We Regret to Inform You That Election Integrity Won't Be Returning
Top O' the Briefing
Happy Tuesday, dear Kruiser Morning Briefing friends. Ghyrrbellin became rather fond of strawberry preserves on spicy beef jerky after a kitchen mishap in which tequila also featured prominently.
Well, that was certainly a wearisome turn of events in a short period of time, wasn't it?
Just one day after lamenting leftist activist judges, two of the ones who are supposed to be on our side went rogue and got squirrelly on one of the most important issues facing the United States of America. This is from Catherine:
The U.S. Supreme Court has finally handed down a ruling on a vitally important mail-in ballot counting deadline case. The decision comes amid controversy over election results altered by alleged mail-in ballots in California.
Unfortunately, the court ruled 5-4 in favor of allowing Mississippi to count ballots received up to five days after Election Day. This is a disaster, obviously a huge opportunity for fraud, an encouragement not to count expeditiously, approval for ballots not mailed in time and possibly harvested, and also indirectly ensures other states like California will count until they get the results authorities want. It was a very disappointing decision from SCOTUS, especially given our supposed conservative majority.
It was Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett who decided to aid and abet the Democrats in their election fraud efforts. I can complain all I want about activist libs in the judiciary, but they never, ever waver on this issues that are most important to the Democrats. In fact, that was pretty much what we were discussing yesterday.
Justice Barrett wrote the majority decision, which is very disappointing. Then again, she's wobbled before.
Mail-in ballots are the most deadly cancer killing election integrity in this country. That's why they're a priority for the Democrats. Justice Samuel Alito wrote the dissent for this nightmare, which Matt wrote about:
Alito then argued that the decision "leaves open opportunities for voter fraud that may further undermine Americans' faith in the integrity of this country's elections."
We all know he’s right. We’ve been covering the problems with mail-in ballots for years, and Alito also backed up his claim with receipts.
Alito pointed to a bipartisan commission from 2005, co-chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker, that concluded absentee voting was "the largest source of potential voter fraud" in American elections. Alito noted that "diverse sources have recognized that mail-in ballots increase the potential for fraud.”
The reason that vote-by-mail is the darling of the Democrats is that the fraud is so difficult to prove. As the commission study that Matt cites noted, it's the potential for fraud that's so huge. The transparency gets, put politely, very muddied and that's where all of the "anomalies" occur.
President Trump responded to the ruling by immediately renewing his call for Republicans to pass the SAVE America Act. Regular readers here know that I have written about the importance of the need to get that done a lot. I have one big problem with the bill, however — it doesn't do nearly enough to shut down the mail-in ballot problems. Some new restrictions are placed on the process, but the greatest impact they'll have is making the Democrats whine louder. I favor restrictions on vote-by-mail that a lot of Republicans would call Draconian.
As Catherine wrote, we are still doomed to endure post-election day ballot counting until Dems get the votes that they need. Election fraud deniers say that's merely a result of voting habits — Republicans tend to vote on election day while Democrats vote by mail. Or for several cycles after they're dead. Anyway, that's a story I might have bought if just once it was a Republican who was behind on election night in an important race and benefitted from several days of post-election ballot dumps.
Just once.
The probability involved in it always being the Democrat gives everything a decided "statistical impossibility" vibe to me.
As Justice Alito pointed out in his dissent, this does destroy the faith that good people have in elections. That is, of course, the game plan for the Dems. They're trying to get all Republicans to give up and stop voting. I know a few people who it's already worked on.
I'll keep raging at the fraud-fest, but it is getting more and more discouraging. If the SAVE Act doesn't get passed, the bleakness will really kick in.
Sorry Dems, I'm still going to vote. In person. On election day.
