Former Special Counsel Robert Hur testified before the House of Representatives and dropped several “bombshell” revelations about Joe Biden’s classified documents case.

But one House Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a Democrat from Washington state, attempted to whitewash Robert Hur’s findings for public consumption, but with disastrous consequences.

Jayapal attempted to claim that Hur “exonerated” Joe Biden, but got instantly fact-checked. Even more absurd, however, is she scolded Hur for correcting her bogus claim.

“You exonerated [Biden],” Jayapal claimed.

“I did not exonerate him,” Hur corrected her.

“Sir, it’s my time,” she replied. “Thank you.”

Japayal fared no better in the overall course of her questioning of Hur.

“So this lengthy, expensive and independent investigation resulted in a complete exoneration of President Joe Biden for every document you discussed in your report,” she claimed.

“You found insufficient evidence that the president violated any laws about possession or retention of classified materials. The primary law that you analyzed for potential prosecution was part of the Espionage Act 18 USC 793 E, which criminalizes willful retention or disclosure of national defense information. Is that correct?”

“Congresswoman, that is one statute that we analyzed,” Hur replied. “I need to go back and make sure that I take note of a word that you used — ‘exoneration.’ That is not a word I used in my report and that is not part of my job as a prosecutor…”

“I’m going to continue with my questions,” Japayal said, talking over Hur’s response.

“You exonerated him,” she wrongfully insisted, despite Hur attempting to correct her willful distortion of the report.

Special Counsel Hur’s testimony before the House of Representatives laid out in damning fashion how Joe Biden not only mishandled classified documents, as a matter of fact and not opinion, but he had lied to about it, raising questions about obstruction of justice.

NOW READ:

Matt Gaetz Exposes Robert Hur For Refusing to Charge Joe Biden in Classified Documents Scandal

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis finds herself in more hot water over evidence of ethical violations regarding partisan collusion with the now-disbanded January 6 select committee to bring criminal charges against former President Donald Trump.

Republicans on a House committee announced Monday that they are investigating Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, who is prosecuting a case against former President Donald Trump, for interactions she had with the House Jan. 6 committee, which was disbanded last year.

A report released on Monday delved into depth regarding the information and evidence allegedly concealed by the Democrat-controlled House Jan. 6 select committee, but they also discovered that the Jan. 6 committee talked with Willis, a Democrat, before she filed her case against President Trump.

During its initial review of records archived by the Select Committee, the Subcommittee discovered a letter from Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to the Select Committee dated December 17, 2021.273 In this letter, Willis requested access to any Select Committee records relevant to her investigation into President Trump’s actions to challenge the 2020 presidential election, including “recordings and transcripts of witness interviews and depositions, electronic and print records of communications, and records of travel.”

Based on public reporting, the Select Committee shared important records with Willis and the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office. According to the Atlanta Journal Constitution, the Select Committee provided “Fulton County prosecutors…key evidence about what former President Trump and his top advisers knew” with respect to Georgia’s 2020 election results.

Politico also reported that Fani Willis’ staff met with the Select Committee in April 2022 and participated in multiple phone calls with the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office. The same video recordings that the Fulton County District Attorney requested were never archived by the Select Committee.

Although no additional communications between the Select Committee and the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office were archived by the Select Committee, the prospect of the Select Committee sharing video recordings of witness interviews with Willis but not this Subcommittee remains particularly concerning. The Subcommittee has opened an investigation into the extent of the coordination between Willis and the Select Committee and is committed to uncovering answers to these questions.

The Jan. 6 committee, chaired by former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), harshly criticized the former president and essentially blamed him for the breach at the United States Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Republicans and the former president claim the panel was politicized and overlooked key facts.

According to Monday’s report, the select committee shared information with Willis and her office, including allegations made against the former president and his aides about the 2020 Georgia election results.

Willis requested access to any Select Committee records relevant to her investigation into President Trump’s actions to challenge the 2020 presidential election, including “recordings and transcripts of witness interviews and depositions, electronic and print records of communications, and records of travel,” according to a letter she sent to the committee on December 17, 2021.

Apart from the House Administration Committee’s findings, other House Republicans have pressed Willis in recent months. Last month, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, stated that his staff had met with a “whistleblower” who had “raised concerns that Ms. Willis was not following the rules of grant dollars in an appropriate manner.”

Jordan issued a subpoena to Willis a few weeks ago to acquire documents linked to potential abuse of taxpayer funds in her case against President Trump and more than a dozen other co-defendants.

The letter stated that Willis was “required to produce the following items in your possession, custody, or control, from the period of September 1, 2020, to present in unredacted form.”

Previously, the district attorney’s office criticized House Republicans’ proposals as politically motivated. Last year, she stated that Congress had no constitutional authority to “interfere with a state criminal matter.”

President Trump has been hit with a series of charges in Georgia, with prosecutors accusing him of illegally seeking to sway the 2020 election outcome. The former president has pleaded not guilty, claiming the allegations are an effort to interfere in the 2024 election.

The entire January 6 report can be read below.

New House J6 Report Details… by Kyle Becker

NOW READ:

New House Report on J6 Lays Out Damning Details of How Nancy Pelosi Failed America During Capitol Riots

A new House report on January 6 gives Americans the “other side of the story” that was suppressed during the partisan committee’s hearings leading up to the ultimate recommendation that Donald Trump should be charged over his role in the Capitol Riots.

There is not only exonerating evidence that shows decisively that Donald Trump had nothing to do with inciting a pre-planned attack on the Capitol, but the report raises extremely serious questions about J6 security failures, including the potential complicity of former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who showed willful neglect to authorize National Guard troops.

Speaker Pelosi’s failure to authorize National Guard troops during the attack on the Congress, despite repeated requests from former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund through her House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving, led to prolonged disruption of the official election challenges, which were launched by Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) and sustained by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) at 1:12 p.m.

It is a further oddity that the DNC pipe bomb threat was reported at 1:14 p.m., despite multiple security sweeps and a dummy pipe bomb that had sat in the open near a park bench; surveillance footage suggests the J6 pipe bomb suspect had placed it there to sit overnight.

The 2020 election challenges would eventually be supported by 147 Congressmen, including 8 senators. Thus, it was extremely fortuitous for the Democrats not to have to deal with explaining to the American people how the 2020 election was entirely ‘above board.’

The new House report provides key insights into Nancy Pelosi’s curious behavior on January 6, which includes her dereliction of duty to secure the Congress, along with showing off for a documentary filmed by her daughter Alexandra Pelosi.

Prior to January 6, 2021, the U.S. Capitol Police Chief was required by law to receive approval from the Capitol Police Board before directly requesting assistance from the D.C. National Guard. This requirement caused significant delays in the deployment of the National Guard and therefore delayed law enforcement’s efforts to secure the Capitol.

In the days leading up to January 6, both the House and Senate Sergeant at Arms received requests from USCP Chief of Police Steven Sund for approval to request National Guard assistance. Chief Sund testified that he first requested National Guard assistance from the
House and Senate Sergeant at Arms during the morning of January 3, 2021. According to his testimony before the Subcommittee on September 19, 2023, Chief Sund decided to expand the security perimeter around the Capitol and believed National Guard assistance would be needed to man the expanded perimeter due to the staffing constraints that a Joint Session placed on the Department.

Chief Sund testified that on the morning of January 3, 2021, he walked into House Sergeant at Arms (“HSAA”) Paul Irving’s office and asked that he approve a request for National Guard assistance to support the expanded perimeter.283 According to Chief Sund’s testimony, HSAA Paul Irving, upon learning of the request, said he did not like the “optics” of National Guard troops on Capitol Grounds and did not think the intelligence justified National Guard deployment. It should be noted, however, that HSAA Irving has testified that he does not recall ever using the term ‘optics’ in relation to National Guard deployment, and claims Chief Sund ultimately agreed with his conclusion that the intelligence did not support requesting National Guard assistance.

Before departing, HSAA Irving then urged Chief Sund to speak to the Senate Sergeant at Arms (“SSAA”) and then-Chairman of the Capitol Police Board, Michael Stenger, about the request.286 Later on January 3, Chief Sund conferred with SSAA Stenger, who like HSAA Irving, delayed Chief Sund’s request. SSAA Stenger did, however, suggest that Chief Sund reach out to D.C. National Guard Commanding General William Walker and inquire about what National Guard resources he could have ready for deployment if needed. Chief Sund later wrote in his book: “Several weeks after January 6, I had the chance to ask Stenger if he had been given a heads-up that I was coming to request the Guard, and he told me that Irving had called him and said, ‘Sund just came to my office asking for national Guard assistance. We need to come up with another plan. I will never get this by Pelosi.’”

Had the House and Senate Sergeant at Arms approved Chief Sund’s request, it is likely the Capitol’s outer perimeter would never have been breached. Beginning on December 31, 2020, Major General (“MG”) William Walker of the D.C. National Guard received two letters from the Washington, D.C. government. The first was from Dr. Christopher Rodiguez, the Director of the D.C. Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency, who issued a request for assistance (“RFA”) from the D.C. National Guard to assist the Metropolitan Police Department (“MPD”) at metro stations and traffic control points (“TCP”) on January 5 and January 6 due to planned protests throughout the city. The second letter came from the Mayor of Washington, D.C., Muriel Bowser, urging General Walker to immediately connect with Dr. Rodriquez regarding the RFA.

These requests for the D.C. National Guard were directly related to the intelligence received by the D.C. government regarding the scheduled demonstrations.292 In addition to requesting the National Guard, Mayor Bowser also publicly requested non-residents of D.C. to “stay out of the District” in anticipation of these protests.

It is critical to note what Nancy Pelosi was doing during these attempts to get her House Sergeant at Arms to authorize National Guard troops.

On January 6th, 2021, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had her daughter, Alexandra, a documentary filmmaker, accompany her around the United States Capitol with a camera while the day’s events transpired.

Alexandra’s film was given to CNN, which gladly aired the cherry-picked footage in October 2021, which conveniently reinforced the Democratic Speaker’s narrative that the J6 riots were an “insurrection.”

Speaker Pelosi is briefed by staff in the clip. She watches Trump supporters walking toward the Capitol from her office windows says she “hoped” Trump would come to the Capitol.

Pelosi then exclaims, “I’m gonna punch him out” – threatening physically harm against the President of the United States.

But it was a little-noticed aspect of the video that is now raising serious questions about the former Speaker’s coordination and knowledge aforehand about the January 6 riots.

In the video, Speaker Nancy Pelosi is seen talking to Secret Service agents about President Donald Trump.

“The Secret Service said they have dissuaded him from coming to Capitol Hill,” Chief of Staff Terri McCullough said. “They told him, they don’t have the resources to protect him here.”

“So, at the moment, he is not coming, but that could change,” she added.

“I hope he comes, I want to punch him out,” Nancy Pelosi remarks.

“I’ve been waiting for this, for trespassing on the Capitol grounds,” she went on. “I’m going to punch him out and I’m going to go to jail and I’m going to be happy.”

There are some very important things to point out about this particular exchange. First of all, Pelosi’s officer and staff were coordinating with the Secret Service during the J6 riots.

Why does this matter? Because the texts and call transcripts of Secret Service agents on January 6 have now gone “missing.”

As reported by the New York Intelligencer in July 2022:

A raft of Secret Service text messages sent on January 5 and January 6, 2021, have been deleted, according to a letter from the inspector general for the Department of Homeland Security.

In the letter, which the Intercept reported was originally sent to the House and Senate Homeland Security Committee and then given to the January 6 Committee, investigators claim the messages were deleted soon after officials asked for them, lending the episode an air of nefariousness.

The second aspect of the video that is concerning is the remark that Pelosi had been “waiting for this.” She then refers to “trespassing on the Capitol grounds.”

Nancy Pelosi, for her part, claimed in January that she “begged” for National Guard troops, which is impossible. How do we know? There would have been National Guard troops deployed to secure the Congress, who were already on stand-by, according to General William Walker.

But a huge contrast with Nancy Pelosi’s negligent behavior comes from Donald Trump himself. That is because it was confirmed that Donald Trump had issued his desire that National Guard troops secure the Congress, while he did not have authorization to request that the troops be put there by himself.

The partisan January 6 committee suppressed this exculpatory evidence, which renders claims that he sought to disrupt the election certification (actually, the election challenges) completely implausible.

The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway recently reported this story.

Former Rep. Liz Cheney’s January 6 Committee suppressed evidence that President Donald Trump pushed for 10,000 National Guard troops to protect the nation’s capital, a previously hidden transcript obtained by The Federalist shows.

Cheney and her committee falsely claimed they had “no evidence” to support Trump officials’ claims the White House had communicated its desire for 10,000 National Guard troops. In fact, an early transcribed interview conducted by the committee included precisely that evidence from a key source. The interview, which Cheney attended and personally participated in, was suppressed from public release until now.

Deputy Chief of Staff Anthony Ornato’s first transcribed interview with the committee was conducted on January 28, 2022. In it, he told Cheney and her investigators that he overheard White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows push Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser to request as many National Guard troops as she needed to protect the city.

He also testified President Trump had suggested 10,000 would be needed to keep the peace at the public rallies and protests scheduled for January 6, 2021. Ornato also described White House frustration with Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller’s slow deployment of assistance on the afternoon of January 6, 2021.

Not only did the committee not accurately characterize the interview, they suppressed the transcript from public review. On top of that, committee allies began publishing critical stories and even conspiracy theories about Ornato ahead of follow-up interviews with him. Ornato was a career Secret Service official who had been detailed to the security position in the White House.

Nonetheless, the Democratic Party has been seeking to eliminate Donald Trump from state ballots based on the spurious claim that he had backed an “insurrection,” and are attempting to see him convicted in court for exercising his constitutional right to challenge elections.

The entire January 6 report can be read below:

New House J6 Report Details… by Kyle Becker

NOW READ:

New RNC Leadership Cleans House, Goes on Major Firing Spree

It’s a “blood bath” at the RNC.

The Republican National Committee (RNC) is now conducting a massive personnel restructure. The new leadership team, which is closely linked with former President Donald Trump, has taken the dramatic step of firing scores of employees.

The “house cleaning” represents a concerted attempt by the new RNC leadership to overhaul the committee’s direction and strategy ahead of critical election contests. According to sources familiar with the proceedings, the purge is part of a larger attempt to consolidate control and redirect the RNC’s operational focus.

The firings, characterized by insiders as a “wild firing spree,” follow upon Lara Trump being elected as RNC Co-Chair, along with North Carolina GOP leader Michael Whatley.

Michael Whatley, who has shown support for Trump, nonetheless has a mixed record on policies such as election integrity. He has been accused of practicing law without a license and being a McDaniel loyalist, but has garnered the backing of former President Trump.

Lara Trump’s nomination as co-chair was viewed as a watershed event for the RNC, ushering in a new era of leadership that is expected to closely reflect the political and intellectual leanings of the Trump faction within the GOP. Her promotion to a key leadership position inside the RNC was welcomed with both praise and suspicion, highlighting the party’s profound differences about its future direction and the role of the Trump family among its ranks.

Politico reported:

All told, the expectation is that more than 60 RNC staffers who work across the political, communications and data departments will be let go. Those being asked to resign include five members of the senior staff, though the names were not made public. Additionally, some vendor contracts are expected to be cut.

In a letter to some political and data staff, Sean Cairncross, the RNC’s new chief operating officer, said that the new committee leadership was “in the process of evaluating the organization and staff to ensure the building is aligned” with its vision. “During this process, certain staff are being asked to resign and reapply for a position on the team.”

The overhaul is aimed at cutting, what one of the people described as, “bureaucracy” at the RNC. But the move also underscores the swiftness with which Trump’s operation is moving to take over the Republican Party’s operations after the former president all but clinched the party’s presidential nomination last week.

Ronna McDaniel indicated in February that she will retire from office on March 8th, upholding her vow to step down following the South Carolina primary. At the committee’s spring meeting, McDaniel had mixed feelings, stating, “It is a little bittersweet to be with all of you here today as I step down as chair after seven years of working with you all.”

It certainly was “bittersweet” for Ronna McDaniel loyalists, as well, who are undoubtedly among the staffing casualties on “Bloody Monday” at the RNC. Before stepping down, McDaniel had taken heat for her multiple election losing streak, as well as wasteful spending on frivolities like limousines and floral bouquets while viable candidates lacked backing.

H/T Trending Politics News

NOW READ:

President Biden Seeks To Increase His Student Debt Handout In New Budget

President Joe Biden is hoping to expand his efforts to slash student debt with a $12 billion initiative in his fiscal year 2025 budget released Monday.

After the Supreme Court ruled in June that Biden’s student loan forgiveness program was unconstitutional, the Department of Education announced a new costly repayment plan followed by a near $5 million handout in December. Biden proposed the $12 billion Reducing the Costs of College Fund to help finance “strategies to lower college costs for students, along with several other initiatives aimed at furthering his student loan forgiveness agenda.

“From Day One of his Administration, President Biden vowed to fix the student loan system and make sure higher education is a pathway to the middle class—not a barrier to opportunity,” the budget reads. “Already, the President has cancelled more student debt than any President in history, approving debt cancellation for nearly 4 million borrowers through more than two dozen executive actions.”

Biden also proposed “eliminating the origination fees charged to borrowers on every new federal student loan,” increasing “the discretionary maximum Pell Grant by $100” and expanding “free community college through a Federal-State partnership.”

The budget would also pay for two years of tuition for those whose families make less than $125,000 that attend Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities and Minority-Serving Institutions.

The Supreme Court decided that the Biden administration wasn’t permitted to forgive $10,000 in student loan debt for non-Pell Grant recipients and up to $20,000 for those who received the Pell Grant. Following the decision, the Department of Education announced it would forgive student loans via the Higher Education Act and income-driven repayment plans instead.

The Biden administration has already cancelled billions of dollars worth of student debt for more than 3.6 million individuals, according to the White House.

Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation

NOW READ:

President Trump Stands to Gain Up to $4 Billion from Recent Court Decision

There’s a heart-warming ending to Deadspin’s famously failed story of a 9-year-old kid who was caught wearing “black face” at a Chiefs game (obviously just team-colored face paint.)

The writer, Carron J. Phillips, is now unemployed. Gregg Re, former head writer for Tucker Carlson, shared the good news.

Carron J Phillips made his name for defaming a child, but even before that, he regularly defamed white people as racists

he typically targeted athletes in order to technically fit within deadspin's mandate of sports coverage pic.twitter.com/RO9aBDlox2

— Gregg Re (@gregg_re) March 11, 2024

“Carron J Phillips, who defamed a child for wearing face paint, is now unemployed after the collapse of Deadspin,” Re noted, adding, “to appeal to future employers, he lists ‘pulitzer nominee’ on his bio. [B]eing a ‘pulitzer nominee’ means nothing except that you paid a $75 free to be considered.”

“Carron J Phillips made his name for defaming a child, but even before that, he regularly defamed white people as racists,” Re continued. “[H]e typically targeted athletes in order to technically fit within deadspin’s mandate of sports coverage.”

It’s a positive development for journalism — including sports journalism — to see Woke smear merchants like Phillips have to seek alternative employment. With any luck, he will have learned his lesson that weaponizing political narratives to attack innocent citizens is not what journalism is about.

After the report, Phillips deleted his tweet after initially doubling down.

After defaming a little boy, Carron Philips has finally deleted the deranged tweet where he doubled down.

He must’ve lawyered up. pic.twitter.com/n6oqSuxl70

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) November 28, 2023

“After defaming a little boy, Carron Philips has finally deleted the deranged tweet where he doubled down,” the popular X account End Wokeness posted. “He must’ve lawyered up.”

The Deadspin story remained posted on X; however, it was also deleted after being Community-Noted into infamy.

Conservative pundits blasted Deadspin after looking into the Deadspin hit piece.

Yeah, the black Chiefs players look totally offended by this Native American kid’s so-called “blackface”

I really hope @Deadspin gets sued over this.pic.twitter.com/s2ovzuQgdf

— ALX 🇺🇸 (@alx) November 29, 2023

Here’s the backstory: During CBS’ broadcast of a Kansas City Chiefs game, the camera caught a glimpse of a young fan wearing a Native American headdress. It only showed the right half of his face, which was painted black.

Instead of doing more research, Woke sports media sites like Deadspin accused the kid of wearing “Black face,” a demeaning form of mockery of African-Americans popular in the 1930s, and have since failed to retract their accusations despite the abundance of known facts flying in the face of their half-baked narrative.

The main problem is that left side of the child’s face was painted red, plainly repping Chiefs colors, while the other half was painted black.

Any thinking person knows that this would not be “Black face”; in addition, wearing a Native American headdress has nothing to do with “Black face.” It flat-out makes no sense.

“Deadspin published a hit piece on a little kid for wearing face paint of his team colors,” the popular X account End Wokeness remarked. “They even used a camera angle to make it look like he was wearing blackface. I hope he sues them into oblivion.”

It would be bad enough just to write an attack piece on a child while pushing an ignorant political agenda, but the writer of the piece, Carron J. Phillips, even doubled down.

Libs of TikTok remarked on the situation:

Shame on you trying to ruin a young child’s life. Hope he sues you for defamation. https://t.co/XAyenORfQ6

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) November 28, 2023

“Shame on you trying to ruin a young child’s life. Hope he sues you for defamation,” she said.

“How soon they forget,” Syzmon Thomas said, while referring to Nicholas Sandmann, who prevailed in his defamation lawsuits against the corporate media. “I hope the parents sue.”

How soon they forget.

I hope the parents sue. pic.twitter.com/4bhxzxlmcZ

— Syzmon Thomas (@ThomasSzymon) November 27, 2023

The Deadspin hit piece was inexcusable. Let’s hope Woke journalists think twice before writing half-cocked pieces attacking children again.

NOW READ:

President Trump Stands to Gain Up to $4 Billion from Recent Court Decision

There is great financial news for Donald Trump.

Delaware Chancery Court Judge Sam Glasscock III has declined to block the March 22 shareholder vote on a merger involving Trump Media & Technology Group, which might result in a $4 billion gain for President Trump.

This court decision came despite protests from Trump Media co-founders Andy Litinsky and Wes Moss, who claim that the merger will reduce Trump’s 8.6% ownership in the firm. Litinsky and Moss were previous competitors on Trump’s TV show The Apprentice, and they eventually collaborated with him to build Trump Media.

Glasscock declined to schedule a hearing on the challenged merger before the March 22 vote. He stated on a Zoom call that if Trump agrees to place the extra shares in an escrow account during the dispute, “maybe the whole thing will go away.”

Officials at Digital World Acquisition Corp., the blank-check corporation that will handle the vote, have already agreed to put the disputed stock in escrow in response to a separate complaint brought by Patrick Orlando’s ARC Global Investments II, Bloomberg reported.

ARC opposed the suggested conversion rate for its founder’s interest, arguing for a larger share in the merged entity. Orlando, Digital World’s former CEO, filed the case.

Lori Will, the Chancery judge hearing the case, recently refused a plea to accelerate the proceedings, citing the escrow agreement.

The business development comes in the aftermath of an unprecedented New York civil case that hammered the former president with $350 million in damages.

Judge Arthur Engoron ruled in February that Donald Trump must pay the massive sum and barred Trump “from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation or other legal entity in New York for a period of three years.”

Trump enterprise Truth Social faces considerable obstacles, but it has a promising future if it “goes public.” The platform was once valued at over $700 million in 2022 and has since dropped in value to less than $100 million.

If that happens, Trump’s stake in Truth Social may increase to an impressive $4 billion.

CNN earlier reported on the potential windfall for Donald Trump from the media merger.

NOW READ:

Donald Trump ‘Brings the House Down’ with Reason He Won’t Drop Out of 2024 Race

Most Americans agree that our elections should be free of foreign influence. Apparently, some Democrats feel differently.

This week, the Ohio Senate passed a landmark bill by Sens. Theresa Gavarone and Rob McColley to ban foreign influence in critically important ballot measure campaigns. The issue couldn’t be simpler. As McColley put it, “Are we against foreign money in elections or not?”

Democrats in the Ohio Senate answered unanimously: they are not.

No issue should be more bipartisan than protecting elections from corrupting foreign influence. Polling shows the public overwhelmingly opposes foreign nationals playing a role in American politics.

So why is the left defending foreign influence in elections? Because they are benefiting from a half-billion dollars in foreign funds from billionaire activist Hansjorg Wyss.

Wyss is one of America’s biggest political donors, even though he is not a citizen. According to a biography written by his own sister, Wyss aims to “[re]interpret the American Constitution in the light of progressive politics.” He is putting his money where his mouth is. As the watchdog group Americans for Public Trust exposed, Wyss exploits a complex web of left-wing “dark money” groups to inject nearly $500 million into left-wing causes, all while helping to conceal the foreign source of the funding.

A single group, the Sixteen Thirty Fund, has received $243 million. Part of the Arabella Advisors’ dark money network, Sixteen Thirty is a powerhouse of left-wing political spending.

NBC News reported that Sixteen Thirty spent nearly $200 million in 2022 alone “helping Democrats” win elections and “backing state ballot measures.”

Ballot issues are a major focus for the left. Initiatives are supposed to be a chance for citizens to directly check the power of government. But the left has focused on weaponizing them, reducing “citizen-initiated” ballot measures into a tool for left-wing activism — and a backdoor for foreign election influence.

Federal law, and the laws in most states, bar foreign contributions to candidates. But most states do not apply the same safeguards to ballot measure campaigns. That creates a huge loophole, one which foreign-funded groups like Sixteen Thirty are more than willing to exploit.

Since 2017, Sixteen Thirty has spent almost $80 million to influence 33 ballot measures in 18 states. Though it has spent on everything from abortion to Medicaid expansion, Sixteen Thirty has concentrated most of its largest contributions on voting measures. According to figures compiled by Ballotpedia, the group spent $3.5 million fighting voter ID in North Carolina, nearly $4 million to give Florida felons the right to vote, and over $6 million to bring error-prone automatic voter registration to Nevada.

In Michigan, Sixteen Thirty spent $6 million to take redistricting powers away from the Republican-controlled legislature, then followed up with over $11 million to enshrine a left-wing rewrite of Michigan’s voting laws in the state’s constitution — a one-two punch that helped turn the state blue.

Now, the foreign-funded left has its sights fixed on Ohio. Sixteen Thirty poured over $10 million into ballot measures last year, and is already one of the largest donors to a Michigan-style “independent” redistricting measure headed for the ballot this November.

Left-wing election lawyer Marc Elias, who has represented Wyss, is suing in the Ohio Supreme Court to advance another measure rewriting the Buckeye State’s voting laws. That initiative is so extreme that it even re-opens the door to non-citizen voting, something Ohioans just voted to ban.

Issues this important should be free of any trace of foreign influence. It’s already illegal for foreign nationals to donate to candidates. Ohio’s SB 215 simply applies that same protection to ballot measure campaigns. It is hard to imagine a more bipartisan issue.

But with this week’s vote in the Ohio Senate, Democrats are signaling they are perfectly willing to let the foreign influence flow, so long as it helps them. For a party that has railed against foreign election interference, the hypocrisy is astounding — but hardly surprising.

After all, the left is perfectly comfortable with “Zuck Bucks” schemes that pump private funding and left-wing politics into election offices.

The Biden administration is preparing to use tax dollars to finance a get-out-the-vote operation that is partisan in all but name. And liberal groups like the Sixteen Thirty Fund are happy to spend a quarter-billion dollars in foreign money to influence American politics.

For the left, it’s winning uber alles.

Voters deserve elections they can trust, and that begins by protecting them from foreign influence. Ohio is showing us how to protect ballot measure campaigns from corrupting foreign influence.

Every state should follow suit.

This article was written by Jason Snead, the Executive Director of Honest Elections Project, for the Daily Caller News Foundation.

NOW READ:

Javier Milei’s ‘Shock’ Reforms Begin to Resuscitate Argentina’s Collapsing Socialist Economy