Your quick rejection of voting problems has made me think… your comments and views always do. I consider you an inherently honest person in that you are true to your beliefs. Truly, that is the only measure of honesty that humans can apply. Reality is dashed on the rocks of belief all the time, for everyone. About the highest level of human honesty that we can obtain occurs where believers maintain a rational skepticism about everyone’s beliefs, including their own, and then constantly examine bits of information that don’t perfectly fit belief structures.
One must also be prepared to alter beliefs when new facts require it. This would be wonderful in a generic sense, but some beliefs are already based on hard reality and should not be questioned. An honest discussion might ensue at the end of which the questioner of reality-based beliefs should change his or her own.
Many beliefs are perceived by their holders to be unassailable, such as matters of faith, including moral codes and things spiritual, and honesty as a functional reference, itself. Evidence for such things varies from historic to emotional to community-shared beliefs as evidence. Arguments, even in historical realms are unrewarding, threatening and worth avoiding. But beliefs derived from more recent news: incomplete facts, unproven evidence (in the mind of the recipient) deserve some continuity of skepticism until reality can be more firmly grounded in support or disproof of outside opinions not personally experienced. I believe that you are more liberal in political views than am I and of a different faith, yet we respect one another’s views enough to change our own if either might reveal bits of reality to the other. I try to be an honest conservative and you are an honest liberal; I voted for George McGovern, after all.
And so, evidence is the key to any discussion about political shenanigans, one of the least honesty-based areas of argument in human history. But, even here, there is reality, however difficult it may be to pry evidence from the hands of those who may be the perpetrators of voting irregularities, which is where it all resides. At the very least I trust you can agree that there is some evidence of voting anomalies in the 2020 elections (plural; there being 50 state elections held on the same day). In opposing virtually every charge of voting irregularities, media observers, not quite exclusively patisan, immediately state that “You have no proof of fraud.” This is true in a definitive sense since, again, all the hard evidence is in the possession of those who are being accused of perpetrating or allowing said irregularities; there is abundant circumstantial evidence, however. In most cases of civil crimes, circumstantial evidence constitutes “reasonable suspicion” and grand juries have little else to go on unless there is sworn testimony that tends to support the circumstances of possible criminality, from which indictments often derive. Correct me if I misunderstand that.
There is a trap for many when considering political crimes. “It’s just politics as usual.” “This has been going on since Tammany Hall.” “It’s nothing new; charges were leveled in 2016 so it’s just tit for tat politics.” A crime is a crime… (ref: http://www.prudenceleadbetter.com/2020/12/26/admirable-crimes/ ) and we are all besmirched if crime is not sanctioned in a nation of laws, not of men… and women.
Judgment is twisted when hatreds form part of beliefs, and there are hatreds on all sides of the 2020 elections. These are guarded against firmly by honest observers… and debaters, and certainly, we hope, by judges, attorneys and sworn public officials. They are embraced by those who fail to meet standards of honesty, and they’re out there.
One could posit a scenario, based on the past 4 years of unrelenting attempts to politically destroy President Trump, having failed his removal by those means, that the unfulfilled hatred for Mr. Trump by the Democrat Party and the “deep state” denizens, would be concentrated on guaranteeing that Trump lost re-election. To do so required controlling the results in 5 or 6 states, only – the states Hillary was counting on and didn’t nail down in 2016. Attempting to effect a guarantee meant organizing hyper-partisans in only a few cities or counties: just a few parts of those few states. Given this hypothesis, is there any evidence that indicates such a plan may have been put into play?
Why, yes, yes there is! Like what, the skeptical questioner asks? Are there unusual patterns of vote counts in historically strong Democratic counties, cities or even precincts?
Georgia being on everyone’s mind, right now, let’s look there. Georgia’s voting and tabulation procedures have vulnerabilities, as do most states’. To generate a “certified count” for any single vote to be part of the count (assuming a legally-cast vote, disregarding temporarily deceased voters, out-of-state – non-resident voters, or “harvested” absentee votes), the ballot is first marked by the voter and scanned into an electronic file/database: safe so far. Absentee ballots, assuming each is marked by the legitimate voter who requested it, enter the system through a different “door,” but once scanned are also converted to specific pieces of data, safely entered. (A large number of ballots were mailed without a corresponding request, hopefully to be destroyed by the honest voter or person who sees it first. Some voters received more than one with slight variations in the addressee name. If there were a desire to skew the votes, floating quantities of unrequested ballots would be a simple way, particularly where a state has not purged its voter lists for years.)
So, vote intentions are converted to sacred data, one could say, which data is deserving of every possible protection and maintenance of accuracy as humanly possible. Each represents the most fundamental civil right we have. For weeks, absentee, mail-in and in-person early votes have been accumulating, each to be converted to a sacred datum.
Once counting is completed in each precinct / polling place, the compact flash cards holding the images from each “machine’ (scanner-computer) are physically driven by courier to a drop-off point for that jurisdiction, be it a precinct, city or county. From there they are escorted by police to the central tabulation center for the larger jurisdiction-County. Again, assuming that every ballot has been marked and recorded in the name of a legitimate voter, the data are still “safe,” one is assured by elections officials. Unfortunately, signature verification on mail-in and absentee ballots turned out to be a haphazard process in Georgia, largely unmonitored. For mail-in ballots, it was essentially ignored, according to sworn witnesses.
Up to this point the data are passed from machine to machine with no opportunity to manipulate the totals. However, once at the tabulation center, poll workers could exploit wide open vulnerabilities in “RTR” software, including deleting batches of votes, creating batches or replacing batches with new ones. From these tabulation centers across the state, the data is then sent to the SCYTL system that reports totals to the Secretary of State and to the Edison data aggregators who report to the media. If fraud has occurred at the input side or at the tabulation center, it is that fraudulent data that is being reported and relied upon by the Secretary of State and by the media. Is there evidence of these potential frauds?
A team of data analysts looked at only the numbers and the patterns of changes in vote totals along the timeline of the count. Different counties had similar problems and anomalies, most peculiarly sudden NEGATIVE vote movements. That is, in a system that increments votes as reported, there appeared huge decrements of Trump votes. In Gwinnett county, for example, Trump had 29, 391 votes to Biden’s 17,218, reported at 9:11 PM. Eight minutes later, the report was exactly switched, and Trump had 17,218 while Biden had 29,391, a decline of 12,173 for Trump, an identical gain for Biden. Trump ostensibly lost Georgia by only 12,670 votes.
In Putnam County one of those odd “decrements” erased 5,935 votes from Trump – gone altogether. Dougherty County saw 17,650 Trump votes disappeared. Dodge, Daltrey and Fulton Counties, together, saw some 30,000 votes removed from Trump. These are changes: negative vote counts, that cannot happen in an election tabulation that sees votes increasing (incrementing) in varying quantities for all candidates as totals come in. How much cleaner it is for all concerned if the machines are programmed, or intruded upon over the internet, to change totals – plausible ignorance of everything.
In Fulton County (Atlanta) the Elections Director, Richard Barron, announced that of 113,130 ballots counted at one point, over 106 THOUSAND had been adjudicated due to some sort of errors in the scanning/reading of them. The problem with adjudication is that the original ballot image is replaced with a new one, and the original image-data is lost forever. During adjudication the “vote review panel” evaluates the ballot and imputes the voter’s intent, and then enters the new information in replacement of the original. This is a great way to defraud voters and send corrupt data downstream for publication. This was a greater than 94% error rate. The logs from past elections show rates in the 1% or less range; THE LOGS FROM 2020 ARE MISSING.
More glaring, and perhaps more understandable, are anomalies in vote ratios. In most instances, historically, vote ratios of 75%/25% are considered outliers and cause for investigation. This year in Georgia, DeKalb County showed 94 polling places where votes came in at 90% or greater for Biden, a statistical impossibility. Fulton County had more than 150 polling places at 90% or more for Biden. These patterns are anomalous with regard to ANY past presidential elections, and exceed results for Barack Obama in 2008.
There is testimony, lots of it. Those who have come forward are not all Republicans, as if being one meant an inability to tell the truth, and they all have sworn affidavits about what they observed. Many testify to active harassment and intimidation whenever they tried to question obviously questionable votes. Votes by mail, for example, whose ballots had no corresponding registered voter on the qualified voter list, were still counted and challengers were intimidated for suggesting a challenge.
Some 138,000 mail in ballots were received ostensibly from people who had moved out of state, yet were counted without question. It is not possible that 138,000 former Georgia residents are all duplicitous; much more likely it is that these names were known from careful data mining over many months prior to the election, and purposely voted by third parties who knew the voter rolls were not “cleaned” of these ineligible voters.
The famous video of the Fulton County State Farm Convention center shows how observers and press were removed from the center at about 10:30 on the false premise that counting was done for the night. Once they were gone 5 remaining employees resumed counting without observers (illegal) and continued for almost 2.5 hours. In that time they scanned more ballots than the winning difference (12,670 statewide). In short, more than 200,000 votes are questionable in the Georgia election. Exorbitant vote totals from just a handful of counties – totals that exceed all previous voting patterns and statistical probabilities – overcame Trump’s substantial lead during the early morning hours, including “Biden spikes” similar to those in 4 other battleground states.
It is interesting that EVERY single anomaly in vote patterns and in illicit handling of ballots, and every batch of ballots of dubious origin (including photocopied ballots being scanned and stacks of hundreds of pristine, just-Biden votes) benefited Joe Biden. None benefited Trump which, statistically, if honest errors or “glitches,” some percentage would have.
Additional circumstantial doubts are raised by unusual differences between Biden totals and Democrat Senate candidates’ totals in the same key swing states. Pew Research did polling of likely voters in both parties, who overwhelmingly agreed that they would vote for the Senate candidate of the same party whose Presidential candidate they would likely vote for – not 100%, but close, as is the historic pattern in all presidential elections. Oddly, Biden polled 69,000 more votes than did Senate candidate, Greg Peters in Michigan. Compare that to Trump’s difference of just 7,131 over John James in the Republican party. Trump’s is a “normal” differential; Biden’s is 10 times that.
More striking is Biden’s outpolling of Senate candidate John Ossoff (the scheduled 6th year senate race) by 95,800 votes, 117 times Trump’s difference of just 818 votes over David Purdue. Both cases reflect huge quantities of Biden-only votes where no down-ticket choices were made, a very unusual pattern that happened, apparently, only in the “swing” states.
Does any of this constitute the “evidence” or the “proof” that media pundits keep asking for or denying the existence of? Those inclined to believe such an effort to guarantee Trump’s loss is possible, are likely to think it is, albeit not quite courtroom “quality.” Those inclined to dismiss Trump as never classy enough to sit in the oval office, or who may hate Trump for whatever reason, would naturally deny that anything besides Trump’s lack of civility, crude language and embarrassing Tweets were required to secure his defeat. In fact, every aspect of Trump’s campaign, political operation and instincts, and every aspect of historic precedent, numeric, social and cultural indicators… every aspect except just one, Biden’s apparent vote totals in 6 states, predicted a massive Trump landslide. How is it that every predictor of election outcome was wrong for the first time – in some cases for 150 years – and wrong together? That the Biden vote totals were such outliers in the political history of the United States, should at least increase skepticism regardless of partisanship, especially given the near lack of a campaign on the part of Joe Biden.
Donald Trump gained more than 10 Million votes compared to his 2016 totals. By itself this fact should guarantee his win. Historically, such a resounding increase has meant re-election. But, miracle of miracles, not this year. Obama, himself, won in 2012 with 3.5 Million FEWER votes than in 2008. Biden actually received fewer black votes than Obama did everywhere in the United States EXCEPT in the relative handful of cities and counties where ALL the anomalies occurred and from where all the questions derive. Such a pattern deserves some scrutiny, even more so when EVERY anomaly benefits only one candidate.
Okay, enough of this. There are just a couple of final points you should consider. One is that through a couple of obscure corporate steps, a Chinese investment house, UBS Beijing Co., Ltd. owns Dominion voting systems and, through side connections, Smartmatic software, both of which companies have taken part in election fraud in several countries prior to our elections.
The other is that the CCP funds and guides a huge voter registration campaign under the Chinese Progressive Association in San Francisco, whose head brags of his coordination with the Chinese consulate. China has made no secret of its preference for Biden as president. Trump is the first president to resist the Communist Chinese in 50 years. The Biden family is deeply enmeshed with Chinese investment companies tightly connected to the CCP. Biden in the Oval Office is our worst nightmare. The people he has suggested as his appointees to cabinet and other positions all seem to be globalists who are “soft” on China. God save us.
I don’t believe that anyone using Dominion voting systems has any idea what the actual democrat vote totals were on November 3rd (28 states and most of their counties) or else has chosen Dominion precisely because the machines are easily programmed to slice or switch votes. There is evidence of both capabilities. God forbid.
I urge you, as an American citizen, to review this video:
https://www.theepochtimes.com/2020-election-investigation-who-is-stealing-america_3617562.html
_________________________________________________________________
UPDATE: The events of January 6th are gruesome to watch and heartbreaking. Every true conservative hates them, especially Trump’s urging people to go to the Capitol and his son’s encouraging adoption of the tactics of the left. “To what end,” we cry out, Mr. President? Stopping the inevitable?
To be suspicious of very suspicious actions and irregularities on November 3rd, is Prudent. There was a point in Mid-December where the vitriol about what appears to be coordinated fraud should have simply stopped. It was time to be cool and to continue such legal challenges as remained. It was time to listen to cooler voices. It doesn’t mean that Trump needs to concede; his refusal is understandable, believing as he and many others do.
It does mean that January 6th could have easily been avoided. A terrible miscalculation, Mr. Trump. That would have been real leadership of a movement that had the potential to expose the rot in Washington. It will be a while before conservatism can wield as strong a lever again. Certainly it must. The nation won’t withstand much further drift leftward; China’s tentacles are already inverting and subverting our highest ideals with the active connivance of many politicians. Money and re-election are their compass, regardless of source. For shame.
“Globalism,” tightly enmeshed in banking and Wall Street, is antithetical to a Constitutional republic. Some prefer to ignore this truth and its consequence, because working with it makes them wealthy or temporarily powerful. When the ideas of America crash down, many of those who are helping may escape the new order; many hundreds of millions will not.