A federal judge in North Carolina has ruled against Republicans in a dispute over absentee ballot rules.
U.S. District Judge Richard Myers ended the efforts of Republicans to move the case back to state court - where Republicans sued last month to stop a policy allowing absentee ballots to be counted without the lawfully required container-sealed envelopes.
The ruling is a procedural win for Democrats and Hillary Clinton operative Marc Elias, who pushed the judge to keep the case in federal court.
Absentee ballot dispute
The board had issued guidance that allows county clerks to count ballots with just one envelope, even though state law requires absentee ballots to have a sealed, two-envelope package.
The Republican National Committee, the North Carolina Republican Party, and a voter sued the board of elections in state court. The board moved the case to federal court, sparking a battle over jurisdiction.
Republicans had argued the case belongs in state court, and the board "improperly" moved it.
“Plaintiffs alleged only state-law claims,” GOP lawyers added. “They never intended for their Complaint to be reviewed under a federal pleading standard. Nor did they ever intend to argue that any federal court had jurisdiction over this action, because no such jurisdiction exists.”
“It was Defendants who improperly removed this case to this Court, even though the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this litigation."
GOP trending well in NC
The board, joined by the Elias Law Firm and the North Carolina Alliance for Retired American, argued the case belongs in federal court because the GOP's demands would violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Judge Myers agreed that the board "properly removed" the case to federal court.
“[T]he court finds that the organizational Plaintiffs have made a ‘threshold showing’ of standing,” Myers wrote.
Unfortunately for Republicans, the case will not be decided by Election Day.
Despite this setback, Republicans are optimistic about winning the Tar Heel State. The GOP is ahead in early voting in North Carolina, a sign that the party's embrace of voting early has paid off.
"Certainly here in North Carolina, we're seeing record turnout for Republicans," Rep. Richard Hudson, who chairs the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), told Fox News Digital. "And that's good. That allows us to target lower propensity voters with our turnout efforts as we get closer to Election Day and on Election Day. And so I think it's going to be a difference maker."
The last day to vote early in North Carolina is Saturday.
As she tries to contain the damage of Joe Biden calling Americans "garbage," Kamala Harris has been rocked by another gaffe, this time from Bill Clinton.
While stumping for Harris in Michigan, Clinton admitted that President Trump's economy "was better."
Clinton makes gaffe
The economy has consistently been rated the top issue in the election, and polls show that voters trust Trump more to handle the issue.
In his remarks in Michigan, Clinton claimed that Trump inherited a booming economy from President Obama, while conceding the economy "was better" under Trump.
"I don't think it's right to say that people have to vote for Donald Trump because the economy was better then," he said.
Clinton insisted the inflation of the Biden era was an inevitable product of COVID shutting down supply chains, although Biden's critics say he made inflation worse with massive federal spending.
"COVID busted all the supply chains," Clinton said.
Harris' garbled closing argument
Harris has acknowledged that Americans are struggling, while awkwardly distancing herself from "Bidenomics" and trying to paint herself as an agent of change. But many Americans still don't know who Harris is or what she plans to do if elected.
The vice president has been criticized for failing to share details on policy, as she sticks to prepared talking points about growing up in the middle class.
Indeed, Harris has all but abandoned messaging on kitchen table issues in the home stretch before Election Day, as she changes focus to blast Trump as an existential threat to democracy.
Kamala's closing pitch to voters this week was undermined by President Biden, who called Trump supporters "garbage" even as Harris tried to portray Trump as a hateful demagogue.
Some believe Harris is making a mistake by attacking Trump's character instead of telling Americans how she will fix the economy. In his own closing argument, Trump has said he will fix what Biden and Harris broke, and it's an argument that Harris' own surrogates are inadvertently making.
On another key issue, immigration, Clinton undermined Harris' messaging earlier this month while discussing the horrific murder of Laken Riley.
"Well, if they'd all been properly vetted that probably wouldn't have happened," Clinton said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Homeschool parents long have faced the double burden of taxes that support their local public school, but also the costs of paying for their own supplies, curriculum, and more. A definite double-whammy.
But President Donald Trump is pledging, if elected, to change that.
In a video, he explained, "When I am re-elected I will do everything I can to support parents who make the courageous choice of homeschooling."
He noted under the Trump tax cuts of his first term, "We allowed families to use 529 education savings accounts to spend up to $10,000 a year tax-free on tuition for grades K-12. This was a tremendous win for school choice."
But while that applied to parents paying tuition to a school for their student, it did not apply to homeschool families.
"So to support the growing homeschool movement in my next term, I will immediately fight to allow homeschool parents the same incredible benefit," Trump said.
In fact, homeschool numbers across the United States have exploded since the COVID pandemic, which pushed schools to do online classes, and that allowed parents all of a sudden to see the leftist ideologies actually being pushed in the classrooms of their local public schools. Multiple fights erupted, including when schools demanded the authority to control what was in the room in the family's home where online classes were watched.
Trump said his plan is for $10,000 a year per child, "completely tax-free, to spend on costs associated with homeschool education."
He said, "I will also work to ensure that every homeschool family is entitled to full access to the benefits available to non-homeschool students, including participating in athletic programs, clubs, after-school activities, educational trips, and more."
President Joe Biden's characterization of Trump supporters as "garbage" has ignited a wave of criticism and distancing among Democrats, including Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown.
Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio has publicly disagreed with President Biden's remarks, marking a significant rift within the Democratic Party.In a recent call with Voto Latino, President Biden made a statement referring to Trump supporters as "garbage." This controversial comment has resonated through the political landscape, triggering a varied response from fellow Democrats and opponents alike.
Biden's Comment Overshadows Harris's Campaign Efforts
Vice President Kamala Harris, who was focusing on her closing argument address in Washington, D.C., found her efforts overshadowed by the fallout from Biden's remarks. The comment has stirred debates about the appropriate discourse in politics and its impact on political alliances.
Brown's campaign spokesperson, Matt Keyes, quickly addressed the media, emphasizing that Senator Brown does not share Biden's view. Keyes stated, "Sherrod doesn’t agree with that and fights for all Ohioans, regardless of who they vote for."
Democrats and Republicans React to Biden's Statement
The backlash was not limited to Brown's camp. Other notable Democrats have also voiced their disapproval. Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro expressed on CNN that Biden's words were inappropriate, urging a focus on political contrasts rather than personal attacks. Michigan Representative Elissa Slotkin echoed this sentiment on a local radio station, describing the divisive language as harmful to political discourse.
On the other side, Brown's Republican opponent, Bernie Moreno, seized the opportunity to criticize not only Biden but also Harris and Brown, accusing them of contempt for American citizens. Moreno's statement highlighted a deep-seated tension between the parties, emphasizing the political divide.
Support and Disagreement Among Democrats
While some Democrats distanced themselves from Biden's comments, others, like Brown's campaign donor Vinod Khosla, supported the sentiment, albeit more vehemently. Khosla described MAGA extremists as worse than "garbage," intensifying the rhetoric around the issue.
Despite the controversy, Vice President Harris has avoided directly addressing the issue when questioned, perhaps indicating a strategic choice to steer clear of further inflaming the situation.
Political Repercussions of Biden's Remarks
The immediate and diverse reactions to Biden's comments reflect the complex dynamics within the Democratic Party and the broader political environment. As politicians like Brown and Shapiro call for a return to more civil discourse, the impact of such statements on voter sentiment and party cohesion remains to be seen.
As the story develops, the long-term effects of Biden's divisive comment on the Democratic Party's unity and public perception will likely emerge as a critical theme in ongoing political discussions.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Illegal aliens by the millions, often in caravans of thousands that have been delivering women and children, men and boys to the U.S. border ever since Joe Biden and Kamala Harris occupied the White House, have created massive problems for America.
The Democrats had, on their first day in office, destroyed multiple programs that President Donald Trump had instituted, with some degree of success, to secure the border and control those moving into the United States.
The Democrats' agenda has proven catastrophic, with multiple towns and cities now carrying a massive burden of social benefits-consuming newcomers, schools overwhelmed with students who don't speak English, and more.
Those caravans are continuing, with campaigns under way right now to deliver thousands more people who will need American taxpayer help to the border on or shortly after Election Day next week.
But a trend is developing that those individuals won't make the journey to America, based on the sole factor of whether Trump is in office.
The Telegraph visited the current caravans, and reported the migrants themselves are confirming the U.S. may have less of a crisis if Trump is in the White House.
Rohmai Silva, 38, from Guatemala, who was deported in 2018 for a drunken driving offense, said, "If Donald Trump wins I think I am never going to go back. I am trying to get back before the inauguration. I left Guatemala two weeks ago. I could see the election was coming."
He said, "I worry about Donald Trump because the law is going to change a lot and it is going to be more hard to go back to the United States."
Actually if U.S. immigration laws that exist would just be enforced, the migrants would be facing much higher hurdles than they have under the Biden-Harris administration.
Another woman, unidentified, said in the Telegraph report, "We were waiting for the [asylum] appointment but then with the election all these applications will be closed and we are running out of time. The applications are being paused or cancelled but the border will be open. If Donald Trump gets in office again, it will be much tougher."
The report said one caravan of some 2,000 people who would be illegal aliens in the U.S. is en route now, about 1,000 miles from the U.S. border.
Many are urgently making the trek now, in light of the possibility of Trump resuming authority in the White House.
"A second convoy will set off on Nov 5, deliberately timed for election day, 'so Joe Biden and Kamala Harris know we are heading their way' in an effort by human rights activists to emphasise their plight," the report noted.
Trump had cracked down on the problem when in office, with wall construction and the "remain-in-Mexico" practice of having migrants in a holding pattern there while applications were processed. During the Biden-Harris regime, the problem has become acute, especially because of the fact that thousands of criminals have been allowed to enter, including murderers and terrorists.
Trump, in response, has demanded the death penalty for illegal aliens, often gang members, who kill U.S. citizens.
Before the election, and before Trump would be in office should he win, one woman said, "We were waiting for the [asylum] appointment but then with the election all these applications will be closed and we are running out of time. The applications are being paused or cancelled but the border will be open."
The Telegraph said, "The race to get to America is on. The process has become fraught, all the more so in an election year. It is estimated just under half a million illegal migrants enter Mexico every year from Guatemala across the Suchiate River before heading straight to Tapachula, which with a population of 400,000 is the second biggest city in the state of Chiapas. The cartels moved in last year and violence has followed; in April the U.S. issued a warning to its citizens to steer clear of huge swathes of the territory owing to 'rising violence and security concerns.'"
Late in the American presidential campaign, the Biden-Harris administration flipped its own practice, advocating against illegal immigration with a program that has Mexico paid to deter those activities. Harris even has endorsed a border wall, a project that under Trump she called a "medieval vanity project."
Jude Joseph, 40, a Haitian refugee, told the publication, "If I make this CBP One and I get the chance I will go [to the U.S.]. I don't know exactly if I will get a chance if Donald Trump will be president. But there are no jobs in Haiti, just gangsters."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
WASHINGTON – Billionaire Patrick Byrne, founder and former CEO of e-tailing giant Overstock.com, has been relentless – risking his life to expose the "shadow government's" ongoing "soft-coup" against America and the Deep State's elaborate and ongoing scheme to frame, incarcerate and eliminate GOP presidential nominee former President Donald Trump.
In his explosive memoir published earlier this year, titled "Danger Close: Domestic Extremist #1 Comes Clean," Byrne reveals how he, the son of former GEICO chairman John J. Byrne, went from being one of the wealthiest men on the planet as Overstock's CEO to being deemed by the Department of Homeland Security to be "Domestic Extremist #1."
The whistleblower played an integral role in the "Russian collusion hoax," a seditious scheme devised by a politically weaponized FBI to frame a sitting president, Donald Trump. The fictitious "Russia, Russia, Russia" scandal would go on to plague the Trump presidency with the wrongful indictment and incarceration of numerous members of his administration.
The federal government has given Byrne numerous ultimatums, warning him that speaking out about the seditious operation he was tasked to execute by the FBI would become a death sentence.
On top of that, Byrne is reportedly in hiding as he faces off in a legal battle with Dominion Voting Systems and a defamation suit filed by Hunter Biden. Byrne insists he has irrefutable proof of widespread voter fraud implemented to rig the 2020 election, some of which he presented in the Oval Office to Trump. His allegations prompted Dominion to slap him with a $1.7 billion lawsuit.
In September, the Venezuelan government put a $25 million bounty on Byrne, who subsequently "fled to Dubai," reports Newsweek.
'The Russia probe – I set it up'
Last summer, Byrne called this reporter, who had previously interviewed him, with an astounding admission. The wind blared through the phone's speaker as if he were traveling at high speed in a car, or about to take flight in a helicopter.
"I worked with the Democrats on the Russia probe –
I set it up," he said, before abruptly hanging up the phone. Hours later, Byrne, the mysterious billionaire and mentee of Warren Buffett, sent this reporter a link to an
exposé published by Capitol Times Magazine's "Deep Capture" report. His hidden role with the government over the past decade must be widely reported to the masses to stop the steal and save America, he said.
"General Flynn says that the following story is the hypersonic missile," Byrne wrote in a September 2023 text message to this reporter, accompanying a link to the 99-page report. "[Flynn] says the single most important thing for the country is getting this story digested… This is all true."
Byrne summarizes his years-long involvements with the FBI, top law enforcement officials and Senate Judiciary dating back to 2005 in an extensive Q&A featured in the magazine, providing the most comprehensive insight in print of the James Bond-esque clandestine web in which he has been entangled.
Since the release of the Capitol Times Magazine report, the former Overstock CEO, once hailed as the "Messiah of Bitcoin," has spoon-fed the public parts of his story, incrementally, through a series of interviews with various journalists as he reveals what he knows about the FBI's attempt to seize control of the U.S. electoral system.
Excerpts of a video compilation of Byrne's interviews, in which he discusses the ins and outs of "Operation Snow Globe" – a one-time Deep State plan to control Hillary Clinton had she become U.S. president – is an expedient medium through which the public can "digest" Byrne's perilous crusade with the FBI, spanning more than a decade.
The hour-long video is now viral, but only on SpaceX founder Elon Musk's X platform, since Big Tech continues to employ outright censorship on speech damaging to the permanent government.
'Operation Snow Globe'
Like many Americans, Byrne grew up revering the FBI as the nation's premiere law enforcement agency, traditionally one of the federal government's most highly regarded institutions – at least, before it became increasingly clear that the Bureau had been "captured" at its highest levels by so-called leaders with a subversive and unconstitutional intent.
In 2005, Byrne began his first encounter with the FBI when he blew the whistle on Wall Street and the "mass crack in the financial system."
"Hedge funds were looting hundreds of billions and probably trillions out of the system," he told Capitol Times Magazine's "Deep Capture" feature.
After his highly effective exposure of fraud on Wall Street, which had led to the 2008 banking crisis, the feds pursued Byrne to undertake another mission, and then another.
Willing to serve, the next assignment federal agents would present to Byrne was risky, but a relatively simple task that would turn his life upside down and, ironically, incite the Department of Homeland Security to designate him "domestic extremist #1."
In December 2015, Byrne was assigned by FBI agents in New York to initiate "Operation Snow Globe." The mission consisted of facilitating a sting of former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton via entrapping her in a series of bribes.
Byrne was told he was to bribe Clinton with millions of dollars to keep the scandal-plagued former secretary of state on a "Bunsen burner."
"They don't want any attention brought to me," Byrne states in the video that has been viewed 7.5 million times on X. "I bribed Hillary Clinton $18 million dollars."
"I caused Hillary Clinton to be offered to take a bribe in mid-July of 2016 by the FBI. The FBI had me bribe – had me facilitate a bribe for Hillary Clinton, which I accomplished," he explains.
"They also told me she had already taken one bribe for $20 million – and I got an $18 million bribe in her face and she took it. I've been shown the why – the bank records that show that she took it.
"So, they don't want me – any attention being brought to me. That is probably why they omitted my name when they leaked the story."
Byrne contends that when the FBI tasked him with bribing Clinton in late 2015, federal agents informed him that the Democratic presidential contender had already been compromised by accepting a bribe for millions of dollars from Turkey in a bid to entrap the former U.S. senator.
The Overstock CEO was to carry out the next step and facilitate the bribe with a "bagman" from Azerbaijan.
"I know what's in the Durham report," Byrne insists. "I facilitated a bribe for Hillary Clinton on Jan. 14, 2016, right here in this town on behalf of the FBI.
"They came to me on Dec. 1st, 2015, and they told me that Hillary Clinton had accepted a bribe from Turkey for $21 million. They told me that I would be working for a group in New York [with] FBI agents who had authorization to set Hillary Clinton up in a sting.
"The bagman from that other government was, I was to befriend and I was to get that person 10 minutes alone in a room with Hillary Clinton.
"I did," said Byrne.
"On January 16, Hillary Clinton was in this town and she met in a way that was kept off her schedule and she accepted an $18 million bribe. General Barr knows this – Durham – they know. This is what's behind it all."
'Scrubbed from the highest level'
Days after Clinton accepted the bribe from Byrne and met with the bagman, the FBI gave Byrne an ultimatum, recalls Byrne. There had evidently been a change of plans.
The "highest of levels" terminated the scheme to entrap Clinton with bribes, a ploy that could crush her electoral prospects. Instead, Clinton was to be installed as commander-in-chief, as long as she would abide by certain conditions.
"They came to me three days later and told me I 'had to forget about it' and 'forget that ever happened,'" Byrne admonished. "\I said, 'What are you talking about?'
"They gave me one excuse. They said – 'Hillary is going to win – they decided upstairs and there's nothing – nothing is going to be able to stop that now. She's going to win and she's going to send her people up to the FBI and they will ask who is part of investigating Hillary, and any of us who are part of it are going to be destroyed and that includes you too, Patrick.' And so, this mission has been scrubbed from the highest level.
"I thought about that, and I said, 'Yes, sir.'"
But the FBI was not done with Byrne – not yet. Hillary was scandal-plagued: In addition to the bribes Byrne has blown the whistle on, it was Clinton, not Trump, who had actually "colluded with the Russians," as Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton explained in a video interview with WND.
"Two or three weeks later, I was back with three federal agents [in Salt Lake City, Utah]," Byrne said, noting, "I let them know, 'This was not sitting well with me and I'd like to know why they had changed course.'
"We had almost a year before the election," he continued. "They could have me and another person in front of a grand jury in a week and gotten her indicted."
Bottom line: Clinton was going to be placed in the executive office only if she agreed to act as an arm of the shadow government, Byrne explained.
"They told me word for word, 'Patrick, what's really going on is this: President Obama has his people across the federal bureaucracy at this point, but especially the Department of Justice," said Byrne.
"Hillary Clinton is going to be president for eight years, and nothing's going to change that but think of there being a 'Bunsen burner' within the Department of Justice,'" Byrne says the federal agents told him, verbatim. "That evidence about the two bribes you were part of gathering is going to be sitting on the Bunsen burner, and the hand on the Bunsen burner is going to be one of Barack Obama's people.
"If Hillary is a good girl and defends Obamacare, that flame stays low. If she's a bad girl and thinks for herself, it's going to get turned up high that way. Barack Obama's going to manage Hillary Clinton for the eight years she's president, then she's going to step down, and Michelle's going to run, and, Patrick, that's the plan.
"I was later to learn that this plan was called 'Operation Snow Globe.' Snow Globe we had, you know, Christmas kids get a little glass ball like a shake. And this was a snow globe they wanted Hillary Clinton, and a snow globe that Clinton, that Obama and Brennan and Comey could shake up anytime they wanted while she's president. My bribe was the lure, it was the bait to lure her to step into that snow globe."
The government continues to attempt to squeeze Byrne into compliance as he blows the whistle on foreign election interference.
In a video interview conducted in July 2022, Byrne revealed to this reporter that that he, Gen. Flynn and attorney Sidney Powell met with Trump in December 2020 for an emergency meeting. In the Oval office, Byrne presented the president with advisories issued by the Department of Justice and DHS, showcasing how U.S. electoral system had been hacked by Iran, which allowed Trump to invoke emergency powers.
In September 2023, five convicted Proud Boys leaders, four of whom were found guilty of seditious conspiracy, were sentenced to 22, 18, 17, 15 and 10 years in prison for their alleged roles in the U.S. Capitol demonstration on Jan. 6, 2021.
Byrne donated over $200,000 to Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio's legal fund and continues to assist with legal fees of January 6 defendants. In fact, Byrne has offered to pay the $350,000 of damages the Capitol building sustained. Along with whatever other charges J6 defendants typically face, assessments for the damages to the building left behind after the riot are often added.
In addition, as "Deep Capture" reports, "Byrne has publicly offered to face all non-violent charges from that day: those accused can say they did it because they listened to Byrne, and Byrne will agree to stipulate to this, on the condition he can defend himself in televised proceedings."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In a day when the federal government sends grandmothers to jail for advocating for the lives of the unborn, insists it can coerce Christian companies to pay for abortion and promote an LGBT ideology that is out of the mainstream, and more, a federal bureaucracy's blast against religious freedom shouldn't, perhaps, be a surprise.
It is the U.S. Department of Energy that has begun tracking employees' beliefs through a plan to monitor employment accommodations.
And Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., is objecting.
He wrote Ann Dunkin, a DOE official, to "express my strong opposition to the Department of Energy's recent notice regarding the establishment of a new system of records … ."
He warned the agenda "represents a grave violation of religious liberty as protected under the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act."
It is the Washington Stand that obtained a copy of the letter Lankford delivered to the DOE.
It included his warnings that the agency may be violating the constitutional rights of workers with its policy that requires the agency "to collect and store detailed information regarding requests for religious exemptions to various mandates," the report said.
The DOE has claimed its accumulation of information about employees' beliefs is needed to "collect, maintain, and disseminate records on employees and applicants for employment who seek and receive medical and non-medical accommodations."
Also caught up in the information dragnet is information about workers with varying disabilities, and their accommodations.
But it also insists on keeping records regarding, "Federal employees or applicants for employment requesting accommodation based on a 'sincerely held' religious belief, practice, or observance under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. This system includes requests for a medical or religious accommodation."
The report said Lankford has concerns that "collecting detailed records on an individual's sincerely held religious beliefs and practices — alongside other personal and sensitive information — poses a significant threat to the privacy and religious freedoms of federal employees."
He said the government should protect those workers' religious – and privacy – rights.
"The new DOE policy also 'risks creating an environment in which employees may feel compelled to disclose private details about their faith or religious practices to justify their accommodation requests,' Lankford warned, observing that such an environment 'can lead to potential religious discrimination or bias in the workplace,'" the report said.
He suggested the bureaucrats find other ways to ensure that reasonable accommodations are available.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
'Around the country, woke school boards are closing schools and shifting programs because they don't like the racial makeup. This is illegal and immoral race discrimination
A school district in Wisconsin is facing the possibility of a legal challenge after it announced plans to shutter some programs for being "too white."
Technically, according to the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, the district objects that the students in the programs are "not as diverse as the district's overall population."
"To be sure, you view higher populations of white students in any given program or school as a negative factor that must be corrected," the legal team told district officials in the Wauwatosa School District.
WILL explained that a legal action could result.
"Around the country, woke school boards are closing schools and shifting programs because they don't like the racial makeup," explained Dan Lennington, a lawyer for WILL. "This is illegal and immoral race discrimination. (The school) should resist this plan or face the consequences."
WILL reported Wauwatosa officials announced plans "to shut down the Wauwatosa STEM school, currently ranked the third-best elementary school in Wisconsin by U.S. News and World Report."
Further, officials want to dump "other STEM-specific programs and opportunities district-wide because the programs are too white."
However, the lawyers explained in the letter that federal law and the U.S. Constitution prohibit school districts from implementing policies to "racially balance" student populations.
If needed, WILL said it will bring a civil action against the district.
"According to the district website, a task force is proposing to fix several 'challenges' and 'concerns' in the district, including the fact that in certain programs and schools, the 'student population [ ] not as diverse as the District's overall population.' This is just code for race, and the district's desire to shift around students to have a preferable balance," the legal team said.
However, "Title VI asserts that all students must be treated equally, without regard to race."
Its letter said public documents already show "you are making recommendations on which programs to offer and which schools to operate based on the racial demographics of the students using those programs (at least in part). Race-based decision-making like this violates the constitutional guarantees of equal protection. You seem to be under the impression that you have the power to manage the racial composition of classrooms. You don't."
The legal team also called on the district to release communications about the scheme, including "emails sent by or to any member" of the board that discuss racial balance or diversity.
A Democratic campaign staffer was caught on leaked video supporting open borders, Fox News reported. Kevin Oyakawa, who is working on two hotly contested campaigns this year, is heard saying, "Open the f---ing border; I don’t give a s--- who comes in here."
Democrats often attempt to sound pragmatic about illegal immigration. They typically speak about the humanitarian aspect or the morality of kicking out people in the U.S. illegally.
However, Oyakawa spilled the truth about Democrats' philosophy while speaking on a video to a volunteer. "We don’t need border patrol but, [the] issue with even talking about immigration here in Ohio is that it’s a losing issue for Democrats here, for like no f---ing reason other than people’s pure racism," Oyakawa claimed in the video.
Oyakaway is employed by the Ohio Coordinated Campaign, which aims to "re-elect [Sen.] Sherrod Brown, Congresswoman Emilia Sykes, and other down-ballot Democratic candidates." This comes as both Democrats struggle in their respective races.
The Fallout
Social media accounts for Oyakawa show that he has been actively canvassing for Sykes and Brown while sharing this view earlier this month. In a since-deleted post to Facebook, Oyakaway claimed he was "responsible for leading a team of field organizers on day-to-day operations of the campaign" in Summit and Stark counties in Ohio.
A photo on the page shows him with Sykes and other campaign volunteers captioned, "Just another guy who is active in the Resistance." This could not be worse for Sykes, who is struggling to retain her seat against a Republican who hammered her over illegal immigration.
While she won her first term with a comfortable five-point margin in 2022, former President Trump handily won parts of Ohio's 13th Congressional District in 2020. Her office released a statement to Fox News in the hopes of limiting the fallout.
"Congresswoman Emilia Sykes has worked to deliver increased funding to help secure our border and stop the flow of illegal drugs like fentanyl. She also cosponsored the bipartisan Dignity Act that would address border security and infrastructure, all while her opponent Kevin Coughlin uses the border to play politics," the statement said of her Republican opponent, former Ohio state Sen. Kevin. Coughlin.
Brown's campaign spokesperson, Matt Keyes, similarly downplayed Oyakawa's remarks. "While Sherrod supports the bipartisan border security bill backed by border patrol agents and has worked with both parties to secure our southern border and keep Ohioans safe from fentanyl by cracking down on the chemical suppliers in China and drug cartels in Mexico, Bernie Moreno opposes these efforts because he isn’t looking out for Ohioans," Keyes said of the Democrat's GOP opponent for U.S. Senate.
Golden Opportunity
Meanwhile, Republicans are turning this issue into political gold. "Ohioans are already aware of Emilia Sykes’ dangerous open border policies, and now we see what she and her team support behind closed doors," Coughlin said.
"It’s bad enough that Ohio communities are suffering from fentanyl and crime flowing over our borders, but her team has no remorse. And she calls anyone who disagrees with her 'racist,'" Coughlin added.
"It's disgusting, and Emilia Sykes should condemn this immediately," he concluded. Reagan McCarthy, communications director for Moreno, ripped Brown similarly.
"Sherrod Brown's staff is saying the quiet part out loud: Ohio Democrats would rather keep the border open and continue to allow millions of illegals to enter our nation rather than secure the border and protect our communities," McCarthy told Fox News Digital. Brown's race with Moreno is consider a "toss-up" heading into Election Day.
Democrats dance around the issue, but it's clear from how they govern that they want unchecked illegal immigration. Unfortunately for them, Oyakawa did not have the good sense to keep that fact hidden under platitudes.
In a unique shift, several major U.S. newspapers including USA Today have opted not to endorse any presidential candidate for the 2024 elections, Breitbart reported.
This move away from traditional political endorsements includes notable publications such as the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post, neither of which will support former President Donald Trump or Vice President Kamala Harris.
USA Today, a leading national newspaper with significant print and digital readership, has marked a significant departure from its past approach. Lark-Marie Antón, speaking for USA Today, has confirmed their move away from endorsing presidential candidates, unlike in 2020 when they endorsed Joe Biden.
The publication's new stance on endorsements is predicated on the belief that the foundational decisions of America’s future are made at local levels. Antón articulated that USA Today’s primary goal is now to equip readers with essential, trustworthy information to make educated decisions locally rather than nationally.
Broader Non-Endorsement Trends
USA Today is not alone in its approach. The Los Angeles Times, Vice President Harris's hometown paper, also did not endorse any presidential candidate. This abstention is noteworthy given Harris's connections and previous expectations of supportive endorsements.
The Washington Post has similarly returned to its pre-endorsement era, opting out of supporting any presidential candidates now or in future elections. This was clarified by William Lewis, the publisher and CEO, in a statement emphasizing a long-term strategic shift toward neutrality in presidential races.
Furthermore, the absence of an endorsement for Harris by the Teamsters Union, despite her receiving 34 percent of their members' support, reflects a wider political realignment. In contrast, nearly 60 percent of the union's members support Donald Trump, showcasing varied political inclinations within traditional support structures.
Significance of Media Neutrality
The impactful decision by prominent newspapers to refrain from presidential endorsements could significantly alter public perceptions and the dynamics of candidate visibility.
Such neutrality fosters an electoral environment that encourages voters to independently evaluate the merits of candidates.
With its vast network of over 200 local newspapers, USA Today’s influence is expansive. Thus, its editorial decisions could have amplified effects throughout its coverage spectrum, further promoting localized electoral influence over national dynamics.
Antón emphasized that USA Today prioritizes factual reporting on local races and issues over national electoral spectacles, advocating that such decisions should be directly in the hands of the electorate.
Future Outlook on Media and Presidential Elections
This collective retreat from endorsing presidential candidates heralds a potential shift in the role media plays in U.S. elections. The impact of these changes will likely be examined as the 2024 elections progress, possibly setting a new precedent for media conduct in politics.
Observers and pundits will undoubtedly monitor how these editorial changes affect voter behavior and whether this trend will expand within more media outlets, possibly redefining media’s influence in political processes.
In sum, the decision by USA Today and similar institutions to eschew traditional presidential endorsements could significantly shape the future landscape of political journalism, emphasizing a strategy focused more on informing than influencing the electorate.
