thestream--2020-11-30--Christian Friends, Remember: There is Only One Messiah

Although millions of Christians zealously support Donald Trump , none of them think that Trump died for their sins and rose from the dead on the third day .
In that sense , none of them confuse Trump with Jesus .
At the same time , many Christians continue to exalt Trump in very unhealthy , even Messianic ways .
Under no circumstances , can this be for our good ( or the good of the nation , let alone for Trump ’ s good ) .
And for those still believe that the election results will be overturned , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Messianic expectations and attitudes , the better .
Just today , I heard a Christian leader apply Psalm 2 to Donald Trump .
Yes , Psalm 2 , a coronation psalm that ultimately applies to Jesus .
It includes these famous verses in which the Messiah recounts the decree that the Lord Himself made over Him , the King : “ I will proclaim the Lord ’ s decree : He said to me , ‘ You are my Son ; today I have become your father .
Ask Me , and I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ends of the earth your possession .
You will break them with a rod of iron ; you will dash them to pieces like pottery.
’ ” ( Psalm 2:7–9 ) Yes , this psalm , in which the Messiah is described as God ’ s Son , the one who will rule the nations , was applied to Trump – not that he was Jesus , but that the spirit of the psalm could be applied to him .
This is not only a blatant misuse of the Bible .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ circumstances should we put such hope in a man .
The opening verses of Psalm 2 were also applied to God and Trump , in particular , to the attempt to steal the election from him : “ Why do the nations conspire and the peoples plot in vain ?
The kings of the earth rise up and the rulers band together against the LORD and against his anointed , saying , ‘ Let us break their chains and throw off their shackles.
’ ” ( Psalm 2:1–3 ) So , this psalm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ installed by God as Israel ’ s king , and with ultimate application to Jesus the Messiah , is now applied to Donald Trump .
Trump is Not Our Savior Do you understand why I continue to shout from the rooftops that Trump is not our Savior ?
Do you understand why I continue to be concerned about our idolatrous attachment to him ?
( Go ahead and accuse me of virtue signaling .
I ’ ll keep on warning . )
Right now , tens of millions of Americans , including many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ question Trump-appointed judges or Republican governors or the FBI or the DOJ , or anyone in Trump ’ s doghouse , before they will question a word that Trump says .
Why ?
What power does he exert that makes him the only one whose words we can trust ?
And does he have such a perfect record of always telling “ the truth and nothing but the truth ” ?
These things concern me , not as a Trump-basher , but as a Trump-supporter .
They concern me as someone who has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ radical left and is concerned about the real attack on our freedoms , as someone who believes that Trump can be a bulwark against the left and its threats .
But I am also concerned that four more years of Trump ( either now or in 2024 ) will do tremendous harm if we look to him adoringly as the only man who can save the nation ( and protect the church ! )
and if we overlook his failings .
In my book Evangelicals at the Crossroads : Will We Pass the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chapter to the question , “ Did God Uniquely Raise Up Donald Trump ?
” I wrote that , without question , we can view Trump as “ anointed ” in a wrong and dangerous sense , as if nothing he says or does can be questioned .
We dare not challenge God ’ s anointed !
And we can certainly compromise our witness by turning a blind eye to his failings and flaws .
At the same time , with spiritual eyes , we can see how God raised up someone like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrecking ball of a man , for such a time as this .
So , my answer to the question was a qualified “ Yes , ” based on the surprising prophecies pointing to his 2016 election ( some before he was even a candidate ) and the great unlikelihood of his success .
Jon Voight and A Dangerous Misuse of the Bible The problem is that certain Christian leaders , right up to this moment , state that : 1 ) Trump , like King Cyrus of Persia , was “ anointed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even though he was a non-believer ; and 2 ) we can therefore point to other passages in the Bible which speak of God ’ s anointed and apply them to Trump ( as with this Christian leader praying Psalm 2 with reference to Trump ) .
To repeat : this is a dangerous misuse of the Bible , leading directly to us placing Messianic expectations on Trump .
( For those who are not aware , the Hebrew word Messiah and the Greek word Christ both mean “ anointed.
” So , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] because He is the preeminent “ anointed ” one . )
This past Saturday , legendary actor Jon Voight released a video raising grave concerns about a Biden presidency .
He said , “ We ’ re heading down a street that has no name now .
We must not allow our nation to crumble .
Let me warn you all that we are in great danger if we fall under a Biden administration.
” Yes , “ The left are burning and destroying our cities .
We are willing to fight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down our flag but to raise her up with the glory of this land of the free.
” These are certainly grave concerns , which were only underscored by Voight ’ s reference to the destructive California policies implemented by Gov .
Newsom .
But Voight also said this : “ Let the truth show itself that President Trump is the only man that can save this nation.
” With all respect to Voight ’ s vision for a free America , I do not believe that Trump is the only man who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Had Voight said , “ I believe Trump is the best man for the job , ” that would be one thing , and we could have a healthy discussion about it .
Had he said , “ Trump , not Biden , can stop our descent into socialism and government overreach , ” I would have concurred .
But to say he ’ s the only man who can save the nation ( or as I ’ ve heard others say , save the free world ) , is to engage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certainly at an all-time high in terms of which direction America could go , and in certain ways , Trump has been a wedge in the store , delaying some of the lurch to the left .
But we do him a disservice , not to mention dishonor God , when we speak of him or pray for him in Messianic terms .
Such devotion to a mere human never ends well .
When will we learn ?
Dr. Michael Brown ( www.askdrbrown.org ) is the host of the nationally syndicated Line of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is Evangelicals at the Crossroads : Will We Pass the Trump Test ?
Connect with him on Facebook , Twitter or YouTube .

Although millions of Christians zealously support Donald Trump, none of them think that Trump died for their sins and rose from the dead on the third day. In that sense, none of them confuse Trump with Jesus. At the same time, many Christians continue to exalt Trump in very unhealthy, even Messianic ways.
Under no circumstances, can this be for our good (or the good of the nation, let alone for Trump’s good). And for those who still believe that the election results will be overturned, the quicker we get rid of these Messianic expectations and attitudes, the better.
A Coronation Psalm
Just today, I heard a Christian leader apply Psalm 2 to Donald Trump. Yes, Psalm 2, a coronation psalm that ultimately applies to Jesus.
It includes these famous verses in which the Messiah recounts the decree that the Lord Himself made over Him, the King: “I will proclaim the Lord’s decree: He said to me, ‘You are my Son; today I have become your father. Ask Me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession. You will break them with a rod of iron; you will dash them to pieces like pottery.’” (Psalm 2:7–9)
Yes, this psalm, in which the Messiah is described as God’s Son, the one who will rule the nations, was applied to Trump – not that he was Jesus, but that the spirit of the psalm could be applied to him.
This is not only a blatant misuse of the Bible. It is a dangerous misuse. Under no circumstances should we put such hope in a man.
The opening verses of Psalm 2 were also applied to God and Trump, in particular, to the attempt to steal the election from him: “Why do the nations conspire and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth rise up and the rulers band together against the LORD and against his anointed, saying, ‘Let us break their chains and throw off their shackles.’” (Psalm 2:1–3)
So, this psalm, with original application to David, installed by God as Israel’s king, and with ultimate application to Jesus the Messiah, is now applied to Donald Trump.
Trump is Not Our Savior
Do you understand why I continue to shout from the rooftops that Trump is not our Savior? Do you understand why I continue to be concerned about our idolatrous attachment to him? (Go ahead and accuse me of virtue signaling. I’ll keep on warning.)
Right now, tens of millions of Americans, including many Christian conservatives, are more likely to question Trump-appointed judges or Republican governors or the FBI or the DOJ, or anyone in Trump’s doghouse, before they will question a word that Trump says. Why? What power does he exert that makes him the only one whose words we can trust? And does he have such a perfect record of always telling “the truth and nothing but the truth”?
These things concern me, not as a Trump-basher, but as a Trump-supporter. They concern me as someone who has also warned about the dangers of the radical left and is concerned about the real attack on our freedoms, as someone who believes that Trump can be a bulwark against the left and its threats.
But I am also concerned that four more years of Trump (either now or in 2024) will do tremendous harm if we look to him adoringly as the only man who can save the nation (and protect the church!) and if we overlook his failings.
In my book Evangelicals at the Crossroads: Will We Pass the Trump Test?, I devoted a chapter to the question, “Did God Uniquely Raise Up Donald Trump?”
I wrote that, without question, we can view Trump as “anointed” in a wrong and dangerous sense, as if nothing he says or does can be questioned. We dare not challenge God’s anointed! And we can certainly compromise our witness by turning a blind eye to his failings and flaws. At the same time, with spiritual eyes, we can see how God raised up someone like him, a chaos candidate and a wrecking ball of a man, for such a time as this.
So, my answer to the question was a qualified “Yes,” based on the surprising prophecies pointing to his 2016 election (some before he was even a candidate) and the great unlikelihood of his success.
Jon Voight and A Dangerous Misuse of the Bible
The problem is that certain Christian leaders, right up to this moment, state that: 1) Trump, like King Cyrus of Persia, was “anointed” by God for special purposes, even though he was a non-believer; and 2) we can therefore point to other passages in the Bible which speak of God’s anointed and apply them to Trump (as with this Christian leader praying Psalm 2 with reference to Trump).
To repeat: this is a dangerous misuse of the Bible, leading directly to us placing Messianic expectations on Trump. (For those who are not aware, the Hebrew word Messiah and the Greek word Christ both mean “anointed.” So, Jesus is the Christ [= Messiah] because He is the preeminent “anointed” one.)
This past Saturday, legendary actor Jon Voight released a video raising grave concerns about a Biden presidency. He said, “We’re heading down a street that has no name now. We must not allow our nation to crumble. Let me warn you all that we are in great danger if we fall under a Biden administration.”
Yes, “The left are burning and destroying our cities. We are willing to fight for freedom, not freedom to burn down our flag but to raise her up with the glory of this land of the free.”
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
These are certainly grave concerns, which were only underscored by Voight’s reference to the destructive California policies implemented by Gov. Newsom.
But Voight also said this: “Let the truth show itself that President Trump is the only man that can save this nation.”
With all respect to Voight’s vision for a free America, I do not believe that Trump is the only man who can save the nation. Absolutely not.
Had Voight said, “I believe Trump is the best man for the job,” that would be one thing, and we could have a healthy discussion about it. Had he said, “Trump, not Biden, can stop our descent into socialism and government overreach,” I would have concurred.
But to say he’s the only man who can save the nation (or as I’ve heard others say, save the free world), is to engage in dangerous hyperbole.
The stakes are certainly at an all-time high in terms of which direction America could go, and in certain ways, Trump has been a wedge in the door, delaying some of the lurch to the left.
But we do him a disservice, not to mention dishonor God, when we speak of him or pray for him in Messianic terms. Such devotion to a mere human never ends well. When will we learn?
Dr. Michael Brown (www.askdrbrown.org) is the host of the nationally syndicated Line of Fire radio program. His latest book is Evangelicals at the Crossroads: Will We Pass the Trump Test? Connect with him on Facebook, Twitter or YouTube.


thestream--2020-11-29--The Curse of Adolescent Progressivism

The Curse of Adolescent Progressivism

A few years ago Pope Francis dropped a striking term into a homily .
He warned of “ adolescent progressivism ” .
I hope this becomes his memorable slogan rather than “ who am I to judge ?
” Because it is right up there with Pope Benedict XVI ’ s warning about “ the dictatorship of relativism.
” The two phrases go hand in hand because “ adolescent progressivism ” is the manifestation of “ the dictatorship of relativism ” .
Why does Pope Francis refer to progressivism as “ adolescent ” ?
We have to stop and examine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first thing about the adolescent is that they are immature , but they don ’ t know it .
The typical sophomore mentality is that of the “ know-it-all ” who has acquired a little bit of knowledge and thinks he has therefore acquired wisdom .
Secondly , the adolescent know-it-all is a sucker for ideologies .
The adolescent is typically idealistic and wants to fight for the right , but with their limited knowledge and assumption of wisdom they tend to latch on to some great and worthy cause .
It might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It might be some great economic theory , environmentalism , gender politics or it might be religious .
The adolescent wants to change the world and so he joins some great movement and ideology .
He ’ s always ready to join the club , go with the crowd and wave the flag .
Because his own personality is still in formation and he lacks the confidence to think for himself and act on his convictions he joins some great crusade .
Third : progressives are sentimentalists .
They have strong emotions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than their still nascent intellectual abilities .
The adolescent typically rejects arguments based on reason , facts , duties and responsibilities .
Because he is immature he responds instead with heightened emotions .
The cause he or she has espoused becomes a great moral crusade because it is a great emotional event .
Ideologues play on this constantly and leaders of ideological movements always seek to manipulate the adolescent progressive ’ s emotions .
The fourth mark of the adolescent is that he is naive about human nature .
He jumps on an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he and mankind in general is good .
When he discovers that some people are bad , he projects all the darkness on to the person or group he perceives to be the enemy .
Along with the fourth sign of needing someone to blame , the adolescent progressive must always either be a victim or find a victim to feel sorry for .
Once they find the victim , the adolescent progressive will portray the victim as totally good , pure and abused .
Once they have found the totally good victim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ becomes even more evil .
Just as the rebellious adolescent irrationally demonizes the parent and authority figures in his life , so the adolescent progressive demonizes authority figures and places himself on the side of the victim .
He does this with the sort of heightened self righteousness that only the adolescent can muster .
The sixth mark of the adolescent progressive is that he or she mistakes their ideology for their religion .
They believe that their particular worthy cause is the same thing as their religion .
They are certain that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what they have done in their immature lack of understanding is to mistake their narrow ideology with their religion .
They thus limit their religion to their ideology and are blind to the vast areas of their religion that they have yet to explore .
This Progressivism is of the World Finally , Pope Francis is clear that this sort of progressive , ideologically based progressivism is of this world .
It normally adopts the values and struggles that are current in the worldly arena and makes them part of the Christian struggle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ struggles in the world , but it is always bigger and more universal than the particular struggles the worldlings espouse .
Adolescent progressivism exists with society but it also exists within churches , school , colleges and workplaces .
It eats away like a hideous cancer destroying creativity , joy and a positive spirit .
It should also be obvious that you don ’ t have to be a teenager to be an adolescent progressive .
There are adolescent progressives of all ages .
Adolescent progressivism is a counterfeit religion – and remember @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like the real thing .
Dwight Longenecker ’ s latest book Immortal Combat-Confronting the Heart of Darkness explores the dynamics of deception in more depth .
Follow his blog at dwightlongenecker.com

A few years ago Pope Francis dropped a striking term into a homily. He warned of “adolescent progressivism”. I hope this becomes his memorable slogan rather than “who am I to judge?” Because it is right up there with Pope Benedict XVI’s warning about “the dictatorship of relativism.”
The two phrases go hand in hand because “adolescent progressivism” is the manifestation of “the dictatorship of relativism”. Why does Pope Francis refer to progressivism as “adolescent”? We have to stop and examine the dynamic of the adolescent.
The Adolescent Know-It-All
The first thing about the adolescent is that they are immature, but they don’t know it. The typical sophomore mentality is that of the “know-it-all” who has acquired a little bit of knowledge and thinks he has therefore acquired wisdom.
Secondly, the adolescent know-it-all is a sucker for ideologies. The adolescent is typically idealistic and wants to fight for the right, but with their limited knowledge and assumption of wisdom they tend to latch on to some great and worthy cause. It might be right wing or left wing politics. It might be some great economic theory, environmentalism, gender politics or it might be religious.
Adolescent progressivism is a counterfeit religion – and remember counterfeits are always designed to look like the real thing.
The adolescent wants to change the world and so he joins some great movement and ideology. He’s always ready to join the club, go with the crowd and wave the flag. Because his own personality is still in formation and he lacks the confidence to think for himself and act on his convictions he joins some great crusade.
Adolescents are Sentimentalists and Naïve
Third: progressives are sentimentalists. They have strong emotions and will act on their feelings rather than their still nascent intellectual abilities. The adolescent typically rejects arguments based on reason, facts, duties and responsibilities. Because he is immature he responds instead with heightened emotions. The cause he or she has espoused becomes a great moral crusade because it is a great emotional event. Ideologues play on this constantly and leaders of ideological movements always seek to manipulate the adolescent progressive’s emotions.
The fourth mark of the adolescent is that he is naive about human nature. He jumps on an ideological bandwagon first of all believing that he and mankind in general is good. When he discovers that some people are bad, he projects all the darkness on to the person or group he perceives to be the enemy.
Along with the fourth sign of needing someone to blame, the adolescent progressive must always either be a victim or find a victim to feel sorry for. Once they find the victim, the adolescent progressive will portray the victim as totally good, pure and abused. Once they have found the totally good victim the person or group they are blaming becomes even more evil.
Just as the rebellious adolescent irrationally demonizes the parent and authority figures in his life, so the adolescent progressive demonizes authority figures and places himself on the side of the victim. He does this with the sort of heightened self righteousness that only the adolescent can muster.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
The sixth mark of the adolescent progressive is that he or she mistakes their ideology for their religion. They believe that their particular worthy cause is the same thing as their religion. They are certain that God is on their side. But what they have done in their immature lack of understanding is to mistake their narrow ideology with their religion. They thus limit their religion to their ideology and are blind to the vast areas of their religion that they have yet to explore.
This Progressivism is of the World
Finally, Pope Francis is clear that this sort of progressive, ideologically based progressivism is of this world. It normally adopts the values and struggles that are current in the worldly arena and makes them part of the Christian struggle. Christianity might share some of the struggles in the world, but it is always bigger and more universal than the particular struggles the worldlings espouse.
Adolescent progressivism exists with society but it also exists within churches, school, colleges and workplaces. It eats away like a hideous cancer destroying creativity, joy and a positive spirit. It should also be obvious that you don’t have to be a teenager to be an adolescent progressive. There are adolescent progressives of all ages.
Adolescent progressivism is a counterfeit religion – and remember, counterfeits are always designed to look like the real thing.
Dwight Longenecker’s latest book Immortal Combat-Confronting the Heart of Darkness explores the dynamics of deception in more depth. Follow his blog at dwightlongenecker.com


thestream--2020-11-29--America: ‘A Church Relocation Project’?

America: ‘A Church Relocation Project’?

There is a war on history in our time .
There is an all-out effort to cut us off from our past — presumably to make us into a nation in the image of what the Left wants .
For example , Thanksgiving would seem to be as American as apple pie .
But an article last week ( 11/17/20 ) in the New York Times refers to the “ myth ” of Thanksgiving .
The so-called “ paper of record ” quotes a Native-American historian , Linda Coombs , of the Wampanoag Tribe ( of New England ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ There was an event that happened in 1621….But the whole story about what occurred on that first Thanksgiving was a myth created to make white people feel comfortable.
” In effect , the article blames the Pilgrims for what others did long after them .
Amazing .
The Pilgrims , who settled Plymouth , Massachusetts , had a stellar reputation with the Indians .
They made a treaty of peace that lasted half a century .
Rev .
Billy Falling , a Native-American pastor and author , told me : “ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Native-American , I thank God for the Europeans that brought us… the Gospel and brought Western Civilization.
” Obviously , terrible , inexcusable things happened to Indians , long after the Pilgrims , at the hands of other European settlers and Americans .
But in doing injustice to Native Americans , they were not at all following the Christian example of the Pilgrims .
Meanwhile , this month is the 400th anniversary of the Pilgrims coming to these shores — a milestone in history .
Pastor , broadcaster , and author Dr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ began as “ a church relocation project.
” His comment is profound — inasmuch as the Pilgrims who settled Plymouth four centuries ago founded America .
The church relocation was from mid-England to Holland to America .
The Pilgrims were one particular congregation that was born in the Midlands of England , in the sleepy village of Scrooby , about 150 miles north of London .
The Bible was beginning to be read by many in England for the first time , and it caused an unexpected reaction .
As people compared the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in practice in the official Church of England , they felt there was a need for positive changes .
A large group of those wanting reform within the Church of England , which was Protestant in its theology but Roman Catholic in its liturgy , worked for the purity of the Church .
They were derisively called Puritans .
A very small subset of Puritans were Separatists .
They thought reform within the Church was hopeless , so they created small , secret congregations of believers , separate from the Church of England @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Who Were the Pilgrims ?
The Pilgrims were one particular congregation of Separatists that was born in mid-England around 1606 during the time when Separatist church meetings were illegal .
Their goal was to worship Jesus in the purity of the gospel as they understood it .
The Bible ( the Geneva version ) was the focus of their existence .
Because of persecution in England , they decided to emigrate to Holland , where they stayed for more than a decade .
But they could see , over time , their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to come to America to more fully practice their faith .
In the 66-day voyage of the Mayflower , they were blown off course and ended up under no government ’ s jurisdiction .
To bind the colony together , they wrote an agreement for self-government , under God .
It was a political covenant based on the Biblical model of covenant .
In this document , the Mayflower Compact , which was written “ in the name of God ” and in which they stated that they came “ for the glory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Christian faith , ” they created a “ civil body politic.
” Historians tell us that the Mayflower Compact was a key forerunner to the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution .
These in turn have led to a great deal of freedom for hundreds of millions of people to enjoy .
I once interviewed Dennis Prager of PragerU about America ’ s Judeo-Christian roots .
He told me , “ The Pilgrims founded America , for all intents and purposes.
” The great leader of the Pilgrims , William Bradford , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Thus out of small beginnings greater things have been produced by His hand that made all things of nothing , and gives being to all things that are : and , as one small candle may light a thousand , so the light here kindled hath shone unto many , yea in some sort to our whole nation : let the glorious name of Jehovah have all the praise.
” As Americans , we do indeed have many reasons for celebrating thanksgiving to God for our freedom — notwithstanding attempts from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And it all began 400 years ago from this time .
Not bad for a church relocation project .
Jerry Newcombe , D.Min.
, is the senior producer and an on-air host for D. James Kennedy Ministries .
He has written/co-written 33 books , e.g.
, The Unstoppable Jesus Christ , American Amnesia : Is American Paying the Price for Forgetting God ?
, What If Jesus Had Never Been Born ?
( w/ D. James Kennedy ) , and the bestseller , George Washington ’ s Sacred Fire ( w/ Peter @ @ @ @ @ @

There is a war on history in our time. There is an all-out effort to cut us off from our past — presumably to make us into a nation in the image of what the Left wants.
For example, Thanksgiving would seem to be as American as apple pie. But an article last week (11/17/20) in the New York Times refers to the “myth” of Thanksgiving.
The so-called “paper of record” quotes a Native-American historian, Linda Coombs, of the Wampanoag Tribe (of New England). She writes about the first Thanksgiving: “There was an event that happened in 1621….But the whole story about what occurred on that first Thanksgiving was a myth created to make white people feel comfortable.” In effect, the article blames the Pilgrims for what others did long after them.
Amazing. The Pilgrims, who settled Plymouth, Massachusetts, had a stellar reputation with the Indians. They made a treaty of peace that lasted half a century.
Rev. Billy Falling, a Native-American pastor and author, told me: “The Pilgrims had good relationships with the Indians….As a Native-American, I thank God for the Europeans that brought us… the Gospel and brought Western Civilization.”
Obviously, terrible, inexcusable things happened to Indians, long after the Pilgrims, at the hands of other European settlers and Americans. But in doing injustice to Native Americans, they were not at all following the Christian example of the Pilgrims.
A Church Relocation Project
Meanwhile, this month is the 400th anniversary of the Pilgrims coming to these shores — a milestone in history.
Pastor, broadcaster, and author Dr. D. James Kennedy once observed that America began as “a church relocation project.” His comment is profound — inasmuch as the Pilgrims who settled Plymouth four centuries ago founded America.
The church relocation was from mid-England to Holland to America.
The Pilgrims were one particular congregation that was born in the Midlands of England, in the sleepy village of Scrooby, about 150 miles north of London.
The Bible was beginning to be read by many in England for the first time, and it caused an unexpected reaction. As people compared the New Testament with what they were seeing in practice in the official Church of England, they felt there was a need for positive changes.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
A large group of those wanting reform within the Church of England, which was Protestant in its theology but Roman Catholic in its liturgy, worked for the purity of the Church. They were derisively called Puritans.
A very small subset of Puritans were Separatists. They thought reform within the Church was hopeless, so they created small, secret congregations of believers, separate from the Church of England — which was illegal at the time.
Who Were the Pilgrims?
The Pilgrims were one particular congregation of Separatists that was born in mid-England around 1606 during the time when Separatist church meetings were illegal. Their goal was to worship Jesus in the purity of the gospel as they understood it. The Bible (the Geneva version) was the focus of their existence.
Because of persecution in England, they decided to emigrate to Holland, where they stayed for more than a decade. But they could see, over time, their church slowly dissipating. So they wanted to come to America to more fully practice their faith.
In the 66-day voyage of the Mayflower, they were blown off course and ended up under no government’s jurisdiction. To bind the colony together, they wrote an agreement for self-government, under God. It was a political covenant based on the Biblical model of covenant.
The Mayflower Compact
In this document, the Mayflower Compact, which was written “in the name of God” and in which they stated that they came “for the glory of God and the advancement of the Christian faith,” they created a “civil body politic.”
Historians tell us that the Mayflower Compact was a key forerunner to the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. These in turn have led to a great deal of freedom for hundreds of millions of people to enjoy.
I once interviewed Dennis Prager of PragerU about America’s Judeo-Christian roots. He told me, “The Pilgrims founded America, for all intents and purposes.”
The great leader of the Pilgrims, William Bradford, wrote of the whole Pilgrim experience: “Thus out of small beginnings greater things have been produced by His hand that made all things of nothing, and gives being to all things that are: and, as one small candle may light a thousand, so the light here kindled hath shone unto many, yea in some sort to our whole nation: let the glorious name of Jehovah have all the praise.”
As Americans, we do indeed have many reasons for celebrating thanksgiving to God for our freedom — notwithstanding attempts from the New York Times to distort our history. And it all began 400 years ago from this time. Not bad for a church relocation project.
Jerry Newcombe, D.Min., is the senior producer and an on-air host for D. James Kennedy Ministries. He has written/co-written 33 books, e.g., The Unstoppable Jesus Christ, American Amnesia: Is American Paying the Price for Forgetting God?, What If Jesus Had Never Been Born? (w/ D. James Kennedy), and the bestseller, George Washington’s Sacred Fire (w/ Peter Lillback) djkm.org @newcombejerry www.jerrynewcombe.com


thestream--2020-11-30--USA Today and Facebook Use Slanderous ‘Fact Check’ to Suppress Facts About Illegal Voting by Non-Cit

USA Today and Facebook Use Slanderous ‘Fact Check’ to Suppress Facts About Illegal Voting by Non-Citizens

A “ fact check ” by USA Today is defaming a Ph.D.-vetted study by Just Facts that found non-citizens may have cast enough illegal votes for Joe Biden to overturn the lawful election results in some key battleground states .
The article , written by USA Today ’ s Chelsey Cox , contains 10 misrepresentations , unsupported claims , half-truths , and outright falsehoods .
Furthermore , Facebook is using this misinformation to suppress the genuine facts of this issue instead of honoring its policy to “ Stop Misinformation and False News.
” Compounding this malfeasance , a note at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states that USA Today ’ s “ fact check work is supported in part by a grant from Facebook.
” Starting with the most simplistic falsehood in Cox ’ s piece , she impugned the character of Dr. Andrew Glen , a Ph.D. scholar who specializes in data analytics and who examined Just Facts ’ study and found that it “ provides a credible data analysis that supports a strong hypothesis of non-citizens having a significant effect on this election.
” Cox did this by claiming that “ though he is attributed as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Military Academy , an ‘ Andrew Glen ’ did not appear in a search result on the website for the United States Military Academy , West Point .
Glen attended the school as a student , according to his LinkedIn profile page.
” That statement reveals that Cox and her editor were ignorant of the fact that a professor emeritus is one who has “ retired from an office or position.
” Thus , Dr. Glen would not appear on the webpage of current faculty to which she linked .
Had Cox conducted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ found that West Point ’ s website lists Glen among a group of professors who wrote a reference work for its Department of Mathematical Sciences .
Cox could have also found proof of Glen ’ s professorship at West Point via a peer-reviewed journal , an academic book that he coauthored on the topic of computational probability , or the website of Colorado College , where Glen currently teaches .
After reading what USA Today published about Dr. Glen , current West Point adjunct professor Dr. Joseph P. Damore wrote : And Ms. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war vet , a graduate of West Point , and a retired Colonel from the U.S. Army is somehow lying about his credentials is so egregiously offensive , that it demands your apology .
Instead of an apology , USA Today altered the article 18 hours after publication to remove this attack on Glen without issuing a correction .
This is a breach of journalistic ethics that require reporters and media outlets to “ acknowledge mistakes ” and explain them “ carefully and clearly.
” Cox also assails the credibility of Dr. Michael @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data analytics and reviewed Just Facts ’ study .
Cook found that the study is “ methodologically sound , and fair in its conclusions , ” but Cox dismisses him as a “ financial analyst , according to his LinkedIn profile page.
” However , Cook ’ s LinkedIn profile states that he is an “ applied mathematician and strategic thinker with experience on Wall Street , scientific research , statistical modeling.
” This experience , coupled with Cook ’ s Ph.D. in mathematics , make him eminently qualified to assess Just Facts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to discredit both Ph.D. scholars by reporting that they “ are not election experts.
” Given that Cox gives no credence to their reviews of Just Facts ’ study , she is overtly implying that they are unqualified to assess it .
After reading this , Dr. Cook wrote : Agresti , the president of Just Facts , is the author of the study .
Dr. Glen replied similarly while explaining the folly of Cox ’ s argument : That a “ fact checker ” would be unaware of these types of interdisciplinary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ academic fields displays a significant lack of qualification for the job and reflects poorly on the trustworthiness of USA Today .
Cox also mangles the facts about every major aspect of Just Facts ’ study .
She mainly does this by treating unsupported claims from progressives as if they were facts , while ignoring or dismissing actual facts .
Cox asserts that “ only a handful ” of non-citizens ever register to vote , and “ that ’ s not going to change an election.
” Those words came from a lawyer named @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fair Elections Center .
In the article from which Cox quotes him , Brandon provides no evidence to support this statement .
He simply makes it .
Yet , Cox accepts this unsubstantiated claim as a fact .
Meanwhile , Cox disregards these rigorously documented facts that appear in Just Facts ’ study : • In scientific surveys conducted in 2008 , 2012 , and 2013 , 13 % to 15 % of self-declared non-citizens admitted that they were registered to vote .
• Database matches with voter registration records in 2008 suggest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ registration is almost twice what they reveal in surveys .
• Data from the S. Government Accountability Office , the Social Security Administration , and the New York Times show that the vast bulk of illegal immigrants use false identifications that would allow them to vote .
Without a hint of skepticism , Cox also relies on “ a 2007 report by the Brennan Center for Justice , a center-left institute ” that allegedly shows “ few people purposefully register to vote if they are knowingly ineligible.
” Written by Loyola Law School @ @ @ @ @ @ @ narrow , weakly sourced evidence that does not come close to supporting Cox ’ s broad claim .
For example , Levitt ’ s first piece of evidence that non-citizens rarely register to vote is a Seattle Times editorial chastising a lone person who challenged the citizenship and voting credentials of 1,000+ people “ based on the sound of their name.
” Levitt gives the false impression that an investigation was conducted , but the editorial says nothing of the sort .
Instead it says that “ state election officials are not aware @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ that is not to say non-citizens did not vote or that non-citizens should vote.
” Levitt provides another fives examples that suffer from similar flaws , including arguments from silence , references to secondary sources , and the use of narrow probes with no capacity to root out voting by illegal immigrants who use false IDs .
All-in all , Cox does not provide a single fact to support her statement that “ few noncitizens register to vote in federal elections.
” She merely declares this to be a fact based on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she selects .
Then based on this , she claims that Just Facts ’ study “ is unfounded.
” Furthermore , Cox misrepresents the results of a seminal 2014 paper in the journal Electoral Studies .
She does this by quoting it out of context to convey the false impression that only “ some noncitizens ” vote .
She never mentions the study ’ s striking results , which are as follows : • “ Non-citizen voting likely changed 2008 outcomes including Electoral College votes and the composition of Congress.
” • The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of non-citizens who voted illegally in the 2008 presidential election is 1.2 million , with a range “ from just over 38,000 at the very minimum to nearly 2.8 million at the maximum.
” • “ Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass ” Obamacare .
# 6 First Attack on the Integrity of the Electoral Studies Paper Cox also tarnishes the Electoral Studies paper , and with this , the reputations of the scholars who wrote it .
Once again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and demonstrably false claims as if they were facts .
Citing an article in Wired magazine , Cox writes : “ Michael Jones-Correa , a political science professor at the University of Pennsylvania and one of the study ’ s critics , told Wired that any responses from noncitizens ” in the survey used for the study “ were included due to error.
” Neither Cox , nor Wired , nor Jones-Correa present any evidence to support that accusation .
Moreover , it is disproven by the fact that the survey posed this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of these statements best describes you ?
… I am an immigrant to the USA but not a citizen.
” # 7 Second Attack on the Integrity of the Electoral Studies Paper Based on the same Wired article , Cox declares that “ Jones-Correa also said the sample size is too small for a representative sample of the noncitizen population.
” In reality , Jones-Correa makes a different claim ( debunked below ) , but neither Cox nor the Wired reporter seem to understand the difference between them .
Cox ’ s argument @ @ @ @ @ @ @ puerile notion debunked by a teaching guide for K–8th grade students , as well as other academic sources .
Snopes and PolitiFact previously made the same false argument , and for this reason , Just Facts ’ study provides a warning about this “ mathematically illiterate ” claim and a link to the facts that disprove it .
However , Cox completely ignores these facts and reports this untruth instead .
# 8 Third Attack on the Integrity of the Electoral Studies Paper The argument that Jones-Correa actually made in Wired is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unlikely to “ accurately represent ” non-citizens .
This has nothing to do with the sample size and everything to do with the fact that surveys can be highly inaccurate if they don ’ t use random samples of respondents .
As stated in the textbook Mind on Statistics , “ Surveys that simply use those who respond voluntarily are sure to be biased in favor of those with strong opinions or with time on their hands.
” However , the Electoral Studies paper directly confronts this issue by “ weighting the data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that appears to be a better match with Census estimates of the population.
” As explained in the academic book Designing and Conducting Survey Research : A Comprehensive Guide , weighting “ is one of the most common approaches ” that researchers use to “ present results that are representative of the target population….
” The book goes on to explain that weighting is far from foolproof , and both Just Facts and the Electoral Studies paper directly state that .
This is one of the reasons why Just Facts refers to its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ separate times and directs readers to these “ possible sources of error , some of which may produce overcounts and some undercounts.
” Nonetheless , weighting is a generally accepted means of making survey data representative , and Cox ’ s omission of this fact is grossly misleading .
Cox , Wired , and Jones-Correa are not the only ones to spread this half-truth .
PolitiFact and Brian Schaffner of UMass Amherst have done the same — despite the fact that the Electoral Studies paper addressed this issue right from the start .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and organizations either did not read the full paper , did not understand it , or are deliberately trying to slander it .
Cox writes that “ registrants voting in a federal election supply evidence of their residence , ” but “ Agresti argues some noncitizens manage to vote in federal elections despite preventive measures.
” This mischaracterizes the facts on two levels .
First , proof of residency is not proof of citizenship .
And as Agresti pointed out in his study and in an email to Cox , “ all 50 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in order to register to vote in federal elections.
” Second , Agresti does not merely argue that “ some noncitizens manage to vote in federal elections despite preventive measures.
” He provides reams of facts from primary sources showing that : • no state requires anyone to provide documentary proof of citizenship in order to register to vote because federal courts have stopped them from enacting this requirement .
• the vast bulk of illegal immigrants use false identifications that would allow them to vote .
• three scientific surveys and database @ @ @ @ @ @ @ millions of non-citizens are registered to vote .
• Barack Obama stated that there is no effective way to enforce the law that prohibits non-citizens from voting .
The sources cited by Agresti to prove these facts include : • an Obama administration Department of Justice legal brief .
• a scientific bilingual survey of Hispanic adults in the U.S. • the 2014 Electoral Studies paper and a follow-up working paper by the same scholars .
• a study by the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration .
• a video of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Leon stating that “ anyone who has family members who are undocumented knows that almost entirely everybody has secured some sort of false identification.
” • a video of Obama stating that non-citizens would not be deported if they voted because “ there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over , and people start investigating , etcetera.
” Yet , Cox describes this stunning array of documented facts with the phrase “ Agresti argues ” and then rejects all of them in favor of an unsubstantiated claim from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not fact checking but propagandizing .
Finally , Cox contests the reality that states have withheld public voter roll data from the Trump administration that could be used to prove how many illegal votes are cast by non-citizens .
She does this by linking to a summary of state policies on public access to voter lists .
She then points out that “ voter information is publicly available ” in the battleground states .
This is one of the rare cases where Cox actually presents facts to support her case , but she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ failing to account for the differences between : • limited public data versus detailed public data provided in a format that can be analyzed to root out illegal votes .
Once again , all of the facts needed to understand these points are documented in Just Facts ’ study with links to credible primary sources , including the Federal Judicial Center and a statement from California ’ s Secretary of State .
Though California is not a battleground state , it provides a crystal clear example of the distinctions that Cox fails to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provided , California ’ s voter rolls are available to “ candidates , parties , ballot measure committees , and to any person for election , scholarly , journalistic , or political purposes , or for governmental purposes , as determined by the Secretary of State.
” Yet , when Trump ’ s Commission on Election Integrity requested the data , California ’ s Secretary of State vowed that he would not provide it and promised lawsuits and “ opposition at every step of the way ” to keep the data from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by USA Today contains 10 demonstrably false claims that smear a range of scholars and denigrate a rigorously documented study as “ unfounded.
” Facebook partly funded this defamatory work and then notified Just Facts that Facebook is : • placing a label on Just Facts Facebook post for the study that states : “ Independent fact-checkers say this information is missing context and could mislead people.
” • reducing the reach of the post .
• counting this post as a “ Page Quality Violation ” against Just Facts .
Just Facts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its so-called “ independent third-party fact-checking organizations ” and is awaiting a reply : • Given that Facebook has hand-selected these organizations to be the judges of truth on your platform , do you hold them to actionable standards and count quality violations against them ?
• If so , what exactly are these standards and the repercussions for violating them ?
• If not , why are you vesting certain people with unchecked authority to use Facebook to censor others , sow misinformation , and slander the reputations of scholars ?
James @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Facts , a think tank dedicated to publishing rigorously documented facts about public policy issues .

A “fact check” by USA Today is defaming a Ph.D.-vetted study by Just Facts that found non-citizens may have cast enough illegal votes for Joe Biden to overturn the lawful election results in some key battleground states. The article, written by USA Today’s Chelsey Cox, contains 10 misrepresentations, unsupported claims, half-truths, and outright falsehoods.
Furthermore, Facebook is using this misinformation to suppress the genuine facts of this issue instead of honoring its policy to “Stop Misinformation and False News.” Compounding this malfeasance, a note at the bottom of Cox’s article states that USA Today’s “fact check work is supported in part by a grant from Facebook.”
#1 Dr. Glen’s Credentials
Starting with the most simplistic falsehood in Cox’s piece, she impugned the character of Dr. Andrew Glen, a Ph.D. scholar who specializes in data analytics and who examined Just Facts’ study and found that it “provides a credible data analysis that supports a strong hypothesis of non-citizens having a significant effect on this election.”
Cox did this by claiming that “though he is attributed as a professor emeritus at the United States Military Academy, an ‘Andrew Glen’ did not appear in a search result on the website for the United States Military Academy, West Point. Glen attended the school as a student, according to his LinkedIn profile page.”
That statement reveals that Cox and her editor were ignorant of the fact that a professor emeritus is one who has “retired from an office or position.” Thus, Dr. Glen would not appear on the webpage of current faculty to which she linked.
Had Cox conducted a proper search, she would have found that West Point’s website lists Glen among a group of professors who wrote a reference work for its Department of Mathematical Sciences.
Cox could have also found proof of Glen’s professorship at West Point via a peer-reviewed journal, an academic book that he coauthored on the topic of computational probability, or the website of Colorado College, where Glen currently teaches.
After reading what USA Today published about Dr. Glen, current West Point adjunct professor Dr. Joseph P. Damore wrote:
I can personally attest to the fact that Andrew Glen, COL USA, ret. was an Academy Professor at West Point. I know, because I was there with him.
And Ms. Cox, to imply that an Iraq war vet, a graduate of West Point, and a retired Colonel from the U.S. Army is somehow lying about his credentials is so egregiously offensive, that it demands your apology.
That a “fact checker” would be unaware of these types of interdisciplinary interactions that are common in scientific and academic fields displays a significant lack of qualification for the job and reflects poorly on the trustworthiness of USA Today.
Instead of an apology, USA Today altered the article 18 hours after publication to remove this attack on Glen without issuing a correction. This is a breach of journalistic ethics that require reporters and media outlets to “acknowledge mistakes” and explain them “carefully and clearly.”
#2 Dr. Cook’s Credentials
Cox also assails the credibility of Dr. Michael Cook, another scholar who specializes in data analytics and reviewed Just Facts’ study. Cook found that the study is “methodologically sound, and fair in its conclusions,” but Cox dismisses him as a “financial analyst, according to his LinkedIn profile page.”
However, Cook’s LinkedIn profile states that he is an “applied mathematician and strategic thinker with experience on Wall Street, scientific research, statistical modeling.” This experience, coupled with Cook’s Ph.D. in mathematics, make him eminently qualified to assess Just Facts’ data-heavy study.
#3 Cook’s and Glen’s Qualifications
Cox also attempts to discredit both Ph.D. scholars by reporting that they “are not election experts.” Given that Cox gives no credence to their reviews of Just Facts’ study, she is overtly implying that they are unqualified to assess it. After reading this, Dr. Cook wrote:
Though I am not an “election expert,” I have training and experience in statistical modeling, statistical inference, and sampling theory, which is the basis of my comments on Agresti’s methodology and approach.
Agresti, the president of Just Facts, is the author of the study.
Dr. Glen replied similarly while explaining the folly of Cox’s argument:
Once elections happen, they leave the academic realm of sociologists and political scientists, and enter the realm of statisticians, data scientists, and operations research. Analogously, biostatisticians are often not medical doctors and yet are of great necessity in studying the effects of public health, disease spread, and drug efficacy.
That a “fact checker” would be unaware of these types of interdisciplinary interactions that are common in scientific and academic fields displays a significant lack of qualification for the job and reflects poorly on the trustworthiness of USA Today.
#4 Voter Registration by Non-Citizens
Cox also mangles the facts about every major aspect of Just Facts’ study. She mainly does this by treating unsupported claims from progressives as if they were facts, while ignoring or dismissing actual facts.
Cox asserts that “only a handful” of non-citizens ever register to vote, and “that’s not going to change an election.” Those words came from a lawyer named Robert Brandon, founder of the left-leaning Fair Elections Center. In the article from which Cox quotes him, Brandon provides no evidence to support this statement. He simply makes it. Yet, Cox accepts this unsubstantiated claim as a fact.
Meanwhile, Cox disregards these rigorously documented facts that appear in Just Facts’ study:
In scientific surveys conducted in 2008, 2012, and 2013, 13% to 15% of self-declared non-citizens admitted that they were registered to vote.
Database matches with voter registration records in 2008 suggest that the true rate of non-citizen voter registration is almost twice what they reveal in surveys.
Data from the S. Government Accountability Office, the Social Security Administration, and the New York Times show that the vast bulk of illegal immigrants use false identifications that would allow them to vote.
Without a hint of skepticism, Cox also relies on “a 2007 report by the Brennan Center for Justice, a center-left institute” that allegedly shows “few people purposefully register to vote if they are knowingly ineligible.” Written by Loyola Law School professor Justin Levitt, the report provides narrow, weakly sourced evidence that does not come close to supporting Cox’s broad claim.
For example, Levitt’s first piece of evidence that non-citizens rarely register to vote is a Seattle Times editorial chastising a lone person who challenged the citizenship and voting credentials of 1,000+ people “based on the sound of their name.” Levitt gives the false impression that an investigation was conducted, but the editorial says nothing of the sort. Instead it says that “state election officials are not aware” of such illegal voting, but “that is not to say non-citizens did not vote or that non-citizens should vote.”
Levitt provides another fives examples that suffer from similar flaws, including arguments from silence, references to secondary sources, and the use of narrow probes with no capacity to root out voting by illegal immigrants who use false IDs.
All-in all, Cox does not provide a single fact to support her statement that “few noncitizens register to vote in federal elections.” She merely declares this to be a fact based on the allegations of two progressives — who she selects. Then based on this, she claims that Just Facts’ study “is unfounded.”
#5 Results of the Electoral Studies Paper
Furthermore, Cox misrepresents the results of a seminal 2014 paper in the journal Electoral Studies. She does this by quoting it out of context to convey the false impression that only “some noncitizens” vote. She never mentions the study’s striking results, which are as follows:
“Non-citizen voting likely changed 2008 outcomes including Electoral College votes and the composition of Congress.”
The “best estimate” for the number of non-citizens who voted illegally in the 2008 presidential election is 1.2 million, with a range “from just over 38,000 at the very minimum to nearly 2.8 million at the maximum.”
“Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass” Obamacare.
#6 First Attack on the Integrity of the Electoral Studies Paper
Cox also tarnishes the Electoral Studies paper, and with this, the reputations of the scholars who wrote it. Once again, she does this by treating unsupported and demonstrably false claims as if they were facts.
Citing an article in Wired magazine, Cox writes: “Michael Jones-Correa, a political science professor at the University of Pennsylvania and one of the study’s critics, told Wired that any responses from noncitizens” in the survey used for the study “were included due to error.”
Neither Cox, nor Wired, nor Jones-Correa present any evidence to support that accusation. Moreover, it is disproven by the fact that the survey posed this question to its respondents: “Which of these statements best describes you? … I am an immigrant to the USA but not a citizen.”
#7 Second Attack on the Integrity of the Electoral Studies Paper
Based on the same Wired article, Cox declares that “Jones-Correa also said the sample size is too small for a representative sample of the noncitizen population.” In reality, Jones-Correa makes a different claim (debunked below), but neither Cox nor the Wired reporter seem to understand the difference between them.
Cox’s argument about sample size is based on a puerile notion debunked by a teaching guide for K–8th grade students, as well as other academic sources. Snopes and PolitiFact previously made the same false argument, and for this reason, Just Facts’ study provides a warning about this “mathematically illiterate” claim and a link to the facts that disprove it. However, Cox completely ignores these facts and reports this untruth instead.
#8 Third Attack on the Integrity of the Electoral Studies Paper
The argument that Jones-Correa actually made in Wired is that the survey sample for the study was unlikely to “accurately represent” non-citizens. This has nothing to do with the sample size and everything to do with the fact that surveys can be highly inaccurate if they don’t use random samples of respondents. As stated in the textbook Mind on Statistics, “Surveys that simply use those who respond voluntarily are sure to be biased in favor of those with strong opinions or with time on their hands.”
However, the Electoral Studies paper directly confronts this issue by “weighting the data” to produce “a non-citizen sample that appears to be a better match with Census estimates of the population.” As explained in the academic book Designing and Conducting Survey Research: A Comprehensive Guide, weighting “is one of the most common approaches” that researchers use to “present results that are representative of the target population….”
The book goes on to explain that weighting is far from foolproof, and both Just Facts and the Electoral Studies paper directly state that. This is one of the reasons why Just Facts refers to its study results as “estimates” five separate times and directs readers to these “possible sources of error, some of which may produce overcounts and some undercounts.”
Nonetheless, weighting is a generally accepted means of making survey data representative, and Cox’s omission of this fact is grossly misleading.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
Cox, Wired, and Jones-Correa are not the only ones to spread this half-truth. PolitiFact and Brian Schaffner of UMass Amherst have done the same — despite the fact that the Electoral Studies paper addressed this issue right from the start. This shows that each of these people and organizations either did not read the full paper, did not understand it, or are deliberately trying to slander it.
#9 Pathways to Illegal Voting
Cox writes that “registrants voting in a federal election supply evidence of their residence,” but “Agresti argues some noncitizens manage to vote in federal elections despite preventive measures.” This mischaracterizes the facts on two levels.
First, proof of residency is not proof of citizenship. And as Agresti pointed out in his study and in an email to Cox, “all 50 states require people to be U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in federal elections.”
Second, Agresti does not merely argue that “some noncitizens manage to vote in federal elections despite preventive measures.” He provides reams of facts from primary sources showing that:
no state requires anyone to provide documentary proof of citizenship in order to register to vote because federal courts have stopped them from enacting this requirement.
the vast bulk of illegal immigrants use false identifications that would allow them to vote.
three scientific surveys and database matches with voter registration records show that millions of non-citizens are registered to vote.
Barack Obama stated that there is no effective way to enforce the law that prohibits non-citizens from voting.
The sources cited by Agresti to prove these facts include:
Yet, Cox describes this stunning array of documented facts with the phrase “Agresti argues” and then rejects all of them in favor of an unsubstantiated claim from a progressive lawyer. That’s not fact checking but propagandizing.
#10 Confirming Fraud
Finally, Cox contests the reality that states have withheld public voter roll data from the Trump administration that could be used to prove how many illegal votes are cast by non-citizens. She does this by linking to a summary of state policies on public access to voter lists. She then points out that “voter information is publicly available” in the battleground states.
This is one of the rare cases where Cox actually presents facts to support her case, but she misinterprets them. She does this by failing to account for the differences between:
a policy summary versus its practical application.
limited public data versus detailed public data provided in a format that can be analyzed to root out illegal votes.
Once again, all of the facts needed to understand these points are documented in Just Facts’ study with links to credible primary sources, including the Federal Judicial Center and a statement from California’s Secretary of State.
Though California is not a battleground state, it provides a crystal clear example of the distinctions that Cox fails to recognize. According to the link she provided, California’s voter rolls are available to “candidates, parties, ballot measure committees, and to any person for election, scholarly, journalistic, or political purposes, or for governmental purposes, as determined by the Secretary of State.” Yet, when Trump’s Commission on Election Integrity requested the data, California’s Secretary of State vowed that he would not provide it and promised lawsuits and “opposition at every step of the way” to keep the data from the Commission.
Summary
A “fact check” by USA Today contains 10 demonstrably false claims that smear a range of scholars and denigrate a rigorously documented study as “unfounded.”
Facebook partly funded this defamatory work and then notified Just Facts that Facebook is:
placing a label on Just Facts Facebook post for the study that states: “Independent fact-checkers say this information is missing context and could mislead people.”
reducing the reach of the post.
counting this post as a “Page Quality Violation” against Just Facts.
Just Facts posed these three questions to Facebook about its so-called “independent third-party fact-checking organizations” and is awaiting a reply:
Given that Facebook has hand-selected these organizations to be the judges of truth on your platform, do you hold them to actionable standards and count quality violations against them?
If so, what exactly are these standards and the repercussions for violating them?
If not, why are you vesting certain people with unchecked authority to use Facebook to censor others, sow misinformation, and slander the reputations of scholars?
James D. Agresti is the president of Just Facts, a think tank dedicated to publishing rigorously documented facts about public policy issues.


thestream--2020-11-30--Slanted: Our Dumb, Incompetent, Dangerous and Awful Media

I ’ d like to do Sharyl Attkisson one better .
In her new book Slanted : How the News Media Taught Us to Love Censorship and Hate Journalism , Attkisson indicts the media .
Reporters are , she writes , biased , unprofessional , reckless and stupid .
It ’ s a familiar critique , and one that Attkisson , the winner of five Emmy Awards , delivers with skill .
She explores how the media is committed to “ The Narrative , ” the storyline that will bolster whatever left-wing cause is currently in fashion .
Attkisson nails @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d like to add my own example to her list .
I have plenty of reasons to hate the media , but for now I ’ d like to focus on a small item that reveals a much broader truth about just how deep the awful incompetence of the press goes .
The fact that it was covered up and excused away represents the venality , stupidity , and willful blindness of the modern media .
First , Attkisson ’ s bona fides .
Attkisson left CBS because the spin was so bad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told to do a story on “ why Steve Forbes ’ s flat tax won ’ t work ” rather than report on the pros and cons of the issue .
She indicts the ridiculous Russia investigation and interviews Lou Waters , who was an anchor on CNN for twenty years .
Waters calls the modern CNN unwatchable , the “ all-panel network ” whose virtue-signaling talking heads push liberalism all day every day .
President Trump , observes Attkisson , has become “ the vehicle that the media at large has used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a way it was never defined before.
” Slanted closes with a very long , unassailable list of “ major mistakes ” journalists made about Trump .
The Crucial Question About Christine Blasey Ford the Media Missed During Kavanaugh Fiasco Attkisson also writes about the 2018 Brett Kavanaugh confirmation war , a battle that put me close to ground zero .
As the world knows , a California professor named Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault while in high school .
She would also claim that I was in room @ @ @ @ @ @ @ friends with Brett in the 1980s when we were both students at Georgetown Prep .
The accusation resulted in mass hysteria and the worse media coverage in American history , a bottom-beneath-the-bottom for the fourth estate .
One thing that I always wondered , and even brought up with friends and law enforcement , was why Ford had never attempted to contact me in the summer of 2018 , before everything blew up .
I ’ m a conscientious person who strives ( and fails ) to be a good Christian .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It was a devastating accusation about an alleged event that I have no memory of — nor do the others Ford claims were there .
I ’ m always willing to listen and examine my conscience about anything someone wants to bring to my attention .
Why not ask me about it before triggering World War III ?
It ’ s a crucial question .
In her book Supreme Ambition : Brett Kavanaugh and the Conservative Takeover , liberal Washington Post writer Ruth Marcus offers a passage that I have read five @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quite comprehend .
Recounting the summer of 2018 , Marcus raises the very same question I had .
Then she writes this : “ One possibility : Ford would call Mark Judge , remind Judge of what had happened , tell him to call Kavanaugh , and advise him to spare his family the ordeal .
She dug up Judge ’ s Twitter handle but wasn ’ t sure how to go about contacting him.
” Wait .
She dug up my Twitter handle but wasn ’ t sure how to go about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have tried my Twitter handle , the very one you were looking at .
Or Facebook .
Or the magazines and websites I worked for .
Or the hundreds of people I ’ ve met in my thirty years as a journalist .
Or Ford ’ s father , who worked for the CIA .
Not sure how to contact me ?
Woodward and Bernstein would have laughed at that answer .
I recently wrote about how journalism is now an elite profession , and that those who practice it have no experience @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They suffer what H.L .
Mencken once called “ a leprosy of the horse sense.
” If any one of the guys I ’ ve washed dishes with , or waited tables with , or slung mulch with , had been presented with what Ford presented Marcus — told she just did not know how to contact me — the reply would have been a one word answer .
The word consists of two syllables and is represented with the letters BS .
This evasion is like the duct tape that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Watergate Hotel in June of 1972 .
A good reporter would have used it to reveal a much larger story .
“ The Narrative ” Was More Important Than The Truth This gets to Attkisson ’ s point about the media pushing The Narrative .
The Narrative in this case was that Brett , myself and our friends were a bunch of wild prep school jocks , equal parts Conan the Barbarian and Fast Times at Ridgemont High , marauding our way through the suburbs of Washington , D.C. with a reindeer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ isn ’ t possible for Marcus or the rest of the media to conceive that in the summer of 2018 a political hit was coming , a Code Red intended to bury my friend and myself , and that diffusing that by contacting me would have prevented the public kill shot that the Left had mapped out .
( I could tell you stories that would make your hair stand up . )
Marcus , who went to Yale and Harvard , just doesn ’ t have the life experience to think in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to embarrass herself and immolate her career when , in 2020 , she trashed Tara Reade , the woman who accused Joe Biden of sexual assault .
In Supreme Ambition , Marcus offers this pathetic observation : “ Ford was a Democrat , although not a particularly active one ; she had given small amounts to Democratic committees and candidates , including Bernie Sanders .
And , like so many others in Palo Alto shocked by Trump ’ s election , she had protested against the new administration — in Ford ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brain hat for the March for Science , which criticized Trump ’ s policies on climate change and anticipated cuts to scientific funding.
” Imagine if Marcus were describing a conservative female who had donated to the Republican party — not just candidates , but committees — and who had attended MAGA marches .
Would she claim the person was not a political activist ?
If your answer to that is no , you need to stop huffing glue .
The media is now a lost cause , so played out it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are not a pernicious , agenda-driven plague is like claiming COVID doesn ’ t exist .
The last word goes to Attkisson : Mark Judge is a writer and filmmaker in Washington , D.C .

I’d like to do Sharyl Attkisson one better.
In her new book Slanted: How the News Media Taught Us to Love Censorship and Hate Journalism, Attkisson indicts the media. Reporters are, she writes, biased, unprofessional, reckless and stupid. It’s a familiar critique, and one that Attkisson, the winner of five Emmy Awards, delivers with skill. She explores how the media is committed to “The Narrative,” the storyline that will bolster whatever left-wing cause is currently in fashion.
Attkisson nails it in Slanted, but I’d like to add my own example to her list. I have plenty of reasons to hate the media, but for now I’d like to focus on a small item that reveals a much broader truth about just how deep the awful incompetence of the press goes. The fact that it was covered up and excused away represents the venality, stupidity, and willful blindness of the modern media.
First, Attkisson’s bona fides. Attkisson left CBS because the spin was so bad. Among other things, she was told to do a story on “why Steve Forbes’s flat tax won’t work” rather than report on the pros and cons of the issue. She indicts the ridiculous Russia investigation and interviews Lou Waters, who was an anchor on CNN for twenty years. Waters calls the modern CNN unwatchable, the “all-panel network” whose virtue-signaling talking heads push liberalism all day every day.
President Trump, observes Attkisson, has become “the vehicle that the media at large has used to unleash its furor and redefine journalism in a way it was never defined before.” Slanted closes with a very long, unassailable list of “major mistakes” journalists made about Trump.
The Crucial Question About Christine Blasey Ford the Media Missed During Kavanaugh Fiasco
Attkisson also writes about the 2018 Brett Kavanaugh confirmation war, a battle that put me close to ground zero. As the world knows, a California professor named Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault while in high school. She would also claim that I was in room when it happened. I was close friends with Brett in the 1980s when we were both students at Georgetown Prep.
The accusation resulted in mass hysteria and the worst media coverage in American history, a bottom-beneath-the-bottom for the fourth estate.
One thing that I always wondered, and even brought up with friends and law enforcement, was why Ford had never attempted to contact me in the summer of 2018, before everything blew up. I’m a conscientious person who strives (and fails) to be a good Christian. I’ve been sober for thirty years. It was a devastating accusation about an alleged event that I have no memory of — nor do the others Ford claims were there. I’m always willing to listen and examine my conscience about anything someone wants to bring to my attention. Why not ask me about it before triggering World War III?
It’s a crucial question. In her book Supreme Ambition: Brett Kavanaugh and the Conservative Takeover, liberal Washington Post writer Ruth Marcus offers a passage that I have read five times over and still can’t quite comprehend. Recounting the summer of 2018, Marcus raises the very same question I had. Then she writes this: “One possibility: Ford would call Mark Judge, remind Judge of what had happened, tell him to call Kavanaugh, and advise him to spare his family the ordeal. She dug up Judge’s Twitter handle but wasn’t sure how to go about contacting him.”
Wait. She dug up my Twitter handle but wasn’t sure how to go about contacting him. Well, you might have tried my Twitter handle, the very one you were looking at. Or Facebook. Or the magazines and websites I worked for. Or the hundreds of people I’ve met in my thirty years as a journalist. Or Ford’s father, who worked for the CIA. Not sure how to contact me? Woodward and Bernstein would have laughed at that answer.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
I recently wrote about how journalism is now an elite profession, and that those who practice it have no experience in manual labor and no street smarts. They suffer what H.L. Mencken once called “a leprosy of the horse sense.” If any one of the guys I’ve washed dishes with, or waited tables with, or slung mulch with, had been presented with what Ford presented Marcus — told she just did not know how to contact me — the reply would have been a one word answer. The word consists of two syllables and is represented with the letters BS.
This evasion is like the duct tape that the security guard found on the door of the Watergate Hotel in June of 1972. A good reporter would have used it to reveal a much larger story.
“The Narrative” Was More Important Than The Truth
This gets to Attkisson’s point about the media pushing The Narrative. The Narrative in this case was that Brett, myself and our friends were a bunch of wild prep school jocks, equal parts Conan the Barbarian and Fast Times at Ridgemont High, marauding our way through the suburbs of Washington, D.C. with a reindeer sleigh of kegs behind us.
It isn’t possible for Marcus or the rest of the media to conceive that in the summer of 2018 a political hit was coming, a Code Red intended to bury my friend and myself, and that diffusing that by contacting me would have prevented the public kill shot that the Left had mapped out. (I could tell you stories that would make your hair stand up.)
Marcus, who went to Yale and Harvard, just doesn’t have the life experience to think in those terms. She would go on to embarrass herself and immolate her career when, in 2020, she trashed Tara Reade, the woman who accused Joe Biden of sexual assault.
In Supreme Ambition, Marcus offers this pathetic observation: “Ford was a Democrat, although not a particularly active one; she had given small amounts to Democratic committees and candidates, including Bernie Sanders. And, like so many others in Palo Alto shocked by Trump’s election, she had protested against the new administration — in Ford’s case, by donning a knotted gray brain hat for the March for Science, which criticized Trump’s policies on climate change and anticipated cuts to scientific funding.”
Imagine if Marcus were describing a conservative female who had donated to the Republican party — not just candidates, but committees — and who had attended MAGA marches. Would she claim the person was not a political activist?
If your answer to that is no, you need to stop huffing glue.
The media is now a lost cause, so played out it’s gotten funny. To say they are not a pernicious, agenda-driven plague is like claiming COVID doesn’t exist.
The last word goes to Attkisson:
A new breed of reporter is dominant at many news organizations: the kind who think it is their job to convince you to believe whatever they personally believe, the kind who don’t look for original stories, seek out research, or open their minds to opposing views. They are the kind that spin the news according to what they want you to think. They ignore facts that contradict their story line. They get their ideas from other reporters, quasi–news media, PR firms, political operatives, and talking points.
Mark Judge is a writer and filmmaker in Washington, D.C.


thestream--2020-11-30--Military Photo of the Day: November 30, 2020

A U.S. Air Force E-3 Sentry airborne warning and control system is refueled by a KC-135 Stratotanker over the Middle @ @ @ @ @ 2020 .

A U.S. Air Force E-3 Sentry airborne warning and control system is refueled by a KC-135 Stratotanker over the Middle East on November 21, 2020.
Have a great week, everyone!
React to This Article What do you think of our coverage in this article? We value your feedback as we continue to grow.


thestream--2020-11-30--#ElectionSteal: Call Me a Crank Who Believes in Liberty

Patrick Basham over at The Spectator put it best this weekend : “ If only cranks find the tabulations strange , put me down as a crank.
” You and me both .
Basham has written a wonderful article called “ Reasons Why the 2020 Presidential Election is Deeply Puzzling.
” In it , he rolls out wave after wave of election anomalies , from statistical impossibilities to violations of historic election norms to examples of election fraud so clear you ’ d have to be a CNN expert not to see it .
It ’ s a must read @ @ @ @ @ @ @ juiciest whoppers Basham found : This last one screams to high heaven of an algorithm being employed to give Biden a victory .
When was that algorithm deployed ?
After Georgia shut down vote counting on election night , around 10:30 p.m. , claiming a water pipe had burst in the counting center in Fulton County .
This has been proven to be a lie .
Here is what they want you to believe : a ) We lied about why we shut down counting .
And b ) We shoved GOP observers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trust us , the count is legit.
” You ’ re not a crank to question the Fulton County count .
You ’ d have to be a sap to accept it .
Magic algorithms and imaginary pipe bursts are hardly the only problem in Georgia .
On Wednesday night , Sidney Powell filed her massive lawsuit against Georgia .
She gives 104 pages of sworn who-what-where-and-whens that together spell out “ # JoeCheated.
” Find in Powell ’ s document 30 different allegations , each backed with evidence .
Included in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stream contributor William Briggs .
He estimates between 31,559 and 38,886 absentee ballots were returned by Republican voters , but not counted .
( Biden currently “ leads ” Trump by 12,670 votes in Georgia . )
Briggs also found a 95 % chance that some 27,000-32,000 Republican ballots in Pennsylvania also vanished .
How damning was Powell ’ s lawsuit ?
Biden ’ s friends at Twitter immediately stifled Powell ’ s link to the lawsuit .
Yes , they didn ’ t want you to see official court documents .
Public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ block was a “ mistake.
” Funny , how these mistakes always suppress information helpful to President Trump or harmful to Joe Biden .
Meanwhile , the media avoided the evidence and obsessed over the filing ’ s … typos .
Although Powell did include evidence of old school election fraud , she concentrated much of her fire on Dominion Voting Systems .
Dominion and the software it uses were built to manipulate votes .
In fact , a former military intelligence analyst swore an affidavit indicating that China and Iran played a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be the same China , incidentally , that gave Biden ’ s crack-headed , hooker-chasing son and bagman $ 1.5 billion … and the same Iran that Biden helped give cargo planes filled with cash .
But you need not even look at foreign interference .
Dominion ’ s Director of Product Strategy and Security Eric Coomer was caught on an Antifa Zoom meeting in late September assuring his radical pals , “ Don ’ t worry about the election .
Trump ’ s not gon na win .
I made f***ing sure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s top security whiz .
Coomer , who was a public face of Dominion , has now done a disappearing act worthy of D.B .
Cooper .
What ’ s the most amazing thing about how the election fraud story is playing out ?
The mainstream media ’ s complete indifference to their own earlier reporting .
It ’ s not as if Sidney Powell invented the idea that Dominion Voting Systems is insecure .
For years … right up until Election Day … the media was constantly harping about how easily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , how open the election system was to fraud .
Any of these outlets sound familiar ?
Yet , you ’ re the crank today if you say Dominion and its software were open for dirty business .
And then point to specific instances in the raw data that indicate dirty business .
So Much Fraud , So Many States , So Little Time There is so much fraud , so many methods of fraud , so many states subjected to fraud , it ’ s a Herculean task to corral it , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prove it .
The media is not going to report on the fraud .
They ’ re too consumed writing about Joe Biden getting a cat .
Democratic judges aren ’ t going to rule to overturn the fraud .
Spineless RINO legislators aren ’ t going to do their constitutional duty to make amends for the fraud .
And the clock continues to tick .
• Who in a position of authority will have the courage to take the heat and do what is right ?
• Can the truth – so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people to create an even grander groundswell of patriots whose trumpets can bring down the wall of lies and corruption ?
This one ’ s up to We the People .
You Only Need to Win the Final Battle CNN Jake Tapper is mocking the legal efforts of the Trump legal team so far .
On Saturday , he remarked their record futility is approaching that of the 1940 Washington Redskins who lost 73-0 to the Chicago Bears .
Some were quick to remind Tapper that George W. Bush ’ s legal team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his final challenge at the Supreme Court .
We may see the same again this time out .
Given the stakes – namely , the survival of the United States – I prefer another analogy .
But for the Battle of Trenton , General George Washington and his deplorable ragtag army of patriots lost every single battle in the American Revolution .
They were suffering defeat after defeat at the hands of the massive , slick British military machine aligned against them .
Time was short .
The odds were long .
Then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington caught the British Army in Yorktown .
Trapped them .
Suddenly finding themselves surrounded by Patriots with no means of escape , the supposedly invincible British Army surrendered .
The United States had won its independence .
Today , another power aims to snuff out our democratic republic .
Again the odds are long .
But the fight is far from finished .
The trap is being set .
The Patriots continue on the march .
We continue to grow .
The facts , the law , the U.S. Constitution are our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
God willing , the massive machine aligned against us will be pushed onto the Truth and forced to surrender .
Independence will again be ours .
And you can call me a crank for believing that .
Al Perrotta is the Managing Editor of The Stream and co-author , with @ JZmirak , of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration .
You can follow him at @ StreamingAl .
And if you aren ’ t already , please follow The Stream at @ Streamdotorg .

Patrick Basham over at The Spectator put it best this weekend: “If only cranks find the tabulations strange, put me down as a crank.”
You and me both.
Basham has written a wonderful article called “Reasons Why the 2020 Presidential Election is Deeply Puzzling.” In it, he rolls out wave after wave of election anomalies, from statistical impossibilities to violations of historic election norms to examples of election fraud so clear you’d have to be a CNN expert not to see it.
It’s a must read. To list just three of the juiciest whoppers Basham found:
Pennsylvania mailed out 1.8 million ballots, but 2.5 million ballots were returned.
In Nevada, there are 77,982 more votes in the presidential election than total ballots cast.
In Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted. For the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the same exact 50.05 to 49.95 percent margin in every single batch.
Georgia (Theft) on My Mind
This last one screams to high heaven of an algorithm being employed to give Biden a victory. When was that algorithm deployed? After Georgia shut down vote counting on election night, around 10:30 p.m., claiming a water pipe had burst in the counting center in Fulton County. This has been proven to be a lie.
Here is what they want you to believe:
a) We lied about why we shut down counting. And
b) We shoved GOP observers out the door. But
c) Trust us, the count is legit.”
You’re not a crank to question the Fulton County count. You’d have to be a sap to accept it.
Magic algorithms and imaginary pipe bursts are hardly the only problem in Georgia. On Wednesday night, Sidney Powell filed her massive lawsuit against Georgia. She gives 104 pages of sworn who-what-where-and-whens that together spell out “#JoeCheated.”
Find in Powell’s document 30 different allegations, each backed with evidence. Included in the mix is an analysis by statistician and Stream contributor William Briggs. He estimates between 31,559 and 38,886 absentee ballots were returned by Republican voters, but not counted. (Biden currently “leads” Trump by 12,670 votes in Georgia.) Briggs also found a 95% chance that some 27,000-32,000 Republican ballots in Pennsylvania also vanished.
How damning was Powell’s lawsuit? Biden’s friends at Twitter immediately stifled Powell’s link to the lawsuit. Yes, they didn’t want you to see official court documents. Public court documents. Twitter later said the block was a “mistake.” Funny, how these mistakes always suppress information helpful to President Trump or harmful to Joe Biden. Meanwhile, the media avoided the evidence and obsessed over the filing’s … typos.
The Media’s Sudden Amnesia: “Dominion? What’s Dominion?”
Although Powell did include evidence of old school election fraud, she concentrated much of her fire on Dominion Voting Systems. Dominion and the software it uses were built to manipulate votes. In fact, a former military intelligence analyst swore an affidavit indicating that China and Iran played a hand in the manipulation. This would be the same China, incidentally, that gave Biden’s crack-headed, hooker-chasing son and bagman $1.5 billion … and the same Iran that Biden helped give cargo planes filled with cash.
But you need not even look at foreign interference. Dominion’s Director of Product Strategy and Security Eric Coomer was caught on an Antifa Zoom meeting in late September assuring his radical pals, “Don’t worry about the election. Trump’s not gonna win. I made f***ing sure of that.”
That’s Dominion’s top security whiz. Coomer, who was a public face of Dominion, has now done a disappearing act worthy of D.B. Cooper.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
What’s the most amazing thing about how the election fraud story is playing out? The mainstream media’s complete indifference to their own earlier reporting.
The Left Didn’t Trust Dominion Either
It’s not as if Sidney Powell invented the idea that Dominion Voting Systems is insecure. For years … right up until Election Day … the media was constantly harping about how easily votes could be manipulated on Dominion machines, how open the election system was to fraud.
Any of these outlets sound familiar?
NBC News: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/all/chinese-parts-hidden-ownership-growing-scrutiny-inside-america-s-biggest-n1104516
New York Times: https://thejewishvoice.com/2020/11/ny-times-proved-dominion-voting-machines-can-easily-be-hacked-in-2018/
Reuters: https://in.reuters.com/article/usa-election-pennsylvania-machines-idINKBN2382D2
USA Today: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2020/11/02/computer-experts-sound-warnings-safety-americas-voting-machines/6087174002/
PBS: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/will-georgias-new-voting-machines-solve-election-problems-or-make-them-worse
And let’s not forget MSNBC: https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1330364450935812100
Or Mother Jones: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/09/defcon-2019-hacking-village/
Even actress Alyssa Milano knows:
I feel the need to point out (again) that our voting system is vulnerable to attack. Citizens of 13 states will be voting in the midterms on insecure, obsolete, hackable, paperless voting machines that cannot be recounted. — Alyssa Milano (@Alyssa_Milano) June 14, 2018
Yet, you’re the crank today if you say Dominion and its software were open for dirty business. And then point to specific instances in the raw data that indicate dirty business.
So Much Fraud, So Many States, So Little Time
Now the bad news.
There is so much fraud, so many methods of fraud, so many states subjected to fraud, it’s a Herculean task to corral it, and there is so little time to prove it.
The media is not going to report on the fraud. They’re too consumed writing about Joe Biden getting a cat. Democratic judges aren’t going to rule to overturn the fraud. Spineless RINO legislators aren’t going to do their constitutional duty to make amends for the fraud.
And the clock continues to tick.
Two questions remain:
Who in a position of authority will have the courage to take the heat and do what is right?
Can the truth – so thoroughly suppressed – get to enough honest people to create an even grander groundswell of patriots whose trumpets can bring down the wall of lies and corruption?
This one’s up to We the People.
You Only Need to Win the Final Battle
CNN Jake Tapper is mocking the legal efforts of the Trump legal team so far. On Saturday, he remarked their record futility is approaching that of the 1940 Washington Redskins who lost 73-0 to the Chicago Bears.
Some were quick to remind Tapper that George W. Bush’s legal team lost every challenge in 2020 … except his final challenge at the Supreme Court. We may see the same again this time out.
Given the stakes – namely, the survival of the United States – I prefer another analogy. But for the Battle of Trenton, General George Washington and his deplorable ragtag army of patriots lost every single battle in the American Revolution. They were suffering defeat after defeat at the hands of the massive, slick British military machine aligned against them. Time was short. The odds were long.
Then came the Battle of Yorktown.
The Trap
General Washington caught the British Army in Yorktown. Trapped them. Suddenly finding themselves surrounded by Patriots with no means of escape, the supposedly invincible British Army surrendered. The United States had won its independence.
Today, another power aims to snuff out our democratic republic. Again the odds are long. But the fight is far from finished. The trap is being set. The Patriots continue on the march. We continue to grow. The facts, the law, the U.S. Constitution are our weapons. The Truth is our Yorktown. God willing, the massive machine aligned against us will be pushed onto the Truth and forced to surrender.
Independence will again be ours.
And you can call me a crank for believing that.
Al Perrotta is the Managing Editor of The Stream and co-author, with @JZmirak, of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration. You can follow him at @StreamingAl. And if you aren’t already, please follow The Stream at @Streamdotorg.