A few states and municipalities are proposing and allowing legal non citizens to vote in school board and municipal elections. How are they able to so bodaciously disregard their state constitutions?

Surprisingly, the legal loophole they think they have found is that most state constitutions say citizens have the right to vote but not ONLY citizens have the right to vote.

Ben Shapiro
@benshapiro
Democrats' radically nuclear response to the SCOTUS vacancy is a real threat to Joe Biden's candidacy. Up until now, Biden has been able to run as the "take a breath" candidate. Things have been crazy; here's an empathetic elderly gentleman who will restore normalcy.
11:03 AM · Sep 21, 2020

All of that goes by the wayside when Dems threaten to kill the filibuster, ram through new states, pack the court, and impeach people just to delay Supreme Court hearings. Now the election becomes a referendum on the new, far more threatening batch of crazy Dems are proposing.

And it IS crazy. If Democrats were to kill the filibuster, add states, and pack the court, the fundamental nature of the federal government would be completely rewritten. Essentially, a bare majority of Democrats would be able to, unchecked, rewrite the Constitution.

States would correctly resist. Imagine a 53-vote Democratic majority (adding four Dem Senators from DC and Puerto Rico, e.g.) ramming through a gun confiscation package. Imagine a 13-member packed SCOTUS greenlighting that measure. You think TX, MS, GA, FL stand for that?

Checks and balances were designed to require overwhelming consent to major political changes. Democrats have long objected to those checks and balances, but have refrained from utterly abolishing them. That's because the consequences of abolishing them is national dissolution.

“After the treatment of Justice Kavanaugh I now have a different view of the judicial-confirmation process,” Graham said. “Compare the treatment of Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh to that of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan, and it’s clear that there is already one set of rules for a Republican president and one set of rules for a Democrat president. I therefor think it is important that we proceed expeditiously to process any nomination made by President Trump to fill this vacancy. I am certain if the shoe was on the other foot, you would do the same.”

Finally, McConnell hit Democrats directly, quoting Chuck Schumer in 2018 proclaiming that election to be a referendum on the handling of the Supreme Court. Well, in 2018 the American people handed Republicans an even bigger majority. The Majority Leader then ended by saying that “we are going to keep our world” in regards to the promises made to voters over the Supreme Court.

Andrew Weissmann is a legend in his own mind. He’s been hailed as a crusading avenger against the Mafia in New York before moving on to Washington DC and leading the campaign to tackle boardroom corruption on corporate America when he was picked to lead a DOJ task force prosecuting cases connected to the collapse of ENRON. But the “legend” of Weissmann has always been tarnished by the “ethics” — or lack thereof — of Weissmann. This was nowhere better displayed than in the reversal of one of his most famous ENRON scandal victories, when the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 in United States v. Arthur Anderson that Weissmann’s jury instructions that he convinced the District Court Judge to give failed to state a crime. Yes, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens agreed with Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia that Andrew Weissmann didn’t know what he was doing. //

But in 2011, Weissman left DOJ and became General Counsel of the FBI. Note the symmetry to that date — that is the same time that Aaron Zebley left DOJ to be Mueller’s Chief of Staff. In the two roles, Zebly had the much better of the “action” while Weissmann was left tending to internal legal matters for the FBI. And, more significantly, Weissmann would have reported to Zebly in the chain of command.

So the former FBI agent and line AUSA was now in a position of authority over vaunted DOJ “ENRON Champion” Andrew Weissmann. Weissmann returned to DOJ when Mueller departed, but Zebley got the invitation to the lucrative partnership at WilmerHale.

So, when Weissmann was given the offer to join the Special Counsel’s team, it’s likely that he was not all that happy to look up and find Aaron Zebley once again looking down at him in the Chain-of-Command and holding his reins.

And it was Aaron Zebley who Mueller asked to sit beside him at his appearance before Congress and assist in answering questions about the Mueller Report — not Andrew Weissmann. //

kirkeidman
a day ago
Mmmmmmmmm?

Perhaps the root problem was basically no EVIDENCE that anything was wrong?

junkbondtrader41
a day ago
So there were tactical errors in your fundamentally illegitimate "investigation" based on a "crime" that never happened??

Good to know!

BoDeen3417 junkbondtrader41
a day ago
When has lack of a crime ever stopped Weismann from prosecuting?

During the course of the last four years, we have heard every excuse in the book as to why Republicans can’t do something that they are entitled to do. Most of the time, it is some appeal to fairness, or justice, or some other appeal to emotion, but never do Democrats argue that the Constitutionally-appointed rules are being broken. The issue isn’t that Democrats are actually being treated unfairly. The rules have been clear. The communicating of ideals has been equal. They have run for the same offices, in the same states, in the same country as Republicans. It is that they have lost. Now that their failures have mounted to the point of cementing their legacy of failure for the next couple of decades, they want to change the rules. //

The rules of the game are written in advance so that all parties participating in the game, know how to succeed from the onset.

The rules for our country have long been written. //

The rules for the “game” are clear. Democrats don’t hate Republicans for their ability to conduct the business of government as they see fit. They hate the Constitution and many of the rules they’ve instituted because now, they’ve lost.

It isn’t like they haven’t tried to play the game. It’s just that… well… they suck at it. //

Here we are, beating the Democrats at their own game again and again, so what do they propose? Changing the rules again. Dems, instead of trying to appeal to voters in areas they know they are losing, are proposing to make D.C. and Puerto Rico states, //

Democrats aren’t mad that Republicans get to nominate and confirm a Justice of their choice. They are mad that they don’t. End of Story.

Which brings me to this thought exercise: Take a minute and try to think of a time, in the last 50 years, that Republicans have either changed procedural rules (or threatened to do so) in response to Democrats’ exercise of a legal, Constitutionally-appointed power? Sure, they’ve threatened to use the newly appointed power or rule change once they are in power, but when have they ever explicitly changed or threatened to change rules? Can’t think of a time? Neither can I. Now, do the same with Democrats.

The old sayings “the rules are rules” and “elections have consequences” have never been more true. The only difference is that Democrats don’t want to live by either. Sorry guys, those are the rules.

We can’t rightfully talk about a racial war currently ongoing against white people because for some reason, talking about it is taboo in mainstream culture.

Let me say it here, though. White people are being discriminated against in overt ways. They’re being denied jobs because of diversity quotas, labeled as villains by mainstream culture, and now, the idea of simply killing white people is being laughed about on mainstream programs.

As I reported earlier on Monday, the BBC hosted a program where one of its guests openly spoke about killing white people to the laughter of her fellow panelists.

If this was said about any other race there would be endless media reporting about it. The person who made the comment would be banned from every public appearance on every network from here till the end of time. Protests would have been had in front of the network building, and think pieces would swarm the internet about how our country and our culture is racist beyond any doubt. //

There has already been violence in the streets but it will get so much worse. Racial hatreds are going to erupt where none should and those racists will teach other people to be racist either by handing down their prejudices to them or by teaching them to be prejudiced against them.

If we’re going to avoid this dark fate then we need to seize back the culture from the people who pollute it. Advocacy groups exist left and right who dedicate their time and effort solely to fighting one thing or another. They need your support.

the fact that Weissmann would have pushed for that language to be in a jury instruction says all I need to know about him:

“even if [Arthur Anderson] honestly and sincerely believed that its conduct was lawful, you may find [Arthur Anderson] guilty.”

That pretty much accurately describes third-world “show trial” requirements. That’s how people end up in Chinese prisons. //

The Supreme Court Justices who joined in rejecting “Weissman’s Law” were:

Chief Justice Rehnquist — wrote the opinion.

Justice Scalia

Justice Thomas

Justice O’Connor

Justice Kennedy

Justice Souter

Justice Stevens

Justice Ginsburg

Justice Breyer

Not a single Justice wrote a concurring opinion. Not one wrote separately to say “I agree with the outcome, but I disagree with the opinion of the Chief Justice for the following reasons….”

Every Justice REJECTED Weissmann’s view of “criminality” without hesitation.

Trump War Room - Text TRUMP to 88022
@TrumpWarRoom
Joe Biden made $15.6 MILLION in the two years after he left office.

But watch him casually lie to Detroit workers yesterday, claiming $400,000 "is more money than I’ve ever made."

The Founding Fathers were incredibly brilliant and visionary people. They were establishing a nation that was almost entirely agrarian. But they knew it would not always be thus.

The aforementioned Jefferson then wisely warned:

“When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.”

And so it became. //

For decades and decades, Democrats could continue to over-government cities into oblivion. Because their prisoners – oops, I mean citizens – were shackled to their metropolises by their jobs.

Well, Democrat victims – are prisoners no more.

Because our fabulous free market – has delivered us the Information Revolution…a successor to the Industrial Revolution. //
Democrats have forced us to work from home. And we have discovered – thanks to the free market Internet and ISPs – we actually can:

“(G)igabit-speed home broadband availability has skyrocketed from 6% to 86% in just over three years. //

Which is leading more and more of us to realize:

“We can work from home. Which means our homes – can be anywhere. We no longer have to remain in the confining confines of Democrat municipal awfulness.”

Oops. Torpedos are turning on their overreaching Democrat launchers – all across the land.

And the next great American migration – is now underway.

We’re About to See Biggest Exodus from Cities in Fifty Years

The Great Exodus Out of America’s Blue Cities

Exodus: The Migration From High Tax To Low Tax States

People Are Fleeing Democrat-Run States in DROVES for Republican-Run Ones

Which leads to pathetic pathetic-ness like this….

‘Come Back So We Can Tax You,’ New York City Begs Departed Residents //

Americans are realizing the free market Internet – allows them to escape America’s huge government Democrat fiefdoms.

Here’s hoping they achieve self-realization – and stop voting for the Democrats from whom they’re fleeing.

Twitter has reportedly been looking into why some of the artificial intelligence it uses — a neural network — apparently opts to display white people’s faces more frequently than black people’s faces.

Several users pointed out the issue over the weekend, posting examples of posts that contained a black person’s face and a white person’s face, only to have Twitter previews display the white faces more often.

There’s a saying that hard times create strong men and that strong men create good times. The saying, however, continues with “good times create weak men, and those weak men create hard times.”

We’re currently experiencing this. //

If we did live in that world then those who create mountains out of molehills would die off by the thousands as their existence solely depended on strong men providing their protection for them.

Oddly enough, their comfort is provided by people whom they profess to hate.

I have no desire to see our civilization slip back into a place where you survive, not thrive. I would rather our first-world lifestyle continue with all the abundance and comfort it provides. The commerce we’ve created and the healthy environment that we raise our children in safety in is a good thing.

However it’s clear that looking at our mainstream culture today, we’ve fallen into a lazy kind of living where we take for granted things that many other countries would still consider miraculous. We’ve seen more human rights advancement than we could have imagined in previous attempts at civilization and yet, so many hate the country that provides it.

We’ve completely lost sight of reality.

I’m not sure how to get this value back with the exception of one thing. A return to the study and worship of God’s word. We joke that we daily fall further from God’s grace but the sad reality is that the drift away from him has been a gradual acceptance of stupidity, shallowness, and even straight-up evil. //

What I propose is a move forward toward God. That the real “progressive” is the one who aims toward bringing our society towards what works. Clearly God works and distancing ourselves from Him doesn’t. So let’s aim for progress.