Just read where a Judges decision in Pennsylvania will probably flip that state to Trump. Will look deeper.
When I was in college (right after they invented the wheel) I was a conservative, as I am now. We debated liberals all the time. The classic liberal of yesteryear questioned everything. When Reagan won 49 states they wanted iron clad proof. Todays lefty is not a liberal. They never question authority or media if those entities agree with their ideology. I have changed over the years. Not my philosophy but much of what I believed about the party I v**e for. I despise the Bush's now. I v**ed for them at the time because I thought they were correct on policy because they were labeled as conservatives. They weren't.

Bribed: Subverting American Universities

by Raymond Ibrahim
November 25, 2020 at 5:00 am

More than one-third of the nearly $20 billion in foreign donations and contracts made to American universities between just 2014 and 2020 were never disclosed as required by federal law, according to "Institutional Compliance with Section 117 of the Higher Education Act of 1965," a Department of Education report released on October 20, 2020.

Among those "gifts" were more than $3 billion from the Muslim Brotherhood's number one state backer, Qatar; more than $1.1 billion from the chief disseminator of "radical" Islamic ideology, Saudi Arabia; and nearly $1.5 billion from China.

The reason U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East has traditionally tended towards disaster may partly be -- in addition to the elixir of wishful thinking -- because policymakers and the advisors and analysts on whom they rely are products of programs in which benefactors are hostile to the United States.



A recent governmental report exposes the "purchased" influence foreign nations have on America's most prestigious universities and, as a result, on what America's current and upcoming generations of analysts and policymakers will think and believe.

More than one-third of the nearly $20 billion in foreign donations and contracts made to American universities between just 2014 and 2020 were never disclosed as required by federal law, according to "Institutional Compliance with Section 117 of the Higher Education Act of 1965," a Department of Education report released on October 20, 2020.

Among those "gifts" were more than $3 billion from the Muslim Brotherhood's number one state backer, Qatar; more than $1.1 billion from the chief disseminator of "radical" Islamic ideology, Saudi Arabia; and nearly $1.5 billion from China.

According to the report:

"[A]t least some of these foreign sources are hostile to the United States and are targeting their investments (i.e., 'gifts' and 'contracts') to project soft power, steal sensitive and proprietary research, and spread propaganda. Yet, the Department is very concerned by evidence suggesting the higher education industry's solicitation of foreign sources has not been appropriately or effectively balanced or checked by the institutional controls needed to meaningfully measure the risk and manage the threat posed by a given relationship, donor, or foreign venture."

This new report follows earlier initiatives. In March 2019, an event described as a "Three-Day Anti-Israel H**e-Fest," was sponsored by the University of North Carolina's Center for Middle East and Islamic Studies and the Duke-UNC Consortium for Middle East Studies. Following this event, the Department of Education warned the Consortium, in a letter dated August 29, 2019, to stop misusing federal grants by advancing "ideological priorities."

According to the letter:

"The Duke-UNC CMES appears to lack balance as it offers very few, if any, programs focused on the historic discrimination faced by, and current circumstances of, religious minorities in the Middle East, including Christians, Jews, Baha'is, Yadizis, Kurds, Druze, and others. Also, in your activities for elementary and secondary students and teachers, there is a considerable emphasis placed on the understanding the positive aspects of Islam, while there is an absolute absence of any similar focus on the positive aspects of Christianity, Judaism, or any other religion or belief system in the Middle East. This lack of balance of perspectives is troubling"

Similarly, a 2018 report found that "elite U.S. universities took more than half a billion dollars" from Saudi Arabia in gifts and donations between 2011 and 2017; as far back as 2005, Georgetown and Harvard each received $20 million "to support Islamic studies on their respective campuses."

Here the question arises: why would nations such as Saudi Arabia -- which treats women like chattel, teaches Muslims to h**e all non-Muslims, arrests and tortures Christians "plotting to celebrate Christmas"; a nation that has crack units dedicated to apprehending witches and warlocks -- why would it become a leading financial supporter of America's liberal arts?

The answer would seem to be so that the foreign donors can influence what students are taught about the Middle East and Islam. The new report's concerns, for example, regarding Georgetown University's Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, which are paradigmatic of its overall concerns, are worth quoting at length:

"[T]he Center could advance Islamic ideology in a fashion that belittles opposition, threatens academic integrity, and improperly influences future civil servants. The Center also received criticism for deceptively labeling itself as pluralistic; according to critics, the 'Christian' studies portion of the Center was a 'misnomer' as there was no Christian representation. Additional worries spawned from Saudi Arabian infiltration of an institution commonly known to siphon graduates into government employment. Such concerns were salient because the Saudi Arabians had communicated that their money would 'follow' the Center's first Director. This strategy of funding a particular director [John Esposito] is concerning, as it would allow a foreign government unduly to guide the Center's content.

"This donation empowered the Saudi Arabian government to advance a particular narrative about Islamic society to the West via a legitimate Western institution like Georgetown University.....

"The Saudi Arabian government had successfully impacted American foreign policy thinking through money alone. The Saudi Arabian government invested significantly into the dissemination of its favored ideological views at Georgetown University and several other U.S. academic institutions. Prince Alwaleed has made considerable international donations and has conducted similar soft power operations by creating Islamic studies centers at the University of Cambridge and Edinburgh University located in the United Kingdom, for examples. Prince Alwaleed's controversial and political past, ranging from anti-Z*****m to handsomely rewarding Saudi Arabians who participated in Yemen bombing raids, shadows him and his donations.

"Prince Alwaleed's agreement with Georgetown exemplifies how foreign money can advance a particular country's worldview within U.S. academic institutions — influence that has often remained undisclosed to American taxpayers as required by Section 117."

While raking in and failing to report on these billions in foreign "gifts," these same universities "depend on direct and indirect subsidies from U.S. taxpayers, including through Federal student loans that have encumbered Americans with staggering debt loads, to operate," the report states. Even so, "the evidence suggests institutional decision-making is generally divorced from any sense of obligation to our taxpayers or concern for our American national interests, security, or values."

In all spheres of life, education is an indicator of the potential for success; its opposite, ignorance -- or worse, indoctrination in falsehoods -- is an indicator of potential failure. The reason U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East has traditionally tended towards disaster may partly be -- in addition to the elixir of wishful thinking -- because policymakers and the advisors and analysts on whom they rely are products of programs in which benefactors are hostile to the United States.

Raymond Ibrahim, author of Crucified Again and Sword and Scimitar, is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute, a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and a Judith Rosen Friedman Fellow at the Middle East Forum.

Follow Raymond Ibrahim on Twitter and Facebook

Are We Looking at an Egregious American V**e Heist?
former democratic p**********l candidate andrew yang
I confidently presume to speak on behalf of many tens of millions of people, regardless of partisan leanings, who like me — a rube — feel egregiously c***ted witnessing the what appears to be racketeers stealing our precious individual v**es.

Sure, I know that those single b****t choices I make aren’t going to swing any e******ns.

So maybe in the big scheme of outcomes they don’t amount to much. I could just save the time and effort of going to a polling station, the post office, or a drop off box . . . who would know the difference?

I would. And I care a heck of a lot about that. Lots and lots of others feel the same. I see it in their solemn expressions in the v****g lines.

Sometimes I’m tempted to try to casually guess by their outward appearances whether their choices will cancel or support mine. But, overall, there is something about them — the shared atmosphere of the experience — that supersedes all.

Everyone — all who await their turns to participate in determining who will best represent their community and national priorities – and those volunteers who generously gave of their time to confirm legitimate v**er identities — they obviously care.

After all, what actual value does my v**e your v**e- really warrant?

What "price" would you sell it for?

Mine isn’t for sale at any price.

It would be a betrayal of something beyond anything I can ever imagine putting in a market.

How would you respond if someone offered to pay for your v**e in exchange for something — a free tee shirt — for example?

I’ve heard of that happening.

Would that be legal?

Is the alleged b****t harvesting from nursing homes in some states legal as well?

It’s ugly enough realizing that every single dead person’s v**e may very well cancel one of yours or mine, but then contemplate hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of such thefts that collectively dilute equal numbers of ours.

Racketeers seem to be actively targeting a massive state v**e hijacking effort upon a crucial upcoming Georgia contest that will determine control of the U.S. Senate, and in many respects, our nation’s future.

Former Democratic p**********l candidate billionaire Andrew Yang is urging out-of-state party residents to temporarily move to Georgia for the sole purpose of defeating Republican Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue in their runoff e******ns against Democrats Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock on Jan. 5.

To expedite this apparently t***sparent fraud, Yang told Democratic interlopers from other states to "get ready to head to Georgia to give Joe [Biden] a unified government."

Yang warned, "There isn’t much time. The earliest date for absentee b****ts to be mailed for the runoff is Nov. 18. The registration deadline is Dec. 7. The In-person early v****g begins Dec. 14."

Georgia law states that it is a felony to v**e in Georgia e******ns if you are not a legal resident or if you are residing in the state briefly with the intention just to v**e and then move away.

Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger issued a warning that groups who finance or organize such efforts to interfere with e******n integrity can be charged with committing fraud under Georgia’s Racketeering Conspiracy laws with severe consequences.

If true, persuasive current, organized systemic electronic and illegal write-in b****t v**e tabulation fraud on state and nationwide levels amounts to nothing less than all-out criminal warfare on our rights and liberties.

Those who assert that demands for full investigations of such factually supported allegations undermine the stability of our government institutions, processes and leaderships are fundamentally and dangerously misguided.

Regardless of the outcomes — whether individually wished for or not — what matters most is a shared belief in the fairness of processes that determine our common confidence of legitimacy regarding those chosen to represent us.

The key issue here is not exclusively tied to whether various assaults on our v****g rights rise to a level that will drive or change the ultimate results one way or another.

More, a central urgency revolves around whether we, a free society, turn blind eyes to all such improper behaviors whether committed for ideology, control or any other motive — where r****d systems and unaccountable injustices become a banana republic norm.

Something enormously large is at stake here . . . that same something that motivated us to cast our small, caring rube v**es for candidates, visions and legislative programs that racketeers view only as chits to be nullified in sinister orchestrated machine agendas.

That something we stand to lose is the America we know, love, and honor by protecting our priceless inherited privileges. We the disenfranchised rubes, must stand steadfastly united for reforms at that precarious precipice.

Larry Bell

Progressives automatically take the e******n result at face value. Why not? They won. Those that really believe that Biden somehow won, in a f**r e******n cannot understand why the rest of us don't believe he did. Here's one Conservatives reasons: Common sense.

1). I always wondered why the first House Bill passed in Pelosi's new congress changed v****g I.D. laws and mass mail in b****ts. Well before the p******c.
2). V****g laws were changed, using C***d as an excuse. Yet we kept grocery stores open and Social distanced successfully all over the country. In other words we could have received and counted all the b****ts postmarked by e******n day.
3). Mass mail in b****ts allow for b****t harvesting and easily concealable fraud. Again common sense.
4). Months before the e******n I really knew something was up (I have the President of an IT company that keeps me informed) when Democrats filed hundreds of law suits all over the country trying to get v**er laws changed.
5). The sheer number of v**es Biden supposedly received. Again common sense. He hid most of the campaign season. Couldn't get 100 to a rally. No one with a thinking mind can truly believe this guy got more v**es than Obama or Hillary. Joe Biden did not get the most v**es in our history.
6). His VP choice was the most unpopular of the 17 Democrat Primary candidates.
7). The Democrats lost House Seats they were supposed to win and the Republicans did not lose a seat and picked up at least eleven while gaining two more state legislatures. The Republicans also look like they will hold the Senate.
8). Trump got roughly 10 million more v**es than he did in 2016 and the majority of those v**es came on e******n day.
9). Data and statistics. Now this common sense point isn't for everyone (especially dummies like lonewuss). Data shows huge spikes for Biden around 2:00 to 3:30 A.M. in the morning in Battle ground states and many of these states quit counting v**es by midnight (for some unknown reason) and resumed the next day. Suddenly 700,000 v**e leads, in some cases for Trump, disappeared over night.
10). This v**e had the highest percentage turnout of registered v**ers ever, 63%, (I believe). Somehow the Milwaukee area in Wisconsin reported 93% turnout. Again, common sense tells us that number is bogus.
11). Hundreds of thousands of b****ts with only Biden's name checked. Ridiculous to assume this wan't done by people (not wanting to be caught) in a hurray filling out b****ts to fraudulently insert said b****ts. Face it, If these had been actual mail in b****ts received legally the people sending them in had weeks to fill them out completely.
12). Last, but by no means least, hundreds of American citizens under the criminal threat of perjury have signed affidavits affirming they witnessed v****g irregularities and or v***r f***d.

I'm sure any progressives who read this will say this doesn't prove anything. Correct. If provable it will be up to attorneys. I'm just stating why myself and many deep in their souls know this was a f********t e******n. Again common Sense.