Monday, November 30, 2020

PA poll watcher: USB cards uploaded to voting machines 24+ times, 47 USB cards missing


Screenshot: Greg Stenstrom

A Republican poll observer from Pennsylvania’s Delaware County told a Senate GOP Policy Committee hearing in Gettysburg on Nov. 25 that he witnessed a range of Election Day irregularities, including 47 USB cards that went missing.

Greg Stenstrom, who, besides being a poll watcher, said he’s an expert in security fraud, told the hearing that he witnessed a number of chain-of-custody violations, including around mail-in ballots, the balance of votes from drop boxes, and the handling of USB card flash drives—all of which he said broke rules defined by the Delaware County Board of Elections and the election process review.

“They didn’t follow one,” Stenstrom said. “It shocked me that this could happen.”

He described witnessing a situation in which data on USB cards was uploaded to voting machines by a warehouse supervisor without being observed by a poll watcher, which he said he saw happen at least 24 times.

“He’s walking in with baggies, which we have pictures of and that were submitted in our affidavits,” Stenstrom said, adding that Democratic poll watchers also witnessed this occurrence.

Stenstrom said he was told by an attorney that it’s normal for several USB cards to be left in machines and then brought back by the warehouse manager for input into tally systems. He added that when he later raised the issue with U.S. Attorney William McSwain and some law enforcement officers, he was told it is unusual for more than two drives to be left in voting machines.

He said he was later told that “these 24 to 30 cards that were uploaded” were unaccounted for, adding that “as of today, 47 USB v-cards are missing.”



ALERT: Our Nation Is Embroiled In A Second Civil War!


By Frances Rice

We are currently in the midst of a Second Civil War and the fate of our nation is at stake.

Will the forces fighting to keep our country a free and prosperous capitalist nation win?

Or will the forces fighting to turn our country into a failed socialist nation win?

As is indicated in the below article, former Vice President Joe Biden is controlled by the radical socialists in the Democratic Party who are fighting to turn our country into a failed socialist nation.

Here is a key sentence from the article: “After all, a Stanford study found that the Biden tax and regulatory agenda, if implemented, would kill 4.9 million jobs and decrease average household income by $6,500.”



4 Radical Policies That Could Pass if Democrats Win the Georgia Senate Runoffs

By Brad Polumbo


Photo: Jon Ossoff (L) and Raphael Warnock (R). In Georgia, Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, the GOP incumbents, were forced into a runoff election against their Democratic challengers — Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock, respectively.

Pollsters and pundits predicted that the November election would be a landslide for Democrats. They were highly favored not just to take the presidency but to expand their House majority and retake control of the Senate. 

Once again, the political class got it all wrong

Joe Biden is projected to win the presidency, pending official vote certifications and recounts, but the race was far, far closer than expected. And Republicans actually picked up seats in the House, shrinking the Democratic majority to single digits. The GOP exceeded expectations in Senate races as well, with the current balance of power set at 48 Democrats, 50 Republicans. 

There are two races headed to a runoff—both in Georgia. If Democrats win both, they will have a razor-thin majority, as the presumptive vice-president elect Kamala Harris will be the tie-breaking vote. 

This means that, essentially, a prospective Biden administration’s ability to pass a sweeping policy agenda hinges on the outcome of the two runoffs. If Republicans win one or both seats and retain a majority, much of the Biden agenda is dead-on-arrival. However, if Democrats secure that razor-thin majority they could pass major policy initiatives such as a bloated, budget-busting stimulus bill, a $15 minimum wage, tax hikes, and government healthcare.

It’s possible that defection from moderates could still sink these proposals in a Democratic-majority Senate. But the possibility of implementing the Biden agenda is clearly up for grabs—and even he knows it.

“President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s transition team is preparing multiple sets of policy proposals for the economy, health care, climate change and other domestic issues, including the ambitious agenda Mr. Biden laid out in his winning campaign, while acknowledging it may have to be pared back in recognition of divided government,” the New York Times reports

“Where the incoming administration lands depends heavily on two Senate runoffs in Georgia in early January,” the report continues. 

So, it’s certainly worth considering the potential benefits of divided government.

Here are four radical policy proposals that GOP control of the Senate would take off the table. 

1. Another $2+ Trillion, Bloated Stimulus Bill 

Congress’s first round of stimulus efforts exploded the federal budget and led to record levels of debt. Moreover, the CARES Act’s major programs have also proven rife with wastefrauddysfunction, and abuse. They’ve also been ineffective in many instances.

Yet Biden and congressional Democrats want to pass another behemoth package similar to the CARES Act. Senate Republicans, for their part, want to pass a relatively modest $500 billion package. (Only in Washington, D.C., is half a trillion in spending the “conservative” position).

Some form of a stimulus bill might still get passed if the GOP takes the Senate, but there’s no doubt it would be far less expensive and sweeping. This outcome would be far better for the American taxpayer.

2. A $15 Minimum Wage

Biden wants to pass a federal $15 minimum wage, and has even made it part of his “transition agenda.” It’s reasonable to predict that he could attempt to include such a national wage mandate in a COVID-19 stimulus package, infrastructure bill, or must-pass budget deal. This might sound like a good thing for workers at first glance, but it’s not.

Small businesses are struggling throughout the country under the weight of the COVID-19 crisis and government lockdowns. Many have already gone out of businesses and millions more are barely staying afloat. Minimum wage increases always destroy jobs. Even under normal conditions, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects a federal $15 minimum wage would destroy up to 3.7 million jobs. 

But now more than ever, a $15 minimum wage would lead to mass layoffs and job losses.

3. Corporate Tax Hikes

Biden campaigned on partially reversing the GOP 2017 tax reform, even though it clearly helped boost incomes and the economy after its passage. One key change the Democrat wants to pass is an increase in the corporate tax rate up to 28 percent. 

This is a bad idea for many reasons, but most importantly, the burden of this tax hike would not fall on “Big Business”—it would be borne mostly by American workers. 

Research has consistently shown that corporate taxes, sold as making corporate big wigs pay their “fair share,” are actually passed onto workers through lower wages and reduced investment and job creation. According to the Tax Foundation, “studies appear to show that labor bears between 50 percent and 100 percent of the burden of the corporate income tax, with 70 percent or higher the most likely outcome.”

Workers will fare better if divided government consigns corporate tax hikes to the dustbin.

4. A ‘Public Option’ That Leads to Socialized Healthcare

Similarly, the fate of Biden’s proposal to expand government-controlled healthcare also likely rests on the Georgia runoff outcome. The Democrat wants to expand the federal government’s currently vast role in the healthcare market by having it provide a “public option” via Medicare to the public. 

Supposedly, this government-run healthcare option would “compete” with the private sector, rather than abolish it outright like other proposals. However, because the government can both subsidize itself and mandate that healthcare providers accept lower compensation rates, it will inevitably drive private insurers out of business and leave us all dependent on the government for healthcare.

If Republicans keep the Senate, this proposal won’t go anywhere. If not, it is very much on the table.

The Takeaway: Divided Government and Gridlock are Bulwarks Against Extremism

Americans often gripe about Washington, D.C.’s inability to get anything done. There’s validity to this sentiment. 

It often feels like our well-paid elected representatives do little to actually advance the people’s interests and instead just showboat for TV cameras. However, there’s clearly an upside to divided government and gridlock: It blocks extreme, radical policies that would limit our freedoms and leave us all worse off. 

It’s statistically proven that the growth of government and federal spending are slower under divided government. And it’s no coincidence that after the election results came in, the business sector reacted very favorably to the prospect of a gridlocked Congress unable to pass any more interventionist policies. After all, a Stanford study found that the Biden tax and regulatory agenda, if implemented, would kill 4.9 million jobs and decrease average household income by $6,500.

So, yes, divided government might be frustrating sometimes. But this time around, it would be great news for the economy and the American people.

Sunday, November 29, 2020

Pandemic Rules Are Only for the Little People

 By J.D. Tuccille | From the December 2020 issue of Reason 

(The Image Bank/Getty)

We're expected to suffer discomfort, economic pain, and emotional distress or else pay fines or serve jail time. Government officials, meanwhile, take offense when called out for violating the standards they created.

The defining moment in the "rules for thee but not for me" ethos of the ruling class during the COVID-19 pandemic may have come when Neil Ferguson, the epidemiologist behind Britain's lockdown policy, met with his married girlfriend in defiance of the restrictions he promoted. Eager to threaten the common people with penalties if they failed to socially distance, he saw no reason to inconvenience himself the same way—although at least he conceded that propriety required him to resign his government post when the trysts were discovered in May.

"He has peculiarly breached his own guidelines, and for an intelligent man I find that very hard to believe," marveled Sir Iain Duncan Smith, a prominent member of the ruling Conservative Party. "It risks undermining the Government's lockdown message."

Well, yes. But like all too many officials, Ferguson obviously never thought he'd be caught violating rules that he'd never intended be applied to himself. As we've since learned, Ferguson's above-the-law attitude is common among those who feel entitled to write regulations and impose penalties on others for violating them.

That attitude is obvious in Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, whose wife and daughter visited properties in Florida and Wisconsin even as he ordered state residents to stay at home except for "essential" activities. "My official duties have nothing to do with my family," Pritzker huffed when a reporter called him out about his family's wanderings. "So I'm not going to answer that question. It's inappropriate, and I find it reprehensible."

Reprehensible might more accurately describe government officials who penalize the common folk for behavior in which they themselves indulge. The word also could be applied to officials and hangers-on who try to leverage their positions for special advantage.

That appears to be what motivated Marc Mallory, husband of Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, in the lead-up to Memorial Day weekend. After his wife eased some of the travel restrictions she had imposed on state residents, Mallory invoked his political connections in a failed effort to get his boat in the water ahead of everybody else.

"He jokingly asked if being married to me might move him up," Whitmer conceded after the offended marina owner described the incident, which he found less than humorous, on social media. "He regrets it," she added. "I wish it wouldn't have happened." She did not clarify whether it was the power play or the marina owner's public complaint.

For Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney, the it moment was a hearty meal at a Maryland restaurant while indoor dining in his own city remained forbidden by his order. "I know some are upset that I dined indoors at a restaurant in Maryland yesterday," Kenney sniffed on Twitter in August. "I felt the risk was low because the county I visited has had fewer than 800 COVID-19 cases, compared to over 33,000 cases in Philadelphia. Regardless, I understand the frustration."

A few days later, Eater Philadelphia published a long but incomplete list of restaurants that had permanently closed their doors because of the COVID-19 lockdown. The former owners of those businesses undoubtedly have plenty of frustration to share with the mayor.

"It was clearly a setup," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.) complained after a salon owner released video footage of the powerful lawmaker, maskless and getting her hair done, in defiance of the rules in San Francisco. "I take responsibility for falling for a setup by a neighborhood salon I've gone to for many years."

Maybe it was a setup—the salon owner is an open critic of Pelosi and of pandemic restrictions. But a setup would be possible only because the owner could correctly assume the House speaker wouldn't flinch at violating widely publicized restrictions.

As we've seen time and again, such hypocrisy is common. We're expected to suffer discomfort, economic pain, and emotional distress or else pay fines and even serve jail time. Government officials, meanwhile, take offense when called out for violating the standards they created.

The pandemic will eventually pass, but it will leave behind our memories of arrogant authorities who consider themselves above the concerns of the common people. Long after the virus is gone, those memories should stay with us as a vaccine against future trust in agents of the state.

Saturday, November 28, 2020

Pennsylvania Lawmakers Seek To Decertify State's Election Results, Citing 'Substantial Irregularities'


AP Photo/Matt Slocum

Twenty-six Republican lawmakers in Pennsylvania submitted a resolution late on Friday seeking to decertify their state’s election results, claiming proof of “substantial irregularities and improprieties associated with mail-in balloting.”

Democrat Governor Tom Wolf certified the election results on Tuesday.

The House Republicans said that the issues that have been raised with the election have “undermined our elector process and as a result we can not accept certification of the results in statewide races.”

“It is absolutely imperative that we take these steps if we are to ensure public trust in our electoral system,” they said in a statement released Friday evening. “Faith in government begins with faith in the elections which select that government. Just as Pennsylvania led the founding of our nation, Pennsylvania should also lead the way by making sure our commonwealth continues to stand as a keystone in our nation where free and fair elections are of paramount concern, no matter the final outcome of those elections.”

House Democratic spokesman Bill Patton dismissed the Republicans’ efforts. “Rudy Giuliani and others brought a circus to Pennsylvania and this is like the crowded clown car going round and round at the end of the show,” he said. “Just a bit of ridiculous farce. The simple fact is the election’s over and Joe Biden is president-elect.”

The resolution notes, amongst other things, that “heavily Democrat counties permitted mail-in voters to cure ballot defects while heavily Republican counties followed the law and invalidated defective ballots;” that “in certain counties in the Commonwealth, watchers were not allowed to meaningfully observe the pre-canvassing and canvassing activities relating to absentee and mail-in ballots,” and “in other parts of the Commonwealth, watchers observed irregularities concerning the pre-canvassing and canvassing of absentee and mail-in ballots.”

The resolution also notes that the results were prematurely certified. “In 2016, Pennsylvania’s general election results were certified on December 12, 2016, and on November 24, 2020, the Secretary of the Commonwealth unilaterally and prematurely certified results of the November 3, 2020 election regarding presidential electors despite ongoing litigation,”

It also states that “witnesses testifying before the Pennsylvania Senate Majority Policy Committee on November 25, 2020 have provided additional compelling information regarding the questionable nature of the administration of the 2020 General Election.”

The resolution declares that “the selection of presidential electors and other statewide electoral contests results in this Commonwealth is in dispute” and urges both Secretary of the Commonwealth Kathy Boockvar and Governor Wolf (both Democrats) to “withdraw or vacate the certification of presidential electors and to delay certification of results in other statewide electoral contests voted on at the 2020 General Election.”

President Trump referenced irregularities in Pennsylvania on Twitter Friday evening.



Donald J. Trump



The 1,126,940 votes were created out of thin air. I won Pennsylvania by a lot, perhaps more than anyone will ever know. The Pennsylvania votes were RIGGED. All other swing states also. The world is watching!


Quote Tweet

Senator Doug Mastriano


This was posted on our Department of State dashboard but had since been deleted.


The entire resolution can be read here.


Matt Margolis is the author of the new book Airborne: How The Liberal Media Weaponized The Coronavirus Against Donald Trumpand the bestselling book The Worst President in History: The Legacy of Barack Obama. You can follow Matt on Twitter @MattMargolis



The objection is to the culture, not the people. The objection is to the people manipulating and controlling the culture, not the people being manipulated and controlled. 

The puppet masters want you to read my words as a rebuke of black people. It’s a rebuke of the puppet masters, the organizers of the “Unapologetically Black Olympics” that I referenced last week in columns that explored comedian Dave Chappelle’s Saturday Night Live monologue. 

I am repulsed by the people who have worked tirelessly for more than 400 years to convince black people that our skin color is our most prized asset and defining characteristic. This conceit originally led to our physical enslavement. It has now led to our mental enslavement. 

The stewards of the zeitgeist — i.e. the spirit, mood, characteristics of a particular time in history — have persuaded black people to pursue blackness above all else, above faith, intelligence and freedom. 

I object. Passionately. 

This blinding, irrational pursuit is leading to the destruction of black people and the destabilization of our country.

I object because I love black people, I love America and I love God.

I do not love the stewards of the zeitgeist, and they do not love me or any other black person who would dare object to their racist manipulation of black consciousness and black culture. 

The root of my disdain is biblical. Sixty years ago, the hallmark of black culture was religious faith. It carried us through slavery, Jim Crow segregation, lynching and was the power source of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s Civil Rights Movement. 

In 1965, political sociologist Daniel Patrick Moynihan authored what would come to be known as the Moynihan Report, a study of The Negro Family: The Case for National Action. Written to influence President Lyndon Johnson’s policies regarding America’s black-white racial dilemma, the 16,000-word Moynihan Report spelled out the devastating impact of 350 years of racial oppression on the black family. It predicted that the growing matriarchy defining black culture would undermine the progress of black people in a Western society built for patriarchal families.

Today, the Moynihan Report reads like a biblical prophecy. Fifty-five years ago, Moynihan argued black people’s survival in America was a modern miracle.

“A lesser people might simply have died out, as indeed others have,” Moynihan wrote. 

We didn’t die out because of our religious faith, the world’s primary source of hope. Faith in a higher power made our spirit unbreakable.

The Moynihan Report was written to make the case that America should take extraordinary measures to invest in the black nuclear family. It was written as a rebuttal of President Johnson’s Great Society initiative. The Johnson administration disavowed the Moynihan Report and its author. The mainstream media spent the next several years framing Moynihan as a racist. 

Over the last 55 years, the stewards of American culture have worked to disconnect black people from our religious faith, our salvation. Black pride is our new religion. Our skin color and the degenerate behaviors white liberals have deemed as authentically black have become the hallmarks of black culture. There’s nothing blacker than repeatedly saying “nigga” in public spaces or having a baby mama/daddy or dealing drugs to survive poverty. The highest form of blackness is being a victim of racism, especially if it involves a white cop. 

According to the stewards of the zeitgeist, George Floyd is 100 times blacker than Dr. Ben Carson.  

Black entertainers are instructed to and rewarded for evangelizing for blackness and celebrating black victimhood. Being a victim of a racial slight often causes the victim to speak in tongues. Victimization is so coveted that some believers fake racial incidents and speak in forked tongues. 

Black Lives Matter is a mega church for the religion of blackness. LeBron James and Colin Kaepernick are pastors at the Nike denomination of BLM. It was James’ and Kaepernick’s responsibility to change the culture of sports from worship of God to worship of blackness.

Look at what has happened in our lifetime. As a child, the most frequent message you would see at a televised sporting event was a fan in the stands holding a sign reading “John 3:16.”

For God so loved the world, He gave his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in Him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting.

Now, we are bombarded with messages promoting the salvation of loving blackness. Some NBA players wore jerseys with “Love Us” emblazoned on the back. Can they not recognize their narcissism? 

Loving a skin color, loving a millionaire black athlete, loving a black rapper improves the world? Really?

Salvation, justice and fairness are delivered through the love of God, not through the love of man regardless of his skin color. We used to understand this. Love, submission and obedience to God ended slavery and Jim Crow, and they will retard the last vestiges of American bigotry. 

White liberals have convinced black people to take God out of the equation and replace Him with Barack Obama, LeBron James, Dr. Harry Edwards, Colin Kaepernick, Black Lives Matter and all the other approved symbols of unapologetic blackness.  

I object to this insanity. Love of my skin color is not America’s salvation. Random white people loving me is not the key to my happiness, freedom or success in this country. 

The worship of skin color creates a dangerous level of racial division. White liberals, socialists and communists are using black people to promote racial anarchy. Every tenet of Karl Marx’s political theory can be seen in the Black Lives Matter movement. 

The antipathy toward religion is the greatest tell. Marxism and its political soulmates, socialism and communism, cannot exist in a faith-based society or culture. 

Black people had been America’s religious backbone, our moral compass. This extends well beyond Dr. Martin Luther King and Malcolm X to men and women such as Frederick Douglass, Sojourner Truth, Bishop Richard Allen (founder of the AME church) and Adam Clayton Powell.  

The key to bringing down America and installing socialism and then communism is disconnecting black people from religion and connecting us to political theories hostile toward Christianity and other religions. 

The mission is nearly complete. Black Lives Matter is the final piece of the puzzle. Skin color and liberal politics are the new hallmarks of black culture. That’s why Pastor LeBron James preaches a regular BLM sermon. 

And that’s why I keep criticizing James. I don’t dislike James. I dislike the culture his handlers make him promote. It will lead to the destruction of black people and America.

Love Us or Love God?

The answer is easy for any person — black or white — who understands the history of America. God promises love. America promises freedom. We’re looking for love in the wrong places. 


Jason Whitlock is a longtime sports writer, TV personality, radio host, podcaster and the newest member of the Outkick family. If you are interested in a media appearance by Jason Whitlock, please click this link and give us the details.

Friday, November 27, 2020

Blacks of Yesteryear and Today

By Walter E. Williams | 

Source: AP Photo/Patrick Semansky

I was a teenager, growing up in the Richard Allen housing project of North Philadelphia, when Emmett Till was lynched in Money, Mississippi, on Aug. 28, 1955, and his brutalized, unrecognizable body later recovered from the Tallahatchie River. From 1882-1968, 4,743 lynchings occurred in the United States. Roughly 73%, or 3,446, were black people, and 27%, or 1,297, were white people. Many whites were lynched because they were Republicans who supported their fellow black citizens and opposed the lawless act of lynching. Tuskegee University has the best documentation of lynching. It records an 1892 high of 69 whites and 161 blacks lynched. By the 1940s, occurrences of lynching fell to single digits or disappeared altogether.

At the time of my youth, today's opportunities for socioeconomic advancement were nonexistent for black people. For all but a few, college attendance was out of the question because of finances and racial discrimination. If you were not admitted to the black colleges of Lincoln University or Cheyney State College, forget about college. I do not know of any student of my 1954 class at Philadelphia's Benjamin Franklin High School who attended college. Though the quality of education at Benjamin Franklin is a mere shadow of its past, today roughly 17% of its graduating class has been admitted to college. The true hope for a youngster graduating from high school during the 1950s was a well-paying and steady job. My first well-paying job was as a taxi driver for Yellow Cab Company.

Younger black people today have no idea of and have not experienced the poverty and discrimination of earlier generations. Also, the problems today's black people face have little or nothing to do with poverty and discrimination. Political hustlers like to blame poverty and racism while ignoring the fact that poverty and racism were much greater yesteryear but there was not nearly the same amount of chaos.

The out-of-wedlock birth rate among blacks in 1940 was about 11%; today, it is 75%. Black female-headed households were just 18% of households in 1950, as opposed to about 68% today. In fact, from 1890 to 1940, the black marriage rate was slightly higher than that of whites. Even during slavery, when marriage was forbidden, most black children lived in biological two-parent families. In New York City, in 1925, 85% of black households were two-parent households. A study of 1880 family structure in Philadelphia shows that three-quarters of black families were two-parent households.

There's little protest against the horrible and dangerous conditions under which many poor and law-abiding black people must live. It is not uncommon for 50 black people to be shot over a weekend in Chicago -- not by policemen but by other black people. About 7,300 black people are murdered each year, and not by white people or racist cops, but mostly by other black people. These numbers almost make our history of victimization by racist lynching look like child's play.

The solutions to the many problems that black Americans face must come from within our black communities. They will not come from the political arena. Blacks hold high offices and dominate the politics in cities such as Philadelphia, Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and New Orleans. Yet, these are the very cities with the nation's worst-performing schools, highest crime rates, high illegitimacy rates, weak family structure and other forms of social pathology.

I am not saying that blacks having political power is the cause of these problems. What I am saying is that the solution to most of the major problems that confront black people will not be found in the political arena or by electing more blacks to high office.

One important step is for black Americans to stop being "useful tools" for the leftist, hate-America agenda. Many black problems are exacerbated by guilt-ridden white people. Often, they accept behavior and standards from black people that they would not begin to accept from white people. In that sense, white liberal guilt is a form of disrespect in their relationships with black Americans. By the same token, black people should stop exploiting the guilt of whites. Let us all keep in mind that history is one of those immutable facts of life.

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University.



Should Blacks Support Destruction of Charter Schools?

By Walter E. Williams  | 

Source: AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli

The academic achievement gap between black and white students has proven resistant to most educational policy changes. Some say that educational expenditures explain the gap, but is that true? Look at educational per pupil expenditures: Baltimore city ranks fifth in the U.S. for per pupil spending at $15,793. The Detroit Public Schools Community District spends more per student than all but eight of the nation's 100 largest school districts, or $14,259. New York City spends $26,588 per pupil, and Washington, D.C., spends $21,974. There appears to be little relationship between educational expenditures and academic achievement.

The Nation's Report Card for 2017 showed the following reading scores for fourth-graders in New York state's public schools: Thirty-two percent scored below basic, with 32% scoring basic, 27% scoring proficient and 9% scoring advanced. When it came to black fourth-graders in the state, 19% scored proficient, and 3% scored advanced.

But what about the performance of students in charter schools? In his recent book, "Charter Schools and Their Enemies," Dr. Thomas Sowell compared 2016-17 scores on the New York state ELA test. Thirty percent of Brooklyn's William Floyd public elementary school third-graders scored well below proficient in English and language arts, but at a Success Academy charter school in the same building, only one did. At William Floyd, 36% of students were below proficient, with 24% being proficient and none being above proficient.

By contrast, at Success Academy, only 17% of third-graders were below proficient, with 70% being proficient and 11% being above proficient. Among Success Academy's fourth-graders, 51% and 43%, respectively, scored proficient and above proficient, while their William Floyd counterparts scored 23% and 6%, respectively. It's worthwhile stressing that William Floyd and this Success Academy location have the same address.

Similar high performance can be found in the Manhattan charter school KIPP Infinity Middle School among its sixth-, seventh- and eighth-graders when compared with that of students at New Design Middle School, a public school at the same location. Liberals believe integration is a necessary condition for black academic excellence. Public charter schools such as those mentioned above belie that vision. Sowell points out that only 39% of students in all New York state schools who were recently tested scored at the "proficient" level in math, but 100% of the students at the Crown Heights Success Academy tested proficient. Blacks and Hispanics constitute 90% of the students in that Success Academy.

In April 2019, The Wall Street Journal reported that 57% of black and 54% of Hispanic charter school students passed the statewide ELA compared to 52% of white students statewide. On the state math test, 59% of black students and 57% of Hispanics at city charter schools passed as opposed to 54% of white students statewide.

There's little question that many charter schools provide superior educational opportunities for black youngsters. Here is my question: Why do black people, as a group, accept the attack on charter schools?

John Liu, a Democratic state senator from Queens, said New York City should "get rid of" large charter school networks. State Sen. Julia Salazar, D-Brooklyn, said, "I'm not interested in privatizing our public schools." New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio explicitly campaigned against charter schools saying: "I am angry about the privatizers. I am sick and tired of these efforts to privatize a precious thing we need -- public education. The New York Times article went on to say, "Over 100,000 students in hundreds of the city's charter schools are doing well on state tests, and tens of thousands of children are on waiting lists for spots."

One would think that black politicians and civil rights organizations would support charter schools. The success of many charter schools is unwelcome news to traditional public school officials and teachers' unions. To the contrary, they want to saddle charter schools with the same procedures that make so many public schools a failure. For example, the NAACP demands that charter schools "cease expelling students that public schools have a duty to educate." It wants charter schools to "cease to perpetuate de facto segregation of the highest performing children from those whose aspirations may be high but whose talents are not yet as obvious." Most importantly, it wants charter schools to come under the control of teachers' unions.

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University.

Thursday, November 26, 2020

SCOTUS Ruling on Religious Services During COVID Lockdowns Removes Obstacle Named Chief Justice Roberts

By Matt Vespa 

Source: Michael Reynolds/Pool via AP

Alas, we have a victory for religious freedom in the COVID lockdown era. The Supreme Court recently ruled that New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo illegally targeted churches in his COVID lockdown order—and Justice Amy Coney Barrett was the deciding vote. In the 5-4 decision, the Court ruled Cuomo’s edict violated First Amendment rights (via NYT):

The Supreme Court late Wednesday night barred restrictions on religious services in New York that Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo had imposed to combat the coronavirus.

The vote was 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and the court’s three liberal members in dissent. The order was the first in which the court’s newest member, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, played a decisive role.


In an unsigned opinion, the majority said Mr. Cuomo’s restrictions violated the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch said Mr. Cuomo had treated secular activities more favorably than religious ones.

“It is time — past time — to make plain that, while the pandemic poses many grave challenges, there is no world in which the Constitution tolerates color-coded executive edicts that reopen liquor stores and bike shops but shutter churches, synagogues, and mosques,” Justice Gorsuch wrote.

The court’s order addressed two applications: one filed by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, the other by two synagogues, an Orthodox Jewish organization and two individuals. The applications both said Mr. Cuomo’s restrictions violated constitutional protections for the free exercise of religion, and the one from the synagogues added that Mr. Cuomo had “singled out a particular religion for blame and retribution for an uptick in a societywide pandemic.”

This is a breath of fresh air since the Supreme Court had previously either upheld COVID restrictions on religious services or shot down the legal challenges brought before them. In those cases, Chief Justice John Roberts, who arguably is now the face of the Court’s liberal wing, was the one who delivered the death blow. In the Nevada case, SCOTUS upheld limitations concerning church attendance but was fine with movie theaters and casinos operating with a more cavalier capacity policy. It made no sense, and Justice Neil Gorsuch torched the entire premise in his dissent in just a single paragraph.  With Barrett on the Court, Roberts is now an irrelevant factor. We have a solid 5-4 majority now. Expect more good things with Justice Amy Coney Barrett in Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat.

Wednesday, November 25, 2020

The Heart of America: Mary Chapin Carpenter ‘s Thanksgiving Song

 Thanksgiving Song Lyrics by Mary Chapin Carpenter


Grateful for each hand we hold gathered round this table.

From far and near we travel home, blessed that we are able.

Grateful for this sheltered place with light in every window, saying welcome, welcome, share this feast come in away from sorrow.

Father, mother, daughter, son, neighbor, friend and friendless; all together everyone in the gift of loving-kindness.

Grateful for what's understood, and all that is forgiven; we try so hard to be good, to lead a life worth living.

Father, mother, daughter, son, neighbor, friend, and friendless; all together everyone, let grateful days be endless.

Grateful for each hand we hold gathered round this table.



Huge court win lets Trump present ballot evidence, could overturn Nevada result

 By Paul Bedard | Washington Secrets Columnist

In its first court victory, a Nevada judge has agreed to let the Trump campaign present its evidence that fraud and illegalities plagued the state’s election, enough to reverse Joe Biden's win and set an example for other state challenges.

According to Trump officials, the judge set a Dec. 3 hearing date and is allowing 15 depositions. What’s more, the campaign plans to present its evidence that could result in the rejection of tens of thousands of mail-in ballots in Democratic Clark County where Biden ballots outnumbered Trump ballots by 91,000 in unofficial results.

“BIG news in Nevada: a Judge has allowed NV Republicans to present findings of widespread voter fraud in a Dec. 3rd hearing. Americans will now hear evidence from those who saw firsthand what happened—a critical step for transparency and remedying illegal ballots. Stay tuned,” White House chief of staff Mark Meadows tweeted.

American Conservative Union Chairman Matt Schlapp, one of those heading the Nevada case, told Secrets, “It gives us a real chance, if to do nothing else, to begin to show this historic level of fraud.”

Oddly, there has been a virtual news blackout of the Trump court victory. However, there were major headlines on the state Supreme Court’s certification of Biden’s victory Tuesday.

In its court filing from Nov. 17, the Trump team made several allegations of voter fraud, including votes by nonresidents and the dead.

But its biggest claim was that the signatures on hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballots were not verified by human officials, as required by law.

What’s more, they found that officials used a machine to verify signatures, apparently against the rules, and even those machines were plagued with problems.

Schlapp said he is eager to get a chance to finally show its evidence of fraud and for the campaign to present the thousands of examples of signature machine errors. Since many states require signature verification, that is where the campaign’s fraud investigation is focused.

“The biggest thing which is true in all of these states we're talking about including in Georgia where a third of the ballots were cast in the mail Nevada half the ballots were cast in the mail, with no legal signature verification, certainly not in Clark County, that is the big treasure trove of illegal balloting in all of these states,” he said on Fox late Tuesday.

The campaign also has testimony from a blind person who claims somebody else voted for her and that she was barred from voting as a result. And they plan to present evidence that Native Americans were offered bribes of TVs and gas cards for their vote.

“Our filing said we have over 15 individual and tens of thousands more from mail-in fraud. We have enough to switch the outcome,” Schlapp told us.

Late last night, he revealed the judge’s decision on Sean Hannity’s Fox show. Schlapp said, “For the first time in this whole tragic story of the 2020 presidential election, a state court has granted Republicans in Nevada and the Trump campaign, the ability to present their case of widespread illegal balloting, and to just depose up to 15 people who know what went down in Clark County in the state of Nevada, so this is big news you know a lot of people in the national media have said, you know, if you have evidence of voter fraud, show it. Well, we have thousands and thousands of examples of real people in real-life instances of voter illegality. And I just think it's a great step that we're going to have a chance to present it. A court if we get a fair hearing. I believe the results in Nevada should be switched.” 





Judge Blocks Certification of Pennsylvania Election Results


A Clark County election worker scans mail-in ballots at the Clark County Election Department in North Las Vegas, on Nov. 7, 2020. (Ethan Miller/Getty Images)

A Pennsylvania judge on Nov. 25 ordered state officials to not certify the results of the 2020 election until her court holds a hearing on an election contest on Nov. 27.

Commonwealth Judge Patricia McCullough ordered the state to not take any further steps to complete the certification of the presidential race, which the state announced on Nov. 24. She also blocked the certification of all the other election results.

“To the extent that there remains any further action to perfect the certification of the results of the 2020 General Election for the offices of President and Vice President of the United States of America, respondents are preliminarily enjoined from doing so, pending an evidentiary hearing to be held on Friday,” the judge wrote in her order (pdf).

“Respondents are preliminarily enjoined from certifying the remaining results of the election, pending the evidentiary hearing.”

McCullough is presiding over a lawsuit brought by Republican lawmakers and candidates against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf, Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar, and the Pennsylvania General Assembly.

The plaintiffs allege that Pennsylvania’s vote-by-mail statute—Act 77—is in violation of the state’s constitution.

“Act 77 is the most expansive and fundamental change to the Pennsylvania voting code, implemented illegally, to date,” the lawsuit, filed in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, states.

“As with prior historical attempts to illegally expand mail-in voting by statute, which have been struck down going as far back as the Military Absentee Ballot Act of 1839, Act 77 is another illegal attempt to override the limitations on absentee voting prescribed in the Pennsylvania Constitution, without first following the necessary procedure to amend the constitution to allow for the expansion.”

The plaintiffs include Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.), Republican congressional candidate Sean Parnell, and Pennsylvania House of Representatives candidate Wanda Logan.

The office of Gov. Wolf didn’t immediately respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment. It’s unclear what steps remained as of Nov. 25 to “perfect” the certification of the presidential and vice-presidential races.

After the Keystone State announced the certification of the presidential election results on Nov. 24, the plaintiffs filed an emergency request (pdf) just before midnight, arguing that there was no need to act so fast. In 2016, Pennsylvania certified the presidential election on Dec. 12.

“It appears that respondents’ actions may have been accelerated in response to the application for emergency relief … in an effort to preclude any remedial action by this court faster than this court was able to evaluate the application for emergency relief and the answers to it,” the plaintiffs wrote.

The emergency request underlined that while Pennsylvania completed vote-counting and submitted the signed certification to the U.S. archivist, a number of steps still remain for the formal certification process to be completed.

“While Respondents may have proactively attempted to avoid potential injunctive relief granted by this Court, Respondents duties with regard to finalization of the full election results are far from complete,” the filing states.

Marc Elias, one of the top attorneys leading the Democrats’ post-election legal battles, called the lawsuit frivolous.

“Republican Congressman Mike Kelly has filed a new frivolous lawsuit in Pennsylvania seeking to block the state from certifying the election results and having the state legislature choose electors,” Elias wrote on Twitter on Nov. 21. “This is absolutely shameful.”

President Donald Trump responded to Elias, writing: “This is not at all frivolous. It is brought on behalf of one of the most respected members of the United States Congress who is disgusted, like so many others, by an Election that is a fraudulent mess. Fake ballots, dead people voting, no Republican Poll Watchers allowed, & more!”

Wolf signed Act 77 into law on Oct. 31, 2019. Eight of the nine sponsors of the bill in the Pennsylvania Senate were Republicans.

Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro responded to the order, saying that it does not affect Tuesday’s appointment of electors.

Later on Wednesday, Boockvar and other state officials filed a notice of appeal informing the court that they were appealing McCullough’s decision to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.


Janita Kan contributed to this report.

Follow Ivan on Twitter: @ivanpentchoukov