theblaze--2020-11-10--Report: MSNBC contributor fired for failing to disclose he was a Biden speechwriter

Report : MSNBC contributor fired for failing to disclose he was a Biden speechwriter He probably should 've mentioned he @ @ @ @ @ analyzing

MSNBC contributor and presidential historian Jon Meacham was reportedly fired as a paid contributor by MSNBC after failing to disclose that he was a speechwriter for former Vice President Joe Biden before appearing on TV to comment favorably on Biden's victory speech — which he apparently had a hand in writing.
The New York Times reported Monday that Meacham assisted Biden with the victory speech he delivered Saturday night from Wilmington, Delaware. According to the Times, Meacham, a longtime friend of Biden, has previously written drafts of speeches for him and edited others, including Biden's acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention earlier this year.
A Biden spokesman told the Times that the former vice president consulted many people about the content of his speech.
"President-elect Joe Biden wrote the speech he delivered to the American people on Saturday night, which laid out his vision for uniting and healing the nation," the spokesman said. "Given the significance of the speech, he consulted a number of important and diverse voices as part of his writing process, as he often does."
Meacham, who endorsed Biden in March and was a featured speaker at the Democratic convention over the summer, had been a paid contributor at MSNBC but as of Monday is no longer, the Times reports:
During the Trump years, Mr. Meacham had also been a regular presence on MSNBC and NBC News broadcasts. But as of Monday, he was not a paid contributor at the network, according to two people familiar with the decision. Mr. Meacham was expected to return to NBC as an unpaid guest and could resume his paid role next year, possibly after the inauguration, the people said. NBC declined to comment.
He even appeared on MSNBC on Saturday and was asked to give his thoughts on Biden's speech. He didn't mention that he wrote at least some of it.
Indeed, Mr. Meacham appeared on MSNBC before and after Mr. Biden's acceptance speech on Saturday. About half an hour after Mr. Biden had concluded, the anchor Brian Williams introduced Mr. Meacham by saying, "I'm not the historian that you are, and I don't have the Pulitzer that you do, but do you concur that is the way we are used to hearing from our presidents?"
"Absolutely," Mr. Meacham responded, without disclosing that he had been involved in the writing of the speech.
Meacham went on to characterize Biden's rhetoric as "poetic."
According to Mediaite, Meacham appeared on MSNBC an additional three times since Saturday without disclosing he was a speechwriter for Biden. During these appearances he was asked to analyze Biden's speech, remarking favorably on Biden.
"You know, Vice President Biden, I think, represents a kind of tonic for a toxic politics," Meacham told MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace. "He's not perfect. There are vices, but there are a lot of virtues, too."


theblaze--2020-11-10--Gwinnett County, Georgia, officials explain what happened regarding the 'software glitch' that delay

Gwinnett County, Georgia, officials explain what happened regarding the 'software glitch' that delayed counting of thousands of absentee ballots

Gwinnett County , Georgia , officials explain what happened regarding the 'software glitch ' that delayed counting of thousands of @ @ @ @ @ nightmare scenario is finally over

An election night nightmare scenario is finally over in Gwinnett County, Georgia, a suburban part of Atlanta where several tech problems last week caused a delay in ballot-counting in the middle of a contentious election. Nearly a week after the election, all of the votes, 416,458 to be precise, have been counted and the county results of the election have been certified.
Biden holds a mere 12,000-vote lead over Trump in Georgia, so when reports emerged that a "software glitch" in Gwinnett County prevented up to "80,000 absentee ballots" from being counted on the night of the election, voters nationwide were understandably concerned about the integrity of the process.
TheBlaze reached out to Gwinnett County for clarification on what happened, and county communications director Joe Sorenson explained the initial problems last Tuesday were caused by the machines that scan absentee ballots.
Georgia elections law allows county officials to begin scanning absentee and mail-in ballots on Oct. 19, but the county is not allowed to tabulate the results until Election Day. Going into election night, the county had prepared 118,000 received mail-in ballots for processing. Officials said Gwinnett County is unique in Georgia because each ballot is printed on two pages, front and back, one in English and another in Spanish. The ballots are processed in batches. Each batch can contain up to 50 pages, or 25 ballots.
"Absentee ballots are filled out by hand, and if a ballot is marked clearly, it will run through the scanner without a problem," Sorenson also told WXIA-TV in Atlanta. "If there's a problem with how the ballot was filled out — for example, a voter placed a check mark instead of filling in the circle, didn't completely fill in the circle, or voted for more candidates than allowed in a race — the scanning software will send the ballot to the adjudication module."
According to Sorenson, when a ballot is adjudicated because the scanning software could not read it, a three-person panel consisting of one Democrat, one Republican, and an election official will review the ballot to determine the intent of the voter. Say a voter was supposed to fill in a circle but instead marked an "X" for Donald Trump. The panel would look at the ballot and determine the voter meant to vote for Trump. The flagged ballot would be marked as adjudicated and the vote would be pushed forward to be counted.
Sorenson told TheBlaze that leading up to the election, Gwinnett County officials prepared 5,900 batches of ballots to be scanned and counted. About half of these batches, 2,700, were scanned, adjudicated, counted, and pushed forward Tuesday night. However, the software rejected 3,200 batches of ballots, showing that they still needed to go through the adjudication process even though they already had done so.
Because the ballots are scanned in batches, even if only one ballot needed to be reviewed, the entire batch could not be processed. So anywhere from 3,200 individual ballots to approximately 80,000 (every ballot in all 3,200 batches) needed to be reviewed and re-adjudicated before they could be counted.
When election officials realized this, they immediately contacted the Georgia secretary of state's office to inform them of the problem. They also contacted Dominion, the software company that makes the voting machines used by the county, for technical support. Given the unknown number of ballots affected, the Board of Voter Registrations and Elections decided to push the batches through Tuesday night knowing that many ballots would have to be re-adjudicated and the unofficial election results would likely change before they were made available to the public.
Sorenson directed TheBlaze to the Gwinnett County website, where officials published updates on the vote counting process beginning on Election Day and continuing until the process was complete to maintain transparency with voters.
On the day after the election, the county began to re-adjudicate the 3,200 batches of absentee ballots and announced the results would not be tallied and published until this process was complete. Recall that the adjudication process requires one Democrat, one Republican, and one election official to review the problem ballots. There is no evidence or indication that absentee votes received by Gwinnett County were illegally changed between Election Day and when the results were finally certified.
On the morning of Friday, Nov. 5, the re-adjudication process was completed. The only outstanding votes to count were absentee by mail ballots awaiting issues with their signatures to be resolved by a Nov. 6 deadline, provisional ballots, and overseas and military ballots. These remaining ballot issues are typical of every election year.
It is important to understand that the "results" reported by the media on election night everywhere in the country are not the final results certified by local governments to state governments across the nation. Official, certified election results are usually not available until a few days after the election. Georgia state law requires the secretary of state to certify the results of any election no later than 5:00 p.m. on the 17th day following said election. In other words, there is an expectation built into state law that it may take a little more than two weeks to have official election results finalized.
Gwinnett County certified the results of the election on Monday, Nov. 9, after all of the votes were counted. Joe Biden carried Gwinnett County with 58.39% of the vote, earning 241,827 votes. Donald Trump earned 166,413 votes, 40.18%. Turnout in this suburb was very high with 416,458 voters of 581,467 registered voters (71.62%) casting their ballots.


theblaze--2020-11-10--Nancy Pelosi refuses to denounce socialism during press conference

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) refused to denounce socialism during a recent press conference , according to Fox News .
The apparent refusal comes amid Pelosi 's bid for another term as speaker of the House .
What are the details ?
The outlet reported that during a Friday press conference , the network requested comment from Pelosi `` several times , '' including `` multiple phone calls to Pelosi 's office , '' regarding inquiries as to whether the long-serving Democrat opposes socialism and whether she would permit any self-identifying socialists elected in the Democratic caucus to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` During a press conference on Friday , Pelosi acknowledged that there was a 'difference of opinion ' among members of her caucus as a rift between moderates and progressives appears to have expanded following the 2020 election , '' the outlet wrote , pointing out that in 2019 , Pelosi had no problem insisting that socialism was `` not the view '' of the Democratic Party .
In her remarks , Pelosi said , `` Our caucus has its differences .
I would not want to lead in a caucus that was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , lockstep caucus .
That 's called Republicans .
We are the Democratic Party , and we have several exuberances in our midst , and that is representative of the districts that people come to Congress to serve , and we respect that . ''
Fox pointed out that self-identified `` democratic socialists '' have been growing in the mainstream , including Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-N.Y ) .
`` The subject of socialism is apparently becoming a growing concern among Democrats behind closed doors , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaked recording from a Democratic caucus call showed Rep. Abigail Spanberger , D-Va. , suggesting that socialism , in addition to 'defund the police ' rhetoric , were to blame for several congressional defeats as their GOP opponents used the ideology as a bludgeon . ''
In the recording in question , Spanberger can be heard saying , `` We want to talk about funding social services , and ensuring good engagement in community policing , let 's talk about what we are for .
And we need to not ever use the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again .
Because while people think it does n't matter , it does matter .
And we lost good members because of it . ''
Sen. Lindsay Graham ( R-S.C. ) on Tuesday shared the Fox News story and wrote , `` How hard is it to renounce socialism if you really do n't believe in it ?
The reason she ca n't renounce it is because the mainstream of her party — deep in their soul — backs socialism . ''
Ocasio-Cortez is reported to have insisted that Democrats and former Vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ball in attempting to sway Latino voters in Florida .
President Donald Trump 's use of the term `` socialist '' when describing former Vice President Joe Biden 's agenda is also what could have cost the Democratic candidate significant Latino votes in Florida after Trump was successfully able to paint the Democratic candidate as a socialist .

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) refused to denounce socialism during a recent press conference, according to Fox News.
The apparent refusal comes amid Pelosi's bid for another term as speaker of the House.
What are the details?
The outlet reported that during a Friday press conference, the network requested comment from Pelosi "several times," including "multiple phone calls to Pelosi's office," regarding inquiries as to whether the long-serving Democrat opposes socialism and whether she would permit any self-identifying socialists elected in the Democratic caucus to hold leadership positions in the House.
"During a press conference on Friday, Pelosi acknowledged that there was a 'difference of opinion' among members of her caucus as a rift between moderates and progressives appears to have expanded following the 2020 election," the outlet wrote, pointing out that in 2019, Pelosi had no problem insisting that socialism was "not the view" of the Democratic Party.
In her remarks, Pelosi said, "Our caucus has its differences. I would not want to lead in a caucus that was a rubber stamp, a rubber stamp, lockstep caucus. That's called Republicans. We are the Democratic Party, and we have several exuberances in our midst, and that is representative of the districts that people come to Congress to serve, and we respect that."
Fox pointed out that self-identified "democratic socialists" have been growing in the mainstream, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y).
"The subject of socialism is apparently becoming a growing concern among Democrats behind closed doors," the outlet added. "A leaked recording from a Democratic caucus call showed Rep. Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., suggesting that socialism, in addition to 'defund the police' rhetoric, were to blame for several congressional defeats as their GOP opponents used the ideology as a bludgeon."
In the recording in question, Spanberger can be heard saying, "We want to talk about funding social services, and ensuring good engagement in community policing, let's talk about what we are for. And we need to not ever use the words 'socialist' or 'socialism' ever again. Because while people think it doesn't matter, it does matter. And we lost good members because of it."
Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) on Tuesday shared the Fox News story and wrote, "How hard is it to renounce socialism if you really don't believe in it? The reason she can't renounce it is because the mainstream of her party — deep in their soul — backs socialism."
In related news ...
Ocasio-Cortez is reported to have insisted that Democrats and former Vice President Joe Biden's presidential campaign dropped the ball in attempting to sway Latino voters in Florida.
President Donald Trump's use of the term "socialist" when describing former Vice President Joe Biden's agenda is also what could have cost the Democratic candidate significant Latino votes in Florida after Trump was successfully able to paint the Democratic candidate as a socialist.


theblaze--2020-11-10--Moderate Democratic lawmaker dares to 'talk back' to AOC and the Squad: Your ideas are 'unworkable a

Moderate Democratic lawmaker dares to 'talk back' to AOC and the Squad: Your ideas are 'unworkable and extremely unpopular'

Moderate Democratic lawmaker dares to 'talk back ' to AOC and the Squad : Your ideas are 'unworkable and extremely @ @

Democratic socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) really does not appreciate that many members of her party — from moderates to liberals who still think straight-up socialism is a losing issue — are blasting the agenda she and her "Squad" have pushed for Democrats' overall poor showing in the 2020 elections.
The congresswoman has tried to lay the blame at the feet of moderates and their campaign failures.
One moderate Democrat is daring to call her out and saying she's not a team player and that her ideas are "unworkable and extremely unpopular."
What happened?
Beyond the fight for the White House, Democrats were projected to expand their majority in the U.S. House, quite possibly flip the majority of the U.S. Senate, and flip multiple state legislative chambers.
They failed on all counts.
Following last week's election results, Democrats blamed anti-police and pro-socialism messaging from far-left members for their failures.
Ocasio-Cortez took exception to those claims and instead blamed the party's losses on GOP smears connecting Democrats to socialism and "defund the police" movements and on moderate Democrats' poor campaigning efforts that allowed Republican charges to stick.
In an interview with the New York Times during which she said she feels like her party thinks she's the "enemy," the congresswoman specifically called out moderate Democratic Rep. Conor Lamb (Pa.) for "criminal" political "malpractice." She blasted Lamb for spending only $2,000 on Facebook the week before the election as an example of how moderate Democrats' poor campaigning was what cost her party in 2020 and not radicals like her and her fellow liberal progressives.
Some of this is criminal. It's malpractice. Conor Lamb spent $2,000 on Facebook the week before the election. I don't think anybody who is not on the internet in a real way in the Year of our Lord 2020 and loses an election can blame anyone else when you're not even really on the internet.
But there's one problem in Ocasio-Cortez's logic: Lamb won re-election.
And now the congressman is speaking out and, as HotAir's John Sexton noted, daring to do what other members of his party have refused to do: "talk back to AOC."
How did Lamb respond?
The Times interviewed Lamb after his victory and noted that he is "one of those moderates who believes the left is costing Democrats in key areas" and that he believes a Biden administration will "govern as it had campaigned: with progressives at arm's length."
Lamb told the Times that what went wrong for House Democrats was the message being pushed by progressives (and self-avowed socialists). Their "unrealistic" calls for a far-left agenda alienated a lot of voters, Lamb said.
"I'm giving you an honest account of what I'm hearing from my own constituents, which is that they are extremely frustrated by the message of defunding the police and banning fracking," he told the Times. "And I, as a Democrat, am just as frustrated. Because those things aren't just unpopular, they're completely unrealistic, and they aren't going to happen."
The green agenda pushed by people like Ocasio-Cortez "isn't something to joke around about," Lamb added.
According to Lamb, the progressive policies and rhetoric have "gone way too far." Instead, he said, the Democrats' messaging "needs to be dialed back" and "rooted in common sense, in reality."
He urged that the party needs to have a "united" message when it comes to law enforcement and avoid the rabid calls to "defund the police." According to Lamb, when he and fellow House Democrats were working on a police reform bill, its wasn't the Squad that was doing the work.
"The people that I was on the phone with, when we were passing [the police reform bill] at the time, were not the freshmen members who are criticizing us today," he told the Times.
Lamb warned that the policies Ocasio-Cortez and her fellow radicals have been pushing "are unworkable and extremely unpopular."
He added that "people are not clamoring for" single-payer health insurance or the Green New Deal, noting that those issues separate a winner from a loser in a moderate district like his.
Asked about Ocasio-Cortez's specific comments about him and his campaign, Lamb responded, "She doesn't have any idea how we ran our campaign, or what we spent."
He went on to blast her for not being a "team player" and for pushing a damaging agenda.
But I got to say, as you've talked a lot about Representative Ocasio-Cortez, she can put her name behind stuff and that's I guess courageous, but when it's a damaging idea or bad policy, like her tweeting out that fracking is bad in the middle of a presidential debate when we're trying to win western Pennsylvania — that's not being anything like a team player. And it's honestly giving a false and ineffective promise to people that makes it very difficult to win the areas where President Trump is most popular in campaigns.
And he really didn't like that the socialist congresswoman was going after moderates.
I have to be honest and say that I was surprised about the whole interview on the day when Vice President and now President-Elect Biden was having the election called for him. I just don't think it was a day for people to be sniping at other members, especially in districts that are so different from their own.
I respect her and how hard she works. And what she did in an extremely low-turnout Democratic primary. But the fact is that in general elections in these districts — particularly in the ones where President Trump himself campaigns over and over and over again, and attacks members within their own Republican-leaning districts, like me and Representative Slotkin and Representative Spanberger — it's the message that matters. It's not a question of door knocking, or Facebook. It matters what policies you stand for, and which ones you don't. And that is all that we are trying to say.
He also offered a little reminder to the Squad types: "The American people just showed us in massive numbers, generally, which side of these issues that they are on. They sent us a Republican Senate and a Democratic president."


theblaze--2020-11-10--Whoopi Goldberg goes off on 'The View,' tells Republicans, Trump supporters to 'suck it up': 'How da

Whoopi Goldberg goes off on 'The View,' tells Republicans, Trump supporters to 'suck it up': 'How dare you question' election results?

Whoopi Goldberg goes off on 'The View , ' tells Republicans , Trump supporters to 'suck it up ' : @ @ @ @ @ election results ?

Whoopi Goldberg, co-host on "The View," said that Republicans and conservatives should "suck it up" and accept the preliminary results of the 2020 presidential election — and even cited how "gracious" former secretary of state and failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was in 2016 when she lost the election to President Donald Trump.
At the time of this reporting, Trump has refused to concede to Joe Biden and has said that he will be filing various lawsuits against several states' election results in order to "ensure election laws are fully upheld and the rightful winner is seated."
What are the details?
Goldberg opened Monday's airing of the long-running daytime TV show by singing Sam Cooke's "A Change Is Gonna Come."
Later during one of the segments on the 2020 presidential election, Goldberg accused Trump supporters of overreacting in their desire for a recount in various states across the country, saying that they need to "suck it up" and accept the preliminary results showing a victory for former Vice President Joe Biden.
"Now, I just want to bring something up right now," she said. "I want to say to all those people who don't believe that Americans actually got out and voted, let me say this to you: When you knew who was elected four years ago, Hillary Clinton didn't say 'Hey, wait a minute, this doesn't feel right, stop the count.' She didn't say, 'This isn't right, I'm not going for it.' She didn't say any of that. So, all of you, suck it up. Suck it up like we sucked it up."
She continued, "And if you're not sure that you're comfortable with Joe Biden, do what we did: Find things and then take it to the law and if the law says it's something to look at, look at it. But from now on, suck it up."
Goldberg added, "Grow the pair for [Trump] that he can't grow for himself, because this is ridiculous, you're not sure that he won. You're bringing into question all these Americans who voted legally, came out and stood and voted. How dare you question it?"
What else?
It seems fair to point out that many Democrats lost their minds and went into meltdown mode following Trump's 2016 election — and while former Democratic nominee Clinton did concede after the 2016 election results, she repeatedly obsessed over the loss for months and months following the Nov. 2016 shutout.
In the days following the 2016 presidential election, demonstrations and riots broke out across the country.
The New York Times reported, "On campuses nationwide, students marched against Mr. Trump with signs bearing slogans like 'Not my president,' and protesters in Oakland, Calif., smashed windows and set fire to garbage bins. On Wednesday night, thousands of people protested in several cities, including Chicago, Philadelphia, Seattle and New York, where demonstrators converged in Midtown Manhattan in front of Trump Tower, the home of the president-elect."
Some voters even suggested that the Electoral College should refuse to elect Trump at the time.
In 2017, Clinton herself wrote a book titled "What Happened," which pondered the many failures on her part that led to the stunning defeat. In the book, she admitted to going to the woods nearby her New York home and screaming in horror. That same year, she also admitted that she'd watch news coverage on Trump's policymaking and international dealings and ask herself what she'd do instead, if she were president.
"Losing is my biggest regret," she told NPR at the time. "And losing to someone who was not qualified and did not have the experience or the temperament to be president of the United States. That is my biggest regret."
That same year, the former secretary of state also said that she wouldn't rule out contesting the legitimacy of the 2016 election.
According to a Politico report, she "refused to rule out challenging the legitimacy of last year's presidential election ... though she said such a move would be unprecedented and legally questionable."
"I don't know if there's any legal constitutional way to do that. I think you can raise questions," Clinton told NPR's Terry Gross during an interview.
Following her interview with Gross, a Clinton spokesperson clarified the former secretary of state's remark, saying, "Secretary Clinton has said repeatedly the results of the election are over but we have to learn what happened. I would hope anyone in America concerned about the integrity of our democracy would feel the same way if we got there. But we're not. Right now Bob Mueller and several congressional committees are investigating to what extent the Russians impacted our election and who exactly helped them do so."


theblaze--2020-11-10--Katy Perry urges fans after election to express love to relatives 'who do not agree' with them polit

Katy Perry urges fans after election to express love to relatives 'who do not agree' with them politically — and leftists pulverize her

Katy Perry urges fans after election to express love to relatives 'who do not agree ' with them politically — @ @ @ @ @ good to know white supremacy is n't a dealbreaker for you '

Leftists unsurprisingly continue to demonstrate unhinged hatred and lack of mercy to anyone who doesn't view the world through their flawless lenses.
Their latest victim is singer Katy Perry, who committed a heinous sin after media outlets declared former Vice President Joe Biden the winner of the 2020 election over President Donald Trump.
You see, she actually urged her fans to contact family members who don't share their political views — and express love to them.
Perry tweeted "the first thing I did when the presidency was called is text and call my family members who do not agree and tell them I love them and am here for them. #FamilyFirst. Call your family today. Happy Sunday."
Oh, the heresy! Oh, the scandal!
How did folks react?
As you might expect, leftists didn't take kindly to Perry's kindness and accused her of being a little too forgiving toward those they believe are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Hitler-loving, knuckle-dragging science deniers. Or something.
Here's a sampling:
"Truth is, rich white ppl such as yourself were NEVER at risk no matter who won this election," one commenter said. "To you, this is more a disagreement of opinions — to the rest of us, this election was a matter of life or death in many aspects. So no, I won't be calling my family to console them."
"Super good to know white supremacy isn't a dealbreaker for you," another commenter noted.
"I refuse to bow down to my oppressors," another commenter reacted. "I refuse to extend an olive branch to people who don't think I should exist."
"You can disagree on pizza topings [sic] and TV shows, Katy, not basic human rights and decency," another observer said.
"'Yes family I forgive you for wanting to deny marginalized people human rights; after all I would hate for Sunday dinner to be awkward," another user quipped.
Another commenter offered "better options," which were "calling friends and family who have been traumatized by 4 years of hate and asking them what they need," and "calling friends and family who are republican but voted for Biden and thanking them for putting people above politics," as well as "slapping racism outta others."
Insider said representatives for Perry didn't immediately respond to requests for comment.


theblaze--2020-11-10--Tucker Carlson takes shot at fellow Fox News host for cutting away from WH press sec Kayleigh McEnan

Tucker Carlson takes shot at fellow Fox News host for cutting away from WH press sec Kayleigh McEnany 'In a @ @ @ @ @ ignore honest questions from citizens '

Fox News host Tucker Carlson appeared to take a shot at his Fox News colleague Neil Cavuto on Monday after Cavuto controversially cut away from White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany.
What's the background?
During a press conference on Monday, McEnany, appearing alongside Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, suggested the outcome of the election was marred by "fraud" and "illegal voting."
That's when Cavuto immediately cut away from McEnany.
"Whoa, whoa, whoa, I just think we have to be very clear," Cavuto said.
"She's charging the other side as welcoming fraud and welcoming illegal voting," Cavuto continued. "Unless she has more details to back that up, I can't in good countenance continue showing you this. I want to make sure that maybe they do have something to back that up, but that's an explosive charge to make that the other side is effectively rigging and cheating."
He went on to say, "If she does bring proof of that, of course, we'll take you back; so far she has started saying, right at the outset, welcoming fraud, welcoming illegal voting. Not so fast."
What did Carlson say?
On his Fox News show Monday night, Carlson took a swipe at Cavuto, although he did not refer to his Fox News colleague by name.
"A large percentage of our population no longer believes that our democracy is real. That is sad. It is also dangerous — it could easily get worse," Carlson began.
"What we're doing in response is hardly the solution. It is making our country much more volatile. It is setting us up for something bad," Carlson continued. "In a democracy, you can't ignore honest questions from citizens. ... You can't dismiss them out of hand as crazy or immoral for asking. You can't just cut away from coverage you don't like."
Carlson went on to say, "You can't simply tell people to accept an outcome, because force doesn't work in a democracy — that's dictatorship. In a free society, you have to convince the public of your legitimacy; you have to win them over with reason."
Although Trump's campaign and supporters continue to allege voter fraud swung the election in Biden's favor, election experts say they have not seen evidence of widespread voter fraud.
"The credible path is to actually be able to produce evidence in the individual states to show fraud, to throw the results in doubt. So far we have seen absolutely nothing that would rise to that level," election law expert Benjamin Ginsberg said, the Los Angeles Times reported.
Meanwhile, election law expert Richard Hasen told NPR, "Unless something new happens, I don't see a viable path for Trump to litigate his way out of an Electoral College loss."


theblaze--2020-11-10--Bill Barr approves Justice Department probe into voting irregularities

Steven covers the latest breaking news including Fox 's censoring of the press secretary and Bill Barr 's new DOJ @ @ @ @ @ Trump 's success in developing a COVID vaccine with Operation Warp Speed and outlines some @ @ @ @ @ in Michigan .
Use promo code LWC to save $ 10 on one year of @ @ @ @ @ Steven Crowder ?
To enjoy more of Steven 's uncensored late-night comedy that 's actually @ @ @ @ @ — the only place for all of Crowder uncensored and on demand .

Steven covers the latest breaking news including Fox's censoring of the press secretary and Bill Barr's new DOJ investigation. He then examines Trump's success in developing a COVID vaccine with Operation Warp Speed and outlines some of the latest voting irregularities in Michigan.
.
Use promo code LWC to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.
Want more from Steven Crowder?
To enjoy more of Steven's uncensored late-night comedy that's actually funny, join Mug Club — the only place for all of Crowder uncensored and on demand.


theblaze--2020-11-10--POLL: If officially elected, who will Biden select as press secretary?

POLL : If officially elected , who will Biden select as press secretary ?
Cast your vote and do n't @ @ @ @

POLL: If officially elected, who will Biden select as press secretary?
Cast your vote and don't forget to share!


theblaze--2020-11-10--Horowitz: Yes, state legislatures do indeed have the final say over this election

Horowitz : Yes , state legislatures do indeed have the final say over this election The framers made it very @ @ @ @ @

It's not like the framers of our Constitution or the crafters of federal election law never envisioned the challenge of contested elections and prepared a method for resolution. In fact, they did prepare for this scenario, and they clearly intended for the state legislatures to have the most power to resolve any conflict over the validity of election results.
Last week, I wrote an article reminding Republican-controlled legislative bodies in states with widespread concerns of voter fraud that the Constitution vests in them the ultimate authority to appoint presidential electors. I noted that, because the Constitution allows them to completely bypass a popular vote when selecting those electors, they can certainly decide, if the preponderance of evidence indicates the results are tainted, how they wish to choose those who ultimately cast the ballot for the president.
Several state legislators in key states have reached out to me expressing interest in reclaiming their authority rather than allowing the courts (or worse, the media) to have the final say. However, some have expressed concerns about limitations on their power, given delegated authority that has already passed out of their chambers years ago.
In some states, the legislature cannot convene a special session outside the regular session (typically in January) without the consent of the governor. Lawmakers from these states are concerned that they might not be able to convene without the green light from a Democrat governor who clearly has no interest in further investigating election fraud.
Other legislators have raised questions about whether they can reclaim their constitutional power to select the electors after they have already delegated the authority to the political parties based on the winner of the popular election.
The answer to both of these concerns lies in federal law. 3 U.S.C. §2 states clearly: "Whenever any State has held an election for the purpose of choosing electors, and has failed to make a choice on the day prescribed by law, the electors may be appointed on a subsequent day in such a manner as the legislature of such State may direct."
Thus, even if we accept the argument that legislators cannot abolish popular elections and return to the original practice without passing a new statute (which would require the signature of the governor), that is not what they would be doing here. There has already been a popular election. And assuming the results remain contested and unclear, federal law dictates they alone are responsible for resolving it. Given the existing plenary power to select electors, plus the power of Congress to set the time for voting on them (and Congress gave the authority to the legislators to control that process), it's hard to see how any other state law would supersede such power in this case – at least as it relates to the presidential election.
The fact that any state statute would not supersede the legislature's plenary power of selection of the electors seems clear from the language in the landmark Supreme Court case McPherson v. Blacker (1892). In the unanimous opinion, the court cited an 1874 Senate report, which explained the power as follows:
"The appointment of these electors is thus placed absolutely and wholly with the legislatures of the several states. They may be chosen by the legislature, or the legislature may provide that they shall be elected by the people of the state at large, or in districts, as are members of Congress, which was the case formerly in many states; and it is, no doubt, competent for the legislature to authorize the governor, or the supreme court of the state, or any other agent of its will, to appoint these electors. This power is conferred upon the legislatures of the states by the Constitution of the United States, and cannot be taken from them or modified by their state constitutions any more than can their power to elect senators of the United States. Whatever provisions may be made by statute, or by the state constitution, to choose electors by the people, there is no doubt of the right of the legislature to resume the power at any time, for it can neither be taken away nor abdicated."
Accordingly, we see that even without the federal law, it's clear that such a degree of plenary power cannot be abdicated by state statutes. Therefore, there is never a scenario when they would need the consent of the governor – either to convene or to pass a new statute.
Nobody is saying to rush into this final result. It's the Biden camp that is rushing to short-circuit a count on a style of balloting that necessarily takes several weeks to verify and that he pushed for. What I am suggesting is that the legislatures must convene hearings and investigations to shadow the litigation in court.
Just reading through some of the allegations asserted in a sworn affidavit from GOP poll challenger and former assistant attorney general for Michigan Zachary Larsen, on the alleged fraud he observed in Detroit, is enough to convene a special session in the state of Michigan. Then we have the supposed glitches in numerous states from faulty software. U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg in Georgia already agreed last month that the new voting system, which is used in many other states, "presents serious security vulnerability and operational issues" caused by "fundamental deficits and exposure. ... These risks are neither hypothetical nor remote under the current circumstances"
It's the job of the legislatures to investigate all of this information. If they determine that the fraud is sufficient to negate the unofficial results of the election, then they should demand that the governor hold a new election without mail-in ballots. If the governors in those states refuse, then it would be time for the legislatures to exercise their constitutional power. The only people who see no fraud are those who refuse to investigate. Any Republican who is elected to state office in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia who refuse to join such an investigation are clearly unworthy of their office.


theblaze--2020-11-10--Leftist thug accused of kicking man in head from behind and knocking him out after repeatedly punchi

Leftist thug accused of kicking man in head from behind and knocking him out after repeatedly punching him is sentenced to prison

Leftist thug accused of kicking man in head from behind and knocking him out after repeatedly punching him is sentenced @ @ @ @ @ proper resolution .
Marquise Love is accepting responsibility for his actions and the punishment .
@

Marquise Love — accused of kicking a man in the head from behind and knocking him out cold after repeatedly punching him amid a Portland protest in August — has been sentenced to 20 months in prison, KOIN-TV reported.
Here's the clip of the head kick. (Content warning: Language):
What are the details?
Love received the sentence after pleading guilty to third-degree assault and felony riot as well undergoing "months of pretrial negotiations and a judicial settlement conference," the station said, citing the Multnomah County District Attorney's Office.
More from KOIN:
His guilty plea acknowledges that he caused physical injury to the victim, identified as Adam Haner, and that "he and others engaged in tumultuous and violent conduct and created a grave risk of causing public alarm."
The DA's office said Haner, as well as law enforcement, the court and the state, found the resolution in this case "appropriate." Haner was not personally at the sentencing hearing on Monday, but has previously said in interviews with the media that he hoped Love would learn from what happened.
Love apologized to the victim in court, according to the DA's office, and reportedly expressed genuine remorse.
"The video of this assault is violent and shocking. It outraged our community and nation. We are fortunate that the victim's injuries were not as severe as it first appeared they may have been," Multnomah County District Attorney Mike Schmidt said in a statement, according to the station. "In the days, weeks and months after this assault, detectives with the Portland Police Bureau worked quickly to identify the suspect and complete the investigation. This is a proper resolution. Marquise Love is accepting responsibility for his actions and the punishment."
After his time behind bars, Love will have to complete 36 months of probation, KOIN reported, adding that any violations could result in additional prison time. He also must undergo an alcohol abuse evaluation and comply with any recommended treatment, the station said.
What's the background?
Portland police identified Love as the suspect seen in cellphone videos repeatedly punching a man who was forced by a mob to sit in the street after which the suspect kicked the victim in the head from behind and apparently knocked him out.
The beating began after the victim was trying to get away from violent protesters and crashed his truck — then a mob descended upon him. (Content warning: Language):
Here's another clip of the head-kicking thug — who was wearing a "security" vest — showing him repeatedly punching the man in the head. (Content warning: Language):
Haner, recounting the incident to KPTV-TV, said he was yanked out of his vehicle and hit the ground, after which the mob "wouldn't let me get up" — and then the beating began.
"I was just standing for myself as a citizen," he told the station, "and if you can't do that on a street, then what can you do?"


theblaze--2020-11-10--LAUGH: The New York Times FINALLY decodes Trump's Twitter typos

Just wait until you hear what 'covfefe ' REALLY meant

On "The Glenn Beck Radio Program," Glenn Beck and producer Stu Burguiere took a break from the slog of post-election commentary to enjoy a laugh, courtesy of a New York Times article titled, "Trump's Tweeting Isn't Crazy. It's Strategic, Typos and All."
"They've exposed us!" Glenn joked. "A well-known media outlet finally had the courage to publish what we all know on the right: President Trump's tweets are not just random musings. I'm not making this up. They're secretly coded messages to his right-wing followers!"
Watch the video below to finally find out what "covfefe" really meant:
Want more from Glenn Beck?
To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.
Subscribe to BlazeTV today with our BEST DEAL EVER for $30 off with promo code GLENN.


theblaze--2020-11-10--Biden plans to enact no fewer than 4 executive orders on Inauguration Day undoing President Trump's

Biden plans to enact no fewer than 4 executive orders on Inauguration Day undoing President Trump's efforts

Biden plans to enact no fewer than 4 executive orders on Inauguration Day undoing President Trump 's efforts

Former Vice President Joe Biden plans to roll out at least four executive orders should he ultimately be sworn in as president on Jan. 20, undoing the work of President Donald Trump, his campaign said this week.
What are the details?
A spokesperson for the Biden campaign on Monday told Fox News that the former vice president plans to rejoin both the Paris climate agreement and the World Health Organization and also plans to reinstate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals — or DACA — and repeal the president's so-called travel ban on certain Muslim countries.
Biden has also previously vowed to repeal Trump's tax cuts and reverse the Mexico City Policy, which bans foreign aid from going to nongovernmental organizations that promote or pay for abortions.
"Other abortion-related policies and those weakening the Affordable Care Act will likely be on the chopping block in a Biden-Harris administration as well," the outlet noted.
Following the 2020 presidential election, Biden also said he has plans to tackle the coronavirus pandemic both at home and abroad and announced the formation of a coronavirus advisory board composed of scientists and physicians.
"The challenge before us right now is still immense and growing, and so is the need for bold action to fight this pandemic," Biden said after announcing the advisory board. "We are still facing a dark winter."
CBS News reported that the advisory board will include members such as former FDA Commissioner Dr. David Kessler, former U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy, Yale professor Dr. Marcella Nunez-Smith, former head of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority Dr. Rick Bright, and more.
"Dealing with the coronavirus pandemic is one of the most important battles our administration will face, and I will be informed by science and by experts," Biden added. "The advisory board will help shape my approach to managing the surge in reported infections; ensuring vaccines are safe, effective, and distributed efficiently, equitably, and free; and protecting at-risk populations."
CBS noted that Biden is also expected to start announcing White House staff appointments as early as this week.


theblaze--2020-11-11--Chaos erupts after Dems claim that USPS whistleblower recanted his testimony, whistleblower denies r

Chaos erupts after Dems claim that USPS whistleblower recanted his testimony, whistleblower denies recanting

Chaos erupts after Dems claim that USPS whistleblower recanted his testimony , whistleblower denies recanting

The bizarre case of the Erie, Pennsylvania, U.S. Postal Service whistleblower who claims that he overheard his supervisors discussing backdating the postmarks on absentee ballots took another twist Tuesday when Democrats on the House Oversight Committee claimed that the whistleblower recanted, only to have the whistleblower release a video denying that he recanted.
The whistleblower, who has been identified as Richard Hopkins, claimed in an affidavit that he overheard his supervisor telling another postal employee that he had backdated a group of mail-in ballots that were collected on Nov. 4 to make it appear that they had in fact been mailed on Nov. 3. Under a ruling from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, ballots that were mailed by Nov. 3 will still be counted (pending a legal challenge to this ruling) even if they were received after Election Day.
It is important to note that, even if the whistleblower's allegations are true, none of the ballots received after Nov. 3 have yet been counted or added to either candidate's total. Thus, the whistleblower's allegations do not directly pertain to Biden's current lead in the state. The state has revealed that about 10,000 votes total were received in the mail between Nov. 3 and Friday, but those ballots have remained sequestered and uncounted pending the Trump campaign's legal challenge to their inclusion. Presumably, if the Trump campaign's challenge fails, those ballots will only serve to increase Biden's current lead in the Keystone State.
Nevertheless, the whistleblower's affidavit has become a flash point of controversy as it represents one of the few concrete allegations of voter fraud that have been brought forth by the campaign. The affidavit appears to have been the reason for remarks by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) over the weekend promising a Senate Judiciary Committee investigation into voting irregularities.
The controversy intensified Tuesday afternoon when Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released a statement claiming that the whistleblower had "recanted" his testimony, a claim that was magnified by many in the media.
Project Veritas, which publicized Hopkins' story, did not waste time refuting this characterization, releasing a video of Hopkins saying that he did not recant his testimony.
In a subsequent tweet, O'Keefe claims that federal investigators "intimidated" Hopkins and complains that he was interviewed for four hours without legal counsel. He further promised a full release of the transcript of that interview.
Although Hopkins has denied "recanting," it is not yet clear what he did say to federal agents during their interview or whether he may have revised some details that he claimed in his affidavit.
Hopkins was also praised by President Donald Trump on Twitter, who stated, "A brave patriot. More & more people are stepping forward to expose this Rigged Election!"


theblaze--2020-11-11--TheBlaze thanks our veterans on this and every day

In spite of some fairly serious challenges that we now face, we live in a great country that is going through some exciting times. We have freedom to live as we choose (within reason). We enjoy the fruits of tremendous technological advancements that have made human life better and less filled with physical misery. We have peace and prosperity and don't live under the thumb of an oppressive dictator.
And we are aware that all of that is due, in large part, to the men and women who have served in the armed forces and helped to keep this country safe from external threats. They have helped to keep this country free not only because no one would dare to invade a country possessed of our military, but also because the strength of our armed forces allows us to feel secure in a more deliberative form of government than we might otherwise have if we were not safe from external threat.
Those who serve in the military, particularly in times of war, make the ultimate sacrifice and what the Bible calls the ultimate act of love: They put themselves in harm's way so that others don't have to. Most of the people they fight to defend are total strangers and many of them are ungrateful for the sacrifice of the military, but they do it anyway. They are the best of us, and for that they deserve our sincere and solemn gratitude.
Thank you, veterans. For all you've done.


theblaze--2020-11-11--Two-time USA memory champion quizzed on memorization of the US Constitution

On Tuesday's episode of the "Chad Prather Show," Chad and the gang were joined by two-time USA Memory Champion Ron White. In this clip, Chad selected random excerpts from the U.S. Constitution and prompted Ron with a few words to see if Ron could recite the full clause.
About Ron White
Ron White is a mnemonist, and was the USA memory champion in 2009 and 2010. In 2010, he appeared on the History Channel television program, "Stan Lee's Superhumans."
Watch the video and be amazed.
Use promo code CHAD to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.
Want more from Chad Prather?
To enjoy more of Chad's comedy, craziness and common sense, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.


theblaze--2020-11-11--Progressives lash out at centrist Democrats blaming far-left policies for their election failures

Progressives lash out at centrist Democrats blaming far-left policies for their election failures They accused Democrats of caving to GOP @ @

Progressive far-left Democrats lashed out against centrist establishment Democrats for blaming socialist political platforms and "defund the police" efforts for their 2020 electoral failures.
The progressive groups drafted a memo scolding Democrats for scapegoating their movement. The retort, drafted by groups including the Justice Democrats, the Sunrise Movement, and Data for Progress, was a direct rebuttal against the claims by Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger of Virginia and others in an emotional private caucus phone conference.
"Republican attacks levied at Democrats this cycle based on terms like 'defund the police' or 'socialism' have become scapegoats for Representatives like Abigail Spanberger, Conor Lamb (D-Pa.), and other senior Democrats," said the memo, according to Politico.
"Not a single Democrat — progressive or otherwise — argued that Democrats should run primarily on these themes," the groups claimed. "These attacks will never go away, nor will demands for reform from social movements. The attacks are designed to stoke racial resentment."
Spanberger specifically blamed the progressive policies for Democratic losses.
"We need to not ever use the words socialist or socialism ever again," Spanberger said. "If we run this race again we will get f***ing torn apart again in 2022."
Among those lashing out were progressive socialist Democrats Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan.
"We're not going to be successful if we're silencing districts like mine," said Tlaib. "Me not being able to speak on behalf of many of my neighbors right now, many of which are black neighbors, means me being silenced. I can't be silent."
Ocasio-Cortez voiced similar frustrations.
"It's not just like some moral question about how you confront racism in elections, but it is now an existential crisis for the Democratic Party," complained Ocasio-Cortez. "Anti-racism plays zero percent of a role in Democratic electoral strategy — zero, explicitly, implicitly. I'm not telling people to virtue signal, but there's just like no plan for it."
Here's more about Dems fighting over socialism:


theblaze--2020-11-12--New York State Democratic Party chairman slaps down Ocasio-Cortez for lecturing Dems on progressivis

New York State Democratic Party chairman slaps down Ocasio-Cortez for lecturing Dems on progressivism

The chairman of the New York state Democratic Party blamed the extreme leftism from Democrats for disappointing election results and specifically singled out Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) for his ire.
Chairman Jay Jacobs told the New York Post that Ocasio-Cortez had no business telling other Democrats how to campaign given how far left her own district is.
"AOC has no standing on how to run a general election in the suburbs and upstate. AOC is in a district that's 6-1 Democrat and she couldn't find a Republican in her district with binoculars," Jacobs said.
"I invite AOC to come to Long Island and stand for election in one of our districts. You'll see different results," Jacobs added.
Ocasio-Cortez easily won her re-election campaign over a Republican challenger on Election Day, but Democrats elsewhere in the state didn't fare as well.
The comments from Jacobs mirror those from centrist establishment Democrats who are blaming the far-left progressive messaging for the party's national losses as well.
In an emotional caucus phone conference after the election, Democratic politicians said that Republicans pummeled them by aligning them with "socialist" policies, including "defund the police" efforts from Black Lives Matter protests.
"We need to not ever use the words socialist or socialism ever again," said Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger, who won a close re-election race in Virginia.
"If we run this race again we will get f***ing torn apart again in 2022," she added.
Progressive groups fired back in a memo that tossed gasoline on the internecine conflagration.
"Not a single Democrat — progressive or otherwise — argued that Democrats should run primarily on these themes," the memo said. "These attacks will never go away, nor will demands for reform from social movements. The attacks are designed to stoke racial resentment."
Democrats raised $400 million in hopes of seizing the Senate from Republican control, but their hopes are hanging by a thread in Georgia where two Senate seats will be determined in runoff elections.
Here's more about Democrats failing:


theblaze--2020-11-12--Joe Biden has chosen a White House chief of staff

The Democratic presidential candidate is moving forward with a transition to power

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden has chosen a White House chief of staff, moving forward with an anticipated transition of power from President Donald Trump after mainstream media roundly declared Biden the victor in the contested presidential race.
What are the details?
The Washington Post reported that Biden has selected longtime Democratic adviser Ronald Klain to serve as White House chief of staff, noting that Klain previously worked "in the late 1980s as a top aide to Biden when he was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and ran Biden's office when he first became vice president."
Biden said in a statement:
"Ron has been invaluable to me over the many years that we have worked together, including as we rescued the American economy from one of the worst downturns in our history in 2009 and later overcame a daunting public health emergency in 2014. His deep, varied experience and capacity to work with people all across the political spectrum is precisely what I need in a White House chief of staff as we confront this moment of crisis and bring our country together again."
According to the Associated Press, Klain "was the Ebola response coordinator during the 2014 outbreak and played a central role in drafting and implementing the Obama administration's economic recovery plan in 2009."
The New York Times pointed out that Klain, who was described as President Barack Obama's "Ebola Czar," has "been a sharp critic of President Trump's handling of the coronavirus."
But Klain is also the former Biden staffer who admitted at the National Press Club last year that it was "just luck" that the H1N1 "swine flu" outbreak that occurred during the first Obama-Biden administration wasn't a "mass casualty event."
"Sixty million Americans got H1N1 in that period of time, and it's just purely a fortuity that this isn't one of the great mass casualty events in American history," Klain said. "It had nothing to do with us doing anything right. It just had to do with luck."
Klain acknowledged Wednesday that he had been tapped by Biden for the top White House role, writing, "I've seen so many kind wishes tonight on this website. Thank you - and I'm sorry I can't reply to each of you. I'm honored by the President-elect's confidence and will give my all to lead a talented and diverse team in a Biden-Harris WH."
The race for the White House, however, remains contested, as the Trump campaign presses forward with legal battles in several states pointing to voting irregularities and allegations of voter fraud.


theblaze--2020-11-12--WATCH: Glenn SNAPS over Dem corruption: ‘It’s not OVER!’

We DO N'T have to sit on our hands

While the mainstream media has called the election for Joe Biden, Glenn gives a rallying cry to conservatives. Many of the over 71 million people who voted for President Trump are split between frustration and an urge to do something. The multiple allegations of election fraud are largely out of our hands, and Donald Trump's legal team must be allowed to go through the process to ensure our voting systems are fair.
But that doesn't mean we have to sit on our hands. There is an urgent need to focus on the ongoing Senate races. Glenn has warned us of the Left's radical plans should they sweep this election, and the wolves are already descending on Georgia.
On his Wednesday night special this week, Glenn reveals the desperate measures they're taking to win two Georgia runoff races in January and claim the Senate. Senator Mike Lee joins to warn what will happen to the country if Chuck Schumer becomes Senate majority leader and why we must have a transparent process so that Americans can trust the final count.
Later, Glenn reveals a new project for Americans who are not ready to roll over and let the Marxists win the battle for our country.
Watch a video clip from the full special below:
Because the content of this show is sure to set off the Big Tech censors, the full episode is only be available on BlazeTV. The election and its aftermath are the most important stories in America. That's why we're offering our most timely discount ever: $30 off a one-year subscription to BlazeTV with code "GLENN." With BlazeTV, you get the unvarnished truth from the most pro-America network in the country, free from Big Tech and MSM censors.


theblaze--2020-11-12--New Yorker fires Jeffrey Toobin following investigation into Zoom masturbation allegations

Longtime New Yorker staff writer Jeffrey Toobin has been fired from the magazine, following the completion of an investigation into accusations that he exposed himself while allegedly masturbating during a Zoom call with colleagues last month.
But CNN, where Toobin remains chief legal analyst, remains mum on the issue.
What are the details?
Condé Nast, which owns the New Yorker, reportedly announced Toobin's departure Wednesday in an internal memo obtained by The Daily Beast.
"I am writing to share with you that our investigation regarding Jeffrey Toobin is complete, and as a result, he is no longer affiliated with our company," Condé Nast human resources chief Stand Duncan wrote to staff, adding, "I want to assure everyone that we take workplace matters seriously. We are committed to fostering an environment where everyone feels respected and upholds our standards of conduct."
Toobin also confirmed his departure from the New Yorker, tweeting, "I was fired today by @NewYorker after 27 years as a Staff Writer. I will always love the magazine, will miss my colleagues, and will look forward to reading their work."
In mid-October, Vice reported that Toobin had been suspended by the New Yorker for exposing himself during a Zoom call involving his colleagues at the magazine along with some employees from WNYC radio. The piece was updated later to clarify that Toobin was allegedly seen masturbating by the other participants on the virtual meeting.
According to Vice:
Both people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to speak freely, noted that it was unclear how much each person saw, but both said that they saw Toobin jerking off. The two sources described a juncture in the election simulation when there was a strategy session, and the Democrats and Republicans went into their respective break out rooms for about 10 minutes. At this point, they said, it seemed like Toobin was on a second video call. The sources said that when the groups returned from their break out rooms, Toobin lowered the camera. The people on the call said they could see Toobin touching his penis. Toobin then left the call. Moments later, he called back in, seemingly unaware of what his colleagues had been able to see, and the simulation continued.
Toobin told the outlet at the time, "I made an embarrassingly stupid mistake, believing I was off-camera. I apologize to my wife, family, friends and co-workers."
"I believed I was not visible on Zoom," he added. "I thought no one on the Zoom call could see me. I thought I had muted the Zoom video."
What about CNN?
When news of Toobin's suspension by the New Yorker broke, CNN released a statement saying, "Jeff Toobin has asked for some time off while he deals with a personal issue, which we have granted."
CNN, as of this writing, has not weighed in on whether Toobin will remain at the network, and has not yet responded to a request for comment from Fox News. Toobin has not appeared on CNN since before the scandal broke.


theblaze--2020-11-12--Biden's coronavirus advisor says lockdown of 4 to 6 weeks could control the pandemic until vaccines

Biden's coronavirus advisor says lockdown of 4 to 6 weeks could control the pandemic until vaccines arrive, would pay for lost wages

Biden 's coronavirus advisor says lockdown of 4 to 6 weeks could control the pandemic until vaccines arrive , would @ @ @ @ @ also said that the government should pay for all of the lost wages during that @

A top adviser on coronavirus to former Vice President Joe Biden says that a lockdown of 4 to 6 weeks could control the pandemic and help revive the economy.
Dr. Michael Osterholm made the comments Wednesday in an interview with Yahoo! Finance.
The director of the Center of Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota said that the government should consider a package to pay for the wages lost by Americans during that time.
"We could pay for a package right now to cover all of the wages, lost wages for individual workers for losses to small companies to medium-sized companies, for city, states, county governments. We could do all of that, and if we did that, then we could lockdown for 4 to 6 weeks," Osterholm said.
"And if we did that we could drive the numbers down, like they've done in Asia, like they did in New Zealand and Australia, and then we could really watch ourselves cruising into vaccine availability in the first and second quarter of next year and bringing back the economy long before that," he explained.
'COVID hell'
Osterholm reiterated his claim that the U.S. is headed into what he calls "COVID hell" because of pandemic fatigue from the public not taking guidelines from experts seriously enough.
"There won't be any blue or red states anymore, there won't be blue or red counties, they will be COVID color," he added.
Biden has also said that he would advocate for a national mask mandate by talking to local and state government leaders and trying to persuade them to implement local mandates.
"Let's institute a mask mandate nationwide starting immediately and we will save lives. The estimates are we will save over 40,000 lives in the next three months if that is done," Biden said in August.
The U.S. has seen more than 10.7 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 across the country, and the death toll in the U.S. is at more than 247,000 people.
Here's another interview with Biden adviser Michael Osterholm:


theblaze--2020-11-11--Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan wins re-election in Alaska, giving GOP 50 seats in Senate

Control of the Senate may now be in the hands of Georgia voters

Alaska Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan has won re-election in an apparent landslide over independent challenger Al Gross, putting the GOP another step closer to keeping control of the upper chamber.
Sullivan's victory means the GOP is projected to hold 50 Senate seats — one short of a majority — in the 2021 Congress. Democrats currently hold 48 seats, meaning the two remaining Senate runoff races slated for Jan. 5 could determine which party will control the Senate, and both are in the state of Georgia.
What are the details?
Several media outlets called the race for Sullivan on Wednesday, and RealClearPolitics showed Sullivan 20 points ahead after 74% of precincts reported results, with 57.5% of the vote to Gross' 37.5%.
The Hill reported that "the projection confirms that control of the Senate will come down to two Jan. 5 runoffs in Georgia, one between Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R) and the Rev. Raphael Warnock (D) and the other between Sen. David Perdue (R) and Jon Ossoff (D)."
However, Gross has thus far refused to concede. The Associated Press reported that his campaign manager, David Keith, said in a statement, "With so many Alaskans voices needing to be heard, we'll continue to monitor the race as results come in and assess tonight."
President Donald Trump was also declared the projected winner Wednesday in the state of Alaska over Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, adding three electoral votes to his count. Despite mainstream media outlets declaring Biden president-elect, the race for the White House remains contested as the Trump campaign presses forward with legal battles in several states pointing to voting irregularities and allegations of voter fraud.
The winner of the presidential race could also have an impact on Senate control.
If either Loeffler or Perdue win re-election, Republicans keep the majority in the Senate no matter who wins the presidency.
If President Trump is ultimately victorious and remains in office, Republicans will retain control of the Senate no matter what happens in Georgia.
But if Democrats win both Senate races in Georgia, the Senate would essentially be divided 50-50 along party lines, considering independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders does not identify as a Democrat but is further left than the party and tends to vote with it.
In the scenario that Georgia Democratic Senate candidates Warnock and Ossoff were to both win, and Biden is, indeed, inaugurated, Democratic vice presidential nominee Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) would be the deciding vote in a divided Senate. That would also mean that Democrats would control the House, Senate, and presidency.


theblaze--2020-11-11--Trump tweets suspicious video of ballots being collected after a state was called, and local electio

Trump tweets suspicious video of ballots being collected after a state was called, and local election officials respond

Trump tweets suspicious video of ballots being collected after a state was called , and local election officials respond '' @ @ @ @ @ has come to ? ''

President Donald Trump tweeted on Wednesday a video showing election ballots being collected after an unnamed state had been called in the media. Just an hour later, local election officials responded.
The president tweeted the video from his Twitter account, which has almost 90 million followers.
"You are looking at BALLOTS! Is this what our Country has come to?" tweeted the president.
In the video a woman walks up to two men who are picking up ballots from drop boxes and placing them into duffel bags.
"I thought they collected them all? I just want to document," says the woman on the video.
The worker's response is unintelligible.
"Wait, but how come they already called the state?" asks the woman.
"Because these are mail-in ballots," responds one man.
"Are there a ton in there?" she asks. "Thank you guys. Are you guys official election guys?"
One shows her his identification badge and objects to her standing too close to them, ostensibly because of the coronavirus guidelines.
"Where do you guys take them?" she asks.
"Collection center," says the man.
"I just want to see because they called our state so quickly," she adds.
The video quickly garnered millions of views and many of his supporters assumed that the video was showing evidence of voter fraud a week after Election Day.
'We're still counting'
But, according to reporter Bill Melugin of KTTV-TV, there is nothing "nefarious" going on in the video because it's from Los Angeles and was recorded the day after the election.
"There is nothing nefarious about this. LA County locked and closed all the drop boxes at 8pm on election night and ballots were collected from the boxes the next day. We're still counting. LA is very slow," Melugin explained.
Very soon after, the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk's office also tried to undo any implication of wrongdoing surrounding the video.
"Yes, they are ballots; valid, legally cast ballots collected and processed by authorized election officials in accordance with the California Elections Code," they tweeted.
"The Drop Boxes are closed and locked at 8PM on Election Night and then collected the following day. These are valid ballots processed and counted during the post election canvass. Local certification in CA is on Nov 30," they added in a second tweet.
At least in the presidential race, California was called early because of overwhelming evidence that Joe Biden would carry the state easily.
Here's more about voting regulations in California:


theblaze--2020-11-11--'Bad news'? Gov. Cuomo's response to groundbreaking COVID-19 vaccine shows just how much he REALLY c

'Bad news'? Gov. Cuomo's response to groundbreaking COVID-19 vaccine shows just how much he REALLY cares about human lives

'Bad news ' ?
Gov .
Cuomo 's response to groundbreaking COVID-19 vaccine shows just how much he REALLY cares @ @ @ @ @ is not alone in politicalizing this vaccine

The Trump administration has a huge achievement to be proud of: pharmaceutical company Pfizer announced recently it is almost ready to release a COVID-19 vaccine that could have a 90% effectiveness rate. Unsurprisingly, the announcement almost immediately became a political one.
In response to the announcement of a vaccine that could potentially save countless lives, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) said it's "bad news" that the promising breakthrough came "two months before Joe Biden takes over."
In an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America," Cuomo said to host George Stephanopoulos: "The good news is the Pfizer tests look good and we'll have a vaccine shortly. The bad news is it's about two months before Joe Biden takes over, and that means this administration is going to be implementing a vaccine plan."
He went on to add, "You have two months, and we can't let this vaccination plan go forward the way the Trump administration is designing it because Biden can't undo it two months later, We'll be in the midst of it. And I'm going — I've been talking to governors across the nation about that. How can we shape the Trump administration vaccine plan to fix it or stop it before it does damage."
On the radio program, Glenn Beck, Stu Burguiere, and Pat Gray discuss Gov. Cuomo's response to the vaccine's announcement, which they said shows he has very little regard for human life — including those who put him in office.
Watch the video clip below:
Want more from Glenn Beck?
To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.
Subscribe to BlazeTV today with our BEST DEAL EVER for $30 off with promo code GLENN.


theblaze--2020-11-11--Megachurch pastor, prominent Trump supporter Robert Jeffress says 'it appears' Biden won

'Here is our chance to show that Christians are not hypocrites . '

One of President Donald Trump's most prominent evangelical Christian supporters acknowledged Wednesday that former Vice President Joe Biden appears to be the winner of the 2020 presidential election.
Pastor Robert Jeffress, of the megachurch First Baptist Dallas, told The Dallas Morning News that Biden's victory seems to be "the most likely outcome," though he emphasized that he is not in any way calling the election over.
Trump has refused to concede the election to Biden, making allegations of voter fraud and challenging the results of several states in court. Jeffress did not echo Trump's complaints, insisting that if there is fraud it will come to light eventually.
"I don't pretend to be an election expert," he said. "I trust that if there is that kind of fraud that it would be uncovered."
Jeffress also penned a column for Fox News in which he wrote that Biden's election would be a "bitter pill to swallow" for conservative Trump supporters and that, while the results aren't official, "it appears that he won."
Jeffress' article is a pastoral exhortation for Christians to trust that God is sovereign no matter who is president and to remember to pray for earthly leaders, event those you disagree with.
"Human governments and rulers change at God's direction and design. Our faith and our salvation lie not in any human ruler, but in the ruler of rulers, the King of kings. We have to remember that even though the occupant of the White House is changing, the One who occupies the throne of Heaven hasn't changed," Jeffress wrote.
"The fact that God has established authorities means that by obeying the government, we obey God."
Quoting the Apostle Paul from 1 Timothy 2:1-2, Jeffress reminded Christians to pray "for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions."
Now, it's always easier to submit and to pray for someone when he was our preferred candidate. But the rubber really meets the road when the person who takes office is not the one we supported. Paul didn't give us any wiggle room — his command applies all the same, whether the emperor was the faith-friendly Constantine or the evil emperor Nero.
Here is our chance to show that Christians are not hypocrites. We serve a God who remains on His throne, sovereignly reigning over every square inch of this vast universe. We serve a God who loves us and will never leave or forsake us. And now we have the chance to show the consistency and constancy/ of our Christian witness to this world.
Jeffress is one of Trump's most vocal and visible Christian supporters, having traveled with the president on the campaign trail in 2016 and served on Trump's evangelical advisory board. While he supports Trump's right to challenge the results of the election, he acknowledges that it's unlikely the Trump campaign's lawsuits will uncover enough evidence of voter fraud to overturn the election.
"I understand – looking at it, it appears that [Biden] won," Jeffress told The Dallas Morning News. "I've said publicly – I've said on Fox News – that I think the only way for us to have unity in our country is not only to respect the right of people to vote in an election, but the right to contest an election and President Trump has every right to contest this election."
"It's 'if he becomes president' and we won't know that till I suppose December 14 when the Electoral College meets," he said.
Jeffress did express disappointment with Biden's stated desire to undo Trump executive orders protecting the right to life and religious liberty.
"I think most people are well intentioned," Jeffress said. "They want the best for our country. And I think Christians want to hope for the best with the new president, but frankly, I think Joe Biden is making the wrong moves up front, if he really does want to work with all Americans. I mean to immediately attack religious liberty issues and protection of the unborn. I just don't think that's the kind of thing you do if you truly are interested in working with groups who may not believe like you do."


theblaze--2020-11-11--The Trump campaign has released 234 pages of affidavits regarding alleged voting regularities in Mic

The Trump campaign has released 234 pages of affidavits regarding alleged voting regularities in Michigan. Here's what they say.

The Trump campaign has released 234 pages of affidavits regarding alleged voting regularities in Michigan .
Here 's what they @ @ @ @ @ an alleged 'atmosphere of intimidation ' at a major Detroit counting location

In recent days, the Trump campaign has touted a number of affidavits collected from poll workers in Michigan that they say proves the existence of widespread irregularities in the Michigan vote counting process, and which they plan to attach as an exhibit to an expected lawsuit that will challenge the certification of the vote in Michigan.
The campaign released those affidavits Tuesday to some members of the media (thanks to Brad Heath of Reuters for providing me with a copy). The full .pdf file of exhibits can be read here. I have endeavored to separate the actual allegations of fraud in this post. Keep in mind that, at this point, these are mere allegations that have not been tested by cross-examination or any other form of investigation.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL SET OF AFFIDAVITS
By my count, the 234 pages contain affidavits from 101 individuals. The majority of them appear to be handwritten impressions of the counting process.
Here, by my count, is a complete list of actual allegations that raise the potential of voter fraud from these affidavits:
Alexandra Seely claimed that she challenged 10 votes at a given table and that those challenges were not recorded. She claims that poll workers would not take out the "log" to record her challenges.
Articia Bomer claimed that "At approximately 4:50am I witnessed a man spraying a chemical on a ballot counting machine. He then placed twenty-seven ballots into the machine and I noticed tape on the top of the ballot where a ballot number would normally be. Throughout the night I witnessed him insert these same 27 ballots at least five times." Note that this could have been repeated attempts to get the machine to scan ballots that would not scan rather than the same 27 ballots actually being counted five times.
Betty Tyson claimed that she saw poll workers reviewing rejected ballots and curing where an erroneous or defective mark had made the ballot unreadable by the machine. She claims that some of the workers "added votes where there was no X or [check mark]," but does not specify how many.
Multiple affidavits raised as their sole complaint that they witnessed ballot duplication (transfer of correct voter data from a damaged or defective ballot to another one that can be read by a machine) being done and that there was not a GOP observer present for that process. It is unclear whether Michigan law requires this, but it seems certain that best practices would have been to avoid such a scenario. The number of ballots that are damaged in machines is, by all accounts, very small. Note: This claim was raised in a lawsuit filed last week, and the city denied the claim at that time. TheBlaze has reached out to Wayne County officials for further comment on the contents of these affidavits.
A number of the affidavits claim that GOP poll workers were not permitted to access records that were necessary to properly challenge some ballots.
Cythnia Brunell claimed that, at the table she observed, she believed 11 ballots would have been rejected due to irregularities she believed had occurred, but only four were. The other seven were scanned through the counting machine. It is unknown what the ultimate disposition of those votes was.
David Piontek claims that he saw an unnamed poll worker scan six ballots from the "problem ballot" file and that the computer declared them an "unlisted person." According to Piontek, the worker manually entered the ballots into the system and assign each voter a fictitious birthdate of 1/1/1900. A Jeffrey A. Gorman also stated this issue in his affidavit. The fictitious birthdate issue has been explained ad nauseam, but these allegations do raise at least the possibility that non-registered voters had their votes counted. This accusation was also noted in several other affidavits. Best estimate is that approximately 100 of these ballots were identified throughout the course of the affidavits.
Jacqueline Zaplitny alleges that, "I was told to observe the computers that were identifying ballots that showed 'error'. I was told [to] view the people that were 'determining the intent of the voter.' There were multiple ballots that were 'corrected' on ballots that should have been overvoted and not counted." Without seeing the ballots in question, it is difficult to determine the validity of this claim.
Michael Cassin, who identified himself as an independent poll watcher, said that he made six challenges to ballots that were not recorded in the log. A handful of other affiants raised similar contentions, although some of their challenges are, just by the way they are described, things that could not be challenged (e.g., one worker described trying to challenge a poll worker taking a pile of ballots off a table and moving it somewhere else).
Patricia Rose alleged that she witnessed a poll worker attempt to run a batch of 50 ballots through a machine four times due to the machine jamming. According to her affidavit, "The ballot stack she was feeding in kept getting jammed. Rather than stop and go seek the assistance of a supervisor or technical support person, she removed the remaining ballots in the in-feed tray, and kept taking the scanned ballots off the top feed and adding them back to the stack, reinserting the whole stack again, and scanning them in again." The affiant was able to identify a number of batches where this happened, but was unable to say whether those votes had actually been counted multiple times, or whether the machine had been reset in-between each batch. This allegation was repeated regarding a different batch by Glen Sitek.
Multiple affiants claimed that signature verification was not being done, or that they did not see it being done, on absentee ballots.
Whitney Meyers claimed that, "On the street in front of the Department I witnessed workers with 'Detroit Elections' aprons on collecting ballots from cars. I witnessed multiple drivers in cars drop off multiple ballots, including more ballots than people in the car." Meyers did not explain how she arrived at this conclusion or whether she brought it to anyone's attention at the time. She also indicated that she saw a worker accept at least one ballot after the polls closed at 8pm. She also alleged that an unnamed individual placed "ballots" (did not specify or estimate how many) into one of the ballot drop boxes after 8pm and before the box could be locked.
William Henderson alleged that eight ballots went missing from a given batch that he identified, but he does admit that it's possible they were located elsewhere and counted appropriately there.
Brett Kinney claims that he successfully challenged a group of ballots, which were initially set aside as being problem ballots but were subsequently processed. It is not clear whether this was done because these challenges were ultimately rejected, or for some other reason.
Anita Chase claims that she checked the voter records and discovered that her deceased son, identified as Mark D. Chase, voted twice since he passed away, including in the 2020 election.
This list constitutes the entire body of potential actual fraud allegations raised in the affidavits. The testimony contained in these affidavits clearly pertains to fewer than 1,000 total ballots, although it should be noted that numerous affiants complained that they were not able to see what was happening because they were required to maintain six feet of social distance or because people were in their way.
Some (most?) of the allegations in the affidavit concern allegations that GOP poll watchers were treated differently (worse) than Democratic poll watchers, or that the majority of the people in the room were Democrats or were friendlier to the Democrats. Although these allegations are at least potentially relevant politically (albeit they are not tremendously surprising in Wayne County), they do not directly pertain to the issue of voter fraud, so I have not included them in this list, although you may certainly peruse them and draw your own conclusions.
The material in the affidavits alleging an "atmosphere" of intimidation and hostility toward the GOP poll workers is voluminous. I would estimate that it constitutes a significant portion of the material in the affidavits. I have not repeated most of it here because it does not directly establish or allege voter fraud.
Reading between the lines, some of the frustration experienced by the poll workers and refusal to entertain further complaints may have been come by honestly. The affidavits are rife with complaints about things that were, in fact, done properly and in accordance with the law.
For example, one affiant described at length how she insistently and repeatedly attempted to challenge a group of ballots that had already been placed in a "problem" ballot box (i.e., they had already been successfully challenged). This is, again, not the fault of people who got about 10 minutes of training in the procedures, but you can imagine that the cumulative effect of these challenges (which appear to have been quite voluminous, just based on the people who submitted affidavits) may have led to some short fuses and unwillingness to explain the same thing to each of the 200-plus watchers who were present.
Additionally, a large portion of the affidavits' contents centers on complaints regarding the counting process and what poll watchers viewed as selective enforcement of social distancing measures like six feet distance and mask wearing. Again, these complaints are in the affidavits and can be perused at leisure, if you are interested. They are not proof of voter fraud.
The affidavits contain many complaints that poll workers were not able to see as well as they would have liked due to having to remain six feet away from the tables due to COVID-19 social distancing measures. Many of the affiants claim that poll workers intentionally blocked their view of certain aspects of the counting process. These claims are difficult to evaluate without having been present in the environment.
I have omitted all of the complaints contained in the affidavits about poll workers being insulted, etc. This behavior should not have occurred, and you can read all about it in the affidavits if you wish. In most cases, it is not clear, however, who leveled the insults, nor what the context of the conversation was. Ultimately, those complaints are beyond the purview of this article.
I have also summarily omitted complaints about the number of poll watchers allowed in the location, and complaints about the boarding up of windows and/or cheering of people who were ejected. By all accounts, including the admission of the Trump campaign, the Trump campaign had more than 130 observers present and on site at the TCF Center during the entire duration of counting. Additionally, the controversy over whether the windows should have been boarded up in order to prevent people outside from filming what was going on inside is not directly relevant to allegations of voter fraud. Probably the most common complaint in the affidavits is from people who were not, in fact, allowed into the counting facility. Ultimately, the argument about how many people should have been allowed in the room is beyond the purview of this article.
I have also omitted some allegations that are, on their own terms, completely unsupported by eyewitness testimony and are mere conjecture on their own terms. For example, one affiant complained that s/he was completely unable to see what was happening with a particular batch of ballots, but then followed that up with a statement of belief that the people s/he could not see were illegally altering ballots.
Additionally, some of the allegations appear to be borne out of failure to understand how the process was supposed to be carried out. For instance, one of the affidavits complains that when the computer identified a "duplicate" ballot (which presumably refers to a situation where someone has voted in person and also requested a mail-in ballot), the ballot was removed from the pile and then passed to the next person at the table. However, that is exactly what was supposed to happen to those ballots: they were supposed to be removed from the rest of the pile and considered as a provisional ballot until a check could be performed to determine whether the mail-in ballot was ever received.
Where an affidavit raises a complaint for which there is an obvious, non-fraud explanation (for instance, the complaints about 1/1/1900 birthdays), or where it complains about things that happened exactly as they should have (e.g., "I observed ballots that should have been duplicated due to being torn, stained or damaged. A supervisor instructed the workers to run damaged ballots through the tabulator and only to duplicate rejected ballots") I have omitted it. I do not, by the way, blame any of the affiants for raising these issues; many of them make clear that they responded to calls for volunteers on Facebook and received very little training.
Many of the allegations present an incomplete picture, from which it is impossible to draw any conclusions at all. For instance, numerous affiants complained that people who showed up to vote but who had requested a mail-in ballot were allowed to vote. This was proper procedure, and their in-person ballots were supposed to be provisional until it could be determined if they had turned in a mail-in ballot or not. Most of the affiants raising this complaint do note that the ballots were set aside, as is proper, but have no information about what was revealed when these provisional ballots were checked against the mail-in list.
Also, it should be noted that the affidavits contain numerous complaints about lack of security at the counting location, and I have also not included those. Having personally worked as an observer for elections before, I will say that none of the complaints strike me as representing unusual behavior (I don't recall having my ID checked and I certainly don't recall being searched or having my belongings searched when I entered a poll location); however, perhaps many of these complaints should lead to reforms in the security process for counting votes.
Notably, many of the affiants also complained about batches of ballots being left unsecured on or underneath tables; however, none of the affidavits contains any testimony about these boxes being tampered or destroyed or added to in any way.
TheBlaze has reached out to officials for the State of Michigan and Wayne County for comment on the issues raised by the affiants.