Category Archives: Federalist

A left-wing nonprofit that interfered in the 2020 election to Democrats benefit is coaching election offices on how to address concerns about leftist oligarchs silent coup to replace Joe Biden as the partys presidential nominee.

On Tuesday, the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) sent an email to its newsletter subscribers highlighting Bidens Sunday exit from the 2024 race and informing election officials that voters and media outlets will be looking to you for guidance in the coming weeks, and you will play a powerful role in shaping this emerging story.

Your community is likely wondering how the Presumptive Democratic Nominees decision to drop out of the presidential race will impact voters election experience, the email reads. Proactive communication from your office to the public and the media will help assure your community and inspire confidence in the ongoing democratic process.

During the 2020 election, CTCL and the Center for Election Innovation and Research collectively received hundreds of millions of dollars from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg. The left-wing nonprofits then dumped these Zuckbucks into election offices across the country and were used to advance Democrat-backed voting policies. Heavily directed at blue municipalities, the effort effectively amounted to a giant Democrat get-out-the-vote operation.

In its Tuesday email, CTCL offered to support election offices in navigating Bidens exit from the 2024 campaign by providing linked resources from a bevy of left-wing organizations. This included a list of talking points devised by the Partnership for Large Election Jurisdictions (PLEJ) that address potential questions voters and media may have about the 2024 election following Bidens dropping out.

According to InfluenceWatch, PLEJ is a membership-based coalition open to election officials and administrators representing jurisdictions that have a population greater than 300,000 or that are one of the three largest jurisdictions in their state. Last year, the group signed onto a letter written by the left-wingElection Infrastructure Initiative a CTCL venture that attacked [c]ongressional Republicans for opposing additional federal funds for state and local elections. PLEJ has also received funding from the left-wing Democracy Fund, according to InfluenceWatch.

CTCL also provided election officials with communication resources from Democrat-aligned organizations such as The Elections Group and U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence, described as an $80 millionventurelaunched by CTCL in 2022to systematically influence every aspect of election administration and advance Democrat-backed voting policies in local election offices. The Elections Group is a participating member of the Alliance, along with a host of other entities that are also left-leaning.

CTCL isnt solely coaching election officials on how to grapple with Bidens exit, however. The group is also seemingly aiming to collect information from election offices and establish relationships with them.

Enclosed in the Tuesday newsletter is a link to a survey election officials can fill out to share how the Biden-Harris candidate swap will impact [their] work and inform CTCL of what additional support would be helpful in the coming days and weeks. The survey includes several statements officials are asked to rate on a one-to-five scale, with one signifying strongly disagree, and five signifying strongly agree.

Among the statements are: The change in presumptive nominee will greatly impact my offices workflow, and My office understands the processes in state and federal law that apply to the change in a presumptive nominee.

The survey further includes two response-style questions, in which election officials are asked to disclose [h]ow, if at all, [they] anticipate [their] offices workflow will be significantly impacted by Bidens exit and [w]hat, if anything [their] office need[s] right now to prepare for these changes.

The attempt to collect personal information from election offices closely mirrors prior questionnaires CTCL has distributed in the past.

Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

Visit link:

'Zuckbucks' Org Coaches Election Offices On Handling Biden Exit - The Federalist

The since-resigned Secret Service director conceded before House lawmakers Monday that this months shooting of former President Donald Trump was the worst agency security failure since President Ronald Reagan was shot in 1981.

On July 13th, we failed, Kimberly Cheatle said.

But was the assassination attempt a failure because Trump survived? Or was it a failure because he was shot in the first place? Its easy to blow off a government attempt to kill the former and potential future president as an episode of conspiratorial paranoia, but not so much when one is reminded of the extent to which Trump has remained the Washington regimes Public Enemy No. 1 since 2015.

Trumps bloodied fist-pump wasnt just an expression of patriotic defiance in the face of a near-assassins bullet. The former presidents display of physical courage was much larger than that. The dramatic images of Trumps heroism in the moment reflected the triumph of an ex-commander-in-chief whos conquered not one but two impeachments, serially fabricated financial scandals, and 91 state and federal charges in a weaponized legal system run by ideological opponents who smear him as Adolf Hitler. An entire decade of character assassinations culminated in a bullet blowing through the right ear of a leader who emerged from the latest assault as a lionized icon of American perseverance and determination just months from an election.

The FBI and the Department of Justice failed to take Trump down through the Russia hoax. Then the intelligence state failed to bring Trump down through impeachment with a hoax on aid to Ukraine. Then congressional Democrats failed to keep Trump down with another hoax surrounding the capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021. As the DOJs lawfare campaign to imprison Trump with a series of charges brought by prosecutors of the incumbent regime began to derail this summer, the Secret Service naturally became the agency of last resort through which Trumps opponents could finally execute their insurance policy against another Trump presidency.

Trumps shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, might not have deliberately coordinated with deep state security to pull the trigger on the Republican presidential nominee. But the string of security lapses in the former presidents detail clearly left the door open for any number of the crazies who wish to carry out an assassination, including even a deranged 20-year-old, to succeed just once.

On Wednesday, the FBI confirmed Crooks had been able to fly a reconnaissance drone just roughly 200 yards from the rally fairgrounds in Butler, Pennsylvania, only hours before the event. The news had already been leaked to The Wall Street Journal, which reported a programmed flight path suggests Crooks flew the drone more than once as he researched and scoped out the event site.

Several law enforcement officials were apparently stationed inside the building from which Crooks was able to fire off eight gunshots in under six seconds, injuring two rallygoers and killing one. According to the disgraced ex-Secret Service director, however, the rooftop from which the gunman fired was left vacant because it was sloped. A former roofer explained in a column for The Federalist why Cheatles Sloped Roof Excuse Is Total Nonsense.

Contrary to Director Cheatles statement, wrote Dmitri Rutkowski, the two- to four-pitch industrial roof is not too sloped.

It presents no special safety factor for agents to walk, Rutkowski explained. It is low-pitch, and people can comfortably stand and maneuver upon it. The killer easily climbed and moved around on it, and the internet is replete with images of agents comfortably walking it.

The courageous commitment of front-line agents to take a bullet for the former president was on clear display at this months rally, but the leadership within the upper echelons of the federal security agency obviously carries no such mandate. The Secret Service director who finally stepped down was also an appointee of First Lady Jill Bidens, whose own detail was apparently beefed up while Trumps team was stripped down. In fact, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) denied the Trump campaigns requests for additional security time and again, and yet Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas still hasnt joined Cheatle in resigning.

On Tuesday, the Secret Service requested Trump forgo any more outdoor campaign rallies right after Republicans wrapped up one of the most successful conventions to propel the party into the fall election.

The Secret Service did not return an email from The Federalist requesting comment, Federalist Senior Election Correspondent Matt Kittle reported. So its not clear whether the agency has made the same requests ofVice President Kamala Harris.

An agency otherwise committed to Trumps protection might not have placed a partisan handicap on federally protected persons. Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., even tried to strip the Republican presidential candidate of Secret Service protection earlier this year, and Democrats are considering the Mississippi lawmaker for a seat on a bipartisan commission to investigate the failed assassination attempt.

Even if Trumps assassination attempt wasnt a government plot to kill an ex-president, its obvious to Americans that the Secret Service was yet another hostile agency prone to the corrupt impulses of far-left ideologues in the capital who grandstand on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. If the Secret Service had been weaponized to block Trumps triumphant return to the Oval Office, the events might look very similar to those of the last two weeks.

See the rest here:

The Secret Service Was Obviously Going To Be The Next Vehicle Of The Deep State - The Federalist

A new whistleblower revealed another agency failure by the Secret Service two weeks after former President Donald Trump was wounded by a would-be assassins bullet.

On Thursday, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., posted a letter on X addressed to Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas outlining the new allegations brough forward from an anonymous whistleblower.

According to one whistleblower, the night before the rally, U.S. Secret Service repeatedly denied offers from a local law enforcement partner to utilize drone technology to secure the rally, Hawley wrote. This means that the technology was both available to [U.S. Secret Service] and able to be deployed to secure the site.

The Secret Service, however, said no, and the whistleblower further alleges that after the shooting took place, [U.S. Secret Service] changed course and asked the local partner to deploy the drone technology to surveil the site in the aftermath of the attack.

On Wednesday, FBI Director Christopher Wray confirmed The Wall Street Journals reporting last week that the Trump shooter flew a reconnaissance drone roughly 200 yards from the rally fairgrounds in Butler, Pennsylvania, just two hours before the event.

We think, but we do not know, Wray told the House Judiciary Committee, that he was live-streaming, viewing the footage.

The Wall Street Journal reported Friday the failed assassin was able to fly the drone on a programmed flight path which suggests Crooks flew the drone more than once as he researched and scoped out the event site.

Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle resigned after the agency chief struggled to answer lawmakers questions in a Monday hearing with the House Oversight Committee. The disgraced Secret Service chief told representatives her agency had no radio recordings from agents on the day that she admitted was the most significant operational failure of the Secret Service in decades.

NBC News reported the Secret Service was warned about days in advance about the building used by the shooter. Cheatle said the roof was left unsecured because it was sloped.

I just dont think this is partisan, said Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., on Monday. If you have an assassination attempt on the president, a former president, or a candidate, you need to resign.

Cheatle submitted her resignation the next day.

[RELATED: 20 Questions Unanswered After Cheatle Resigns As Secret Service Director]

The House of Representatives voted unanimously Wednesday night to establish a bipartisan commission to investigate the assassination attempt. Democrats are reportedly considering Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., to serve on the panel, even after the Mississippi lawmaker sought to strip Trump of Secret Service protection earlier this year. Thompson also led the Democrats partisan Select Committee on Jan. 6 as chairman.

Read this article:

Whistleblower Says Secret Service Refused To Fly Drones Before Trump Assassination Attempt - The Federalist

After a letter posted to X on Sunday announced that President Joe Biden would not seek the Democrat nomination, Vice President Kamala Harris stands as the partys presumptive nominee without receiving a single primary vote or delegate this election cycle.

Before his withdrawal from the race and endorsement of Harris, the president had earned 3,896 pledged delegates, nearly double the amount required to clinch the nomination. Yet many lawmakers and political pundits have been calling for Biden to drop out of the race for weeks in the wake of his disastrous debate performance in June.

The Federalist reached out to all of the left-leaning lawmakers 36 Democrats and one independent who publicly called for Bidens withdrawal and asked how they would ensure that their constituents voices were heard leading up to the Democratic National Convention.

Only two offices responded, while the other 35 failed to comment.

I respect President Bidens decision and believe it is the right thing to do for our country, Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont.,saidin a statement. Sharla and I thank him for his lifetime of public service and dedication to our great nation.

The Senators staff clarified to The Federalist that he supports an open primary to select the nominee.

Rep. Ed Case, D-Hawaii, directed The Federalist to a previous statement.

Ive had the time and discussions with my constituents, colleagues and others I needed before deciding on the Democratic nominee for President. I endorse Vice President Harris,saidCase.

Neither lawmaker commented directly on The Federalists questioning regarding how Democrat voters who chose Biden in the primaries will be represented on the ballot in November.

Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, was the first lawmaker to call for Biden to halt his reelection campaign. The congressmanposteda statement on X, July 2.

Doggett was the first of many to call for Biden to back down, starting a wave of elected officials blatantly disregarding the choices of Americans throughout primary season.

After Bidens withdrawal, many Democrats lined up to wholeheartedly endorse Harris, who was notably unpopular during the 2020 Democrat primaries. Former PresidentBillClinton, former Secretary of State and 2016 Democrat presidential nomineeHillaryClinton, and former House SpeakerNancyPelosi all have endorsed Harris.

Harris has reportedly secured the endorsement of almost 2,000 Democratic delegates, enough support to secure the nomination at the pre-convention virtual roll call vote,accordingto the BBC.

The removal of Biden has left14 million people, in essence, disenfranchised, and the lawmakers who pushed for his removal have not revealed how they will fix it.

In simpler terms, Democratic primary voters who cast a ballot for Biden are now being told by a handful of D.C. elites that their votes were simply perfunctory,Federalist elections correspondent Brianna Lyman pointed out in an article earlier this week.

Kamden Mulder is a summer intern at The Federalist. She is a senior at Hillsdale College pursuing a degree in American Studies and Journalism.

See more here:

Dems Who Called For Bidens Removal Fail To Address How Voters Voices Will Now Be Heard - The Federalist

While most political pundits are focused on the pending matchup between former President Donald Trump and (presumably) Vice President Kamala Harris, a major facet of the 2024 contest thats not getting enough attention is the election-related policy proposals appearing on state ballots across the country.

From voter ID requirements to expanding mail-in voting, these proposed statutory and constitutional changes could significantly alter the way states administer their elections. Here are the biggest ones you need to know about.

Often referred to as rigged-choice voting by its critics, ranked-choice voting (RCV) is an elections system in which voters rank candidates of all parties in order of preference. If no candidate receives more than 50 percent of first-choice votes in the first round of voting, the last-place finisher is eliminated, and his votes are reallocated to the voters second-choice candidate. This process continues until one candidate receives a majority of votes.

The system has largely been pushed by Democrats as a way of winning traditionally Republican seats and has regularly produced inaccurate election results and discarded ballots. While 10 states have prohibited RCV in recent years, that hasnt stopped its proponents from attempting to trick voters into adopting the system via the ballot amendment process.

In Idaho, where Republicans passed a law barring the practice last year, RCV supporters reportedly submitted enough signatures earlier this month to have a top-four RCV initiative appear on the states November ballot. According to Ballotpedia, the initiative would change state law to require the use of ranked-choice voting in congressional, gubernatorial, and state and county elections.

Nevada and Oregon will also have pro-RCV initiatives appearing on their November ballots. The former states constitutional amendment proposal would implement a top-five RCV system for congressional, gubernatorial, state executive official, and state legislative elections, according to Ballotpedia, while the latters statutory initiative would require the system to be used for all federal and most state races, including those for president and governor. Oregons initiative would further permit localities to adopt RCV if their governing charters permit it.

Meanwhile, other states are looking to stop RCV from corrupting their elections.

Alaska, which narrowly adopted a top-four RCV system via ballot initiative in 2020, will have an amendment to repeal the systems use on its fall ballot. The Last Frontier States use of RCV has produced a scenario in which a Democrat now represents Alaskas at-large congressional seat. The system also helped establishment GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski win reelection against a more conservative challenger during the 2022 midterms.

Missouri voters will also have the opportunity to prohibit RCV in elections via constitutional amendment this November. Arizonans will similarly vote on a constitutional amendment proposal requiring partisan primaries. While Republican Rep. Austin Smith, the measures legislative sponsor, reportedly indicated the amendment doesnt prohibit RCV, he argued it will help gird the state against radical experimental election systems that disenfranchise voters such as ranked choice voting.'

Sponsors of an Arizona constitutional amendment that would eliminate partisan primaries and pave the way for RCV submitted signatures to appear on the November ballot earlier this month. Election officials have yet to determine if it will.

South Dakotas Amendment H seeks to alter the states existing primary system. Rather than allow parties to hold individual primaries, the proposal would amend the state constitution by requiring a top-two primary system for state executive and legislative, congressional, and county races. Candidates from all parties would compete in a single primary, in which the top two vote-getters regardless of party affiliation would advance to the general election.

This type of primary system is currently used by states such as California.

Amid the Biden-manufactured invasion at the southern border, various states are aiming to advance measures ensuring illegal aliens cant vote in American elections.

Electors in Idaho, Kentucky, South Carolina, Wisconsin, Missouri, Oklahoma, and North Carolina will have the opportunity this November to vote on constitutional amendment proposals stipulating that only U.S. citizens may vote in their elections.

A similar initiative specifying only U.S. citizens can vote in elections and prohibiting localities from allowing noncitizen voting in municipal races will appear on Iowas 2024 ballot. The amendment proposal includes an additional provision permitting 17-year-olds who will be 18 at the time of the general election to vote in primaries.

With Democrats weaponizing the ballot initiative process to enshrine their radical agenda into law in traditionally red states, some jurisdictions are hoping voters will advance measures to make such efforts more difficult.

In Arizona, Proposition 134 would raise the threshold for citizen-led ballot initiatives to appear on the states ballot. According to Ballotpedia, The current signature requirement to get an initiative petition on the ballot in Arizona is equal to 10% or 15% of qualified electors in the state for state statutes and constitutional amendments, respectively.

Proposition 134 seeks to amend that provision of the state constitution to provide that the initiative signature requirement would be 10% of votes cast for governor in each legislative district to qualify initiated state statutes for the ballot, and 15% of votes cast for governor in each legislative district to qualify initiated constitutional amendments for the ballot (emphasis added). Passing the amendment would effectively force leftist groups hoping to use their dark money to garner support from Democrat-friendly, high-population centers to expand their efforts to rural areas less likely to back their extreme policies.

Proposition 136 would amend the Arizona Constitution to allow for legal challenges against ballot initiatives and constitutional amendment proposals after such measures have been submitted to the secretary of state for approval.

Meanwhile, a North Dakota amendment proposal seeks to establish a single-subject rule for all ballot measures, require that voters pass constitutional initiatives twice (in a primary and general election), and raise the signature requirement for any statute or constitutional amendment proposal from 4 percent of the state population to 5 percent.

The Connecticut No-Excuse Absentee Voting Amendment seeks to amend the Constitution States founding document by allowing the Democrat-controlled legislature to pass laws allowing for no-excuse absentee voting. The Connecticut Constitution only permits voters to request an absentee ballot if they fulfill any of the documents listed criteria, such as if theyre sick or wont be in town on Election Day.

Opponents of the measure expressed concern that it would move the state away from its traditional voting procedures, in which electors vote in person on Election Day. Attempts to pass the leftist-backed amendment come at the same time Democrat officials in Connecticuts most-populous city are facing charges for absentee ballot fraud.

The Nevada Voter Identification Initiative is a constitutional amendment proposal that would require Nevada residents to provide a photo ID when voting in person or their Social Security number or the last four digits of their drivers license when voting by mail. If passed by a majority of voters this November, the proposal will need to pass again during the states next general election to ratify the Nevada Constitution.

Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

Excerpt from:

These Important Election Integrity Initiatives Might Be On Your 2024 Ballot - The Federalist

Years after acknowledging and even praising President Joe Biden for naming Vice President Kamala Harris border czar, corporate media claimed the presumptive 2024 Democrat nominee was never charged with overseeing the logistics of the record-breaking invasion.

Biden first charged Harris with leading our efforts with Mexico and the Northern Triangle and the countries that help are going to need help in stemming the movement of so many folks, stemming the migration to our southern border in March 2021. At the time, he claimed the former California attorney general and senator was the most qualified person to do it.

Harris didnt do much with the title and task. Yet, even her delayed first and only (and heavily staged) visit to the border received celebration from her allies in the press.

This kid-glove treatment intensified recently when corporate media accused those critical of Harris failure to do anything but exacerbate the Biden administration-incentivized invasion of making the VP a convenient scapegoat.

Harriss job was meant to be narrow, The Wall Street Journal insisted, and over the years Harris has fulfilled it by announcing tranches of private investments by companies like Pepsi, Cargill and Nestle in Central America.

Axios insinuated in an X post on Wednesday that Republicans are wrong to point out Harris border failures because the Democrat never actually had the title border czar.

The outlets complaints that the Trump campaign and Republicans like House GOP Chair Elise Stefanik have unfairly labeled Harris role, however, fall short in the face of its own reporting, which repeatedly referred to Harris as Bidens border czar.

The same Axios author who wrote on Wednesday that Harris was only meant to help with a slice of the migration issue, penned a March 2021 article claiming Biden put Harris in charge of the border crisis.

Axios added an editors note to the story shortly after publication with a notice stating three years later it was among the news outlets that incorrectly labeled Harris a border czar.

Why, other than the usual motivations for the corporate media to deliberately distort the narrative, would publications like Axios lie about something its own pages contradict?

Its because the border has been and continues to be a political grenade for the Democrats who wrecked it. Stef W. Kight explicitly stated in her latest story that she aimed to signal it has become even more critical for Harris to find a clear border message, fast.

Making a clear immigration pitch to voters could be critical for Harriss campaign, Kight repeated, before noting that illegal border crossing activists are invigorated by Harris rise on the ticket because she is personally well-versed and invested in the issue.

Politifact, known for aiding Big Techs censorship efforts by printing fake fact-checks designed to demonize political dissenters, even joined in the propaganda dogpile when it claimed that Harris was merely assigned to tackle immigrations causes, not border security.

USA Today, similarly, published a fact-check that deemed the claim that Harris was the presidential pick to oversee the skyrocketing number of illegal crossings exaggerates the vice presidents role in addressing migration at the southern border.

One quick look at Bidens border czar pronouncement in 2021 suggests the opposite.

Biden noted that he was tasked with a similar assignment to determine the best way to keep people from coming is keep them from wanting to leave during the Obama administration.

The Vice President has agreed among the multiple other things that I have her leading and I appreciate it agreed to lead our diplomatic effort and work with those nations to accept re- the returnees, and enhance migration enforcement at their borders at their borders.

Harris also explicitly emphasized in her acceptance that we will enforce the law.

The real border story continues to be that the Biden administration ushered in the deadliest invasion in the world without facing any accountability. Corporate media, however, are more interested in running propaganda to help Democrats 2024 election chances instead of covering how Americans are suffering the consequences like violent crime,fatal drugs, andinfrastructure problems that are directly linked to the ongoing influx of illegal border crossers.

Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire, Fox News, and RealClearPolitics. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on X @jordanboydtx.

Read more here:

Media Pretend Kamala Harris Never Named Border Czar - The Federalist

There isnt a single thing normal about the past week of this campaign, and yet the news media are acting like this is, at most, an interesting time, but otherwise politics as usual.

To recap: A sitting president, up for reelection, announced in a terse letter that he was abandoning his campaign just a little over 100 days from Election Day. He was supposedly sick for the second time in the course of a month and nobody saw him for days after the announcement. To replace him as the presumptive Democrat nominee, he endorsed his vice president, a woman whose entire term in that office has been marked by wild turnover, unresolved problems, blame shifting for those problems, and an irrefutable lack of charm.

Kamala Harris is literally the reason Joe Biden couldnt not run for a second term. If he hadnt, everyone knew she would have, and it was going to be the worst campaign ever, or at least tied with her first campaign for president in 2020. Unfortunately for Biden and his party, the already decrepit presidents health deteriorated at a much quicker pace than anticipated, and now Harris will be the nominee anyway.

But that doesnt change history and what everyone has known for almost four years that Harris has been a complete failure as vice president, she isnt equipped for the job as president, and she didnt miraculously become popular. To the contrary, shes the least liked vice president in the history of polling the question.

A bizarre and woefully underwhelming endorsement from former President Barack Obama says everything. There was no reason to expect anything less than a blowout campaign event wherein Obama took to the stage and delivered a thundering speech as he declared his support for what could theoretically be the next somewhat black president of the United States.

What happened instead was a staged and highly suspect phone call with all the enthusiasm and candor of a debt collections notice.

It appears that people feel very strongly that you need to be our nominee, is literally how Obama put it to Harris, according to a transcript of the call that all parties involved mutually agreed to release.

There have been more favorable assessments of diarrhea.

Obamas X account posted a 55-second video of Harris receiving the call at 5 a.m. on a Friday.

A legitimate news media would declare that a scandal because it is. What just happened? Whats going on? Somethings not right.

But heres the New York Times headline: Obama Endorses Harris for the Democratic Nomination.

The media continue humming along, talking about this freak show like its a little unusual but nothing untoward. The poll numbers The fundraising The rallies

This is all wrong and if the media werent lying, it would be impossible.

See the article here:

Heres How The Media Are Lying Right Now: Everything Is Fine Edition - The Federalist

President Joe Biden may have left the presidential race, but Bidenbucks lives on.

And you can bet your federal tax bill that the Biden administration will be revving up the taxpayer-funded, get-out-the-vote machine for not-so-accidental candidate Vice President Kamala Harris.

I think they definitely will, Hans von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Election Commission and manager of the Heritage Foundations Election Law Reform Initiative, told me in an interview this week. I think what theyre doing is an unlawful use of federal taxpayer dollars, and I dont think any president has the right to do it.

Documents obtained by the Heritage Foundations Oversight Project expose federal agencies working with left-wing activist groups in targeting traditionally Democrat voters to cast mail-in ballots for Bidens No. 2 in Novembers election. And there appears no slowdown in the constitutionally suspect initiative now that Biden has withdrawn from his reelection run and endorsed his leftist lieutenant.

We have published thousands of records showing this is a mass mobilization of the federal government to enhance and advance the presidential reelection effort, Kyle Brosnan, chief legal counsel for the Oversight Project told me in a recent interview.

The initiative runs a microsite containing the trove of records it has contained in pursuit of tracking Bidens Executive Order 14019. Signed soon after the Democrat took office in 2021, the order is innocuously billed as Promoting Access to Voting. But as government watchdogs like The Federalist and the Heritage Foundation have uncovered, the sweeping directive is oozing with partisanship.

Critics have called it Bidenbucks, a nod to the hundreds of millions of dollars in so-called election administration grants funded by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg during the Covid-captive 2020 election. The brunt of those grants went to Democrat cities to help target left-leaning voters.As I reported earlier this year, however, Bidenbucks is making Zuckbucks look like chump change.

As Brosnan notes, the executive order directed federal agencies to make plans to promote access to voting, particularly those agencies that engage directly with clients through welfare and other government programs. The agencies are to use taxpayer-funded resources to facilitate voter registration and mass mail-in ballots, as well as to assist their clients in completing the registration forms. And they do it all with the assistance of White House-approved nongovernmental organizations and state officials to accomplish those directives.

Who are the approved helpers? Why, theyre leftist groups, of course, just like they were in Zuckbucks 20.

Weve been doing a number of investigations here at the Oversight Project over the last few years into this executive order, and weve found that all of the approved NGOs involved are left-wing organizations that promote radical ideas with elections, such as registering noncitizens to vote, using prisons as voter registrations hubs, and basically mobilizing all of the unsecured issues that we saw in 2020, basically when everyone was locked down, Brosnan said.

At the core is the left-wing policy activist group Demos.

If youre filling your leftist bingo card, Demos is closely tied to the far-left Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., wing of the Democrat Party, according to activist tracker InfluenceWatch.

The organization emphasizes three areas of commitment: voting rights expansion, a hybrid environmentalist-left agenda it calls pathways to ensure a diverse, expanded middle class in a new, sustainable economy, and advocacy for communitarianism and a liberal interpretation of racial equality, InfluenceWatch reports.

As The Federalist reported earlier this year:

Biden tapped former Demos executive K. Sabeel Rahman to serve as Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs senior counselor and Chiraag Bains, the groups former director of legal strategies, as the presidents deputy director of the Domestic Policy Council for Racial Justice and Equity at the White House. They were responsible for reviewing the actions taken to fulfill Bidenbucks, according to the Foundation for Government Accountability. The GOTV effort was being carried out by Susan Rice, Bidens former domestic policy adviser who served as President Barack Obamas national security adviser and ambassador to the United Nations.

The endgame is to find people in central locations to vote one way the Democrat way and make sure those mail-in votes are harvested.

The Biden administration has not only defied the Freedom of Information Act in blocking the release of related records, it has defied congressional subpoenas.

Tired of the administrations stonewalling, U.S. Rep. Bryan Steil, R-Wis., over a month ago subpoenaed 15 Biden Cabinet officials demanding they turn over communications and other documents tied to Bidenbucks.

Bidens Voting Access Executive Order is the administrations latest scheme to tilt the scales ahead of 2024, Steil wrote on his X account. Ive subpoenaed the Biden admin for documents related to EO 14019 as Congress did NOT appropriate taxpayer funds for partisan activities.

On Thursday, Steil told The Federalist that he was very concerned by the Biden-Harris administrations partisan voter registration scheme.

Federal agencies should never be used to influence the outcome of elections, the congressman said. The public deserves answers for how this Executive Order is being implemented, particularly as VP Harris becomes the new nominee.

The Biden administration has fought several lawsuits in court. Bidens Department of Justice incredibly argued to a federal judge in Washington, D.C., that the records are presidential communication privileged documents in siding with the corrupt administration. The lawsuit is being appealed. Republican senators introduced a bill that would ban federal agencies from using taxpayer funds to work with partisan nonpartisan organizations on voter mobilization efforts. The Democrat-controlled Senate would have none of it.

If this is really a good government, good for the republic, public participation in the electoral system mechanism as the administration and congressional Democrats are claiming it is, then why are they fighting any attempt at transparency at any step? Brosnan said.

Matt Kittle is a senior elections correspondent for The Federalist. An award-winning investigative reporter and 30-year veteran of print, broadcast, and online journalism, Kittle previously served as the executive director of Empower Wisconsin.

Visit link:

Kamala Harris Now Has The Keys To The Bidenbucks Election Machine - The Federalist

A majority of voters are concerned that the 2024 election will be marred by cheating, a new survey released by Rasmussen Reports and the Heartland Institute finds.

Sixty-two percent of Likely Voters are concerned that cheating will affect the outcome of the 2024 election, including 37% who are Very Concerned, the survey found. When broken down among presidential preference, 83 percent of voters who claimed they voted for former President Donald Trump in 2020 are at least somewhat concerned that cheating will affect the outcome of the 2024 election, the survey found. Forty-two percent of voters who said they supported President Joe Biden in the last election cycle expressed the same concern.

Concerns about the security of mail-in ballots were also raised in the survey. Twenty-two percent of Republicans surveyed as well as 18 percent of both Democrats and participating voters not affiliated with either major party, [said] they either received more than one official ballot in the mail or received a ballot for someone who does not live at their address in 2020. The share of voters who said they received multiple mail-in ballots in 2020 is higher (20%) among voters in swing states Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, according to the survey.

The survey was conducted amongst 2,466 likely voters nationally and 5,605 likely voters in the battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The survey was conducted via phone and online between July 5 12.

The fact that more than 60% of likely voters are concerned about election integrity should be a massive wake-up call to all those who refuse to admit that potential cheating in elections is a major problem, Editorial Director of The Heartland Institute Chris Talgo said.

The survey also found that a little more than one percent of Likely Voters in the six battleground states said theyre not U.S. citizens while 0.85 percent said they are not sure if they are a citizen.

Non-citizen voting in federal elections is illegal, though federal voter registration forms simply require an applicant to check a box affirming he is a citizen. No documentary proof of is currently required. Republicans recently introduced the SAVE Act, which would mandate applicants provide documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote. The Save Act passed in the House earlier this month, although Democrats have largely opposed the measure.

In California, individuals with no government ID can still vote if they show a utility bill, credit card, or gym membership as proof of identity. None of the aforementioned documents verify citizenship.

[READ NEXT: From Lawfare To Bidenbucks, Democrats 2024 Election Rigging Is Already Worse Than 2020]

Swing states in particular saw a series of problems both during and following the 2020 election after Democrats exploited loopholes and, in some cases, usurped the authority of the legislature and unilaterally changed election laws.

This past May, the Georgia State Election Board (SEB) chided Fulton County for violating the law during the 2020 election after it found more than 3,000 ballots were scanned twice during the 2020 presidential recount. It is unclear whether the double-scanned ballots were actually counted twice in the recount, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported. SEB member Janice Johnston also said in May that 380,761 ballot images from the 2020 Election Day machine count were not available.

During the 2020 presidential election and 2022 midterms, thousands of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania that did not comply with the date requirement were still counted. The Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in April that unelected officials were wrong to accept the undated or incorrectly dated ballots during the presidential election.

Meanwhile, other issues present during the 2020 election are looking to reappear this November. Just last week a federal judge in Nevada dismissed a challenge from Republicans who argued that accepting mail-in ballots after Election Day is unconstitutional. The ruling permits a state law that extends the deadline for when counties can accept mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day to four days after Election Day to remain in effect. The statute also permits ballots whose date of postmark cannot be determined to be accepted up to three days after Election Day so long as they arrive before 5:00 p.m.

Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist. Brianna graduated from Fordham University with a degree in International Political Economy. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2

See the original post here:

A Majority Of Likely Voters Believe The 2024 Election Will Be Tainted By Cheating, Survey Finds - The Federalist

A letter posted on President Joe Bidens X account Sunday announced his withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race, reversing what Biden and other Democrats were insisting mere days ago. Its obvious that something happened to change Bidens mind and force him out. No one with a brain thinks Biden, who has made a career of politics for 54 years and until Sunday was insisting that only God could convince him to step aside, would willingly give up another shot at the presidency.

We know leftist power players, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, all reportedly pushed Biden to step down from the campaign.

Nancy Pelosi dumped him. They all dumped him, former President Donald Trump said in a press call on Tuesday. They said, Either you get out nice or were going to go after you. Thats what happened.

Nancy made clear that they could do this the easy way or the hard way, one anonymous Democrat insider told Politico. She gave them three weeks of the easy way. It was about to be the hard way.

Democrat operatives apparently removed a president of the United States from his reelection campaign in a soft coup. Was that the easy way? What was the hard way?

Republicans must demand the preservation of any records and communications that might relate to potential deals or threats that Democrats extended to Biden to secure his exit from the race. Further, they should prepare to subpoena such records. Until Americans get to the bottom of how the coup happened, they have good reason to doubt that Washington elites are doing anything in the interest of the voters whom the president is supposed to represent.

Democrats pressured Biden to drop out for weeks, causing the president anger, paranoia and frustration, according to the New York Post. He insisted on staying in the race, despite the mounting pressure. So they orchestrated a palace coup.

Powerful figures set Biden up to fail at his debate with Trump in June, according to the New York Post, hoping to convince Democrats he could not run for president. Biden froze up, stuttered, and acted visibly confused during the debate. He performed so poorly that afterward, even corporate media turned on him. Just like Bidens adversaries planned.

Still, Biden would not drop out.

The debate was really his ending, Trump said.

Polling numbers from battleground states last week showed Biden trailing not only in those states but in states that reliably vote blue, according to Politico. It appeared it would be nearly impossible for him to beat Trump.

According to the New York Post, Democrat leaders threatened to eject Biden from office. An unnamed Biden insider told the Post that Democrats threatened to invoke the 25th Amendment, which allows removal in case a president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, unless Biden dropped out.

They told him to Get out, youre not going to win, Trump said. They gave him a chance, and they said, If you dont get out now were going to go after you. And that was it. He got out.

If true, using the 25th Amendment to blackmail a sitting president is nothing less than a coup. Was that the easy way or the hard way? What other means might party leaders have leveraged to convince Biden to get out?

The Biden family has largely escaped accountability for their influence-peddling business. What kind of influence could top Democrats exert on the Biden family if someone threatened to stop turning a blind eye?

When President Barack Obama was in office, then-Vice President Joe Biden peddled political influence in exchange for payments to his family members, with a cut of the cash going to himself, as The Federalist previously reported.

At the center of the operation was Hunter Biden, who appears to have acted as an unregistered foreign agent for Ukraine and China. Hunter sat on the board of Burisma Holdings, from which he allegedly coerced $10 million for himself and his father.Hunter, the presidents brother James Biden, and James wife Sara Biden all played key roles in funneling money from China to Biden bank accounts.

Joe Biden claimed in 2019 that he had never spoken to Hunter Biden about his overseas business dealings. But according to the House Oversight Committee, Joe Biden interacted with his sons business associates including Russian and Kazakhstani oligarchs, a Burisma executive, and Chinese nationals. They spoke by phone, attended dinners and meetings, and had coffee.

In addition to influence trading, Hunter allegedly engaged in sex trafficking which the Department of Justice ignored, according to the House Oversight Committee. He has used cocaine often, which mysteriously appeared in the West Wing of the White House last year.

A jury found Hunter guilty on three firearms charges in June. But he, his relatives, and his father have so far evaded accountability for most of their alleged wrongdoings.

According to an FBI confidential human sources account, Burisma executive Mykola Zlochevskysaidit cost 5 [million dollars] to pay one Biden, and 5 [million] to another Biden to buy political favors. What kind of incentives might it take to get him and Hunter and Jill to give up a chance at four more years in the White House?

Were Jill and Joe Biden offered lofty board positions or other sinecures, complete with generous salaries and security details? What about donations to Bidens presidential library?

Now that theyve pushed Biden out, Democrats have disingenuously praised him as a wonderful president who ushered in unparalleled wealth, peace, and safety. Pelosi gushed that he was on the right side of history. Were those praises part of the deal?

Assurances to financially take care of the Biden family including Hunter Biden and James Biden, now that their bargaining chip is headed out of office might be convincing.

On the other hand, Bidens withdrawal was announced on National Ice Cream Day. Perhaps Democrats offered him a scoop of chocolate-chocolate chip.

Logan Washburn is a staff writer covering election integrity. He graduated from Hillsdale College, served as Christopher Rufo's editorial assistant, and has bylines in The Wall Street Journal, The Tennessean, and The Daily Caller. Logan is originally from Central Oregon but now lives in rural Michigan.

View post:

Democrats Forced Joe Biden To Drop Out. How Did They Do It? - The Federalist