The Jim Bakker Show

Overseas voters kick off crucial French presidential election

A municipal employee prepares ballot boxes on the eve of the first round of the French presidential election at a polling station in Tulle, France, April 22, 2017. REUTERS/Regis Duvignau

By Bate Felix and Daniel Pardon

PARIS/PAPEETE, French Polynesia (Reuters) – French overseas territories and residents in some U.S. states such as Hawaii began voting on Saturday in the French presidential election, a day ahead of a main first-round vote that could change the global political landscape.

Of 47 million registered French voters, there are fewer than a million resident in far-flung places like French Polynesia in the South Pacific and Guadeloupe, French Guiana and Martinique in the Caribbean. They vote early so as not to be influenced by the mainland results due on Sunday evening at around 1800 GMT.

The first round will send two of 11 candidates into a run-off vote in two weeks time to pick a new president for France, a core member of the European Union and the NATO alliance, a permanent member of the United Nations Security council, and the world’s fifth largest economy.

With two anti-globalisation candidates whose policies could break up the European Union among the four frontrunners, the vote is of major significance to the international political status quo and to investment markets.

Coming after the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States and after the ‘Brexit’ decision of British voters to quit the EU, few experts dare rule out a shock, and all of the likely outcomes will usher in a period of political uncertainty in France.

Polls make centrist and pro-European Emmanuel Macron the favorite, but he has no established party of his own and is a relatively unknown political quantity.

His three close rivals, according to voting surveys, are the anti-EU, anti-immigration National Front leader Marine Le Pen, who would dump the euro currency and return to national ones, far-left candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon, who wants France to rip up international trade treaties and quit NATO, and the conservative Francois Fillon, whose reputation has been sullied by a nepotism scandal.

“The election of either Le Pen or Melenchon would put Paris on a fast-track collision course with (EU officials in) Brussels),” said James Shields, professor of French politics at Aston University in Britain.

“The election of Marine Le Pen would make Brexit look trivial by comparison.”

Although Le Pen is in second place behind Macron in the first round, she is seen by pollsters as unlikely to win in the second. Melenchon, by contrast, can win the presidency according to some scenarios.

Polls in the dying days of the campaign put all the candidates roughly on between a fifth and a quarter of the vote, with around five percentage points or less separating them – threatening the margin of error for polling companies.

High levels of abstention and indecision are also a key factor.

Voters in the tiny French island of Saint-Pierre and Miquelon, south of Canada’s Newfoundland in the north Atlantic, were first to start voting on Saturday morning.

Results from ballots cast in the territories will, however, remain sealed until Sunday evening after polls have closed in mainland France.

France will be voting under tight security with over 50,000 police and other security branches fully mobilized for special election duty.

Security was thrust to the fore of the already acrimonious campaign after a policeman was killed by a suspected Islamist militant in Paris on Thursday.

Le Parisien newspaper said French government security authority the DCSP had circulated a note saying the threat during the elections of a militant attack like the ones that have killed more than 230 people in the past two years in France was a “constant and pregnant” one.

Legislative elections are due to follow in June.

(This story has been refiled to fix paragraph 10 to say first round.)

(Additional reporting by Elizabeth Pineau; Editing and additional reporting by Andrew Callus)

Turkey set for close vote on boosting Erdogan’s powers, polls suggest

Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan greets the audience during a meeting in Ankara, Turkey March 29, 2017. Murat Cetinmuhurdar/Presidential Palace/Handout via REUTERS

By Ercan Gurses and Humeyra Pamuk

ANKARA/ISTANBUL (Reuters) – Less than three weeks before Turkey votes on sweeping new powers sought by President Tayyip Erdogan, opinion polls suggest a tight race in a referendum that could bring the biggest change to the system of governance in the country’s modern history.

Two senior officials from the ruling AK Party told Reuters that research it commissioned had put support for “yes” at 52 percent in early March, down from 55-56 percent a month earlier, though they expected a row with Europe in recent weeks to have fired up nationalists and bolstered their camp.

Turks will vote on April 16 on constitutional changes which would replace their parliamentary system with an executive presidency, a change Erdogan says is needed to avoid the fragile coalition governments of the past and to give Turkey stability as it faces numerous security challenges.

Publicly-available polls paint a mixed picture in a race that has sharply divided the country, with Erdogan’s faithful seeing a chance to cement his place as modern Turkey’s most important leader, and his opponents fearing one-man rule.

A survey on Wednesday by pollster ORC, seen as close to the government, put “yes” on 55.4 percent in research carried out between March 24-27 across almost half of Turkey’s 81 provinces.

By contrast, Murat Gezici, whose Gezici polling company tends to show stronger support for the opposition, told Reuters none of the 16 polls his firm had carried out over the past eight months had put the “yes” vote ahead. He expected a “no” victory of between 51-53 percent, based on his latest numbers.

None of the polls suggest the 60 percent level of support which officials in Ankara say Erdogan wants.

“Right now we have not seen a result in our polls that did not show the ‘yes’ vote ahead. But we want the constitutional reform to be approved with a high percentage for wider social consensus,” said AKP spokesman Yasin Aktay.

The wide disparity of the poll results is partly due to the political sympathies of Turkey’s polling companies.

But it also reflects a sense that a section of the public remains undecided, including some AKP loyalists uncomfortable with too much power being concentrated in Erdogan’s hands.

Prime Minister Binali Yildirim held a meeting last week with former AKP ministers and officials, seeking to shore up wider support for the “Yes” campaign.

But former prime minister Ahmet Davutoglu and former president Abdullah Gul, both high-profile members of the AKP who fell out with Erdogan, did not show up and were also absent from the AKP’s campaign launch in late February.

“NO EARLY ELECTION”

Erdogan assumed the presidency, currently a largely ceremonial position, in 2014 after more than a decade as prime minister with the AKP, which he co-founded. Since then, pushing his powers to the limit, he has continued to dominate politics by dint of his personal popularity and forceful personality.

Critics accuse him of increasing authoritarianism with the arrests and dismissal of tens of thousands of judges, police, military officers, journalists and academics since a failed military coup in July.

With the constitutional overhaul, the president would be able to retain ties to a political party, potentially allowing Erdogan to resume his leadership of the AKP, a move that opposition parties say would wreck any chance of impartiality.

Abdulkadir Selvi, a pro-government columnist in the Hurriyet newspaper, said the latest numbers presented to the AKP headquarters showed the lead for the “yes” campaign widening, boosted partly by Erdogan’s row with Europe.

Bans on some campaign rallies by Turkish officials in Germany and the Netherlands have prompted Erdogan to accuse European leaders of “Nazi methods”.

“The stance of the Netherlands and Germany is expected to motivate nationalist voters at home and abroad and add 1-1.5 percentage points to the ‘yes’ vote,” Selvi wrote on Thursday.

The constitutional changes envisage presidential and parliamentary elections being held together in 2019, with a president eligible to then serve a maximum of two five-year terms. Those elections could be called early if Erdogan wins the referendum, enabling him to assume full executive powers sooner.

But AKP officials said such a move was unlikely, citing concern that a slowing economy could weaken their parliamentary majority and pointing to voter fatigue after four elections in the past three years.

“Whether there is a ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ vote in the referendum, leaving this parliamentary majority to have another election does not make sense for us,” a senior AKP official said.

(Additional reporting by Orhan Coskun in Ankara, Daren Butler in Istanbul; Writing by Nick Tattersall; Editing by Gareth Jones)

U.S. Senate approves measure launching Obamacare repeal process

The federal government forms for applying for health coverage are seen at a rally held by supporters of the Affordable Care Act, widely referred to as "Obamacare", outside the Jackson-Hinds Comprehensive Health Center in Jackson, Mississippi, U.S

By Susan Cornwell

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Senate on Thursday took a first concrete step toward dismantling Obamacare, voting to instruct key committees to draft legislation repealing President Barack Obama’s signature health insurance program.

The resolution, passed in the early hours of Thursday in a 51-48 vote, now goes to the House of Representatives, which is expected to vote on it this week. Scrapping Obamacare is a top priority for Republican President-elect Donald Trump and the Republican majorities in both chambers.

Republicans have said the process of repealing Obamacare could take months, and developing a replacement plan could take longer. But they are under pressure from Trump to act fast after he said on Wednesday that the repeal and replacement should happen “essentially simultaneously.”

Some 20 million previously uninsured Americans gained health coverage through the Affordable Care Act, as Obamacare is officially called. Coverage was extended by expanding Medicaid and through online exchanges where consumers can receive income-based subsidies.

Republicans have launched repeated legal and legislative efforts to unravel the law, criticizing it as government overreach. They say they want to replace it by giving states, not the federal government, more control.

But in recent days some Republicans have expressed concern about the party’s current strategy of voting for a repeal without having a consensus replacement plan ready.

House Speaker Paul Ryan said this week he wants to pack as many replacement provisions as possible into the legislation repealing Obamacare. But Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, also a Republican, said that could be difficult under Senate rules.

The resolution approved Thursday instructs committees of the House and Senate to draft repeal legislation by Jan. 27. Both chambers will then need to approve the resulting legislation before any repeal goes into effect.

Senate Republicans are using special budget procedures that allow them to repeal Obamacare by a simple majority so that they will not need Democratic votes. Republicans have 52 votes in the 100-seat Senate. One Republican, Senator Rand Paul, voted no on Thursday.

Democrats mocked the Republican effort, saying Republicans have never united around an alternative to Obamacare. “They want to kill ACA but they have no idea how they are going to bring forth a substitute proposal,” said Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats.

On Wednesday, Trump said he would submit a replacement plan as soon as his nominee to lead the Health and Human Services Department, Representative Tom Price, is approved by the Senate. Trump gave no details.

Trump senior adviser Kellyanne Conway praised lawmakers for clearing the way for repeal and said the replacement effort will likely tackle medication costs.

“To repeal and replace Obamacare and not have a conversation about drug pricing seems not like a very reasonable prospect and not (a) responsible prospect,” Conway told Bloomberg Television on Thursday, one day after Trump targeted the pharmaceutical industry, a traditional Republican ally.

Democrats passed the Affordable Care Act in 2010 over united Republican opposition. Democrats say the act is insuring more Americans and helping to slow the growth in healthcare spending.

But Republicans say the system is not working. The average Obamacare premium is set to rise 25 percent in 2017.

(Reporting by Susan Cornwell; Additional reporting by Susan Heavey; Editing by Nick Macfie and Bill Trott)

Know the Platforms and VOTE VOTE VOTE!!!

By Kami Klein

Today, in the few hours of a single day, the United States will know the outcome of one of the most pivotal and historical Presidential votes in our 240 year history.

This has been an election year where the polls are in a frantic debate over who is really ahead and mud slinging is at an all time high. Even the most uninformed voter knows that the stakes are high for deciding what direction the American people are wishing for this country to go. We have been torn apart, friendships threatened, and voices raised for a very long time.

Electing a President is not all about the character of the person, or who you want to listen to for four years. What we must remember is we are voting on a platform of ideas and beliefs for what is best for U.S., the American people! We will have a say on what we personally, in our own hearts and from our own experiences, feel is best to answer the the current problems and challenges.

Maybe you don’t know the platforms. Unfortunately, in all of the rhetoric and the passion from both sides, the ideas and policies each candidate wishes to lead for a new America has been shrouded in a fog. What is the Democratic Platform? Do their beliefs match yours? What ideas will the Republican Platform put forth in answer to the many problems facing this nation? Your faith and your lifetime of experience matters.

I have heard a few people say that they don’t like either of the candidates. They don’t like them at all so they just won’t vote. They think their inaction will make a statement to the nation that ‘hey, we just don’t like those candidates, what do you think about that?’. Unfortunately, history has shown that not voting will mean nothing to your leaders. You have decided not to count. And you won’t.

No matter where you live or what your circumstances are, you MUST realize that deep down you know what you believe. You have those gut feelings telling you what you believe. You know when something doesn’t sit right with you, and you know when it feels right. What I am telling you is that how you feel will be counted in the vote unless you wish to remain silent.

Not voting is akin to surrender. We do not have the luxury of surrender with all that is going on in this country and in this world. Be brave, be informed, and get to know what it is that these candidates are representing. Vote! Please vote!

Franklin D. Roosevelt said, “ Nobody will ever deprive the American people of the right to vote except the American people themselves and the only way they could do this is by not voting.”

DO NOT SURRENDER!! Please study the platforms and VOTE!

Download the Republican Party Platform

Download the Democratic Party Platform

U.S. Boosting cyber defenses but not police presence for election

A man types on a computer keyboard in this illustration picture

By Julia Harte and Dustin Volz

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Federal and state authorities are beefing up cyber defenses against potential electronic attacks on voting systems ahead of U.S. elections on Nov. 8, but taking few new steps to guard against possible civil unrest or violence.

The threat of computer hacking and the potential for violent clashes is darkening an already rancorous presidential race between Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump, amid fears that Russia or other actors could spread political misinformation online or perhaps tamper with voting.

To counter the cyber threat, all but two U.S. states have accepted help from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to probe and scan voter registration and election systems for vulnerabilities, a department official told Reuters.

Ohio has asked a cyber protection unit of the National Guard, a reserve force within the U.S. military, for assistance to protect the state’s systems.

On Thursday, Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan and her cyber security team met with officials from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the DHS, in addition to state-level agencies, to discuss cyber threats, said Matt Roberts, a spokesman for Reagan.

Cyber security experts and U.S. officials say chances that a hack could alter election outcomes are remote, in part because voting machines are typically not connected to the internet.

But the FBI sent a flash alert in August to states after detecting breaches in voter registration databases in Arizona and Illinois.

ARMED GROUPS

Unidentified intelligence officials told NBC News on Thursday that there is no specific warning about an Election Day attack, but they remain concerned that hackers from Russia or elsewhere may try to disrupt the process, likely by spreading misinformation by manipulating social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter.

DHS cyber security experts plan to hold a media briefing on Friday to discuss the agency’s efforts with states to boost the security of their voting and election systems.

The potential for violence around the election has loomed in the background of the campaign for months. Armed groups around the country have pledged in unprecedented numbers to monitor voting sites for signs of election fraud.

Voter intimidation reported at polling sites so far prompted Democrats to accuse Trump of a “campaign of vigilante voter intimidation” in four states on Monday.

But local authorities surveyed by Reuters on Thursday in five states – Ohio, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin and Florida – said they were not increasing election-related law enforcement personnel or resources above 2012 levels.

‘A LOT OF TALK, LITTLE ACTION’

The FBI, which designates one special agent from each of its 56 field offices for election crime matters, has not increased its numbers or given staff additional training this year, said an FBI spokeswoman.

There has been no “substantive change” in the number of personnel deployed by the rest of the Justice Department, which designates Assistant U.S. Attorneys and federal prosecutors within the agency’s Public Integrity Section to handle election crimes, according to a spokesman.

Jim Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, which represents hundreds of thousands of U.S. officers, said cops are taking the same security measures they would take for any large event. He said he expects the vows by militias to monitor the polls to be “a lot of talk, little action.”

Civil rights groups said deploying more police officers to the polls can actually intimidate voters.

“The presence of law enforcement can have a chilling effect on the electorate,” said Kristen Clarke, president of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a watchdog group. “That’s something we want to discourage.”

(Additional reporting by Andy Sullivan in Washington; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh and Bill Rigby)

Negative tone of White House race sours young voters

By Scott Malone

BOSTON (Reuters) – The exceptionally negative tone of this year’s race for the White House is souring young Americans, turning some away from the democratic process just as the millennial generation has become as large a potential bloc of voters as the baby boomers.

Reuters/Ipsos polling shows that Americans aged 18 to 34 are slightly less likely to vote for president this year than their comparably aged peers were in 2012. Some political scientists worry that this election could scar a generation of voters, making them less likely to cast ballots in the future.

Young Americans on the left and right have found reasons to be dissatisfied with their choices this year. Senator Bernie Sanders had an enthusiastic following of younger people before he lost the Democratic primary race to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. On the Republican side, some are unwilling to vote for Donald Trump, citing the New York businessman’s sometimes insulting rhetoric on women, minorities and immigrants.

Brandon Epstein, who turned 18 on Monday, had looked forward earlier in the year to casting his first vote for Sanders. Now, the resident of suburban Suffolk County, New York, plans to sit out the vote on Election Day, Nov. 8.

“It’s because of the selection of the candidates. I find them to be not just sub-par, but unusually sub-par,” said Epstein, a student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in Cambridge, Massachusetts. “Something’s gone terribly wrong.”

That sentiment is broadly reflected in poll data that show that young Americans are less enthusiastic about their choices in November than they were four years ago when Democratic President Barack Obama faced a re-election challenge from Republican Mitt Romney.

Some 52.2 percent of respondents aged 18 to 34 told Reuters/Ipsos they were certain or almost certain to vote, compared with 56.1 percent who reported that level of certainty at the same point in 2012.

The national tracking poll was conducted online in English in all 50 states. It included 3,088 people between 18-34 years old who took the survey from Oct. 1 to Oct. 17, and 2,141 18-34 year olds who took the poll on the same days in 2012. It has a credibility interval, a measure of accuracy, of 2 percentage points for both groups.

‘DEEP CYNICISM’

For at least the past half century, young Americans have voted at lower rates than their elders. But this year’s decline in enthusiasm is of particular concern because it comes as the millennial generation – people born from 1981 through 1997 – has become as large a bloc of eligible voters as the baby boomers – born between 1946 and 1964. Each group’s number of eligible voters is approaching 70 million people, according to the Pew Research Center.

“This generation has never trusted the government, Wall Street or the media less,” John Della Volpe, director of polling at Harvard University’s Institute of Politics, said of the millennials. “That’s likely to result in turnout of less than 50 percent and of those who do turn out, there is still a deep cynicism regarding the impact of their vote, whether or not it will make a difference.”

The projected low turnout is a particular concern given recent research showing how important habit is in encouraging voter participation. Put simply, a person who votes in one election is about 10 percent more likely to vote in the next than an eligible voter who opted to stay home, said Alexander Coppock, an assistant professor of political science at Yale University.

“If you extend that logic, if you have an election that fails to turn people on to voting, you’d expect that you wouldn’t get that cumulative effect,” said Coppock, whose article “Is Voting Habit Forming?” was published in this month’s issue of the American Journal for Political Science.

However, not all young voters unhappy with their choices will be staying home. Some plan to cast a ballot anyway, even if only in protest, rather than sitting out.

That group includes Cameron Khansarinia, a 20-year-old vice president of the Harvard Republican Club, who said he would cast a ballot even though he opposed Trump.

“I will definitely vote, I just don’t know if I will be writing someone in or voting for (Libertarian) Gary Johnson or even voting for Hillary Clinton when it gets down to it,” said Khansarinia, who is registered to vote in heavily Democratic California. “Once this is over, come Nov. 9, we will need people here to rebuild the party.”

(Reporting by Scott Malone; Editing by Frances Kerry)

U.S. vote authorities warned to be alert to Russian hacks faking fraud: officials

By David Rohde and Mark Hosenball

(Reuters) – U.S. intelligence and law enforcement officials are warning that hackers with ties to Russia’s intelligence services could try to undermine the credibility of the presidential election by posting documents online purporting to show evidence of voter fraud.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said however, that the U.S. election system is so large, diffuse and antiquated that hackers would not be able to change the outcome of the Nov. 8 election.

But hackers could post documents, some of which might be falsified, that are designed to create public perceptions of widespread voter fraud, the officials said.

They said that they did not have specific evidence of such a plan, but state and local election authorities had been warned to be vigilant for hacking attempts.

On Oct. 7, the U.S. government formally accused Russia for the first time of a campaign of cyber attacks against Democratic Party organizations to interfere with the election process.

U.S. officials familiar with hacking directed against American voting systems said evidence indicates that suspected Russian government-backed hackers have so far tried to attack voter registration databases operated by more than 20 states. Tracing the attacks can be difficult but breaches of only two such databases have been confirmed, they said.

The officials said there is no evidence that any hackers have succeeded in accessing equipment or databases used to record votes. Many states use systems that would be difficult to hack or defraud, including paper ballots which initially are tallied by machines.

U.S. elections are run by state and local officials, not the federal government. On Nov. 8, votes will be cast in hundreds of thousands of polling stations in 9,000 different jurisdictions, according to the National Association of Secretaries of State.

The U.S. officials declined to comment on Republican candidate Donald Trump’s contention that the election is being “rigged.” Trump said in the third and final presidential debate with Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton on Wednesday night that he would not say until the election results were known whether or not he would accept the outcome.

Trump and his campaign officials have repeatedly said that the potential for voter fraud remains high but they have not provided any evidence.

On Thursday, Trump said he would accept the results of the election “if I win.” He said he reserved the “right to contest or file a legal challenge in the case of a questionable result.”

Clinton supporters said Trump is unwittingly aiding an effort by Russian President Vladimir Putin to undercut the credibility of the vote. Washington and Moscow are at odds over several issues, from Russian involvement in the Ukraine conflict, the war in Syria and cyber attacks.

“Trump does not even know he is being manipulated,” said Michael Morell, a former deputy CIA director who has endorsed Clinton. “Trump is an unwitting agent of Putin.”

(Reporting By David Rohde in New York and Mark Hosenball; in Washington; editing by Grant McCool)

‘No doubt’ Russia behind hacks on U.S. election system: senior Democrat

By Dustin Volz

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A senior Democratic lawmaker said Sunday he had “no doubt” that Russia was behind recent hacking attempts targeting state election systems, and urged the Obama administration to publicly blame Moscow for trying to undermine confidence in the Nov. 8 presidential contest.

The remarks from Representative Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the intelligence committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, come amid heightened concerns among U.S. and state officials about the security of voting machines and databases, and unsubstantiated allegations from Republican candidate Donald Trump that the election could be “rigged.”

“I have no doubt [this is Russia]. And I don’t think the administration has any doubt,” Schiff said during an appearance on ABC’s “This Week.”

Schiff’s call to name and shame the Kremlin came a week after Trump questioned widely held conclusions made privately by the U.S. intelligence community that Russia is responsible for the hacking activity.

“It could be Russia, but it could also be China,” Trump said during a televised debate with Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. “It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds.”

On Saturday, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said hackers have probed the voting systems of many U.S. states but there is no sign that they have manipulated any voting data.

Schiff said he doubted hackers could falsify vote tallies in a way to affect the election outcome. Officials and experts have said the decentralized and outdated nature of U.S. voting technology makes such hacks more unlikely.

But cyber attacks on voter registration systems could “sow discord” on election day, Schiff said. He further added that leaks of doctored emails would be difficult to disprove and could “be election altering.”

The National Security Agency, FBI and DHS all concluded weeks ago that Russian intelligence agencies conducted, directed or coordinated all the major cyberattacks on U.S. political organizations, including the Democratic National Committee, and individuals, a U.S. official who is participating in the investigations said on Sunday.

However, the official said, White House officials have resisted naming the Russians publicly because doing so could result in escalating cyberattacks, and because it is considered impossible to offer public, unclassified proof of the allegation.

Schiff and Senator Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the U.S. Senate intelligence committee, said last month they had concluded Russian intelligence agencies were “making a serious and concerted effort to influence the U.S. election.”

(Reporting by Dustin Volz and John Walcott; Editing by Nick Zieminski)

Kansas, ACLU reach temporary agreement on voter ID

(Recasts to show that judge has canceled contempt of court hearing scheduled for Friday, adds comment by Kansas secretary of state)

Sept 29 (Reuters) – The Kansas Secretary of State and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have reached a temporary agreement over the state’s voter registration laws, keeping Kansas’ chief elections officer from a contempt of court hearing, according to court documents filed on Thursday.

The deal between Secretary of State Kris Kobach and the ACLU comes six weeks before the U.S. presidential election.

The two sides have been at odds over a Kansas law requiring people to prove American citizenship if they want to register to vote while applying for a driver’s license. Critics say this requirement disenfranchises voters, especially minorities.

The deal will allow people who registered at motor vehicle offices or with a federal form without providing citizenship documents to vote in the Nov. 8 election with a standard ballot, rather than be forced to use a provisional one, the ACLU and Kobach said in a status report filed on Thursday.

Kobach will also clarify his office’s website to help voters find information more easily, according to the report filed to U.S. District Judge Julie Robinson.

Robinson had ordered Kobach, a Republican, to explain by Thursday why he should not be held in contempt for failing to obey a federal order issued in May.

That order required him to register people who applied to vote at motor vehicle offices or with a federal form without proof of citizenship.

Robinson canceled the contempt hearing scheduled for Friday, according to her own court filing, citing the ACLU and Kobach’s agreement.

“Our case is ongoing, but this interim agreement is a critical victory for Kansans who want to vote in the November election. It is a shame that voters had to fight so hard to get Kris Kobach to do his job,” ACLU attorney Orion Danjuma said in a statement.

Kobach said he was pleased an agreement had been reached, but criticized the ACLU.

“The ACLU’s argument was weak at best. However, at this point the preparations for the November 8, 2016, general election must proceed with rules established to ensure the efficient administration of the election,” he said in a statement.

Kansas’ law, among the strictest voter identification statutes in the country, is defended by Republicans who say the rules are meant to prevent voter fraud.

On Tuesday, a Kansas state judge issued a separate ruling extending voting rights through the Nov. 8 election of about 17,500 people who registered to vote at motor vehicle offices.

(Reporting by Timothy Mclaughlin in Chicago; Editing by Matthew
Lewis)

This Pastor Clarifies How the Very Future of America Is At Stake-Trump or Hillary?

By, Dr. Jim Garlow, Skyline Church, San Diego, CA ; With permission from Charisma Magazine

I have been asked “the question” so many times regarding Trump or Hillary. By way of background, I have followed every national convention—Republican and Democrat—from the time I was age 9, and have attended most of the GOP Conventions from 1984 to the present. I have watched the news virtually every day from the age of 8. I have never seen anything like what we are observing.

In spite of the unprecedented nature of this election cycle, I will attempt to respond to “the question.” I am not demanding that anyone else share my view. But I was asked. Here is my best attempt to answer as I am able to see things at this time:

1. The Democratic and Republican party platforms are as different as night and day, in my opinion, as far apart as evil vs. good. The 51-page Democratic platform is the most leftist ever. (I don’t care for the “right vs. left” nomenclature. I am far more concerned with “right vs. wrong.”) The Democratic platform contains many points which are anti-biblical. (Time does not permit me here to identify what is meant by “anti-biblical,” which is covered in my new book Well Versed: Biblical Answers to Today’s Tough Issues.) It is thoroughly socialistic (a socialist is a communist without a gun). The 54-page GOP platform is one of the strongest GOP platforms ever. A biblically alert person could be comfortable with almost all of it. Party platforms are a big issue to me. Although some “blow off” party platforms, I do not. Nor do many people up and down the ballot who are running for office. This is a serious and very important item. I have a hard copy of both platforms in front of me now. Most people have never checked out what the party platforms say. They should. If a person is not drawn to the “top-of-the-ballot” candidate, they ought to at least consider voting for the candidate attached to the best party platform.

2. Analogy #1: Both candidates are flawed. We all know that. But permit me an analogy: As a pastor, I would rather deal with a church attendee who is blatant and brash in his sinning than one who is devious, lying, cunning and deceptive. Both are problematic, but one is easier to deal with than the other. If I were a pastor bringing correction to a parishioner, I would prefer dealing with a “Trump-type” any day over a “Hillary-type.” The chances of making progress with the “Trump-type” are many times greater than the “Hillary-type.”

3. Analogy #2: When my (late) wife’s remarkable and much loved oncologist said, “Don’t take Carol to that alternative (non FDA approved) treatment.” I asked, “Why not?” He said, “The unknown.” I said, “Doctor, your ‘known’ is much worse than the alternative treatment’s ‘unknown.'” I took her to that alternative treatment. One year later that same oncologist went to the alternative treatment doctor to see how it was that Carol had improved so much. While this alternative treatment did not ultimately save her life, it likely stretched two to three years of life to six years of life—by the admission of another one of her brilliant young oncologists who later said, “Without any medical training or scientific fact, you have put together a protocol of treatment that has moved her into the top fraction of 1 percent of survival rates of all patients with Carol’s particular cancer. Application of the analogy: Hillary’s “known” is considerably worse—many times over—than Trump’s “unknown.”

4. Trump has lots of sins in his past (actually, we all do), and—in the present—says things he should not say. I make no attempt to defend any of the things he has said. There is no need to rehearse the wrong things he has said. We know what they are. He should not have thought or said them. But there is no need to rehash them here. So we won’t. But let’s turn to the other candidate. Although America has had some scandal-ridden candidates in its history, we have never seen any one major party candidate more constantly scandalous as Hillary (along with her husband). She seems to exceed all previous boundaries for wrongdoing. The scandals just don’t stop. In the same way we did not take time to list all of Trump’s misstatements, neither will we here rehash the seemingly continuous string of horrific scandals of the Clintons.

5. Trump is slowly being surrounded by increasingly good people. From time to time, I receive encouraging calls regarding this. Can these good people impact Trump? We will see. In contrast, I see no reason for any encouragement regarding the people who surround Hillary.

6. Trump is right on approximately 75 percent of the issues. I wish it was 100 percent. It is not. I am in hopes that those beginning to surround him can help him connect the dots on more issues. Hillary is wrong on 100 percent of the issues.

7. This next issue might be one of the most important, but I suspect few will understand its significance. Trump opposes globalism. Hillary thrives on it. Globalism is far more than “geographical” or “eliminating national borders and boundaries.” It is spiritual and demonic at its core. Few—very few—understand this. This is quite likely one of the main reasons why Trump is hated. Do your homework on this one. Think “principalities and powers.” Serious. Extremely serious.

8. Not voting is not a viable option, contrary to what the “purists” claim. It is not my intention to begin a war of the issue. I know that some radically disagree with this. My view? They have the right to be wrong.

9. Voting for a third party candidate is—regardless of what is said—a complete “throw-away.” No third party candidate will be elected, or even come remotely close to being elected. And yes, that matters to me. And for the record, the Libertarian ticket—Johnson and Weld—is nearly as bad on many issues as Hillary. When I listen to them, I am stunned people of their ability have ever made it to elective office.

10. Trump has moved pro-life. Hillary is pro-baby killing, and prides herself on that, and honors the organization—Planned Parenthood—that actually traffics human parts from dead babies whom they have killed. This is below anything we have seen since Nazi Germany. The gall of Hillary! The Clintons have evaded justice for decades and likely will continue to. But they will someday stand before the Great White Throne. They will have to give account of their support of the ripping babies to shreds in the womb. For the record, those who vote for those who support the genocide of pre-borns will also have to give an account.

11. Trump wants to defend the nation (which is the purpose of government). Hillary has a horrific track record as Secretary of State, and due to hundreds of millions of dollars given to her and her husband’s foundation, she is beholden to those who want us dead.

12. Hillary claims “everything is fine” in America. This defies every single fact, but facts have never been an interest of Hillary’s. Trump understands that it is 11:59 p.m. on the “cultural clock.” America is near the end—morally, economically, militarily and, sadly, spiritually. There are very clear identifiable indicators—measurable ones—that America is no longer the world’s leading power. That day is over. Hillary will hasten the final destruction. Trump could either slow that down—or possibly, with God’s help—reverse it. Maybe.

13. Trump will address the massive government spending. Hillary will expand it above the existing unsustainable debt the U.S. currently is carrying (almost $20 trillion plus unfunded liabilities to Social Security, etc).

14. Trump will expose—and I pray, bring down—”the systemic evil” (crony, deceitful, misuse of capitalism) that reigns among many high-dollar lobbyists. Hillary thrives because of them.

15. Trump will stop the massive overreach of government. Hillary will extend it.

16. Freedoms come in “threes.” Political freedom, economic freedom and religious liberty coexist together. Take one away and the other two will eventually disappear. One cannot exist without the other two. The genius of America is that it had all three, until recently. Trump fully grasps the loss of religious liberty. I have heard him speak on it in person on several occasions. He knows that economic and political freedoms are evaporating. He will reverse that. Hillary will decimate all three.

17. Every rational person knows the Supreme Court appointments are paramount. Trump has listed 11 superb potential nominees. Hillary’s appointments would snuff out the tiny vestige of the three freedoms that are left (mentioned in the statement above).

18. I make no excuse for wrongdoing or wrongful, hurtful words from either candidate. Candidly, I want King Jesus. He rules in my heart. And yours too, I suspect. And I want Him to rule here—now. But that day is not fully manifested—yet. In the meantime, we prayerfully, carefully navigate this challenging election season, with great concern that above all, we honor our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in every arena of our lives, including the voting booth. That is my hope. I believe it is yours as well.

Read the original article at Charisma News.

Sign up for Jim Bakker Show