RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/01/illinois_citizens_group_files_formal_complaint_with_state_board_of_elections.html

A couple from Illinois, Jodie and Ken Zitko, have formed a group of concerned citizens who have been analyzing the Illinois state voter database.  They have found serious irregularities, detailed in a formal complaint filed with Bernadette Matthews, director of the Illinois State Board of Elections on December 21.

Here are some of their findings after almost 2,000 hours of analysis.  

There were over 300,000 votes from the 2020 election missing or deleted from the Illinois voter data prior to the conclusion of the federal retention period of 22 months.  
Over a four-year period, Illinois population decreased by 150,000, while the voter roll increased by 650,000.  
Over 2.5 million people had votes cast prior to their registration dates.  
More than 230,000 registrations show seemingly Illegal or illogical registration dates.  
There are more than 4 million apparent registration violations out of 8.9 million registrations.

This couple is not your ordinary pair of election sleuths.  Ken has been an MSSQL Data Analyst, DBA, and architect for 28 years, working with Fortune 50 companies, and Jodie has been working with “People Data” and analytics since the mid-’90s in large enterprise environments.  She’s a “subject matter expert” in integrated workplace management systems.  

They were able to view a copy of the Illinois State Board of Elections voter roll while working for a candidate for the U.S. Senate.  The couple also did an informal study of Illinois voting history, which began when they decided to check their own records.  They were shocked to find that their history showed votes cast in three midterm elections when they had never voted in a midterm election.  Ken did vote in the 2008 presidential election, but there was no indication of a vote.  

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/ramaswamy-drops-out-of-presidential-race-endorses-trump/?utm_source=onesignal&utm_medium=push&utm_campaign=article

Entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy announced Monday night that he is suspending his presidential campaign after a lackluster showing in the Iowa caucuses.

In a speech announcing his exit from the race, Ramaswamy endorsed former president Donald Trump, who was projected to have won the caucuses by a strong margin, according to the Associated Press and other media outlets.

With an estimated 95 percent of votes counted, Trump was winning with 51 percent of the vote, followed by Florida governor Ron DeSantis in second at 21.2 percent and former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley in third with 19.1 percent. Ramaswamy was in a distant fourth at 7.7 percent.

“There’s no path for me to be the next president, absent things that we don’t want to see happen in this country,” Ramaswamy told his supporters. “And I think that I am very worried for our country. I think we are skating on thin ice as a nation.” 

https://amgreatness.com/2024/01/15/lawfare-against-trump-is-running-out-of-gas/

We should dispense with the tired narrative that four conscientious state and federal prosecutors—independently and without contact with the Biden White House or the radical Democrats in Congress—all came to the same disinterested conclusions that Donald Trump should be indicted for various crimes and put on trial during the campaign season of 2024.

The prosecutors began accelerating their indictments only once Trump started to lead incumbent Joe Biden by sizable margins in head-to-head polls. Moreover, had Trump not run for the presidency, or had he been of the same party as most of the four prosecutors, he would have never been indicted by any of them.

Yet now they are in a doom loop of discovering that the more they seek to rush to judgment before the election and gag Trump from speaking publicly about these star-chamber proceedings, the more he rises in the polls.

In truth, each succeeding cycle of corrupt leftwing lawfare that ends in failure—the Russian collusion hoax, the weaponized first impeachment, trying ex-president Trump in the Senate as a private citizen, the laptop disinformation set-up, the Alfa bank ping caper, the pathetic attempt to erase Trump from state ballots, and the unfolding Fani Willis moral debacle—does not return things to zero.

Rather, they serve as force multipliers for each other. Each overreach geometrically increases the dangers to democracy, ever more turns the public off, and ironically cascades sympathy and poll numbers for the very target of their paranoias.

Some of the prosecutors have colluded with White House lawyers and congressional liaisons. Some had run for office, offering campaign promises to get Trump convicted for something or other.

Now, after years of delays and deadends, all four are rushing to synchronize their trial dates to ensure that the front-running Trump is on the docket daily and not out on the 2024 campaign trail.

https://amgreatness.com/2024/01/14/trumps-resurgence-draws-parallels-to-reagans-1980-upset-victory/

It’s hard to recapture the contempt with which Reagan was excoriated by the best and the brightest, but it was just as visceral and widespread as the animus against Trump in 2016 and today.

The 2024 presidential election is still more than 10 months away, but already there is a lot of déjà vu all over again about the festivity.

The smart money—which does not, I hasten to add, mean that it will turn out to be the most accurate money—has been telling us for months that wily Democrats have engineered Trump’s nomination because, clever chaps that they are, they know he cannot possibly win the election.

The main reason adduced is that Trump is not sufficiently popular to win.  How do said pundits know this?  Some point to the polls, though the polls have not been cooperating on that front of late. Trump is ahead in all or nearly all the swing states, and more and more polls put him ahead of Biden in the general election.  Some adduce Trump’s “character,” his behavior after the 2020 election, and the cornucopia of indictments he faces in four separate jurisdictions.  Back in December, Byron York summed up the state of play with this headline: “As Trump lead widens, prosecutors step up pursuit.”

What do you suppose most people think of that? What, I mean, do they think of a situation in which one political candidate is targeted by the opposing political party—which party, it may almost go without saying, totally controls the coercive instruments of state power?  I believe most people don’t like it.  They don’t like it because it reeks of basic unfairness and totalitarian overreach.

But that’s where we are now.  Who knows, perhaps Jack Smith, Fani Willis, or Letitia James will finally nab Trump on one charge or another.  After all, the net designed to capture the former president has been spread far and wide. But I would not be so sure.  Everywhere one looks, the cases against him have come more and more to resemble the House of Usher. Fani Willis put her boyfriend on the payroll and ordered him to get Trump. Unfortunately, that secret intimacy is making headlines everywhere. The news threatens to collapse the case against Trump in Georgia.

Prosecutors in New York and Washington can rely on biased judges and juries. But I suspect that even if Trump is convicted of something in one or both places, he will win on appeal. The cases against him long ago took on the slightly comical aspect of a vendetta.

https://spectator.org/nikki-haley-stands-up-for-the-swamp/

One of the hazards of running for president is making a remark in front of cameras that quickly points out why you’re not the right candidate.

This brings to mind this recent, decidedly telling remark from former Gov./UN Ambassador Nikki Haley in her race for the Republican presidential nomination.

Haley said of former President Donald Trump:

The reality is, rightly or wrongly, chaos follows him, and we all know that’s true … and we can’t have a country in disarray and a world on fire and go through four more years of chaos. We won’t survive it.

Translation?

Haley, in a blink, made herself the symbol of what millions of Americans have come to see as exactly what’s wrong with the country. Her comment is a clear representation that she is first and last a supporter of what Americans have come to call “The Swamp.”

What is “The Swamp”? It is Status Quo Washington and the Status Quo Establishment in the country at large.

The Swamp could be corrupt Old Order bureaucrats in the FBI, the CIA, and the Department of Justice trying to thwart, first, a presidential election that elects Trump. Then, when that failed in 2016, The Swamp spent four years seeking to disrupt the president and his entire administration.

The legal arm of the Swamp, whether in Washington, New York, or Georgia, has spent endless amounts of time to impeach and/or indict President Trump, deliberately weaponizing and corrupting the legal system to do so.

The Swamp includes a corrupted media that makes it its mission to not report the news that doesn’t fit The Swamp’s objectives. The suppression by Big Tech and Big Government of the 2020 New York Post exclusive about Hunter Biden’s laptop is exactly The Swamp at work. 

On and on — and on and on — goes The Swamp in its obsession with controlling America and all of its different entities. The Swamp wants complete cultural and political control of America. Its players see themselves as having a God-given right to run America, whether they are in the federal bureaucracy, the media, academia, and more.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2024/01/11/winner_of_the_desantis-haley_debate_150313.html

After two hours of going at each other with hammer and tong, there was a clear winner at the debate between Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley at Drake University last night sponsored by CNN. But he wasn’t in the building.

Instead, Donald Trump was across town, speaking at a town hall hosted by a different cable network, floating the tantalizing claim that he has already chosen his running mate.

If it seems brazen to make an announcement before the first primary season votes have been cast, there’s a reason: With less than a week before the Iowa caucuses, Trump maintains a sizeable – possibly insurmountable – lead over his nearest rivals. A big victory for Trump next Monday night would put him in a position to run the table of early states and cruise toward the nomination – notwithstanding his mounting legal difficulties.

And, as has been the case so often through the primary process, the bickering and infighting among his main challengers that took place on the debate stage in Des Moines last night only served to help the former president’s campaign.

They didn’t waste any time on niceties, either.

In his opening statement, DeSantis rehashed Haley’s recent remarks in New Hampshire where she seemed to acknowledge Trump’s looming victory in Iowa by telling New Hampshire voters that they can “correct” Iowa’s caucus results.

“We don’t need another mealy-mouthed politician who just tells you what she thinks you want to hear just to try to get your vote, then to get into office and to do her donors’ bidding,” DeSantis said. 

https://issuesinsights.com/2024/01/12/will-trumps-rising-support-from-minority-voters-put-him-back-into-the-white-house-ii-tipp-poll/

As 2023 has ended and a new year begun, those looking for a big change in the presidential polls for either major party may be disappointed. The I&I/TIPP Poll taken in early January shows that both President Joe Biden (69% support) and former President Donald Trump (65%) have big leads currently in the primaries for their respective parties.

With little competition so far from others, what about the head-to-head competition between Biden vs. Trump?

I&I/TIPP’s national online I&I/TIPP Poll of 1,247 registered voters taken Jan. 3-5 shows that Trump holds a slender 1 percentage-point lead over Biden if the election were held today. The actual numbers are 41% Trump, 40% Biden, a virtual statistical tossup given the poll’s +/-2.8 percentage point margin of error.
However, significant problems lurk for both candidates, but mainly for Biden, the data show.

Biden runs strongly in urban areas, taking 55% of that vote to Trump’s 31%. But the suburbs favor Trump 44% to Biden’s 38%, while Trump’s lead in rural areas is even larger: 49% Trump, 27% Biden. Urban voters in the I&I/TIPP survey make up just about 30% of all voters.

An even larger problem looms for Biden when it comes to minority voters, in particular blacks and Hispanics. In 2020, according to a Roper Survey exit poll of voters, Biden took an estimated 87% of the black vote and 65% of the Hispanic vote running against Trump, who received an estimated 12% of the black vote and 32% of the Hispanic tally.

This time around might be a surprise for the Democrats, who have long held a tight lock on the votes of the country’s two-largest minorities. Current I&I/TIPP data show Trump getting a near-identical level of Hispanic support as in 2020, 31%, but Biden’s backing has plunged from more than 60% to just 53%.

ttps://issuesinsights.com/2024/01/10/one-in-four-americans-now-believe-bidens-election-in-2020-wasnt-legitimate-ii-tipp-poll/

It’s a question that infuriates some, but remains on the minds of many: Was Joe Biden legitimately elected to the presidency in the hotly contested 2020 election? While most say he was, just over one in four U.S. voters believe the answer is no, according to the latest I&I/TIPP Poll.

The national online poll, taken January 3-5 from among 1,247 registered voters, asked: “To what extent do you agree or disagree with the statement: Joe Biden was legitimately elected president.”

Of those polled, 65% said that they agreed either “strongly” (50%) or “somewhat” (15%) with that statement. But another 26% said they disagreed either “somewhat” (9%) or “strongly” (17%), while 9% said they were not sure. The poll has a +/-2.8 percentage point margin of error.

But, when it comes to political affiliation, the responses show some of the most skewed results yet in an I&I/TIPP Poll. It’s fair to say that Democrats, Republicans and independents are far apart in their responses.

Among Democrats, 92% believe Biden was elected legitimately, with 80% agreeing “strongly” and 12% “somewhat.” Just 4% disagreed.

For Republicans, the numbers told a different tale.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-and-political-norms-9bd72737?mod=opinion_lead_pos12

By now news consumers are familiar with the strange phenomenon that much of the American left professes to care deeply about political “norms” even while displaying contempt for the actual rights enumerated in the first two amendments of the U.S. Constitution. This month brings more evidence that the pose is just as phony as it appears.

During the Trump administration there was enough media shouting about this or that norm to fill an entire season of “Cheers.” Yet witness the placid reaction to allies of President Joe Biden attempting to complete the destruction of two political norms that were not convenient to his re-election. The Iowa caucuses have been the first nominating contest on the presidential calendar for half a century. New Hampshire has been the site of the nation’s first presidential primary for more than a century. Starting next Monday in Iowa, Team Biden intends to end these traditions for Democrats.

Robert Yoon reports for the Associated Press:

Are both the Republicans and Democrats holding caucuses in Iowa this year?
Sort of. While both the state Republican and Democratic parties will hold caucuses on Jan. 15, only the Republican event will have an immediate, binding impact on the presidential race. In a departure from previous years, the Democratic caucuses will be held only to conduct administrative party business and to start the process of choosing delegates to the national conventions. Iowa Democrats will express their preferences for their party’s presidential nominee through a mail-in voting process, the results of which will not be known until March.
What’s at stake?
For Democrats, nothing is at stake, since the 2024 caucuses will have no bearing on the presidential race.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-supreme-court-to-the-ballot-rescue-f887f84f?mod=opinion_lead_pos3

The Supreme Court agreed Friday to hear Donald Trump’s appeal of the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to ban him from the state’s presidential primary ballot, and just in time too. The political malpractice of using Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to ban opposition candidates is spreading.

In Pennsylvania, progressive activist Gene Stilp is suing to have incumbent Republican Congressman Scott Perry stripped from the state’s primary ballot. Mr. Stilp is a Democrat who lives in Mr. Perry’s 10th Congressional district and lost a race for Congress in 2012.

Mr. Stilp is asking the Pennsylvania courts to declare that the Pennsylvania secretary of state can ban Mr. Perry from the ballot. Mr. Perry objected to the certification of the election results on Jan. 6, but then so have Democrats in other elections. Democrats in Congress have introduced bills to banish other Members from the ballot in the next election.

When Colorado and Maine moved to strip Mr. Trump from their own ballots, we warned that it would lead to more such efforts. Democrats are piling on now because of the Jan. 6 riot. But if this ballot banishment stands, Republicans won’t be the only targets.

It’s a shame the Supreme Court has been dragged into the election, but it has never ruled definitively on Section 3 disqualification. This makes it all the more welcome that the Justices will hear the Colorado case on a relatively rapid timeline. The Court set oral argument for Feb. 8, which means that if the Justices are more or less united they could issue a ruling before the presidential primaries are over.