Category Archives: Voting Issues

Confessions of a Coup Plotter, or The Death of Free Speech

By Frank Miele   April 25, 2022
 

Remember when we all thought we knew what a coup was? “A sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government,” as defined by Google’s Oxford dictionary. From the French coup d’etat, literally “blow of state.”

That’s what it was then, but now a coup is when legal means are used to counter a perceived attempt to seize power through subterfuge and electoral manipulation. Huh? That doesn’t make any sense.

No it doesn’t, but it’s the narrative being pushed by the far-left media and the inbred governing elites, who have essentially turned language into a weapon against those who would challenge their power. Thus, anyone who sought an investigation into the 2020 presidential election is now a danger to society, a threat to democracy, a domestic terrorist who ought to be thrown in prison.

It starts with Donald Trump, of course, who apparently engaged in what Rep. Jamie Raskin has identified peculiarly as a “self-coup.” And it continues with the protesters who foolishly fought with police on Jan. 6 because they thought that a real coup was taking place inside the Capitol and that they could do something about it. But in the past few weeks, we have been coached to accept the idea that anyone was part of the so-called “Trump coup” if they doubted the official election results. Never mind the First Amendment. Never mind the rule of law. If you took any steps, even though entirely legal, to contest the election, you are an enemy of the state.

Which brings me to my confession. I have to admit that both before and after the Nov. 3, 2020 election, I suspected that the Democrats would rig the election and said so publicly. I encouraged President Trump to fight the election results in the Electoral College, in the courts, in peaceful rallies, and in Congress. It seemed to me that no step short of violence should be omitted in the effort to prove that the election was stolen.

I was not alone. That’s probably what pisses off Democrats so much. There were millions of us, the good old Deplorables, who refused to give up and go away just because we were told by the media that we were crazy. After all, the media had told us we were crazy for thinking The Donald could win in 2016. They told us we were crazy for thinking Hillary Clinton was behind the Russia collusion hoax. They told us we were crazy for believing that a laptop filled with incriminating evidence against Hunter Biden and his father could be anything other than “Russian disinformation.”

They told us we were unhinged conspiracy theorists, but we persevered. We knew by now that the media lies – relentlessly. We knew they were in the tank for the Democratic Party. We knew that it was an uphill battle to get the truth out when the other side controlled Twitter, Facebook, Google, YouTube, the Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, and most of Fox News. But we knew we had a right to fight for what we believe in – not with arms, but armed with truth. This was still America after all.

So Sen. Josh Hawley worked to put together a coalition of Republican senators and representatives who would present evidence of fraud to the joint body of Congress which had to give its imprimatur to the Electoral College results. Earlier, attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis had gone into court after court looking for a venue where the evidence would be heard instead of turned away. And behind the scenes, people like Clarence Thomas’ wife Ginni were working to convince anyone who could help to keep fighting.

Under the new rules, Thomas is a coup plotter because she sent a text message urging Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows to help Trump “stand firm” against what she called “the greatest Heist of our History.” That communication was one of many collected by the House’s Jan. 6 select committee through subpoenas and intimidation and then leaked to the media, which dutifully reported them as if they were incriminating.

They are not. Despite the breathless reporting by the likes of Chuck Todd and Jonathan Karl, the messages are predictable and repetitive. They prove nothing other than what we knew already – that many of those who believed the 2020 election was stolen weren’t content to sit quietly on the sidelines. Like Ginni Thomas, we were trying to think of any strategy that would convince the courts, Congress, and the American people to look at the evidence. It was no secret that we were doing so, because we were shouting from the highest mountain tops. Yet the Jan. 6 committee keeps trotting out these text messages and emails as if they were shedding light on some dark, hidden conspiracy.

Democrats seem to be convinced that anyone who questioned the election results publicly is guilty of “seditious conspiracy.” People like me are called “insurrectionists” even if we weren’t anywhere near the Capitol on the day when protesters stormed the halls of Congress.

The logic of the case is flawless. After all, the government told us in no uncertain terms that this election was “the most secure in American history,” and since the government has never lied to us before, we were expected to either heartily embrace the official story or at the very least shut the hell up. Dissent, we discovered, is not allowed in a democracy, dammit.

Unfortunately for me, I’ve always been a contrarian, so now there is a ton of evidence that I was part of the Trump “self-coup,” and I figure there’s nothing left for me to do except confess. It should be easy for some smart young government lawyer to convince a court to lock me up for years based on what I have written.

Heck, even before the election was over, I warned that no one should expect the results to be announced early “because of the rigged system of early voting and late counting cobbled together by Democrats and useful idiot RINOs that allows massive manipulation of the results to achieve a favored result.” I also warned that “Any state that allows late counting could see weird things like precincts voting 100% for Biden.”

Despite my fears, by midnight Eastern Time, I was ready to project that Donald Trump was the winner even though I conceded that he had likely lost Wisconsin and Arizona. I awarded him Pennsylvania, where he was ahead by 14 percentage points, and Michigan, where he had an 11-point lead. And I gave him Georgia, of course, not yet knowing about the votes that were stashed under tables or the corrupt bargain that Stacy Abrams had negotiated with the secretary of state.

The next morning I wrote a post where I assessed the dramatic swing that had occurred while most of America was sleeping. Seems that the vote counting had stopped in key states with Trump far ahead, but then miraculously switched direction when counting started again. All of a sudden it looked like Trump would lose. Still, I included this caveat: “The question of course is whether there is any fraud in the ballot counting. The whole thing will be headed to court, but Republicans don’t usually win in court.”

Truer words were never written. Except maybe these written later that same day:

“How can it be 24 hours later, and we still don’t know the final unofficial vote count from every state in the union? I know there are many different time zones, but are some of the states still in the 19th century? In what reality is it OK for Nevada to just stop counting its ballots with 75% done? … Don’t get me started on Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. There are lots of questions in all three states about the magical ability of Joe Biden to garner thousands of votes at the same time Trump gets none. We will see whether those votes hold up.”

Well, needless to say, they did hold up – in the official count – but that didn’t stop many of us from asking questions, raising hell, and demanding answers.

Two days after the election, I wrote a column for RealClearPolitics that called Nov. 3 “the Kafka Election” and began to list some of the irregularities being reported in five battleground states, and particularly in Detroit, Mich.; Philadelphia, Pa.; Atlanta, Ga.; Milwaukee, Wis.; and Las Vegas, Nev.

“The allegations,” I noted, “range from mysterious ballot drops that seem to show tens of thousands of votes for Joe Biden and zero votes for President Trump, inexplicable record turnouts in late-counting counties (all Democrat-dominated) that far surpass turnouts in counties in other states where the votes were counted on a timely basis; and of course the illegal banning of election observers in those very counties where the most outrageous anomalies are reported.”

As I also wrote at the time, “The judicial process allows a candidate to go to court to present evidence of fraud or violations of law in the casting or counting of ballots, but then what? … [I]f Republicans prove wrongdoing, what exactly is the solution? Remember, you can’t distinguish a legal vote from an illegal vote once they have been counted, so what can a judge do? What could the Supreme Court do?”

For the next two months, I posted repeatedly to my blog at HeartlandDiaryUSA.com about the legal fight to prove fraud in the election – and about the media’s stubborn refusal to look at the evidence. By the end of December, there was only one legal remedy left – stopping the certification of the electoral votes by Congress on Jan. 6, 2021. I therefore celebrated on Dec. 30 when Sen. Hawley announced he would object to the results in Pennsylvania and possibly in other states. That meant the case for election fraud would finally be put before the American people in a venue where the evidence could not be ignored or swept under the rug.

The following Monday, I ran a column at RealClearPolitics that lauded Hawley for answering “The Call of Conscience,” but adding a word of caution:

“Mind you, there is no reason to expect that the Jan. 6 session of Congress will result in certification of President Trump as the victor of the 2020 election. Despite the extensive evidence of fraud that has been amassed, this vote will be an exercise in raw political power, not an expression of blind justice. Probably the best that Trump supporters can hope for is a fair hearing before the American people regarding the reason why doubts exist as to the legitimacy of Biden’s apparent victory.”

Unfortunately, that fair hearing never happened. As everyone now knows, the invasion of the Capitol by overzealous protesters shut down the whole process. The case for fraud was never properly made because by the time Congress reconvened in the middle of the night, the nation’s attention had shifted to the dangerous assault that had occurred in broad daylight. National Guard troops were called up to protect the Capitol, razor-wire fences were erected, and the Democrats began their steady drum beat of rhetoric that blamed Trump for a coup and an insurrection.

Let’s get one thing straight. The riot that happened on Jan. 6 did not aid Trump’s cause.. It hurt the president more than anyone, and quickly led to him being impeached for the second time. As I wrote while the riot was still taking place:

“We don’t know who these people are yet, but President Trump is going to get the blame for this idiotic insurrection. If they are patriots, who do they think they are helping? Certainly not Trump! [But] when Democrats say Trump was attempting a coup, they will now point to this violence as proof of their claims.”

That was smart of me. Too smart. And when I look back at what I wrote from Nov. 3, 2020 to Jan. 6, 2021, and beyond, I am surprised there hasn’t already been a knock on my door, followed by the shout: “Come out from behind the First Amendment. Put your column down, stop writing, hands in the air, and follow us! You’re under arrest for plotting a coup.”

Frank Miele, the retired editor of the Daily Inter Lake in Kalispell Mont., is a columnist for RealClearPolitics. His new book, “What Matters Most: God, Country, Family and Friends,” and his earlier books are available from his Amazon author page. Visit him at HeartlandDiaryUSA.com to read his daily commentary or follow him on Facebook @HeartlandDiaryUSA or on Twitter or Gettr @HeartlandDiary.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/04/25/confessions_of_a_coup_plotter_or_the_death_of_free_speech_147512.html

Share

25 Big Questions That Democrats Can’t Answer About The 2020 Election

by Emerald Robinson
  1. Why did the vote counting stop on election night in several swing states?

  2. Why did the vote counting delays only happen in swing states?

  3. Why were election observers barred from entering vote counting stations in swing states?

  4. Why did Trey Trainor, the chair of the Federal Election Commission, declare on TV that election “observers have not been allowed into the polling locations in a meaningful way” and that “if they’re not, the law is not being followed, making this an illegitimate election” on November 6th, 2020?

  5. Why are any electronic voting machines hooked up to the Internet?

  6. Why were votes from the 2020 election sent overseas for “processing” and “tabulation” purposes?

  7. Why would votes from 30 states in America be processed by a Canadian firm?

  8. Why would the company that “tabulates” votes for 800 American counties be a recently bankrupt Barcelona-based firm with the Department of Defense as its best-known client?

  9. Why would America’s electronic voting machines be under the ownership of citizens from foreign nations?

  10. Why are so many electronic voting machine companies owned by shell companies?

  11. Why did it take Maricopa County (Arizona) two weeks to count its votes?

  12. Why did an audit expert find 74,000 more votes were counted in Maricopa County (Arizona) than were mailed out?

  13. Why did Mark Zuckerberg fork over $400 million to his personal charity to run a parallel private election system in 2020?

  14. Why did the Special Counsel in Wisconsin just release a report that called Zuckerberg’s donations in five Wisconsin counties a classic case of bribery?

  15. Why did AG Merrick Garland at Biden’s Department of Justice threaten to interfere in a post-election audit conducted in Arizona — and authorized by the state of Arizona?

  16. Why did a county circuit court judge in Wisconsin rule that the Wisconsin Elections Commission had run the 2020 election in an illegal manner?

  17. Why have the voting machine companies refused to comply with subpoenas from the state officials of Wisconsin?

  18. Why do the voting machine companies refuse to have their machines inspected even though these machines are used in public elections?

  19. Why is a federal judge in Georgia refusing to release a report by a cybersecurity expert who inspected a Dominion machine and found it vulnerable to hacking and manipulation of the votes?

  20. Why has Dominion Voting Systems refused to comply with the post-election audit in Arizona — which was ordered by the State of Arizona itself?

  21. Why are more than 300,000 ballot transfer forms missing in Georgia’s 2020 election?

  22. Why did Dominion Voting Systems fail to show up and answer questions from the elected officials of Pennsylvania after the 2020 election?

  23. Why do 204,430 mail-in ballots in Arizona have mismatched signatures?

  24. Why do 740,000 mail-in ballots in Arizona have broken chain of custody?

  25. Why did the Wisconsin Special Counsel find that 50 nursing homes had 100% voter turnout and that cheating was widespread?

 

https://emeralddb3.substack.com/p/25-big-questions-that-democrats-cant?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxNTQ5MzgyMCwicG9zdF9pZCI6NDE4ODA0NjEsIl8iOiJrcnBibSIsImlhdCI6MTY0NzIxOTg5NiwiZXhwIjoxNjQ3MjIzNDk2LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMjYzMDYzIiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.t780NzTwsGnUg9yEnIIlzLcBeLc5PdTsluEaEnqdSZs&s=r

Share

And Now, It’s Economic Warfare 

And Now, It’s Economic Warfare 

By Jeffrey A. Tucker   February 17, 2022  

With the world reopening, and even US blue states and cities repealing mandates, how optimistic should we be? A little bit is warranted but not that much. What we are seeing right now in Ottawa reveals the hegemonic depth of the system that gave us lockdowns, then mandates: it is now capable of freezing your accounts and essentially starving you and your family. 

It’s economic warfare. 

This was a wild conspiracy theory last year. Now it is very obvious that this is where many governments want to go. We’ve seen examples just in the past week. 

The truckers in Canada deployed the crowd-funding platform GoFundMe and raised $9M, until suddenly the platform said that they would not distribute the money yet, pending the release of a clear plan on what the truckers were going to do with it. 

Many of us immediately smelled a rat. Sure enough, a few days later, GoFundMe announced that it would not give the money to the truckers but rather to other charities of its choosing. In other words, it would steal the money. That outraged many people, among them Elon Musk, and the Internet blew up in fury. At that point, GoFundMe returned all the money back to the donors. 

In the next act of this drama, the truckers went to GiveSendGo, a platform that seems more independent and that pledged to give the money to the truckers. With no promotion or even a clear link on Google on where to send money, the new method raised even more money. This was entirely thanks to uncensored networks where people were sharing information. 

But the story was far from over. The platform was hit with denial-of-service attacks from malicious actors and then hacked. The thing went down hard and had to be rebuilt. The data on donors was leaked to the government and then to the Canadian Broadcasting Company who contacted donors under the guise of “doing a story” on the funding. It was a clear attempt at intimidation. 

The Minister of Finance got into the act and essentially declared that anyone using these to provide funding to the truckers were engaging in illicit activity — essentially terrorists. Without missing a beat, the Minister of Justice for Trudeau went further to declare that anyone who has given large figures through these platforms “should be worried” about having their bank accounts frozen. 

So there we have it on record: the Canadian government has declared that it can freeze anyone’s bank account and seize the contents based on their political views or charitable actions. In the midst of all of this, Trudeau declared emergency powers that allow the government to do this to all non-compliers, and do so without any court order. 

The next step in this astonishing drama: crypto. The platform TallyCoin somehow and almost miraculously navigated all the compliance regulations and became a viable way to use crypto to crowd fund, thus bypassing banks (so long as you don’t convert your crypto to dollars). 

Very quickly, the platform raised $1M for the truckers. This was all put together by a group of truckers calling itself HonkHonkHodl. That means, of course, hold crypto don’t sell. 

Almost immediately, the ​​Royal Canadian Mounted Police (Canada’s FBI) sent letters to many crypto exchanges demanding that any assets flowing through their systems that are known to be intended as donations to the truckers must be reported immediately. At the same time, the truckers are being told to leave. Two leaders of the convoy have been arrested. 

Yes, all these actions are clearly political, totalitarian, and relying fundamentally on the control of money and finance to shore up regime power and crush political opposition. 

For weeks now, I’ve worried that Trudeau would pursue a Tiananmen Square solution. This was the strategy deployed in China in 1989 to forestall the type of regime meltdown that had characterized events in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet empire. For a while, it appeared that regimes could be toppled if enough people gathered in the streets. China showed otherwise: bullets, tanks, and arrests of key leaders are often enough to shore up control. 

These days, a Tiananmen-style solution takes a different form. With financial intermediaries forced to do the state’s bidding, rebellions can be put down with texts, emails, and a few clicks on an interface. Your assets are frozen, then stolen, and you are left without a job or any financial means at all. Jails aren’t even necessary. 

Yes, crypto can help bypass the system, but it still must deal with three huge barriers: 1) the exchanges and platforms deal with enormous burdens in regulatory compliance, 2) the onramps to obtaining crypto are ever more intrusive, 3) the offramps to moving crypto out of digits and into cash are highly regulated. None of this is the fault of crypto. It is a failure of the transition. 

As an aside, the one word hardly spoken during this incredible drama is Covid. It was never really about a virus. The world is moving past the virus, and left only with the massive and terrifying state machinery that emerged under the guise of public health, a principle which has oddly mutated into another priority: political health. 

Since 2013, I’ve written about the possibility of a privatized monetary system. It seemed like a wonderful ideal. Someday, we will get there, surely, in one form or another. But the transition has become extremely complicated, as government authorities attempt to use their existing regulatory hold on conventional money and regulated exchanges to institute a China-style social credit system. 

Even now, I cannot believe that I just typed those sentences, which I used to hear only from very fringy commentators. Now the fringe is the fabric. Anyone who has not paid attention to the conspiracy theories of the last year has failed to anticipate most of the news. 

Many of the world’s wisest minds have observed that the main means by which powerful states seize and retain control is through the realm of money. Guns help. Prestige helps. But in the end, it’s the control of money that keeps the people in servitude. 

Crypto was once for geeks only. Now it has become a tool for saving the working class from obliteration by hegemonic forces within the ruling-class financial structure. The workers’ revolution is taking a different path from what anyone in the 19th century could have ever imagined: from diesel to crypto to freedom. 

Or so we can hope.

Author

  • Jeffrey A. Tucker Jeffrey A. Tucker is Founder and President of the Brownstone Institute and the author of many thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press and ten books in 5 languages, most recently Liberty or Lockdown. He is also the editor of The Best of Mises. He speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture. tucker@brownstone.org
Share

800,000 Noncitizens Allowed to Vote in NYC Elections

It is mind-boggling how Democrats think, or not think, as in this case. Maybe he was elected by the non-citizens? Unbelievable. mrossol

The Epoch Times,  By Harry Lee,  January 10, 2022 
 
 

New York City Mayor Eric Adams allowed a measure to become law on Jan. 9 making about 800,000 noncitizens in the city eligible to vote in municipal elections.

“I believe that New Yorkers should have a say in their government, which is why I have and will continue to support this important legislation,” Adams said in a statement. “I believe allowing the legislation to be enacted is by far the best choice, and look forward to bringing millions more into the democratic process.”

The bill was approved by the City Council on Dec. 9, 2021, giving the mayor 30 days to veto; Adams allowed it to become law without any action. Former Mayor Bill de Blasio had expressed concerns about the measure but declined to veto it before leaving office on Dec. 31.

“To me, this is something that I’m not sure is legally what a city can do,” he said during a Nov. 23 press briefing. “I think it’s something the state government needs to do.”

The law applies to legal permanent residents, people with working papers, and so-called Dreamers, as long as they’ve been residents of the city for 30 consecutive days.

 

“Dreamers” are people who entered the United States illegally as children and were granted amnesty under Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), a controversial executive order signed by President Barack Obama.

The law doesn’t apply to state or federal elections.

These noncitizen voters also can apply to cast an absentee ballot for municipal elections.

Adams was initially concerned about the 30-day residency requirement. But he told CNN on Jan. 9, “After hearing their rationale and their theories behind it, I thought it was more important to not veto the bill.”

He said that in Brooklyn, where he was the borough president, 47 percent of residents don’t speak English at home.

“I think it’s imperative that people who are in a local municipality have the right to decide who’s going to govern them.”

New York Republican Party Chairman Nick Langworthy criticized the law as “perhaps the worst idea out of New York City Democrats.”

“This radical legislation is unconstitutional, un-American, and downright dangerous. This not only will undermine the credibility of local city elections but will undoubtedly interfere with the integrity of state and national elections across New York State,” Langworthy told reporters before the City Council approved the bill.

“Democrats do not get to create their own brand of citizenship to manipulate elections. This is unconditionally unconstitutional, and we will use every legal method to make sure it’s stopped.”

Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), also criticized the law as “extreme.”

“About 1.1 million votes were cast in the recent mayoral election. With the addition of some 800,000 foreign nationals to the voter rolls, they will almost certainly have an impact on the outcome of future elections,” Stein said in a Jan. 10 statement. “This number is sure to grow due to an increase in all forms of immigration under President [Joe] Biden, as well as the fact that you only have to live in the city for 30 days to be eligible to vote.”

Former Councilman Ydanis Rodriguez, who sponsored the bill and now serves as the city’s transportation commissioner tapped by Adams, praised the new mayor on Twitter, writing: “Eric has shown once again his relentless commitment to our immigrant communities.

“We build a stronger democracy when we include the voices of immigrants!”

Under the law, the earliest election these noncitizens could participate in would be municipal elections held on or after Jan. 9, 2023.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/800000-noncitizens-allowed-to-vote-in-nyc-elections_4203732.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-01-10-4&utm_medium=email&est=OHZKvKAF6VChwQ0Q+YEPErzic80JQTn7fcZzPX6Q6kSqvcSvZnlE7hEXShU4+Q==

Share

I'm serious… usually. (Martin Rossol)