While top cabinet positions are appointed based on merit, it is common practice for the president to appoint large donors to lesser roles in the administration. Louis DeJoy is one such appointee.  President Trump made the Republican fundraiser from North Carolina the new Postmaster General. The Postmaster General leads the United States Postal Service. Under Dejoy’s watch, the Postal Service was embroiled in scandal for its handling of the 2020 elections. The agency was criticized for unacceptable delays at a time when many people were using mail in ballots to vote. Now, new allegations have come to light against Dejoy himself. A bombshell report from the Washington Post exposed Dejoy for demanding employees of his company, New Breed Logistics, donate to Republican candidates of his choosing in violation of federal election laws. Dejoy allegedly reimbursed the employees for their expenses by issuing them a bonus in the amount of their donation.  This process is known as “straw donations,” where an individual pays another to donate to a political campaign. While the law restricts people from donating more than $2,800 to any one candidate, unscrupulous individuals use straw donations to circumvent that limit. The practice is prohibited by the Federal Election Commission (FEC). If the allegations are true, Dejoy also violated additional rules by using his company to make political donations. Companies are allowed to donate to Political Action Committees (PAC), but not to individual politicians. Conservative political commentator Dinesh D’Souza was sentenced in 2014 to five years of felony probation for a similar scheme in New York. He was later pardoned by President Trump, who said D’Souza was “treated very unfairly by our government.“ Whether Dejoy will be prosecuted remains to be seen, but is unlikely, considering that the FEC currently does not have enough members to meet the required four-person quorum. The agency traditionally has three Democrat commissioners and three Republicans, but gridlock in Congress has meant there are only three members total. As the organization is the only agency allowed to rule on election law violations, Dejoy will be off the hook at least until another commissioner is confirmed by the Senate. The statute of limitations is another obstacle preventing Dejoy from being held accountable. The statute of limitations, which is five years in this case, regulates the time between when an offense happened and when charges are brought. Dejoy’s actions are alleged to have occurred between 2000 and 2014, meaning that Dejoy cannot be issued a fine. However, he still could be prosecuted in criminal court if the allegations against him are proven beyond a reasonable doubt. President Trump weighed in on the situation, saying Dejoy should be fired if he did in fact engage in straw donations. President-elect Joe Biden also criticized Dejoy, but will have to keep him as Postmaster General, as the president is unable to remove someone from that position. That power lies in a six-member USPS Board of Governors, all of whom were Trump appointees. They are unlikely to remove Dejoy, a staunch Republican, unless further evidence comes to light implicating him in the scandal.Photo Creator: Erin Scott | Credit: REUTERS OPINION Dear Friends, It is necessary for me to state that from the very beginning, even during the primaries, I was totally on board with President Donald Trump. He offered prosperity like America has never seen before. He lowered taxes, he did away with obstructive regulations that allowed businesses to prosper, he corrected the trade deficit, and he lowered unemployment to the best it has been in many years. America’s middle class began to move upwards like never before. Indeed, prosperity reigned. However, from the very beginning the Democrats with the help of the Obama administration, the FBI, the CIA, and corrupt legislative operatives created the Russian hoax, and the Ukrainian debacle-leading to a vicious and wrongful impeachment of the President! Then came the Corona Chinese Virus that Communist China unloaded on the United States, killing 350,000 people in the US alone. Why did Trump lose the election? Here are the reasons and it is mind-boggling. First of all, Donald Trump is no politician; he is a New Yorker, and worked in his father’s construction business. He is crude, rude, and sometimes says things that infuriate people. Many people on both sides of the aisle find him obnoxious and hated him from the get-go. The “Never Trumpers” were a partial factor in the loss! On the other hand, having met him on several social occasions at Mar-a-Lago, I found him to be extremely charming, interesting, and humorous. I will quote a good friend of mine, a beautiful woman, who worked for him for 10 years had this to say about The Donald, “Trump was very professional, extremely brilliant and innovative, never hit on me, however sometimes when things didn’t go his way, he had the emotional stability of a 12-year-old.” Isn’t that interesting, when you look back at the first debate where Trump seemed out of control? Then his behavior would again revert back to brilliance and charm. No doubt, he was the best President in my lifetime, yet his demeanor has always worried me. Another issue that has me upset about my President is the fact that he created expectations for the million people that came to Washington DC to support him, that VP Mike Pence could and should send Electors back to their various State Legislatures, thus overturning the election. Folks, there is absolutely no way Mike Pence had the constitutional authority to do what the President asked him to do. Prior to the President’s speech, Pence actually told the President what he had to legally do and Trump excited the crowd anyway. Pence was a loyal partner with Donald Trump in every way, shape, and form! No way did this man of great character and integrity deserve the bad rap he has been given. To Trump’s credit, he did not urge or instigate the thousands of people there to create havoc in the Capitol Building. To blame him for the actions of a few nut cases, who have destroyed so many things, killing a Capitol Police officer, and devastating Trump’s future and that of our conservative credibility is unreasonable to the point of absurdity. To invade the sacred halls of the Capitol Building, vandalizing, terrifying  legislators, and actually killing a cop has put us back in a significant way! Why did the people come to DC to protest? The reason why is the number one reason Trump lost—election fraud! Folks, there is no doubt in my mind that millions of votes were illegally cast, altered, and double-voted. The evidence was overwhelming with thousands of documented and certified witnesses, including video evidence, exclusions of legal Republican witnesses, and illegal voting through wrongful voting-law changes, contrary to various state laws. Secretaries of State cannot arbitrarily change the rules. It must be done through the legislature. There were enough votes compromised, that Trump actually won the election! However, much to my amazement and chagrin, Trump couldn’t find a lawyer that could write a proper legal brief to actually get the cases heard in Federal Court! To me and to millions of others, we feel that we were robbed. We have been violated! That is why the people demonstrated in DC. My God, why did they have to go inside the Capitol Building? How would that be productive or positive? They killed a cop—Party over! Handled differently, the Republicans take back the house in 2022 and Trump is in position to win the Presidential election in 2024—not now folks! So now, the entire country is a virtual powder keg. There are 75 million pissed off Trump voters. It appears we are already losing our freedoms, especially the 1^st amendment, our right to free speech! Speech is free as long as you agree with the left. When you don’t, it is censored, jobs are lost, and conservatives are discriminated against! Soon they will be coming for your guns. Now, new articles of Impeachment are being drawn up by Nancy Pelosi to take out Trump with just days left in his term. Talk about division, talk about violence? Folks, it is my concern that if Trump is impeached, the streets will run red with blood! Make no mistake, the Trump movement is alive and his base is strong. His platform was the best I have ever seen. Maybe, after 4 years of grotesque socialism, dissolution of our freedoms, and loss of prosperity under the corrupt Biden administration —we patriots will vote a Trump like dude back in or maybe Trump himself as President and take back our country. If it gets really bad, then you might actually see an armed revolution that will force a return to capitalism and democracy. Indeed “big brother” is watching us and we are moving slowly into a George Orwell world of oppression as he wrote about in his novel “1984.” I have witnessed in 6 short months, fear, anarchy, sedition, corruption, a pandemic, the destruction of a Presidency, a stolen election, a raid on the capitol building, censorship, and more—hell why not a full scale revolution as well? Is that next? What a year 2020 was. Good riddance, but now what? The left has got all the power and they have told us what they are going to do! God help us. Respectfully Submitted,   JUDSON Bennett-Coastal NetworkPhoto By: Jose Luis Magana / AP Photo OPINION Dear Friends. The events of Tuesday, January 5, 2021 and Wednesday, January 6, 2021 will indeed go down in infamy as truly significant happenings that have not only rocked the entire world, but have shaken our very foundation as American citizens. My thoughts and emotions have been all over the place. My resolve has been tested, my concerns have been elevated, and the cold reality is setting in. As someone who supported President Donald Trump from the very beginning, as a Republican activist, and a conservative pundit, the word “disconcerting” basically covers it all. President Donald Trump has officially lost the election to former Vice President Joe Biden. I am truly disappointed and extremely concerned about the future of our nation and the prospect of socialism pervading our lives, destroying our freedoms, and destining our futures to mediocrity. Now that the Democrats have won Georgia, they will now control all aspects of our government-the Presidency, the House, and the Senate. Socialism does not work and I believe the radical agenda of the left with the ridiculous “Green New Deal” will send us into economic ruin and a tremendous loss of our personal freedoms. I am deeply concerned and frankly frightened for the future of our nation. I truly believe that the election of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris is going to be a travesty, especially now with the radical left controlling it all. Huge tax increases, authoritarian restrictions on business operations, defunding of the police and rampant crime, loss of freedom of speech, open borders, and so much more are of great concern. I also believe that Joe Biden is a corrupt politician and that he is guilty of high crimes and even treason. After 4 years of this, we won’t recognize our country. That is what I think about that. Do I think the election was stolen and there was election fraud that significantly cost Trump the election? ABSOLUTELY! The real rub, besides the innumerable irregularities, is the indisputable fact that several battleground states wrongly changed their election laws through the illegal orders of Secretaries of State, when the law required the state legislatures to determine any change in voting laws. These arbitrary and capricious violations resulted in election chaos, especially in regard to universal mail-in ballots. The election was a suspicious disaster and 75 million Trump voters believe the election was rigged. I am amazed that the Trump team could not find a lawyer that could write a legal brief that would be heard in the Supreme Court? Unfortunately, the avenues to overturn an election are limited and almost impossible. Once legal votes are combined with illegal votes, it is impossible to fix it and the results are what they are. Now, I have to address President Donald Trump. Indeed the man has the right to explore and determine his options in resolving an election that was suspicious in its outcome. Indeed, it was actually a reasonable thing for his supporters to march on Washington and express their support for him, especially on the day that Congress was to certify the election. However, here is where Trump blew it, and without a doubt he did. Whether misguided or intentional, Trump indicated to his followers that the congress could overturn the election and that VP Mike Pence, who was overseeing the procedure could send the Electors back to the various states if he determined the objections were valid. Folks, nothing is further from the truth. Congress certifies the election and the VP oversees it. THERE IS NO CONSTITUTINAL AUTHORITY TO DO ANYTHING ELSE! It was a fools’ errand and it resulted in one of the most shameful events in American history. For Trump to even suggest that Pence should do the right thing, was a blatant mistake. VP Pence who has been loyal to Trump through thick and thin, did not and could not do what Trump asked. President Trump’s speech incited an unwanted reaction and then we witnessed the disgraceful attack on the capital building where violent perpetrators broke into the House and Senate chambers. Afterwards, Trump disparaged VP Pence, stating that he had let us down— which to me was outrageous. Folks, Trump’s rally and speech in Washington backfired with the terrific and disgusting assault on the Capital building which he must take responsibility for, because he misrepresented what was legitimate action, when it was not. Unfortunately, these disgusting jerks that invaded the capital building have hurt the Republican party, hurt Trump’s validity, and put a stench over all that was good about the Trump agenda. I am personally drained and disgusted by the whole thing and that is my position. So what is next? I intend to continue writing, most likely resisting the probable Biden debacle as long as I can. I don’t know now what is going to happen, but what I do know is that Trump’s legacy, if you can call it that, has been scarred and severely damaged by the events of January 6th. If there is ever another Republican President elected as President of the United States, especially in 2024, I do not believe it will be Donald Trump. So be it-AMEN. As always your feedback is welcome and appreciated. Respectfully yours, JUDSON Bennett-Coastal Network COASTALNETWORK.com   OPINION Dear friends, At this moment in time, the future of the United States is teetering on the brink of radical change that could be shocking to most traditional Americans. Indeed, for all intents and purposes, Joe Biden will eventually be installed in January as the 46^th President of the United States. President Donald Trump, having lost a Supreme Court bid to overturn the election and the Electoral College vote, still has an extremely narrow path or two before surrendering the Presidency. There is no doubt he will fight to the bitter end, with the possibility of a serious Constitutional Crisis. The evidence of election irregularities is terrific beyond belief and the validity of the process is in huge doubt?? What options does President Trump still have? 1) In the face of rampant voter fraud, from which, in Trump’s mind and the minds of 70 million voters, the election was stolen, he could still find a lawyer who was able to write a significant brief showing legitimate “STANDING” and “EVIDENCE” enough to get the case actually heard before the United States Supreme Court. 2) There are still some State Court options available that could prevent certification. 3) Trump could determine that the country is in danger of an illegitimate, hostile takeover, refuse to give up the Presidency, and institute the “Insurrection Act”, bringing out federal troops. Regardless, Trump has a very narrow road to follow with enormous odds against him. Why on paper and according to the official calculations did Trump lose? No doubt in my mind, there were thousands of counterfeit votes stuffed into the tally, votes actually changed and counted, votes allowed that should not have been, and Dominion Voting machine fraud that changed Trump Votes to Biden votes. The news media presented one false scenario after another, brainwashing innumerable voters. The Covid-19 pandemic clouded all of Trump’s magnificent achievements, creating economic chaos in the country. Finally, Trump ran the worst Presidential campaign in U.S. history–void of proper opposition research, ignoring the devastating facts about Biden’s dishonesty, which if utilized properly in TV ads, Biden would not have had a chance. Trump was out gunned 7-to-1 in TV ads and Trump rallies obviously were not enough! Regardless, with Biden as President it will not be a good situation and indeed problematic, and if Georgia sends two Democrats to replace two Republicans in the Senate, it will be a disaster with socialist programs and tax increases that will send America into economic ruin. As always, whether you are left or right, agree or disagree, your feedback is important and appreciated. Let me know how you feel. Thank you kindly. Respectfully yours, Judson Bennett-Coastal Bennett   OPINION Dear Friends, Some of you will hate this article, however it needs to be said, whether you like it or not. As a partisan, Republican from Delaware who knows more about Joe Biden than most people, as a man who has actually ran a campaign against him, having done extensive opposition research, to this minute, I am frustrated and angry at the total lack of understanding that the Trump campaign exhibited. I also take great umbrage with how little access there was to Trump operatives and how many people were wrapped up in their own self- importance, while doing a terrible job for Donald Trump. Unfortunately Donald himself had no clue how bad it was within his own political organization. I consider myself a political scientist and there is a science behind a successful political campaign. Frankly, in my view, Donald Trump ran the worst Presidential campaign in US history. Folks, I supported Trump with my heart and soul and I can say with a clear head, that in the Trump campaign, the money raised was poorly managed and clearly not used as it should have been. The factual information about Joe Biden’s history of lies, deceit, and malicious actions was enough to easily prevent him from being elected. None of it was used! This election should have not even been close. The people in the Trump campaign should be ashamed of themselves, including his children who spent hours on national TV late in the game touting stuff that was insignificantly not specific and obviously had no clue about how truly despicable Joe Biden really is, nor the details of his life of corruption which was clearly available to anyone who researched it properly. There is a SCIENCE involved in these enterprises and if it is not used properly, failure is probably going to occur. The first important factor is to develop a strong message or messages that include significant opposition research about your opponent. The more dirt you can find the better. The 2^nd factor is the venue: Where is that message going to be delivered?? TV, radio, direct mail, grass-roots, and so on. The 3^rd and most important factor is the frequency of the message. Biden’s message appeared roughly 7 times to Trump’s 1 — on a NATIONAL BASIS! What the rub was for me, was that I tried everything to get the information that I had to the right Trump people. It was impossible!!!!!! I even spoke to Robert Arlette, who was supposedly the Delaware contact for the Trump campaign. He set me up with a conference call with some useless underling who was working for the National GOP. I was shocked at how little they knew about Biden and how clear it was that they had no idea how to proceed accordingly. Granted, The Pandemic from Communist China, the evil, malicious, lying press, and the clear evidence of nationwide fraud, surely affected the entire election, which again is frustrating because all the cards were stacked against us! However, if Trump had utilized Biden’s lies and corruption in a planned organized attack, it would have been no contest. TRUMP RALLIES WERE NOT ENOUGH!!! Trump has to take partial responsibility for surrounding himself with the wrong people who ran a terrible campaign on his behalf. Now I, and many others, have to live in fear of losing our future to Joe Biden, who has publicly declared war on prosperity. The oil and gas industry is so important to thousands of Americans, especially in states that produce energy. The Keystone pipeline affects me directly along with many other Americans. Biden wants to stop America from being the number 1 exporter of oil and gas, and empower China, Russia, and Iran. Folks, I could write a book about the reasons Biden won and why he shouldn’t be our President. I will be reiterating and explaining stuff in future articles. Right now, the American people need to know what is coming and how the landscape is going to change not only in Delaware, but everywhere. Please read the in-depth article from Reuters, which I have attached below. Grasp the possibilities. As always, your feedback is welcome and appreciated. My hat goes off to all of the Patriots who fought so hard for Trump to have our hopes dashed by the Biden Crime Family. We do have an outside chance of getting the fraud before the Supreme Court, but that is a terrific long-shot. Please stay tuned, as there is much more coming. Respectfully yours, JUDSON Bennett-Coastal Network SCROLL DOWN: Factbox: How a Biden Presidency Would Transform the U.S. Energy Landscape By Reuters Staff (Reuters) – Democrat Joe Biden has won the November U.S. presidential election, according to several major networks. Here are some of the changes that could occur in U.S. energy policy under his administration. Biden has shown an interest in multilateral diplomacy similar to previous Democratic administrations. That could mean an eventual path for OPEC members Iran and Venezuela to get out from under Washington’s sanctions and start pumping again, if the right conditions are met. In Iran, that path could include a partnered approach between Washington and Europe, similar to a deal struck under Obama’s administration. In Venezuela, Biden appears likely to continue to favor sanctions to pressure the regime of President Nicolas Maduro, but could increase diplomatic efforts to end the impasse by negotiating a new election or power-sharing with the opposition. Outgoing President Donald Trump’s unilateral sanctions on the two countries have taken around 3 million barrels per day of crude oil off international markets, a little more than 3% of world supply. Biden’s campaign has not detailed how it would approach these issues. Biden lacks the chummy rapport that Trump had developed with Saudi Arabia’s defacto leader Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. That country is the biggest voice in the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, meaning Biden may not engage as closely on the group’s production policy. He is also more likely to rely on quiet diplomatic channels for influencing OPEC than Trump’s Twitter-centered approach. Biden’s campaign has not yet detailed how it would approach these issues, but any influence he would wield as president would likely be in service of the same goal – a moderate oil price. Any U.S. president needs affordable fuel for consumers. And for Biden, the price would need to be high enough to make clean energy alternatives to fossil fuels competitive in support of his ambitious climate plan. Trump had been more engaged with the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries than most of his predecessors. He has sometimes influenced OPEC policy with his tweets and phone calls, arguing for an oil price low enough for consumers but high enough for drillers. His sanctions also weakened the influence of OPEC hawks Venezuela and Iran within the group, removing two big historical hurdles to a pro-Washington OPEC policy. That concentrated power with leading producer Saudi Arabia, along with Russia, part of the group known as OPEC+. A Biden administration would look to re-enter the Paris Climate Agreement, an international pact negotiated during the Obama administration to fight global warming that Trump pulled away from saying it could hurt the U.S. economy. Biden has also vowed to bring U.S. emissions down to net zero by 2050, including by bringing emissions from the power industry to net zero by 2035 – a goal that will be tricky to accomplish without a Democratic majority in Congress. Biden’s view is that climate change is an existential threat to the planet, and that a transition from fossil fuels can be an economic opportunity if the United States moves fast enough to become a leader in the clean energy technology. Trump’s administration had acted to weaken or eliminate emissions targets, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s softening of vehicle emissions standards, and its rescinding of former President Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan requiring cuts from the electric power industry. Transport and electricity together make up around half the country’s greenhouse gas emissions. While European oil and gas companies like BP BP.L and Royal Dutch Shell RDSa.L have already begun implementing strategies for a global energy transition, U.S. majors like Exxon Mobil XOM.N and Chevron CVX.N have remained focused on the traditional energy business – sheltered politically by Trump’s leadership in Washington. While Trump had sought to maximize domestic oil and gas production, Biden has promised to ban issuance of new drilling permits on federal lands and waters in order to fight global climate change. The United States produced nearly 3 million barrels of crude oil per day from federal lands and waters in 2019, along with 13.2 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas, according to Interior Department data. That amounts to about a quarter of total domestic oil output and more than an eighth of total U.S. production of gas. A federal ban on new permits would mean those numbers trend toward zero over a matter of years. There would also be an impact on public revenue federal oil and gas production produced about $12 billion in public revenue in 2019, divided between the U.S. Treasury, states and counties, tribes, and cleanup funds. New Mexico, for example, received $2.4 billion in disbursements last year, much of it going to its historically underfunded education system. The state’s Democratic Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham told Reuters this spring she would seek a waiver from Biden’s government to allow continued drilling if he was elected. Biden’s camp has been mum on whether such a waiver program would exist.

How Does Mail-In Voting Work? What are the Pros and Cons of Mail-In Voting?

In the last few weeks, there has been heated debate over the pros and cons of mail-in voting. Because of the dangers of gathering in groups while COVID-19 continues to spread, mail-in voting has become an appealing option for voters to exercise their right without fear of being exposed to the novel virus. However, many officials have resisted this option out of fears that voter fraud and suppression would increase, leading to further United States corruption and a lack of voter transparency, or worse, a fraudulent election. This article will go over some of the key pros and cons of mail-in voting. 

Pro: Providing Voter Access

Mail-in voting is a prime opportunity for all voters to participate in the process that is their guaranteed right. In America, anyone is allowed to request an absentee ballot without explanation, and mail-in voting would work in much the same way. This option is especially helpful for those who suffer from disabilities and have a hard time getting out of the house. It is also simpler and less time-consuming to mail ballots, making it easier for young people or disadvantaged groups who normally don’t take the time to go in. Anyone, regardless of age, gender, race, or ability, has the opportunity to vote by mail. 

Con: Inefficiency and Issues with Voter Transparency

Mail-in voting is convenient for many voters, but once it gets in the mail, many problems can potentially ensue. Often, ballots arrive late at their destinations, as evidenced earlier this summer in Wisconsin. Sometimes, requests for ballots overwhelm officials, leading to many citizens not receiving a ballot in time to fill it out and send it back. Some ballots are not properly filled out or have mismatched signatures, which makes them ineligible and reduces the total number of votes. Counting is made more difficult by such delays, and most mail-in elections also suffer from some element of voter fraud. 

Pro: Saving Government Funds 

According to research done by Pew Trusts, the state of Colorado cut government voting expenditures by 40% after instituting a process of sending all voters a ballot by mail. Costs were decreased in printing services, paying officials, renting facilities, and, (with the inclusion of drop-off locations), even postage. 

Con: Security Concerns Over United States Corruption 

Many voters fear voter corruption from mail-in ballots because they don’t want their signature and other personal information exposed or lost in the mail.  Drop boxes used for dropping off ballots on or near the day of election are also open to security risks as they are usually unattended, leaving it possible that locks may be tampered with or boxes moved. Officials are encouraged to place boxes near security cameras/videos in well-lit areas. 

Pro: Convenience

Convenience is especially important for young people in the voting cycle, but with mail-in voting it becomes a benefit for all. Instead of seeing varying deadlines across states for the absentee ballots to be turned in, mail-in voting would include a deadline on election day. This would be easy for voters to understand and increase numbers in demographics like young adults who just don’t want to be bothered to go to a polling place. It would also be convenient for older people who are more at risk from COVID-19 and maybe be hesitant to vote in person. 

Con: Voter Fraud and Voter Suppression 

Doing everything by mail can make it easier for voters to vote by several names, and it is time-consuming for officials to check each name and ensure that it belongs to a living, registered state resident. Voter suppression is often enabled as collectors enter homes and pressure people to vote for a particular party. Officials at the polls often run into problems with verifying signatures as well, whether due to fraud or simply aging or injury that changes the signature. In such cases, they must send a notification to the voter and allow them 14 days to send a matching signature, which only further delays the counting of votes. 

Coastal Network

Coastal Network is an online forum dedicated to providing transparency in our Delaware court system and the world beyond by providing a sincere voice against corruption in all its forms.  To find out more about United States Corruption, visit us at www.coastalnetwork.com.   

What is the Electoral College? How does the Electoral College Work?

Opinions vary when it comes to the Electoral College’s role in selecting the President of the United States, and for good reason. America’s founders may have had good intentions when they included this step in the election process, but is it still relevant today?  Limits on federal power, such as the Bill of Rights, are intended to protect against government overreach. This is the logic behind supporters of the Electoral College—they believe it keeps one highly populated section of the country from controlling the presidency. Those opposed believe it’s an outdated process. 

The Electoral College System and U.S. Constitution 

The Electoral College is defined by the National Archives as a process rather than a place: “The Founding Fathers established it when creating the Constitution, in part, as a compromise between the election of the President by a vote in Congress and deciding the issue via a popular vote of qualified citizens.”   According to History, the shapers of the constitution thought that rural voters lacked the knowledge of the candidates necessary to make a wise selection and feared a “headstrong democratic mob” leading the country astray. The concept of the Electoral College limited potential government overreach that could happen by allowing Congress alone to select a president, while allowing for representation of American citizens.  The concept of the Electoral College controlled the potential government overreach that might be implied by allowing Congress alone to select the president, yet allowed for representation of the entire American population through the popular vote, without allowing the popular vote’s totals to be the sole deciding factor. Instead, each state has an electoral vote.

The 12th Amendment and Where We Stand Today in the Electoral College Process

The 1800 presidential election pointed out problems with the American electoral college system and use of electoral delegates. Since the constitution did not distinguish between President and Vice President in votes cast by electors in the American Electoral College, Thomas Jefferson and his running mate Aaron Burr received the same number of electoral votes. Ultimately, this led to the passage of the 12th amendment in 1804, which specified separate votes for President and Vice President. Since then, states have varied in the process of selecting electoral delegates. Today, electoral delegates are chosen through an election process, which is also called the electoral college election. The Electoral College process essentially grants states equal representation in the election. Each party on the ballot in each state selects the number of electors, or electoral delegates, equal to the number of delegates the state has in Congress, and these electors are expected to vote for their designated candidate when the Electoral College meets following the presidential election. On January 6, when the votes are opened in a joint session of Congress, a candidate must receive 270 of the 573 available votes to become President, or Vice President, respectively. The Electoral College outcome overrules that of the popular vote when the two differ.

The American Electoral College: A System of Checks and Balances

Many people want the American Electoral College system to remain a part of the presidential election process, citing the fact that it gives less populated states fair representation. Since each state has a fairly close number of electoral votes, highly populous states don’t possess a disproportionate amount of power. Additionally, proponents believe having an Electoral College system limits US voter corruption.  Those in support of the system believe that it offers necessary checks and balances. In addition to offering fair representation to rural states, the Electoral College system, they say, is fundamental to our Federalist setup, preserves the two party political system and legitimizes the popular vote, possibly preventing problems due to US voter fraud. 

Why People Oppose the American Electoral College System Today

Those advocating the repeal of the American Electoral College system requirement cite the fact that it is no longer necessary. They remind critics that the Constitution has been changed before when procedures were proven obsolete. Mass communication, they say, has eliminated the need for electors to represent the public. Those opposed to the American Electoral College system believe that the Electoral College ignores the will of the majority of voters when its outcome differs from the popular vote, thus overruling it.  Americans have been debating the pros and cons of the Electoral College for years. Many experts believe it maintains a system of checks and balances, while others see it as ignoring the will of too many voters.

Coastal Network

Coastal Network aims to provide an outlook of transparency regarding the modern political and judicial processes. Search our site for information you can count on to make clear, informed decisions concerning current events. If you have any thoughts on the American Electoral College system and its role today, please post below in our comment section.  If Former Vice President Joe Biden Doesn’t Win, Delaware Democrats Can Point the Finger at One Person: Andre Bouchard I told you so, folks! You heard it here first. You can’t go around doing, what I clearly see, as stealing $250 million and not expect to be held accountable for it! Andre Bouchard has led his band of cronies, happily, as I see it, milking a very-profitable, not-at-all “dysfunctional” and, in fact, quite successful company for millions upon millions of dollars. Did they think no one was watching? Did they think no one would see this injustice happening over the past few years? You read it here first folks and now you’re reading about this story EVERYWHERE! CBS, Bloomberg News, U.K.’s Daily Mail (see below). This story is not only getting national headlines, it’s getting international headlines and it’s being talked about as the Democratic debates are about to heat back up and Delaware’s own Joe Biden and Democratic presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren are both part of this international story! You can’t have $250 million being siphoned off over the past few years from a very successful company without serious ramifications. While that money may have gone from TransPerfect to many lawyers associated with Andre Bouchard, and his comrades– Bob Pincus of Skadden Arps, Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson, and Stephen Lamb of Paul Weiss — and now that missing money is now sparking a controversy the likes of which Delaware has never seen before! Folks, as I see it, we owe all of this negative attention and unflattering notoriety to Chancellor Andre Bouchard. What’s happening is Shirley Shawe, the 79-year-old shareholder at TransPerfect and mother of CEO Philip Shawe, is fighting the “Good Ole Boy’s Club” and taking on the role of an Anti-Chancery Court, Corruption activist. By doing so, she’s holding former Vice President and current 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate Joe Biden accountable for his blind support of Bouchard’s Chancery Court. This isn’t the first time she has taken on Chancery Court Corruption. Here are two examples of Shirley Shawe turning to the airwaves to fight Delaware Chancery Court corruption: I’ve been forewarning about this, pounding the table, and demanding action from the legislature for the last few years. In my opinion, Chancellor Bouchard is undermining our State’s reputation and is detrimental to our entire state economy. I applaud fellow senior-citizen Shirley Shawe for having the courage and grit to take on the establishment cronies. As always, your feedback is welcome!  

---

Republican businesswoman behind $500,000 Joe Biden attack ads explains she was furious he supported ‘corrupt’ Chancery Court that dissolved her business costing her millions

Political unknown Shirley Shawe paid for the TV ads in Iowa and New Hampshire to show next week Shawe shared with DailyMail.com the ad is to ‘raise public awareness to the serious issues plaguing America’s most powerful business court’ It is the largest third-party attack ad spend so far in the 2020 campaign The ad includes a 2005 exchange between then Senator Biden and Elizabeth Warren – at-the-time a Harvard professor – as they discussed bankruptcy reform But the ad dices up the dialogue between the two and suggests that they were speaking on the Chancery Court Transcripts from the hearing reveal that Biden had just misspoke and confused bankruptcy courts with the Chancery Court, a point he later clarifies Both Warren and Biden have called for the ad to be pulled from the air Shawe seems to be angry about a business dispute that impacted her son in 2015, more than ten years after the political exchange took place

By MATTHEW WRIGHT FOR DAILYMAIL.COM and KEITH GRIFFITH FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

PUBLISHED: 14:52 EDT, 29 August 2019 | UPDATED: 16:15 EDT, 29 August 2019 A Republican entrepreneur who released a perplexing ad decrying Joe Biden’s relationship with the Delaware Chancery Court has explained that she was angry at the presidential candidate for supporting the court that dissolved her business – costing her millions. Shirley Shawe told DailyMail.com that she released the misleading advert as a means to ‘raise public awareness to the serious issues plaguing America’s most powerful business court.’ ‘I was a personal victim of ageism, sexism, and corruption at the hands of Delaware Chancellor Andre Bouchard over the last five years; my constitutional rights were trampled and my private property was seized by a Delaware government body and put up for auction-and part of the justification for this was my age,’ she claimed in a statement to DailyMail.com. She added the behavior was ‘typical of the “Old Boy’s Club” that runs Delaware.’ ‘The Chancellor turned simple board deadlock into a 3 year occupation of the company I am part owner of, and caused over $250 million to be spent on the case, much of which directly benefited his social circle in Delaware. Bouchard was sworn in as Chancellor in 2014, five years after Biden ended his time as Senator of Delaware and almost a decade after the footage Shawe used in her advert. Shawe clarified that she sought to ‘encourage the candidates to drive reform’ with her ad that correctly identifies Delaware as getting an ‘F’ grade from the 2015 State Integrity Investigation that looks at ‘state government accountability and transparency.’ The ad includes a 2005 exchange between then Senator Biden and Elizabeth Warren – at-the-time a Harvard professor – as they discussed bankruptcy reform. ‘The Delaware court is too male, too white and anything but open,’ the ad’s narrator asserts in the advertisement. In the ad, Biden speaks on how the Chancery Court are open and calls it ‘outrageous’ to suggest otherwise. The clip then shows Warren ‘responding’ and seemingly pointing out how the Chancery Court impacts Delaware workers. But, the clip actually chops up Warren’s entire comment and fails to contextualize Biden’s comment – especially once he realizes that the conversation is about bankruptcy courts and not the Chancery Court. A transcript from the hearing shows that Biden realized his mistake and focused on Bankruptcy. Chancery was only ever mentioned in his initial comment. ‘Employees of companies like Enron literally cannot go to Delaware and hire local counsel, which the Delaware bankruptcy court requires of them before they can make an appearance, and that effectively cuts thousands of small employees, pensioners and local trade creditors out of the bankruptcy process,’ Warren said in the entirety of her quote. ‘If they can’t afford it, they are not there.’ Both Biden and Warren demanded the ad to be pulled, with the former Vice President declaring that the advert mischaracterized his remarks. Shawe shared that she was ‘disappointed’ by the politicians reaction but added that it was not ‘unexpected’ for Biden to respond in that way ‘given his home state court’s attempt to silence me and treat me as less than a person for years.’ She continued: ‘It is typical of the “Old Boy’s Club” that runs Delaware.’ ‘For Ms Warren, I suspect the Senator doesn’t yet fully understand how the Chancery Court harmed me and our 5000 workers worldwide. If she researches this case more deeply, I believe she will understand the facts and may have a different view.’ The Republican apparent endorsement of Warren – as seen on the ad – happens to just fall on that particular issue. Shawe said ‘who knows’ when commenting on who she would support for other issues and added that she and Warren agreed on this particular one. ‘The court needs to be brought up to 2019 and needs transparency,’ she stated. ‘I will keep fighting for that. This is just the first in a planned effort to drive awareness.’ Shawe’s grudge seems to stem from a costly legal battle that her son’s translation company, TransPerfect, fought in Delaware’s chancery court in 2015. ‘Two years after the case has ended, my company is still be billed outrageous sums per month by Skadden Arps, the Chancellor’s and the Chief Justice’s former employers,’ said the businesswoman. ‘We are required to pay these bills by court order, yet we are not allowed to see them, or even know what this work is for.’ She plans to run the television ad in early primary states Iowa and New Hampshire next week in what is the largest third-party attack ad spend so far in the 2020 presidential race. The ad eschews mainstream campaign issues and instead focus on the Chancery Court, a legal system which Shawe blames for a business dispute that hurt her son’s company. ‘The Delaware court is too male, too white and anything but open,’ the ad’s narrator intones. The 60-second ad shows Biden during a 2005 Senate hearing, in which he debated Elizabeth Warren, then a Harvard law professor. The ad accuses Biden of defending the Chancery Court as Warren attacks it. The transcript of the hearing shows that Warren was actually speaking about the bankruptcy courts, a separate forum of equity law, but Biden became briefly confused and referred to chancery court. Delaware’s Court of Chancery oversees business disputes, though not bankruptcy, which is a federal matter. The state’s chancery court has great influence due to the large number of companies that are incorporated in Delaware, which has business-friendly laws. Both Biden and Warren, who are among top contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination, have called for the ad to be pulled. ‘The ad misrepresents Vice President Biden’s position in this exchange from 2005 by manipulating footage to suggest he means one court when he means another,’ Biden campaign national press secretary Jamal Brown told CBS News in a statement. ‘It’s a clear reminder of the way that third-party money poisons our politics with false attack ads, and it has no place in this race,’ he continued. Warren also spoke out against the ad, even though it seems to cast her in a heroic light. ‘Elizabeth does not believe individual donors should have an outsized influence in this primary, and has consistently said that Super PACs or individuals with the means to finance ad campaigns on their own should stay out of the primary,’ her deputy communications director Chris Hayden said. Shawe’s grudge seems to stem from a costly legal battle that her son’s translation company, TransPerfect, fought in Delaware’s chancery court in 2015. In a landmark case, the head of the Delaware Chancery, Chancellor Andre Bouchard, ordered the dissolution of the company even though it was not in financial distress, but because its co-owners could not get along. The court-ordered decision to sell TransPerfect came in 2015 after a chancellor concluded the feuding CEO’s Philip Shawe and Elizabeth Elting were ‘hopelessly deadlocked’ over significant matters and business decisions. Shirley Shawe owned 1 percent of the company at the time of the forced sale, which resulted in her son Philip Shawe gaining ownership by bidding in the public auction. Shirley Shawe launched a crusade against the chancery courts, however, lobbying lawmakers to banned forced sales like the one of TransPerfect. ‘When a judge makes a precedent and makes a ruling to just sell a privately held company, then why would other people be motivated to start a company and why would they be motivated to incorporate in the state of Delaware? If someone is just going to take their private property?’ Shawe told WMDT-TV in 2017. Shawe has said through a spokesperson that she is a Republican and did not intend to boost Warren with her ad. She has vowed to run to run the TV ads in spite of the candidates’ protests, and has also reportedly ordered print newspaper ads on the subject.

What is a Court of Chancery?

Chancery courts began with petitions to the Lord Chancellor of England, and developed into a parallel legal system along with common law courts. Chancery dealt with issues of equity, or what is fair, rather than matters of law, and had a looser set of rules to speed to pace of proceedings. Instead of judges, they had chancellors, and had jurisdiction over trusts and estates, guardianship over children and ‘lunatics’. They also handled lawsuits requesting something other than financial damages, such as an order requiring a party to perform a specific act. Some states in the early U.S. republic replicated this dual legal system, but the two systems were merged in England in 1875. Today, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court operates as a court of equity at the federal level, and several states maintain separate court systems for matters of law and equity. Delaware, Mississippi, New Jersey, and Tennessee still make a distinction between a ‘court of law’ and chancery court.