RNC Steps Up for Election Integrity
Early voting for the presidential election begins in September, and election integrity needs to be a top priority. Trump leads in polls, but a slim margin can be unfairly overcome by last-minute drop-box ballot dumps or mailed- in ballots not received until after Election Day.
Fortunately, the Republican National Committee (RNC), which just wrapped up its spring meeting at and near Mar-a- Lago in Florida, steps up its efforts to combat election fraud. Led by Michael Whatley as its new chairman, along with the telegenic Lara Trump as co-chair, the RNC has filed dozens of lawsuits in swing states to ensure compliance with laws concerning mail-in voting.
On May 3rd, the RNC sued to stop the counting of ballots after Election Day in Nevada. The U.S. Constitution requires that there be one election day, not a week’s or month’s worth of backroom ballot counting.
Whatley said about monitoring elections, “You got to have observers and attorneys in the room when the votes are being cast, and when the votes are being counted. So we’re in the process of recruiting tens of thousands of volunteers, thousands of attorneys all across the country so that when we get into the election season, we’re going to be in the room.”
The previous week, help surprisingly came from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, where three Democrat-appointed judges sided with Republicans to vote 10-4 to deny reconsideration of a good decision upholding the statute requiring signatures and dates on mail-in ballot envelopes in Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court had already approved this, but this litigation in federal court had prevented it from being enforced, and even now the ACLU vows to seek further review.
Whatley, whose emphasis on election integrity in 2020 in North Carolina enabled Trump to win that hotly contested battleground state, applauds this ruling as “a crucial victory for election integrity and voter confidence.” Whatley has led the RNC to file additional lawsuits in 23 states to enhance election integrity as posted on Protect the Vote.
In 2020 Pennsylvania allowed 2.7 million mailed-in ballots without any verification of signature or requirement of a witness or notary. Even far-Left California at least ostensibly requires verification of signatures on mailed-in ballots.
Poll watchers traditionally safeguarded election integrity by monitoring what happens at precincts as people vote in person. Trump and other Republicans repeatedly win the in-person voting by landslides, only to have the elections taken away from them based on millions of ballots cast in a process that bypasses poll watching.
Ballot harvesting and drop-box ballot dumping, by which workers hired by Democrats bundle large numbers of ballots, combine with mostly unverified millions of mail- in ballots to overwhelm the voters who cast their ballots in person on Election Day. There should be transparency as to who cast these mail-in ballots and what their alleged signatures look like, but candidates are denied any way to protect against fraudulent voting practices by opponents.
The RNC sued Arizona and Michigan to require them to perform signature matching on mail-in ballots. Without signature matching, Democrats can send in hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballots using hired operatives while bypassing the voters themselves.
Michigan and Nevada, two must-win states for both Trump and Biden this year, have been slow in purging their election rolls of people who died or moved away. The RNC compared census data to voter registration and found discrepancies, and sued to enforce the federal law that requires these states to eliminate the phony voters.
Overpaid consultants do not win elections; volunteers do. More than half of the fundraising by the RNC and Trump for the month of April came from small donors, and these grassroots are who need to be mobilized to overcome the monetary and media advantages held by Democrats.
Liberals obtained numerous court orders in their favor in 2020 to invalidate good laws, and they are suing again this cycle in places like the pivotal must-win state of Wisconsin. A lawsuit by progressives there seeks to toss out a reasonable law that requires all ballots be counted by 8 pm the evening of Election Day.
The RNC sought to intervene to defend this law, stating that it establishes “appropriate safeguards and transparency while still offering voters ample opportunities to cast a ballot.” Lawsuits like this should not be decided without the full participation of the affected Republican Party, but a state court unjustifiably blocked the RNC and the local GOP from intervening.
Some wonder if Republican polling leads will be enough to overcome a predictable repetition of ballot harvesting, drop-box ballot dumping, and unverified mail-in signatures by Democrats. In the key swing states of the last two election cycles, oversight was not allowed by poll watchers to monitor signatures on millions of mail-in ballots.
Biden Blunders by Suing Iowa over Immigration
The bullies in D.C. have gone too far with Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) lawsuit on May 9th against Iowa. Suing this state of Midwestern farmers is as much a political blunder as a legal one, as Biden trails in all battleground states similar to Iowa, including neighboring Wisconsin.
Iowa enacted a reasonable law in April making it a misdemeanor for an illegal alien, who has already been ordered to leave our country, to remain in Iowa. At a town hall sponsored by a pro-immigration group and attended by dozens of immigrants about this new statute, an anonymous written question asked, “Should I leave Iowa?”
The host sighed and replied, “Entiendo el sentido.” That means, in this context, “I see your point.”
Although Iowa is a thousand miles from the Mexican border, Biden “has secretly flown illegal immigrants into our state in the dead of night,” observed Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird. “Those who come into our country illegally have broken the law, yet Biden refuses to deport them,” Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds stated.
This new statute, Iowa Senate File 2340, makes it an aggravated misdemeanor for someone to remain in Iowa after being denied admission or previously ordered to leave our country. Upon signing this bill into law, Gov. Reynolds observed that “the Biden Administration has failed to enforce our nation’s immigration laws, putting the protection and safety of Iowans at risk.”
Scheduled to take effect on July 1, this law authorizes Iowa officials to send illegal migrants to a border port of entry, allowing federal officials to deal with them there. Contrary to misleading claims by opponents of this and similar legislation in Texas, no state officials are authorized to deport anyone.
Biden’s DOJ continues to rely on a Supreme Court decision against a 2010 Arizona law that created a state misdemeanor for violations of federal immigration law, and authorized police to arrest suspected illegal aliens who commit deportable crimes .Only two of the five Justices who joined that bad Arizona v. United States (2012) decision are still on the Court, and the three new Justices appointed by Trump would probably vote to overturn it.
The DOJ quotes that decision an astounding 14 times in its 19-page lawsuit against Iowa. As Justice Kennedy did so often during his 30 years on the Court, he resorted in that decision to vapid platitudes, saying that “the history of the United States is in part made of the stories, talents, and lasting contributions of those who crossed oceans and deserts to come here.”
The millions of illegals allowed in by Biden did not have to cross “oceans and deserts” to get here, but simply walked across our unguarded southern border. Courts should have retired the Arizona v. United States decision when Kennedy did, six years ago, because the Constitution protects the police power of every state to establish law and order within its own borders.
The Iowa law is similar to the good Texas law enacted last year. Biden has tied that one up in court, benefiting from an appellate panel assignment that includes one Biden appointee and one liberal Republican, who have blocked enforcement of Texas SB 4.
The DOJ’s recent lawsuit against Iowa was assigned to an Obama-appointed trial judge, who will presumably block its enforcement in June. But then this case will proceed quickly on an expedited appeal to the Eighth Circuit in St. Louis, where the active judges are 16-to-1 Republican- appointed, so Biden and the DOJ will not have a friendly Democrat majority as in D.C.
Nothing in the Iowa statute interferes with the ability of Biden to enforce federal laws against illegal immigration, which Biden has utterly failed to do. Nothing in the Iowa law interferes with Biden’s ability to frame foreign policy, unless his policy is to invite the whole world to resettle in the United States.
Trump vows to allow states to enforce laws as enacted in Texas and Iowa. Immediately upon Trump’s taking office on January 20, all of this lawfare by the DOJ can be terminated, and states can begin to reduce the unlawfulness caused by illegal aliens.
Seizures of deadly fentanyl by border patrol shot up nearly 6-fold between 2020 and 2023. Counterfeit fentanyl produced in Mexico and China, which has increased in one year from 71 to 115 million pills seized in 2023, is designed to look deceptively like lawful medication.
Farmer Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who visits all of Iowa’s 99 counties annually while maintaining a perfect attendance record in the U.S. Senate, told Biden in 2021 that “border security’s essential in keeping out public safety threats, and a cartel-controlled border presents our greatest criminal threat.” The D.C. elite heads for defeat in the Eighth Circuit at the hands of Iowa farmers defending our nation against the invasion.
Trump-Haters Hit a Brick Wall at SCOTUS
Trump-hating prosecutors’ joy ride hit a brick wall in the Supreme Court on April 25th, where six Justices doubted and ridiculed liberals’ attempts to prosecute Trump in federal court. This was so thoroughly a rout of Biden’s minions that it also diminishes the impact of the ongoing New York County prosecution of Trump.
Delusional Biden supporters have expected federal prosecutors to rescue Biden by putting Trump on trial before the election. But a barrage of comments by a Supreme Court majority exposed fatal defects in this legal strategy of anti- Trumpers to win the presidential election by prosecuting Trump.
Chief Justice Roberts did more than reject the decision by the Democrat-dominated D.C. Circuit that went against Trump. Roberts mocked that decision for relying on a senseless tautology, which is also known as begging the question – assuming the truth of a statement without proving it.
Roberts observed that the reasoning of the prosecutors and lower courts is that Trump can be prosecuted because he is being prosecuted, without any review of whether the prosecution has any legitimate basis. In a rare rebuke of the D.C. Circuit that sits near the Supreme Court, Roberts essentially said that it had failed to do its job in this landmark case.
Roberts quoted this ruling by the D.C. Circuit: “A former president can be prosecuted for his official acts because the fact of the prosecution means that the former president has allegedly acted in defiance of the laws.” Roberts then pointedly asked the federal attorney, “Do you agree with that statement?”
The Biden Administration attorney responded, “Well, I think it sounds tautologically true,” which is another way of saying that the decision against Trump by the D.C. Circuit was senselessly circular. Dismayed by the government’s defense of the tautology, Roberts retorted, “I think it sounds tautologically true as well, and that, I think, is the clearest statement of the court’s holding, which is why it concerns me.”
Hot air suddenly rushed out of the High Court from the many Trump-haters gathered there in anticipation of blocking Trump’s reelection. There is no path for liberals to attain a majority on the Supreme Court without Roberts on their side, and he is apparently strongly against them in this immunity case.
Justice Gorsuch observed that future presidents could pardon themselves at the end of their terms to ensure that there would not be similar prosecutions of them. Justice Alito followed up by asking the attorney representing the Justice Department whether a president had the power to pardon himself.
To the further dismay of liberals, the government attorney said that the Justice Department has never taken a position on whether a president can pardon himself. So that opens the door to Trump issuing blanket pardons against prosecutions of him and his incoming staff upon taking office on January 20th.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett went beyond this pending case by asking whether county-level prosecutions should be allowed against a former president, which are ongoing in New York County and in Fulton County, Georgia. The government attorney then deflated liberals’ balloon further by admitting that county prosecutions could be shut down based on the Supremacy Clause in the Constitution.
Trump could not attend the Supreme Court argument on April 25th because he was stuck in a county-level prosecution against him in New York City, where a low- level judge fined and threatened imprisonment of Trump for speaking out. But that case is looking increasingly irrelevant to the election, as the battleground states already have a dim view of “The Big Apple” as Manhattan was called in its heyday.
The arrogance of some county prosecutors was laid bare by a body cam in New York that captured a county district attorney refusing to pull over when caught red-handed driving 55 mph in a 35 mph zone, despite the lights and siren by the police officer.
The DA ranted after parking at her home, “You know what? If you give me a traffic ticket, that’s fine. I’m the one who prosecutes it, OK? Just go ahead and do it.”
“I understand the law better than you,” the DA declared while defying the officer’s lawful commands. Because of the DA’s belligerence, the officer had to call for help from another officer on this routine traffic stop for speeding.
The polite police officer said, “I’m doing my job. You say you’re a DA?” The haughty NY Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley shot back, “I am THE DA.”
On April 30th, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) filed a formal ethics complaint against the federal prosecutor, Jack Smith, for interfering with the upcoming election by seeking to accelerate a trial of Trump. She observes that his “conduct has brought disrepute to the Department of Justice and the entire federal government.”
1968 Returns as Biden’s Nightmare
Politics repeats itself, and the presidential election of 1968 has returned as Biden’s nightmare. On April 22nd, student protests shut down in-person classes at Columbia and disrupted Yale, New York University, and Harvard, sparking many arrests.
The upcoming Democratic National Convention could face worse turmoil in Chicago, the same place where the Democrats held their 1968 convention amid anti-war riots that caused a bad impression with voters. Even Chicago’s very tough Mayor Richard J. Daley was unable to control the violent protests, which television cameras broadcast nationwide.
Today, with an emasculated police force and none of the law-and-order that ruled Chicago decades ago, the growing unrest could be disastrous for Biden’s reelection. Mass arrests, like that initiated by New York University, will become necessary and will not play well with young voters whom Biden desperately needs.
There was a strong third-party candidate in 1968 just as today there is Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Democrats are doing all they can to obstruct his access to ballots. The Biden Administration recently again denied RFK Jr.’s customary request for Secret Service protection, forcing his campaign to divert millions of dollars to spend on security.
More bad news for Biden arrived when the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition to review a ban in Texas on no- excuse mail-in voting by those under 65 years old. Ballot- box stuffing through the mail, with unverified signatures, is how Biden claimed victory in Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania in 2020, but the High Court just allowed states to rein in early voting abuse.
Ending America’s involvement in foreign war, which in 1968 was Vietnam, is a pivotal issue among young voters. Pushing through Congress a $61 billion package to extend the war in Ukraine “for as long as it takes,” as he promised, Biden has made himself the pro-war candidate.
The only member of Congress born in Ukraine, Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-IN), voted against this bill that pours more fuel on that fire without spending a dollar on our own border security. Rep. Spartz, who defeated several challengers in her primary on May 7, tweeted her opposition to the America Last uniparty on X.
“A uniparty in Washington is failing the American people,” Rep. Spartz observed. “I spoke on the floor in support of my amendment to eliminate an additional blank check of $16B to @POTUS Biden hidden in this bill by increasing the emergency presidential authorities to spend for any foreign country or international organization – ANY – true blank check,” she added.
In other words, the bill just passed by the Republican- controlled House includes a $16 billion handout to Biden to spend however he likes, much of which could be used for political gain. One recent “national security” project by the Biden Administration is to “train at least 200 LGBTQI+ community leaders … with preference given to trans and intersex community leaders” to advance their ideology in India.
Sen. JD Vance (R-OH) has shown it is impossible for Ukraine to win this war against Russia, so the continued funding delays peace. Sen. Vance explained in an op-ed in the New York Times that “Russia has nearly four times the population of Ukraine” and “Ukraine needs upward of half a million new recruits,” while the “average Ukrainian soldier is roughly 43 years old” and already fatigued from 2 years in battle.
Ukraine lacks four million 155-millimeter artillery shells. But after doubling our capacity, we produce only 360,000 annually, which is less than one-tenth of what would offset Russia’s 5-to-1 artillery advantage.
Rep. Spartz points out that only $13.8 billion of the Ukraine package passed by the House will actually go toward direct military aid. Lobbyists, globalists, Leftists, and well-connected insiders in Washington and Kiev will get much of this $61 billion package.
The presidential election in Ukraine scheduled for March 31 was canceled by Zelensky to remain in power indefinitely, so it is unclear how many Ukrainians even support his government.
George Washington warned Americans against entanglement in foreign conflicts, in his Farewell Address published in 1796. Yet Democrat congressmen were waving Ukrainian flags in the House of Representatives to celebrate deepening American involvement in that unwinnable war.
“History and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government,” Washington warned Americans in words probably drafted by his brilliant aide, Alexander Hamilton. “A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils,” they prophetically cautioned.
Perhaps the House Democrats who unanimously voted for the Ukraine package privately realize that billions of it could support partisan liberal goals. It would not be a surprise if a chunk of it is routed through lobbyists and others toward electing liberals or enacting their state ballot initiatives throughout America this Fall.
