When it comes to the topic of vote harvesting, “AP” does not stand for the Associated Press; it stands for Agit-Prop.
After a long drive from South Dakota, I was at my brother-in-law’s home in Montana, busy with my business, browsing my email and social media.There is a copy on his kitchen counter Billings bulletin. I admit that because of their “system bias” towards non-Democrats, I haven’t really read the hardcopy newspaper-even the online version for months, so I picked it up and went through the previous section to see if it was What was distributed to Montanas by their main newspaper.
The headline writer successfully completed his work because I was immediately triggered by the featured story of the Associated Press hacker with the headline “Court Supports Voting Restrictions” and the subheadline “Fighting Voting Rights Act Again”. This article, of course, refers to the landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling that supports a new election integrity law in Arizona that cancels the counting of votes cast in wrong districts and “Prohibit most people except family members from collecting votes and transporting them to polling stations. “Nowhere in this clause is there any explanation for the purpose of these laws, which is to increase credibility by preventing the submission of fraudulent ballots, while placing the burden of completing voting privileges on individual voters, rather than allowing others to “do this.” “For them” through votes and other tricks. In short, the goal of the new law is to ensure that valid ballots for legitimate votes are not compromised by ballot fraud for illegal voting.
This is a very simple common sense principle supported by most Americans. to this end, Rasmussen Poll The following insights were provided in April:
Most voters said that preventing cheating in elections is more important than making it easier to vote, and they rejected the discriminatory argument that the voter ID law is more than two to one.
The latest Rasmussen report national telephone and online surveys found that only 29% of possible U.S. voters stated that laws requiring photo identification in polls discriminated against certain voters. 62% (62%) said that the voter ID law does not discriminate.
The majority (51%) of voters believe that cheating is likely to affect the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, and 35% of them said that cheating is likely to affect the election.
A question to the Associated Press hacker who wrote that article on Billings Gazette: Since April, news of election fraud has been exposed, is it possible that more Americans support election fraud than in the Rasmussen poll? The election integrity law that Arizona has just passed and supported by SCOTUS? One follow-up question: So why don’t you provide any ostensible balance to report the majority position in your article, and the Democratic National Committee or Perkins Coy can easily write such a position? The third question: Before submitting, did you provide a draft of your article to any Democratic agent, or were you just a Democratic activist disguised as a reporter?
Think this is a bit too harsh? Let’s take a look at the points made in that article:
- The first paragraph describes the SCOTUS decision as an attempt to “cut” the voting rights bill. It is described as an established one, without a trace of evidence or argument.
- The second paragraph quoted the unnamed “civil rights groups and liberals dissenting judges” who claimed that SCOTUS’s decision undermined the Voting Rights Act-again without any explanation or argument, just as a “fact” statement.
- In addition to quoting Justice Alito’s majority opinion out of context, the entire article cited left-wing figures: Hologram, Justice Elena Kagan, Senator Tim Kane (D-VA), Senator Congressman Ed Markey (D-MA) and left-wing “election expert” Rick Hasen. Check Hasen’s Twitter timeline and fixed tweets to see how left-wing he is:
- The rest of the article cites claims without evidence: there are no specific details about the generalization of the “excessive burden” imposed on minority voters by the new law.
- Of course, this article conveys the Democratic Party’s statement that SCOTUS needs to be crowded with more liberal judges than the nine currently in court. (When the Democratic Party cannot achieve their political goals with the support of the people, the judicial order of the left-wing judge is their preferred strategy.)
Democrats have always been struck by SCOTUS’s insistence on the vote collection restrictions in Arizona law because they know it promotes the core interest of their systematic efforts to create illegal votes because it sets a precedent that allows other states to ban the collection of votes. The Associated Press article is an example of the anger of the Democratic media.
Rather than quote Judge Alito out of context, the Associated Press hackers should quote directly SCOTUS decisionThis overturns the Democratic National Committee’s claim that the new law “suppresses” minority voters by restricting voting outside the constituency, but hey-don’t let facts interfere with the Democratic Party’s narrative! The key additions are as follows:
[T]It is said that the racial difference in the burden caused by foreign policy is very small in absolute terms. In Arizona counties that reported out-of-constituency votes in the 2016 election, slightly more than 1% of Hispanic voters, 1% of African-American voters, and 1% of Native American voters who voted on Election Day voted against districts . For non-minority voters, this ratio is about 0.5%. A procedure that appears to apply to 98% or more of voters (both minorities and non-minorities) is unlikely to result in an unequal opening of the system.
The SCOTUS decision also overturned the Democratic Party’s claim that restricting the collection of votes would inhibit the absentee mail voting of minority voters (emphasis added):
HB 2023 in Arizona also passed the call under §2. Arizonans can submit their early ballots to the mailbox, post office, early ballot box, or authorized election official’s office. These options will bring the “usual voting burden” and can also get the help of a legally authorized agent. The state also makes special regulations for certain groups of voters who cannot use the early voting system. See §16-549(C). And here, The plaintiff could not prove the extent to which HB 2023 imposes a disproportionate burden on minority voters.
By the way, the Associated Press articles and variants on the same subject before and after the specific story of the same AP hacker on July 2 have been published in many other newspapers across the country. The same information, the same Democratic narrative, the same one-sided report, the same shadow of facts in the case, and the reasons for SCOTUS’s reasonable ruling.
But that Associated Press article is not the only biased Associated Press report in this edition. Billings bulletin. The following are some other considerations:
- A front-page article on wage and price growth, but did not mention the main reasons (for example, Hologram’s disastrous “U.S. Last” policies, such as the closure of the Keystone XL pipeline, and the Democratic Party’s overall policy of keeping states closed)
- A featured article on the third page with the title “Garland Stops Execution” (this is a typical Democratic position and is not supported) 60% of Americans agree with the death penalty For certain crimes, even the left-wing Pew Research Center reported this in a poll last month; the hologram regime seeks “consensus” on key issues)
- Also on the third page, an article about Trump’s CFO being accused of participating in a tax fraud scheme (most thoughtful Americans are very aware that this is a politically motivated prosecution, but this is how the Manhattan DA All the content that can be thought of after more than 3 years of investigation); Of course, there is nothing in the article)
- An article buried in the corner pointed out that the CBO predicts that the federal deficit this year will reach 3 trillion US dollars (not including or mentioning The Hologram’s proposed 6 trillion US dollars deficit expenditure for “infrastructure” purposes, including the Green New Deal nonsense. )
- A heart-wrenching story on page 5 tells of the U.S. withdrawal from Bagram, Afghanistan after 20 years (not to mention the cheerleaders provided by the Associated Press for years of endless war)
- Threaten the “low vaccine rate of Delta variants” on page 6, promote “vaccination”, and advocate wearing masks (we are discussing that BS)
- Buried on page 6 is an article detailing that The Hologram failed to achieve his promise of providing 80 million doses of “vaccine” to other countries by the end of June (I seem to remember a recent one who actually kept his promise. President of the United States, isn’t it?)
- An article on page 7 aims to put pressure on the Democratic Party to promote HR1/S1 and a new “John Lewis Voting Rights Act” in response to SCOTUS’ decision
- Page 8 (front and back pages) an article about the melting of Arctic ice caused by “climate change” (implying that humans are “responsible” without evidence, and even throwing away the old “polar bear’s last refuge” So” duck)
Please keep in mind that the above article was only published in one issue Billings bulletinImagine what Montanas must have seen during the 2020 campaign, when the Associated Press went all out in the anti-Trump reporting model (not to mention during the two impeachment periods!). To make matters worse, there are many small and medium-sized newspapers across the country that regularly publish Associated Press reports and left-wing columns.I can’t read it anymore Mitchell Republic, This Yankton Daily Press and Dakotan, Or Sioux Falls Argus leader In my own hometown, because of their inherent and constant pro-Democratic bias.
Unconfirmed but still attributed to him, Joseph Goebbels is right If repeated enough, the big lie will become the truth! Imagine the propaganda effect of reading the Associated Press story in a few months or years, as some people must have done.
Thank God for providing an alternative news source that actually provides a balance of facts and ideology! That’s certainly not the Associated Press.
the end.
