A Texas woman named Rachel Rodriguez was arrested on 26 counts of election fraud, illegal voting, unlawfully assisting people voting by mail, and unlawfully possessing an official ballot.
Each charge constitutes a felony under the Texas Election Code.
A Project Veritas video last fall exposed her as she engaged in vote harvesting leading up to the 2020 election.
The Election Fraud Division of the Office of the Attorney General reviewed dozens of hours of unedited, raw footage, which led to this arrest.
In an uncharacteristic moment of honesty, Rodriguez acknowledged on video that what she was doing is illegal and that she could go to jail for it. If convicted, Rodriguez could face up to 20 years in prison.
How is this possible? It was the most secure election ever.
YouTube removed a video of the New York Post’s interview of Aaron Mostofsky, one of President Trump’s supporters who stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021. YouTube claimed the video was removed over election misinformation.
“We realize this may be disappointing news, but it’s our job to make sure that YouTube is a safe place for all,” YouTube said in the removal notice. The removed video was posted on the personal channel of the reporter who conducted the interview just before the riot began.
“Content that advances false claims that widespread fraud, errors, or glitches changed the outcome of the US 2020 presidential election is not allowed on YouTube,” the platform added.
Mostofsky, the son of Brooklyn Supreme Court Judge Steven Mostofsky, was one of the first rioters to storm the Capitol. He was clad in a fur costume, a police vest, and a police shield when he was interviewed by the Post. He said he had found the police gear.
During his trial, where he was sentenced to eight months in prison, it was revealed that he wore fur to show that “even a caveman knows the election was stolen.”
“Can you tell me what you’re doing here today?” the interview started.
“Well, to express my opinion as a free American, my belief that this election was stolen. We were cheated. I don’t think 75 million people voted for Trump, I think it was close to 85 million. I think certain states that had been blue for a long time had been red and were stolen like New York,” Mostofsky said.
“And where did you travel from?” the Post’s reporter asked.
“Brooklyn,” Mostofsky said.
“Can you tell me anything about the shield here?” the interviewer pressed.
“The shield? Found it on the floor. I found a cap and I gave it to the cops because it may be someone’s personal thing. This [shield], I have no idea. There’s no name. They probably just grab it. Looks like it’s been used a lot,” Mostofsky said.
“Should senators be afraid? Should House members be afraid?” the interviewer asked.
“They shouldn’t be afraid,” he replied. “They should find their courage to do their duty … to examine the fraud, maybe delay the election. I don’t know what to do. But we have a Constitution. You don’t rewrite the law because of COVID. It’s not ‘Give me liberty or give me death, but COVID.’”
The Post says YouTube’s election misinformation policy, like many other policies, is enforced arbitrarily.
In an appearance on NBC’s Today show, Bill Gates was asked about online “misinformation” and what he thought about Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter in relation to that.
The discussion about misinformation started with host Savannah Guthrie saying: “When you look at how the US and the world responded to COVID-19, whether it’s masks or vaccines or shutdowns, closures, it’s become so political…It’s been so politicized.”
Gates responded: “Yeah, it’s unfortunate that we didn’t get trusted voices in both parties talking about the benefit of masks and vaccines so that it wasn’t a political issue.”
Guthrie then asked about misinformation, noting that it has “been a hallmark” of the pandemic.
“President Biden rather famously said last July that misinformation on social media is killing people. Do you agree?” she asked.
Gates said: “Absolutely…It’s terrible.”
There was a recurring theme during the presidency of Donald Trump that went something like this: Trump’s most impetuous and destructive instincts — particularly in the realm of foreign policy — were being nobly restrained by the so-called “Adults in the Room.” Thank heavens! These impressive “adults,” a cadre of seasoned military men serving in Trump’s administration, included James Mattis (Defense Secretary), H.R. McMaster (National Security Advisor), and John Kelly (Chief of Staff). Their presence in the halls of power was supposed to be taken as a profound relief: whether you feared Trump would conspire with Vladimir Putin to collapse “the rules-based international order” — likely because you heard that phrase intoned on some Think Tank webcast — or simply believed that Trump was nuts, you could rest assured that the fate of the Republic would be protected by this crew of Serious Adults watching gamely over Trump’s shoulder. If any crazy ideas got into his head, such as withdrawing US military personnel from overseas deployments or forging a diplomatic accord with Russia, they’d spring boldly into action and put a stop to it.
In August 2017, the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump’s “top national-security advisers,” namely Mattis and McMaster, were “searching for a way to overcome the commander-in-chief’s reluctance to send thousands more troops to Afghanistan.” Ultimately, the two honored “adults” were successful — they finagled Trump into ordering yet another totally useless “surge” of US troops, which accomplished nothing other than additional death, destruction, waste of taxpayer money, and prolongation of a war that was fundamentally hopeless. An outcome that surprised nobody except perhaps Mattis and McMaster themselves. Still, these same “adults” were cheered once more when they maneuvered to undercut Trump’s fantasy of removing troops from Syria, another successful stymieing effort on their part. Profound gratitude was showered on this valiant assemblage of “adults” for having been “in the room” to stop Trump from doing anything reasonable.
A former CIA officer took to Twitter to boast about how he helped “swing” the 2020 presidential election “away from Trump” by trying to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop bombshell story as Russian disinformation.
The admission by John Sipher, a retired officer of the CIA’s National Clandestine Service, came during a spat with former acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell over the weekend.
Sipher was one of the 51 intelligence officials who signed a letter falsely claiming the Hunter Biden laptop story broken by The New York Post in October 2020 was “Russian disinformation.”
“I take special pride in swinging the election away from Trump. You’re welcome,” Sipher tweeted.
“Maybe cowardly Dick forgot he blocked me for the last several years and only unblocked me to give me credit for swinging the election.”
A new deep dive into discrepancies in the ballot counts of six key battleground states in the 2020 election has turned up more than 250,000 “excess votes” for President Joe Biden, and maybe far more.
The key point in the upcoming peer-reviewed study for the journal Public Choice by economist and noted gun expert John Lott Jr. is that the excess voting may challenge — or explain — Biden’s margin of victory over former President Donald Trump in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
In his report, on the Public Choice website but still awaiting final approval, Lott said that there were 255,000 excess votes and possibly as many as 368,000 for Biden in the key states.
And in a review of his statistical study he provided to RealClearPolitics, he said that “Biden only carried these states — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin — by a total of 313,253 votes. Excluding Michigan, the gap was 159,065.”
Lott, who runs the Crime Prevention Research Center, said that his report was not meant to overturn the 2020 election but to reinforce the need for changes to voter identification, absentee voting, and provisional ballots.
Rabid Democrats are now calling on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from any cases related to January 6 because his wife Virginia “Ginni” Thomas exercised her First Amendment rights to friends in private texts regarding the 2020 election.
The text messages exchanged between Ginni Thomas and Trump’s former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows are uneventful.
The media however is having a feeding frenzy over Ginni Thomas’ benign text messages that are completely covered by the First Amendment.
Many Democrat lawmakers are now calling on Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from January 6 cases because his wife sent text messages to Mark Meadows encouraging him to fight for Trump and expose the election fraud.