Most Secure Election Ever (Just Don’t Ask Questions)
If 2020 was flawless, why do Democrats speak like experts on election corruption?
To me, the most interesting thing that has happened over the last few days has been the Democrat freakout over the DNI Gabbard and the FBI securing boxes of 2020 voting information from Fulton County, Georgia.
The media breathlessly reports that Donald J. Trump is making “false” and “without evidence” claims about the 2020 election, while their own assertion that absolutely nothing happened is based on court proceedings truncated because a judge decided there was no need to look at anything — or on assurances from Democrat or NeverTrump state officials that no funny business took place.
Sure, Jan.
We never see judges issue crazy rulings just because they hate Trump, do we?
My thesis about 2020 has always been that the genius of the Democrat effort in close states wasn’t in manipulating the count — it was in finding ways to spoil the ballot pool before the count ever began. Then they point to recounts as proof nothing was wrong, ignoring the simple fact that no matter how many times you count a potentially corrupted population, the result will be the same.
Of course, I’m just an individual voter so I personally have no evidence the ballot population was corrupted, but we do know ballot-handling procedures were changed by states, allegedly due to COVID, prior to the election, and while the Dems claim that mail-in ballots are totally secure and proper, we also do know that the 2005 Commission on Federal Election Reform, also commonly referred to as the Carter-Baker Commission, noted that voting by mail creates increased logistical challenges and the potential for vote fraud, especially if safeguards are lacking or when candidates or political party activists are allowed to handle mail-in or absentee ballots. We also know that mail-out ballots were flooded out to unverified voters at unverified elections and that, logically, was just asking for some enterprising fraudster or fraudsters to elevate their corruption game.
And we know that in places like Fulton County, Georgia, the required processes were not followed and legally mandated records were not retained, despite state law mandating otherwise.
I mean, its not like a bunch of Minnesota Somali immigrants were running things, so it should all be hunky dory, correct? Corruption at a scale of Minnesota Day Cares or California Home Health Care simply couldn’t escape notice, could it?
What we don’t know is whether any of this had an impact on the 2020 outcome—mostly because nobody really looked. John Roberts made sure SCOTUS ran away from every challenge because he didn’t want the court “tarnished” by getting into a partisan food fight and lower courts avoided it like the plague, claiming that neither states nor individuals had the necessary standing to sue, alleging that nobody could show actual harm.
Well, Biden’s term showed how much harm a bogus election could cause.
Apparently, Trump isn’t allowed to have an opinion about any of it. We’re just supposed to take election officials, Democrat lawyers, and Democrat politicians at their word. They would never lie about something this important, right? They never have before, have they?
Give me a break.
As much as they love to talk about “fake electors” (alternate slates of electors are constitutional and have existed in past elections) and how January 6 was an “insurrection” — even while what’s currently happening in Minnesota looks far closer to an actual insurrection — they really don’t want to talk about 2020. So the media calls Trump a liar for having an opinion, as if that settles it.
Done and dusted, right? Most secure election ever — even though Democrats were claiming voting machines were vulnerable right up until Biden pulled ahead.
We should have had a federal investigation to conclusively answer questions about the election that put a mentally compromised man and his cackling, incompetent running mate in the White House. Instead, Democrats couldn’t “move on” fast enough. They were too busy hunting PTA parents labeled domestic terrorists and grandmothers who illegally “paraded” at the Capitol.
“Shut up,” they said.
Even without the Michael Mann climate “hockey stick” effect showing up in late-night vote tallies, the fact that Joe Biden — a candidate who campaigned from his basement and drew crowds of dozens when he emerged — somehow surpassed Obama by roughly eleven million votes (and that no election since has matched that turnout) should have been enough to trigger a DOJ investigation.
But the totally non-partisan, not bitter, and definitely not butt-hurt Attorney General Merrick Garland was never going to do that. He was far too busy coordinating with state prosecutors on plans to imprison Donald Trump and bankrupt his family.
It certainly seems that as you read the passionate defenses of what was done — along with detailed explanations of how Trump supposedly plans to corrupt the midterms and the 2028 election — you start to realize something.
Democrats and their defenders clearly understand that it is possible to corrupt a national election.
They even seem to know exactly how it would be done.
One might consider it the self-own of all self-owns.
“Most secure election ever” is a slogan, not a finding. If 2020 was beyond question, Democrats wouldn’t speak like seasoned arson investigators every time ballot integrity comes up. You don’t panic over sealed boxes unless you’re afraid of what’s inside. Courts didn’t validate 2020—they dodged it. Standing, laches, prudence, “move on.” Fine. But refusing to look isn’t proof of cleanliness; it’s proof of fear. Recounts don’t cure a tainted ballot pool, they just recount it. Procedures were changed, records vanished, safeguards loosened—and then we were told to shut up. That’s not confidence. That’s control. The real tell is this: they insist corruption is impossible in the past while warning it’s imminent in the future. That contradiction says everything.
I can't find the exact post/quote/prediction, what have you, but well before the election, Mark Zuckerberg explained exactly how the 2020 election would turn out. There may have even been a graph, one that looked a lot like the "hockey stick" made of red and blue that made the rounds shortly after election day.
I travel the state I live in from border to border and sometimes beyond with frequency. I noticed the number of 'red signs' outnumbered the number of 'blue' by almost 2000:1. Yet the 'blue' guy carried the state. Again.
I made my living with numbers. Not just numbers, but the way they're recorded, used, arranged. They had to reconcile, or what I was building wouldn't work. Numbers don't lie. They can be miscalculated. They can be massaged. They can be manipulated. They can be misinterpreted. But they cannot lie.
People do. Those doing the figuring, the calculating, the massaging, the manipulating, and the interpreting can lie and often do. Numbers do not work in the way we were told they did.