11/5/17

President Trump Targets Voter Fraud—Dems Go Insane!

By: Joan Swirsky | Canada Free Press

They never ever counted on the one entity for which neither media hacks nor pollsters have any respect: the American public!

”…The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.” Joseph Stalin, 1923

On Tuesday, American voters will once again go to the polls hoping that the candidate(s) they vote for will fulfill what should be their one and only mission, i.e., to serve the needs of We the People.

Republican, ahem, leaders are appropriately nervous that the phony so-called conservatives they’ve been foisting on us for decades will be replaced by authentic conservatives who will help President Trump fulfill his mission to Make America Great Again!

And—oxymoron here—Democrat leaders are even more agitated because looming over the entire election will be the initiative President Trump announced last May to investigate voter fraud, an issue they are all-too-seedily familiar with.

They are also in high anxiety about the inconvenient truth that, according to journalist Susan Jones, “There have been five special congressional elections so far this year, and in the four races where Republicans ran against Democrats, Republicans have won all four. (In CA, two Democrats vied for a House seat, so a Dem win was the only possible outcome).

VP Mike Pence and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach are leading the commission’s efforts to reassure voters about the integrity of federal elections. The president also appointed Hans von Spakovsky, a GW Bush appointee, to head the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity.

And there is one more thing. Democrats felt confident that they had perfected the voter-fraud scheme so exquisitely that their girl Hillary would cakewalk her way into the Oval Office in a landslide. But the one thing they didn’t count on—and haven’t counted on for four elections in which they’ve sustained thunderous losses in state legislatures, governorships, congressional and senatorial seats and, in 2016, the White House—is the preference of most Americans for sane policies that don’t include:

Anguish over going to a public bathroom
Dictates that insist nuns tout birth control
Burgeoning food-stamp and welfare rolls
Sissified Rules of Engagement for our distinctly non-sissified military
A dumbed-down, anti-American, Islamophilic federalized education system
A socialized medical system

You get the picture.

THE EPIDEMIC

I’ve heard of some cases of Republican gerrymandering. According to Wikipedia, this is “a practice intended to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating district boundaries. Not really sure how this works, but it pales by light years from the countless examples of Democrat voter fraud. For one thing, gerrymandering is legal, although it can be contested.

Shortly after President Trump’s commission was formed, stories of Democrat voter fraud from all over the country started to emerge. Of course, most of the fake-news liberal media refused to cover these stories, just as they—including the far-left New York Times—kept buried the story of Miramax founder Harvey Weinstein’s predatory sexual harassment and alleged rape for nearly 15 years, the better to protect a huge financial donor to Democrat candidates.

Here is a small sampling of the kind of voter fraud that is perfectly routine in Democrat circles:

October 2017: Corruption in Voting! Los Angeles has 144% of Those Eligible to Vote on Voting Rolls.
As reported by the National Review’s Deroy Murdock, “some 3.5 million more people are registered to vote in the U.S. than are alive among America’s adult citizens…” Murdock counted Judicial Watch’s state-by-state tally and found that 462 U.S. counties had a registration rate exceeding 100% of all eligible voters. That’s 3.552 million people, who Murdock calls “ghost voters.”
California, for instance, has 11 counties with more registered voters than actual voters and 10 of those counties voted heavily for Hillary Clinton.
September 2017: Hundreds of Illegal Voters Revealed in Philadelphia: non-U.S. citizens registered to vote in Philly and nearly half of them voted in past elections.
September 2017: 248 counties have more voters than eligible citizens. Lowndes County, Alabama, has been accused of having 131 percent of its total eligible population on its list of registered voters. Another 247 counties have the same problem.
From the same article by Bob Unruh of WorldNetDaily.com: Kentucky has 41 counties with more voters than residents, Michigan 32, Iowa 31, Illinois 22, Mississippi 19, Colorado 17, Texas 12, Alabama 12, South Dakota 12, Nebraska 9, Georgia 6, New York 6, West Virginia 6, New Mexico 5, North Carolina 5, California 2, Louisiana 2, Montana 2, Virginia 2, Arizona 1 and Florida 1.
September 2017: The NY Post reported about “the endless rigging of NY politics.”
September 2017: An election supervisor in Broward County, Florida, testified in court that both noncitizens and felons have voted illegally in her county—just as then-candidate Trump asserted, to the howling denials of leftists and their media whores.
In the second meeting of the Commission on Election Integrity, held on Sept. 12, 2017, computer expert Ken Block found approximately 8,500 voters who voted in two different states in the November 2016 election, including 200 couples who voted illegally together. He estimated that “there would be 40,000 duplicate votes if data from every state were available.”
A Commission on Election Integrity reports that “voter history data from only 21 states…found that 8,471 votes in 2016 were ‘highly likely’ duplicates. Extrapolating this to all 50 states would likely produce, with ‘high-confidence,’ around 45,000 duplicate votes.
Hillary won New Hampshire by fewer than 3,000 votes out of over 700,000 cast. (NH was one of the states that refused to turn over its data for this study, and it is one of only 15 states that allow same-day voter registration). If 74.8 percent of the 5,513 fraudulent votes were cast for Clinton, then the presidential election in New Hampshire was tipped as well.
According to a riveting article by Kris Kobach, statistics released by the Speaker of the New Hampshire House of Representatives on the date of the general election in November 2016, there were 6,540 same-day registrants who voted in New Hampshire using an out-of-state driver’s license to prove their identity. But further research proved that over 5,000 were not legitimate, more than enough to swing an election!
August 2017: Judicial Watch reported that Mass. state employees sold drivers’ licenses and state identification cards to illegal immigrants…according to the Depart. of Justice (DOJ). Also that there is “an epidemic of voter fraud in the U.S.” and the case in Boston “occurred in multiple cases,” a matter being investigated by JW’s five-year-old Election Integrity Project.
On August 18, 2017 Tyler Durden wrote a column on Zero Hedge titled “U.S. Has 3.5 Million More Registered Voters Than Live Adults—A Red Flag For Electoral Fraud.”
Virginia’s Governor Terry McAuliffe has said he has no intention of honoring the new commission’s request for information because “there is no evidence of significant voter fraud in Virginia.” This is the same guy who enabled over 60,000 felons to vote in the presidential election last November, the same slick operator who gave over $700,000 dollars to acting FBI director Andrew McCabe’s wife who was running in a local race. Yes, that McCabe, who just coincidentally was running the FBI investigation into Hillary’s use of a home-made e-mail server.
Last June, California’s Election Integrity Project (EIP), in a routine audit of CA’s new VoteCal voter registration database, found that five counties alone accounted for nearly one-million more registered voters than citizens of voting age!
Officials in College Park, Maryland, don’t like President Trump’s voter fraud commission and are considering giving noncitizens voting rights, a longstanding practice elsewhere in the state. In Maryland, Judicial Watch sued Montgomery County last month after finding more registered voters than citizens of voting age.
According to California political commentator Stephan Frank, “Thanks to [Obama’s] “leadership,” five-million (not a typo) of those granted United States citizenship CANNOT speak or read English.”
‘Substantial Evidence’ Over a Million Illegal Aliens Voted in 2016

All of the above cases, from just the past few months, involve Democrat voter fraud and this is the teeniest tiniest tip of the iceberg!

RIGGING 101

Founded in 1970, ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), received multimillions in federal funds, ostensibly to work on social issues like affordable housing and healthcare in poor neighborhoods, as well as voter registration. It soon became known as a massive voter-fraud scheme that registered dead people, children, illegal aliens, felons, fraudulent absentee voters, even cartoon characters.

The group was finally outed in 2009 by conservative activists Hannah Giles and James O’Keefe who used hidden cameras to expose ACORN’s nefarious agenda. The U.S. Congress cut ACORN’s funding and the group eventually disbanded. But it continues to operate to this day under new names.

According to journalist and author Matthew Vadum, “Project Vote—the voter mobilization division of now-defunct ACORN—leaves behind a legacy of lies, criminal conspiracies, and voter fraud, including millions upon millions of fraudulent voter registrations.” As he documented in his book, Subversion Inc.: How Obama’s ACORN Red Shirts Are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers, “at least 54 ACORN employees and individuals associated with ACORN have been convicted of voter fraud, a blanket term coined by lawyers referring to fraudulent voting, identify fraud, perjury, voter registration fraud, forgery, and other crimes related to the electoral process.”

In a stunning, must-read, three-part series—here, Part 1 by Katy Grimes, here, Part 3 by Katy Grimes, Grimes begins with a chilling quotation from Joseph Stalin: “…The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”

Grimes and Barth report the massive election fraud that took place during the California primary in June (2016).

Thousands upon thousands of California voters showed up at their designated polling stations only to discover that their party registration had been changed, or they were dropped entirely from the rolls. And it was evident this was done from within the state’s electronic voting system.
“A group from Princeton needed only seven minutes and simple hacking tools to install a computer program on a voting machine that took votes for one candidate and gave them to another,”
Recent DNC delegate manipulations made it so nearly every primary and caucus magically favored Hillary Clinton, despite the millions of winning votes going to Sanders” [and the probability that he won]. Just last week, a new book by longtime democrat consultant Donna Brazile claimed that Hillary rigged the DNC Primary, or, as she corrected that notion on Friday, that Hillary “totally controlled” the bankrupt Democratic National Committee. She did this, as reported by Jon Levine of The Wrap, by agreeing to pay off the DNC’s debt in exchange for overseeing the “party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised.”
Three liberal federal judges (two appointed by Pres. Clinton, one by Barack Obama) overturned voter-ID laws—in Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Texas—claiming they were racially discriminatory.

Barth cites a study on Democrat fraud in multiple states, the conclusion of which was that election fraud [occurred] and benefitted Hillary Clinton—especially in states that used unaccountable, electronic voting machines.

“What’s more, two of the three companies that controlled the electronic voting machine market, Dominion Voting and H.I.G. Capital (i.e. Hart Intercivic) were on the list of big money donors that donated to the Clinton campaign, as shown by the DNC documents leaked by Guccifer 2.0.”

These stories were nowhere to be found in the mainstream media. Either was the video—since removed—of a Diebold machine spitting out incorrect votes in favor of Hillary.

In addition, according to Dean Garrison at dcclothesline.com, not only did Reuters rig a major poll to show Hillary winning when Breitbart News was reporting a 17-point swing towards Trump and away from Hillary, but Thomas Reuters, owner of the Reuters News Service, was among the top-tier donors ($1.5 million) to the Clinton Foundation!

It is impossible not to mention the famous “popular vote” that Hillary insisted she won by. Actually, in October of 2015, just a year before the presidential election—perfect timing—a motor-voter law cooked up by California Governor Jerry Brown was enacted. In short, this gave over three-million illegal aliens the “right” to vote.

A report from Investors Business Daily said that: “According to the American Civil Liberties Union—which opposes the motor-voter law—California houses 3.3 million illegals, or a quarter of the nation’s total. So the stage is set not just for extending voting to illegals but for swinging national elections, too.”

Well whaddaya know? That number—3.3 million—is just about the exact number Hillary and her bitter minions—and her pathetic book—say she won the popular vote by!

We all know how this massive voter-fraud attempt ended. Donald Trump not only won the 2016 election, but successfully exposed the fake news and fake polls that until 8 p.m. on election night continued to insist that Hillary was ahead and would win.

They never ever counted on the one entity for which neither media hacks nor pollsters have any respect: the American public!

11/5/17

Transgenders in the Military – Who Decides: Congress, the President, or Federal Judges?

By: Publius Huldah

In a case now pending before the US District Court for the District of Columbia,¹ the trial judge recently granted a preliminary injunction which purports to temporarily stop the Trump Administration from banning so-called “transgender” persons from serving in the Military.

But we will look at the real issue: Does the Judicial Branch of the federal government have constitutional authority to require the Legislative and Executive Branches of the federal government to permit transgender persons to serve in the Military?

Instead of going along with what everybody says – or expounding on one’s personal views on the topic –let us consult and obey the US Constitution:

Article I, Section 8, clauses 11 – 13, delegate to Congress the powers to declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, make rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; raise and support Armies; and to provide and maintain a Navy.

Article I, Section 8, clause 14, delegates to Congress the power “To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;”

Article II, Section 2, clause 1, says, “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States…”

In Federalist Paper No 69 (6^th para), Alexander Hamilton says:

“…The President is to be commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the United States. … his authority … would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces, as first General and admiral of the Confederacy…”

So! All the powers over the Military which have been delegated by the Constitution are vested in the Legislative and Executive Branches of the federal government.

The Judicial Branch has no role to play in the organizing and operation of the Military Forces.

Pursuant to Article I, Section 8, clauses 11-14, Congress alone has the delegated authority to decide who may serve in the Military. If Congress issues Rules banning transgender persons from serving, then it is the President’s job, as Commander in Chief, to enforce those rules.

Accordingly, instead of participating in the litigation before the federal district court, the Trump Administration should instruct the federal judge on the long-forgotten concept of “Separation of Powers” and advise the court, “You have no jurisdiction over the Military – we will not participate.”

1. Military courts and military lawyers in a nutshell

The Judicial Branch of the federal government was created by Article III, US Constitution. That Article created the supreme Court, and authorized Congress to ordain and establish, from time to time, such inferior courts as needed. Pursuant to that authority, Congress has established 94 federal district courts (where most federal trials are conducted), and 13 US Circuit Courts of Appeals.

The US Military has its own court system which is not part of the Judicial Branch of the federal government. The military courts are “Article I Courts” created by Congress in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).² They consist of trial courts where courts-martial are conducted; each Branch of Service has its own “Court of Criminal Appeals”; and the “US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces” hears appeals from the Services’ Courts of Criminal Appeals.

And when military commanders need legal advice, they get it from their own Service lawyers (this is one of the duties of lawyers in the Judge Advocate Generals’ Corps).

The Judicial Branch of the federal government has no constitutional authority over the US Military.

2. Federalist Paper No. 80 and the meaning of “arising under”

Some may assert that the Judicial Branch has authority to determine who may serve in the Military because Article III, Section 2, clause 1 says,

“The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases…arising under this Constitution and the Laws of the United States…”

But they would be wrong. In Federalist No. 80, Alexander Hamilton explains the jurisdiction of the courts created by Article III: In the 2^nd, 3^rd, 4^th, and 13^th paragraphs, he shows that the purpose of the language quoted just above is to authorize the Judicial Branch to enforce the Constitution – not re-write it; and to enforce constitutional federal laws – not re-write them.

Furthermore, in Federalist No. 81 (8^th para), Hamilton addresses judicial encroachments on legislative authority, and reminds us that such encroachments need never be a problem because of the courts’ “total incapacity to support its usurpations by force”; and because Congress may protect the Country from usurping federal judges by impeaching, trying, convicting, and removing them from office.

3. Political Questions

Accordingly, when a power is vested by the Constitution in the Legislative or Executive Branches [the “political branches”] the federal courts [the “legal branch”] have traditionally refused to interfere.

In Martin v. Mott, 25 US 19 (1827), the Supreme Court considered the Militia Act of 1795 which authorized the President to call forth the militia when he judged it necessary to repel an invasion.³ The Court pointed out that the power had been confided [entrusted] by Congress to the President, and

“We are all of opinion, that the authority to decide whether the exigency has arisen, belongs exclusively to the President, and that his decision is conclusive upon all other persons.”

In Foster v. Neilson, 27 U.S. 253 (1829), which involved a dispute between the United States and Spain over territory, the Court held that once those departments [Executive and Legislative Branches] “which are entrusted with the foreign intercourse of the nation” have asserted rights of dominion over territory, “it is not in its own courts that this construction is to be denied”. “A question … respecting the boundaries of nations, is … more a political than a legal question; and … the courts of every country must respect the pronounced will of the legislature.”

Likewise, the power to determine who may serve in the Military has been delegated to the Legislative Branch of the federal government i.e., Congress. The Judicial Branch may not substitute its judgment for the Will of the Legislative Branch; and if it attempts to do so, Congress should employ the remedies suggested by Hamilton in Federalist No. 81.

4. The President’s “check” on the federal courts

Finally, let’s look at Federalist No. 78 (6^th para) where Hamilton – unlike the pundits of today – tells us the Truth about the powers of federal courts:

“…The judiciary … has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.” [boldface mine; caps are Hamilton’s] ⁴

An informed President who is a manly man will ignore ultra vires orders of the Judicial Branch.

5. Conclusion

Let us put the federal courts in their proper place! Congress and the President have the recognized power to refuse to go along with unconstitutional or ultra vires acts of the Judicial Branch; and their Oaths of office require them to do so. Congress also has the power to rid us of usurping federal judges via the impeachment process.

Endnotes:

¹ The US District Court for the District of Columbia was established by Congress pursuant to Art. III, §1, US Constitution.

² Congress’ authority to create the Military Courts is derived from Art. I, §8, cl. 14, US Constitution.

³ Article I, §8, clause 15, delegates to Congress the power, “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.”

⁴ I trust you see why Hamilton is viciously smeared. The relentless attacks on our Framers have a purpose: Take them down – and our Foundation is destroyed. Hamilton wrote most of The Federalist Papers, which Madison and Jefferson recognized as the best evidence of the genuine meaning of our Constitution. What effect do these constant attacks on Hamilton have on peoples’ respect for The Federalist Papers? Beware of false friends who undermine our Foundation; and of jealous men whose claim to fame is that they attack Hamilton.