WHO ELECTS AMERICAN PRESIDENTS? NOT THE PEOPLE!!! MARK ZUCKERBERG'S NEO-FASCIST ASSAULT ON DEMOCRACY - AND YOU THOUGH HE ONLY ASSAULTED THE BORDER? - On the one hand, they tied the hands of the Tea Party, on the other they put on blinders to the patent corruption of the BLM and Zuckerberg-funded outfits.

Amazon, Facebook Spend Millions Lobbying Congress for More Legal Immigration, Amnesty for Illegal Aliens

https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2022/05/joe-bidens-crony-modern-slaver-jeff.html

Refugee resettlement costs taxpayers nearly $9 billion every five years. Over the course of a lifetime, taxpayers pay about $133,000 per refugee and within five years of resettlement, roughly 16 percent will need taxpayer-funded housing assistance.

The Internal Revenue (Election Rigging) Service

By Clarice Feldman

Should the projections of a Republican tsunami at the midterms prove true, there are so many things that a Republican Congress must prioritize. Not the least of which is revising the civil-service laws to permit removing incompetent and corrupt bureaucrats, cutting drastically the federal bureaucracy and reforming, among other agencies, the CDC, NIH, FBI, and the IRS.

I’m focusing now on the IRS, which first hit my radar screen when with no consequences whatsoever.  Loretta Lynch’s Department of Justice declined to press criminal charges against Lois Lerner, whose outfit delayed and denied the Tea Party reform groups the tax-exempt status to which they were entitled, hamstringing them against the very well-financed (probably including illegal funds from abroad) Obama crowd. 

This time, pay attention to Black Lives Matter, an utterly corrupt outfit whose riots and lootings destroyed so many cities and wreaked havoc on the black communities and their businesses.

The damage continues to this day as the riots fueled the defund police movement, a ridiculous effort that leaves the poor and the black communities particularly vulnerable to violent crime, and as another consequence caused an exodus of needed businesses from those places.

On her own, the mayor of D.C. ordered one street painted in huge letters “Black Lives Matter.” School kids were urged to walk out to support the group, while big corporations sent them money. All told, the group reportedly raised $90 million in 2020.

The money seems to have vanished. What we know is that millions of it went to mansions purchased by Patrisse Cullors, the co-founder of the group. And now the Clintonista involved in rigging election laws (Mark Elias) and DNC bigwig Minyon Moore have stepped away from its board just days before an expected financial disclosure of its books.

The Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation revealed in February that the Elias Law Group, Elias's namesake law firm, had taken control of its books and finances. But Elias Law Group is nowhere to be found in BLM's latest registration filings submitted to Florida and Oklahoma on April 28, according to records obtained by the Washington Examiner. 

Elias funded Christopher Steele’s discredited dossier 

While the new records show the Elias Law Group is no longer in control of BLM's books, whatever continued involvement Elias's firm may have with the embattled charity remains a mystery. The Elias Law Group declined to provide an on-the-record comment to the Washington Examiner. 

The Elias Law Group's absence from BLM's Florida and Oklahoma registrations submitted on the eve of the charity's financial disclosure is telling, said Tom Anderson, the director of the Government Integrity Project at the National Legal and Policy Center watchdog group. 

"It is important to note the Elias Law Group is a firm with a laser focus on electing Democrats and pushing the progressive agenda," Anderson told the Washington Examiner. "This makes their disappearance from the latest BLM Global Network Foundation filings a pivotal moment, probably foreshadowing the total collapse of what is left of the organization." 

BLM had disclosed in February that Elias's law firm had taken control of its books and Moore had joined its board of directors. The filings were made public about two weeks after the BLM shut off its online fundraising streams amid legal threats from California and Washington over the charity's lack of financial transparency. 

BLM's fundraising remains shuttered, and the charity is due to file its long-awaited federal form 990 financial disclosure to the IRS next week revealing what it did with its financial windfall from 2020. 

The likelihood that BLM was intimately involved in the Democrats’ 2020 election strategy is clear from the fact that Elias funded Christopher Steele’s “Dossier,” a pack of lies at the heart of Russiagate, and that his then legal colleague at Perkins Coie, Michael Sussman, is being tried by Special Counsel John Durham next week where Elias is expected to testify.

BLM’s singular noted program for the past fiscal year was the purchase in Los Angeles of a mansion for parties. 

That purchase alone should have triggered an IRS investigation but there’s no indication that it has.

...a man named Dyane Pascall purchased the seven-bedroom house that would become known as Campus. According to California business-registration documents, Pascall is the financial manager for Janaya and Patrisse Consulting, an LLC run by Cullors and her spouse, Janaya Khan; Pascall is also the chief financial officer for Trap Heals, a nonprofit led by Damon Turner, the father of Cullors’s only child.

Within a week, Pascall transferred ownership of the house to an LLC established in Delaware by the law firm Perkins Coie. The maneuver ensured that the ultimate identity of the property’s new owner was not disclosed to the public. [snip]

Nonprofit experts say that any apparent intermingling of resources among BLMGNF, Cullors, and outside entities might jeopardize the charity’s tax-exempt status. [snip]

BLMGNF was awarded tax-exempt status from the IRS in December 2020, two months after the house’s purchase. The distinction meant the group would have to disclose information about donors and expenditures in an annual filing known as a 990. But BLMGNF has not submitted those forms for 2020 or 2021. It also has problems at the state level: The Washington Examiner reported in February 2022 that California’s attorney general told the group it was considered delinquent. BLMGNF has since retained the high-profile Democratic lawyer Marc Elias and maneuvered to get more time to formally submit data from 2020 by switching from calendar-year to fiscal-year tracking. [snip]

The group informally released a batch of financial information in February 2021, when it said it had taken in more than $90 million in 2020 and still had $60 million on hand. The house was not mentioned. [snip]

Real-estate purchases have been a problem for the BLMGNF outside of the U.S. as well. In the summer of 2021, BLM Canada announced that it was purchasing a mansion in Toronto and hoped to establish a Black community hub. Conservative-media outlets later reported that public-property records indicated the transaction involved a transfer of approximately $6.3 million to a Canadian nonprofit, M4BJ, that was established in part by Janaya Khan, who was born in Toronto. 

Janaya Future Khan denies knowledge of this house, says she has never had access to the financials of BLM and was not an officer of the company. ”Khan separated from Cullors in September 2017 and left BLM shortly after,” years before the purchase of the house.

(While the IRS seems to be looking the other way and the Clintonistas are heading for the exits, in March of 2021 the IRS tossed the electronically filed information returns  for an estimated 30 million filers because of a paperwork backlog  which may well delay taxpayer refunds because without that documentation [which had been properly and timely filed by the taxpayers] the agency cannot verify the details on the returns.)

While the IRS makes it harder for you to get your refunds, Black Lives Matters is not the only sketchy Democrat-controlled election-rigging outfit whose tax-exempt status the IRS has not looked into. David Horowitz and John Perazzo detail how Mark Zuckerberg funneled $419.5 million to tax exempt outfits (Center for Election Innovation and Research and the “Safe Elections” Project of the Center for Technology and Civic Life through yet a third tax-exempt outfit, the Silicon Valley Community Foundation.)

The purpose of these grants was obvious -- it was to tip the scales for the Democrats in the 2020 election despite the fact that such tax-exempt foundations are “barred from contributing their resources to election campaigns.”

The grants to these two outfits and the ways they used them to tip the election for Biden are well laid out in this article. 

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity.

The existence of such a regulation is meaningless, however, if it is not enforced. Consequently, this ban on campaign activities by “charitable” organizations didn’t daunt Facebook billionaire and Democrat Party patron Mark Zuckerberg and his wife when they plotted a massive campaign to swing the 2020 presidential election in favor of the Democrat, Joe Biden.

The Facebook couple donated to two left-wing tax-exempt foundations “with the intention of tipping the result to Biden by launching “get-out-the-vote” campaigns focused on Democrat precincts in battleground states.” And they achieved that purpose.

The authors contend that none of these travesties could have taken place “without the seditious collusion of I.R.S. Commissioner Charles Rettig and his 63,000 agents“ who neglect their duty to protect our tax laws and elections.

I find their argument compelling. On the one hand, they tied the hands of the Tea Party, on the other they put on blinders to the patent corruption of the BLM and Zuckerberg-funded outfits.

THE PAYOFF FOR ZUCK WAS NAFTA BIDEN'S PROMISE TO LIFT ALL CAPS ON TECH VISAS. ALREADY 70% OF HIGH TECH WORKERS ARE FOREIGN BORN. ALONG WITH 'CHEAPLER' LABOR, BIDEN PROISED BORDER TO BORDER CHEAP WIFI SO ZUCK COULD EXPAND HIS FACEBOOK PROPAGANDA MACHINE FOR THE NAFTA GLOBALIST DEMOCRAT PARTY'S AGENDA OF NO BORDERS.

By failures of border security, a lack of the enforcement of our immigration laws from within  the interior of the United States and huge numbers of visas for high tech workers, the lives and livelihoods of Americans and their children, are being stolen by America’s corrupt political elite who are doing the bidding of those who provide them with huge “Campaign Contributions” (Orwellian euphemism for bribes) pursue legislation that is diametrically opposed to the best interests of America and Americans.

                                                       MICHAEL CUTLER

How Zuckerberg Used a Tax-Exempt Foundation to Help Biden Fix the 2020 Election

And got away with it.

Fri May 13, 2022

David Horowitz and John Perazzo

35 comments

[Order David Horowitz's new book: The Enemy Within: How a Totalitarian Movement is Destroying America.]

Everybody to the right of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez knows that the root cause of the crisis facing America — the most serious since the Civil War — is lawlessness. And everybody not under the spell of the Democrat spin machine understands that the lawlessness begins at the top, with government and the many agencies of the executive branch who are tasked by our Constitution with enforcing the law. Whether by failing to enforce our immigration statutes, or failing to prosecute criminals in our streets, or violating our election procedures to favor one party, Democrat administrations in our nation’s capital and our major cities have brazenly supported criminal behavior carried out by Black Lives Matter rioters, common street thugs, and anti-Supreme Court agitators seeking to extort decisions by fear. The effect has been to systematically undermine the rule of law, stoke the fires of anarchy, and sow chaos in our institutions.

This trend has been evident since the revival of the radical left on the eve of the 9/11 attacks and its creation of Sanctuary Cities designed to flout the law and prevent the enforcement of the PATRIOT Act. It escalated with Obama’s illegal, unconstitutional — and self-acknowledged — violation of America’s immigration laws. And it spread to the revenue authority of the I.R.S., which systematically rejected the applications for tax-exempt status of conservative organizations, until the scandal grew so large that it forced the resignation of the tax commissioner Lois Lerner. But while one commissioner is gone, the illegal partisan practices of the I.R.S.  have continued to grow under her latest successor, Charles Rettig, playing a key role in skewing the results of the last presidential election.

Tax-exempt foundations are barred from contributing their resources to election campaigns. There is no ambiguity in the law concerning this prohibition:

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity.

The existence of such a regulation is meaningless, however, if it is not enforced. Consequently, this ban on campaign activities by “charitable” organizations didn’t daunt Facebook billionaire and Democrat Party patron Mark Zuckerberg and his wife when they plotted a massive campaign to swing the 2020 presidential election in favor of the Democrat, Joe Biden. The Facebook couple donated $419.5 million to two leftwing tax-exempt foundations with the intention of tipping the result to Biden by launching “get-out-the-vote” campaigns focused on Democrat precincts in battleground states.

A rarely mentioned fact about the 2020 election is that Biden eked out a victory by perhaps the narrowest margin in history — .027% of the 159 million votes cast. This was a margin easily created by a strategic influx of campaign cash coupled with orders to spend the money on massive numbers of paper ballots, which could be harvested from “drop boxes,” which, as Dinesh D’Souza’s documentary 2000 Mules shows, were repeatedly stuffed by Democrat operatives in the middle of the night.

All these millions of Zuckerberg dollars, underwritten by American taxpayers, drew no attention from I.R.S. Commissioner Charles Rettig or the I.R.S. investigating teams whose responsibility it was to see that taxpayer supported operations like the Zuckerberg “charities” were not intervening in American election campaigns with the idea of shaping their outcomes.

In 2020, the Zuckerbergs donated $69.5 million to the tax-exempt Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR), whose founder was formerly a director of the leftwing People For the American Way, and $350 million to the “Safe Elections” Project of the tax-exempt Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL). The title “Safe Elections” refers to the cover for Zuckerberg’s fraudulent operation, which he presented as an effort to protect voters from COVID-19. The three founders of CTCL were former co-workers at the Democrat-aligning New Organizing Institute. The conduit Zuckerberg used to funnel his $419.5 million to CEIR and CTCL was yet another tax-exempt nonprofit, the California-based Silicon Valley Community Foundation. The Silicon Valley Community Foundation supports get-out-the-vote campaigns for the Democratic Party.

On receiving Zuckerberg’s funds, CEIR and CTCL distributed the money, in the form of “COVID-19 response” grants of varying amounts, to election administrators in some 2,500 municipalities in 49 U.S. states and Washington, D.C. The alleged purpose of these grants, according to CTCL, was to help create conditions where Americans could vote as safely as possible in the midst of the deadly coronavirus pandemic. This could have been accomplished by renting football stadiums and other sports arenas that would provide enough space for “social distancing” and would have been a worthy tax-exempt objective, if it had been the actual purpose of the project. But it wasn’t.

 Neither CEIT nor CTCL had ever before experienced anything even remotely resembling the size of the cash influx they received from Zuckerberg for the 2020 election cycle. For example, over the course of the entire prior history of CTCL - a small, unremarkable organization founded in 2012 - its yearly revenues from contributions and grants had never once exceeded $2.84 million. That high-water mark represented a mere eight-tenths-of-one-percent of the astronomical sum donated by Zuckerberg in 2020.

Despite their self-professed “non-partisanship,” CEIR and CTCL allocated their Zuckerberg-provided funds in a highly partisan manner, which conformed to the election strategies followed by Democrat operatives across the country to make election fraud easier. The goal of Zuckerberg and the two organizations was to pump massive sums of money into voter-mobilization initiatives in specific cities and counties that had traditionally voted for Democrats, so as to maximize the likelihood that large numbers of Democrat voters in those places would cast ballots in the 2020 elections. Meanwhile, places that traditionally had voted Republican received far less money — or in some cases no money at all. The CEIR and CTCL campaigns were highly targeted efforts to boost voter turnout in Democrat districts to a degree that would be substantial enough to overcome whatever level of voter turnout Republican districts in the same states might experience.

The CEIR/CTCL grants were not awarded as gifts that the recipient cities and counties could use in whatever way they saw fit. The Zuckerberg organizations extended formal invitations to the targeted communities encouraging them to apply for the Zuckerberg funds, which in turn would be doled out with many strings attached. Strict conditions were laid down as to how the recipient jurisdictions could use the money and administer their respective elections. “It was a pay-to-play scheme, where in exchange for taking this money, the CTCL gets to tell them how to run the election,” observed Thomas More Society attorney Erick Kaardal.

Using COVID-19 fears as an excuse, CTCL required that its grant money be used to: (a) suspend existing election laws in order to promote universal mail-in voting, a practice singled out by the bi-partisan Carter-Baker Commission as particularly vulnerable to fraud and corruption; (b) eliminate or weaken signature-matching requirements and ballot-receipt deadlines for mail-in votes; (c) expand opportunities for “ballot curing” (i.e., “fixing” wrongly cast ballots to remove their disqualification); (d) cover the very considerable expenses associated with massive bulk mailings and “community outreach” programs administered by private activists; (e) enable the proliferation of unmonitored ballot drop boxes which would make it impossible to ensure a transparent and secure chain-of-custody trail for all ballots; (f) create unprecedented opportunities for illegal ballot harvesting; and (h) greatly increase funding for the hiring of temporary poll workers, which, as The Federalist points out, “supported the infiltration of election offices by paid Democratic Party activists, coordinated through a complex web of left-leaning non-profit organizations, social media platforms, and social media election influencers.” In other words, the Zuckerberg/CTCL funds were used to conduct and support multiple practices that are widely recognized as practices that make election fraud possible.

Zuckerberg’s donations to CEIR were used to promote objectives similar to the CTCL priorities cited above. But because CTCL received so much more money from the Facebook founder than did CEIR, the 2020 elections were impacted much more powerfully by CTCL. Zuckerberg’s “coordinated assault on in-person voting generally favored Democrat Party voters who preferred to vote in advance, while placing Republicans, who preferred to vote in person, at a disadvantage,” according to former Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline in his December 2020 report titled The Legitimacy and Effect of Private Funding in Federal and State Electoral Processes, published by the Thomas More Society's Amistad Project. That assault helped to create “a two-tier election system favoring one demographic while disadvantaging another demographic.” Kline’s report was also critical of CTCL for generally viewing state election-integrity laws as nothing more than “obstacles and nuisances to be ignored or circumvented.”

Additional ways in which CTCL grants were used in various states and cities across America:

• CTCL encouraged elections departments in multiple states to use its grant money for the purchase of vehicles to transport “voter navigators” to the places where their services were needed — services like: (a) registering voters; (b) helping people apply for absentee ballots; (c) helping voters, potentially at their front doors, to fill out their ballots; (d) witnessing absentee ballot signatures; and (e) “curing” absentee ballots that had been filled out incorrectly.
• CTCL grants in Georgia were used to: (a) expand curbside voting and conduct “voter outreach” campaigns designed to “promote absentee voting and encourage higher percentages of our electors to vote absentee”; (b) dispatch CTCL agents to train poll workers; and (c) fund “Happy Faces,” a temporary staffing agency affiliated with the Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams, to count the votes on election night in Fulton County.
• CTCL grants to Philadelphia were used to pay election judges and various other election officials, and to increase the number of polling locations, mobile ballot-pickup units, and ballot drop boxes in the city.
• CTCL grants helped Delaware County, Pennsylvania — a heavily Democratic area — put one drop box in place for every 4,000 voters and every four square miles of land. By contrast, in the 59 Pennsylvania counties that Trump had won in the 2016 election, there would now be just one drop box for every 72,000 voters and every 1,100 square miles of land. “Government encouraging a targeted demographic to turn out the vote is the opposite side of the same coin as government targeting a demographic to suppress the vote,” Phill Kline wrote in the Amistad Project report. “This two-tiered election system allowed voters in Democrat strongholds to stroll down the street to vote while voters in Republican strongholds had to go on the equivalent of a ‘Where’s Waldo’ hunt. These irregularities existed wherever Zuckerberg’s money was granted to local election officials.”
• CTCL gave $443,000 to Lansing, Michigan, whose elections department used that money to purchase additional absentee-ballot drop boxes and to mail absentee-ballot applications to every registered voter.
• Election officials in Lorain County, Ohio used CTCL funds to pay an $8,100 Verizon phone bill and to purchase a $24,000 van that was used to transport equipment between a warehouse and the elections department.
• The Boone County, Missouri elections department used $3,000 of CTCL’s COVID grant to produce a rap video and purchase radio spots that, according to County Clerk Brianna Lennon, would “appeal to younger, first-time voters” — a demographic strongly inclined to support Democrat candidates.
• When CTCL gave $100,000 to Racine, Wisconsin in May 2020, the organization directed Racine’s mayor to recruit the leaders of four additional cities — Green Bay, Kenosha, Madison, and Milwaukee — to collaboratively draft a grant request for CTCL funds as well. On June 15, those four cities together submitted a “Wisconsin Safe Election Plan” to CTCL and were quickly approved to receive $6.3 million to put their plan into action. As Amistad Project director Phill Kline points out, CTCL “retained the right, in the grant document, to, in its sole discretion, order all funds returned if the grantee cities did not conduct the election consistent with CTCL dictates. Effectively, CTCL managed the election in these five cities.”

All told, CTCL in 2020 made 26 separate grants of $1 million or more to cities and counties in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Virginia. Twenty-five of those grants, totaling a combined $85.5 million, went to places that Joe Biden ultimately won in the 2020 presidential election. The vast majority of CTCL’s money also went to places that had voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton in 2016. By contrast, the lone Trump-supporting CTCL grant recipient of $1 million or more in 2020 — Brown County, Wisconsin — was given just $1.1 million.

        Below are some additional examples of the enormous imbalance in CTCL’s grants to Democrat areas vs. Republican areas:

• In Texas, counties that Biden won in 2020 received CTCL grants that amounted to $3.22 per capita, whereas counties that Trump won received just 55 cents per capita..
• CTCL gave $2.8 million to the heavily Democratic Webb County, Texas, thereby helping total registrations in that jurisdiction increase by approximately 10,000 over the corresponding figure from 2016 — and helping Biden beat Trump by a two-to-one margin.
• In Virginia, grants to pro-Biden counties accounted for over 90% of all CTCL grants in that state — far more than the corresponding 9.6% that was given to Trump-supporting counties.  
• CTCL gave $1.4 million to the Democrat stronghold of Fairfax County, Virginia, helping to increase Democrat voter turnout there by 65,458 above the 2016 figure. By contrast, Republican turnout in Fairfax County increased by only 10,564 above the 2016 figure.
• In Arizona, a state with 15 counties, fully 83.6% of all known CTCL grants were poured into just 3 counties that Biden won in 2020.
• The total dollar amount of CTCL grants to pro-Biden counties in Arizona was 5.8 times greater than the dollar amount given to pro-Trump counties in that state.
• In Pennsylvania, grants to counties that Biden won in 2020 received $3.11 per capita, vs. just 57 cents per capita to counties that Trump won. More specifically, CTCL grants to rural, Republican-leaning Pennsylvania counties like Mercer and Luzerne amounted to an average of about 75 cents per registered voter, while Democrat-majority areas like Delaware and Chester Counties received $5.17 and $6.73 per registered voter, respectively.
• CTCL gave $20.8 million in grants to 10 (of the 13) Pennsylvania counties that Biden won in 2020. Those 10 CTCL-funded counties provided Biden with nearly 73% of all the votes that he received statewide. By contrast, CTCL awarded grants to 12 (of the 54) Pennsylvania counties won by Trump, and those dozen grants totaled a combined $1.73 million. In other words, the combined value of CTCL’s grants to pro-Biden counties in Pennsylvania was 12 times greater than the value of its grants to pro-Trump counties.
• CTCL gave $42.4 million in grants to 17 (of the 31) Georgia counties won by Biden — a figure amounting to more than 94% of all CTCL funding in that state. Those 17 CTCL-funded counties provided Biden with almost 73% of all the votes that he captured statewide. By contrast, a mere $2.6 million — less than 6% of all CTCL grants distributed across Georgia — were allotted to 26 (of the 128) counties won by Trump. Put another way, CTCL’s grants to pro-Biden counties were 16.3 times greater than its grants to pro-Trump counties.
• In Wisconsin, CTCL grants to 20 separate pro-Biden counties amounted to more than 90% of all of the organization’s grants in that state.
• CTCL awarded eleven massive grants in Michigan, ten of which went to cities that Hillary Clinton had won in the 2016 presidential election. The total number of dollars given to those Democrat strongholds was 14.7 times greater than the corresponding amount given to the lone Republican jurisdiction.
• The Wisconsin legislature gave the heavily Democratic city of Green Bay approximately $7 per voter to manage its 2020 elections, vs. just $4 per voter to the state’s Republican rural counties. Then, after CTCL got through allocating Zuckerberg’s money in Wisconsin, the Green Bay figure ballooned to an astronomical $47 per voter, while the figure for most of the state’s rural areas remained steady at just $4 per voter.

Similar funding disparities — favoring Democrat areas over Republican areas — occurred in and near Democrat citadels such as Detroit, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Flint, Dallas, and Houston.

The Zuckerberg grants dwarfed the amount of election-related money normally spent by the various Democrat cities that were recipients of those grants. As J. Christian Adams reported in PJ Media, for instance:

“Philadelphia’s election office budget was normally $9.8 million. The CLTC gave Philadelphia $10 million, more than doubling the city budget.”

“Those millions were used to hire local activists as city employees to drive around and collect ballots. The millions bought new printers and scanners to accommodate mail ballots. Philadelphia established brand new satellite election offices across the most Biden-friendly neighborhoods in the entire Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The millions bought scores of convenient drop boxes across the same neighborhoods where mail ballots could be conveniently dropped. Even though laws limited third parties from collecting and dropping off multiple ballots, people were photographed dropping off bundles of ballots at the boxes.

“If voters couldn’t muster the initiative to travel a few blocks to the drop-off boxes or new satellite offices, the city went to them to collect their ballot.

“CLTC dollars flowed through Philadelphia election officials to the pricey public relations firm Aloysius Butler & Clark. They designed billboards, posters, bus advertisements, and print ads. Radio advertisements and street marketing all added to the blitz.…

“The hundreds of millions poured into urban election offices by the CTLC and affiliated charities also explains how Trump dramatically increased his share of the black and Hispanic vote and still lost… Even if Trump increased his share of the black and Hispanic vote, the opening of the urban turnout floodgates through private donations to government election offices easily swamped Trump statewide in Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Michigan.

“It doesn’t matter if Trump has 15 percent of the black vote in Detroit if turnout there soared by 92,891 Detroit votes, which it did. It doesn’t matter if Trump has even 20 percent of the black vote in Atlanta if turnout in DeKalb soared by 54,550 votes, which it did.

“This also explains how the GOP was so successful everywhere… except at the top of the ticket.  A flood of blue votes gushing out of deep blue urban areas has a statewide effect only for statewide candidates. It doesn’t affect legislative races outside of the cities.”

“The amount of additional money these groups [CTCL and CEIR] poured into elections offices in Democrat-voting areas was truly staggering,” said the New York Post in October 2021. “To put it in perspective, federal and state matching funds for COVID-19-related election expenses in 2020 totaled $479.5 million. The CTCL and CEIR money totaled $419.5 million. These two private nonprofits were responsible for an 85 percent increase in total additional election funding — and that largesse was concentrated in a relatively small number of heavily Democratic municipalities.”

Summing up, The Federalist noted that: “The practical effect of these massive, privately manipulated election-office funding disparities was to create a ‘shadow’ election system with a built-in structural bias that systematically favored Democratic voters over Republican voters. The massive influx of funds essentially created a high-powered, concierge-like get-out-the-vote effort for Biden that took place inside the election system, rather than attempting to influence it from the outside.”

In addition to issuing the aforementioned grants, CTCL collaborated with Facebook to produce a guide and webinar that taught election officials how to engage and assist voters more effectively. This voter-assistance campaign targeted low-income and nonwhite minorities who typically lean Democrat but shun election participation.

By no means was Facebook the only ally with which CTCL collaborated. As Real Clear Investigations explains, a “CTCL partner” nonprofit known as the Center for Civic Design “helped design absentee ballot forms and instructions, crafted voter registration letters for felons, and tested automatic voter registration systems in several states, working alongside progressive activist groups in Michigan and directly with elections offices in Georgia and Utah.” “Still other groups with a progressive leaning, including the [tax-exempt nonprofit] Main Street Alliance, The Elections Group, and the [tax-exempt nonprofit] National Vote at Home Institute, provided support for some elections offices,” added RCI. In other words, leftwing activists were infused directly into the elections offices of various cities and towns.

The effects that the funding patterns of CEIR/CTCL had on the composition of the electorates in their targeted recipient areas were noteworthy. In Georgia, for instance, counties that received money from Zuckerberg and CEIR/CTCL in 2020 were, on average, 2.3 points more Democratic than they had been in 2016. Meanwhile, the political mix of non-funded counties was essentially the same as it had been four years earlier.

Such realities are particularly significant in light of the fact that Biden’s margin of victory in the 2020 presidential race was razor-thin. The final tally in the Electoral College (EC) was 306 EC votes for Biden, to 232 EC votes for Trump, with 270 being the number required to win the presidency. The popular vote margins by which Biden allegedly won the three most hotly contested battleground states were as follows: Arizona: 10,457 (EC votes: 11); Georgia: 11,779 (EC votes: 16); Wisconsin: 20,682 (EC votes: 10). The presidential election of 2020 was decided by a mere 42,918 out of the 159 million votes that were cast overall, or 0.027 percent of all the votes that were cast.

Collectively, Trump lost the states of Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin by just 42,918 votes. If he had won these 3 states, he would have gained their 37 combined EC votes, bringing his total up to 269. Biden, conversely, would have lost 37 EC votes, bringing his total down to 269 as well. In the event of a 269-269 tie, the election would have been decided by the House of Representatives. Even though the Democrats held a majority in terms of total House members, the Republicans held a majority of seats in 26 separate states while the Democrats held a majority of seats in 23 separate states, and 1 state had an equal number of Democrats and Republicans. Each state delegation would have been permitted to cast 1 vote for president, meaning that Trump would have won the election in this scenario.

The money donated by CTCL and CEIR bore no resemblance to traditional campaign finance or lobbying. Rather, it enabled left-wing activists to infiltrate city and county elections offices, and using those offices as vehicles for particular administrative practices, voting methods, and outreach campaigns targeting cities and counties with high concentrations of Democratic voters. As Tarren Bragdon, CEO of the Foundation for Government Accountability, told Fox News in June 2021: “The Zuckerberg funding is an unprecedented example of using government employees and government resources to put your finger on the scale, to affect the election outcome. It would be like giving private money to police departments to have officers do more stop-and-frisk in certain neighborhoods compared to other neighborhoods. It would be like giving money to the tax department to do increased audits in certain zip codes or neighborhoods versus other neighborhoods.”

Bragdon also noted that although the stated justification for the CEIR/CTCL grants was voter and election-official safety during the COVID-19 pandemic, some counties spent little or no money at all on things like personal protective equipment [PPE] that could have made in-person voting safer for everyone. Fulton, Cobb and Dekalb Counties, for instance, spent on average only 1.3% of the Zuckerberg-funded Georgia grants on PPE, while most of the money was used to promote mail-in voting statewide. “This had nothing to do with COVID and had everything to do with using government resources and government employees to play politics,” said Bragdon.

 In a more timid vein, a group of 14 congressional Republicans sent a letter to CTCL’s executive director on June 21, 2021 that said: “Designated as ‘COVID-19 response grants,’ the hundreds of millions in CTCL grant money were marketed as funds available to election officials to ‘safely serve every voter’ during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the current data available shows that less than one percent of funds were spent on personal protective equipment. If true, the American public deserves to know how the other 99 percent of these grants were spent.”

“This private funding has never been done before,” said Hayden Dublois, a researcher at the Foundation of Government Accountability. “We hear about dark money and corporations buying ads, but never have we seen hundreds of millions of private dollars going into the conducting of elections. And states didn’t have any laws on the books to stop it.” But the I.R.S. did, and did nothing.

In the 2020 Amistad Project report, Phill Kline wrote that in 2020 there had been “an unprecedented and coordinated public-private partnership to improperly influence” the election in swing states, a partnership that “effectively placed government’s thumb on the scale to help these private interests achieve their objectives and to benefit the candidates of one political party.” Zuckerberg and his wife were central players on the “private” side of that equation.

Moreover, Zuckerberg continued to use his riches to influence political elections in a major way even after the 2020 presidential race was over. CTCL gave 14.5 million of the Facebook founder’s dollars to select Georgia counties during the open-voting period for the crucial January 2021 runoff elections in Georgia where radical Democrats Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff won a pair of U.S. Senate seats that gave their party a majority in the Senate. More than 60% of CTCL’s grants in Georgia were earmarked for Fulton and Dekalb Counties, both of which are heavily Democratic.

Conclusion

In sum, while the I.R.S. authorities turned a blind eye towards his illegal activities Mark Zuckerberg used his enormous wealth to help fix the 2020 presidential election for Joe Biden — and the January 2021 Senate runoff races for Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff, all the while reducing his own tax bill. Zuckerberg did this on the pretext that he was simply seeking to help ordinary Americans find a way to participate safely in the electoral process during the deadly COVID-19 pandemic. Nothing could have been further from the truth.

Zuckerberg’s goal was to massively increase voter turnout in Democrat-dominated jurisdictions by maximizing fraud-breeding practices like ballot harvesting, the use of unmonitored ballot drop boxes, and mail-in voting without strict signature-matching requirements. To achieve his political ends, Zuckerberg poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the coffers of a pair of politically partisan, tax-exempt nonprofit organizations that were more than willing to do his dirty work and secure the presidency for a doddering contempt-for-the-law-and-the-truth Alzheimer’s case.

None of these travesties could have taken place without the seditious collusion of I.R.S. Commissioner Charles Rettig and his 63,000 agents whose duty is to protect the integrity of our tax laws — and, as it turns out, our elections.

David Horowitz is the founder of the David Horowitz Freedom Center and the author of the newly published book, The Enemy Within: How a Totalitarian Movement Is Destroying America.

John Perazzo is the editor of DiscoverTheNetworks.org—an encyclopedic guide to the political Left and a project of the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is the author of Black Lives Matter: Marxist Hate Dressed Up As Racial Justice.

Did Mark Zuckerberg Buy the Oval Office for Joe Biden?

By Rajan Laad

Last week, a study by Dr. William Doyle, from the Caesar Rodney Election Research Institute, that appeared in The Federalist presented some startling discoveries pertaining to the presidential election of 2020.

The study revealed that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan donated nearly $419 million to nonprofit originations that aided in the administration and infrastructure of the 2020 election.

These donations were specifically made to The Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL) and The Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR).

These organizations claimed to be both non-partisan and non-profit.  However, there is a lot more here than meets the eye.

How did the CTCL and CEIR use their funds?

To begin with, the CTCL actively lobbied for the promotion of universal mail-in voting and extending deadlines that favored mail-in over in-person voting using COVID-19 as a reason.

This probably contributed to most states changing their rules around voting, with nine states and the District of Columbia sending mail-in ballots to all active registered voters.

In the end, a record-breaking 64 million Americans cast their ballots by mail during the 2020 presidential election.

Mail-in ballots inherently compromise the confidentiality and integrity of votes.

Federal laws clearly restrict partisans and activists from making overt political displays or indulging in coercion or intimidation, or even asking voters whom they voted for, anywhere near polling stations on Election Day.

However, these laws do not apply to mail-in ballots.

This is where CTCL and CEIR saw an enormous window of opportunity.

CTCL/CEIR funded activists in Wisconsin, who euphemistically called themselves "vote navigators."  Their job was to "assist voters, potentially at their front doors, to answer questions, to assist in ballot curing and witness absentee ballot signatures."  Wisconsin went to Biden by a narrow margin.

They also funded a temporary staffing agency affiliated with Stacey Abrams called "Happy Faces" to assist in counting votes amid the election-night chaos in Fulton County, Georgia.  Georgia also went to Biden by a narrow margin.

CTCL also promoted the practice of unmonitored private drop boxes for ballots, which are vulnerable to myriad fraudulent practices such as ballot-stuffing.  They also allowed the inclusion of numerous questionable post–Election Day ballots.

CTCL increased funding for temporary staffing and poll workers all over the country, which led to Democrat activists infiltrating election offices and vote-counting stations.

In the end, all of this yielded huge benefits for the Democrats.

CTCL funded 25 cities and counties with $1 million or higher grants in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Virginia, totaling $87.5million in grants.  Biden won 23 of those jurisdictions in the election. 

It is amply clear that battleground states, specific cities, and counties across the country were surgically targeted to affect the results of the election.

The study also showed that counties that Biden won were three times more likely to get funding from the above organizations than Trump ones.

It is now perfectly obvious why Biden's handlers chose to keep him in his basement.  They knew that their proxies were working tirelessly to rig the outcome such that he didn't need to shed a drop of sweat.

U.S. elections already have very serious issues pertaining to campaign financing.

It is legal for private individuals and organizations to donate millions of dollars to finance electoral campaigns.  This functions as a legal form of bribery.

NASCAR drivers with endorsement stickers attached all over them is a symbolic representation of an elected candidate funded by big donors.  The elected representative obviously fulfills obligations to his big donors first, including voting for certain bills and endorsing certain projects.  The consequences of his actions may be disastrous for his voters, who pay his salary with their tax money.  But the candidate is more concerned about the same big donors funding his re-election campaign.

This grave problem was compounded when, for the first time, private donations were made and accepted for government-run election administration and infrastructure.

We therefore have private individuals who are not content merely buying candidates; they also want to buy the entire electoral process.

To put things in perspective, Zuckerberg's contributions nearly matched the federal and state funding for COVID-19-related election expenses, which totaled $479.5 million during the 2020 election.

A perfect example is the state of Wisconsin, which Biden won, where the Legislature gave the city of Green Bay, a Democrat-heavy area, roughly $7 per voter to manage the election.  But CTCL boosted resources in Green Bay to $47 per voter. 

Similar disparities were found in Detroit, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Flint, Dallas, and Houston, all of which received large grants from CTCL.

Funding and managing elections must strictly be a government function because government employees are, at least on paper, subject to accountability and transparency.  If matters go awry, they are compelled to submit themselves for investigations and hearings.

Private individuals or enterprises have no such obligations.  They donate and leave it to their proxies to do the dirty work.

The conducting of free and fair elections trusted by every citizen is the hallmark and the foundation of a thriving democracy.

The fact that Zuckerberg's donations were not rejected by government bodies is proof that democratic values are gradually eroding and are being replaced by a subtle form of totalitarianism.

There will be elections, and you will be able to vote, but the outcome will have been decided already by a few wealthy and powerful individuals.  They bend rules and regulations to facilitate the desired outcome.

Conducting audits of these votes may not lead to the discovery of many discrepancies because the votes are probably genuine.  It is just that the circumstances that led to the choice are compromised.

With so much time, money, and effort involved, it isn't beyond the realm of possibility that master forgers may also be employed to make it impossible to differentiate between real and bogus votes.

This story should have hit headlines across newspapers and should have been debated on each and every TV news show.

When the government is compromised, it is the media that should be the watchdog and make enough noise to compel the government to take action.

The current mainstream media are not compromised.  They are instead a department of the Democrat party.

When they see a story such as this, they either spin it or disparage it and dismiss it as a "right-wing conspiracy theory."  Finally, they bury it.  Since most people are casual consumers of the news, they probably never discover these shocking facts.

It is left to the Republicans to fix the situation.  Thus far, they have made all the right noises. "Are our elections for sale?  Did Zuckerberg purchase the Wisconsin presidential election?" asked Kentucky senator Rand Paul.  Florida governor Ron DeSantis blasted Zuckerberg and touted new election laws he recently signed into law as a ban on "Zuckerbucks" in Florida.  Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin said: "I continue to question whether Mark Zuckerberg's highly partisan 2020 election spending was even legal."

The question is, will these words be backed by actions to investigate the extent of voter fraud and to prevent it from ever occurring again?  We must be cautiously optimistic!

Zuckerbucks: Mark Zuckerberg says he won't be so naked about it anymore

By Monica Showalter

Mark Zuckerberg, whose $419 million "Zuckerbucks" vote-rigging operation played a significant part in swinging the election to Joe Biden in 2020, now says he's a changed man.

A representative for Mark Zuckerberg confirmed the Facebook CEO will not make another multi-million dollar donation to aid this year’s elections, which comes after fierce pushback that Zuckerberg’s 2020 contributions tilted the outcome of the presidential race toward President Biden.

"As Mark and Priscilla made clear previously, their election infrastructure donation to help ensure that Americans could vote during the height of the pandemic was a one-time donation given the unprecedented nature of the crisis," Ben LaBolt, a spokesperson for Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan, said. "They have no plans to repeat that donation."

Don't believe it. Don't believe it for even one second.

Zuckerberg's mother-of-all-sleazeball political operations, which was described as "bribery" by Wisconsin state special counsel last month, directed cash to two non-government organizations run by veteran Soros and Obama operatives, to help city officials supposedly improve the election experience for voters under the rubric of increasing "inclusiveness" and improving democracy.

In reality, it was a cash-funneling operation, where 92% of the money splashed out went to Democrat swing districts in select blue urban areas to get out the vote while rural and red districts got virtually nothing.

It was big money, too. According to Dave Bossie, in an op-ed written for the Washington Times yesterday, the Democratic National Committee shelled out $461 million for all election expenditures over two years culminating in the 2020 election. Zuckerbucks, by contrast, doled out a lightning-swift $400 million for election day, and according to The Federalist, it was actually more than that -- $419.5 million. The 2020 election wasn’t stolen," wrote The Federalist's William Doyle. " — it was likely bought by one of the world’s wealthiest and most powerful men pouring his money through legal loopholes." NSS.

It featured unelected NGO operatives, with Soros-linked and Obama-linked pasts, marching into election offices around election day, giving orders to elected officials tasked by voters to run elections, overruling them, setting up illegal ballot drop boxes, raiding nursing homes for insentient voters, setting up "vote navigators," (which sound like the old Obamacare 'navigators') and re-writing election forms, which are supposed to be fair and uniform state-wide, all to maximize leftist votes. I wrote about that here, citing what John Solomon wrote about that miserable experience from the perspective of a Green Bay county clerk, who saw illegality after illegality from these carpetbaggers, effectively taking over the entire election operation to get Democrats elected. 

Not surprisingly, the Wisconsin special counsel put forth to investigate election irregularities blasted the slimy operation, calling it "bribery." 

Which brings us back to Zuckerberg and his successful but now-reviled and well-exposed political rigging operation.

Zuck says he won't do it again this time, since the pandemic was so unique, you see, but that's a load of garbage.

To start, Capital Research Center notes that Zuckerberg's pandemic noises were a ruse:

Despite its claims that the grants were strictly for COVID-19 relief, not partisan advantage, the data show otherwise. CRC research into grants distributed in key states—Arizona and Nevada, Texas, Michigan and Wisconsin, Virginia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Georgia—has documented their partisan effects. We have also catalogued our major findings at InfluenceWatch.

More important, here's what Zuckerberg is looking at as he now promises to be a good boy:

As of April 2022, 18 states have banned or restricted the use of private funds for election offices and 6 governors—all Democrats—have vetoed potential bans. Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers (D) has vetoed 2 Zuck buck bans; Kansas’s legislature overrode its Democratic governor’s veto.

 

Many states are currently considering bans (see “in-progress”).

In other words, he couldn't get in there to rig election results for Democrats if he tried. State after state after state have banned the use of private funds to run elections, or else done severely regulatory things to keep them from turning into disguised Democrat rigging operations. Wisconsin, where the worst of the events described happened, has a leftist governor who has twice vetoed these efforts to keep elections out of the hands of oligarchs, but a huge number of states have stepped forward to protect themselves and the integrity of their elections, and more such measures are on the way in more states.

Just the idea of a private company or NGO running a public election is utterly repulsive. In a free society, if you don't like Mark Zuckerberg's product, you are always free not to buy it. You don't get that kind of choice in elections when Zuckerberg's money is running the show.

Zuckerberg says he will now channel $80 million to something called the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence for the 32 states they are still allowed to run riot in.

A check of their FAQ section suggests they are doing the exact same thing they did in the 2020 election that made the word 'Zuckerbucks' stink so bad with voters.

Start with the process of getting the Zuckerbucks:

How is the Allianced selecting the Centers for Election Excellence?

All U.S. local election departments are invited to be a Center for Election Excellence. The 2022 cohort will be selected based on their:

· 

Excitement and willingness to participate in the program

· 

· 

Commitment to improve upon practices and procedures aimed at enhancing the voter, poll worker, and staff experiences

· 

· 

Commitment to being part of a learning cohort, sharing materials among cohort members, and providing input into the future of the program

· 

Based on what we know, that means being a leftist Democrat with interest in doing what they did last time.

What is the process for selecting the Centers?

All U.S. local election departments are invited to be a Center for Election Excellence. Local election departments should let the Alliance know if they are interested in being a Center by Friday, May 6th. After a verification and review process, some election departments may be asked for additional information and receive an invitation to an informational session.

Verification and review? I thought they were supposed to be helping out the poor mokes who didn't have enough money to run elections properly. Apparently, districts must be vetted for their usefulness to Democrats.

How will voters benefit?

What is one example of an improvement an election official wishes they could make to better serve their voters, but don’t have enough time, staffing, resources, or technology? Local election officials are the expert on what their voters need, and the Alliance will work with each Center to fill in the gaps. This could look like redesigning a form so it’s more likely a voter will successfully complete it or updating an election website so it is mobile-friendly and answers voters’ top questions.

Still redesigning forms no matter what the county clerk thinks, just like last time.

This operation isn't any different from the last one. They are still doing the same kind of rigging, it's just that their arena of operations has been reduced.

What it does show is that states had better get busy if they don't want an tech oligarch controlling and rigging their elections. It also shows that citizens have got to be vigilant about illegal and unfair practices by carpetbaggers looking for a Democrat win they can't get otherwise. It shows that Zuckerberg is aware that his sleazy operation has gotten exposed and voters don't like it. 

And above all, it shows that he doesn't give a fig about those problems and plans to keep on doing the exact same thing he's been doing, come 2022 and 2024.

Image: Anthony Quintano, via Flickr // CC BY 2.0

 

Analysis conducted last year reveal that 71 percent of tech workers in Silicon Valley are foreign-born, while the tech industry in the San Francisco, Oakland, and Hayward area is made up of 50 percent foreign-born tech workers.

Despite his Wall Street, big business, Big Tech, and billionaire donations, Biden has attempted to portray himself as a small-town fighter from Scranton, Pennsylvania

By failures of border security, a lack of the enforcement of our immigration laws from within  the interior of the United States and huge numbers of visas for high tech workers, the lives and livelihoods of Americans and their children, are being stolen by America’s corrupt political elite who are doing the bidding of those who provide them with huge “Campaign Contributions” (Orwellian euphemism for bribes) pursue legislation that is diametrically opposed to the best interests of America and Americans.

                                                       MICHAEL CUTLER

Alex Marlow: Don’t Call It ‘Stolen’ — How the Big Tech Masters of the Universe Imposed Their Will on the American Electorate

REBECCA MANSOUR

“The manipulation of social media platforms and activism by partisan Democrats in Silicon Valley was a deciding factor in the outcome of the 2020 presidential election,” Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow explains in an op-ed in the Washington Times detailing his research into the 2020 election from his new book Breaking the News: Exposing the Establishment Media’s Hidden Deals and Secret Corruption.

Marlow writes that the 2020 election wasn’t “stolen” from Donald Trump in some “spy-thriller-esque” conspiracy involving Hugo Chavez and voting machines, and suggesting that it was “stolen” is the “easiest way to get removed from the Internet and social media.” However, the true story of how Democrats won is still troubling and reeks of corruption, according to Marlow.

First, he explains how Silicon Valley’s Masters of the Universe controlled the flow of critical information: “Some of the most powerful people in the world, the Masters of the Universe in Silicon Valley — none of them elected, most of them anonymous — turned dials to increase or decrease the flow of critical information the American electorate needed to make informed decisions in the presidential race.”

Marlow points to Big Tech censorship of stories about Hunter Biden’s corruption scandals, as well as Google suppressing Breitbart News’ traffic for anyone searching for articles about “Joe Biden.” Suppression of negative stories about Biden – as well as positive stories about Trump – had the potential of swinging voters in key states, Marlow notes, highlighting a poll conducted by the Media Research Center showing that 17 percent of Biden voters would have changed their votes had they known about certain stories widely covered by Breitbart News.

In addition to controlling the “flow of information,” Silicon Valley billionaires also spent lavishly to impact the election at the ballot box, particularly with the push for vote-by-mail, Marlow explains:

If you had any doubt those who control the flow of information in this country were determined to get Trump out of power, look no further than Mark Zuckerberg. The Facebook CEO spent hundreds of millions of dollars on “safe” election administration, but these efforts appear to have been little more than a de facto get-out-the-vote (GOTV) operation to benefit Democrats.

The centerpiece of this was COVID-safe “drop boxes.” These were bins that look like aluminum public trash cans, placed throughout the country, largely unprotected and unguarded (compared to in-person voting). These made it easier for people to “safely” turn in their mail-in ballots. Critics of the plan said that a high number of these drop boxes were placed in precincts that favor Democrats, particularly ones that were likely to be close races. These drop boxes weren’t necessary anyway, as in-person voting did not worsen the pandemic.

Yet, the sad reality is that Republicans, by and large, let the Masters of the Universe do all this. Perhaps it was because they feared harming the tech companies that were driving the stock markets to record highs, maybe they were following a blind loyalty to the free market, perhaps many were paid off by Big Tech lobbyists, certainly some were uninformed and ignorant. Whatever the explanation is, the GOP was wildly ineffective at protecting their own voters’ ability to freely read and share information.

Marlow calls on Republicans to pursue legislative reforms to rein in Big Tech, including “legislation to treat social media platforms as common carriers like trains or phone companies; this would prevent them from discriminating based on political ideology (or any other reason, for that matter).”

“Breaking up the biggest technology companies, reforms to antitrust law, and reforming the safe harbor for censorship of section 230 of the Communications Decency Act should all be considered,” he writes. “But most importantly, conservatives must turn to governors, legislatures, and Attorneys General in Republican-led states. This will take political willpower, but it can be done.”

Marlow’s book Breaking the News is now available.

Rebecca Mansour is Senior Editor-at-Large for Breitbart News. Follow her on Twitter at @RAMansour.

 

Reports: India’s H-1B Workers Back Joe Biden for PresidentBRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images

NEIL MUNRO

Indian H-1B visa workers in the United States are rooting for Joe Biden and hoping President Donald Trump and his pro-American reforms will get the boot, according to reports in Indian media.

“Many H-1B visa holders, according to Jeya Ganesh, are wishing for a Biden win,” said a report in IndiaTimes.com. “Biden would be the preferred choice for skilled workers. He established clearly that he would resolve the hurdles for tech workers,” he said, adding, “If Trump gets reelected …  Canada is one option I am looking forward to.”

At least 500,000 Indians hold H-1B visas or H4EAD work permits that keep them in a wide range of U.S. white-collar jobs — despite the exclusion of many American graduates from career jobs. Nearly all of those visa workers hope the federal government will quickly provide them with the huge prize of green cards and citizenship. But that process is facing political challenges as Trump pushes popular rewrites of the H-1B program to help younger American graduates get white-collar jobs.

The support for Biden among Indians reflects the same rational assessment made by poor migrants at the U.S-Mexican border. “Asylum-seekers stranded in Matamoros, Mexico, have a plea for voters in November: Elect Joe Biden and “get us out of this hell,” said an October 20 report from the New Republic:

Migrants (& Wall St.) say they want Joe Biden to win – b/c he will open the United States to many more cheap-labor migrants.
That huge inflow, of course, would cut wages & raise housing $, so shifting yet more wealth to employers & coastal investors. https://t.co/6LGJQtVTj9

— Neil Munro (@NeilMunroDC) October 27, 2020

“The most pressing concerns for many [migrant] Indians and [citizen] Indian-Americans remain immigration and H-1B visas and how the outcome of the elections impact these issues,” said IndiaExpress.com:

“If Biden-Harris prevail, the immigration situation will improve,” says [Manish] Kothari. “However, the H-1B situation could continue to be challenging because of how the State Department has changed under the Trump administration. It will take some time to undo these changes.”

Trump’s hostile immigration policies over the past four years have deeply impacted many Silicon Valley employees and their families. “Many workers had to return and this could continue in the next administration. Students who come to the US will be protected because new H-1B entrants from India will have more challenges arriving. We’ve already seen both examples of workers having to return to India and students rising to take available jobs,” explains [Nirav] Shah.

Pramod, who “has spent nearly 13 years in the US, said he would want to see Biden as the next US president,” according to the IndiaTimes.com.  “Biden is good. But I don’t want to keep my hopes up,” he said.

Indian students in the United States, many of whom cycle between university courses and visa jobs, also support Biden. “I personally feel that [Trump’s student visa reform] this is some sort of attack on the international students,” said Ratul Biswas, a University of Minnesota Ph.D. student from India. He told the Star Tribune that he hopes to land a job as a professor in the flooded market for U.S. academic slots.

“Of course Biden,” responded Ajay Bhutoria, a Democrat-aligned Indian in Silicon Valley, Breitbart News asked him who is the favorite of Indian-origin H-1B workers in the valley. “They don’t have a vote, but their voices are for Biden,” he added. In Silicon Valley, he said 80 percent of naturalized Indians are voting for Biden rater than Trump, partly because of the H-1B visas issue, he said.

“The community understands who the real friend of India is, who the foe,” Bhutoria told FinancialExpress.com. “Trump is a foe. … He has suspended the H1 Visa Programme [and] put trade deals with India in jeopardy.”

Many Indian Americans rationally favor the H-1B program. The huge program — and other visa worker pipeless — bring in at least 150,000 Indian visa workers per year, thereby providing Indian-run businesses with cheap and controllable labor and also expanding the cultural, economic, and political clout of Indians in the United States:

Another survey shows Indian-Americans vote overwhelmingly for welcoming pro-diversity Democrats.
Yet GOP legislators support the policies that import roughly 150K Indian workers (incl. #H1B for US jobs) & 150K Indian legal immigrants per year. https://t.co/h03hkUtEQA

— Neil Munro (@NeilMunroDC) October 15, 2020

“Biden has clearly said he is going to raise at the H-1[B] program and increase it as the industry needs. He’s going to streamline the Green Card process in the first hundred days … so people in the Green Card [waiting line] can get the Green Card much faster,” Bhutoria told Breitbart.

On October 22, IndiaWest.com posted an op-ed appeal by Biden to Indian American voters:

I’ve always felt deeply connected to the Indian American community because of the values we share: duty to family and elders, treating people with respect and dignity, self-discipline, service, and hard work.

…

[Sen.] Kamala [Harris] is smart, tested, and prepared. But another thing that makes Kamala so inspiring is her mother, Shyamala Gopalan. We feel Kamala’s pride when she talks about her. She was from Chennai, where her father, Kamala’s grandfather, was active in the fight for Indian independence.

…

We also believe America is a land of opportunity. But it’s likely you and your family have been caught in the middle of President Trump’s crackdown of legal immigration and pathways to permanent residency and citizenship and his decisions on the H-1B visa program. And his dangerous rhetoric about immigrants has empowered white supremacists and even fueled hate crimes against Indian Americans.

Trump has also made much effort to win Indian American votes, particularly by helping businesses and cementing trade and security ties with India as its borders are challenged by an aggressive China.

Indian government officials also lean towards Biden, according to the Indian writer of an op-ed at CNN.com, who briefly noted the importance of the H-1B visa worker issue to India. “Indian diplomats say privately that handling the Trump administration has been complicated,” he wrote, adding:

If Biden wins, the Indian government can be expected to re-engage on climate issues, an easing of immigration restrictions and a resumption of less rancorous trade talks. New Delhi would also like to shore up sagging multilateralism and expects a President Biden to be less eager to pull all US troops out of Afghanistan, a major point of difference with the Trump administration.

…

There is also considerable vicarious pride in the choice of an Indian-American, Sen. Kamala Harris, as Biden’s running mate. One noticeable characteristic of the present campaign is the degree to which both candidates have gone to woo the Indian-American community. That the US is home to what is perceived by Indians as their most successful diaspora is just one more — and arguably the most lasting — reason that India and the US will remain close, irrespective of election results in either country.

Trump's H-1B rewrite is a huge break from the Fortune 500 b/c it shrinks their outsourcing & subcontracting policies.
So a huge win for US labor-rights, but few journos have the freedom to get past corporate/progressive framing of #H1B as 'immigration.'https://t.co/2lPDZhY2oH

— Neil Munro (@NeilMunroDC) October 29, 2020

Businesses and progressives praise open-ended legal migration partly because migrants’ arrival helps transfer wealth from wage earners to stockholders.

Migration moves money from employees to employers, from families to investors, from young to old, from homebuyers to real estate investors, and from the central states to the coastal states.

Migration also allows investors and CEOs to skimp on labor-saving technology, sideline U.S. minorities, ignore disabled people, exploit stoop labor in the fields, short-change labor in the cities, impose tight control on American professionals, centralize technological innovation, undermine labor rights, and get many progressive reporters to cheerlead for Wall Street’s priorities.

 

Kamala Harris Raked in Cash from Big Tech During Democrat Primary

JOHN BINDER

During the 2020 Democrat presidential primary, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) was bestowed with the most billionaire donations of the nearly 30 candidates who ran for the nomination.

In the primary, Harris secured more donations from billionaires than any other Democrat running, according to a November 2019 analysis by Forbes. Before dropping out in early December 2019, Harris raked in donations from at least 46 billionaires.

A number of Harris’s donations came from executives and employees of big tech corporations, as Breitbart News reported at the time.

By August 2019, seven Facebook executives and employees had donated $1,000 or more to Harris’s campaign, nearly 20 Google executives and employees had donated more than $1,000, four Twitter executives and employees had donated more than $1,000, and 71 Amazon executives and employees had donated anywhere from $5 to $2,000.

Notably, Harris took donations from Impossible Foods president Dennis Woodside, LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse, and Salesforce chairman Marc Benioff.

Despite a lack of enthusiasm and support among primary voters, Harris’s campaign was propped up by a base of elite coastal donors, with less than 40 percent of her funding coming from small-dollar donors giving $200 or less as of October 2019.

On Tuesday, Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden confirmed Harris as his vice presidential pick. In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) called Harris a “champion for hardworking families everywhere.”

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

 

Report: Facebook Manually Censored NY Post Biden Corruption Bombshell

TOM CICCOTTA

A report published this week alleges that Facebook manually censored the New York Post bombshell story about Biden family corruption.  According to the Guardian, Facebook moderators manually overrode the platform’s automatic processes to censor the Post, an effort that successfully censored about half of the engagement the article would have received, according to researchers.

According to a report by the Guardian, internal documents from Facebook suggest that the platform intentionally restricted the distribution of a New York Post report that allegedly revealed ties between Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden and a Ukrainian energy company. The suppression was not automatic or based on Facebook’s AI and algorithmic approach to content, but rather done by hand by Facebook moderators.

This does not come as a surprise as some Facebook executives announced their decision to restrict the distribution of the report. In a tweet, Facebook’s Policy Communications Director Andy Stone said that the story would be restricted in some form on the platform.

“While I will intentionally not link to the New York Post, I want be clear that this story is eligible to be fact checked by Facebook’s third-party fact checking partners. In the meantime, we are reducing its distribution on our platform,” Stone wrote in a tweet on October 14.

While I will intentionally not link to the New York Post, I want be clear that this story is eligible to be fact checked by Facebook's third-party fact checking partners. In the meantime, we are reducing its distribution on our platform.

— Andy Stone (@andymstone) October 14, 2020

According to an internal Facebook policy, the platform will remove “unverified rumors” that could lead to violence, harm, or voter interference. It is not clear how this policy is applied by Facebook.

“Generally, we take action on misinformation rated by fact-checking partners by reducing its spread and surfacing more information to people,” the policy reads. “However, we will remove misinformation if it violates our Community Standards, including misinformation and unverified rumors that could contribute to the risk of imminent violence or physical harm, voter and census interference content, and certain manipulated videos…”

Facebook’s censorship of the Post was deemed successful by social media engagement experts that examined the decision. They found that the Post‘s bombshell article only reached about half the engagement it would have been expected to reach on its own. Mark Zuckerberg denied censoring the Post during his recent testimony to the Senate Commerce Committee.

Breitbart News reported over the weekend that Twitter has finally reinstated the Twitter account belonging to the New York Post. The newspaper was locked out of their account on October 14 following the publication of the Hunter Biden story.

Stay tuned to Breitbart News for more updates on this story.

Wall Street Praises Kamala Harris as Joe Biden’s VP: ‘What’s Not to Like?’

JOHN BINDER

Wall Street executives are praising Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden’s choosing Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) as his running mate against President Trump, feeling they dodged a bullet from a progressive insurgency.

In interviews with the Wall Street Journal, CNBC, and Bloomberg, executives on Wall Street expressed relief that Biden picked Harris for vice president on the Democrat ticket, calling her a “normal Democrat” who is a “safe” choice for the financial industry.

Morgan Stanley Vice Chairman Tom Nides told Bloomberg that across Wall Street, Harris joining Biden “was exceptionally well-received.”

“How damn cool is it that a Black woman is considered the safe and conventional candidate,” Nides said.

Peter Soloman, the founder of a multinational investment banking firm, told Bloomberg he believes Harris is “a great pick” because she is “safe, balanced, a woman, diverse, what’s not to like?”

As the Journal notes, many on Wall Street see Harris is another conscious decision by the Democrat establishment to stave off populist priorities to reform Wall Street:

To some Wall Street executives, Ms. Harris’s selection signals a more moderate shift for the Democratic Party, which its progressive flank has pushed to the left in recent years. [Emphasis added]

“While Kamala is a forceful, passionate and eloquent standard-bearer for the aspirations of all Americans, regardless of their race, gender or age, she is not doctrinaire or rigid,” said Brad Karp, chairman of law firm Paul Weiss, who co-led a committee of lawyers across the country who supported Ms. Harris during the primary. [Emphasis added]

Marc Lasry, CEO of Avenue Capital Group, called Harris a “great” pick for Biden. “She’s going to help Joe immensely. He picked the perfect partner,” Lasry told CNBC.

Executives at Citigroup and Centerview Partners made similar comments about Harris to CNBC and the Journal, calling her a “great choice” and “direct but constructive.”

Founder of financial consulting firm Kynikos Associates Jim Chanos was elated in an interview with Bloomberg over Harris joining Biden on the Democrat ticket:

“She’s terrific,” said Chanos, founder of Kynikos Associates. “She’s got force of personality in a good way. She takes over a room. She certainly has a charisma and a presence which will be an asset on the campaign.” [Emphasis added]

Harris is no stranger to praise from Wall Street executives. In the 2019 Democrat presidential primary, Harris won over a number of financial industry donors, even holding a fundraiser in Iowa that was backed by Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

While criticizing “the people who have the most” in Democrat primary debates, Harris raked in thousands in campaign cash from financial executives from firms such as the Blackstone Group, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, and Wells Fargo.

This month, the New York Times admitted the “wallets of Wall Street are with Joe Biden” in a gushing headline about the financial industry’s opposition to Trump:

Financial industry cash flowing to Mr. Biden and outside groups supporting him shows him dramatically out-raising the president, with $44 million compared with Mr. Trump’s $9 million.

Harris’s views on trade and immigration, two of the most consequential issues to Wall Street, are in lockstep with financial executives’ objective to grow profit margins and add consumers to the market.

On trade, Harris has balked at Trump’s imposition of tariffs on foreign imports from China, Mexico, Canada, and Europe — using the neoliberal argument that tariffs should not be used to pressure foreign countries to buy more American-made goods and serve as only a tax on taxpayers.

Likewise, the Biden-Harris plan for national immigration policy — which seeks to drive up legal and illegal immigration levels to their highest levels in decades — offers a flooded labor market with low wages for U.S. workers and increased bargaining power for big business that has long been supported by Wall Street.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

 

Sold Out: How High-Tech

 Billionaires & Bipartisan Beltway

 Crapweasels Are ScrewingAmerica's

 Best & Brightest

By Michelle Malkin and John Miano

Hardcover, ISBN: 1501115944, $16.80
http://smile.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1501115944/centerforimmigra

Kindle, 10644 KB, ASIN: B00VBW3SYQ, $14.99

Book Description: The #1 New York Times bestselling author and firebrand syndicated columnist Michelle Malkin sets her sights on the corrupt businessmen, politicians, and lobbyists flooding our borders and selling out America’s best and brightest workers.

In Sold Out, Michelle Malkin and John Miano reveal the worst perpetrators screwing America’s high-skilled workers, how and why they’re doing it—and what we must do to stop them. In this book, they will name names and expose the lies of those who pretend to champion the middle class, while aiding and abetting massive layoffs of highly skilled American workers in favor of cheap foreign labor. Malkin and Miano will explode some of the most commonly told myths spread in the media like these:

Lie #1: America is suffering from an apocalyptic “shortage” of science, technology, engineering, and math workers.

Lie #2: US companies cannot function without an unlimited injection of the most “highly skilled” and “highly educated” foreign workers, who offer intellectual capital and entrepreneurial energy that American workers can’t match.

Lie #3: America’s best and brightest talents are protected because employers are required to demonstrate that they’ve made every effort to hire American citizens before resorting to foreign labor.

For too long, open-borders tech billionaires and their political 

enablers have escaped tough public scrutiny of their means and 

motives. Sold Out is an indictment of not only political corruption 

in Washington, but also the journalistic malpractice that enables it.

It’s time to trade the whitewash for solvent. American workers 

deserve better and the public deserves the unvarnished truth.

Tech Elites Endorse Joe Biden to Secure More Foreign Workers for U.S. Jobs

JOHN BINDER

Tech industry elites have endorsed Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden, citing their opposition to President Trump’s efforts to prioritize Americans for high-paying tech jobs in the United States.

Twenty-four winners of the Turing Award, considered the Nobel Peace Prize for computer science, have endorsed Biden on the premise that the former vice president will allow the tech industry to import more foreign workers, specifically those on H-1B visas, to fill coveted U.S. jobs.

The list includes Google executive Vinton Cerf, Pixar executive Ed Catmull, Facebook executive Yann LeCun, and Alphabet executive John Hennessy.

“Information technology is thoroughly globalized. Academic computer science departments attract talented students, many of whom immigrate and become American inventors and captains of industry,” the executives and industry insiders wrote in their endorsement of Biden:

We celebrate open source projects, the lifeblood of our field, as exemplars of international collaboration. Computer Science is at its best when its learnings and discoveries are shared freely in the spirit of progress. These core values helped make America a leader in information technology, so vital in this Information Age. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris listen to experts before setting public policy, essential when science and technology may help with many problems facing our nation today. As American computer scientists and as US citizens, we enthusiastically endorse Joe Biden for President and Kamala Harris for Vice President. [Emphasis added]

Since mass unemployment hit the U.S., spurred by the Chinese coronavirus crisis, Trump signed an executive order halting a number of visa programs including the H-1B visa. Likewise, the Trump administration is eyeing H-1B visa reforms that would more effectively weed out the business model of outsourcing that has allowed American workers to be replaced by foreign H-1B visa workers.

In August, billion dollar tech corporations such as Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Twitter signed onto a U.S. Chamber of Commerce lawsuit against Trump’s executive order — arguing that they have a right to import foreign workers to fill U.S. jobs.

Unlike Trump, Biden has promised to increase the number of foreign H-1B visa workers that tech corporations will be able to import every year. The practice is a boon to tech executives.

There are about 650,000 H-1B visa workers in the U.S. at any given moment. Americans are often laid off in the process and forced to train their foreign replacements, as highlighted by Breitbart News. More than 85,000 Americans annually potentially lose their jobs to foreign labor through the H-1B visa program.

Analysis conducted in 2018 discovered that 71 percent of tech workers in Silicon Valley, California, are foreign-born, while the tech industry in the San Francisco, Oakland, and Hayward area is made up of 50 percent foreign-born tech workers. Up to 99 percent of H-1B visa workers imported by the top eight outsourcing firms are from India.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

 

Mark Zuckerberg: ‘There Is a Risk of Civil Unrest Across the Country’

LUCAS NOLAN

2 Nov 2020816

2:22

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg told analysts on a recent conference call with analysts that he believes there could be “civil unrest” across the country following the presidential election.

ZDNet reports that during a conference call with analysts, Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg stated that the social media giant plants to post notices at the top of users’ news feeds on November 3 discrediting claims by either U.S. presidential candidate that they have won the election if the site deems the announcement premature.

Zuckerberg stated: “If any candidate or campaign tries to declare victory before the final results are called, we will put a notification to the top of People’s Facebook and Instagram feed letting them know the results aren’t final yet and we’ll put an informational label on the candidate’s post.”

Zuckerberg added that Facebook was taking the initiative as “There is a risk of civil unrest across the country, and given this, companies like ours need to go well beyond what we’ve done before.”

Discussing Facebook’s various efforts around the election, Zuckerberg stated that the site “helped 4.4 million people register [to vote] exceeding the goal that we set for ourselves this summer.”

Facebook has also paused all new political ads on its site for this week, Zuckerberg commented on this stating: “We’re doing this because while I generally believe that the best antidote to bad speech is more speech, in the final days of an election, there may simply not be enough time to contest new claims.”

Breitbart News recently reported that Facebook revealed in a blog post that a number of political ads were “improperly” restricted due to a technical error as the company attempted to prevent new political ads from being posted ahead of the November 3 election. Facebook stated that “technical flaws” caused a number of ads to be “paused improperly.”

Facebook stated that it has “implemented changes to fix these issues” and most of the advertisements were now running without any issues. Facebook stopped accepting new ads related to political issues on Tuesday and stated that it would allow pre-existing ads to run during that period but would block any adjustments to the ads’ content or design.

Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan or email him at lnolan@breitbart.com

 

Sen Kamala Harris is a product of Silicon Valley's billionaires and will enforce their agenda in DC.

Eg, she's an author of the S.386 bill that allows the Fortune 500 to hire more white-collar workers from India for jobs needed by America's college grads https://t.co/gKCuD9DH5z

— Neil Munro (@NeilMunroDC) August 12, 2020

 

In today's election, yours is a choice between freedom and globalism

By Mark Christian

I know something about both freedom and globalism.  What I know is that you cannot have both, which is why I immigrated to America, the world's last stronghold of freedom. 

In the way of background, I grew up in a prominent Muslim family in Egypt and became an imam at an early age.  Like Christianity, Islam is a global religion.  Unlike Christianity, Islam imposes an imperial global vision on true believers and denies them freedom of thought and movement.

Progressive globalism does much the same.  Although Islam and progressivism would seem to have nothing in common, they do share one overriding goal: the need to crush traditional American Christianity, the one obstacle to world dominance in either case.  At some point, Islam and progressivism will part ways, but for now, they are content to "coexist."

Progressive leaders turn a blind eye to the slaughter of Christians at a church in France or the shooting of a priest in another church or the beheading of a French teacher for daring to show a picture of Mohammed, the prophet of Islam.  In countries like France, leftists have been responsible for as much church vandalism as Muslims, maybe more.  For now, the left and Islam are allies.  The result of the failed immigration policies and the rabid push of atheism by most European governments has made their combined mayhem possible.

The mayhem has been papered over with lies, which is why Joe Biden makes such a perfect front man for the global elites.  Biden has lied about almost everything in his life.  Where to begin?

Biden lied about his undergraduate degree and his majors, lied about his rank in law school, lied about scholarships and educational aid he had received, lied about his stance toward the Vietnam war while in college, lied about his plagiarism of other politician's writings and speeches, lied about the circumstances around his first wife's fatal accident, lied about how he met his second and current wife, and lied about the affair they were having when they were both married.

Joe Biden is the embodiment of the dark side of American politics.

When the Vietnam war ended, and our troops needed funding to evacuate gracefully, Joe Biden stood in the way.  His obstruction led to Saigon's fall and the disgraceful flight of American troops and personnel off the American embassy's rooftop in Vietnam.

When President Ford pleaded with Congress to help the Vietnamese refugees, the ones who were aiding Americans during the war, Joe Biden stood in the way.  Even though many of these refugees were orphan children, Joe Biden called them criminals and prostitutes on the Senate floor.

Most recently and dramatically, Biden lied about his knowledge of his son's shady dealings, lied about his own involvement in corruption and bribery, and lied about his current presidential agenda and what he wants to implement in regards to energy, fracking, court-packing, health care, education, and COVID among other issues.

Biden has lied about so much that I am not sure if he ever told the truth or is now even capable of doing so.  Thanks to Big Tech's and Big Media's suppression of his record, he can present himself as a man of character and high morals.  We must feel sorry for the multitude of gullible Americans who believe him.

Do not be a fool and believe for a second that the elites hate Trump because of his tweets or because he is allegedly a sexist, a rapist, a racist, or a foreign agent.  Nor do they hate him because of the pandemic death toll.

In reality, the elites hate Trump because of "YOU," because you elected a man they did not nominate and could not control.  I have never seen global anticipation for an American election like this one.  The world is watching.  The progressive and Islamic elites are pulling for Biden, but lovers of freedom all over the world are quietly cheering for Trump.  If you have yet to vote, be sure to vote today and give them something to cheer about.

Image: Biden the globalist by Andrea Widburg.

Likewise, the Biden-Harris plan for national immigration policy — which seeks to drive up legal and illegal immigration levels to their highest levels in decades — offers a flooded labor market with low wages for U.S. workers and increased bargaining power for big business that has long been supported by Wall Street.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

 

Tech Elites Endorse Joe Biden to Secure More Foreign Workers for U.S. Jobs

JOHN BINDER

Tech industry elites have endorsed Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden, citing their opposition to President Trump’s efforts to prioritize Americans for high-paying tech jobs in the United States.

Twenty-four winners of the Turing Award, considered the Nobel Peace Prize for computer science, have endorsed Biden on the premise that the former vice president will allow the tech industry to import more foreign workers, specifically those on H-1B visas, to fill coveted U.S. jobs.

The list includes Google executive Vinton Cerf, Pixar executive Ed Catmull, Facebook executive Yann LeCun, and Alphabet executive John Hennessy.

“Information technology is thoroughly globalized. Academic computer science departments attract talented students, many of whom immigrate and become American inventors and captains of industry,” the executives and industry insiders wrote in their endorsement of Biden:

We celebrate open source projects, the lifeblood of our field, as exemplars of international collaboration. Computer Science is at its best when its learnings and discoveries are shared freely in the spirit of progress. These core values helped make America a leader in information technology, so vital in this Information Age. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris listen to experts before setting public policy, essential when science and technology may help with many problems facing our nation today. As American computer scientists and as US citizens, we enthusiastically endorse Joe Biden for President and Kamala Harris for Vice President. [Emphasis added]

Since mass unemployment hit the U.S., spurred by the Chinese coronavirus crisis, Trump signed an executive order halting a number of visa programs including the H-1B visa. Likewise, the Trump administration is eyeing H-1B visa reforms that would more effectively weed out the business model of outsourcing that has allowed American workers to be replaced by foreign H-1B visa workers.

In August, billion dollar tech corporations such as Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Twitter signed onto a U.S. Chamber of Commerce lawsuit against Trump’s executive order — arguing that they have a right to import foreign workers to fill U.S. jobs.

Unlike Trump, Biden has promised to increase the number of foreign H-1B visa workers that tech corporations will be able to import every year. The practice is a boon to tech executives.

There are about 650,000 H-1B visa workers in the U.S. at any given moment. Americans are often laid off in the process and forced to train their foreign replacements, as highlighted by Breitbart News. More than 85,000 Americans annually potentially lose their jobs to foreign labor through the H-1B visa program.

Analysis conducted in 2018 discovered that 71 percent of tech workers in Silicon Valley, California, are foreign-born, while the tech industry in the San Francisco, Oakland, and Hayward area is made up of 50 percent foreign-born tech workers. Up to 99 percent of H-1B visa workers imported by the top eight outsourcing firms are from India.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

 

Analysis conducted last year reveal that 71 percent of tech workers in Silicon Valley are foreign-born, while the tech industry in the San Francisco, Oakland, and Hayward area is made up of 50 percent foreign-born tech workers.

Zuck Troubles: Internal Facebook Memos Outline Hiring Freeze, ‘Slower’ Revenue Growth

35

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

LUCAS NOLAN

6 May 20220

Recently leaked internal Facebook memos have revealed that the company is implementing a hiring freeze due to its failure to hit revenue targets. The Masters of the Universe continue to struggle with Apple’s privacy changes, which have damaged Mark Zuckerberg’s ability to suck up the personal data of users from their iPhones.

Business Insider reports that Facebook is enacting a massive hiring freeze and reducing hiring targets in a strategy that will impact “almost every team across the company.” This information comes from leaked internal memos sent to employees by executives this week.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg  (JOSH EDELSON/AFP via Getty Images)

Mark Zuckerberg introduces Meta (Facebook)

This is a surprising decision from Facebook which has been overhauling its company in recent years, rebranding as Meta and vowing to focus on building “the Metaverse.” The company plans to build a digital reality and hardware to seamlessly access it, but the business pivot is reportedly becoming costly. Combined with an almost 40 percent decline in stock value this year, company CFO David Wehner announced that the firm is “reprioritizing.”

Breitbart News previously reported that according to internal reports, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has become increasingly obsessed with the idea of a digital metaverse, to the point where many of his employees are becoming frustrated and annoyed with the concept. According to a former director-level employee who recently left the company, it’s “the only thing Mark wants to talk about.”

Now, due to “slower revenue growth than anticipated,” Facebook is implementing a company-wide hiring freeze and doesn’t intend to meet hiring goals set at the start of the year. According to the memo, the company’s problems are due to the Apple privacy changes, the war in Ukraine, and the “general macroeconomic environment.”

The memo from company CFO David Wehner reads in part:

While we’re still going through our reprioritization, we know this will have an effect on hiring for the rest of the year. We came into 2022 with really aggressive growth targets and have hired at an incredible pace this year so far — we hired more engineers in Q1 than all of 2021. We’ve brought thousands of talented people into the company that are helping us work towards our ambitious goals and 2022 priorities. However, as we look towards the second half, we’re going to adjust those targets in a couple of ways:

1. Reducing our hiring targets for 2022. This means hiring fewer people than we initially forecast. We’re still working out what this means for each org, but this will affect almost every team in the company. We’re entering into the H2 planning cycle, and this will be an opportunity to reprioritize work to make sure we’re all focused on the most important things and the top priorities for the company. Your org leaders will follow up with more information over the coming days and weeks, but today we’re announcing some changes on the Engineering side — look out for a post in Engineering FYI for details.
2. Reviewing headcount allocation to make sure it’s aligned to our top company priorities given our modified hiring targets. This will help us resource the projects that we’re prioritizing for the rest of the year. You’ll learn more about this from your functional and org leads over the next couple of weeks.

Read more at Business Insider here.

Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan or contact via secure email at the address lucasnolan@protonmail.com

Analysis conducted last year reveal that 71 percent of tech workers in Silicon Valley are foreign-born, while the tech industry in the San Francisco, Oakland, and Hayward area is made up of 50 percent foreign-born tech workers.

 

Despite his Wall Street, big business, Big Tech, and billionaire donations, Biden has attempted to portray himself as a small-town fighter from Scranton, Pennsylvania

 

By failures of border security, a lack of the enforcement of our immigration laws from within  the interior of the United States and huge numbers of visas for high tech workers, the lives and livelihoods of Americans and their children, are being stolen by America’s corrupt political elite who are doing the bidding of those who provide them with huge “Campaign Contributions” (Orwellian euphemism for bribes) pursue legislation that is diametrically opposed to the best interests of America and Americans.

                                                       MICHAEL CUTLER

Zuckerberg’s FWD.us Claims No Amnesty Ensures Midterm Defeat for Democrats

NEIL MUNRO

The Facebook-funded FWD.us investor advocacy group is touting the claim that Democrat turnout will drop in 2022 if the party cannot pass an amnesty through Congress.

But that claim is toothless, in large part because recent polls show that many Americans of Latino ancestry are increasingly voting for the GOP, precisely because GOP leaders oppose the amnesty-amplified wave of cheap labor into their communities.

The claim is being made by pro-migration groups, including the leaders of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON) which denounced the Senate’s parliamentarian’s decision to exclude the parole amnesty for 6.5 million illegals from the draft Build Back Better spending plan.

NDLON declared Thursday night:

Democrats’ excuses for their failure, for their incompetence, and for their insincerity will be the ammunition used by xenophobes in the Republican Party to retake control of the federal government in upcoming elections. Inaction on immigration legalization risks further propelling Trumpism in every possible way … No more excuses. Where there is a will, there is a way.

The NDLON group represents illegal migrants, most of whom work for very low wages, and none of whom can vote in U.S. elections.

Rep. Lou Correa (D-Calif.) is making the same claim, according to Bloomberg, which reported that he “warned that Democrats would face wrath from voters in the 2022 elections if they don’t secure a citizenship path”

But the NDLON claim is being echoed by the politically powerful investor class, who use imported workers, consumers, and renters to spike the value of their Wall Street investments.

Todd Schulte is the president of the FWD.us advocacy group for investors, which gets about $30 million a year from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative to push for more migration. On Thursday night, he tweeted:

 

Schulte’s deputy also pushed a hard line:

 

Unsurprisingly, FWD.us has a hidden agenda in the amnesty debate.

The establishment media extensively cover the proposed parole amnesty for 6.5 million illegal migrants. But the media largely ignores  two other proposed changes to immigration laws that would deliver huge benefits to West Coast investors who created the FWD.us advocacy group in 2013.

For example, the BBB legislation would allow the White House to provide green cards to millions of favored migrants, including perhaps three million “chain migrants” selected by recent immigrants. This open-doors policy would provide investors with millions of new profit-generating consumers, renters, and workers.

The BBB legislation would also allow President Joe Biden’s pro-migration deputies to sell green cards to at least one million migrants who have taken many of the Fortune 500 jobs sought by skilled U.S. college graduates. This change would allow Fortune 500 companies to hire many more foreign graduates with dangled offers of fast-track green cards. These workers are usually imported via the visa worker programs, such as the H-1B and Optional Practical Training program.

But those two benefits for the Fortune 500 investors may be dropped if the Democrat senators cannot also get their amnesty for illegal migrants.

On Friday, an advocacy group for corporate-funded immigration lawyers urged Congress to keep pushing the green card giveaway, even after the amnesty was nixed:

 

“The corporate guys are riding on perceived sympathy for the illegal alien population in order to get their immigration giveaways,” said Robert Law, the director of regulatory affairs and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies. He continued:

The Hispanic population knows immigration is a pocketbook issue for them as well, and mass illegal immigration — plus legal immigration — hurts the economic opportunities of Hispanic Americans or the black community, or any people who typically are competing at the lower end of the economic spectrum.

The Senate’s debate referee has not issued any judgments on the two green card proposals.

Zuckerberg’s FWD.us network of coastal investors stands to gain from more cheap labor, government-aided consumers, and urban renters. The network has funded many astroturf campaigns, urged Democrats to not talk about the economic impact of migration, and manipulated coverage by the TV networks and the print media.

FWD.us’also spotlights many family dramas amid the inflow of border migrants. This focus helps keep reporters from recognizing the huge pocketbook impact of the establishment’s economic policy of mass migration. The resulting family-drama coverage also keeps many young progressives from noticing that the extraction migration policy drives up their rents and cuts their salaries.

The breadth of investors who founded and funded FWD.us was hidden from casual visitors to the group’s website sometime in the last few months. But copies exist at other sites.

 

 

Biden’s Chief of Staff Worked on Behalf of Big Tech for Endless H-1B Visas

JOHN BINDER

Democrat Joe Biden has chosen Ronald Klain to be his chief of staff should he enter the White House in January. Klain worked on behalf of Silicon Valley executives and their interests, which include providing tech corporations with an endless supply of H-1B foreign visa workers and more free trade.

Klain, who was made Biden’s incoming chief of staff this week, served on the executive council of TechNet — a firm that promotes the interests of Silicon Valley’s tech corporations in Washington, D.C. Klain served on the council alongside executives from the Oracle Corporation, Hewlett-Packard Enterprise, Google, Visa, Apple, and Microsoft.

TechNet, most recently, joined a lawsuit against President Trump’s reforms to the H-1B visa program that sought to prioritize unemployed Americans for jobs rather than allowing businesses to continue importing foreign workers.

TechNet is one of the groups that has filed an amicus brief to oppose the new regulations on H-1B visas. https://t.co/ofY4GJ2sVR

— U.S. Tech Workers (@USTechWorkers) November 12, 2020

Trump’s seeking to force businesses to hire Americans over importing foreign visa workers is an affront to Silicon Valley’s tech corporations, those represented by TechNet, who advocate for an endless flow of H-1B foreign visa workers.

There are about 650,000 H-1B visa workers in the U.S. at any given moment. Americans are often laid off and forced to train their foreign replacements, as highlighted by Breitbart News. More than 85,000 Americans annually potentially lose their jobs to foreign labor through the H-1B visa program.

Analysis conducted in 2018 discovered that 71 percent of tech workers in Silicon Valley, California, are foreign-born, while the tech industry in the San Francisco, Oakland, and Hayward area is made up of 50 percent foreign-born tech workers. Up to 99 percent of H-1B visa workers imported by the top eight outsourcing firms are from India.

TechNet’s listed immigration goals include allowing corporations to dictate the annual level of legal immigration to the United States and the elimination of per-country caps that would effectively let India and China monopolize the U.S. green card system.

The group’s goals on trade are in direct opposition to President Trump’s economic nationalist agenda that has imposed tariffs on foreign imports from China, Canada, Europe, and other parts of the globe.

TechNet’s trade goals include reducing “tariff and non-tariff barriers to information, communications, and advanced energy technology products, services, and investments” as well as “protections for the free flow of data across borders…”

While Biden has vowed to flood the U.S. labor market with more foreign workers to compete against Americans for jobs, he has shied away from questions on whether he will eliminate tariffs on foreign imports that were imposed by Trump. Such elimination of tariffs would be a boon to multinational corporations that offshore their production and jobs overseas only to import their products back into the U.S. market, often with no penalties for doing so.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.