A major disappointment that I had with the Trump 2020 campaign was Trump’s failure—in the face of the usual problems, aggravated by the Covid Regime—to make education a major part of of his campaign.
I’m surprised he did not go after CRT earlier, but perhaps he did not realize how bad it was. I honestly did not.
Why was his Education Secretary Devos MIA on CRT?
Kurt Schlichter had the interesting comment that the Trump Administration was not fully staffed with people willing to do his agenda, until the last 6 months.
Mark - For “standard election fraud” I agree 100% with you on the concept of margin of fraud.
The 2020 election, gut feel, had to do extra ordinary fraud to barely edge out Trump. And this election fraud exceeded the norms of election fraud, which is part of why the Maga Voters are spitting nails. The aiding and abetting by the establishment GOP of the fraud makes them feel even more betrayed / disillusioned by the system. Plus all the instructions that were supposed to protect against voter fraud, that turned a blind eye. DOJ, FBI, Courts, elected and party GOP at all levels federal and state, and the press.
And with the daily disaster of the Biden residency being rubbed in their faces, the anger / disgust / disillusionment with the parties that allowed this being continually reinforced.
With the gas lighting becoming so obvious, the USA Today fact check on Biden looking at his watch is a great example, I feel the official narrative / credibility is fragmenting.
I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think it was simply done by reassigning votes remotely, digitally, via algorithm. If that had been the game then I'm not sure I see the sense in the counting stoppages. Plus, we're seeing old fashioned fraud at a rate that could explain the results--double voting, fraud with absentee ballots, dead voting. Capped, of course, by the mail in. I saw a story claiming that there are now videos from GA of people dumping backpacks full of ballots into the mailin deposit boxes, in addition to the other videos in the counting centers. The mailin vote seems to be clearly where they goosed turnout (fraudulently) to get Baidan within range.
But isn't adjudication more or less the same thing--in concept and practice--as reading or adjudicating the chads? We've seen this stuff before. It's the 'industrial scale' that sets it apart, as well as what appears to be coordination on a much broader scale--from the party hierarchies and across much of the nation. Perhaps not entirely uniform, but scarily widespread.
I am a non-paying subscriber to several different substacks, but the e-mails are no problem- I like having a notice that there is something to read- I even like the e-mails telling me I have a reply to a comment.
I remain open to the role of computer fraud, but what we're seeing from most of the investigation on the ground is variations on standard election fraud.
Mark, there is not a way to do "standard election fraud" without the computer fraud to go with it. You can't stuff ballots indiscriminately into an electronic voting machine running an election management software program and because the computer can too easily track at a rudimentary level, all the ballots mailed out , all the voters registered to vote etc... And all too easily reconcile those too the ballots actually cast on /by election day. To achieve the fraud you have to have the eligible voters on the rolls to stuff those ballots to. I think the fact that people can't grasp that elemental point allows the fraudsters to defraud us all coming AND going. The fraud was everywhere. Many well intention upstanding election officials had no idea their election systems were being controlled. I think this presentation by Douglas Frank explains it well.
I would call ballot stuffing at the ward and precinct and county level standard fraud , I would call nationwide unauthorized access to the election management software in every state in the union before, during, and after the election, unauthorized access that is used to inflate voter rolls , flip votes, or manipulate tabulations in real time (in many cases without election officials even being aware) something other than standard fraud. If you watch Dr. Frank he talks about the fraudsters choosing the outcome they want before the election takes place. Either Dr. Frank is lying to us about what he has found, or Bill Barr was lying to us when he told us there was no sign of fraud at a level that would effect the outcome. Which person with his public statements do you think is fudging the truth?
It’s interesting what Trump did, and did not.
I’m surprised he did not go after CRT earlier, but perhaps he did not realize how bad it was. I honestly did not.
Why was his Education Secretary Devos MIA on CRT?
Kurt Schlichter had the interesting comment that the Trump Administration was not fully staffed with people willing to do his agenda, until the last 6 months.
So if Trump would have included education in his campaign the Democrats wouldn’t have fraudulently won the election?
There's such a thing as the margin of fraud.
Mark - For “standard election fraud” I agree 100% with you on the concept of margin of fraud.
The 2020 election, gut feel, had to do extra ordinary fraud to barely edge out Trump. And this election fraud exceeded the norms of election fraud, which is part of why the Maga Voters are spitting nails. The aiding and abetting by the establishment GOP of the fraud makes them feel even more betrayed / disillusioned by the system. Plus all the instructions that were supposed to protect against voter fraud, that turned a blind eye. DOJ, FBI, Courts, elected and party GOP at all levels federal and state, and the press.
And with the daily disaster of the Biden residency being rubbed in their faces, the anger / disgust / disillusionment with the parties that allowed this being continually reinforced.
With the gas lighting becoming so obvious, the USA Today fact check on Biden looking at his watch is a great example, I feel the official narrative / credibility is fragmenting.
The grass roots revolt over crt is huge.
I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think it was simply done by reassigning votes remotely, digitally, via algorithm. If that had been the game then I'm not sure I see the sense in the counting stoppages. Plus, we're seeing old fashioned fraud at a rate that could explain the results--double voting, fraud with absentee ballots, dead voting. Capped, of course, by the mail in. I saw a story claiming that there are now videos from GA of people dumping backpacks full of ballots into the mailin deposit boxes, in addition to the other videos in the counting centers. The mailin vote seems to be clearly where they goosed turnout (fraudulently) to get Baidan within range.
But isn't adjudication more or less the same thing--in concept and practice--as reading or adjudicating the chads? We've seen this stuff before. It's the 'industrial scale' that sets it apart, as well as what appears to be coordination on a much broader scale--from the party hierarchies and across much of the nation. Perhaps not entirely uniform, but scarily widespread.
What’s suspicious is the the intense push back against any auditing of the Dominion Machines, as well as the routers in Az.
I read someplace about how the gop ballot was printed different causing more adjudication.
I wish there was a complete top to bottom Election audit in every state.
Intriguing article.
https://www.propublica.org/article/heeding-steve-bannons-call-election-deniers-organize-to-seize-control-of-the-gop-and-reshape-americas-elections
Congratulations on shifting to Substack. I particularly appreciate that your stories are pushed to my inbox. Keep up the great work!
I like the blog format, but if people like getting the emails that works too.
I am a non-paying subscriber to several different substacks, but the e-mails are no problem- I like having a notice that there is something to read- I even like the e-mails telling me I have a reply to a comment.
I vote yes to getting email notifications.
I remain open to the role of computer fraud, but what we're seeing from most of the investigation on the ground is variations on standard election fraud.
Mark, there is not a way to do "standard election fraud" without the computer fraud to go with it. You can't stuff ballots indiscriminately into an electronic voting machine running an election management software program and because the computer can too easily track at a rudimentary level, all the ballots mailed out , all the voters registered to vote etc... And all too easily reconcile those too the ballots actually cast on /by election day. To achieve the fraud you have to have the eligible voters on the rolls to stuff those ballots to. I think the fact that people can't grasp that elemental point allows the fraudsters to defraud us all coming AND going. The fraud was everywhere. Many well intention upstanding election officials had no idea their election systems were being controlled. I think this presentation by Douglas Frank explains it well.
httpss://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2021/08/14/transcript-of-dr-douglas-g-frank-presentation-during-cyber-symposium/
What you're describing sounds like standard election fraud to me.
I would call ballot stuffing at the ward and precinct and county level standard fraud , I would call nationwide unauthorized access to the election management software in every state in the union before, during, and after the election, unauthorized access that is used to inflate voter rolls , flip votes, or manipulate tabulations in real time (in many cases without election officials even being aware) something other than standard fraud. If you watch Dr. Frank he talks about the fraudsters choosing the outcome they want before the election takes place. Either Dr. Frank is lying to us about what he has found, or Bill Barr was lying to us when he told us there was no sign of fraud at a level that would effect the outcome. Which person with his public statements do you think is fudging the truth?
I'm not sure the dichotomy is as simple as all that, but I do agree that Bluto was lying and knew he was lying.
@Hemsley Hawes
I'm going to delete your latest "comment". I'm simply not going to allow you to filibuster when a link and brief comment will suffice.