Charles c.w. Cooke has held a special place in my heart, and in the lore of our household, due to his amazing performance on the Bill Maher show in 2012. In a segment in which Charles, Joy Reid, and Glenn Greenwald were discussing Benghazi, Charles contrasted the American revolution with other modern revolutions.
He explained, “so i think Americans have a problem thinking about this sometimes because –and i include myself and British people –because the revolution that happened here was great, um and very rarely is that the case in the world . you know you have this revolution in America in which um the British fight the British and then they codify classical liberal values into a Constitution and it’s great but that’s not how it goes down normally normally there’s bloodshed and it’s horrible and especially in the middle east what they want to replace their dictatorships with if you look at the the polling is sharia law.”
His point could have led to some very interesting side paths, but instead, Joy Reid burst forth with the dutifully produced race based “slavery is bad” line, the only line the left seems to have about anything before 1965. (slavery/segregation interchangeable)
Charles waited until she was done, and even though she was trying to throw it to him, stuck to his point, and said “that the slavery point, i think , is cheap, if I’m honest “
“the point is is that if you’re looking for perfection in the 18th century, you’re not going to find it what the Americans did was a massive step forward it wasn’t perfect it was resolved in a civil war that was bloody and awful but if we’re going to write off the greatest revolution and the greatest Constitution in world history because it was imperfect and it was flawed then we might as well all go home”
Now, you can see that shows a boldness and insight not seen in many Americans, and with the most beautiful not plummy don’t know where it’s from accent from UK, said by a man who did his degree at Oxford? in the UK? on the American bill of rights and .
Which is why it was extremely frustrating to hear him on the now discontinued mad dogs and Englishman podcast the other day, stating that because Trump had said that he “should be reinstated” (as President partway through Biden’s term) (presumably after the midterm) because the election was a fraud and Joe Biden didn’t honestly win and there was actual concrete evidence abounding.
Of course, since the Democrats “won” the house and had the tie-breaking vice president in the senate and the Biden interlocutory resident, the only investigations involving the 2020 election have been these horrific ones where they have been going after people who were there in DC on Jan 6 to show their support for Trump, but who were arrested and held often in solitary for up to a year, on the basis of unlawful entry into a government building. I’ve gone over that before, how it is likely a left scheme to smear and come up with a reason to malign Trump and the Republicans and anyone who questions the election of 2020. Simply paint it as an insurrection, leave out that there were FBI and other instigators involved which are not being revealed, and you see it was just taking advantage of the Trump supporters presence in DC to imply that there was unlawful intent to block or overturn the perfectly proper election results.
As I have said, if the Trump voters had wanted to do something unlawful, why do it on Jan 6, the last day to legally bring evidence before Congress before they accept the results? Insurrections and coups don’t abide by deadlines for lawful procedures. But over and over again leading up to Jan 6, Trump’s supporters had communicated and shown that they intended to work within the law . That was the reason for all the lawsuits they filed – using the legal process to bring their evidence before the courts up to and including mandamus petitions at all levels. While the Democrats with their fraudulently obtained numbers simply took a knee and let time run out. So EVERYTHING was riding on January 6 being the day that the evidence could be brought in front of Congress before they certified the electors votes. That was the plan, was my understanding, there was a chance to bring the evidence before Congress and the people that day, and there were presentations planned by lawyers on the Trump side. Because the courts had thrown out all the cases, even though that is the incorrect standard to hear a case, you don’t have to have all the evidence in line before you get a hearing. And they had affidavits and mathematical examinations and proofs of anomalies up the ass, but the captured or blackmailed courts just froze.
Secondarily, we must remember that many also went because they realized that if the electors votes were certified, it was also a last chance to join with other Trump supporters to revel in the happiness and freedom we had felt under President Trump, and a chance to show him, en masse, our deep appreciation for his tireless devotion to America and Americans. The first president who had done what he said he would,fighting the deep state every step of the way, making America great again. Trump had asked them to come to DC to so that the great millions assembled would show the Congress that the people disputed the election results and wanted Congress to see how many actual Trump supporters they were. As Trump said, s, that way, after Congress had seen the evidence that the election was massively fraudulent, and was asked to vote against certifying such ill gotten supposed vote numbers,they could look out and d see the millions gathered there in a proper peaceful assembly for redress of grievances and feel emboldened to stop the steal..
Arg. So Charles says that because it’s preposterous and there is no evidence that the election was stolen or fraudulent (que?) that for Trump to say that he “should be reinstated” though Biden was already sworn in is a statement of intent to overthrow or use some unlawful process to be reinstalled. (even if based on fraudulent results that can now be proven fraudulent through the packets data Mike Lindell has and through the 2000 mules phone trace data in the movie about the operatives dropping off hundreds of ballots across state lines after stopping by Democratic agencies to get paid to do so.)
Real proof/.
Which isn’t to say I agree that Biden should be overthrown and Trump installed, come on Charles, you know the Republicans – or at least Trump and his MAGA nation – believe in the proper law and process being followed. That is not necessarily what Trump means by the phrase either. Saying “I should be reinstalled as the rightful president” doesn’t mean he was suggesting it be done unlawfully.
Yes, reinstalling is unprecedented, I get that, so that would be a problem unless we could find a law that covered that. Why is it unprecedented, because presidents who get 10 million more votes in their reelection ALWAYS win their reelection, and the only other time one did not was yet another election wherein fraud was suspected, I think the Nixon versus Kennedy one if I’m not mistaken.
Anyway, so then Charles took it a step further, because with just the Trump was wrong to say that part, all he would be suggesting is don’t let Trump convince you to unlawfully overthrow the sitting President. But Charles kicked it up a notch from that innocuous level, in a way scarily like how the media and left do with things. Make a huge intertwined narrative out of a thing that gets the left exactly what they want. So to show you, imagine, how would this statement differ if Pelosi said it? not at all, and that’s why it’s scary that Charles said it.
He said “And in the midterm, any Republican who said they support Trump without specifically disavowing that Trump should be reinstalled (because that would violate the law) no Republican should vote for that Republican candidate in that case, because they are advocating violating the law. “
And when the interviewer said well, what if they just said he should be reinstalled without specifying how or stating they would do it unlawfully? Doesn’t matter. And what if the candidate simply said they think Trump should win in 2024? And Charles said “Well, then you’d have to consider more and where they come in on other things”
So his solution is that it would be better for America if Republicans voted for commie leftie dems rather than anyone who didn’t disavow Trump’s rather vague, “I should be reinstalled”.
I think “I should be reinstalled” is a great way for Trump to “the election was fake” and “Joe Biden didn’t actually win and we all know it” without saying those phrases which will now get you banned as part of the Jan 6 insurrection for questioning the election results.
Charles Cooke, for once, was wrong. Amazing. It has taken ten years, but here it is. He was wrong. He didn’t consider it from different angles and he let himself get blinded by one side of it. Not only that, unlike his usual measured commentary, in this he actually magnified the error by suggesting that6 people base their Congressional voting on this one phrase of Trump’s. So I hope you see this and think some more, Charles Cooke, because you usually are right on the money and I count on your insight because of it.
This whole thing plays on the lie the manufacturers have done which said that these which do not prevent or prevent transmissions are still called vaccines. this was to bank on the public acceptance of that word and undertstanidng of it
most people getting and thinking its good to mandate covid19 vaccines mistakenly think these are also vaccines
the court cases used to uphold these vaccine mandates with no exceptions were about diseases with much higher death and transmission rates. covid has in the normal under 65 population about a .7 death rate/. thus mandating these even if they were normal vaccines would be not okay based on something that is not really a public health threat due to actual low death rate.
if the white house and congress can be excempt why cant others
in adddition, these3 are not vaccines so court cases asbout vaccinee sare not on all fours.
these are a new experimental technology without the proper length of studies completed and without enough animal studies and it is not a dead form of the virus but instead makes your body make part of the virus.
if this reasoning, well it;’s for public safety is allowed to stand as a justification for the government to violate bodily integrity by saying its for safety and then you have to inject WHATEVER THEY SAY TO INJECT – paves the way for them to be able to order people with no medical or religious exemptions permitted – to inject whatever the government wants into their body. with all the nano tech knowledge out there this could \easily be darpa like things that can remotely kill you or track you if those aren’t already in the vaccines. scary
this thinking in this article was helped in part by the children’s defense network lawsuit against the fda.
When you consider that Heller and MacDonald were decided by a 5-4 decision and that they have heard exactly one case about the 2a since then, you can see that the most important right is the one that is being pushed aside.
For the past maybe ten years, since Obama’s end of first term I’d say, each year contains an ever escalating event or change or two or three that eviscerates rights, destroys the past, or irrevocably reduces choices and freedom in the future. Each year brings a more jaw dropping openly done action against all that is good and right – globally, and, more to my concern, here against America, against her citizens and their way of life and their rights.
Consider, how innocent even the very robotic and evil Hillary Clinton campaign looks now, when an entire election was stolen through international and domestic coordinated vote machine fraud and open actions of (mostly black) foot soldiers who were convinced they were saving the country by cheating for Joe Biden. Which of course led to Biden being seated and then immediately taking each and every action on each and every situation that was the opposite of what was good and right and Constitutional and openly displaying that he is a empty shell and no one knows who is really running things, except well, the same as who is running the country generally. The CFR/Bohemian/Davos/Big Tech/Big Media/Soros-Democrat Globalists.
They all follow the same plan, and it is apparent that the same network is part of why the 2a is treated as it is. We are now up to over 200 pages in lexis when you search under just Second amendment of the US Constitution – 200 pages of holdings from cases. One is Miller, one is Cruikshank, those are old, then Heller, and MacDonald, and Caetano (although it was not heard it was summarily reversed) and ALL THE REST are cases where either the district or the circuit court found a twisted way to interpret Heller and MacDonald to rule against the people claiming they had rights under the 2a.
200 pages!
I will paste in some selections, but they will enrage you if you are anything like me. What manipulation!@ And at this point, we are only one supreme court decision away from a ruling which decides if it is okay that the lower courts have said people can’t carry in public (then what does “bear arms” mean?) or if it is true that anything a state says is an “assault weapon” made up term is outside the protection of the 2a because they are “like the m-16, and Heller said that the m-16 was not protected as it was most useful in war”
(as an aside, how could a militia be armed if they were forbidden something “most useful in war”)
But that is the actual ruling in the decision which was on its way to the supreme court and which all CA cases were ordered “held in abeyance” pending the ruling. Then suddenly, a new York pistol and rifle case got there ahead of the CA case, even though it was only two years ago that new York pistol and rifle vs. city and state of new York also got all CA 2a cases held in abeyance pending the supreme court decision. And you know what happened with THAT case? After all that waiting, and even though the case asked them to clarify to lower courts if they really meant what they said in Heller and MacDonald – well, at the last minute, new York city and state overturned their own law that was the one challenged in the case, and the Supreme court then dismissed the case as MOOT! Meaning the petitioners who had spent millions to fight the law the legal way with the case were left without a ruling that they were entitled to their costs on appeal. And meaning that any state or city now can make any unconstitutional law they want – petitioners will have to pony up the millions to fight it and wait all those years as it works its way up to the supreme court. Other cases challenging similar laws in other circuits or states will be held in abeyance pending the resolution of the case challenging the unconstitutional law, and then, only IF the supreme court agrees to hear the case, then the city or state can get rid of the law. They will have been able to keep it all the way until then, all through the pending, and then get it dismissed as moot. And as soon as its dismissed, just pass another law, exactly the same or worse, and start the same process over again.
insert justice thomas’s dissent in that dismissal
insert the Scalia dissent on cases after Heller
insert the pet for cert in Jackson
insert that recent pet for cert which discussed how the 9th sua sponte en banc always overrules panel decisions on the 2a which are in keeping with heller.
insert the terrible parts of rupp
insert some great parts from miller and duncan
and insert some sad pictures of what happens when 100 million are killed by their own government after being disarmed (and usually placed under communist or tyrannical rule)
Anyway, here are some links about this, and I will add some great quotes I”ve been getting from 2a cases to this article later.
The Amistad project commissioned a study of the impact of private money on the election – which carefully documented the way that Zuckerberg’s (and his wife, last name Chan, who is Chinese ancestry, which would be handy if you were China and needed spies, interestingly, so is Mitch McConnel’s) CTCL grants of 500 million were spent to influence the election.
Of course, before the election, this sort of thing would have been denied, because of course until it was done, it did not appear to be a coordinated plan, and without the extreme behavior on election night at the larger counting centers – which the CTCL grant had pushed its grantees towards – it still might not seem believable. But Amistad’s digestion and delineation was so good that the left had to take the tack of celebrating the hidden network, through the disgusting Time article I wrote of earlier, for one, and by this NPR piece for two.
As an aside, seeing what used to be neutral media bend the knee so hard on the communist/elites line since Trump won, and with BLM/diversity, and COVID has been revolting. It is so disappointing to see, given that when Bush was in power, and even Obama to some extent, they were doing some reasonable balanced reporting. For instance, they would have Wayne La Pierre on the show to debate someone on gun control, they on their own investigated some of the surveillance being used on Americans, they explored and decried the police state. Now, it is simply an arm of the democrat (read elite/globalist/anointed/marxist) party. And Tom Fitton even revealed that through an info request, he got emails showing direct coordination of various state governments with facebook, google twitter, to censor posts related to the election. Among other terrible things big tech did, as they moved to an exclusive partner for the left under Obama. I heard google visited the white house 450 times in a year. Now under interlocutory resident Biden, they have decided the public gets to know the visitor log when the white house feels like it. Which of course means there must be the most awful procession of demon globalist annointeds going in and out every day. The ones who are really in control. (Where are the inside the White House leakers now?)
This of course, implicates the Constitution because the companies have been shielded both by section 230, though of course, the protections there were based on those companies only offering platforms to everyone and having no editorial control over what was seen – but now they completely do this and the protections still apply. The other protection that the courts came up with then for big tech was that they are private companies and free speech is only protected from government interference, not private companies interference. Yet, if the government pressures private companies to do what the government itself is forbidden by the constitution to do, that is as if the government is doing the thing. So it will be interesting to see if anyone bothers to file a lawsuit against that, but again, these are conservatives being censored, so suddenly the organizations that filed on behalf of people who wanted to hand out leaflets on private property such as housing developments and malls, where the court was convinced that even though it was private property, free speech rights applied and the private owner of the property could not block the person’s speech. Now that the same is happening to conservatives online, which is basically the main “public square” even with the evidence of direct government collusion, nothing happens. Yuck.
So the paper is great, and maybe because of it, or because they noticed in on their own, there have been several lawsuits related to the behavior of the countries election commissions and secretaries of state/whoever it was at the city or county level in charge of the election who applied for these grants thought hey were against the law because they violated hava provisions, AND because they had claw-back provisions and paid directly for election related jobs which are always supposed to be neutral. It is unheard of for private money to be involved in paying election judges or poll workers – I think a very stupid child could see why, yet they had the audacity to pull this off, in such a way that there was almost nothing anyone could do about it until it was too late. It also details the hundreds? of lawsuits filed by left leaning organizations before the election to move the ballots to mail and then to remove the safeguards states had in place to protect the mail ballot votes. So it details those well, also.
Anyway, a chart inside the report goes over where the grants were and the percentage Hillary won in 2016 and Trump in 2016 and I thought it would be cool to go and add in the actual vote outcome for trump and Biden in those places. This is because ctcl gave grants to places where Hillary won to places where trump won in a ratio of 9:1 which is putting its thumb on the scale. And someone who used to work for obama had said in a book that 2020 would be a block by block knock down battle of turnout, and loqw and behold, that’s what they did.
The 2020 election was a scandal – and it had traitors within a coordinated conspiracy and foreign actors, taking advantage of those insiders (China and others but China the most) using the internet to directly take votes from president Trump and give them to Biden. Mike Lindell of My Pillow made a second movie, this time about some packet logs that people recorded on election night which forensic analysts who have worked for us cyber command say are the proof and unchangeable of these intrusions and we are lucky someone thought to record the packets that night and bring them to Mike Lindell.
Sounds valid, and probably is, especially when you google search and get only articles trashing the film even though it is packet evidence verified by lots of cyber security people he paid for himself to review before publicizing it so he could be sure.
The baddies who stole the election and are now taking advantage of the interlocutory residents’ falsely attained presence in the White House are evil demons. I hope God punishes these people for this.
After all, just as the epic rap battle tesla vs edison song says of Tesla, the same could be said of President Trump
“You did not steal from me, you stole me from mankind”. Tesla and Trump.
A decision from Judge Benitez, after 14000 pages and hours of testimony – that the case filed in 2019 called Miller v Beccerra (now Miller v. Bonta) covers the various arguments made by the state to upholding their since-1989 ever expanded “assault weapon” ban, and decides that it fails to meet even the very low (and rejected by Heller) interest balancing standard of scrutiny, as well as intermediate scrutiny and of course, strict scrutiny.
It is a big deal, covering all the wide sweep of usefulness for militia as a valid reason (interoperable with mil spec guns if Californians were ever called up as a militia) and hammers home “in common use for lawful purposes” deciding factor given by Heller with industry literature and experts. And offers sympathetic declarants for the self defense reasoning too. It particularly focuses on pulling second amendment jurisprudence back to what was held in Heller, away from the “building on flawed precedent to ignore Heller‘s mandate” direction cases have currently gone.
That is especially important, given the Supreme Court’s unwillingness to take a second amendment case and show that they meant what they said in Heller and MacDonald. There was one 2a case the Supreme Court issued a per curiam opinion on, named Caetano, which I heard nothing about -and that case is deftly woven into the arguments in MIller v. Bonta, too. It is like Heller v. District of Columbia or U.S. v. Texas (the dapa injunction case filed by Texas after Obama sought to expand daca and add dapa, where the filings and declarations are by people who are very polished and very good at narrowing issues and clearly stating things – and more importantly,. at predicting what the state of ca will attempt to argue. It seems amazing to me the state’s lawyers can argue what they do when they have to know it is wrong, and amazing to me too that there are so many court decisions involving Heller where the most tortured reasoning is used. That is soooo offensive, and awful, in a land of precedent decisions being binding. Heller was supposed to be binding too, but it wasn’t as clear as many lower courts needed it to be for them to actually follow it. Added to that, by refusing to grant certiorari on any of the 2a cases that came to it, the Supreme court let stand those wrongly decided lower court decisions against Heller. Miller really reads like an attempt by Judge Benitez to pull it back to Heller’s correct interpretation and put an end to the treachery below. It’s good because the arguments are very strong, and also, the issues thus displayed force the state of ca, and any courts which overturn his carefully and historically and Heller bound opinion to actually come out and state so on the record. t is pretty obvious that the last 40 years they have been pushing the gun laws in one direction, away from the US Constitution.It would be so nice to start pushing things back in a direction where the US Constitution and the rights of the people triumph over the government attempt to take power. It would be great for CA and for all the 9th circuit and I would hope would do something to restore the 2a as a valid constitutional right.
I. I thought that after Heller, the constitutionality of the assault weapons ban in CA would be challenged because t the assault weapons ban (roberti roos) in CA was found Constitutional in the earlier case that challenged it found it Constitutional because the second amendment only protected the rights of the militia and not an individual right to bear arms. That was BEFORE the Supreme Court decided in Heller and MacDonald that the second amendment protected an individual’s right to bear arms. I guess it is good they waited until now to do the case, after Judge Benitez in an earlier case found that the ban on “large capacity” magazines (over ten rounds, commonly sold with many firearms around the country) was unconstitutional, Then they were able to frame the case as just asking the same reasoning be applied to the entire class of weapons banned by the assault weapons ban. But they are communists, and want people disarmed. So reading the parts of it, and also law review articles and other scholarly journal articles by some of the declarants has been quite cool.
However, there is a 7 dem to 4 republican on the 9th, and while I am impressed with the recently filed papers opposing the emergency stay well, I think we know what the 9th likes to do to get its way and that is – “decide – SUA SPONTE, of course, to DO WHATEVER THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CA wants” Just like Peruta and Jackson.
So rather than deal with any deferential standard like you do in a normal appeal, nor in issuing an emergency stay due to irreparable harm, they will decide to rehear it sua sponte en banc, and then in connection with that, say the 9th en banc panel are sua sponte ordering a stay until the decision is reheard or if that reheard en banc decision is appealed, then stayed until the supreme court decides on the appeal. What will the excuse be about why a stay is needed to prevent irreparable harm? Same reason as in peruta, because if the ban is lifted, the entire second amendment jurisprudence in CA will be upended with resulting increase in gun violence. That was what Kampala Harris argued when she asked them after it was all over, to let her horn in on the case and to rehear it en banc. She said the case has such large public policy impact, which is what they said for peruta. In fact, why in peruta when the sheriff did not appeal it and thus it would have stood, allowed Kampala Harris the AG to file a notice of intervenor request for emergency stay and rehearing en banc. But the court en banc panel decided there too, SUA SPONTE to rehear. And rehearing avoids the fairness of the deferential standards normally required by appeals judges, who are not “re trying” the case, but applying certain appellate rules such as mistakes of law or procedural/constitutional issues that meant procedural, the parties were not fairly heard, if the judge abused his discretion. If it was all procedurally proper (especially as here) the appeals court can’t substitute their judgment for that of the lower court judge. But I bet these 9th en banc judges will do just that.
I saw the filings done by Miller in opposition to the a.g. request for emergency stay in this case, and when I saw the words
In deciding whether a party has demonstrated such a strong likelihood of success, this Court must review the District Court’s findings of fact for clear error, conduct a de novo review of the District Court’s legal findings, and consider the scope of the injunction under a deferential abuse of discretion standard. Index Newspapers, 977 F.3d at 824 (citing cases)
If deciding sua sponte lets them essentially retry the case, and issue a stay for as long as athey can, that is what they will do. Mark my words.
The Supreme Court threw out a series of legal challenges on Feb. 22 to voting processes and results in several states left over from the recent presidential election cycle.
On Jan. 11, with Inauguration Day just over a week away, the high court denied requests from the litigants–President Donald Trump, Republicans, and Trump supporters—to expedite several of the lawsuits, which concerned the presidential elections held in the battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The court, as is its custom, didn’t explain why it dismissed the emergency applications seeking to fast-track the lawsuits.
President Joe Biden, a Democrat, was inaugurated on Jan. 20, alongside Vice President Kamala Harris after Congress voted Jan. 7 to reject objections by senators and representatives challenging Electoral College votes from disputed states won narrowly by Biden. That vote took place after a breach of the U.S. Capitol by hundreds of protesters delayed the certification process for hours.
Some of the lawsuits challenged the election results on the basis of allegedly unconstitutional changes made to state election procedures. Article II of the U.S. Constitution states that “Each State shall appoint [electors for president and vice president] in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.” Litigants point out that the legislative power here is “plenary,” meaning unqualified and absolute.
State officials, they say, aren’t allowed to modify election procedures without the consent of the legislature.
One of the now-dismissed appeals, Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Degraffenreid, court files 20-542 and 20-574, was originally known as Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Boockvar, but then respondent Kathy Boockvar resigned as Pennsylvania’s secretary of state and was replaced by Veronica Degraffenreid. The case dealt with the perceived overreach of the state’s Supreme Court when it unilaterally changed election rules without the consent of the state legislature.
The GOP argued in its petition that “important questions of federal law [were] implicated by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s 4–3 decision extending the General Assembly’s Election Day received-by deadline and mandating a presumption of timeliness for non-postmarked ballots.”
This is the case in which Justice Samuel Alito ordered on Nov. 6, three days after Election Day, that “all ballots received by mail after 8:00 p.m. on November 3 be segregated,” away from other voted ballots.
Justices Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the appeal.
On Feb. 22, Alito wrote in his dissent, joined by Gorsuch, that the case presents “an important and recurring constitutional question: whether the Elections or Electors Clauses of the United States Constitution … are violated when a state court holds that a state constitutional provision overrides a state statute governing the manner in which a federal election is to be conducted. That question has divided the lower courts, and our review at this time would be greatly beneficial.”
In his dissent, Thomas expressed frustration, writing that the court “failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections.”
Another now-dismissed appeal, Kelly v. Pennsylvania, court file 20-810, was brought by Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.), a strong Trump supporter who challenged Biden’s victory in the Keystone State. Kelly had asked the Supreme Court to consider his lawsuit which challenged mail-in voting policies in his home state of Pennsylvania. Kelly argued that Act 77, the 2019 state statute that authorized universal, no-excuses mail-in voting, violated the Constitution.
Although support for challenging Electoral College results evaporated in Congress after the breach of the Capitol, Kelly held firm, objecting to the certification of the Pennsylvania electors early on Jan. 7. The challenge failed.
The Supreme Court denied another petition from Pennsylvania, Donald J. Trump for President v. Degraffenreid, court file 20-845. Boockvar was originally listed as the respondent.
Trump campaign attorney John C. Eastman of Anaheim, California, told The Epoch Times in mid-January that he still held out hope the nation’s highest court would take up the case because it concerned important issues.
“There is a well-recognized exception to mootness called ‘capable of repetition yet evading review,’ he said at the time.
“It is invoked quite frequently in election litigation, as oftentimes the issues are as applicable to the next election as to the current one. Our legal issue—whether non-legislative election and judicial officials in the state have the ability to ignore or alter state election law in the ‘manner’ of choosing presidential electors violates Article II of the U.S. Constitution, remains important and in need of the Court’s review.”
Another dismissed case was Wood v. Raffensperger, court file 20-799, brought by Trump supporter and lawyer L. Lin Wood against Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. Wood argued that Raffensperger, a Republican, “usurped” the plenary authority of the Georgia Legislature “by entering into a Settlement Agreement with the Democratic Party earlier this year and issuing an Official Election Bulletin that modified the Legislature’s clear procedures for verifying the identity of mail-in voters.”
The March 2020 settlement with the Democratic Party of Georgia, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee violated voters’ rights by setting forth “totally different standards to be followed [by] a poll worker processing absentee ballots in Georgia.”
A case from Arizona, Ward v. Jackson, court file 20-809, also was dismissed.
That lawsuit, brought by Arizona GOP chief Kelli Ward, claimed that the lower courts hadn’t allowed sufficient time to those challenging the state’s election results.
“In this case, the lower courts allowed only two full days of inspection and discovery into the validity of the presidential election in Arizona, in which … [3,333,829] ballots were cast.”
A case from Michigan, King v. Whitmer, court file 20-815, was dismissed.
The petition stated that there were “widespread voter irregularities and fraud in the State of Michigan in the processing and tabulating of votes and absentee ballots,” and that the trial court “completely and utterly ignored the dozens of affidavits, testimonials, expert opinions, diagrams and photos that supported the petitioners’ claim.”
This can only be a provocation. That republican state legislatures permitted the violation of state election laws and went along with seating the slate of electors for the “victor” based on these fraudulent results is appalling. That no court would even grant standing to review the evidence, including the supreme court, when the standard to get a hearing is only makes it likely that they will succeed is such a proof that so many are conspirators or compromised or both. That open violations of the law which make elections fair were videotaped and made available, yet no legacy media would touch it and big tech actively suppressed it is proof of the communist future we all face. And the lawless (but enforced with armed security, again, in violation of election laws) behavior such as blocking observation by republican poll watchers and secret counting in back rooms and blocking off the windows of rooms, as well as counting after sending everyone home, destyroying the GA ballots once the committee voted to have them reviewed by Pullitzer with zero justice system consequences makes this a sordid mockery. And then that the elected officials showed just how true it is that we have now lost the only thing that we the people have to control our government with – the vote, is gone forever, and they are free to do just as they please. Making up stupid excuses for every protest registered by a state to seating the electors, clapping when the protests were found invalid as they “were not signed by a senator”, and the pressure (deatg threats? blackmail?) used to put pressure on the congress to just “go along” and approve the seating of Biden! I have never been so disheartened by anything in my life.
THIS is what they mean by a travesty. In the face of all this evidence, they go along like automatons approving it so as to assure a peaceful transfer of power, when we the people picked Trump, overwhelmingly (not including my actual self in the we the people phrase, as a non citizen of course I did not vote as that would be wrong as voting is so sacred.) so that he received 10 million more votes than he did in 2016. Obama got 3.5 million less on his re-election.
Here is the full copy of a wonderful article detailing much of the fraud written by some staff at behind the networks. I do not own the copyright, but it is an excellent summary. I am posting it for political discussion under free use and thank them,
As Americans watched the presidential election controversy unfold in November and December of 2020, the very same publications that had spent years lying about President Trump’s “Russia collusion” were once again dictating the narrative that Americans people were dutifully supposed to believe. The Los Angeles Times, for instance, declared that Trump’s “baseless” and “dangerous” claim “that the election was rigged to benefit Joe Biden” had been thoroughly “debunked.” The New York Times proclaimed that “Trump’s false election fraud claims” were founded upon nothing more than a “torrent of falsehoods.” Sneering at “how Trump drove the lie that the election was stolen,” The Washington Post mocked Republicans who were “still pretending that there was election fraud.” And CNN.com warned that “Trump’s obsession with overturning the election” had begun to spiral “out of control.”
Contrary to the claims of the aforementioned sources, what follows is a compilation of vital facts which demonstrate that the 2020 presidential election was not only rife with fraud, but also with unconstitutional measures by which state election laws were changed during the months and weeks prior to Election Day — changes that were, in every single case, designed to benefit Joe Biden and the Democrats.
Before the Election: How We Got Here
In 2005, a landmark report by the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, known informally as the Carter-Baker Commission, advised all U.S. states that in order to guarantee free and fair elections, they should: (a) increase voter ID requirements; (b) minimize the use of mail-in ballots, which “remain the largest source of potential voter fraud”; (c) disallow ballot harvesting by third parties; (d) purge voter rolls of all ineligible or fraudulent names; (e) allow election observers to monitor ballot-counting processes without restraint or obstruction; (f) ensure that voting machines are accurate in their tabulations; and (g) encourage news organizations to “delay the release of any exit-poll data until the election has been decided.” All of these recommendations were widely ignored in the elections of November 2020.
During the months leading up to the 2020 presidential race, the Biden campaign assembled a team of some 600 lawyers and more than 10,000 volunteers to “[go] into every single state” in order to “call out local rules that don’t adequately ensure access to vote.”
Toward that end, Democrats, starting in late 2019, filed nearly 300 lawsuits in dozens of states – most notably all of the key battleground states – in an effort to change election laws and regulations in ways that would benefit Democrat candidates. For example, they sought to: (a) extend the statutory deadlines by which mail-in ballots could be submitted, postmarked, or received by election authorities; (b) permit people to vote earlier than ever before — in some cases, as many as 50 days prior to Election Day; (c) eliminate signature, signature-verification, and witness requirements for mail-in ballots; (d) void state laws that disallowed ballot harvesting by third parties; (e) terminate photo-ID requirements for in-person voting; (f) introduce provisions that would allow for the “curing” of mail-in ballots that contained errors or omissions; and (g) require state election officials to send unsolicited mail-in ballots to every person listed as a registered voter, even though such lists have long been notorious for their multitudinous inaccuracies.
Though the Democrats did not get everything that they wanted via their lawsuits, they got most of it. On December 16, 2020, broadcaster and bestselling author Mark Levin, citing the cases of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona — and their combined 73 Electoral College votes – explained what had happened:
“Every one of these states [and others as well] were targeted by Democrats. Every one of these states violated the United States Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 [which empowers the state legislatures alone to make election law for each state]. Every one of them, because changes were made to their election systems not by the state legislature, but by other public officials.… That’s 73 Electoral College votes. This is why Donald Trump won the election…. [I]f the federal Constitution had not been violated, yes, Donald Trump would be … president of the United States today. Putting all fraud aside…. This is why you should be furious with the United States Supreme Court, that had as its duty, as its sworn responsibility … to insist that the states comply with the federal Constitution under Article II, Section 1, Clause 2, and that any changes made outside that clause, by governors, secretaries of states, by courts, federal or state, by election boards or other bureaucrats, will be deemed unconstitutional. [The Supreme Court] had a case [in Pennsylvania] … before a single vote was counted, they had a case [alleging unconstitutional changes to election laws] and they didn’t take it up…. [The Democrats] made these changes, they plotted, they planned, they litigated, they pressured, they lobbied, and now we have, if he’s sworn in, Joe Biden, who will be an illegitimate president of the United States in every meaning of that word, ‘illegitimate.’”
On December 30, 2020, Levin expanded on this theme as follows:
“Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the federal Constitution could not be more explicit. It states, in pertinent part: ‘Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress….’ This language was purposeful. During the Constitutional Convention, there were various proposals suggested for electing a president. Should the president be directly elected by the people? That proposal was rejected out of concern that such a purely democratic process could be hijacked by a temporary majority. Should the president be chosen in the first instance from within the national legislature? That proposal was also rejected on grounds of separation of powers. Should the judiciary play a role in the selection of the president? That idea was dispensed with as being the most objectionable, as judges were to be the least political of all public officials. The framers deliberatively and with much thought created the Electoral College process, in which the people and their elected legislatures — both state and national — would play important roles. But the electoral process rested first and foremost on the state legislatures directing how the electors would be chosen. The reason: While rejecting the direct election of a president, the framers concluded that the state legislatures were closest to the people in their respective states and would be the best representatives of their interests. At no time did the framers even raise the possibility that governors, attorneys general, secretaries of state, election boards, administrators, etc., would play any significant role in the electoral process. Indeed, certain of those offices did not even exist. Moreover, as I said, the courts were rejected out of hand. Thus, such an important power was to be exercised exclusively by the state legislatures.
“After the 2016 election, the Democrat Party, its various surrogate groups, and eventually the Biden campaign unleashed hundreds of lawsuits and an unrelenting lobbying campaign in key states that had previously been won by President Trump, taking unconstitutional measures intended to stop President Trump from winning these states in the 2020 election, thereby literally undoing this critical constitutional provision. What had been carefully crafted at the Constitutional Convention and clearly spelled out in the Constitution was the main obstacle to defeating President Trump and winning virtually all future presidential elections. The problem for the Democrats was that in several of these battleground states, the Republicans controlled the legislatures, while the Democrats controlled state executive offices. The Constitution was not on their side. Therefore, they used the two branches [executive and judicial] of government that were to have no role in directing the appointment of electors to eviscerate the role of the Republican legislatures.”
Levin then proceeded to explain specifically how four of the most important battleground states had bowed to Democrat Party pressure and unconstitutionally changed their election laws:
“In Pennsylvania … the Democrat governor, attorney general, and secretary of state made and enforced multiple changes to the state’s voting procedures, all of which were intended to assist the Democrats and Biden. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, whose seven justices are elected, has a 5-2 Democrat majority. (In 2018, there was a big push by the Democrat Party to fill three of the seats with Democrats, and it succeeded.) Just months before the [2020] general election, that court rewrote the state election laws to eliminate signature requirements or signature matching, eliminate postal markings that were intended to ensure votes were timely, and exten[d] the counting of mail-in ballots to Friday at 5:00 p.m. (state law had a hard date and time — election day on Tuesday, which ended at 8:00 p.m. ET), thereby fundamentally altering Pennsylvania’s election laws and nullifying the federal constitutional role of the Republican legislature.
“In Michigan, among other things, the Democrat secretary of state unilaterally changed the state’s election laws with respect to absentee ballot applications and signature verification. Indeed, she sent unsolicited absentee ballot applications by mail prior to the primary and general elections. State law required would-be voters to request such ballots. She intentionally circumvented the Republican state legislature and violated the federal Constitution by issuing over 7 million unsolicited [ballot applications]. Furthermore, a court of claims judge, appointed by a Democrat, ordered clerks to accept ballots postmarked by Nov. 2 and received within 14 days [after] the election, the deadline for results to be certified. The ballots would be counted as provisional ballots. The state legislature had no role in these changes.
“In Wisconsin, the Elections Commission and local Democrat officials in the state’s largest cities, including Milwaukee and Madison, changed the state’s election laws. Among other things, they placed hundreds of unmanned drop boxes in strategic locations in direct violation of state law. Not surprisingly, the locations were intended to be most convenient to Democrat voters.[1] In addition, they told would-be voters how to avoid security measures like signature verification and photo ID requirements. These bureaucrats and local officials bypassed the Republican legislature in altering state election procedures.
“In Georgia, the secretary of state is a Republican. Regardless,… Georgia’s Secretary of State entered a Compromise Settlement Agreement and Release with the Democratic Party of Georgia to materially change the statutory requirements for reviewing signatures on absentee ballot envelopes to confirm the voter’s identity by making it far more difficult to challenge defective signatures beyond the 22 express mandatory procedures set forth at GA. CODE § 21-2-386(a)(1)(B).71. Among other things, before a ballot could be rejected, the Settlement required a registrar who found a defective signature to now seek a review by two other registrars, and only if a majority of the registrars agreed that the signature was defective could the ballot be rejected but not before all three registrars’ names were written on the ballot envelope along with the reason for the rejection. These cumbersome procedures are in direct conflict with Georgia’s statutory requirements, as is the Settlement’s requirement that notice be provided by telephone (i.e., not in writing) if a telephone number is available. Finally, the Settlement purports to require State election officials to consider issuing guidance and training materials drafted by an expert retained by the Democratic Party of Georgia.’ Georgia’s Republican legislature had no role in these electoral changes resulting from [the] consent decree.
“Consequently, in each of these four battleground states — and there were others — whether through executive fiats or litigation, key, if not core, aspects of state election laws were fundamentally altered in contravention of the explicit power granted to the state legislatures and, therefore, in violation of the federal Constitution and the process set forth for directing the selection of electors. And this is before we even get to the issue of voter fraud. That said, in many instances, ballots that would have been rejected or, if counted, [would have been] evidence of fraud, were now said to be legal — not by state legislatures but by those who unilaterally changed the election laws.
“The United States Supreme Court had an opportunity before the election, and in this general election cycle, to make clear to the states that they must comply with the plain language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution. Indeed, when a federal district judge in Michigan altered that state’s election laws, a closely divided U.S. Supreme Court overturned his order. Justice Gorsuch pointed out that the state legislature writes election laws. However, when a case was brought to the Court involving the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s interference in state election laws, the U.S. Supreme Court was paralyzed…. Its failure to enforce the Constitution … has contributed mightily to our current plight.”
The Implausibility of Trump’s Loss
While President Trump was granting interviews on a daily basis to friendly and hostile media outlets alike, and was holding campaign rallies that drew tens of thousands of passionate supporters, Joe Biden, for the most part, remained locked away inside the basement of his home, rarely even agreeing to give brief video interviews. On the few occasions when Biden did take part in interviews — almost always with fawning, sycophantic questioners — he typically seemed confused, disoriented, incoherent, exhausted, and reliant on a teleprompter or written notes for nearly every remark he made.[2] And when he held his “rallies” or gave speeches, they were invariably awkward, uninspired events mired in pessimistic rhetoric and attended only by tiny handfuls of people.[3] Common sense tells us that no candidate so deeply flawed and so severely limited, could possibly have inspired 15.4 million more people to vote for him, than had voted for Democrat icon Barack Obama in 2012.
Late on Election Night – November 3, 2020 — President Trump led Biden by approximately 112,000 votes in Wisconsin, 293,000 votes in Michigan, 357,000 votes in Georgia, and 555,000 votes in Pennsylvania. Then, highly populous counties in two of those states — Allegheny County in Pennsylvania and Fulton County in Georgia — suddenly suspended their vote counts, almost simultaneously. By the early-morning hours of the following day, Wisconsin had flipped in Biden’s favor, followed by Michigan soon thereafter. A few days later, Georgia and Pennsylvania followed suit as well.
President Trump received more votes than any previous incumbent seeking re-election, and he increased his 2016 vote total by 11 million — the third largest rise ever achieved by an incumbent. By contrast, President Obama had comfortably won re-election in 2012 with 3.5 million fewer votes than he had received in 2008.
Biden in 2020 won the vote in only 16.7% of all counties nationwide, a record low. In raw numbers, Biden won 509 counties, while Trump won 2,547 counties.
According to exit polls, black support for Trump grew by 50% above its 2016 level, while black support for Biden was substantially lower than it had been for other Democrats in recent presidential elections. For example, Biden won 80% of the black male vote, down from Hillary Clinton’s 82% in 2016, Barack Obama’s 87% in 2012, and Obama’s 95% in 2008. Meanwhile, Biden won 91% of the black female vote, down only slightly from Hillary Clinton’s 94% in 2016 and Barack Obama’s 96% in both 2012 and 2008.
Trump increased his share of the national Hispanic vote from 29% in 2016, to 35% in 2020.
Trump easily won Florida, Ohio, and Iowa in 2020. Since 1852, the only presidential candidate to lose an election while winning these three states was Richard Nixon in 1960 – an outcome that was likely the result of election fraud by Democrats.
Biden’s purported victory was due entirely to the fact that he seems to have overperformed specifically in the tiny handful of Democrat-run cities that provided him with narrow leads in each of the battleground states, and nowhere else. As TheAmerican Spectator put it: “Biden [won] Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin because of an apparent avalanche of black votes in Detroit, Philadelphia, and Milwaukee. Biden’s ‘winning’ margin was derived almost entirely from such voters in these cities, as coincidentally his black vote spiked only in exactly the locations necessary to secure victory. He did not receive comparable levels of support among comparable demographic groups in comparable states.”
The Washington Examiner noted how strange it was that Trump could have lost the election even though “Republicans won all 27 House races [that] the Cook Political Report rated as ‘toss-ups’ in its 2020 election analysis, in addition to picking up 7 of the 36 seats the outlet rated as ‘likely Democrat’ or ‘lean Democrat.’” Moreover, Democrats were unable to overturn even a single Republican seat in the House. And in New Hampshire, Republicans seized control of the state House and the state Senate, both of which had been in Democrat hands.
Republicans cut the Democrat advantage in the U.S. House of Representatives from 38 seats to just 10 seats, making Trump the only incumbent president in American history to lose his re-election bid while his own party gained seats in the House.
In a December 6 interview with Mark Levin on Fox News, pollster and Democracy Institute founder Patrick Basham said that if Biden was indeed the winner of the presidential election, he had defied key “non-polling metrics” in a way that may be “not statistically impossible, but it’s statistically implausible.” Basham explained that there are “a dozen or more of these metrics … [that] have a 100% accuracy rate in terms of predicting the winner of the presidential election,” including “party registration trends, how the candidates did in their respective presidential primaries, the number of individual donations, [and] how much enthusiasm each candidate generated in the opinion poll.” Other notable variables are the candidates’ social media followings, their broadcast and digital media ratings, the number of online searches that their names generate, the number of small donors they have, and the number of individuals who are betting on them to win. “In 2016,” said Basham, “[these metrics] all indicated strongly that Donald Trump would win against most of the public polling. That was again the case in 2020. So if we are to accept that Biden won against the trend of all these non-polling metrics, it not only means that one of these metrics was inaccurate … for the first time ever, it means that each one of these metrics was wrong for the first time and at the same time as all of the others.”
Noting also that “Donald Trump improved his national performance over 2016 by almost 20%,” Basham stated: “No incumbent president has ever lost a reelection bid if he’s increased his [total] votes.”
What Happened in Georgia
In Georgia, illegal ballots were cast by, or in the name of: (a) more than 2,500 felons; (b) 66,247 underage voters; (c) 2,423 unregistered voters; (d) 4,926 individuals who had failed to register prior to the state’s voter-registration deadline; (e) 395 individuals who voted in two states; (f) 40,279 people who had moved across county lines in Georgia without re-registering in their new county of residence; (g) 30,000 to 40,000 people whose absentee ballots lacked a valid, verifiable signature; (h) 3,987 non-citizens; (i) 20,311 voters who had moved out of state and thus were no longer eligible to vote in Georgia; and (j) at least 1,043 individuals whose voter registrations claimed postal facilities as their home address and disguised their box numbers as “apartment” numbers. Almost all of the people in this latter category were absentee voters who cast their ballots early.
More than 300,000 Georgia residents who, in violation of state law, had applied for absentee ballots more than 180 days prior to the Election Day, were permitted to vote.
Nine individuals at various recount sites in Georgia issued sworn affidavits stating that they had seen large numbers of uncreased mail-in ballots – meaning that the ballots had not been folded and mailed in an envelope as required by law — almost all cast for Biden. As longtime poll manager Susan Voyles wrote in her affidavit: “It was pristine. There was a difference in the texture of the paper … There were no markings on the ballots to show where they had come from, or where they had been processed. I observed that the markings for the candidates on these ballots were unusually uniform, perhaps even with a ballot marking device. By my estimate in observing these ballots, approximately 98% constituted votes for Joseph Biden.”
Trial lawyer Carlos Silva, who was a Republican poll challenger on Election Day, said in an affidavit that he saw DeKalb County election officials pull out many hundreds of ballots, all of which had an unusually perfectly formed black circle, or bubble, filled in for Joe Biden. “I was able to observe the perfect bubble for a few minutes before they made me move away from the table,” he said. “At no time did I speak to the poll workers or obstruct them in any way. I heard them go through the stack and call out Biden’s name over 500 times in a row.”
At least 96,600 absentee ballots in Georgia were requested and counted but were never recorded as having been returned by the voter to county election boards.
In a major Fulton County, Georgia polling place — the State Farm Arena — surveillance cameras captured perhaps the most graphic video evidence of election fraud ever recorded. At about 10:30 PM on Election Night, poll workers and election observers were told that because of a water-main break inside the building, they were to go home for the night and not return until 8:30 the following morning, at which time all vote-counting – which was purportedly being suspended for the overnight hours — would resume. By approximately 10:50 p.m., everyone had left the facility except four Democrat poll workers who stayed behind. As soon as everyone else had gone home, these four individuals promptly pulled four large, wheeled cases out from under a long table whose floor-length black tablecloth had theretofore concealed them. The cases were filled with approximately 6,000 ballots apiece, and the four remaining poll workers proceeded to count them until about 1:00 a.m. – with no Republican observers on hand. Moreover, it was later confirmed that there had not been any water-main break in the building; that was a concocted excuse designed to create a pretext for removing non-Democrat poll workers.
A vote update in Georgia at 1:34 AM on November 4 added 136,155 votes for Biden and 29,115 votes for Trump.
On December 30, 2020, Lynda McLaughlin from the Data Integrity Group, along with data scientists Justin Mealey and Dave Lobue, presented vital data to the Georgia Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Elections. Mealey was an electronic warfare technician in the U.S. Navy for nearly 10 years and was a former CIA contractor as a data analyst and programmer for the National Counterterrorism Center, while Lobue has spent more than a decade as a data scientist in several different industries. According to the McLaughlin-Mealey-Lobue analysis, at least 30,593 votes were removed from Trump’s total as result of this fraud, including 17,650 votes in Dougherty County, 7,008 votes in Dodge County, and 5,935 votes in Putnam County. As The Epoch Times explains: “The removals happened at the county level and were hard to observe at the state level because the decrements were offset by accurate data uploaded by other counties.” “I want to make … very, very clear that at no point in an incremental process, should you decrement it,” said Mealey, vis-à-vis the fact that Trump’s official vote total actually decreased at a certain point. “What we have here is we actually have fraud that we can prove in this election, there was fraud in Georgia’s election, we can prove it with data,” Mealey added. “The voting will of the people of Georgia is not reflected in what was certified by the Secretary of State.”
A “clear example of vote switching” occurred in Bibb county, Georgia, said the McLaughlin-Mealey-Lobue research team. At 9:11 p.m. on Election Night, Trump received 29,391 votes as Biden simultaneously received 17,218. But in the very next reported time update, those numbers were switched, meaning that Biden suddenly turned a 12,173-vote deficit into an advantage of the same size.
According to Real Clear Investigations journalist Paul Sperry: “In the early hours of Nov. 5, a surge of some 20,000 mail-in votes suddenly appeared for Joe Biden, while approximately 1,000 votes for President Trump mysteriously disappeared from his own totals in the critical swing state [of Georgia].”
Cobb County election observer Debbie Fisher told a Georgia legislature hearing that while she served as part of the voter review for a November 16 hand recount of votes, she noticed something highly unusual about the military ballots that had been cast in the county. Fisher stated that on that day, somewhere between 80 and 90 percent of the 298 military ballots that she reviewed were for Biden. Because that particular section of Cobb County has traditionally been heavily Republican, Fisher said that “throughout the day, it made me sicker to see” all those votes going for Biden, adding: “I find that statistically impossible.”
Data expert Edward Solomon analyzed the 2020 election results in Georgia and found that approximately 200,000 votes had been transferred from Trump to Biden at the precinct level.
On December 30, 2020, Digital ID systems inventor Jovan Pulitzer testified before the Georgia Senate Judiciary subcommittee on Elections and announced that his team of technicians had been able — at that very moment in time — to hack into the Dominion Voting Machines that were being used — also at that very moment in time — in the two Georgia run-off elections that would determine which party would have a majority in the U.S. Senate. This proved, beyond any doubt, that the Dominion machines were indeed connected to the Internet and thus could be manipulated by external actors — something that Dominion and Georgia state election officials had theretofore denied vehemently.
During the same Georgia Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing, Pulitzer explained that, by means of highly sophisticated technology, he could examine the paper ballots that had been cast in Fulton County, Georgia, and determine immediately which ones were fraudulent and which ones were not. He could easily examine 500,000 such ballots in just two hours, Jovan added. Following the hearing, the subcommittee unanimously passed a motion to audit Fulton County’s absentee ballots by means of the procedure that Pulitzer had outlined during the hearing. The very next day, December 31, Pulitzer told radio host Monica Matthews that almost immediately after he had been tasked with auditing the Fulton County ballots, trucks pulled up to the facility where the ballots were being held, and the ballots were loaded into those vehicles and shredded. Said Pulitzer: “The very minute that order went through and that order was followed, and all the legal notices were done, it didn’t even take four hours later where moving trucks with this stuff was [sic] backed up to those buildings trying to get rid of the evidence.”
What Happened in Pennsylvania
Some 165,412 of the mail-in and absentee ballots that were requested in the names of registered Republican voters in Pennsylvania, were never tabulated by vote-counters. Williams College mathematics professor Steven Miller, who specializes in analytic number theory and sabermetrics, analyzed the data and concluded, in a sworn affidavit, that: (a) the number of ballots “requested in the name of a registered Republican by someone other than that person” was “almost surely … between 37,001 and 58,914,” and (b) the number of “Republican ballots that the requester returned but were not counted” was “almost surely” between 38,910 and 56,483.
Up to 25,000 nursing home residents in various facilities across the state requested mail-in ballots at precisely the same time prior to the election. This strongly suggests a coordinated action that would constitute a form of ballot harvesting, which is illegal in Pennsylvania.
A sworn affidavit claims that election workers in Pennsylvania were instructed to assign ballots without names to random people across the state. Consequently, thousands of Pittsburgh residents who showed up to vote in person were told that, according to official records, they already had voted.
At least 1,400 early and absentee voters in Pennsylvania listed their home addresses as those of post offices, UPS facilities, and FedEx locations, disguising the box numbers as “Apartment,” “Unit,” “Suite,” etc.
In Pennsylvania, more than 51,000 mail-in and absentee ballots were marked as having been returned just one day after they were sent out by election officials, a virtual impossibility. Nearly 35,000 additional mail-in and absentee ballots were marked as having been returned on the same day that they were sent out, and another 23,000+ had a return date that was earlier than the sent date. Further, there were more than 43,000 mail-in and absentee ballots marked as having been returned just two days after being sent out, which still represents an implausibly fast turnaround time. Plus, more than 9,000 mail-in and absentee ballots had no “sent” date listed at all.
A “naked ballot” is a mail-in or absentee ballot that lacks an outer envelope with the voter’s signature on it. Because that signature constitutes the only evidence by which election officials can verify an absentee voter’s identity, those officials are barred by law from accepting and counting any naked ballets. But Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar, a registered Democrat, issued a “guidance” directing election officials to accept naked ballots, in violation of state law. When the Pennsylvania Supreme Court subsequently rejected this guidance, Boockvar refused to issue a new guidance mandating that any noncompliant mail-in or absentee ballots should not be counted.
A Republican poll observer from Pennsylvania’s Delaware County, Greg Stenstrom — an expert in security fraud — told a Senate GOP Policy Committee hearing that 47 USB cards containing poll results had gone missing without explanation. He also said that he had witnessed at least two dozen instances where a warehouse supervisor uploaded USB card data to voting machines without being observed by a poll watcher.
In addition, Stenstrom testified that he and a fellow poll watcher had observed between 60,000 and 70,000 ballots kept in a back room “for about three hours” and never counted, before “they disappeared.” Asserting that “we just learned two days ago that virtually all chain of custody logs, records, yellow sheets, everything, was gone,” Stenstrom said that “all forensic evidence, all custody sheets” from Delaware County “are gone,” meaning that “we have a situation in where we have 100,000 to 120,000 ballots, both mail-in and USB, that are in question” and “impossible to verify.”
Whistleblower Jesse Morgan, who worked as a truck driver for a subcontractor with the USPS, said that on October 21 he had driven a truck filled with potentially upward of 288,000 ballots from Bethpage, New York to Lancaster, Pennsylvania, thereby illegally transporting ballots across state lines.
Affidavits by postal workers in three Pennsylvania cities testified that various post offices had illegally backdated ballots and had ordered that Trump mail be placed in the “Undeliverable Bulk Business Mail” bin, while emphasizing that Biden mail should be delivered on time.
Pennsylvania postal worker Richard Hopkins told James O’Keefe of Project Veritas that Erie County postmaster Robert Wisenbach had told postal employees to separate mail-in ballots that arrived after November 3 from other mail, and to backdate those ballots so that they could be counted in the election. Both the Washington Post and New York Times later published false stories claiming, incorrectly, that Hopkins had retracted his allegation.
In one particular vote spike in Pennsylvania during the wee morning hours of November 4, approximately 570,000 votes were added to Biden’s total, while a mere 3,200 were added to Trump’s total – a ratio of about 178-to-1.
On December 28, 2020, a group of Republican state lawmakers who had analyzed election data in Pennsylvania reported that whereas Department of State records indicated that 6,962,607 total ballots had been cast on Election Day (November 3) — including 6,931,060 total votes for the presidential race — the Department of State/SURE system records showed that only 6,760,230 individuals had actually voted on that date. The discrepancy of 170,830 votes in the presidential race was more than twice the reported statewide difference of 80,555 votes that separated Biden and Trump. The aforementioned Republican lawmakers issued a statement that said: “These findings call into question the accuracy of the SURE system, consistency in the application of the Pennsylvania Election Code from county to county, and the competency of those charged with oversight of elections in our Commonwealth. These numbers just don’t add up, and the alleged certification of Pennsylvania’s presidential election results was absolutely premature, unconfirmed, and in error.”
On January 4, 2021, Lynda McLaughlin from the Data Integrity Group, along with data scientists Justin Mealey (a former electronic warfare technician in the U.S. Navy) and Dave Lobue, reported vital data on the presidential election results in Pennsylvania. According to the McLaughlin-Mealey-Lobue analysis, at least 432,116 votes—including 213,707 Election Day votes and 218,409 mail-in/absentee votes—were removed from President Trump’s total in at least 15 counties statewide. As The Epoch Times explained: “Time-series election data shows Trump’s votes decrementing in various counties at numerous time points instead of increasing as would be expected under normal circumstances.” According to Lynda McLaughlin: “There were vote movements across all candidates. However, we did not see the same type of negative decrements to any of the [other] candidates that we saw with President Trump’s tallies, and they happened repeatedly with no explanation.”
What Happened in Michigan
Approximately 9,500 Michigan mail-in ballots were purportedly submitted by voters whose names and birth dates matched those in the death records of the Social Security Death Index. In addition, nearly 2,000 more ballots were cast in the names of voters who claimed to be aged 100+ but were not listed in public records as living individuals.
In a federal lawsuit filed against Michigan on November 10, 2020, President Trump’s re-election campaign presented 234 pages of sworn witness affidavits describing how, in violation of Michigan’s election code, Republican poll challengers had been prevented in various ways from being able to properly observe the vote-counting process – particularly in Wayne, which is Michigan’s most populous county. “Election officials would applaud, cheer, and yell whenever a Republican challenger was ejected from the counting area,” the lawsuit stated.
In 18 sworn affidavits, Michigan witnesses claimed that election officials had counted the ballots of people whose names were not in the voter file, and that those names were added into the system with the birth date of January 1, 1900. One of these 18 affiants was Robert Cushman, who said in his testimony: “When I asked about this impossibility of each ballot having the same birthday occurring in 1900, I was told that was the instruction that came down from the Wayne County Clerk’s office.”
Affidavits filed in Michigan claimed that poll workers had been instructed to ignore signature mismatches, backdate late-arriving ballots (to make it appear that they had arrived before the statutory deadline), and process ballots of questionable validity.
Seven witnesses in Michigan said they had seen the same stacks of ballots being run through tabulation machines multiple times by Democrat poll workers (with no Republicans alongside them).
According to one affidavit, a Michigan election supervisor violated existing state law by instructing election workers at in-person polling places not to request photo identification from voters.
Poll challenger Andrew Sitto swore in an affidavit that boxes filled with tens of thousands of unsealed, unsecured ballots—all cast for Democrats—had arrived in vehicles with out-of-state license plates in Michigan’s Wayne County at 4:30 AM on the morning after Election Day. “I specifically noticed that every ballot I observed was cast for Joe Biden,” said Sitto. According to another sworn affidavit, the names on the ballots in these boxes did not appear on either the Qualified Voter File (QVF) or the supplemental lists of voters who had registered shortly before Election Day.
Sitto said that in the vote-counting room where he had been stationed on Election Day, an election official at one point used a large sheet of cardboard to block the windows; that same official subsequently refused to let Sitto re-enter the room after he had left for a break.
Robert Cushman, a poll challenger in Detroit, said in a sworn affidavit: “I saw the computer operators at several counting boards manually adding,” “to the QVF system,” “the names and addresses of these thousands of ballots … from unknown, unverified ‘persons.’”
An affidavit filed by a postal worker in Traverse City, Michigan states that various post offices illegally backdated some 100,000 ballots and ordered that Trump mail be placed in the “Undeliverable Bulk Business Mail” bin, while stipulating that Biden mail should be delivered promptly.
Another postal employee in Traverse City contacted James O’Keefe of Project Veritas to describe, on video, how his supervisor, Johnathon Clarke, had required postal workers to illegally segregate and manually backdate ballots received after the statutory deadline of 8 PM on Election Day. The workers were then ordered to immediately send these doctored ballots to the P.O.’s main distribution center. When Mr. O’Keefe subsequently reached Clarke by phone to question him about the allegations, a startled Clarke refused to say a word and immediately hung up the call.
IT and cyber-security specialist Melissa Carone, who on November 3 and 4 worked as a contractor for Dominion Voting Systems — the company that provided the voting machines in 66 of Michigan’s 83 counties in 2020 — told a Michigan Senate Oversight Committee hearing: “What I witnessed at the TDS Center [where votes were being counted] was complete fraud. The whole 27 hours I was there. There were batches of ballots being ran through the tabulating machines numerous times, being counted eight to ten times, I watched this with my own eyes. I was there to assist with IT.” Adding that she was “under the impression 100 percent that all of these workers were in on this,” Carone claimed: “There was not a single ballot that the whole night, the whole 27 hours that I was there, that was for Donald Trump, not one.”
Carone also noted that there had been approximately 22 to 24 tabulating machines in the location where she was working, and that she observed election-related malpractice “thousands of times” while she was at the site.
The anti-election-fraud organization “Guard the Vote” examined 30,000 of the 172,000 mail-in and absentee ballots that were cast in the city of Detroit. Of those 30,000 ballots, 229 were cast in the names of dead people, while another 2,660 were cast by people claiming invalid home addresses such as those of vacant lots and burnt-down houses. In short, at least 2,889 (9.6%) of these 30,000 Detroit ballots should have been discarded. If this rate of ineligibility is representative of the city’s 172,000 mail-in votes as a whole, more than 16,500 of those votes were likely invalid.
Patty McMurray, a Republican poll challenger in Detroit, claimed that she had seen large numbers of photocopied mail-in ballots submitted in the names of unregistered voters, all cast for Biden. “Not one of the ballots was a registered military voter, and the ballots looked like they were all the same Xeroxed copies of the ballot,” she testified. “They were all for Biden across the board. There wasn’t a single Trump vote. None of the voters are registered.” Asserting that election workers had entered those names and addresses with phony birthdates that “would override the system and allow them to enter nonregistered voters,” McMurray added: “Throughout the day, that’s how they would override voters that were neither in the electronic poll book or the supplemental, updated poll book.”
A vote update in Michigan at 3:50 AM on November 4 added 54,497 votes for Biden and 4,718 votes for Trump.
Another vote update in Michigan at 6:31 AM on November 4 added 141,258 votes for Biden and 5,968 votes for Trump.
What Happened in Wisconsin
At least 26,673 people used mail-in ballots to vote illegally in Wisconsin after they had moved out of the state.
Postal subcontractor Nathan Pease testified that he had been told by two separate postal workers, on two separate occasions, that the USPS in Wisconsin was preparing to backdate more than 100,000 late-arriving ballots on the morning of November 4, to make it look like they had arrived prior to the statutory deadline.
According to election data in Wisconsin, approximately 49,000 people voted for a Republican House candidate down-ballot but purportedly chose not to vote for Trump at the top of the ticket.
State data showed a voter-turnout rate in Wisconsin of 89.25%, an implausibly high number.
James Troupis, the lead attorney for the Trump campaign in Wisconsin, testified as follows to the U.S. Senate on December 16 vis-à-vis the many scores of thousands of illegally cast ballots that had been approved and counted in that state:
“In Wisconsin, we just completed a recount…. Uniquely, we are able to examine actual envelopes that contain the ballots that are submitted by absentee voters. This allowed us to identify by person, by address, by ward. It’s not conspiracy. The real names are in the record. And here’s what we found. We found that there were incomplete and altered certificates. These are the certificates on the front of the envelopes that have to be exactly done correctly under our law. If not, those results may not be counted [in the election]. How many of those? More than 3,000 of those identified by person were nonetheless counted, even though they are clearly invalid under the law.
“A second category, initials of clerks are placed on all of those envelopes. Why? Because the clerk identifies it having been properly received and identification is provided. That’s the check in advance of the election. What did we find? More than 2,000 of those ballots in Dane and Milwaukee County had no initials at all. But nonetheless, they got counted.
“We also have special laws in Wisconsin with regard to voting in advance. We do not allow advanced voting. We allow in-person and other voting as absentee. So, anything before election day is under our absentee rules. What did the city of Madison do? They created a system where people could arrive at a park, hand in their ballots in envelopes five weeks before the election. They also created boxes. No controls at all. Just boxes on [street] corners that you could throw the ballot in. No attempt at all. And our statutes explicitly say there are only two ways to submit an absentee ballot. In person or delivery to the clerk’s office. That’s it. Nothing else is allowed. And yet have the city of Madison, we had … 17,271 ballots in this category that we identify. There are tens of thousands more because they co-mingled the ballots afterwards so we couldn’t identify each one that may have been properly cast.
“Then we have an interesting category called ‘indefinitely confined.’ These are people who [cannot vote in person because of their] age, physical illness or infirmity, or [disability]. So, they don’t have to provide any identification. Among those claiming this status is one of the electors for Joe Biden, who said, ‘I can’t get to the polls.’ We have poll workers who claimed it. We have people who went to protests, people who had weddings, people who had vacations, all claimed this status. ‘I can’t get to the polls.’ So, they were able to vote without identification. There were 28,395 people we explicitly identified [in this category].
“Finally, there are other categories in which as much as 170,000 other ballots were submitted without any application. In fact, they considered the certification envelope the application, though a separate application is required by law. Three million people properly voted in the state of Wisconsin. More than 200,000 identified during this recount did not. But those votes got counted, and our statute says they should not have been.”
A vote update in Wisconsin at 3:42 AM on November 4 added 143,379 votes for Biden and 25,163 votes for Trump.
What Happened in Nevada
In Nevada, 42,284 people are on record as having voted twice in 2020. Moreover, ballots were cast in the names of approximately 20,000 individuals without a Nevada mailing address; 2,468 people who had moved to another state and thus were ineligible to vote in Nevada; 1,506 people who were dead; almost 4,000 non-citizens; and nearly 30,000 people who falsely listed non-residential, vacant, or non-existent addresses as their home addresses.
On December 16, Trump campaign attorney Jesse Banal testified to the U.S. Senate: “All in all, our experts identified 130,000 unique instances of voter fraud in Nevada. But the actual number is almost certainly higher. Our data scientists made these calculations not by estimations or statistical sampling, but by analyzing and comparing the list of actual voters with other lists, most of which are publicly available.”
Also in his Senate testimony, Banal explained how this widespread fraud had initially come to pass in Nevada:
“On August 3rd, 2020 after a rushed special session, Nevada legislators made drastic changes to the state’s election law by adopting a bill known as AB-4. The vulnerabilities of this statute were obvious. It provided for universal mail voting without sufficient safeguards to authenticate voters or ensure the fundamental requirement that only one ballot was sent to each legally qualified voter. This was aggravated by election officials’ failure to clean known deficiencies in their voter rolls. Because of AB-4, the number of mail ballots rocketed from about 70,000 in 2016 to over 690,000 this year. The election was inevitably riddled with fraud, and our hotline never stopped ringing.”
Data scientist Dorothy Morgan reported that in the Third Congressional District of Nevada alone, there had been 13,372 incomplete and fraudulent voter registrations submitted in 2020, as compared to a mere 68 in 2016. Many of these phony registrations listed casinos or temporary RV parks as the voters’ “home or mailing addresses.” Fully 74% of the fraudulent registrations of 2020 took place between July and September.
What Happened in Multiple Battleground States
In a study headed by Matt Braynard, the former data-and-strategy director for President Trump’s 2016 election campaign, researchers made phone calls to many thousands of registered Republican voters in Pennsylvania who, according to state data, were among the 165,412 Republicans statewide who in 2020 were mailed ballots that were never subsequently marked as having been returned. Of the 1,706 voters whom the researchers were able to contact, nearly one-third said they had never actually requested a ballot. Among the remaining 1,137 voters who said that they had in fact requested a ballot, were 453 (42%) who both: (a) reported that they had mailed their ballots back, and (b) were unaware of the fact that those ballots were never recorded as “received” or “counted” by the state. If the foregoing percentages are representative of what happened to the overall total of 165,412 Republican-requested mail-in ballots that were never tabulated by vote-counters, the implications are obviously enormous.
In other states, Braynard found that the percentage of Republicans who likewise had requested ballots that were never subsequently recorded as having been “received” or “counted” by election officials were: 50% in Arizona, 44% in Georgia, nearly 33% in Michigan, and 20% in Wisconsin.
Braynard found 17,877 early or absentee ballots that were cast in Georgia in the names of people who had filed out-of-state move notices and thus were not eligible to vote in Georgia. The same was true of 7,426 ballots in Pennsylvania, 6,254 ballots in Wisconsin, 5,145 ballots in Nevada, 5,084 ballots in Arizona, and 1,688 ballots in Michigan.
Records show that in Pennsylvania, some 98,000 people voted only for Joe Biden and did not vote for anyone further down the ticket. The corresponding numbers in other key states were approximately: 80,000 to 90,000 in Georgia, 42,000 in Arizona, 63,000 in Wisconsin, and 69,000 to 115,000 in Michigan.
At least 19,997 people used mail-in ballots to vote illegally in Arizona after they had moved out of the state.
According to an analysis by the research group Just Facts, it is likely that 234,570 noncitizen votes benefited Biden across seven closely contested battleground states: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. Previous research has found that 81% of noncitizens who vote, cast their ballots for Democrats.
Prior to the 2020 election, a Pew Research Center survey reported that in those states where a Senate seat was up for grabs in 2020, “overwhelming shares of voters” who planned to back either Trump or Biden said that they also would be “supporting the same-party candidate for Senate.” Consistent with those survey results, in traditionally red and blue non-battleground states alike, the total number of votes garnered by Biden was only slightly higher than the number of votes received by the Democrat Senate candidates who were also on the ballot. Similarly, the total number of votes won by Trump was only a little bit higher than the number of votes received by the Republican Senate candidates who were also on the ballot.
But in the battleground states, inexplicably, the gap between Biden and the Democrat Senate candidates was far greater than the gap between Trump and the Republican Senate candidates. In Michigan, for example, Biden received 69,093 more votes than did Democrat Senate candidate Gary Peters, while Trump received only 7,131 more votes than Republican Senate candidate John James. And in Georgia, Biden received 95,801 more votes than did Democrat Senate candidate Jon Osoff, while Trump received only 818 more votes than Republican Senate candidate David Perdue. This means that in battleground states, a large number of Democrats seem to have voted for Biden while mysteriously choosing to ignore the highly important Senate races.
In the overwhelmingly Democrat cities of New York, Chicago, and Miami, Biden’s vote totals in 2020, when compared with Hillary Clinton’s vote totals from 2016, was down by 201,408, 260,835, and 6,945 respectively. But in cities that Biden needed in order to win battleground states in 2020, he gained massively in comparison to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 vote totals. For example, in Atlanta, Milwaukee, and Pittsburg, he outperformed Mrs. Clinton by 76,518, 67,630, and 29,150 votes, respectively.
When data analyst Bobby Piton examined a list of people who had voted in Pennsylvania in 2020, he identified 521,879 unique last names among them. These were people who had no known relatives — parents, siblings, aunts, uncles, or cousins — anywhere in the state who had the same last name as the voters. According to a 2010 report by the U.S. Census Bureau, there are fewer than 4 million such cases in every U.S. state combined. This means that in order for the Pennsylvania election results to be accurate, that state, which has only about 4% of the U.S. population, would have to have more than 13% of all the unique names — a huge statistical improbability. Piton added that more than half of these voter surnames in Pennsylvania appear to be fake. He also stated that this same surname anomaly extended to a number of other battleground states, including Georgia and Arizona. The data, said Piton, was likely manipulated by a “sophisticated state entity” in order to ensure a particular election outcome.
Because so many ballots were cast in 2020 by people voting by mail for the first time, most experts, using historical patterns as a guide, predicted that ballots would be rejected at a higher-than-usual rate for flaws such as missing information, inaccurate information, or a failure to place ballots in secrecy envelopes. But precisely the opposite occurred in the battleground states:
In Pennsylvania, a mere 0.03% of the state’s mail-in ballots were rejected in 2020 – a rate more than 30 times lower than the 2016 rejection rate of 1%.
In Georgia, the rejection rate in 2020 was 0.2%, more than 30 times lower than the 6.4% figure from 2016.
In Nevada, the 2020 rejection rate was approximately 0.75%, less than half the 1.6% rate from 2016.
In North Carolina, the 2020 rejection rate was 0.8%, less than one-third the 2.7% rate from 2016.
In Michigan, the 2020 rejection rate was 0.1%, about one-fifth the 0.5% rate from 2016.
Citing what occurred in Pennsylvania, an Epoch Times report provides a partial explanation for these low 2020 rejection rates: “Election officials in [Pennsylvania’s] Democrat strongholds … exceeded their authority in order to give voters preferential treatment that wasn’t afforded to voters in Republican-leaning areas of the state. Specifically, election workers illegally ‘pre-canvassed’ mail-in ballots to determine whether they were missing a secrecy envelope or failed to include necessary information. When ballots were found to be flawed, voters were given an opportunity to correct, or ‘cure,’ their ballots to make sure they counted.”
Rigged & Corrupted Voting Machines
According to witness and expert statements contained in a lawsuit released by former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell and her legal team: (a) agents of malicious actors such as China and Iran accessed the software used by the Dominion voting machines in 2020 “in order to monitor and manipulate elections”; (b) an affiant who was part of a national security detail to former Venezuelan socialist dictator Hugo Chavez, said that the software used by Dominion was designed specifically to enable the Venezuelan government to rig elections without getting caught; (c) that allegation was corroborated by another witness who “was in an official position related to elections and witnessed manipulations of petitions to prevent a removal of President Chavez”; (d) another affiant who was the cousin of the former chief executive of Smartmatic, the company that developed the Dominion software, said that Smartmatic executive was determined “to ensure the election for Chavez in the 2004 Referendum in Venezuela”; (e) Princeton computer-science professor and election-security expert Andrew Appel testified that the vote tallies calculated by the Dominion machines could be manipulated by imputing a malicious code in just “7 minutes alone with [the voting machine] and a screwdriver”; and (f) Finnish computer programmer and election-security expert Hari Hursti testified that the Dominion voting machines can easily be hacked because they are connected to the Internet, a fact which he described as “a grave security implication.”
One particularly noteworthy affiant describes himself as a former “electronic intelligence analyst under 305th Military Intelligence” with “experience gathering SAM missile system electronic intelligence” and “extensive experience as a white hat hacker used by some of the top election specialists in the world.” After conducting extensive forensic reviews, this witness concluded that “the Dominion software was accessed by agents acting on behalf of China and Iran in order to monitor and manipulate elections, including the most recent US general election in 2020.” He denounced Dominion for its “complete failure” to provide “basic cyber security.”
A separate complaint in Georgia concurred that “by using servers and employees connected with rogue actors and hostile foreign influences combined with numerous easily discoverable leaked credentials, Dominion neglectfully allowed foreign adversaries to access data and intentionally provided access to their infrastructure in order to monitor and manipulate elections, including the most recent one in 2020.”
Ben Turner — the head of Fraud Spotters, a consultancy specializing in the detection of insurance fraud — conducted a county-by-county analysis of how the adoption of Dominion Voting Systems machines between the 2008 and 2020 presidential races may have affected election results in those places. After controlling for a host of key variables like race, population, immigration rate, and education, Turner found that in presidential races, the use of Dominion machines was associated with a 1.55 percentage point decrease in the Republican vote and a 1.55 percentage point increase in the Democratic vote.
Another longtime data analyst found that Biden in 2020 had performed above the prediction line in 78% of counties that used either Dominion or HART InterCivic voting machines, consistently receiving 5.6% more votes than expected. The analyst called this “a dramatic red flag.”
After conducting a forensic audit of Dominion voting machines, Russell Ramsland Jr., co-founder of Allied Security Operations Group, said in a report: “We conclude that the Dominion Voting System is intentionally and purposefully designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election results. The system intentionally generates an enormously high number of ballot errors. The electronic ballots are then transferred for adjudication. The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency, and no audit trail.” Ramsland added that the machines’ “own logs … show very clearly that the RCV [Ranked-Choice Voting] algorithm was enacted. It shows very clearly that the error messages were massive. It [shows] very clearly that races were flipped.”
On December 23, 2020, Trump attorney Rudolph Giuliani stated that recent forensic audits in Michigan had found that Dominion Voting Machines were programmed to give Biden an automatic advantage over any number of votes cast for Trump. “We believe from what we saw in Michigan that the machines have an inaccurate vote,” said Giuliani. “That they’re programmed to give Biden somewhere between a 2 percent and 5 percent advantage.” Giuliani also noted that Democrat officials were continuing to resist subpoenas by state lawmakers to allow a broader examination of the Dominion machines.
Conclusion
Democrats and leftists have long maintained that occurrences of voter fraud and election fraud are so rare as to be nearly nonexistent, and that such occurrences should therefore not be used as pretexts for implementing allegedly unnecessary measures like voter ID requirements, signature-verification procedures, and voter-roll updates. But as the evidence presented in this overview plainly attests, the amount of fraud that took place in the 2020 presidential election alone, was nothing short of monumental.
Footnotes
Though any use of a drop box in Wisconsin is illegal by statute, the Wisconsin Election Committee placed approximately 500 of them in locations across the state. They were placed disproportionately in urban areas with overwhelmingly Democrat populations.
I also have the other post with links to many of the horrific details, but this one blog is just to register how absolutely sick at heart I am, because, as detailed by a guest interviewed by Joshua Phillip in his excellent film about the fraud (which youtube blocks the audio of for 50 minutes, if you can believe that!) “there will vnever be another free election”
As Americans continue to watch the 2020 election controversy unfold, the very same publications that spent years lying about President Trump’s “Russia collusion” are once again telling us what we are dutifully supposed to believe. The Los Angeles Times, for instance, assures us that Trump’s “baseless” and “dangerous” claim “that the election was rigged to benefit Joe Biden” has been thoroughly “debunked.”[1]The New York Times proclaims that “Trump’s false election fraud claims” are founded upon nothing more than a “torrent of falsehoods.”[2] Sneering at “how Trump drove the lie that the election was stolen,” The Washington Post mocks Republicans who “are still pretending that there was election fraud.”[3] And CNN.com warns that “Trump’s obsession with overturning the election” has now begun to spiral “out of control.”[4]
But so much for what the comic books have to say. What follows is a compilation of vital facts that will demonstrate, to anyone interested in following the truth wherever it may lead, that the 2020 presidential election was indeed rife with fraud, and that Joe Biden, if he should in fact be sworn into office next month, will be an illegitimate president from the very start.
Before the Election: How We Got Here
Fifteen years ago, a landmark report by the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, known informally as the Carter-Baker Commission, advised all U.S. states that in order to guarantee free and fair elections, they should: increase voter ID requirements; minimize the use of mail-in ballots, which “remain the largest source of potential voter fraud”; disallow ballot harvesting by third parties; purge voter rolls of all ineligible or fraudulent names; allow election observers to monitor ballot-counting processes without restraint or obstruction; ensure that voting machines are accurate in their tabulations; and encourage news organizations to “delay the release of any exit-poll data until the election has been decided.” All of these recommendations were widely ignored in the elections of November 2020.[5]
During the months leading up to this year’s presidential race, the Biden campaign assembled a team of some 600 lawyers and more than 10,000 volunteers to “[go] into every single state” in order to “call out local rules that don’t adequately ensure access to vote.”[6]
Beginning more than a year ago, Democrats filed nearly 300 lawsuits in dozens of states[7] – most notably all of the key battleground states – in an effort to change election laws and regulations in ways that would benefit Democrat candidates. For example, they sought to: (a) extend the statutory deadlines by which mail-in ballots could be submitted, postmarked, or received by election authorities; (b) permit people to vote earlier than ever before, in some cases as many as 50 days prior to Election Day; (c) eliminate signature, signature-verification, and witness requirements for mail-in ballots; (d) void state laws that disallowed ballot harvesting by third parties; (e) terminate photo-ID requirements for in-person voting; (f) introduce provisions that would allow for the “curing” of mail-in ballots that contained errors or omissions; and (g) require state election officials to send unsolicited mail-in ballots to every person listed as a registered voter, even though such lists have long been notoriously inaccurate.[8]
Though the Democrats did not get everything that they wanted, they got most of it. Broadcaster and bestselling author Mark Levin, citing the cases of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona — and their combined 73 Electoral College votes – explains what happened:
“Every one of these states [and others as well] were targeted by Democrats. Every one of these states violated the United States Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 [which empowers the state legislatures alone to make election law for each state]. Every one of them, because changes were made to their election systems not by the state legislature, but by other public officials.… That’s 73 Electoral College votes. This is why Donald Trump won the election…. [I]f the federal Constitution had not been violated, yes, Donald Trump would be … president of the United States today. Putting all fraud aside. All fraud aside. This is why you should be furious with the United States Supreme Court, that had as its duty, as its sworn responsibility … to insist that the states comply with the federal Constitution under Article II, Section 1, Clause 2, and that any changes made outside that clause, by governors, secretaries of states, by courts, federal or state, by election boards or other bureaucrats, will be deemed unconstitutional. [The Supreme Court] had a case [in Pennsylvania] … before a single vote was counted, they had a case [alleging unconstitutional changes to election laws] and they didn’t take it up…. [The Democrats] made these changes, they plotted, they planned, they litigated, they pressured, they lobbied, and now we have, if he’s sworn in, Joe Biden, who will be an illegitimate president of the United States in every meaning of that word, ‘illegitimate.’”[9]
The Implausibility of Trump’s Loss
While President Trump was granting interviews on a daily basis to friendly and hostile media outlets alike, and was holding campaign rallies that drew tens of thousands of passionate supporters, Joe Biden, for the most part, remained locked away inside his basement, rarely even agreeing to give brief video interviews. On the few occasions when Biden did take part in interviews, he was typically disoriented, incoherent, and seemingly exhausted. And when he held “rallies,” they were invariably awkward, uninspired events mired in pessimistic rhetoric and attended only by tiny handfuls of people.[10] Common sense tells us that no candidate so pathetically inept and so deeply unappealing, could possibly have inspired 15.4 million more people to vote for him, than had voted for Democrat icon Barack Obama in 2012.[11]
Late on Election Night – November 3, 2020 — President Trump led Biden by approximately 100,000 votes in Wisconsin, 300,000 votes in Michigan, 300,000 votes in Georgia, and 700,000 votes in Pennsylvania. Then, suddenly, all four of these states suspended their vote counts, almost simultaneously. By the early-morning hours of the following day, Wisconsin had flipped in Biden’s favor, followed by Michigan soon thereafter. A few days later, Georgia and Pennsylvania followed suit as well.[12]
President Trump received more votes than any previous incumbent seeking re-election, and he increased his 2016 vote total by 11 million — the third largest rise ever achieved by an incumbent. By contrast, President Obama had comfortably won re-election in 2012 with 3.5 million fewer votes than he had received in 2008.[13]
Biden in 2020 won only 17% of all counties nationwide, a record low.[14]
According to exit polls, 95% of Republicans voted for Trump. Moreover, black support for Trump grew by 50% above its 2016 level, while Biden’s black support fell well below 90%.[15]
Trump also increased his share of the national Hispanic vote from 29% in 2016, to 35% in 2020.[16]
Trump easily won Florida, Ohio and Iowa in 2020. Since 1852, the only presidential candidate to lose an election while winning these three states was Richard Nixon in 1960 – an outcome that was likely the result of election fraud by Democrats.[17]
Biden’s purported victory is due entirely to the fact that he seems to have overperformed specifically in the tiny handful of Democrat-run cities that provided him with narrow leads in each of the battleground states, and nowhere else. As TheAmerican Spectator puts it: “Biden [won] Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin because of an apparent avalanche of black votes in Detroit, Philadelphia, and Milwaukee. Biden’s ‘winning’ margin was derived almost entirely from such voters in these cities, as coincidentally his black vote spiked only in exactly the locations necessary to secure victory. He did not receive comparable levels of support among comparable demographic groups in comparable states.”[18]
The Washington Examiner notes how strange it is that Trump could have lost the election even though “Republicans won all 27 House races [that] the Cook Political Report rated as ‘toss-ups’ in its 2020 election analysis, in addition to picking up 7 of the 36 seats the outlet rated as ‘likely Democrat’ or ‘lean Democrat.’”[19] Moreover, Democrats were unable to overturn even a single Republican seat in the House.[20] And in New Hampshire, Republicans seized control of both the state House and the state Senate, which had been firmly in Democrat hands.[21]
In a December 6 interview with Mark Levin on Fox News, pollster and Democracy Institute founder Patrick Basham said that if Biden was indeed the winner of the presidential election, he had defied key “non-polling metrics” in a way that may be “not statistically impossible, but it’s statistically implausible.” Basham explained that there are “a dozen or more of these metrics … [that] have a 100% accuracy rate in terms of predicting the winner of the presidential election,” including “party registration trends, how the candidates did in their respective presidential primaries, the number of individual donations, [and] how much enthusiasm each candidate generated in the opinion poll.”[22] Other notable variables are the candidates’ social media followings, their broadcast and digital media ratings, the number of online searches that their names generate, the number of small donors they have, and the number of individuals who are betting on them to win.[23] “In 2016,” said Basham, “[these metrics] all indicated strongly that Donald Trump would win against most of the public polling. That was again the case in 2020. So if we are to accept that Biden won against the trend of all these non-polling metrics, it not only means that one of these metrics was inaccurate … for the first time ever, it means that each one of these metrics was wrong for the first time and at the same time as all of the others.”[24]
Noting also that “Donald Trump improved his national performance over 2016 by almost 20%,” Basham stated: “No incumbent president has ever lost a reelection bid if he’s increased his [total] votes.”[25]
Because so many ballots were cast in 2020 by people voting by mail for the first time, most experts, using historical patterns as a guide, predicted a higher-than-usual rate of ballots being rejected for flaws such as missing information, inaccurate information, or a failure to place ballots in secrecy envelopes.[26] But precisely the opposite occurred in the battleground states:
In Pennsylvania, a mere 0.03% of the state’s mail-in ballots were rejected in 2020 – a rate more than 30 times lower than the 2016 rejection rate of 1%.
In Georgia, the rejection rate in 2020 was 0.2%, more than 30 times lower than the 6.4% figure from 2016.
In Nevada, the 2020 rejection rate was approximately 0.75%, less than half the 1.6% rate from 2016.
In North Carolina, the 2020 rejection rate was 0.8%, less than one-third the 2.7% rate from 2016.
In Michigan, the 2020 rejection rate was 0.1%, about one-fifth the 0.5% rate from 2016.[27]
Citing what occurred in Pennsylvania, an Epoch Times report provides a partial explanation for these low 2020 rejection rates: “Election officials in [Pennsylvania’s] Democrat strongholds … exceeded their authority in order to give voters preferential treatment that wasn’t afforded to voters in Republican-leaning areas of the state. Specifically, election workers illegally ‘pre-canvassed’ mail-in ballots to determine whether they were missing a secrecy envelope or failed to include necessary information. When ballots were found to be flawed, voters were given an opportunity to correct, or ‘cure,’ their ballots to make sure they counted.”[28]
What Happened in Georgia
In Georgia, illegal ballots were cast by, or in the name of: more than 2,500 felons; 66,247 underage voters; 2,423 unregistered voters; 4,926 individuals who had failed to register prior to the state’s voter-registration deadline; 395 individuals who voted in two states; 20,311 voters who had moved out of state and thus were no longer eligible to vote in Georgia; 40,279 people who had moved across county lines in Georgia without re-registering in their new county of residence; 30,000 to 40,000 people whose absentee ballots lacked a valid, verifiable signature; and at least 1,043 individuals whose voter registrations claimed postal facilities as their home address and disguised their box numbers as “apartment” numbers.[29] Almost all of the people in this latter category were absentee voters who cast their ballots early.[30]
Nine individuals at various recount sites in Georgia issued sworn affidavits stating that they had seen large numbers of uncreased mail-in ballots – meaning that the ballots had not been folded and mailed in an envelope as required by law — almost all cast for Biden. As longtime poll manager Susan Voyles wrote in her affidavit: “It was pristine. There was a difference in the texture of the paper … There were no markings on the ballots to show where they had come from, or where they had been processed. I observed that the markings for the candidates on these ballots were unusually uniform, perhaps even with a ballot marking device. By my estimate in observing these ballots, approximately 98% constituted votes for Joseph Biden.”[31]
At least 96,600 absentee ballots in Georgia were requested and counted but were never recorded as having been returned by the voter to county election boards.[32]
In a major Fulton County, Georgia polling place, surveillance cameras captured perhaps the most graphic video evidence of election fraud ever recorded. At about 10:30 PM on Election Night, poll workers and election observers were told that because of a water-main break inside the building, they were to go home for the night and not return until 8:30 the following morning, at which time all vote-counting – which was purportedly being suspended for the overnight hours — would resume. By approximately 10:50 pm, everyone had left the facility except four Democrat poll workers who stayed behind. As soon as everyone else had gone home, these four individuals promptly pulled four large, wheeled cases out from under a long table whose floor-length black tablecloth had theretofore concealed them. The cases were filled with approximately 6,000 ballots apiece, and the four remaining poll workers proceeded to count them until about 1:00 a.m. – with no Republican observers on hand. Moreover, it was later confirmed that there had not been any water-main break in the building; that was a phony excuse designed to create a pretext for removing non-Democrat poll workers.[33]
A vote update in Georgia at 1:34 AM on November 4 added 136,155 votes for Biden and 29,115 votes for Trump.[34]
According to Real Clear Investigations journalist Paul Sperry: “In the early hours of Nov. 5, a surge of some 20,000 mail-in votes suddenly appeared for Joe Biden, while approximately 1,000 votes for President Trump mysteriously disappeared from his own totals in the critical swing state [of Georgia].”[35]
Data expert Edward Solomon analyzed the 2020 election results in Georgia and found that approximately 200,000 votes had been transferred from Trump to Biden at the precinct level.[36]
What Happened in Pennsylvania
Some 165,412 of the mail-in and absentee ballots that were requested in the names of registered Republican voters in Pennsylvania, were never tabulated by vote-counters. Williams College mathematics professor Steven Miller, who specializes in analytic number theory and sabermetrics, analyzed the data and concluded, in a sworn affidavit, that: (a) the number of ballots “requested in the name of a registered Republican by someone other than that person” was “almost surely … between 37,001 and 58,914,” and (b) the number of “Republican ballots that the requester returned but were not counted” was “almost surely” between 38,910 and 56,483.[37]
A sworn affidavit claims that election workers in Pennsylvania were instructed to assign ballots without names to random people across the state. Consequently, thousands of Pittsburgh residents who showed up to vote in person were told that, according to official records, they already had voted.[38]
At least 1,400 early and absentee voters in Pennsylvania listed their home addresses as those of post offices, UPS facilities, and FedEx locations, disguising the box numbers as “Apartment,” “Unit,” “Suite,” etc.[39]
In Pennsylvania, more than 51,000 mail-in and absentee ballots were marked as having been returned just one day after they were sent out by election officials, a virtual impossibility. Nearly 35,000 additional mail-in and absentee ballots were marked as having been returned on the same day that they were sent out, and another 23,000+ had a return date that was earlier than the sent date. Further, there were more than 43,000 mail-in and absentee ballots marked as having been returned just two days after being sent out, which still represents an implausibly fast turnaround time. Plus, more than 9,000 mail-in and absentee ballots had no “sent” date listed at all.[40]
A Republican poll observer from Pennsylvania’s Delaware County, Greg Stenstrom, who is an expert in security fraud, told a Senate GOP Policy Committee hearing that 47 USB cards containing poll results had gone missing without explanation. He also said that he had witnessed at least two dozen instances where a warehouse supervisor uploaded USB card data to voting machines without being observed by a poll watcher.[41]
Whistleblower Jesse Morgan, who worked as a truck driver for a subcontractor with the USPS, says that on October 21 he drove a truck filled with potentially upward of 288,000 ballots from Bethpage, New York to Lancaster, Pennsylvania, thereby illegally transporting ballots across state lines.[42]
Affidavits by postal workers in three Pennsylvania cities have testified that various post offices illegally backdated ballots and ordered that Trump mail be placed in the “Undeliverable Bulk Business Mail” bin while emphasizing that Biden mail should be delivered on time.[43]
Pennsylvania postal worker Richard Hopkins told James O’Keefe of Project Veritas that Erie County postmaster Robert Wisenbach had told postal employees to separate mail-in ballots that arrived after November 3 from other mail, and to backdate those ballots so that they would be counted in the election. Both the Washington Post and New York Times later published false stories claiming, incorrectly, that Hopkins had retracted his allegation.[44]
In one particular vote spike in Pennsylvania during the wee morning hours of November 4, approximately 570,000 votes were added to Biden’s total, while a mere 3,200 were added to Trump’s total – a ratio of about 178-to-1.[45]
What Happened in Michigan
According to one affidavit, a Michigan election supervisor violated existing state law by instructing election workers at in-person polling places not to request photo identification from voters.[46]
Affidavits filed in Michigan claim that poll workers were instructed to ignore signature mismatches, backdate late-arriving ballots (to make it appear that they had arrived before the statutory deadline), and process ballots of questionable validity.[47]
Poll challenger Andrew Sitto swore in an affidavit that boxes filled with tens of thousands of unsealed, unsecured ballots—all cast for Democrats—had arrived in vehicles with out-of-state license plates in Michigan’s Wayne County at 4:30 AM on the morning after Election Day. “I specifically noticed that every ballot I observed was cast for Joe Biden,” said Sitto. According to another sworn affidavit, the names on the ballots in these boxes did not appear on either the Qualified Voter File (QVF) or the supplemental lists of voters who had registered shortly before Election Day.[48]
Sitto says that in the vote-counting room where he was stationed on Election Day, an election official at one point used a large sheet of cardboard to block the windows; that same official subsequently refused to let Sitto re-enter the room after he had left for a break.[49]
Robert Cushman, a poll challenger in Detroit, said in a sworn affidavit: “I saw the computer operators at several counting boards manually adding,” “to the QVF system,” “the names and addresses of these thousands of ballots … from unknown, unverified ‘persons.’”[50]
In 18 sworn affidavits in Michigan, the witnesses claimed that election officials had counted the ballots of people whose names were not in the voter file, and that those names were added into the system with the birth date of January 1, 1900.[51] One of these 18 affiants was Robert Cushman, who said in his testimony: “When I asked about this impossibility of each ballot having the same birthday occurring in 1900, I was told that was the instruction that came down from the Wayne County Clerk’s office.”[52]
Approximately 9,500 Michigan mail-in ballots were purportedly submitted by voters whose names and birth dates matched those in the death records of the Social Security Death Index. In addition, nearly 2,000 more ballots were cast in the names of voters who claimed to be aged 100+ but were not listed in public records as living individuals.[53]
In a federal lawsuit filed against Michigan on November 10, President Trump’s re-election campaign presented 234 pages of sworn witness affidavits describing how, in violation of Michigan’s election code, Republican poll challengers had been prevented in various ways from being able to properly observe the vote-counting process – particularly in Wayne, which is Michigan’s most populous county. “Election officials would applaud, cheer, and yell whenever a Republican challenger was ejected from the counting area,” the lawsuit stated.[54]
Seven witnesses in Michigan said they had seen the same stacks of ballots being run through tabulation machines multiple times by Democrat poll workers (with no Republicans alongside them).[55]
An affidavit filed by a postal worker in Traverse City, Michigan states that various post offices illegally backdated ballots and ordered that Trump mail be placed in the “Undeliverable Bulk Business Mail” bin while demanding that Biden mail should be delivered promptly.[56]
Another postal employee in Traverse City contacted James O’Keefe of Project Veritas to describe, on video, how his supervisor, Johnathon Clarke, had required postal workers to illegally segregate and manually backdate ballots received after the statutory deadline of 8 PM on Election Day. The workers were then ordered to immediately send these doctored ballots to the P.O.’s main distribution center. When Mr. O’Keefe subsequently reached Clarke by phone to question him about the allegations, a startled Clarke refused to say a word and immediately hung up the call.[57]
IT and cyber-security specialist Melissa Carone, who on November 3 and 4 worked as a contractor for Dominion Voting Systems — the company that provided the voting machines in 66 of Michigan’s 83 counties in 2020[58] — told a Michigan Senate Oversight Committee hearing: “What I witnessed at the TDS Center [where votes were being counted] was complete fraud. The whole 27 hours I was there. There were batches of ballots being ran through the tabulating machines numerous times, being counted eight to ten times, I watched this with my own eyes. I was there to assist with IT.” Adding that she was “under the impression 100 percent that all of these workers were in on this,” Carone claimed: “There was not a single ballot that the whole night, the whole 27 hours that I was there, that was for Donald Trump, not one.”[59]
Carone also has noted that there were approximately 22 to 24 tabulating machines in the location where she was working, and that she observed election-related malpractice “thousands of times” while she was at the site.[60]
The anti-election-fraud organization “Guard the Vote” examined 30,000 of the 172,000 mail-in and absentee ballots that were cast in the city of Detroit. Of those 30,000 ballots, 229 were cast in the names of dead people, while another 2,660 were cast by people claiming invalid home addresses such as those of vacant lots and burnt-down houses. In short, at least 2,889 (9.6%) of these 30,000 Detroit ballots should have been discarded. If this rate of ineligibility is representative of the city’s 172,000 mail-in votes as a whole, more than 16,500 of those votes were likely invalid.[61]
Patty McMurray, a Republican poll challenger in Detroit, claims that she saw large numbers of photocopied mail-in ballots submitted in the names of unregistered voters, all cast for Biden. “Not one of the ballots was a registered military voter, and the ballots looked like they were all the same Xeroxed copies of the ballot,” she testified. “They were all for Biden across the board. There wasn’t a single Trump vote. None of the voters are registered.” Asserting that election workers had entered those names and addresses with phony birthdates that “would override the system and allow them to enter nonregistered voters,” McMurray added: “Throughout the day, that’s how they would override voters that were neither in the electronic poll book or the supplemental, updated poll book.”[62]
A vote update in Michigan at 3:50 AM on November 4 added 54,497 votes for Biden and 4,718 votes for Trump.[63]
Another vote update in Michigan at 6:31 AM on November 4 added 141,258 votes for Biden and 5,968 votes for Trump.[64]
What Happened in Wisconsin
A vote update in Wisconsin at 3:42 AM on November 4 added 143,379 votes for Biden and 25,163 votes for Trump.[65]
At least 26,673 people used mail-in ballots to vote illegally in Wisconsin after they had moved out of the state.[66]
Postal subcontractor Nathan Pease has testified that he was told by two separate postal workers, on two separate occasions, that the USPS in Wisconsin was preparing to backdate more than 100,000 late-arriving ballots on the morning of November 4, to make it look like they had arrived prior to the statutory deadline.[67]
According to election data in Wisconsin, approximately 49,000 people voted for a Republican House candidate down ballot but purportedly chose not to vote for Trump at the top of the ticket.[68]
State data show a voter-turnout rate in Wisconsin of 88%, an implausibly high number.[69]
James Troupis, the lead attorney for the Trump campaign in Wisconsin, testified as follows to the U.S. Senate on December 16 vis-à-vis the many scores of thousands of illegally cast ballots that had been approved and counted in that state:
“In Wisconsin, we just completed a recount…. Uniquely, we are able to examine actual envelopes that contain the ballots that are submitted by absentee voters. This allowed us to identify by person, by address, by ward. It’s not conspiracy. The real names are in the record. And here’s what we found. We found that there were incomplete and altered certificates. These are the certificates on the front of the envelopes that have to be exactly done correctly under our law. If not, those results may not be counted [in the election]. How many of those? More than 3,000 of those identified by person were nonetheless counted, even though they are clearly invalid under the law.
“A second category, initials of clerks are placed on all of those envelopes. Why? Because the clerk identifies it having been properly received and identification is provided. That’s the check in advance of the election. What did we find? More than 2,000 of those ballots in Dane and Milwaukee County had no initials at all. But nonetheless, they got counted.
“We also have special laws in Wisconsin with regard to voting in advance. We do not allow advanced voting. We allow in-person and other voting as absentee. So, anything before election day is under our absentee rules. What did the city of Madison do? They created a system where people could arrive at a park, hand in their ballots in envelopes five weeks before the election. They also created boxes. No controls at all. Just boxes on corners that you could throw the ballot in. No attempt at all. And our statutes explicitly say there are only two ways to submit an absentee ballot. In person or delivery to the clerk’s office. That’s it. Nothing else is allowed. And yet have the city of Madison, we had … 17,271 ballots in this category that we identify. There are tens of thousands more because they co-mingled the ballots afterwards so we couldn’t identify each one that may have been properly cast.
“Then we have an interesting category called ‘indefinitely confined.’ These are people who [cannot vote in person because of their] age, physical illness or infirmity, or [disability]. So, they don’t have to provide any identification. Among those claiming this status is one of the electors for Joe Biden, who said, ‘I can’t get to the polls.’ We have poll workers who claimed it. We have people who went to protests, people who had weddings, people who had vacations, all claimed this status. ‘I can’t get to the polls.’ So, they were able to vote without identification. There were 28,395 people we explicitly identified [in this category].
“Finally, there are other categories in which as much as 170,000 other ballots were submitted without any application. In fact, they considered the certification envelope the application, though a separate application is required by law. Three million people properly voted in the state of Wisconsin. More than 200,000 identified during this recount did not. But those votes got counted, and our statute says they should not have been.”[70]
What Happened in Nevada
In Nevada, 42,284 people are on record as having voted twice in 2020. Moreover, ballots were cast in the names of approximately 20,000 individuals without a Nevada mailing address; 2,468 people who had moved to another state and thus were ineligible to vote in Nevada; 1,500 people who were dead; almost 4,000 non-citizens; and nearly 30,000 people who falsely listed non-residential, vacant, or non-existent addresses as their home addresses.[71]
On December 16, Trump campaign attorney Jesse Banal testified to the U.S. Senate: “All in all, our experts identified 130,000 unique instances of voter fraud in Nevada. But the actual number is almost certainly higher. Our data scientists made these calculations not by estimations or statistical sampling, but by analyzing and comparing the list of actual voters with other lists, most of which are publicly available.”[72]
Also in his Senate testimony, Banal explained how this widespread fraud had initially come to pass in Nevada:
“On August 3rd, 2020 after a rushed special session, Nevada legislators made drastic changes to the state’s election law by adopting a bill known as AB-4. The vulnerabilities of this statute were obvious. It provided for universal mail voting without sufficient safeguards to authenticate voters or ensure the fundamental requirement that only one ballot was sent to each legally qualified voter. This was aggravated by election officials’ failure to clean known deficiencies in their voter rolls. Because of AB-4, the number of mail ballots rocketed from about 70,000 in 2016 to over 690,000 this year. The election was inevitably riddled with fraud, and our hotline never stopped ringing.”[73]
Data scientist Dorothy Morgan reports that in the Third Congressional District of Nevada alone, there were 13,372 incomplete and fraudulent voter registrations submitted in 2020, as compared to a mere 68 in 2016. Many of these phony registrations listed casinos or temporary RV parks as the voters’ “home or mailing addresses.” Fully 74% of the fraudulent registrations of 2020 took place between July and September.[74]
What Happened in Multiple Battleground States
In a study headed by Matt Braynard, the former data-and-strategy director for President Trump’s 2016 election campaign, researchers made phone calls to many thousands of registered Republican voters in Pennsylvania who, according to state data, had received mail-in ballots for the 2020 election. Of the 1,706 voters whom the researchers were able to contact, nearly one-third said they had never actually requested a ballot. Among the remaining 1,137 voters who said that they had in fact requested a ballot, were 453 (42%) who both: (a) reported that they had mailed their ballots back, and (b) were unaware of the fact that those ballots were never recorded as “received” or “counted” by the state. If the foregoing percentages are representative of what happened to the overall total of 165,412 Republican-requested mail-in ballots that were never tabulated by vote-counters, the implications are obviously enormous.[75]
In other states, Braynard found that the percentage of Republicans who likewise had requested ballots that were never subsequently recorded as having been “received” or “counted” by the state were: 50% in Arizona, 44% in Georgia, nearly 33% in Michigan, and 20% in Wisconsin.[76]
Braynard found 17,877 early or absentee ballots that were cast in Georgia in the names of people who had filed out-of-state move notices and thus were not eligible to vote in Georgia. The same was true of 7,426 ballots in Pennsylvania, 6,254 ballots in Wisconsin, 5,145 ballots in Nevada, 5,084 ballots in Arizona, and 1,688 ballots in Michigan.[77]
Records show that in Pennsylvania, some 98,000 people voted only for Joe Biden and did not vote for anyone further down the ticket. The corresponding numbers in other key states were approximately: 80,000 to 90,000 in Georgia, 42,000 in Arizona, 63,000 in Wisconsin, and 69,000 to 115,000 in Michigan.[78]
At least 19,997 people used mail-in ballots to vote illegally in Arizona after they had moved out of the state.[79]
According to an analysis by the research group Just Facts, it is likely that 234,570 noncitizen votes benefited Biden across seven closely contested battleground states: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania.[80] Previous research has found that 81% of noncitizens who vote, cast their ballots for Democrats.[81]
Prior to the election, a Pew Research Center survey reported that in those states where a Senate seat was up for grabs in 2020, “overwhelming shares of voters” who planned to back either Trump or Biden said that they also would be “supporting the same-party candidate for Senate.” Consistent with those survey results, in traditionally red and blue non-battleground states alike, the total number of votes garnered by Biden was only slightly higher than the number of votes received by the Democrat Senate candidates who were also on the ballot. Similarly, the total number of votes won by Trump was only a little bit higher than the number of votes received by the Republican Senate candidates who were also on the ballot.[82]
But in the battleground states, inexplicably, the gap between Biden and the Democrat Senate candidates was far greater than the gap between Trump and the Republican Senate candidates. In Michigan, for example, Biden received 69,093 more votes than did Democrat Senate candidate Gary Peters, while Trump received only 7,131 more votes than Republican Senate candidate John James. And in Georgia, Biden received 95,801 more votes than did Democrat Senate candidate Jon Osoff, while Trump received only 818 more votes than Republican Senate candidate David Perdue. This means that in battleground states, a large number of Democrats seem to have voted for Biden while mysteriously choosing to ignore the highly important Senate races.[83]
Rigged & Corrupted Voting Machines
According to witness and expert statements contained in a lawsuit released by former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell and her legal team: (a) agents of malicious actors such as China and Iran accessed the software used by the Dominion voting machines “in order to monitor and manipulate elections”; (b) an affiant who was part of a national security detail to former Venezuelan socialist dictator Hugo Chavez, said that the software used by Dominion was designed specifically to enable the Venezuelan government to rig elections without getting caught; (c) that allegation was corroborated by another witness who “was in an official position related to elections and witnessed manipulations of petitions to prevent a removal of President Chavez”; (d) another affiant who was the cousin of the former chief executive of Smartmatic, the company that developed the Dominion software, said that that executive was determined “to ensure the election for Chavez in the 2004 Referendum in Venezuela”; (e) Princeton computer-science professor and election-security expert Andrew Appel testified that the vote tallies calculated by the Dominion machines can be manipulated by imputing a malicious code in just “7 minutes alone with [the voting machine] and a screwdriver”; and (f) Finnish computer programmer and election-security expert Hari Hursti testified that the Dominion voting machines can easily be hacked because they are connected to the Internet, a fact which he described as “a grave security implication.”[84]
One particularly noteworthy affiant describes himself as a former “electronic intelligence analyst under 305th Military Intelligence” with “experience gathering SAM missile system electronic intelligence” and “extensive experience as a white hat hacker used by some of the top election specialists in the world.” After conducting extensive forensic reviews, this witness concluded that “the Dominion software was accessed by agents acting on behalf of China and Iran in order to monitor and manipulate elections, including the most recent US general election in 2020.” He denounced Dominion for its “complete failure” to provide “basic cyber security.”[85]
A separate complaint in Georgia concurred that “by using servers and employees connected with rogue actors and hostile foreign influences combined with numerous easily discoverable leaked credentials, Dominion neglectfully allowed foreign adversaries to access data and intentionally provided access to their infrastructure in order to monitor and manipulate elections, including the most recent one in 2020.”[86]
Ben Turner, who heads Fraud Spotters, a consultancy specializing in detecting insurance fraud, conducted a county-by-county analysis of how the adoption of Dominion Voting Systems machines by those counties between the 2008 and 2020 presidential races may have affected election results in those places. After controlling for a host of key variables like race, population, immigration rate, and education, Turner found that in presidential races, the use of Dominion machines was associated with a 1.55 percentage point decrease in the Republican vote and a 1.55 percentage point increase in the Democratic vote.[87]
Another longtime data analyst found that Biden in 2020 had performed above the prediction line in 78% of counties that used either Dominion or HART InterCivic voting machines, consistently receiving 5.6% more votes than expected. The analyst called this “a dramatic red flag.”[88]
After conducting a forensic audit of Dominion voting machines, Russell Ramsland Jr., co-founder of Allied Security Operations Group, said in a report: “We conclude that the Dominion Voting System is intentionally and purposefully designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election results. The system intentionally generates an enormously high number of ballot errors. The electronic ballots are then transferred for adjudication. The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency, and no audit trail.”[89] Ramsland added that the machines’ “own logs … show very clearly that the RCV [Ranked-Choice Voting] algorithm was enacted. It shows very clearly that the error messages were massive. It [shows] very clearly that races were flipped.”[90]
Conclusion
Democrats and leftists have long maintained that occurrences of voter fraud and election fraud are so rare as to be nearly nonexistent, and that such occurrences should therefore not be used as pretexts for implementing allegedly unnecessary measures like voter ID requirements, signature-verification procedures, and voter-roll updates. But as the evidence presented in this article plainly attests, the amount of fraud that took place in the 2020 presidential election alone, was nothing short of monstrous.
Why, then, has one court after another refused to even listen to testimony regarding these many abominations? In some cases, of course, the courts are controlled by hardline leftists firmly committed to ignoring any evidence that might call Joe Biden’s “victory” into question. But in many other cases, fear has played a major role. Noting, for instance, that “the court system has been deeply intimidated by the left,” former judge James Troupis, representing the Trump campaign in Wisconsin, recently told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee:
“One of the reasons I was called [to represent the Trump campaign was] because virtually every major law firm in this country and in this city refused to represent the president. Not because of the lack of merit in his claims—we’ve certainly demonstrated that there’s merit—but because of the cancel culture. Because of the environment that has been created by the left that has intimidated lawyers so that they can’t be here. They’re not here, from the giant law firms, precisely because they were ordered by their management committees and others that, ‘You cannot take those cases. The reasons you cannot take those cases is because our clients, or the Democrat party, or the incoming administration will remember that and they will hold it against you.’”[91]
In a similar vein, Mark Levin observes: “[T]he judiciary has collapsed. They saw the [Black Lives Matter & Antifa] riots, they saw the threats against individual senators. They saw how these violent mobsters would find your home, harass your children, and they want none of it. They want none of it. And so they’d just as soon burn their copy of the Constitution, and that’s what they did.”[92]
The great scholar Dennis Prager has written that “the rarest of all the positive human traits” is courage.[93] That observation seems particularly profound at this moment in time, as America stares directly into the abyss of a fanatical tyranny that has candidly and openly vowed to engulf it. Right now, not tomorrow, is the time for ordinary men and women to reach deep inside themselves, summon up a measure of courage that they may never have realized they possess, and do some extraordinary things. If fear can destroy a civilization, courage can save it.
In the book Beyond all Reason: The Radical Assault on Truth in American Law, Daniel A. Farber and Suzanna Sherry, the authors, name the disease that has spread from a portion of the sociology department throughout the rest of the university, including the law departments. (as of yet, it has only touched its toe into the science department, but there are signs it is implanting itself there too)
T
They define this group of legal scholars (which I posit is causing what can only be termed a disease), radical multiculturalists. “Largely progressive, radical multiculturalism includes adherents of a broad assortment of theories, including critical race theory, radical feminism…and “gaylegal” theory….untied mostly by their rejection of the aspiration to universalism and objectivity that is the fruit of the european enlightenment.”
They go on explaining that “these radical multiculturalists beleive in particular that western ideas and institutions are socially constructed to serve the interests of the powerful, especially straight, white men. This leads them to attack such core concepts as truth, merit, and the rule of law.”
So what does it mean when people funded by George Soros, who believes in those ideas and spends millions per year in grants funding groups who press for this world view, has so many District Attorneys and democrats in elections who then “win” at least in the twisted way the very most recent election was counted.
Twelve days out from the 2020 Presidential election, never have we seen a more clear display of the nature of the two options on the table for America and the future of the West (and the world). Exemplifying the term “the gloves are off” and ” all the cards are on the table” has been the approach of the Biden campaign and the democratic party. Blatantly obvious deceit and misdirection and suppression are fed as the narrative to what they hope is a compliant public who will buy in enough to the cognitive dissonance to act in the ways the globalists have determined they need them to. They’ve been testing through the covid disaster, their ability to 1. get government actors to take actions the globalists want, and 2. test their little standby army of automaton phone trained young people and trained marxist operatives to perform actual insurrectionist activity against the state without discovery, and 3. the ability of big tech and legacy media to completely control information, using, we assume based on the Millenial millie videos about it, done using the shadownet . After all, the controllers of the Biden campaign are the same or interlinked with those in her videos.
Examples of all of these, coordinated actions and statements from the cabal in media, DNC and the deep state rogues for each of the actions above are:
Joe Biden for sure got the debate questions ahead of the debate as his answers were so perfectly prepared. And also, was being coached, like we wondered in the first debate, why would he not agree to be checked for an ear piece. As Sidney Powell shows here….
the coronavirus whole thing, as laid out by this guy in this report, which led me to discover this amazing paper which shows the infectious level the Ipfr of covid is actually around .24%, and then takes apart why the CDC is suddenly raising their estimate of infectious rate (but deceptively, this is the cpvr rate, which is the rate at which people die from the disease as DETERMINED BY SYMPTOM SIMILARITY OR SUSPECTED CASES, NOT CONFIRMED. The paper shows that the whole thing was way overblown. And this shows that Russia could teach us some stuff about covid19 dealing and yet it is another thing that is blacklisted by the cabal. Because Putin kicked them out. Even India has caught on to the cabal. And the fact that
for political reasons, presumably, the CDC is NOW, after all these hellishly over inclusive invasive measures are done, now are pushing the numbers up again. So many lies about this and the information control again astounding. Here are some papers published six months ago, saying things about it which are still verboten and stuck believing it is a terrifying pandemic of biblical proportions. Yet despite us being stuck wearing masks and schools closed, there are real studies showing this and like this and this and this and this
the covid lies are what prepared people to just go along with what they are told, even if their eyes see something or their own experience have led them to believe one thing, or they’ve been told it for years by the authorities now they can be told a completely different thing and whatever soros wants and will fund, they are softened up enough that will go along with it due to fear and
due to the control of phones and info by big tech, on full display with patreon visa etc actions against those doing free speech/conservative. ALERT: Today, October 22, 2020 at 9:07am SGTReport was terminated by PATREON after 3+ years. Patreon changed their policy TODAY and then began purging accounts whose politics they don’t like. This is economic warfare friends.
completely blocking any sharing of or linking to the new York post story of the biden laptop.
Shocking thigs I never thought i would see in america. And, as Sidney powell says, also these are undisclosed campaign contributions to joe biden by big tech – the suppression and misdirection is directly and only benefiting Joe Biden
The campaign in relation to Joe Biden and kamala
proves that if you stump for soros as kamala did and i mentioned in my article 2 years ago, you will be granted the position soros promised. here she is running for VP. like they knew ahead of time.
joe biden is senile and no one on the left in the legacy media or in the dem party is discussing this. The right is. We think they plan to pull the 25th on him as soon as he wins, then it will be kamala and the bolsheviks. Their ability to manipulate him – whatever they do on debate night to pep him up.
plus bernie wins but the other guy “wins” and then bernie bows to him like he did to Hillary. at least Ron Paul did not when he was rigged out, he stayed in as independent
all of this is to say, this is what they do, this is their deceitful totalitarian power hungry way of doing things. If you want america run like that, a sham, full of pain behind the scenes and totalitarian control by a few puppets of soros, with no chance of change because elections are rigged going forward and the constiutution is gone along with the guns, then biden is the puppet to pick
But if you love america, president Trump with four more years can actually change things, and drain the swamp, and we can have the america we always imagied, and hopefully, continue in a truthful free way forever.
the full text of the soros article since it is most likely to disappear from the archive
Ross covered the 2016 presidential election closely, but the majority of her stories appear to be anti-Trump in retrospect.
Allegedly unbiased Washington Post reporter Janell Ross spoke at a top-secret meeting of liberal movers and shakers last week, where Democratic donors including billionaire George Soros outlined the future of their progressive agenda.
A Post spokesperson told the Washington Free Beacon that Ross took part of the California event “without notifying her superiors that she would be attending.”
The Democracy Alliance, which hosted the event, bills itself as “the largest network of donors dedicated to building the progressive movement in the United States” on the group’s official website. The liberal group also claims to “play a leading role in fostering the infrastructure necessary to advance a progressive agenda” in the United States.
The group intended to keep “the identities of its members and guests confidential,” according to the Beacon, but the paper obtained a “detailed conference agenda that lists both events and featured guests.” Once the Beacon revealed the attendees, the group reportedly beefed up security and asked participants to keep details off social media.
One of the surprising guests was Ross, who used to pass as a somewhat impartial reporter for the prestigious Post. While the paper’s slogan is, “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” she apparently wanted to keep her bosses in the dark about attending the liberal planning session and hanging out with prominent Democratic donors such as Soros.
According to the agenda published by the Beacon, Ross’ panel aimed to help the liberal attendees get “the economic narrative right” and was immediately followed by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) speaking about on Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Media Research Center Vice President Dan Gainor called it a “classic example” of journalism “openly coordinating with the alt-left” to take down conservatives.
“Someone should introduce reporter Janell Ross and her boss Marty Baron to the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics. It appears they haven’t read it, or any other text on journalistic ethics.”— Media Research Center Vice President Dan Gainor
“Someone should introduce reporter Janell Ross and her boss Marty Baron to the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics. It appears they haven’t read it, or any other text on journalistic ethics. Funny, the movie ‘Spotlight’ portrays Baron as a big advocate of legitimate journalism,” Gainor told Fox News. “Can’t wait for the sequel that shows the Post for what it really is, the research and reporting arm of the left.”
While it’s surprising that a reporter from the Post would appear at such a partisan event, a quick glance at Ross’ archive page on the paper’s website reveals her agenda. One headline lumps President Trump into the same category as O.J. Simpson, while others touch on issues of race and gender discrimination. She covered the 2016 presidential election closely, but the majority of her stories appear to be anti-Trump in retrospect.
Members of the secretive liberal group who attended the shady presentation each promised to donate at least $20,000 to advance its left-wing agenda. The session was part of a three-day conference at the luxurious La Costa Resort located in Carlsbad, Calif., last week, where the group plotted their 2018 “resistance” and game plan, according to the Beacon. Soros was introduced by a video message from Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and House Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, according to the paper.
“We’ve only now learned about her participation in this event,” a Washington Post spokesperson told the Beacon when asked about Ross’ involvement, adding that she has been “reminded” that the paper “discourages” participation in events that may be “perceived as partisan.”
Ross did not comment when reached by the Beacon.
The Washington Post did not respond to questions from Fox News on whether or not Ross will be disciplined for attending the event. Ross did not respond to our request for comment either.
The Democracy Alliance did not respond to a question about who funded Ross’ trip to the ritzy resort where the event was held.Brian Flood covers the media for Fox News. Follow him on Twitter at @briansflood.
Subscribe
Share this profile
A PROJECT OF THE
Site Title 