ballot security measures to ensure that ballots are going to citizens of their country and that each citizen is getting one and not multiple ballots.
We tell them that U.S. observers want to be at the ballot counting locations, and that we want to see that representatives of all parties are able to observe the counting process.
And we tell them that we want to watch the reporting process from the central election authority so we can ensure that ballots are secured from the time they are counted to the time the results are reported.
Under the criteria we have used to judge other countries, we have not met our own obligation for free and fair elections in city after city that is run by left-wing socialist Democrats. That should bring a sense of outrage and shame to all Americans.
The State Department should say we will no longer send representatives to judge other countries because Democrats just proved we are incapable of upholding the standards we expect of other nations.
Time For Unity?
There is a growing chorus of commentators, Democrats, Biden campaign aides, and even some Republicans who were AWOL the last four years, saying to President Trump that it is time to stop the partisanship and bring the country together.
I understand why the left and their media allies say that. But hearing Republicans, such as Maryland Governor Larry Hogan, say that is infuriating. Do they not remember what happened four years ago?
The left spent the past four years refusing to accept the results of the 2016 elections!
Rather than help unify the country, they formed the "Resistance." They screamed at the sky. They boycotted Trump's inauguration. They rioted during the inauguration. They accused the president of being a traitor and a Russian asset. They impeached the president over a phone call.
Adam Schiff went on TV time and again and declared that the "evidence of collusion is in plain sight." He never apologized for that lie and his part in the country never coming together these last four years.
And now they expect us to just fall in line?!
Who Would Trust Them?
Yesterday I noted that if Democrats are willing to abort a baby in the ninth month of pregnancy, we shouldn't be surprised that they are willing to cheat to win an election. But that's not the only reason we should be skeptical of what is going on in the Democrat-dominated cities that are still counting ballots.
The mayors who are turning in the worst totals are the same mayors who were willing to let their cities burn rather than call President Trump and ask for the National Guard to help restore order.
These are the same mayors who are willing to handcuff and defund their own police departments. They are morally suspect leftists, who reject the Judeo-Christian views that guide and govern us.
Thank you!
The president is continuing to fight the left's efforts to hijack the election. In the meantime, I want to remind you of all the incredible things we can thank him for accomplishing for the conservative cause.
Before this is over, he's on the way to bringing in ten million more voters for the GOP.
On his coattails we elected 14 pro-life Republican women to the House so far, along with pro-life champions Marsha Blackburn, Joni Ernst and Cynthia Lummis in the Senate.
He set the standard for how any future Republican leader should fight the radical left and the media.
He has given us the best chance of ending abortion on demand than any Republican president in the history of our country.
We were one vote away on the Supreme Court from losing our religious liberty and our Second Amendment rights. Trump stopped that assault.
He has been the strongest ally Israel ever had in the White House, and he successfully negotiated peace deals between Israel and three majority-Muslim nations.
He dramatically reformed the tax code and massively rolled back regulations.
He aggressively confronted communist China and renegotiated unfair trade deals.
And if we prevail over the left's cheating and fraud, just imagine what President Trump can accomplish in another four years!
That's how some House Democrats and others in the media are describing their party's performance Tuesday night.
Democrats promised to go on offense "deep into Trump territory." They expected gains of 10 to 15 seats. That didn't happen. Not a single Republican incumbent lost, and Republicans won "deep in Democrat territory," flipping two South Florida seats and holding open seats we were expected to lose.
With many races still not called, Democrats have lost at least half a dozen seats. As a result, the number of pro-life Republican women in the House of Representatives will double next year.
Yesterday, House Democrats vented their frustrations on a caucus conference call. While Speaker Nancy Pelosi insists she has a mandate for her far-left agenda, others aren't so sure.
Rep. Jim Clyburn, a member of Pelosi's leadership team, said, "If we are going to run on Medicare for All, defund the police, socialized medicine, we're not going to win."
Rep. Abigail Spanberger was more emphatic, telling her colleagues, "We lost races we shouldn't have lost. Defund police almost cost me my race. . . Don't say 'Socialism' ever again. . . If we run this race again we will get f---ing torn apart again in 2022."
Spanberger's remarks are a clear indication of the fight that is brewing within the Democrat Party. Even New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is blaming New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio for setbacks in the Empire State.
Democrats suffered a humiliating setback at the state level as well. Republicans are well-positioned to control the redistricting process that will determine the congressional maps for the 2022 elections.
That said, Democrats aren't the only party with major problems. The silence of many Republican politicians in recent days has not gone unnoticed by grassroots conservatives, the president or his family.
More Jobs
We got another stellar jobs report this morning as the economy continues to recover from the pandemic. Last month, 638,000 new jobs were created, far more than the 538,000 economists expected. The unemployment rate fell a full point from 7.9% to 6.9%, a much bigger drop than economists had predicted.
And CNBC notes that the October figures were weighed down by the loss of 147,000 temporary Census workers.
------------------------------ Gary Bauer (@GaryLBauer) is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working FamiliesTags:Gary Bauer, A Colossal Embarrassment, Time For Unity, More JobsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Mandatory E-Verify Could Help End Tragic Deaths at the Border
Lisa Irving Venus
by Lisa Irving Venus: The New York Times feature "How U.S. Policy Turned the Sonoran Desert Into a Graveyard for Migrants" by James Verini published late this summer profiles 23 year old Roberto Primero Luis, a "cheerful, studious and devout" barbershop entrepreneur in Guatemala who tragically died, dehydrated and exhausted, while traversing the Sonoran Desert in an attempt to illegally enter the United States last year.
Roberto made the decision to take a much longer route through the Sonoran Desert than expected after being abandoned by his guide amidst alerts of border patrol presence - even though, according to author James Verini, "[h]e had heard about migrants dying in the desert; everyone in Guatemala had."
Verini meticulously describes the hostile and unforgiving elements of the Sonoran Desert. But for Verini, the Sonoran Desert's inhospitality to survival is not an "ultimate" cause of Roberto's death. Rather, he points to U.S. federal policy on "prevention and deterrence."
"Prevention and deterrence" began in the early 1990s under the Clinton Administration and has continued. This policy was created to decrease illegal border crossings by adding Border Patrol agents along cities that at the time were more accessible and convenient for migrants.
As a result of this policy, Verini notes, migrants like Roberto have attempted to avoid patrol by seeking entry through locations like the Sonoran Desert that are much more remote and perilous.
At the time Roberto set out for the U.S., he was more successful financially than anyone in his family had ever been. He had contemplated becoming a nurse. Roberto was not desperate, but saw potential for increased upward economic mobility by securing a job in the United States. Verini touches slightly on this topic:"Whatever Roberto might be making at his barbershop, whatever he might make in the future as a nurse, would be dwarfed by the pay he would find in the U.S., even in a job like construction or meatpacking."While focusing on "prevention and deterrence" policy, however, Verini fails to discuss U.S. employment verification policy. In doing so, he neglects how Roberto's employment in construction or meatpacking would violate U.S. law. He also neglects how self serving employers would have the most to gain from Roberto's unlawful employment by exploiting migrant labor while diminishing prospects and wages of Americans struggling in those industries.
E-Verify is a program that allows employers to determine whether a new hire has authorization to work in the US. Since its availability in 1997, political, policy and economic leaders and journalists - recognizing that job availability contributes to illegal border crossings - have at times endorsed its efforts to curb unlawful employment and punish exploitative employers.
However, congressional leaders and presidents of both parties have refused to make E-Verify mandatory, thereby refusing to hold employer and trafficker profiteers accountable.
A comment by JM, one of the top reader picks, more fully and accurately underscores the tragedy of Roberto's story:
JM
Southwest"The only winners in this story are the coyotes, cartels & human traffickers. The saddest part is that Roberto left his pregnant wife, family, culture & small successful business to chase a mirage. He was not desperate. As the border agent said of the journey "they had no idea what was coming." This is a huge part of the problem. Roberto's talents & determination would have been more beneficial to his family & community if he had used those thousands of dollars paid to the coyote to build his future at home. A humane immigration system should not perpetuate this hugely profitable racket that lures families, unaccompanied children, and immigrants to pay with their lives. This is a global problem & the US cannot solve it alone. Migrants from all over the world pass through Columbia & Ecuador to make the dangerous trek north to cross our southern border. If only they knew what was coming. Applying for asylum in ones own country or a bordering country might be a start. Enforcement of E-verify. And eliminate incentives for illegal crossings such as automatic citizenship for a child birthed here by an illegal."
-------------------------- Lisa Irving Venus is the Volunteer Coordinator for the Media Standards Program for NumbersUSATags:Lisa Irving Venus, Mandatory E-Verify, Could Help, End Tragic Deaths, at the Border, NumbersUSATo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Trump and Supporters Wage Legal Battles Across US to Defeat Biden — Here’s a Rundown
We may not know for a while if we’ll have four more years of President Trump or a newly inaugurated President Joe Biden by Zack Smith & Hans A. von Spakovsky: We all knew Election Day 2020 wouldn’t be normal. And yet it still seems remarkable that we don’t know yet who will be the president of the United States on Jan. 20.
And we may not know for some time if we’ll have four more years of President Trump or a newly inaugurated President Joe Biden.
Even if news organizations declare a winner in the close presidential race, that’s not the official result. States have until Dec. 8 to settle any election disputes and certify their results before the meeting of state electors in every state Dec. 14, when they cast their Electoral College votes for president.
While knowing who won a presidential election usually doesn’t take this long, it isn’t unprecedented if it does. Think back to Bush v. Gore. There, the race between Texas Gov. George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore wasn’t decided until December, when the U.S. Supreme Court stepped in to end any further vote recounts in Florida because of the mistakes made by state courts and election officials.
Everyone hopes it won’t come to that again, but election-related litigation is already underway at a dizzying pace and could play a key role in deciding what has morphed into an incredibly tight race.
Here’s a look at legal fights in key states.
Pennsylvania
The litigation in Pennsylvania started well before Election Day. An evenly divided U.S. Supreme Court deadlocked 4-4 and left in place a ruling by Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court requiring officials to count absentee ballots received by Friday Nov. 6.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court had also ruled that state officials could not reject late-received ballots unless they could produce evidence that the ballot was mailed after Election Day — and that they could not reject ballots due to mismatched voter signatures. That’s a basic ballot integrity procedure used in many jurisdictions.
The U.S. Supreme Court also declined a subsequent request to rule on the merits of the dispute before the election, and may now have put itself in the unenviable position of ruling on the merits of the dispute after the election — which could, in effect, decide the outcome. Presumably recognizing this fact, President Trump’s campaign filed a motion Wednesday to intervene in the case.
Still, that’s not the only pending litigation in Pennsylvania. It gets messy, so hold on.
Also on Wednesday, the Trump campaign filed a lawsuit seeking to allow observers to be close enough to actually observe the counting of ballots in Philadelphia. A Pennsylvania state trial court rejected the request, but the next day, a Pennsylvania appellate court reversed the ruling.
The appeals court said that “effective immediately … all candidates, watchers, or candidate representatives [shall] be permitted to be present for the canvassing process … and be permitted to observe all aspects of the canvassing process within 6 feet, while adhering to all COVID-19 protocols, including, wearing masks and maintaining social distancing.”
The Philadelphia Board of Elections filed an emergency petition that same day (Thursday) with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, asking it to overturn the appellate court’s decision. The petition remains pending there.
But that’s not the end of this particular saga.
After the Pennsylvania intermediate appellate court issued its order, the Trump campaign filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Philadelphia claiming that the Board of Elections is “nonetheless continuing to count ballots, without any observations by any representatives or poll watchers of President Trump and the Republican Party.”
Clearly, this issue remains to be resolved, given that Philadelphia is apparently refusing to comply with the court order.
The Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee also filed a lawsuit where they argued that the Pennsylvania secretary of state wrongly extended the deadline from Nov. 9 to Nov. 12 for absentee and mail-in voters to provide missing proof of identification.
A Pennsylvania state court judge ordered that “the county boards of elections shall segregate ballots for which identification is received and verified on November 10, 11, and 12, 2020, from ballots for which identification is received and verified on or before November 9, 2020,” pending resolution of the matter.
Republican candidates and officials also filed a lawsuit challenging Montgomery County officials’ decision to notify voters whose ballots are defective and giving them a chance to “cure” the defects — something not authorized under state law.
Other outside groups, such as the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF), have also filed lawsuits. PILF specifically filed a suit against the Pennsylvania Department of State for failing to maintain accurate voter rolls and remove individuals who have died, moved out of state, or otherwise become ineligible to vote.
Georgia and Michigan
President Trump’s campaign lost legal challenges in both Georgia and Michigan on Thursday.
In Georgia, the Trump campaign filed a lawsuit after a GOP observer said he had observed Chatham County (Savannah) election officials comingling late ballots with on-time ballots. Absentee ballots in Georgia must be received by the end of Election Day. After hearing testimony from both sides of the dispute, a Georgia state court judge dismissed the case.
In Michigan, like in Pennsylvania, the Trump campaign filed a suit against the secretary of state asking to be allowed to “meaningfully participate and oversee” the vote-counting process.
However, because the vote counting, done primarily by local officials, had already been completed, the judge denied the request. She said that in her view, there was no meaningful relief left to provide.
Other claims were also raised in Georgia and rejected. What is unexplained is why election officials refused to comply with a state law that requires qualified poll watchers to be able to observe every aspect of the voting and ballot-counting process.
Just like in Philadelphia, one has to wonder — what were they trying to hide?
Nevada
The Trump campaign has also teased, but hasn’t yet filed, a lawsuit in Nevada where it alleges that many ineligible voters — some deceased, some non-residents — cast votes. The significant problems with Nevada’s voter rolls have been well documented, including by the Public Interest Legal Foundation, which recently produced a video showing voters illegally registered at commercial businesses such as casinos and pawn shops, as well as vacant lots.
Arizona
In Arizona, the Public Interest Legal Foundation has also filed a lawsuit against Maricopa County on behalf of voters who claim they were unable to cast a ballot due to errors by election officials. They allege they were given Sharpies to complete their ballots, even though the computer scanners used with opti-scan paper ballots cannot process such ballots.
Now What?
Clearly, this election has generated significant litigation. We can’t help but wonder if a lot of it could have been avoided if election officials had heeded our warnings about the dangers of mail-in voting and changing election procedures too close to an election without their state legislature’s approval.
We might also have avoided some of these problems if election officials had complied with their state laws guaranteeing candidates and political parties complete access to the process. Failure to do so damages the transparency essential to maintaining public confidence in the integrity of elections.
Two things should be kept in mind.
First, gathering the evidence of misconduct, fraud and other problems that may have compromised an election is extremely difficult and expensive. As an Indiana state court pointed out in an election fraud case in 2004, “the time constraints that govern election contests, primarily designed to serve important interests and needs of election officials and the public interest in finality, simply do not work well in those elections where misconduct” is widespread and multifaceted.
Second, courts are usually very reluctant to overturn election results even with substantial evidence of possible problems that raise questions about the legitimacy of the outcome. Thus, no matter what the merits are of the claims being made by the Trump campaign, they face an uphill battle in the courts.
Here’s what’s clear at this point: Every legally cast ballot should count and be counted. Those that were not legally cast should not.
Hopefully, this litigation will be a reminder that clear election rules established by state legislatures well before an election can avoid delays and problems after an election. The same is true if election officials comply with the law instead of defying it.
In other words, as Benjamin Franklin wisely advised in 1736: “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”
------------------------ Zack Smith is a legal fellow in the Heritage Foundation’s Institute for Constitutional Government. Hans A. von Spakovsky is a Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation and a former commissioner on the Federal Election Commission. Shared by Fox NewsTags:Zack Smith, Hans A. von Spakovsky, Trump and Supporters, Wage Legal Battles, Across US, to Defeat Biden, Here’s a Rundown,To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
If this election is not authenticated, what future election will be trusted?
by Mark Alexander: After Democrat governors in many states, including Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, counted “late ballots,” their prediction of a “red mirage” — President Donald Trump appearing to win some states he won in 2016 but Joe Biden ultimately prevailing — turned out just as they planned.
Three days after the polls closed, late ballots have moved multiple states into the Biden column. Based on how the Demos used the CV19 pandemic to implement massive bulk-mail balloting, combined with ballot harvesting in Democrat precincts, their unverified balloting campaign has worked.
As Biden himself declared in a colossal political gaffe a week before the election: “We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.” Indeed they did.
The Demos’ bulk-mail ballot fraud is their THIRD attempted coup d'état — the first being the “Russia collusion” delusion and the second being the Pelosi/Schiff impeachment charade.
Despite the tenuous Republican hold on the U.S. Senate after Democrats spent almost $900 million to flip it, and Republican increases in the U.S. House combined with gains of state houses and governorships, Demos will likely succeed in a marginal presidential electoral victory for Biden and Kamala Harris.
In brief remarks from the White House Thursday, President Trump assailed media voter suppression and fraudulent bulk-mail balloting, declaring, “They’re trying to steal an election. They’re trying to rig an election and we can’t let that happen. We can’t allow anybody to silence our voters and manufacture results. We want an honest election and an honest count.”
“The pollsters got it knowingly wrong. … Media polling was election interference, in the truest sense of that word, by powerful special interests. These really phony polls — fake polls — were designed to keep our voters at home, create the illusion of momentum for Mr. Biden and diminish Republicans’ ability to raise funds. They were what’s called suppression polls. Everyone knows that now, and it’s never been used to the extent that it’s been used on this last election.”
Recall that on Election Day, The New York Times declared that the mainstream media should be the ultimate arbiters of the presidential election: “The role of declaring the winner of a presidential election in the U.S. falls to the news media. The broadcast networks and cable news outlets have vowed to be prudent.”
Regarding their pollaganda efforts, combined with social media collusion, they have mastered directing election outcomes.
On bulk-mail ballot fraud, President Trump said:
“I’ve been talking about mail-in voting for a long time. It’s really destroyed our system. It’s a corrupt system. … They want to find out how many votes they need, and then they seem to be able to find them. … Votes should be in by Election Day, and they didn’t do that. Democrat officials never believed they could win this election honestly, I really believe that. That’s why they did the mail-in ballots, where there’s tremendous corruption and fraud going on. That’s why they mailed out tens of millions of unsolicited ballots without any verification measures whatsoever.”
While people assume returned bulk-mail and absentee ballots are actually from the intended recipients — absentee ballots most likely are — the signature comparisons to validate those ballots are subjective and based on signature matches. Some states even declared they would not validate all signatures.
Biden declared, “While the votes continue to be counted, we’re going to remain vigilant. The right to vote has been at the center of our democracy since the founding of this nation, and we’re going to protect the integrity of the vote.”
For Biden to assert, with a straight face, that Democrats are going “to protect the integrity of the vote” is laughable.
Bulk-mailing ballots completely undermines the integrity of elections. The lack of verification of who cast each ballot is akin to those states that reject any effort to require a voter ID to verify the same. Bulk-mail balloting defies any uniform standard of confirming who cast a ballot, which is to say this latest Democrat strategy has been a great leap forward in their effort to undermine election integrity.
As for the Trump administration’s path forward, the president says, “There [is] lots of litigation, even beyond our litigation. There’s a tremendous amount of litigation generally because of how unfair this process was.”
Unfortunately, and I can’t state this strongly enough, Trump’s rambling about unsubstantiated or demonstrably false voter fraud claims serve only to undermine the administration’s legitimate claims about media voter suppression and fraudulent bulk-mail balloting. And the distracting claims will foment a surge of urban violence supported by Democrats.
Finally, if this election is not authenticated to the satisfaction of the vast majority of Americans, what future election will be trusted?
----------------------- Mark Alexanderwrites for the Patriot Post.Tags:Voter Fraud, The Demos' Final Coup Frontier, Mark Alexander, Patriot PostTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Michael Barone: This was not a good night for conventional polling. My review in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal of a book on the history of "polling failures" took perhaps too positive a view of contemporary polling. I find it remarkable that polling has been as accurate as it has been in a country where the completion rate for pollsters' contacts is below 10% -- but it got worse this week.
The Real Clear Politics average of recent polls showed Joe Biden with more than 51% of the popular vote and Donald Trump with 44%. As this is written, Biden has 50% of the tabulated national popular vote, which will probably rise as California's data comes dribbling in, but Donald Trump has 48%. So, the current 1.9% Biden plurality is far lower than the polls' 7.2% Biden plurality.
The results in target states seem to have been off as well. The polls had Biden up 0.9% in Florida, far different from Trump's 3.4% victory margin there. I have been dubious about the polling techniques of firms like Robert Cahaly's Trafalgar, which produced numbers apparently closer to the election results so far than other pollsters in Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. But in an opinion climate where mass media and corporate political correctness has many Americans unwilling to state their opinions, there may be something to say for Cahaly's unorthodox methods -- and something to say against the more standard polling technique. There is, as my Washington Examiner colleague Byron York has argued, a hidden Trump vote. Most pollsters have not learned how to find it.
Donald Trump is running much better than almost everyone in the press and on Twitter expected. As I write, he has won or is ahead in the tabulated vote in 28 states with 280 electoral votes. He is clearly on his way to winning more popular votes than he did in 2016.
Democrats don't seem likely to pick up the Senate majority that they seemed almost assured of gaining as recently as Tuesday morning. Republicans Corey Gardner and Martha McSally lost, as expected, in Colorado and Arizona, and Democrat Doug Jones lost, as expected, in Alabama. But as I write, Susan Collins is running well ahead of Trump and has a significant lead in Maine. She is a rare example of a politician who can get voters to split their tickets. Cal Cunningham, Chuck Schumer's handpicked candidate in North Carolina, is trailing by 1.8%; I bet if Schumer if had known about Cunningham's extramarital affairs, which were revealed and admitted during the campaign, the Senate minority leader would have picked another candidate. In Iowa, Republican incumbent Joni Ernst, having trailed in polls for months, won by a 7% margin. This is even larger than the prediction shown in last weekend's Des Moines Register poll, conducted by star pollster Ann Selzer, about which I wrote a column entitled "The Disconcerting Iowa poll: A Trump Surge?"
Democrats' hopes for a Senate majority now rest on Georgia's two Senate seats. It's now looking unlikely that incumbent David Perdue will fail to get 50% of the vote and therefore, under state law, have to face a runoff with Democrat Jon Ossoff on Jan. 5; Perdue currently holds 50% of the vote with 98% of precincts reporting. There will definitely be a runoff for the state's other seat between appointed incumbent Kelly Loeffler and Democrat Raphael Warnock. Old-timers may recall that in 1992, when Georgia voted for Bill Clinton, Republican Paul Coverdell trailed incumbent Wyche Fowler in the general election 49% to 48%, but came back to win the runoff, with a sharply reduced turnout, by 51% to 49%. This year, with the Senate majority potentially at stake, turnout is likely to remain high.
Whatever the exact Senate result, it seems unlikely that the Senate will go along with the plans backed enthusiastically by leftist Democrats to pack the Supreme Court or to confer statehood on the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.
Democrats have not done nearly as well as expected in House races. The Cook Political Report, with its fine record of assessing congressional elections, predicted that Democrats would increase their 232-seat majority in the House. Instead, at present, they've lost multiple seats and have gained only two, both in North Carolina, thanks to a favorable court redistricting decision.
One consequence of the House election results: Republicans went into the election with majorities in 26 state delegations. That's important, because the Constitution mandates that if no presidential candidate has a majority in the Electoral College, the presidency is decided by the House, with each state casting one vote and a majority required to elect. So, if the Electoral College is divided 269-269, Republicans with 26 or more state delegations could elect the president.
This was, as our Washington Examiner editorial argues, a bad election for identity politics. It's also been bad for the theory unfurled most famously in the 2004 book "The Emerging Democratic Majority" that increasing percentages of nonwhites would assure Democrats of a permanent natural majority. But there never was any assurance that the Americans classified (beginning with the 1970 census) as Hispanics would overwhelmingly identify as Democrats, just as Black Americans have for the last half-century; the contemporary and historic experiences of these groups are far different.
But Hispanic voters didn't perform as expected, and neither did Black voters. National exit polls showed Trump winning the votes of 32% of Latinos and 36% of Latino men; it also showed Trump winning 12% of Black voters and 18% of Black men. The gender gap is apparently widening among Latino voters and Black voters.
Hispanics were particularly prominent in determining the results in Florida and Texas. Miami-Dade County, which casts 11% of Florida's votes, voted 63% to 34% for Hillary Clinton in 2016 but gave Joe Biden only a 53 to 46% margin in 2020. And Democrats lost two congressional seats anchored in Miami-Dade. Cuban Americans in particular, who were open to Democrats in the Obama elections and in 2016, were successfully wooed by Donald Trump as they had been by Florida Republicans Rick Scott and Ron DeSantis in the 2018 Senate and gubernatorial races (polls showed both behind, but they won; sound familiar?). The Trump campaign ran catchy ads aimed at Florida Hispanics and reminded them that the Democrats stood for "socialism," which people with backgrounds in Cuba, Venezuela and other Latin countries do not think is a good thing. In south Texas as well, Trump carried almost every county in the lower Rio Grande Valley, an area that has usually gone 2-1 Democratic.
There's more to learn about these trends, but one thing that is obvious is that Democratic strategists and journalists who like to use the campus-invented term "Latinx" are out of touch with American Latinos, only 3% of whom identify with that term.
One more result worthy of notice: California's overwhelmingly Democratic legislature put on the ballot a proposition repealing Proposition 209, passed in 1996, which banned racial discrimination by state and local governments, including in college and university admissions. Some legislators with many Asian constituents complained, but the assumption was that it would pass easily. Not so. The current returns show this Proposition 16 rejected by a 56% to 44% margin. It is barely carrying Los Angeles County with 52% and the San Francisco Bay area with 53%, but is rejected by 64% in the rest of the state, where most California voters live. Evidently something sticks in the craws of most Californians, like most Americans, when they are asked to authorize discriminating against their fellow citizens because of their race.
------------------------- Michael Barone is a senior political analyst for the Washington Examiner, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and longtime co-author of The Almanac of American Politics. Contibutor to Rasmussen Reports.Tags:Michael Barone, Rasmussen Reports, Some Observations, Extended Election NightTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Patrick Buchanan: The American electorate failed to perform its designated role in the establishment’s morality play. Indeed, Democrats ended Tuesday night terrified that America had again turned its back on them and preferred Trump to the leaders and agenda they had put forth.
Donald Trump may end up losing the 2020 election in the Electoral College, but he won the campaign that ended on Nov. 3.
Democrats had been talking of a “sweep,” a “blowout,” a “blue wave” washing the Republicans out of power, capturing the Senate, and bringing in an enlarged Democratic majority in Nancy Pelosi’s House.
They visualized the ouster of Trump in a defeat so massive and humiliating that it would serve as an eternal repudiation of the man. And, most intoxicating of all, they believed they would be seen by history as the angels of America’s deliverance.
It was not to be.
The American electorate failed to perform its designated role in the establishment’s morality play. Indeed, Democrats ended Tuesday night terrified that America had again turned its back on them and preferred Trump to the leaders and agenda they had put forth.
By the campaign’s end, Democrats were freezing the ball and running out the clock.
Consider the immense burdens candidate Trump had to carry.
Early in his reelection year, the nation was struck by the worst pandemic in a hundred years that, by Election Day, would kill nearly a quarter of a million Americans and cause an economic collapse to rival the Great Depression.
Trump had to endure daily the near-universal hatred and hostility of the nation’s academic, media and cultural elites. How hostile is this city to President Trump?
He lost D.C.’s three electoral votes by a margin of 20-1.
Yet, even so burdened, Trump won 3 million more votes in 2020 than he had in 2016, and, as of midnight on Election Day, he seemed headed for victory in the Electoral College.
Giving the energy and effort he put into his campaign — a dozen rallies in the last three days — and the enthusiastic response from the huge crowds, Trump has much to be proud of.
Trump may lose the presidency, but Trumpism was not rejected.
Nor was it repudiated by the people if, by Trumpism, one means “America First” nationalism, securing our borders, using tariffs to bring back our manufacturing base, bidding goodbye to globalism, staying out of unnecessary wars and swearing off ideological crusades.
And if Joe Biden becomes our 46th president, the tenure of office of this visibly frail and enfeebled leader is likely to be among the more abbreviated in American history, and bereft of high achievement.
For Democrats appear to have lost seats in Nancy Pelosi’s House, and, instead of sweeping to power in the Senate to make Chuck Schumer the new majority leader, Senate Democrats appear to have gained only a single seat. As of now, Sen. Mitch McConnell is set to be the gatekeeper to any passage of the Biden-Harris and Sanders-AOC agendas.
Good luck getting something enacted that Mitch McConnell doesn’t like.
As of today, the 2020 election has restored to Senate Republicans veto power over any and all administration legislation, be it liberal, progressive or socialist. This election may have made McConnell the most powerful congressional leader since Lyndon Johnson.
With McConnell leading a GOP majority, Democrats would be unable to end the filibuster or pack the Supreme Court, and the GOP majority would have the power to kill the Biden tax plan, “Medicare for All” and the “Green New Deal.” There will be no statehood and two senators for Puerto Rico or D.C., and no reparations for slavery. Mayors and governors seeking blue state bailouts to avoid defaulting on overdue debts will need McConnell’s blessing.
In times past, there was often comity between the parties, or at least an attempt at comity. In mid-August of 1974, after he took office, President Gerald Ford went before Congress to declare: “I do not want a honeymoon with you. I want a good marriage.”
It was not to be. And in the ideological divide and poisoned politics of this city, there is little likelihood of compromise — or even civility.
Biden faces other troubles, too.
The worst of the COVID-19 crisis, in terms of cases, hospitalizations and deaths, may be ahead of us. And Democrats will not be able to blame Trump indefinitely. And if their answer is, as Joe Biden has at times indicated, a national “shutdown,” a Biden honeymoon is unlikely to last.
Bottom line: Joe Biden is not going to be the “transformational” president of his imagining. Nor is he going to be the “most progressive president since Roosevelt” as some Democrats have been promising.
And the reasons are obvious.
FDR had massive Democratic majorities in both Houses of Congress throughout the 1930s. And he won the presidency in 1932 by capturing 57% of the vote and 42 of the 48 states of the Union. In 1936, he carried 46 of 48 states, losing only Maine and Vermont.
Biden has no such mandate and no such power base, and he lacks the natural gifts of FDR. Sorry, but there is no new “Era of Good Feelings” in store for America. To the contrary.
-------------------- Patrick Buchanan (@PatrickBuchanan) is currently a blogger, conservative columnist, political analyst, chairman of The American Cause foundation and an editor of The American Conservative. He has been a senior adviser to three Presidents, a two-time candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, and was the presidential nominee of the Reform Party in 2000.Tags:Patrick Buchanan, conservative, commentary, Trumpism Lives On!To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Four years after utterly discrediting their entire profession, the same hacks and bean counters did it again. Instead of counting people, they counted political agendas.
And the polls will never be the same again.
“Trump Can Still Win, But The Polls Would Have To Be Off By Way More Than In 2016,” Nate Silver headlined a widely shared article at the tail end of last month. Spoiler alert: they were.
The polls were not measuring the nation, but the agenda of the media and the questioners.
Pin on Pinterest
Once again the media set out to create the perception of an inevitable Democrat, inventing their leads, boosting their popularity, mixing up the statistical secret sauce, and spicing it with lies.
The same plan and the same lies that hadn’t worked for them in 2016 was unleashed again.
Meanwhile, a 97-mile car rally for President Trump raced across Arizona. Tens of thousands gathered to cheer his determination in Pennsylvania with a sound like thunder. These Americans, by the countless thousands, stood up to be counted where no pollster was looking and where no pollster wanted to see.
President Trump’s base drew together elderly white voters and Latinos to stop Biden cold in Florida. Meanwhile the working class voters the media had been telling us had soured on Trump amidst the trade war and the economic downturn came out for him stronger than ever.
Their roar toppled Ohio and forced Democrats in Philly to forge new ballots all night along.
For four years, the media tells Americans who they are and what they believe. And at least once in four years, Americans get to answer back, not on the censored platforms of Big Tech, but with every man and woman finding their own secret voice and speaking not their truth, but the truth.
The establishment began fighting this election after the last one. It prepped censorship, unrolled an economic disaster, and spent the entire cycle frantically lying to potential voters. The lies failed, but where they failed, voter tampering may succeed. The lies didn’t convince Americans that there was no point in voting because a senescent Democrat hack was the inevitable choice.
But they can still serve as the cover-up for the massive voter fraud operating now underway.
Had the lies worked, the voter fraud would have seemed plausible. But as the night of Election Day approached, so many conservatives took to the streets, rallied, and showed their faces. The crowds at the rallies predicted the massive turnout by working class voters for Trump. And now the voter fraud is much less plausible. That doesn’t mean that it won’t happen anyway.
As night approaches day, as ballots are taken away or counted, the real struggle begins.
2020 was never going to be a clean election. The same radicals and corrupt establishment interests that spied on political opponents and tried to lock them up are not going to stop at Tammany Hall’s oldest habit of raising the dead and finding as many ballots as it takes.
What Election Day did was shatter the lies that would have made the fraud seem plausible.
Republicans stormed the polls. They waited on in line, hour after hour, even as the media made its bad calls, because it wasn’t just about voting, it was about making the country see them.
We live in the age of lies. The only way to tell the truth is to stand up and be counted.
---------------------------- Daniel Greenfield is a journalist investigating Islamic terrorism and the Left. He is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
--------------------------- Tags:Daniel Greenfield, Fake Polls, Fake Votes, And A Real CoupTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Mike Huckabee: UPDATE: Decision Desk HQ has given Pennsylvania to Biden, declaring him the winner of the Presidency with 273 electoral votes. But expect that to be challenged in court. This is not over.
The Trump campaign’s general counsel Matt Morgan issued this statement:,dir>"This election is not over. The false projection of Joe Biden as the winner is based on results in four states that are far from final. Georgia is headed for a recount, where we are confident we will find ballots improperly harvested, and where President Trump will ultimately prevail. There were many irregularities in Pennsylvania, including having election officials prevent our volunteer legal observers from having meaningful access to vote counting locations. We prevailed in court on our challenge, but were deprived of valuable time and denied the transparency we are entitled to under state law. In Nevada, there appear to be thousands of individuals who improperly cast mail ballots. Finally, the President is on course to win Arizona outright, despite the irresponsible and erroneous ‘calling’ of the state for Biden by Fox News and the Associated Press. Biden is relying on these states for his phony claim on the White House, but once the election is final, President Trump will be re-elected.”
PRESIDENT TRUMP'S LEAD IN GEORGIA ERASED OVERNIGHT
By now, you might be getting used to going to bed with Trump comfortably ahead in a vital battleground state and waking up to hear that somehow, Joe Biden surged ahead in the middle of the night. Well, it’s happened again, with Trump’s lead in Georgia somehow erased and Biden now ahead by over 900 votes.
Could this have anything to do with incidents like this report from the state Republican Party Chairman that Fulton County officials told GOP poll watchers to go home because they were closing up for the night, then they kept on counting anyway?
I’m not going to say there’s chicanery, because I don’t know for certain. But when this many places smell fishy, the odor becomes overpowering. Novelist Larry Correia, who used to be an accountant and auditor, explains that when you’re auditing a system, one or two red flags may be attributable to stupidity or dishonesty. But a giant pile of red flags, particularly ones that all wave in the same direction (like benefitting Biden) usually mean something bad is going on and some people need to go to jail.
The Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) insist this is just the result of counting all those mail-in ballots that were mostly Democrat. The other side replies that it seems awfully strange that the mail-in ballots in must-win states lean so much more toward Biden than those in states he didn’t need to win. Or that urban minority districts in states that Biden needs seem to favor him so much more heavily than minorities did in states that weren’t vital to Biden winning, where Trump scored the highest support among minorities of any Republican in decades.
Still, no matter what you’re told, this is not over and it won’t be for a while. Citing numerous accusations of ballot irregularities, RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel announced that the GOP has formed legal challenge teams in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan and Pennsylvania. She said they intend to insure that all legal voters have their votes counted, that observers are granted the access they’re due under the law (although it’s too late for that in Michigan and Pennsylvania, unless there's a recount), and any irregularities, whether due to malice or incompetence, are investigated to the fullest extent of the law.
President Trump also called on Joe Biden to stop saying that every vote should be counted and instead say that every legal vote should be counted. I already suggested that, but I don’t expect him to take us up on it. . . .
------------------------ Mike Huckabee, Morning Edition, November 6, 2020Tags:Mike Huckabee, Biden Declared, Commander in CheatTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Caroline Glick: On Wednesday, supporters of President Donald Trump gathered outside ballot counting centers in Arizona and Michigan to demand a clean and honest vote count. An MSNBC reporter in Arizona filmed the protesters in Maricopa Country where 400,000 ballots were being counted. Standing behind the protesters, the reporter tried to paint the crowd as violent and dangerous even as they kneeled in silent prayer for election integrity.
It was a hard sell, but other reporters quickly got in on the action and videos appeared throughout the day of reporters describing the swelling crowd chanting “Count the Vote” as violent. There may be an innocent explanation for the obvious misinformation. Perhaps the men and women with the mics simply don’t know the meaning of the word “violent.” After all, for the past seven months, they have been describing riots replete with broken windows, burning tires and looted stores as “peaceful protests.”
The urge Trump voters feel to protest the vote count is easy to understand. The widespread fear that the Democrats are working to falsify the US presidential election results grows with each news update about another 369,000 ballots suddenly appearing in Philadelphia or 10,000 votes in Nevada cast by people who don’t live in Nevada.
On Wednesday afternoon, Trump supporters at a ballot counting facility in Detroit were stunned as a poll worker used cardboard boards to block Republican poll watchers from watching the vote count.
Republican fears bubbled over Wednesday morning.
Tuesday night, Trump was leading Biden by comfortable margins in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia and North Carolina. And suddenly, election officials in Detroit, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and Atlanta – Democrat-run cities in states where Trump was leading – announced they were stopping the vote count.
According to a report in The Federalist, based on information published by election officials in Michigan and Wisconsin, while the vote-counting had officially been suspended, strange things were happening.
In the wee hours of the night in Michigan, 138,339 mail-in ballots were counted. Biden won every single one of them. Hours after the stunning, vertical rise in Biden’s numbers was reported, (and after Twitter censored Republicans, including President Trump who demanded an explanation), Michigan election officials claimed the numbers were a “data error.” A glitchy vote-counting software accidentally added a zero – that is, 100,000 votes — to Biden’s tally. The same glitchy software accidentally forgot to enter the votes that Trump won. Oops.
In Wisconsin, Biden got a similar 120,000 vote boost during the night and when Republicans woke up on Wednesday morning, Trump’s 4.7% lead had all but disappeared. Trump got none of the votes.
Trump’s campaign filed lawsuits in Michigan and Wisconsin regarding the apparent irregularities. The campaign also filed suit against Nevada’s Board of Elections for allegedly counting 10,000 votes cast by non-residents. The campaign is exercising its right to order a recount of the ballots in Wisconsin after Biden was declared the winner with a less than one percent margin.
There are also multiplying claims of improprieties in vote-counting in Philadelphia. On Wednesday, Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani came to Philadelphia to file a lawsuit after Republican poll watchers were barred from observing election officials count 120,000 ballots. A court order to permit the Republicans to observe the vote-counting was ignored by election officials and Democrats appealed the ruling.
The Democrats’ response to all of the Trump campaign’s claims is to accuse Trump and his supporters of trying to suppress the vote.
Most of the alleged irregularities have to do with mail-in ballots. This is no surprise. Trump and the Republicans warned from the outset of the Democrats’ mail-in ballot campaign that the purpose of the move was not to minimize the spread of the coronavirus. Standing in line to vote is no riskier than standing in line at a grocery store. The goal of mail-in balloting is to tamper with the vote, they said.
AS PRESIDENT TRUMP said in his remarks Thursday evening, it may take time for the legal challenges to work their way through the courts and determine definitively who will be inaugurated on January 20. But we can already see that whoever wins, America’s democratic order is steeped in crisis. The Democrats’ post-election shenanigans are an expression of this crisis.
To be clear, Trump did not cause the crisis. It has two authors: The Democrats and the media.
The Democrats’ fomented the crisis, which places America’s very future as a constitutional democracy on the line when they refused to accept the results of the 2016 election. The media caused it by abandoning journalism in favor of political activism.
Perhaps the most emblematic image of the 2020 elections came in the days leading up to Election Day. Footage surfaced of business owners in big cities throughout the country boarding up their windows to protect their property from the riots they expected to break out once the voting stations closed.
The media’s treatment of the footage exposed their pathology. The business owners expectation of political violence received little coverage. And to the extent the footage was mentioned at all, the mention was as laconic as the weather report: Tomorrow will be partly cloudy, violent riots forecast for downtown beginning at nightfall, and scattered thundershowers are expected around 10 p.m. in the northwest suburbs.
Newspapers and television networks didn’t ask the shop keepers from whom they were protecting their property.
But then, they didn’t need to ask. Everyone knew who the rioters were. Although the media and the Democrats have spent four years insisting that Trump supporters are violent, dangerous racists and Nazis, the merchants in Kenosha and Los Angeles didn’t post Trump election signs in their storefronts to win brownie points from the rioters. They posted signs of support for the looters. And they all hailed from Black Lives Matter, Antifa and allied Democrat voting groups.
Trump’s supporters standing outside vote-counting centers in Philadelphia, Maricopa County and Detroit didn’t plan to protest after the election. Conservative activists only began organizing protests after Biden’s vote tallies magically rose vertically on Wednesday morning.
In notable contrast, Biden’s supporters in Black Lives Matter and allied groups started posting detailed instructions to their supporters about where to gather and where to protest a week before Election Day. And when late Tuesday night, the riots began on schedule in Washington, New York, Portland and Los Angeles, they weren’t kneeling in prayer.
According to the New York Post, a “protester” in Portland was arrested Wednesday carrying hand grenades and a loaded AR-15 assault rifle. “Protesters” in New York were arrested carrying commercial military-grade firecrackers, a taser, knives, and hammers.
Black Lives Matter rioters in Washington reportedly stabbed five Trump supporters close to the White House early Wednesday morning.
Political violence, like ballot harvesting, is a feature of the Democrats’ post-democratic political playbook. And here it is important to remember how things transpired in real-time.
During the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton, her campaign and the media presented Trump and his supporters as illegitimate political actors. Clinton notoriously referred to them as “deplorables.” When Trump won the race, the Democrats’ delegitimization of Trump and his supporters led them to forego simply opposing Trump’s presidency and his actions and policies in favor of rejecting the legitimacy of both his presidency and of the democratic process that enables “deplorables” to choose a president that the Democrats don’t support. The weren’t leading an opposition. They were waging an insurrection.
In other words, Clinton’s delegitimization of Trump and his voters morphed into a rejection of the rules of American democracy. All Democrat efforts to oust Trump from office and to block his ability to govern since, like the political violence the Democrats have employed with greater intensity in the intervening years, are a function of that move.
The Democrats revealed their new post-democratic character and totalitarian bent on inauguration day. When the millions of Democrats came out to protest the peaceful transfer of power, they called themselves “the Resistance.” They weren’t opposing Trump. They were resisting an illegitimate regime. And to take down the regime – that is, the US government – all means were justified.
The media have been a full partner in the Democrats’ efforts to overturn America’s constitutional order in favor of one that denies their opponents (or “enemies”) the ability to lead the country. In 2008, the US media replaced its traditional pro-Democrat bias with full mobilization when Barack Obama entered the presidential race. The media writ large presented Obama as a man without blemish. His domestic and foreign policies were deemed ingenious, completely successful and kind-hearted and never subjected to serious scrutiny. Obama’s personal and policy failings were airbrushed out of the storyline.
Obama’s opponents were demonized as corrupt and evil foreign agents and avaricious “moneymen.”
Biden has similarly enjoyed entirely positive coverage in the media. Together with Twitter and Facebook, the networks and major newspapers have censored, rather than reported information that could in any way undermine support for Biden.
From the moment Trump rode down the escalator of Trump Towers, he received the exact opposite treatment. If Obama was a messianic figure and Biden a kindly grandpa, Trump was the devil incarnate. The media’s abuse of Trump has known no bounds. The legacy newspapers and television networks competed over who could report more Trump-Russia lies.
Trump’s dizzying array of accomplishments in office, at home and abroad were deliberately ignored or downplayed all day, every day for the past four years.
Media executives, editors, anchors and reporters made clear the moment Trump was elected that their only goal, and the only legitimate goal was to oust him from office.
It’s impossible to know how things will develop in America in the coming weeks. But it is hard to see a rainbow over the horizon. If Trump is declared the winner, the Democrats won’t accept the legitimacy of the verdict. Their use of political violence will undoubtedly rise.
And if Biden is declared the winner, the Democrats will not rest on their laurels. Having already adopted the totalitarian mindset, they will insist their newfound power be used to advance their post-democratic program. Indeed, they already are.
MSNBC commentator Jason Johnson said Wednesday that there must be no peace for Republicans in a Biden presidency.
Johnson warned Biden that he mustn’t even think about magnanimity in victory. He is “at war.”
In Johnson’s words, “You cannot come into this White House with the idea that these people [Trump supporters] aren’t the enemy. They are. They are the enemies of democracy.”
As for Trump’s supporters, after being called “chumps” by Biden, after watching the Democrat-run vote counts and Big Tech’s censorship of President Trump, Trump’s supporters will not trust the integrity of the process that brought Biden to the White House. And it is hard to imagine them taking it silently.
Standing outside the Philadelphia courthouse Wednesday, Giuliani addressed both the media and Trump’s supporters. Looking at the reporters, said, “Do you think we’re stupid? You think we are fools?”
Turning to Trump’s supporters, Giuliani added, “Do you know something? The Democrats do think you’re stupid, they do think you’re fools, and that’s why you get called deplorable chumps. That’s over.”
---------------------------- Caroline Glick article published originally in Israel Hayom.Tags:Caroline Glick, Where America Now StandsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Personal Tweets by the editor: Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru - @arra
#Christian Conservative; Retired USAF & Grad Professor. Constitution NRA ProLife schoolchoice fairtax - Editor ARRA NEWS SERVICE. THANKS FOR FOLLOWING!
To Exchange Links - Email: editor@arranewsservice.com!
Comments by contributing authors or other sources do not necessarily reflect the position the editor, other contributing authors, sources, readers, or commenters. No contributors, or editors are paid for articles, images, cartoons, etc. While having reported on and promoting principles & beleifs beliefs of other organizations, this blog/site is soley controlled and supported by the editor. This site/blog does not advertise for money or services nor does it solicit funding for its support.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.