Month: April 2020

Twice the usual number of suspects, including CNN’s combative Jim Acosta, have been criticizing President Donald Trump for the concerns he has raised about elections conducted entirely by mail. 

As the president said in a tweet, we do need absentee ballots for “many senior citizens, military, and others who can’t get to the polls on Election Day.” But the president is right to be worried about elections conducted entirely by mail. 

Absentee ballots
are the tools of choice of election fraudsters because they are voted outside
the supervision of election officials, making it easier to steal, forge, or
alter them, as well as to intimidate voters. 

Going entirely to by-mail elections would unwisely endanger the security and integrity of the election process, particularly if officials automatically mail absentee ballots to all registered voters without a signed, authenticated request from each voter. 

Voter registration rolls are notoriously inaccurate and out of date, containing the names of voters who are deceased, have moved, or otherwise have become ineligible. 

Having thousands
of ballots arriving in the mail for individuals who no longer reside at a
registered address risks those ballots being stolen and voted. 

Yet many liberals are pushing that very process.

The coronavirus bill that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., tried to pass would have forced states to mail absentee ballots to all registered voters, rather than allowing states to require a signed, absentee-ballot request form that can be authenticated by election officials before a ballot is sent to the voter. 

Opportunity for Fraud

The problem (and opportunity for fraud) this could cause is illustrated by something the president talked about at one of his news conferences; namely, the settlement that Judicial Watch obtained from Los Angeles and the state of California over their failure to maintain the accuracy of their voter-registration rolls. 

The state and LA agreed to remove from the rolls 1.5 million individuals who remained registered even though they no longer were eligible to vote. Imagine what would have happened if 1.5 million ballots were simply mailed out to all of those individuals to addresses where they no longer live.

Ballots are a valuable commodity. How many would have been voted anyway by fraudsters or vote harvesters collecting absentee ballots in neighborhoods throughout Los Angeles? 

Just look what happened in North Carolina in 2018 in the 9th Congressional District race, in which the result was overturned by the state election board because of illegal vote harvesting that including altering and forging absentee ballots.

All-mail
jurisdictions such as Oregon like to brag about the supposed “security” of
their systems, which consists of almost nothing other than a rapid, superficial
signature comparison.

As Melody Rose, an assistant professor of political science at Portland State University, told The Los Angeles Times: “I don’t have much faith in that process. I can forge my husband’s signature perfectly.”

Rose conducted a survey of one county, Washington County, outside Portland. Five percent of registered voters admitted that other people marked their ballots, and 2.4% said someone else signed their ballots. 

Rose suspected the actual number was higher, given that most people would not want to admit to being “party to a crime.” That would mean that tens of thousands of mail-in ballots are being cast in Oregon by individuals other than the registered voter.

Voter ID as Security

Trump was also right when he said we need voter ID laws as a basic security measure in voting. As for those who say there is no election fraud in the U.S. that we need be concerned about, they are wrong and the president is right. 

As the U.S. Supreme Court said in 2008 when it upheld Indiana’s voter-ID law:

flagrant examples of such fraud … have been documented throughout this Nation’s history by respected historians and journalists [including] Indiana’s own experience with fraudulent voting in the 2003 Democratic primary for East Chicago Mayor … demonstrate that not only is the risk of voter fraud real, but that it could affect the outcome of a close election.

The Heritage Foundation’s Election Fraud Database documents almost 1,300 proven instances of fraud, including numerous cases of absentee ballot fraud. That fraud often targets the most vulnerable voters, including the elderly and the poor. 

The most recent batch of cases added to the database emphasize that the president’s concern over election integrity is not misplaced.

For example, Richard Davis was convicted of a felony in California after registering his four dogs to vote as Democrats over a four-year period. Davis said his goal was to draw attention to the flawed voter registration system in his state, and he did notify the local district attorney’s office of what he was doing.

Disregarding several warnings to stop those false registrations, and after registering his deceased father, too, Davis was charged and pleaded guilty to voter registration fraud. 

He never submitted a fraudulent vote, but he could have done so easily using absentee ballots if he hadn’t told officials what he was doing, since his “signature” for his dogs would have been a match on all of the forms.

Or take Gustavo Araujo Lerma, an illegal alien from Mexico. He voted multiple times in elections in Sacramento, California, under a false identity.

Protecting the Marginalized

Another case out
of California demonstrates how voter fraud often hurts the most marginalized
individuals in communities. 

Norman Hall was involved in a scheme with eight other individuals involving the homeless on Skid Row. According to the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office, they “solicited hundreds of false and/or forged signatures on state ballot petitions and voter registration forms by offering homeless people $1 and/or cigarettes for their participation.”

The ballot petitions for which Hall and others gathered
fraudulent signatures included calling for reducing jail time, changing the
authority of the sheriff’s office, and increasing taxes on millionaires and other
business owners.

Two other cases
out of California include two individuals, Jentry and Bradley Jasperson, who
forged the signatures of voters for a referendum initiative. They were each
paid $5 per signature. 

Another case from
our newest batch features Frank Rabia, a City Council candidate in Hoboken, New
Jersey, who bribed voters with $50 payments for mail-in-ballots to support his
candidacy.

Heritage’s Election Fraud Database has more than 60 instances of vote buying. Attempting to buy votes or signatures is entirely repugnant to the republic that America is so lucky to maintain. But purchasing votes is much easier with absentee or mail-in ballots. 

The purchaser—such
as Rabia—can see the voter’s absentee ballot in the voter’s home and ensure he
is getting what he paid for. A purchaser can’t do that when a voter goes into
the privacy of a voting booth.

Another new case we added to our database arises out of Espanola, New Mexico, where Laura Seeds and Dyon Herrera falsified absentee ballots in favor of Seeds’ husband, a Democratic candidate for City Council.

This is the same state where a lawsuit has been filed to require election officials to automatically mail absentee ballots to all registered voters in the upcoming election. 

The Public Interest Legal Foundation pointed out in an amicus brief that it found more than 3,000 individuals registered multiple times in New Mexico; almost 1,700 registrants who are dead; 1,500 voters aged 100 or above (64 of whom are over 120 years old); and almost 200 individuals registered at commercial rather than residential addresses. All of these supposed voters would receive ballots automatically if the lawsuit were  successful.

These cases
demonstrate that election fraud does occur and can compromise the integrity of
the election process.   

Not even the coronavirus can stop the upcoming presidential election, with the 2020 primaries already well underway. Soon enough, the general election will be upon us.

States should be doing everything they can to help everyone who is eligible to vote. But that doesn’t mean casting aside the safeguards in place to prevent elections from being stolen or compromised by administrative errors and fraud.

The post Potential for Fraud Is Why Mail-in Elections Should Be Dead Letter appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailysignal.com/

President Donald Trump last week fired Michael Atkinson, the inspector general for the nation’s intelligence community.

Atkinson made headlines last year when he told Congress about a report filed by an anonymous intelligence official who alleged that Trump inappropriately had offered Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy foreign aid in exchange for a politically beneficial investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden.

That anonymous official later was identified as a CIA analyst who left the White House in 2017 after being suspected of leaks to the media.

Trump said he fired Atkinson because “he did an absolutely terrible job” handling the complaint as inspector general.  Some in the news media, however, have accused the president of retaliating against Atkinson for disclosing the complaint that lead to Trump’s impeachment. 

We don’t know which narrative is correct, and the concern that Atkinson’s firing was political retribution should be taken seriously. Inspectors general need to be fully independent and nonpartisan to do their jobs well. Presidents should neither expect nor require loyalty from them. 

That all-important independence, however, is no shield against legitimate criticism. And Atkinson rightly has earned a great deal of criticism for his actions.

As we’ve written
previously, Atkinson’s handling of the intelligence official’s report did
not comply with the law or his own department’s policy. 

Under federal law, a
member of the intelligence community may file a complaint with the inspector general
if it relates to a matter of “urgent concern.” 
The law defines a matter of urgent concern as a problem relating to “an
intelligence activity within the responsibility of the Director of National
Intelligence.”

The complaint Atkinson sent to Congress was about a diplomatic phone call, not an “intelligence activity.” It did not fall under the jurisdiction of the director of national intelligence. The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel issued a memorandum explaining that point. 

Thus, it did not
qualify as a valid whistleblower complaint. Atkinson either failed to
understand the law or decided to ignore it.

Strike one for Atkinson.

Another law states that the inspector general should refer the complaint—even if it was not a valid whistleblower complaint—to the Justice Department for investigation. Atkinson did not do that.

Strike two.

The law also requires the inspector general to determine
whether the complaint is credible. At the time Atkinson received the complaint,
long-standing department policy required, for good reason, that a complaint be
based on firsthand information—not hearsay—to be considered credible. 

That was not the case with the complaint Atkinson greenlighted. The supposed “whistleblower” was not involved in the phone call between Trump and Zelenskyy, didn’t work in the White House at the time the call was made, and clearly had a political ax to grind against Trump. 

Despite all of his knowledge being thirdhand, Atkinson deemed
his complaint to be credible anyway. 

Strike three.

Usually with three strikes, you’re out. But Atkinson
kept swinging—and missing. 

When asked about how he made his credibility determination, Atkinson admitted that he never reviewed the White House memorandum describing the content of the call between Trump and Zelenskyy.

Strike four.

When the press asked Atkinson why he violated the
policy, he acknowledged
that the policy prohibited him from deeming the report credible, but said he
changed the policy after receiving the complaint.

Strike five.

Perhaps realizing that he had backed himself into a
corner, Atkinson tried to spin his way out.  

He said that, regardless of what was written down, the true policy actually always had been the opposite; that is, complaints were totally fine, even if they were not based on firsthand information. And anyway, Atkinson continued, the complainant checked a box on a form that said he had firsthand information, even though the body of the complaint made it obvious he didn’t.

There are several ways to slice this, and none makes Atkinson look good.

He either allowed a defunct policy to sit on the books for years, disregarded an established policy for political ends, or didn’t do his job with the care required from the inspector general of the intelligence establishment, one of the most important functions of the executive branch when it comes to the nation’s security.

Strike six.

Still, Atkinson maintains that he
did his job properly and was fired for it.

He may or may not have been fired as an act of political retribution. That’s something that should not happen, because it can undermine the independence of all inspectors general. 

But contrary to his claims, Atkinson did not do his job properly, and it’s understandable why Trump would lack confidence in his competence, independence, and dependability.

Our respect for the importance of the independence of inspector generals does not shield Atkinson from the criticism he rightly earned.

The post 6 Strikes, You’re Out: Independence Can’t Shield Inspectors General Who Ignore the Law appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailysignal.com/

A majority of American adults agree with using the term “Chinese virus” to describe coronavirus, despite media members pillorying President Donald Trump for using that term, three polls showed.

Three consecutive national surveys by The Harris Poll found that more than 50% of Americans said they somewhat or strongly agree with Trump using the term “Chinese virus.”

The poll results make for a stark contrast with the national media’s reaction to the term “Chinese virus.”

MSNBC anchor John Heilemann said on air in March that Trump’s use of the term “Chinese virus” is “nakedly racist and obviously racist and blatantly racist.”

CNN opinion writer Jill Filipovic similarly argued that using the term “Chinese virus” was “xenophobic racism,” and compared it to scapegoating European Jews for the Black Death.

Other journalists, from Vox writers to The New York Times editorial board, have denounced the president’s use of the term.

But the American public seems to disagree.

The three Harris polls, all of which are from late March or early April, showed 52%, 54% and 52% of Americans agreeing with Trump.

The most recent Harris poll, which surveyed 1,993 adults between April 3 and 5, also found that an overwhelming majority of Americans hold the Chinese government responsible for the virus’s spread. That’s in line with scientific research on the subject.

One study found that up to 95% of COVID-19’s spread could have been prevented if the Chinese government had acted three weeks sooner than they did.

A majority of Americans, 58%, agree that China should “be required to pay other countries for the spread of the virus,” the most recent Harris poll found.

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 this original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The post Majority Of Americans Agree With Trump Calling COVID-19 ‘Chinese Virus’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailysignal.com/

According to The Washington Post‘s sources, President Trump has been pushing “behind closed doors” to “reopen much of the country next month,” an effort the Post notes has some health experts sounding the alarm out of fear of a possible “resurgence” of COVID-19.

“Behind closed doors, President Trump — concerned with the sagging economy — has sought a strategy for resuming business activity by May 1, according to people familiar with the discussions,” the Post reported Thursday.

“In phone calls with outside advisers, Trump has even floated trying to reopen much of the country before the end of this month, when the current federal recommendations to avoid social gatherings and work from home expire, the people said,” the Post reports. “Trump regularly looks at unemployment and stock market numbers, complaining that they are hurting his presidency and reelection prospects, the people said.”

While the Post is relying on its unnamed sources about what Trump is doing behind the scenes, what he is doing in public is clear enough: He has repeatedly expressed a desire to reopen the country as quickly as is safely possible, based on the advice of the nation’s top health experts who are informing the Coronavirus Task Force.

As The Daily Wire reported, one of the key members of that task force, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s leading infectious disease expert and director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told CBS on Thursday that because of the “very good job” the nation is doing on social distancing measures, it is now “very likely” that by the end of the 30-day nationwide lockdown, we will be taking important steps toward “normalization” and, by summer, will have taken “many steps in that direction.”

Later that day, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, who is reportedly a member of a newly formed economy-focused task force, made a similar comment, saying we are on track to begin reopening the U.S. economy in May.

“When you say get back to ‘normal,’ it’s not going to be a light switch that you turn on and off. It’s going to be differential and gradual depending upon where you are and where the burden of infection is,” Fauci told “CBS This Morning” Thursday. “But the bottom line of it all is, that what we see looking forward, it is very likely that we will progress toward the steps toward normalization as we get to the end of this 30 days. And I think that’s going to be a good time to look and see how quickly can we make that move to try and normalize. But hopefully, and hopefully, by the time we get to the summer, we will have taken many steps in that direction.”

In an interview with Jim Cramer on CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street,” Mnuchin said he could see the country beginning to reopen in May. “I think as soon as the president feels comfortable with the medical issues,” said the Treasury secretary, noting that the Trump administration is doing “everything necessary” to help American businesses be “open for business” and “have the liquidity that they need to operate their business in the interim.”

In its report on Trump’s push to reopen the economy sooner rather than later, the Post stresses that health experts are warning about the potentially “disastrous” consequences of easing restrictions prematurely, “because U.S. leaders have not built up the capacity for alternatives to stay-at-home orders — such as the mass testing, large-scale contact tracing and targeted quarantines that have been used in other countries to suppress the virus.”

A particularly influential model in the nation’s response, the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IMHE) model, which recently twice-downgraded its fatality projections by August from around 94,000 to 82,000 then down again to 60,000, assumes widespread “lockdown”-type measures until the end of May, the Post notes.

So far, about 17 million Americans have filed for unemployment as a result of the widespread lockdowns.

Related: NYT Calls Out De Blasio, Cuomo For Coronavirus Failures; Readers: Thanks For Finally Saying Something

via The Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com

NL

Very few Americans are dying to date from the coronavirus who had no pre-existing conditions.  Based on the most recent data, this number will shock you.

As of this morning, April 10, 2020, there are now 16,697 Americans who have died who had the coronavirus and more than 96,000 world-wide.

But this data is misleading because the most recent data shows that only .9% of deaths related to the coronavirus are related to individuals with no comorbidity (i.e. pre-existing conditions):

Therefore based on this data, only 150 Americans have died from the coronavirus who had no pre-existing conditions out of 16,697.

In addition, of the top 29 countries in the world based on number of coronavirus cases confirmed, eight of these countries have opened their countries up economically in some part or in full.  (See countries highlighted above in yellow: China, Brazil, Austria, Sweden, Norway, Denmark Czechia and Japan.)  The death rate per case identified for these countries is 4.1% which is less than the overall world average of 6% but the US death rate is slightly lower than both at 3.6%.

So …. the US has shut down its entire economy because of the coronavirus based on 17,000 deaths (which is less than this year’s deaths related to the flu) and only 150 deaths where individuals had no other pre-existing conditions?  Hmmm…

So why are we committing economic suicide again?

The post FROM THE NUMBERS: Only 150 Americans to Date With No Pre-Existing Conditions Have Died From the Coronavirus or 0.9% appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Dramatic Footage Shows Home Owner Fight Off Home Invaders In Fatal Confrontation

Tyler Durden

Fri, 04/10/2020 – 10:00

via ZeroHedge News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.zerohedge.com/fullrss2.xml

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

If you’re wondering why this nation’s health care system is in disarray, unprepared, disorganized, and malfunctioning? 

First look in the mirror.

You voted for it in 2008 and then doubled down by voting for it again in 2012.

via CanadaFreePress.Com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://canadafreepress.com/

The Trump campaign on Thursday unveiled a new ad hitting Joe Biden hard for his record on appeasing China.

Joe Biden constantly praises the ChiComs because his crackhead son Hunter is financially tied with China.

In 2013, Hunter Biden flew on Air Force Two with his daddy VP Biden and managed to procure a whopping $1.5 billion for his private equity fund.

The Trump camp slammed Biden for his praise and defense of China.

The new ad also highlighted just how wrong Biden was when he attacked President Trump as a ‘xenophobic fear-monger’ for restricting incoming flights from China in January as the Coronavirus spread across the world.

WATCH:

The Trump campaign releases a new ad highlighting former VP Joe Biden’s ties to China amid the #COVIDー19 outbreak.pic.twitter.com/zOpYq4frcI

— Alex Salvi (@alexsalvinews) April 9, 2020

The post New Trump Campaign Ad Hits Biden Hard For His Record on Appeasing China (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

via Weasel Zippers

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.weaselzippers.us