Trump reveals himself about Capitol Hill incident, had asked to deploy 10,000 guards rejected by Pelosi
Trump (Trump) recently revealed some little-known details about the congressional riots and clarified some facts, such as that he did not watch the riots live and that he had long asked to deploy 10,000 security personnel to Congress, but was refused by Pelosi and others.
On Feb. 28, Trump was interviewed by Fox host Steve Hilton. Trump said his team informed the U.S. Department of Defense just days before the Jan. 6 rally that the rally in front of Congress could be larger than expected and that 10,000 National Guard troops should be deployed to Congress.
Trump added that the warning was also communicated to congressional leaders, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), but Trump’s request was denied because those leaders said they did not like the idea of having tens of thousands of soldiers stationed at the Capitol.
Trump said, “So that (not deploying guards ahead of Time) was a big mistake.”
Major U.S. legislation in multiple states to reshape election integrity
Major legislative attempts are underway in several U.S. states, including key swing states, to undo major changes in voting rules and regulations and return to the pre-2020 variety of conditions. Legislation could close the loopholes created by relaxing voting rules.
Watch China compiled a Feb. 28 report by Just the News that changes to election rules – some of which were enacted before 2020 and others implemented in response to last year’s COVID-19 pandemic – include expanded mail-in voting, expanded early voting, relaxed verification rules, and extended deadlines for ballot collection.
These rules likely contributed to the record 158 million-plus votes cast in the 2020 election. But the relaxation of various voting requirements has led millions of Americans to question the fairness, security, transparency and accountability of the election.
Lawmakers in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Arizona and numerous other states have grappled with some of these issues, pushing legislation to close loopholes that critics say have been created by the relaxation of voting rules.
In blue-flipping Georgia, the Senate passed a bill that would require voters to submit “copies of voter identification for absentee ballot applications.
In Pennsylvania, state lawmakers have signaled their intention to repeal the state’s “no-excuse” vote-by-mail system, which was first implemented in 2019.
State Senators Patrick Stefano (D-Pennsylvania) and Doug Mastriano (D-Pennsylvania), in a Senate memo in February, said they “intend to introduce legislation to repeal the no-excuse mail-in voting requirement that was implemented two years ago through the state’s Act 77.”
Stefano also vowed to repeal Act 77’s “annual mail-in voter list” and provide that “only the Pennsylvania Department of State may send a request for a mail-in ballot to an eligible voter.
In some cases, lawmakers are trying to catch up with changes to voting laws observed in some states during the 2020 election. For example, a bill being considered in Arizona would make it a felony for any public official to initiate sending a mail-in ballot to any voter who is not on the state’s early voting list.
Out-of-Control President: Biden‘s Executive Orders Resisted by States and Courts
Brian Cates is a Writer in South Texas. His analysis, published in the English-language Epoch Times, says the incoming Biden Administration made it clear in its first month in office that it did not expect their numerous progressive agendas to pass legislation in the U.S. Congress.
Instead of working with members of the House and Senate to introduce new bills to enact his agenda, Biden issued wave after wave of executive measures and executive orders, signing 30 executive orders and eight executive memoranda from Jan. 20 to Feb. After just one month, it became clear that Biden’s radical agenda did not enjoy widespread support.
So far, Biden’s choice to go the executive order route seems to indicate that he has no guarantee that the bill will succeed in the hands of an increasingly vulnerable Democratic House majority.
While much of the right-leaning media is anxious about Biden’s executive measures, the good news is that a coalition of states and federal courts has moved to stop him. This will be the payback for Trump’s appointment of more than three hundred federal judges.
When the U.S. Department of health and Human Services tried to force doctors to perform sex reassignment surgery nationwide, even though they might face religious or moral objections that doctors might have to participate in such procedures, federal judges were quick to block the practice.
Federal District Court Judge Peter D. Welte ruled that such a mandate to force doctors to participate in sex reassignment surgery violated their First Amendment rights under the Constitution.
The article concludes, “As time goes on, I believe it will become more apparent to this country that there is not universal support for the radical Biden agenda. As he continues to try to implement the changes he wants across the country by executive order, his administration will be met with more resistance from the states and the courts.
The mainstream media has insisted for four years that Trump is acting like a dictator, and now the country will see what a truly out-of-control president looks like.
Trump confesses: Can’t imagine anyone else winning 2024
Trump’s speech at the 2021 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) received an extremely enthusiastic response from conservative and Republican audiences, but he told Newsmax television that he had not decided whether to run in the 2024 presidential election, and that if he did, he He “can’t imagine” that anyone else could win 2024.
Watch China compiled reports that Trump appeared and spoke at the CPAC convention on Feb. 28. After his speech, Trump spoke with Newsmax TV host Mark Halperin backstage at the convention. In an interview with Newsmax host Mark Halperin, Trump said, “I’m not sure anybody can win except us (Republicans). Look, I’ve done a great job for this party. We have the greatest economy ever, and we’ve done another economic rebuild.”
Five state attorneys general oppose Biden’s nominee for deputy attorney general
Vanita Gupta, then president of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, speaks at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on June 10, 2020.
On March 1, five attorneys general from Indiana, Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana and Oklahoma sent a joint letter (pdf) to Biden urging him to withdraw his nomination of Vanita Gupta as assistant attorney general.
The five attorneys general, Todd Rokita of Indiana, Leslie Rutledge of Arkansas, Mike Hunter of Oklahoma, Jeff Landry of Louisiana, and Ken Paxton of Texas, have written to Biden urging him to withdraw his nomination of Vanita Gupta as assistant attorney general. Ken Paxton (Texas).
In their letter, they wrote: “Ms. Gupta’s past statements and record demonstrate that she is not interested in meaningful judicial reform and supports destructive policies to stop funding the police force. Her nomination would further divide our country rather than implement policies that protect our communities and support law enforcement.”
The letter notes that 2020 will be a rather difficult year for justice, with violent crime increasing dramatically in many cities and murders reaching record levels. They said, “At this juncture, we need to support police officers and provide them with the resources to help make our cities and communities safer.”
The five attorneys general noted that “Ms. Gupta has a history of making radical statements that do not support providing law enforcement officers with the resources they need to succeed” and that “supporting such a radical nominee is not going to bring unity.”
As previously reported by The Federalist, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, of which Gupta is president and CEO, urged Congress in September 2019 to “shift government funding away from policing practices rooted in the criminal legal system and prison state to reflect a vision of promoting community health and rebuilding trust” in public safety. The organization, in March 2019, released a 416-page report (pdf) calling for the abolition of school police in all schools, saying, “Police should have no role in student discipline.”
Teachers’ union president opposes campus reopening, kicked for sending daughter to brick-and-mortar private school
As school districts across the country consider full or partial reopening of campuses closed due to the Epidemic, Berkeley Federation of Teachers (BFT) President Mel Mel has issued a “double standard” that has drawn controversy.
The World Journal reports that Matt Meyer, president of the Berkeley Federation of Teachers, led many teachers in opposing the reopening of the campus on safety grounds. Meyer has been photographed sending children to private schools.
Mara Kolesas, former president of the PTA Berkeley Council, said in a media interview, “The real issue in this case is that Meyer is putting fear ahead of science and putting the rights of teachers ahead of the rights of schoolchildren. That’s the problem.”
The Berkeley School District has reached a tentative agreement with the Berkeley Federation of Teachers in February this year, agreeing to allow district schools to reopen their campuses in March and April, with the proviso that faculty members complete the new crown vaccination.
U.S. Supreme Court rejects Powell lawsuit challenging election results
The U.S. Supreme Court on March 1 formally dismissed two lawsuits filed by Sidney Powell challenging the results of last year’s Nov. 3 election.
The Supreme Court did not comment Monday on the dismissal of the lawsuits, the Epoch Times reported. One lawsuit was filed against Wisconsin and the other against Arizona.
The court said, “The petitions for writs of mandamus (petitions) are dismissed.”
One of Powell’s petitions for writ of mandamus said, “It is unusual to petition this court directly for a writ of extraordinary mandamus, but it is well founded. Although the practice is rare, the Supreme Court should grant it when a matter of public importance is involved or when the nature of the issue is particularly appropriate for this Court to take such action.”
Heavyweight: 150 counts of election fraud involving a U.S. judge and others arrested
Pictured are voting signs in the 2020 U.S. election.
A Texas magistrate judge has been arrested along with three other people on a staggering 150 counts of election fraud. The case may be the first substantial crackdown on election fraud in the midst of a bitter legal battle over the 2020 U.S. election.
On Monday (March 1), the San Antonio News reported that Medina County, Texas, Magistrate Judge Tomas Ramirez had issued a ruling on the case. Ramirez was indicted by a Bandera grand jury on Feb. 11 and arrested on Feb. 9.
Ramirez was charged with organized election fraud, assisting a voter to vote by mail and 17 counts of unlawful possession of a ballot or ballot envelope.
The charges are said to have been made after an investigative deposition. Nevertheless, Ramirez insisted on defending himself. However, no strong evidence could be given to refute the charges.
Recent Comments