Was There Massive Election Fraud in 2020 Election?

Update

There are not many disagreements that the Obama administration weaponized many portions of the federal government against Republicans for nothing other than political purposes. This includes the IRS, FBI, CIA, and many other 3-letter agencies.  In addition, Obama and Biden were both involved in the spying on the Trump campaign and the efforts to impeach Trump before he even entered office.  This was followed by four years of constant aggression against anything Trump.  Given this background, does anybody with half a brain really think there was a “clean” election process in 2020?

Some comments from American Thinker:

The reason allegations of a “stolen election” linger is that there are mountains of irregularities that have not been addressed.  There were “pristine ballots” — ballots that had supposedly been mailed in envelopes but had never been folded.  There were ballots that were received at the polls before they were mailed (according to their postmarks).  There were votes from dead people (a key Democratic demographic).  With those and other irregularities staring us in the face, we don’t know if the election was stolen because the evidence has never been litigated.

Instead of allaying the concerns of fellow US citizens, the Democrats are running scared and attempting to intimidate anyone that questions the results.  This in itself is a major red flag and reminiscent of the Soviet approach for controlling its citizens.

 

January 12, 2021

It’s rather unfortunate that there has not been an objective review of the recent election process along with some sort of bipartisan conclusion. For the last 60 days, it’s been difficult to find any attentive rebuttals for the many claims of election fraud.  The typical retorts were “The AP has declared that Biden won the election”.  Now it appears that the same forces that are attempting to “cancel” conservative voices are working to hide the facts from the general public.  These approaches of trying to clumsily obliterate perceptions rarely ends well (see the Streisand Effect) — especially when it’s roughly 50% of the population that is actively being snookered.

I was wondering if anyone had researched the dispositions of the various legal cases about the 2020 presidential election, which were submitted over the last 6 months.  Fortunately, there is a recent article on this very subject at Doug Ross covering 57 court cases.

  1. 61% of the cases were brought before the election, including a number brought by the Democratic party.  These cases generally involved election procedures and obviously did not address any alleged misconduct that may have occurred during the conduct of the election;
  2. 88% of the cases, the court did not hold an evidentiary hearing and thus made no findings regarding potential or actual election misconduct.
  3. In most of the cases brought after the election, the court declined to address the merits of the claims based on various procedural grounds (e.g., standing, mootness).
  4. Even in those cases where an evidentiary hearing was held, the courts reached the merits in only three of these cases.

 

January 1, 2021

One thing I find interesting about Trump’s legal team challenging the election: They have one senior male attorney named “Lin” and a senior female attorney named “Sidney”.

Perhaps that is why they are so confused.

 

December 18, 2020

The conflicting messages from bureaucrats in the Trump administration are certainly enlightening.  On one hand, there was Chris Krebs, The former head of cybersecurity at the Department of Homeland Security, who claimed that “…the 2020 election was the most secure in history”.  A couple of weeks later he had to walk-back his statement when he acknowledged that a perpetrator had indeed penetrated multiple sensitive government computer systems.

Meanwhile, there is the position taken by departing Attorney General, William Barr, who has thrown cold water on the assertion that there was wide-spread fraud during the presidential election.  He indicated, “…we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election.”   This would seem to imply that the many claims that have been swirling around the right-leaning web sites are not real… or Barr has been extremely compromised.

 

December 17, 2020

The former economist and White House trade adviser Peter Navarro has conducted a forensic analysis of reported election irregularities and distilled the findings into formal report.  The report concludes that “patterns of election irregularities . . . are so consistent across the six battleground states that they suggest a coordinated strategy to, if not steal the election, strategically game the election process in such a way as to . . . unfairly tilt the playing field in favor of the Biden-Harris ticket.”

 

November 24, 2020

This is a relatively startling but likely deserving statistic: 79% of Trump voters believe that election was stolen from combination of illegal voting and fraud.

Nearly two thirds of Trump Voters don’t accept the result. 81 percent of Republicans voters have less respect for Democrats that they did four years ago. 77 percent of Democrats feel the same… This level of distrust in election results is unprecedented.

This doesn’t bode well for our democratic republic.

 

November 19, 2020

The Trump legal team highlighted nine key points behind the election fraud that they alleged were present:

1. Observers were prevented from watching mail-in ballots being opened.
2. Unequal application of the law in Democratic counties.
3. Voters arrived at the polls to discover other people had voted for them.
4. Election officials were told not to look for defects in ballots, and to backdate ballots.
5. Ballots casting votes for Joe Biden and no other candidates were run several times through machines.
6. Absentee ballots were accepted in Wisconsin without being applied for first.
7. There were “overvotes,” with some precincts recording more voters than residents, among other problems.
8. Voting machines and software owned by companies with ties to the Venezuelan regime and to left-wing donor George Soros.
9. The Constitution provides a process for electing a president if the vote is corrupted.

Here is a useful video update from Bill Whittle

 

November 14, 2020

I am not certain that the outcome in the presidential election is the result of wide-scale fraud, but there appear to be many examples of questionable circumstances. More importantly, about half of the citizens in the United States believe that there has been a dishonest charade presented to the public.  This is unprecedented in American history.

It is certainly difficult in a period of less than 2 weeks to prove that large amounts of election fraud have taken place. Especially with the national election taking place across different States, each with its own method for accepting and tabulating votes.  As a reference point, it is important to recall that the recent Mueller investigation took more than 2 years to come to any conclusion.  It is also important to note that there are two well-known Democrat constitutional scholars (Alan Dershowitz and Jonathan Turley ) that have come out in support of examining the contested results of this election.

For the 2020 Presidential election, the first step is to examine the situation from multiple perspectives and quickly determine if there are any red flags.  Naturally, one side is extremely dismissive of the entire review process while the other side identifies every voting hiccup as a conspiracy.  In addition, outside observers (such as yours truly) cannot vouch for the authenticity of many of the claims. Nevertheless, at this point, after digesting numerous commentaries about the recent presidential election process, I have identified a 4-tier hierarchy about the claims of election fraud.   These are:

  1. Historical behavior toward winning at all cost
  2. Assessment of macro political sentiment
  3. Statistical analysis of overall voting patterns
  4. Individual observations of voting anomalies

A more detailed dive and provision of examples for each of these 4 tiers follows:

 Historical behavior toward winning at all cost

A) An attempt by federal employees to subvert a sitting President – there are numerous articles detailing the attempted coup against Trump before he even entered office in 2017. This protracted effort clearly highlights the dishonorable nature of the Democrats and exhibits their proclivity for major political machinations.

B) Four years of non-stop Leftist aggression against the President – the mainstream media consistently took the position that everything Trump touched was harmful. In fact, more than 90% of the news about him over 4 years was negative.  This would seem to exhibit an unnatural pathological hatred for a President.

C) Massive expenditures by Democrat apparatus to defeat the President in the election – Michael Bloomberg spent upwards of $1 billion (that’s billion with a ‘b’) in his public attempt to defeat Trump. Given the two items above, would it seem unnatural for he or other Democrats to invest in other means to defeat Trump’s re-election effort?

D) Intimidation of lawyers supporting Trump in contesting the election – The lawyers supporting Trump in contesting the election in Pennsylvania were pursued by Leftists in Philadelphia with bomb threats and death threats.  This type of behavior is typically a sign of desperation.

Assessment of macro political sentiment

A) Approval statistics for a sitting president – Trump’s approval rating before the election was 52%, which is the approval rating that Obama had going into the 2012 election.  Trump received over 71 million votes.  Is it likely that more people came out to vote for lackluster Biden than voted for Obama?

B) Support for specific interests in contested States – In 2016, Hillary Clinton was favored to win Pennsylvania by 1.9 percent. Trump outperformed that easily, by 2.6 percent. And somehow in 2020, even with Biden’s statements on fracking, Trump  underperformed by 2.0 percent?

C) The overwhelming success for Republicans nationwide – Republicans won 28 of the most competitive seats in the US House of Representatives, retained at least 50 seats in the US Senate, added 3 State legislatures.  Meanwhile, the Republican candidate with the most rabid support lost to an incoherent man hiding in his basement?

D) The odds offered by professional gamblers versus political polls – The gambling sites, which take wagers on election outcomes, got the odds up to 8-to-1 in favor of Trump during the day of the election.  Despite the current tallies in Biden’s favor, the gambling sites around the world are refusing yet to pay-out.

Statistical analysis of overall voting patterns

A) The extremely unnatural voting patterns – Everyone reading about potential fraud has now become familiar with Benford’s Law, which focuses on identifying phony data entry and manipulation. This appears to be very prevalent among the late votes for Biden.

B) The trajectory of votes after polls closed – The introduction of numerous ballots after the polls had closed has limited explanations. More importantly, the votes that were counted late ceased to fit the statistical norm that preceded it. The ratio of Biden votes to Trump votes inexplicably rose in apparent violation of the statistical probabilities.

C) The very unlikely voter turnout rates – an increase in convenience in voting-by-mail can logically explain an increase in voter participation rates, yet turnouts of 90% and — in some cases exceeding — 100% raises a red flag.

D) Rate of mail-in ballot rejections vs previous rejections – In Georgia in 2018, when 230,000 absentee ballots were cast, 3.5% were rejected for signature mismatches or other reasons. In 2020, when more than 1.2 million absentee ballots were cast, the rejection rate fell to 0.3%.

E) Use of computer-based voting and the appearance of “glitches” – In Michigan, a problem in the tabulating software caused a 6,000-vote swing against the Republican candidate. This represented the difference between winning and losing.  Is this an isolated incident or prevalent?

F) Democrat voting results in specific cities – Biden underperformed Hillary Clinton in every major metropolitan area around the country, except for Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta and Philadelphia.  Is there a significant pattern with this situation?

Individual observations of voting anomalies

A) Running off Republican poll observers – there were numerous cases recorded where observers were intimidated to leave the premises. “They will not allow us within 30 to 100 feet of the ballots being counted… I can’t believe what I am seeing with my own two eyes. There is corruption at the highest level in the city of Philadelphia.”

B) More registered voters than eligible voting-age citizens – According to a 2020 study, there are 353 U.S. counties that have a total of 1.8 million more registered voters than eligible voting-age citizens.   How does this get reconciled?  This would appear to be a significant anomaly.

C) Numerous ballots with votes only for President – There were over 450,000 Biden-only ballots cast (meaning no other votes on the ballot) including closely-contested Senate and House races. This phenomenon appears far more prominently in battleground states, raising a flag of potential manipulation.

D) Vote-switching in real-time – there were numerous cases where people watching the election results immediately observed votes being switched from Trump to Biden.  Is this result of tallying the votes improperly and then making corrections?  Or is there a more nefarious motivation?

Even though the mainstream media has already anointed Joe Biden the president-elect, there are far too many questions in play to just ignore these realities. And unfortunately, regardless of the final outcome (in favor of Trump or Biden), this situation does not bode well for our democratic republic.

One comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.