DHS allows officers to review visa applicants’ use of welfare programs while considering permanent status qualification

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has issued a final rule overturning a 2022 regulation from former President Joe Biden’s administration to allow immigration officers to consider an applicant’s use of welfare programs to determine if they qualify for permanent legal citizenship.

In a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) news release on Thursday, the DHS held that the decision will better align immigration law with “Congressional intent that aliens in the United States be self-reliant and not dependent on taxpayer-funded government benefits.”

Furthermore, under the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), a person applying for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status is ineligible “because of the likelihood of becoming a public charge.”

“With this final rule, USCIS officers are empowered to assess all pertinent facts on a case-by-case basis for each applicant,” the DHS stated.

“The Trump administration is upholding the rule of law and protecting American taxpayers from subsidizing aliens who may become dependent on public benefits. USCIS is committed to safeguarding the safety, security, and financial well-being of Americans,” said USCIS spokesperson Zach Kahler.

The rule will be effective on September 18th. A revised version of Form I-485, used to apply for permanent residence or adjust one’s status, will be released. The new version of the form will be required after the effective date.

The new policy could impact hundreds of thousands of migrants seeking green cards every year from inside the U.S., as well as deter migrant households from applying for taxpayer-funded social programs, such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

The rescission of the Biden-era policy also reverts some leeway back to federal immigration officers that they held during President Donald Trump’s first term, according to CBS News.

When effective, the new rule also allows reviewers to examine an applicant’s age, health, family situation, assets, finances, education and skills.

“This final rule is intended to help ensure that those seeking permanent residence are able to support themselves and are not likely to become primarily dependent on public assistance,” USCIS said in a statement on X Thursday.

This final rule is intended to help ensure that those seeking permanent residence are able to support themselves and are not likely to become primarily dependent on public assistance.

USCIS is committed to applying the law as enacted by Congress, providing clear guidance.

Katherine Mosack

Humiliation for hundreds of California colleges whose alumni earn less than high school grads

Hundreds of California college programs are facing renewed scrutiny after federal data revealed that many graduates earn less than those with only a high school diploma, placing these schools at risk of losing federal student loan access unless their outcomes improve.

A new federal requirement that took effect this month requires colleges, universities and certificate programs to prove graduates earn at least as much as the median worker in their state with only a high school diploma.

In California, that benchmark is about $18 an hour, or roughly $36,000 a year.

An analysis by Michael Itzkowitz — president of the HEA Group — found about 90% of nearly 3,000 California higher education programs met that standard.

Yet about 300 programs missed the mark, with many concentrated in fields such as cosmetology, medical assisting, theater, and fine arts.

If these programs continue to fall short of the earnings benchmark, students could lose access to federal loans as early as July 1, 2028. Schools, however, still have at least two years to boost graduate earnings.

Many of the underperforming programs are run by for-profit colleges, institutions that have already been under the microscope for years over concerns of student outcomes and high tuition costs.

Public institutions also made the list, with theater and fine arts programs at eight California State University campuses and three University of California campuses coming under fire.

Over 30 California programs in fine arts, music, theater, film, and photography failed to pass the new earnings test.

By comparison, about 100 similar programs cleared the federal bar, such as UC Berkeley’s film program and fine arts programs at San Diego City College and the University of Southern California, where graduates reported earning over $70,000 four years after graduation.

New York Post

Sen. Darline Graham Considers Running for a Full-Term, Source Confirms

Newly minted Sen. Darline Graham (R-S.C.) is considering running for her late brother’s old seat in the South Carolina special election, according to one person granted anonymity to discuss private conversations.

Graham was sworn in earlier this week to replace Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who died on Saturday. Her appointment, backed by President Donald Trump, was widely seen as a move to fill the seat with a caretaker who would leave Washington at the end of the term in January.

Graham’s interest in running for the seat was first reported by Semafor.

The filing window for candidates in the August 11 primary opens Tuesday. The field of candidates could include Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette; Reps. Russell Fry, Nancy Mace and Ralph Norman; businessman Mark Lynch; and former Gov. Mark Sanford, among others.

On Wednesday, Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) hinted that Graham could join their ranks. “Darline has so far been off to a remarkable start,” Scott, who chairs the National Republican Senatorial Committee, told CBS News. “Why not her?”

A spokesperson for Graham did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The news of her interest in running for a full term came as a surprise to some prominent South Carolina Republicans. “My understanding is that she told Governor [Henry] McMaster that she would accept the appointment to fill the rest of the term, not to be a candidate for it,” said South Carolina Republican Party Chair Drew McKissick.

Cameron Arcand

Cameron Arcand 

10 Rejected Titles For Biden’s New Memoir

At long last, the wait is over — President Joe Biden has written a memoir about his time in the White House. The book, titled Promise Me, America, will be released this fall following the November midterm elections, but that wasn’t the only title that was pitched.

Here is an exclusive list of potential titles that were rejected:

1. If You Don’t Read This, You Ain’t Black: Close, but the marketing team wanted to cast a wider net.

2. My Time As, You Know, The Thing: All the trademark clarity of his presidency in one phrase.

3. Two Scoops of Mint Chocolate Chip, Waffle Cone, Please: Always ice cream with this guy.

4. Look, Fat: This option was ultimately discarded to avoid body shaming any potential readers.

5. The Last of the Dog-Faced Pony Soldiers: A tantalizing tease of the treasures found in the book.

6. My Life as a Chinese Asset: A little too raw and real-world.

7. Tales from a Truck Driving Lifeguard: This title was tossed after the fictional portion of the book was removed.

8. How We Finally Beat Medicare: An inspiring rallying cry everyone still hasn’t figured out.

9. If I Did It: His “hypothetical” confession to killing America, right there in black and white.

10. Truinnernationalundrepressure: Surprisingly, this is more legible than the rest of the memoir.

The Babylon Bee

Trump’s Speech Sends Beijing, And China-Watchers, Into A Frenzy

President Donald Trump’s explosive allegations against China Thursday night are already reverberating far beyond domestic politics.

Speaking from the White House on Thursday, Trump accused China of “the largest compromise of election data in history,” alleging Beijing illicitly obtained information from roughly 220 million American voter files during the 2020 election cycle. The Chinese Communist Party quickly denied the charges, while China-watchers in the United States questioned if the relationship between Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping has been shattered.

“China has all along adhered to the principle of non-interference in others’ internal affairs,” Chinese Embassy spokesman Liu Chang said in a statement. “The U.S. election is an internal matter of the U.S. Its outcome is determined by the votes of the American people. China has never and will never interfere in the presidential elections of the U.S.”

The spat could have implications for a reportedly sought-after summit between Trump and Xi later this year.

Among longtime China observers, Trump’s accusations immediately prompted questions about whether the administration’s broader China strategy can withstand the allegations. Bill Bishop, publisher of the influential Sinocism newsletter, questioned how the allegations could be reconciled with Trump’s stated interest in maintaining a working relationship with Xi.

“So how can he still be friends with Xi after what he says the PRC [People’s Republic of China] just did in stealing 220m voter files?” Bishop wrote on X. “If any of these allegations are true how can this not be a rupture?”

China hawk Gordon Chang, author of “Plan Red” and “China Is Going To War”, argued that Beijing’s leadership would be deeply unsettled by Trump’s decision to publicly release the intelligence. “China’s leaders are almost certainly in a panic right about now,” Chang wrote. “Bravo, President Trump, for revealing China’s massive interference in our elections and in our society.”

“Trump just showed China who’s boss.”

Not everyone accepted Trump’s characterization of the newly released intelligence. Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, dismissed the allegations, arguing that publicly available voter registration data has long been accessible to foreign governments and private organizations alike. “The idea that somehow these countries are gathering voter files — these are publicly available. You don’t have to hack into them. You can buy them,” Warner said to CBS News.

Trump’s allegations also go further than previously declassified intelligence assessments produced during his first administration.

A January 2021 intelligence community assessment concluded that China “probably continued longstanding efforts to gather information on U.S. voters and public opinion” in order to better predict election outcomes and inform Beijing’s policy toward whichever administration ultimately took office. Another assessment, partially declassified in 2022, similarly found that Chinese intelligence officials analyzed voter registration data from multiple states during the 2020 election cycle.

Neither assessment concluded that China attempted to alter vote totals or directly manipulate election infrastructure.

Just one day before Trump’s announcement, a Pew Research Center survey found that China is now viewed more favorably than the United States in 25 of the 36 countries surveyed — the first time in the organization’s two decades of polling that Beijing has surpassed Washington in a majority of participating nations. That shift, researchers argued, reflects both China’s expanding diplomatic and economic influence abroad and declining international perceptions of the United States.

The Daily Wires ^ | July 17, 2026 | Drew Berkemeyer

Democrats Are Panicking and Scrambling to Hide Something Big

Matt Margolis 

Things just keep getting worse for the Democratic Party, and at this rate, they may need a new metaphor because “keeps getting worse” barely covers it anymore. We already told you the polls are tightening heading into the midterms in November, which was bad enough on its own. Now it turns out the party’s situation is so much worse than we already know, and the people running the show apparently don’t want you to know just how bad it really is.

In a bizarre move, the Democratic National Committee required its senior leadership to sign non-disclosure agreements before a private meeting on the party’s finances, according to two people familiar with the conversations who spoke to Axios. That alone is a break from past practice. DNC officers are high-ranking members of chair Ken Martin’s team, not entry-level staffers. Officers at that level don’t typically get handed a confidentiality agreement before they can hear how much money they have in their piggy bank and what they plan to do about it.

Make no mistake about it, you don’t slap NDAs on your own leadership team unless you’re worried about what might leak. And boy, it’s gotta be something really juicy.

The private senior officers’ meeting happened on June 25, five days before the Supreme Court issued a ruling that reshaped party fundraising rules. Martin has been fending off a crisis of confidence among Democrat donors, operatives, and even DNC members over how he’s managing the party, especially with the Republican National Committee sitting on a huge fundraising advantage without any debt.

And the numbers justify the panic. Through the end of May, the DNC had nearly $15 million on hand but $18 million in debt. The RNC, meanwhile, had $125 million on hand and zero debt. In other words, the Democrat Party is running on fumes, and they know it.

ICYMI: Democrats Got Some Devastating News About the Midterms

Martin has been privately and publicly defensive about all of this for months. In a contentious Pod Save America interview earlier this year, he insisted, “to suggest that we’re not raising money is inaccurate.” He also argued the real gap between the parties isn’t about how much money comes in, but how much goes out. Dizzy from the spin yet?

The Supreme Court ruling that landed five days after that closed-door meeting didn’t do Democrats any favors either. It lifted limits on how much parties can spend in coordination with candidates and allowed parties to buy campaign ads at the same discounted rate that individual campaigns pay. As we reported, that decision was widely seen as benefiting the GOP, as it effectively wiped out much of the fundraising edge Democratic candidates were counting on this fall.

The DNC declined to comment on the specific NDA requirement for its officers. Chris Lowe, the DNC’s national finance co-chair, waved off the whole thing as a non-issue, calling confidentiality agreements for officers and board-meeting attendees standard practice in the corporate world, even though they are not. Lowe also said senior DNC staff already operate under confidentiality agreements and argued it would be poor practice not to have them in place when finance and political strategy get discussed at the highest levels.

Mark Margolis, PJ Media

Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday announced the imposition of visa restrictions in a bid to target violent, far-left terrorist groups.

The announcement coincided with an international summit in which Rubio met with representatives of dozens of nations and warned of growing far-left extremism. He further invoked international coalitions to stop the Islamic State as a model for them to emulate.

“Today, in support of National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 and ongoing U.S. Government efforts to disrupt networks fomenting political violence before they escalate to criminal action, the Department of State is announcing a new visa restriction policy that targets members of Far-Left Terrorist and other aligned groups who have supported or incited acts of terrorism; supported violent criminal activity; participated in economic sabotage; financed, recruited, or provided logistical support for violent or criminal actions committed by Far-Left Terrorist and other aligned groups; and/or facilitated the convergence of Far-Left Terrorist and other aligned networks for the purposes of violent action,” Rubio wrote in a statement.

Far-left extremism has been increasingly in the eye of the administration since the assassination of Charlie Kirk, who was fatally shot during an open-air event at Utah Valley University in September 2025. His alleged killer, Tyler Robinson, was reportedly motivated by Kirk’s comments criticizing transgender ideology.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday announced the imposition of visa restrictions in a bid to target violent, far-left terrorist groups.

The announcement coincided with an international summit in which Rubio met with representatives of dozens of nations and warned of growing far-left extremism. He further invoked international coalitions to stop the Islamic State as a model for them to emulate.

“Today, in support of National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 and ongoing U.S. Government efforts to disrupt networks fomenting political violence before they escalate to criminal action, the Department of State is announcing a new visa restriction policy that targets members of Far-Left Terrorist and other aligned groups who have supported or incited acts of terrorism; supported violent criminal activity; participated in economic sabotage; financed, recruited, or provided logistical support for violent or criminal actions committed by Far-Left Terrorist and other aligned groups; and/or facilitated the convergence of Far-Left Terrorist and other aligned networks for the purposes of violent action,” Rubio wrote in a statement.

Far-left extremism has been increasingly in the eye of the administration since the assassination of Charlie Kirk, who was fatally shot during an open-air event at Utah Valley University in September 2025. His alleged killer, Tyler Robinson, was reportedly motivated by Kirk’s comments criticizing transgender ideology.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday announced the imposition of visa restrictions in a bid to target violent, far-left terrorist groups.

The announcement coincided with an international summit in which Rubio met with representatives of dozens of nations and warned of growing far-left extremism. He further invoked international coalitions to stop the Islamic State as a model for them to emulate.

“Today, in support of National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 and ongoing U.S. Government efforts to disrupt networks fomenting political violence before they escalate to criminal action, the Department of State is announcing a new visa restriction policy that targets members of Far-Left Terrorist and other aligned groups who have supported or incited acts of terrorism; supported violent criminal activity; participated in economic sabotage; financed, recruited, or provided logistical support for violent or criminal actions committed by Far-Left Terrorist and other aligned groups; and/or facilitated the convergence of Far-Left Terrorist and other aligned networks for the purposes of violent action,” Rubio wrote in a statement.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday announced the imposition of visa restrictions in a bid to target violent, far-left terrorist groups.

The announcement coincided with an international summit in which Rubio met with representatives of dozens of nations and warned of growing far-left extremism. He further invoked international coalitions to stop the Islamic State as a model for them to emulate.

John Horvat, American Thinker

Plucky Village Declares Independence To Avoid Being Overrun By Male Migrants

A tiny village is taking a stand against its own government as it faces the threat of being overrun by migrants.

The couple hundred residents of Piddington, Oxfordshire, in the United Kingdom, voted July 4 for independence against the United Kingdom in a bid against authorities who are seeking to flood the area with illegal male migrants. The vote to separate passed in an overwhelming 96 percent majority.

At the heart of the problem for Piddington is the Home Office’s (the UK equivalent of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security) June 26 decision to relocate almost 4,000 migrants to three rural former military bases. One of those bases — the Ministry of Defense Bicester — sits directly next to Piddington and has a fence that runs alongside many locals’ homes, one resident told GB News. The site also borders a playground for children and families created by the parish council.

An estimated 1,250 single adult male asylum seekers aged 18 to 65 are expected to be relocated to the Bicester base next to Piddington. This is over four times the population of the entire village.

The relocation of migrants is part of the British Labour Party’s efforts to end the temporary housing of illegals in hotels as they await case processing. The hotel system has sparked huge controversy and has cost British taxpayers billions of pounds, while contributing to housing shortages.

The Home Office plans to use the Bicester camp for a minimum of 10 years, according to a government fact sheet. The government says it will appoint a “specialist provider of asylum accommodation” to manage the camp and will provide 24/7 on-site security through “a provider of security services” and “CCTV monitoring and recording.”

Locals have expressed fear, however, that the sudden and overwhelming flood of single male migrants into the area will make the village unsafe for women and children.

Piddington resident Tim McNally, who chairs the village’s Parish Council, said his neighbors are distraught.

“[The camp] will just turn the village into a ghost town. It’ll just destroy the spirit of the village, and that’s how people feel absolutely trapped, stressed, concerned,” McNally told the Daily Caller.

“I’ve had men — grown men — crying to me because they’ve got young daughters of an age that for the next 10 years they’ll be young ladies,” McNally added. “One guy who’s got an 18-year-old said, ‘I will not let her go out. I will not let her leave the house alone.’”

Piddington — a village of just 150 homes — has no police force of its own. “We have no crime in this area,” McNally said. “There’s no police. There’s no need. The community is very tight. It’s very well connected.”

“There’s a lot of young people coming into the village, young families evolving, growing here now,” McNally added. “And they are absolutely beside themselves to determine what on earth to do.”

“We don’t have anything to defend ourselves with,” McNally said, “It’s against the law for us to carry a knife or have a gun.”

The government information page on the project reports that asylum seekers will undergo “mandatory security checks” before they reach the camp by “linking their biometric data to immigration, security, and criminality databases.”

But, as McNally observed, foreign criminal databases are not readily accessible, much less after Britain’s exit from the European Union in 2020. “They don’t have access to anything.”

“Only 10 days or 15 days before [the announcement],” McNally added, “I was listening in to BBC Radio Four. And they were interviewing […] the Home Office — these are the people who basically are responsible for managing these asylum seekers — and they were asking, how do they age-verify the people coming in? And [the Home Office] admitted they have no means to verify the age of any of these people.”

“They have no documentation,” McNally told the Caller. “There’s no database they can utilize. There is nothing they can do to verify who these people are by age.”

“If you can’t verify by age, what database can you review to link anyone together anyway? You can’t,” McNally said. “[The Home Office is] using the words to try and make [the camp] sound less risky than it is.”

But the migrant camp poses more threats to Piddington than just safety. McNally —who lives just a 10-minute walk from the base’s front gate — told the Caller it will take a serious toll on the financial stability of his neighbors.

“The values of their houses are virtually just dumped,” McNally said. “Even if they wanted to leave, some of them would have to pay money back to the bank to get out of the village, because no one is going to want to own their property in this village with 1,250 men having the freedom to run around as they wish.”


Lucy Spence, The Daily Caller

Trump: US elections are riddled with foreign and domestic fraud

It’s telling that several major networks, knowing what the speech would report, refused to carry it. Plus, the speech ended (I thought) weakly.

President Trump spoke to the nation last night about serious problems with American elections. You could watch the speech live on Fox News, Newsmax, C-SPAN, and PBS. ABC, NBC, and CNN refused to air the speech on their live broadcasts, while CBS and MSNBC managed to air just a little bit before abandoning it to spout their own opinions (including what they laughably call “fact checks”).

That’s the state of America today. It was a good speech but ended (I thought) weakly.

Had the networks (some of which still have a free gig on the public airways) run the speech, the American people would have been exposed to shocking information about our elections, which are being controlled, not by We, the People, but by foreign governments (especially China) and inside operators, and are generally deeply corrupt and mismanaged. You can watch the speech here and read the transcript here, but these are the core points (which came after Trump did a mini State of the Union intro about how well the U.S. is doing in 2026).

One. Beginning around 2020, China illegally acquired around 220 million American voter files, learning who voters were, their party affiliations, and their voting patterns. China’s goal was to prevent Trump’s reelection. Trump also alluded to, but did not dive into, the fact that China may have printed ballots for Biden.

Hearing all that, my first thought was that I bet China is kicking itself for having interfered in the 2020 election. Had Trump been reelected, he would have been an utterly ineffectual lame duck.

China’s short-term 2020 election victory had an unexpected outcome: In 2024, Trump came back loaded for bear, wise to Washington’s ways, and with a cabinet equally passionate about his goals—including pushing back against China on every non-military front.

Two. Government intelligence operatives were fully aware of China’s massive election actions, but suppressed or downplayed the information about foreign interference in an American election. The burn bags that didn’t burn provide hard proof. Trump cited communications that had government operatives explicitly discuss withholding information from Trump about foreign election interference.

Three. Those of us who worried about electronic voting machines were right to worry. In many states, those machines are wide open to manipulation. He specifically cited the then-Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s government as one that could, if it wished, affect vote outcomes by altering the machines.

Four. America’s voting rolls are filled with dead people and non-citizens. So far as we know, 278,000 non-citizens have registered in federal elections.

Five. Trump noted that mail-in voting is inherently corrupt and, as an example, cited California’s extremely suspicious 38-day vote count following its June 2 primaries. (Can you imagine waiting 38 days in November and December 2026 and, especially, 2028, for California to count its votes?)

Six. Election officials and agencies know about many of these problems, but routinely fail either to disclose or address them. One of the many failures is that states are not sharing voting rolls to identify people who, because of relocations, are registered in two or more states.

This was all important information that major networks, in the spirit of suppression, continued to suppress by refusing to air President Trump’s speech.

As for me, I was disappointed in how the speech ended. I believe that the Guaranty Clause of the U.S. Constitution requires emergency federal action when it’s proven that our election system is corrupted to the point at which our votes have become meaningless. That clause, which is founded in Article IV, Section 4, and applies generally to the whole of government, states that:

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

A “Republican Form of Government” is one that derives its authority from the people, reflecting their will through their votes. We now know that, thanks to massive foreign and domestic interference, our will is not being reflected through our votes.

I wanted Trump to issue an emergency executive order addressing at least some of these concerns. He didn’t. He did tell everyone that all the statements he made are supported by facts, and that all those facts can be found here. He also said that his government notified various state agencies about problems with their systems.

Finally, Trump urged people to get in contact with their representatives (people he’d just proven may not, in fact, be the People’s duly elected representatives) to urge them to pass the SAVE America Act. That’s weak sauce considering that he just identified a massive, unconstitutional emergency situation in America, with foreign election interference and officials in both states and the federal government covering up foreign interference and conniving to corrupt the process from within.

EXPLOSIVE: Massive Election Corruption Report Details 824 Findings Across 800 Pages of Search Warrants and Investigative Documents

A newly released 799-page report titled “An Attack Upon U.S Critical Infrastructure” details the 2020 election corruption and beyond.

It provides a list of 18 prioritized and recommended election investigations, along with 8 search warrants. Entities named include Runbeck Election Services, Elections Group LLC, The Office of Georgia SOS, Tyler Technologies, Associated Press, and many others.

All assertions in the report are drawn from forensic analyses, sworn legislative testimony, court filings, IG investigations, vendor invoices, open-source intelligence, government communications obtained through litigation and FOIA, and more.

The Full Report contains 9 sections. This is followed by “Appendix A,” which provides the detailed findings and sources. Also available is the shorter 10-page Executive Summary.

TGP reported on the Library of Evidence used for this report, which proves President Trump’s assertions that our elections can be stolen.

This new report documents 824 findings bearing directly on the security of the 2020 election. It covers the effects on 12 U.S. States and the activity from nine nations.

Of these findings, 553 are established facts, 155 are disputed facts, and 116 are reasonable, analytically supported inferences.

Patrick Colbeck, primary author and COO of the Election Crime Bureau, said: “The report is proof that the narrative ‘there is no evidence of election fraud’ is itself a deliberate fraud, as the report demonstrates.”

In other words, anyone who claims there is no evidence of 2020 election malfeasance is just not a credible person.

This report is organized by ten converging vectors, proving that malfeasance occurs in almost every aspect of our election system. In January 2017, our elections were deemed “critical infrastructure”.

They are one of the 16 sectors whose physical and virtual assets are so vital to the Nation that their incapacity or destruction would have a debilitating impact on national security, economic security, public health, and safety.

Mr. Colbeck stated: “The report has been shared with numerous DOJ and elected officials.”

TGP confirmed that detailed presentations were given to at least one Congressman, along with key election integrity groups.

According to Colbeck, the report has had “near-zero mainstream media coverage” even though it’s the most extensive election report ever produced.

Here’s an example from page 72:

3.2.5 – Remote Access Findings. Live absentee ballot processing was remotely taken over. The Election Management System was left on the internet during the count. On October 23, 2020, a Fulton County poll worker reported that the computers for absentee ballot processing had been remotely accessed. The remote party was in control and deleted data. In emails, the incident was documented by the Chief Investigator of the GA SOS Investigations Division, but no criminal referral followed.

These 799 pages are the foundation to justify rapid federal and state investigations. They also supply an evidentiary basis for identifying, prosecuting, and deterring anyone responsible.

Our failure to respond to these election manipulations and attacks invites repetition and jeopardizes our constitutional government.

The report highlights dozens of “Key Takeaways”, and other important “Observations”. We list several below.

KEY TAKEAWAY (Components)

“The machines contained Chinese components. The data center ran on Huawei. The code was maintained in Serbia. The poll worker files lived on a server in Beijing. The CIA analysts declined to report Chinese interference in writing, on the record, for political reasons. Iran was charged. The E.O. 13848 sanctions trigger was never pulled. By every measurable layer of the system, a foreign adversary had a path in. And the intelligence architecture built to close that path was deliberately left open.”

KEY TAKEAWAY (Certification)

Certification was not a checkpoint – it was a closing mechanism. In every decisive battleground state, officials certified results over missing records, statutory violations, mathematical impossibilities, and canvassers operating under duress. The last institutional brake on a defective election was never applied; it was bypassed, coerced, or falsified out of the way.

KEY TAKEAWAY (Challenges)

“They didn’t need to rig the count. They needed the pre-election challenge to be too early, the post-election challenge to be too late, the discovery request to be denied, the forensic sample to be too small, the protocol order to never arrive, and the attorney who kept filing to lose her license. By the time the public was told the courts found no evidence, the courts had made certain they never would.”

Section 2.3 discusses the 64 lawsuits. Plaintiffs couldn’t get records from government agencies or NGO’s. Judges evaluated evidence without ordering discovery, often because they found initial evidence (affidavits, expert reports) to be speculative or inadmissible hearsay. Judges just didn’t want election cases in their courtrooms.

Disposition of 64 lawsuits claiming election malfeasance.

REMOTE ACCESS

The Federal Government contracted with an NGO called the “Center For Internet Security” to secure our electronic voting systems – while we are told they are not connected to the Internet.

NGO FUNDING

“Private money selected the jurisdictions. Private operatives ran the operations. Private attorneys defended the officials. Private NGOs built the voter lists. By 2020, elections in key cities weren’t administered by the government — they were administered by a privately funded network that answered to its donors.”

RECORD DESTRUCTION

“Without the adjudication logs, you can’t know who changed the votes. Without the ballot images, you can’t verify the count. Without the EMS database, you can’t trace the chain of custody. Without the drop box videos, you can’t confirm the deliveries. Each record destroyed was a question that can never be answered. That may have been exactly the point.”

PRIVILEGED ACCESS

“In Michigan, only vendors could inspect the machines. In Wisconsin, only private operatives controlled the ballot room. In Georgia, only NGO volunteers had untrained access to the voter registration system. Across 2020, the people with the most access to your election were the people with the least accountability to you.”

As extensive as this list of findings may be, not all were released. Whistleblowers and other investigators are encouraged to share their findings with TGP or the Election Crime Bureau at nexus@electioncrimebureau.com.

Jim Hoft, Gateway Pundit