THE 2020 'CHAOSCARS': Awarding the left's efforts to sow DIVISION and CONFUSION

October 15, 2020

CEO/Founder

When I first talked about all the problems with mail-in voting two months ago, I said the last thing we want to see is voting rules getting changed so close to an election. Yet, that is exactly what is happening right now across the nation.

And in almost every case, Democrats are fighting to get rid of simple, common sense safeguards like requiring a witness signature, or requiring that a voter's signature on a mail-in ballot matches their signature on file. It's really an insane effort to change the rules in the middle of the game. And the effort is still going strong even though we're less than three weeks from Election Day.

Remember how mail-in voting is supposed to save the Republic? If that doesn't sit well with you or make sense to you, you are not alone. Start the video below at the 2:04 mark and see what reassurances Abrams shares.

"We must adapt to how we conduct our elections?!" That's practically been the Democrats' motto for 2020. Don't like the results you get from regular old-fashioned elections? Let's just create some new "norms" for voting. I mean it's been on their to-do list forever anyway and COVID is the perfect opportunity to finally get it done.

So, how is that "adapting to new norms" thing going? Well, I'm glad I asked. Because it's the perfect time to welcome you to the inaugural Chaoscar Awards, recognizing achievements in mail-in voting chaos.

For example, the "Every Vote Matters" Chaoscar award goes to Luzerne County, Pennsylvania where the FBI found nine discarded military ballots in a dumpster.

The Letter from U.S. Attorney David Freed to the Luzerne County Bureau of Elections says:

The FBI has recovered a number of documents relating to military ballots that had been improperly opened by your elections staff, and had the ballots removed and discarded…

The FBI also found additional absentee ballot envelopes that were empty, so who knows where those ballots went.

But wait, Stacey Abrams told us mail-in voting is safe and secure! Secure? Well, maybe not if you're in the military and sending your ballot to Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.

The "It Takes Two to Tango" Chaoscar goes to Fairfax County, Virginia for mailing duplicate absentee ballots to 1,400 voters.

But don't worry, election officials have it all under control. They say only one of the ballots will be counted — unless you're a Democrat. Okay, they didn't really say that, but they were probably thinking it. Officials blamed a printer problem and said people should destroy their duplicate ballot. Or, they could just send it to our next Chaoscar winner — Texas mayoral candidate Zul Mohamed.

He was arrested last week on voter fraud charges after applying for 84 absentee ballots and having them sent to a P.O. box that allegedly belongs to a nursing home.

Nice try.

Next, the "You've Got No Mail" Chaoscar goes to Outagamie County, Wisconsin. Three trays of mail, which included multiple absentee ballots, were discovered in a ditch along a state highway.

Does no one bury anything anymore? If you want to get rid of ballots, why are you using dumpsters and ditches?

New York City wins the "G.I. Schmo" Chaoscar for sending voters mail-in ballots marked for military use.

That's right, New Yorkers who have never served in the military have received the ballot, which says "Official Military Absentee Ballot."

Maybe there was supposed to be a slash between the words "military" and "absentee," but voters are obviously confused and concerned about whether they're supposed to go ahead and use the ballot even though they're not in the military.

Over 520,000 ballots have already been sent out and the New York Elections Board does not know how many of those have the error.

The 'Every Vote Matters' Chaoscar goes to...

We hop over to New Jersey for our next award — the "Dumpster Diver" Chaoscar goes to a mailman who has been arrested for allegedly tossing 1,875 of pieces of mail — including 99 election ballots — into a dumpster.

What was that Stacey Abrams? I forgot...

Next, New York City wins its second Chaoscar of the night — it's the "You Had One Job" award for sending out 140,000 absentee ballots to Brooklyn voters with the wrong names and addresses.

These voters are supposed to complete their ballot and put it inside the official absentee ballot envelope, then sign the outside of the envelope and send it in. But these return envelopes have the wrong name and address, so voters cannot sign them unless they want their ballot to be voided.

And it looks like some people are getting not just the wrong return envelopes with their ballot, but other's people's ballots entirely. I can only hope this isn't a widespread problem bc it's a pretty serious safety/privacy issue https://t.co/ZVKrMxk0Df
— Grace Panetta (@grace_panetta) September 28, 2020

Many voters do not even have the right name on the ballot itself.

And this is great — the New York Board of Elections says a "printing error" is responsible for the bad ballots. Wow — really, a printing error? Gee, how did they ever solve that mystery?

One report on this said:

It was unclear exactly how the city planned to handle voters who had already mailed their completed ballot back in the provided envelopes.

That is a huge red flag, because it's exactly the kind of issue that will help fuel chaos and endless litigation all over America after Election Day.

Next, the "I See Dead People Voting" Chaoscar goes to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for its new temporary rules allowing dead people's votes to count.

Before this year, Massachusetts allowed early voting to start ten days before the election. If you voted early and died before Election Day, sorry, your vote would not count.

But Massachusetts changed the rules this year because of the pandemic. Now early voting starts 30 days before Election Day. And if you cast your vote during this early window, and then kick the bucket before November 3, you can rest in total peace knowing your vote will still count!

America — land of opportunity, even after you're dead.

Our final Chaoscar of the night is the "It's So Crazy It Just Might Work" special achievement award, which goes to Houston, Texas. This is for an alleged ballot harvesting and voter fraud operation that — if the allegations prove to be true — dwarfs any election-related fraud we've seen anywhere so far this year.

Two private investigators — one a former FBI agent, the other a former Houston police captain — filed sworn affidavits with the Texas Supreme Court as part of a class-action lawsuit against Harris County.

This is a copy of the lawsuit and I want to quote directly from it, so you understand what the specific allegations are:

Licensed Private Investigators... have been investigating ballot harvesting in Harris County for many months...
The organization and operation of the illegal harvesting program is being used to commit fraud in the November 3, 2020 election...

According to the investigators, witnesses have identified Harris County Commissioner Rodney Ellis... and Texas State Senator Borris Miles as leading the organization tasked with harvesting ballots. The investigators further state that witnesses have identified Houston businessman Gerald Womack and political consultant Dallas Jones as lieutenants working directly under Commissioner Ellis and Senator Miles.

By the way, in September, Dallas Jones was hired by the Joe Biden campaign to be its Texas Political Director.

This is a copy of the affidavit from one of the private investigators, Mark Aguirre. He says:

I have in my possession video-taped interviews of witnesses attesting to the aforementioned people having groups of people completing thousands of absentee and mail-in ballots, including completing ballots for deceased individuals; illegally going into nursing homes, with the complicity of the nursing home staff, and filling out and forging the signatures of nursing home residents; signing up homeless individuals to vote using the ballot harvester's address then completing the ballot and forging the homeless individual's signature.

And this is from the affidavit of the second private investigator. He says:

[One] witness stated to me that an employee of Commissioner Ellis, Tyler James, has bragged that he could guarantee that the illegal ballot harvesting operation, with the help of mass mail-in ballots, could harvest 700,000 illegal ballots.

Democrats successfully created chaos and now they're working overtime to change voting rules across the nation, taking advantage of friendly courts and judges to legislate from the bench. It's all about election insurance, tweaking the state voting systems to make Joe Biden's path to victory easier, including — in many states — rigging the ballot.

While Big Tech, the Democrats and the media insist mail-in voting is safe and secure, it's already going off the rails in many states and uncovers the left-wing forces behind the massive litigation war being waged by Democrats to permanently change the way you vote.

Patriotic uprising—Why 90% say Old Glory isn’t just another flag

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

In a nation where the Stars and Stripes symbolize the blood-soaked sacrifices of our heroes, President Trump's executive order to crack down on flag desecration amid violent protests has ignited fierce debate. But in a recent poll, Glenn asked the tough question: Can Trump protect the Flag without TRAMPLING free speech? Glenn asked, and you answered—thousands weighed in on this pressing clash between free speech and sacred symbols.

The results paint a picture of resounding distrust toward institutional leniency. A staggering 85% of respondents support banning the burning of American flags when it incites violence or disturbs the peace, a bold rejection of the chaos we've seen from George Floyd riots to pro-Palestinian torchings. Meanwhile, 90% insist that protections for burning other flags—like Pride or foreign banners—should not be treated the same as Old Glory under the First Amendment, exposing the hypocrisy in equating our nation's emblem with fleeting symbols. And 82% believe the Supreme Court's Texas v. Johnson ruling, shielding flag burning as "symbolic speech," should not stand without revision—can the official story survive such resounding doubt from everyday Americans weary of government inaction?

Your verdict sends a thunderous message: In this divided era, the flag demands defense against those who exploit freedoms to sow disorder, without trampling the liberties it represents. It's a catastrophic failure of the establishment to ignore this groundswell.

Want to make your voice heard? Check out more polls HERE.

Labor Day EXPOSED: The Marxist roots you weren’t told about

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

During your time off this holiday, remember the man who started it: Peter J. McGuire, a racist Marxist who co-founded America’s first socialist party.

Labor Day didn’t begin as a noble tribute to American workers. It began as a negotiation with ideological terrorists.

In the late 1800s, factory and mine conditions were brutal. Workers endured 12-to-15-hour days, often seven days a week, in filthy, dangerous environments. Wages were low, injuries went uncompensated, and benefits didn’t exist. Out of desperation, Americans turned to labor unions. Basic protections had to be fought for because none were guaranteed.

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

That era marked a seismic shift — much like today. The Industrial Revolution, like our current digital and political upheaval, left millions behind. And wherever people get left behind, Marxists see an opening.

A revolutionary wedge

This was Marxism’s moment.

Economic suffering created fertile ground for revolutionary agitation. Marxists, socialists, and anarchists stepped in to stoke class resentment. Their goal was to turn the downtrodden into a revolutionary class, tear down the existing system, and redistribute wealth by force.

Among the most influential agitators was Peter J. McGuire, a devout Irish Marxist from New York. In 1874, he co-founded the Social Democratic Workingmens Party of North America, the first Marxist political party in the United States. He was also a vice president of the American Federation of Labor, which would become the most powerful union in America.

McGuire’s mission wasn’t hidden. He wanted to transform the U.S. into a socialist nation through labor unions.

That mission soon found a useful symbol.

In the 1880s, labor leaders in Toronto invited McGuire to attend their annual labor festival. Inspired, he returned to New York and launched a similar parade on Sept. 5 — chosen because it fell halfway between Independence Day and Thanksgiving.

The first parade drew over 30,000 marchers who skipped work to hear speeches about eight-hour workdays and the alleged promise of Marxism. The parade caught on across the country.

Negotiating with radicals

By 1894, Labor Day had been adopted by 30 states. But the federal government had yet to make it a national holiday. A major strike changed everything.

In Pullman, Illinois, home of the Pullman railroad car company, tensions exploded. The economy tanked. George Pullman laid off hundreds of workers and slashed wages for those who remained — yet refused to lower the rent on company-owned homes.

That injustice opened the door for Marxist agitators to mobilize.

Sympathetic railroad workers joined the strike. Riots broke out. Hundreds of railcars were torched. Mail service was disrupted. The nation’s rail system ground to a halt.

President Grover Cleveland — under pressure in a midterm election year — panicked. He sent 12,000 federal troops to Chicago. Two strikers were killed in the resulting clashes.

With the crisis spiraling and Democrats desperate to avoid political fallout, Cleveland struck a deal. Within six days of breaking the strike, Congress rushed through legislation making Labor Day a federal holiday.

It was the first of many concessions Democrats would make to organized labor in exchange for political power.

What we really celebrated

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

Kean Collection / Staff | Getty Images

What we celebrated was a Canadian idea, brought to America by the founder of the American Socialist Party, endorsed by racially exclusionary unions, and made law by a president and Congress eager to save face.

It was the first of many bones thrown by the Democratic Party to union power brokers. And it marked the beginning of a long, costly compromise with ideologues who wanted to dismantle the American way of life — from the inside out.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Hunter laptop, Steele dossier—Same players, same playbook?

ullstein bild Dtl. / Contributor | Getty Images

The Durham annex and ODNI report documents expose a vast network of funders and fixers — from Soros’ Open Society Foundations to the Pentagon.

In a column earlier this month, I argued the deep state is no longer deniable, thanks to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. I outlined the structural design of the deep state as revealed by two recent declassifications: Gabbard’s ODNI report and the Durham annex released by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

These documents expose a transnational apparatus of intelligence agencies, media platforms, think tanks, and NGOs operating as a parallel government.

The deep state is funded by elite donors, shielded by bureaucracies, and perpetuated by operatives who drift between public office and private influence without accountability.

But institutions are only part of the story. This web of influence is made possible by people — and by money. This follow-up to the first piece traces the key operatives and financial networks fueling the deep state’s most consequential manipulations, including the Trump-Russia collusion hoax.

Architects and operatives

At the top of the intelligence pyramid sits John Brennan, President Obama’s CIA director and one of the principal architects of the manipulated 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. James Clapper, who served as director of national intelligence, signed off on that same ICA and later joined 50 other former officials in concluding the Hunter Biden laptop had “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation” ahead of the 2020 election. The timing, once again, served a political objective.

James Comey, then FBI director, presided over Crossfire Hurricane. According to the Durham annex, he also allowed the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server to collapse after it became entangled with “sensitive intelligence” revealing her plan to tie President Donald Trump to Russia.

That plan, as documented in the annex, originated with Hillary Clinton herself and was personally pushed by President Obama. Her campaign, through law firm Perkins Coie, hired Fusion GPS, which commissioned the now-debunked Steele dossier — a document used to justify surveillance warrants on Trump associates.

Several individuals orbiting the Clinton operation have remained influential. Jake Sullivan, who served as President Biden’s national security adviser, was a foreign policy aide to Clinton during her 2016 campaign. He was named in 2021 as a figure involved in circulating the collusion narrative, and his presence in successive Democratic administrations suggests institutional continuity.

Andrew McCabe, then the FBI’s deputy director, approved the use of FISA warrants derived from unverified sources. His connection to the internal “insurance policy” discussion — described in a 2016 text by FBI official Peter Strzok to colleague Lisa Page — underscores the Bureau’s political posture during that election cycle.

The list of political enablers is long but revealing:

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who, as a former representative from California, chaired the House Intelligence Committee at the time and publicly promoted the collusion narrative while having access to intelligence that contradicted it.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), both members of the “Gang of Eight” with oversight of intelligence operations, advanced the same narrative despite receiving classified briefings.

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, exchanged encrypted text messages with a Russian lobbyist in efforts to speak with Christopher Steele.

These were not passive recipients of flawed intelligence. They were participants in its amplification.

The funding networks behind the machine

The deep state’s operations are not possible without financing — much of it indirect, routed through a nexus of private foundations, quasi-governmental entities, and federal agencies.

George Soros’ Open Society Foundations appear throughout the Durham annex. In one instance, Open Society Foundations documents were intercepted by foreign intelligence and used to track coordination between NGOs and the Clinton campaign’s anti-Trump strategy.

This system was not designed for transparency but for control.

Soros has also been a principal funder of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, which ran a project during the Trump administration called the Moscow Project, dedicated to promoting the Russia collusion narrative.

The Tides Foundation and Arabella Advisors both specialize in “dark money” donor-advised funds that obscure the source and destination of political funding. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was the biggest donor to the Arabella Advisors by far, which routed $127 million through Arabella’s network in 2020 alone and nearly $500 million in total.

The MacArthur Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation also financed many of the think tanks named in the Durham annex, including the Council on Foreign Relations.

Federal funding pipelines

Parallel to the private networks are government-funded influence operations, often justified under the guise of “democracy promotion” or counter-disinformation initiatives.

USAID directed $270 million to Soros-affiliated organizations for overseas “democracy” programs, a significant portion of which has reverberated back into domestic influence campaigns.

The State Department funds the National Endowment for Democracy, a quasi-governmental organization with a $315 million annual budget and ties to narrative engineering projects.

The Department of Homeland Security underwrote entities involved in online censorship programs targeting American citizens.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Pentagon, from 2020 to 2024, awarded over $2.4 trillion to private contractors — many with domestic intelligence capabilities. It also directed $1.4 billion to select think tanks since 2019.

According to public records compiled by DataRepublican, these tax-funded flows often support the very actors shaping U.S. political discourse and global perception campaigns.

Not just domestic — but global

What these disclosures confirm is that the deep state is not a theory. It is a documented structure — funded by elite donors, shielded by bureaucracies, and perpetuated by operatives who drift between public office and private influence without accountability.

This system was not designed for transparency but for control. It launders narratives, neutralizes opposition, and overrides democratic will by leveraging the very institutions meant to protect it.

With the Durham annex and the ODNI report, we now see the network's architecture and its actors — names, agencies, funding trails — all laid bare. What remains is the task of dismantling it before its next iteration takes shape.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The truth behind ‘defense’: How America was rebranded for war

PAUL J. RICHARDS / Staff | Getty Images

Donald Trump emphasizes peace through strength, reminding the world that the United States is willing to fight to win. That’s beyond ‘defense.’

President Donald Trump made headlines this week by signaling a rebrand of the Defense Department — restoring its original name, the Department of War.

At first, I was skeptical. “Defense” suggests restraint, a principle I consider vital to U.S. foreign policy. “War” suggests aggression. But for the first 158 years of the republic, that was the honest name: the Department of War.

A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

The founders never intended a permanent standing army. When conflict came — the Revolution, the War of 1812, the trenches of France, the beaches of Normandy — the nation called men to arms, fought, and then sent them home. Each campaign was temporary, targeted, and necessary.

From ‘war’ to ‘military-industrial complex’

Everything changed in 1947. President Harry Truman — facing the new reality of nuclear weapons, global tension, and two world wars within 20 years — established a full-time military and rebranded the Department of War as the Department of Defense. Americans resisted; we had never wanted a permanent army. But Truman convinced the country it was necessary.

Was the name change an early form of political correctness? A way to soften America’s image as a global aggressor? Or was it simply practical? Regardless, the move created a permanent, professional military. But it also set the stage for something Truman’s successor, President Dwight “Ike” Eisenhower, famously warned about: the military-industrial complex.

Ike, the five-star general who commanded Allied forces in World War II and stormed Normandy, delivered a harrowing warning during his farewell address: The military-industrial complex would grow powerful. Left unchecked, it could influence policy and push the nation toward unnecessary wars.

And that’s exactly what happened. The Department of Defense, with its full-time and permanent army, began spending like there was no tomorrow. Weapons were developed, deployed, and sometimes used simply to justify their existence.

Peace through strength

When Donald Trump said this week, “I don’t want to be defense only. We want defense, but we want offense too,” some people freaked out. They called him a warmonger. He isn’t. Trump is channeling a principle older than him: peace through strength. Ronald Reagan preached it; Trump is taking it a step further.

Just this week, Trump also suggested limiting nuclear missiles — hardly the considerations of a warmonger — echoing Reagan, who wanted to remove missiles from silos while keeping them deployable on planes.

The seemingly contradictory move of Trump calling for a Department of War sends a clear message: He wants Americans to recognize that our military exists not just for defense, but to project power when necessary.

Trump has pointed to something critically important: The best way to prevent war is to have a leader who knows exactly who he is and what he will do. Trump signals strength, deterrence, and resolve. You want to negotiate? Great. You don’t? Then we’ll finish the fight decisively.

That’s why the world listens to us. That’s why nations come to the table — not because Trump is reckless, but because he means what he says and says what he means. Peace under weakness invites aggression. Peace under strength commands respect.

Trump is the most anti-war president we’ve had since Jimmy Carter. But unlike Carter, Trump isn’t weak. Carter’s indecision emboldened enemies and made the world less safe. Trump’s strength makes the country stronger. He believes in peace as much as any president. But he knows peace requires readiness for war.

Names matter

When we think of “defense,” we imagine cybersecurity, spy programs, and missile shields. But when we think of “war,” we recall its harsh reality: death, destruction, and national survival. Trump is reminding us what the Department of Defense is really for: war. Not nation-building, not diplomacy disguised as military action, not endless training missions. War — full stop.

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Names matter. Words matter. They shape identity and character. A Department of Defense implies passivity, a posture of reaction. A Department of War recognizes the truth: The military exists to fight and, if necessary, to win decisively.

So yes, I’ve changed my mind. I’m for the rebranding to the Department of War. It shows strength to the world. It reminds Americans, internally and externally, of the reality we face. The Department of Defense can no longer be a euphemism. Our military exists for war — not without deterrence, but not without strength either. And we need to stop deluding ourselves.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.