Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: U.S. Politics  (Read 100044 times)

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #632 on: May 23, 2022, 01:54:20 PM »
Advertisement
Biden: US would intervene with military to defend Taiwan

President Joe Biden says the U.S. would intervene militarily if China were to invade Taiwan

TOKYO -- President Joe Biden said Monday that the U.S. would intervene militarily if China were to invade Taiwan, saying the burden to protect Taiwan is "even stronger' after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It was one of the most forceful presidential statements in support of self-governing in decades.

Biden, at a news conference in Tokyo, said “yes” when asked if he was willing to get involved militarily to defend Taiwan if China invaded. “That’s the commitment we made,” he added.

The U.S. traditionally has avoided making such an explicit security guarantee to Taiwan, with which it no longer has a mutual defense treaty, instead maintaining a policy of “strategic ambiguity" about how far it would be willing to go if China invaded. The 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, which has governed U.S. relations with the island, does not require the U.S. to step in militarily to defend Taiwan if China invades, but makes it American policy to ensure Taiwan has the resources to defend itself and to prevent any unilateral change of status in Taiwan by Beijing.

Biden's comments drew a sharp response from the mainland, which has claimed Taiwan to be a rogue province.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin expressed “strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition" to Biden's comments. “China has no room for compromise or concessions on issues involving China’s core interests such as sovereignty and territorial integrity."

He added, "China will take firm action to safeguard its sovereignty and security interests, and we will do what we say.”

A White House official said Biden’s comments did not reflect a policy shift.

Speaking alongside Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, Biden said any effort by China to use force against Taiwan would “just not be appropriate,” adding that it “will dislocate the entire region and be another action similar to what happened in Ukraine.”

China has stepped up its military provocations against democratic Taiwan in recent years aimed at intimidating it into accepting Beijing's demands to unify with the communist mainland.

“They’re already flirting with danger right now by flying so close and all the maneuvers that are undertaken,” Biden said of China.

Under the “one China” policy, the U.S. recognizes Beijing as the government of China and doesn’t have diplomatic relations with Taiwan. However, the U.S. maintains unofficial contacts including a de facto embassy in Taipei, the capital, and supplies military equipment for the island’s defense.

Biden said it is his “expectation” that China would not try to seize Taiwan by force, but he said that assessment “depends upon just how strong the world makes clear that that kind of action is going to result in long-term disapprobation by the rest of the community."

He added that deterring China from attacking Taiwan was one reason why it's important that Russian President Vladimir Putin "pay a dear price for his barbarism in Ukraine," lest China and other nations get the idea that such action is acceptable.

Fearing escalation with nuclear-armed Russia, Biden quickly ruled out putting U.S. forces into direct conflict with Russia, but he has shipped billions of dollars in U.S. military assistance that has helped Ukraine put up a stiffer-than-expected resistance to Russia’s onslaught.

Taipei cheered Biden's remarks, with Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Joanne Ou expressing “sincere welcome and gratitude” for the comments.

“The challenge posed by China to the security of the Taiwan Strait has drawn great concern in the international community,” said Ou. “Taiwan will continue to improve its self-defense capabilities, and deepen cooperation with the United States and Japan and other like-minded countries to jointly defend the security of the Taiwan Strait and the rules-based international order, while promoting peace, stability and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region.”

It's not the first time Biden has pledged to defend Taiwan against a Chinese attack, only for administration officials to later claim there had been no change to American policy. In a CNN town hall in October, Biden was asked about using the U.S. military to defend Taiwan and replied, “Yes, we have a commitment to do that."

Biden's comments came just before he formally launched a long-anticipated Indo-Pacific trade pact that excludes Taiwan.

White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan confirmed Sunday that Taiwan isn’t among the governments signed up for the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, which is meant to allow the U.S. to work more closely with key Asian economies on issues like supply chains, digital trade, clean energy and anticorruption.

Inclusion of Taiwan would have irked China.

Sullivan said the U.S. wants to deepen its economic partnership with Taiwan on a one-to-one basis.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/biden-us-intervene-military-defend-taiwan-84904398

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #632 on: May 23, 2022, 01:54:20 PM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #633 on: May 23, 2022, 02:04:56 PM »
Senate Republicans Want Your Cleaning Lady to Pay Income Tax, but Not FedEx

Dwindling revenues from corporate taxes are beggaring the Treasury, and the GOP doesn’t care.



Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen traveled to Poland this week to urge support for a 15 percent global minimum tax on corporate income. These negotiations are slow going, but the Poles will be pushovers compared to the United States Senate. The same Senate Republicans who wish to impose a minimum income tax on people refuse to impose one on corporations.

“All Americans should pay some income tax,” says Senator Rick Scott of Florida, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, in his Rescue America plan. In practice, that means someone making, for example, $30,000 annually should pay the IRS more than $1,000 in income tax. A thousand bucks is an awful lot of money to someone living on $30,000 a year. But it’s necessary for this person to pay something, Scott insists, so that he or she will “have skin in the game.”

It’s a matter of behavioral conditioning—Pavlov’s dogs, B.F. Skinner’s box, that sort of thing. Without skin in the game, the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal explained 20 years ago (“The Non-Taxpaying Class”), people who are too poor to pay income tax become “that much more detached from recognizing the costs of government.” (Never mind that our friend making $30,000 already pays $2,295 annually in Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax to pay for Social Security and Medicare.) Instead, this person thinks of the government merely as an automated teller machine that spits out food stamps and welfare checks.

Should all American corporations pay income tax, Senator Scott? They don’t right now. A report by the nonprofit Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy that is cited a lot by President Joe Biden identified 55 large corporations, more than 10 percent of the S&P 500, that paid no income tax in 2020. These included FedEx, Nike, and Archer Daniels Midland. A report by the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation that sampled tax returns from 50 large corporations covering the years 2014 to 2018 found the percentage that paid no income tax was more like 20 percent.

Applying Scott’s logic, and that of the Journal’s editorial page, FedEx, Nike, and Archer Daniels Midland don’t have skin in the game. Ten to 20 percent of the biggest corporations in America have become “that much more detached from recognizing the costs of government.” Instead, they think of government merely as an automated teller machine that spits out accelerated depreciation schedules and opportunity zone tax credits.

Yet Scott and the Senate GOP’s Rescue America plan make no mention of President Joe Biden’s proposed minimum income tax on corporations; the Journal’s editorial page fervently opposes it; and various Senate Republicans pledged to oppose it, too. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell called it a “red line.”

The ranking members of the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee, Representative Kevin Brady of Texas and Senator Mike Crapo of Idaho, wrote Yellen last June about the minimum corporate tax. “Other countries have shown that they will aggressively seek to gain market share and strip away our tax base,” they said. “The administration should not surrender jobs, growth, or tax revenues to other countries in order to advance a partisan tax increase agenda at home.”

That was grandstanding. As Brady and Crapo well know, the minimum corporate tax proposed by the Biden administration is a global minimum worked up by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to halt an international arms race of tax cutting. A corporate minimum tax is necessary precisely because tax havens are slashing tax rates to attract U.S. corporations. In 2017, President Donald Trump entered this game of limbo by dropping the top corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent.

Before we proceed, allow me to share a couple of charts from a 2020 report by Harvard economist Jason Furman for the Brookings Institution’s Hamilton Project.

The first chart shows revenue from the U.S. corporate income tax since 1930 as a percentage of gross domestic product. Note its downward slope. Corporate taxes, Furman writes, “are less than half their historic average.”



The second chart compares tax revenue from U.S. corporations, as a share of GDP, to that in other advanced industrial democracies. Even before the 2017 tax cut, the effective corporate tax rate in the U.S. was, when you figured in various exemptions and deductions, about the same as in other comparable nations. But as a share of GDP, it wasn’t about the same; it was way behind—indeed, one up from dead last, just ahead of Latvia.



Don’t let anybody tell you corporate taxes are high in the U.S. By historic standards and by international standards they are very, very low. As Scott would say (but doesn’t), corporations don’t have a lot of skin in the game.

Unlike Scott’s anxieties about the working poor who don’t pay income tax, the shortfall of corporate tax revenue is not an abstract concern. Low corporate tax revenue is a major reason why the U.S. Treasury is starved for cash. In 2018, Furman observed, overall tax revenue for the federal government was, omitting cyclical downturns, at a 50-year low relative to GDP. And that was before Congress spent $4 trillion on Covid relief (most of it on a bipartisan basis).

There are two reasons for the downward trend in corporate revenue. One is that tax havens like Bermuda and the Cayman Islands have much lower tax rates (or, in the case of the Caymans, no corporate income tax at all). Hence the OECD proposal for a 15 percent minimum corporate income tax. As Yellen’s Poland trip shows, there remain some obstacles abroad to implementing the minimum tax. But after the G-7 nations endorsed it last year, 130 nations, representing more than 90 percent of global GDP, signed on, including, in principle, Poland. Even the Caymans signed on! Congressional Republicans, by contrast, won’t endorse an international minimum even in principle.

The second reason for the downward trend is that tax laws, both here and abroad, make it laughably easy for corporations to lower their tax bills by allocating profits to foreign tax havens. Before the Trump tax cut, this practice cost the Treasury more than $100 billion annually, according to congressional testimony last year by Kimberly Clausen, deputy assistant secretary for tax analysis at the Treasury Department. The loss was less after the Trump tax cut, but only because the U.S. corporate tax rate was lower.

The 2017 tax cut included a couple of provisions intended to reduce profit-shifting, including a tax on intellectual property and other “intangible income” when it’s assigned to other countries. But the 2017 law also included a couple of other provisions that made profit-shifting easier. The net result, Clausen observed in her testimony, was that the share of U.S. corporate income in the seven biggest tax havens (Bermuda, the Caymans, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Singapore, and Switzerland) remained about the same after the 2017 law was enacted.

The OECD plan would go after the profit-shifting problem more aggressively, in part by shifting tax jurisdictions to places where customers actually reside, which is mostly in wealthier nations with higher corporate tax rates. Because it’s more complicated, the details of the profit-shifting proposal are taking longer to produce. They will also be harder to implement, because they’ll require alterations to various existing international treaties.

In the U.S., that poses the biggest obstacle. At least in theory, the 15 percent minimum corporate tax can be folded into a reconciliation bill—it was included, for instance, in the Build Back Better bill—and therefore would require only 51 votes in the Senate. But the profit-shifting changes alter U.S. treaties and therefore require 67 votes in the Senate.

Don’t Republicans want corporations to pay their fair share? Not on your life. If anything, Republican opposition is hardening. “I certainly hope that the deal does not get implemented by the U.S.,” Crapo told Bloomberg reporter Laura Davison on Wednesday. “That would be a terrible mistake.” Corporations don’t want to pay a minimum income tax, and therefore Senate Republicans (and, to be fair, a few Democrats) don’t want to impose one. I doubt your cleaning lady wants to pay a minimum income tax, either. But as far as Senate Republicans are concerned, she’ll just have to suck it up.

https://newrepublic.com/article/166537/senate-republicans-corporate-taxes-dwindling

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #634 on: May 23, 2022, 02:47:38 PM »
President Biden @POTUS

Today I toured the Air Operations Center’s Combat Operations Floor at Osan Air Base and met with the service members who represent the commitment U.S.-ROK have made to each other and the strength of our alliance.



Today, I had the great honor of meeting service members and military families at Osan Air Base. They represent the commitment our two countries made to each other and to the strength of the U.S.-ROK alliance





Thank you to the American troops at Osan Air Base. Thank you for what you do to defend our country and our ally, and for representing our country so very well.

And to the Korean forces, thank you for your service, and for having our backs just as we have yours.




https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1528458275230040064

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #634 on: May 23, 2022, 02:47:38 PM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #635 on: May 24, 2022, 12:50:14 PM »
House ethics panel to investigate GOP Rep. Madison Cawthorn over cryptocurrency

The House Ethics Committee has voted unanimously to launch an investigation into Rep. Madison Cawthorn for his connection to an alleged cryptocurrency scam and a possible inappropriate relationship with a member of his staff.

The scandal-prone Cawthorn (R-NC), who lost his renomination bid earlier this month, has been accused of insider trading related to the Let's Go Brandon cryptocurrency, a Washington Examiner investigation revealed.

"Pursuant to the Committee’s action, the Investigative Subcommittee shall have jurisdiction to determine whether Representative Madison Cawthorn may have: improperly promoted a cryptocurrency in which he may have had an undisclosed financial interest, and engaged in an improper relationship with an individual employed on his congressional staff," the committee said in a press release.

Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX) will oversee the subcommittee, and the statement notes that an investigation is not a declaration of guilt.

Jordan Libowitz, the communications director for the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, hailed the committee's decision to investigate Cawthorn's promotion and reported financial interest in the meme cryptocurrency but noted that the committee doesn't have much time to complete its inquiry following Cawthorn's primary defeat last week to North Carolina state Sen. Chuck Edwards.

"It's good that House Ethics will be investigating this, Libowitz told the Washington Examiner. "However, their jurisdiction is limited to Cawthorn's time in Congress, so we hope that they are able to complete their investigation before his term is up and they are forced to drop the matter."

Dylan Hedtler-Gaudette, the government affairs manager for the Project on Government Oversight, noted the significance of the committee's unanimous vote to launch an investigation into Cawthorn.

"There is substantial reason to believe that Rep. Cawthorn may have committed insider trading or some other manner of impropriety," Hedtler-Gaudette told the Washington Examiner. "The natural next step is an official investigation, and the findings of that investigation will be important to the effort to prevent this kind of misconduct in the future. The unanimous, bipartisan vote from the committee underscores the seriousness of these allegations, and that is encouraging from the standpoint of Congress wanting to get its house in order."

The announcement comes just weeks after Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) cited the Washington Examiner's reporting and called on the House Ethics Committee to investigate allegations that Cawthorn engaged in an insider trading scheme with LGBCoin.

Sen Thom Tillis - "Insider trading by a member of Congress is a serious betrayal of their oath, and Congressman Cawthorn owes North Carolinians an explanation. There needs to be a thorough and bipartisan inquiry into the matter by the House Ethics Committee."

Multiple government watchdog groups previously told the Washington Examiner that Cawthorn may have implicated himself in an insider trading scheme when he wrote: "LGB legends ... Tomorrow we go to the moon!" in response to a Dec. 29 Instagram picture of himself posing with the meme coin's ringleader, James Koutoulas.

The next day, Koutoulas was featured in a statement from NASCAR driver Brandon Brown announcing that the coin would be the primary sponsor of his 2022 season, causing the cryptocurrency's value to spike by 75%.

LGBCoin is a reference to the "Let's go Brandon" chant mocking President Joe Biden.

Koutoulas revealed in response to the Washington Examiner's reporting that Cawthorn last traded the coin three weeks before the announcement was made.

But Cawthorn has never filed any financial disclosures reporting his purchase of LGBCoin, which members of congress are required to do whenever they purchase more than $1,000 of any cryptocurrency.

Both Cawthorn and Koutoulas later said knowledge of LGBCoin's pending deal with Brown was all public knowledge in early December when the lawmaker reportedly traded the coin.

But neither Cawthorn nor Koutoulas were able to provide any records to the Washington Examiner showing that the deal was public knowledge in early December.

Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen, previously told the Washington Examiner that Koutoulas's statement that Cawthorn traded the meme coin before it struck its deal with Brown strengthened his suspicions that Cawthorn had insider knowledge at the time of his trade.

"The new information that Madison Cawthorn did indeed buy up LGBCoin prior to the public announcement of the NASCAR endorsement adds greater evidence to the suspicions of Cawthorn violating the insider trading laws," Holman said. "If Cawthorn knew of the nonpublic material information that would radically boost the value of the cryptocurrency, and purchased LGBCoin with that knowledge, this would likely constitute insider trading."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/house-ethics-panel-to-investigate-gop-rep-madison-cawthorn-over-cryptocurrency

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #636 on: May 24, 2022, 12:57:20 PM »
Court upholds the block on Florida's social media 'censorship' law

The 11th Circuit court found that social media companies "are 'private actors' whose rights the First Amendment protects."


Gov. Ron DeSantis signed Florida's social media bill into law last year, before it was almost immediately blocked.

As the Supreme Court weighs whether to block Texas' social media "censorship" law, a court of appeals has decided to uphold the injunction on a similar Florida law, finding that social media companies "are 'private actors' whose rights the First Amendment protects."

The 11th Circuit ruling comes in response to a lawsuit brought by NetChoice and CCIA, the same trade groups who filed an emergency application with Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito after a similar Texas social media law went into effect earlier this month. The court found that Florida's argument that social media giants are not entitled to First Amendment rights doesn't hold up.

"Not in their wildest dreams could anyone in the Founding generation have imagined Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, or TikTok," the court wrote in its opinion. "But 'whatever the challenges of applying the Constitution to ever-advancing technology, the basic principles of freedom of speech and the press, like the First Amendment’s command, do not vary when a new and different medium for communication appears.'”

The opinion stands in stark contrast to the Fifth Circuit's decision to lift an injunction on Texas' law earlier this month without so much as a sentence of explanation. That decision created potentially catastrophic consequences for the tech industry, leading NetChoice and CCIA to file an emergency application asking the Supreme Court to stay the Fifth Circuit's decision. The Supreme Court has yet to issue its decision, which could come any day now.

The 11th Circuit's decision on the Florida law upheld an injunction on parts of the law that would prohibit companies from "deplatforming" political candidates, prioritizing or deprioritizing posts "by or about" political candidates and removing any content by a "journalistic enterprise." It also blocks provisions that require companies to provide a “thorough rationale” for every content moderation decision.

But the court did allow the other disclosure provisions in the law — which includes having clear content standards and allowing users to access their data — to stand, finding that they are "far less burdensome" and unlikely to violate the First Amendment.

Whatever the Supreme Court decides with regard to the emergency application in Texas, the Florida decision tees up a possible circuit split in the event that the Texas law, which is still awaiting appeal, is upheld. That could create an opportunity for the Supreme Court to decide once and for all whether social media platforms enjoy First Amendment rights or whether they should be, as Justice Clarence Thomas has suggested, considered common carriers of a new age.

The tech groups behind both lawsuits were encouraged by the Florida decision and what it could mean for the Supreme Court's forthcoming decision. “The First Amendment protects platforms and their right to moderate content as they see fit—and the government can’t force them to host content they don’t want," NetChoice Vice President Carl Szabo said in a statement. “This makes it even more likely that the US Supreme Court will overturn the 5th Circuit’s split decision on the similar Texas law.”

https://www.protocol.com/bulletins/florida-social-media-law-block

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #636 on: May 24, 2022, 12:57:20 PM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #637 on: May 24, 2022, 01:14:45 PM »
President Biden @POTUS

I had a very productive three days in the Republic of Korea. Looking forward to what we will accomplish in Tokyo next.




It was an honor to meet with Emperor Naruhito yesterday at the Imperial Palace in Tokyo. The strong relationship between our two nations is anchored by our people-to-people ties and I look forward to building on that foundation during my time here in Japan.




The U.S.-Japan alliance is the cornerstone of peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region — and our relationship is stronger than ever before. I met with Prime Minister Kishida to deepen our cooperation on security, emerging technologies, clean energy, and more.






Yesterday, I met with family members of Japanese citizens who were abducted by North Korea several decades ago. Their stories were heartbreaking, and I call on North Korea to right this historic wrong and provide a full accounting of the 12 Japanese nationals who remain missing.



https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1528877655789117441

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #638 on: May 24, 2022, 01:47:44 PM »
David Perdue attacks Stacey Abrams: 'She is demeaning her own race'



Former Sen. David Perdue, a Republican candidate for governor in Georgia, accused Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams of "demeaning her own race" because she had suggested a plan for creating higher-paying jobs.

Perdue made the remarks while appearing at a campaign stop in Georgia on Monday afternoon.

"Did y'all see what Stacey said this weekend?" he asked the crowd. "She said that Georgia is the worst place in the country to live. Hey, she ain't from here. Let her go back where she came from if she doesn't like it here."

"The only thing she wants is to be president of the United States," he continued. "When she told Black farmers, you don't need to be on the farm. And she told Black workers in hospitality and all this, you don't need to be -- she is demeaning her own race when it comes to that."

Perdue added: "I am really over this. She should never be considered material for governor of any state, much less our state, where she hates to live."

Perdue was most likely referring to remarks Abrams made about agricultural work in 2018. Abrams later clarified that she was "the only candidate with detailed plans to invest in rural Georgia by creating good-paying jobs, expanding access to broadband, and investing in rural educators and students."

Watch the video below from John Fredericks Radio Network:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1528848054916468736


Trump-backed candidate sounded ‘foghorn’ of racism after getting endorsement from ‘low-energy Don’

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough accused David Perdue of sounding a "foghorn" of racist rhetoric in the closing days of his Georgia gubernatorial campaign.

The "Morning Joe" host was disgusted by the former GOP senator, who has been endorsed by former President Donald Trump, after he hurled a litany of racist attacks against Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams over the weekend.

"I don't know where to start with that," Scarborough said. "No endorsement from low-energy Don is going to erase all the things that happened there. He got replacement theory in there, the fascist refrain of, 'Go back to where you came from,' then you have an old, white millionaire being indignant that Black people might, quote, 'get off the farm.'"

"This is just, this is, this is not a dog whistle, this is, like, a foghorn blaring," he added. "And it's a foghorn through a megaphone, I guess. Again, even an endorsement from low-energy Don is not going to erase the horrors of this."


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #638 on: May 24, 2022, 01:47:44 PM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #639 on: May 24, 2022, 02:52:59 PM »
McCormick sues over mail-in ballot procedures amid close GOP Senate fight with Oz

U.S. Senate candidate David McCormick has filed a lawsuit in a Pennsylvania court to compel the counting of Republican mail-in ballots submitted without a handwritten date on the outside envelope in a bid to close the gap with primary opponent Dr. Mehmet Oz.

The lawsuit, filed late Monday in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, asks the state to force all 67 counties' boards of elections to count Republican mail-in ballots received on time but without a handwritten date on the outside envelope, as mandated by the statute. McCormick campaign lawyers are basing their case on a fresh decision by a federal appellate court that ruled such ballots should be counted in a dispute over a Pennsylvania election in 2021.

"Both the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit have held that mail-in ballots should not be disqualified simply because the voters failed to hand write a date on the exterior mailing envelope of their ballots,” McCormick campaign Chief Legal Counsel Chuck Cooper said in a statement provided to the Washington Examiner.

“Because all ballots are time-stamped by the County Boards of Elections on receipt, a voter's handwritten date is meaningless,” he added. “All timely ballots of qualified Republican voters should be counted."

Oz led McCormick by .08 percentage points with most precincts reporting as ballots continued to be counted six days after the primary election. But McCormick says that he believes he won the nomination and insists he will overtake Oz once remaining Republican mail-in ballots are tallied. With some Election Day votes and a sizable number of mail-in ballots and overseas military ballots left to count, McCormick’s claims are viable.

Going to court, however, presents a political risk for McCormick, at least in the court of Republican public opinion.

Former President Donald Trump, who endorsed Oz, is critical of mail-in ballots generally, as well as lawsuits filed to force states and municipalities to count votes in ways not expressly permitted by state law. Grassroots conservatives have historically opposed court-ordered rules changes but not necessarily mail-in balloting. But haranguing by Trump has made Republican voters suspicious of the latter and even more troubled by the former.

The McCormick campaign believes its lawsuit presents minimal risk because the goal here, unlike legal wrangling in the 2020 presidential contest, is simply to ensure that all Republican voters have their ballots counted.

“Every Republican primary vote should be counted, including the votes of Pennsylvania’s active-duty military members who risk their lives to defend our constitutional right to vote. When every Republican vote is counted, Dave looks forward to uniting the party and defeating socialist John Fetterman in the fall,” said McCormick campaign spokeswoman Jess Szymanski.

The Oz campaign has dismissed McCormick’s optimism and said mail-in ballots would not change the outcome of this contest, which is likely headed for a recount. Perhaps anticipating Monday’s legal action by McCormick, the Oz campaign issued a preemptive statement criticizing lawsuits that might seek to include the counting of excluded mail-in ballots.

“David McCormick has been a formidable opponent, but it is becoming obvious that he is likely going to come up short to Dr. Mehmet Oz. Unfortunately, the McCormick legal team is following the Democrats’ playbook, a tactic that could have long-term harmful consequences for elections in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,” Oz campaign manager Casey Contres said.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/mccormick-sues-over-mail-in-ballot-procedures-amid-close-gop-senate-fight-with-oz