Election News 7: The “United Front” Cometh
BY DIANA WEST | NOVEMBER 10, 2020
Election News 6 is here.
Behold the banner across America’s paper of record: “BIDEN CALLS FOR UNITED FRONT AS VIRUS RAGES.”
“United front”? Does it really say “united front”?
It is perfectly true that calling for a “united front” may be construed as simply calling for unity.
But “united front” also means something else. In the context of the socialist/communist forces vying for political control inside and alongside the Biden-Harris campaign, “united front” sounds quite sinister — especially when attributed to the pretender-“president-elect” as anointed by big media/tech and Swamp. Why? The term couldn’t be more communist.
Best to go back to the source for the explanation, which itself couldn’t be more communist: the Executive Committee of the Communist International (Comintern). John Riddell, the Marxist editor of The Communist International in Lenin’s Time, eight volumes of Comintern documents, tells us that the “united front” was the brainchild of the Comintern, the international arm of Bolshevik revolution.
Calling united front policy “one of the most most effective tools for working class action” inherited from Lenin era and the Russian revolution,” Riddell writes that the “united front” as formulated by Comintern in 1921 “called for the `greatest possible unity of all workers’ organisations in every practical action against the united capitalists,’ while assuring revolutionary socialists and other participating currents `absolute autonomy’ and “freedom in presenting their point of view.’ “
In other words, the united front is the political vehicle communists have used time and again in their drive to absolute power. Joe Biden, which is to say, the Biden organization, is calling for one.
For your situational awareness.
—
Now readers have to make a choice. Below you will find my independent election wrap, leading with bell-ringing news of legal action underway by the President’s teams and others alleging 2020 election fraud. These allegations include what Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani is now describing as a “common plan” across multiple states regarding the unlawful handling of hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballots, which he says were used to erase President Trump’s lead late in the night of Election Day.
Or, you can switch back to The New Comrade York Times and read the latest Pulitzer-Prize-encrusted, multi-editor-layered, and, by, elite consensus, “comprehensive” coverage of same.
Of course, there is barely a sentence about the opening this week of the president’s legal campaign against election fraud. To wit, the Times reports, “On Monday, the Trump campaign announced it had filed a lawsuit in Pennsylvania asserting that ballots cast in person there were scrutinized more closely than those sent by mail.”
Imagine being a Times reader and believing this summed up the whole case against The Big Steal! If such a reader even wanted more coverage of the lawsuits currently dropping in courts across the country, however, this is Timesworld’s upside-down major offering.
Growing Discomfort at Law Firms Representing Trump in Election Lawsuits
Some lawyers at Jones Day and Porter Wright, which have filed suits about the 2020 vote, said they were worried about undermining the electoral system.
Just so we can all stop rubbing our eyes, yes, the main story updating the contested presidential election in the paper of record (record of what, we usually forget to note) concerns the feelings of a handful of lawyers at megafirms Jones, Day and Porter, Wright, some number of whom, I am betting, went to school with the trio of NYT reporters by-lined in the story, all of whom were triggered by election integrity lawsuits filed by their firms on behalf of the President of the United States.
Sideways and backwards, a little news does creeps through.
Already, the two firms have filed at least four lawsuits challenging aspects of the election in Pennsylvania. The cases are pending.
(Wow! Four lawsuits by Team Trump in Pennsylvania already! See more below.)
The latest salvo came on Monday evening, when the Trump campaign filed a suit in federal court in Pennsylvania against the Pennsylvania secretary of state and a number of county election boards. The suit — filed by lawyers at Porter Wright — alleged that there were “irregularities” in voting across the state.
That was a “salvo,” all right, but, in Timesworld, it was not against fraud, Democrats, or Pennsylvania state officials. It’s a “salvo” against the feelings of these hard left snowflakes with legal degress, who, the report continues, were already in a state of distress over Jones Day partner (Don McGahn) having put in a stint as Trump White House counsel. Before that, the Times reports, three senior partners “grimaced at the sight of Mr. McGahn standing with Mr. Trump onstage after he won the New Hampshire primary in February 2016.”
Not that. Anything but that. But that’s not all.
The firm’s work for Mr. Trump has also garnered it unfavorable public attention. “Jones Day, Hands Off Our Ballots,” read a mural painted on the street outside the law firm’s San Francisco offices late last week.
The mural in question, you will not read in the New York Times, is a project of something called Bay Resistance, which turns out to be a leftist group co-founded by one Emily Lee, who has served as political director of the pro-Beijing Chinese Progressive Association.
Which just goes to show, “united front” action is everywhere.
And finally:
In recent days, two Jones Day lawyers said they had faced heckling from friends and others on social media about working at a firm that is supporting Mr. Trump’s efforts. ..
I’m going to cut it off there. I think we’ve gotten a good whiff of the poisonous stuff Americans including friends and family are constantly receiving directly or by osmosis through news and social media.
It makes it easier to understand how it is that so many Americans know nothing about what is really going on and how dangerous that is.
—
As promised, the big election news of the day is the Trump campaign legal offensive, now moving forward as lawsuits rev up.
For starters, here is an overview of the multi-state effort from the president’s attorney, Rudy Giuliani, interviewed last night on Lou Dobbs.
On this 105-page lawsuit, filed on November 9th in United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Giuliani said:
I would say it’s a very very powerful lawsuit. It demonstrates already that approximately 600,000 ballots were cast without any observation by Republicans, meaning mail-in ballots. So, Pennsylvania elections are governed by the legislature, not the governor, not even the Congress. So the state legislature provided, when these mail-in ballots were allowed, that they would have to observed by a Republican and a Democrat. And if not, it would be an unlawful ballot. There are somewhere north of 600,000 unlawful ballots cast in this election.
Turning to other lawsuits, Giuliani explained:
As a group, there are … six states in which the same exact pattern took place that is so unusual that it cannot be coincidental. On the morning of the election when the mail-in ballots were being looked at and counted, the Republican inspectors were not allowed to get near the ballots. They were put in corrals, 20 or 30 feet away. And while the counting went on, they could see nothing but white envelops being passed back and forth. In other words, they couldn’t see the writing on the envelop that would verify the ballot. Then the envelop was thrown away. At that point the law is violated because the law requires there be observation by both sides. That’s only way we can protect these mail-in ballots from fraud. The minute they’re separated, it becomes a secret ballot, and we never know exactly what was connected to it with those envelops.
Giuliani then expounded on the implications of this same pattern repeating across so many contested states.
It means that on Election Day, the chief Democratic crook in Philly wakes up and has the same idea as the one in Pittsburgh, the one in Detroit, the one in Milwaukee, the same idea as the one in Nevado, Reno, in Phoenix, Arizona, and Atlanta, Georgia. They all do the same thing. They all put the Republicans in corrals. They must have at least subcontracted for the corrals. So we’re gong to take discovery. I think this was a common plan.
In any event, I mean, the vote in Pennsylvania has to be altered to throw out these illegal ballots. so that’s going to overturn. He [Trump] was ahead. … We have 682 [thousand] illegal ballots. Remember on election night he [Trump] was ahead by 740,000 votes? Sounds like this was exactly the plan they had to overcome the 700,000 votes.
My judgment is that when Hillary Clinton said about four weeks ago, Don’t concede no matter what, she meant even if you’re behind by 800,000 votes in Pennsylvania, Joe, don’t worry, we’ll fix it for you. I mean, that’s an extraordinary number to make up, Lou. I never saw that: an 800K vote margin made up? When you consider the fact they wouldn’t let look at a single ballot. So, now, why, if these ballots are legitimate, would you not let us look at it and remove this issue? Why do you want to give us this issue all over the country if it’s not critical? And these are all the states, the states I’m mentioning, in which he [Biden]had to catch up, right, except maybe for Arizona. He was behind in Wisconsin by a lot, he was behind in MI by 5 points, he was behind in Georgia. These were the make up ballots from the very begining.
I include Giuliani’s comments in full because not even snippets have been widely reported, just as the president’s legal case itself is downgraded or ignored by big media/tech.
In other acts of press suppression/derision
In the best united front style, the Times’ coverage of the Trump legal team’s initial press conference on Saturday was left to a round-up of late-night comedians punchlines about it.
Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto cut away from White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany as she was doing her job, which, to remind us, is to keep the press (public) updates on White House matters.
Just as McNamy was saying
We want every legal vote to be counted, and we want every illegal vote to be…
Cavuto cut the video feed, saying:
Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. I just think we have to be very clear. She’s charging the other side is welcoming fraud and welcoming illegal voting, unless she has more details to back that up, I can’t in good countenance continue showing you this. That’s an explosive charge to make, that the other side is effectively rigging and cheating. If she does bring proof of that we will take you back.
Having by-passed the entire electoral process to “declare” a president, what’s a little more censorship?
Since the media won’t tell us
Here is the link to the Trump-Pence campaign press release about the recently filed Pennsylvania case. In a nutshell, the campaign legal team alleges
the creation and implementation of an illegal “two-tiered” voting system for the 2020 General Election. Pennsylvania’s “two-track” system resulted in voters being held to different standards depending on how they chose to exercise their right to vote. In-person voters had to sign voter registrations, have those signatures checked against voter rolls, vote in a polling place monitored by statutorily-authorized poll observers, and have their votes counted in a transparent and verifiable open and observed manner.
The state’s mail-in voting, which nearly 2.65 million votes were cast through, lacked all of the hallmarks of transparency and verifiability that were present for in-person voters, including not adequately verifying the voter’s identity, permitting ballots received up to three days after the election to be counted without any evidence of timely mailings, such as a postmark, and denying sufficient monitoring over the reviewing and counting of mail-in ballots.
We believe this two-tracked system results in two Constitutional violations: 1) Equal Protection Clause violation, and 2) Elections and Electors Clauses violation. …
In other big Pennsylvania news, Gateway Pundit reports that ten state attorneys general have filed an amicus brief in support of “two lawsuits asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review Pennsylvania’s three-day extension to receive mail-in ballots.”
The brief was filed Nov. 9 in support of Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Boockvar and Scarnati v. Boockvar by the Attorney General of Missouri and joined by the Attorneys General of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, South Dakota and Texas.
Gateway Pundit is also closely tracking a growing number election fraud stories that come under the category of “vote-switching in the computer,” previously discussed here. This is the phenomenon that may be observed as updating televised vote tallies show one candidate’s totals (Trump’s) dropping by the exact number the other candidate’s totals is increasing.
So far, this phenomenon has been observed in three Pennsylvania counties, in Virginia, Michigan and Wisconsin. Latest on the story here.
Michigan Update
From Great Lakes Justice Center (unaffiliated with the Trump team):
As first reported by Steve Gruber on the Steve Gruber Radio Show, the Great Lakes Justice Center (GLJC) filed an action in Wayne County Circuit Court alleging massive fraud in the election vote-counting procedures. The suit states Wayne County election officials allowed illegal, unlawful, and fraudulent processing of votes cast in last Tuesday’s election. Numerous witnesses have filed sworn affidavits under oath attesting to the fraudulent activities they observed directly. These acts disenfranchised lawful voters and potentially changed the outcome of the election. The various acts of fraud are itemized in the Complaint.
As first reported by the Steve Gruber Radio Show … Kudos to the Gruber show, of course, but shame on the omerta-media.
This lawsuit includes an affidavit from Zachary Larsen, former Michigan assistant attorney general. His account of Election Day crimes alone is hair-raising.
More Alternate Reality to Run Screaming From
I was about to conclude with links to reports of all of the adorable blacklists (hit lists?) being put together by Biden-Harris united fronters such as AOC and Jennykins Rubin but I’ll save them for later.
Instead, here’s a bulletin from the Great FEMA Drill in Stalinist Utopia that all organs of propaganda are trying to brainwash us into entering.
According to Shore News:
Just as you couldn’t think things in America and giant-tech couldn’t get any worse, it has done just that.
Open up your iPhone or Apple home devices and ask Siri, “How old is the President?”
Siri will tell you that Kamala Harris was born 56 years ago on Tuesday, October 20th, 1964. Wait…what? Where are the armies of Facebook and Twitter fact-checkers? Last time we checked, President Donald Trump was 74 years old.
This is what it was saying between 10:30 and 11:20 PM ET Sunday night. We documented it and it was documented by others who shared the videos to various social media platforms. By 11:20 PM Eastern Time, Apple corrected the answer to the correct response.
I’m still banking on a way bigger correction than that.
