Category: Political Analysis

Restore Newsmax to DirecTV and Score a Win for Our Free Speech Rights

To truly amass power, a would-be autocrat or totalitarian regime will typically suppress any criticism or dissent that might emanate from those who may wish to challenge such authority.

How is the sinister goal of silencing vast numbers of individuals or organizations reached? By controlling and/or eliminating the free flow of news and information within a society.

Examining Newsmax’s removal from DirecTV’s platform is critical in understanding what has happened to the Fourth Estate, what stage in the totalitarian process we are presently in, and what are the means by which we can make our way back to freedom.

In a 2020 Atlantic article, which was written by Harvard law professor Jack Goldsmith and University of Arizona law professor Andrew Keane Woods, and recently referenced by legal scholar and law professor Jonathan Turley, the article’s authors stated that “in the great debate of the past two decades about freedom versus control of the network, China was largely right and the United States was largely wrong.”

Characterizing “significant monitoring and speech control” as “inevitable,” the authors also determined that “governments must play a large role in these practices to ensure that the internet is compatible with society norms and values.”

This translates into the First Amendment’s complete abolishment.

It is imperative therefore to focus on the recent action by DirecTV (AT&T’s satellite TV provider) in removing Newsmax (the fourth largest cable news channel) from its network, and doing so on the heels of the similar earlier removal of One America News from its lineup.

Twitter owner Elon Musk opened the eyes of so many with the release of the “Twitter Files.” These are internal messages that demonstrate the company, under previous ownership, interacted with government and law enforcement officials to block or restrict prominent right-of-center accounts.

To the rescue have come some heroic office holders that are currently working, via policy and law, to rescue free expression from the jaws of suppression.

The attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana have filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Louisiana against the White House and dozens of government officials, alleging that they have been coercing media to censor political criticisms, which is in direct violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution.

The outcome of the case is part of the valiant effort to restore the First Amendment to its proper place, and to also expose the “disinformation” ruse.

The attorneys general are responding to recent revelations that indicate news media companies, digital platforms and social media companies have worked in tandem with government officials to discriminate against the free expressions of their political opponents.

Andrew Bailey, Missouri’s new attorney general, was blunt in his language regarding administration officials.

“When, in the public forum, there is speech they disagree with and does not align with their political narratives they then collude with and coerce Big Tech’s social media to take that speech down.”

Via the discovery process attendant to the lawsuit, the depositions of administration officials and the production of documents have yielded evidence, which points to explicit and repeated censorship.

The legislatures of Florida and Texas have stepped into the free speech fray by passing new laws that help prevent digital platforms from removing content that is based on viewpoints involving politics, policies and the like.

The new Republican majority in the House has formed a select subcommittee to investigate what chairman Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, described as routine government violations of the First Amendment’s protections.

Legislators have subpoenaed top tech executives of some of the tech industry’s biggest companies. They are conducting a probe into whether there was collusion between Silicon Valley and Washington, D.C. to suppress free speech.

Letters demand documents and communications, including any White House communications related to the regulation of content between the companies and administration officials.

Said documents and communications are being sought from Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Amazon CEO Andy Jassy, Apple CEO Tim Cook, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella.

Perhaps legislators will consider adding the names of the executives who run DirecTV and AT&T to the list.

“Congress has an important role in protecting and advancing fundamental free speech principles, including by examining how private actors coordinate with the government to suppress First Amendment-protected speech,” Rep. Jordan’s office indicated in a statement.

So the free speech battle lines have been drawn. The fight to restore free speech in the digital media realm brings up a simple question.

How much ideological discrimination of speech should a free people tolerate?

Here’s the simple answer.

None.

A Win for J.D. Vance Would Be a Boon for the U.S. Senate

J.D. Vance has had great success as an attorney, venture capitalist and author.

The modern-day Renaissance man may soon be adding another notch to his career belt, that of U.S. Senator.

The son of Donald Bowman and Bev Vance was born in Middletown, Ohio, after the family moved there from Jackson, Kentucky.

His parents divorced early on, so he and his sister went to live with their grandparents James and Bonnie Vance. As a tribute to them, J.D. later chose to take on the surname of Vance.

He attended Middletown High School, and after graduating he enlisted in the Marine Corps, where he served in the Iraq War. He went on to attend Ohio State University and later earned his Yale law degree.

He took on the corporate law firm world, and then moved to San Francisco to work in the technology industry as a partner with Peter Thiel’s venture capital firm, Mithril Capital.

He experienced an additional game changer in 2016, when Harper published his book “Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis.” The book enjoyed phenomenal success and remained on The New York Times Best Seller list for months.

“Hillbilly Elegy” tells the story of the strengths and struggles of one of America’s truly forgotten segments, a group that is largely invisible to our nation’s leaders, media outlets and business communities. It is the subculture of impoverished whites living in rural America.

As the title indicates, the book sheds light on the culture of Appalachia, those with whom J.D.’s family shares its rural Kentucky roots before additional ones were established in the Ohio Rust Belt.

The book would take flight in a different manner in 2017. Iconic director-actor Ron Howard signed on to direct a film version of “Hillbilly Elegy,” which was released by Netflix in 2020. This would also be the year that J.D. would become a CNN contributor.

His upbringing and life experiences informed his positions on national policies in a dynamic way, which helped to prepare him for his campaign run as well as his likely senate post. He is expected to win the Ohio seat.

As would be expected, MSNBC hosts have gone on the attack against the Republican candidate.

A recent MSNBC panel used the final debate between J.D. and Dem candidate Tim Ryan to target J.D. while simultaneously slamming “white Republican men.”

Abortion was the overriding theme of the panel discussion, though, which is consistent with the hierarchy of issues being pushed by Democrats and their allies in the lead-up to the midterms.

Host Joy Reid, along with Democratic strategist and frequent guest Kurt Bardella, went on the attack against J.D. Then Bardella flatly stated that J.D. and other Republicans do not understand how “a baby is actually made.”

“I mean the one thing we’ve seen during the abortion debate that’s unfolding is that most of these White Republican men have no idea how a baby is actually made,” Bardella stated.

Reid agreed, saying, “Do they even know how to make a baby? I don’t think they do, and he [J.D.] has kids!”

Just for the record, J.D. has been married to former law school classmate Usha Chilukuri Vance for eight years and the couple has three children.

The negative focus on abortion and white GOP males by the Democrats and liberal media appears to be the result of an increase in J.D.’s voter support, as indicated in a recent USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll.

The poll shows a 47% to 45% lead for J.D. This suggests that there has been a significant swing in recent weeks from Ryan’s one-point advantage over J.D. to J.D.’s current 3 point advantage.

Although Ryan has attempted to portray himself as a pragmatic moderate, many voters have taken note of Ryan’s voting record in Congress, where he has consistently voted in lockstep with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Voters may also recall that during his unsuccessful 2020 presidential campaign he sounded unmistakably woke.

In contrast, J.D.’s relatability appeals to average everyday folks because he really has lived their same pain. In the Ohio steel town home of his youth, he felt the aftereffects of an ever shrinking economy.

Additionally, like so many families affected by addictions of various sorts, his mother tragically became addicted to heroin. Grandmother “Mamaw” came to his rescue, bringing stability to his life and teaching him to accept responsibility for his actions.

Mamaw told him that he lived in the “best and greatest country on earth,” which in J.D.’s words “gave meaning to my childhood.”

J.D.’s writings and life example stand as a testament to the axiom that the virtues of humility and fortitude are forged in the triumph over adversity.

“One of the things Hillbilly Elegy is about is a struggle to find stability in your own life, but also to become a good person when you didn’t have an easy upbringing,” J.D. shared. “That means being a good husband and a good father, and being capable enough to provide for your family.”

A search for the source of goodness has led him on a faith journey. He was raised as an evangelical Protestant but ended up unattached to any particular religious denomination. Then in 2016, he began thinking more deeply about his faith and became a Catholic Christian in 2019.

“When I looked at the people who meant the most to me, they were Catholic. My uncle by marriage is a Catholic,” he explained.

As a Confirmation patron name, he chose a figure that is beloved by Christians, philosophers and academics alike, St. Augustine, who authored a book that J.D., like so many others, finds inspirational, “Confessions.”

Sure would be nice if the pursuit of virtue that J.D. exhibits could rub off on his future colleagues in D.C.

The Road to Success for Kari Lake

Kari Lake has been garnering quite a bit of national attention of late.

As Arizona’s GOP gubernatorial nominee in the upcoming 2022 election, she has made a name for herself as a dynamic candidate, expert communicator and truly affable individual.

Illinois was her birthplace and Iowa was the state where she grew up in a family with eight other siblings. Fortuitous by-products of her early life experiences were her solid mid-western roots and down-home values.

Prior to venturing into the political arena, Kari’s professional career included serving in the capacities of news anchor and reporter. This is where she had the rare opportunity of interviewing both former President Barack Obama and former President Donald Trump.

She became a household name in Arizona when she served as a prime time television broadcaster, the position she held for 22 years. Over the two decades-plus she received several prestigious awards, including an Emmy.

It was in March of 2021 that she would walk away from her successful media career. She had grown uncomfortable with the lack of objectivity being exhibited by many within the journalistic field.

Her primary election turned out to be a power struggle between Republicans that were aligned with former President Trump and those affiliated with the establishment wing of the GOP.

Kari received the endorsement of former President Trump. Her establishment-backed challenger had the support of former Vice President Mike Pence, incumbent Arizona Governor Doug Ducey and former New Jersey governor Chris Christie.

Boris Epshteyn, a former Trump White House aide, noted that Kari won the primary despite being “outspent 10-to-1.” She was victorious in every single county in the state.

Mainstream news outlets recently reported that Democrats are becoming increasingly concerned about Kari. They evidently have good reason to be.

Axios featured a story titled “Democrats fear Arizona Republican Kari Lake will be a big star.” The sub-headline of the piece was “Democratic Party strategists are watching Arizona’s Kari Lake with growing alarm.”

“Some of Katie Hobbs’ supporters are concerned MAGA firebrand Kari Lake is outshining her low-key campaign,” one NBC News headline read.

A New York Times article bore the label “Democrats Worry They’re Being Overshadowed in Arizona’s Governor Race.”

For its part, The Washington Post published the upbeat title “How Kari Lake turned her campaign for Arizona governor into a phenomenon.”

The above reports and similar ones generally describe the degree that Democrats are engaging in hand-wringing over the performance and prospects of Kari’s opponent Katie Hobbs, who is their party’s nominee for governor.

Kari’s ability to relate to people and clear delivery of her policy positions are strengths that her opponent seems to lack.

Democratic Party operatives appeared to panic when Kari’s opponent, who is Arizona’s former secretary of state, declined to debate Kari.

Instead her opponent arranged a one-on-one interview with a local PBS affiliate. Among those who were upset with the decision was Sandra Kennedy, a co-chair of the 2020 Democratic campaign for president in Arizona.

“If I were the candidate for governor, I would debate, and I would want the people of Arizona to know what my platform is,” Kennedy told NBC News.

Columnist for The Arizona Republic Laurie Roberts went even further, writing that the Democratic nominee’s refusal to debate Kari “represents a new level of political malpractice.”

David Axelrod, former senior adviser to President Obama, expressed criticism on his podcast for what he said was a “mistake” in avoiding debates.

“I think it’s a recognition that Kari Lake is a formidable media personality,” he added.

The New York Times reported that some Democrats were unhappy with Kari’s opponent’s recent appearance on “Face the Nation,” stating that the Democrat nominee spent too much of her eight-minute segment being on the defensive. From the Democrats’ perspective, the television moment was a missed opportunity to go on the attack against Kari.

Arizona’s GOP gubernatorial nominee actually has more going for her than the Democrats realize.

She has re-discovered the faith that makes for strength.

In an interview with The Arizona Sun Times in June 2021, Kari recounted the manner in which her faith was re-ignited, which led to a renewed connection with God.

It was in the summer of 2019 that she was confronted with the sheer anger of the woke mob.

“Two years ago, I got canceled – as they say – now I laugh at it. It was painful at the time and really frightening. At the time, it was horrible,” she said. “Something had been recorded at work, and somehow [was] put out in the world and became a really big story and I immediately was attacked for it and was canceled for it.”

As is often the case, suffering brought blessing.

“It really brought me to my knees. I was praying to God to just get me through this,” Kari revealed.

During the pandemic lockdowns, while working from home she had the opportunity to embrace the Scriptures once again.

“I don’t know how people didn’t return to their faith during COVID,” she remarked. “I started reading the Bible. I hadn’t been reading the Bible for decades – since I was a kid!”

After immersing herself in The Word, Kari yearned for regular church attendance. Some friends invited her to come and worship with them. She went and it changed her life.

“I had the most beautiful church epiphany, and found a church that just stirred my soul. I’ve never missed a week, except when I’m out of town,” she said. “It just brought me so much closer to where I have an intimate, good relationship with Jesus. I feel as if I have a connection with Jesus.”

This is the kind of connection that makes for success in any direction the road may lead.

Even a political one.

California’s San Bernadino County to Vote on Secession from State

There is no doubt that a political divide has occurred in our nation, one that is greater than most folks could have anticipated and more confounding than mere humans can comprehend.

It has been, to say the least, quite distressing to a people whose longstanding traditions have incorporated the esteemed societal values of unity, equality, and harmony.

To compound matters, folks are additionally experiencing a sense of alienation from political, legal, educational, cultural, and religious institutions, which had previously been relied upon by society as well as individuals for both external and internal stability and cohesion.

Here on the Left Coast, one county in California is considering whether or not to segment off into a smaller state.

The Golden State is presently the most populous state in the nation and has (since its admission to the Union in 1850) been the subject of hundreds of proposals to section it off into multiple states.

For decades, residents of rural California have looked at distant state and federal governments as being less than beneficial to them.

A movement to secede actually sprung up during the 1940s, as did a proposed name for the future site, the State of Jefferson. The new state was to be a combination of counties in Northern California and Southern Oregon. There was even a proposed state flag that had a green and yellow design with two X’s that symbolized the renunciation of state governments located in Sacramento, California and Salem, Oregon.

Six California counties officially backed the idea, and the proposal is still being promoted.

Many people have used the idea of secession in a symbolic way as a means to bring attention to regional disparities. But nowadays things appear to be different. Unprecedented actions by governments and corporations over the past two years have moved the subject of succession in the Golden State front and center.

Geographically, San Bernardino County is the largest county in the entire country. It is larger than 9 U.S. states, and it contains more land than the states of Connecticut, Delaware, New Jersey, and Rhode Island combined.

Located east of the city of Los Angeles, San Bernardino County has a population of 2.1 million people.

This significant chunk of California is in the process of placing a measure on the upcoming November ballot that would allow the San Bernardino County supervisors to explore the concept of secession of the county from the state.

After the issue had been raised at several board meetings, the county’s Board of Supervisors voted unanimously (4-0) to put the secession measure on the 2022 ballot. The mayors of the cities of Upland and Fontana expressed support for the idea.

Regarding the proposed measure, voters would be given the choice to vote Yes or No on the following question:

“Do the citizens of San Bernardino County want the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors to study all options to obtain its fair share of state and federal resources, up to and including secession?”

This upcoming week the board will be holding a second and final reading and an additional vote to finalize the ballot initiative.

“I was surprised by the idea, and I don’t believe it’s feasible politically or financially to secede from California,” Supervisor Janice Rutherford said. “However, I absolutely join with my constituents who have a growing, palpable anger about everything from high gas prices to burdensome taxes.”

If the measure were to be approved by voters, it would have several more hoops to jump through.

Article IV, Section III of the Constitution states, “No new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.”

This means that for San Bernardino County to able to secede it must have the approval of the California Legislature and the U.S. Congress.

If the county’s secession from California were constitutionally approved, then San Bernadino County would be able to seek to become its own state or take steps to become a part of a neighboring state.

The scenario that San Bernardino County is contemplating was actually accomplished in the creation of West Virginia back in 1863.

West Virginia was the only state in the Union to separate from a Confederate state during the Civil War. The region that now constitutes West Virginia successfully broke away from the Commonwealth of Virginia to become a separated Mountain State.

We find ourselves at an unusual time in history, one in which many Americans believe that the federal government no longer represents their interests. Additionally, many perceive that state governments are equally unable to handle the geographic and cultural differences and/or meet the diverse needs of constituents.

As the societal chasm continues to grow, so do the possibilities that something like secession could actually take root.

However, infused into the American people is a steadfast determination to forever seek solutions.

This is where hope springs eternal.

Lessons from the Left Coast Primaries

On the minds of Left Coast voters are some major concerns, which happened to be revealed in California’s recent primary elections.

It’s been said, “As California goes, so goes the nation,” so it may be that California’s primaries are also a foreshadowing of things to come in November’s general midterm elections.

Democratic Party turnout in the Golden State was dismal this time around. It may be an indication that liberal and even moderate Dems are experiencing a lack of enthusiasm.

At the same time, the primary election results showed that Republicans and Independents are deeply concerned over rising crime rates, exorbitant gas prices, and soaring food and housing costs.

Two of the Left Coast’s largest cities let their electoral voices be heard loud and clear.

In San Francisco, a far-left prosecutor was actually recalled. The electoral earthquake occurred when voters overwhelmingly chose to terminate District Attorney Chesa Boudin’s job right in the middle of his first term.

Boudin, a public defender-turned-district attorney was fired via a recall election, primarily for his policies of non-prosecution of criminal activity, lenient sentencing of criminals, and abolishment of cash bail, all of which resulted in a horrific spike in violent crime.

The ousting of Boudin should serve as a warning signal for politicians and government officials, apart from political affiliations. Those who promote, pursue, and implement policies that de-fund law enforcement agencies, reduce sentences of convicted felons, release back into society those who have not yet completed their prison time, eliminate cash bail, and abuse prosecutorial discretion may be in for a day of reckoning.

Boudin’s removal may also be a predictor for another elected official, one in Los Angeles County. A campaign is underway to recall District Attorney George Gascón, who appears to be cut from the same left-leaning political cloth as the aforementioned San Francisco prosecutor.

Before Gascón set his sights on destroying the criminal justice system in Los Angeles, he was Boudin’s predecessor as the district attorney of San Francisco.

The primary elections in Los Angeles were illuminating, particularly when it came to the mayoral race. Real estate developer Rick Caruso, a former Republican, came in first, with Democratic Congresswoman Karen Bass finishing second. The two are set to face one another in November, and right now Caruso appears to have an edge in the upcoming race.

Caruso left the Republican Party in 2019 and registered as a Democrat in 2022. He ran a campaign that emphasized a tough on crime position and a determination to address the homeless crisis.

California Governor Gavin Newsom, who survived a recall vote in 2021, was able to avoid any serious competition in the recent primary election, partially due to the unusual manner in which the state currently conducts its primaries. This November, Newsom will face the second-place primary election finisher, GOP state lawmaker Brian Dahle.

A whole lot of voters who participated in the Golden State’s primary were understandably confused by the ballot. What they saw, in addition to the incumbent Newsom’s name, was a dizzying array of 27 gubernatorial candidates, 14 of which were labeled as Republicans. Those who, prior to casting their votes, researched the candidates’ qualifications and positions on issues had quite a difficult and time-consuming challenge.

It wasn’t always like this. Years ago, via a ballot initiative, voters eliminated conventional closed primaries and replaced them with a so-called blanket primary system. Consequently, all candidates appeared on the same ballot in the form of a list. The top vote-getter from each party advanced to the general election.

The Supreme Court actually struck down this system, saying that it violated a political party’s First Amendment right of association. However, with a push from then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, California voters passed a new electoral initiative for something called the “top-two” open primary system.

In this system, all candidates on the list from all political parties, along with non-affiliated candidates, appear on the same ballot, with the top two finishers, regardless of party, advancing to the November general election.

This system and other types of open primaries frequently have unintended consequences that seriously undermine the main purpose of primary elections – to afford political parties the opportunity to pick their own candidates.

The conventional closed primary limits participation strictly to those who are designated party members. This concept relates to the previously mentioned right of free association contained in the Constitution.

Open primary laws violate the freedom of association of a political party, because they force a party to allow outsiders to select its candidates, a patently unfair and non-representative construct. Such primaries enable members of opposing political parties to subvert the nominating process.

Additionally, the California top-two primary system and similar designs oftentimes create circumstances that are disturbingly disenfranchising to voters.

In 2016, listed on the primary ballot in a run for U.S. Senate were 34 candidates. The top two finishers ended up being members of the same Democratic Party.

The top two vote-getters happened to be Loretta Sanchez and the now-Vice President Kamala Harris. Both emerged from the Senate primary as the lone candidates listed on the general election ballot. Their political parties, ideological positions, and policy proposals were, for the most part, identical.

This left voters with no real choice. However, Harris had the party backing, and she ended up winning the senate seat in a low turnout election.

The top-two primary system hasn’t delivered the increase in voter turnout that its proponents promised either. Since 2012, when the top-two rules took effect, turnout in primaries has averaged just 37.6% of registered voters.

In the recent primary, only 16% of the roughly 22 million mail-in ballots sent to voters were cast, and based on the count thus far experts believe the final turnout will be a record low.

Conversely, in a conventional closed primary system the top vote-getter from each partymoves on to the general election, thereby giving voters a bona fide choice.

This is what a functioning republic looks like.

Maybe it’s time for another visit to the Supreme Court.

Election Irregularities Call for a Full Investigation

The establishment media are ignoring, suppressing, and even dismissing altogether an enormous amount of evidence that indicates significant voting irregularities took place during the 2020 presidential election. Additionally, there are serious inferences of fraud as it relates to the counting of ballots.

Using the coronavirus as justification, prior to the election the Democratic Party pushed through a voting procedure that had never been used before. This resulted in an unparalleled number of mail-in, absentee, and provisional ballots pouring into the system.

This would not be the only segment of the voting process that would earn the label of “unprecedented.” Last minute rule changes, software glitches, count halts, ballot dumps, and statistical anomalies made their ugly appearances this election-go-round, all to the benefit of one Party only.

Make no mistake, though, this election is in no way over. In football terminology, it may be that we are still in the third quarter, with lots of big plays to come.

The mounting evidence that continues to surface presents a pressing need for a complete investigation and judicially supervised remedies, including recounts, audits, and even election do-overs.

The term used in the law of negligence, res ipsa loquitur, has a counterpart appropriateness here. The Latin term, which means “the thing speaks for itself,” stems from its use in Roman trials. In tort law, it provides elements of a cause of action, when a tortious injury would not ordinarily occur without negligence.

In the case of this election, there are results that would not ordinarily occur without fraud.

In Democrat-run swing states, where on election eve President Donald Trump was leading over Democratic challenger Joe Biden, ballot counting inexplicably came to a screeching halt.

A few hours later, massive amounts of ballots suddenly appeared. Few, if any of the votes, went in President Trump’s favor.

The Numbers Story

In Michigan, Democratic presidential candidate Biden at one point received a block of 138,000 votes. Nearly all of the votes added to his tally. This is a statistical impossibility.

Data scientists have noticed other mathematical patterns that raise serious inferences of election fraud. Benford’s law is a forensic tool that is commonly used to detect potential fraud in accounting and vote tallies.

The Benford principle dictates a specific distribution of digits in data to determine whether such data are random and natural.

The digits of the vote counts are expected to follow an exponential distribution across the integers. When the analysis of numerical data samples indicates that the samples are not actually random, i.e., a numerical violation of Benford’s law, an inference of fraud is produced and has been used to detect fraud in elections. Numerical data that deviate from Benford’s law have been admitted in court as evidence of vote fraud.

Informal analyses of Trump’s numbers show no violations of Benford’s law; however, candidate Biden’s numbers do show violations that indicate fraud.

There are other ways that numbers become indicators of election fraud, including the vote total differential between candidate Biden and other down ballot candidates as well as precincts that have more than 100% voter participation.

As of this writing, the GOP has not lost a single seat in the House. Instead the Party has picked up several new House members and added at least three state legislatures, a result that appears highly inconsistent with a win by candidate Biden, who experienced record low enthusiasm across his entire campaign.

In Pennsylvania, due to a lack of signature verification, the rate of rejected mail-in ballots is almost 30 times lower this year than it was in the 2016 presidential election; this is yet another statistical anomaly.

During the inevitable coming litigation, based on claims of irregular voting and election fraud, data from Democrat-controlled swing states will be analyzed, and statistical anomalies and violations of Benford’s law will be presented to the courts.

The Software Story

Dominion Democracy Suite software was used for tabulating ballots in Michigan’s Antrim County. A reported “glitch” caused at least 6,000 Republican votes to be counted as Democrat votes, according to Michigan GOP Chairwoman Laura Cox.

When corrected, the miscalculation, which was first reported by a county clerk, changed the results of the county from candidate Biden to President Trump.

Forty-seven other counties in Michigan may also have suffered a similar glitch, due to the same software. If each of these counties, when corrected, were to have a switch-over of 6,000 votes, it would result in President Trump receiving 282,000 additional votes, likely changing Michigan’s election results.

Dominion Democracy Suite software is reportedly used in 30 other states, including all of the other swing states.

The Election Law Story

Election rules in the United States are made by the state legislature. In order to be counted, election law in Pennsylvania requires ballots to be received by November 3.

The state legislature in Pennsylvania turned down the governor’s request to allow ballots to be counted that were postmarked by November 3, but not actually received until November 5.

The governor then went to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to obtain a court order to continue counting the ballots. It was an illicit move and merely a way in which to circumvent the state legislature. The Democrat-controlled court issued the illegal order, one that violated state law.

Although the precincts have been counting late-received ballots, the U.S. Supreme Court via Justice Samuel Alito issued Pennsylvania an order to segregate the late-received votes and remove them from the counted totals.

The validity of late-received votes will almost inevitably end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. If the ballots received after November 3 are thrown out for violating Pennsylvania election law, the result of the election in that state will likely change.

The Coming Story

President Trump and the GOP have obtained sworn witness testimony that alleges poll watchers were denied entry to the polls, election officials took actions that were not authorized by the state legislature, a post office manager ordered postal workers to back-date ballots to November 3, and election workers illegally created new voter files; all this, in order to create more ballots for candidate Biden.

These claims must be fully examined and litigated. Getting to the bottom of all of it is not just about the 2020 election. Rather, it is about all future elections in America and whether representative democracy survives.

President Trump’s Success Boosts African-American Support

There are some intriguing indicators that suggest President Donald Trump is going to do better than expected in garnering votes in the upcoming election from the African-American community.

Emerging signs include the president’s demonstrable track record of policies that have benefited the Black community, as well as the record high approval number that he now experiences with African-American voters.

But perhaps the most interesting indicator of all is the large number of prominent public figures who now go by the title of “formerly known as Democrat.”

The Democratic Party has typically relied upon a strong showing of support over the years from African-American voters. However, as the public in general and the Democratic Party in particular have learned, when you’re talking about President Trump there is very little that can be characterized as “typical.”

In the 2016 presidential election, CNN exit polls (https://www.cnn.com/election/2016/results/exit-polls) indicated that then-candidate Trump received 8 percent of the African-American vote and 13 percent of Black male voters. The latter percentage was a historically high number for Republicans.

What has surprised many in recent days is the fact that some well known hip-hop artists made headlines in their Trump-supportive opining, and for some, in their tacit and/or explicit endorsements. This has obviously caused concern on the part of certain Democrat strategists and candidates alike.

Recently, rapper 50 Cent gave a social media endorsement to President Trump, expressing his wariness with the stratospheric tax rates that Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s tax plan portends. Predictably, the artist was deluged with social media haters who were intent on hurling insults.

Following the backlash, 50 Cent doubled-down via his Instagram account, sharing a Fox News video about his Trump endorsement and attaching a pithy caption: “I don’t want to be 20 cent,” adding, “62% [income tax rate] is a very very bad idea.”

Senior advisor to the Trump campaign Katrina Pearson used her Twitter account to reveal that actor and hip-hopper Ice Cube was actively helping the Trump administration to connect with the African-American electorate. Cube’s detractors attempted to smear him for being a Trump supporter, and the cancel culture launched an attack.

Undeterred, the rapper has confirmed his assistance to the president, but he has yet to endorse him outright.

Cube is advising President Trump on an administration initiative titled “The Platinum Plan,” which will reach out to African-American communities in an effort to improve overall economic circumstances using the Trump administration’s innovative “Opportunity Zones.”

Another hip-hopper, Waka Flocka Flame, was recently blasted by social media trolls for the comments he expressed about President Trump being a better president than the previous occupant of the White House, former President Barack Obama.

Joining in with more hip-hop Trump energy are BlocBoy JB, Fivio Foreign, and longtime Trump ally Kanye West.

Jason Whitlock, sportswriter for Outkick, is an African-American Trump convert himself, who has observed the rap community’s growing esteem for Trump and has a grasp on the phenomenon.

Whitlock, who also recently conducted a focused interview with the president, told Fox News’s Tucker Carlson, “I think there’s some clear momentum for President Trump, particularly I think with black men. I think we’ve been carrying on a facade for three and a half years as black men that somehow we can’t relate to Donald Trump, that we didn’t celebrate him in hip hop music for decades, that he wasn’t friends with countless black athletes, entertainers.”

The truth is the president’s name has been part of the hip-hop repertoire since the genre’s inception. The rap world has long-embraced success and all of its attendant parts.

Across his lifetime, President Trump has been the quintessential symbol of success, and as destiny has made manifest, this has never been more true.

In a track that emerged back in 1989, rapper Ice-T’s collaborator Donald D shouted out, “Yo Ice, I did a concert at the White House. And after that, me and Donald Trump hung out!”

Consequently, many hip-hop artists placed the Trump name within their lyrics. Rapper Rick Ross had the most Trump mentions, nine songs between 2008 and 2015. Hip-hopper Nas recorded seven songs with Trump mentions between 1996 and 2012. Artists Migos and Young Thug had six each, and Lil Wayne and Raekwon featured five Trump references.

After the rise to hit status of NBC’s “The Apprentice” in 2004, President Trump’s brand as sensei of success was cemented into the cultural fabric. The then-New York tycoon appeared in tunes by hip-hoppers Chingy, Mystikal, Lil’ Kim, Diddy, and Young Jeezy.

Enduring Trump supporter West, who is ostensibly running for president and is reportedly on ballots in some states as vice president, appears to remain a Trump backer.

In an April interview with GQ magazine, West said, “It’s unclear if Ye’s vote will still be for Trump as he is running for president as well. In any event, perhaps we’ll find out on Election Day.”

Whitlock wrote, “Kanye said he and President Trump shared ‘dragon energy,’ natural instincts for leadership.”

West’s ‘dragon energy’ characterization, in my opinion, refers to a special kind of steadfastness that it takes to make any desired objective a success.

Those who impartially examine the track record of the Trump administration can’t help but notice a string of laudable successes, including energy independence, de-regulation, defeat of ISIS, NATO finance reform, improved trade deals, record low unemployment, record wage growth, and progress towards peace in the Middle East, just to name a few.

Additionally, a growing segment of African-Americans, along with many of the artists in the hip-hop world, also know that they have a powerful advocate in the White House. Employment, school choice, university funding, prison reform, and pro-life policies have made an impression on leaders in the Black community.

Social media legend and “Blexit” originator Candace Owens, NFL legend Herschel Walker, civil rights attorney Leo Terrell, and “Grey’s Anatomy” star Isaiah Washington, all former Democrats, have become vocal supporters of the Trump presidency and of his re-election campaign.

As President Trump said at the recent second presidential debate in Nashville, Tennessee, “Success is going to bring us together.” 

The truth is it already has.

New Patriotic-Themed Music COMING SOON

Proceeds to Tunnel to Towers Foundation

A charity committed to ensuring we never forget the events of 9/11 and the sacrifices that were made and continue to be made by our first responders. Through the Fallen First Responder Home Program, Tunnel to Towers aims to pay off the mortgages of fallen law enforcement officers and firefighters killed in the line of duty that leave behind young children.