wnd--2020-11-17--In states nationwide, voters 'clearly rejected Democrats' substance'

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics . ]
Barack Obama and Eric Holder ’ s National Democratic Redistricting Committee ( NDRC ) aimed to raise $ 400 million to help flip state legislatures from red to blue in the 2020 elections .
The thinking went like this : Democrats were frustrated after the 2010 midterm elections because Republicans held legislative majorities in states where lawmakers draw legislative and congressional district maps .
So Democrats sought to turn the tables in time for the next decennial drawing , after the 2020 census .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 'Million MAGA March ' in drive-by cameo The 2018 elections gave them reason to hope .
In that election cycle , Democrats captured six state legislative chambers from Republicans , all of which NDRC had targeted .
While the 2018 national Democratic Party “ blue wave ” failed to win control of the legislature in my state of Pennsylvania , Democrats did gain 11 seats in the state house and six seats in the senate – getting half way toward flipping the General Assembly and making Pennsylvania not only a prime swing state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the legislative level this year .
Then , in 2019 , Democrats – again with NDRC ’ s help – turned the Virginia legislature blue , raising expectations even further .
These results , combined with enthusiastic anti-Trump sentiment and a purported $ 400 million war chest , seemed to portend another Democratic wave this year .
It didn ’ t happen .
Not even close .
The NDRC targeted 13 legislative chambers in nine states – and flipped none .
Republicans expanded their majorities in several of these states , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pennsylvania .
The GOP captured both chambers of the New Hampshire legislature , gaining a trifecta in that state , where Republicans also hold the governorship .
And that $ 400 million ?
According to an NDRC email , it turned out to be closer to $ 7 million .
Still , the Democrats did raise nearly $ 90 million for their red-to-blue effort , compared with more than $ 60 million raised by Republicans .
Why , then , did their efforts fail so spectacularly ?
Simply put : While voters showed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for President Trump ’ s style , they also clearly rejected Democrats ’ substance .
In Pennsylvania , voters resoundingly rejected Democratic Gov .
Tom Wolf ’ s far-reaching COVID business lockdown – aided and abetted by Democratic legislators – and other aspects of the progressive policy agenda , including calls to defund police .
The winning candidates ran against Wolf and his party .
As one Democrat operative put it , the left ’ s efforts in Pennsylvania “ hit a big , giant red wall.
” But it ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where the Democrats ’ policies failed to woo voters .
While control of the U.S. Senate will be determined by runoff elections in Georgia in January , Republicans gained seats in the House of Representatives ( though they remain in the minority ) .
Voters also “ mostly ” said no to tax increases on the ballot , as the Wall Street Journal characterized it .
Such measures failed in Alaska , California , and Illinois ; Colorado voters passed a tax cut .
Joe Biden has claimed a mandate , but his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defeat suggests otherwise .
The progressive policies he campaigned on – free college , more government health care , higher taxes – fell flat with voters .
Down-ballot Democratic candidates paid the price .
While Biden supporters celebrate victory , Democrats should be concerned about the future of a progressive policy agenda that proved an utter failure at the ballot box .

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]
By Matthew J. Brouillette
Real Clear Politics
Barack Obama and Eric Holder’s National Democratic Redistricting Committee (NDRC) aimed to raise $400 million to help flip state legislatures from red to blue in the 2020 elections.
The thinking went like this: Democrats were frustrated after the 2010 midterm elections because Republicans held legislative majorities in states where lawmakers draw legislative and congressional district maps. So Democrats sought to turn the tables in time for the next decennial drawing, after the 2020 census.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The 2018 elections gave them reason to hope. In that election cycle, Democrats captured six state legislative chambers from Republicans, all of which NDRC had targeted. While the 2018 national Democratic Party “blue wave” failed to win control of the legislature in my state of Pennsylvania, Democrats did gain 11 seats in the state house and six seats in the senate – getting half way toward flipping the General Assembly and making Pennsylvania not only a prime swing state for 2020 but also a prime target at the legislative level this year.
Then, in 2019, Democrats – again with NDRC’s help – turned the Virginia legislature blue, raising expectations even further. These results, combined with enthusiastic anti-Trump sentiment and a purported $400 million war chest, seemed to portend another Democratic wave this year. It didn’t happen. Not even close.
The NDRC targeted 13 legislative chambers in nine states – and flipped none. Republicans expanded their majorities in several of these states, including Florida, Kansas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. The GOP captured both chambers of the New Hampshire legislature, gaining a trifecta in that state, where Republicans also hold the governorship.
And that $400 million? According to an NDRC email, it turned out to be closer to $7 million. Still, the Democrats did raise nearly $90 million for their red-to-blue effort, compared with more than $60 million raised by Republicans.
Why, then, did their efforts fail so spectacularly? Simply put: While voters showed that they didn’t care much for President Trump’s style, they also clearly rejected Democrats’ substance.
In Pennsylvania, voters resoundingly rejected Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf’s far-reaching COVID business lockdown – aided and abetted by Democratic legislators – and other aspects of the progressive policy agenda, including calls to defund police. The winning candidates ran against Wolf and his party. As one Democrat operative put it, the left’s efforts in Pennsylvania “hit a big, giant red wall.” But it’s not only in Pennsylvania or in state legislatures where the Democrats’ policies failed to woo voters.
While control of the U.S. Senate will be determined by runoff elections in Georgia in January, Republicans gained seats in the House of Representatives (though they remain in the minority).
Voters also “mostly” said no to tax increases on the ballot, as the Wall Street Journal characterized it. Such measures failed in Alaska, California, and Illinois; Colorado voters passed a tax cut. Joe Biden has claimed a mandate, but his one victory amid a wave of Democrat defeat suggests otherwise. The progressive policies he campaigned on – free college, more government health care, higher taxes – fell flat with voters. Down-ballot Democratic candidates paid the price.
While Biden supporters celebrate victory, Democrats should be concerned about the future of a progressive policy agenda that proved an utter failure at the ballot box.


wnd--2020-11-17--GOP 'within spitting distance' of taking control of House

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics . ]
Democratic joy at defeating Donald Trump was partially dulled by the simultaneous diminishment of the party ’ s House majority .
As of Sunday at least 11 Democratic-held House seats have been lost to Republicans ( while Democrats have flipped three others ) .
That ’ s the biggest net loss in a presidential election year by the winning presidential candidate ’ s party in 60 years .
The unexpected divergence in the two results sparked a round of reciprocal recriminations between the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Moderates blamed the “ defund the police ” sloganeering and “ socialist ” branding from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her supporters , which Republicans deployed in swing district attack ads .
Ocasio-Cortez shot back by claiming moderate incumbents ran musty campaigns with minimal investment in digital media .
TRENDING : President Trump drops In on 'Million MAGA March ' in drive-by cameo Who ’ s right ?
Who deserves the lion ’ s share of the blame ?
Before answering , let ’ s first challenge the premise that there is lots @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats lost voters they could have and should have won , that would be cause for affixing blame .
But if Republicans showed up in big numbers , there ’ s not much Democrats can do about that .
Considering 2020 produced the largest eligible-voter turnout percentage ( 66.4 % ) in 120 years , one can reasonably conclude that both parties did all they could to motivate their bases .
For any Democrat trying to win on Republican turf , a high turnout election produces a stiff headwind .
And since Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they were fighting on a lot of Republican turf .
They were tenuously defending 30 House seats in districts Trump won in 2016 , 16 of which were also won by Mitt Romney in 2012 .
Furthermore , while it is unusual for the winning presidential candidate ’ s party to lose 10 or more House seats in the same election , it is not unusual for a party to give back some seats shortly after making double-digit gains .
After Democrats snatched a combined 52 seats in the 2006 and 2008 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2010 .
After Democrats took 49 seats in the post-Watergate 1974 election , Republicans netted 49 seats in the 1978 and 1980 elections .
With that history in mind , Democrats shouldn ’ t beat themselves up too badly over a net loss of at least eight seats .
They should take pride in holding on to at least 21 of those hard-fought 30 seats in Trump ’ 16 districts .
Democrats limited their losses in Trump-won districts despite an election that featured minimal ticket-splitting .
Nearly all of the Democratic Senate candidates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ within 2.5 percentage points of Biden ’ s performance in their states .
Only Maine ’ s Susan Collins , a Republican incumbent who touts her bipartisanship , won in a state that voted for the opposite party ’ s presidential candidate .
Data for presidential candidate performance by congressional district is not as readily available .
But I was able to piece together data in six of the districts where Democrats lost seats .
Most were Trump-won districts in which the Democratic candidate was a one-term incumbent .
In those , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than Donald Trump , and the Democrat earned a bit more than Joe Biden .
That suggests the Democrats ran decent races , but couldn ’ t overcome the GOP tilt of their districts during a presidential election year in which Republican turnout was robust .
Still , Democratic moderates and progressives shouldn ’ t escape all blame .
The outsized attention given to one-term congresswoman , and self-described socialist , Ocasio-Cortez created an impression that she is a party leader , and made it easier for Republicans to tar Democrats with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helped Republicans poach two Hillary Clinton-won districts in the Miami area , where many Cuban- and Venezuelan-Americans who revile socialism reside .
Republicans cannily ran ads accusing the two Democratic first-termers — Debbie Mucarsel-Powell in FL-26 and Donna Shalala in FL-27 — of being socialists .
Riding that anti-socialist tide , Trump also improved mightily in both districts , flipping the 26th and dramatically narrowing his margin in the 27th , buoying the Republican House candidates .
Plus , both of the winning Republican candidates are Cuban-Americans , unlike the Democratic incumbents , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But while the moderates have openly complained about getting dragged down by sloganeering popularized by Ocasio-Cortez and her “ Squad , ” they need to take responsibility for failing to sharply define themselves .
Ocasio-Cortez ’ s claim that they needed more digital media to do so seems off the mark — no one is crediting Joe Biden ’ s facility with TikTok for his victory .
But certainly if the defeated Democrats were to defy political gravity , withstand a Republican turnout surge , and repel negative attacks , they needed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as well as the national party .
Shalala made an unforced error when she called herself in an October TV interview a “ pragmatic socialist , ” which her opponent gleefully used in a late attack ad .
Shalala clearly misspoke ; in the same interview she said , “ I ’ m as far from being a socialist as anyone that you ’ ll ever meet .
I ’ m a capitalist.
” But while it was disingenuous for her opponent to use the truncated clip , if Shalala had a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attack wouldn ’ t have stuck so easily .
In other , more Republican/Trump-friendly districts , first-term Democrats such as Xochitl Torres Small of New Mexico ’ s 2nd , Ben McAdams of Utah ’ s 4th and Kendra Horn of Oklahoma ’ s 5th were hammered with ads noting they voted with Speaker Nancy Pelosi around 90 % of the time .
Since these Democrats can ’ t win in presidential election years without ticket-splitters , such partisan loyalty can have consequences .
Swing district representatives need to work extra hard to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the national party .
The simplest way to do that is to periodically vote against the party ’ s wishes .
If they didn ’ t break ranks enough , or if they didn ’ t call enough attention to the times when they did , they shouldn ’ t be surprised if they get yoked to Pelosi and Ocasio-Cortez .
Nevertheless , considering the amount of party loyalty Pelosi demanded , and received , from her caucus , one can interpret the Democrats ’ retaining of the majority as an impressive success @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote , and they kept most of the seats previously claimed in Trump-majority districts .
The party ’ s brand can ’ t be all that toxic .
At the same time , the perception of the Democrats as socialistic thwarted their desire to expand their reach .
As a result , Republicans are now within spitting distance of regaining House control in 2022 .
There are two ways for the surviving-yet-still-vulnerable Democratic House members to inoculate themselves from future “ socialist ” attacks .
One is to reach across the aisle and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that reaches President Biden ’ s desk .
The other is to run afoul of Pelosi and help block some partisan legislation from clearing the House .
The former would be better for the country , but requires cooperative Republicans .
The latter raises the specter of gridlock and dysfunction , but needs no Republicans to execute .

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]
By Bill Scher
Real Clear Politics
Democratic joy at defeating Donald Trump was partially dulled by the simultaneous diminishment of the party’s House majority. As of Sunday at least 11 Democratic-held House seats have been lost to Republicans (while Democrats have flipped three others). That’s the biggest net loss in a presidential election year by the winning presidential candidate’s party in 60 years.
The unexpected divergence in the two results sparked a round of reciprocal recriminations between the House Democratic caucus’ moderate and left-wing factions. Moderates blamed the “defund the police” sloganeering and “socialist” branding from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her supporters, which Republicans deployed in swing district attack ads. Ocasio-Cortez shot back by claiming moderate incumbents ran musty campaigns with minimal investment in digital media.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Who’s right? Who deserves the lion’s share of the blame?
Before answering, let’s first challenge the premise that there is lots of blame to go around. If Democrats lost voters they could have and should have won, that would be cause for affixing blame. But if Republicans showed up in big numbers, there’s not much Democrats can do about that.
Considering 2020 produced the largest eligible-voter turnout percentage (66.4%) in 120 years, one can reasonably conclude that both parties did all they could to motivate their bases. For any Democrat trying to win on Republican turf, a high turnout election produces a stiff headwind.
And since Democrats had such a great 2018 midterm election, they were fighting on a lot of Republican turf. They were tenuously defending 30 House seats in districts Trump won in 2016, 16 of which were also won by Mitt Romney in 2012.
Furthermore, while it is unusual for the winning presidential candidate’s party to lose 10 or more House seats in the same election, it is not unusual for a party to give back some seats shortly after making double-digit gains. After Democrats snatched a combined 52 seats in the 2006 and 2008 elections, Republicans grabbed back 63 in 2010. After Democrats took 49 seats in the post-Watergate 1974 election, Republicans netted 49 seats in the 1978 and 1980 elections.
With that history in mind, Democrats shouldn’t beat themselves up too badly over a net loss of at least eight seats. They should take pride in holding on to at least 21 of those hard-fought 30 seats in Trump ’16 districts.
Democrats limited their losses in Trump-won districts despite an election that featured minimal ticket-splitting. Nearly all of the Democratic Senate candidates in competitive races earned a vote share within 2.5 percentage points of Biden’s performance in their states. Only Maine’s Susan Collins, a Republican incumbent who touts her bipartisanship, won in a state that voted for the opposite party’s presidential candidate.
Data for presidential candidate performance by congressional district is not as readily available. But I was able to piece together data in six of the districts where Democrats lost seats. Most were Trump-won districts in which the Democratic candidate was a one-term incumbent. In those, the Republican challenger earned a bit fewer votes than Donald Trump, and the Democrat earned a bit more than Joe Biden. That suggests the Democrats ran decent races, but couldn’t overcome the GOP tilt of their districts during a presidential election year in which Republican turnout was robust.
Still, Democratic moderates and progressives shouldn’t escape all blame.
The outsized attention given to one-term congresswoman, and self-described socialist, Ocasio-Cortez created an impression that she is a party leader, and made it easier for Republicans to tar Democrats with the “socialist” slur. That clearly helped Republicans poach two Hillary Clinton-won districts in the Miami area, where many Cuban- and Venezuelan-Americans who revile socialism reside. Republicans cannily ran ads accusing the two Democratic first-termers — Debbie Mucarsel-Powell in FL-26 and Donna Shalala in FL-27 — of being socialists.
Riding that anti-socialist tide, Trump also improved mightily in both districts, flipping the 26th and dramatically narrowing his margin in the 27th, buoying the Republican House candidates. Plus, both of the winning Republican candidates are Cuban-Americans, unlike the Democratic incumbents, and that probably helped as well.
(Two other Republican upsets — in California’s Clinton-won 39th and 48th districts — were likely aided by the GOP’s nomination of Asian-American candidates in areas with large Asian-American populations.)
But while the moderates have openly complained about getting dragged down by sloganeering popularized by Ocasio-Cortez and her “Squad,” they need to take responsibility for failing to sharply define themselves. Ocasio-Cortez’s claim that they needed more digital media to do so seems off the mark — no one is crediting Joe Biden’s facility with TikTok for his victory. But certainly if the defeated Democrats were to defy political gravity, withstand a Republican turnout surge, and repel negative attacks, they needed to better distinguish themselves from the far left, as well as the national party.
Shalala made an unforced error when she called herself in an October TV interview a “pragmatic socialist,” which her opponent gleefully used in a late attack ad. Shalala clearly misspoke; in the same interview she said, “I’m as far from being a socialist as anyone that you’ll ever meet. I’m a capitalist.” But while it was disingenuous for her opponent to use the truncated clip, if Shalala had a deeper connection with her district, the attack wouldn’t have stuck so easily.
In other, more Republican/Trump-friendly districts, first-term Democrats such as Xochitl Torres Small of New Mexico’s 2nd, Ben McAdams of Utah’s 4th and Kendra Horn of Oklahoma’s 5th were hammered with ads noting they voted with Speaker Nancy Pelosi around 90% of the time. Since these Democrats can’t win in presidential election years without ticket-splitters, such partisan loyalty can have consequences.
Swing district representatives need to work extra hard to establish individual reputations that separate themselves from the national party. The simplest way to do that is to periodically vote against the party’s wishes. If they didn’t break ranks enough, or if they didn’t call enough attention to the times when they did, they shouldn’t be surprised if they get yoked to Pelosi and Ocasio-Cortez.
Nevertheless, considering the amount of party loyalty Pelosi demanded, and received, from her caucus, one can interpret the Democrats’ retaining of the majority as an impressive success. They won the national House popular vote, and they kept most of the seats previously claimed in Trump-majority districts. The party’s brand can’t be all that toxic.
At the same time, the perception of the Democrats as socialistic thwarted their desire to expand their reach. As a result, Republicans are now within spitting distance of regaining House control in 2022.
There are two ways for the surviving-yet-still-vulnerable Democratic House members to inoculate themselves from future “socialist” attacks. One is to reach across the aisle and get their names on some bipartisan legislation that reaches President Biden’s desk. The other is to run afoul of Pelosi and help block some partisan legislation from clearing the House.
The former would be better for the country, but requires cooperative Republicans. The latter raises the specter of gridlock and dysfunction, but needs no Republicans to execute.


wnd--2020-11-17--Millions of student borrowers could have some debt 'forgiven' under Biden administration

Though President-elect Joe Biden has not pledged to forgive all student debt , he has supported broad changes that could affect millions of Americans .
While most of his favored policies adopt fragments of progressive plans , most differ slightly from the Democratic Party ’ s liberal wing .
In addition to targeted debt relief , Biden ’ s plan for student debt relief also supports both expanding federal aid and cutting tuition for certain Americans .
TRENDING : President Trump drops In on 'Million MAGA March ' in drive-by cameo During the campaign , Biden released “ The Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” a comprehensive plan with numerous proposals for student debt relief .
Among the proposals is a program that offers workers in public schools , government , and nonprofit workers $ 10,000 of debt relief per year for up to five years .
Under Biden ’ s plan workers earning $ 25,000 or less will also be exempt from federal student loan payments and the interest that they would have collected .
Those making above $ 25,000 will have to pay 5 % of their discretionary income , which excludes taxes and income @ @ @ @ @ @ @ essential items .
“ After 20 years , the remainder of the loans for people who have responsibly made payments through the program will be 100 % forgiven , ” his website adds .
His plan stands in contrast to what was initially proposed by Democratic Sens .
Elizabeth Warren and Chuck Schumer , who have lobbied Biden to adopt a plan that would cancel up to $ 50,000 of student debt per person .
The plan would also double the value of Pell grants and make all public colleges and universities tuition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less than $ 125,000 .
“ Doubling the maximum value of Pell grants will increase the grant value for individuals already eligible for Pell and , given the program ’ s formula for determining eligibility , expand the benefits of Pell to more middle class Americans , ” his website says .
It is unknown , however , how much Biden will be able to do without congressional approval .
Republicans have opposed broad student debt relief programs in past years , and Democrats ’ hopes of unified government control rest on flipping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ runoff .
Though Biden did endorse canceling $ 10,000 of student debt relief per person in March to partially alleviate burdens imposed by the coronavirus pandemic , he only called on Congress to pass the measure , which it has not done .
Even if Democrats fail to win a Senate majority , Biden could still take some executive action on student debt .
In March , President Donald Trump issued an executive order which waived interest on student loans through the end of 2020 , which Biden could further extend once he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden can adopt systemic changes without congressional approval , writing that “ Biden-Harris can cancel billions of dollars in student loan debt ” via executive order on day one .
This story originally was published by the Daily Caller News Foundation .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of our original content , please contact [ email protected ]

By Andrew Trunsky
Daily Caller News Foundation
Though President-elect Joe Biden has not pledged to forgive all student debt, he has supported broad changes that could affect millions of Americans.
While most of his favored policies adopt fragments of progressive plans, most differ slightly from the Democratic Party’s liberal wing. In addition to targeted debt relief, Biden’s plan for student debt relief also supports both expanding federal aid and cutting tuition for certain Americans.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
During the campaign, Biden released “The Biden Plan For Education Beyond High School,” a comprehensive plan with numerous proposals for student debt relief. Among the proposals is a program that offers workers in public schools, government, and nonprofit workers $10,000 of debt relief per year for up to five years.
Under Biden’s plan workers earning $25,000 or less will also be exempt from federal student loan payments and the interest that they would have collected. Those making above $25,000 will have to pay 5% of their discretionary income, which excludes taxes and income spent on food, housing and other essential items.
“After 20 years, the remainder of the loans for people who have responsibly made payments through the program will be 100% forgiven,” his website adds.
His plan stands in contrast to what was initially proposed by Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Chuck Schumer, who have lobbied Biden to adopt a plan that would cancel up to $50,000 of student debt per person.
The plan would also double the value of Pell grants and make all public colleges and universities tuition free for families whose collective incomes are less than $125,000.
“Doubling the maximum value of Pell grants will increase the grant value for individuals already eligible for Pell and, given the program’s formula for determining eligibility, expand the benefits of Pell to more middle class Americans,” his website says.
It is unknown, however, how much Biden will be able to do without congressional approval. Republicans have opposed broad student debt relief programs in past years, and Democrats’ hopes of unified government control rest on flipping two Georgia senate seats in a January runoff.
Though Biden did endorse canceling $10,000 of student debt relief per person in March to partially alleviate burdens imposed by the coronavirus pandemic, he only called on Congress to pass the measure, which it has not done.
Additionally, we should forgive a minimum of $10,000/person of federal student loans, as proposed by Senator Warren and colleagues. Young people and other student debt holders bore the brunt of the last crisis. It shouldn’t happen again. — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) March 22, 2020
Even if Democrats fail to win a Senate majority, Biden could still take some executive action on student debt. In March, President Donald Trump issued an executive order which waived interest on student loans through the end of 2020, which Biden could further extend once he takes office.
Warren has advocated that Biden can adopt systemic changes without congressional approval, writing that “Biden-Harris can cancel billions of dollars in student loan debt” via executive order on day one.
1. Biden-Harris can cancel billions of dollars in student loan debt, giving tens of millions of Americans an immediate financial boost and helping to close the racial wealth gap. This is the single most effective executive action available for a massive economic stimulus. — Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) November 12, 2020
This story originally was published by the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].


wnd--2020-11-17--Evangelical leader: If Biden wants 'unity,' invite us to the table

After a presidential campaign in which the Democratic Party continued the demonization of President Trump that began with its bogus Russia-collusion probe , Joe Biden is now urging `` unity . ''
Biden declared , after establiment media projected him as the winner : `` Let 's give each other a chance .
It 's time to put away the harsh rhetoric , lower the temperature . ''
He said his `` opponents '' are `` not our enemies , '' they 're `` Americans . ''
But many influential members of his party are not on board with his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : President Trump drops In on 'Million MAGA March ' in drive-by cameo Some Democrats have called for a `` truth and reconciliation commission '' and others insist the GOP must be `` broken , burned down '' and members `` who committed crimes '' should be punished .
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez , D-N.Y. , is asking whether or not there 's `` anyone archiving these Trump sycophants for when they try to downplay or deny their complicity in the future ? ''
Meanwhile , evangelical leaders , who were among Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden 's truly desires unity , he needs to reach out to them .
Rev .
Tony Suarez , vice president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference , says Trump has every right to pursue the challenges to the vote count , but acknowledges Biden `` may in fact be our next president . ''
`` Should that be the case , I hope he surrounds himself with true evangelicals and will listen to our concerns , '' Suarez said in a Religion News report , `` If his message is healing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to not invite us to the table . ''
Ralph Reed , founder and chairman of the Faith and Freedom Coalition , told RNS it 's too early to talk about a Biden presidency .
He said that as `` a veteran of the 2000 Florida recount , I take the integrity of elections and the rule of law very seriously . ''
`` Donald Trump ’ s campaign is entirely within its rights to pursue legal challenges and recounts where appropriate , '' he told RNS .
`` This election will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those legal challenges are resolved — and not until . ''
Franklin Graham , CEO of Samaritan 's Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association , said the courts will have to decide the winner because of significant concerns raised in court .
He said the election will be decided when the Electoral College votes in December , RNS reported .
`` He has a case , '' Graham said of Trump .
`` That does n't mean the outcome will change .
Our forefathers , when they created the Constitution , realized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s why the certification isn ’ t until a month or so later .
It gives time for disputes to be worked out . ''
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins also pointed to the constitutional process as well as state and federal law .
And Rev .
Robert Jeffress , a Texas pastor who has supported Trump 's efforts to protect religious rights , said that while `` it appears '' Biden will become president , the president has `` every right to contest the election . ''

After a presidential campaign in which the Democratic Party continued the demonization of President Trump that began with its bogus Russia-collusion probe, Joe Biden is now urging "unity."
Biden declared, after establiment media projected him as the winner: "Let's give each other a chance. It's time to put away the harsh rhetoric, lower the temperature."
He said his "opponents" are "not our enemies," they're "Americans."
But many influential members of his party are not on board with his message, Fox News reported.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Some Democrats have called for a "truth and reconciliation commission" and others insist the GOP must be "broken, burned down" and members "who committed crimes" should be punished.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, D-N.Y., is asking whether or not there's "anyone archiving these Trump sycophants for when they try to downplay or deny their complicity in the future?"
Meanwhile, evangelical leaders, who were among Trump's strongest supporters, insist that if Biden's truly desires unity, he needs to reach out to them.
Rev. Tony Suarez, vice president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, says Trump has every right to pursue the challenges to the vote count, but acknowledges Biden "may in fact be our next president."
"Should that be the case, I hope he surrounds himself with true evangelicals and will listen to our concerns," Suarez said in a Religion News report, "If his message is healing and unity it would be a mistake to not invite us to the table."
Ralph Reed, founder and chairman of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, told RNS it's too early to talk about a Biden presidency.
He said that as "a veteran of the 2000 Florida recount, I take the integrity of elections and the rule of law very seriously."
"Donald Trump’s campaign is entirely within its rights to pursue legal challenges and recounts where appropriate," he told RNS. "This election will be over when those recounts are complete and those legal challenges are resolved — and not until."
Franklin Graham, CEO of Samaritan's Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, said the courts will have to decide the winner because of significant concerns raised in court.
He said the election will be decided when the Electoral College votes in December, RNS reported.
"He has a case," Graham said of Trump. "That doesn't mean the outcome will change. Our forefathers, when they created the Constitution, realized the election might be contested. That’s why the certification isn’t until a month or so later. It gives time for disputes to be worked out."
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins also pointed to the constitutional process as well as state and federal law.
And Rev. Robert Jeffress, a Texas pastor who has supported Trump's efforts to protect religious rights, said that while "it appears" Biden will become president, the president has "every right to contest the election."


wnd--2020-11-17--'Reparations' promoter on Biden transition team

An outspoken advocate of taxpayer-funded `` reparations '' for black Americans to compensate for slavery is a member of Joe Biden 's transition team .
Mehrsa Baradaran , a professor at the University of California at Irvine , was appointed by Biden 's campaign to help make recommendations for policy at the U.S. Treasury , should Biden take office , the Washington Free Beacon reported .
Baradaran believes reparations are necessary not only to close the `` racial wealth gap '' but also to correct `` white supremacy . ''
TRENDING : President Trump drops In on 'Million MAGA March @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential nominee Kamala Harris have `` dodged questions about reparations throughout the 2020 cycle , '' the Free Beacon said .
Baradaran made her case in her 2017 book `` The Color of Money : Black Banks and the Racial Wealth Gap . ''
`` A reparations program could take many forms from simple cash payments or baby bonds to more complex schemes such as subsidized college tuition , basic income , housing vouchers , or subsidized mortgage credit , '' she writes .
Her background includes helping Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem they define as the `` racial wealth gap . ''
Baradaran wrote on Twitter : `` Insofar as capitalism was based on white supremacy , it would block black capital accumulation . ''
Baradaran contends the `` wealth gap '' was created `` by a failure of public policy '' and that no `` private markets '' can solve it .
`` Without major structural reforms , the wealth gap will continue to expand , '' she writes .
`` A 2016 study glibly predicted that based on the current racial wealth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for blacks to have as much wealth as whites today .
The prediction , though grim , is based on a false assumption : that the wealth gap will naturally close over time—albeit a very long time—without intervention .
`` In fact , as my previous research demonstrates , it is likely that the racial wealth gap will remain in place and continue to reproduce itself .
In other words , if nothing changes , no amount of time will close the wealth gap because of the self-perpetuating effects of capital accumulation .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ created the wealth gap and therefore `` must be used to address it . ''
`` Reparations could take many forms—all of which would have to be measured in monetary outcomes as are all contractual claims , '' she says .
`` One way to measure the remedy is to focus on outcomes rather than means .
For example , reparations could mean that the federal government could enlist several programs and agencies at once intended to eliminate the racial wealth gap .
The means of elimination would be flexible so long as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the wealth gap was eliminated . ''
Kamala Harris , the Democrats ' vice presidential nominee , already has promoted the idea of equal outcomes , a tenet of Karl Marx .
`` From each according to his ability , to each according to his needs , '' he wrote in 1875 .
In the video on Twitter , Harris insists it 's government 's job to make sure `` we all end up at the same place . ''
Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro said Harris is `` openly making the argument that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ itself inequity .
Which is called communism . ''

An outspoken advocate of taxpayer-funded "reparations" for black Americans to compensate for slavery is a member of Joe Biden's transition team.
Mehrsa Baradaran, a professor at the University of California at Irvine, was appointed by Biden's campaign to help make recommendations for policy at the U.S. Treasury, should Biden take office, the Washington Free Beacon reported.
Baradaran believes reparations are necessary not only to close the "racial wealth gap" but also to correct "white supremacy."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Biden and vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris have "dodged questions about reparations throughout the 2020 cycle," the Free Beacon said.
Baradaran made her case in her 2017 book "The Color of Money: Black Banks and the Racial Wealth Gap."
"A reparations program could take many forms from simple cash payments or baby bonds to more complex schemes such as subsidized college tuition, basic income, housing vouchers, or subsidized mortgage credit," she writes.
Her background includes helping Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren pursue proposals for addressing a problem they define as the "racial wealth gap."
Baradaran wrote on Twitter: "Insofar as capitalism was based on white supremacy, it would block black capital accumulation."
It was not intentional or a slight. And I don’t think I’m making a case that black banks were capitalist. I’m simply saying that insofar as capitalism was based on white supremacy, it would block black capital accumulation. My thesis is not against black cooperatives at all — Mehrsa Baradaran (@MehrsaBaradaran) August 3, 2019
Baradaran contends the "wealth gap" was created "by a failure of public policy" and that no "private markets" can solve it.
"Without major structural reforms, the wealth gap will continue to expand," she writes. "A 2016 study glibly predicted that based on the current racial wealth gap, it would take 228 years for blacks to have as much wealth as whites today. The prediction, though grim, is based on a false assumption: that the wealth gap will naturally close over time—albeit a very long time—without intervention.
"In fact, as my previous research demonstrates, it is likely that the racial wealth gap will remain in place and continue to reproduce itself. In other words, if nothing changes, no amount of time will close the wealth gap because of the self-perpetuating effects of capital accumulation."
She contends "public policy" created the wealth gap and therefore "must be used to address it."
"Reparations could take many forms—all of which would have to be measured in monetary outcomes as are all contractual claims," she says.
"One way to measure the remedy is to focus on outcomes rather than means. For example, reparations could mean that the federal government could enlist several programs and agencies at once intended to eliminate the racial wealth gap. The means of elimination would be flexible so long as within a stated amount of time, the wealth gap was eliminated."
Kamala Harris, the Democrats' vice presidential nominee, already has promoted the idea of equal outcomes, a tenet of Karl Marx.
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs," he wrote in 1875.
In the video on Twitter, Harris insists it's government's job to make sure "we all end up at the same place."
See it:
There’s a big difference between equality and equity. pic.twitter.com/n3XfQyjLNe — Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) November 1, 2020
Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro said Harris is "openly making the argument that inequality of outcome is in and of itself inequity. Which is called communism."


wnd--2020-11-17--Revealed: Trump voters beat out Biden voters in marriage, church attendance and full-time employment

A comprehensive look at some exit polling following the still-contested 2020 presidential election is giving us a deeper look at those who presumably voted for Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden .
ABC News shared its audit of the voting trends during the election , and it revealed that those who are unreligious , unmarried and less likely to hold a full-time job voted for Democrats by big margins .
Biden ’ s apparent support for more invasive lockdowns and other mandates to curtail cases of the coronavirus , should he win the election , did not chase away some groups @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exit polling , people who are unmarried voted reported voting Democrat over Republican by a margin of 18 points .
TRENDING : President Trump drops In on 'Million MAGA March ' in drive-by cameo Democrats carried voters who answered `` no '' on the question , “ Are you currently married ?
” Of those who were unwed , 58 percent of them voted Democrat , while a mere 40 percent reported voting Republican .
Those who were married voted Republican over Democrat by a margin of seven points , 53 percent to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is accurate , that means that Democrats ’ proposed policies for the country were popular with a majority of unmarried voters .
With voters who do not work full-time , Democrats also prevailed .
Democrats were more popular with those who answered `` no '' on the question , “ Do you work full-time for pay ?
” Of people who are not currently working a full-time job , 57 percent reported voting Democrat , while only 42 percent voted Republican .
Republicans also prevailed by four points , 51 percent to 47 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they work a full week .
One other factor that is noteworthy was the vote of those who identify as belonging to a religion .
Protestant or other Christians voted Republican over Democrat by a margin of 60 percent to 39 percent .
Those who reported having no religion split for Democrats by a margin of 65 percent to 31 percent .
Exit polling from The Associated Press VoteCast survey asked approximately 140,000 voters about the frequency with which they attend church or other religious services .
Biden won big with those who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Donald Trump , meanwhile , carried voters who attend religious services once a week or more by a margin of 62 percent to 37 percent .
Trump also won over voters who attend religious services a few times a month 54 percent to 44 percent , and he won once-a-month churchgoers by an almost-identical margin of 54 to 45 .
Biden , meanwhile , grabbed 63 percent of voters who reported `` never '' going to church .
Not to denigrate those who might not work full-time , are not married or do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are arguably less likely to be affected by Biden 's plans for the economy as , if declared the winner , he would likely use the coronavirus as a pretext to clamp down on those who attend in-person religious services and go to work .
Biden has signaled he would have few reservations about shuttering the economy .
We of course know after looking at the effects of lockdowns that they kill jobs and also create a plethora of other issues -- from mental health to substance abuse -- for many people .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ home all day , alone in the world and without meaningful company , lockdown measures might be of little consequence , so long as liquor stores remain open and cat food is widely available , one could assume .
People who live lives that might for now be void of any meaningful relationships , gainful employment or faith arguably have little invested in the future of the country , and perhaps even less invested in what our country ’ s young people will someday inherit .
While voting demographics are generally looked at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and gender , the breakdown of votes is eye-opening , considering the chaotic nature of the 2020 election and the coronavirus pandemic .
If the ABC exit polling is accurate , Democratic proposals didn ’ t hurt them with Americans whose lives are essentially , in some cases , already a lockdown .
On the other hand , working people , people of strong faith and those who have managed to lock down a spouse reported voting Republican by some pretty big margins .
The takeaway is that forward-looking people in many circumstances @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those with life factors that might have them living in the now were unbothered by Democratic proposals to cede away their liberties and the country 's future prosperity .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

A comprehensive look at some exit polling following the still-contested 2020 presidential election is giving us a deeper look at those who presumably voted for Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden.
ABC News shared its audit of the voting trends during the election, and it revealed that those who are unreligious, unmarried and less likely to hold a full-time job voted for Democrats by big margins.
Biden’s apparent support for more invasive lockdowns and other mandates to curtail cases of the coronavirus, should he win the election, did not chase away some groups of people.
Let's dive into the numbers.
According to the ABC exit polling, people who are unmarried voted reported voting Democrat over Republican by a margin of 18 points.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Democrats carried voters who answered "no" on the question, “Are you currently married?”
Of those who were unwed, 58 percent of them voted Democrat, while a mere 40 percent reported voting Republican.
Those who were married voted Republican over Democrat by a margin of seven points, 53 percent to 46 percent.
If the exit polling is accurate, that means that Democrats’ proposed policies for the country were popular with a majority of unmarried voters.
With voters who do not work full-time, Democrats also prevailed.
Democrats were more popular with those who answered "no" on the question, “Do you work full-time for pay?”
Of people who are not currently working a full-time job, 57 percent reported voting Democrat, while only 42 percent voted Republican.
Republicans also prevailed by four points, 51 percent to 47 percent, with those who answered that they work a full week.
One other factor that is noteworthy was the vote of those who identify as belonging to a religion.
Protestant or other Christians voted Republican over Democrat by a margin of 60 percent to 39 percent.
Those who reported having no religion split for Democrats by a margin of 65 percent to 31 percent.
Exit polling from The Associated Press VoteCast survey asked approximately 140,000 voters about the frequency with which they attend church or other religious services.
Biden won big with those who rarely or never attend church.
President Donald Trump, meanwhile, carried voters who attend religious services once a week or more by a margin of 62 percent to 37 percent.
Trump also won over voters who attend religious services a few times a month 54 percent to 44 percent, and he won once-a-month churchgoers by an almost-identical margin of 54 to 45.
Biden, meanwhile, grabbed 63 percent of voters who reported "never" going to church.
Not to denigrate those who might not work full-time, are not married or do not attend religious services, but they are arguably less likely to be affected by Biden's plans for the economy as, if declared the winner, he would likely use the coronavirus as a pretext to clamp down on those who attend in-person religious services and go to work.
Biden has signaled he would have few reservations about shuttering the economy.
We of course know after looking at the effects of lockdowns that they kill jobs and also create a plethora of other issues -- from mental health to substance abuse -- for many people.
For some persons who might already be home all day, alone in the world and without meaningful company, lockdown measures might be of little consequence, so long as liquor stores remain open and cat food is widely available, one could assume.
People who live lives that might for now be void of any meaningful relationships, gainful employment or faith arguably have little invested in the future of the country, and perhaps even less invested in what our country’s young people will someday inherit.
While voting demographics are generally looked at through a lens of ethnicity, age and gender, the breakdown of votes is eye-opening, considering the chaotic nature of the 2020 election and the coronavirus pandemic.
If the ABC exit polling is accurate, Democratic proposals didn’t hurt them with Americans whose lives are essentially, in some cases, already a lockdown.
On the other hand, working people, people of strong faith and those who have managed to lock down a spouse reported voting Republican by some pretty big margins.
The takeaway is that forward-looking people in many circumstances voted Republican, while a majority of those with life factors that might have them living in the now were unbothered by Democratic proposals to cede away their liberties and the country's future prosperity.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-11-17--Dr. Scott Atlas urges Michigan to 'rise up' against governor

Responding to Democratic Michigan Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer 's announcement of a three-week lockdown closing colleges , high schools , workplaces and in-person dining , White House coronavirus adviser Dr. Scott Atlas called on citizens to protest .
`` The only way this stops is if people rise up , '' Atlas wrote in a tweet Sunday night , citing information about Whitmer 's new restrictions .
“ You get what you accept .
# FreedomMatters # StepUp.
” Whitmer responded to Atlas ' tweet Sunday night on CNN , accusing him of bullying , the Washington Post reported .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ likes to single us out here in Michigan , me out in particular , '' she said .
`` I 'm not going to be bullied into not following reputable scientists and medical professionals . ''
TRENDING : President Trump drops In on 'Million MAGA March ' in drive-by cameo Atlas defended his tweet against people who characterized it as a call to violence .
`` Hey .
I NEVER was talking at all about violence , '' Atlas wrote .
`` People vote , people peacefully protest .
NEVER would I endorse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' Michigan 's Democratic attorney general , Dana Nessel , called Atlas 's tweet “ disappointing , irresponsible , and the reason why the United States finds itself in such desperate circumstances regarding COVID-19 . ''
Nessel recently threatened a journalist who published evidence of vote fraud , dispatching to him a `` cease and desist '' letter ordering him to erase evidence leaked by poll watchers .
Michigan health officials announced Saturday the new restrictions , limiting restaurants and bars to outdoor dining , and all banning in-person high school and college @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Maddock said Sunday that he and a number of his colleagues will work to impeach Whitmer .
`` Today , myself and a growing list of Michigan Legislators have decided that @ GovWhitmer has crossed the line and will be calling for # ImpeachWhitmer hearings , '' Maddock tweeted .
`` The list of violations is long and the call is overdue . ''
'Boy , those Flat Earthers sure do n't give up' Last month , as WND reported , Atlas reacted to Joe Biden 's claim that `` no serious '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of loosening coronavirus restrictions for the healthy while protecting the vulnerable .
CBS News anchor Norah O'Donnell noted to Biden that Atlas is `` advocating young people go about their business and older people sequester . ''
`` Nobody thinks he makes any sense , '' Biden responded in the Oct. 25 `` 60 Minutes '' interview .
`` Nobody .
No serious doc around the world . ''
`` 'NOBODY ! '
Ummm ... tell that to the 11,000+ ( so far ) epidemiologists and ID scientists from Harvard , Stanford , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Boy , those Flat Earthers sure do n't give up , '' he wrote .
WND reported last Wednesday the coronavirus adviser to Joe Biden who is advocating a national lockdown of four to six weeks argued against lockdowns in March in a Washington Post op-ed , advocating the unleash-the-healthy , protect-the-vulnerable strategy promoted by Atlas .
In his tweet last month responding to Biden , Atlas was referring to more than 11,000 experts who have signed the The Great Barrington Declaration since it was published in October .
As WND reported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Martin Kulldorff of Harvard , Dr. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford and Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya of Stanford states that as `` infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies , and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection . ''
A recent study published in the British Medical Journal found the sweeping lockdowns lead to more COVID-19 deaths and a prolonging of the pandemic than if the government were to let herd immunity build up in young populations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The researchers did a reanalysis of data modeling used by the U.K. government as guidance for implementing blanket lockdowns .
They concluded that that while strict public health measures bring cases down , the number of deaths rise in the long run .
The authors described the lockdown model as a postponement of the pandemic .
The CDC in September issued new estimates that showed people under 50 years infected by COVID-19 have nearly a 100 % survival rate .
It broke down to a 99.997 % survival rate for 0-19 ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % for 50-69 ; and 94.6 % for those over 70 .
Those who died of coronavirus , according to the CDC , had an average of 2.6 comorbidities , meaning more than two chronic diseases along with COVID-19 .
Overall , the CDC says , just 6 % of the people counted as COVID-19 deaths died of COVID-19 alone .
The World Health Organization said in early October it estimated 10 % of the world 's population has been infected , meaning that by the U.N. body 's own account , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 0.13 % .
That 's a little more than one-tenth of 1 % , which the WHO says is the rate for the seasonal flu .
The WHO 's estimate in March of a death rate of 3.4 % sparked panic worldwide , fueling the catastrophic lockdowns .

Responding to Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's announcement of a three-week lockdown closing colleges, high schools, workplaces and in-person dining, White House coronavirus adviser Dr. Scott Atlas called on citizens to protest.
"The only way this stops is if people rise up," Atlas wrote in a tweet Sunday night, citing information about Whitmer's new restrictions. “You get what you accept. #FreedomMatters #StepUp.”
Whitmer responded to Atlas' tweet Sunday night on CNN, accusing him of bullying, the Washington Post reported.
"We know that the White House likes to single us out here in Michigan, me out in particular," she said. "I'm not going to be bullied into not following reputable scientists and medical professionals."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Atlas defended his tweet against people who characterized it as a call to violence.
"Hey. I NEVER was talking at all about violence," Atlas wrote. "People vote, people peacefully protest. NEVER would I endorse or incite violence. NEVER!!"
Michigan's Democratic attorney general, Dana Nessel, called Atlas's tweet “disappointing, irresponsible, and the reason why the United States finds itself in such desperate circumstances regarding COVID-19."
Nessel recently threatened a journalist who published evidence of vote fraud, dispatching to him a "cease and desist" letter ordering him to erase evidence leaked by poll watchers.
Do you agree with Dr. Scott Atlas on this issue?? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to WND news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 99% (153 Votes) 1% (2 Votes)
Michigan health officials announced Saturday the new restrictions, limiting restaurants and bars to outdoor dining, and all banning in-person high school and college classes.
Michigan Republican state Rep. Matt Maddock said Sunday that he and a number of his colleagues will work to impeach Whitmer.
"Today, myself and a growing list of Michigan Legislators have decided that @GovWhitmer has crossed the line and will be calling for #ImpeachWhitmer hearings," Maddock tweeted. "The list of violations is long and the call is overdue."
'Boy, those Flat Earthers sure don't give up'
Last month, as WND reported, Atlas reacted to Joe Biden's claim that "no serious" doctor agrees with Atlas' coronavirus strategy of loosening coronavirus restrictions for the healthy while protecting the vulnerable.
CBS News anchor Norah O'Donnell noted to Biden that Atlas is "advocating young people go about their business and older people sequester."
"Nobody thinks he makes any sense," Biden responded in the Oct. 25 "60 Minutes" interview. "Nobody. No serious doc around the world."
Atlas shot back in a tweet.
"'NOBODY!' Ummm ... tell that to the 11,000+ (so far) epidemiologists and ID scientists from Harvard, Stanford, Oxford etc. who aligned with this. Boy, those Flat Earthers sure don't give up," he wrote.
WND reported last Wednesday the coronavirus adviser to Joe Biden who is advocating a national lockdown of four to six weeks argued against lockdowns in March in a Washington Post op-ed, advocating the unleash-the-healthy, protect-the-vulnerable strategy promoted by Atlas.
In his tweet last month responding to Biden, Atlas was referring to more than 11,000 experts who have signed the The Great Barrington Declaration since it was published in October.
As WND reported, the petition organized by professors Dr. Martin Kulldorff of Harvard, Dr. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford and Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya of Stanford states that as "infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection."
A recent study published in the British Medical Journal found the sweeping lockdowns lead to more COVID-19 deaths and a prolonging of the pandemic than if the government were to let herd immunity build up in young populations, the National Post of Canada reported.
The researchers did a reanalysis of data modeling used by the U.K. government as guidance for implementing blanket lockdowns.
They concluded that that while strict public health measures bring cases down, the number of deaths rise in the long run.
The authors described the lockdown model as a postponement of the pandemic.
The CDC in September issued new estimates that showed people under 50 years infected by COVID-19 have nearly a 100% survival rate. It broke down to a 99.997% survival rate for 0-19; 99.98% for ages 20-49; 99.5% for 50-69; and 94.6% for those over 70.
Those who died of coronavirus, according to the CDC, had an average of 2.6 comorbidities, meaning more than two chronic diseases along with COVID-19. Overall, the CDC says, just 6% of the people counted as COVID-19 deaths died of COVID-19 alone.
The World Health Organization said in early October it estimated 10% of the world's population has been infected, meaning that by the U.N. body's own account, the infection fatality rate for COVID-19 is only 0.13%. That's a little more than one-tenth of 1%, which the WHO says is the rate for the seasonal flu.
The WHO's estimate in March of a death rate of 3.4% sparked panic worldwide, fueling the catastrophic lockdowns.


wnd--2020-11-17--3 small business that deserve support this Black Friday

The `` Buy American '' strategy has always been more than walking into a store , looking at products on the shelves , and hoping that store offers made in the USA merchandise .
Many small companies make products in America that are n't on the shelves of big-box stores or on Amazon that deserve our consumer support .
So , I have featured three great small companies that I have recently learned about that are of particular interest .
1 .
At last !
Doormats that last , and they 're 100 % American made !
If you 're @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year or so because they wear out and leave a mess on your porch , the solution is to check out www.rugsthatfit.com for a personalized , designer , Infinity Custom Entry Mat .
Infinity Mats are one-of-a-kind and luxurious .
The letters , numbers , and designs are precision cut inlaid , NOT printed , so they do n't fade like printed or painted mats .
Infinity Mats are all-weather anti-bacterial mats that wo n't mold , mildew , shed , or shred and come with non-slip backing , so they stay in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In on 'Million MAGA March ' in drive-by cameo With over 30 years of experience , rugsthatfit.com makes full-size doormats designed to fit your entire single or double door at your home or business .
Say good-bye to undersized and pre-cut products .
At www.rugsthatfit.com , every mat is made from American-made materials right here in the USA .
Infinity Mats are anti-bacterial , lightweight , and low-profile , eliminating trip hazards and interference with door sweeps .
They also wo n't swell with water , maintaining that low profile .
Ordinary mats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which transfers by shoes and feet right into your home .
To increase the quality inside your home , get the right products for outside your home !
Get your doormats from www.rugsthatfit.com !
2 .
Jacob Bromwell , the oldest kitchenware and housewares maker in North America , is having its biggest sale that is happening now just in time for Black Friday , Cyber Monday , and on through Christmas .
Take a full 90 percent off on select items by visiting this special link !
Jacob Bromwell was founded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ manufacturing products in America for over 40 years before Abraham Lincoln was elected president .
At a time when almost all housewares companies have moved their production offshore , Jacob Bromwell still proudly manufactures nearly all of its products in the United States ( cork replacements for the flasks are n't made here due to sourcing issues ) .
Jacob Bromwell 's two U.S. manufacturing facilities in Indiana and Vermont support more than 100 American jobs .
Its products are sold at select specialty retailers throughout North America , Australia , Asia , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American company contributes to domestic employment and reduces America 's trade deficit with the rest of the world .
The supply is limited ( you can see on the website that two items are currently sold out - for now ) , so you 'll have to act fast to take advantage of this huge sale .
3 .
It 's no secret that personal safety is paramount these days .
If you 're outside jogging or going shopping ( especially at night ) , you should have a quality self-defense tool with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Safety Fist can help .
Safety Cat is made in the USA of aircraft aluminum and offers a potent self-defense weapon while also serving as a decorative keychain .
And it comes in five anodized colors .
Note : only the cat keychain from Safety Cat is made in the USA .
Safety First is a family-owned business providing high-quality self-defense products designed specifically for women .
But men can feel safer with it as well .
When you place your fingers into the eyes of the cat keychain , the face of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ palm of your hand .
Safety Cat will feel very comfortable in your hand , and you will be able to grasp it firmly .
Safety Cat keychains are made for striking at the eyes of your attacker or attacking any fleshy part of the body .
Studies have shown that your odds of escaping an attack are far greater if you fight back instead of worrying about retaliation for doing so .
There are foreign-made imitations to Safety Cat out there , so make sure you get the genuine American-made product by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ visit the Facebook page here .
The above three companies present an excellent opportunity to patronize American-owned small companies that employ fellow Americans , keeping profits , jobs , and tax revenue within our national borders .
Roger Simmermaker has written multiple books on buying American and trade policy since 1996 , and has been a frequent guest on Fox News , Fox Business Network , CNN , and MSNBC .
Roger has also been quoted or featured in The Wall Street Journal , USA Today , BusinessWeek , and The New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ His new book `` UNCONSTITUTIONAL : Our Founding Fathers Rejected FREE TRADE And So Should We , '' was printed in January 2020 .

The "Buy American" strategy has always been more than walking into a store, looking at products on the shelves, and hoping that store offers made in the USA merchandise.
Many small companies make products in America that aren't on the shelves of big-box stores or on Amazon that deserve our consumer support. So, I have featured three great small companies that I have recently learned about that are of particular interest.
1. At last! Doormats that last, and they're 100% American made! If you're tired of buying a new doormat every year or so because they wear out and leave a mess on your porch, the solution is to check out www.rugsthatfit.com for a personalized, designer, Infinity Custom Entry Mat.
Infinity Mats are one-of-a-kind and luxurious. The letters, numbers, and designs are precision cut inlaid, NOT printed, so they don't fade like printed or painted mats. Infinity Mats are all-weather anti-bacterial mats that won't mold, mildew, shed, or shred and come with non-slip backing, so they stay in place.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
With over 30 years of experience, rugsthatfit.com makes full-size doormats designed to fit your entire single or double door at your home or business. Say good-bye to undersized and pre-cut products. At www.rugsthatfit.com, every mat is made from American-made materials right here in the USA. Infinity Mats are anti-bacterial, lightweight, and low-profile, eliminating trip hazards and interference with door sweeps.
They also won't swell with water, maintaining that low profile. Ordinary mats hold bacteria, mold, and mildew, which transfers by shoes and feet right into your home. To increase the quality inside your home, get the right products for outside your home! Get your doormats from www.rugsthatfit.com!
2. Jacob Bromwell, the oldest kitchenware and housewares maker in North America, is having its biggest sale that is happening now just in time for Black Friday, Cyber Monday, and on through Christmas. Take a full 90 percent off on select items by visiting this special link!
Jacob Bromwell was founded in 1819, which means it was manufacturing products in America for over 40 years before Abraham Lincoln was elected president. At a time when almost all housewares companies have moved their production offshore, Jacob Bromwell still proudly manufactures nearly all of its products in the United States (cork replacements for the flasks aren't made here due to sourcing issues).
Jacob Bromwell's two U.S. manufacturing facilities in Indiana and Vermont support more than 100 American jobs. Its products are sold at select specialty retailers throughout North America, Australia, Asia, and Europe. That means this historic American company contributes to domestic employment and reduces America's trade deficit with the rest of the world.
The supply is limited (you can see on the website that two items are currently sold out - for now), so you'll have to act fast to take advantage of this huge sale.
3. It's no secret that personal safety is paramount these days. If you're outside jogging or going shopping (especially at night), you should have a quality self-defense tool with you.
Cat Safety Defense Keychains from Safety Fist can help. Safety Cat is made in the USA of aircraft aluminum and offers a potent self-defense weapon while also serving as a decorative keychain. And it comes in five anodized colors. Note: only the cat keychain from Safety Cat is made in the USA.
Safety First is a family-owned business providing high-quality self-defense products designed specifically for women. But men can feel safer with it as well.
When you place your fingers into the eyes of the cat keychain, the face of the cat will rest securely in the palm of your hand. Safety Cat will feel very comfortable in your hand, and you will be able to grasp it firmly. Safety Cat keychains are made for striking at the eyes of your attacker or attacking any fleshy part of the body.
Studies have shown that your odds of escaping an attack are far greater if you fight back instead of worrying about retaliation for doing so.
There are foreign-made imitations to Safety Cat out there, so make sure you get the genuine American-made product by visiting this website! You can also visit the Facebook page here.
The above three companies present an excellent opportunity to patronize American-owned small companies that employ fellow Americans, keeping profits, jobs, and tax revenue within our national borders.
About Roger Simmermaker
Roger Simmermaker has written multiple books on buying American and trade policy since 1996, and has been a frequent guest on Fox News, Fox Business Network, CNN, and MSNBC. Roger has also been quoted or featured in The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, BusinessWeek, and The New York Times, among many other publications. His new book " UNCONSTITUTIONAL: Our Founding Fathers Rejected FREE TRADE And So Should We," was printed in January 2020.


wnd--2020-11-17--Does election justice now lie with GOP state legislators?

We probably wo n't know for weeks whether or not any of President Trump 's legal challenges or recounts will succeed in reversing the pro-Biden edge in several states , but one has to admit there is something very wrong about this election .
Trump 's legal team is pursuing legal action on some fronts but ignoring some strategies on other fronts .
Let 's hope they know what they 're doing .
First of all , every swing state that accepted ballots after Nov. 3 needs to be challenged in court .
Indeed , while the Constitution does give @ @ @ @ @ @ @ procedures , state law can not violate federal law , and both the Constitution and various U.S. codes clearly state that Congress has the authority to set the `` date , '' not dates , for federal elections .
Moreover , Article II of the Constitution also clearly authorizes Congress to set a `` date '' and says the `` Day shall be the same throughout the United States . ''
The words date and day obviously mean one day .
While liberal judges in lower courts have ruled that these words do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ originalists who now dominated the Supreme Court .
Exploiting the COVID crises for political purposes , the Democrats have filed hundreds of lawsuits all over the country in order to completely shatter the single-day mandate thereby creating a mishmash of different deadlines for ballots to be returned .
This is clearly unconstitutional , and the Trump team should not only challenge this in Pennsylvania – as they are – but should file a case arguing that ALL states that allowed ballots to be returned or postmarked after the official Election Day , be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , many of the states involved with election challenges are not in compliance with the National Voters Registration Act , which requires states to purge their voter database of inactive voters , dead voters and those who moved out of state .
Many states have hundreds of thousands of such voters , and yet these illegal voters were sent ballots , thus creating the conditions for massive vote fraud .
Just three months ago , Judicial Watch released a study showing that `` 353 U.S. counties had 1.8 million more registered voters than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the registration rates of those counties exceed 100 % of eligible voters . ''
States that have refused to keep their voter database in compliance with federal law include Michigan , Pennsylvania , North Carolina , Arizona and Georgia , all which happen to be contested states with a high degree of voting irregularities .
TRENDING : President Trump drops In on 'Million MAGA March ' in drive-by cameo If a state purposely refused to comply with the National Voter Registration Act , then the entire vote count in such states should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be for a judge to order the purging of these illegal voters from their databases and then hold a recount with attorneys from both camps overseeing the recount .
However , so far I have not seen any challenges based on state non-compliance with the NVRA .
Then there 's the illegal-alien vote .
According to an MIT study , we now have at least 22 million illegal aliens in the USA .
And , according to several studies , between 6 % and 13 % are voting in presidential elections .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ years old , so we have to assume the percentage of illegal-alien voting may be even higher , especially since leftist groups funded by George Sorors have been registering `` immigrants '' for years without regard to citizenship .
It is believed that between 3 and 4 million illegals are now voting in our national elections .
We do know that in Arizona , for example , there are at least 400,000 illegal aliens and know that anywhere from 12,000 to 52,000 of them are voting .
The Trump campaign can expose this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all the Arizona courts and used for sending out jury notices .
Those jury notices include a box that can be checked allowing one to be exempt from jury duty if they are not a citizen .
We know from past experience that thousands of non-citizens will check this box .
The Trump campaign should demand to see these lists or ask a judge to release them .
If not , take that to the Supreme Court as well .
This could involve tens of thousands of illegal voters .
We now have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that only legal citizens can vote , and the Trump team should make this an issue now or this will haunt our elections for years to come .
So far , they have n't touched this issue .
But not only should Trump 's legal team be checking for illegal aliens in the course of the various state recounts , but also for dead voters and those who moved out of state .
There are databases that exist for all these groups that can easily be obtained by his legal team .
Finally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the `` Hammer '' software , which has the ability to change voting totals during a data transfer .
Credible people such as attorney Sydney Powell , Judicial Watch Chairman Tom Fitton and retired Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney , believe it may have been used in the key swing states .
The source for this allegation is a CIA whistleblower named Dennis Montgomery , who testified before Congress about how Obama and Biden used this software to win Florida in the 2012 presidential election .
And yes , there is some evidence that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually occurred .
Indeed , a statistical analysis of the election data show Republicans performing incredibly well in some swing states down ticket , but , strangely , the vote count for Trump plummets .
The idea the Republicans would have the highest voter turnout in history and vote for everyone from dog catcher to Congress , but then not cast a vote for Trump , flies in the face of everything we know about elections , not to mention Trump 's popularity with Republicans .
This , I believe , is evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ key swing states and moved votes from the Trump to the Biden column , but did n't bother altering the down ticket races .
If this can be proven , it will go down in history as the largest election fraud ever , and people will be sent to prison .
However , the Trump team needs to bring in cyber-hacking experts and gain access to some state datebases in order to prove this occurred .
They may have to convince a judge to grant them such access .
And that 's one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Most courts , and certainly not the Supreme Court , will not entertain cases unless there is concrete evidence of fraud .
While I 'm convinced the Trump team has solid evidence proving that thousands of dead and out-of-state voters voting illegally , that may not be enough to change the election results .
The fraud may be much more extensive than that , but to prove the existence of a nationwide conspiracy to steal the election via a sophisticated software program , the court will demand evidence that will be difficult to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump team access to state voter databases .
It 's difficult to prove fraud unless the court first acts , but they wo n't act until you prove fraud .
It 's a big circle .
If that occurs and the judicial branch does not cooperate with uncovering this massive fraud , and the various state recounts and audits fail to uncover the bulk of the fraud , then the Trump grassroots movement needs to switch gears and create a massive pressure campaign to persuade state legislators to intervene .
Indeed , state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reject electors chosen in fraudulent elections .
The liberals claim electors must vote for Biden if the popular vote for that state favors him , but they 're wrong ; the Constitution clearly gives the legislators the power to seat a different group of electors who will vote for Trump .
This should be done in Michigan , Pennsylvania , Arizona and Georgia at a minimum , all of which have legislatures controlled by the GOP .
And they will have good cause for doing this .
They can point to the numerous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigations and argue that the courts refused to accept cases that would expose this fraud .
Moreover , the legislators can argue that Big Tech companies illegally meddled in the election by blocking many GOP ads and posts and refusing to air negative stories about Joe Biden , such as his complicity in selling access to our No .
1 adversary , China , in exchange for lucrative cash cow deals that enriched his family .
The first thing these state legislators must do is announce that they will not seat the official @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resolved and demand an audit of the entire state vote .
If the liberals wo n't agree to that – and they wo n't – then the legislators should exercise their constitutional duty and reject the Biden electors .
In fact , I would argue they are not doing their constitutional duty if they recognize electors chosen as a result of a fraudulent election .
As the chairman of the FEC , Trey Trainor , stated , `` I do believe there is fraud in these places – if the law is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
Indeed , it is clear the Democrats are trying to `` run out the clock , '' since all states must certify their vote count by Dec. 8 .
That 's only a few weeks away and may not be enough time for the Trump team to prove the existence of a well-planned effort to steal the election .
And it may not even be enough time to weed out the hundreds of thousands of ilegal votes we know were cast .
By Dec. 14 , the state electors must cast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America will rest in the hands of the GOP majorities controlling the states of Michigan , Arizona , Pennsylvania and Georgia .
If they do n't have the guts to replace the Biden electors with Trump electors , Biden becomes president , and this vast vote-stealing operation will haunt us for every election thereafter .
There has never been so much fraud in an American election in our history , and if we do n't resolve this right now , we will pay a dear price for our inaction .
Steve Baldwin was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Policy , 2001-2009 , and is a former member of the California State Assembly .

By Steve Baldwin
We probably won't know for weeks whether or not any of President Trump's legal challenges or recounts will succeed in reversing the pro-Biden edge in several states, but one has to admit there is something very wrong about this election. Trump's legal team is pursuing legal action on some fronts but ignoring some strategies on other fronts. Let's hope they know what they're doing.
First of all, every swing state that accepted ballots after Nov. 3 needs to be challenged in court. Indeed, while the Constitution does give the states the authority to establish voting procedures, state law cannot violate federal law, and both the Constitution and various U.S. codes clearly state that Congress has the authority to set the "date," not dates, for federal elections. Moreover, Article II of the Constitution also clearly authorizes Congress to set a "date" and says the "Day shall be the same throughout the United States." The words date and day obviously mean one day. While liberal judges in lower courts have ruled that these words don't matter, it should to the originalists who now dominated the Supreme Court.
Exploiting the COVID crises for political purposes, the Democrats have filed hundreds of lawsuits all over the country in order to completely shatter the single-day mandate thereby creating a mishmash of different deadlines for ballots to be returned. This is clearly unconstitutional, and the Trump team should not only challenge this in Pennsylvania – as they are – but should file a case arguing that ALL states that allowed ballots to be returned or postmarked after the official Election Day, be ordered to reject those ballots.
Secondly, many of the states involved with election challenges are not in compliance with the National Voters Registration Act, which requires states to purge their voter database of inactive voters, dead voters and those who moved out of state. Many states have hundreds of thousands of such voters, and yet these illegal voters were sent ballots, thus creating the conditions for massive vote fraud. Just three months ago, Judicial Watch released a study showing that "353 U.S. counties had 1.8 million more registered voters than eligible voting-age citizens. In other words, the registration rates of those counties exceed 100% of eligible voters." States that have refused to keep their voter database in compliance with federal law include Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Arizona and Georgia, all which happen to be contested states with a high degree of voting irregularities.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
If a state purposely refused to comply with the National Voter Registration Act, then the entire vote count in such states should be challenged in court. The remedy would be for a judge to order the purging of these illegal voters from their databases and then hold a recount with attorneys from both camps overseeing the recount. However, so far I have not seen any challenges based on state non-compliance with the NVRA.
Then there's the illegal-alien vote. According to an MIT study, we now have at least 22 million illegal aliens in the USA. And, according to several studies, between 6% and 13% are voting in presidential elections. But those studies are at least 6 years old, so we have to assume the percentage of illegal-alien voting may be even higher, especially since leftist groups funded by George Sorors have been registering "immigrants" for years without regard to citizenship. It is believed that between 3 and 4 million illegals are now voting in our national elections.
We do know that in Arizona, for example, there are at least 400,000 illegal aliens and know that anywhere from 12,000 to 52,000 of them are voting. The Trump campaign can expose this by obtaining the voter database maintained by all the Arizona courts and used for sending out jury notices. Those jury notices include a box that can be checked allowing one to be exempt from jury duty if they are not a citizen. We know from past experience that thousands of non-citizens will check this box.
The Trump campaign should demand to see these lists or ask a judge to release them. If not, take that to the Supreme Court as well. This could involve tens of thousands of illegal voters. We now have a Supreme Court sympathetic to the idea that only legal citizens can vote, and the Trump team should make this an issue now or this will haunt our elections for years to come. So far, they haven't touched this issue. But not only should Trump's legal team be checking for illegal aliens in the course of the various state recounts, but also for dead voters and those who moved out of state. There are databases that exist for all these groups that can easily be obtained by his legal team.
Finally, we've all heard stories about the "Hammer" software, which has the ability to change voting totals during a data transfer. Credible people such as attorney Sydney Powell, Judicial Watch Chairman Tom Fitton and retired Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney, believe it may have been used in the key swing states. The source for this allegation is a CIA whistleblower named Dennis Montgomery, who testified before Congress about how Obama and Biden used this software to win Florida in the 2012 presidential election.
And yes, there is some evidence that a nationwide conspiracy to steal the election actually occurred. Indeed, a statistical analysis of the election data show Republicans performing incredibly well in some swing states down ticket, but, strangely, the vote count for Trump plummets. The idea the Republicans would have the highest voter turnout in history and vote for everyone from dog catcher to Congress, but then not cast a vote for Trump, flies in the face of everything we know about elections, not to mention Trump's popularity with Republicans. This, I believe, is evidence that someone hacked into the system in key swing states and moved votes from the Trump to the Biden column, but didn't bother altering the down ticket races.
If this can be proven, it will go down in history as the largest election fraud ever, and people will be sent to prison. However, the Trump team needs to bring in cyber-hacking experts and gain access to some state datebases in order to prove this occurred. They may have to convince a judge to grant them such access.
And that's one of the dilemmas we now face. Most courts, and certainly not the Supreme Court, will not entertain cases unless there is concrete evidence of fraud. While I'm convinced the Trump team has solid evidence proving that thousands of dead and out-of-state voters voting illegally, that may not be enough to change the election results. The fraud may be much more extensive than that, but to prove the existence of a nationwide conspiracy to steal the election via a sophisticated software program, the court will demand evidence that will be difficult to obtain without a court order giving the Trump team access to state voter databases. It's difficult to prove fraud unless the court first acts, but they won't act until you prove fraud. It's a big circle.
If that occurs and the judicial branch does not cooperate with uncovering this massive fraud, and the various state recounts and audits fail to uncover the bulk of the fraud, then the Trump grassroots movement needs to switch gears and create a massive pressure campaign to persuade state legislators to intervene. Indeed, state legislators actually have the constitutional right to reject electors chosen in fraudulent elections. The liberals claim electors must vote for Biden if the popular vote for that state favors him, but they're wrong; the Constitution clearly gives the legislators the power to seat a different group of electors who will vote for Trump. This should be done in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona and Georgia at a minimum, all of which have legislatures controlled by the GOP.
And they will have good cause for doing this. They can point to the numerous Democratic lawsuits attempting to obstruct voter fraud investigations and argue that the courts refused to accept cases that would expose this fraud. Moreover, the legislators can argue that Big Tech companies illegally meddled in the election by blocking many GOP ads and posts and refusing to air negative stories about Joe Biden, such as his complicity in selling access to our No. 1 adversary, China, in exchange for lucrative cash cow deals that enriched his family.
The first thing these state legislators must do is announce that they will not seat the official electors until every vote fraud allegation is resolved and demand an audit of the entire state vote. If the liberals won't agree to that – and they won't – then the legislators should exercise their constitutional duty and reject the Biden electors. In fact, I would argue they are not doing their constitutional duty if they recognize electors chosen as a result of a fraudulent election. As the chairman of the FEC, Trey Trainor, stated, "I do believe there is fraud in these places – if the law is not followed it makes this an illegitimate election."
Indeed, it is clear the Democrats are trying to "run out the clock," since all states must certify their vote count by Dec. 8. That's only a few weeks away and may not be enough time for the Trump team to prove the existence of a well-planned effort to steal the election. And it may not even be enough time to weed out the hundreds of thousands of ilegal votes we know were cast.
By Dec. 14, the state electors must cast their ballots, so the fate of America will rest in the hands of the GOP majorities controlling the states of Michigan, Arizona, Pennsylvania and Georgia. If they don't have the guts to replace the Biden electors with Trump electors, Biden becomes president, and this vast vote-stealing operation will haunt us for every election thereafter.
There has never been so much fraud in an American election in our history, and if we don't resolve this right now, we will pay a dear price for our inaction.
Steve Baldwin was executive director for the Council for National Policy, 2001-2009, and is a former member of the California State Assembly.


wnd--2020-11-17--Georgia 'finds' 2,600 uncounted votes

Georgia 'finds' 2,600 uncounted votes

( WASHINGTON EXAMINER ) -- ATLANTA — A hand recount of the presidential race in Georgia 's closely watched election @ @ @ @ @ previously uncounted votes in one county .
`` The reason you do an audit is @ @ @ @ @ thing , '' Gabriel Sterling , who oversaw the implementation of the new election system @ @ @ @ @ 's office , said Monday night .
President Trump could see a gain of about @ @ @ @ @ newly discovered ballots in Floyd County .

(WASHINGTON EXAMINER) -- ATLANTA — A hand recount of the presidential race in Georgia's closely watched election audit has turned up 2,600 previously uncounted votes in one county.
"The reason you do an audit is to find this kind of thing," Gabriel Sterling, who oversaw the implementation of the new election system for the secretary of state's office, said Monday night.
President Trump could see a gain of about 800 net votes from the newly discovered ballots in Floyd County.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-11-17--Brownback warns China using tech to suppress religious people

( WASHINGTON EXAMINER ) -- Chinese officials are developing high-tech mechanisms to monitor and suppress religious believers as an alternative @ @ @ @ @ according to a senior United States diplomat .
“ The big one that really concerns @ @ @ @ @ advanced technologies , ” Ambassador Sam Brownback , the State Department ’ s lead official @ @ @ @ @ , told the Washington Examiner .
“ So they 'll have less people locked up @ @ @ @ @ more people under oppression by uses of cameras and artificial intelligence and social credit systems @ @ @ @ @ controlling you.
” Those tactics might help Beijing obscure the repression targeting minorities such as @ @ @ @ @ , where the regime has established mass detention facilities that U.S. officials liken to the @ @ @ @ @ Nazi Germany .
Brownback is emphasizing , through an international ministerial on religious freedom , @ @ @ @ @ as severe as it is invisible .

(WASHINGTON EXAMINER) -- Chinese officials are developing high-tech mechanisms to monitor and suppress religious believers as an alternative to physical detention camps, according to a senior United States diplomat.
“The big one that really concerns me is their use of advanced technologies,” Ambassador Sam Brownback, the State Department’s lead official for international religious liberty issues, told the Washington Examiner. “So they'll have less people locked up probably in the future but more people under oppression by uses of cameras and artificial intelligence and social credit systems, where they will be controlling you.”
Those tactics might help Beijing obscure the repression targeting minorities such as the Uighur Muslims of Xinjiang, where the regime has established mass detention facilities that U.S. officials liken to the “concentration camps” of Nazi Germany. Brownback is emphasizing, through an international ministerial on religious freedom, that the repression will be as severe as it is invisible.
Read the full story ›