'Stanley was an instrumental and well respected'

'Like skin cream but grips like sandpaper'

'We think there could be a little bit of chaos happening, especially in this area'

Tech mogul Elon Musk’s America PAC faced legal scrutiny for offering financial incentives for voters to sign a petition supporting the First and Second Amendments. Some saw the legal challenge in Philadelphia as a partisan double-standard against Musk, and on Monday, a municipal judge there rejected the local district attorney’s call for halting the giveaways. Every day since Oct. 20, one person has received $1 million for signing the petition in the lead-up to Tuesday’s election.   That was not sitting well with the Left, however. Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner, whose campaign for office was heavily financed by leftist billionaire George Soros, sued Musk over the giveaways.  “The Philadelphia District Attorney is charged with protecting the public from public nuisances and unfair trade practices, including illegal lotteries,” the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office said in an Oct. 28 press release. “The DA is also charged with protecting the public from interference with the integrity of elections.”  Some have wondered, if Krasner thinks Musk’s raffle is improper or illegal, then why didn’t he likewise sue former first lady Michelle Obama over her now-ended “When We All Vote” campaign raffle?   According to Obama’s campaign’s website, registered voters across the country could put their names in a raffle to win two tickets to an exclusive event with Obama that was held on Sept. 16 in Las Vegas. The winner and a guest had the opportunity to meet Obama at the event, with hotel and airfare included.  National nonprofit Headcount also offered a raffle for registered voters to enter. Entries had to be received by late Monday night. Winners are to get tickets to a VIP experience at “RuPaul’s Drag Race Live” in Las Vegas. Headcount describes its mission as being “to use the power of music and popular culture to register voters and promote participation in democracy.”  However, there was little or no attention from Krasner or the legacy media to Obama’s or Headcount’s raffles.  Founded in July, Musk’s America PAC is also financing canvassing operations by awarding people interested in working on increasing voter registration and voter turnout at $30 per hour, with bonuses for exceptional performance. People could also receive $47 for each registered voter they refer that signs a petition pledging support for the first two constitutional amendments. The $47 figure was chosen as symbolic of former President Donald Trump’s bid to become the nation’s 47th president on Nov. 5, which Musk is supporting. Both of America PAC’s programs were open only to registered voters in seven electoral swing states—Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, and North Carolina. That appears to be an attempt by Musk to garner support for Trump in those swing states.  America PAC was created to support the “key values” of secure borders, sensible spending, safe cities, a fair justice system, free speech, and self-defense, according to its website.  During a hearing in Pennsylvania on Oct. 31, Judge Angelo Foglietta of the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas said he would put the Musk case on pause until a federal court decides to take up the case. But that appeared to have rendered the case a moot point, because—as the judge noted Monday—the promotion was scheduled to end on Election Day, and he allowed it to continue. The post Musk’s $1M Giveaways Allowed to Continue  appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Expect Kamala Harris’ Justice Department to wage Green New Deal lawfare if she is elected president on Nov. 5. As with every last issue pertaining to this election, Harris has not said much about the substance of her climate policy. But a review of her record suggests she’d be amenable to unleashing the Justice Department on energy providers, and her conspicuously quiet allies on the climate left are optimistic she’ll do just that. Unleashing the Justice Department on American energy companies means hurtling this country deep into the last century. Traditional energy sources are essential for the world’s historic quality of life most Americans enjoy. Litigation will drive prices up. The lawsuits will also strongarm a transition to electric vehicles, stoves, and water heaters that will remain unpopular with most people because they aren’t affordable and don’t work as well as gas-powered alternatives. Green New Deal lawfare unfolding at the state and local levels all over the country means to force those appliances onto an unwilling public through settlement terms or public spending funded by big money verdicts. Harris is already aligned with climate lawfare. Harris investigated whether Exxon “repeatedly lied to the public and its shareholders about the risk to its business from climate change” during her tenure as California attorney general, according to the Los Angeles Times. The probe did not result in a lawsuit, though she was supportive of legal claims targeting energy providers as a presidential candidate.  Harris parroted claims typical of climate lawsuits during her ill-fated 2020 bid. She accused energy providers of concealing inside information about emissions, much as tobacco companies were accused of misleading customers about the health consequences of smoking. “You should be really prepared to look at a serious fine or be charged with a crime,” Harris said at a 2019 town hall in South Carolina. She made a similar remark in an interview she gave to Mother Jones. Harris has of course renounced much of her 2020 platform, but climate cultists sense she remains willing to pursue energy providers in court. A coalition of alarmist groups is pushing Harris to direct the Justice Department to investigate the industry, calling such a probe “long overdue.” Democrat partisans like Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse and Rep. Jamie Raskin are similarly pressuring the DOJ to take this step. One step the DOJ could take—and the climate left is already calling for it—is to open a probe under the anti-mafia statute, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. That means holding defendants liable not just for emissions, but also for political speech and actions that support a pro-gas energy policy. Democratic lawmakers favorably discussed this avenue in May as a former DOJ official testified to the Senate Budget Committee. How would anti-energy lawfare cash out for the average American? The cost of settlements or big money verdicts will inevitably reach consumers across numerous points of service. Everything will cost more. You’ll notice this most when paying an energy bill, filling up your tank, or buying a plane ticket. But cheap and abundant energy is essential to all businesses, and there will be hidden penalties everywhere. Moreover, the climate plaintiffs are already mapping their plans for spending money climate lawfare delivers. These plans include investments in EV-charging infrastructure, mandated electric appliances in new builds, and even repurposing neighborhoods to create 15-minute cities. This is social reengineering by lawsuit, a foisting of lifestyle choices on unwilling participants. With preelection forecasts favoring a Republican takeover of the Senate, it’s quite likely a President Kamala Harris would not move landmark climate laws through Congress. That means she would have to think creatively about bird-dogging energy companies, and siccing the Justice Department on them is a likely step.  This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post A Kamala Harris Victory Means Green New Deal Lawfare appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Election Day is accompanied by some major voting controversies in battleground states, with lawsuits and investigations looking into alleged voter registration fraud, overseas ballots, and complaints about how some jurisdictions follow election law.  Both Democrats and Republicans brought lawsuits.  Some matters already have been settled. For example, the U.S. Supreme Court sided last week with Virginia by allowing the state to remove the names of 1,600 noncitizens from the voter rolls. And in Pennsylvania, Republicans successfully sued to extend early voting hours.  However, courts tossed other election cases on procedural grounds or cases remain unsettled and could prompt arguments in close elections.  Here are eight issues to look out for, both on Election Day and after.  1. Voter Registration in Pennsylvania At least four jurisdictions in Pennsylvania are investigating potential voter registration fraud.  State prosecutors in Pennsylvania’s Lancaster County are investigating two batches of about 2,500 voter registration forms that may include several hundred fraudulent forms.  As of Monday afternoon, the Lancaster County District Attorney’s Office had determined that 17% of the forms were fraudulent. Another 57% were determined to be legitimate, WPMT-TV (Fox 43) reported. The rest were still being investigated. York County officials also are investigating potential voter registration fraud. Of a batch of 3,087 forms, about 24% were declined after being found to be duplicate requests.  York County also is reviewing challenges to 350 overseas mail-in ballots.  And the Monroe County District Attorney’s Office last week identified fraudulent voter registration forms. A specific number wasn’t given and the investigation continues, the Pocono Record reported.  Berks County also referred two potential voter registration violations for investigation.  Pennsylvania Attorney General Michelle Henry, a Democrat, said attempts to submit fraudulent voter registration forms in the four counties “have been defeated.” Henry said her office is working with local law enforcement. “While we will not be divulging sensitive information about these investigations, we want to clarify that the investigations regard voter registration forms, not ballots,” Henry said in a public statement, adding later: “The investigations are ongoing, and offenders who perpetrated acts of fraud will be held accountable under the law.” 2. Undelivered, Duplicate Ballots In Erie County, Pennsylvania, Democrats sued over a debacle concerning absentee ballots. Judge David Ridge ruled Friday that Erie County must offer a new set of absentee ballots to almost 20,000 voters who didn’t receive them. The state judge also said the county would have to stay open longer office hours until Election Day.  The vendor wasn’t able to confirm the status of between 13,000 and 17,000 absentee ballots requested by Erie County residents before the deadline, USA Today reported. In addition, 1,200 county residents who said they would be out of town requested absentee ballots. On top of that, 365 duplicate ballots were sent to voters. 3. Overseas Mail Ballots Republicans lost three federal lawsuits regarding a law called the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, which governs how Americans living overseas can vote in federal elections.  The GOP lawsuits over UOCAVA focused largely on nonmilitary overseas voters, many of whom indicated no intention to return to the United States. Six Republican members of the  U.S. House sued Pennsylvania over the state’s counting procedures. The GOP lawmakers’ complaint says that about 15,000 nonmilitary American voters living abroad but casting ballots in Pennsylvania elections should have to provide the same personal identification as Pennsylvania residents.  But U.S. District Judge Christopher Conner determined last Tuesday—one week before Election Day—that an injunction could “upend the commonwealth’s carefully laid election administration procedures to the detriment of untold thousands of voters.” Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Sima Patel ruled against the Republican National Committee’s challenge to rules in the U.S. law. The RNC challenge was based on nonresidents’ dependents who live abroad voting in state elections. Patel ruled that the GOP lawsuit was an attempt to “disenfranchise” voters. Similarly, North Carolina Superior Court Judge John Smith ruled that the RNC challenge “presented no substantial evidence” of fraudulent voting.  4. 218,000 Arizona Voters With No Proof of Citizenship  Arizona state Judge Scott Blaney last week ordered the office of Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat, to release the names of voters who were misclassified as not being required to show proof of U.S. citizenship, The Associated Press reported.  Fontes initially said that the number of misclassified voters was thought to be 98,000 registered voters who lacked proof of citizenship and thus could not vote in state and local elections. However, a revised estimate put the number more than twice as high, at 218,000 voters who lacked proof of citizenship when registering to vote. Arizona state officials contend that a coding glitch caused the problem. Arizona law requires proof of U.S. citizenship for voting in state and local elections, but not in federal elections. The concern is that the 218,000 voters without proof of citizenship could vote in state and local elections because of the glitch.  Arizona state law requires proof of citizenship for voting only in state and local elections, not federal elections such as for president or Congress. The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 prevents a state from imposing proof-of-citizenship requirements for federal elections.  So, Arizona voters lacking proof of citizenship would be able to vote in the presidential election, just as in any other state. However, these voters normally would not be allowed to vote in state and local elections in Arizona.  The total of 218,000 voters without proof of citizenship—who may vote in federal elections but not state elections—prompts concerns because federal law prohibits noncitizens from voting or registering to vote.  The America First Legal Foundation sued for the voter registration records.  Blarney, in his ruling, rejected Arizona’s contention that the information would provoke violence. He gave Fontes a deadline of noon Monday to release the names of the 98,000 misclassified voters.  5. Georgia Ballot Centers The Trump campaign and the RNC sent letters over the weekend to county ballot processing centers, asserting the reopening of the offices was illegal.  The letters called for sequestering the ballots received after Nov. 1, Georgia’s deadline for receiving absentee ballots. The Republican National Committee filed a lawsuit as well.  The RNC contends that the Democrat counties of Chatham, Clark, Cobb, DeKalb, Fulton, and Gwinnett accepted Saturday in violation of Georgia law. 6. Nevada Postmarks The Nevada Supreme Court last week determined that mail ballots that arrive three days after Election Day with no postmark will still be counted.  Nevada uses universal mail-in voting.  The state’s highest court rejected a challenge brought by the Republican National Committee, which argued that when a ballot lacks a postmark it’s difficult to know whether it really was sent before Election Day.  The court also determined that ballots with smudges and indecipherable writing would be counted.  7. Iowa and Noncitizen Voting Although the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a Justice Department lawsuit against Virginia for removing the names of 1,600 noncitizens from the voter rolls, the United Latin American Citizens of Iowa sued Iowa’s Republican secretary of state, Paul Pate, and election officials from five counties over removal of noncitizens’ names.  Pate sent a list of 2,176 registered voters who were suspected noncitizens to local election officials in Iowa.  The plaintiffs filed their complaint Oct. 30. On Sunday, an Iowa judge denied the motion for a temporary restraining order or temporary injunction, and determined that the voter registrations would not be restored before Election Day.  The judge determined, however, that any individual would be allowed to cast a provisional ballot.  8. Unsent Mail Ballots in Georgia In this case, the Democratic National Committee sued Cobb County, Georgia, alleging that the county’s Board of Elections failed to send mail-in ballots to more than 3,000 voters who requested the forms.  Georgia law requires elections offices to send ballots within three days of receiving a request. The deadline to receive a request was Oct. 25.  The elections board announced it didn’t get all ballots sent on time, and planned to send some by express shipping. However, Democrats, in their complaint in state court, contend that wasn’t sufficient since that’s not enough time to ensure ballots would be counted. Democrats are suing to extend the deadline to receive ballots from Nov. 5 to Nov. 8. The post 8 Voting Controversies That Could Spark Disputes After Election Day appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The death of a squirrel has somehow intruded on the news cycle in the relentless last days of a presidential election. Last week, the New York state government seized P’Nut the pet squirrel and a pet raccoon named Fred from owners Mark and Daniela Longo in Pine City, New York, in what was reportedly a five-hour raid.  Shortly afterward, the two animals were euthanized. P’Nut apparently had been an internet sensation. The squirrel had been rescued seven years earlier after its mother was killed by a car and was quite tame. P’Nut’s owners put videos of him performing tricks online, and he appeared to be quite far from being a public menace. Frankly, I walk past more public health and safety menaces (that the government does nothing about) every time I walk outside my home in New York City. So why did the state government have to use valuable resources on this case? The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the Chemung County Department of Health released a joint statement on the P’Nut incident, which they said took place only after reports of wildlife being held at a residence: The Chemung County Department of Health and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) are coordinating to ensure the protection of public health related to the illegal possession of wild animals that have the potential to carry the rabies virus.  On Oct. 30, DEC seized a raccoon and squirrel sharing a residence with humans, creating the potential for human exposure to rabies. In addition, a person involved with the investigation was bitten by the squirrel. To test for rabies, both animals were euthanized. So, the reason these animals had to be euthanized was that, during the raid, one of these Keystone Cops got bitten by the likely terrified squirrel? I can’t imagine how outraged I’d be. Let’s say the Longos really were doing something dangerous and illegal. Do they deserve to be treated this way by their government? “They made me sit outside for five hours,” Mark Longo said, according to The New York Times. “They wouldn’t even let me feed my horses.” Needless to say, the incident created a huge amount of public backlash. Here’s entrepreneur Elon Musk on X, which he owns: Government overreach kidnapped an orphan squirrel and executed him … https://t.co/YKoOCJWLMv— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 2, 2024 Even Donald Trump’s running mate, Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, opined on the incident at a campaign stop. Vance said the former president is outraged. “[Trump] was like, ‘You know, is it really the case that the Democrats murdered the Elon Musk of squirrels? Have you seen the videos of this squirrel? He’s, like, a genius. Or he was,” Vance said, according to the New York Post.   “The same government that doesn’t care about hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrant criminals coming into our country, doesn’t want us to have pets,” Vance said. “It’s the craziest thing.” This line from a Wall Street Journal editorial was spot-on about not only an apparently abusive action by the government but the typical pettiness of our out-of-control bureaucracies. “The P’Nut incident has exploded on social media as an example of abusive government, and it’s hard to conclude otherwise if Mr. Longo’s account is accurate,” The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board wrote. “The 34-year-old had better watch out now that he’s gone public, because there’s nobody more vengeful than a bureaucracy that’s been embarrassed when its bullying zealotry is exposed.” What kind of system do we have where the people have to be fearful of their government? At this point, I think most Americans have an experience or two where some government agency or another swooped into their lives like a great lummox and made a mess of things before ejecting from the situation without so much as an apology. Even the kids got a national lesson in how this works during the COVID-19 lockdowns. Government agencies from the federal government on down stepped intrusively into and convulsed our entire way of life—creating an economic crisis and generational learning loss—all in the name of public health. It turns out that an enormous number of the highly intrusive COVID-19 mandates weren’t based on science at all. They were based on the arbitrary whims of bureaucrats, to make people feel like the government was doing something. And after all that, the bureaucrats were allowed to move on with little accountability and certainly no apology to the American people. That’s why this P’Nut story resonated so much on social media.  Our elected officials defer to so-called bureaucratic “experts” who often run roughshod over liberty and make what often are egregiously wrong decisions against our interests. At times there are deadly consequences. This was the heart and soul of Fauci-ism. But it isn’t just a few big public health agencies that have this mindset.  No, it infects the culture and mentality of government agencies from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to the FBI. In the case of the Longos, the consequences may have been “low,” although the lives of their two beloved pets were mercilessly extinguished. But what about when it’s parents who won’t affirm their child’s gender transition and blue states such as New York and California sic their agencies on them? When Vice President Kamala Harris says on the presidential campaign trail that she would trust the so-called experts to make decisions, this is what I and many Americans think of. Our apparent new-age philosopher kings often have expertise in little more than navigating the byzantine bureaucracies that they perpetually swim in. And they now clearly are willing to use their power on behalf of increasingly radical ideology. They aren’t reasonable, they aren’t rational, and most importantly they aren’t accountable for their actions. In the end, this story isn’t really about a pet squirrel and a pet raccoon. It’s about how American citizens increasingly are being treated by authorities that hardly resemble the limited government of, by, and for the people, as laid down by our forefathers. The post Don’t Tread on P’Nut appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Lefties Threaten Law Licenses of Attorneys Who May Work For Trump

Gaslighting Fail: Nobody's Boarding Up Because 'the Insurrectionists Are Coming'

Glenn Beck was worried that Trump’s 2024 campaign would be centered around claims of previous election fraud, the weaponization of government against him, and an understandable grudge against Kamala Harris. However, to his pleasant surprise, Trump has been “fun, funny, [and] relatable” on his campaign trail. “He’s not doing any grudge stuff,” says Glenn. “He’s just doing the work for the American people.” And if he is successful at taking back the Oval Office, Glenn believes his word will prove good on these six issues: 1. War A vote for Kamala Harris is a vote for “global war,” says Glenn. However, a vote for Trump likely means both wars will end. “He said just yesterday he is telling Benjamin Netanyahu, ‘This war — you gotta be finished before I get into office,”’ Glenn recounts, adding that “he also said that with the Ukrainian conflict that that'll be done as well.” 2. COVID “This whole mandate crap — it’s over if Donald Trump comes in,” says Glenn, noting that Fauci, the CDC, and the FDA will be turned over to RFK Jr. if Trump wins the election. 3. Immigration “The immigration status of a lot of people” is bound to change following a Trump victory. “Those who came here illegally are going to be removed,” Glenn predicts. 4. Romeike family In 2008, the Romeikes came to America seeking asylum because they were being persecuted for homeschooling their children in Germany. They’ve lived in the states for 16 years and are well loved by their community. Joe Biden, however, has been trying to deport the family. Obama did the same. “I think possibly Donald Trump will give them the freedom to stay here and maybe citizenship if they want it,” says Glenn. 5. Lying Although this is just one of countless examples, Glenn points to the recent anti-Semitic crime in Chicago in which a Jewish man was shot and wounded by an illegal immigrant named Sidi Muhammad Abdellahi. According to eyewitnesses, the shooter “screamed ‘Allah Akbar.”’ However, until recently, “Police [said], ‘Well, we're not sure what the motive was,’” scoffs Glenn, adding that it’s pretty obvious what his motive was. Under Trump, he believes “the nonstop lying” will cease. 6. Anti-Americanism And most importantly — “We’re going to stop drinking the poison that the rest of the Western world is drinking right now,” says Glenn. To hear more of Glenn’s analysis and predictions, watch the clip above. Want more from Glenn Beck?To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.