thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-09--Health Passports:  The Next Stage In Tracking & Surveillance

The next stage in goverment tyranny is being attempted in the UK .
It ’ s called a health passport .
“ A passport holder can present their assigned VCode using their smartphone , fob or lanyard printout which can be scanned outside of the 2 metre safe distancing zone .
This can present extended information to verified health care officials ( using platform permissions ) or a high level , GDPR compliant screen to members of the public to confirm and authenticate their current health status visualised by a traffic light system.
” Zed Phoenix joins me to discuss @ @ @ @ @ @ @ technology for tyranny .
Zed Phoenix has been an actor , filmmaker and investigative journalist , having worked on the Cash for Questions Story about political corruption .
He was the London 2012 Olympic Whistleblower concerning the G4S security scandal .
He also revealed the Phone Hacking Story which led to the closure of the News of The World newspaper .
In 2015 , he was accused of perverting the course of justice about an article he wrote about an incident between himself and a high ranking member of parliament in the UK @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entertainment industry figures for being pedophiles and named names .
Since then , he changed his name from Ben Fellows to Zed Phoenix and authored a book called : The Power of Great Dreams , which became a bestseller for 5 minutes on Amazon UK .
He is now the CEO and co-founder of Govote.org.uk , which is a social media platform that is an experiment in democracy .
Partner with us as a Son or Daughter of Liberty : https : //thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/membership/ Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media SonsOfLibertyMedia.com @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tim Brown is an author and Editor at FreedomOutpost.com GunsInTheNews.com and TheWashingtonStandard.com .
He is husband to his `` more precious than rubies '' wife , father of 10 `` mighty arrows '' , jack of all trades , Christian and lover of liberty .
He resides in the U.S. occupied Great State of South Carolina .
.
Follow Tim on Twitter .
Also check him out on Gab Mumbl It and Steemit

The next stage in goverment tyranny is being attempted in the UK. It’s called a health passport. “A passport holder can present their assigned VCode using their smartphone , fob or lanyard printout which can be scanned outside of the 2 metre safe distancing zone. This can present extended information to verified health care officials (using platform permissions) or a high level, GDPR compliant screen to members of the public to confirm and authenticate their current health status visualised by a traffic light system.” Zed Phoenix joins me to discuss his fight against the use of this technology for tyranny.
Zed Phoenix has been an actor, filmmaker and investigative journalist, having worked on the Cash for Questions Story about political corruption. He was the London 2012 Olympic Whistleblower concerning the G4S security scandal. He also revealed the Phone Hacking Story which led to the closure of the News of The World newspaper. In 2015, he was accused of perverting the course of justice about an article he wrote about an incident between himself and a high ranking member of parliament in the UK, which he won.He also outed leading entertainment industry figures for being pedophiles and named names. Since then, he changed his name from Ben Fellows to Zed Phoenix and authored a book called: The Power of Great Dreams, which became a bestseller for 5 minutes on Amazon UK. He is now the CEO and co-founder of Govote.org.uk, which is a social media platform that is an experiment in democracy.
https://sonsoflibertyradio.com
https://sonsoflibertymedia.com
Sons of Liberty Store: https://thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/
Support us through a donation: https://thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/donate
Partner with us as a Son or Daughter of Liberty: https://thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/membership/
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-09--Texas Tyranny:  Americans To Be Arrested For Not Self-Quarantining If Tested Positive For COVID-19

In Brooks County , south Texas , people are going to be arrested if they test positive for COVID-19 and refuse to quarantine .
Remember , the tests are highly inaccurate , and asymptomatic people don ’ t spread the coronavirus , according to the WHO .
Plus , masks work , right ?
Like I ’ ve said from the beginning , this is not about health or infections or deaths or safety .
This about straight-up totalitarian control and a complete takeover and enslavement of humanity .
Brooks County , located north of McAllen in South Texas , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for COVID-19 and do not self-quarantine , according to a report by CBS Austin .
Obviously , this article by CBS and the order to arrest people for not quarantining is done to panic people and keep them in a state of fear-backed compliance with whatever edict the government decides .
Apply critical thinking and logic : who is going to arrest these people for not quarantining , especially if they are not sick ?
Probably the police right ?
Will the police have masks ?
The answer is yes because Texas already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the tyrannical governor there .
If so , and masks are so effective , why bother quarantining ?
None of the rules , laws , regulations , and enslavement of humans has been warranted from the get-go .
But politicians at all levels disagree .
They are the masters , and we are the slaves .
There ’ s no voting our way out of this mess .
Look at what this tyrannical judge is using as his excuse to enslave the people of Brooks County : KVII reports that Brooks County attorney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ members notified his office of seeing people who tested positive for the coronavirus at grocery stores and businesses .
“ If you ’ re going to go out and endanger other people , and we find out about it , we will prosecute you , ” Garcia told KVII .
“ People have not really embraced the dangers of COVID-19 .
It ’ s dangerous .
It ’ s killing people , and it ’ s making people very sick .
So either do it because you ’ re concerned about others or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be punished if you don ’ t. ” CBS Austin No , people haven ’ t “ embraced the dangers of COVID-19 ” because the majority of us know it ’ s a scam .
It ’ s a hoax .
It ’ s being done to control the public , and when the tests are wrong half the time , it ’ s hard to put any faith in the case numbers .
We know the death toll is being amped up to make it look worse than it is .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ government ’ s own inflated and fabricated numbers , there is no more of a danger with COIVD-19 than there is with a bad flu season .
Garcia is using the threat of violence to keep everyone from disobeying , this tyranny is the very reason so many people have already been killed in history .
Appeal to cops and the military as much as you can to get them to see exactly what they are enforcing .
If you can not , they should know they will go down in history in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hitler could not have killed as many people as he did without people willing to follow his orders .
If no one obeys , there are no orders .
There are no masters , and there are no slaves .
Wake up .
This is a full-blown dictatorship and they were able to pull it off in a matter of months .

In Brooks County, south Texas, people are going to be arrested if they test positive for COVID-19 and refuse to quarantine. Remember, the tests are highly inaccurate, and asymptomatic people don’t spread the coronavirus, according to the WHO. Plus, masks work, right?
Like I’ve said from the beginning, this is not about health or infections or deaths or safety. This about straight-up totalitarian control and a complete takeover and enslavement of humanity. Brooks County, located north of McAllen in South Texas, will begin arresting people who test positive for COVID-19 and do not self-quarantine, according to a report by CBS Austin.
Obviously, this article by CBS and the order to arrest people for not quarantining is done to panic people and keep them in a state of fear-backed compliance with whatever edict the government decides. Apply critical thinking and logic: who is going to arrest these people for not quarantining, especially if they are not sick? Probably the police right? Will the police have masks? The answer is yes because Texas already has a mandatory mask policy courtesy of the tyrannical governor there. If so, and masks are so effective, why bother quarantining?
None of the rules, laws, regulations, and enslavement of humans has been warranted from the get-go. But politicians at all levels disagree. They are the masters, and we are the slaves. There’s no voting our way out of this mess. Look at what this tyrannical judge is using as his excuse to enslave the people of Brooks County:
that Brooks County attorney David Garcia made the announcement after community members notified his office of seeing people who tested positive for the coronavirus at grocery stores and businesses. “If you’re going to go out and endanger other people, and we find out about it, we will prosecute you,” . “People have not really embraced the dangers of COVID-19. It’s dangerous. It’s killing people, and it’s making people very sick. So either do it because you’re concerned about others or do it because you’re going to be punished if you don’t.” CBS Austin
No, people haven’t “embraced the dangers of COVID-19” because the majority of us know it’s a scam. It’s a hoax. It’s being done to control the public, and when the tests are wrong half the time, it’s hard to put any faith in the case numbers. We know the death toll is being amped up to make it look worse than it is. Still, even then, by the government’s own inflated and fabricated numbers, there is no more of a danger with COIVD-19 than there is with a bad flu season.
Garcia is using the threat of violence to keep everyone from disobeying, this tyranny is the very reason so many people have already been killed in history. Appeal to cops and the military as much as you can to get them to see exactly what they are enforcing. If you cannot, they should know they will go down in history in the same manner as the Nazis. Hitler could not have killed as many people as he did without people willing to follow his orders.
If no one obeys, there are no orders. There are no masters, and there are no slaves. Wake up. This is a full-blown dictatorship and they were able to pull it off in a matter of months.
Article posted with permission from Mac Slavo


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-10--The Supreme Court Just Gave Away Half Of The State Of Oklahoma

The Supreme Court Just Gave Away Half Of The State Of Oklahoma The stunning Supreme Court decision regarding Donald Trump ’ s tax records is making headlines all over the globe , and this is causing a far more important Supreme Court decision to fly under the radar .
In a 5-4 decision written by Neil Gorsuch and joined by four of the other liberal justices , the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that about half of the state of Oklahoma belongs to Native American tribes even though the state of Oklahoma has “ maintained unquestioned jurisdiction ” over that land @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other words , there are now approximately 1.8 million former Oklahoma residents that suddenly live on land that no longer belongs to Oklahoma .
And now that the Supreme Court has handed down this ruling , there will be countless other Native American tribes that will be going to court with claims of sovereignty which will need to be resolved .
Do you remember the big rally that President Trump held in Tulsa , Oklahoma not too long ago ?
Well , it turns out that the state of Oklahoma no longer has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comes from a CNBC article entitled “ Supreme Court says eastern half of Oklahoma is Native American land ” … I can not even begin to describe how disastrous this decision is , and this is what we get for appointing so many radical leftists to the highest court in the land .
The issue in the case was whether or not a Native American that had been convicted of rape should have his conviction overturned because the rape occurred on land that once belonged to the Creek Nation… Neil Gorsuch and four @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Congress never properly disestablished the reservations in Oklahoma and so the promises that the federal government originally made to those tribes were still in force… Even though Chief Justice John Roberts has sided with other liberal justices on the Court repeatedly in recent years , it was so obvious that the prior claims that Native American tribes had to these lands were extinguished that he felt compelled to side with the conservatives in this case .
In a dissent , Roberts explained why the ruling of the majority , in this case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ once , Roberts is right on the money .
The Supreme Court has turned back the clock more than 100 years , and as the government of Oklahoma has noted , this decision essentially cuts their state “ in half ” … If you live in the state , you should be aware that things are about to get a whole lot more dangerous .
According to the state ’ s solicitor general , this decision is likely to “ require the release of more than 1,700 inmates ” … Of course , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back to the state of Oklahoma by formally disestablishing the reservations on Oklahoma land , but with Democrats in control of the House of Representatives there is zero chance of that happening at this point .
So for the foreseeable future , 1.8 million people in eastern Oklahoma are stuck in a really bizarre situation .
The state of Oklahoma no longer has jurisdiction over them , but the five Native American tribes that have now been given jurisdiction are completely unequipped to exercise sovereignty over those areas because they haven ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But Neil Gorsuch is convinced that somehow everything will work out just fine… This is yet another example that shows that Supreme Court appointments must be handled with extreme care .
Republicans have nominated 14 of the last 18 Supreme Court justices , and yet right now there are 7 liberals on the Court and only two conservatives .
And yes , I am counting correctly .
At this point , only Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito can be considered “ conservative ” justices , and both of them are quite elderly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is very little hope of reversing the string of horrible Supreme Court decisions that we have seen over the last 50 years , and it is extremely likely that we will continue to see an endless series of bad decisions in the years ahead .
If much more care had been taken to make sure that people that had a tremendous amount of respect for the U.S. Constitution were being appointed to the Supreme Court , this could have all been avoided .
But instead , we just went along with whoever was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been absolutely disastrous .

The Supreme Court Just Gave Away Half Of The State Of Oklahoma
The stunning Supreme Court decision regarding Donald Trump’s tax records is making headlines all over the globe, and this is causing a far more important Supreme Court decision to fly under the radar. In a 5-4 decision written by Neil Gorsuch and joined by four of the other liberal justices, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that about half of the state of Oklahoma belongs to Native American tribes even though the state of Oklahoma has “maintained unquestioned jurisdiction” over that land for more than 100 years. In other words, there are now approximately 1.8 million former Oklahoma residents that suddenly live on land that no longer belongs to Oklahoma. And now that the Supreme Court has handed down this ruling, there will be countless other Native American tribes that will be going to court with claims of sovereignty which will need to be resolved.
Do you remember the big rally that President Trump held in Tulsa, Oklahoma not too long ago?
Well, it turns out that the state of Oklahoma no longer has sovereignty over that area. The following comes from a CNBC article entitled “Supreme Court says eastern half of Oklahoma is Native American land”…
The 5-4 decision, with an opinion authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch, endorsed the claim of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation to the land, which encompasses 3 million acres in eastern Oklahoma, including most of the city of Tulsa.
I cannot even begin to describe how disastrous this decision is, and this is what we get for appointing so many radical leftists to the highest court in the land.
The issue in the case was whether or not a Native American that had been convicted of rape should have his conviction overturned because the rape occurred on land that once belonged to the Creek Nation…
The case concerned an appeal from Jimcy McGirt, a Native American, who claimed his state rape conviction from 1997 should be overturned because Oklahoma lacked jurisdiction. Congress, his lawyer Ian Gershengorn said, never properly terminated the reservation. During oral arguments in May, the justices reached back to 1907 to determine whether Congress, using imprecise language, failed to disestablish the 1866 boundaries of the reservation.
Neil Gorsuch and four of the other liberal justices were persuaded that Congress never properly disestablished the reservations in Oklahoma and so the promises that the federal government originally made to those tribes were still in force…
“On the far end of the Trail of Tears was a promise,” the conservative justice wrote. “Forced to leave their ancestral lands in Georgia and Alabama, the Creek Nation received assurances that their new lands in the West would be secure forever.”
Even though Chief Justice John Roberts has sided with other liberal justices on the Court repeatedly in recent years, it was so obvious that the prior claims that Native American tribes had to these lands were extinguished that he felt compelled to side with the conservatives in this case. In a dissent, Roberts explained why the ruling of the majority, in this case, is completely and utterly absurd…
“A century of practice confirms that the Five Tribes’ prior domains were extinguished,” wrote Roberts. “The State has maintained unquestioned jurisdiction for more than 100 years. Tribe members make up less than 10%–15% of the population of their former domain, and until a few years ago the Creek Nation itself acknowledged that it no longer possessed the reservation the Court discovers today.”
For once, Roberts is right on the money.
The Supreme Court has turned back the clock more than 100 years, and as the government of Oklahoma has noted, this decision essentially cuts their state “in half”…
The state said that if the Supreme Court accepted McGirt’s reasoning it would “cause the largest judicial abrogation of state sovereignty in American history, cleaving Oklahoma in half.”
If you live in the state, you should be aware that things are about to get a whole lot more dangerous.
According to the state’s solicitor general, this decision is likely to “require the release of more than 1,700 inmates”…
The state’s solicitor general, Mithun Mansinghani, had warned in May that a ruling for Native Americans could require the release of more than 1,700 inmates. That didn’t sit well with several justices who feared a chaotic overhaul of long-decided criminal cases.
What a mess.
Of course, Congress could transfer sovereignty over those areas back to the state of Oklahoma by formally disestablishing the reservations on Oklahoma land, but with Democrats in control of the House of Representatives there is zero chance of that happening at this point.
So for the foreseeable future, 1.8 million people in eastern Oklahoma are stuck in a really bizarre situation. The state of Oklahoma no longer has jurisdiction over them, but the five Native American tribes that have now been given jurisdiction are completely unequipped to exercise sovereignty over those areas because they haven’t done it in more than 100 years.
But Neil Gorsuch is convinced that somehow everything will work out just fine…
“We do not pretend to foretell the future, and we proceed well aware of the potential for cost and conflict around jurisdictional boundaries, especially ones that have gone unappreciated for so long,” Gorsuch wrote. “But it is unclear why pessimism should rule the day. With the passage of time, Oklahoma and its Tribes have proven they can work successfully together as partners.”
This is yet another example that shows that Supreme Court appointments must be handled with extreme care.
Republicans have nominated 14 of the last 18 Supreme Court justices, and yet right now there are 7 liberals on the Court and only two conservatives.
And yes, I am counting correctly.
At this point, only Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito can be considered “conservative” justices, and both of them are quite elderly.
What this means is that there is very little hope of reversing the string of horrible Supreme Court decisions that we have seen over the last 50 years, and it is extremely likely that we will continue to see an endless series of bad decisions in the years ahead.
If much more care had been taken to make sure that people that had a tremendous amount of respect for the U.S. Constitution were being appointed to the Supreme Court, this could have all been avoided.
But instead, we just went along with whoever was being nominated, and the results have been absolutely disastrous.
Article posted with permission from Michael Snyder


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-10--Muslim Representative Ilhan Omar Wants To “Dismantle America” During This Revolution!

Recently , the head of the terror-tied organization The Council on American-Islamic Relations ( CAIR ) , Jaylani Hussein , stated that America is at the cusp of a revolution .
He went on to add , “ CAIR Minnesota has stood on the side of justice in Minnesota for over a decade and we continue to fight that battle alongside all of you , today .
We stand with the protestors , not just in voice , but in action .
We are using our resources to educate ( indoctrinate ) the public , lobby for policy change , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the oppressed ( Transgressors – 1 John 3:4 ) , and protect the weak in our communities , which are really those that want the power to rule .
We are at the center of the revolution and we must be champions of justice ( According to the Koran ) at all costs.
” Just think , this guy sets on the treasonous Governors ’ ( Luke 22:48 ) board as Council on Law Enforcement alongside Attorney General Keith Ellison , who supports cop killers and is calling for a 300 % increase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Friends , can you make this up ?
To add insult to injury , we have Ilhan Omar , who sits as the representative of the 5th district in Minnesota , where the Muslims were covertly colonizing during the 1990s , to the Muslim population that means to conquer the United States ( Deuteronomy 28:43 ) .
llhan , as you all know , was responsible , as one of her first legislative acts , was to oppose a bill that would not pay insurance to families of ISIS members from South Minneapolis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Neonnettle.com recently reported Sen Blackburn Declares Ilhan Omar a ‘ Threat to Our Democracy , ’ Demands Resignation-Republican senator slams radical Democrat over calls to tear down America ’ s economy Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn ( R-TN ) has torched Rep. Ilhan Omar ( D-MN ) over the radical Democrat ’ s recent calls to tear down America ’ s political and economic systems .
The GOP senator urged Omar to resign after the far-left lawmaker expanded on her calls for “ dismantling ” the police to include attacks on the U.S @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday during the Minnesota People of Color and Indigenous Caucus event in support of the Black Lives Matter movement .
During a speech at the “ anti-racism ” event in her home state , Omar told the crown “ we are fighting to tear down ” the “ economy and political systems , ” adding that “ as long as our economy and political systems prioritize profit without considering who is profiting , who is being shut out , we will perpetuate this inequality .
“ We can not stop at criminal justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We must begin the work of dismantling the whole system of oppression wherever we find it.
” One clip prompted condemnation from Blackburn , who tweeted , “ Ilhan Omar took an oath to defend and protect the Constitution , not shred it .
“ Omar and her Marxist comrades are a threat to our Democracy .
Omar should resign.
” First off , we are not a democracy .
America is a Constitutional Republic ( Article 4 , Section 4 , US Constitution ) .
Second , calling for her resignation ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ who swore in on the Koran that runs antithetical to the US Constitution , who has been called out for misappropriation of funds , being married to her brother , etc.
, and she wants her resignation ?
No wonder why these subversive enemies within act in such a fashion !
They are encouraged by these said representatives who do not know the difference .
They are to be removed ( Article 2 , Section 4 ) , and then prosecuted for their crimes against American law .
Those laws , let me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uphold , not tear down ( Article 3 , Section 1 , Clause 7 of the US Constitution ) .
When you look to the subversive organizations that have been tolerated over the last 8 decades in this country such as Planned Parenthood , American Civil Liberties Union , Southern Poverty Law Center , Council on American-Islamic Relations , etc .
look at the damage that has been done ( Leviticus 26:14-46 ; Deuteronomy 28:15-68 ) .
For Americans to give this sort of subversive a free hand deserves not the freedoms which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others on their behalf ( John 15:13 ) .
This is NOT a game .
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media .
Article by Bradlee Dean

“This is the same subversive woman that wanted insurance policies for Muslim men killed fighting on the behalf of ISIS.”
Recently, the head of the terror-tied organization The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Jaylani Hussein, stated that America is at the cusp of a revolution. He went on to add, “CAIR Minnesota has stood on the side of justice in Minnesota for over a decade and we continue to fight that battle alongside all of you, today. We stand with the protestors, not just in voice, but in action. We are using our resources to educate (indoctrinate) the public, lobby for policy change, which undermines the US Constitution, defend the oppressed (Transgressors – 1 John 3:4), and protect the weak in our communities, which are really those that want the power to rule. We are at the center of the revolution and we must be champions of justice (According to the Koran) at all costs.”
Just think, this guy sets on the treasonous Governors’ (Luke 22:48) board as Council on Law Enforcement alongside Attorney General Keith Ellison, who supports cop killers and is calling for a 300% increase of Muslims from the Middle East. Friends, can you make this up?
To add insult to injury, we have Ilhan Omar, who sits as the representative of the 5th district in Minnesota, where the Muslims were covertly colonizing during the 1990s, to the Muslim population that means to conquer the United States (Deuteronomy 28:43).
llhan, as you all know, was responsible, as one of her first legislative acts, was to oppose a bill that would not pay insurance to families of ISIS members from South Minneapolis, Minnesota who were killed in jihad.
Neonnettle.com recently reported Sen Blackburn Declares Ilhan Omar a ‘Threat to Our Democracy,’ Demands Resignation-Republican senator slams radical Democrat over calls to tear down America’s economy
Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) has torched Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) over the radical Democrat’s recent calls to tear down America’s political and economic systems.
The GOP senator urged Omar to resign after the far-left lawmaker expanded on her calls for “dismantling” the police to include attacks on the U.S economy.
Omar made the controversial comments Tuesday during the Minnesota People of Color and Indigenous Caucus event in support of the Black Lives Matter movement. During a speech at the “anti-racism” event in her home state, Omar told the crown “we are fighting to tear down” the “economy and political systems,” adding that “as long as our economy and political systems prioritize profit without considering who is profiting, who is being shut out, we will perpetuate this inequality.
“We cannot stop at criminal justice system,” she added.
“We must begin the work of dismantling the whole system of oppression wherever we find it.”
One clip prompted condemnation from Blackburn, who tweeted, “Ilhan Omar took an oath to defend and protect the Constitution, not shred it.
“Omar and her Marxist comrades are a threat to our Democracy. Omar should resign.”
First off, we are not a democracy. America is a Constitutional Republic (Article 4, Section 4, US Constitution). Second, calling for her resignation? Is she kidding me? A Muslim who swore in on the Koran that runs antithetical to the US Constitution, who has been called out for misappropriation of funds, being married to her brother, etc., and she wants her resignation? No wonder why these subversive enemies within act in such a fashion! They are encouraged by these said representatives who do not know the difference. They are to be removed (Article 2, Section 4), and then prosecuted for their crimes against American law. Those laws, let me remind you, that they swore to uphold, not tear down (Article 3, Section 1, Clause 7 of the US Constitution).
When this whole thing fails, take note that Congresswoman Ilhan Omar also supports the dismantling of the Minneapolis Police Department. pic.twitter.com/cW3O745oq5 — Benny (@bennyjohnson) June 8, 2020
When you look to the subversive organizations that have been tolerated over the last 8 decades in this country such as Planned Parenthood, American Civil Liberties Union, Southern Poverty Law Center, Council on American-Islamic Relations, etc. look at the damage that has been done (Leviticus 26:14-46; Deuteronomy 28:15-68).
For Americans to give this sort of subversive a free hand deserves not the freedoms which have been bestowed through the sacrifice of others on their behalf (John 15:13). This is NOT a game.
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media. Article by Bradlee Dean


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-10--Journalist Exposes Ghislaine Maxwell’s Ties To The UN – Mainstream Media Uses Photo, Doesn’t Say Whe

Journalist Exposes Ghislaine Maxwell ’ s Ties To The UN – Mainstream Media Uses Photo , Doesn ’ t Say Where It ’ s From Following the announcement of an unsealed indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell , the madam and girlfriend of billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein , some interesting things have taken place and some interesting things have not taken place .
One of those is the curious photo that media outlets have been using regarding Maxwell .
That photo came from a secret meeting at the United Nations , but none of them told you about it .
However , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Press went to her press conference at the US Attorney ’ s Office and asked , Doesn ’ t charging Maxwell with perjury undercut any ability to use testimony from her against other , bigger wrong-doers ?
Periscope here at 23:07 .
Strauss replied that it is not impossible to use a perjurer ’ s testimony .
But how often does it work ?
At 3:30 pm on July 2 Maxwell appeared in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampsire , before Magistriate Judge Andrea K. Johnstone .
Inner City @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the July 3 media coverage of Maxwell , media all of the world used a video and stills from it of Maxwell speaking in front of a blue curtain , like here .
What they did not mention is something Inner City Press has been asking the UN about , as under UNSG Antonio Guterres with his own sexual exploitation issues ( exclusive video and audio ) it got roughed up and banned from the UN : Ghislaine Maxwell had a ghoulish United Nations press conference , under the banner of the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on July 5 , after some crowd-sourcing , Inner City Press can report on another Ghislaine Maxwell use of the United Nations , facilitated by Italy ’ s Permanent Representative to the UN , UN official Nikhil Seth and Amir Dossal , who also let into the UN and in one case took money from convicted UN briber Ng Lap Seng , and Patrick Ho of CEFC China Energy , also linked to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres .
At the Ghislaine Maxwell UN event , the UN Deputy Secretary-General was directly involved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the participants on Patreon here .
Guterres has been involved in financial and sex scandals within the United Nations .
He hasn ’ t been one to expose anything .
He ’ s been a coverup artist .
• Exclusive : UN Secretary General , Antonio Guterres banned journalist after his alleged unethical financial dealings were exposed • UN boss mired in sex scandal of Western Sahara mission official As I ’ ve written before , the UN has always had corrupt Socialists and Communists in charge and Guterres is just the latest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And Supported Socialist & Communist Leaders Inner City Press added , “ Terramar has been dissolved , even though Maxwell ’ s former fundraiser / director of development Brian Yurasits still lists the URL on his ( protected ) Twitter profile , also here.
” Now , Lee is beginning to look at other UN/Maxwell connections .
Among the first is to start with “ this photograph of another day ’ s ( or at least another outfit ’ s ) presentation in the UN , here .
“ While co-conspirator Antonio Guterres @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any entry into the UN for two years and a day , this appears to be in the UN Economic and Social Council ( ECOSOC ) chamber , ” writes Lee .
I ’ m betting Mawell has a ton on Guterres , as well as a few people who are telling us they are actually going after her .
Just remember , when you eventually hear the news , Ghislaine Maxwell didn ’ t kill herself .
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media

Journalist Exposes Ghislaine Maxwell’s Ties To The UN – Mainstream Media Uses Photo, Doesn’t Say Where It’s From
Following the announcement of an unsealed indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell, the madam and girlfriend of billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, some interesting things have taken place and some interesting things have not taken place. One of those is the curious photo that media outlets have been using regarding Maxwell. That photo came from a secret meeting at the United Nations, but none of them told you about it.
However, Inner City Press did.
Matthew Russell Lee reported:
Inner City Press went to her press conference at the US Attorney’s Office and asked, Doesn’t charging Maxwell with perjury undercut any ability to use testimony from her against other, bigger wrong-doers? Periscope here at 23:07.
Strauss replied that it is not impossible to use a perjurer’s testimony. But how often does it work?
At 3:30 pm on July 2 Maxwell appeared in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampsire, before Magistriate Judge Andrea K. Johnstone. Inner City Press live tweeted it here.
In the July 3 media coverage of Maxwell, media all of the world used a video and stills from it of Maxwell speaking in front of a blue curtain, like here.
What they did not mention is something Inner City Press has been asking the UN about, as under UNSG Antonio Guterres with his own sexual exploitation issues (exclusive video and audio) it got roughed up and banned from the UN: Ghislaine Maxwell had a ghoulish United Nations press conference, under the banner of the “Terramar Project,” here.
Now on July 5, after some crowd-sourcing, Inner City Press can report on another Ghislaine Maxwell use of the United Nations, facilitated by Italy’s Permanent Representative to the UN, UN official Nikhil Seth and Amir Dossal, who also let into the UN and in one case took money from convicted UN briber Ng Lap Seng, and Patrick Ho of CEFC China Energy, also linked to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres.
At the Ghislaine Maxwell UN event, the UN Deputy Secretary-General was directly involved.
List of (some of) the participants on Patreon here.
Ghislaine Maxwell held a United Nations press conference under the banner of this "Terramar Project." Inner City Press has repeatedly asked the UN about the event, and got roughed up & banned by @AntonioGuterres (who covers up #UNsexploitation & trafficking) 1/x pic.twitter.com/nmcGNKXPjO — Inner City Press (@innercitypress) July 4, 2020
The video footage that media all of the world were using yesterday of Ghislaine Maxwell speaking in front of a blue curtain is from this UNexplained presser in the UN – but almost none – Inner City Press did – mentioned the UN, much less #UNsexploitation pic.twitter.com/1CRursdPR5 — Inner City Press (@innercitypress) July 4, 2020
Here's another photo of Ghislaine Maxwell, speaking in front of a sign which looks to be a UN meeting room name sign (I've been banned from any entry of the UN for 2 years & a day by @AntonioGuterres, so can't be sure). So when was this event? #crowdsourcing pic.twitter.com/Wa3nqTQOaV — Inner City Press (@innercitypress) July 4, 2020
Guterres has been involved in financial and sex scandals within the United Nations. He hasn’t been one to expose anything. He’s been a coverup artist.
As I’ve written before, the UN has always had corrupt Socialists and Communists in charge and Guterres is just the latest.
Inner City Press added, “Terramar has been dissolved, even though Maxwell’s former fundraiser / director of development Brian Yurasits still lists the URL on his (protected) Twitter profile, also here.”
Now, Lee is beginning to look at other UN/Maxwell connections. Among the first is to start with “this photograph of another day’s (or at least another outfit’s) presentation in the UN, here.
“While co-conspirator Antonio Guterres has had Inner City Press banned from any entry into the UN for two years and a day, this appears to be in the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) chamber,” writes Lee.
I’m betting Mawell has a ton on Guterres, as well as a few people who are telling us they are actually going after her.
Just remember, when you eventually hear the news, Ghislaine Maxwell didn’t kill herself.
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-10--Now Churches, False Teachers & Non-Profits Are Getting In On Trump Admin’s Giveaway Of Your Money In

Now Churches , False Teachers & Non-Profits Are Getting In On Trump Admin ’ s Giveaway Of Your Money In Bailout Here ’ s what Fascism looks like people !
By holding their hands out to the state to receive money , which the Constitution does not authorize to be given , which is theft , these churches , false teachers and non-profits are demonstrating who their god really is .
Megachurches and other religious organizations who are supporters of President Donald Trump were approved for millions of your dollars , America in forgivable loans in the government pandemic bailout @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those approved for loans through the massive government relief program were a Dallas megachurch whose pastor has been an outspoken ally of the president ; a Florida church tied to Trump spiritual adviser and “ prosperity gospel ” leader Paula White ; and a Christian-focused nonprofit where Jay Sekulow , the lawyer who defended the president during his impeachment , is chief counsel .
Evangelical Christians played a key role in Trump ’ s victory in the 2016 presidential election and have remained a largely unwavering contingent of his base .
Vice President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month at the First Baptist Church of Dallas , whose pastor , Robert Jeffress , has been on Trump ’ s evangelical advisory board .
The church was approved for a $ 2-5 million loan , the data showed .
Launched on April 3 , the Paycheck Protection Program ( PPP ) allows small businesses , nonprofits and individuals hurt by the pandemic to apply for forgivable government-backed loans .
Some say allowing religious institutions to qualify for loan forgiveness highlights a breakdown in the American tradition of a strict separation of church @ @ @ @ @ @ @ separation of church and state is dead , and the PPP loan program is the evidence of that , ” said Micah Schwartzman , a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law .
“ The money is going to fund core activities of many organizations , including religious organizations .
That ’ s something we ’ ve not seen before.
” The list of religious organizations approved for about 88,400 small business loans also included Faith and Freedom Coalition Inc in Georgia , which qualified for a $ 150,000- $ 350,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ founder and chairman Ralph Reed praised Trump for his photo-op at a church nearby the White House after authorities hurled tear gas and shot rubber bullets at protesters .
Cross Church of Arkansas , whose pastor emeritus has been a member of Trump ’ s evangelical advisory board , received a $ 1.8 million loan and will seek loan forgiveness if the requirements are met , a spokesman told Reuters .
The American Center for Law and Justice Inc , a nonprofit founded by televangelist Pat Robertson and also known as Christian Advocates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a $ 1-2 million loan .
Sekulow is listed as chief counsel on the organization ’ s website .
City of Destiny Inc. of Florida , where , White , Trump ’ s spiritual adviser , is listed as an oversight pastor , was approved for a loan of $ 150,000- $ 350,000 , the data showed .
Now , lest you cheer because these are alleged “ Christian ” organizations , you should think long and hard about money going to these institutions that is not authorized in our Constitution .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and immoral as any other organization receiving money from the people that the Constitution does not authorize .
In fact , the Associated Press added , “ Data released this week by the US Treasury Department and Small Business Administration this week showed religious organisations accounting for more than 1 million of the 51.1 million jobs protected by the high-profile program .
The list of named religious organisations was heavily skewed toward Christian denominations , according to a Reuters analysis.
” The corruption here is nothing but a whore riding the beast and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the whore , watch and see .
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media

Now Churches, False Teachers & Non-Profits Are Getting In On Trump Admin’s Giveaway Of Your Money In Bailout
Here’s what Fascism looks like people! By holding their hands out to the state to receive money, which the Constitution does not authorize to be given, which is theft, these churches, false teachers and non-profits are demonstrating who their god really is. Megachurches and other religious organizations who are supporters of President Donald Trump were approved for millions of your dollars, America in forgivable loans in the government pandemic bailout, according to government data.
Reuters reports:
Among those approved for loans through the massive government relief program were a Dallas megachurch whose pastor has been an outspoken ally of the president; a Florida church tied to Trump spiritual adviser and “prosperity gospel” leader Paula White; and a Christian-focused nonprofit where Jay Sekulow, the lawyer who defended the president during his impeachment, is chief counsel.
Evangelical Christians played a key role in Trump’s victory in the 2016 presidential election and have remained a largely unwavering contingent of his base.
Vice President Mike Pence spoke at a rally last month at the First Baptist Church of Dallas, whose pastor, Robert Jeffress, has been on Trump’s evangelical advisory board. The church was approved for a $2-5 million loan, the data showed.
Launched on April 3, the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) allows small businesses, nonprofits and individuals hurt by the pandemic to apply for forgivable government-backed loans. Some say allowing religious institutions to qualify for loan forgiveness highlights a breakdown in the American tradition of a strict separation of church and state.
“The notion of separation of church and state is dead, and the PPP loan program is the evidence of that,” said Micah Schwartzman, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law. “The money is going to fund core activities of many organizations, including religious organizations. That’s something we’ve not seen before.”
The list of religious organizations approved for about 88,400 small business loans also included Faith and Freedom Coalition Inc in Georgia, which qualified for a $150,000-$350,000 loan. The evangelical group’s founder and chairman Ralph Reed praised Trump for his photo-op at a church nearby the White House after authorities hurled tear gas and shot rubber bullets at protesters.
Cross Church of Arkansas, whose pastor emeritus has been a member of Trump’s evangelical advisory board, received a $1.8 million loan and will seek loan forgiveness if the requirements are met, a spokesman told Reuters.
The American Center for Law and Justice Inc, a nonprofit founded by televangelist Pat Robertson and also known as Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism Inc., was approved for a $1-2 million loan. Sekulow is listed as chief counsel on the organization’s website.
City of Destiny Inc. of Florida, where, White, Trump’s spiritual adviser, is listed as an oversight pastor, was approved for a loan of $150,000-$350,000, the data showed.
Now, lest you cheer because these are alleged “Christian” organizations, you should think long and hard about money going to these institutions that is not authorized in our Constitution. It’s just as dirty, criminal and immoral as any other organization receiving money from the people that the Constitution does not authorize.
In fact, the Associated Press added, “Data released this week by the US Treasury Department and Small Business Administration this week showed religious organisations accounting for more than 1 million of the 51.1 million jobs protected by the high-profile program. The list of named religious organisations was heavily skewed toward Christian denominations, according to a Reuters analysis.”
The corruption here is nothing but a whore riding the beast and the beast is about to turn on the whore, watch and see.
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-10--Dead Men Tell No Tales:  Epstein Didn’t – Will Ghislaine Maxwell?

Jeffrey Epstein ’ s longtime girlfriend , a woman who lured underage girls into sex trafficking and believed to be tied to Israel ’ s Mossad as a spy running a honeypot organization for blackmail , was alleged to have been arrested this past week and while she is reported to be ready to name names , one wonders if she will end up “ suicided ” like Epstein was .
But who is she really ?
Articles and previous interview with Dylan Howard , author of Dead Men Tell No Tells , mentioned in this episode .
Even more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Son or Daughter of Liberty : https : //thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/membership/ Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media SonsOfLibertyMedia.com , Minds , MeWe , Spreely , Tim Brown is an author and Editor at FreedomOutpost.com GunsInTheNews.com and TheWashingtonStandard.com .
He is husband to his `` more precious than rubies '' wife , father of 10 `` mighty arrows '' , jack of all trades , Christian and lover of liberty .
He resides in the U.S. occupied Great State of South Carolina .
.
Follow Tim on Twitter .
Also check him @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Jeffrey Epstein’s longtime girlfriend, a woman who lured underage girls into sex trafficking and believed to be tied to Israel’s Mossad as a spy running a honeypot organization for blackmail, was alleged to have been arrested this past week and while she is reported to be ready to name names, one wonders if she will end up “suicided” like Epstein was. But who is she really?
Articles and previous interview with Dylan Howard, author of Dead Men Tell No Tells , mentioned in this episode.
60 Minutes Australia
https://sonsoflibertyradio.com
https://sonsoflibertymedia.com
Sons of Liberty Store: https://thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/
Support us through a donation: https://thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/donate
Partner with us as a Son or Daughter of Liberty: https://thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/membership/
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-10--Author & Economist Explains “Why The Constitution Had To Be Destroyed” By Those Wanting A “British S

Author & Economist Explains “ Why The Constitution Had To Be Destroyed ” By Those Wanting A “ British System ” & Calling It “ American ” Economist Thomas J. DiLorenzo , author of such books as The Real Lincoln , The Problem with Lincoln , Lincoln Unmasked and Organized Crime : The Unvarnished Truth About Government , gave a brief talk at the Mises Circle in Houston , Texas on the history of how the US Constitution has been slowly destroyed by those who wish to impose something on the united States for their own gain and bring us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not to frighten you nor is it to make you despair .
Rather , it is to inform you on the deception that has been put in place against the people in order to advance an agenda , and it ’ s not an American agenda .
The Constitution has not been destroyed .
It ’ s been ignored , unlearned , unfollowed and has not been upheld despite the claims of some .
Listen to what Dr. DiLorenzo has to say and then it might give us a better grasp on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who ignore the Constitution to our demise , as well as their own .
Ultimately , President Abraham Lincoln , one of the greatest tyrants the US has ever known , was instrumental in helping to accomplish this cause .
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media

Author & Economist Explains “Why The Constitution Had To Be Destroyed” By Those Wanting A “British System” & Calling It “American”
Economist Thomas J. DiLorenzo , author of such books as The Real Lincoln , The Problem with Lincoln , Lincoln Unmasked and Organized Crime: The Unvarnished Truth About Government , gave a brief talk at the Mises Circle in Houston, Texas on the history of how the US Constitution has been slowly destroyed by those who wish to impose something on the united States for their own gain and bring us once again into bondage.
This information is not to frighten you nor is it to make you despair. Rather, it is to inform you on the deception that has been put in place against the people in order to advance an agenda, and it’s not an American agenda.
The Constitution has not been destroyed. It’s been ignored, unlearned, unfollowed and has not been upheld despite the claims of some.
Listen to what Dr. DiLorenzo has to say and then it might give us a better grasp on how to defeat the criminals in government who ignore the Constitution to our demise, as well as their own.
Ultimately, President Abraham Lincoln, one of the greatest tyrants the US has ever known, was instrumental in helping to accomplish this cause.
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-10--Constitutional Republic vs. Pure Democracy: How the U.S. Election Process Has Changed

Conservatives are generally quick to point out that America is a republic , not a democracy .
But what really is the difference , and are they even right ?
Voting in America has changed considerably since the days of our founding .
Back then , the government didn ’ t even print official ballots .
Instead , you got ballots from the candidate who wanted your support .
Sometimes voting took place in public , so everyone knew who you voted for .
And , of course , the franchise was largely restricted to white , male property owners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can vote .
And the Democratic Party wants to increase ballot access by automatically registering anyone who gets a driver ’ s license .
Democrats even pushed for mail-in ballots for the 2020 election to make voting even easier – and more open to voter fraud .
But is any of this a good thing ?
Indeed , it is worth considering the transformation of the United States from a Constitutional Republic , ruled by law with the input of the people , to a total democracy , where the will of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Brief History of the Franchise in America Open up your pocket Constitution and find the part where it says who can vote and who can ’ t .
You ’ ll come up short .
That ’ s because the Constitution delegates this right to the states .
And while there are some amendments that , for example , say states can ’ t restrict the franchise on the basis of race , gender or being over the age of 18 , otherwise there is broad leeway given in terms of who can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Before the United States existed , people were still voting and there were oftentimes even more restrictions in place .
Property qualifications were most common , but there was often also a religious test involved .
For example , Plymouth Colony required that voters be “ orthodox in the fundamentals of religion , ” which would have likely excluded even Catholics from voting .
Indeed , Catholics , Quakers and Baptists were frequently forbidden from voting in early colonial elections .
( Jews were forbidden from state office in Maryland until 1828 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of belief in an afterlife . )
One of the first laws drafted by the new nation was a process for people to become citizens and thus be able to vote in places where citizenship was a requirement to do so – and indeed , citizenship was not a requirement in many states or colonies in the early days of America .
While only “ natural born ” citizens can become president , naturalized citizens enjoy the full benefits of the franchise .
There is still much debate as to what qualifies as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and it ’ s worth noting that several recent major party presidential candidates were not born in the United States – most recently Tulsi Gabbard ( who was born in American Samoa ) and Ted Cruz ( who was born in Canada ) .
The Republican nominee in 2008 , John McCain , was born in the Panama Canal Zone .
The last of these was the most problematic , as Downes v. Bidwell ruled that unincorporated territories were explicitly not the United States .
While it is easy to ascribe this to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually somewhat more profound : The colonists and the colonial governments that they formed considered it important to only allow the franchise to people who shared their values .
Thus , those with heterodox religious beliefs were not allowed to vote on the grounds that doing so would undermine both the values and the liberty of the colony .
Similarly , property holders were meant to be the main voters for the simple reason of having skin in the game .
The early colonists did not want , for example , the merchant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ politics because they were not tied to the land and thus not as subject to bad decisions .
A shopkeeper or importer can simply sell their stock and move on to the next colony .
A freeholder , working the land with his family , has far less flexibility and , the theory goes anyway , would be making more long-term decisions about what is best for the polity .
What this meant , also , is that , in places like New Jersey , women were allowed to vote until 1807 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requirement .
What changed in the early 19th century , under the expansion of the franchise under Jacksonian Democracy , was that race and gender were prized more than property rights .
But free blacks still had the right to vote in some Northern states until 1838 .
This too was not an arbitrary distinction .
Men who had been veterans of the War of 1812 , or at the very least , defended their community against Indian raids , believed that they were entitled to the franchise on the basis of that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ men were allowed to vote without meeting any property requirements , but five of the states still kept tax requirements ( frequently a poll tax ) in place .
Again , this makes sense : The force of government is largely about the spending of taxes and the use of the military .
By 1856 , all property requirements had been lifted , but tax requirements remained in place in Rhode Island and Pennsylvania , until the 20th century .
Rhode Island had what was basically a brief , low-level civil war over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Dorr War .
Indeed , anytime that post-Civil War disenfranchisement is discussed , it must include a discussion of the disenfranchisement of poor whites as well .
The Battle of Athens is a fascinating tale of World War II veterans returning from battle and refusing to be shafted at the ballot box anymore .
Of the 15 Constitutional Amendments passed since the Civil War , four involve the franchise .
The 15th Amendment bars states from restricting the franchise on the basis of race , the 19th from restrictions on the basis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tax requirements , and the 26th bars any age restrictions against those over the age of 18 .
Another Amendment , the 17th , allows for the direct election of senators , rather than having them elected by the respective state legislature – another expansion of pure democracy in America , though not an expansion of suffrage per se .
The previous method of electing senators , having them appointed by the respective state legislatures , was not an oversight on the part of the Founders .
Rather , this was to give @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the federal government .
This was seen as an important safeguard against the overreach of federal power .
Among other things , the Senate was a check on a power-hungry federal government seeking to put its tentacles into anything it could .
It was a form of distributed power that was yet another attempt by the Founders to prevent consolidation and centralization of government .
It ’ s worth noting that Western states , starting with Wyoming in 1869 , were granting women the right to vote , largely as an enticement to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which was seriously devoid of women .
The concept of “ one man , one vote ” is the cornerstone of a more pure democracy .
There were three decisions of the Earl Warren Supreme Court that definitively transformed the landscape of America into a democracy : • Baker v. Carr found that federal courts had jurisdiction over state redistricting efforts .
• Wesberry v. Sanders found that U.S. House of Representatives districts – whose borders are determined by state governments – must be roughly equal in population .
• Reynolds v. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be roughly equal in population , regardless of chamber .
This effectively means that states are not allowed to have institutions like the Senate – for example , a state government can not give each county two seats in the state legislature if the counties do not have roughly the same population size .
Residency requirements are mostly illegal in the United States , with one-year requirements struck down in Dunn v. Blumstein .
The longest residency requirement that states are allowed to have now is 50 days .
All of this raises @ @ @ @ @ @ @ democracy , as opposed to a Constitutional Republic ?
It ’ s a cliche that democracy is the right of 51 percent of the population to take away the toothbrushes of the other 49 .
The Constitution provides protections against the tyranny of the majority and one of those protections is against pure democracy .
Indeed , the Senate and Electoral College , two of the last vestiges of the anti-democratic mood that penetrated the country during Revolutionary times , provide protections to rural states to this day .
Without either of these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a proportional representation body , as some have suggested , rural states are effectively political serfs for the larger urban centers .
The counter argument presented to this is that “ land doesn ’ t vote , ” which is fair enough , but again : America was not conceived as a pure democracy where everyone had an equal say in everything .
There are many layers to the onion , many tiers that prevent one group of the population from having too much say over the others .
The Electoral College and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a voice in how the country is run , rather than being totally ruled over by people in urban centers who don ’ t own guns , can ’ t grow food , and have never met their neighbors .
It ’ s not a coincidence that Electoral College abolition is a particular ax ground by the left .
The abolition of the Electoral College would allow for sweeping changes in American public policy championed by those currently on the leftward edge of the political spectrum .
Do you want to live in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the voters of smaller states like Nevada , New Hampshire and Montana are drowned out by a handful of cities on the coasts ?
What of medium-sized states with a number of post-industrial cities with their own concerns , just as valid as those of rural America , but entirely separate from the centers of financial , cultural and academic power ?
There ’ s also the small matter of the role that the media plays in shaping public opinion , as well as the role that public works projects and other government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ostensibly “ undemocratic ” institutions act as brakes on the manipulation of public opinion .
Indeed , the Senate was specifically designed as a deliberative body that would “ cool the passions ” of the masses represented in the lower house , the House of Representatives .
The Primary System as a Laboratory of Democracy The primary process for nominating presidential candidates represents an excellent example of how pure democracy has produced poorer results than a more managed and directed one .
Most Americans , particularly younger ones , don ’ t know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary contests didn ’ t mean much .
Rather , it was the state party conventions which held greater weight and these were largely managed by party bosses rather than directly influenced by voters .
It ’ s not that this system of backroom wheeling and dealing never produced a total dud or stifled genuine needs for reform – of course it did .
However , looking at the roster of candidates produced by this process ( i.e.
, two Roosevelts , a Coolidge , an Eisenhower and a Kennedy ) , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results .
What was entirely lacking was the current primary process that we have in the United States , which still boasts a very low overall turnout and lasts from approximately the fourth quarter of the year before the election sometimes all the way up until the convention .
All told , the Democratic Primary cycle of 2020 had 12 debates planned , with 11 completed and the 12th not happening simply because Joe Biden said he wasn ’ t going to show up .
The primaries are dominated by highly motivated and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a number of highly polarizing figures have made it through the modern primary process , including Barry Goldwater ( 1964 , so a little early ) and George McGovern , but also a ton of people who the party in question loved but Americans just plain didn ’ t like ( examples of this being Walter Mondale , Michael Dukakis and Mitt Romney ) .
This is because party bosses were much more concerned about someone who could win – and all the patronage that flowed from that – rather than someone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Eisenhower is perhaps the gold standard of a president annointed by party bosses .
Senator Robert Taft , the leading light of the ideologically conservative faction of the party , lost to the choice of the party bosses , General Dwight D. Eisenhower .
While historical counterfactuals are hard to tease out , there ’ s little reason to believe that Senator Taft could have won a general election against President Truman or eventual nominee Senator Adlai Stevenson .
This is because , while there was a big thirst to roll back the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hardcore Republican base , there was virtually no taste for it in the American mainstream , which either liked the programs or had learned to live with them .
Indeed , it is largely believed that the delegates themselves might have preferred Taft to Eisenhower – but they preferred Eisenhower to losing .
It ’ s worth noting that in the last two Democratic primaries , party bosses have leaned heavily on the scale against insurgent candidate Bernie Sanders in favor of , respectively , Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden .
In contrast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the nomination in 2016 without any significant organized chicanery on the part of the party bosses .
But it ’ s not just political parties who lose when American presidential candidates are the result of a process catering to a very small niche of the electorate .
America loses also , because we are incapable of having substantive , issue-driven debates that address real problems of the American people .
Instead , we end up focusing much more on the personalities and cultural differences that divide the two parties – to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is dispute as to whether or not there is widespread election fraud in the United States .
However , there are three presidential elections that merit a brief discussion in our exploration of the franchise in America .
The election of 1876 was so controversial and potentially fraud-ridden that it was the subject of a Congressional Electoral Commission in response to a major Constitutional crisis .
There were 20 electoral votes outstanding , with the Democratic candidate one shy of winning , with the 20 outstanding electoral votes all coming from states with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was convened by the Democratic House and the Republican Senate , with five members from each body and five from the Supreme Court of the United States .
One of the tricks in question is actually an exploit of pure democracy : In those days , there were no official ballots .
Ballots or “ tickets ” were generally printed up by political parties or their partisans and distributed to the voters .
Southern Democrats used ballots with Abraham Lincoln on them in an attempt to fool illiterate voters into voting for their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” was a slogan at the time and Democratic candidate Samuel Tilden ’ s supporters declared that they had 100,000 men ready to march on the capital and install him as president if need be .
A party-line vote of the Electoral Commission gave all the votes to Republican Rutherford B. Hayes , making him president .
However , as a concession , the South got the end of Reconstruction and the withdrawal of all remaining federal troops .
Democrats remained unsatisfied , with the House of Representatives going as far to pass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Electoral Count Act of 1887 made the state legislature the definitive arbiter of who counted as an elector , which was the subject of Bush v. Gore , another controversial election over 100 years later .
The 1960 election was disputed as well , but not formally and officially like in 1876 .
The claim is this : That the Democratic Party used friendly city machines in Dallas and Illinois to win states for John F. Kennedy that he otherwise would not have won – and that would have delivered the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not a marginal theory .
Senators such as Everett Dirksen and Barry Goldwater have stated that they believe there was fraud in the election .
All told , Republicans in 11 states sought to have the vote overturned , including in Illinois and Texas .
A special prosecutor charged 650 people with voter fraud , but there were no convictions .
It is unknown to what degree Nixon felt he had been cheated , but he never seriously pursued it , believing it would divide the nation and tarnish the office of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 2000 election , where chicanery is alleged to have taken place not at the ballot box , but at the Supreme Court .
It was the Supreme Court who stopped the recount under the Equal Protection Clause because they did not approve of how the recount was being carried out .
Further , a new standard could not be agreed upon because of the time frame – electors had to be selected by December 12 .
This allowed a previous vote count certified by Secretary of State Katherine Harris ( a Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Here the question was not about whether or not someone was ballot-box stuffing .
No one has seriously or credibly proposed this .
What was in question is how the votes were counted .
This calls to mind an apocryphal quote often attributed to Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin : Several have written that if a statewide recount were done , rather than a county-based one , that it was Vice President Al Gore who would have won .
But the question here is what was the best way to count the votes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parties prefer the method resulting in their candidate winning .
Beyond the Theory : Why Pure Democracy Is Bad In Its Execution Once the notion of a universal franchise enters the public vernacular , there is then no limit on who should be included .
Andrew Yang became the first major party presidential candidate to endorse lowering the voting age to 16 , but others have endorsed removing age requirements for voting entirely .
Indeed , there is an entire current of thought that says that citizenship shouldn ’ t be a requirement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ municipal elections ) or even that the entire world should be allowed a say in who becomes the President of the United States .
While these might all sound like ridiculous proposals – and we agree that they are – they are the thin edge of the wedge , the tip of the spear that will eventually introduce this kind of discourse into the political mainstream and perhaps much sooner than anyone thinks .
If the only criteria for who gets to vote is that you are “ affected by government policy ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a say , why not let the entire populations of France and Bangladesh and China have a vote ?
There is a logic to universal suffrage that does not end with America ’ s adult population or even at its borders .
Consider the fight against voter ID laws in the United States .
When one accepts that voting is a universal right , it makes perfect sense that having or not having an ID shouldn ’ t be an impediment to exercising that right .
A lack of voter ID laws has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ perhaps more disturbing is the growing practice of ballot harvesting .
The Democratic Party likes ballot harvesting so much that they tried to insert it into the stimulus and relief bill targeted at people suffering from the effects of the Wuhan Coronavirus outbreak of 2020 .
Put simply , this is when paper ballots are collected by intermediaries between the state and the voter , then delivered en masse .
If this sounds like it ’ s a ripe place for voter fraud to happen , that ’ s because it is .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ do-over of the 2019 North Carolina election , where Democrats were , perhaps for the first time ever , deeply concerned with the specter of voter fraud .
Orange County , California , was home to a whopping quarter million ballots delivered on Election Day alone .
In practice , ballot harvesters go around collecting ballots for people who vote for the candidate they want to win .
In the case of North Carolina , there were allegations that ballots had been discarded because people voted for the “ wrong ” candidate .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ outbreak , there has been a push – mostly from Democrats – to offer mail-in ballots .
These are different from absentee ballots , which are sent out to specific voters on a by-request basis .
Compare this with the push for mass mail-in voting : This is just printing up a ton of ballots , sending them out and letting everyone mail them in .
There are few , if any , protections in place for preventing people from voting twice , preventing non-registered voters from voting , or preventing illegal aliens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ votes that shouldn ’ t , a legal voter has their vote cancelled out or nullified .
There ’ s not much of a way to verify and track this process to ensure that everyone who votes is having their vote counted .
But again , it is very much in keeping with the logic of “ one man , one vote.
” Those who espouse the ideology of a pure democracy are always looking for ways to make it easier for people to vote .
Perhaps , not coincidentally , making it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up the door to electoral fraud .
And this is really the crux of the matter when it comes down to pure democracy : The transition to a purer democracy has coincided with greater influence among unofficial kingmakers who control the process while also consolidating greater power in Washington , D.C .
In practice , this has meant favoring a bureaucratic elite who effectively act as unelected legislators .
Most of the regulations put in place by the alphabet soup of federal agencies aren ’ t there by statute , but are in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the legislature who have abdicated their legislative authority .
What ’ s more , these unofficial kingmakers are often shadowy figures whose names ( to say nothing of their intentions ) are mostly unknown .
These are not the traditional party bosses who were , in a sense , beholden to their people in the form of having to provide patronage and pork and other tangible results .
Rather the new kingmakers of our pure democracy are the mass media , party activists and others with no skin in the game and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Their angle is one entirely of self-interest and not to the broader body politic , to say nothing of future generations .

“I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” Pledge of Allegiance, with a revision made in 1923
Conservatives are generally quick to point out that America is a republic, not a democracy. But what really is the difference, and are they even right?
Voting in America has changed considerably since the days of our founding. Back then, the government didn’t even print official ballots. Instead, you got ballots from the candidate who wanted your support. Sometimes voting took place in public, so everyone knew who you voted for. And, of course, the franchise was largely restricted to white, male property owners.
Now, anyone who turns 18 can vote. And the Democratic Party wants to increase ballot access by automatically registering anyone who gets a driver’s license. Democrats even pushed for mail-in ballots for the 2020 election to make voting even easier – and more open to voter fraud. But is any of this a good thing?
Indeed, it is worth considering the transformation of the United States from a Constitutional Republic, ruled by law with the input of the people, to a total democracy, where the will of the people dominates all other discussion.
A Brief History of the Franchise in America
Open up your pocket Constitution and find the part where it says who can vote and who can’t. You’ll come up short. That’s because the Constitution delegates this right to the states. And while there are some amendments that, for example, say states can’t restrict the franchise on the basis of race, gender or being over the age of 18, otherwise there is broad leeway given in terms of who can vote and who can’t.
Before the United States existed, people were still voting and there were oftentimes even more restrictions in place. Property qualifications were most common, but there was often also a religious test involved. For example, Plymouth Colony required that voters be “orthodox in the fundamentals of religion,” which would have likely excluded even Catholics from voting. Indeed, Catholics, Quakers and Baptists were frequently forbidden from voting in early colonial elections. (Jews were forbidden from state office in Maryland until 1828, because of a state law requiring affirmation of belief in an afterlife.)
One of the first laws drafted by the new nation was a process for people to become citizens and thus be able to vote in places where citizenship was a requirement to do so – and indeed, citizenship was not a requirement in many states or colonies in the early days of America. While only “natural born” citizens can become president, naturalized citizens enjoy the full benefits of the franchise. There is still much debate as to what qualifies as a “natural born” citizen, and it’s worth noting that several recent major party presidential candidates were not born in the United States – most recently Tulsi Gabbard (who was born in American Samoa) and Ted Cruz (who was born in Canada). The Republican nominee in 2008, John McCain, was born in the Panama Canal Zone. The last of these was the most problematic, as Downes v. Bidwell ruled that unincorporated territories were explicitly not the United States.
While it is easy to ascribe this to petty religious bigotry, the reason is actually somewhat more profound: The colonists and the colonial governments that they formed considered it important to only allow the franchise to people who shared their values. Thus, those with heterodox religious beliefs were not allowed to vote on the grounds that doing so would undermine both the values and the liberty of the colony.
Similarly, property holders were meant to be the main voters for the simple reason of having skin in the game. The early colonists did not want, for example, the merchant class to have an outsized say in politics because they were not tied to the land and thus not as subject to bad decisions. A shopkeeper or importer can simply sell their stock and move on to the next colony. A freeholder, working the land with his family, has far less flexibility and, the theory goes anyway, would be making more long-term decisions about what is best for the polity.
What this meant, also, is that, in places like New Jersey, women were allowed to vote until 1807, provided that they could meet the property requirement. What changed in the early 19th century, under the expansion of the franchise under Jacksonian Democracy, was that race and gender were prized more than property rights. But free blacks still had the right to vote in some Northern states until 1838.
This too was not an arbitrary distinction. Men who had been veterans of the War of 1812, or at the very least, defended their community against Indian raids, believed that they were entitled to the franchise on the basis of that service. By 1856, free white men were allowed to vote without meeting any property requirements, but five of the states still kept tax requirements (frequently a poll tax) in place. Again, this makes sense: The force of government is largely about the spending of taxes and the use of the military.
By 1856, all property requirements had been lifted, but tax requirements remained in place in Rhode Island and Pennsylvania, until the 20th century. Rhode Island had what was basically a brief, low-level civil war over the question of property requirements known as the Dorr War. Indeed, anytime that post-Civil War disenfranchisement is discussed, it must include a discussion of the disenfranchisement of poor whites as well. The Battle of Athens is a fascinating tale of World War II veterans returning from battle and refusing to be shafted at the ballot box anymore.
Of the 15 Constitutional Amendments passed since the Civil War, four involve the franchise. The 15th Amendment bars states from restricting the franchise on the basis of race, the 19th from restrictions on the basis of gender, the 24th bars any tax requirements, and the 26th bars any age restrictions against those over the age of 18. Another Amendment, the 17th, allows for the direct election of senators, rather than having them elected by the respective state legislature – another expansion of pure democracy in America, though not an expansion of suffrage per se.
The previous method of electing senators, having them appointed by the respective state legislatures, was not an oversight on the part of the Founders. Rather, this was to give a voice to the state governments in the federal government. This was seen as an important safeguard against the overreach of federal power. Among other things, the Senate was a check on a power-hungry federal government seeking to put its tentacles into anything it could. It was a form of distributed power that was yet another attempt by the Founders to prevent consolidation and centralization of government.
It’s worth noting that Western states, starting with Wyoming in 1869, were granting women the right to vote, largely as an enticement to get them to move to the region, which was seriously devoid of women.
The concept of “one man, one vote” is the cornerstone of a more pure democracy. There were three decisions of the Earl Warren Supreme Court that definitively transformed the landscape of America into a democracy:
Baker v. Carr found that federal courts had jurisdiction over state redistricting efforts.
Wesberry v. Sanders found that U.S. House of Representatives districts – whose borders are determined by state governments – must be roughly equal in population.
Reynolds v. Sims found that state legislature districts must be roughly equal in population, regardless of chamber. This effectively means that states are not allowed to have institutions like the Senate – for example, a state government cannot give each county two seats in the state legislature if the counties do not have roughly the same population size.
Residency requirements are mostly illegal in the United States, with one-year requirements struck down in Dunn v. Blumstein. The longest residency requirement that states are allowed to have now is 50 days.
What’s So Wrong With Democracy?
All of this raises the question of what is wrong with democracy, as opposed to a Constitutional Republic? It’s a cliche that democracy is the right of 51 percent of the population to take away the toothbrushes of the other 49. The Constitution provides protections against the tyranny of the majority and one of those protections is against pure democracy.
Indeed, the Senate and Electoral College, two of the last vestiges of the anti-democratic mood that penetrated the country during Revolutionary times, provide protections to rural states to this day. Without either of these, or with a Senate converted into a proportional representation body, as some have suggested, rural states are effectively political serfs for the larger urban centers.
The counter argument presented to this is that “land doesn’t vote,” which is fair enough, but again: America was not conceived as a pure democracy where everyone had an equal say in everything. There are many layers to the onion, many tiers that prevent one group of the population from having too much say over the others. The Electoral College and the Senate allow rural states to have a voice in how the country is run, rather than being totally ruled over by people in urban centers who don’t own guns, can’t grow food, and have never met their neighbors.
It’s not a coincidence that Electoral College abolition is a particular ax ground by the left. The abolition of the Electoral College would allow for sweeping changes in American public policy championed by those currently on the leftward edge of the political spectrum. Do you want to live in a country where, for example, the voters of smaller states like Nevada, New Hampshire and Montana are drowned out by a handful of cities on the coasts? What of medium-sized states with a number of post-industrial cities with their own concerns, just as valid as those of rural America, but entirely separate from the centers of financial, cultural and academic power?
There’s also the small matter of the role that the media plays in shaping public opinion, as well as the role that public works projects and other government spending play in essentially buying votes. Ostensibly “undemocratic” institutions act as brakes on the manipulation of public opinion. Indeed, the Senate was specifically designed as a deliberative body that would “cool the passions” of the masses represented in the lower house, the House of Representatives.
The Primary System as a Laboratory of Democracy
The primary process for nominating presidential candidates represents an excellent example of how pure democracy has produced poorer results than a more managed and directed one.
Most Americans, particularly younger ones, don’t know that prior to the 1970s, the primary contests didn’t mean much. Rather, it was the state party conventions which held greater weight and these were largely managed by party bosses rather than directly influenced by voters. It’s not that this system of backroom wheeling and dealing never produced a total dud or stifled genuine needs for reform – of course it did. However, looking at the roster of candidates produced by this process (i.e., two Roosevelts, a Coolidge, an Eisenhower and a Kennedy), it’s hard to argue with the results.
What was entirely lacking was the current primary process that we have in the United States, which still boasts a very low overall turnout and lasts from approximately the fourth quarter of the year before the election sometimes all the way up until the convention. All told, the Democratic Primary cycle of 2020 had 12 debates planned, with 11 completed and the 12th not happening simply because Joe Biden said he wasn’t going to show up.
The primaries are dominated by highly motivated and often highly ideological voters. This means that a number of highly polarizing figures have made it through the modern primary process, including Barry Goldwater (1964, so a little early) and George McGovern, but also a ton of people who the party in question loved but Americans just plain didn’t like (examples of this being Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis and Mitt Romney). This is because party bosses were much more concerned about someone who could win – and all the patronage that flowed from that – rather than someone who shared their ideological picadillos.
President Eisenhower is perhaps the gold standard of a president annointed by party bosses. Senator Robert Taft, the leading light of the ideologically conservative faction of the party, lost to the choice of the party bosses, General Dwight D. Eisenhower. While historical counterfactuals are hard to tease out, there’s little reason to believe that Senator Taft could have won a general election against President Truman or eventual nominee Senator Adlai Stevenson. This is because, while there was a big thirst to roll back the whole of the New Deal among the hardcore Republican base, there was virtually no taste for it in the American mainstream, which either liked the programs or had learned to live with them. Indeed, it is largely believed that the delegates themselves might have preferred Taft to Eisenhower – but they preferred Eisenhower to losing.
It’s worth noting that in the last two Democratic primaries, party bosses have leaned heavily on the scale against insurgent candidate Bernie Sanders in favor of, respectively, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. In contrast, Donald Trump was able to coast to the nomination in 2016 without any significant organized chicanery on the part of the party bosses.
But it’s not just political parties who lose when American presidential candidates are the result of a process catering to a very small niche of the electorate. America loses also, because we are incapable of having substantive, issue-driven debates that address real problems of the American people. Instead, we end up focusing much more on the personalities and cultural differences that divide the two parties – to the detriment of the entire nation.
Election Fraud in the United States
There is dispute as to whether or not there is widespread election fraud in the United States. However, there are three presidential elections that merit a brief discussion in our exploration of the franchise in America.
The 1876 Election
The election of 1876 was so controversial and potentially fraud-ridden that it was the subject of a Congressional Electoral Commission in response to a major Constitutional crisis. There were 20 electoral votes outstanding, with the Democratic candidate one shy of winning, with the 20 outstanding electoral votes all coming from states with potentially massive voter fraud. The Commission was convened by the Democratic House and the Republican Senate, with five members from each body and five from the Supreme Court of the United States.
One of the tricks in question is actually an exploit of pure democracy: In those days, there were no official ballots. Ballots or “tickets” were generally printed up by political parties or their partisans and distributed to the voters. Southern Democrats used ballots with Abraham Lincoln on them in an attempt to fool illiterate voters into voting for their slate.
“Tilden or Blood!” was a slogan at the time and Democratic candidate Samuel Tilden’s supporters declared that they had 100,000 men ready to march on the capital and install him as president if need be. A party-line vote of the Electoral Commission gave all the votes to Republican Rutherford B. Hayes, making him president. However, as a concession, the South got the end of Reconstruction and the withdrawal of all remaining federal troops.
Democrats remained unsatisfied, with the House of Representatives going as far to pass a non-binding resolution declaring Tilden the winner. The Electoral Count Act of 1887 made the state legislature the definitive arbiter of who counted as an elector, which was the subject of Bush v. Gore, another controversial election over 100 years later.
The 1960 Election
The 1960 election was disputed as well, but not formally and officially like in 1876. The claim is this: That the Democratic Party used friendly city machines in Dallas and Illinois to win states for John F. Kennedy that he otherwise would not have won – and that would have delivered the presidency to Republican Richard Nixon.
This is not a marginal theory. Senators such as Everett Dirksen and Barry Goldwater have stated that they believe there was fraud in the election. All told, Republicans in 11 states sought to have the vote overturned, including in Illinois and Texas. A special prosecutor charged 650 people with voter fraud, but there were no convictions.
It is unknown to what degree Nixon felt he had been cheated, but he never seriously pursued it, believing it would divide the nation and tarnish the office of the presidency.
The 2000 Election
Finally, there is the 2000 election, where chicanery is alleged to have taken place not at the ballot box, but at the Supreme Court. It was the Supreme Court who stopped the recount under the Equal Protection Clause because they did not approve of how the recount was being carried out. Further, a new standard could not be agreed upon because of the time frame – electors had to be selected by December 12.
This allowed a previous vote count certified by Secretary of State Katherine Harris (a Republican and Bush family ally) to stand.
Here the question was not about whether or not someone was ballot-box stuffing. No one has seriously or credibly proposed this. What was in question is how the votes were counted. This calls to mind an apocryphal quote often attributed to Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin:
“The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”
Several have written that if a statewide recount were done, rather than a county-based one, that it was Vice President Al Gore who would have won. But the question here is what was the best way to count the votes. And unsurprisingly, partisans of both parties prefer the method resulting in their candidate winning.
Beyond the Theory: Why Pure Democracy Is Bad In Its Execution
Once the notion of a universal franchise enters the public vernacular, there is then no limit on who should be included. Andrew Yang became the first major party presidential candidate to endorse lowering the voting age to 16, but others have endorsed removing age requirements for voting entirely. Indeed, there is an entire current of thought that says that citizenship shouldn’t be a requirement (it isn’t in some municipal elections) or even that the entire world should be allowed a say in who becomes the President of the United States.
While these might all sound like ridiculous proposals – and we agree that they are – they are the thin edge of the wedge, the tip of the spear that will eventually introduce this kind of discourse into the political mainstream and perhaps much sooner than anyone thinks. If the only criteria for who gets to vote is that you are “affected by government policy” or some such and thus entitled to a say, why not let the entire populations of France and Bangladesh and China have a vote? There is a logic to universal suffrage that does not end with America’s adult population or even at its borders.
Consider the fight against voter ID laws in the United States. When one accepts that voting is a universal right, it makes perfect sense that having or not having an ID shouldn’t be an impediment to exercising that right. A lack of voter ID laws has been tied to voter fraud. But perhaps more disturbing is the growing practice of ballot harvesting.
Ballot Harvesting
The Democratic Party likes ballot harvesting so much that they tried to insert it into the stimulus and relief bill targeted at people suffering from the effects of the Wuhan Coronavirus outbreak of 2020. Put simply, this is when paper ballots are collected by intermediaries between the state and the voter, then delivered en masse. If this sounds like it’s a ripe place for voter fraud to happen, that’s because it is. Ballot harvesting played a role in the do-over of the 2019 North Carolina election, where Democrats were, perhaps for the first time ever, deeply concerned with the specter of voter fraud.
Orange County, California, was home to a whopping quarter million ballots delivered on Election Day alone. In practice, ballot harvesters go around collecting ballots for people who vote for the candidate they want to win. In the case of North Carolina, there were allegations that ballots had been discarded because people voted for the “wrong” candidate.
In the wake of the Wuhan Coronavirus outbreak, there has been a push – mostly from Democrats – to offer mail-in ballots. These are different from absentee ballots, which are sent out to specific voters on a by-request basis. Compare this with the push for mass mail-in voting: This is just printing up a ton of ballots, sending them out and letting everyone mail them in. There are few, if any, protections in place for preventing people from voting twice, preventing non-registered voters from voting, or preventing illegal aliens from voting. For every person who votes that shouldn’t, a legal voter has their vote cancelled out or nullified.
There’s not much of a way to verify and track this process to ensure that everyone who votes is having their vote counted. But again, it is very much in keeping with the logic of “one man, one vote.” Those who espouse the ideology of a pure democracy are always looking for ways to make it easier for people to vote.
Perhaps, not coincidentally, making it easier for people to vote also opens up the door to electoral fraud.
And this is really the crux of the matter when it comes down to pure democracy: The transition to a purer democracy has coincided with greater influence among unofficial kingmakers who control the process while also consolidating greater power in Washington, D.C. In practice, this has meant favoring a bureaucratic elite who effectively act as unelected legislators. Most of the regulations put in place by the alphabet soup of federal agencies aren’t there by statute, but are in fact part of powers delegated to them by the legislature who have abdicated their legislative authority.
What’s more, these unofficial kingmakers are often shadowy figures whose names (to say nothing of their intentions) are mostly unknown. These are not the traditional party bosses who were, in a sense, beholden to their people in the form of having to provide patronage and pork and other tangible results. Rather the new kingmakers of our pure democracy are the mass media, party activists and others with no skin in the game and little in the way of public accountability. Their angle is one entirely of self-interest and not to the broader body politic, to say nothing of future generations.
Written by Sam Jacobs Article posted with permission from Ammo.com