bonginoreport--2020-11-08--Jason Chaffetz: Biden, Harris Win Means Big Changes for House and Senate

Fox News has projected that former Vice President Joe Biden will be the 46th president of the United States .
While the legal challenges from President Trump persist , and they should , no matter who wins the White House will be dealing with a dramatically different United States House of Representatives and Senate .
Fortunately , there was no big blue wave .
Ultimate control of U.S. Senate does not appear , at this writing , to have flipped .
If this turns out to be the case when final results of the 2020 election are in , Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controlling both houses of Congress and the White House .
That would mean Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer , D-N.Y. , will not get to become majority leader .
Phew .
Based on preliminary results , Republicans have 50 Senate seats ( this assumes that Sen. Dan Sullivan in Alaska and Sen. Thom Tillis in North Caroline go Republican ) .
Both Republican Senators in Georgia will be in a runoff election in January .
Undoubtedly this will be the most expensive race in history with the potential of a billion dollars being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win at least one of the two , they can maintain control in the Senate .
All eyes will be on this race as the balance of Senate power remains in the balance .
With the House of Representatives remaining under Democratic control , a Republican Senate is needed to prevent the Democrats from packing the Supreme Court , changing the filibuster rule , and implementing the radical left-wing agenda promised to Democratic primary voters .
A Republican-controlled Senate will take on the role of stopping the crazy policy ideas and legislation that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been able to become the majority party there .
Without Republican control , the Democratic far-left agenda could go unchecked .
Many of us believe House Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif. , will be unable to continue in her leadership position .
Coupling 218 votes on the Floor of the House in her favor of her being Speaker of the House remains an uncertainty .
No incumbent Republican running for re-election in the House lost their seat .
None .
Democrats predicted a pickup of more than a dozen seats .
Instead , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ file Democrats are restless and they are anxious for new leadership .
In many ways , it won ’ t matter .
The far-left wing of the party will push the House to further extremes .
Undoubtedly there will be calls for the Green New Deal , socialized medicine , higher taxes , more regulation , dismantling of the rule of law , and generally more control of our lives from Washington .
The legislation emanating from the House will be extreme .
The national debt will rise , the deficit will continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ budget and appropriations processes will be further dismissed .
A Pelosi-controlled House never even attempts to keep “ regular order.
” The consequence is government run by continuing resolutions and omnibus bills .
The ugly sausage-making will continue , no matter who is the Democratic Speaker .
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR OPINION NEWSLETTER The day of the election , former FBI Director James Comey sent out a picture of himself wearing a Biden-Harris shirt , further infuriating people who simply seek the balanced implementation of the rule of law .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and his team were not impartial administrators of justice .
They were partisans misusing their offices and trust .
After scathing reports from the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General , including multiple recommendations for potential prosecution , the Justice Department investigations dealing with actions by Comey and others that drew the criticism of President Trump will fade away without pressure from a Republican-controlled Senate .
The House ’ s Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has regularly demonstrated , under the chairmanship of Adam Schiff , D-Calif. , its priority for political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This won ’ t change unless Speaker Pelosi is no longer the Speaker .
The Intel Committee is the one committee where membership is selected solely by the leader of each party , thus the name “ select.
” If there is a new Speaker , there will be a new chairman or chairwoman for Intel .
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP In the Senate , if Republicans are in control , there will be more investigation of Hunter Biden and his suspicious overseas dealings .
If the Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let it fade into the sunset .
Control depends on the two senate races in Georgia .
If you thought the election was nearly over , we really won ’ t know until January .
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FROM JASON CHAFFETZ

Fox News has projected that former Vice President Joe Biden will be the 46th president of the United States.
While the legal challenges from President Trump persist, and they should, no matter who wins the White House will be dealing with a dramatically different United States House of Representatives and Senate.
Fortunately, there was no big blue wave. Ultimate control of U.S. Senate does not appear, at this writing, to have flipped. If this turns out to be the case when final results of the 2020 election are in, Republicans may be able to keep Democrats from controlling both houses of Congress and the White House. That would mean Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., will not get to become majority leader. Phew.
Based on preliminary results, Republicans have 50 Senate seats (this assumes that Sen. Dan Sullivan in Alaska and Sen. Thom Tillis in North Caroline go Republican). Both Republican Senators in Georgia will be in a runoff election in January. Undoubtedly this will be the most expensive race in history with the potential of a billion dollars being spent in Georgia.
If Republicans can win at least one of the two, they can maintain control in the Senate. All eyes will be on this race as the balance of Senate power remains in the balance.
With the House of Representatives remaining under Democratic control, a Republican Senate is needed to prevent the Democrats from packing the Supreme Court, changing the filibuster rule, and implementing the radical left-wing agenda promised to Democratic primary voters.
LIZ PEEK: LIBERAL MEDIA WERE BIG LOSERS IN ELECTION
A Republican-controlled Senate will take on the role of stopping the crazy policy ideas and legislation that would have been sought had the Democrats been able to become the majority party there. Without Republican control, the Democratic far-left agenda could go unchecked.
Many of us believe House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., will be unable to continue in her leadership position. Coupling 218 votes on the Floor of the House in her favor of her being Speaker of the House remains an uncertainty.
No incumbent Republican running for re-election in the House lost their seat. None. Democrats predicted a pickup of more than a dozen seats. Instead, they lost quite a few. Rank and file Democrats are restless and they are anxious for new leadership.
In many ways, it won’t matter. The far-left wing of the party will push the House to further extremes. Undoubtedly there will be calls for the Green New Deal, socialized medicine, higher taxes, more regulation, dismantling of the rule of law, and generally more control of our lives from Washington. The legislation emanating from the House will be extreme.
The national debt will rise, the deficit will continue to be untenable, and the normal budget and appropriations processes will be further dismissed. A Pelosi-controlled House never even attempts to keep “regular order.” The consequence is government run by continuing resolutions and omnibus bills. The ugly sausage-making will continue, no matter who is the Democratic Speaker.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR OPINION NEWSLETTER
The day of the election, former FBI Director James Comey sent out a picture of himself wearing a Biden-Harris shirt, further infuriating people who simply seek the balanced implementation of the rule of law. It drove home the point that Comey and his team were not impartial administrators of justice. They were partisans misusing their offices and trust.
After scathing reports from the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General, including multiple recommendations for potential prosecution, the Justice Department investigations dealing with actions by Comey and others that drew the criticism of President Trump will fade away without pressure from a Republican-controlled Senate.
The House’s Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has regularly demonstrated, under the chairmanship of Adam Schiff, D-Calif., its priority for political spin rather than bi-partisan intelligence community oversight.
This won’t change unless Speaker Pelosi is no longer the Speaker. The Intel Committee is the one committee where membership is selected solely by the leader of each party, thus the name “select.” If there is a new Speaker, there will be a new chairman or chairwoman for Intel.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
In the Senate, if Republicans are in control, there will be more investigation of Hunter Biden and his suspicious overseas dealings. If the Democrats take over, the committee will undoubtedly let it fade into the sunset.
Control depends on the two senate races in Georgia. If you thought the election was nearly over, we really won’t know until January.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FROM JASON CHAFFETZ


bonginoreport--2020-11-08--Jeff Davidson: The President’s To-Do List, While Awaiting Courtroom Justice

Does it seem ironic , if not among the oddest political twist of fate since the beginning of time , that candidate Donald Trump won Michigan , Wisconsin , and Pennsylvania in 2016 , based on promises ?
Yet , President Donald Trump lost Michigan , Wisconsin , and Pennsylvania in 2020 , following his spectacular deeds which greatly benefitted each state ?
Inquiring minds want to know .
While the president is awaiting numerous court decisions , there is much to do !
Whether or not justice will prevail , rightfully according Trump his 300-plus electoral votes and victory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the dastardly Democrats pulled off the greatest coup in our nation 's history , via massive fraud , and send us down the rabbit hole of socialism , here is a ready-made list of to-do items for the next two months .
Big Tech needs to be thoroughly reined in now .
The brand name tech giants are guilty of supporting Democrats with in-kind election interference .
This is a federal crime , and the top officers of Google , Twitter , Facebook , etc.
, need to be indicted .
Ample evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ individuals , manipulated search results , temporarily or permanently suspended accounts , and so much more .
They have earned the right to be stripped of their `` Section 230 '' special status , primarily granted to public utilities , and not to private , highly biased internet technology companies .
Without question , Facebook and Twitter now act as publishers , and in no way can claim public utility status .
Why Google was not divvied up years back into at least four to six companies is a mystery .
The company @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results for at least the last decade .
Moreover , their overarching intent , as documented by Veritas and other investigators , has been to overthrow President Trump and to install the leader of the Biden Crime Family .
John Durham , for whatever reason , had nothing to report even through early October .
Well , he ’ s had another full month .
The criminality on the Left , going back at a minimum of four years , has been beyond the pale .
It is time to insist that Durham @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , make indictments , and see to it that the guilty are punished .
Clearly , if the Democrats prevail in the 2020 electoral count , they will axe Durhams ’ investigation in nanoseconds .
Christopher Wray needs to be terminated , even if his replacement would be replaced in January .
Wray is beyond a disgrace to the U.S. , let alone to the FBI , the Department of Justice , and law enforcement .
His reflexive inaction could well suggest that he ’ s been compromised to the point of uselessness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seemingly has no interest in the rule of law .
Worse , he is a committed , serial liar .
The CIA ’ s first female director , Gina Haspel , also needs to be fired .
She knows where all the bodies are buried and is far too protective of the Agency .
She has deliberately slow-walked crucial documents which reveal the pervasive plot to overthrow President Trump .
There can be no excuse for the CIA ’ s long-term non-compliance , particularly on the heels of Congressional as well as Freedom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be replaced by someone who is dedicated to leading the agency in accordance with the oath of office .
Shake Up the Department of Justice Much has been written about what a great guy Bill Barr is .
Still , he has been beyond slow to take needed action .
Pervasive evidence of malfeasance , uncovered by Judicial Watch and Project Veritas – groups that are focused on preserving the republic – have offered Barr a treasure trove of prosecutorial starting points .
Barr , however , has failed to act on nearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Barr inherited a Department of Justice swamp that reeks to the high heavens , as a result of the non-leadership of Jeff Sessions , the corruption of Loretta Lynch , and the serial criminality of Eric Holder .
Nevertheless , Barr has had ample opportunity to have embarked upon much of the evidence handed to him , and he ’ s done next to nothing .
Why pray tell , do the likes of John Brennan , James Clapper , James Comey , William McCabe , Bruce Ohr , Peter Strzok , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stride about freely ?
Why do many still retain their security clearances ?
None of them should ever be allowed back in the once hallowed halls of their former agencies .
Between now and say , January 12 , is more than sufficient time to ensure that each as his or her security clearances stripped .
The president can pardon everyone that Mueller stung with a process crime , starting with General Flynn .
Hillary Clinton is still walking , or waddling , around freely .
The Bidens – all of them – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the DoJ and interim reports , if not indictments , issued in early January .
And , yes , there is so much more to address in the next ten weeks , but more later…

Does it seem ironic, if not among the oddest political twist of fate since the beginning of time, that candidate Donald Trump won Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania in 2016, based on promises? Yet, President Donald Trump lost Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania in 2020, following his spectacular deeds which greatly benefitted each state? Inquiring minds want to know.
While the president is awaiting numerous court decisions, there is much to do! Whether or not justice will prevail, rightfully according Trump his 300-plus electoral votes and victory for a second term, or if the dastardly Democrats pulled off the greatest coup in our nation's history, via massive fraud, and send us down the rabbit hole of socialism, here is a ready-made list of to-do items for the next two months.
Stick it to Big Tech
Big Tech needs to be thoroughly reined in now. The brand name tech giants are guilty of supporting Democrats with in-kind election interference. This is a federal crime, and the top officers of Google, Twitter, Facebook, etc., need to be indicted.
Ample evidence illustrates that they have blackballed target GOP individuals, manipulated search results, temporarily or permanently suspended accounts, and so much more. They have earned the right to be stripped of their "Section 230" special status, primarily granted to public utilities, and not to private, highly biased internet technology companies. Without question, Facebook and Twitter now act as publishers, and in no way can claim public utility status.
Why Google was not divvied up years back into at least four to six companies is a mystery. The company has been contorting literally multi-millions of search results for at least the last decade. Moreover, their overarching intent, as documented by Veritas and other investigators, has been to overthrow President Trump and to install the leader of the Biden Crime Family.
John Durham, Make Your Play
John Durham, for whatever reason, had nothing to report even through early October. Well, he’s had another full month. The criminality on the Left, going back at a minimum of four years, has been beyond the pale. It is time to insist that Durham release some or most of his findings, make indictments, and see to it that the guilty are punished. Clearly, if the Democrats prevail in the 2020 electoral count, they will axe Durhams’ investigation in nanoseconds.
Christopher Wray needs to be terminated, even if his replacement would be replaced in January. Wray is beyond a disgrace to the U.S., let alone to the FBI, the Department of Justice, and law enforcement. His reflexive inaction could well suggest that he’s been compromised to the point of uselessness. He protects a special class and seemingly has no interest in the rule of law. Worse, he is a committed, serial liar.
The CIA’s first female director, Gina Haspel, also needs to be fired. She knows where all the bodies are buried and is far too protective of the Agency. She has deliberately slow-walked crucial documents which reveal the pervasive plot to overthrow President Trump. There can be no excuse for the CIA’s long-term non-compliance, particularly on the heels of Congressional as well as Freedom of Information requests. Haspel needs to be replaced by someone who is dedicated to leading the agency in accordance with the oath of office.
Shake Up the Department of Justice
Much has been written about what a great guy Bill Barr is. Still, he has been beyond slow to take needed action. Pervasive evidence of malfeasance, uncovered by Judicial Watch and Project Veritas – groups that are focused on preserving the republic – have offered Barr a treasure trove of prosecutorial starting points. Barr, however, has failed to act on nearly all of them.
To be sure, Barr inherited a Department of Justice swamp that reeks to the high heavens, as a result of the non-leadership of Jeff Sessions, the corruption of Loretta Lynch, and the serial criminality of Eric Holder. Nevertheless, Barr has had ample opportunity to have embarked upon much of the evidence handed to him, and he’s done next to nothing.
Why pray tell, do the likes of John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, William McCabe, Bruce Ohr, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and so many others stride about freely? Why do many still retain their security clearances? None of them should ever be allowed back in the once hallowed halls of their former agencies. Between now and say, January 12, is more than sufficient time to ensure that each as his or her security clearances stripped.
Wait, There’s More
The president can pardon everyone that Mueller stung with a process crime, starting with General Flynn. Hillary Clinton is still walking, or waddling, around freely.
The Bidens – all of them – need to be under heavy investigation by the DoJ and interim reports, if not indictments, issued in early January.
And, yes, there is so much more to address in the next ten weeks, but more later…


bonginoreport--2020-11-08--Brendan O’Neill: Why Elite Democrats Are Furious Over the Loss of Anti-Trump Politics

American voters ranked the sluggish US economy over the surging ...

So Joe Biden has won the highest popular vote in the history of the US. At the time of writing, more than 73 million people have voted for him. He has beaten the record set by Barack Obama who was swept to power on that famous wave of ‘HOPE’ and 69.5 million votes in 2008. But here’s the thing: so has Donald Trump. Trump might be trailing Biden in the popular vote of 2020, but he, too, has beaten Obama’s 2008 record. Trump, at the time of writing, has 69.7million votes. So he has won the second-highest popular vote in the history of the American republic. That is remarkable. Far more remarkable than Biden’s very impressive count.
Why? For one simple reason. Trump is the man we’re all meant to hate. He has been raged against ceaselessly by the cultural elites for the past four years. Hardly any of the American media backed him in 2020. Globalist institutions loathe him. Academia, the media elites, the social-media oligarchies, the celebrity set and other hugely influential sectors have branded him a 21st-century Hitler and insisted that only a “white supremacist” could countenance voting for him. He’s the butt of every sniffy East Coast joke and the target of every fiery street protest. He’s the worst thing to happen to Western politics in decades, we’re told, by clever people, constantly.
And yet around 70 million Americans voted for him. The second-highest electoral bloc in the history of the US put their cross next to the name of a man who over the past four years has been turned by the political clerisy into the embodiment of evil.
That is what makes the vote for Trump so striking, and so important. Because what it speaks to is the existence of vast numbers of people who are outside of the purview of the cultural elites. People who have developed some kind of immunity to the cultural supremacy of the ‘woke’ worldview so intensely mainstreamed by the political and media sets in recent years. People who are more than content to defy the diktats of the supposedly right-thinking elites and cast their ballots in a way that they think best tallies with their political, social and class interests. People who, no doubt to varying degrees, are at least skeptical towards the narratives of identitarianism, racial doom-mongering, climate-change hysteria and all the pronouns nonsense that have become dominant among political and cultural influencers, and which are essentially the new ideology of the ruling class.
Hillary Clinton infamously referred to many Trump supporters as “the deplorables.” But a far better word for them would be “the unconquerables.” These are minds and hearts uncolonized by the new orthodoxies. Seventy million people in a peaceful state of revolt against the new establishment and its eccentric, authoritarian ideologies. This is the most important story of the US election and it deserves serious attention.
The fury of the elites in the wake of the US election is palpable, and at times visceral. Even though their man is highly likely to have won, they are incandescent. Already there is rage against the innate racism and “white supremacy” of the throng. Already there is neo-racist disgust with the Latinos and black people who, in larger numbers than 2016, voted for Trump. “We are surrounded by racists,” said New York Times columnist Charles M Blow, capturing the sense of siege felt by the woke clerisy. This rage of the elites against the masses, despite the victory of the elites’ preferred candidate, suggests they instinctively recognize their failure to bring significant sections of the masses to heel. They splutter out terms like “racist” and “white supremacist” as reprimands against the millions who refuse to take the knee to their politics of fear, politics of identity, and politics of cancellation and control.
The elites, despite probably getting their way with a Biden presidency, have been thrown by this election. First, because they called it so wrongly. Their predictions of a “blue wave” did not materialize. Their polls and punditry insisting that Trumpism would be resoundingly defeated turned out to be catastrophically incorrect. The stories of a 10-point swing to Biden evaporated upon contact with reality. So far, Trump has increased his vote by seven million.
The elite’s wrongness about this election is itself a crushing confirmation of their failure to ideologically domesticate large numbers of Americans. Many Americans have clearly chosen not to communicate their beliefs to pollsters, a key part of the new political clerisy, because they are aware that the political elites hold them in contempt. As one election analyst said, because of the “degree of hate” directed to Trump supporters “by nearly all the media,” we have a situation where “people didn’t necessarily want to admit to pollsters who they were supporting.” Not only do many Americans refuse to embrace the new orthodoxies of the uniformly anti-Trump cultural elites, but they also refuse to engage honestly with the cultural elites. They know it’s a waste of time. That is the size of the moral and political chasm that now exists between the guardians of correct-thought and millions of ordinary people.
The second reason this election has rattled the seeming victors — the pro-Biden establishment — is because of who voted for Trump. Exit polls suggest there were significant shifts of black and Latino voters to Trump. It is reported that 18 per cent of black men voted for Trump, up from the five per cent who voted for John McCain in 2008 and the 11 per cent who voted for Mitt Romney in 2012. A shift of this kind towards a politician relentlessly described as a “white supremacist” is very significant. According to the AP VoteCast, 35 percent of Latinos seem to have voted for Trump. And a whopping 59 percent of Native Hawaiians and 52 percent of Native Americans and Alaska Natives opted for Trump. Seemingly these First Nation peoples didn’t get the NYT, SNL, DNC message that Trump is a racist who hates all non-white people.
As we should expect from the neo-racialists of the identitarian elites, there is already fierce denunciation of minority groups who voted for Trump. They have sold out to “white supremacy,” woke academics and columnists claim. Blow writes in the NYT that the Latino and black shift towards Trump is proof of the “power of the white patriarchy” and the influence it has even over oppressed racial groups: “Some people who have been historically oppressed will stand with their oppressors.” That’s a lot of words to say “Uncle Tom.” The anger with Latinos and blacks who voted for Trump is motivated by a view of these people as racial deviants, as traitors to their race. In the rigid worldview of the identitarian elites, people are not individuals or members of an economic class — they are mere manifestations of race and ethnicity and they must conform to that role. That many voters have clearly bristled at such racial fatalism is a very positive development. Identity politics was dealt a blow in this election, and the elites know it.
More striking still is the educational divide in terms of who voted for Biden and Trump. A majority of people whose educational level is high school or less voted for Trump, while a majority of college graduates voted for Biden. Among white voters, the educational divide is even more stark. Majorities of white men voted for Trump, but among white men who didn’t go to college 64 per cent voted for Trump, while among white men who did go to college it was only 52 per cent. Meanwhile, 60 per cent of white women who didn’t go to college voted for Trump, whereas 59 per cent of white women who did go to college voted for Biden.
The educational divide is telling. Naturally, some observers claim it is proof that clever people primarily vote for Biden while dumb people prefer Trump. In truth, this split is primarily reflective of the key role universities now play as communicators of the new orthodoxies. In recent years, universities in the Anglosphere have gone from being citadels of intellectual consideration and experimentation to being factories of woke indoctrination. From critical race theory to genderfluidity, from the view of American history as one crime after another to the myopic policing of speech — including conversational speech in the form of “microaggressions” — universities have become important transmitters of the ideologies of the new elites. As a consequence, one of the great ironies of our time is that it is those who have not attended a university who seem better able to think independently and to resist the coercions of elite-decreed correct-thought.
The ideas that hold on a university campus — that men can become women, that offensive people must be “cancelled,” that complimenting a woman on her hair is a racial microaggression, that describing America as a “melting pot” is a denial of people’s “racial essence,” as UCLA has claimed — hold no sway whatsoever in the factories, delivery centers, mess rooms or bars of vast swathes of America. That university-educated and non-university-educated people now think so differently is testament, not to uneducated people’s stupidity, but to the transformation of universities into machines for socializing young adults into the ways and creeds of the removed new elites.
Indeed, the split of Biden and Trump voters on issues is striking, too. Of the voters who think the economy and jobs is the most important issue, the vast majority are Trump supporters: 81 percent compared with just 16 percent of Biden supporters. Of the voters who think racism is the most important issue, 78 percent were Biden supporters and just 19 percent were Trump supporters. And of the voters who think climate change is the most important issue, 86 percent were Biden supporters and just 11 percent were Trump supporters. On COVID, 83 percent of Biden supporters said it is “not under control at all,” while just 15 percent of Trump voters said the same thing.
This is incredibly revealing. On issues that are central to the clerisy’s worldview — the idea that racism in America is as bad as ever, that the climate is heating uncontrollably, that COVID poses an existential challenge to the future of the nation — Trump voters deviate consistently from the elite narrative. That isn’t to say that they don’t think climate change or racism are problems we must address — I’m sure majorities of them do. But they clearly reject the fatalism and dominance of these issues in the body politic. They clearly balk at the ceaseless discussions of America’s inescapable racism and the idea that if Americans do not radically alter their lifestyles then they will fry in the heat-death of climate catastrophe. They push back, in their thoughts and their votes, against the identitarianism and apocalypticism of the new elites. And they do so even on issues for which you can be canceled for disagreeing. Try going on to a campus and saying that racism and climate change are not major issues for the US. You would be finished. But not in other parts of America. There, free discussion, or at least free thought, appears still to reign.
One study, published in the Journal of Social and Political Psychology after the 2016 election, described the widespread support for Trump among working-class or less-educated communities in particular as a form of ‘cultural deviance’. The study used over-psychologised language to describe people’s voting behaviour, but it hit on an important point: the evidence suggests that Trump-voting for many people was a form of “cultural deviance… [from] the salience of restrictive communication norms.” In short, the Trump phenomenon represents a revolt against the cultural supremacy of political correctness and its cancellation of any views or beliefs that are judged to be problematic. Trump became a vehicle for those who don’t agree that America is broken or racist, or that climate change will kill us all, or that identitarian correctness is more important than the economy and jobs, or that Trump is Hitler — things it is increasingly difficult to say in a polite society so feverishly policed by the new elites.
Perhaps the most important act of “cultural deviance” carried out by the millions who chose Trump over Biden is their attempt to re-elevate class over identity. This is why the shift of working-class blacks and Latinos towards Trump is so important. It is also why Trump voters’ overwhelming belief that the economy and jobs is the most important issue in the US right now — in contrast with very small numbers of Biden voters who think the same thing — is so relevant. What we have witnessed in the US is a reassertion of the importance of class over identity, of the shared social and economic interests of a significant section of society over the narrow cultural obsessions of the new elites and their supporters in the new knowledge industries. The emerging populist coalition of working-class blacks, Latinos and non-university whites is a quiet revolt against the stranglehold that the upper middle-class elites have over the political narrative, and against the elites’ self-conscious promotion of the neoliberal myopia of identity and their diminution of the importance of class.
This is another reason why the elites are so furious in the wake of their own predicted election victory. It’s the key reason, in fact. Because they instinctively recognize that the economic concerns, and, more importantly, the economic consciousness, of substantial sections of society pose a threat to their ideological dominance. Witness the sneer, the naked contempt, with which the phrase “economic populism” has been uttered by Biden-backing observers in recent days. ‘Economic populism’ is a cover for racism, our moral superiors insist. They dread nothing more than the re-emergence of a more class-based politics because they know it would run entirely counter, politically, morally and economically, to the divide-and-rule identitarianism they have cultivated in recent decades.
Corporations, academia, the education system, the Democratic establishment, the media elites and the social-media oligarchies are heavily invested in the cult of identity because it is a means through which they can renew their economic dominance over society and exercise moral authority over the masses. Identitarianism has provided spiritual renewal for the capitalist elites, new means of rebuking and censuring the workforce in corporations, and a sense of purpose for a political class utterly adrift from the working masses it might once have sought to appeal to. And they are not about to let some uppity blacks and Latinos and uneducated whites disrupt this new ruling-class ideology with their vulgar concerns about the economy and jobs.
Trump has lost. But so has the anti-Trump establishment. In some ways, the establishment’s loss is far more significant. These elites see in the 70 million people who disobediently, flagrantly voted for “evil,” and who question the doom and divisiveness and censure of the new elites, a genuine mass threat to their right to rule and their self-serving ideologies. And they are right to. For these unconquerables, these teeming millions who have not been captured by the new orthodoxies, are proof that populism will survive Trump’s fall and that the self-protecting narratives of the new elites are not accepted by huge numbers of ordinary people.
This is the real resistance. Not the upper-middle-class TikTok revolutionaries and antifa fantasists whose every view — on trans issues, Black Lives Matter, the wickedness of Trump — corresponds precisely with the outlook of Google and Nike and the New York Times. No, the resistance is these working people. These defiant Hispanics. Those black men who did what black men are not supposed to do. Those non-college whites who think college ideologies are crazy. These people are the ones who have the balls and the independence of mind to force a serious rethink and realignment of the political sphere in the 21st-century West. More power to them.
Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked, where a version of this piece originally appeared, and host of the spiked podcast, The Brendan O’Neill Show. Subscribe to the podcast here. And find Brendan on Instagram: @burntoakboy


bonginoreport--2020-11-08--Jason Garshfield: The Compromise of 2021

2020 is shaping up to be the most hotly contested presidential election since 1876 .
In that inauspicious year , as you may recall , Democrat Samuel Tilden won the popular vote , but after a protracted Electoral College battle , Republican Rutherford B. Hayes was declared the winner in exchange for his promise to end Reconstruction and remove federal troops from the South .
The Compromise of 1877 – as it was called – was a historical tragedy which paved the ways for decades of Jim Crow .
However , the precedent it set could be used for nobler @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a leaf from the Tilden playbook : in no circumstance should he concede the election without receiving some major concessions in exchange .
As of right now , the outcome of the presidential election is still uncertain .
If Joe Biden wins , his position will not be strong .
A President Biden would likely face a Republican Senate , which would effectively prevent him from passing any major legislation , or appointing any judges or Cabinet nominees , without bipartisan support .
If he tried to rule by executive order , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court and a federal judiciary where a quarter of judges are now Trump appointees .
Still , Republican control of the Senate is far from guaranteed , and Democrats retain a chance of claiming a narrow majority .
The American people can not rely on the whims of that body alone to prevent Democrats from implementing the most radical planks of their 2020 platform .
They need another line of defense , and Donald Trump can provide one .
Even if Joe Biden is found to be the clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legal votes are counted , Trump will still have plenty of room for mischief .
While he likely won ’ t barricade himself in the White House , he can refuse to concede , call Biden a cheater , and spend his last two months in office sabotaging the executive branch in any way he can .
After leaving the White House , Trump can use his vast fortune to pepper Biden with legal challenges and continue to hold rallies all over the United States , loudly proclaiming to raucous crowds that Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be respected .
Biden could get this treatment… or he could get a gracious concession speech from Trump and a peaceful and orderly transition of power .
In no case should Trump give him the latter without eliciting significant concessions from the Democrats .
This means abandoning all of the radical proposals of Bernie Sanders and the Squad .
No Green New Deal , no Medicare-for-All , no assault weapons ban , no Court packing , no D.C. statehood , no Puerto Rico statehood unless a blue state is split in two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no nationwide Covid lockdowns , no critical race theory , no removal of due process for college students accused of Title IX violations , no radical picks for Cabinet positions or judicial vacancies .
None of it .
Joe Biden and Kamala Harris must both publicly commit themselves to governing as the moderates that they have spent the last several months claiming to be .
If this truly was about saving America from the alleged evils of Trump , and not about implementing a plan to fundamentally reshape America into a democratic socialist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance to prove it by agreeing to a Biden presidency in exchange for a centrist policy agenda .
Lest I be accused of defeatism , allow me to emphasize that there is no reason yet to accept Trump as the loser of the election .
However , if the prospect for a Trump victory grows bleak in the coming weeks , then this sort of deal will serve as an insurance policy against the worst tendencies of the Democratic Party .
While the Compromise of 1877 did great and lasting harm to our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2021 might save it , ensuring that we are governed by a moderate coalition rather than a junta of fringe left-wing activists hell-bent on foisting their radical agenda upon the rest of us .

2020 is shaping up to be the most hotly contested presidential election since 1876.
In that inauspicious year, as you may recall, Democrat Samuel Tilden won the popular vote, but after a protracted Electoral College battle, Republican Rutherford B. Hayes was declared the winner in exchange for his promise to end Reconstruction and remove federal troops from the South.
The Compromise of 1877 – as it was called – was a historical tragedy which paved the ways for decades of Jim Crow. However, the precedent it set could be used for nobler purposes today. Donald Trump should take a leaf from the Tilden playbook: in no circumstance should he concede the election without receiving some major concessions in exchange.
As of right now, the outcome of the presidential election is still uncertain. If Joe Biden wins, his position will not be strong. A President Biden would likely face a Republican Senate, which would effectively prevent him from passing any major legislation, or appointing any judges or Cabinet nominees, without bipartisan support. If he tried to rule by executive order, he would be subject to the rulings of a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court and a federal judiciary where a quarter of judges are now Trump appointees.
Still, Republican control of the Senate is far from guaranteed, and Democrats retain a chance of claiming a narrow majority. The American people cannot rely on the whims of that body alone to prevent Democrats from implementing the most radical planks of their 2020 platform. They need another line of defense, and Donald Trump can provide one.
Even if Joe Biden is found to be the clear winner of the Electoral College once all legal votes are counted, Trump will still have plenty of room for mischief. While he likely won’t barricade himself in the White House, he can refuse to concede, call Biden a cheater, and spend his last two months in office sabotaging the executive branch in any way he can. After leaving the White House, Trump can use his vast fortune to pepper Biden with legal challenges and continue to hold rallies all over the United States, loudly proclaiming to raucous crowds that Biden is an illegitimate usurper whose authority should not be respected.
Biden could get this treatment… or he could get a gracious concession speech from Trump and a peaceful and orderly transition of power. In no case should Trump give him the latter without eliciting significant concessions from the Democrats.
This means abandoning all of the radical proposals of Bernie Sanders and the Squad. No Green New Deal, no Medicare-for-All, no assault weapons ban, no Court packing, no D.C. statehood, no Puerto Rico statehood unless a blue state is split in two to create a new red state, no nationwide Covid lockdowns, no critical race theory, no removal of due process for college students accused of Title IX violations, no radical picks for Cabinet positions or judicial vacancies. None of it. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris must both publicly commit themselves to governing as the moderates that they have spent the last several months claiming to be.
If this truly was about saving America from the alleged evils of Trump, and not about implementing a plan to fundamentally reshape America into a democratic socialist nation, then here is Democrats’ chance to prove it by agreeing to a Biden presidency in exchange for a centrist policy agenda.
Lest I be accused of defeatism, allow me to emphasize that there is no reason yet to accept Trump as the loser of the election. However, if the prospect for a Trump victory grows bleak in the coming weeks, then this sort of deal will serve as an insurance policy against the worst tendencies of the Democratic Party. While the Compromise of 1877 did great and lasting harm to our nation, a similarly concocted Compromise of 2021 might save it, ensuring that we are governed by a moderate coalition rather than a junta of fringe left-wing activists hell-bent on foisting their radical agenda upon the rest of us.


bonginoreport--2020-11-08--Jeff Ballabon: Call in the Quants

Jeff Ballabon: Call in the Quants

Editor 's Note : This post was co-authored by Bruce Abramson .
Did America just hold a deeply fraudulent election ?
Many people believe so .
Disturbingly few seem willing to vouch for its integrity ; instead , they insist that “ there is no evidence of fraud.
” Fair enough .
It ’ s actually possible to split that difference .
America just held an election featuring many anomalies that have not yet been proven fraudulent .
It thus seems obvious that what America now needs is a fraud investigation .
Any inquiry into the integrity of Tuesday ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Taking things in order , ballots are produced ( i.e.
, printed ) , distributed ( to voters ) , completed ( by voters ) , transported ( via a chain of custody ) , delivered ( to an Elections Board ) , handled ( by a worker ) , tabulated ( by computer or by hand ) , and reported ( as part of the information revealed to the public ) .
In the 2020 election , nominally under the duress of “ ballot access during COVID , ” jurisdictions across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pushing ballot integrity in precisely the wrong direction—on each and every step .
As anyone with any experience in systems knows , new and untested procedures heading into a major event guarantee failure—even if the new procedures are objectively “ better ” than those they replace .
Too many people need to retrain , coordinate their actions , and realign their expectations too quickly .
An electoral system with safeguards would introduce mechanisms designed to protect the integrity of each step .
While some of these safeguards are complicated and technical , others @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up at a specific time and place offering an ID are less likely to be acting fraudulently than those who do not .
Ballots mailed only to those who request them are less likely to fall into fraudulent hands than to those broadcast to a pre-existing list .
Advanced registration using verifiable data reduces votes from ineligible voters .
The 2020 election walked away from each of these safeguards .
In 2020 , for the first time , many states mailed ballots to everyone on their voter rolls—without first cleaning those rolls .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather than in person .
They legalized , popularized , or promoted insecure distribution networks like dropboxes and ballot harvesters .
They dropped standard requirements for validating documents , like legible signatures and postmarks and a trusted chain of custody .
The resultant electoral system lacked safeguards capable of ensuring either that every tabulated ballot came from an eligible voter , or that every legal vote placed into the distribution system was tabulated .
Because systems designed to ease fraud typically invite fraud , it was predictable and predicted that the tabulations would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ votes , along with a sizable number of illegal ballots .
Common sense and logic , however , do not constitute “ evidence.
” They can ’ t identify which ballots were fraudulent or what effect the fraud had on the election .
Yet sifting through millions of ballots looking for indicia of fraud on each one is a painstaking process .
Given the sheer numbers and time constraints , it ’ s effectively undoable .
Fortunately , modern technology has developed advanced statistical techniques known as data mining and Artificial Intelligence .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ great success to identify fraud in a variety of financial markets and elsewhere .
They have been utilized for years to identify and track transactions linked to terrorist and other criminal activities .
Without getting into technical specifics , these data tools develop a sense of “ normal ” behavior , then highlight only things that appear unusual .
Individual ballots voting for only one office or splitting parties are more interesting than those voting a straight party line .
Precincts that doubled their voter turnout , or shifted their partisan preferences significantly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same voting patterns as they did in recent elections .
Ballots delivered in a batch skewing far more favorably for one candidate than the balance of the jurisdiction that cast them are interesting ; those that solidify a community ’ s leanings are not .
These sophisticated quantitative tools alone are still not enough to “ prove ” fraud .
They are , however , a critical step along the way .
They can eliminate the vast majority of ballots from consideration and focus the attention of fraud investigators on the anomalies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there , the work remains challenging—but the task becomes achievable .
We already know that the 2020 electoral system was designed using new and untested procedures , many of which reduced safeguards capable of deterring fraud .
Record numbers of ballots arrived from many new sources , delivered in many new ways .
Many anecdotes of improprieties are circulating—at least some of which appear highly credible .
Patterns of tabulation and reporting , particularly since election night , are statistically improbable .
America deserves to know—quickly—if it has been defrauded .
Without that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s legitimate winner packing—and will certainly inaugurate a President operating beneath a permanent cloud .
In other words , there ’ s only one way forward .
In addition to the phalanx of lawyers already descending upon the most anomalous states , send in the quants !

Editor's Note: This post was co-authored by Bruce Abramson.
Did America just hold a deeply fraudulent election? Many people believe so. Disturbingly few seem willing to vouch for its integrity; instead, they insist that “there is no evidence of fraud.”
Fair enough. It’s actually possible to split that difference. America just held an election featuring many anomalies that have not yet been proven fraudulent. It thus seems obvious that what America now needs is a fraud investigation.
Any inquiry into the integrity of Tuesday’s elections must consider the entire process. Taking things in order, ballots are produced (i.e., printed), distributed (to voters), completed (by voters), transported (via a chain of custody), delivered (to an Elections Board), handled (by a worker), tabulated (by computer or by hand), and reported (as part of the information revealed to the public).
In the 2020 election, nominally under the duress of “ballot access during COVID,” jurisdictions across the country introduced new and untested procedures pushing ballot integrity in precisely the wrong direction—on each and every step. As anyone with any experience in systems knows, new and untested procedures heading into a major event guarantee failure—even if the new procedures are objectively “better” than those they replace. Too many people need to retrain, coordinate their actions, and realign their expectations too quickly.
An electoral system with safeguards would introduce mechanisms designed to protect the integrity of each step. While some of these safeguards are complicated and technical, others are common sense. People who show up at a specific time and place offering an ID are less likely to be acting fraudulently than those who do not. Ballots mailed only to those who request them are less likely to fall into fraudulent hands than to those broadcast to a pre-existing list. Advanced registration using verifiable data reduces votes from ineligible voters.
The 2020 election walked away from each of these safeguards. In 2020, for the first time, many states mailed ballots to everyone on their voter rolls—without first cleaning those rolls. They encouraged people to vote by mail rather than in person. They legalized, popularized, or promoted insecure distribution networks like dropboxes and ballot harvesters. They dropped standard requirements for validating documents, like legible signatures and postmarks and a trusted chain of custody.
The resultant electoral system lacked safeguards capable of ensuring either that every tabulated ballot came from an eligible voter, or that every legal vote placed into the distribution system was tabulated. Because systems designed to ease fraud typically invite fraud, it was predictable and predicted that the tabulations would include most but not all properly cast votes, along with a sizable number of illegal ballots.
Common sense and logic, however, do not constitute “evidence.” They can’t identify which ballots were fraudulent or what effect the fraud had on the election. Yet sifting through millions of ballots looking for indicia of fraud on each one is a painstaking process. Given the sheer numbers and time constraints, it’s effectively undoable.
Fortunately, modern technology has developed advanced statistical techniques known as data mining and Artificial Intelligence. Data scientists have deployed these tools with great success to identify fraud in a variety of financial markets and elsewhere. They have been utilized for years to identify and track transactions linked to terrorist and other criminal activities. Without getting into technical specifics, these data tools develop a sense of “normal” behavior, then highlight only things that appear unusual.
Individual ballots voting for only one office or splitting parties are more interesting than those voting a straight party line.
Precincts that doubled their voter turnout, or shifted their partisan preferences significantly, are more interesting than those showing the same voting patterns as they did in recent elections.
Ballots delivered in a batch skewing far more favorably for one candidate than the balance of the jurisdiction that cast them are interesting; those that solidify a community’s leanings are not.
These sophisticated quantitative tools alone are still not enough to “prove” fraud. They are, however, a critical step along the way. They can eliminate the vast majority of ballots from consideration and focus the attention of fraud investigators on the anomalies most likely indicative of fraud. From there, the work remains challenging—but the task becomes achievable.
We already know that the 2020 electoral system was designed using new and untested procedures, many of which reduced safeguards capable of deterring fraud. Record numbers of ballots arrived from many new sources, delivered in many new ways. Many anecdotes of improprieties are circulating—at least some of which appear highly credible. Patterns of tabulation and reporting, particularly since election night, are statistically improbable.
America deserves to know—quickly—if it has been defrauded. Without that knowledge, America may send the election’s legitimate winner packing—and will certainly inaugurate a President operating beneath a permanent cloud. In other words, there’s only one way forward. In addition to the phalanx of lawyers already descending upon the most anomalous states, send in the quants!


bonginoreport--2020-11-08--David Marcus: Trump Won Record Minority Support – Yet the Left Is Calling It ‘Racism’

They blew it again .
After muffing it spectacularly in 2016 , ...

In an ideal world, political parties would be about different approaches to governing. Yet too often in our nation’s history they’ve been about tribalism along regional, economic and, most divisively, racial lines.
Then came 2020: This Election Day, President Trump garnered the highest percentage of non-white votes for a Republican presidential candidate in 60 years. This movement toward balance should be celebrated by all, but not surprisingly, that is not what is happening.
Take MSNBC anchor Joy Reid, who claims that the election showed a “great amount of racism, anti-blackness and anti-wokeness.” Or The New York Times’ Charles Blow, who somehow sees this election as confirming the power of the “White Patriarchy.”
Writer Bree Newsome Bass conceded that some white voters had chosen Joe Biden but voted Republican down ballot to preserve “white rule.”
These people view everything through a racial lens. They’re convinced Trump is a racist and regard his broad support — half the country voted for him — as proof that the nation, as a whole, is likewise hopelessly racist.
A kind way to describe such reactions would be “unhinged.” Another way: terrified.
Between 2004 and 2016, black men and women gave between 88 percent and 95 percent of their votes to the Democratic candidate for president. This year, Trump won 18 percent of the vote among black men — a staggering number for a Republican.
To put that in visceral terms, of every six black men who voted, one voted for Trump.
He also made significant gains with Hispanic voters and even Muslim voters.
Trump has had significant accomplishments as president — halting the liberal, activist tilt of the courts, standing up to China, striking peace treaties that offer fresh hope in the Middle East peace, firing up the economy — but perhaps none is as important or has more far-reaching implications than his transformation of the GOP into a multiracial party. For all of his high principles and good hair, the last Republican candidate for president, Mitt Romney, could never have dreamed of such success among non-white voters.
So why are so many progressive and black intellectual elites so upset about the American political parties achieving so much more racial balance?
Some cynics might see it as simply sour grapes over the left’s loss of power and influence. Democrats assumed only they could speak for minorities, who it now turns out have their own ideas. But it also reflects a fundamental difference between how Americans view race and racism.
Over the past few decades, progressives have insisted racism is built into the system and the system must change (in progressive ways) to curb it — though it’s never been clear if they think it can ever be satisfactorily defeated. Those on the right, meanwhile, view racism as an issue of individuals holding irrational beliefs regarding minorities, which can be organically overcome.
In the 2020 election, we now see that millions of minority voters rejected the idea that their votes should be bound by identity politics, or as Joe Biden put it, that if you don’t vote Democratic, you ain’t black. That remark didn’t come out of nowhere. He was simply saying out loud what many on the left have long believed.
Fact is, Trump made the most direct appeal to non-white voters we’ve seen from a Republican in most of our lifetimes. And it worked.
This is also good news for America, and especially minorities. We now have a GOP that will be eager to maintain these gains, and a Democratic Party that can no longer take minority votes for granted.
And we can now stop believing the color of a person’s skin gives us certainty about their political affiliation — and that in and of itself strikes a blow at racism. It’s exciting: Individuals can be treated as individuals, rather than lumped into political boxes based on their racial group.
Some may find it ironic that it was Trump, of all people, who’s most responsible for this. But what matters is that the body politic has landed in a better, more equal and more promising place.
May our parties now be about politics, not racial division, and may every American feel free, regardless of skin color, to embrace the party of their choice.
David Marcus is The Federalist’s New York correspondent. Twitter: @BlueboxDave


bonginoreport--2020-11-08--Sidney Powell Sounds the Alarm on Dem Vote Stealing

Attorney Sidney Powell claims that her team has found 450,000 ballots with only votes for Biden and no down-ballot selections made .
Powell suggests that this number of single vote ballots is suspect , and indicative in part of `` abject fraud '' that she says flipped the election to Biden .
Powell is the attorney for Michael Flynn and has been vocal about the need to challenge the results of the General Election , which she contends is rife with evidence of a `` massive and coordinated effort to steal this election , '' by efforts to `` delegitimize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to manufacture votes for Joe Biden '' '' They have done it in every way imaginable , from having dead people vote in massive numbers , to absolutely fraudulently creating ballots that exist only voting for Biden , '' Powell told Fox 's Maria Bartiromo .
We 've identified identified at least 450,000 ballots in the key states that miraculously only have a mark for Joe Biden and no other candidate . ''
Powell pointed to Floria , `` where things were done right , '' noting that that 's `` how the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
Powell maintains that malicious actors `` used an algorithm to calculate the votes they would need to flip , and they used computers to flip those votes from ... Trump to Biden , and from other candidates to their competitors also . ''
`` It was n't just president Trump , there were many people affected by this , '' said Powell .
`` We have got to fight tooth and nail in federal court to expose this abject fraud and the conspiracy behind it , and get a recount and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which is frankly most of the country . ''
Individual instances of suspicious discoveries have popped up consistently since Election Day , the latest being the discovery of an `` issue involving reporting '' from Fulton County , Georgia.The Georgia Secretary of state announced Saturday that he had `` investigators onsite . ''
President Trump tweeted a Breitbart article about the investigation on Sunday afternoon .

Attorney Sidney Powell claims that her team has found 450,000 ballots with only votes for Biden and no down-ballot selections made. Powell suggests that this number of single vote ballots is suspect, and indicative in part of "abject fraud" that she says flipped the election to Biden.
Powell is the attorney for Michael Flynn and has been vocal about the need to challenge the results of the General Election, which she contends is rife with evidence of a "massive and coordinated effort to steal this election," by efforts to "delegitimize and destroy votes for Donald Trump, to manufacture votes for Joe Biden"
"They have done it in every way imaginable, from having dead people vote in massive numbers, to absolutely fraudulently creating ballots that exist only voting for Biden," Powell told Fox's Maria Bartiromo. We've identified identified at least 450,000 ballots in the key states that miraculously only have a mark for Joe Biden and no other candidate."
Powell pointed to Floria, "where things were done right," noting that that's "how the rest of the country should have gone."
Powell maintains that malicious actors "used an algorithm to calculate the votes they would need to flip, and they used computers to flip those votes from...Trump to Biden, and from other candidates to their competitors also."
"It wasn't just president Trump, there were many people affected by this," said Powell. "We have got to fight tooth and nail in federal court to expose this abject fraud and the conspiracy behind it, and get a recount and audits in every place its' needed, which is frankly most of the country."
Investigators Dispatched After Fulton County Discovers ‘Issue‘ with Ballot Reporting https://t.co/lShmKksQ0O via @BreitbartNews — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 8, 2020
Individual instances of suspicious discoveries have popped up consistently since Election Day, the latest being the discovery of an "issue involving reporting" from Fulton County, Georgia.The Georgia Secretary of state announced Saturday that he had "investigators onsite." President Trump tweeted a Breitbart article about the investigation on Sunday afternoon.


bonginoreport--2020-11-08--Nearly All Election Statistical Irregularities Boosted Biden

Two reports , providing over 10 pages of statistical analysis of raw Pennsylvania voter data , appear to signal election irregularities – virtually all boosting Biden ’ s vote count in the critical state .
In Philadelphia , for example , the likelihood of the city ’ s voting outcome is as likely as someone flipping a coin 100 times and landing on heads every time .
At the time of publishing , Pennsylvania stands at 6,749,175 votes cast – unclear how many were cast legally vs. illegally – and 98 % reporting .
The state and its 20 electoral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s chances to rightfully clinch the presidency .
For example , Biden , who bizarrely beat Barack Obama ’ s popular vote record , received several tens of thousands of more votes than registered Democrats in the following counties .
In some cases , the increase in support for Biden surpasses 65,000 votes : “ The votes for Biden are unusually high for ten counties , reporting an excess of ~244,000 votes in excess of expectation .
These deviations are legitimate reasons to insist on closely monitored recounts , ” the report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conclusions , specifically concerning the counties Montgomery , Chester , Cumberland , and Pike .
But Biden soared in three predominately R counties , by 1.24 to 1.43 times greater than either Obama run or Hillary .
This is a likely absurd result , that Biden would get that much more in these almost 50-50 D/R counties .
Another point of summary from the report is the estimated percentage of how many registered Democratic voters voted for Biden – a nearly impossible 115 % .
Typically , the number hovers around 70 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ± of PA registered voters vote in a national election .
After elimination of Allegheny County , 115 % of PA registered Democratic voters voted for Biden .
That is a serious statistical aberration .
Per data provided by the state of Pennsylvania , an exorbitant number of individuals cast ballots , only voting for the president .
Analysis reveals this phenomenon occurred exponentially more with Biden voters .
“ Another way to track down fraudulent votes is to look closely at how many of the votes did little or no down-ticket voting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too time consuming to vote for other office holders , ” the report notes .
For example , the number was more than double in Arizona and , at maximum , more than triple in Michigan .
In Pennsylvania , it was slightly less than half .
The piece also posits that Pennsylvania ’ s violation of a “ standard voter fraud ” identification method – Benford ’ s Law – “ flags Allegheny County as suspect.
” In contrast , “ he shape of the voter count first digits follows Benford ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The critical swing state remains imperative for President Trump ’ s chances to secure the presidency , and per data , history , and a host of technical “ glitches , ” it seems Pennsylvania was not immune from Democrats ’ attempt to steal the election .
Both reports urge recounts and close monitoring of the votes in the state : Based on the concerns outlined herein , to correct any honest errors , and to eliminate the possibility of fraud , a well-supervised recount ( where every vote is verified as being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these three Pennsylvania counties : Montgomery , Chester and Cumberland .

Analysis of votes cast for Joe Biden and turnout itself in Pennsylvania reveal a host of statistical and historical anomalies that favor the Democratic candidate’s chances of winning the presidency.
Two reports, providing over 10 pages of statistical analysis of raw Pennsylvania voter data, appear to signal election irregularities – virtually all boosting Biden’s vote count in the critical state.
PA Voter Analysis Young by Natalie Winters on Scribd
PA Voter Analysis Briggs (1) by Natalie Winters on Scribd
In Philadelphia, for example, the likelihood of the city’s voting outcome is as likely as someone flipping a coin 100 times and landing on heads every time.
https://twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/1324767712846008325?s=20
At the time of publishing, Pennsylvania stands at 6,749,175 votes cast – unclear how many were cast legally vs. illegally – and 98% reporting. The state and its 20 electoral college votes remain critical to President Trump’s chances to rightfully clinch the presidency.
TURNOUT.
For example, Biden, who bizarrely beat Barack Obama’s popular vote record, received several tens of thousands of more votes than registered Democrats in the following counties.
In some cases, the increase in support for Biden surpasses 65,000 votes:
“The votes for Biden are unusually high for ten counties, reporting an excess of 299,000 votes in excess of expectation. These deviations are legitimate reasons to insist on closely monitored recounts,” the report notes.
The other report reaches similar conclusions, specifically concerning the counties Montgomery, Chester, Cumberland, and Pike.
But Biden soared in three predominately R counties, by 1.24 to 1.43 times greater than either Obama run or Hillary. This is a likely absurd result, that Biden would get that much more in these almost 50-50 D/R counties.
BIDEN ONLY.
Per data provided by the state of Pennsylvania, an exorbitant number of individuals cast ballots, only voting for the president. Analysis reveals this phenomenon occurred exponentially more with Biden voters.
“Another way to track down fraudulent votes is to look closely at how many of the votes did little or no down-ticket voting. When manufacturing votes, it is too time consuming to vote for other office holders,” the report notes.
For example, the number was more than double in Arizona and, at maximum, more than triple in Michigan.
In Pennsylvania, it was slightly less than half.
https://twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/1325200621314650112?s=20
BENFORD’S LAW.
The piece also posits that Pennsylvania’s violation of a “standard voter fraud” identification method – Benford’s Law – “flags Allegheny County as suspect.”
https://twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/1325198442428309506?s=20
In contrast, “he shape of the voter count first digits follows Benford’s Law rather closely for Trump.”
The critical swing state remains imperative for President Trump’s chances to secure the presidency, and per data, history, and a host of technical “glitches,” it seems Pennsylvania was not immune from Democrats’ attempt to steal the election.
Both reports urge recounts and close monitoring of the votes in the state:
Based on the concerns outlined herein, to correct any honest errors, and to eliminate the possibility of fraud, a well-supervised recount (where every vote is verified as being legitimate) is necessitated in at least these three Pennsylvania counties: Montgomery, Chester and Cumberland.


bonginoreport--2020-11-08--James Murdoch’s Wife Tweets “We Did It!” and Shares Anti-Trump Posts

James Murdoch 's wife Kathryn tweeted 'we did it !
!
!
! '
and shared anti-Trump posts after Joe Biden 's historic win Saturday .
On Election Day she had written : 'What will you tell your children or your future self about the part you played in history ? '
By Saturday she had also shared posts that referenced 'Trump 's authoritarian antics ' and 'surviving the gravest threat to our system of government since the Civil War ' .
Kathryn , 47 , had also voiced her agreement that her family , which owns Fox News , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ' and disavow President Donald Trump 's claims of widespread voter fraud .
Her husband James stepped down from the board of Fox News parent News Corp in July , citing disagreements with some of the company 's editorial content .
Kathryn expressed the sentiment in a tweet on Friday , saying she agreed with CNN host Jake Tapper , who had stated : 'The Murdochs and the people at Fox have an obligation to put their country above their profits .
It is very important that people make it very clear -- @ @ @ @ @ @ @ widespread fraud . '
' I agree with this , ' Kathryn tweeted .
Her remark came as little surprise given her history of public criticism of Fox News coverage , particularly on the topic of climate change , and her work with groups such as Unite America on bridging partisan divides .
Kathryn 's latest comments came at a time when Fox News and other media outlets faced divisive questions over how to cover the Trump 's explosive claim , without proof , that the election was being 'stolen ' though rampant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ address as president-elect to vow to heal a deeply divided nation , declaring it was time to 'let this grim era of demonization in America begin to end ' and reaching out to the millions of people who voted against him to say , 'Let ’ s give each other a chance . '
His calls for reconciliation at a Saturday evening victory celebration came even as President Donald Trump continued to argue that the election had been stolen from him , an indication that the divisive politics that have gripped the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from over .
On Friday CNN had reported that Fox News employees had been instructed to avoid calling Biden the 'president elect ' on air even if the network projects Biden will win the presidency .
'If you 're a Fox News report , and you 're going to abide by this crazy instruction , you might as well hand in your press credentials at the same time , ' commented CNN 's Tapper .
A Fox News spokesperson told DailyMail.com then that there have been no network wide memos or editorial guidance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instructions that CNN claimed .
Trump is said to have called RRupert Murdoch in a fury on Tuesday night after Fox News became the first to call Arizona for Biden .
A source told Vanity Fair that Trump phoned Murdoch , who owns Fox 'to scream about the call and demand a retraction . '
The 89-year-old media mogul refused to order his staff to retract the Arizona call .
Biden was on track to win the national popular vote by more than 4 million , a margin that could grow as ballots @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump the first incumbent president to be denied a second term since Republican George H.W .
Bush lost to Bill Clinton in 1992 .
Fox News , along with CNN , was one of only two major news networks to carry Trump 's angry White House address in its entirety on Thursday evening , without cutting away .
In his 17-minute tirade Trump claimed he was the victim of 'big media , big money and big tech ' coming together to commit 'historic election interference ' to give Biden the presidency .
Fox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that just because Trump did not allege specific instances of irregularities does n't mean there have n't been any .
But the president and his lawyers need to present evidence , they said .
'What we saw tonight is a president who believes that at the end of the day , when all the votes are counted , the election is not going to to go his way , so he 's trying to plan an alternate route to retain the White House , ' said Fox White House correspondent John Roberts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news staff have also remained skeptical , demanding proof of Trump 's claims .
'We have n't seen that level of fraud .
He 's saying it 's there , but we have n't seen it , ' said Bret Baier , Fox News ' chief political correspondent , while pushing back on former House Speaker Newt Gingrich in an interview on Friday .
Fox News host Tucker Carlson , one of the network 's top opinion commentators , took a more sympathetic line , saying broadcasters are duty-bound to cover Trump 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election .
'Our system works .
It has worked before .
If people air concerns , resolve the concerns , ' Carlson said in his monologue on Thursday night .
'Do n't call them names , do n't sweep those concerns under the rug , do n't shut it down artificially with unelected news anchors . '
Earlier this year , Kathryn Murdoch spoke out about her 'radical centrist ' politics in an interview with Politico 's Women Rule podcast .
'This is the first time where I 've really decided that I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ try to use it , ' said Kathryn , who has long quietly supported climate change causes after Al Gore convinced her the issue was urgent in a 2006 presentation .
'The decisions we make in the next few years are going to have an impact on coming generations , ' Kathryn said . '
I need to know that I 've done everything that I can possibly do . '
The Murdoch family retains 39 percent of the voting power in News Corp , the parent company of Fox News and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 89 , remains executive chairman of News Corp , with his son Lachlan Murdoch as co-chairman .
James Murdoch , the younger son of media mogul Rupert , had been on the board of directors at News Corp since 2013 when he quit in July .
He said : 'My resignation is due to disagreements over certain editorial content published by the Company 's news outlets and certain other strategic decisions . '
He did not go into detail about his differences with the company , but has been publicly critical of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ His departure meant the board will now consist of ten members , headed by Rupert and Lachlan .
James has spoken out against his father 's company on a number of occasions , with him and his wife Kathryn slamming the family business for promoting climate change 'denials ' during the Australian bushfire crisis in January .
The pair released a statement saying they were 'disappointed ' by the coverage of the fires by Fox News and other News Corp outlets .
'Kathryn and James 's views on climate are well established and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Corp and Fox coverage of the topic is also well known .
'They are particularly disappointed with the ongoing denial among the news outlets in Australia given obvious evidence to the contrary , ' their statement read .
The 'denials ' were in reference to allegations arsonists and not climate change were to blame for the destructive wildfires .
His comments were perceived as 'unprecedented ' and sparked speculation of a feud within the family since he rarely speaks publicly about his role in the business .
James is known as the more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lachlan 's views seem to be more aligned with those of his conservative father .
He was even last year reportedly looking to set up a $ 1billion new project including a liberal news outlet , in stark contrast to his father 's Fox News .
In March it was further suggested he pumped money into start-ups looking to combat fake news .
His firm Lupa Systems was said to have teamed up with Betaworks to create a 'more sustainable news ecosystem ' .
The Australian-born mogul began building his media empire in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1950s , before entering the British newspaper market in 1969 , and expanding to the US in 1974 .
He founded News Corporation in 1980 , which quickly evolved into one of the largest media groups in the world owning assets in print , news , and television .
In 2013 , News Corporation split into two sister companies , News Corp and 21st Century Fox .
The latter was later rebranded as Fox Corporation after the majority of its assets were sold to The Walt Disney Company in 2019 .
Murdoch currently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Corp and the chairman of Fox Corporation .
He is estimated to be worth $ 17billion .
LACHLAN MURDOCH , EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN AND CEO OF FOX CORPORATION , CO-CHAIR OF NEWS CORP Lachlan Murdoch , 48 , the eldest of the Murdoch children , is the heir apparent to News Corp Executive Chairman Rupert and is co-chairman of News Corp .
He was named executive chairman and CEO of Fox Corp in 2019 , after 21st Century Fox was sold to Disney .
Before the sale , younger brother James had been the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ executive chairman .
Lachlan is also chairman of Australian entertainment company NOVA Entertainment , which operates a number of radio stations across the country .
The younger son of Rupert Murdoch , James , 47 , had been on the board of News Corp since 2013 .
He and brother Lachlan had shared power at 21st Century Fox , but the sale of much of the Fox entertainment business to Disney in 2019 saw James depart as CEO .
Since then , he has worked at the helm of investment fund Lupa Systems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his older brother who is CEO of Fox Corp , home to conservative news network Fox News , the Fox broadcast and sports networks and local TV stations .
James has been critical of News Corp 's editorial decisions and has said he disagreed with Fox News coverage .
He resigned from the board on July 31 , 2020 .
Prudence Murdoch , 62 , is the eldest child of Rupert Murdoch through his first marriage with Patricia Booker .
She formerly worked as journalist for now-defunct British tabloid , News of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ father .
Prudence was once described in the media as the 'only one of [ Murdoch 's ] children not directly competing for his business affections . '
ELISABETH MURDOCH , MEDIA EXECUTIVE AND FORMER CHAIRPERSON OF SHINE GROUP Elisabeth is Rupert Murdoch 's daughter from his second marriage with Anna Maria Torv .
Born in Sydney , she moved to London in 1990s where she worked on the operations side of BSkyB , ran by her father .
She founded UK-based TV programming company Shine Limited in 2001 , which was sold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She currently serves as executive chairman of production company Sister .
The sisters , aged 19 and 17 , are Rupert 's daughters from his third marriage to Wendi Deng .

James Murdoch's wife Kathryn tweeted 'we did it!!!!' and shared anti-Trump posts after Joe Biden's historic win Saturday.
On Election Day she had written: 'What will you tell your children or your future self about the part you played in history?'
By Saturday she had also shared posts that referenced 'Trump's authoritarian antics' and 'surviving the gravest threat to our system of government since the Civil War'.
Kathryn, 47, had also voiced her agreement that her family, which owns Fox News, must 'put their country above their profits' and disavow President Donald Trump's claims of widespread voter fraud.
Her husband James stepped down from the board of Fox News parent News Corp in July, citing disagreements with some of the company's editorial content.
Kathryn expressed the sentiment in a tweet on Friday, saying she agreed with CNN host Jake Tapper, who had stated: 'The Murdochs and the people at Fox have an obligation to put their country above their profits. It is very important that people make it very clear -- that there is no credible evidence of widespread fraud.'
'I agree with this,' Kathryn tweeted. Her remark came as little surprise given her history of public criticism of Fox News coverage, particularly on the topic of climate change, and her work with groups such as Unite America on bridging partisan divides.
Kathryn's latest comments came at a time when Fox News and other media outlets faced divisive questions over how to cover the Trump's explosive claim, without proof, that the election was being 'stolen' though rampant fraud.
Kathryn Murdoch, 47, tweeted Saturday shortly after Biden's win was confirmed. She is pictured with her husband James in 2013
Kathryn, 47, tweeted 'we did it!!!!'. She had also voiced her agreement that her family, which owns Fox News, must 'put their country above their profits' and disavow President Donald Trump 's claims of widespread voter fraud
On Election Day she had written: 'What will you tell your children or your future self about the part you played in history?' By Saturday she had also shared posts that referenced 'Trump's authoritarian antics' and 'surviving the gravest threat to our system of government since the Civil War'
Biden used his first national address as president-elect to vow to heal a deeply divided nation, declaring it was time to 'let this grim era of demonization in America begin to end' and reaching out to the millions of people who voted against him to say, 'Let’s give each other a chance.'
His calls for reconciliation at a Saturday evening victory celebration came even as President Donald Trump continued to argue that the election had been stolen from him, an indication that the divisive politics that have gripped the U.S. over the past four years are far from over.
On Friday CNN had reported that Fox News employees had been instructed to avoid calling Biden the 'president elect' on air even if the network projects Biden will win the presidency.
'If you're a Fox News report, and you're going to abide by this crazy instruction, you might as well hand in your press credentials at the same time,' commented CNN's Tapper.
A Fox News spokesperson told DailyMail.com then that there have been no network wide memos or editorial guidance from Fox News regarding the type of instructions that CNN claimed.
Trump is said to have called RRupert Murdoch in a fury on Tuesday night after Fox News became the first to call Arizona for Biden.
A source told Vanity Fair that Trump phoned Murdoch, who owns Fox 'to scream about the call and demand a retraction.' The 89-year-old media mogul refused to order his staff to retract the Arizona call.
Kathryn's husband James stepped down from the board of Fox News parent News Corp in July, citing disagreements with some of the company's editorial content. The couple are pictured
Biden was on track to win the national popular vote by more than 4 million, a margin that could grow as ballots continue to be counted.
He made Trump the first incumbent president to be denied a second term since Republican George H.W. Bush lost to Bill Clinton in 1992.
Fox News, along with CNN, was one of only two major news networks to carry Trump's angry White House address in its entirety on Thursday evening, without cutting away.
In his 17-minute tirade Trump claimed he was the victim of 'big media, big money and big tech' coming together to commit 'historic election interference' to give Biden the presidency.
Fox News contributors Bill Bennett and Byron York said that just because Trump did not allege specific instances of irregularities doesn't mean there haven't been any. But the president and his lawyers need to present evidence, they said.
'What we saw tonight is a president who believes that at the end of the day, when all the votes are counted, the election is not going to to go his way, so he's trying to plan an alternate route to retain the White House,' said Fox White House correspondent John Roberts.
Fox News, along with CNN, was one of only two major news networks to carry Trump's angry White House address in its entirety on Thursday evening
Kathryn Murdoch, 47, expressed the sentiment in a tweet on Friday, saying she agreed with CNN host Jake Tapper (above)
"The Murdochs are ultimately responsible," @BrianStelter notes. "Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch are responsible for what is on this network in the coming hours."@JakeTapper says if you're a Fox reporter who obeys the instruction, "You might as well hand in your press credential." pic.twitter.com/LlwvkorXLS — Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) November 6, 2020
Other members of the network's news staff have also remained skeptical, demanding proof of Trump's claims.
'We haven't seen that level of fraud. He's saying it's there, but we haven't seen it,' said Bret Baier, Fox News' chief political correspondent, while pushing back on former House Speaker Newt Gingrich in an interview on Friday.
Fox News host Tucker Carlson, one of the network's top opinion commentators, took a more sympathetic line, saying broadcasters are duty-bound to cover Trump's accusations and not airbrush them from the election.
'Our system works. It has worked before. If people air concerns, resolve the concerns,' Carlson said in his monologue on Thursday night.
'Don't call them names, don't sweep those concerns under the rug, don't shut it down artificially with unelected news anchors.'
Earlier this year, Kathryn Murdoch spoke out about her 'radical centrist' politics in an interview with Politico's Women Rule podcast.
Kathryn's latest comments came at a time when Fox News and other media outlets faced divisive questions over how to cover the Trump's explosive claim, without proof, that the election is being 'stolen' though rampant fraud
James Murdoch, Kathryn, Rupert Murdoch and Wendi Deng leave Murdoch's annual summer party at the Oxo Tower in London on June 17, 2009
News Corp Executive Chairman and Fox Corporation Co-Chairman Rupert Murdoch
'This is the first time where I've really decided that I have a voice and I need to try to use it,' said Kathryn, who has long quietly supported climate change causes after Al Gore convinced her the issue was urgent in a 2006 presentation.
'The decisions we make in the next few years are going to have an impact on coming generations,' Kathryn said. 'I need to know that I've done everything that I can possibly do.'
The Murdoch family retains 39 percent of the voting power in News Corp, the parent company of Fox News and the Wall Street Journal.
Founder Rupert Murdoch, 89, remains executive chairman of News Corp, with his son Lachlan Murdoch as co-chairman.
James Murdoch, the younger son of media mogul Rupert, had been on the board of directors at News Corp since 2013 when he quit in July.
He said: 'My resignation is due to disagreements over certain editorial content published by the Company's news outlets and certain other strategic decisions.'
He did not go into detail about his differences with the company, but has been publicly critical of its news platforms in the past.
In his resignation letter, James cited 'disagreements over certain editorial content' as the reason for his departure
His departure meant the board will now consist of ten members, headed by Rupert and Lachlan.
James has spoken out against his father's company on a number of occasions, with him and his wife Kathryn slamming the family business for promoting climate change 'denials' during the Australian bushfire crisis in January.
The pair released a statement saying they were 'disappointed' by the coverage of the fires by Fox News and other News Corp outlets.
'Kathryn and James's views on climate are well established and their frustration with some of the News Corp and Fox coverage of the topic is also well known.
'They are particularly disappointed with the ongoing denial among the news outlets in Australia given obvious evidence to the contrary,' their statement read.
The 'denials' were in reference to allegations arsonists and not climate change were to blame for the destructive wildfires.
His comments were perceived as 'unprecedented' and sparked speculation of a feud within the family since he rarely speaks publicly about his role in the business.
James is known as the more liberal Murdoch brother, while older brother Lachlan's views seem to be more aligned with those of his conservative father.
He was even last year reportedly looking to set up a $1billion new project including a liberal news outlet, in stark contrast to his father's Fox News.
In March it was further suggested he pumped money into start-ups looking to combat fake news.
His firm Lupa Systems was said to have teamed up with Betaworks to create a 'more sustainable news ecosystem'.


bonginoreport--2020-11-08--Giuliani Says Trump Campaign Has Enough Evidence to Change Pennsylvania Results

President Trump 's attorney Rudy Giuliani said he has evidence that may change the results of the presidential electoral map .
In a Sunday interview with Fox News host Maria Bartiromo , Giuliani said the lawsuits being filed by the Trump campaign might reveal that up to 900,000 invalid ballots were cast in the state of Pennsylvania , a key election swing state several news outlets projected presumptive President-elect Joe Biden would win .
`` Do you believe that you have enough to actually change the fate of the election ? ''
Bartiromo asked .
`` Well , I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Pennsylvania election was a disaster , '' Giuliani said .
`` We have people that observed people being pushed out of the polling place .
We have people who were suggested to vote the other way and shown how to do it .
I 'm giving you the big picture . ''
Giuliani described details of its investigation in Pennsylvania , which may translate to new lawsuits this week , as early as Monday .
He alleged Republican observers in Pittsburgh , Pennsylvania , were `` kept out of the room or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 24-hours where mail-in ballots were counted , adding that 135,000 ballots were counted during that time period .
`` Even though we went to court , and we were allowed to move 6 feet closer , the Democrat-machine people moved the counting place six feet further away .
This is documented on videotape .
There are upwards of 50 witnesses , '' Giuliani said , which would be the subject of a Monday civil rights lawsuit on Monday .
Giuliani said the Trump team was also looking into whether ballots were cast in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dead and if ballots were `` back-dated . ''
`` We have evidence now , from not only the Post Office but from others , that there was back-dating .
I can only tell you right now that that amounts to about 2,000 or 3,000 votes , '' Giuliani said .
In a statement released on Saturday through his campaign , Trump declared , `` This election is far from over . ''
`` Joe Biden has not been certified as the winner of any states , let alone any of the highly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or states where our campaign has valid and legitimate legal challenges that could determine the ultimate victor , '' the statement reads .
On Friday , Associate Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito ordered all Pennsylvania county boards of elections to segregate late-arrival ballots from the rest of the mail-in ballots during the counting process .
However , Democrats in the state have said the Supreme Court should not involve itself in the election and that the election 's outcome would be unlikely to change .
According to Fox News chief White House correspondent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president would `` graciously concede '' the election if unsuccessful in his legal efforts .
`` I ’ m told that , you know , in addition to the president wanting to see this done , the president is really being supported and being pushed to some degree by his family who want to make sure every legal vote was counted and that no illegal votes were counted , '' Roberts said .
He added that if Trump `` does not see a path to continuing in as the president of the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work on a peaceful and appropriate transfer of power , '' according to words given to him .

President Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani said he has evidence that may change the results of the presidential electoral map.
In a Sunday interview with Fox News host Maria Bartiromo, Giuliani said the lawsuits being filed by the Trump campaign might reveal that up to 900,000 invalid ballots were cast in the state of Pennsylvania, a key election swing state several news outlets projected presumptive President-elect Joe Biden would win. "Do you believe that you have enough to actually change the fate of the election?" Bartiromo asked.
"Well, I think we have enough to change Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania election was a disaster," Giuliani said. "We have people that observed people being pushed out of the polling place. We have people who were suggested to vote the other way and shown how to do it. I'm giving you the big picture."
Giuliani described details of its investigation in Pennsylvania, which may translate to new lawsuits this week, as early as Monday. He alleged Republican observers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, were "kept out of the room or kept away from the room" for 24-hours where mail-in ballots were counted, adding that 135,000 ballots were counted during that time period.
"Even though we went to court, and we were allowed to move 6 feet closer, the Democrat-machine people moved the counting place six feet further away. This is documented on videotape. There are upwards of 50 witnesses," Giuliani said, which would be the subject of a Monday civil rights lawsuit on Monday.
Giuliani said the Trump team was also looking into whether ballots were cast in the name of people who are already dead and if ballots were "back-dated."
"We have evidence now, from not only the Post Office but from others, that there was back-dating. I can only tell you right now that that amounts to about 2,000 or 3,000 votes," Giuliani said.
In a statement released on Saturday through his campaign, Trump declared, "This election is far from over."
"Joe Biden has not been certified as the winner of any states, let alone any of the highly contested states headed for mandatory recounts, or states where our campaign has valid and legitimate legal challenges that could determine the ultimate victor," the statement reads.
On Friday, Associate Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito ordered all Pennsylvania county boards of elections to segregate late-arrival ballots from the rest of the mail-in ballots during the counting process. However, Democrats in the state have said the Supreme Court should not involve itself in the election and that the election's outcome would be unlikely to change.
According to Fox News chief White House correspondent John Roberts, sources tell him the president would "graciously concede" the election if unsuccessful in his legal efforts. "I’m told that, you know, in addition to the president wanting to see this done, the president is really being supported and being pushed to some degree by his family who want to make sure every legal vote was counted and that no illegal votes were counted," Roberts said.
He added that if Trump "does not see a path to continuing in as the president of the United States, he will graciously concede and work on a peaceful and appropriate transfer of power," according to words given to him.