After the election with two races undecided in Georgia, Chuck Schumer sounded more like William Tecumseh Sherman, proclaiming on the streets of New York: “Now we take Georgia, then we change the world. Now we take Georgia, then we change America.” The Senate Minority Leader (and hopeful Senate Majority Leader) was referring to two runoff elections that could hand the Senate to the Democrats with total control of the legislative and executive branches. The last Yankee to promise a scorched earth campaign through Georgia delivered on his promise. Ironically, the Georgia campaign will commence on an ominous anniversary. The infamous “March to the Sea” by Gen. Sherman began on November 15th and ended shortly before Christmas. The march left Georgia in ashes. Continue reading “Georgia Prepares For Second “March To The Sea” As Leading Democrats Promise Scorched Earth Campaign”

Below is my column in The Hill on the challenges to the presidential election and moving beyond heated allegations to hard evidence in the filings. I have expressed skepticism over the sweeping claims of fraud or that the current margins could be overcome with anything other than systemic flaws in the authentication of ballots. However, the demand for clear evidence of systemic violations after only a couple days of the tabulation stage is bizarre. We would not necessarily have such evidence, which is largely held by election officials. As expected, we have a series of localized affidavits and allegations of intentional fraud. Yet, network analysts were dismissing any and all allegations within the first 24 hours, as tabulations were continuing. It is like saying that a patient has a low white blood cell level but insisting on stopping testing if you cannot conclusively say that there is cancer. These initial allegations may or may not be indicative of a more systemic problem. There is no reason to presume fraud but also no reason to demand concessions before we look at these allegations, particularly with the addition of sworn statements and at least one computer problem resulting in loss of thousands of Trump votes in Michigan. Half of this country voted for Trump and it is not much for them to ask for a review of the challenges — a right that the Democrats would be demanding if the positions in this close election were reversed. Moreover, those voters can be understandably skeptical to hear these instant dismissals from networks, which previously predicted a sweeping victory for Biden and the Democrats. Even if, as expected, these allegations are rejected, it is important for this country to have a full and open consideration of these claims and the underlying evidence.
By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
Voters within the City of San Francisco passed Proposition L, a measure designed to tax corporations having CEO compensation in excess of 100 times the median compensation of line employees. City analysts estimate the measure would raise between sixty and one hundred million dollars per year confiscated from large for-profit companies employing over one thousand persons nationwide and having administrative offices in San Francisco.
According to the San Francisco Voter Information Pamphlet:
• For a business that pays the Gross Receipts Tax, if its Top Executive Pay is more than 100 times Employee Pay, the business would pay an additional tax from 0.1% to 0.6% of its San Francisco gross receipts.
• For a business that pays the Administrative Office Tax, if its Top Executive Pay is more than 100 times Employee Pay, the business would pay an additional tax from 0.4% to 2.4% of its San Francisco payroll expense.
The Proposition invoked from a hearing of July 28, 2020 where the Board of Supervisors voted 11 to 0 to place Proposition L on the ballot. The government wrote:
The more inequity between the top executive and their workers, the higher the surcharge. Corporations can avoid the tax by simply paying their executives less or by raising their employees’ wages.
We believe that big corporations that can afford to pay their executives million-dollar salaries every year can afford to pay their fair share in taxes to help us recover. Over the last 30 years, executive salaries in the United States have skyrocketed by 940 percent. But regular workers’ salaries have grown by just 11 percent. Prop L incentivizes companies to invest in their workers, not just their executives ~+~
That’s quite an incentive? Yes, I would agree: Laying off workers is the incentive that might actually come to mind at some companies.

Being a legal analyst often makes you a killjoy at a party. As millions broke out in celebration over the calling of the election for Joe Biden (including most of my immediate family), I watched with a mix of shared excitement and silent apprehension. It does appear that Biden won this election and his speech last night was the perfect pitch and message for a divided nation. However, there are still legal challenges being filed in a half dozen, new affidavits containing troubling sworn allegations, and relatively close state contests. As someone who has covered presidential elections for networks going back to 2000, those challenges are like live torpedoes in the water – you do not know if one could actually hit below the water line. The issue for legal analysts is that, with the tabulations still occurring, there is little ability to judge allegations of voting irregularities.
It turns out that some things that happen in Vegas may not stay in Vegas . . . like voting. The Republican Party in the Silver State is now arguing that thousands of votes in the close presidential election were cast by workers who moved out of the state or even by deceased individuals. Various voters reported their deceased relatives receiving live ballots in the mail. Now, the Nevada Republican Party has sent a criminal referral to the Justice Department alleging at least 3,062 instances of voter fraud in the battleground state. The referral is substantially less than the “10,000” referenced earlier but the underlying allegation is still important. The early concern for many of us was that the system established in Clark County would be difficult to review for violations due to how the tabulation was handled and the record preserved. Continue reading “What Happens In Vegas May Not Stay In Vegas: Why The Nevada Challenge Could Be Important To The Presidential Election”
Below is my column in the Hill on continuing controversies over vote counting in states like Nevada and Pennsylvania. Some of these challenges are based on the resistance to monitors and observers in states like Pennsylvania. It is mystifying why Pennsylvania is fighting so hard against such access. The litigation is only fueling suspicions of wrongdoing as the vote balance shifts dramatically. The problem is that a court could ultimately agree that the officials violated state laws but declare such challenges as effectively moot since the vote counting is largely completed. For other challenges, the litigants will need to convince a court that the number of impacted ballots could be “outcome determinative” for the electoral votes. Otherwise, it could be treated as immaterial to the outcome. Those challenges need to be made and supported without delay. Time works to the advantage of the party protecting a lead. As it stands, the allegations of systemic violations is still to be made by the Trump campaign. Absent real evidence, Joe Biden has a clear path to 270 electoral votes and the White House.
Here is the column:
Below is my earlier column in the Hill on the issues that we are following in the various states. Many of these issues are now being litigated on the deadlines and conditions for voting. We are still seeing challenges over the voting and now over the counting. We will be moving to the next phase from counting to keeping votes. Even if a state is declared for a candidate, there will be recount and challenges. Recounts historically have no resulted in substantial changes with the exception of the Florida recount in 2000 where there were serious problems in the design of ballots and intent of voters. There remain however categorical challenges like the one kicked back by the Supreme Court in Pennsylvania.
Here is the column:
With the unfolding contested election, the only clear conclusion is the uniform polls declaring Joe Biden with commanding leads nationally and in states like Wisconsin were laughingly false. It appears that pollsters at newspapers like the Washington Post (which gave Biden a 17 point lead in Wisconsin on Election Day) have succumbed to the same pressures of echo chamber journalism as their journalistic counterparts. Polls on NBC, CNN, and the major newspapers all gave the same reassuring message that only a hardcore group of knuckle-dragging racists were left supporting Donald Trump. It has been a conversation with themselves in an echo chamber of unrelenting negative coverage. That narrative crashed and burned last night. As I noted today, if Trump is reelected, he will have the mainstream media to thank.
Continue reading “Reality Check: How Trump Found Success In The Media’s Failure”

We have been discussing the rising private censorship on the Internet demanded by Democratic leaders and meted out by companies like Twitter and Facebook. The original purpose of the Internet as a free and robust space for political and social expression is under attack as politicians demand greater levels of control to combat “disinformation.” Indeed, Biden adviser Pete Buttigieg on Election Day demanded more penalties for companies not stopping “inciting material,” a subjective term left intentionally undefined. This drumbeat for censorship was amplified on Election Day when Twitter again hit tweets from President Donald Trump with warnings of disinformation. The tweets were pure political speech and Twitter again showed that it is now fully committed to biased regulation of speech between users of its service. Continue reading “Twitter Doubles Down On Censorship With Renewed Warnings On Trump Tweets”

Below is my column from Fox.com on the boarding up of downtown areas across the country in anticipation of election rioting if Trump wins or the election is close. I have been long critical of both sides in fueling the anger and conspiracy theories on both sides. On the Republican side, President Donald Trump has been denouncing mail-in voting as a Democratic conspiracy to steal the election. On the Democratic side, leaders have been telling voters that there is no legitimate way for Trump to win. The fact that our leaders are trying to use such anger and fears is reprehensible. However, none of that excuses those people who believe that they have license to riot, loot, and burn. These are criminal acts being excused as “protests.” We now prepare for rioting like it is a natural result of contested elections.
Here is the column:
Continue reading “Election Rioting: How Violence Became A Forecastable Event In America”
We recently discussed how the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that Gov. Whitmer violated the state constitution — a decision repeatedly misrepresented by both Whitmer and major media figures. Now a California judge has ruled that California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) executive pandemic powers on the election violate that state’s constitution. These rulings are notable in that the media has portrayed those opposing such powers as raising frivolous, if not laughable, challenges. There are other cases that support Newsom but this is the second judge to rule against him. The result of the order will not change the current election rules but it is indicative of a trend on pandemic orders.
There was an interesting moment on Monday as the hosts and guest on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” were discussing the coverage of the election. Willie Geist raised the possibility that President Trump could declare victory on election night before all the votes have been counted. Joe Scarborough responded that NBC would simply make a Twitter-like determination and not carry the speech. It would not be treated as obvious news but rather “disinformation” . . . regardless of what has transpired on election day.
Continue reading “Scarborough: We Will Not Air Any Trump Victory Speech Tuesday Night”

Below is my column in The Hill on Twitter’s adoption of a “living Internet” approach to censorship policies. Notably, at the recent hearing before the Senate, Democratic Senators demanded more censorship despite the Big Tech CEOs admitting that the blocking of the Hunter Biden story was a mistake. Twitter and Facebook responded within days with new attacks on free speech in barring conservative viewpoints from a Republican women’s group and one of the highest Trump Administration officials.
Here is the column: Continue reading “The Case For Internet Originalism”


