The Myth of Honest Elections
We know what we've been told, but what do we KNOW?
[This is written by me, but first appeared in Liberty Magazine]
The Myth of Honest Elections
“They’re going to steal the election!”
“No, that’s impossible, our election system has always been scrupulously overseen by trustworthy election officials!”
“They’re going to decertify the electors in the Senate! It’s unconstitutional, it’s a coup!”
OK, for twenty points and the chance to try for the really big prize in the grand finals, which parties did the speakers above belong to? No pressure, take your time.
Ok, too late. The answer is, I made those statements up; but they certainly are representative of both parties. That’s right, both parties.
You might have been under the impression that only Trump and his coup attempting regime would say things like that. Where did you get that impression? What are your sources? Are your sources the same people who said, immediately after the 2020 election, “We have no evidence of voter fraud to an extent that would have affected the outcome of the election”? Do you realize that that statement is one that only a lawyer could love? Does that statement say that there was no election fraud? No, it does not. Does it say that there was no behind the scenes election rigging? No, it doesn’t even reference election rigging. So, what does that statement tell you? It tells you absolutely nothing. Still, some are entirely satisfied that they know the ‘truth’, based on that misleading statement.
A lot of people were convinced when they heard that statement. They were convinced that Trump’s claims were false, without bothering to find out what Trump’s claims were. (Have you noticed that the MSM keep using the expression ‘Trump’s false claims’ without EVER saying what those claims are or how they know them to be false?) Admit it, if you are a TDSer, you have no idea what Trump’s claims are, but you’re sure he’s wrong, and that the people who came up with that bullshit, ”We have no evidence…” crap are right.
Hopefully, I’ve opened up some minds just a tad. Now, I hope to push them wide open. First a civics lesson. You were supposed to have had this lesson in high school, but perhaps you were absent that day. Or maybe your school couldn’t be bothered with it. Here it is: We the People do not elect the president. The states do. The states created the federal government to represent the state’s collective interests internationally and to settle disputes between themselves. The states did NOT create the federal government to facilitate two political parties gaining absolute control of all governments.
The states elect the president. Each gets a certain number of electoral votes, based on their population size. This is the fairest way that the states could come up with to see that the bigger states got representation commensurate with their size, while also assuring that smaller states would not be trampled underneath. Guess what. It works. Both parties care about Idaho. And Wyoming. And New Hampshire. No, it’s not that the parties give a shit about those states, but they covet their electoral votes. With a popular vote for president, those states, and most others would be ignored.
So, there is an electoral college. Each state sends its electors to Washington to have their votes recognized and certified by the Senate. No, it’s not an automatic, ceremonial process. Clearly a lot rides on this electoral college, and they take it very seriously. There is no constitutional limit on how many people can run for president, and before the two parties took dictatorial control of our governments, there have been four and five viable candidates in one election. Thus, it can not be presumed that any candidate will get a majority. After a CAREFUL tally of votes, if no candidate has a majority of the votes, it is turned over to the House, and they decide from among the top three vote getters. In 1824, John Quincy Adams was elected by the House, even though Andrew Jackson had more electoral votes. It’s constitutional, folks.
So, that’s how presidents get elected. But can we count on the electoral certification process in the Senate? Can we count on the process at all? We used to be able to, until Trump came along, right? Wrong. Just for instance, in the 1876 election Rutherford Hayes beat Samuel Tildon by a significant majority, and everyone started singing “Hail to the Chief” (or something like it). Well, not exactly. Actually, Tildon got the most electoral votes, but it was clearly as a result of voter suppression of blacks by democrats in the south. It was claimed that the electors that the southern states sent to Washington were therefore not legitimate. So, should the Senate have accepted the electoral votes as presented, or rejected them, pending an investigation. They rejected them, pending an investigation. It was a squeaker, but enough democrats sided with the Republicans, that Hayes was declared the winner.
That’s right kids, what Trump did in 2020 has been done before. He did nothing illegal or unconstitutional or unprecedented. You would know that, if you studied civics as much as you study TikTok, Instagram and CNN.
Consider this, from the National Constitution Center (linked below),
“The procedures for handling a disputed presidential election that reaches Congress are regrettably, and embarrassingly, deficient,” Foley wrote in 2019 for the Loyola University Chicago Law Journal. The Electoral Count Act of 1887, which Foley calls “astonishingly messy,” could lead to competing interpretations within Congress of what actions it can take on January 6. Foley also notes there are some historical arguments [for] parts of the Electoral Count Act of 1887 that are unconstitutional and there could be a role for the Supreme Court to settle these disputes before January 20, 2021, when the Constitution’s 20th Amendment requires the new President to take the oath of office.”
Interestingly, the article in which this appears was published on Oct 5, 2020, about a month before the 2020 election, and about three months before the Jan 6 ‘event’ in which Trump has been charged with an ‘attempted overthrow’ when he in fact was following both the law and the constitution. It appears that Nancy Pelosi and CNN were wrong, yet again.
But, hey, Trump and his minions had NO right to question those voting machines, right? You know what’s coming, don’t you? That’s right, those machines have been questioned many times, and for good reason. And by democrats as well as republicans. You’d know that, too, if you didn’t believe everything NYT, NPR and PBS tell you.
Democrats made quite a thing of the Ohio presidential election in 2004. Bush beat Kerry in Ohio. Or did he? Not according to democrats who insisted that Secretary of State Ken Blackwell had rigged the machines. My own personal observation, based on at least a reasonable knowledge of computer software, is that any computer, which is what a voting machine is, can be hacked, if it can be gotten to. And every voting machine can be gotten to. Think of the credit card companies, banks, government agencies etc that have been hacked. And these are organizations that spend millions, even billions, working on not being hacked. Yes, voting machines can be hacked. Anyone who says, “Trust us”, should not be trusted. I won’t get into it here, but you can check the links below for a representative example of the issues.
At least we can trust the mail to handle our ballots, right? Maybe not. Consider that the USPS recommends that you send neither cash nor checks through the mail, because they get stolen. Checks get ‘washed’ (falsified) and then cashed. Well, then, how can I trust my ballot to not be intercepted? You can’t. Prior to 2020, you needed a really good reason to vote absentee, because of the obvious issues. Now, democrats beg you to mail in your ballot. Decide for yourself why that is.
OK, so there’s voting machine issues, mail fraud issues, and the electoral college has been horribly politicized, but outside of that, we can trust the election process, right? Perhaps not. Here’s a response I got while commenting on Quora:
“I moved from Maryland to Florida. I took all the required steps to become a resident of Florida including surrendering my [Maryland] photo ID, obtaining a Florida photo ID and registering to vote as a resident of Florida. I discovered that my name is still on the voter register in Maryland. I still correspond with the person who bought my home in Maryland. She reported that I received a mail-in ballot at my former address. She destroyed it. I reported the invalid ballot to the Maryland Board of Elections and later checked to verify that I had been removed from the voting register. Several friends from my former Maryland HOA are election judges. They reported that the records show that I am still recognized as a voter in Maryland AND I voted by mail-in ballot in the last election. I did none of that personally. Someone else voted by mail-in ballot for me despite the buyer of my house destroying the invalid ballot she received in the mail. The media reported that there was no voter fraud in Maryland. Naturally, I believe the media and not my friends — not. Requiring a photo ID to vote would put an end to this form of voting fraud. I am retired now, but for 15 years I was manager of a half billion dollar, nation wide accessibility program for the Department of Transportation that provided assistance to the disabled. I am well aware that all of the claims that the disabled would be dis-enfranchised by requiring photo ID and in-person voting, are the wailings of those who prefer fraudulent elections.”
“We have no evidence of voter fraud to an extent that would have affected the outcome of the election.” The moment I heard ALL of the MSM spew those words in unison, just days after the 2020 election, I knew the fix was in.
This is way serious, folks. Please, if you have never questioned before, question now. If you have always trusted in the system, STOP! And please forward, repost or otherwise get this to as many people as you can. What I have said here only scratches the surface.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-constitution-and-contested-presidential-elections
https://columbusfreepress.com/article/diebold-indicted-its-spectre-still-haunts-ohio-elections
https://nypost.com/2020/08/29/political-insider-explains-voter-fraud-with-mail-in-ballots/
https://www.cbsnews.com/pittsburgh/news/u-s-postal-service-warning-checks-mail/
Comments?