By his words, Senator Durbin holds Democrats to Fair Elections

By his words, Senator Durbin holds Democrats to Fair Elections

By Dennis JamisonOctober 27, 2020

I am honored to congratulate Judge Amy Coney Barrett on her confirmation as the next Supreme Court Justice. It is highly likely that President Trump could not have picked a finer individual to fill the vacant seat on the Supreme ‘Court. It is also highly likely that the prayers of the faithful across the nation have been received by God in Heaven, and the confirmation of this judge can help America in the long process of healing.

There is one point, however, during the confirmation hearings for Judge Amy Coney Barrett, that seems to require an extended focus. During the confirmation hearings, Senator Dick Durbin showed himself to be little match for the good judge. Although he tried to draw answers from her which were not appropriate, he had to agree with her own unrehearsed answers as he made sure of the truth of what the Constitution said regarding his own questions. His pocket guide was overly obvious as he carefully read from it as if he needed to remind the good judge of what it said. However, it was Judge Barrett who reviewed a series of additional laws regarding voting rights.

While it is commendable that Senator Durbin could locate a pocket guide to the US Constitution to help him in his grasp of the Constitution, it is doubtful that his Democrat colleagues would go to such trouble—-especially when it comes to truly caring about the Law of the Land. Nevertheless, the core of the “tense” exchange between Barrett and Durbin brought out some important points. I viewed the video of this exchange on Facebook under the headline: “Amy Coney Barrett Dodges Questions On Whether the President Can Deny Voter Rights.”

The overly extreme irony of such a title is that it betrays ignorance of the purpose of Senate confirmations of judges to the Supreme Court. But, that would be expected from a Facebook hack. The other irony is Senator Durbin’s own menial word play and refusal to accept a judge directly quoting law. If the question were whether she had the intent to break the law, it would have been a different story. Durbin’s question centered on whether Barrett believed the POTUS had the right to unilaterally deny the vote to anyone based on race or gender. That is a farcical question coming from the Democrats since their governors and state legislatures in the South unilaterally barred blacks from voting right up to the mid 1960s. That is not that long ago. Many people alive today lived through that dark time.

So, the protective narrative that young people have been fed is the the Democrat Party changed. They have become the Party of the “little guy,”—the union workers, the laborers, the immigrants, the poor. This is all the propaganda of a chameleonic political entity that knows how to survive by adapting to the times.

If the Democrat Party changed its stance on voting rights, how come there is now a serious controversy over the mail-in ballots that have been sent en masse in some of the states? The likelihood of fraud in the mail-in ballots is extremely high and it means that people’s votes will be destroyed. Democrats have a history of only wanting to count the votes that their electorate casts. This was true in the Deep South, it was true with the Big City Bosses controlling the votes of the unions and the immigrants, and it is true today with their desire to destroy the votes of their opposition.

They will portray all kinds of intellectually sounding propaganda to make people believe that it is safe, especially in the time of COVID to vote by mail. This is in opposition to federal officials, including Dr. Fauci, who stated that people could vote in person as early as August of this year. So, why have the mainstream media outlets not followed through on such good news? The better question is this: why have the Democrats pushed the mass mailing of ballots to the public despite voting in person being safe according to guidelines explained by Fauci?

One guess. Democrats have a history of only wanting to count the votes that their electorate cast, and they have been caught in voter fraud time and time again.

The appearance of ineptitude is probably where the greatest fraud has been committed, or sadly, outright incompetence is one of the more egregious types of negating someone’s vote. They play the voting game loose and easy,  and if some people’s votes aren’t counted it is chalked up as their fault. Except, it is not. The electoral process in the United States should be above reproach. However, the number of cases of ballots being lost or not counted or simply destroyed is criminal. The ones who have a history of cheating and not counting votes in a proper way falls upon one Party in which votes were disregarded institutionally. The Democrat Machine has not changed—according to the propaganda—the Democrat Machine has only become more criminal and more ruthless.

When a political party demonstrates that it is criminal to its core and cares little for the rule of law, or the traditions of a civil society, that political party serves no useful purpose in a Free Republic. Senator Dick Durbin showed himself to be a complete hypocrite in his questions of the good judge regarding voting rights. His Party is still trying to manipulate the vote and illegally alter the outcome of the vote as in days not too long ago. This represents a travesty of justice. And, every measure to pursue inappropriate or potentially illegal manipulations of the vote in 2020 should be undertaken. But beyond this, a political party, more specifically the individuals who gave the directions for cheating, discounting ballots illegally, or using fraudulently manufactured ballots, to name a few problems, should be investigated, prosecuted, and held accountable.

Durbin by his own questioning of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, has provided through his own words a genuine standard by which his Party will be held accountable for their actions should they try to deny anyone their right to vote. No, Mr. Durbin the POTUS cannot unilaterally deny anyone the right to vote. You knew that, Judge Barrett knew that, even many viewers know that, although the Facebook writer may still be trying to figure it out. The law, as Judge Barrett so instructed you, protects all people’s right to vote. However, no political party should presume to operate outside of the law in order to manipulate the vote through fear mongering or legislative mandates.

Citizen Watch groups should be on the ready to call attention to any suspicious activity on or surrounding election day. Already, reports are flowing about fraud, so this election should be taken absolutely seriously. So, not only the leaders of that Party should be held accountable for such illegal actions, the Party should be penalized and prohibited from operating legally in a Constitutional Republic—especially if they could be so callous in disregarding one of the citizen’s most sacred rights. The Democrats ducked true responsibility at the time of the Civil War, they ducked true responsibility at the time of the Civil Rights Movement, but they should no longer be allowed to duck responsibility for suppressing people’s rights and illegally manipulating the vote. Freedom is too precious to ignore it.


Spread the word. Share this post!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Follow by Email
%d bloggers like this: