Tag: 2024 elections

Dem Governor Josh Shapiro Snaps When He Finds Out What Kamala Harris Said About Him: ‘Complete and Utter Bulls***’

Democrat Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania lost his normally even-keeled demeanor when a reporter read to him what former Vice President Kamala Harris wrote about him in her book about the 2024 presidential race.

Political pundits have argued that Harris would have increased her chances of beating Donald Trump if she had selected Shapiro as her running mate, given his more moderate stances on some issues, and because he is a popular governor in a swing state that she needed to carry.

The Atlantic’s Tim Alberta recounted that he had received an advance copy of Harris’ “107 Days” before he interviewed the governor earlier this fall.

“I asked Shapiro if Harris had given him any heads-up about her book. She had not, he said. Then I told him that Harris had taken some shots at him,” Alberta wrote, causing the politician to furrow his brow and cross his arms.

“The man I observed over the next several minutes was unrecognizable. Gone was his equilibrium. He moved between outrage and exasperation as I relayed the excerpts. Harris had accused him, in essence, of measuring the drapes, even inquiring about featuring Pennsylvania artists in the vice-presidential residence; of insisting ‘that he would want to be in the room for every decision’ Harris might make,” Alberta continued.

Her book accused Shapiro — who is considered a likely 2028 presidential contender — of hijacking the meeting when the two sat down to discuss the possibility of him joining her on the Democratic ticket, “to the point where she reminded him that he would not be co-president.”

“She wrote that in her book?” Shapiro asked Alberta in response to the claim concerning the residence’s art. “That’s complete and utter bulls***.”

“I can tell you that her accounts are just blatant lies,” he added.

Keep reading

‘What the F*** Did You Just Do?’ New Book Recounts Obama’s Stunned Call to Pelosi After She Endorsed Harris

Democrats’ policy positions on everything from abortion to transgender ideology spring from pure evil.

It would make sense, therefore, if God had supernaturally rendered their leaders ineffective, incoherent, and ridiculous.

That prospect, of course, offers one explanation for a 2024 incident involving former President Barack Obama and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as detailed in the new book “Retribution: Donald Trump and the Campaign That Changed America,” by Jonathan Karl of ABC News.

The U.K.’s Daily Mail obtained an advance copy of the book, scheduled for publication Tuesday.

According to a “Pelosi confidant” who spoke with Karl, an outraged Obama called the former House Speaker shortly after her endorsement of then-Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic Party’s 2024 presidential nominee. Under pressure following a catastrophic debate performance on June 27, then-President Joe Biden had withdrawn from the race.

“The Obamas were not happy,” the Pelosi confidant said, adding that Obama’s message to the former Speaker amounted to, essentially, “‘What the f*** did you just do?’”

Rather than hand the nomination to Harris, Obama preferred a “process” to select the Democrat nominee.

“That train has left the station,” Pelosi replied.

The former Speaker’s endorsement of Harris stunned Obama because, per Karl and according to the Mail, Pelosi had maintained “regular communication” with the 44th president. Moreover, the two powerful Democrats “agreed Harris should not simply be handed the nomination unchallenged.”

One raises one’s eyebrows. How did Pelosi and Obama fail so miserably in their “communication”?

Indeed, for more than a year the entire Democratic leadership has appeared incapable of getting on the same page.

Biden, for instance, reportedly harbored resentment over what he regarded as Obama’s treachery.

Meanwhile, in a book published last month, Harris burned bridges by blaming other Democrats for her loss to Trump.

Even former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre got in on the act. In her new book, Jean-Pierre explained, among other things, why she left the Democratic Party altogether.

Keep reading

Obama Scolded Voters for Not Supporting the Black Woman in 2024, Now He’s Telling Voters to Ignore the Black Woman Candidate in Virginia and Support the White One

Anyone who follows politics will recall that during the 2024 election, former President Obama campaigned for Kamala Harris and scolded voters, particularly black men, for not showing enough support for Kamala Harris.

Now a year later, Obama is campaigning for the white woman candidate, Abigail Spanberger, in the Virginia governor race. Winsome Earle-Sears, the Republican in the race, is a black woman and does not have the support of Obama.

Isn’t it funny how that works? It’s almost as if what really matters to Obama is party ID, and not the race of the candidate – unless it’s politically useful.

People have noticed this.

The Daily Mail reports:

Democrats spiral in Virginia as Obama is slammed for ‘campaigning against black woman’

Virginia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Abigail Spanberger was considered a runaway favorite for the state’s top office, but recent scandals and a lack of a clear identity for her party are keeping alive the chances of her Republican rival.

In the latest sign of peril, Barack Obama has been parachuted in and will speak alongside Spanberger next Saturday as polls show Republican candidate Winsome Earle-Sears gaining ground.

The former president’s decision to enter the fray has been criticized as hypocritical after he bluntly rebuked black men for not supporting Kamala Harris during the most recent general election campaign.

‘I watched Obama sit there and chastise black men saying, y’all don’t want to support this woman, but at the same time turn around, go to Virginia and campaign against a real natural black woman,’ said one local on TikTok.

The NAACP, which also cares more about Democrats than it does about black people, recently hosted an event and invited Abigail Spanberger, not Winsome Sears. Isn’t that odd?

Keep reading

Seven Pennsylvania Election Canvassers Charged For Fake Voter Registration Scheme In 2024 Election

Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday has announced charges against seven people in connection with a fraudulent voter registration scheme. The case serves as another example of vulnerabilities in the U.S. election systems and highlights why our system should not allow third parties to handle voter registration requests.  

According to police criminal complaints, workers who were hired to collect voter registration requests were given a quota to meet. Some workers told investigators they would be fired if they did not turn in enough requests, so they handed in bogus registrations, according to the complaints.

As the ground game for the 2024 presidential election picked up steam in the final weeks last year, election workers focused on swing states like Pennsylvania, with its 19 vital electoral votes. It was said the presidency could not be won without Pennsylvania, and the presidential winner did take Pennsylvania, with Donald Trump declaring victory soon after winning the state.  

For months before Election Day, the state was teaming with organized canvassers urging low-propensity voters to register to vote. As counties received loads of daily registration forms and worked to verify the requester’s identity, several counties noticed a troubling pattern.  

In Lancaster County, officials received around 2,500 voter registration requests in about a week that came in two large batches. County election workers noticed some had the same handwriting, many shared the same date, and some had other anomalies, as The Federalist reported last year.

“The county investigated and found 60 percent were confirmed as ‘fraudulent,’ according to Lancaster County District Attorney Heather Adams.” She indicated the fraudulent applications were part of a larger operation that began in June 2024.

Similar reports came out of neighboring Berks and York counties. Officials said the bogus registration requests were related to workers canvassing “at shopping centers, parking lots of grocery stores and businesses, sidewalks, and parks.”

Sunday took the case from the county district attorneys, and last week the Office of Attorney General charged Guillermo Sainz, 33, of Sierra Vista, Arizona, with three counts of Solicitation of Registration, that is, allegedly giving workers quotas to meet. Sainz “served as director of a company’s registration drive efforts in Pennsylvania,” Sunday’s statement reads. Each count carries a fine of at least $500 or “imprisonment for not less than one month” or both.

The criminal complaint names the company as Field and Media Corps. Sainz’s LinkedIn account showing his work history there has been removed.

Keep reading

Jack Smith Starts Getting Nervous — Demands Chance to Testify Against ‘Mischaracterizations’ of His Trump Prosecutions

Jack Smith, who led the attempts to prosecute and imprison President Trump in the run-up to the 2024 election over his efforts to challenge the voter fraud that took place in the 2020 presidential election, said he wants to appear “in open hearings” to share his side of the story.

In a letter from his attorneys, he pledged to address the “numerous mischaracterizations” surrounding his investigations, which were designed to prevent Trump from taking back the presidency.

The letter, sent by Smith’s lawyers and obtained by CNN, states:

We have received Chairman Jordan’s October 14, 2025, letter and are aware of Chairman Grassley’s interest in testimony from our client, Jack Smith.

Given the many mischaracterizationsof Mr. Smith’s investigation into President Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified document sand role in attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election, Mr. Smith respectfully requests the opportunity to testify in open hearings before the House and Senate Judiciary Committees.

During the investigation of President Trump, Mr. Smith steadfastly adhered to establishedlegal standards and Department of Justice guidelines, consistent with his approach throughouthis career as a dedicated public servant.

He is prepared to answer questions about the Special Counsel’s investigation and prosecution, but requires assurance from the Department of Justicethat he will not be punished for doing so.

To that end, Mr. Smith needs guidance from theDepartment of Justice regarding federal grand jury secrecy requirements and authorization onthe matters he may speak to regarding, among other things, Volume II of the Final Report of theSpecial Counsel, which is not publicly available.

In addition, to provide full and accurate answersto your questions, Mr. Smith requires access to the Special Counsel files, which he no longer no longer has the ability to access.

Just last week, Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee referred Smith to the Department of Justice for criminal investigation and possible disbarment over “deeply disturbing revelations” that he illegally obtained Senate Republicans’ call logs.

Keep reading

Democratic National Committee STILL Struggling to Pay Off Kamala Harris Campaign Debt Nearly a Year Later

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is still struggling to repay Kamala Harris’s campaign debt almost a year after the 2024 election.

The amazing thing about this, is that it’s a reminder that Harris had a campaign war chest of more than a billion dollars, a massive sum for a political campaign, and yet she still lost and she still incurred millions of dollars in campaign debt.

It really is a testament to what an absolutely awful candidate she was and still is. If she runs again in 2028, she will probably be torpedoed by Democrat voters during the primary.

The New York Post has the story on her 2024 campaign debt:

DNC pays off $1.6M in debt for Kamala Harris’ failed campaign as Dems face tight race in New Jersey

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is still paying off shortfalls incurred by former Vice President Kamala Harris’ failed 2024 election campaign — with at least $1.6 million paid out in September alone, according to the latest federal filings.

The Harris campaign shelled out $1.49 million alone for media production and consulting, $106,312 for data services and $21,762 to rent space at a Grand Rapids, Mich. community center for an October 2024 event alongside billionaire investor Mark Cuban touting the Democratic nominee as the “pro-business candidate.”

Last month’s payouts push the total debt covered since Election Day to more than $20 million, according to Axios, which first reported on the Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings.

Former President Barack Obama’s successful 2012 campaign incurred a similar level of debt that the DNC three years to fully pay off, with former chairwoman Donna Brazile claiming the 44th commander-in-chief’s “neglect had left the party in significant debt.”

Harris made a “handshake deal” with the national party after Donald Trump defeated her this past November, under which the DNC agreed to cover $20.5 million in outstanding campaign bills, The New York Times reported in August.

It’s amazing that Harris was able to burn through so much cash in such a short period of time. It does not speak well of her, either.

Keep reading

OOPS! Michigan’s SOS Jocelyn Benson’s Laughable 2024 Election Audit Is Worse Than Anyone Imagined—“Random” Sampling Conveniently Excluded State’s Most Crooked City—Why?

Imagine a health inspector conducting a “random” restaurant safety audit that somehow manages to skip McDonald’s and Burger King—the two busiest establishments in town, and imagine they had the longest history of violations. Then imagine the health inspector was inspecting his own work. Then the inspector announces that all restaurants passed with flying colors.

Would you trust that audit?

Yet this scenario mirrors what happened with Michigan’s 2024 post-election audit. Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s office announced in October 2025—ten months after the election—that Michigan’s ballot counting achieved 99.97% accuracy. Impressive. But their “random” sample conspicuously excluded Detroit and Troy, the largest cities in Michigan’s two most populous counties, despite Detroit’s notorious election administration challenges.

When randomness becomes suspiciously convenient, trust evaporates.

The audit took ten months to complete and publish—an extraordinary delay that national election security experts Susan Greenhalgh and Dr. David Jefferson called “inadequate” and lacking “transparency” in their August 2025 analysis of swing-state audits. Michigan’s 2020 audit required only five months. Why did 2024 take twice as long?

Delays matter. 

Risk-limiting audits exist precisely to provide swift statistical assurance when public scrutiny peaks—immediately after elections. Publishing results ten months later, when news cycles have moved on and memories have faded, defeats the purpose. In a swing state with controversial election administration, such delays amplify rather than alleviate distrust.

But timing represents only one problem. The audit examined whether Michigan counts ballots accurately—it did—while ignoring whether those ballots came from eligible voters at legitimate addresses, whether signatures on 2,081,265 mail-in ballots matched registration records, and whether Michigan’s voter databases comply with federal maintenance requirements.

Keep reading

The Conspiracy Theorists Who Claim Kamala Harris Really Won in 2024

Election denial has lately come to be viewed as a feature of the political right, reflected by the lawsuits, conspiratorial documentaries, and “Stop the Steal” protests that followed Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 presidential election. But in the months since 2024, a similar—albeit much quieter—form of election denial has emerged in parts of the progressive left.

These theories range from claims that Elon Musk used Starlink satellites to hack the election to a the quasi-mystical TikTok subculture known as the “4 A.M. Club,” whose members believe the timeline glitched and Kamala Harris won in a parallel reality. But the most prominent claims have been rooted in data-heavy spreadsheets and statistical jargon.

One of the most popular of these theories suggests that a 2024 National Security Agency audit confirmed that Kamala Harris won the election, a claim which gained notoriety after it appeared in This Will Hold, an anonymously published Substack. The post alleges that one of the audit’s supposed participants, an ex-CIA officer named Adam Zarnowski, possessed insider information about a global cabal of corrupt actors, international criminals, foreign operatives, billionaires, and political insiders who conspired together to manipulate the election’s outcome.

As The Atlantic recently reported, there is no independent verification of Zarnowski’s background beyond his own claims. A LinkedIn profile describes him as a “former CIA paramilitary operations officer” but provides no evidence that he is an expert in election security or statistics. Snopes has been unable to “independently verify Zarnowski’s employment with the CIA or his alleged involvement in [the] NSA audit.”

The Election Truth Alliance (ETA), a self-described nonpartisan watchdog group, has used statistical models to push claims that Harris won the election. In Rockland County, New York, for example, Harris received fewer votes for president than incumbent Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D–N.Y.) did for Senate. The ETA suggests that possible election tampering can be inferred from this discrepancy.

But Charles Stewart, a political scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, points out that this apparent discrepancy isn’t unusual and can easily be explained. Stewart attributes Harris’ weaker performance to her unpopularity among the county’s Orthodox Jewish voters relative to Gillibrand, as well as the broader trend of voters skipping races or voting split-ticket.

The organization’s claims go further. In a recent interview with the progressive commentator David Pakman, the ETA’s Nathan Taylor claimed that vote patterns in Nevada, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania illustrate a series of unusual relationships between candidate support and voter turnout. Using color-coded heat maps, Taylor asserts that his group has discovered statistical distortions similar to those seen in countries with a reputation for fraudulent election practices, such as Russia and Uganda. Using these maps, Taylor alleges that up to 190,000 votes cast in Pennsylvania may have been algorithmically shifted, which would be more than enough to flip the state.

To lend credibility to these claims, the ETA circulated a working paper by the University of Michigan political scientist Walter Mebane that used statistical techniques to examine Pennsylvania’s 2024 election results. Mebane told The Atlantic that while he was aware the group had used his public methodology and data models, he had not reviewed their findings and did not endorse their conclusions. 

Keep reading

Kamala’s Memoir Is So Bad, It’s Hard To Believe She Read It

The reviews are in for former Vice President Kamala Harris’ memoir, “107 Days.” The book is bad on its own merits. And worse for what’s left of Harris’ reputation. 

First, an unforgivably tardy critique of former President Joe Biden’s decision to stay in the presidential race. Harris never managed to artfully separate from Biden after she took his place as Democratic nominee. 

“‘It’s Joe and Jill’s decision.’ We all said that, like a mantra, as if we’d all been hypnotized,” Harris writes, according to a screenshot. “Was it grace, or was it recklessness? In retrospect, I think it was recklessness. The stakes were simply too high. This wasn’t a choice that should have been left to an individual’s ego, an individual’s ambition. It should have been more than a personal decision.”

An honest Democrat strategist might say the same of Harris’ decision to run in Biden’s stead. 

But Harris isn’t done complaining. 

“I shouldered the blame for the porous border, an issue that had proved intractable for Democratic and Republican administrations alike,” Harris whines. Note: President Donald Trump’s second administration has proved the issue is more than tractable. 

Harris spins securing the border as an utter impossibility. 

“No one around the president advocated, Give her something she can win with.”

What would that be? Third grade math? Slurring her words during interviews?

Harris claims she was “castigated for, apparently, delivering [a speech] too well.” 

The Biden White House’s “thinking was zero-sum: If she’s shining, he’s dimmed. None of them grasped that if I did well, he did well. That given the concerns about his age, my visible success as his vice president was vital. It would serve as a testament to his judgment in choosing me and reassurance that if something happened, the country was in good hands. My success was important for him.” 

If Harris managed to speak with half the lucidity she mustered for this book, she might’ve had different presidential odds. 

Instead, Harris blames “a series of mistakes, committed over years, mostly by other people,” according to a review of the memoir from Semafor. 

“I didn’t have enough time,” she writes, according to The New York Times (NYT). 

Keep reading

Kamala Harris Admits She Snubbed Pete Buttigieg as VP Pick Because He’s Gay – “Too Big of a Risk”

The mask slipped again.

Failed presidential hopeful Kamala Harris confessed in her upcoming memoir, 107 Days, that Pete Buttigieg was her “first choice” for running mate during last year’s election, but she chickened out because he’s gay.

In excerpts published by the far-left rag The Atlantic, Harris whines about how Buttigieg “would have been an ideal partner—if I were a straight white man.”

“But we were already asking a lot of America: to accept a woman, a Black woman, a Black woman married to a Jewish man. Part of me wanted to say, ‘Screw it, let’s just do it.’ But knowing what was at stake, it was too big of a risk.”

So much for Democrats being the party of “inclusion.” Behind closed doors, Harris admits what conservatives have been saying for years: identity politics is nothing more than a tool to manipulate voters, and even Democrats don’t trust the country to accept their own rhetoric.

Responding to Harris’ remarks, Buttigieg told Politico on Sept. 18 that he was “surprised” by the passage and argued that Americans deserve “more credit” than assuming they would reject such a ticket.

“You just have to go to voters with what you think you can do for them,” he said. “Politics is about the results we can get for people and not about these other things.”

It can be recalled that Harris had not won a nationwide primary vote before becoming the nominee. Kamala Harris was chosen only when Joe Biden dropped out.

When pressed by MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, Harris delivered her trademark word salad and denied discriminating against Buttigieg, while in the very same breath admitting his sexuality was a “real risk.”

Keep reading