You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘election’ tag.
Last week, a reader, prairie123, responded to my post, ‘Brexit Chronicles: the parliamentary drama continues’:
This is very informative, I have been trying to learn more about this situation for a while now, but I have such a firm understanding of how US govt. works, that it’s a little tricky to figure out how British govt. does things. The questions (and shouting matches, etc) during the question portion of that even were insane! I thought there would be more decorum and manners… also the crossing of the floor by Lee – that must have been a BIG deal! He basically just switched parties, correct? Yikes. I hope Boris can win some back, but I have a feeling it’s just time to vote some members out.
I do have some random questions, if could ask you CM: Does the UK have a set time for elections or is it random? Does the House of Lords get voted in/out? Is the majority/minority whip jobs similar to US positions? When the UK joined the EU, did the people get to vote to decide that, or did the govt. just decide it was best? The EU is basically draining the economy of the UK, right? What other negative implications has being a part of the EU brought to the people of the UK, in other words what is so bad about the EU that you don’t like?
Ok, sorry to be a pest, but I really am curious about this. I know there is nothing I can do to help, but just keep Boris Johnson in my prayers and the people of Britain, I hope the politicians will actually do what they said they will do, which is the will of the people!
Thanks CM – have a great day! 🙂
I am most grateful to prairie123 for the questions. Answers follow.
That post discussed the now-former Conservative MP Phillip Lee crossing the floor of the House of Commons to the Liberal Democrats.
… that must have been a BIG deal! He basically just switched parties, correct?
Yes, and it is a big deal whenever it happens when MPs are in session. This was notable as Prime Minister Boris Johnson, also Conservative Party leader, was addressing Parliament at the time:
Does the UK have a set time for elections or is it random?
It used to be more random until the Fixed Term Parliaments Act — FTPA — became law in 2011.
When David Cameron (Conservative) became Prime Minister after the May 2010 election, there was a hung Parliament, with no clear Conservative majority. The Conservatives had 306 MPs and the Liberal Democrats 57 MPs. The Conservatives had to go into coalition with the Liberal Democrats, led at that time by Nick Clegg. Clegg became Deputy Prime Minister.
The purpose of the FTPA was to ensure that neither of the coalition partners — the Conservatives nor the Liberal Democrats — could trigger a snap general election.
In principle, under the FTPA, general elections are now held every five years. In reality, Prime Minister Theresa May, David Cameron’s successor, was able to trigger one in 2017, even though the Conservatives won the 2015 election. (Opposition MPs said she had no mandate to deliver Brexit, and the election was seen as a way of giving her legitimacy.)
Under FTPA, Theresa May needed the Aye votes of two-thirds of sitting MPs in order to trigger an election. She got those votes, and the election went ahead in June 2017. Unfortunately, she came out with less of a majority than before the election.
PM Boris Johnson has tried twice in the past two weeks to trigger a general election. Unfortunately, although the Aye votes were overwhelming, they did not come from two-thirds of sitting MPs. Other MPs abstained or did not vote.
Does the House of Lords get voted in/out?
There is no public vote for members of the House of Lords.
The House of Lords used to be comprised of hereditary peers until Labour, under Tony Blair, enacted reforms between 1997 and 2010. The House of Lords Act 1999 retains only 92 hereditary peers among the Lords Temporal.
There are also Lords Spiritual who are members: 26 bishops from the Church of England.
The majority of the Lords Temporal are life peers who are appointed by the monarch on the advice of the Prime Minister or the House of Lords Appointments Commission.
There is no limit to the number of members of the House of Lords. It is the only upper house of bicameral government in the world to be larger than the lower house.
Are the majority/minority whip jobs similar to US positions?
Yes and no.
In the UK, a whip withdrawn from an MP means that the MP no longer represents his political party in Parliament, even though he can remain as a sitting MP. This is what happened to the rebel Conservative MPs last week. They became independents upon withdrawal of the Conservative whip.
Wikipedia explains:
In British politics, the chief whip of the governing party in the House of Commons is customarily appointed as Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury so that the incumbent, who represents the whips in general, has a seat and a voice in the Cabinet. By virtue of holding the office of Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury, the government chief whip has an official residence at 12 Downing Street, although the chief whip’s office is currently located at 9 Downing Street. Government whips report to the prime minister on any possible backbench revolts and the general opinion of MPs within the party, and upon the exercise of the patronage, which is used to motivate and reward loyalty.
In the sense of ‘voting instructions’, there are three categories of whip in British politics that are issued on particular business. An expressed instruction on how to vote could constitute a breach of parliamentary privilege, so the party’s wishes are indicated unequivocally but indirectly. These whips are issued to MPs in the form of a letter outlining the parliamentary schedule, with a sentence such as “Your attendance is absolutely essential” next to each debate in which there will be a vote, underlined one, two or three times according to the severity of the whip:
-
- A single-line whip is a guide to what the party’s policy would indicate, and notification of when the vote is expected to take place; this is non-binding for attendance or voting.
- A two-line whip, sometimes known as a double-line whip, is an instruction to attend and vote; partially binding for voting according to the party’s position, attendance required unless prior permission given by the whip.
- A three-line whip is a strict instruction to attend and vote according to the party’s position, breach of which would normally have serious consequences. Permission to not attend may be given by the whip, but a serious reason is needed. Breach of a three-line whip can lead to expulsion from the parliamentary political group in extreme circumstances, and even to expulsion from the party. Consequently, three-line whips are generally only issued on key issues, such as votes of confidence and supply.[citation needed] The nature of three-line whips and the potential punishments for revolt vary among parties and legislatures.
In the US, the whip has a similar function, but without the drastic consequences that are possible in the UK system:
Both houses of Congress, the House of Representatives and Senate, have majority and minority whips. They in turn have subordinate “regional” whips. While members of Congress often vote along party lines, the influence of the whip is weaker than in the UK system. American politicians generally have considerably more freedom to diverge from the party line and vote according to their own or their constituency’s conscience. One reason is that a considerable amount of money is raised by individual candidates. Furthermore, neither members of Congress, nor any other person, can be expelled from a political party, which are formed simply by open registration. In addition, because preselection of candidates for office is generally done through a primary election that is open to a wide number of voters, candidates who support their constituents’ political positions, rather than those of their party leaders, cannot easily be rejected by their party due to a democratic mandate.
Because members of Congress cannot serve simultaneously in Executive Branch positions, a whip in the United States cannot bargain for votes by using potential promotion or demotion in a sitting administration as an inducement. There is, however, a highly structured committee system in both houses of Congress, and a whip may be able to offer promotion or threaten demotion within that system instead. In the House of Representatives, the influence of a single member individually is relatively small and therefore depends a great deal on the representative’s seniority (i.e., in most cases, on the length of time they have held office).
In the Senate, the majority whip is the third-highest ranking individual in the majority party (the party with the most seats). The majority whip is outranked by the majority leader and, unofficially, the president pro tempore. As the office of president pro tempore is largely honorific and usually given to the longest-serving senator of the majority, the majority whip is in reality the second-ranking senator in the majority conference. Similarly, in the House, the majority whip is outranked by both the majority leader and the speaker. Unlike the Senate’s presiding officer, the Speaker is the leader of his or her party’s caucus in the House.
In both the House and the Senate, the minority whip is the second highest-ranking individual in the minority party (the party with the lesser number of legislators in a legislative body), outranked only by the minority leader.
When the UK joined the EU, did the people get to vote to decide that, or did the govt. just decide it was best?
In the 1960s, the Government had made repeated applications to join the European Common Market — purely a trading bloc without much of today’s bureaucracy — and the UK was finally accepted in 1969.
It took three years to work out the terms, and on January 1, 1972, the UK joined the EC (European Community), along with Denmark and Ireland.
Some Labour MPs disapproved of the terms of the treaty and thought that the matter should be taken to the public in a referendum, and this was part of the Labour Party’s manifesto for the 1974 election, which they won.
The referendum was held in 1975. The Conservatives supported EC membership, and Labour MPs were still divided. Tony Benn was deeply concerned about how EC membership would eventually erode the UK’s sovereignty as a nation. (Today, his grandson Hilary holds the opposite view.)
Yes won by 67.23% of the vote, with a turnout of 64.62%.
You can read more at the following links: History of European Union-United Kingdom relations and 1975 United Kingdom European Communities membership referendum.
The EU is basically draining the economy of the UK, right?
Not really, however, we could be using the annual contributions we make to the EU for our own nation.
What EU membership has done is weaken our manufacturing over the years (details in this post).
As for contributions, we are second behind Germany. We are a net contributor, meaning that we send more to the EU every year than we get back.
On June 1, 2019, the Express reported:
In 2017, the UK was the second largest contributor with €7.43bn (£6.55bn), just behind Germany at €12.8bn (£11.2bn).
Britain will remain a member of the EU until its departure has been negotiated and will continue to contribute to the EU budget until it formally leaves.
On the other end, Poland was the biggest net recipient of the EU budget (getting more back than it contributed in the first place), followed by Greece, Romania, Hungary and Portugal.
Regardless of their ability to contribute, the 27 countries are able to vote on EU policies equally. Is it advisable that countries who sap from the EU coffers receive an equal vote on everything?
On May 29, the BBC published a good analysis of how EU contributions are spent and where they go. As their article explains, figures can be looked at in a few ways.
First, on the poorer countries:
The EU spends the money on a wide range of projects, but about three quarters of the budget every year goes to two main areas: agriculture and development of poorer areas of the EU.
So, poorer countries and those with a lot of farms get more.
Poland was the biggest net recipient of the EU budget (getting more back than it contributed in the first place), followed by Greece, Romania, Hungary and Portugal.
Luxembourg and Belgium, two of the richest EU countries, are also on the list of EU budget net recipients, because they receive a high proportion of the funding for administration as many EU institutions, such as the Commission and the European Parliament, are based there.
Secondly, on the contributions, whilst the BBC quotes the same German and British contribution figures as the Express article, when one analyses the contributions per person, a different picture emerges:
The largest net contributor to the EU budget per capita is the Netherlands, followed by Sweden, Germany, Denmark and the United Kingdom in fifth place, with €112.85 in 2017.
Thirdly, the placement differs again, albeit slightly, when one looks at the contributions in terms of GDP:
The Netherlands pays the biggest proportion of its gross domestic product (GDP) – a measure of the amount produced in an economy in a year. In 2017, its contribution to the EU budget was 0.47% of its GDP.
Germany is second on this list, followed by Sweden and the UK, in fourth place, with 0.32% of GDP contributed in 2017.
As for our final ‘divorce’ settlement, a page on Parliament’s website has excellent information, in part:
The UK will remain a member of the EU until its departure has been negotiated and will continue to contribute to the EU budget until it formally leaves …
The UK Government costs the settlement at around £35 billion-£39 billion. However, the true cost will not be known until all the future payments have been made …
The UK Government says that it may pay to participate in some EU programmes after Brexit. For instance, the UK might contribute to remain in Horizon 2020, the EU’s research and innovation programme. Exit negotiations will determine the extent of the UK’s future participation in EU programmes and any cost.
What other negative implications has being a part of the EU brought to the people of the UK, in other words what is so bad about the EU that you don’t like?
The main issue is loss of national sovereignty.
Hilary Benn, the Labour MP who has been running serious interference against Brexit, had a grandfather who felt quite the opposite. The late Tony Benn was a legendary Labour MP. Whilst I did not agree with most of his views, his 1975 prediction about membership in the EU came true. He warned that we would lose our sovereignty bit by bit, which we did. He also warned that once in, we would find it very difficult to leave. And so it is proving. I wish he were still alive to talk to his grandson about this issue.
———————————————————————————————————–
I hope this answers some of your questions, prairie123. Thank you very much for your moral support for those of us who wish to leave!
Advertisements
The truth about Remainers wanting Britain to stay in the European Union continues to emerge.
The result is that British voters have become very angry — even Remainers and the normally apathetic.
People are angry because of the false promises those on both sides of the aisle made three years ago:
News items
Late last week, a number of news interviews and articles exposed the continued, wilful intransigence of Remain MPs calling for ‘compromise’, ‘coming together’ and so on — all in a concerted effort to block not only Brexit but also a general election.
Spiked’s Brendan O’Neill appeared on Sky Australia on September 4 to discuss Hilary Benn’s European Union (Withdrawal) (No.6) Bill and the failed vote on a general election:
Meanwhile, in Britain that day, former Conservative MP Michael Portillo rightly said that the 2016 referendum was never about Deal or No Deal. The voter responding to him also remembers then-PM David Cameron’s words correctly:
Brexit Party MEP Dr David Bull said the same on David Vine’s Channel 5 morning talk show. On Friday, September 6, he responds to a Remainer panellist saying that Leave ‘was based on a lie’:
Nor did any of the Leave campaigners say it would be easy:
Well said, Portillo! No leading figure campaigning for Brexit *ever* mentioned a deal of any kind! Nobody said we’d be getting a great, quick, easy deal! Nobody said we’d have to have a deal in order to enjoy the exact same benefits of being the EU! These are all Remoaner lies!
On Thursday, September 5, news emerged that former Conservative MPs, from whom the Party whip had been withdrawn last week, plan to stand as Independent MPs in the next general election. They are Remainers:
The Sun reported not only on the rogue MPs but also on other developments going on at the heart of Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government (emphases mine):
They are Philip Hammond, David Gauke, Dominic Grieve, Ed Vaizey, Sam Gyimah, Alistair Burt, Steve Brine, Caroline Nokes, Antoinette Sandbach, Rory Stewart, Margot James and Stephen Hammond.
Even if the rebels fail to win them, the move could split the Tory vote and hand the seats to opposition parties, diminishing the PM’s chances of a majority.
It came as Sir John Major last night demanded the PM reinstate the 21 rebels – and sack controversial aide Dominic Cummings in an extraordinary attack.
The former PM said it defied belief the Tory MPs had been booted out for failing to “parrot the views of a Prime Minister influence by a political anarchist”.
Former Attorney General and rebel leader Mr Grieve told The Sun last night that his decision to stand “depends on the circumstances of the election”.
But Mr Grieve added: “I’m certainly of the view that pulling out of politics during the biggest crisis in recent history would be the wrong thing to do …”
… The development comes as Sajid Javid became the latest senior Tory to join the spiralling Cabinet revolt against the expulsions.
Asked if there was a road to redemption for them, the Chancellor told LBC: “I would hope so. I would like to see them come back at some point” …
It wasn’t good news for Labour that day, either, as voters in Grimsby, in North East Lincolnshire, told BBC Radio 4 that they could not countenance the idea of Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister. Grimsby is a Labour stronghold and has elected a Labour MP consistently since 1945: 74 years!
The Express has the story about the fishing town that also voted overwhelmingly to Leave in 2016. Some residents are considering voting for the Brexit Party:
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, one local said: “Labour are out, I think.
“I would definitely say Labour would be gone. Their position on Brexit is not very clear and that’s probably why they’re going to be in trouble.
“They’ll be seen as the worst of the parties because at least the Lib Dems have come out and said, ‘this is our position.’ Everyone knows the Tory position with Johnson and people.
“I feel Labour is still sort of in the middle and Corbyn’s not going to be, probably, the world’s best prime minister” …
And another local appeared to echo the sentiment, saying: “It’s difficult when you’ve been a paid-up Labour member for years and now we’re really struggling to think, ‘I don’t really want to vote for them.’
“Where does your vote go? We could be Liberals but Conservatives, no. Because if you look at the Conservatives at the top at the minute, they don’t have to worry about what challenges or financial challenges Brexit would bring because they’re all very rich.”
Other locals also signalled they would be willing to switch their vote to the newcomer Brexit Party led by Nigel Farage, whose candidates snatched at least one seat in each constituency at the European parliamentary elections in May – including one seat in Scotland.
A man said: “I was talking to my friend earlier and he said he’d vote Farage.
“Actually, that’s quite a possibility. I’m thinking about it and my friends are, too.”
Boris’s call to the voters
On Thursday, September 5, Boris updated the voters, explaining what their choice is now, given last week’s events in the House of Commons. The short video has subtitles:
An MP speaks
This video clip shows Conservative MP Nigel Evans defending the voters who, in good faith, ticked the Leave box in 2016. What a pity he spoke to nearly empty benches on both sides:
A Conservative MEP sums up
The eloquent MEP Daniel Hannan sums up the current Brexit deadlock — and prorogation — as follows:
A Labour MP for Leave gets threatened
Kate Hoey, Labour MP for Vauxhall (South London), has been an ardent Leave campaigner from the beginning. After her re-election in 2017, she decided not to stand again as a Labour MP in the next general election.
Last week, she voted with the Government against Hilary Benn’s ‘Surrender’ bill:
She also received the following email, which looks as if it came from a bot. Nonetheless, it carries a nasty threat. She received support from the aforementioned Dr David Bull. Language alert:
Labour Leave tweets
Labour Leave point out the hypocrisy of Remainer MPs. ‘SM’ is Single Market and ‘CU’ is Customs Union:
In fact, SM + CU is worse than Remain. We would have no sovereignty — or EU vote.
I am glad to see they took exception to Remain MPs’ extreme characterisations of Leavers last week:
The British speak out — ‘bigger than Brexit’
It is telling that the British public are now clearly angry about the way Parliament has treated them.
This is now bigger than Brexit. It is about how we are governed.
Some Remainers understand what is happening and want MPs to carry out the referendum result.
So do some who were formerly apathetic about politics in general.
The Remainers
This former Remainer is irked by the People’s Vote (FBPE) — second referendum — brigade:
The awakened apathetics
This is a great tweet — followed by similar replies:
Teachers are angry
These are more replies to the man’s tweet about his apathetic wife.
These are important because they are about teachers, most of whom voted to Remain. Yet, even they can see that what’s happening is greater than Brexit. This is about how we are governed, full stop:
Conclusion
The British are ready now for a general election.
Some of us have had two elections this year: local (not everywhere) and for the EU Parliament.
Yes, we were sick of going to the polls so frequently, especially for an EU election, but, based on last week’s antics, we are looking forward to casting our vote.
Consider it a People’s Vote, or a second referendum. It serves the same purpose.
In two votes, MPs stymied Prime Minister Boris Johnson during the afternoon and evening of Wednesday, September 4, 2019.
You can read my earlier report here.
The European Union (Withdrawal) (No.6) Bill
The Hilary Benn – Alistair Burt Bill passed the House of Commons, effectively limiting the chances of No Deal Brexit in favour of yet ANOTHER cap-in-hand request to the EU for yet ANOTHER extension!
Burt, by the way, is a rebel Tory and is now an Independent:
Parliament’s website has a summary of the bill, known officially as the European Union (Withdrawal) (No.6) Bill:
The Bill would require that unless the House of Commons approves a deal with the EU or the House of Commons agrees a no-deal Brexit, the Government must by 19 October 2019 seek an extension to the Article 50 period until 31 January 2020.
In debating it yesterday afternoon, a handful of Conservative MPs loyal to the British public pointed out that some Remainer MPs — unnamed — are in league with Brussels to prevent a No Deal Brexit or any Brexit at all.
They further accused Remainer MPs of playing for time. The more extensions they get, the further away the timeline moves from the 2016 referendum, at which point they could say that it’s time for a second referendum.
There are already some MPs with private estates or farms that receive EU grants. So, they have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Others must have some other dependency on the EU financially, otherwise, they would vote to leave on October 31. At some point, someone will reveal more about this.
In any event, the bill progressed to the House of Lords, which — despite the amendments the Conservative peer Lord True tabled (he lives up to his name) — is scheduled to clear by the end of the day, Friday, September 6. The Lords will then return it, with amendments, to the Commons for further debate on Monday. It is likely to pass into legislation.
On Thursday, September 5, Guido Fawkes reported that, in a twist of events, No. 10 has agreed with opposition MPs that the Lords should be enabled to clear this by Friday. That would indicate that the 100+ amendments that Lord True tabled have either been reduced or eliminated:
… following Boris’s defeat in the [C]ommons, there ha[ve] been reports that far from the 100 hours-worth of debate we were anticipating in the Lords, the Government has conceded defeat and negotiated with the opposition to agree Hilary Benn’s Bill to complete all its stages by Friday – with the bill then going back to the Commons for any further consideration on Monday.
This sounds like a further climbdown on the government’s part, but Guido explains that this could help Boris get more leverage for a snap general election (emphasis in the original):
It looks like the decision was accepted by Boris, who now will want legislation to be passed as quickly as possible, to ensure Labour can’t again duck out of backing a general election next week. Prorogation could be enacted as late as the 12th, allowing Boris to secure his preferred route to an election by the 16th…
We can but see.
More on the bill follows below.
General Election voted down
Last night, Boris brought forward a motion for a general election.
MPs defeated him on this vote, too.
Until 2011, it was relatively easy for a sitting Prime Minister to call for a general election. However, in 2010, Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron had to form a coalition government with the leader of the Liberal Democrats at that time, Nick Clegg. The Liberal Democrats are a far smaller party than either the Conservatives or Labour. In order to secure the Liberal Democrats’ position in the coalition, Parliament passed the Fixed Term Parliament Act, under which no general election can be held unless two-thirds of all sitting MPs approve it. The Queen then rubber stamps the decision.
Last night’s vote was overwhelmingly in favour of a general election, however, not all of the MPs voted Aye or No. Some abstained. Others did not vote at all:
The replies to the tweet show that the British public are not happy:
Yes, indeed.
As I write on Thursday, it appears that the Government could be contemplating another motion for an election, to be tabled on Monday:
That said, this is what the Prime Minister said after Thursday’s vote:
The Opposition has opted to show confidence in Her Majesty’s Government.
That is true.
One member of the public summed up the result as follows:
Yes, in effect, a general election would be a People’s Vote on Brexit. The Left has been clamouring for a People’s Vote — a second referendum — for most of this year. A general election would accomplish the same objective.
It is also worth noting that Labour have also been calling for a general election since February 2018, only months after the June 2017 election was held. This video shows all their requests:
The following tweets from The Independent‘s John Rentoul explain Labour’s reasoning for voting against the Government’s motion on Wednesday:
What Boris might be thinking
These two defeats on Boris’s first full day in the Commons look terrible, and indeed they are, however, knowing that he is a keen student of world history going all the way back to the Ancient World, he and his Svengali, Dominic Cummings, no doubt have other cards they intend to play.
On these two votes, some on Twitter offer speculation. One involves Jacob Rees-Mogg’s sister Annunziata, who is a Brexit Party MEP:
It makes sense.
What Boris said last night
Late yesterday evening, the Prime Minister gave a ten-minute interview to ITV’s Robert Peston, in which he discussed his past two days in Parliament:
At the 2:00 mark, he discussed the new Bill, saying that it damages his ability to negotiate a good deal with the EU. He said that it also dictates the letter he is to write for an extension.
You can see the letter here on page 8. Talk about supplication!
It is clear that Remainer MPs are now out in the open about their opposition to No Deal. The public understands what is going on:
Yep!
Boris’s brother resigns
The Prime Minister’s brother, Jo Johnson, has a place in the Cabinet, but has chosen to become a rebel and resign the Party whip.
News broke early Thursday afternoon. Andrew Neil discussed it on his BBC show that day:
The now-former Minister for Universities and Science tweeted:
ITV’s Robert Peston quipped:
Was it a surprise or not?
Someone replied with the referendum result for Johnson’s Kent constituency:
Jo Johnson failed to mention that his constituency of Orpington had a 57.54% estimated LEAVE vote in 2016
Johnson’s resignation was only a matter of time. I was surprised to see him accept his brother’s offer of a Cabinet post in July, considering his Remainer views.
In other news
Boris’s top adviser Dominic Cummings was found in contempt of Parliament in March 2019 for his 2016 role in the Vote Leave campaign, which he chaired. He refused to appear before the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) committee, which accused him of spreading fake news for the campaign.
On Wednesday, Damian Collins MP wrote again to ask him to appear before the committee:
I think Cummings will ignore the request, but I could be wrong.
———————————————————————————————-
And, so, this wraps up a week of excitement in Parliament. What a potboiler this saga is! More to come anon.
There is much to cover in the aftermath of the EU elections held in the UK.
Hell certainly broke loose at the end of May, and I don’t mean Theresa.
Labour
After many months, if not a year, of anti-Semitic slurs coming from some elements of the Labour Party, the EHRC (Equality and Human Rights Commission) finally took action:
During the BBC’s programme about the EU election results on Sunday, May 27, Tony Blair’s former spin doctor Alastair Campbell declared that he had voted for the Liberal Democrats, the largest Remain party. The Labour Party duly expelled him, then decided to review their decision:
Kate Hoey, on the other hand, has played her cards well as the most prominent Leave Labour MP since 2016. She believes that The Brexit Party deserves a seat at the negotiating table:
The Brexit Party
Nigel Farage is absolutely correct about Theresa May’s ‘deal’, or treaty:
Meanwhile, party chairman Richard Tice, one of three newly-elected MEPs for the East of England region, isn’t taking any nonsense:
On May 29, Westmonster reported:
Brexit Party chairman Richard Tice has issued a legal letter to an SNP MEP following allegations of money laundering were made in a Sky News interview on Monday.
Alyn Smith accused the Brexit Party of being “shysters” who were “a shell company for a money laundering front”.
The interview which has been circulated across social media for the last 48 hours was brought to the attention of Tice whose solicitors have now issued Mr Smith with the following letter:
Conservative Party
The race continues for party leader, succeeding Mrs May.
The overall picture of the runners and riders shows gaps in their commitment to delivering Brexit:
Priti Patel has been committed to delivering a proper Brexit since 2016:
She also recognises the despair at grassroots level among the loyal, tireless volunteers:
It won’t be long before we see how this develops for the Conservatives.
I hope true Leavers do well. More to come as the leadership contest narrows.
Between Thursday, May 23 and Sunday, May 26, European voters let their leaders know what was on their minds.
The 2019 EU elections were quite the eye-opener, as nationalist parties and the Greens did very well indeed:
Like them or not, interesting trends emerged:
Italy
Matteo Salvini was thrilled:
France
Marine Le Pen’s Rassemblement National (RN) — National Rally — edged past Emmanuel Macron’s LREM — Renaissance — list:
Politico reported that Le Pen’s party:
scored about 24 percent of the vote, compared with roughly 22.5 percent for Macron’s centrist-liberal party, according to two initial projections.
United Kingdom
The biggest news came from the United Kingdom. The six-week old Brexit Party won nine out of ten regions.
The Telegraph reported (emphases mine):
The Brexit Party has won nine of the 10 regions to declare their results in the European elections, claiming 28 of 64 seats in the European Parliament.
Nigel Farage’s party came top in the North East, North West, East of England, Wales, West Midlands, East Midlands, Yorkshire & Humber, the South West and South East.
This came largely at the expense of the Conservative Party. Theresa May’s party have lost a huge share of the vote across all regions, so far losing 15 MEP seats to leave a total of three. The party is in fifth place, with its lowest vote share in a national election since they formed in 1834.
Good grief!
However, The Brexit Party is represented in 10 out of 10 regions, as this Scottish result came in early on Monday morning:
It seems that Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party will now hold one more seat than Angela Merkel’s CDU Party: 29 to 28!
Nigel Farage gave his MEP acceptance speech in Southampton, saying:
These are some of the regional results (click on image to enlarge):
Here are the other new Brexit Party MEPs.
Hearty congratulations, ladies and gentlemen!
What an amazing result!
Like the Conservatives, Labour also suffered. The Liberal Democrats received a lot of Remain votes from Labour voters, as did the Greens. In Scotland, the SNP took a substantial share of Labour votes.
You can read more about the EU election results on the BBC’s website and at the Daily Mail.
It is increasingly apparent that PM Theresa May and her fellow Remainers do not care about the future of their own party.
Leave MP Michael Fabricant might be eccentric, but he speaks the truth:
It is unfortunate that every decent article and editorial in The Telegraph lies behind a paywall, however, at least one can still view the comments.
This one (4 Apr 2019 12:33PM) expresses the average Conservative voter’s perspective on Brexit and the Party (emphasis in the original, those in purple mine):
I cannot recall a time when I have been more disgusted by, and ashamed of, the party I have voted for my entire life.
I am 69 years old and was brought up in the North East, a massively Labour area, by strongly conservative parents. The lessons and morality I learned from them have stayed with me for life.
I may be old, but I am neither stupid nor ignorant. I am university educated and world-travelled and ran my own small business for 30 years, employing staff and exporting my hand-made goods worldwide. I knew very well what I was voting for when I voted ‘leave’ in the 2016 referendum, my main motivation was to regain our precious sovereignty and our ‘British Spirit’, a word I am struggling to define but I’m sure you get my meaning. I am in no way prejudiced and welcome people of all shades, religions and nationalities to our Country. The one thing I do ask is that immigrants make a life in this country and, whilst not forgetting their own heritage, they honour our native mores, lifestyle and laws.
It now seems that our constitutional, democratic values, backed by the Rule of Law, whilst largely unwritten, have been honoured for hundreds of years. The way in which our current elected representatives in the House of Commons have, by tricks, lying, cheating and deceitful, mendacious behaviour overturned democracy and defied the Rule of Law. This has started from the top, from the Prime Minister downwards. How can the Cabinet, MPs of all stripes, behave themselves lawfully and democratically under these circumstances? The answer is that under such leadership they cannot, and will not.
I never thought I would live to see this appalling day, when we are so grossly, and traitorously, betrayed by a CONSERVATIVE government. It stinks, and the Conservatives will never, in my lifetime, be forgiven for leading us into rule by a foreign power.
May God help us all.
It is unclear what PM May expects to get out of pushing her deal — which seems to be a treaty — and cosying up to Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn except perhaps some sort of EU job. One thing is for certain. She has no future in the Conservative Party:
The Sun‘s article from Wednesday, April 3, 2019, is lengthy and informative. An excerpt follows, emphases mine:
The Sun has been told that 15 Brexiteer ministers are “on the edge” of also walking out – 10 junior ministers, five in the Cabinet.
One of those ministers said: “Many, many colleagues in government are just seething and a lot of us are on the edge now – some over a customs union, others over European Parliament elections.
“What’s for sure is if she asks for a long extension next week it will mean mass resignations.”
International Trade Secretary Liam Fox signalled last night he is one ready to quit if Mrs May watered down her red lines, telling MPs he is prepared to dump “none” of the party’s manifesto promises.
A large group of Brexiteer ministers – known as the Pizza Club – met twice yesterday, including late last night in the Commons, to try to plot a way to stop Mrs May from softening Brexit further.
Among them were Commons Leader Andrea Leadsom – who hosted the meeting – Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson and Environment Secretary Michael Gove.
Last week, three Conservative MPs resigned ministerial positions, with one — Nick Boles — leaving the Party. Nigel Adams will continue as MP from the back benches as will Chris Heaton-Harris:
On May 2, many local councils will hold elections. Conservative Party associations are working hard to get out the vote, but, given the antics from their own MPs with Brexit, this is proving to be quite a challenge.
Compounding the issue is the prospect of another general election, as May’s popularity continues to tank.
Brexit was supposed to be the great Conservative Party unifier. Instead, it is proving to be incredibly divisive.
What should voters think when the BBC’s Andrew Neil takes down a Remainer Conservative MP — the Father of the House, no less — on live television? This shows how duplicitous Kenneth Clarke is in his push for a customs union. After so many years as an MP, he should know better. Consequently, astute Leavers are wondering why he is pushing for it:
This comment on Conservative Home is directed towards the Clarkes of this Parliament:
How about a survey of Conservative MPs.
1) How many of you think you can get re-elected to Westminster in the event of an emergency GE without the help of your Associations?
2) Given your goppingly ghastly way of trying to subvert Brexit by voting for it not to pass, how do you expect to motivate your party workers.
3) Why do you think you are worth being re-adopted and why shouldn’t your members choose someone more inclined to support a proper Brexit?
4) Are you aware that of the Conservative membership, 3/4 are Brexiteers. 6/10 Labour constituencies voted to Leave 7/10 Conservative constituencies voted to leave – and if you were, WTF are you doing in Westminster?
I can tell the MPs that from the bottom to almost the top, that those who work for the MPs and councillors, including the councillors who are going to be most badly affected, that doing business with Corbyn is new low for the PM. She has to bloody well go.
May’s attempted rapprochement with Corbyn is going to prove difficult for local Conservative members going from door to door, as Paul Goodman explains at Conservative Home:
“Don’t go anywhere near Corbyn – or his supporters,” Tory canvassers will be saying on the doorstep. To which voters will surely reply: “why not? Your own leader is.”
In many areas, local canvassing for May 2 is not going well. Conservative Home’s Harry Phibbs has been out and about getting reactions from Party association members. What follows are reactions from around the country.
In a strong Brexit area of the West Midlands:
… Conservatives are not going to switch to Labour or the Lib Dems. But a lot of Conservatives will abstain. Also, there are rumours of independents standing.
In a rural district:
I must emphasise that the problem is not just with Brexiteers. It is wider than that. It’s down to trust and there is very precious little of it left. There is this dismay at the incompetence and the duplicity. People coming on and saying one thing one week and then doing the opposite the next week.
In a Labour-run local authority:
What is so infuriating is that we had been working hard to make gains. Now we will be lucky not to make losses. Labour locally is in a mess. But what is happening nationally is a very significant problem. The morale of our team is very low. If they are disillusioned then how can they expect to persuade others? People say why bother voting. We end up agreeing with them.
In a Conservative-run local authority:
We are supposed to be in a safe seat. But I don’t think there are any safe seats. CCHQ is very complacent about that. The situation is very volatile. It’s pretty dire at the moment, to be honest. But I think it could change.
In the South East:
It is extraordinarily bad. We have seriously considered stopping canvassing for the time being in case it does more harm than good. Could we be annoying people, winding them up? Over and over again people are saying they will ‘never vote Conservative again.’ I’ve been campaigning for several years now and I have never encountered this pure rage on the doorstep before.
A comment on the article supports all of the above:
All I can add is that as a small c and long standing Leave supporting independent candidate, campaigning hard to keep my seat, I am very grateful not to be a Tory right now. I don’t think I could stand the abuse. Few people want to talk about local issues. It’s mainly the failure to implement the Brexit they voted for and the subsequent denial of a democratic process that makes people so very angry.
A number of Conservative and swing Leave voters are likely to ditch the Party on May 2, even though local councillors have no part in the Brexit process. It’s their way of making a protest statement.
CCHQ and PM May, as Party leader, should be asking themselves probing questions during these remaining weeks. However, it seems unlikely that they will. They live in the Westminster bubble, far removed from voters.
In some American states, the mid-term vote discrepancies seem to have been a dress rehearsal for 2020, President Trump’s re-election year.
So many strange things have been happening since Tuesday, November 6, 2018, especially in Florida, where a state-wide recount took place.
Here is a partial summary of vote discrepancies.
South Carolina
Katie Arrington (R) ended up losing narrowly to Joe Cunningham (D) in a bid to represent South Carolina’s 1st District in Congress.
On election night, The State reported (emphases mine):
COLUMBIA, SC
11 p.m.
With 52 percent of results now in from the slow-moving 1st District race, Arrington maintains her lead of 53 percent to 47 percent for Cunningham.
The next morning, The State reported that Cunningham had won in a surprise upset:
COLUMBIA, SC — In a stunning upset, a Democrat has won South Carolina’s coastal 1st District for the first time in 40 years.
Political newcomer Joe Cunningham narrowly defeated Republican state Rep. Katie Arrington Tuesday, flipping from red to blue a district that Republican President Donald Trump won by 13 points just two years ago. The Associated Press called the tight race at 2 a.m. Wednesday …
Cunningham will replace U.S. Rep. Mark Sanford, the Charleston Republican whom Arrington beat in the June GOP primary after highlighting the two-time congressman’s criticisms of Trump and pledging to support the president’s agenda in Washington, D.C.
Meanwhile, all five of South Carolina’s incumbent congressmen kept their seats in landslide victories.
TheLastRefuge — Sundance of The Conservative Treehouse — tweeted:
Hmm.
New Mexico
New Mexico discovered several thousand Democrat votes after a Republican candidate gave her victory speech:
Curious.
Minnesota
Keith Ellison won his bid for Minnesota attorney general, despite being investigated for domestic abuse against his former partner:
It’s not just fraud. Add to that voter stupidity.
Ellison had represented Minnesota’s fifth Congressional district since 2007 and was appointed as Deputy Chair of the Democratic National Committee last year, so he certainly had name recognition.
Wisconsin
One Wisconsin voter, Bev, was furious:
Her message is an important one, even though it is all one paragraph. It explains how the Dems know how many fraudulent votes to manufacture.
Arizona
Arizona’s Senate race was controversial. Military veteran Martha McSally (R) lost to Kyrsten Senema (D), raising eyebrows in a state where a Republican — i.e. the late John McCain — was Senator for many years:
By November 10, votes were still being counted — continuing in Sinema’s favour:
That day, The Epoch Times stated:
On Friday night, the lead was about one percentage point of the two million ballots tallied, with Sinema at 991,433 votes and McSally at 971,331 votes. Some 80,000 ballots were submitted to the state from Maricopa County, tilting towards Sinema by more than 11,500, reported 12 News. More than 400,000 remain to be counted statewide, most from Maricopa.
Sinema for Arizona campaign manager Andrew Piatt said in a statement that Sinema will win. “Kyrsten will steadily build her advantage and be elected to the U.S. Senate. She will win this race,” he said.
And, lo, she had.
On November 12, Ricochet said that McSally had been too cautious a candidate and was unprepared for a determined Democrat GOTV (Get Out The Vote) campaign:
The Pima County Republican is very cautious. Very cautious. Instead of barnstorming the map and mixing it up with all comers, she carefully issues press releases and attends controlled events. She wouldn’t even agree to a debate with Sinema for months and then only participated in one …
McSally hails from Pima County, home to Tucson, while Sinema is from Maricopa County, home to Phoenix. More than half the state’s population lives in the latter, so they didn’t know much about the Tucson-based candidate. She needed to spend a lot more time defining herself since Sinema was already defined to a big chunk of Arizonans …
If the GOP wants to win in the Grand Canyon State, they can’t rest on their party registration advantage and old trends. Instead, great candidates need to run great campaigns and, at the very least, keep up with Democratic GOTV innovations.
Larry Schweikart, who watched the mid-terms closely, has this analysis:
Sinema is, at heart, a radical. However, she was careful not to expose that side to the public.
I still maintain there were suspect votes in that count. So does the president:
Florida
As I write, the final recount totals appear to be in for Florida.
The initial count was still going on for two days after the election:
Senator Marco Rubio (R) pointed out that counties hit by Hurricane Michael were capable of getting their vote totals in on time:
That day, Rubio went further. Fox News reported:
Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio on Thursday charged that two Democrat-controlled counties in the state, in possible violation of election law, have been reporting a “slow drip” of tens of thousands of additional ballots favorable to several Democratic candidates for statewide office, including incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson.
Liberal lawyers, Rubio said in an extraordinary series of tweets that alleged incompetence if not outright complicity by Florida officials, are “descending on” the state in a calculated attempt to “change the results” and “try and steal” races for Senate and agriculture commissioner.
Some former Floridians now living out of state received Florida ballots. Interesting:
President Trump was aware of the situation in the Palm Beach – Fort Lauderdale area:
Gateway Pundit discussed what was going on in Broward County (Fort Lauderdale) on November 8:
The US Senate candidates in Florida received 24,000 fewer votes than the Gubernatorial candidates.
How is this possible? (We know the answer already) …
Breaking update: Governor Rick Scott & the NRSC are filing a public records lawsuit against Broward election supervisor Brenda Snipes for failing to provide them with information about outstanding ballots that have yet to be tabulated
The lawsuit comes as Scott’s margins are shrinking v. Sen Nelson …
That same day, Gateway Pundit carried an eye-witness report on ballots in Broward County (emphasis in the original):
Florida voter JoAnn Knox captured Broward County Election Officials Transferring Ballots in Rented Truck on Election Night!
The article includes her full statement from Facebook, which makes for shocking reading.
Former Independent candidate Tim Canova tweeted this video:
More reports emerged:
On November 9, it looked as if Mike Caldwell (R) had lost his bid for Florida’s agricultural commissioner to Nikki Fried (D). The News-Press reported (emphases mine):
Caldwell thought he had edged out a victory in the agricultural commissioner race Tuesday night when he had about a 40,000 vote lead over Democratic candidate Nikki Fried.
But the latest vote count shows Caldwell losing by 3,120 votes to Fried. The difference between the candidates is .04 percent, signaling an automatic recount, and a likely manual recount.
“Over the course of the last two and half days, the Broward supervisor has continued to magically find boxes of ballots that have potentially altered the course of the race,” Caldwell said in an interview Friday. “And after all that time, we still cannot get a straight answer as to where they came from, when they were cast. We just heard there is another magical box of 2,100 ballots they supposedly found here (Friday).”
He said what is happening in Broward County is unacceptable.
Fried, he said, is from Broward County. Fried’s campaign team had no comment to make to News-Press at that time.
Florida’s congressman Matt Gaetz (R) had this to say about Florida’s election count in Broward:
In Palm Beach County, Democrats wanted non-citizens’ votes counted:
It seems as if Rick Scott (R) won his Senate seat by a narrow margin. Here’s the GOP chairwoman offering her congratulations. Incidentally, she is Mitt Romney’s niece:
Nelson was hanging tough, though:
It also looks as if Ron DeSantis (R) won the governorship over Andrew Gillum (D), again by a slim margin.
President Trump said:
This is how many votes Broward County’s election commissioner managed to find:
On Sunday, November 11, a criminal investigation was launched into voting in Broward and Palm Beach counties. According to the Gateway Pundit, all Florida counties met a deadline for final vote tallies on November 10.
Even so, on November 11, investigative journalist Laura Loomer who was in Fort Lauderdale at the time, reported a ‘bomb threat’ was declared at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport. Another box of ‘provisional votes’ had been spotted in a rental car last driven by a Broward County employee (this man, perhaps?). Laura Loomer has more on her website. Here is a brief video of an interview of a Republican Party lawyer. Here is another video of hers explaining what the sheriff’s office had to say. She alleges that some of his law enforcement officers are embarrassed.
She also managed to obtain a frank statement from a Democrat attorney on destroying votes:
Indeed, because as someone else explained, quick destruction means no trail:
Other states
On November 12, the Gateway Pundit reported that vote count irregularities had also occurred in Georgia and California:
Democrats have mysteriously found thousands of new votes in Georgia on Saturday after losing the governor’s seat on Tuesday.
And now several California Republican candidates who led their races by significant margins on election night days later are losing their seats as Democrats produce new votes several days later.
Conclusion
President Trump had set up an election commission to address fraud in 2017. However, because so many blue states refused to co-operate, it had to be abandoned in January 2018.
It’s apparent that something concrete and effective must be done before 2020 about vote fraud, which, contrary to what Democrats and their water carriers in the media say, does exist.
Enforcing the laws would be a start. Getting rid of early voting weeks before an election would be another. Stipulating that absentee votes must arrive on or by election day would be another. Non-citizens must be prohibited from voting (the Motor Voter programme registers nearly everyone applying for a driver’s licence). At least Texas governor Greg Abbott will investigate that in his state.
Until then, by golly, what a dress rehearsal by the Dems for 2020.
Politically and culturally, the whole of this year in the US has been a build-up to the mid-term elections.
I barely scratched the surface of everything I wanted to cover in this regard, so I might use that material to analyse the results in the days to come.
Two things are clear.
One: this is a referendum on Donald Trump’s presidency.
Two: the Democrat Party is dying. (I refuse to write ‘Democratic’, because they do not live up to it.)
That said, it is incumbent on independents and Republicans to go out and vote on Tuesday, November 6. Here are Cuban immigrants’ views:
The US needs another monster Republican vote to overcome voter fraud.
What follows are my final thoughts before Election Day, written at the end of October.
Trump and young black conservatives
By the time you read this, President Trump will have welcomed a large group of young black conservatives to the White House:
On October 23, the New York Post reported that the first ever Young Black Leadership Summit is sponsored by Turning Point USA (TPUSA), a conservative student organisation founded by Charlie Kirk (see tweets throughout this post). Candace Owens is TPUSA’s Director of Communications and has been pivotal in getting Kanye West to speak out about his support for President Trump.
The Post‘s article says, in part (emphases mine):
Owens, who was gaining traction as a black YouTube star with right political leanings, wanted to hold a forum for young black Americans who were “conservative curious,” as she once was, from day one.
“So my mission was always really clear when Charlie and I met. One of the first things he asked me was, ‘What do you want to do?’ And I said, really, in plain words, ‘I’d like to lead the black revolution against the Democrat Party,’” Owens told The Post.
While Owens joined the group in November, the plan to hold a conference for young black people got a shot of dragon energy in April.
Just days before he would put on the MAGA hat and pronounce his love for Trump, rapper Kanye West tweeted, “I love the way Candace Owens thinks,” the first online suggestion that he was more Republican-leaning.
Kirk said that West’s tweet made both Owens and Turning Point more prominent.
“And kind of gave more reinforcement to the idea of a black leadership summit because during that moment we saw hundreds of blacks across the country come out and say to Candace, ‘Oh my goodness, this is an amazing thing that you’re doing, we love you, we’re afraid to voice our mind,” Kirk explained to The Post. “Candace and I wondered, ‘I wonder how many there really are?’”
Turns out there are at least 350 to 400 young black people interested in hearing Trump speak.
Kanye was not at the conference and by Monday, October 29, had pulled away from the Turning Point organisation over a disagreement about Blexit (black exit) merchandise marketing.
That said, the crowd attending President Trump’s address to them was highly enthusiastic:
This is news bad for the Dems:
Border security
ICE have a tough job, especially as they are under-manned patrolling the southern border. That said, they rack up some incredible accomplishments, as TPUSA’s Charlie Kirk tweets:
Think about that, especially when Democrats, the media and other leftists plea for us to ‘think about the children!’
When it comes to illegal entry, there are a lot of bad, exploitative people crossing the border. When I think of the children among them, I think of the human and sex trafficking victims, exploited people.
Obama, when he was a senator, also said that the rule of law must be respected with regard to crossing the border:
The ‘caravan’
While the world still believes the Trump campaign is guilty of colluding with Russia two years ago at this time, there is little news associating the human caravan in Mexico — happening right before the election — with foreign interests.
Vice President Pence said it is being ‘financed by Venezuela’ which is a nuanced way of saying that foreign powers that own and influence the impoverished nation are behind it. The Conservative Treehouse (CTH) explains:
Announcing the migrant caravan is “financed by Venezuela” is a direct notification the Central American invasion force is being funded by Russia and China. Venezuela doesn’t have any money to sustain its own operational government – let alone a 10,000 person convoy. Venezuela is entirely reliant upon massive investment from Russia and China.
In fact China owns 49% of Venezuela’s state run PDVSA energy production. A collateral system where Beijing takes oil as payment for prior loans the Maduro regime cannot pay back. With the crippling treasury department sanctions President Trump put on Venezuela last year, Trump has punched Maduro and Xi-Jinping hard.
With Mike Pence pointing a finger at Venezuela the politics behind the invasion force begin to make much more sense. The invasion objective takes on a geopolitical angle directly targeting a series of U.S. policies that are against the interests of Russia and China.
The post goes on to say that Trump and Treasury secretary Steve Mnuchin have sanctioned Venezuela and limited their ability to expand state oil revenue. China cannot trade directly with Venezuela at the risk of losing access to the US banking system. China continues lending to Venezuela, which will have little chance of repaying the loans.
Furthermore, the US has withdrawn $900m in aid from Pakistan in an effort to stop them enabling extremism in Afghanistan. As China is Pakistan’s main trading partner, Pakistan looks to them to fill the aid gap, unless the World Bank decides to bail them out.
Russia is being squeezed as the US increases its influence in the energy markets in Europe. European nations that were getting their energy supplies from Russia are increasingly turning towards the US for LNG, oil and coal.
The CTH post has more details, but, from this, we see that it is entirely plausible for Vice President Pence to conclude that ‘Venezuela’ is behind the human caravan just before the mid-terms. If so, this constitutes election meddling by a foreign power.
On that note, the Gateway Pundit reported that tens of thousands of migrants are already pouring across the southern border into the United States — including Chinese citizens:
Thousands of illegal aliens are swarming the Texas border this month in advance of the migrant caravan marching through Mexico, prompting Chief Patrol Agent Manuel Padilla, Jr., the Customs and Border Patrol Sector Chief of the Rio Grande Valley, to beg for help dealing with the onslaught of illegal aliens, gang members and drug cartel smugglers. Just on Saturday over 700 illegal aliens were caught, with over 12,000 caught in the past three weeks. In addition, safe houses have been busted and drug smugglers intercepted by the overstretched CBP in the Rio Grande Valley.
16,000 “family units” were reported caught in the last month in the RGV sector by CBP. All these illegals take manpower and resources to detain, process, house, clothe, feed, and give medical treatment.
Padilla sent out several tweets this weekend with the message, “We need #personnel #technology #infrastructure“, in conjunction with video reports by on scene Fox News Channel reporter Griff Jenkins …
In his interview Sunday with Jenkins about the migrant caravan marching through Mexico, Padilla said that just the day before his sector reported 700 illegal aliens caught at the border, 8 human smuggling cases, one dead body recovered, a potential river drowning (body not surfaced yet), over 700 pounds of marijuana and 68 pounds of peyote seized–all on Saturday.
In a separate report, Jenkins noted a group of illegal aliens from China were caught.
This migration is being orchestrated. It is not a spontaneous ‘humanitarian’ movement. It is designed to provoke Trump into taking violent action before November 6.
Nationalism
Nationalism has been a dirty word for nearly 20 years, unless a Democrat uses it favourably. Then it’s okay:
At a recent campaign rally, President Trump described himself as a ‘nationalist’ in the MAGA sense. On October 23, CNN’s Jim Acosta, the son of immigrants, took him to task for it in the Oval Office. Trump replied that he is tired of seeing the US pay more than its fair share when it comes to NATO and trade. Trump’s answer is excellent and measured, especially to a journo who should have had his White House press privileges revoked last year:
Selected state races
Here is an update on a few state races.
North Dakota
On October 17, I wrote about the deleterious effect the Dems’ antics during the Kavanaugh hearings had on American voters. I mentioned North Dakota, where Heidi Heitkamp is running for re-election against Kevin Cramer. Up until the Kavanaugh hearings, she looked comfortable. Now, not so much. She also had to suspend campaigning after her team released an ad which identified victims of sexual assault:
Worse was to come. That day, James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas released an expose of her and her campaign team. Her campaign workers say that, if the Democrats win a majority, her political stance will move further to the left. Currently, she tries to present herself as a centrist, even refusing an appearance from Obama, so as not to offend Trump Democrats who might vote for her. However, it’s all for show:
Michigan
Another Democrat senator running for re-election is Michigan’s Debbie Stabenow. Her GOP opponent is a young veteran and West Point graduate, John James. Unfortunately, only lately has James’s campaign been getting much traction. That’s because he is a political outsider:
Here’s a short, honest advert from James. I hope he wins:
Florida
Andrew Gillum is the Democrat candidate running for governor in Florida.
He has influential money behind him, as the Tampa Bay Times reported on July 23, which was during primary season:
Billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer’s group NextGen America made waves last month when it announced it is backing Democrat Andrew Gillum in the Florida governor’s race.
This week, the group is putting some more money where its mouth is.
NextGen America is making a six-figure digital ad buy in support of Gillum, pushing two new ads on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and other online platforms, according to a release obtained by the Tampa Bay Times.
“We know that young voters are online, and a strong and smart digital campaign will be key to pushing Andrew Gillum across the finish line on August 28th,” Steyer, the president of NextGen America, said in the release.
Gillum won the Dem nomination, but questions arose soon afterwards:
Gillum admits the following is true and that he has a ’15-year relationship’ with another influential donor:
On September 3, this appeared:
In that interview, the show’s host Chuck Todd summarised Gillum’s platform:
You ran as an unabashed progressive Democrat. You’re for Medicare for all, you talk about getting rid of ICE …
No wonder those two billionaires are supporting him. That’s exactly what they want.
On October 14, online host Bill Mitchell did a little social media stumping for Gillum’s Republican opponent:
Meanwhile, Breitbart was digging into Gillum’s background. On October 17, they gave us more information about the Soros connection (bold emphasis in the original, the one in purple mine):
Florida gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum graduated from an Oakland, California-based training school for progressive revolutionaries that has spawned a list of activists who have gone on to become the who’s who of the far-left leadership world, with many taking senior positions at organizations financed by billionaire George Soros.
In scores of cases, graduates of the Rockwood Leadership Institute founded or directed notorious Soros-financed activist groups, such as Black Lives Matter, Media Matters for America, MoveOn.org and the Tides Foundation, one of the nation’s largest funders of progressive groups.
Soros’s own Open Society Foundations sent top staff to Rockwood for training. Notorious radicals Van Jones and Linda Sarsour are among the many famous names listed as alums.
Gillum graduated from Rockwood in 2012, yet he told independent journalist Joe Biggs (see above tweet), that he has a ’15-year relationship’ with Soros. Interesting.
Breitbart‘s article describes how Soros donates to Gillum’s campaign (emphases mine):
Soros, meanwhile, has directly donated to organizations seeking to get Gillum elected. Days before Gillum’s Aug. 28 primary, Soros joined with billionaire Tom Steyer to lead a group of donors making a $650,000 infusion into Gillum’s coffers.
Soros also contributed to The Collective, a little-known but increasingly influential political organization that says it is seeking to build a “black political power” movement. The Collective reportedly injected nearly $2 million into Gillum’s campaign, funding television and radio ads, get-out-the-vote drives, and playing a key role in helping Gillum defeat his Democratic opponents, some of whom were better-funded and had more statewide name recognition. The group announced plans to continue backing Gillum during the current general election campaign.
On October 20, Breitbart reported voting irregularities among Gillum’s siblings:
Leon County voting records show Marcus Gillum voted by absentee in the 2012 general election, absentee in the 2014 primary election, and early voted in the 2016 general election.
But the trouble is, months before he cast that 2016 ballot in Florida, Marcus Gillum, in an affidavit for an unrelated court case, swore under oath he was a resident of Chicago.
Also, according to records, Marcus Gillum is still currently registered to vote in Leon County at a home that his brother, gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum, sold over three years ago. The Leon County Property Appraiser indicates that Andrew Gillum sold 5325 St. Ives Lane on February 27th, 2015.
Furthermore, Florida Department of Motor Vehicle records show that Marcus Gillum has not had a valid Florida drivers license since 2011 …
This information was presented to Leon County Supervisor of Elections Mark Earley. “Based on this information I will initiate an investigation into potential voter ineligibility,” Earley said.
Earley also added that fraudulent voting is actually very difficult to prevent.
“It could be that (ineligible voters) consider Leon County to be their place of residence,” Earley said. “But the reality is until they notify us that it isn’t their residence, or we are notified by a different jurisdiction we have nothing to go on to remove them as an active voter.”
But voting irregularities involving Andrew Gillum’s siblings may not be confined to his brother Marcus. Voter records indicate that Monique Gillum, Andrew Gillum’s sister, voted in Florida despite questions about residency.
Monique Gillum voted absentee in the 2012 general election, absentee in 2014 primary election, early voted in the 2016 general election, and voted in the 2018 primary election.
However, like her brother Marcus, voting records also show that Monique Gillum is still currently registered to vote at the St. Ives address. However, the mailing address she provided to the Leon County Supervisor of Elections is a P.O Box in New York City.
Public records show Monique Gillum does have a current Florida drivers license with a Tallahassee address. However, the address is different from the two provided to the Leon County Supervisor of Elections.
Also, other records, including work she did as a registered lobbyist for the Southern Poverty Law Center, indicate that Monique resided in Montgomery, Alabama from 2014 to 2016 …
Hmm.
On October 23, news emerged that Gillum’s ticket to the musical Hamilton came from an undercover FBI agent:
The Miami Herald broke the story, which also involves Gillum’s aforementioned brother Marcus:
Undercover FBI agents paid for Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum’s hotel room and his ticket to the Broadway musical “Hamilton” during a 2016 trip to New York City, according to a bombshell trove of records that raises new questions two weeks before the Nov. 6 election for Florida governor.
Among the records released Tuesday: photos, a video and dozens of text messages between Gillum, who is the Democratic nominee for governor, former lobbyist Adam Corey and an undercover FBI agent. They appear to contradict Gillum’s explanation for the expenses, which have been made a major issue by his Republican rival, Ron DeSantis.
Gillum’s campaign has maintained — and continued to do so Tuesday after the records were released — that Gillum’s brother, Marcus, handed him the ticket the night of the show.
But text messages at the time of the trip show Gillum was told the tickets came from “Mike Miller,” an FBI agent looking into city corruption who was posing as a developer …
The campaign has not said how Marcus Gillum, who lives in Chicago, came by such a sought-after Broadway ticket, or whether Andrew Gillum asked his brother about it.
“These messages only confirm what we have said all along,”Andrew Gillum said on Facebook Live on Tuesday. “We did go to see ‘Hamilton.’ I did get my ticket to ‘Hamilton’ from my brother. At the time, we believed that they were reserved by friends of Adam’s, Mike Miller.
“And when I got there after work, got my ticket, we went in there and saw it, assumed my brother paid for it, and so far as I know, that was the deal” …
Once a close friend of Gillum’s, Corey is at the center of the FBI’s long-running probe into corruption in Tallahassee. No one has been charged, and Gillum has said that agents assured him he was neither a target nor a focus of the probe.
Gillum has repeatedly given vague answers to questions about who paid for the New York City trip. His avoidance of a direct answer became pronounced during a Sunday debate on CNN between DeSantis and Gillum.
“Did you pay for the ‘Hamilton’ tickets?” DeSantis asked.
But there’s more. The new information raises a question over how the trip to New York was financed:
They show that undercover FBI agents posing as businessmen were working for months to get an out-of-state meeting with Gillum, and that Gillum appeared willing to oblige them.
In June 2016, Corey texted Miller, the undercover agent, telling him that he would discuss options with Gillum.
“I just want to make it a good trip and Sweets and B will be booked on something else if we don’t lock something down,” Miller replied.
“Mike Sweets” and “Brian Butler” were the two other undercover FBI agents posing as businessmen …
… they met in New York, while Gillum was attending a conference on behalf of the People for the American Way Foundation, a liberal advocacy group that employed him.
Text messages show Miller paid for the airfare and hotel room for Gillum’s brother, Marcus.
“Send me the mayor and his brother’s information and I will have my girl book their flights,” Miller wrote.
Corey replied that Gillum had already booked his flight, but he would send his brother’s information “ASAP.”
“Just tell them to let me know what their flights cost and I will cover it,” Miller said.
The ethics complaint was filed against Gillum in June this year, and Gillum met with investigators in early September …
Tuesday’s document dump was the type of event Democrats feared when Gillum won the party’s nomination in August but hoped would never come. Though supporters generally dismissed the significance of the texts and emails between Gillum and Corey, one Democratic consultant acknowledged that anyone on the fence about Gillum could be deflated.
The timing of the release — exactly two weeks before Election Day and on the second day of early voting — comes during a key period for the Democratic Party, when voters typically begin showing up to the polls in large numbers and making up the advantage Republicans build during absentee voting …
On October 31, Project Veritas issued a damning video of Gillum’s campaign and a written summary. Gillum is left wing, not just left-of-centre. Omar Smith, the main campaign worker interviewed, said Gillum promises things he will not be able to accomplish. Be prepared for untoward remarks about Floridians:
James O’Keefe, the founder of Project Veritas, went to follow up. Omar Smith, the main speaker in the video, has asked that these videos not be circulated. This is bad news for Gillum:
From 1968 …
In closing, this 50-year-old poster about voting helped Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew win an election in a highly turbulent year in the US (Martin Luther King Jr’s assassination, Bobby Kennedy’s assassination and the riots by radicals during the Democratic National Convention in Chicago). It’s no surprise that Republicans won that year:
It has the same message that Republicans are trying to get out today, especially taking other people along so that they, too, can vote.
Fifty years on, here is the unofficial, but no less powerful, Republican slogan circulating online:
President Trump has tweeted #JobsNotMobs several times recently, including in the tweet below with a short video from his Houston rally, promising what Republicans will continue to do to shore up the US:
PROMISES MADE. PROMISES KEPT.
