More Dispelling the Myth of Marine "Uniqueness"

Way back on 21 November 2010, I wrote an article in this Blog entitled:

Marine Commandant: Marines are Unique – Dispelling the Myths about Marines

questioning an assertion by the then new Marine Corps Commandant, Gen Amos, that “Marines are unique.” This assertion was reported in a 7 November 2010 Washington Post Federal Page article. As a Soldier for 30 years going from enlisted man squad leader as a sergeant to and commanding units from 2LT (earning a Combat Infantryman Badge) to full Colonel, I totally reject there is anything “unique” about a Marine Infantryman. In fact, since World War II, the Marine Corps has become just another, abet smaller, ground army and their performance has been identical to that of regular Army Infantry units in every conflict. In his definitive account of the Korean War, The Forgotten War, the author Clay Blair proves this beyond any doubt for Korea.  Also, for all their hype, in World War II the US 8th Air Force alone (one of 16 numbered US Air Forces in the War) had more men killed (27,000), almost all in actual combat, than the entire Marine Corps (24,000) suffered including those lost in bar fights around Camp Lejeune.

Over the years I have worked with Marines and even had some attached to me for extended periods and, except for the PR commissars assigned down to the squad level, I found them identical to and even interchangeable with my Soldiers.  As a result of my previous experiences with Marines, I was surprised to learn when I visited the Marine Corps Museum at Quantico that the Marines had won for us every War our Country has fought. Just to put the Marine Corps’ contribution in ALL our armed conflicts in perspective, I will Insert this chart that reflects the sacrifices each of our Military services has made by War:

As further testament to who has “fought our Country’s Battles on the Land” for the past 246 years, here is a list of the 10 deadliest Battles in US History and Marines have only participated in two of them (#1 & #6):

1.    Meuse-Argonne Offensive, World War I, Sep-Nov 1918; 26,277 US Killed.  Of the 2 Million US Military deployed overseas in WWI, only 30,000 were Marines with almost half arriving after the Armistice and remaining for occupation duty.  Of the 116,516 deaths from all causes in the War, only 2851 were Marines. Only one Marine Brigade commanded by US Army BG James G. Harbord served in Combat as the 4^th Brigade of the 2^nd US Army Infantry Division.

2.    Battle of the Bulge, World War II, Dec 1944-Jan 1945; 19,200 US Soldiers Killed.

3.    The Battle for France, World War II; Jul-Sep 1944; 17,844 US Soldiers Killed.

4.    The Battle for Normandy, World War II, Jun-Jul 1944; 16,293 US Soldiers Killed.

5.    Battle for Western Germany, World War II, Mar-May 1945; 15,000 US Soldiers Killed.

6.    Battle for Okinawa, World War II, Apr-Jun 1945; 12,500 US Killed (4907 Navy, 4582 Army, 2792 Marines with another 7,700 US dead from wounds or non-combat).

7.    Huertgen Forrest, World War II, Sep-Dec 1944, 12,000 US Soldiers Killed.

8.    Luzon Philippines, World War II, Jan-Aug 1945; 10,380 US Soldiers Killed.

9.    The Gothic Line, Northern Apennines Italy; World War II, Sep 44-Apr 45; 10,380 US Soldiers Killed.

10. Operation Dragoon, Southern France; World War II, Aug-Sep 1944; 7301 US Soldiers Killed.

Why Comments in the Washington Post Comments Sections Run Ten to One Liberal

I’ve been a Washington Post (WaPo) subscriber off and on for 60+ years and 30 years continuously this time.  Although it’s always been an ultra-Liberal Socialist Rag, I’ve maintained my subscription to understand the alternative reality of the Liberal Left and some comic relief as their obvious mistakes are so blatant as to be humorous.  Because Liberals rarely serve in the Military and the rank-in-file WaPo is an ultra-Liberal, many of their more blatant errors are in their Military coverage although their other coverage gets its fair share of faux paus.

In recent years I have been a frequent WaPo commenter gleefully pointing out and correcting their numerous errors but have noticed fewer and fewer comments from Conservative readers have been showing up.  I had assumed that this lack of Conservative comments was attributable to fewer and fewer Conservative WaPo subscribers as the paper kept drifting further and further to the Left but recently I have learned otherwise.  It seems the WaPo just censors, deletes and ultimately bans Conservative commenters to avoid WaPo embarrassment from having their errors and biased coverage exposed.  I know this because that is what has happened to me.

Although I was routinely making respectful but provocative comments, for some reason and without warning or justification my ability to comment was abruptly and without notice shut off and I was banned.  A couple of times a week my comments would garner “most responses” and were often even WaPo featured comments but that made no difference. My only transgression was I routinely pointed out glaring mistakes in their reporting that I’m sure were embarrassing to the WaPo because it called into question the accuracy of their entire article.

Although being banned was irritating, what was even more so was the WaPo had the chutzpah to tell me: “If you think this has been done in error, please contact our community team.” Of course they failed to mention that when someone “contacts the community team” they get the below “auto-reply” so what is the point in the WaPo directing someone to contact their community team? It is obvious there is NO Community Team, just an auto-reply that tells loyal readers to “go pound sand.”

The only good thing that has come out of this experience is I have found out why WaPo Comments are so heavily skewed Liberal and only occasionally does a Conservative comment slip by the WaPo censors.  It's because as soon as a Conservative commenter is detected, they are banned and never heard from again.  Mystery solved and, in the immortal words of Paul Harvey, “Now you know the rest of the story.”

Since being banned weeks ago, I have written, emailed and phoned the WaPo several time to appeal my ban but have gotten only the below auto-reply and definitely no satisfaction.  I will attach below my latest exchange and the email I sent directly to the WaPo Executive Editor but I'm confident I will never hear from a real live Washington Post person ever!

---

To: Army-COL
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2022 5:43 PM
To: Sally.Buzbee@WashPost.com
Cc: Kat.Downs@WashPost.com
Subject: FW: Response to Ticket #[2249327] Re: I have been banned from commenting with no explanation and for no reason

Ms. Buzbee, Washington Post Executive Editor,

            See below, I am a retired U.S. Army Colonel/06 with 30 years of service serving in significant Pentagon positions. I routinely make respectful but provocative comments and a couple of times a week my comments would garner “most responses” and are often featured. For some reason and with no warning or justification my ability to comment was suspended/banned. My only transgression is I routinely point out glaring mistakes in your reporting that I’m sure are embarrassing to the Post because it calls into question the accuracy of your entire article.

Part of my frustration is the capricious and arbitrary manner in which you exercise your power of censorship which probably accounts for why the overwhelming majority of your comments lean left; you just ban anyone that might post a right leaning comment or point out an obvious mistake in your reporting. One example was recently your crack military reporter mentioned someone in their article “had been drafted into the Navy during Vietnam.” When I pointed out the Navy not only DID NOT use the draft during Vietnam but had not drafted anyone since WWII, my comment was deleted as “violating community standards.” Seem “facts” must violate WaPo “Community Standards.”

Finally, here is the way you inform a reader they have been banned, they get this banner when they got to comments:

Your account has been banned from commenting.

Someone with access to your account has violated our community guidelines. As a result, your account has been banned. You will no longer be able to comment, use reactions or report comments. If you think this has been done in error, please contact our community team.

The height of chutzpah is when you say: “If you think this has been done in error, please contact our community team.” When someone “contacts the community team” they get the below “auto-reply” so what is the point in you directing someone to contact the community team?

Although I don’t expect you to even read this email let alone reply but it feels good to get this off my chest.  Regardless, I have a Blog with ~ a quarter of a million hit and I intend to begin posting all the WaPo mistake with my corrections there.   Previously, I would have just posted them in your comments.

v/r

Army-COL

Blog:  https://old-soldier-colonel.blogspot.com/

---

From: Washington Post Customer Care [mailto:help@washpost.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2022 1:54 PM
To: Army-COL
Subject: Response to Ticket #[2249327] Re: I have been banned from commenting with no explanation and for no reason

##- Please type your reply above this line -##

Washington Post (Washington Post Customer Care) Mar 29, 2022, 1:54 PM EDT Hello,   Thank you for reaching out to The Post about your commenting account.   Moderators may suspend or ban a reader after they post multiple comments against our rules. Suspensions will automatically lift after the allotted time. A ban is a permanent block from commenting on the site.   Suspensions and bans only preclude readers from posting in discussions on The Post. If you are suspended or banned, you will still be able to read all of The Post’s reporting. Due to the volume of messages we receive, we cannot respond to requests to appeal bans or explain suspensions. If you are banned, do not attempt to create a new account after being banned. We will also ban the new account.

---

Army-COL Mar 29, 2022, 10:13 AM EDT I am a retired U.S. Army Colonel/06 with 30 years of service serving in significant Pentagon positions. I routinely make respectful but provocative comments and a couple of times a week my comments would garner “most responses” and often featured. For some reason and with no warning or justification my ability to comment was suspended/banned. My only transgression is I routinely point out glaring mistakes in your reporting that I’m sure are embarrassing to the Post because it calls into question the accuracy of your entire article. I realize your reporters are not Military knowledgeable so make these errors out of ignorance but embarrassment should not be a reason to ban someone that has been a WaPo subscriber for over 50 years. Your banning message says that if you believe the ban was done in error, contact the Community Team. When I contacted the Community Team I got an automatic reply saying “we get many requests so we don’t respond to inquiries about bans.” If that’s the case, why do you tell people to contact the Community Team? Bottom line, in all fairness, I request my ban be lifted.

This email is a service from Washington Post Customer Care.

To further prove my point, before I was out right banned, one of my factual comments I posted was removed by the WaPo as “violating WaPo Community Standards.”  The only “WaPo Standard” violated was being 100% factual and contradicting WaPo Fake News.  Below is what I sent to the WaPo to find out what I had done so I wouldn’t repeat my “transgression.”  Of course the WaPo never bothered to respond.

This below was the comment I made to the article: “Former Special Forces soldier and onetime congressional candidate arrested in Capitol riot case

Jeremy Brown, former Special Forces soldier and congressional candidate, arrested in Capitol riot case - The Washington Post

 

And the WaPo removed it with the following comment:

This commenter has been removed by a moderator for violating our community guidelines.

So that I don’t violate WaPo “standards” in the future, can you tell me what, other than being critical of the Washington Post, was objectionable about this below comment?

 

THANKS

 

COLONEL (Retired) US Army

 

===========================================================================

I think the 6 January Insurrection was horrendous and condemn everyone that participated but for Mr. Hawkins to claim “Five people died as a result of the riot” is disingenuous, misleading and untrue.

Dr. Francisco Diaz, the district's chief medical examiner, announced the causes of deaths as:

Capitol Police officer Brian D. Sicknick suffered two strokes and died of natural causes a day after he confronted rioters at the Jan. 6 insurrection, the District’s chief medical examiner has ruled…. the autopsy found no evidence the 42-year-old officer suffered an allergic reaction to chemical irritants…”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/brian-sicknick-death-strokes/2021/04/19/36d2d310-617e-11eb-afbe-9a11a127d146_story.html

Ashli Babbitt, 35, died by homicide from a gunshot to the left shoulder. She was shot by a Capitol police officer while trying to climb through a door near the House chamber.

Kevin Greeson, 55, died of natural causes from cardiovascular disease. From Greeson, of Athens, Alabama.

Benjamin Phillips, 50, died of natural causes from cardiovascular disease. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, Phillips of Ringtown, Pennsylvania, was a computer programmer who founded a social media website for Trump supporters.

Roseanne Boyland, 34, died by accident from acute amphetamine intoxication. Boyland, of Georgia, wanted to be a sobriety counselor.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/04/07/capitol-riot-deaths-cause-death-released-4-5-not-sicknick/7128040002/

The Only person that died on 6 Jan or as a result of the Insurrection was Ashli Babbott.  Two people with heart disease died of a heart attack, one drug abuser OD’ed, and the Capitol Police Officer died but none of the deaths were attributed by the DC Medical Examiner.

“Democracy Dies in Darkness and the WaPo is Turning Out the Lights.”

Added: In 2025 under the Federal Tort Claims Act, the estate of Ashli Babbitt (the woman who was shot and killed on 6 Jan 2021 during the U.S. Capitol incident) filed a tort lawsuit and reached a nearly $5 million settlement with the government.

The most disingenuous thing in this article is Derick linking to this early WaPo article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/two-arrested-in-assault-on-police-officer-brian-d-sicknick-who-died-after-jan-6-capitol-riot/2021/03/15/80261550-84ff-11eb-bfdf-4d36dab83a6d_story.html?itid=lk_inline_manual_12&itid=lk_inline_manual_10

Instead of this later WaPo article correcting the misinformation in his referenced article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/brian-sicknick-death-strokes/2021/04/19/36d2d310-617e-11eb-afbe-9a11a127d146_story.html

That is a blatant effort to mislead readers. Typical of a dishonest WaPo writer (can’t call him a “reporter” or even a “journalist”).

The Renaming Commission Has Announced the Contenders for Renaming Army Posts Named for Confederates – But How They Arrived at Many of Them Is Mystifying!

The Confederate renaming commission has narrowed down tens of thousands of recommendations into a list of 87 new names (see Below) for the nine (9) Army posts originally named in honor of Confederate troops.

The nine (9) Army posts on the renaming list are Forts Lee, A.P. Hill and Pickett, in Virginia; Forts Benning and Gordon in Georgia; Fort Bragg in North Carolina; Fort Rucker in Alabama; Fort Polk in Louisiana; and Fort Hood in Texas.

The Congressionally appointed Commission’s mission was to provide naming, renaming, and removal recommendations to Congress for all Department of Defense items that commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America.

Although retired Navy Admiral Michelle Howard, Chair of the Naming Commission, said in a news release: “It’s important that the names we recommend for these installations appropriately reflect the courage, values and sacrifices of our diverse military men and women …. We also are considering the local and regional significance of names and their potential to inspire and motivate our service members.” the Commission only included these seven names (highlighted Below Red Bold) that would even be recognizable to most Soldiers let alone the average American and definitely worthy of such recognition:

 

President/General of the Army the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower – President of the United States, Supreme Allied Commander Europe, and Chief of Staff Army.

 

General of the Army George C. Marshall – Chief of Staff Army (During WWII), Secretary of State, and Secretary of Defense.

 

General of the Army Omar N. Bradley – Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Chief of Staff Army and Head of the Veterans Affairs Administration.

 

General Colin Powell – Chairman of the Joint Chef of Staff, National Security Advisor and Secretary of State.

 

Sergeant/Major Alvin C. York –Medal of Honor Recipient and most celebrated Soldier of World War I.

 

Colonel Robert L. Howard - Medal of Honor Recipient and most decorated Soldier in the history of the Army and of the Vietnam Nam War (see below).

 

Major Audie L. Murphy - Medal of Honor Recipient and most decorated Soldier of World War II (see Below)

 

The choices were narrowed down from more than 34,000 submissions, including 3,670 unique names, according to the release. The names were gathered both from an online form and from site visits to the posts to speak with troops there and surrounding community leaders. What is mystifying is how the Commission selected many of the obscure and dubiously worthy candidates they did while not selecting such obviously noteworthy American heroes as General of the Armies John J. Pershing who led American Forces in World War I and was Chief of Staff Army, President/General of the Army Ulysses S. Grant who led the Union Army to victory in the Civil War, President/General Zachary Taylor who led the Army to victory in the Mexican-American War, or even General George S. Patton of World War II fame.  One other not so recognizable name but would be obvious to any Army Logistician would be General Johnnie E. Wilson, the first Black 4-Star Army Materiel Command commander.  In my opinion, Admiral Howard needs to reconvene her Commission and go back to the drawing board.

The Commission did not make any recommendations associating candidate names with specific Posts but the three that are beyond obvious are these three for Fort Hood, Fort Bragg and Fort Lee:

The first “no-brainer” has to be to name Fort Hood for Major Audie L. Murphy, a native Texan and the most decorated US Soldier of World War II. He had every award for valor the Army can award. Not only did he have the Medal of Honor but he also had the Distinguished Service Cross, the highest award the Army can award for Valor, two (2) Silver Stars, two (2) Bronze Stars for Valor and three (3) Purple Hearts. He also had several other US and foreign awards.  Significantly, all these awards were awarded during the largest War this country has ever fought with over 12 Million men and women in uniform and over 400,000 service members killed.

The second “no-brainer” has to be naming Fort Bragg, the home of the US Army Special Forces, for the most decorated US Soldier of the Vietnam War and in the entire history of the US Army, Colonel Robert L. Howard. A Green Beret, he was nominated for the Medal of Honor three times but received lesser medals for the first two nominations which were for actions performed in Cambodia where the U.S. was fighting covertly. He was finally awarded the Medal of Honor for his actions on December 30, 1968, his third nomination. In addition to the MOH, Colonel Howard was also awarded the Distinguished Service Cross, the highest award the Army can award for Valor, the Silver Stars, four (4) Bronze Stars for Valor and eight (8) Purple Hearts. He also had several other US and foreign awards. He had 54 months in combat and no other member of any service came even close to Colonel Howard’s record of valor in the Vietnam War.

The third "no brainer" has to be naming Fort Lee, the home of the US Army Sustainment Center of Excellence, for General Johnnie E. Wilson, who as the first Black Commanding

General of the Army Materiel Command (AMC), was the most senior Logistician in the entire US Army. He enlisted in the Army in1961 and in 1967 attended Officer Candidate School as a Staff Sergeant (E-6); upon graduation he was commissioned a second lieutenant in the Ordnance Corps. He held a wide variety of important command and staff positions including the Army Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, AMC Chief of Staff, and Commanding General of the Army Ordnance Center & School. In Vietnam he commanded the Maintenance Company in the 173d Airborne Brigade.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson - Is She Qualified?

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson is well qualified although not as qualified as Justice Kavanaugh was when he went through the Senate Confirmation process. I just hope the Republicans don’t resort to the disgraceful tactics the Democrats used making up lies about Kavanaugh to discredit him. Here are Judge Jackson’s qualifications.

- BA, Harvard, JD Harvard University Law School

- 8 months, Judge, US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

- 8 years (2013 - 2021), district judge on the United States District Court for the District of Columbia

- Clerk, Judge, US District Court for the District of Massachusetts

- Clerk, Judge, Clerk for Judge, US Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit

- Clerk, US Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer

She is married to Dr. Patrick G. Jackson, a gastrointestinal surgeon who is chief of gastrointestinal surgery at Medstar Georgetown University Hospital and an associate professor of surgery at Georgetown University. He is a White sixth-generation Harvard graduate, whose family is considered elite members of Boston's traditional upper class.

Vice President Kamala Harris’ husband is also an accomplished White man. Ever wonder why all these accomplishments Black women pick accomplished White men as husbands?

Latest Nielsen Ratings Just Released This Evening Has FOX News Beating the Brains out of CNN and MSNBC

Here are the latest numbers and it appears it’s FOX News that is “The Most Trusted News Source in Cable News. The CNN numbers raise the age old question: “If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, did it make a noise?” - “If someone says something on CNN ….?”

RATINGS

Thursday, Feb. 24 Scoreboard: Fox News Is No. 1 During Ukraine Coverage, Has Highest-Rated Day in More Than 1 Year

Total Viewers (Live+SD x 1,000)

Total Day: FNC: 3.151 | CNN: 1.709 | MSNBC: 1.462
Prime: FNC: 4.070 | CNN: 1.886 | MSNBC: 2.223

	FNC:	CNN:	MSNBC:
4PM	Cavuto: 3.220	Tapper: 1.940	Wallace: 1.851
5PM	Five: 5.031	Tapper: 1.910	Wallace: —-
6PM	Baier: 3.827	Blitzer: 1.897	Melber: 1.619
7PM	Watters: 4.209	Burnett: 1.901	Reid: 1.568
8PM	Carlson: 4.692	Cooper: 1.961	Maddow: 2.134
9PM	Hannity: 4.266	CNN Tnt: 1.870	Maddow: 2.544
10PM	Ingraham: 3.252	Lemon: 1.828	O’Donnell: 1.992
11PM	Bream: 2.345	Lemon: 1.365	MSReports: 1.423

Washington Post Secretary of the Interior Haaland "I Feel Your Pain" Emmett Till Article -- What the WaPo Left Out (More Lies of Omission)

 

Opinion: Black and Native people are kindred spirits in adversity. Deb Haaland understands that.

By Jonathan Capehart Columnist  18 February 2022

Jonathan Capehart is a member of the Washington Post Editorial Board, writes about politics and social issues

“So it wasn’t a surprise to watch tears well this week for Haaland, now the interior secretary, as she stood outside the Mississippi courthouse that once set free the murderers of Emmett Till. For Haaland, the first Native American to serve as a Cabinet secretary, visiting these sites doesn’t just mean remembering the injustice inflicted upon Black people; it means walking the ancestral lands that were home to Indigenous people long before the slave ships came…. She knows
what it means to come from people who experienced prejudice and violence”

Read the whole Washington Post article at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/02/18/deb-haaland-emmett-till-sites/

This is just a snippet of the article but what is interesting is that Capehart writes this entire article about how Secretary Haaland “feels the pain of oppression” without once mentions her life story growing up as the daughter of a highly decorated United States Marine Corps Field Grade Officer of Norwegian ancestry living on or near Military bases all of the country and even attended 13 different schools.  She never got near an Indian Reservation until she was nearly grown and even than she never lived “on” one. When her father finally retired after his 30 year Marine Corps career, the family settled down in an affluent neighborhood in Albuquerque, New Mexico, home of the sprawling Kirkland Air Force Base so the family could avail themselves of all the amenities the base could offer, e.g. Base Exchange, Commissary, excellent medical facilities and recreational opportunities.

I would also mention that when President Biden appointed Representative Deb Haaland as Interior Secretary she had very little executive experience and can’t be very bright as she spent three years in law school and graduated but couldn’t even pass the NM Bar exam. Then again, this was the norm for most of Biden’s Cabinet appointees. See:

https://old-soldier-colonel.blogspot.com/2020/12/an-open-letter-to-my-senators-opposing.html

 

There are Lies of Commission involving generating false information and Lies of Omission involving leaving out pertinent information. With WaPo commission is also when they state opinions as fact and acts of omission where they omit facts that might not support their desired narrative. WaPo Liberal propagandists masquerading as “columnists” or “reporters” or “journalists” are masters at both techniques but this article is an excellent example of Capehart’s expertise in lying by omission.

 

Of course the Washington Post has a special way of dealing with commenters that continually call attention to their lies and correcting their attempts to plant “Fake News” and that is to ban them from commenting like this:

 

“Your account has been banned from commenting.

Someone with access to your account has violated our community guidelines. As a result, your account has been banned. You will no longer be able to comment, use reactions or report comments. If you think this has been done in error, please contact our community team.”

 

Then when you “contact the WaPo community team,” here is the response you get:

"Due to the volume of messages we receive, we cannot respond to requests to appeal bans or explain suspensions. If you are banned, do not attempt to create a new account after being banned. We will also ban the new account."

The WaPo Tagline used to be: “Democracy Dies in Darkness”

The new one expands the Tagline to confess to what they really mean: “Democracy Dies in Darkness and the WaPo Is Turning Out the Lights”

Pennsylvania Court Declaring PA Mail-in Voting Law Unconstitutional Makes Biden Electors Bogus and Trump’s Legitimate – Shouldn’t Thompson’s 6 January Committee Subpoena Biden’s Bogus PA Electors Too?

 

With the Pennsylvania Court declaring the state mail-in voting unconstitutional, maybe Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), chairman of the select committee investigating the Capitol attack, needs to adjust his subpoena roster to include the entire slate of now “bogus” Biden electors that illegally cast their votes on 6 January. With this decision, it was the Biden electors that cast Bogus votes and the alternate Trump electors that should have been accepted as the legitimate Pennsylvania slate.

Politics

Pennsylvania court declares state’s mail-in voting law unconstitutional, in win for Republicans

January 28, 2022|Updated January 28, 2022 at 3:54 p.m. EST

A Pennsylvania court struck down the state’s expansive mail-in voting law as unconstitutional, delivering a temporary win to state Republicans who challenged the law after former president Donald Trump falsely claimed mail-in voting resulted in election fraud.

To read this entire article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/28/pennsylvania-mail-voting-courts/?commentID=d5a059e8-8852-4066-82cf-1f776ef0e7a4

Most of the WaPo readers missed the basis for the Court decision. It had nothing to do with if mail-in balloting is good or if it’s secure. If you read Article VII of the PA Constitution it clearly lists the limited number of reasons a voter can cast an absentee ballot and does NOT allow just anyone to do it without a reason. When the Pennsylvania legislature changed the Constitution to allow anyone to cast an absentee ballot it voided all absentee ballots. The Pennsylvania Constitution Article XIV clearly states the ways it can be amended and a simple vote by the legislature is NOT one of them, hence the Court correctly ruled that the legislature violated the Constitution. With this ruling Trump would have won Pennsylvania and its 20 electoral votes.

When the entire Article VII is read, it is clear what the legislature can provide for are only the manner in which, and the time and place but NOT the reasons for why a voter can cast an absentee ballot. The ONLY reasons a voter can cast an absentee ballot are clearly delineated in the article.

Article VII - Absentee voting.

(a) The Legislature shall, by general law, provide a manner in which, and the time and place at which, qualified electors who may, on the occurrence of any election, be absent from the municipality of their residence, because their duties, occupation or business require them to be elsewhere or who, on the occurrence of any election, are unable to attend at their proper polling places because of illness or physical disability or who will not attend a polling place because of the observance of a religious holiday or who cannot vote because of election day duties, in the case of a county employee, may vote, and for the return and canvass of their votes in the election district in which they respectively reside.

  

Politics

Committee investigating Jan. 6 attack issues subpoenas to 14 bogus Trump electors in states Biden won

January 28, 2022

The congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob has issued subpoenas to 14 individuals who cast bogus electoral votes for the former president in seven states won by Joe Biden in 2020.

The move comes as two Democratic attorneys general have asked federal prosecutors in recent days to investigate whether crimes were committed in assembling or submitting the “alternate” Trump slates. Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco this week confirmed prosecutors’ consideration of what she termed the “fraudulent elector certifications.”

To read this entire article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/28/committee-investigating-jan-6-attack-issues-subpoenas-14-bogus-trump-electors-states-biden-won/

 Seems the 6 January Committee needs to issue 18 more subpoenas (2 PA alternate electors are already under subpoena) to the Pennsylvania electors who it now appears cast the bogus electoral votes for Biden when, according to the recent Pennsylvania Court decision, the absentee ballots were illegal and Trump should have won all 20 of Pennsylvania’s electoral votes. Hence, it was the Trump electors that were the legitimate electors and the Biden electors the bogus ones.

 The basis for the Court decision has nothing to do with if mail-in balloting is good or if it’s secure. If you read Article VII of the PA Constitution it clearly lists the limited number of reasons a voter can cast an absentee ballot and does NOT allow just anyone to do it without a reason. When the PA legislature changed the Constitution to allow anyone to cast an absentee ballot it voided all absentee ballots. The PA Constitution has the ways it can be amended and a simple vote by the legislature is NOT one of them, hence the Court correctly ruled. With this ruling Trump would have won Pennsylvania and its 20 electoral votes.

 Regardless, Biden still would have won the election but the final count would have been closer at 286 for Biden and 252 for Trump.