Congresswoman Marcia Fudge Asked for Leniency for Friend Charged With Spousal Abuse Who Later Murdered His Wife

This is going to be a problem for Marcia Fudge as she seeks to potentially challenge Nancy Pelosi for Speaker.

Fudge wrote a letter to a prosecutor in support of her friend, Lance Mason. Mason, at the time, was charged with beating his wife. “I commend Lance for immediately recognizing that he needed help and entered counseling,” she wrote. “The Lance T. Mason I know is a kind, intelligent man and loyal friend. The Lance T. Mason I know is an advocate for the people of his community,” she continued.

According to the New York Times, Mason served “nine months in prison for brutally beating his wife in 2014 in front of their children, punching her 20 times and fracturing a bone in her face

Lance T. Mason murdered his estranged wife in front of his kids this past Saturday.

I’ve Changed My Mind on Third Parties and a 2020 Primary Challenge

I want to be careful here. I am not endorsing the concept. But I have reconsidered my flat opposition to both the creation of a third party and a 2020 Presidential primary challenge. I think neither would be successful, but as I recently pointed out to someone, had John C. Frémont not run as a Republican in 1856, there would probably be no Lincoln in 1860.

For the first time, I think I finally see a path forward for a third party in the United States, but it may run through the 2020 Republican primaries.

If you pay attention in Florida, Senator-elect (that sounds awesome to write) Rick Scott got 45% of the Hispanic vote. Brian Kemp, the Governor-elect in Georgia, got 38% of the Hispanic vote in Georgia. In fact, Republicans did far better with the Hispanic vote than the media would have anyone believe is possible.

Across the country, another notable data point is that Republicans this year, without Trump on the ballot, actually increased their share of the vote among black voters. Most notably, the share of the vote of black men and Hispanic men increased for the GOP. The trend away from the Democrats by minority voters is almost entirely because of cultural issues. The Democrats’ growing hostility to faith, conservative social values, etc. is a real Achilles heel for the party with minority voters, particularly Hispanic voters.

Concurrent to that, the white suburbs fled the GOP. High income white voters in the suburbs who have been reliably Republican have had enough of President Trump. Combine white suburban voters with black and Hispanic voters who will not go to the GOP because of Trump, but no longer feel at home in the Democratic Party, and there appears to be real room for a third party in the country now — one that is viable unlike the Libertarians or Green parties.

I suspect this all runs through the GOP, however. Put up someone in the 2020 Republican Presidential primary against Donald Trump running on these sorts of themes and the person probably cannot win, but probably could start a third party movement as a sizable, though not a majority portion of Republicans tired of President Trump leave their political home and make it an acceptable place for black and Hispanic voters.

The GOP would become a mostly white rural party. The Democrats would become a mostly wealthy, urban white party. This new party, call it the Federalists, would be a coalition of former Republicans and minority Democrats with a healthy addition of evangelicals all of whom think the two parties have failed the country.

Again, I do not think such a pivot would be successful in 2020. I also think it would probably lead to President Trump’s defeat, thereby making remaining Republican bitter towards the effort. But the data from the midterms shows pretty clearly the suburban Republicans and the socially conservative minority Democrats are all ready for a new political home. It would not be an immediate successful enterprise, but could potentially sustain itself so long as it makes it a party of ideas, and not one man’s enterprise like the Reform Party of Ross Perot.

For those of us who are fiscally conservative, we’d also have to get used to the idea that this would not be a small government party, per se. But it could no doubt position itself as a fiscally responsible, free market party, which neither of the existing parties are.

I am pretty sure I would not support the effort. And I have said repeatedly I think the GOP is Trump’s for the time being and there is no reason for a primary challenge. But the midterm data all very compelling suggest if someone wanted to try a go at resetting the American political coalitions, now would be the time.

The Facts Matter. Democrats Got Them Wrong.

This is a must read from the Weekly Standard on Stacey Abrams’ concession speech this past Friday. It is stunning to me how many Democrats and their friends in the media got basic facts wrong in Georgia.

Abrams and her allies point out that large numbers of people have been removed from voter rolls—1.5 million Georgians since 2012—but their contention that Kemp “purged” these names as secretary of state is false. The state’s “Use It or Lose It” law, passed in 1997 by a Democratic legislature and signed by Democratic governor Zell Miller, requires that voters who don’t vote or otherwise respond to requests from local voting offices to update their registration status be deemed inactive. This ensures that people who’ve died or moved away can no longer “vote” in state elections—i.e. that their identities can’t be used for untoward electoral purposes.

The Abrams campaign alleges that the number of voters purged spiked in 2017, when 107,000 voters were declared inactive. But the secretary of state’s office points out that the biannual voter-roll maintenance didn’t take place in 2015 owing to a legal challenge and so there was an unusually high number last year.

$10.00

If everyone reading this right now contributed just $10.00, we could operate the Resurgent for the next year and then some. Not everyone will do so. But I hope you might consider it. The contribution link is here.

Here’s what we are doing in the next year. We will be:

  • launching our new site just after Christmas along with a rebranding.
  • starting a new national radio program and podcast.
  • holding the next Resurgent Gathering in Atlanta in August.
  • providing new tools to connect our readers and listeners with candidates and campaigns in the real world.
  • expanding existing activist tools to connect you to policy makers about legislative initiatives at the state and federal level.

But for all these things, we need your help.

For example, we need $11,000.00 for the redesign. We need $5500.00 for some hardware purchases related to the radio and podcast production. Our activism package alone costs $8400.00. These costs add up and we are dependent on the generosity of our readers to help.

If everyone contributed just $10.00, we could could fund all of this, our payroll costs, etc. for more than a year. If you are willing to be one of those people who help, please go here.

Stacey Abrams Plans to Ask a Court to Throw Out the Election Results

UPDATED: Recognizing the burden and near impossibility, Abrams this evening said she would not file this lawsuit. Instead, she will start a new group and file a separate lawsuit seeking to change Georgia’s voting laws. She has now acknowledged her defeat.


It is a highly unusual move. Stacey Abrams has fallen short of 17,594 votes she needs to make it into a runoff with Brian Kemp and has fallen short of the 54,801 votes she would need to win out right. So Abrams’ campaign intends to file a lawsuit to have the entire election thrown out and started over.

This is unheard of at the state level and will probably be swiftly kicked out of court for a variety of reasons.
The Abrams campaign is relying on a statute that says a new election can occur for “misconduct, fraud or irregularities … sufficient to change or place in doubt the results.” Case law in Georgia does not support her claim. I have actually defended elections in Georgia under this standard and it is extremely difficult for Abrams to meet.

The reason it is extremely difficult for Abrams to meet is because Georgia and federal case law presume no election is run smoothly. Every single election has problems. On top of that, in Georgia each county conducts its own elections. The Secretary of State of Georgia does not actually conduct the elections unlike the Abrams claim. Technically, Abrams will need to show flaws in each county, not just cumulatively, because she is dealing with 159 county boards of elections. Continue reading

The Real Reason Stacey Abrams Won’t Concede

Stacey Abrams have refused to concede the Governor’s race. Each time counties certify their results, Abrams seeks out a federal judge to help her move the goal posts. There are around 8,000 provisional ballots to be counted and Abrams would need over 18,000 votes to get into a runoff.

Abrams is now asking a federal judge to order counties to count previously rejected provisional ballots that were rejected for one of three reasons. First, some voters turned out not to be registered to vote. Second, some voters turned out not to be registered to vote in particular counties. Third, some voters showed up without photo identification and then failed to provide their identification within a seventy-two hour window after the election.

There is well-settled legal precedent that the first two groups do not have to be counted and a federal judge cannot now revise the rules of the election, though she might try. The third ground is also dubious considering the voters had three days to provide their identification. But Abrams wants all those votes counted. She wants the rules changed after the election to hand her the election. None of this, however, is about her race. Brian Kemp is the Governor-elect unless Abrams can convince an Obama appointed federal judge to now change the rules of the election after it has concluded. Continue reading

Now That Democrats Retook The House, They Aren’t Shy About Pushing Gun Control.

Any gun control effort will thankfully die in the GOP-control U.S. Senate and not be signed into law by President Trump.

Since winning the House of Representatives, Democrats have already pledged on proposing tough gun control laws — especially in wake of the tragic shooting in Thousand Oaks, CA.

 

When appearing on CNN with Chris Cuomo, Pelosi was quoted in saying the following about this “top-priority” come January:

 

“There is bipartisan legislation to have common sense background checks to prevent guns going into the wrong hands,” the California Democrat told CNN’s Chris Cuomo Thursday night.

That means concealed carry reciprocity and the Hearing Protection Act will be dead-on-arrival, per the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

 

During this past midterm election, two things should be noted.

 

First, several prominent A-rated NRA lawmakers were defeated by virulently anti-gun candidates, who flipped many Republican seats Democrat. This was especially seen with the defeat of Rep. Culbertson in Texas, Mike Coffman in Colorado, and Karen Handel in Georgia.

 

Second, gun control groups spent far more than pro-gun, pro-Second Amendment groups. Two gun control groups Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety and Gabby Giffords’ Americans for Responsible Solutions cumulatively spent $37 million combined in the 2018 elections. Alternatively, gun rights groups spent only $20 million this past election cycle. Fortune Magazine has the figure at $11 million for gun control groups, $2 million more than pro-Second Amendment groups.

 

There is some good news, however. Democrats may flex their gun control muscle in the House but their efforts will die in the U.S. Senate, which is controlled by Republicans. You need both chambers of Congress to pass legislation which would then go on to be signed by President Trump. Trump has pledged and reiterated that he won’t support any gun control legislation or sign it into law.

 

There are so-called moderate Democrats who said they will support common sense gun control legislation. If our worst fears become true, these people must be held accountable and their votes and statements must be recorded.

 

We will keep a watchful eye on anti-gun extremists and those who pose as moderates here at The Resurgent.

Rubio Calls Out Democrat Vote Tactics in Florida

Another election year brings another vote count controversy in Florida. Democrats are trying to wring every vote they can from every corner and eke out a win by changing the rules in the middle of the game (sound familiar, Georgia?).

GOP Senator Marco Rubio is calling out these tactics with an apt metaphor from the world of sports.

Rubio has a point. These legal challenges happening in Florida – and other states – are like referees enacting rule changes in the middle of a football game to give an advantage to one team over the other.

He goes on:

Ever since the 2000 presidential election, the Democrats have made their primary strategy out of something like, “if we don’t win, we’ll pitch a fit and try to change the rules to benefit us.” We saw it with Al Gore and then with Al Franken. Now we’re seeing it with Andrew Gillum and Bill Nelson in Florida and Stacey Abrams in Georgia.

These tactics are underhanded (even though they’re happening out in the open) and are intended to result in a win for the Democrats. We wouldn’t tolerate mid-game rule changes in the NFL or the SEC, so why should we allow them to happen in the fights that really matter?

The Democrats are dragging out the certification of a legal election in order to scramble to find more votes. We’ve let them get away with these shenanigans for nearly two decades now. It’s time that it stops. The GOP and others who truly believe in justice and fairness need to stand up and demand that the lawyering comes to an end and that the Democrats accept the results of the elections.