President Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden went head-to-head on Tuesday night, and moderator Chris Wallace got knocked out. Wallace seemed to push left-wing talking points to help Biden and hurt Trump, but both candidates talked over him. Trump and Biden brought out the fisticuffs and both got in a few good hits. Biden stumbled but he did not come across as a bumbling fool.
While Trump and Biden both went on the offensive, Trump got in more clear statements and Biden came across as shifty, especially on packing the Supreme Court.
Wallace asked Biden if he would support expanding the Supreme Court to more than nine justices, noting that Democrats brought up the issue first. Biden refused to answer the question, and Trump pressed him.
When Trump pressed him, “Why aren’t you going to answer that question?” Biden shot back, “Would you shut up, man?”
After Trump asked, “Who is on your list, Joe?” Biden responded by saying, “This is so unpresidential.”
Not only did Biden dodge the question, but he lost his cool about the issue, and then accused his opponent of being unpresidential right after he said, “Would you shut up, man?”
Joe won't answer whether he'd pack the court and end the filibuster. Candidates are candidates and they're supposed to, you know, take positions on things. Him ducking this shows how he is not "the Democratic Party"#Debates2020 pic.twitter.com/HK2TPokq2m
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) September 30, 2020
On the issue of nominating Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s replacement to the Supreme Court, Trump insisted, “I’m not elected for three years, I’m elected for four years.” He suggested that Biden’s call for delaying the nomination and confirmation until after the election would essentially deny Trump’s presidency — an effective counter.
When Trump tried to catch Biden on the extreme measures of the far-left, the Democrat responded, “I am the Democratic Party right now.” We’ll see what Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has to say about that.
Biden: "I AM THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY right now."
— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) September 30, 2020
On the Chinese coronavirus pandemic, Biden claimed that the U.S. has 4 percent of the world’s population but 20 percent of coronavirus deaths. Trump rightly called him out on this, noting that countries like China are likely undercounting their deaths. (He should have mentioned Iran and Russia, but he did mention China and India.)
Biden repeated the false claim that Trump suggested injecting “bleach into your arm.” In reality, Trump asked the experts a question about using a disinfectant to fight the virus, and he suggested that people should not try this without medical doctors.
In response to Pres. Trump's vaccine claims, Joe Biden says, "This is the same man who told you by Easter this would be gone away. By the warm weather, it'd be gone, miraculously…And by the way, maybe you can inject some bleach into your arm." https://t.co/5Bl4Ob3O2t pic.twitter.com/h1xM8EH98L
— ABC News (@ABC) September 30, 2020
When Trump brought up Hunter Biden’s notorious corruption, Joe Biden insisted, “My son did nothing wrong at Burisma.” The president countered, “Why did he deserve three and a half million from Moscow?!”
Biden noted that black Americans have died from COVID-19 at higher rates, insisting that Trump’s presidency has “been disastrous for the African American community.” Yet Trump rightly countered by citing the 1994 crime bill and Trump’s criminal justice reform. “I’m letting people out of jail now.” Trump accused Biden of using the term “super-predators.” Biden did condemn “predators,” but Hillary Clinton was the one to call criminals “super-predators.” Clinton was defending the bill Biden championed, however.
Trump championed law and order, noting that 250 military leaders and generals have endorsed him, along with a long list of law enforcement organizations, including the national Fraternal Order of Police. The president challenged Biden to name a single law enforcement group that supports him and the Democrat could not.
— Team Trump (Text VOTE to 88022) (@TeamTrump) September 30, 2020
When Wallace asked Trump about his decision to end “white privilege” trainings in the federal government, the president explained, “I ended it because it’s racist.” He noted that the trainings, many of which follow Marxist critical race theory, “were teaching people to hate our country,” claiming that America is fundamentally racist. Biden countered by saying “there is racial insensitivity.”
Trump rightly noted that Biden’s policy would destroy the suburbs by getting rid of local control over zoning. Biden responded by saying, “all these dog whistles on racism don’t work anymore.” The Democrat is correct — dog whistles don’t work, because Trump’s argument isn’t a dog whistle. Biden supports the Obama administration’s radical AFFH (Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing) regulation which gets rid of single-family zoning in the name of diversity. This would end local control, which is the real issue.
President Trump touted that he will have nominated and the Senate will have confirmed approximately 300 federal judges, along with at least 2 — and likely 3 — Supreme Court justices.
Biden countered by claiming that Trump is “Putin’s puppy” and accusing the president of “causing the recession” associated with the coronavirus pandemic.
As Reason’s Robby Soave pointed out, Trump painted Biden as the candidate of lockdowns and Biden did little to rebut the idea. The Democrat has suggested he would shut down the country again if he wins in November.
Trump is painting Biden as the candidate of lockdowns and lockdown-related pain, and Biden is making little effort to rebut this.
— Robby Soave (@robbysoave) September 30, 2020
Wallace pulled a fast one toward the end of the debate, bringing up the issue of climate change. President Trump condemned the Paris Climate Accord, noted that the environment has gotten better, touted the project to build a billion trees, and emphasized the importance of forest management in states like California that have been overwhelmed by forest fires.
“If you had forest management, good forest management, you wouldn’t be getting those calls,” he said, explaining that dead leaves on the forest floor contribute to wildfires. I grew up in dry rural Colorado and I spent my summers clearing up the forest floor in the mountains. My father is a volunteer firefighter and I did my Eagle Project in wildland fire mitigation. Forest management is far more critical to preventing forest fires than the unproven claims about climate change increasing the temperature by a degree or two.
President Trump points to forest management as the cause of the wildfires in the West, but avoids specifics on his climate change beliefs. #Debates2020 https://t.co/McrHYPnMbj pic.twitter.com/EIBsZYXZ1W
— CNBC (@CNBC) September 30, 2020
In one of the more memorable events of the night, President Trump called on the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by,” while Joe Biden refused to even address the instigators in antifa. Instead, Biden cited FBI Director Christopher Wray, who has called antifa an ideology, not a group. “Antifa’s an idea, not an organization,” the Democrat said, supposedly quoting Wray.
Chris Wallace: "Are you willing, tonight, to condemn white supremacists and militia groups…?"
President Trump: "Sure, I'm willing to do that…Proud Boys, stand back and stand by! But I'll tell you what…somebody's got to do something about Antifa and the left." pic.twitter.com/9gJ8qyO4hL
— CSPAN (@cspan) September 30, 2020
While Wallace took Trump to task for interrupting Biden, Wallace himself interrupted Trump.
Moderator Chris Wallace to Trump as he repeatedly interrupts Biden: “Your campaign agreed that both sides would get 2 minute answers uninterrupted … why don’t you observe what your campaign agreed to?”
— ABC News (@ABC) September 30, 2020
Chris Wallace interrupted Trump 35 times tonight.
He did not interrupt Biden once.
— JT Lewis (@thejtlewis) September 30, 2020
“Gentlemen, I hate to raise my voice, but why should I be different than the two of you?” Wallace said. Wallace suggested that Trump had interrupted more than Biden, but Biden also interrupted both Trump and Wallace throughout the debate.
Chris Wallace jumps in after Trump and Biden have continuously interrupted each other: "Gentlemen, I hate to raise my voice, but why shouldn't I be different than the two of you?"
— CBS News (@CBSNews) September 30, 2020
CNN’s Jake Tapper called the debate “a hot mess, inside a dumpster fire, inside a train wreck.”
Biden is going to lose; and it s primarily because he can t hide his deep cynicism and self-loathing. People can sense this sort of thing, Trump genuinely tried to discuss the things he d done over the past few years that were sincerely meant to improve life for the service sector and other downtrodden workers.
Biden could only try to blame him for the virus and call him a clown and a liar. He looked like the smart-*** schoolboy who's all talk and no substance.
His own claims of caring about people came off as hollow and saccharine.
and when trump asked over and over why he hadn t done anything over 47 years in politics, i thought it struck a note: all that time, with his own self proclaimed corruption in Ukraine, and defensiveness about his son, we're left looking at how far the apple didn t fall from the tree.
His dealings with the credit card industry while the US middle class was getting screwed by them, his sale of our vice presidency to China and Ukraine, are all in plain sight...and he thinks he can just just brush it all off .....I don t think so.
Biden lied about his party s endorsement of the green new deal, about favoring the lock-downs (and more of them), and about keeping schools shut.
But now that public opinion is turning on these issues so he has to pretend that the lock-down was a trump policy..but trump s been trying to get things opened up again.
Biden s part of the big tech censorship, he s the mainstream
narrative candidate meant to protect and serve the billionaire
globalists and their security agencies, which are paid for by us, but
work for them.
This week, President Donald Trump appointed J. Christian Adams to the U.S. Civil Rights Commission. A former Department of Justice (DOJ) civil rights election lawyer, president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, and a PJ Media columnist, Adams champions the original meaning of the Civil Rights Amendments (the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution). In an exclusive interview with PJ Media after his appointment, Adams explained why his commitment to protecting the civil rights of all Americans — including whites — not only honors Americans’ Civil War sacrifices but undermines the Left’s dangerous redefinition of civil rights, a Marxist vision that is fueling the violent riots in Portland, Seattle, and Chicago.
“The Left will use civil rights as a racial identity tool for collective power. They think that empowering certain groups of people through the law is a way for them to get and assert power. I view it as an individual thing, not a collective thing. I view it as to whether a person is discriminated against by their government, for example. That’s a real victim, that’s a real harm,” Adams told PJ Media.
Adams has represented blacks in traditional civil rights voting cases but he has also represented whites who have been disenfranchised due to the color of their skin. In the case Davis v. Guam (2020), Adams represented a white man who was barred from voting in Guam’s plebiscite because he could not trace his ancestry back to the original inhabitants of Guam. In United States v. Ike Brown (2009), Adams represented the federal government in suing a black political leader who engaged in blatant mail fraud to disenfranchise white voters (who are a minority in Noxubee County, Miss.). Adams has also vocally condemned the well-funded campaign for vote-by-mail, which denies the problem of voter fraud.
Adams’ willingness to defend white plaintiffs against black defendants in civil rights cases contrasted with the Obama DOJ’s interpretation of civil rights law, Adams told PJ Media. “The Obama people were very hostile to black defendants in civil rights cases. It gets back into the entire question are the civil rights laws intended to protect every American or just some Americans.”
Adams joined the DOJ under President George W. Bush in 2005 and received the Department’s Special Commendation for Outstanding Service in October 2008. Yet the new leadership under President Barack Obama forced him to drop a serious case of voter intimidation where New Black Panthers in full paramilitary regalia intimidated white voters at a polling place in the 2008 election.
After Adams reluctantly dropped the case United States v. The New Black Panther Party (2009), the Civil Rights Commission subpoenaed him to testify about it. “There were criminal penalties associated with non-compliance,” he told PJ Media. “The Obama Justice Department told me, ‘Don’t worry, we’re not going to enforce the law.'”
“I quit and I testified. I would rather be unemployed and not have a criminal referral hanging over my head,” Adams recounted. Had he refused to testify, the Obama DOJ could have blackmailed him. He imagined a future blackmail conversation: “We won’t prosecute you, Christian, but we don’t like that recommendation.”
Tragically, the Obama DOJ’s interpretation of civil rights law has spread throughout America. Trump’s appointment of Adams shows the president’s willingness to push back against a noxious twisting of the law that Adams described as an “abomination.”
During his time at the DOJ, Adams recalled meeting many lawyers who “thought that the civil rights laws were only designed to protect traditional racial minorities. They have a backward and unconstitutional view of things. They just don’t quite understand what the civil war amendments were all about.”
Adams has done extensive research into the civil rights amendments and their place at the end of the Civil War, and he has come to regard them with almost religious awe.
“This nation endured a ferocious upheaval to enact the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments. All of the sunk wealth and calamity of a civil war were a high price indeed for these three amendments. We owe it to the generation that made them possible to fulfill the aims of these amendments,” Adams said in his official statement about his appointment to the Civil Rights Commission.
“So many people died, lost their limbs and their fortunes, to give us those three amendments: ending slavery (the 13th Amendment), equal protection (the 14th Amendment), and the right to vote (the 15th Amendment),” he told PJ Media. “To turn them into weapons to pit people against each other based on race is an abomination. It disgraces them.”
After the Union prevailed in the Civil War, the Radical Republicans controlled Congress for roughly a decade. “The Northeastern abolitionists basically controlled Congress and they controlled all the state governments in the South during Reconstruction,” Adams explained. “They were able to pass a radical revolutionary set of constitutional amendments that did something that never happened before in the history of the world.”
These civil rights amendments “enshrined in law the absolute equality of people on the basis of race. It was like the Ten Commandments coming down,” the lawyer insisted. “Everybody had to be treated equal because they were equal in the eyes of God. The political situation existed where that could pass was only a few years.”
During the congressional debates on the 15th Amendment, a senator tried to introduce an amendment allowing discrimination against Chinese people, Adams recalled. “They said, ‘No, this is universal, it applies to everyone, equally.’ It is very clear that the founders who wrote the Fifteenth Amendment meant it to apply to everyone, white, black, Asian, and every other race.”
Adams noted that a suburban school district in Chicago gave preference to black students, allowing them to return to school first as the school opened after coronavirus lockdown. “That’s exactly what the 14th Amendment was designed to prevent.”
Yet leftist lawyers consider America a fundamentally racist and unjust system and view civil rights laws as a tool to even the scales, not a guarantee of rights to be applied equally to all citizens. Adams argued that this Marxist twisting of justice has enflamed the violent antifa riots on the streets of Portland, Seattle, and Chicago.
“The view of this crowd on civil rights doesn’t tie into the rioting, it’s the genesis of it. This has been brewing for the last 15 years,” Adams told PJ Media. “We saw these crazy ideas in the Justice Department where basic ideas like jail or bail itself or voting precincts, these are all some racist scheme.”
He recalled hearing DOJ lawyers insist that “the word ‘picnic’ is racist,” long preceding the Cancel Culture efforts to erase basic words like “chief” from the English lexicon in the name of fighting racism.
“This crazy lunacy was going on inside a government agency,” Adams said. “Obama normalized it, and now it’s in the streets. Now it wants to allocate resources on the basis of race. It’s trying to turn self-defense into racism.”
“This is completely opposite to the centuries-old principles that have built Western civilization,” the lawyer added. “It eventually results in so many bad things: the eradication of mainstream culture, the appropriation of hard-earned wealth and property, violence, the suspension of the rule of law.”
In short, “it results in everything barbaric that existed before America.”
While the rioting is terrifying, Adams suggested that President Donald Trump likely enjoys far more support than the polls predict because Trump supporters are silenced by fear.
“The political violence that is being mainstreamed against Trump voters and conservatives generally is having an effect on polling data like has never occurred,” he said. “People are afraid of leftist violence and they have a civil right to engage in political discourse without being beaten up.”
“It sounds outlandish, a civil right not to be beaten up,” Adams admitted. But the DOJ has brought cases against thugs who target people for a beating based on their expression of constitutional rights like free speech.
Trump’s decision to appoint J. Christian Adams to the U.S. Civil Rights Commission may indicate a rising backlash to the Marxist reinterpretation of civil rights and the pernicious ideology behind the riots. Trump is willing to go out on a limb and appoint a commissioner who is sure to outrage the Left — precisely because he defends the civil rights of all Americans, regardless of race.
Layoff news, past 24 hours:
* Disney: 28,000 jobs cuts
* Shell: 9,000
* Dow: six percent of workforce
* Marathon Petroleum: https://t.co/B6mgCoMu8b
Many of these cities such as NYC , Portland, Seattle.... are never going to recover, look at Detroit 1967 riots and how they NEVER recovered as your model.
They will have their excuse to take down the stock markets, and make all them people who have benefited from these rigged markets, poor. And the panic that will be created will far surpass this corona-virus panic they have created. The wealth effect they have created from these rigged and fake markets will be replaced by the poverty effect. And we will experience the greatest economic collapse mankind has ever witnessed. So severe that the Dow will drop down below 6,000 points.
Many of the folks above know better. Many in the audience know
better. But they know something else, more viscerally—especially those
in the upper middle class whose professions are tied to larger forces
and elite trends—namely, the white-hot ruling class fury at the Orange
Bad Man. They feel it keenly now more than ever. They see the ruling
class marshaling its forces, readying the purge of the heretics who dare
oppose them. During these times, it is unlikely that those beholden to
such forces will stick their necks out. Instead, it is easier to believe
the acceptable propaganda of “polite” company.
Democrats are preparing to win by any means necessary. What’s the Right going to do about it?
Michael Anton’s warning about the upcoming election, “The Coming Coup,” continues to roil the public square. Will Republican leaders do their best to prepare for the crisis of legitimacy—caused purposefully by Democrat Party changes to our normal voting procedures—that now almost surely awaits us for weeks after November 3? We hope so.
But note well: for all the controversy it has caused, no one on the Left has yet tried to refute Anton’s article, point by point. Instead, slime continues to ooze forth from the usual crevices. At first, no one on “the other side” except Ed Kilgore at New York magazine responded. As we said in “Stop the Coup,” Kilgore, much like everyone else in the mainstream press, simply “sidesteps outrageous statements from leftist activists and Democrat Party royalty indicating they do not plan to concede even if Trump wins.” But at least Kilgore nodded towards to the substance of Anton’s article.
The next round of responses revealed what has become the new normal for the American Left. Let’s take three quick examples.
First, a scurrilous, poorly constructed hit piece appeared (listen to us discuss on our ‘The Roundtable’ podcast here) smearing Anton, The American Mind, and the Claremont Institute as anti-Semitic for daring to mention George Soros’s name. As Newt Gingrich—recently silenced on Fox News for the same supposed sin—responded here at The American Mind: “This is ludicrous.” Once again, the article did not deny or disprove anything asserted in “The Coming Coup.” Instead, it absurdly called us racists.
Nonetheless, Nils Gilman, a think-tanker and PhD from UC Berkeley and one of two central co-founders of the Transition Integrity Project that Anton called out in his article, retweeted this execrable piece of garbage and upped the ante—using it to declare that our friend and colleague Michael Anton “deserves” to be shot to death. Writing such a tweet is unthinkable for anyone in a similar position to Gilman on the American Right; we all know such a public statement would lead to unemployment and full-fledged cancellation.
The letter that Claremont Institute President Ryan Williams sent to Gilman’s employer in reply, read in part:
This is incitement to political violence. Mr. Gilman has yet to retract his inflammatory words.
Is the official position of the Berggruen Institute that its political opponents should be killed? Does the Berggruen Institute countenance or tolerate advocacy of political violence by its employees? If not, why has the Berggruen Institute not disavowed this threat? Why has the Berggruen Institute not terminated the employment of Nils Gilman?
I call on you immediately to disavow, explicitly and publicly, political violence against Michael Anton or anyone else. Failure to do so will constitute an endorsement of political violence by the Berggruen Institute, its staff, and its donors.
Gilman and his friends laughed it off. The tweet is still up. The Berggruen Institute has not responded. And as Claremonster Steve Hayward wrote in City Journal, even the moronic Never Trumpers got in on the act.
Charlie Sykes, an anti-Trump conservative, this week tweeted, “For no particular reason, this morning I’ve been thinking about Nicolae Ceaușescu’s last public appearance.” The Romanian dictator’s last public appearance, of course, was the execution of him and his wife following a ten-minute trial. This is not just unsubtle; it isn’t even artful.
There is something especially pathetic about having to watch these cringing wormtongues writhe in action. Charlie Sykes is being paid now to be a useful idiot for the Left; he will not be pleased with the ultimate fate of his career should they win.
Another TIP member, Edward Luce, recently chimed in with lies and false gossip about Anton in the Financial Times. As Anton replies in “From Death Threats to Lies”:
It’s pretty obvious what’s going on here. TIP’s initial strategy of ignoring criticism of their open coup talk was starting to fail. They realized they needed to get back on the offensive. Hence the recent slate of “Trump Is Attempting a Coup!” articles, on which I hope to have more to say later. These latest attacks are part of a counteroffensive, pure and simple.
The counteroffensive consists of attempts to slander us and distract the audience from the central problem.
Many of the folks above know better. Many in the audience know better. But they know something else, more viscerally—especially those in the upper middle class whose professions are tied to larger forces and elite trends—namely, the white-hot ruling class fury at the Orange Bad Man. They feel it keenly now more than ever. They see the ruling class marshaling its forces, readying the purge of the heretics who dare oppose them. During these times, it is unlikely that those beholden to such forces will stick their necks out. Instead, it is easier to believe the acceptable propaganda of “polite” company.
At present, that propaganda includes two big lies that serve as the bedrock assumptions used by the powers-that-be to stir up and scare the upper-middle, professional classes - the otherwise-very-intelligent-people - many of whom still believe Trump was a Russian agent and Vladimir Putin his handler.
“Trump will not leave office. The President of the United States is prepping to refuse to peaceably transfer power if he loses the election.” This, of course, is part and parcel of the coup narrative that Anton has helped bring into the light. When the results of the election are unclear and disputed in the courts due to their own efforts to change voting procedures throughout the nation, they will say that Trump is refusing to lose office while they are on the side of the angels.
“Trump is telling people to vote twice/break the law.” This is rated fake news even by fake news itself. But the whole story fits very well with the coup narrative as it delegitimizes the President and the election.
So here, again, is the question of the hour: Do Republican leaders understand the purpose of the two false statements above and how enthusiastically—and successfully—they are being wielded as rhetorical weapons at present?
What the other side is doing is smart. They wish to win, by any means necessary.
But where is the Right’s George Soros?
Where is the Right’s Transition Integrity Project and accompanying war-gaming of the possibilities this fall?
Are Republicans preparing for the political complications that will inevitably result from the hundreds of lawsuits Democrats have filed and will file in the future?
Where are the Republican party’s 600+ lawyers-in-waiting?
Where are the Right’s meetings for activist and lobbying groups to plan to protect the polling places and put people in the streets for weeks after the election?
What we know for sure is that it is very likely that we will not know the results of the election for weeks after election day. This should now be the assumption of every thinking person on the Right. The question is: what are we going to do about it?
Michael Anton’s new article “The Coming Coup?” went viral almost as soon as we posted it a week ago today. This is not simply because figures like Lara Logan, Mollie Hemingway, Newt Gingrich, Dan Bongino, and the editors of the New York Post took note. It spread because concerned citizens began sharing it throughout the nation. We could tell it was especially effective because so many in the mainstream media maintained studious radio silence.
But hyperventilating ruling-class supporters of the Biden/BLM/Antifa coalition did predictably lash out. The epitome of these reactions is an article in New York magazine’s Intelligencer, by political columnist Ed Kilgore, entitled “Trump Backers Make Case for Stealing Election, Before Biden Gets the Chance.”
The title itself reveals the stubborn simplicity of the Democratic Party’s coup narrative. Their elites have worked themselves and their base into a frothing lather of existential fright. In article after article, liberal intellectuals and activists have been talking for months about how Trump could steal the election or refuse to leave the White House even if he loses. But if the Right dares to point out that Democrats are actually changing the rules of the electoral process and actually speaking publicly about refusing to concede even if they lose, well, this only proves that the Right is going to steal the election and refuse to concede if they lose!
In reality, of course, Anton and others are simply trying to shine a light on what Democrats are now openly declaring in public.
Kilgore frames Anton’s essay as part of an effort among conservatives to spread the craaaazy idea that Democrats’ obsessive focus on mail-in voting is part of a panicky effort to throw the election, not a good-faith scheme to protect people from coronavirus. Let’s leave aside the fact that no less an establishment authority than the Atlantic admits the voting booth is as safe as the grocery store. In fact, says Kilgore, echoing the new establishment narrative, so many legitimate Biden votes may come flooding in by mail after the in-person voting is through that the election will turn around all on its own.
Every major media outlet is now full of supposed expert authorities—even Mark Zuckerberg recently got into the act—telling the American people that the rule changes Democrat apparatchiks are pushing throughout the nation are totally normal. But as elections expert Hans Von Spakovsky pointed out in these pages, “what is clear from all of these lawsuits is that the Democrats and these organizations are trying to change the rules governing the administration of the November election” midstream while Republicans are trying to “preserve the status quo.” (If you want to understand what the Democrats are up to, give Spakovsky’s “Democrats Versus the Vote” a close read.)
Kilgore likes to present himself as a reasonable man. But how are voters supposed to respond when the message from the Democrat Party is “our lawsuits to change the way we’ve always voted in the middle of a tumultuous election season are not part of a partisan cheat. Oh, but one more thing: America needs to understand that while it might very well look like Trump won on election night, due to our new rules votes will be counted for weeks afterward and then our candidate will probably win.”
More significantly, Kilgore sidesteps outrageous statements from leftist activists and Democrat Party royalty indicating they do not plan to concede even if Trump wins. There is no elephant in a corner here. There is a donkey in the middle of the room. So what if Kilgore thinks that ackshually Democrats will concede the election if Trump wins? The problem is that this is not what Democrats are saying.
As Anton and even Kilgore observe, Hillary Clinton and company have already put Biden and Harris on notice—along with the rest of us—that the Democrat ticket must refuse to concede, no matter how lopsided the loss. Is this report from the Daily Beast wrong? “Inside the coalition, there is dispute over whether Biden should even concede if he wins the popular vote but loses the Electoral College…. The Transition Integrity Project noted that there would be immense pressure on Biden to fight it out.” You get that? Even if Trump wins the Electoral College and therefore the presidency, like every other President in American history, the Left is preparing to—to what, exactly?
As TIP co-founder Rosa Brooks wrote in the Washington Post, “with the exception of the ‘big Biden win’ scenario, each of our exercises reached the brink of catastrophe, with massive disinformation campaigns, violence in the streets and a constitutional impasse”—almost as if the party of chaos is the one whose powerful ideologues run the media, the mobs, and the deep state. We’ve already seen what “mostly peaceful” unrest looks like. But the Daily Beast article tells us “the larger game plan is to apply pressure through mass mobilization.” Given the long list the article provides, every left-leaning group in the nation is seemingly coordinating for “mass public unrest.”
But that’s not all. There are also those on the Left who would threaten secession from the United State of America rather than live in an America in which President Trump won reelection. Granted, “there were mixed opinions over what to do.”
“It’s the hardest scenario,” the source said. “It’s 2016. But it’s that plus all Trump has done on voter suppression. So I think there is a question but I think both sides are going to fight this till the very end.” And what, we asked, was the very end? “I don’t know,” the official replied.
The left elite press has sure gotten the message: it’s Trump and his followers who “may” steal the election. Democracy dies in orangeness—even if voters overwhelmingly agree that orange man is, in fact, good.
Ed Kilgore is not worried about any of this. His concern, he says, is that “if conservative opinion leaders convince each other and a big segment of Trump voters that Biden won’t accept a constitutionally legitimate loss, that’s all it may take to rob the 2020 presidential election of legitimacy.” Buddy. Pal. Robbing the presidency of legitimacy is the full-time job of your side since, er, before Trump took office. Do you remember your colleague Jonathan Chait’s deranged essay and its totally not insane conspiracy theory graphic about how the President of the United States was a Russian agent and Putin was his handler?
No matter. Kilgore is deeply concerned that if the Republicans mistakenly believe what the Democrats are saying and doing is real, the Republicans might refuse to concede the election and then “all hell really could break loose.” You mean, like, riots and stuff? Ed, your side is doing that already, and telling us they plan more of it. Lots more.
Still, Kilgore has one good suggestion: “Joe Biden could stop this toxic cycle of conspiracy theories justifying conspiracies by clearly announcing he will accept a clear Trump Electoral College win.” To do so, Ed, he’d have to speak specifically to the people in his own party who are saying they do not want him to do so. These are the “Democrats” you acknowledge in your next sentence—the Democrats for whom accepting the result of a legitimate election “offends” (your word, not ours).
Will Joe Biden and Kamala Harris tell Clinton, Pelosi, and now General Mattis to stop speaking about what sounds an awful lot like orchestrated insurrection? Of course they won’t. They won’t even tell BLM and Antifa to stop burning down American cities.
Rest assured that if the American Right spoke like this, the feds would start investigating. Then again, if the politics was reversed, BLM and Antifa would be considered domestic terror groups.
What is to be done? Republicans need to directly address and denounce the problem, and everyone must press Democratic leaders to do the same.
There is no way out of the coming cataclysm without Republican leaders closing ranks against the coup—and making clear that all Americans who join them will be well-supported in doing so.
As Andy Busch writes in “Sleepwalking into Secession,”
Those who find the Podesta Gambit [in which John Podesta, playing Biden, refused to concede his loss in a TIP war game] troubling need to shine the brightest possible spotlight onto it. To the highest degree possible, Joe Biden must be pressed as soon as possible to disavow it, whether in the form of pushing for the appointment of alternative electors, holding the election hostage to drastic constitutional change, or (above all) using threats of secession as a weapon.
Likewise, the actual governors central to Podesta’s hypothetical strategy (in California, Oregon, Washington, Wisconsin, Michigan, and North Carolina) must be challenged to put on record a pledge to reject that path. Kamala Harris, as a Californian, should face the same questions. These are simple questions. Do you reject threats of secession to get your way electorally? Will you pledge not to appoint electors contrary to the vote of the people of your state?
As Busch warns, “it is before votes are cast, not after, that maximum pressure will be on Biden and his co-partisans to behave in ways that do not repel swing voters. Once the votes are in, the party base will carry the most weight, and the pressure they will exert (as Podesta acknowledged in the simulation) will all be in the direction of driving out Trump by any means necessary.”
Today’s incessant scaremongering that a defeated Trump will barricade himself in the White House—the Nation devoted its latest cover story to this phony fever dream—is a smokescreen from party bigs scrambling to plan for just the opposite. Progressive radicals have spent years assembling a nationwide machine for legitimizing their switch-flip to autocratic rule. The full apparatus of that machinery—the media, the mobs, the deep-staters—is being leveraged to intimidate and disorient the people into accepting a Biden coup. Now is the time for Americans to make it known we won’t let our country be treated this way.
Republican leaders who love America more than they fear the ruling class will do the same.
“It’s debate night, so I’ve got my earpiece and performance enhancers ready,” Biden tweeted.
It’s debate night, so I’ve got my earpiece and performance enhancers ready. pic.twitter.com/EhOiWdjh1b
— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) September 29, 2020
On Monday night, Project Veritas released a second sting video showing a cash-for-ballots voter fraud scheme intended to help Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.). Some in the video claim that Omar is “behind all this mess.” Minnesota State Rep. Steve Drazkowski (R) told Michelle Malkin that he enlisted Project Veritas after the FBI apparently did not respond to the information. Earlier on Monday, President Donald Trump called on the U.S. attorney in Minnesota, Erica MacDonald, to investigate the claims in the videos.
“Now take this (money) for your pocket change,” a ballot harvester tells a voter in the video. “Okay… when I fill it out, I’ll bring it to you,” the voter responds.
Project Veritas Founder James O’Keefe claims to have “exposed a voter fraud ring so widespread that many members of the Somali community here consider it an ‘open secret.’ … Our sources within the Somali community here allege that the architect of this pay-for-votes scheme is none other than U.S. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar.”
O’Keefe shows the longer video, in which a ballot harvester offers “pocket money” of $200 in exchange for a voter filling out a voter registration form. Another ballot harvester said he received $800 in exchange for his vote.
Project Veritas insider Omar Jamal tells O’Keefe, “I think Ilhan Omar is one of the people who are behind all of this mess.”
“Eighty thousand of [Somali] immigrants votes will swing this election [in Minnesota] to one side,” Jamal explains. “And then they became very important. They became the focus of this and millions of dollars are spent to make sure that this 80 or 100 thousand of immigrant votes go one way.”
Osman Ali Dahquane, one of the ballot harvesters, said, “I have forty people” and he pays each person $800 for his or her vote.
“This is something new with Ilhan,” a local woman told Project Veritas.
Drazkowski told Michelle Malkin that he took this information to the FBI originally, but he was not convinced the agency would run an investigation. He then approached Project Veritas.
MN GOP Rep. @stevedraz recounts why he went to @jamesokeefeiii w/Ilhan-tied election fraud after reporting to FBI: "I was not convinced that they were going to do an investigation…the only other organization that would do this & bring it to the surface was @project_veritas." pic.twitter.com/JilGKQcIby
— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) September 28, 2020
This “pocket money” video follows a first Project Veritas video exposing voter fraud for Ilhan Omar on Sunday night. In that video, Liban Mohamed bragged about cash and showed off his car full of absentee ballots.
As J. Christian Adams reported for PJ Media, the Project Veritas investigation found three locations inside Ward 6, a ballot harvesting triangle, where the scheme operates: the Riverside Plaza apartments, the senior citizen community at Horn Towers, and the Minneapolis Elections and Voter Services office at 980 E. Hennepin Ave., which also functions as a voting location and ballot drop-off site.
Following this first sting video, President Donald Trump suggested that MacDonald, the U.S. Attorney for Minnesota, should investigate these claims.
“This is totally illegal. Hope that the U.S. Attorney in Minnesota has this, and other of her many misdeeds, under serious review??? If not, why not??? We will win Minnesota because of her, and law enforcement,” he tweeted. “Saved Minneapolis & Iron O Range!”
At around midnight Tuesday morning, Trump tweeted the latest Project Veritas video with the message, “Rigged Election!”
PJ Media reached out to MacDonald’s office for comment and did not receive a response by press time.
Hennepin County Attorney Jeff Wojciechowski told a Project Veritas journalist on a recorded line that the ballot harvesting conduct described to him was: “Illegal, and we will be investigating.”
Similar voter fraud scandals appear to be popping up across the country. Queens voters have reported receiving military absentee ballots. A new lawsuit accused the Joe Biden campaign’s Texas political director of running an illegal ballot harvesting scheme.
On Monday, Thomas Spencer, a lawyer in the Bush v. Gore (2000) case and vice president of the Lawyers Democracy Fund, told PJ Media about a criminal “underworld” that perpetrates voter fraud. He said this voter fraud ring is “one of those subterranean problems where it’s very difficult to find who these people are.” He also warned that Democrats are “taking all the guardrails down,” opening up the system to voter fraud. He predicted at least two election cases will likely reach the Supreme Court.
Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.
Source: “She’s [Ilhan Omar] The One Who Came Up with All This [Pay-For-Vote], the Community. She’s the One.”
Osman Ali Dahquane: “The Money Comes from the Candidates Running for office.”
Osman Ali Dahquane: “A Lot of People Will go to Jail If this Continues this way…If This Continues This Direction, Many People Will Go to Prison, Or No One Will Vote in the City of Minneapolis. It is very, very corrupt.”
Osman Ali Dahquane: “The Black Guy [Antone Meton-Meaux] Has Most of the Money…But, We Took the Money From Him, And We Voted for Ilhan…They [Ilhan Omar’s Political Machine] Spent A Lot Money. I Was Given Money, So I Could Vote…$800.”
Project Veritas Insider Omar Jamal: "Some of the Techniques that He [Omar Staffer Ali Gainey Isse] Uses To Exchange Money for Votes; And that’s Not A Secret. It’s Open, And Everybody Knows About It.”
Insider Omar Jamal: Ilhan Omar Operatives Escort Voters into Booths. “They Help Us [Voters] at the Voting Booth. They [Poll Workers] Allow Them To Help Us…They [Operatives] Go Inside With Us and Help Us…They [Operatives] Do the Voting.
[Minneapolis – Sept 29, 2020] In part two of an explosive exposé, a Minnesota-based source tells Project Veritas that the mastermind behind the rampant voter fraud scheme is Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) herself and her extensive political machine.
Staffer for Congresswoman Omar implicated
"Nobody would say that Ilhan Omar isn't part of this,” said Omar Jamal, a Somali community Insider and the Chairman of the Somali Watchdog group. “Unless you're from a different planet, but if you live in this universe, I think everybody knows it."
Jamal said Ali Isse Gainey, a senior Ilhan Omar staffer, is at the center of the vote-buying scheme.
Monday’s Project Veritas report implicated Ilhan Omar staffer Ali Gainey Isse and other Ilhan Omar operatives in conduct related to voter fraud, ballot harvesting, harvesting ballots from seniors and bribery, that is, exchanging ballots for cash and paying precinct managers and election judges.
“She's [Ilhan Omar] the one who came up with all this [pay-for-vote],” said one source who added. “She's [Ilhan Omar] the one, somehow. Nobody knew, but, yeah, this is something like new with Ilhan [Omar].”
Jamal Omar said cash for votes is an open secret in Minneapolis. "The techniques that he [Ali Isse] uses to exchange money for vote -- that's not a secret. It's, it's open, and everybody knows about it," he said. “$200, $300 per ballot received!”
Jamal said the Ilhan Omar operatives would go into the voting booth pretending to help the voter, and instead the operative does the actual voting.
A Minneapolis ballot harvester was recorded with a hidden camera describing how the
operatives make sure the voters vote correctly by walking into the booth with
“They help us at the voting booth. They allow them to help us,” the ballot harvester said. “They go inside with us and help us, and they actually do that inside there.”
The ballot harvester said there is no confusion. The operatives doing the voting: “They
actually are the ones who vote, people don't usually -- they do the voting.”
In the Aug. 11 Democratic Primary, Congresswoman Omar’s opponent Antone Meton-Meaux reportedly paid for votes.
“The black guy [Meton-Meaux] has most of the money, but we took the money from him and we voted for Ilhan,” said Osman Ali Dahquane, a Minneapolis taxi driver involved in local vote buying schemes.
“They [Ilhan Omar operatives] spent a lot of money. I was given money so I could vote. I was given money so I could vote--$800,” he said.
When asked if Ilhan Omar paid for votes, Dahquane said, “Yes, but she paid the wrong guys.”
While he has previously profited from the pay-to-vote scheme, he acknowledges criminals haven’t been arrested or held accountable for their wrongdoings and until they are punished, he has no reason to fear.
“We don’t mind illegal,” Dahquane said, "If this continues this direction, many people will go to prison, or no one will vote in the city of Minneapolis. It is very, very corrupt. We are in trouble if they come after us. We are in big trouble if they come after us."
Ballot harvester connects to Al-Qaeda affiliate Al-Shabaab
O’Keefe said, “Osman Ali Dahquane has a clear, blatant disregard for American’s
political process. He has no fear of his illegal actions -- so much so that he
casually mentions having to pay off Al-Shabaab, a.k.a. Al-Qaeda, to open a
business back home in Mogadishu.”
Dahaquane was recorded by a Project Veritas undercover journalist talking about his
hassles trying to open a business in Mogadishu—and the money he had to send to Al-Shabaab as part of the process.
“I sent it from my account. I sent Mogadishu $2,000 last night. Here is the receipt,” Dahaquane said. “I’m requesting a license to be issued at the Ministry of Interior. It’s very expensive. It cost me $2,000,” he said. “Still, I still have to pay Al-Shabaab to leave me alone--Al-Shabaab, they are demanding $1,000.”
Dahquane said when it comes to ballot harvesting, even the election judges are in on it.
Journalist: “Are the election judges themselves paid off?
Jered Ede, the chief legal officer for Project Veritas, said Mohamed and his confederates
may have violated both state and federal election laws, some carrying a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment as well as felony mail theft and bribery laws.
“The federal laws, 18 USC §597 and 52 U.S.C. §10307(c), are quite clear,” he said. “In the case of 18 USC §597, it is punishable by up to two years in prison and in the case of 52 USC §10307 it’s punishable by up to $10,000 in fines and up to five years in prison.”
The Minnesota statute, 211B.13(1) prohibits paying a person or receiving money to register to vote or to vote, he said. “This is a state felony punishable by more than one-year imprisonment.”
Beyond paying voters, there are also state and federal laws regarding intimidation of voters, he said.
“The federal laws 52 USC §20511, 18 USC §594 and 52 USC §10307(b) and the Minnesota statue 211B.07 law prohibit anyone from using undue influence threats intimidation or fraud to influence a person’s vote or to influence them to vote at all,” he said.
It's also a violation of federal law for anyone who votes for others illegally:
“The punishment under 52 USC §10307(e) also goes up to five years’ incarceration and
a $10,000 fine,” he said.
“In addition to those statutes, Minnesota has another statute, 211B.11(3), which makes it a misdemeanor to induce or persuade a voter to vote for or against a candidate, while transporting the voter to the polls,” he said.
A source told Project Veritas election judges also participated in the pay-to-vote
Source: We are taking the money and we’ll vote for you
Journalist: Are the election judges themselves paid off?
Journalist: So, judges are given money?
Source: Yes, the judges are getting paid. They are corrupted.
A former campaign worker told a Project Veritas journalist that the pay-for-vote scheme is a vertically integrated operation.
Journalist: So, the people that work for [Ilhan Omar] are actually counting the ballots,
counting the vote?
Former Campaign Worker: And they become a manager, in the precinct too.
Journalist: And manage the precinct.
Former Campaign Worker: Yes. Progressives yes.
Journalist: So, they do all of it?
Former Campaign Worker: They do all of it. They do it all. They do all of it.
Jamal said Americans must fix all voter corruption before it is too late. “If the American people don't pay attention to what's happening, it is going to soon - the country will collapse,” he said. The regulations, if you ignore that and you let corruption and fraud become a daily business then tough luck, the country will not exist as they know it.”
A scheme run by a so-called 'ballot harvesters' in Rep. Ilhan Omar's Minneapolis district was uncovered in a shocking exposé by Project Veritas. In one segment, alleged ballot harvester Liban Mohamed - the brother of Minneapolis city council member Jamal Osman, can be seen sifting through piles of ballots in his car in videos posted to his own snapchat channel under the name "KingLiban1."
"Just today we got 300 for Jamal Osman," said Mohamed. "As you can see my car is full. All these are absentees' ballots. Can't you see?"
BREAKING: @IlhanOmar connected cash-for-ballots harvesting scheme EXPOSED— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) September 28, 2020
“Money is the king in everything”; harvester boasts harvesting HUNDREDS of 2020 absentee ballots ILLEGALLY! “Numbers do not lie...these here are all absentee ballots…my car is full…”#BallotHarvesting pic.twitter.com/cB2Bz31mSY
Attorney Jeff Wojciechowski of Hennepin County told Project Veritas that the ballot harvesting described in the video appears "illegal, and we will be investigating."
According to Veritas, "Mohamed said he was collecting the ballots to help his brother win the city’s Aug. 11 special election for a vacant Ward 6 city council race—which was held the same day as the primary for Omar’s MN-05 congressional seat. Ward 6 is the heart of the city’s Somali community and the Omar’s political base."
Our investigation found that among three locations inside Ward 6, a ballot harvesting triangle, where the scheme operates: the Riverside Plaza apartments, the senior citizen community at Horn Towers and the Minneapolis Elections and Voter Services office at 980 E. Hennepin Ave., which also functions as a voting location and ballot drop-off site.
Mohamed continued: “Money is everything. Money is the king in this world. If you got no money, you should not be here period. You know what I am saying.” -Project Veritas
Mohamed also opined on what it takes to run a campaign, saying "Money is everything and a campaign is managed by money. You cannot campaign with $200 or $100 you got from your grandmother or grandfather. You cannot campaign with that. You gotta have an investment to campaign. You gotta have fundraisers."
The scheme was uncovered by Omar Jamal, chairman of the Somali Watchdog Group. Jamal works with the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department and is a political insider who is active within the city's Somali community.
"I have been involved in the community for the last 20 years," he said.
Jamal said he was motivated to reach out to Project Veritas, because he wants to eliminate the corruption that weakens his community, such as the ballot harvesting practiced by Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, in which Ilhan Omar has emerged as a rising power broker.
“It's an open secret,” he said. “she [Omar] will do anything that she can do to get elected and she has hundreds of people on the streets doing that.”
The political insider said he hopes there is still time to clean up elections in the country.
“If American people don't pay attention to what's happening, the country will collapse,” he said. -Project Veritas
"The regulations, if you ignore that and you let corruption and fraud become a daily business and then tough luck, the country will not exist as they [Americans] know it," said Jamal, adding "I'm afraid it's already too big to stop, you know, maybe it's too late. Maybe it's already too big to stop."
"There's a lot of people invested in this, you know, and they don't care how they did it: ‘We win,’ and that's it."
This is totally illegal. Hope that the U.S. Attorney in Minnesota has this, and other of her many misdeeds, under serious review??? If not, why not??? We will win Minnesota because of her, and law enforcement. Saved Minneapolis & Iron O Range! https://t.co/yete31P680— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 28, 2020
Jamal interviewed a Somali-American ballot harvester as part of his participation in the Veritas investigation. The harvester told him how he was paid to vote in the August 11 special election and primary - and that Somali-American vote-buying operatives from the Omar machine came to his apartment building to make sure ballots were 'correctly' filled out - often doing it themselves.
"They come to us. They came to our homes. They said: ‘This year, you will vote for Ilhan,’" he said. "They said: ‘We will make the absentee ballots. We will fill out the forms for you and when you get them back, we will again fill it out and send it."
Somali-Americans were told they don't need to go to voting sites, because Omar operatives told him "You stay home and you will not go to the place."
After the ballots are signed and documented the harvester said he got paid.
"When we sign the voting document and they fill it out is when they give us the money," he said. "The minute we signed the thing [ballot] for the election. That’s when we get paid."
Targeting the elderly:
Omar Jamal: So they [ballot harvesters] will request it [the ballot] for the elderly?
Ballot harvester: Yes. They [ballot harvesters] request [the ballot] for them [the elderly].
Omar Jamal: And it [the ballot] is taken away from them [elderly]?
Ballot Harvester: Yes. It [the ballot] is taken away from them [elderly].
Read the rest of the report here