
Columnist.
Would you like to have Washington take over all state and local elections and stop the reforms intended to improve the integrity and security of the voting process? If you say yes, then you might be in luck.
Trump's opponents claim that unless witnesses are called, the entire impeachment trial will have been a sham. This is consistent with what they've argued all along: any process Democrats control is fair; any process Democrats don't control is a cover-up.
It's 2020, which means election year is upon us. And although Washington is currently preoccupied with the impeachment melodrama going on in the Senate, we should not lose sight of problems in our voter registration and election process that imperil the integrity of upcoming local, state, and federal elections.
The first day of the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump was largely taken up with procedural issues. Senators argued over and then adopted an organizing resolution laying out the rules under which the trial will proceed.
The War Powers Resolution passed Thursday by the House in an effort to restrict President Trump's ability to take military action to defend America against attack from Iran is a meaningless political document designed only to embarrass the president.
We don't yet know whether the Senate trial will involve witnesses or whether any are needed. Contrary to what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats are demanding, now is not the time to answer that question.
"In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep." So began the momentous Christmas broadcast on Dec. 24, 1968 — the most watched television program in history at that time — when astronauts Frank Borman, James Lovell and Bill Anders read verses from the book of Genesis as they became the first humans in history to leave earth orbit and circle the moon.
You would think that after being one of the centers of the election storm in 2000 when the hotly contested Florida recount determined whether George Bush or Al Gore would be president of the United States, Palm Beach County would have gotten its act together.
The vote by the House Judiciary Committee Friday to adopt two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump makes it clear that Democrats are moving full speed ahead on the road to impeachment — regardless of the merits of their accusations or the integrity of their process.
A shocking report by the Justice Department's inspector general lays bare the FBI's "serious performance failures" in conducting a counterintelligence operation in 2016 against the Trump campaign.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler opened Wednesday's impeachment hearing with testimony from three left-wing law professors who consider President Trump to be evil incarnate. If Nadler thought this display would somehow convince the public that the president's actions merit impeachment, he is sure to be disappointed.
The progressive left are outraged over two recent landmark speeches given by Attorney General William Barr. But their howls of complaint serve only to illustrate just how right Barr was about their contempt for the Constitution, the rule of law and religious freedom.
"It's pretty simple," Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., tweeted last March, in calling for President Trump's impeachment. "No one is above the law, including the President of the United States." But perhaps Tlaib — among Trump's harshest critics in Congress — needs to follow up with another tweet, in the interests of transparency. This tweet could read: "No one is above the law. Except me."
Watching the hysterical reaction of the radical left — such as Ruth Marcus of The Washington Post — to Attorney General William Barr's thoughtful, well-reasoned, important speech at the Federalist Society convention on the constitutional doctrine of the unitary executive is like history repeating itself.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., hasn't yet produced most of his witnesses in the public impeachment hearings regarding President Donald Trump.
With the 2020 presidential election less than a year away, America's voter registration rolls are woefully out of shape. Yet well-funded liberal organizations are working to stop states from cleaning up their rolls.
The Supreme Court on Nov. 4 heard oral arguments in an immigration case that could have a dramatic impact on how many criminal aliens plaguing our communities finally get deported.
Why are House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her fellow Democrats so against following historical practices in their impeachment inquiry regarding President Trump?
Vote harvesting gives party activists, campaign consultants, and other political guns for hire the ability to manipulate election outcomes either through coercion of voters or outright ballot theft and forgery. Yet, in places such as California and the District of Columbia, vote harvesting is perfectly legal.
The U.S. Supreme Court got it exactly right this past week in Chatfield v. League of Women Voters when it summarily dismissed a lower court ruling that the Michigan Legislature had violated the Constitution when it drew congressional and state legislative districts that the league and individual Democratic voters claimed favored the Republican Party.