Raising the price of gasoline is part of Democrats’ plan to make driving unaffordable for most Americans, Breitbart News columnist Charles Hurt said Monday .
“They make no secret about the fact that they … want gas at six dollars a gallon,” Hurt remarked. “They want it at eight dollars a gallon. This is not a secret to them. Their intent is to raise the price of gas so that it is so expensive that nobody can drive anywhere. … They want gas to be at $20 a gallon. They want it to be like Europe because they want no one to be able to afford to drive anywhere. That’s their goal.”
Breitbart News reported:
The early Biden era inflation is weighing particularly on the bottom end of the income scale. Gasoline prices, for example, rose 8.8 percent in March. The lower third of household incomes spend more on transportation than the upper two thirds, according to long-running data from Pew Charitable Trusts. In 2019, transportation costs—of which the price of gasoline is a major component—accounted for 17 percent of all household expenditures, according to Statista, the second biggest category after housing.
According to the latest data from U.S. Energy Information Association, national gas prices currently average $2.85 per gallon, up 99 cents from one year ago, an increase of 34.7 percent.
The fate of America’s constitutional republic hangs in the balance as the leftwing progressive base of the Democratic Party tries to parlay Democrat control of the White House and Congress to obliterate the independence of the Supreme Court.
President Joe Biden has kicked things off by naming a 36-member commission to examine possible changes to the size and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as well as proposals to set term limits for Supreme Court justices. The commission has 180 days to report back on its study of the issues, although it has not been given a mandate to make any formal recommendations.
While advertised as being bipartisan, the commission’s co-chairs, Bob Bauer and Cristina Rodriguez, both worked for the Obama administration. Even so, establishing a commission to analyze a hot button issue is often regarded as a convenient way to bury the issue. Not this time, however. The left won’t allow Biden or the Democrat-controlled Congress off the hook so easily. Even on the rare occasions when Biden’s old centrist instincts seem about to kick in, he quickly backtracks in the face of blowback from his left flank. What then-Senator Biden called a “bonehead” idea in 1983 and an “institutional power grab” in 2005 is now very much in play during Biden’s presidency.
The left sees immediate radical change to the structure and composition of the Supreme Court as necessary to cement its permanent control over the third branch of the federal government. That can only happen, however, after first nuking the Senate filibuster to pass their misnamed “For the People Act.” Also referred to simply as S.1, this bill would federalize slipshod election procedures across the country, eliminating state protections against potential election fraud, voter intimidation, illegal votes, and inaccurate vote counts. Passage of the bill will help Democrats guarantee their enduring control of Congress and the White House. With the filibuster already cast aside, Democrats will then be able to push through major changes to the Supreme Court this term with their slender majority. The result will be the left’s tight grip on the Supreme Court, while ensuring that the other two elected branches remain firmly in their pockets in future elections.
On April 15th, four Democrats in Congress decided not to even wait for Biden’s commission to complete its work. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, Rep. Hank Johnson, Rep. Mondaire Jones, and Senator Edward J. Markey introduced the Judiciary Act of 2021 to expand the Supreme Court by adding four seats, creating a 13-justice Supreme Court. This would represent the first change in the size of the Supreme Court since 1869.
“Some people will accuse us of packing the court. We’re not packing the court, we’re unpacking it,” Nadler sneered. Markey claimed that the “legislation will restore the Court’s balance and public standing and begin to repair the damage done to our judiciary and democracy, and we should abolish the filibuster to ensure we can pass it.”
Even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is not willing to oblige these demagogues just yet. Pelosi said that she “has no plans” to bring their bill to the House floor at this time. She wants to wait for Biden’s commission to finish its work before taking any further steps. But Pelosi has not ruled out supporting such a change down the road. “It’s not out of the question,” Pelosi said. “It has been done before.”
Yes, Congress has the constitutional authority to alter the size of the Supreme Court. However, it has chosen not to do so during a span of 152 years for good reason. When FDR tried to push forward his court packing scheme in 1937, the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee issued a report at the time declaring that “we would rather have an independent Court, a fearless Court…than a Court that, out of fear or sense of obligation to the appointing power, or factional passion, approves any measure we may enact.” FDR’s plan was shot down by his own party.
Democrats in Congress today no longer show such respect for the independence of a co-equal branch of the federal government. They are willing to increase the size of the Supreme Court solely for the purpose of turning it into a rubber stamp for their radical agenda. So long as Democrats succeed with their strategy to lock in continuing Democrat control of Congress and the White House by doing away with state law safeguards against election shenanigans, they have nothing to worry about. There will be no future Republican Congress and president elected who will be able to add more conservative justices.
However, there have been a few liberals with a conscience who have spoken out in recent times against court packing, as Joe Biden did when he was his own man in the Senate.
The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg – the liberals’ heroine replaced by Justice Amy Coney Barrett – told NPR in July 2019 that “Nine seems to be a good number. It’s been that way for a long time. I think it was a bad idea when President Franklin Roosevelt tried to pack the court.” Justice Ginsburg worried that court packing “would make the court look partisan,” adding that “it would be that — one side saying, ‘When we’re in power, we’re going to enlarge the number of judges, so we would have more people who would vote the way we want them to.’ “
At Harvard Law School’s annual Scalia lecture on April 6th, Justice Stephen G. Breyer warned about how court packing would “reflect and affect the rule of law itself.” Justice Breyer added, “If the public sees judges as ‘politicians in robes,’ its confidence in the courts, and in the rule of law itself, can only diminish, diminishing the Court’s power, including its power to act as a ‘check’ on the other branches.”
Progressives dismiss such arguments, of course, and indeed are pressing for Justice Breyer to retire so that a much younger and more left leaning justice can replace him. However, a few moderate Democrats in the House may be wary of supporting a bill to pack the Supreme Court, fearing the issue would be hung around their necks in Republican ads during the next election cycle. Democrat Senator Joe Manchin has declared his opposition to court packing legislation, which means it would be dead in the Senate even if the filibuster were eliminated or severely weakened.
Court packing also does not have widespread public support. In a New York Times/Siena College poll conducted last October during the height of the presidential campaign, a question was asked: ”If Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed to the Supreme Court and Joe Biden is elected president, do you think that Democrats should or should not increase the size of the Supreme Court to include more than nine justices?” 58 percent said no. 31 percent said yes. 11 percent said they didn’t know or refused to answer.
Thus, Democrats may decide to rally around a seemingly less drastic alternative to immediately expanding the Supreme Court to 13 members – term limits for future Supreme Court justices. There is more public support for term limits than for court packing. But the proponents of this idea are wolves in sheep’s clothing.
Term limits for Supreme Court justices are arguably unconstitutional since Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution states that “The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour…” Except in the case of impeachment or early retirement, this provision has been interpreted to mean a lifetime term.
The term limit advocates try to get around the constitutional issue by arguing that their reform would only apply to future justices. Moreover, they propose that, after a future justice’s Supreme Court term has expired, the justice would be free to remain in the judiciary as a senior appellate judge. They believe this demotion would satisfy the Constitution’s good behavior term language since the justices would still be judges. However, the Constitution’s text appears to tie the “good behavior” term for Supreme Court justices to their specific “Office” of Supreme Court justice, not to any post in the judicial branch. In her interview with NPR, Justice Ginsburg said that the term limits idea was unrealistic because of this constitutional provision and because, as she pointed out, “Our Constitution is powerfully hard to amend.”
In any case, on a policy level, Democrats proposing term limits for future Supreme Court justices are selling snake oil.
Take, for example, legislation proposed by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Don Beyer (D-Va.) that would apply only to future justices and would limit their service on the Supreme Court to 18 years. New justices would be appointed in the first and third years of each presidential term. Since, under this plan, none of the current justices would be forced off the Supreme Court, there will be a period during which more than nine justices will be serving at the same time. It is just a slower way of achieving the same objective as court packing.
If something like the Khanna-Beyer bill is passed in 2021, for example, President Biden would get to appoint one justice this year. This would expand the Court to ten until one of the current justices retires or dies. By a simple majority in the Senate (with Vice President Harris casting a tie-breaking vote), a progressive will be added to the Supreme Court. Biden’s next appointment would occur in 2023, even if there is then no vacancy on the bench. That could mean eleven justices until one of the current justices retires or dies. Assuming the Senate remains in Democrat hands, with the help of vote cheating enabled by the falsely entitled “For the People Act,” another progressive will be added to the Supreme Court. A Democrat White House and Senate in 2025 will ensure yet another progressive added to the Supreme Court, tilting the Supreme Court in a leftward direction. And so on. If a vacancy occurs during one of the off years, it would be filled temporarily by a lower court judge, until the following year when the president nominates, and the Senate confirms, the next term-limited justice.
The combined effect of the Democrats’ federalizing of elections to slant the outcomes in their direction and the passage of court packing or term limit legislation for the Supreme Court will be to institute permanent one party rule in Washington D.C. for all three branches of government. Separation of powers and checks and balances will be dead.
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction,” Ronald Reagan once said. We are at that crossroads right now. We must fight the leftwing progressives’ attempt to turn this country into their tyrannical domain lest, as Reagan warned, we “spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it once was like in America when men were free.”
It’s a reliable voting block. On Tuesday Democrats held a hearing on the election transformation bill HR1 that will ensure the party that cheats will never lose another election. Democrats LOVE this package of criminal behavior that makes it possible for anyone to in the United States or vote a hundred times.
According to PJ Media the bill is full of all sorts of wild federal mandates – bans on voter ID laws, prohibitions on cleaning voter rolls, requirements to accept late mail ballots and over 700 more pages of other commands that will lead to election chaos like we had in 2020.
During the hearing on Wednesday one of the Democrat witnesses argued that removing dead people from the voter rolls is “voter suppression.”
He actually said this! The dead people may actually feel suppressed of their right to vote!
Some suggested that the Trump era would fundamentally redefine the GOP, but it’s the Democrats that are actually remaking themselves as a permanent anti-Trump party.
One of the first orders of business in the House was a resolution illegally calling on cabinet members to remove President Trump by using the 25th Amendment. Rep. Pelosi and the resolution’s author, Rep. Jamie Raskin, whom the media is touting as a “constitutional scholar”, know quite well that the amendment, introduced because of Eisenhower’s heart attack and JFK’s assassination, protects the succession in case a president becomes medically disabled.
Proposals to have the cabinet use the 25th Amendment to remove a sitting president are sedition. Actually doing it would be a coup. These terms being falsely thrown around by the Democrats would actually apply under the scenario that they are proposing.
Rep. Raskin, who used to teach constitutional law, barely bothers with any kind of constitutional argument in his resolution. Ninety percent of it is an op-ed attacking President Trump only to pivot in its penultimate paragraph to arguing that a president can be removed from office under the 25th Amendment for being unable to discharge the “powers and duties of his office”, which he defines as including a ”duty to respect the legitimate results of the Presidential election“.
That’s a curious argument for the author of Overruling Democracy: The Supreme Court versus The American People to make. In that book, Raskin falsely claimed that President Bush was put into office by the Supreme Court in a “brutal offense against political democracy”.
“Millions of outraged Americans were urged to swallow whatever misgivings they had in the greater interests of political consensus,” he added.
But they could still write books about it, teach at universities, and run for office without being fired or accused of sedition for the quintessentially American act of questioning election results.
Does the constitutional scholar of a government bedroom community really want to argue that presidents can be removed from office for questioning election results by their cabinet: a group that has less constitutional basis than Roe v. Wade? What about House members?
Questioning elections is a crime except when Democrats do it and then write books about it.
Obviously Pelosi and Raskin aren’t serious. Their resolution is legislative trolling by a political movement exploiting seditious proposals to further divide Republicans and the country.
The impeachment push is just as unserious and also as strategic.
The Trump era has been very good for Democrat fundraising and their media apparatus. Now they envision an anti-Trump era in which President Trump is no longer in office, but always there as a target: an Emmanuel Goldstein figure on display for the permanent Two Minutes Hate orgy.
“In protecting our Constitution and our Democracy, we will act with urgency,” Pelosi bleated. “As the days go by, the horror of the ongoing assault on our democracy perpetrated by this President is intensified and so is the immediate need for action.”
The threat is urgent. So urgent that it can wait 100 days.
“It just so happens that if it didn’t go over there for 100 days, it could — let’s give President-elect Biden the 100 days he needs to get his agenda off and running, and maybe we’ll send the articles sometime after that,” Rep. James Clyburn, the House Majority Whip, proposed.
Impeachment worked so well last time that the Democrats could go on impeaching President Trump for years. Especially around election years or peak fundraising seasons. And the New York Times and the Washington Post can go on uncovering new fake crimes to impeach him for.
That gives Democrats the best of both worlds, allowing them to monetize Trump Derangement Syndrome, to permanently run against him, without having him in office.
Every few months, the threat of Trump can be revived, and Democrats will rally another impeachment, another set of totalitarian rules, and another fundraising pitch. Their allies in Big Tech will roll out another wave of censorship to cope with the permanent Trump emergency.
“The face will always be there to be stamped upon. The heretic, the enemy of society, will always be there, so that he can be defeated and humiliated over again,” O’Brien said in George Orwell’s 1984. “Goldstein and his heresies will live for ever. Every day, at every moment, they will be defeated, discredited, ridiculed, spat upon and yet they will always survive.”
Trump now becomes the permanent emergency, even greater than the coronavirus, that will justify the total power of the Democrats who will go on fighting to save Democracy by killing it.
Their frothing base will be driven into orgies of fury by the daily threat that President Trump will return from Elba unless they send $25 to the DNC right now and abolish the Bill of Rights.
Besides the money and the power, becoming the anti-Trump party papers over the conflicts of a political movement of wealthy elites who exploit the inner city for political power.
Rep. Raskin lives in Montgomery County, the 17th wealthiest county in the country, and Rep. Pelosi dwells in Pacific Heights on the Gold Coast which includes Billionaire’s Row. The more the leadership of this oligarchy whips up Trump Derangement Syndrome, the more they distract from the paradox of a ruling class that claims to be fighting for the liberation of the oppressed.
When Trump is always on the agenda, nobody ever asks, “liberation from whom?”
President Trump’s ability to build up support among black and Latino voters scared Democrats far more than a mob barging its way into the halls of power. The Democrats reacted to Trump’s win by building a populist anti-populist movement of suburbanites: some former Republicans.
Keeping the Never Trumpers around will also require permanently keeping Trump around.
Every time they get uncomfortable when police defunding, the Green New Deal, or giving Iran nukes comes up, the Democrats will drag out their effigy of President Trump for the nth time.
Being anti-Trump resolves all the complicated questions of power and political interests. It elementally simplifies the politics of the Democrats and distracts from their hidden agendas. The more that they hate Trump, the less they have to think about what it is they really stand for. And anti-Trumpism is the best way to radicalize their base into accepting any level of extremism.
The Democrats need President Trump. Their media needs him. And they’re not going to let go.
The only problem with this plan is that the general public will tire of it. The public was tired of the original impeachment. There’s no reason to think that infinite impeachments will play any better. But if the Democrats can divert attention long enough to make D.C. and Puerto Rico into states, implement illegal alien amnesty, pack the Supreme Court, and make the election rigging that stole 2020 into a nationwide policy, what the people still paying attention think will matter less.
Anti-Trump theatrics will be a convenient distraction, exciting the Democrat and Republican bases, and diverting attention from the policy killshots that will execute an actual coup.
Becoming the anti-Trump party will also distract from the sad spectacle of Joe Biden groping women, mumbling randomly through speeches, and finally making way for Kamala. All the talk of the 25th Amendment will help pave the way when it’s actually used as intended to remove Joe from office because he actually will be unable to discharge the duties of his office.
Whatever the GOP becomes in the years to come, the Democrats will be the anti-Trump party. Say what you will, but It has better branding than its actual name: the Socialist party.
In 2020, Democrat riots caused billions of dollars in property damage, destroyed historic sites, and assaulted and murdered dozens of people. Meanwhile, on January 6, President Trump asked patriots to walk peacefully to the Capitol to cheer politicians who, copying Democrats, objected to Electoral College votes. Some hotheads (encouraged by Antifa plants?) entered the Capitol, as Democrat protesters have done many times before. This time, though, Democrats demanded that Trump leave office immediately under the 25th Amendment or be impeached and that all Trump-supporting politicians across America be expelled from office.
When George Floyd, an ex-con convicted of a brutal crime, died from a drug overdose while Minneapolis police restrained him in accordance with their department’s training materials, Democrats across America went wild. Minneapolis alone suffered half a billion dollars in damages, mostly to small business owners, many of whom were black. The dam burst in all major Democrat-run cities. Unhindered by lockdowns, Democrats rioted, looted, burned, assaulted, and murdered in New York, Chicago, Austin, Los Angeles, Portland, and Seattle, just to name a few places.
And let us not forget what they did in D.C., where they tried to burn historic St. John’s church, tore down equally historic statues, smothered public property with obscene graffiti, and attacked the White House. This wasn’t the Democrats’ first assault on D.C. For just one example, Ed Driscoll reminds us that, back in 2018, Ocasio-Cortez and Nancy Pelosi applauded Democrats who stormed Pelosi’s office. According to Pelosi, it was a good thing to see activists “organize and participate in our Democracy.” Indeed, they have had a habit of urging violence against Trump and his supporters.
However, when Trump tells his supporters to make a peaceable visit to Congress to cheer on those Representatives and Senators brave enough to object to a manifestly fraudulent election, and a small percentage break away and do what Democrats have always done, it’s suddenly “sedition,” “treason,” and “terrorism.” Then, with their narrative firmly in place, Democrats are ready to do something else that leftists have always done: Purges.
On Sunday, Nancy Pelosi (D. — white supremacist representative occupying a seat a black person should have) announced that on Monday the House will vote to ask Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office – nine days before his term ends. Should Pence refuse to do so (and he has allegedly announced that he will refuse), Pelosi will proceed with impeachment legislation.
Indeed, rumors abound that Trump is gearing up for the legal equivalent of a nuclear strike. The claim is that he will unleash myriad facts about election fraud, including a Roman connection that runs through Obama. I love all these rumors. They’re like the best spy story in the world. They also imagine a deus ex machina – a God from the machine – that magically emerges that makes everything right at the end. That’s fiction, though, and we have to live in reality, no matter how ugly.
However, if even some of the rumors are true, it would explain the rush to hustle Trump out of office. Take note, though, that impeaching Trump cannot prevent him from running for office again because Art. I, Section 3 of the Constitution does not extend to elected offices. Just ask Alcee Hastings. In any event, Trump cannot be impeached once he’s out of office.
But hubristic Democrats have another plan, one that’s even worse than striking at Trump. Ignoring their repeated history of objecting to Republican presidential Electoral College certifications, they plan to use sec. 3 of the 14th Amendment to remove all federal and state elected officials who objected to Biden’s Electoral College votes. That section bars political office to people who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the Constitution” or gave “aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”
The 14th Amendment, of course, was written and passed immediately after a shooting Civil War that killed over 600,000 men. But that’s not stopping Rep. Cori Bush (D. Mo.), a pastor who leads “with radical love,” from working to “expel the Republican members of Congress who incited the white supremacist attempted coup.”
Rep. Ayanna Pressley is all in because “white supremacy is when Black skin alone is treated as a crime punishable by death, but white skin allows you to incite a violent overthrow of the government & still act entitled to hold elected office.” Pelosi is on board, too, because she’s trying to delay the day these execrable race hustlers turn on her.
The Russians had a word for what Democrats are doing: Purge (Большой террор). The Greeks had a word too: Hubris. Both are very bad words.
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.”The New York Times proclaims that “Trump’s false election fraud claims” are founded upon nothing more than a “torrent of falsehoods.” 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.” And CNN.com warns that “Trump’s obsession with overturning the election” has now begun to spiral “out of control.”
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.
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.”
Beginning more than a year ago, Democrats 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 notoriously inaccurate.
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.’”
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. 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.
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.
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 only 17% of all counties nationwide, a record low.
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%.
Trump also 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 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.”
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.’” Moreover, Democrats were unable to overturn even a single Republican seat in the House. And in New Hampshire, Republicans seized control of both the state House and the state Senate, which had been firmly in Democrat hands.
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.”
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. 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.”
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. Almost all of the people in this latter category were absentee voters who cast their ballots early.
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.”
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, 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.
A vote update in Georgia at 1:34 AM on November 4 added 136,155 votes for Biden and 29,115 votes for Trump.
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].”
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.’”
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. 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.”
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, 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.
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).
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.
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 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.
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, 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.”
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
A vote update in Wisconsin at 3:42 AM on November 4 added 143,379 votes for Biden and 25,163 votes for Trump.
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 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.
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 show a voter-turnout rate in Wisconsin of 88%, 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 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.”
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.”
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, 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.
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.”
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.’”
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.”
The great scholar Dennis Prager has written that “the rarest of all the positive human traits” is courage. 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.
More than eight months after “15 days to flatten the curve,” our so-called medical experts, politicos, and pundits are bidding us to avoid our family at all costs over the holidays, lest we die. This Thanksgiving week, family separation is the name of the game, with governors and local authorities implementing onerous restrictions to discourage people from leaving their homes.
Instead, these hypocritical governors insist, “Get together with your family via Zoom to ensure your loved ones stay safe.” Nothing says grateful gathering like a conference call with your kin.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advise the same, qualifying Thanksgiving gatherings as “highest risk,” although the CDC’s own data suggests lockdowns could kill as many people as the Wuhan virus itself.
The media goes right along with all of it, instilling fear and shaming Americans who question them, while also violating health orders themselves and then lying about it. These media elites are already wishing us a very COVID Christmas too, with CNN’s Jake Tapper declaring, “Christmas is probably not going to be possible.”
‘Short-Term’ Is a Myth
“We must make short-term sacrifices for our long-term health,” the governors wrote trying to make their rhetoric more palatable in the Washington Post article. “None of us wants the guilt of gathering and unwittingly spreading this virus to someone we love.”
Nothing about these sacrifices has been “short-term,” however. The March days turned into the summer weeks, which have led to the winter months, which is turning into a full year and more — just gone. The fearmongering has guilted families into objectifying their loved ones, viewing them as threats, and now many of them are gone anyway — dying of cancer, dying of old age, and dying alone. We’ve turned fear into our friend and family into our foe. Is this really best “for our long-term health”?
“Think about your last Thanksgiving and the people you were surrounded by — your parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters, neighbors and friends, or the family you have chosen for yourself,” the group of governors urged. “Picture their faces — laughing with you, watching football with you or even arguing with you about politics. As hard as it will be to not see them this Thanksgiving, imagine how much harder it would be if their chairs are empty next year.”
COVID-19 Rhetoric Is Exhausting and Absurd
Americans are exhausted of the rhetoric and are weary of trying to discern the right thing in the highly politicized pandemic. Of course we don’t want to subject our friends and family to danger, and of course we don’t want their chairs to be empty next year — but we are rational actors. We know every single time we gather around the table, it could be the last, pandemic or not. What is “thanksgiving” if not gratitude for the gracious gifts we don’t deserve, including people, with whom our days are numbered? What an awful prospect to think of relinquishing our limited days with family as though time with them next year were a guarantee.
Should we put our trust in the advice of health experts and the elected that have been known to lie and cheat, and hold at arm’s length the people who most give us life lest they kill us? These “experts” are the same people who insist church is more dangerous than mass protests and rioting, and the same politicians who advise you to wear your mask between bites of food.
Is it so much more dangerous to gather with loved ones over a meal than to eat surrounded by strangers at a restaurant? What about our mental health? Is it wise to progress through the cold winter months, as seasonal depression sets in for many people, with a dismissive attitude toward those who should be under our care?
Joe Biden used the same “empty chair” rhetoric during the last presidential debate, warning that we’re headed into a “dark winter.” But are family separation policies and paralyzing fear of a virus really less dark than the possibility of physical death? Shouldn’t we be permitted to make these assessments and take these risks without condemnation? Eliminating all risk goes against all the things American, and shunning community weakens the bonds that make life worth living.
Gather This Thanksgiving
Life is too short to live it in fear of dying. Of course, we should not be reckless, but rather prudent and charitable so we truly can enjoy an abundant Advent season and gather once again next November with gratitude.
For at-risk family members, use this opportunity to find ways to serve them and to demonstrate your affection even though they might not be present at your table this year. Their need for caution doesn’t eradicate their need for community; don’t make yourself feel better by cutting them out of your life and telling yourself it’s for their safety.
For young, healthy family and friends — whose coronavirus recovery rate is north of 99.9 percent — gather, and give thanks. There’s simply no rational reason to isolate yourself.
One public health expert even advised The Federalist that Americans should “have a Thanksgiving or Christmas get-together with no restrictions, but if older people (60+) are going to be present alongside younger people (18-60), be sure to get rapid antigen tests for everyone — especially the young — before the event.” These are reasonable precautions.
The group of governors concluded, “We will get through this together.” But that isn’t true — and it isn’t what they want. This holiday season, they want you to get through it alone. Be smart, but don’t let the petty tyrants keep you away from your loved ones this holiday season. Cherish the time with them because it is fleeting.
By now it should be obvious – even to conservatives – that we are in a war. It is a conflict that began nearly fifty years ago when the street revolutionaries of the Sixties joined the Democrat Party. Their immediate goal was to help the Communist enemy win the war in Vietnam, but they stayed to expand their influence in the Democrat Party and create the radical force that confronts us today. The war that today’s Democrats are engaged in reflects the values and methods of those radicals. It is a war against us – against individual freedom, against America’s constitutional order, and against the capitalist engine of our prosperity.
Democrat radicals know what they want and where they are going. As a result, they are tactically and organizationally years ahead of patriotic Americans who are only beginning to realize they are in a war. The Democrats’ plan to steal the 2020 election was hatched many years ago when Democrats launched their first attacks on Voter I.D.s, and then every effort to secure the integrity of the electoral system. Those attacks metastasized into an all-out assault on Election Day itself with early- and late-voting grace periods, and a flood of 92 million mail-in ballots, hundreds of thousands of which were delivered in the middle of the night to be counted behind the backs of Republican observers after Election Day had passed.
The result of these efforts is that Election Day no longer really exists as a day when the votes are cast and counted. This is a fact that offers generous opportunities for the election saboteurs to do their work. Those saboteurs’ opportunities were greatly enhanced this year with the installation in battle ground states of voting machines specifically designed to calculate how many votes were required to steal an election and then to switch ballots already cast and deliver them to the chosen party. Mail-in ballots were indispensable to the realization of this plan.
I will not dwell at length on the years it took the Republican Party, and American patriots, to recognize what the Democrat Party had become or the threat it posed to our country as an enemy within. Suffice it to say that Republicans can still be heard referring to Democrats as “liberals” when it is obvious even to them that there is nothing liberal about their principles or methods. They are vindictive bigots who are actively destroying the First Amendment in our universities, on the Internet and in our once but no longer free press. Suffice it to note that while Democrats accuse Republicans including the President of being racists and traitors, the response of Republican leaders is this: “Oh, the Democrats are just playing politics.”
This is not “playing” people. It is war. They are trying to kill us politically, and we need to respond accordingly, to fight fire with fire. Today’s Democrat Party is a party of character assassins and racists. Republicans know this but are reluctant to say it. That is how a pathological liar and corrupt political whore like Joe Biden can accuse the choice of 73 million Americans of being a white supremacist and also murdering 220,000 corona virus patients. That’s why Biden and his gunslingers can do so with no consequences – without so much as a wrist slap – from “moderates” and independents, who know better. The Democrats’ ability to intimidate well-meaning Americans is that great.
Is this too blanket a condemnation? Where, then, is the Democrat who was outraged by the four-year Russia collusion hoax and the failed coup and impeachment attempts – all of which accused the president, without a shred of evidence, of treason? Where was the Democrat who dissented from the public lynching of an exemplary public servant, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, over an incident that never happened 37 years ago at a time when he was a high school kid? Where is the Democrat who has condemned the violent street criminals of Antifa and Black Lives Matter who got away with conducting the most destructive civic insurrection in American history, orchestrating mayhem and disrespect for the law that led to the murders of scores of people who happen to have been mainly black?
What follows is a basic vocabulary for understanding the political war that has engulfed us. When it is used by enough Americans who love their country, it will cancel the surreal universe that Democrats’ lies have imposed on us, and the war will be on its way to being won.
Democrats are not democrats; they are totalitarians. They have declared war on the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the Electoral College, the Senate, the Supreme Court, the election system, and the idea of civil order. They have called for the Republican President of the United States to be de-platformed and jailed. Their obvious goal is a one-party state that criminalizes dissent. To them, support for such basic necessities as borders and law enforcement are racist. If you oppose their efforts to legalize infanticide, they will condemn you as enemies of women, and if you make videos of their confessions to selling body parts of murdered infants, they will – like Kamala Harris – throw you in jail.
Progressives are not progressive; they are reactionaries. They are out to abolish liberal value systems and create a status hierarchy where race, gender, and sexual orientation define and confine you to an unalterable place in their new social order. If you are white or male or heterosexual or religious – Justice Kavanaugh was all four – you are guilty before the fact.
But if you are a member of a designated (but increasingly imaginary) “victim” group you are innocent even when the facts show you are guilty – like the reprehensible female who lied to Congress in a calculated attempt to destroy Kavanaugh’s life and career. If you are a member of a “victim” group you have an unlimited license to persecute others. Thus, the LGBTQ lobby is currently behind a nation-wide crusade to strip Christians of their First Amendment rights and criminalize their religion. They use their victim status to leverage their hate of people who don’t embrace their agendas, and deploy it to crush them – and only Republicans seem to care.
Identity politics is a pure form of racism, yet Trump is the only Republican I’m aware of who has had the political spine to call a Democrat a racist. Identity “wokism” is a totalitarian politics because it encompasses every aspect of life, down to the pronouns one is ordered to use. The progressive police state will leave no space free.
Racists and aspiring totalitarians are what Democrats have become. The only moral principle they are guided by is the old Bolshevik saw, “the ends justify the means.” They will say anything however false and condone anything, however criminal, which advances their goal of maximum power.
Since race is the principal weapon wielded by Democrats, this is most evident in their claim that there is “systemic racism” in America, which needs to be rooted out even if it means destroying the very foundations of law and order. When two Republican canvassers refused to certify the election result in Detroit – a city once the richest in America but now mainly black and poor thanks to fifty-nine years of misrule by Democrats – they were accused of “systemic racism.” This charge and the accompanying threats by the Democrat mob were so intimidating the two withdrew their objections. But if there was in fact election fraud in Detroit, to object to it is not by any stretch of the imagination “systemic racism.” To believe otherwise is to believe that black people, due to their skin color, are incapable of committing election fraud. How racist is that?
“Systemic racism” is an assertion made reflexively by Democrats that is never accompanied by evidence. For good reason. Systemic racism has been outlawed in America since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If there were actual instances of systemic racism in 2020, there would be lawsuits – plenty of them. Even making the racist assumption, which the Identity Politics crowd does make, that all white people are white supremacists by dint of their skin color, there are tens of thousands of black lawyers, prosecutors, district attorneys, attorneys general, and elected officials who would be filing lawsuits over a practice that is illegal. You never hear of massive lawsuits over systemic racism, because “systemic racism” is a myth. The myth lives because it is an indispensable weapon wielded by Democrats to advance their anti-democratic agendas and quests for power.
But the only reason Democrats are able to do this so successfully – even going so far as to justify the arson, looting and general destruction in more than 600 American cities this summer – is because Republicans, and conservatives generally, are too cowardly to confront them. This war will continue until patriotic Americans summon the courage to call Democrats the racists, liars, character assassins and aspiring totalitarians that they actually are. And to do so in so many words. Blowback works.
Democrats, activists and members of the media (but I repeat myself) have reacted hysterically to President Trump’s decision to display a couple M1A1 Abrams tanks and Bradley Fighting Vehicles on the National Mall as part of a Salute to America Fourth of July celebration. They have made comparisons to China and concentration camps, but what they don’t bring up is what Democrats have done when they deployed tanks against Americans.
Wait, is that Hillary Clinton complaining about a display of military force?
Flashback to 1993 when Hillary and co-President Bill Clinton were in the White House.
It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.
The Democrats continue to refuse to provide the funding for DHS to address the border crisis that exists along the dangerous and highly porous U.S./Mexican border while complaining about the conditions in which illegal aliens, particularly alien children, are being housed in detention facilities that were never designed to handle the number of aliens currently being housed within their over-crowded confines.
On June 25, 2019 Fox News reported, “Dem-led House passes $4.5B bill to aid migrants at border, setting up showdown with GOP-led Senate.”