Many in the media are now calling the 2020 Presidential Election for Joe Biden. This is in light of Georgia’s and Pennsylvania’s updated vote count putting Joe Biden slightly ahead of trump in both states as of Friday 11/6/2020.
Georgia Election Results 2020
Pennsylvania Election Results 2020
In Pennsylvania, Trump predicted on twitter that the gap would close…
In Michigan, the GOP Chairwoman claims there was allegedly a pro-Biden glitch and miscount that caused the votes for Trump to be given to Biden…
In Georgia, Trump claims there are missing mail in ballots from the military, votes he needs to reclaim his edge.
If Trump did lose Georgia and Pennsylvania, even if Trump can steal back Arizona and Nevada, he would still lose the election.
So is this is done deal? Is Joe Biden President, or is there a path for Donald Trump to win it still? Where are things going from here?
Well, the media seems to have decided. They are calling it for Joe Biden.
In fact, according to the New York Times on Twitter, a tweet that was since been deleted, the role of determining who won the election goes to the media…
& sure enough, Vox was the first major (liberal) media outlet to declare Biden the winner, while many on social media echoed this claim…
Decision Desk HQ projects that @JoeBiden has won Pennsylvania and its 20 electoral college votes for a total of 273.— Decision Desk HQ (@DecisionDeskHQ) November 6, 2020
Joe Biden has been elected the 46th President of the United States of America.
Race called at 11-06 08:50 AM EST
All Results: https://t.co/BgcQsEyt3j
The front page of DRUDGE REPORT quoted Art of the Deal in it’s featured links section:
When you take a closer look at the excerpt you see it quotes Donald Trump:
Matt Drudge stopped supporting Donald Trump sometime in 2019, and seems to be relishing in the idea of a Trump defeat. Due to this change in tone surrounding Trump, the Drudge Report has declined around 40% in overall viewership.
Drudge seems to think his bet will pay off in the long run, as viewership is still significantly higher than his top competitors.
Drudge does have some new competition with similar conservative aggregation sites coming to popularity since his descent from Trump….
Trump Claims Fraud, Saying “I easily won if you count the legal votes.”
Is there any basis for this claim? Ultimately the courts will decide, but there does seem to be some very suspicious voting anomalies that indicate Biden’s camp may very well have been cheating.
At around 3:00am in Michigan a batch of votes came in giving Biden 138,000 votes and Donald Trump not a single one. Many point to this as evidence of Ballot Harvesting… Something the Democrats have a reputation of.
Many have shared this video of GOP Poll Watchers having to use binoculars in Philadelphia…
Eventually Trump won a legal fight in Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court saying watchers must be allowed within 6 feet of Philly vote counting…
Big tech is playing thier part in controlling the narrative on this. They are censoring posts from the President and others claiming to show proof of fraud in various states, one of which being the National Pulse…
What is Ballot Harvesting?
Watch these videos by PragerU to learn more about the devious practice.
In the end, it may just go to Supreme Court, at least at this point that seems like Donald Trump’s best path to victory. If he can present proof of widespread voter fraud, then he is a few important legal battles away from snatching back his re-election bid.
GOP Senators however seem to be backing away from Trump on the claim of Fraud.
What they’re saying:
- Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie: “We heard nothing today about any evidence. This kind of thing, all it does is inflame without informing. And we cannot permit inflammation without information.”
- Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah): “The president … is wrong to say that the election was rigged, corrupt and stolen — doing so damages the cause of freedom here and around the world, weakens the institutions that lie at the foundation of the Republic, and recklessly inflames destructive and dangerous passions.”
- Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.): “I saw the president’s speech last night and it was very hard to watch. The president’s allegations of large-scale fraud and theft of the election are just not substantiated. I’m not aware of any significant wrongdoing here.”
- Former Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.): “No Republican should be okay with the President’s statements just now. Unacceptable. Period.”
- Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R): “There is no defense for the President’s comments tonight undermining our Democratic process. America is counting the votes, and we must respect the results as we always have before. No election or person is more important than our Democracy.”
- Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas): “A sitting president undermining our political process & questioning the legality of the voices of countless Americans without evidence is not only dangerous & wrong, it undermines the very foundation this nation was built upon. Every American should have his or her vote counted.”
- Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.): “We want every vote counted, yes every legal vote (of course). But, if you have legit concerns about fraud present EVIDENCE and take it to court. STOP Spreading debunked misinformation… This is getting insane.”
- Rep. Denver Riggleman (R-Va.): “Like [Rep. Kinzinger], I took an oath to defend this country and fight for the democratic ideals it stands for. Count every vote, yes, but stop the Bravo Sierra, Mr. President, and respect the democratic process that makes America great.”
- Rep. Paul Mitchell (R-Mich.): “Every legal vote should and will be counted — as they always are. Where there are issues there are ways to address them. If anyone has proof of wrongdoing, it should be presented and resolved. Anything less harms the integrity of our elections and is dangerous for our democracy.”
- Former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge (R): “With his remarks from the White House tonight, the President disrespected every single American who figured out a way to safely vote amid a pandemic that has taken 235,000 lives. Not to mention those who are dutifully counting that vote. Absolutely shameful. Yet so predictable.”
- Former White House press secretary Sean Spicer: “I haven’t seen any evidence of it. And again, I don’t think it helps his case … If he sees an instance in Pennsylvania or Nevada and this particular thing happened, then call it out. … But saying voter fraud … You can’t just throw a term out that without being specific.”
- 19 former U.S. attorneys, all of whom served under Republican presidents, said in a statement: “We hereby call upon the president to patiently and respectfully allow the lawful vote-counting process to continue, in accordance with applicable federal and state laws, and to avoid any further comments or other actions which can serve only to undermine our democracy.”
- Of note: Many Republicans who have condemned Trump’s recent comments have been critics of the president in the past.
The big picture: Vice President Mike Pence, who did not appear with Trump at Thursday’s televised briefing, tweeted, “I Stand With President [Trump]. We must count every LEGAL vote.”
With the possibility of Donald Trump losing, and him seemingly predicting the method by which he would lose, does this tweet now have new meaning?
Or can Trump navigate a victory in this game of 4D Chess? Time will only tell.
Let’s not forget the 2000 election when Al Gore was declared victor and challenged Bush for 37 days after the election until the Supreme Court stepped in and gave the election to Bush.
So could Trump do the same with Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, and perhaps even Nevada? We will see… It certainly seems to have paid off that the courts are packed with Trump appointees who may feel the mail-in votes were improperly handled. If so, there may need to be a recount in those states, meaning this is far from over. But if you listen to the media, Biden won and it’s done. It’s as simple and straight forward as that…
Do you listen to the media? Do they “decide” the election. The electors have not cast their votes yet, so this is not set in stone by any means yet, and Donald Trump has no intention of backing down…
Updates with more coming soon…
Foreign-born population soars to new record under Biden; highest rate of immigrants since 1910
The U.S. has had a massive surge in immigration this year, with as many as 1.5 million newcomers and a record 46.2 million foreign-born people, according to a report for the Center for Immigration Studies.
After a deep trough last year, likely because of the COVID-19 pandemic and the travel and migration restrictions imposed to control the spread, the flow of people rebounded around the time President Biden was elected.
In numbers never seen before, they are coming legally through airports and land border crossings and illegally across the Rio Grande and remote regions of Arizona and California.
“There was pent-up demand for legal immigration, and illegal immigration has exploded in one of the greatest surges, if not the greatest, we’ve ever seen,” said Steven A. Camarota, the demographer who was the chief author of the report. “It’s driving the numbers up and up and up.”
As it stands, 14.2% of the U.S. population is foreign-born, or 1 out of every 7 people. That is the highest rate of immigrants in the population since 1910, when the number was 14.7%. At current trends, the government says, the U.S. will break that record well before the end of this decade.
Those numbers are even starker given the reversal of trends.
The data showed a drop of 1.2 million immigrants from February to September 2020, likely the result of coronavirus restrictions blocking new entrants, even as outmigration continued. That left the population of the foreign-born — the Census Bureau’s term — at 43.8 million.
It was up to 45 million by January and marched steadily to the current 46.2 million total shown for last month.
In the year after President Trump’s election, the immigrant population flattened.
Mashup: MSM worst moments of 2021
Salvation Army’s Internal Survey Suggests Only Whites Are Racist
“I Took The Salvation Army’s Internal Survey On ‘Racism’ Within The Organization. Here’s What I Discovered.”
The Salvation Army has recently come under significant fire for asking white donors to “offer a sincere apology” for racism. The nearly 150-year old organization created a curriculum entitled “Let’s Talk About Racism” and shared it with its members, along with associated DEI Trainings that cite and draw from Robin DiAngelo and Ibram X. Kendi’s work. The packet argues that Christians should “stop trying to be ‘colorblind’” and that they should apologize for being “antagonistic.. to black people or the culture, values and interests of the black community.” In response, donors by the thousands have vowed not to donate until the organization reverses their stance.
The Salvation Army has denied any wrongdoing, defiantly calling the allegations that they have gone woke “false.” While they admit that the topic of race in America can be fraught with controversy, they have denied they have “gone woke.” Much of their denial centers around their claim that use of the guide was completely voluntary, and that they are not peddling critical race narratives in their organization.
I obtained a copy of The Salvation Army’s internal survey on “racism within the Salvation Army” and tested that claim.
One Salvation Army officer reached out on condition of anonymity to Color Us United, the raceblind advocacy organization which I run, to reveal an internal survey he was asked to take. It was not a voluntary survey, and was sent by the Territorial Diversity and Inclusion Secretary to every Salvation Army Officer in the US Central Territory. The purpose of the survey, according to an email from the “Territorial Racial Diversity and Inclusion Secretary,” was “to better understand perception of institutional racial bias within The Salvation Army.” The accompanying email stated that there was no “preconceived idea” with regard to whether or not racism existed in The Salvation Army, and told recipients that there were no wrong answers.
I sat down and went through the questions.
First, Questions #1, #2, and #3 asked me for my race, age, and gender. I could not skip these questions. Already, I felt uncomfortable being required to list my personal attributes. If I was an officer, I would be wondering: how could this information be used against me in the future? (They did promise anonymity in this survey.)
The survey then asks Salvationists if they agree with the following definition of racism: “Institutional racism refers to organizational or system processes, behaviors, policies, or procedures, which produce negative outcomes for nonwhites relative to those for whites.” The remaining questions in the survey are dependent upon agreeing to this definition of racism. For any Officer or Soldier who disagrees with this framing, there is no way to express any disagreement or nuance apart from plainly saying that racism does not exist.
Question #6 goes on to ask the survey taker whether they believe there is any institutional bias or racism in The Salvation Army. Question #7 says: “If you answered no to question #6, do you think others in The Salvation Army think there are racial tensions or institutional racism?” The purpose of these questions, I started to feel, was to force the survey taker to admit that The Salvation Army is institutionally racist according to their definition of racism. There is no room for any Officer to elaborate on how they disagree with the definitions, framing, or worldview informing the questions.
The final question asks: “What is the best way to address Racism in The Salvation Army?” The answer options are: “individual reconciliation,” “group reconciliation,” “addressing structures and practices that cause racism,” “all of the above,” or “other.” Note that there is no option for the survey taker to simply say that racism is not a problem in The Salvation Army. The survey (which according to the email, was “intended to go to all the officers within your division, employees, and soldiers” for the Central Territory) simply assumes that racism is present in the organization.
Going through the survey, it became apparent that the survey was attempting to lead me to making only one conclusion about The Salvation Army – that it harbored problematic racism.
This belief is one of the core tenets of critical race theory. Critical race theorists teach that racism is ubiquitous in all aspects of American life. They also teach that it works systemically; that is, by being ingrained in the systems and institutions that operate in society. Their primary evidence of the system being racist is the reality that individuals from different demographics have different life outcomes on average, without taking into account any variables that might impact said life outcomes apart from the color of their skin. All of these concepts are reflected in The Salvation Army’s survey.
Any officer who believes in individualism, colorblindness, and meritocracy will be unable to answer any of the survey questions in good faith. Any officer who believes that The Salvation Army is not a racist organization would not be able to answer these questions in good faith either. Many (if not most) Americans believe that racism is primarily an issue of individuals who harbor feelings of hate against those of other races, not a society-wide conspiracy as alleged by antiracist activists. This survey totally excludes the colorblind perspective from the conversation and forces Officers and other Salvationists into a critical race theory-informed box.