Connect with us

Published

on

President Trump spoke to 300 state legislators from the battleground states of Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia on Saturday in a Zoom conference call hosted by Got Freedom? in which the 501 (c) (4) non-profit election integrity watchdog group urged those lawmakers to review evidence that the election process in their states was unlawful and consider decertifying the results of the November 3 presidential election.

President Trump addressed the call for 15 minutes at the invitation of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who now serves as the president’s personal attorney, and was one of the featured speakers on the call.

Other featured speakers included Chapman Law School Professor John Eastman, Dr. Peter Navarro, Assistant to the President for Trade and Manufacturing (appearing in his personal capacity), John Lott, Senior Advisor, U.S. Department of Justice (also appearing in his personal capacity), and Liberty University Law School Professor Phill Kline.

Kline, a former attorney general in Kansas, is a spokesperson for the 501 (c) (4) Got Freedom? non-profit, and also serves as director of the 501 (c) (3) Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society, an election integrity public interest law firm which is engaged in litigation regarding the 2020 election.

In a press statement released after the call, GotFreedom? said they conducted Saturday’s “exclusive national briefing . . . at the request of state legislators from Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin to review the extensive evidence of irregularities and lawlessness in the 2020 presidential election.”

“A similar briefing is being scheduled in Washington, D.C. at the request of Members of Congress,” the group noted.

A joint session of the newly convened 117th Congress will meet in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday to determine if they will accept the results of the December 14 meeting of the Electoral College, in which Joe Biden received 306 Electoral College votes for president and Donald Trump received 232 Electoral College votes.

If at least one member of the House of Representatives and one member of the Senate object to certifying those votes on Wednesday, each chamber must then separately hold a debate on whether to accept those Electoral College votes.

More than 30 members of the House have already announced they will object to certification. Last week, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) announced he will publicly object to certification.

Then on Saturday, as Breitbart News reported, 11 Republican senators said they would vote not to certify on Wednesday and would instead recommend the establishment of a commission to review the lawfulness of the election process in the disputed states in a full election audit. That commission would have ten days to review the evidence and report back to the joint session of Congress.

“This information should serve as an important resource for state legislators as they make calls for state legislatures to meet to investigate the election and consider decertifying their state election results,” Kline, who hosted the call on behalf of Got Freedom? said.

“The integrity of our elections is far too important to treat cavalierly, and elected officials deserve to have all relevant information at their disposal as they consider whether to accept the reported results of the 2020 elections, especially in states where the process was influenced by private interests,” Kline added.

The statement continued:

The evidence discussed includes unprecedented public-private partnerships that created a two-tiered election system in the states that determined the winner of the Electoral College. Funded by over $400 million from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, these public-private partnerships sought to boost turnout in Democratic strongholds while depressing turnout in conservative areas, violating constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection.

The private monies paid the salaries of election workers and funded the purchase of election equipment, but came with strict conditions on the conduct of elections in jurisdictions that accepted the money. These private interventions were aided by the actions of public officials, who sought to undermine transparency, fought efforts to audit the results, threatened legislators with investigation and prosecution for questioning the reported results, and in some cases even physically prevented state lawmakers from entering the Capitol Building in order to prevent them from challenging election certification.

A communication sent to participating state legislators after the call summarized Professor Eastman’s argument during the call about the specific “Constitutional imperatives” of state legislators.

State legislators, Eastman stated, have both the right and duty to:

  • Assert your plenary power
  • Demand that your laws be followed as written
  • Decertify tainted results unless and until your laws are followed
  • Insist on enough time to properly meet, investigate, and properly certify results to ensure that all lawful votes (but only lawful votes) are counted.

In that subsequent communication, Kline encouraged the state legislators to:

… agree to sign on to a joint letter from state legislators to Vice President Mike Pence to demand that he call for a 12-day delay on ratifying the election, allowing the states the necessary time to further investigate the lawlessness with which the presidential election was conducted. We also request that you send this message out to fellow legislators to ask them to sign on to the letter as well.

He added that “Representative Daryl Metcalfe (R-Pennsylvania), Senator Brandon Beach (R-Georgia), and Representative Mark Finchem (R-Arizona) already wrote a letter to Vice President Mike Pence for this narrow purpose. Coming together to sign a joint letter is a vital step—one you should take confidently and in solidarity. We will send the joint letter to all legislators who contact us in reply to this message.”

The 1,400 pages of evidence presented to state legislators on the call can be seen at got-freedom.org/evidence/

Advertisement
1 Comment
  • Evangeline says:

    This is great and all but what good is an investigation gonna do at this point cuz the dems and Dominion have had so much time to destroy evidence.

  • CF

    News

    New Details Emerge on Antifa Activist Charged for Role in Capitol Riot

    Published

    on

    The self-described left-wing activist recently arrested for allegedly taking part in the storming of the U.S. Capitol — later claiming he was there to “document” it — allegedly wore a gas mask and had a knife at the time of the siege, court papers show.

    John “Jayden X” Sullivan is due to appear in court at 4 p.m. local time Friday in connection with charges for civil disorder, violent entry or disorderly conduct and entering a restricted building or grounds.

    The 26-year-old self-described journalist and activist was arrested Thursday and has been in the custody of Toeele County, Utah, authorities, officials previously said. Sources told Fox News Sullivan is not known to be affiliated with Antifa.

    In addition to the ballistic vest Sullivan was previously reported to have worn while inside the Capitol, court papers show he also wore a gas mask and claimed to have had a knife.

    Sullivan, who filmed his time in the federal building — including the fatal shooting of California Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt — later shared the footage with authorities.

    In one clip, Sullivan can be heard saying: “Hey guys, I have a knife. I have a knife. Let me up,” court documents state.

    In one video, Sullivan can allegedly be heard cheering on the crowd as they broke through the final barricade before the Capitol and saying: “We did this together. … We are all a part of history.”

    In at least two encounters, Sullivan can be heard on video telling officers to stand down so they don’t get hurt and saying “the people have spoken,” according to an affidavit.

    Sullivan, who founded activist group Insurgence USA, told Rolling Stone he was acting in such a way because he “had to relate to these people.”

    He continued: “And build trust in the short amount of time I had there to get where I need to go … to the front of the crowd to see the dynamic between the police and the protesters, because nobody wants to see the backs of people’s heads from a far-off distance.”

    He told Fox News was at the Capitol siege to “document” the events, and said he frequently attends and films protests.

    “As far as being able to understand who is in the crowd, based on being around protests a lot … I didn’t see any people who were originally at BLM protests,” he told Fox News at the time.

    He could not be reached for comment following his arrest.

    Sullivan was also charged with rioting and criminal mischief on July 13 following a June protest in Provo that resulted in an SUV driver being shot while driving through the two opposing groups. The case is still pending.

    Continue Reading

    News

    Secret Service Refutes WaPo Story Claiming that Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner Denied Agents Restroom Access in Their Home

    Published

    on

    The Washington Post reported Thursday that U.S. Secret Service agents assigned to protect Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump have been forced to go to great lengths to use the bathroom because the couple forbids their protectors from using the facilities in their home.

    But a spokesperson for the Secret Service says The Post’s claims were not true.

    The Post made waves with a story alleging that Kushner and Trump told agents they were not allowed to use any of the six restrooms in their Washington, D.C., home, causing the guardians major inconveniences whenever nature called.

    “After resorting to a porta-potty, as well as bathrooms at the nearby home of former president Barack Obama and the not-so-nearby residence of Vice President Pence, the agents finally found a toilet to call their own,” the newspaper reported, adding, “But it came at a cost to U.S. taxpayers. Since September 2017, the federal government has been spending $3,000 a month — more than $100,000 to date — to rent a basement studio, with a bathroom, from a neighbor of the Kushner family.”

    According to The Post—which published pictures and details of the Kushner-Trump residence—”a spokeswoman for the Secret Service initially declined to comment, writing in an email that the agency ‘does not discuss the means, methods or resources utilized to carry out our protective mission.'”

    Yet, after the allegations went trending on Twitter and spurred on additional headlines, the agency spokesperson corrected the record.

    The Post reported:

    But on Thursday evening, eight hours after this story appeared online, she sent a second email with a new statement, saying that the Secret Service tries to have minimal impact on households it protects. “In accordance with this practice, Secret Service personnel do not request access to the facilities at private residences,” she wrote. “Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner have not denied Secret Service personnel access to their home to include use of the restroom.”

    The White House also denied the claim, with spokesman Judd Deere telling the outlet:

    “When discussions regarding protecting their home were initially had in 2017, Ivanka and Jared made clear that their home would always be open to the incredible men and women on their detail. It was only after a decision by the [Secret Service] was made that their detail sought other accommodations,. The Kushners have a tremendous amount of respect for the servicemen and women on their detail and for the United States Secret Service as a whole. Their home will always be open to them and they have immense gratitude for their service over the last four years.”

    After the Secret Service spokeswoman issued her statement to The Post refuting the claims, an assistant to President Donald Trump tweeted, “The @washingtonpost story about Jared and Ivanka today was a lie. The story never made sense, and was simply not true. Now the Secret Service has even denied the story.”

    Continue Reading

    News

    Jacob Blake Opens Up on Police Shooting, Says He Didn’t Want to be the ‘Next George Floyd’ — Which is Why He Walked Away from Police — and Admits He Was Armed

    Published

    on

    Jacob Blake, who was shot at least seven times in the back by a Kenosha, Wisconsin, police officer — says that he was worried he was going to become the “next George Floyd,” which prompted him to walk away from responding officers.

    He also admitted that he was armed.

    A Kenosha, Wisconsin, police officer shot Blake in the back seven times during an Aug. 23 call for a domestic dispute. The officers who shot Blake were ultimately cleared, and not charged with any crimes after the investigation revealed that Blake was, in fact, armed with a knife at the time he was shot, and that the officer reasonably believed that Blake might harm him or the children in the car.

    The attorney for the officer who shot Blake has noted publicly that the officer believed that Blake was attempting to kidnap the children in the purportedly stolen car that precipitated Blake’s interaction with the police.

    Following the shooting, riots and protests erupted across Wisconsin, after Blake was repeatedly and erroneously described as having been “unarmed” at the time he was shot.

    Blake, who is partially paralyzed as a result of the shooting, spoke to “Good Morning America’s” Michael Strahan on Thursday about the August shooting that took place outside of a Kenosha-area home.

    On the incident, Blake recalled, “I was like, ‘He’s shooting me.’ I couldn’t believe it, so I kind of sat down in the car … put my hands up, because I didn’t want him to shoot me in my face or in my head or nothing. He just kept shooting, kept shooting. My babies are right here, my babies. So after he stopped shooting me, I said, ‘Daddy loves you no matter what.”

    “I thought it was going to be the last thing I said to them,” he admitted. “Thank God it wasn’t. I didn’t want to be the next George Floyd. I didn’t want to die.”

    He told Strahan, “I resisted to getting beat on. What I mean by that is not falling, not letting them put their head on my neck. That’s all I was thinking.”

    According to CNN, “Blake [said he] picked up the knife and began to walk toward the driver’s door of the SUV, away from the officers” during the altercation.

    “I shouldn’t have picked it up,” Blake said, admitting that he “wasn’t thinking clearly” at the time.

    Blake said that he “intended to put the knife in the SUV and then lay on the ground to submit to the police officers.”

    “If they did it there and they killed me there, everybody would see it,” he reasoned.

    A September report from the Kenosha Police Union stated that Blake reportedly confronted responding officers following the domestic dispute call.

    The report alleged that Blake reportedly put one of the responding officer in a headlock position, and was reportedly armed with a knife that he refused to drop.

    When Blake attempted to get back into his vehicle, the officer shot him multiple times.

    Officers reportedly saw a knife on the floor of Blake’s vehicle during the attempted detainment.

    At the time, Kenosha Police Union Attorney Brendan Matthews said that officers were responding to the residence of Blake’s ex-girlfriend, with whom he has children. The unnamed woman accused Blake of sexual assault in May, and in August, phoned police to report that Blake was reportedly attempting to steal her keys and her vehicle. Previous reporting noted that Blake was not supposed to be at the woman’s residence due to the purported May assault.

    Last week, Kenosha County District Attorney Michael Graveley said that the officer who shot Blake would not be charged, and said that the officer fired in self-defense as Blake was “actively resisting” arrest.

    Blake is suing the Kenosha Police Department for reportedly violating his civil rights during the incident.

    Continue Reading

    News

    GOP Congressman Who Lost Legs In War Responds To Attack From CNN’s Tapper On If He Supports Democracy

    Published

    on

    Disabled war veteran Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL) slammed CNN host Jake Tapper on Wednesday after Tapper called out Mast’s “commitment” to American democracy after Mast asked whether members of Congress had questioned individuals involved in last week’s riot before initiating impeachment this week.

    “On January 6th, thousands broke the law by taking siege of our capital here with us inside. Has any one of those individuals who brought violence on the capital, been brought here to answer whether they did that because of our president?” Mast asked on the House floor, which was highlighted during an interview that he did Thursday morning on Fox News. “It appears I will receive no answer. I will yield my time back.”

    Tapper responded to Mast’s remark, saying on live television, “Congressman Brian Mast, a Republican from Florida, who lost his legs, by the way, fighting for democracy abroad, although I don’t know what his—I don’t know about his commitment to it here in the United States.”

    Mast initially responded by writing on Twitter: “I lost two legs for @jaketapper’s right to say whatever the hell he wants, but that free speech also protects the Republicans he is so eager to condemn for asking Constitutional questions about the election.”

    During his interview on Fox News this morning, Mast said that the message he wanted to deliver on the House floor was:

    The message was simple. You have 430 plus members of Congress, they’re responsible for making the highest laws in the land that pertain to all-Americans and they are about to vote one way or another on whether the president incited other people to do something and there wasn’t one of those members that could say they heard any questioning of the people that were said to be incited. Nobody was asked do you do this because of the president? Do you do it because of something he said he year ago or something something Giuliani said on January 6th? Did you go there because of the president but violence was your own thing? Did he tell you to be peaceful? Nobody can say they spoke to one of those individuals and that has to be the most dangerous precedent for this body to set to say if you are an American out there this is how we are going to hold you accountable for inciting somebody else. We’re not going to bother to ask any questions at all, we’re just going to jump to a conclusion and rush to judgment. That is totally un-American, wholly in opposition to the due process that every American is owed.

    Mast was also asked to respond to Tapper’s remarks, to which he responded, “I’m going to say to Mr. Tapper the same thing that half of America is saying right now: Hold me to a high standard, don’t hold me to a double standard.”

    “And me asking if any of these lawmakers that are about to vote have gone through any questioning, any hearings, and asked any questions of anybody, that’s an appropriate question and it speaks to the foundation of our democracy. It doesn’t diminish it,” he continued. “And I would give this statement to him as well, it is not as important in America, especially today with all the division that we have, that I say this is what I think about you. We got to get to the point that we’re saying, this is why I think something, now I can say this is why I think you’re wrong and we can have a real debate and hopefully you end up learning something about each other instead of just coming away with two people that are pissed off at one another.”

    When further pressed by one of the co-hosts on Fox & Friends about how he felt about what Tapper said, Mast said, “My commitment to democracy, to my country, is unwavering.”

    “I love this place so much. It literally breaks my heart to see the divide that exists in it. I love our democracy,” he continued. “For all of our problems, there is no government that I would rather be a part of anywhere in this world. And to strengthen that and keep it strong, we have to ask those questions. It’s not the opposite of that where we don’t ask those questions, don’t ask lawmakers, ‘did you take the time to ask somebody or interview somebody or have a hearing?’ That has to be the foundation of having justice. It’s asking questions and waiting for the answer in silence until somebody gives it to you or taking their silence as an answer. That’s my response to him, I love this place.”

    Continue Reading

    Trending Today

    >