Tag: elections

Texas declares war on plan to seize one of America’s richest counties and turn it into a ‘melanated’ community

Texas is suing a man state officials claim is trying to ‘overthrow the local government’ of an oil-rich county by offering black people free houses to move there and vote how he wants. 

Carpetbagger Malcolm Tanner bought two five-acre plots of land in Loving County, on the Texas/New Mexico border, according to the state’s lawsuit.

The Indiana man, who claims to be running for president in 2028, has offered the land to up to 1,000 ‘melanated people’ for free. 

‘It’s a movement going on called the “melanated people of power,” Tanner says in one Instagram reel. 

‘It don’t matter where you are on the world. It could be Africa, Asia, as long as you melanated. That’s the only thing that matters. It’s for us. It’s for us.’

‘Do not miss out on your opportunity to be a homeowner, to have a deed.’ 

Through social media posts, Tanner explains that he will take over Loving County, which he calls ‘Tanner County.’

In the state’s lawsuit, Attorney General Ken Paxton claims he will get his melanated residents to vote as he wants, easily outvoting the 64 citizens recorded by the last US census – but with a total taxable value of over $18 billion in 2024 thanks to petroleum.

Already dozens of people have taken him up on his offer to move and collect $5,000 a month, the state claimed in a lawsuit.

‘Despite there being no homes or utilities on the land, Tanner has induced dozens of people, including many women and children, to move onto and inhabit the land without any provision for the proper disposal and treatment of sewage,’ Paxton said in a press release announcing the lawsuit.

‘These individuals are forced to live in RVs or other makeshift shelters.’

Keep reading

Criminal Illegal Alien Who Ran Des Moines Schools Registered As Maryland Voter

Ian Andre Roberts, the illegal alien ineligible for employment in the U.S. but hired in Iowa as superintendent at the Des Moines School District, is a registered Maryland voter.

By law, only U.S. citizens are allowed to register to vote in U.S. elections, but an election watchdog group, the American Accountability Foundation (AAF), looked into voter registration in states where Roberts previously lived and found he registered to vote as a Democrat twice, once in 2011 and again in 2016.

It raises questions about how many other illegal aliens or otherwise ineligible people have successfully registered to vote. As AAF president Tom Jones told Fox 45, “We can’t rely on the honor system to hope that illegal aliens won’t lie to us.”

The only citizenship verification on the Maryland voter registration form is a tiny box next to the question “Are you a U.S. citizen?” where the applicant checks yes or no.

Oddly, the documents AAF received from Prince George’s County Maryland concealed his answer. The Federalist asked the Prince George’s County  election office why it redacted that information. It did not respond.

The instructions tell applicants who answer “No” on the citizenship question to not complete the form, so we may assume Roberts lied and claimed to be a citizen since he completed the form, but as an illegal alien, Robert’s has a history of not following instructions. Because of the county’s redaction, we can’t be certain how he answered, so we can’t know if he lied or if he told the truth and the county overlooked it.

The form advises that lying on a voter registration is perjury punishable with up to five years in prison, if he is ever charged for it. Roberts is already incarcerated for his illegal immigration status; he is currently being held at the Council Bluffs, Iowa main jail in Polk County, the U.S. Marshals Service told The Federalist. As previously reported, Roberts has a criminal background, but was promoted through woke school systems.

Keep reading

Smartmatic Indicted For Money Laundering, Bribery Of Philippine Official

Smartmatic — the company involved in a defamation lawsuit against Fox News over the latter’s reporting on the 2020 election — was indicted by a federal grand jury in Miami on Thursday for allegedly bribing a Philippine official in relation to the 2016 Philippine national elections.

The indictment added the parent company of Smartmatic, SGO Corporation Ltd., as a defendant in the case already underway against three Smartmatic executives. The indictment charges that between 2015 and 2018, Smartmatic executives Roger Alejandro Piñate Martinez, Jorge Miguel Vasquez, and others “caused at least $1 million in bribes to be paid” to the former chairman of COMELEC, according to the Department of Justice.

COMELEC stands for the Commission on Elections of the Republic of the Philippines. According to the indictment, COMELEC is an “independent agency mandated to enforce and administer election laws in the Philippines.”

According to the indictment, COMELEC opened the bidding process in 2014 for the lease of 23,000 election machines for the upcoming 2016 election. Smartmatic was awarded a contract in 2015. In 2015, COMELEC awarded a second contract to Smartmatic for the leasing of 70,977 voting machines and services for the 2016 election. Smartmatic was later awarded a third contract.

The indictment alleges that Smartmatic, along with its executives, offered to pay bribes to the COMELEC chairman in order to obtain the contracts, as well as to obtain the “release of favorable value added tax payments.”

In order to pay for the alleged bribes, the indicted co-conspirators allegedly over-invoiced the cost of each voting machine that was used in the 2016 Philippine elections. According to the Department of Justice, “they used coded language, created fraudulent contracts and sham loan agreements, and routed transactions through bank accounts in Asia, Europe, and the U.S., including within the Southern District of Florida.”

The indictment charges Smartmatic, along with Piñate and Vasquez, with one count of conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, as well as one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering and three counts of international laundering of monetary instruments.

Smartmatic denied the allegations in a statement to The Federalist.

Keep reading

Wait, an NAACP Lawyer Did Not Just Say That About the Voting Rights Act

Jeff will have more on the oral arguments in Louisiana v. Callais, which concerns race-based legislative districts and could gut a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. It’s a case that if liberals lose, could see massive implications for the 2026 midterms. 

And yes, some of the arguments made by lawyers fighting to keep this provision in place are downright embarrassing. An NAACP lawyer said that race-based congressional districts are essential, since white Democrats don’t support black candidates regardless of party affiliation. You cannot make this up.  

That’s not true. In fact, one could argue that liberal white women are the reason the Democrats haven’t fallen into total irrelevancy. Second, white liberals are the most hyper-aggressive about these issues and have voted in droves for black candidates. Party affiliation be damned, frankly. These white Democrats now vote based on race alone. The only thing that stops them is seeing an “R” next to the name. There is nothing more insufferable than the white, college-educated progressive who even repels nonwhite voters, which we’ve seen since 2020.  

Keep reading

Clarence Thomas Wrecks Another Race Argument at SCOTUS

Supreme Court Clarence Thomas isn’t buying arguments that the Voting Rights Act allows for congressional districts to be drawn along racial lines (more specifically to help Democrats retain power in Washington D.C.). 

During a back and fourth with Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguinaga Wednesday, who is opposed to race based lines, Thomas argued an all black district in the state wouldn’t exist without the state being forced to consider race in districting. 

“Would the maps that Louisiana have currently be used if they were not forced to consider race?” Thomas asked. 

“We drew it because the courts told us to!” Aguinaga explained. “They said a majority black district was required. And our legislature saw the marching order.”

Keep reading

Gorsuch Gets NAACP Lawyer To All But Admit Support For Racial Discrimination In Redistricting

UPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES — Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch got a lawyer for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund to all but admit support for states intentionally discriminating on the basis of race in the redistricting process.

The moment came during the Supreme Court’s Wednesday oral arguments for a pair of cases known as Louisiana v. Callais and Robinson v. Callais, which center on the Louisiana Legislature’s use of race when creating its recent congressional map.

As The Federalist previously reported, the matter first arose “following ‘a previous lawsuit … where plaintiffs argued that the prior map’ put forward by the state ‘violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by diluting minority votes,’ according to Oyez.” A district court order and subsequent legal battle prompted the Louisiana Legislature to “draft a new map last year ‘that included a second majority-black district,’ which plaintiffs in Louisiana v. Callais contend violates the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause by ‘prioritizing race in its creation.’”

While the Supreme Court was initially supposed to issue a verdict on the matter during its 2024-2025 term, the court announced on the last day of the session that it would be rehearing arguments in the case this fall. The justices notably issued an order over the summer instructing parties in the case to address the question of “[w]hether [Louisiana’s] intentional creation of a second majority-minority congressional district violates the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.”

Keep reading

KBJ Suggests Black People Can’t Vote, Compares Them To The Disabled

During oral arguments for a major case that could put an end to race-based gerrymandering on Wednesday, Democrat-appointed Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson suggested that race should be a consideration when drawing congressional districts because black people are systemically “disabled” and don’t have proper access to voting systems.

Jackson drew a comparison between the redistricting cases in question, Louisiana v. Callais and Robinson v. Callais, and accessibility under the Americans with Disabilities Act. She implied that minorities like black people are systemically blocked from accessing voting polls (a demonstrably false claim) and compared this to disabled people not being able to access a building. She used this faulty comparison to bolster her underlying argument that past race-based discrimination should allow for a present race-based remedy.

“Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Act against the backdrop of a world that was generally not accessible to people with disabilities, and so it was discriminatory in effect because these folks were not able to access these buildings,” Jackson said. She argued that whether such discrimination is intentional is irrelevant.

“I guess I don’t understand why that’s not what’s happening here. … We are responding to current-day manifestations of past and present decisions that disadvantage minorities and make it so that they don’t have equal access to the voting system, right? They’re disabled. … We say that’s a way in which you see that these processes are not equally open.”

The case considers possible 14th Amendment violations of a congressional district map in Louisiana. As The Federalist’s Shawn Fleetwood has reported, the origins of the case date back to 2022, “when the Louisiana Legislature drafted a congressional map with a single black-majority district.” This led to a lawsuit by a group of plaintiffs — “represented by left-wing groups like the ACLU” — who alleged that the map violated Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act by “dilut[ing] black voting strength.” 

“Following an injunction barring the map’s implementation by a district court judge, continued litigation in the case ultimately resulted in the state redrawing the map to include a second black-majority district. This led to another lawsuit from a different group of plaintiffs, who claimed the state unlawfully prioritized race in the map’s creation and therefore violated the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause,” Fleetwood reported. “A three-judge panel on a separate district court agreed with these plaintiffs and blocked the new map’s implementation.”

The Supreme Court was initially slated to decide the case during its 2024-2025 term, but announced in June that it would rehear the case this fall.

Keep reading

Will the Supreme Court upend the Voting Rights Act?

The Supreme Court may very well upend one of the last remaining central pieces of the Voting Rights Act – that elections or voting practices cannot discriminate based on race.

And, in doing so, the high court may bolster efforts by Republican state legislatures to redraw congressional maps to expand the party’s majority.

The justices’ ruling could actually crush minority representation in Congress.

According to two voting rights groups, Fair Fight Action and Black Voters Matter Fund, a ruling gutting the race provision would let the GOP nationwide redraw up to 19 House seats to favor the party.

It could also prevent Black voters from challenging political maps they believe don’t accurately represent them.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday in Louisiana v. Callais.

Arguments lasted for more than two hours in an unusually lengthy, complicated debate.

It stems from a complex congressional redrawing dispute starting in 2022.

Louisiana’s GOP-led legislature drew a map that only had one Black majority district and five mostly white districts, despite Louisiana’s population being one-third Black. So, a group of Black voters sued.

A federal judge struck the map down and ordered a redraw. Instead of letting the judge redraw it, Louisiana Republicans passed the current map that added a second Black majority district (but protected districts of key Republicans in the state, like House Speaker Mike Johnson and Majority Leader Steve Scalise).

Keep reading

Unprecedented Times: “It’s Hard To Keep Up, Even By Experienced Folks”

That we are living in unprecedented times was borne out by events in the last couple of days again. Indeed, it is probably hard to keep up, even by experienced folks.

The London silver market saw the spot price of silver pushing above $51 per troy ounce on Friday (and higher again this morning) due to a short squeeze and shortage of silver in London vaults. Some say the situation now, in particular the lack of liquidity, is comparable or even worse than in the early 1980s when the famous Hunt brothers tried to corner the market (after which silver crashed).

Meanwhile, crypto markets saw on Friday what data tracker Coinglass dubbed the “largest liquidation in history”, leading to hefty declines in cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin. But significant losses were also recorded in global equity markets, with the S&P500 down 2.7% and investors seeking refuge in ‘safe-haven’ bond markets (10Y USTs -11bp, German Bunds -6bp).

That volatility was clearly driven by the strong-worded warnings by President Trump at the address of China (more on that below), although there were other factors at play, including (geo)political instability. Indeed, just name me one country where the political situation is stable, where there is no ‘polarization’ of society and where policy making is ‘boring’… Still thinking?

In France, newly appointed PM Lecornu, who threw in the towel last week after trying to glue together a group of parties able to steer a budget through parliament was re-appointed by President Macron, again with the same task: …to glue together a group of parties able to steer a budget through parliament. On Sunday President Macron announced the new cabinet, headed by Lecornu.

The turn of events, including Lecornu’s conclusion that it should be possible to reach a deal on the 2026 budget, supported French bonds on Friday. But we think there is not much scope for a further rally in the near term. In fact, as we pointed out last week, we think there is not much scope for a further rally in the near term. Political risks remain until the budget negations are concluded. Both key parties on the far left and right have already indicated they will not support this cabinet and so Lecornu will need all the support he can get elsewhere. It is not to be excluded that he will be toppled again in a no-confidence vote this week. But if he stays, negotiations are likely to remain tough. Most parties underscore the need for a budget, but they will undoubtedly demand (further) concessions, which may weaken fiscal consolidation. In the longer run, that leaves the French curve more vulnerable to future fiscal setbacks.

However, the political focus shifted back to Japan last Friday as the long-standing LDP-Komeito coalition collapsed following Sanae Takaichi’s election as LDP leader. She was set to become Japan’s first female Prime Minister after Shigeru Ishiba stepped down, but Komeito withdrew support over disagreements, particularly on stricter party funding rules. While Takaichi’s leadership is now uncertain, she may still retain power if she can secure backing from parts of the fragmented opposition. Otherwise, snap elections are a real possibility.

Keep reading