INFLUENCES ON US ELECTIONS NOVEMBER 5, 2024?
MISINFORMATION, DISINFORMATION, MONEY, OUTSIDE INFLUENCE
Explain, please. There are no good choices. The United States, unlike most countries, has only one political party. Yes, there are Democrats and yes, there are Republicans. However, when you analyze their stands and their policies and their “platforms”, they pretty much agree with one another. War in the Ukraine against the Russian Federation is a good thing. Zionist genocide in Occupied Palestine really means fighting Arab and Muslim extremism. The devastation of Lebanon is a boon to the world—“Israel” is fighting Islamic terrorism.
How did we get here? Every attempt to run an outsider for President has met with furious opposition—from the Established Party(ies?). Every attempt to run an outsider for President has met with furious opposition from the Mainstream Media. Remember Barry Goldwater’s campaign in 1964? “A choice, not an echo.” Or, Ross Perot in 1992, a straight-talking candidate who promised to "clean out the barn."? How about Ralph Nader, the social and political activist? He tried to become President in 1996. Democrats I know damned him for “being a spoiler”, drawing votes away from Democrat Al Gore and helping elect George W. Bush, the Republican.
Part of the problem is the obsession with change. People dislike having the same people or parties always in office. They want problems solved, outlooks changed, new policies put in place. As Carroll Quigley, one-time professor at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. wrote in his 1960s book Tragedy and Hope, people want to “throw the rascals out”. And, fortunately he noted, this happens every so often, but the two parties, the Permanent Ruling Party, really, have no real differences. Consequently, there is no change in programs.
Misinformation, Disinformation. Reading the Washington Post, or other major newspapers, or watching television, listening to the radio, either the principal networks or National Public Radio, we get the same “thought control”. Typical recent Post headlines are: State Dept. faces possible gutting in a Trump term; In Vegas, Democratic union workers go all in; Trump escalates attacks on Liz Cheney (daughter of war monger and former vice president Dick Cheney); Russia hones its meddling, aims to stoke U.S. disarray.
On November 3, two days before the election, the Post carried what should be amazing stories—but aren’t. The journal too often speaks for the federal government and the invisible Elites. Their goal is to tell you how to think and act—or you’re out of step with everyone else. The lead article was:
Post-vote chaos may embolden foreign actors with the subtitles Pentagon girds for preinaugural strife” and “Russia, Iran, China, N. Korea among potential threats’.
The secondary article had the caption: Watch list ’flags’ public workers for firing purge; subhead: Conservative group targets bureaucrats deemed hostile to Trump.
Bats Courtesy Kevin Barrett, Ph.D.
Bias? Prejudice? Unfounded opinion?
Oh, but it gets better (or worse, depending on your viewpoint).
In Washington State, according to the Post, governor, Jay Inslee (D) put the National Guard (successor to earlier eras’ militia) “on alert for any [electoral] unrest”. In 2020, this is the same State and same governor that allowed Antifa and other agents of unrest and insurrection to seize control of Seattle, population about 800,000. Then, nothing was done. Big change?
Most of the reportage is speculation, opinion masquerading as fact, or outright lies. According to an article produced by the Gallup Poll in 2022, ” Just 7% of Americans have "a great deal" of trust and confidence in the media, and 27% have "a fair amount." Meanwhile, 28% of U.S. adults say they do not have very much confidence and 38% have none at all in newspapers, TV and radio.”
Money. Certainly, is the root of all evil, at least in American politics. Look at the spending for political office on the national level; for 2024:
Total Cost of Election Congressional Races Presidential Race
$15,901,068,285 $10,286,346,287 $5,514,721,998
Look at the costs of federal elections in January through March in 2023:
Senator running for re-election: $11,400/day
Congressional contested race: $5,500/day
Typical House member running for re-election: $2,300
In the US, campaign finance is regulated by a series of laws, which aim to prevent corruption while promoting transparency. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) enforces these rules.
Individuals, organizations, and companies can contribute to political campaigns, but there are limits on how much they can give directly to candidates.
Individuals usually contribute the lion’s share of any given candidate’s campaign funds. Wealthier donors tend to give more. Legally, individuals can donate up to $3,300 per candidate, per election in the 2024 cycle.
Both parties have federal- and state-level committees that also raise money. Candidates can also self-fund, as Trump has partially done in the past.
There are ways to get around the contribution limits – political action committees (PACs) and super PACs, which play a monumental role in US elections. PACs pool contributions from members and donate them to campaigns, with limits of $5,000 per candidate per year. PACs often represent industries like oil or aerospace, or focus on issues like climate change or gun rights.
Super PACs, created after a 2010 Supreme Court ruling, are funded by individuals, unions, and corporations. Unlike PACs, they can donate unlimited amounts to independent organizations linked to a candidate, but cannot give to, or coordinate directly with, campaigns.
And that freedom allows the wealthy to pump as much money as they want to support their preferred candidate. So far, outside spending from these groups has totaled approximately $2.8bn since 2010, according to OpenSecrets, a nonpartisan group tracking money in politics. Much of that money funds advertising, mailings, canvassing, and online presence.
There is “hard money” and “soft money”. Hard Money is traditional, political spending. Soft Money is outside political spending. Outside spending — sometimes referred to as independent or non-coordinated spending — refers to political spending made by organizations and individuals other than candidate campaigns themselves.
Then there is “Dark Money”
“Dark money” refers to spending meant to influence political outcomes where the source of the money is not disclosed. Here’s how dark money makes its way into elections:
Politically active nonprofits such as 501(c)(4)s are generally under no legal obligation to disclose their donors even if they spend to influence elections. When they choose not to reveal their sources of funding, they are considered dark money groups.
Opaque nonprofits and shell companies may give unlimited amounts of money to super PACs. While super PACs are legally required to disclose their donors, some of these groups are effectively dark money outlets when the bulk of their funding cannot be traced back to the original donor.
This results in a government of the privileged, by the privileged, and for the privileged.
Outside Influence. Look no farther than the Zionist Entity, i.e. “Israel”. Ahead of 2024, AIPAC announced plans to invest $100 million through its PACs. This cycle, it has funded more than 80% of the 469 congressional races, with money reaching both Republicans and Democrats. AIPAC operates as an agent of a foreign body. It pays to remove American politicians “Israel” sees as opposing its policies. In 2024, this illegitimate organization removed two Democrats who opposed the Gaza Genocide: Jamaal Bowman (N.Y.) and Cori Bush (Mo.).
Although it acts as a foreign hand in U.S. politics, AIPAC has never been successfully prosecuted under Emmanuel Celler’s Foreign Agents Registration Act.
“Israel” has reached deep into the American media. Kevin Barrett, Ph.D., author, talk show host, and Zionist gadfly, has been repeatedly de-platformed by YouTube and other organizations. In a November 2, 2024 article on Substack , he has written about the “loss of over three-quarters of my income a few days ago when Stripe de-banked me. That means paid subscribers to this Substack are no longer paying. (Stripe is Substack’s only payment processor.)”
Kevin Barrett, Ph.D.
COMMENT.
The 2024 Election is a “competition” between two deplorables—and their backers in both branches of the Permanent Ruling Party. Both support the terrorist entity of “Israel”. Both make wild and unsubstantiated pronouncements about their future polices if elected. Both have engaged in and/or supported murders, war crimes, and human rights violations. For Donald Trump, it was the assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani as well as the attacks on Yemen on behalf of repressive Saudi Arabia. For Kamala Harris, who never won an electoral primary, it is her refusal to denounce “Israel” and end its American economic and military support.
People I know will not vote for either “choice”; instead, they are backing Jill Stein and her Green party (who get almost no media coverage). Others may support Cornel West, an American philosopher, theologian, political activist, politician, social critic, and public intellectual. He is running as an Independent.
Sam Husseini, the journalist, has proposed that people who plan to vote for Harris or Trump as the “lesser” of two Evils (horrid thought—they are both Evil), should pair their votes for one of the non-Establishment candidates. This would cancel support for the Evils and give strength to alternative parties. While it’s an interesting concept, I doubt that it will happen.
I personally fear that nothing good will come of this election. Fraud was evident in the 2020 polls. This time around, unattended ballot boxes have been burned, efforts to scrub illegal aliens from the voter rolls have been opposed, and in Erie, Pa., 14,000 voters didn’t get their mail-in ballots. I myself received two mail-in ballots for the District of Columbia! (I am an Independent and in D.C. 75% of the nearly 340,000 registered voters are Democrats.) In 2020, I was mysteriously removed from the rolls—but managed to re-register in person on Election Day.
In the end, we may “throw the rascals out”, but their policies will continue, as long as the money continues to flow.
J. Michael Springmann is an attorney, author, political commentator, and former diplomat, with postings to Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia. He previously authored, Visas for Al Qaeda: CIA Handouts That Rocked the World: An Insider’s View, recounting how the U.S. created and used Islamic Terrorism. Additionally, he penned Goodbye, Europe? Hello, Chaos? Merkel’s Migrant Bomb, an analysis of the alien wave sweeping the Continent. He currently practices law in the Washington D.C. Area. Internationally recognized as a knowledgeable pundit, he is a frequent commentator on Arab, Iranian, and Russian news programs.
Blacklisted by the US news media, he is also on the Ukraine’s “Enemies List”, having questioned, inter alia, that country’s refusal to honor the Minsk Accords and for stating that its government is Nazified.