Search The Archives

Saturday, November 28, 2020

How To Explain Election Fraud So Even A Democrat Can Understand It Exists

How To Explain Election Fraud So Even A Democrat Can Understand It Exists

By now you have been inundated by a barrage of messages stating unequivocally that the 2020 election was “the most secure election ever” and that there is “no proof of voter fraud.”  Undoubtedly you have also observed warnings placed upon tweets or other social media posts by the President and/or his legal team saying something along the lines of “this claim about voter fraud is not substantiated.”

What is interesting about all of the above items is that the news media and elements of the government worked hand-in-glove with social media companies to ensure that President Trump would have his work cut out for him during the 2020 Election, and should he lose, they would all rapidly descend and dismiss any claim of “election fraud” no matter how credible the evidence is.  Not so shockingly, the media is not interested at all in the actual evidence; they are only concerned with saying there is “no evidence” of voter fraud despite the fact there is ample evidence.  

So how did we get to this point?

To those who were paying attention on Election Night, it appeared that President Trump was about to cruise towards a landslide victory.  Ohio, Florida, Texas were called for Trump with North Carolina in a strange holding pattern (but with Trump ahead).  Georgia was clearly in the Trump column as well.  Something had to give.  After all, Biden barely campaigned but as we also know, he stated clearly that he assembled the finest “voter fraud team in history” just a few days before the election in one of his softball interviews.  Fox News made a bold decision to call the Arizona race for Biden very early, by a few days, as even CNN and The NY Times held off calling it Biden’s way for 4 or more days afterwards.  But that was the switch that set everything else in motion.

Suddenly states just decided to stop counting votes.  Not taking more time to count votes;  stopped completely counting votes.  That is until 3:30AM ET when suddenly without warning Michigan and Wisconsin flipped from red to blue in favor of Joe Biden.  From that point on, every state started reporting thousands and thousands of votes for Joe Biden.  Impossible you say?  Agree.  It was impossible then as it is now.  Yet here we are.

There is a very detailed article over at the National Pulse ( that does a deep dive on the statistical improbabilities that Joe Biden won this election cleanly or fairly.  It is a must-read to grasp the level of improbabilities we are talking about here.  Then of course there was the 3.5 hour Pennsylvania State Hearing in Gettysburg last week that highlighted human testimony of fraud, or at the very least, unequal treatment between Democrats and Republicans in that State.  Or you could peruse the documents of any number of lawsuits which are still making their way through various stages of litigation;  each of which has its own accompanying documents and affidavits which are “evidence” of election fraud.

Then there was the odd statement published by an obscure and recently created sub-section of the Department of Homeland Security known as CISA (Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency) which took over our Election security after the 2016 elections (supposedly due to “Russian Interference”).  Their statement was issued on 11/12/20, just days after the election with multiple states still counting ballots, which stated that there was no evidence of election fraud and that the 2020 election was the most secure in our history.  Well isn’t that convenient?

I suppose the biggest question one could ask after reading the CISA statement would be “How would CISA know there was no evidence of voter fraud if the ballots are still being counted and there are valid questions about the election being contested legally in courts?”  Does it strike anyone else as strange that an agency that had no authority over our elections less than four years ago, claims in a sweeping fashion that no election fraud exists without interviewing a single witness or seeing a single piece of evidence?  Keep in mind that much of the election fraud evidence was still being collected (and still is) at the time CISA made their statement.

Still, we must bridge the gap and we all should be operating from a sound set of facts.  I know that Democrats will want to ignore any of what has been presented already, and Republicans will want to push forward with election fraud theory.  Having taken some steps back from the election to review the data and the evidence, it is hard to come to any reasonable conclusion that indicates Joe Biden was able to garner more support in 2020 than Barack Obama ever did by a factor of 125%-144% or that turnout for Biden was at levels equal to those where election participation is mandated by law such as Australia.  It simply defies logic.  I don’t mean that in the 2016 sense where Trump won unexpectedly over Clinton.  I mean that in the mathematical way where certain laws of math, statistics and probabilities simply are impossible to cross over without a forcing factor (read: “cheating”).

So let’s simplify this so everyone can agree on a set of facts, so that we can unify the country in one way or another, since on our current trajectory we are not headed anyplace good.

Let use an example of a bank robbery.  Here are the facts:

  • ABC Bank was held up at gunpoint on December 1, 2020 at 12:00 noon eastern time.
  • The gunman was a white male with a shaved head; no beard or facial hair.  The gunman was 6 feet 11 inches tall as seen on video surveillance by the bank door height marker.
  • The gunman also had a tattoo on his right forearm that had the words “Born to Ride Hard” on top of a heart with the words “Johnny Christmas” under the heart.
  • The gun used was a chrome or silver revolver with a brown handle.
  • The getaway car was a 2012 Hyundai Santa Fe, black in color, and was parked in front of the bank.  An eye witness saw a tall man running into the car and recalled that the license plate was “XXS-778” 
  • Police responded to a silent alarm at the bank and took witness statements.
  • Police looked up the license plate and it came back to a local address about 20 minutes away from the bank.
  • Police went to the residence that matched the license plate at 12:30PM the same day (30 minutes after the robbery) and inside was a tall male with a shaved head and a tattoo on his forearm that matched the video.  In the driveway was the Black 2012 Hyundai Santa Fe.  Officers felt the engine hood and it was warm to the touch.
  • A search of the residence did not turn up any stolen money or a gun.
  • The gunman was put on trial for robbery and convicted even though no money was found, no gun was found and he never confessed.

Given the above set of facts, would a reasonable jury convict the person the police arrested for the bank robbery?  The answer is yes.  There was an eye witness that described the robber, the vehicle used and the license plate.  There was video evidence of the man exiting the bank that gave a measured height.  There was video evidence of the tattoo and hair / facial features.  The accused resided 20 minutes away from the bank and was at his home 30 minutes post-robbery event.  His SUV’s engine was warm.  In fact, people have been convicted on lesser sets of facts.

None the less, in the above scenario, there was strong eye witness testimony in conjunction with video evidence that secured a conviction despite not having a confession or a weapon or the money.  In essence, would a “reasonable person believe that the person arrested committed the crime” based on evidence presented during the trial?

Let’s switch gears to the 2020 Election.  In the 2020 election we have a unique set of facts that seems to have assisted one candidate over another:

  • New mass mailing of ballots in several swing states (not done before 2020)
  • News media spending almost all efforts covering the COVID pandemic despite lack of new or compelling stories
  • Fear tactics used to compel Mail in ballots in several states
  • Statistical / mathematical anomalies that defy generally accepted principles of probabilities
  • Voting system used in several states with known foreign influence and security issues
  • Historical evidence of corruption / election fraud in several location where Democrats garnered large numbers of votes
  • News media refusing to investigate election fraud allegations
  • Social media limiting engagement of any claims of election fraud
  • Rushed statement by CISA before evaluating any evidence or allegations of election fraud

Using the “reasonable person” model again, would a reasonable person come to the conclusion that there is a chance that election fraud has occurred?  The answer is yes.

The question before us now is:  “What do we do about it?”

No comments :

Post a Comment