Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Democrats Renew Push for Justice Stephen Breyer to Retire

Democrats Renew Push for Justice Stephen Breyer to Retire

“Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer should immediately announce his intent to retire from the bench”

Demand Justice, the progressive activist group headed by former Hillary Clinton campaign aide Brian Fallon, is renewing its calls for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer to retire.

They desperately want Joe Biden to be able to appoint a younger justice, presumably someone much further to the left.

Rachel Janfaza reported at CNN:

Liberal-funded ads call for Justice Stephen Breyer to retire

Calls for liberal Justice Stephen Breyer to retire when the annual Supreme Court session ends in a few weeks are intensifying, following Sen. Mitch McConnell’s warning this week that he may block a Democratic Supreme Court nominee should Republicans win the Senate in the November 2022 midterm elections.

A group of 18 scholars on Wednesday signed onto an ad to be published Friday in The New York Times, paid for by the liberal group Demand Justice, calling on the 82-year-old justice to announce plans to step down, giving President Joe Biden the opportunity to nominate a younger liberal justice to the Supreme Court.

“It is time for Justice Stephen Breyer to announce his intent to retire from the Supreme Court. Breyer is a remarkable jurist, but with future control of a closely divided Senate uncertain, it is best for the country that President Biden have the opportunity to nominate a successor without delay,” the statement says.

The left clearly does not understand that pleas from “scholars” no longer hold the sway they once did.

Demand Justice has partnered with other progressive groups including Black Lives Matter and the Women’s March to run an ad in Politico.

Jennifer Bendery reports at the Huffpost:

13 Progressive Groups Urge Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer To Retire

Thirteen progressive groups on Wednesday will publicly call on Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer to step down to let President Joe Biden confirm his successor while Democrats control the Senate.

“Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer should immediately announce his intent to retire from the bench,” reads a forthcoming ad endorsed by national advocacy organizations including Demand Justice, Women’s March, Black Lives Matter and the Sunrise Movement.

“With future control of a closely divided Senate uncertain, President Biden must have the opportunity to nominate a successor without delay and fulfill his pledge to put the first Black woman on the Supreme Court,” they said. “If Breyer were replaced by an additional ultra-conservative justice, an even further-right Supreme Court would leave our democracy and the rights of marginalized communities at even greater risk.”

“For the good of the country, now is the time to step aside.”

These groups are essentially telling Justice Breyer to step aside so that they can satisfy their policy goals.

With the 2022 midterms rapidly approaching, they almost seem panicked.

Hat tip to John Sexton of Hot Air.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

As the states find out how illegal the elections were, perhaps the Left is desperate to replace Breyer before the fall of the Biden/Harris regime.

    Olinser in reply to alaskabob. | June 17, 2021 at 5:34 pm

    Georgia is never going to find out if Raffenweasel has his way.

    mark311 in reply to alaskabob. | June 17, 2021 at 5:59 pm

    How exactly are they finding out how the elections are illegal?

      Paul in reply to mark311. | June 17, 2021 at 6:55 pm

      Well we know for a fact that numerous states violated their own state laws related to absentee ballots, extended voting, mail-in voting, ballot pick-up, chain of custody, etc.

      That is an undisputed fact.

      I could go on, and on, but why should I?

        mark311 in reply to Paul. | June 17, 2021 at 7:04 pm

        That’s pretty debatable actually, in emergency situations like a pandemic the courts give considerable scope for those kinds of changes, especially given the primary purpose was to ensure people could vote. Given there is fuck all evidence of fraud its pretty dubious to make a fraud claim at all. Ooh sorry that’s not quite true Lin Wood might have fraudulently voted but that’s just about it.

          Paul in reply to mark311. | June 17, 2021 at 7:12 pm

          If you’re so confident there was no fraud then I suppose you should be in favor of completing some audits. The progs sure seem like they’re getting all butthurt and contorting themselves trying to stymie the small number of actual audits that are underway.

          And I’m sorry, if you’re going to argue that there was “no fraud” as a result of what essentially amounts to open ballot harvesting, no verification of signatures on mail in ballots, allowing Dims to “cure” ballots but not extending that privilege to R’s, and on and on and on.

          Basically, if you argue there was no fraud then you’re either a complete fucking moron, or a gaslighting cunt. Which is it?

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 17, 2021 at 7:40 pm

          @Paul

          Audits to a degree for sure, in the case of Arizona its had recounts and audits and now it has a partisan conspiracy theorist running a sham audit. In the case of the later no I am not given the innumerable flaws it has.

          Why would anyone be in favour of multiple audits? Given the first audit found no issues you are wasting peoples time and money even if it is your own.

          That’s the problem Paul, there isn’t any evidence, the evidence presented in court has been crucified. The evidence presented in public has been a mixture of hyperbolic nonsense, crazy people and demonstrable lies. I’m still waiting for that Kraken. If you can provide a source that supports your position ill look at it but at the moment the evidence is scant at best (Commochiefs comments notwithstanding).

          Sorry Paul I’m neither, going to have to do a lot better than that. If you are reduced to throwing insults that pretty telling.

          Sanddog in reply to mark311. | June 17, 2021 at 7:43 pm

          A pandemic with a .17% death rate does not invalidate the rule of law. There are procedures for changing elections laws and they do not include unilateral actions by the SOS.

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 17, 2021 at 7:57 pm

          @sandog

          Fuck off are you saying 600K deaths in the US are meaningless!! States reacting to allow voting in a safe way is perfectly reasonable. Disenfranchising people after the fact because you don’t like the result is not a good reason.

          Milhouse in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 12:52 am

          in emergency situations like a pandemic the courts give considerable scope for those kinds of changes,

          Huh? Where the hell did courts get the authority to “give scope” for changes? Presidential electors must be appointed in the manner that the state legislature has directed. Not in the manner the secretary of state has directed, nor in the manner some court has “allowed”. And there’s no exception for emergencies, unless the state legislature itself created one. Appointing them in any way but how the legislature directed is inherently fraud. It’s fraud by definition.

          And all of these unauthorized changes made fraud easier to commit and harder to detect. It was a gilt-edged invitation, so how can you expect anyone to believe that no one took advantage of it? “A breach cries out to a thief”.

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 7:53 am

          @milhouse,

          Of course the courts do, they always have in an emergency situation. They aren’t asinine asses like some.

          The point remains if it were a genuine issue why didn’t it get litigated against at the time. No one gave a shit because no one cared it was reasonable. Now that the result went the wrong way its the worst thing in the world. Not a great argument to hang your hat on.

          Milhouse in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 8:36 am

          Mark, what do you mean, “of course they do”? They clearly don’t. If they did, where is it? The constitution is clear. “In such manner as the legislature thereof may direct”. Nothing else.

          And it didn’t get litigated earlier because of lack of standing. The courts before which it was brought said you can’t show that this will injure you, that’s mere speculation, so it’s none of your business. Come back if and when you’ve been injured. And of course afterwards it was “Well, what can we do about it now?”. The courts may have been right in both cases, but the upshot is that this was fraud. Every vote cast other than as the state legislature directed was not a valid vote. (Unless, of course, the legislature itself gave the secretary of state emergency powers to alter election rules. That would have to be litigated, including whether the non-delegation doctrine applies.)

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 10:43 am

          @milhouse

          You cite a good case yourself with Pennsylvania. the supreme courts reasoning wasn’t released but it can be reasonably inferred how the argument might run.

          In this case the court claimed the broad power to protect voters rights .
          ” justified its decree as necessary to protect voters’ rights under the Free and Equal Elections Clause of the State Constitution. Id., at 44a, 45a–47a.”

          Again you assert fraud, yet you’ve shown nothing about fraud only that there is a tricky legal issue (yes i do acknowledge its a pretty ambiguous decision). All you’ve shown if I grant that the court got it wrong is that the votes were late NOT that its fraud.

          Milhouse in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 6:16 pm

          Mark, it doesn’t matter what the PA supreme court’s reasoning was. I don’t give a flying **** about the “Free and Equal Elections Clause of the State Constitution”. The US constitution says the electors must be chosen as the state legislature directed. Full stop. Neither the courts nor the secretary of state have any authority to deviate from that, and the 10,000 votes that came in late and were nevertheless counted were thus inherently fraudulent. They were invalid votes, and yet they were counted. That is fraud.

          Milwaukee in reply to mark311. | June 19, 2021 at 12:16 am

          A word to the wise here.
          ” Given there is fuck all evidence of fraud its pretty dubious to make a fraud claim at all.”

          Are you now or have you ever been a lying-dog-faced pony soldier? Because the first to use such language gives others reason to believe the author might be, in fact could be, and leans toward being a lying-dog-faced pony soldier. Which is meant to be a pejorative.

        thetaqjr in reply to Paul. | June 18, 2021 at 5:25 am

        Can you, will you please direct me? Where are these “facts” to be found? Which states violated their own voting rules?

        I want to be as convinced as you are that such as you claim to be true is actually so.

          RRRR in reply to thetaqjr. | June 18, 2021 at 7:43 am

          Justice Breyer recently made a major speech in which he emphasized the fragility of the People’s respect for the Supreme Court and how it depends on avoiding the hold of overtly political trends. To a certain degree he was addressing calls to pack the Court to reverse recent decisions. But one might also speculate that he was sending a signal that he himself would retire when he felt the natural time had come, not necessarily at a time dictated to maximize the likelihood that a Democrat President could appoint another Justice either to move the Court to the left or to engage in virtue signaling.

          Milhouse in reply to thetaqjr. | June 18, 2021 at 8:41 am

          For instance Pennsylvania law as made by the legislature required postal votes to be received by the election, but the state supreme court said they should accept votes up to three days later. 10,000 votes were received after the election; every single one of those was by definition fraudulent, even if it was cast before the end of election day, which of course we have no way of knowing, which is the reason for the legislature’s rule in the first place. Now 10,000 votes is not enough by itself to change PA’s result, but it goes a good way there. And that’s just one example.

          mark311 in reply to thetaqjr. | June 18, 2021 at 10:28 am

          @Milhouse

          God example, it shows that the courts did allow election law changes.

          By definition they were late not fraudulent. Fraudulent would imply malicious intent which you cant possibly show. The courts decided that it was legal so by definition these were legal ballots, and therefore could not be fraudulent on the basis of being received after the election day date.

          WillS68 in reply to thetaqjr. | June 18, 2021 at 10:47 am

          MI judge ruled in March ’21 that SOS Benson had violated the administrative procedures and overstepped her authority in changing absentee ballot verification guidelines.

          https://wbckfm.com/judge-determines-secretary-of-state-benson-violated-procedures-act-on-absentee-voters-signatures/

          Milhouse in reply to thetaqjr. | June 18, 2021 at 6:19 pm

          No, Mark, by definition they were fraudulent. They were not legal ballots, because the court had no authority to make them legal. Therefore counting them was fraud. The fraud was committed by the state supreme court and the secretary of state, as well as by every official who counted them knowing that they were invalid.

      CommoChief in reply to mark311. | June 17, 2021 at 7:06 pm

      Mark,

      At root the argument is this:

      The Constitution grants the State Legislature the authority and responsibility to determine how elections are conducted in their State. The State Legislature creates the election laws, rules, procedures.

      In several States either the Sec of State or local elections officials or both issued guidance which was contrary to that approved by the Legislature.

      Since those officials lack the specific authority to do so then all those actions were unlawful and any ballots accepted or counted in a manner inconsistent with that approved by the State legislature are unlawful.

      That’s the broad argument in simple terms.

      Specifically though Felton County GA is now showing that at least one group of roughly 600 ballots which broke roughly 400 Biden/200 Trump were run through five consecutive times. This was caught via the batch number and the five instances of the exact same count. Do others exist?

      Also it appears that many thousands of absentee ballots which were counted do not have the chain of custody paperwork which identifies the drop box they originated in from, who collected them, who delivered them to the counting, who received them ECT.

      No paperwork or timestamps or signatures or even log entries to demonstrate that these ballots are authentic. The chain of custody paperwork was the check against fraudulent ballots. So these particular ballots, IMO, no longer have a presumption that they are valid.

      If the envelopes which contained a way to link back to the voter are missing as well then there is no way to demonstrate their validity. I mention this because in many cases the envelopes were intentionally discarded which is also contrary to the procedures specified by the legislature.

        mark311 in reply to CommoChief. | June 17, 2021 at 7:31 pm

        Its a bullshit argument (no offence) if it were a genuine issue they would have taken legal action at the time. They didn’t because its not an issue in terms of what actually happened at the election. Its not functionally relevant. The only reason its raised is because the result is contested not how the election was performed.

        Fulton county is an interesting issue.

        Your first claim i cant find any news reports on – do you have a source?

        Second claim, the independent monitor has commented on the process and has the view the process was managed badly. Its not actually been shown to be fraud, given the number of recounts and the poor management they have probably fucked up. Which is a fair assessment it seems. Now you have to show that those votes were fraudulent, who those votes went too and that it was wide spread enough to have an impact.

        The broader issue is that one county which consistently votes democrat being chosen as an example of fraud doesn’t logically support fraud. nor does it show fraud to the extent required to have a meaningful impact. That’s assuming it even was fraud and not mismanagement and assuming the fraud didn’t run the other way. Since its a democrat county its more logical to assume it would go the other way if it were to happen.

        Paperwork or timestamps/envelopes – I’ve not read about that again do you have a source?

        I’m not sure focussing on one county of one state is going to get you the answer you want. Its got to be a lot more to get to the claim which is that the election as a whole was fraudulent Sure its a start ill give you that, even if its potentially only one county (assuming a lot)

          CommoChief in reply to mark311. | June 17, 2021 at 9:04 pm

          Mark I don’t take offense easily. So no worries.

          What I will say is the theme of your comments on the election and fraud both here and previously range from outright denial that fraud exists to agreement that some level of fraud always exists but is de minimus.

          You also ask for specific evidence of fraud while claiming that previous recounts were actually audits of not only the official tally but the entirety of the procedures and whether any ballots were accepted and counted which were not in accordance with those procedures. Which you then use as dispositive proof that no fraud occurred.

          Fulton County – GA Sec of Stare has opened another investigation based upon the findings from the monitor who discovered discrepancies in batch over counts and ballot tracking docs missing at the time he conducted his review. Various news outlets. Probably Sec of State website. Obviously these are preliminary not complexes findings.

          The suspicious thing to me, and I am not a conspiracy whacko, is that every single odd circumstance cuts for the d and against r.

          For instance, Fulton County has a pending lawsuit. Plaintiffs hired off duty LEO to over watch the the building where ballots are stored. County filed a motion saying their mere presence was intimidation and were unnecessary because the County had deputies assigned to secure the building. Plaintiffs pulled their guys across the street. Then, on Saturday the door was left unsecured, the alarm went off but…..the deputies had departed the premises.

          The plaintiffs off duty LEOs were doing a drive around the building and noticed all this and called it in. Turns out there was a significant gap between the departure of the deputies and the plaintiffs finding the door unsecured. Time was noted from deputies reports to dispatch that they were departing.

          Was anything tampered with? I don’t know. Was there an opportunity for tampering? Sure.

          Was everything about the Fulton County elections process start to finish 100% error free? Nope, Fulton County already admits that. Was there significant error? We don’t know. Was there significant fraud? We don’t know.

          What we do know is that there is fraud and error in every election. The question is how much. The forensic audits, which examine every facet of the process from registration to tally of votes, will tell us. Fulton County is fighting against that. Which seems to indicate they are not nearly as confident of their processes as they and others claim.

          IMO, simply allowing the full forensic audits to occur with County and State observers present would end all the bitter back and forth divisions.

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 17, 2021 at 10:40 pm

          @commochief

          1) yes fair

          2) officially both have occurred in numerous states/counties etc. but yes in principle i do take that view that these audits/recounts and the lack of evidence to the contrary shows that the election was fair and fraud free (practically)

          3) Chain of custody paperwork, yes read about that, not sure about the other aspects

          4) Antrim county went in republicans favour of the top of my head. The more substantive point is that if the presidential elections are contested why aren’t the house and senate as they were on the same ballots. The claim has always been aimed at the Presidential election but it actually only makes sense to level that claim with the evidence available at the whole election in other words to be truly honest Republicans who believe that there was fraud should be asking for the whole of all the elections to be rerun.

          I don’t know the specifics on Fulton, didn’t see a source that went into that detail but the broader point is this. If the audit is anything like Arizona then no, if its a genuine forensic audit and Trump pays for it then I guess I could live with that.

          Milhouse in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 1:06 am

          The broader issue is that one county which consistently votes democrat being chosen as an example of fraud doesn’t logically support fraud. nor does it show fraud to the extent required to have a meaningful impact.

          Fulton county was audited because that’s where the fraud has always been, and where you would expect to find it. Auditing Cobb instead was an obvious trick, because that’s not where you would expect to find fraud.

          That’s assuming it even was fraud and not mismanagement and assuming the fraud didn’t run the other way. Since its a democrat county its more logical to assume it would go the other way if it were to happen.

          Huh? That makes no sense at all. Obviously in a Dem-controlled county the fraud is going to favor the Dems. Why would Dems cheat for the Reps? Out of a sense of sportsmanship?!

          Milhouse in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 1:10 am

          The more substantive point is that if the presidential elections are contested why aren’t the house and senate as they were on the same ballots.

          Because many of the shonky ballots only had a vote for the presidential race. And in the case of the house because fraud in a solidly Dem-controlled seat isn’t going to change the result in that seat. But it can change the result for the whole state.

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 8:07 am

          @milhouse

          “Fulton county was audited because that’s where the fraud has always been, and where you would expect to find it”

          In a consistently democrat county. No that doesn’t make sense.

          You don’t expect anything you follow the facts and the data, sure Commochief highlights some inconsistencies and its important to get to the bottom of it but it still doesn’t explain why a county that was likely to be democrat would cheat what the point.

          “Huh? That makes no sense at all. Obviously in a Dem-controlled county the fraud is going to favor the Dems”

          Your making an assumption on how the fraud operates, I’m talking specifically about motive not means. The Dems didn’t have a motive to commit fraud in a county they thought reasonably that they were going to win. The motive would be for Republicans to cheat in this county.

          “Because many of the shonky ballots only had a vote for the presidential race. And in the case of the house because fraud in a solidly Dem-controlled seat isn’t going to change the result in that seat. But it can change the result for the whole state.”

          have you looked at that in detail? I’m not convinced that you could know how many ballots were shonky with regard to the other races. No one has paid attention to that at all. You haven’t really addressed the central aspect of the claim which is this. Those, like you who believe there was large scale fraud without evidence cannot distinguish between the house, senate and presidential elections. Not meaningfully. Therefore you have to call into question all of it. Don’t forget that the claim is for widespread fraud nationwide not just in one county.

          CommoChief in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 8:45 am

          Mark,

          Most of us approach this issue with vastly different philosophy. Lets see If I can articulate this without coffee.

          if I am an election official and my role is to go to five drop boxes to collect the ballots daily. As part of that I must by law:
          1. Verify the ‘lock’ is functional
          2. Count the ballots and annotate the count from each drop box
          3. Place the ballots between dividers in my collection box to keep them separate
          4. Deliver to counting location
          5. Recount ballots with the person receiving the ballots to validate the count
          6. Both of us sign and counter sign attesting to the counts and delivery time

          Those measures are some of the basic ways our system works to prevent ‘stuffing the ballot box’ at the counting location.

          Now what happens when I lose the paperwork that is used to demonstrate that these particular ballots were not created by political operatives at the counting location?

          Most of us would say those ballots lose their presumption of validity and without further evidence shouldn’t be counted.

          You seem to suggest that you would prefer those ballots to be counted, even though they lack the required documentation.

          Our side wants every eligible person who chooses to register and chooses to vote to do so as hassle free as possible. There will be some minimal hurdles for ballot security and integrity.

          No one is arguing for the creation of a system that prevents any particular person who is eligible to vote from doing so.

          Ballot security and integrity measures are not suppression of eligible voters. They simply work to ensure no ineligible votes are cast which cancel out the vote of an eligible voter.

          Milhouse in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 8:57 am

          In a consistently democrat county. No that doesn’t make sense.

          Huh? You’re not making sense. Of course the biggest fraud will be in a county they control. Where else would it be?

          The Dems didn’t have a motive to commit fraud in a county they thought reasonably that they were going to win.

          Again, that makes no sense at all. Why would their incentive be less in a county where they’re strong than in one where they’re weak? On the contrary, that’s where they have to make up the numbers, and it’s where they have the opportunity because they control the election there, so that’s where you expect the fraud to be concentrated. And that’s why fraud isn’t as big an issue in the House, because the major fraud takes place in districts where the party committing it was already going to win. (It’s still an issue, because there is some fraud elsewhere, but not nearly as big.)

          The motive would be for Republicans to cheat in this county.

          Again, why? It’s not as if they can win the local races there, and they can’t get away with much because the Dems control it. So why would they bother?

          Don’t forget that the claim is for widespread fraud nationwide not just in one county.

          Large scale fraud, nationwide, has historically been concentrated in a few Dem-controlled counties. Philadelphia. Wayne. King. Dane. Miami-Dade. Etc. These are all completely controlled by the Democrats, and therefore they can do whatever they like. In Philadelphia, for instance, historically they have simply not allowed Republican poll watchers to be there. Any Republican who tried to watch the polls in certain Philadelphia precincts was simply told to leave, and made to understand that if they didn’t leave on their own they would not be safe. That has gone on for decades. It’s notorious.

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 11:19 am

          @milhouse

          I need more coffee, i see your point now.

          With regard to specific fraud prone locations I’m going to have to take your word for that, struggling to find any sources on the subject. Even if I grant certain places being historically prone there have been a number of reforms since then and still isn’t specific evidence of what you claim.

          @Commochief

          I definitely need coffee ha

          “Most of us would say those ballots lose their presumption of validity and without further evidence shouldn’t be counted.

          You seem to suggest that you would prefer those ballots to be counted, even though they lack the required documentation.”

          Not quite, im open to the idea that following a robust fair investigation would find issues with the ballots/chain of custody whatever and doing something about that. Invalidating ballots might be fair. What i tried to articulate is that youve taken the first step in a lot of steps to making your case. That is to say you may have shown that circa 15,000? votes might have been lost but given the nature of the failure here how do we know who’s vote it was? There isn’t a basis for fraud yet not really, nor is the next step taken in terms of a meaningful change in the number of votes.

          “Our side wants every eligible person who chooses to register and chooses to vote to do so as hassle free as possible. There will be some minimal hurdles for ballot security and integrity.”

          Still got to prove that fraud is an issue, still very limited evidence for that. In the case of Fulton county the reforms proposed wouldn’t actually help. Its not a meaningful and relevant set of reforms.

          “Ballot security and integrity measures are not suppression of eligible voters. They simply work to ensure no ineligible votes are cast which cancel out the vote of an eligible voter.”

          Except we know that from historical evidence that the proposed laws do precisely that disenfranchising voters.

          The reform laws should be relevant and focussed on issues that actually address real world election fraud issues. ID laws don’t do that, that’s been shown by the tiny fraction of in person voter fraud cases and the know negative effect that those kinds of laws have.

          CommoChief in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 12:40 pm

          Mark,

          Ballot security measures, such as voter ID, do not disenfranchise any individual. They are neutral. They apply to everyone equally.

          If that were not the case they would be invalidated by our CT. In fact the CT have consistently held these measures to be constitutional.

          Simply repeating the talking points from the SPLC and other partisan interest groups doesn’t change this fact. These groups oppose all voter ID efforts no matter how minimal. They are not making a good faith argument, they are ascribing motives that don’t exist.

          Let me clarify on the ‘missing paperwork’ ballots. They should have been rejected from the start. No ballot that does not comply with every jot of every procedure enacted by the Legislature should be counted. IMO.

          It shouldn’t be a question of finding ballots or batches which didn’t comply after they are accepted and counted. They should have been tossed to a separate pile and never counted in the first place.

          In person voter fraud. It is rare because you have checks at the polling location. Absentee ballots, not so much.

          GA reforms address this by getting rid of signature verification which is impractical. They require ID verification for registration and tie the DL number or ID card number to that voter registration.

          Then an absentee voter just submits their ballot with whichever number they used to register. No more arguments about matching signatures. They simply check the to see if the numbers match.

          That prevents someone from intercepting the ballot and sending it in for counting; they won’t have the correct number. The ballot won’t be counted.

          Additionally, absentee voters can deliver their absentee ballot to the polling location in person to a drop box on election day or one of the 17 days of early voting. They could also deliver in person to the County clerk in person.

          Please don’t ascribe bad intent to those of us who want security.

          As to the 2020 election. None of these audits will overturn the fact that Biden is and will remain in office. No clear path for that.

          What the audits will do is find errors, ommissions and in some cases intentional instances of fraud. How much?

          The only way to find out is the audits. Then incorporate the findings into improving the mitigation measures to prevent and deter fraud, mismanaged processes and errors.

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 4:25 pm

          @commochief

          I think I need to be really clear here. There is extensive research on the subject of voter ID laws and there impact on voting. There are lots and lots of examples of that kind of law. These show that these kinds of laws have a substantive effect.

          https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/research-voter-id

          A large list of studies is within the link

          On the other hand Fulton county not withstanding there is very little credible evidence of fraud in the 2020 election.

          So the question is why impose laws with a known effect for no reason.

          I don’t know how to spell that out any clearer.

          With regard to Fulton county as I’ve agreed before it does sound like there is an issue so yeah there could well be a rectification needed there.

          With regard to voter ID and absentee ballots. I’d have to think about that one. My gut feeling is it might suffer the same issues as above but I’ve not delved into that specifically so that’s a maybe.

          Fraud in general for elections is low, in person fraud in particular is very low.

          I think for clarity I should say that I think you are arguing in good faith. Perhaps in part I rush and muddle my responses so that doesn’t help. I don’t ascribe any Ill intent on your part. I try and treat each person on their merits. Thank you for arguing in good faith it’s a hell of a lot more than I can say for some on LI.

          Milhouse in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 7:08 pm

          I think I need to be really clear here. There is extensive research on the subject of voter ID laws and there impact on voting. There are lots and lots of examples of that kind of law. These show that these kinds of laws have a substantive effect.

          https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/research-voter-id

          A large list of studies is within the link

          I don’t trust any of these so-called “studies”, for the simple reason that their assertion doesn’t make any sense. It’s as if you were to claim that a large list of studies show that people walk on their heads. They don’t.

          Who hasn’t got and can’t get ID, and how do they get along without it? You can’t get a job, open a bank account, cash a cheque, receive welfare, pick up a bus or train ticket (let alone board a plane), or even enter government buildings without it. You certainly can’t buy a gun without it, which is an actual constitutional right, whereas voting is not. So (a) how do these alleged ID-less people manage all of these things (and don’t try telling me they don’t collect welfare); (b) if it’s OK to deny people all of those things without ID, why is it not OK to deny them the vote? Where does this idea come from that everyone must vote, that the more people who vote the better? What is likely to be the quality of a vote from someone so on the margins that they not only haven’t got ID, but can’t get it if they wanted to? Or if it’s merely that they couldn’t be arsed to get it, then why should they vote?

          CommoChief in reply to mark311. | June 18, 2021 at 7:41 pm

          Mark,

          I’m going to write this post and close up for this topic/tread.

          I appreciate you granting my good good faith, for what it’s worth I don’t think you are a nut job or stupid or act in bad faith. I think you make intelligent and coherent arguments but based upon flawed assumptions and a misguided viewpoint.

          For instance I pointed out that the advocacy groups are uniformly partisan and push their agenda. You respond by quoting the Brennan center? Dude, no.

          As to the impacts of voter ID upon people; it’s a neutral standard. Our CT have rightly held that anyone claiming harm can’t rely solely upon ‘disproportionate’ impact theories in the face of a neutral standard.

          Why that matters: ID is a fact of modern life. Open a bank account, cash a check, drive a car, rent a car, lease a car, buy a car, rent an apartment, purchase a home, apply for a loan of any kind, register kids for school, pick up your kid from school during class hours, all those activities of daily life require either a DL or Govt ID.

          Who doesn’t have an ID? Who can’t get one? They offer them for free. In GA you need to prove your Social security number and your physical address. If no DL you can use SS card, SS benefit rejection letter, Birth certificate, certificate of naturalization.

          For address you can use a rental agreement, utility bill or bank statement.

          If you are a dependent you can use the tax return of the person claiming you and their DL. Everyone can get a birth certificate with very minor exceptions. Everyone eligible to vote can get a SS card.

          Keep in mind on the issue of absentee ballots that most on my side of this would prefer no absentee ballots except those on Military orders and expats. We have gone well past halfway on this point to try and find agreement.

          Fraud. Convictions are rare. The potential for fraud due to lax requirements and failure to adhere to those requirements is widespread. Errors are prevalent.

          Audits of the entire process from initial registration to vote to the mechanics of voting, strict adherence to the process approved by the Legislature ECT has never been attempted until now.

          These audits are going to show a great deal of the unreported ugly side of local partisan hacks running unchecked. Count on that.
          Since no one has ever held their practices to any comparable level of scrutiny we should expect to see things they would prefer to remain hidden.

          The folks running local elections are not all detail oriented, diligent public servants. Far from it in many locations. That’s why they are fighting the audits.

          The people/plaintiffs demanding the audits have to pay for it, not the local government. Every hour a public employee spends assisting or observing the audit process is compensated by the plaintiffs.

          Why if the process was supposedly conducted within the applicable statutes and regulations or procedures as mandated would these governments resist the audit?

          Shouldn’t they be shouting ‘come do your thing you conspiracy whacko, come prove yourself wrong’.

          As you are aware, that’s not the stance being taken. Since they get reimbursed for costs, usually at 1.5 times salary money isn’t the reason.

          The reason is they have made errors. Those errors allowed fraud. How much? They don’t seem to want us to know.

          As I said previously, none of this will reverse the fact that Biden is President. It will reveal vulnerabilities, show who and how those vulnerabilities were exploited. This in turn allows specific remedial measures to be established that eliminate or mitigate the vulnerabilities.

          Milwaukee in reply to mark311. | June 19, 2021 at 12:13 am

          “Large scale fraud, nationwide, has historically been concentrated in a few Dem-controlled counties. “

          True that.
          True also, that on the state level, the fraud is done in Democrat Party controlled areas. In Wisconsin, the cities of Milwaukee, Madison, and other Democrat strong holds would always be the last to report their results. They need to wait to see how many fraudulent ballots to put out.

          My recollection is that in the City and County of Milwaukee the percentage of eligible voters voting has been going up over the years while the population has been declining.

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 22, 2021 at 12:23 pm

          @Milhouse and Commochief

          You both ask a similar question ie who doesn’t have ID . Typically people like the elderly, college students, poor people , people in urban centres with no need to drive.

          Voter ID laws by there very nature affect a demographic that typically supports Democrat candidates so by its very nature is not neutral. Research tends o support this position. Thee just isn’t a good reason to implement voter id laws.

    Considering the.election was a fraud, any judge appointed by ‘Biden’ is fraudulently appointed.

RBG taught them that lesson the last go ’round. They can feel 2022 mid-terms breathing down their collective necks.

“For the good of the country, now is the time to step aside.”

That should be the cry of every citizen who loves this county. It is time for Biden and Kamala to step aside before our country is destroyed.

2smartforlibs | June 17, 2021 at 6:04 pm

Where was all this concern when Ruth Buzzi was set to die?

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to 2smartforlibs. | June 17, 2021 at 6:18 pm

    Yes. They were hoping she’d hang on until Biden was installed.

    Lucifer Morningstar in reply to 2smartforlibs. | June 17, 2021 at 6:53 pm

    If I remember correctly Ruth promised to stay alive for as long as Trump was president and not give him an opportunity to nominate a replacement justice. We all know, of course, how that promise worked out in the end.

Well as Putin said after meeting Biden, “I’m disappointed I did not get to meet with the person running their country.”

Interesting timing. Right after McConnell signaled that he won’t try to stop them until 2024. There are a lot of potential Trump endorsements on the line going into 2022 when a lot of Republicans will also be primaried out of existence. Especially the 17 GOP senators who joined McConnell, Grassley and Grahamnesty in approving Merrick Garland for AG.

How many Dems are already worried about Trump? Lots. Will they hang themselves for SCOTUS judge? Maybe.

Sounds like “ageism” to me! Horrors!!

Morning Sunshine | June 17, 2021 at 8:32 pm

He needs to be very careful in his security. I do not believe Justice Scalia died in his sleep with a pillow over his head….. I guess it is possible… but likely?

    Milhouse in reply to Morning Sunshine. | June 18, 2021 at 1:18 am

    Of course it’s likely. There’s no reason to suspect otherwise. The pillow was over his head, not over his face, so how is it relevant? That’s a completely normal position; lots of people sleep like that. If he were suffocated with a pillow then obviously the killer must then have removed the pillow and put it back where he found it, over Scalia’s head. But why would anyone even suspect that?

      Doesn’t everyone sleep with a pillow on their face?

      I’ve actually tried it. Fortunately, a paramedic unit was nearby that night, and after a half hour of oxygen-assisted CPR, they managed to save my life.

        “Doesn’t everyone sleep with a pillow on their face?”

        Breyer has been thinking about trying it to see if It would help him get a deeper sleep.

        Again, there was no pillow on his face. Go back and look, there was no report of such a thing. None at all. You and your fellow paranoid freaks simply made it up. All the reports said the pillow was over his head, which is completely normal and where you would expect to see it.

          henrybowman in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2021 at 2:28 pm

          My face is actually part of my head. It’s a family trait. Where’s yours?

          mark311 in reply to Milhouse. | June 19, 2021 at 3:09 pm

          @milhouse

          The pillow wasn’t even on his head it was found between his head and the headboard. Usual conspiracy theory nonsense.

      Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | June 18, 2021 at 7:11 pm

      A pillow over ones head is obviously very different from a pillow on ones face. I don’t think anyone’s done a survey of how many people sleep with a pillow over their head, but it’s a significant percentage. And it’s bound to be even bigger if they’re in a hotel room, where the bed comes with an abundance of pillows.

Scalia did not die in his sleep

Breyer isn’t gong to retire this year. He may retire next year, or he may not. If he retires next year, Biden still has plenty of time to nominate and confirm a replacement – assuming that Biden is still alive.

If Biden dies before Breyer retires, the Senate will be 50:50 with no tiebreaker until a VP nominee can get at least 1 Republican vote in the Senate.

    Biden won’t last another few months. The stress of office is getting to him, witness his bizarre snapping at reporters.

    Kamala Harris won’t last either. The stress of cackling hysterically to defelct every non-softball question will eventually suffociate her.

      The_Mew_Cat in reply to TheFineReport.com. | June 18, 2021 at 11:45 am

      Harris will last. She is extremely impatient, though. She isn’t in charge of anything, but she wants to be President soo bad, she can’t stand it. If Joe did a photo op with her at an Amtrak station, I could see her bumping him in front of the train.

    henrybowman in reply to The_Mew_Cat. | June 18, 2021 at 2:29 pm

    You say that as if Mitt Romney and Susan Collins were also dead.

Fat_Freddys_Cat | June 18, 2021 at 9:40 am

Gee, why are “progressives” worried about this? They’re not actually admitting that a Republican might win in 2024 are they? Because that would be admitting that the current incumbents are really lame and might not win 81 million votes next time around.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend