This week, a report surfaced about websites being seized by the United States government that were owned by Russians looking to influence our election.
What the media is not reporting, however, is how domestic election interference is running rampant, from our judiciary right to the heights of the DOJ (and this does not even address the issues we have with our social media and media outlets).
Election Interference…
- The judiciary
- The DOJ
- Analysis
Foreign election interference is something this country faces every year; you just never really heard about it until Donald Trump ran for office. Not to mention that the United States has been interfering in foreign elections since at least 1954, possibly much earlier. Foreign interference is a concern, but I would love to know why we ignore domestic interference in our elections, such as the bogus letter defending Biden by 51 former intelligence officials during the 2020 election. Sadly, this election is no different.
One of the most significant issues I have with the 2024 election is the interference by our judiciary. For instance, Donald Trump’s January 6 trial, that is, before Judge Chutkan, was just pushed back until after the election, yet the judge stated that the evidence could be introduced to the American people before the trial started. In justifying her decision, Judge Chutkan stated:
“The electoral process and the timing of the election … is not relevant here.
“This court is not concerned with the electoral schedule.”
If the electoral schedule is not a concern, then why allow the evidence to be presented before the trial begins? There is only one possible benefit I see to this position, and that is that it will hurt Trump in the election. And this is far from the worst of it. Look at Kennedy's problems with having his name removed from the ballot even though he dropped out of the race in plenty of time. Biden dropped out just a few weeks before Kennedy, and the states in question have no problem removing Biden and adding Harris, but they say they cannot remove Kennedy. Could that be because Kennedy is now drawing from Trump, not Harris?
These cases have all been litigated, and only one state, Pennsylvania, has ruled that Kennedy’s name will be removed from the ballot. In Michigan and Wisconsin, the other two Blue Wall states that Kamala Harris needs in order to win this election, the respective Secretaries of State and the judiciary have thus far decided that Kennedy will remain on the ballot even though he is no longer a candidate. If Jill Stein or Cornel West, two third-party candidates expected to draw from Harris, withdrew, what do you think the decision would have been to remove them from the ballot? North Carolina, another state where Trump is winning but that is clearly in play for both Harris and Trump (Trump holds a 0.5% edge), a judge ruled that his name will remain on the ballot.
I am not going to argue whether charges should have been brought against Trump, as my stance on that has been made quite clear. The argument of what this person did and was not charged or was let off makes for great TV, but it is irrelevant because Trump was charged. He does have these legal problems, and some of them have real teeth, such as the January 6 case and the classified documents case, both brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith.
On the other hand, one of the biggest travesties I have seen on this front was the case brought by Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, who did what is known as stacking charges. He literally created a felony for every journal entry related to Trump’s hush-money payments. So we went with what is generally a misdemeanor charge and a fine to 34 felony counts that could put Trump behind bars for the rest of his life. The DA’s office initially declined to prosecute, showing you how weak the case was, and only went forward after pressure was applied and the deck was stacked.
Now, there is a video on social media of the Department of Justice’s Chief of Public Affairs, Nicholas Biase, spilling the beans, calling the case by Bragg against Trump “nonsense” and a “perversion of justice.” You really need to see this entire video to believe just how loose this guy was with this information, almost as though it weighed on him so much he wanted it to get out…
View this post on Instagram
How can Democrats brag about free and fair elections when they are purposely allowing someone to remain on the ballot that is no longer in the race simply because that candidate draws away from Trump? Not only that but these moves are backed by judges appointed by Democrats, who sound more like activists when they release their opinions than they do judges. I don’t even want to get into “whataboutisms” if the GOP was doing this because I would be outraged either way. If they are not in the election, they should no longer be on the ballot, and we all know this is an issue that can be addressed quickly, even with paper ballots, because there is plenty of time to fix it.
As I started out, yes, foreign interference is a problem in every election, and it always has been, with efforts to infiltrate our elections dating back to 1796. In more modern times, foreign election interference was attempted in 1960, 1968, 1980, 1984, 1996, 2012, 2016, 2020, 2022, and again now in 2024. But let me ask everyone reading this a question… how many of you heard about the interference before the 2016 race? If I am guessing right, other than a few history buffs, there is not a single hand raised in the room. My point to all of this is why are we, as a country and the media, not to mention our government, not just as worried about domestic threats to our election because they clearly exist?
