Connect with us

Featured

Newsom Dethroned: Judge rules he overstepped authority in CA, by mandating vote-by-mail ballots

Published

on

Gavin Newsom California Governor

Judge Sarah Heckman of the Sutter County Superior Court said Governor Gavin Newsom lacked the authority needed to amend or change existing elections law. Newsom did so under the guise of an emergency due to the COVID-19 epidemic. However, Heckman said that wasn’t even reason enough to trample election law with the Executive Order that required all Californians receive vote-by-mail ballots for the Nov. 3 general election.

The executive action was taken as part of the California Emergency Services Act, or CESA, which gives Newsom special powers during a public emergency — in this case the novel coronavirus pandemic. Newsom signed an executive order that mandated all registered voters receive vote-by-mail ballots and allowed counties to reduce precincts on Election Day if they provide in-person voting centers for at least three days prior as a way to mitigate the spread of COVID-19.

KCRA Television California

Think about what happened across the nation as Democratic governors and those that supported the push for mail-in ballots opened the door to fraud and election night havoc. Newsom, like others, used the COVID-19 epidemic to frighten people enough to effort the emergency orders to send out universal ballots to voters, suggesting it was too dangerous to vote in person. They used the epidemic to push lawsuits across the country early on to ensure that their loosey goosey provisions would be implemented at the expense of securing the election.

However, the CDC didn’t seem to think it was an absolute emergency and didn’t require people to stay at home. In fact, the CDC issued a health memorandum before the election saying it was safe to vote in person as long as everyone wore a mask and maintained the six feet of social distancing.

Now, weeks after the election, a judge rules that Newsom didn’t have the authority. Of course, he didn’t. It doesn’t matter now, because the election is long past.

Think about it, the Democrats didn’t have to bother going through the state legislatures but instead, many they figured out that they could bypass it by taking these issues straight to the court.

This lawsuit stemmed from Newsom’s  executive order that was issued before the legislature passed a similar law. See how he did it. It was a two for one. Newsom made sure he issued an executive order he had no right to issue and then he insured that his friends in the legislature would go along with it, in case anyone figured out earlier that he far exceeded his authority.

There were only two assembly members — James Gallagher, R-Yuba City, and Kevin Kiley, R-Rocklin, sued, saying that Newsom did not have the authority to issue the order. Wow, two Republicans held him accountable.

The 2020 general election was mired in corruption and COVID-19 was used as a tool by the Democrats to ensure they would muddy up the waters to give media President elect Joe Biden every fighting chance against to steal the win from President Trump.

You can follow Sara A. Carter on Parler @SaraCarterOfficial or on Twitter @SaraCarterDC

You may like

Continue Reading

China

REPORT: China has vast network of covert police stations around the world

Published

on

ChineseFemaleMiitary 652840318

China has a vast network of covert police stations abroad, according to a recent report by Safeguard Defenders, an NGO that focuses on human rights violations in China and other Asian countries. These police stations serve consular functions, but are also used by China to crack down on what the CCP deems “illegal” activity of Chinese nationals abroad. The police stations include at least 38 run by the Fuzhou City police, and 22 run by the Qingtian City police. Cities housing these police stations include New York, Toronto (which has three stations), London (two), Paris (three), Buenos Aires, Rio De Janeiro, and Tokyo.

Key findings of the report are below.

“Persuaded to return”

According to China, China has “persuaded to return [to China]” 230,000 Chinese nationals living aboard from April 2021 to July 2022 alone to face charges of fraud and telecommunications fraud. A Yangxia police station set up in Mozambique, for example, persuaded a Chinese national to return to China after being accused of stealing money from his employer. Chinese authorities also put pressure on the accused family to convince the accused to surrender.

Roughly 54,000 Chinese nationals were persuaded to return from northern Myanmar alone, in the first nine months of 2021. In July 2022, the government of Wenchang City warned that its citizens living in northern Myanmar must check in with their local police stations or face multiple penalties including blocking their children from attending urban schools back in China. Similarly, in February 2022, the government of Liayang City stated that Chinese “illegally staying” in northern Myanmar must return or the bank accounts of their immediate family members could be frozen.

The Nine Forbidden Countries

China has claimed that nine countries contain serious levels of fraud and telecom fraud perpetrated by Chinese nationals. Since November 2021, China has declared that Chinese citizens living in these nine countries must return to China immediately unless they have an “emergency reason” or a “strict necessity” to travel or stay in those countries. Those countries are: Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, the UAE, and Turkey. However, the report questions whether these countries are truly awash in such fraud, as most of China’s oversees police stations are in the West, and only one of the nine countries (Cambodia) has such a police station. Chinese staying in the nine forbidden countries, as well as threats to family members as stated above, creates a “guilt-by-association” atmosphere intended to repatriate the Chinese nationals.

Conclusion

According to the report, Chinese police stations abroad serve to bypass “bilateral extradition treaties or other mechanisms of judicial cooperation” to cooperate with CCP-linked NGOs which effectively “[sets] up an alternative policing and judicial system within third countries.” Instead of using international judicial cooperation, which establishes due process, the presumption of innocence, and the right to a fair trial, China uses the above “persuade-to-return” methods and transnational police stations to circumvent international law and coerce Chinese nationals to return to China for trials. These policies show the power of China’s long-arm oppression over its own subjects.

You can follow Steve Postal on Twitter @HebraicMosaic

You may like

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending Now

Advertisement

Trending

Proudly Made In America | © 2022 M3 Media Management, LLC