20 Indications that Voter Fraud is a Major Determinant of Election Results
Brought to you by the same cast of actors responsible for Covid-19, Covid Tyranny, & The Great Reset
In light of the various nefarious people and schemes dressed up as “Build Back Better” and the “Great Reset”, it is prudent to understand how these people operate and the what they are genuinely capable of.
Dinesh D’Souza’s new film 2,000 Mules documenting mass fraud in the 2020 presidential elections may well singlehandedly shatter the Overton Window regarding the legitimacy of the 2020 elections. But even without his amazing opus, there were still plenty of indications that widespread electoral fraud and cheating have been a longstanding significant factor in deciding US elections for decades.
The idea behind these observations is that a rational and objective person would presume that the most obvious and likely explanation for each is that there is a substantial degree of institutionalized election fraud. While no single observation by itself necessarily proves this, collectively as a mosaic of evidence they are quite powerful.
I am going to use the term “fraud beneficiaries” to refer to the Democrat party, a part of the GOP establishment, the liberal political machines throughout the country, the media, the donors, and everyone else who would benefit from election fraud.
Election fraud is as integral a part of American history and culture as apple pie and baseball.
Fraud beneficiaries oppose as an ideological matter the most basic measures of election security
Fraud beneficiaries have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to control the election process
Fraud beneficiaries violate their highest sacred cows in pursuit of victories in fights over election-related matters
The emotional intensity of fraud beneficiaries regarding the subject of election security
Courts refuse to allow for election fraud claims to be adjudicated
The courts have consistently held that elementary election security measures would disproportionately “suppress” Democrat voters, usually minority voters
Democrats and courts expend significant political capital fighting to ensure that elections be as insecure as possible
Fraud beneficiaries oppose election security measures that have broad bipartisan support
Election Security is one of the most propagandized issues today
“Motor Voter” and other laws and policies intentionally add illegal immigrants & non-citizens to voter rolls automatically
The election security measures that are deliberately and vociferously rejected in the US are considered “duh” in Europe
Major liberal megadonors & orgs specifically targeted Secretaries of State and other positions that manage and oversee elections
Lack of transparency
Fraud beneficiaries already have been cheating in other ways
One political party supports election integrity, the other party opposes it with maximum prejudice
The Trump election anomalies
The fraud beneficiaries are pathological liars on practically every other issue
For the fraud beneficiaries, the ends always justifies the means
Fraud beneficiaries do not have the slightest respect for the actual Democratic process that is the essence of a Democracy
1. Election fraud is as integral a part of American history and culture as apple pie and baseball
Did you know that there was never a time in American history (until about 40-50 years ago anyway according to the prevailing mainstream narrative) where voter fraud was not a major factor? This is a good piece describing some aspects of the situation in the 1800’s: Election Fraud in the 1800s Involved Kidnapping and Forced Drinking - How roving “cooping” gangs got voters drunk and disturbed the democratic process.
There were instances where voter fraud was an entrenched part of the culture, such as the Tammany Hall political machine in NYC that was run by illustrious crime bosses including William M. Tweed, Richard F. Croker, and Charles F. Murray.
Only 60 years ago, the 1960 presidential election where Kennedy defeated Nixon is widely acknowledged to have been stolen by the Chicago political machine run by then-Mayor Richard Daley.
In more recent memory, the FBI launched a massive investigation of the 1982 election in Chicago. 1982 is a mere 40 years ago, not a different epoch of American history. The following is an excerpt from Hans Von Spakovsky’s singularly brilliant treatise detailing the entire saga, Where There's Smoke, There's Fire: 100,000 Stolen Votes in Chicago:
Grand Jury Findings
On December 14, 1984, Chief Judge Frank McGarr of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois publicly released the federal grand jury's report on the 1982 election-only the third time in the history of the court that a grand jury report had been made public. The evidence revealed substantial vote fraud in Chicago during the November 2, 1982, election and found "that similar fraudulent activities have occurred prior to 1982."
What particularly struck FBI agent Ernest Locker was how routine vote fraud was for the precinct captains, election judges, poll watchers, and political party workers he interviewed. They had been taught how to steal votes (and elections) by their predecessors, who had in turn been taught by their predecessors. Based on his investigation, Locker came to believe the claims, hotly debated among historians, that Mayor Daley threw the 1960 presidential election for John Kennedy with massive ballot stuffing in Chicago. This type of voter fraud, stated Locker, "was an accepted way of life in Chicago."
I wanted to quote much more, but I don’t have the space in this post to do so. You really have to read Spakovsky’s article to appreciate just how deep and entrenched voter fraud had become in Chicago’s culture and amongst the average citizen.
The main takeaway is that it is indeed the norm in what are essentially Democrat communist city-states as a result of an uninterrupted century of single-party control for thousands of people who administer or oversee elections to be trained in the art and sciences of election fraud. And that this goes on under our noses without the national political discourse being any the wiser about it.
So the question isn’t what is the basis that there is election fraud, the question is really what is the evidence that systematic fraud ever stopped. (Observe that the FBI did not initiate similar investigations of any of the other cities that had all of the relevant characteristics that were responsible or allowed for the institutionalized election fraud operation in Chicago.)
2. Fraud beneficiaries oppose as an ideological matter the most basic measures of election security
Beneficiaries have engineered a culture where the prevailing ideology of the Democrats/leftists is that basic election security measures - such as removing ineligible voters from state election rolls, photo ID, voting only through secure means, not unsecured drop boxes - are considered evil and racist. This is deranged. The mere existence of such a wildly insane and delusional ideological principle in itself indicates that it is protecting something very significant - people do not typically adopt insane beliefs without there having been a compelling reason to do so. In this case, there is only one plausible reason: lots of illegally cast ballots.
3. Fraud beneficiaries have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to control the election process
People typically don’t spend tons of money on something unless there is a significant return on investment. The obvious reason why beneficiaries would spend hundreds of millions litigating against common sense election security measures, installing their preferred candidates as Secretaries of State who oversee elections, figuring out how to expand election fraud opportunities, etc., is that they think that they are getting a good return on that money in the form of election outcomes. Why else exactly would controlling election administration and oversight be so valuable?
4. Fraud beneficiaries violate society’s highest sacred cows in pursuit of victories in fights over election-related matters
Outside of a court filing arguing that voter ID laws disproportionately impact minority communities, where else could you survive socially after stating blatantly racist and incendiary tropes like blacks are too stupid to figure out how to apply for a state ID / to lazy to vote again shortly after an election / uniquely intimidated by the prospect of having to show an ID to a poll worker even if the poll workers are mostly black / et al? The willingness to “go there” indicates an extreme level of urgency. What could possibly be so urgent about any fight over election laws - laws that don’t in fact discriminate at all - if there isn’t significant fraud enabled by the absence of security measures?
5. The emotional intensity of fraud beneficiaries
The sheer emotional intensity that prominent beneficiaries, especially politicians and media figures/celebrities, feel and convey about this subject indicates that in their minds there is a lot on the line should common sense election laws be implemented and enforced.
6. Courts refuse to allow for election fraud claims to be adjudicated
We were abused with daily reminders for months on end about how every single court ruled that there was no fraud in the 2020 election - which was a lie. What the majority of courts had done was employ a twisted circular logic, whereby plaintiffs with prima facie evidence of fraudulent activity would file suit, but the court would say that you can only move to discovery if you already have evidence that the degree of fraud was sufficient to impact the election results, something that you would need discovery to establish (which is why discovery exists in lawsuits in the first place)!!
This was continuing the prior disposition of courts where they never actually are willing to allow for substantial discovery that could actually uncover the necessary evidence to prove that in the specific case in front of the court there was substantial fraud.
If there was no voter fraud occurring, courts would not be so reticent to adjudicate the merits of election fraud claims.
7. The courts have consistently held that elementary election security measures would disproportionately “suppress” Democrat voters, usually minority voters
The “politically controversial” election security measures that are constantly being fought over only ‘suppress’ illegal votes. If basic election security measures would substantially diminish minority/Democrat votes, than that by definition means that there are (1) substantial numbers of illegal votes being cast in elections, (2) for Democrats.
8. Democrats and courts expend significant political capital fighting to ensure that elections be as insecure as possible
There are two sacrifices being made here that apparently are worth making:
Democrat politicians, organizations, and judges are fighting to the death on an issue where there is broad, bipartisan support against them. What is worth taking such a hardline stance on a losing issue? It certainly doesn’t look good, and it makes the Democrats look bad unnecessarily.
They are also burning political capital to pass legislation, or to use the judiciary, to block or overturn common sense measures that are inherently uncontroversial when not dressed up with delusional race-baiting propaganda & gaslighting.
Politicians only have so much political capital to expend to achieve their many priorities, meaning that they are always triaging some over others. So what makes ensuring insecure elections such an important priority?
9. Fraud beneficiaries oppose election security measures that have broad bipartisan support
The fact that they even oppose elementary election security measures at all, even if it wouldn’t be a priority, is bizarre - since when do politicians embrace extremist positions that are inherently crazy, are founded upon nakedly racist premises, and most importantly are (at least) a 70-30 loser? Unless they have significant benefits that make it worthwhile.
10. Election Security is one of the most propagandized issues today
Consider that we are told:
“election security measures are racist and only supported in order to perpetrate racism”, despite them being supported by clear majorities of every minority
“obvious security measures are stupid and unreasonable”, despite them being the norm for almost every other Western democracy
“photo ID’s are a severe imposition and racist”, despite photo ID being about as ubiquitous as anything in modern society, and minorities having no documentable problems obtaining photo ID’s
“we know for a fact that there is no evidence of voter fraud & that there would be evidence if fraud was occurring”, despite the rich history of fraud in the US & everything else articulated here; and despite the fact that the lack of actual security measures that could generate evidence means that it would be very difficult to generate specific evidence in any specific case
“voter suppression / intimidation of black voters is rampant”, despite black voters being a slightly higher percentage of the electorate than they are a % of the population
“the 2020 election was the most secure election ever”, despite the objective factual reality that it was conducted without many of the standard security measures of previous elections in the last 30 years & the myriad anomalies
These are just a few examples of obvious propaganda. As a rule of thumb, propaganda is used only where the truth is both obvious and lethal to the propagandist. Therefore, the existence of propaganda arguing that voter fraud doesn’t exist indicates that it does.
11. “Motor Voter” and other laws and policies intentionally add illegal immigrants & non-citizens to voter rolls automatically
Does this even require elaboration? There is only one objective of systematically adding ineligible voters to voter rolls: to [illegally] vote in elections (whether they vote themselves or someone else submits a ballot in their name). Plus their own stated objective that illegal immigration is pursued in order to swell the ranks of reliable Democrat voters.
12. The election security measures that are deliberately and vociferously rejected in the US are considered “duh” in Europe
Why does Europe think that mail in balloting is too risky? Or require photo ID? Because across the Atlantic, they think that without these measures there would be an unacceptable risk of election fraud. Is every European country run by racist savages who desperately want to disenfranchise minority voters?
13. Major liberal megadonors & orgs specifically target Secretaries of State and other positions that manage and oversee elections
And have worked very hard to install preferred candidates in a variety of elected and unelected offices that play some role in election administration and oversight.
What would you gain vis a vis elections by having your candidate in charge? Control over how votes are counted, how polling sites are run, how money is spent, and a host of other things that we are told are “non-partisan” and “incorruptible.” Why would you make sure that your candidate is the one in charge of counting votes for example, unless you can engage in “creative counting”? In other words, what’s the “value added” by having your people in charge?
14. Lack of transparency
This one doesn’t really require much elaboration. We have very little idea of just what goes down in critical junctures of the election process, and they sure aren’t keen on telling us. This was ratcheted up in the 2020 election, where for example there were ballot counting locations in key states that famously covered up the windows to prevent anyone from seeing inside.
15. Fraud beneficiaries already have been cheating in other ways
Beneficiaries have illegally violated election laws by executive fiat, illegally accepted “Zuckerbucks” conditioned upon granting functional control over how elections were run on a local level to the rabid Democrat activist who runs Facebook, and so on.
Furthermore, “Big Business” - especially “Big Tech” - has illegally tilted the field for the Democrats in extremely impactful ways, without disclosing their “in-kind” political donations, and without following Federal laws regulating election expenditures and donations that everyone else is limited by. And probably also through a variety of means that we don’t know about.
Someone who cheats and violates the law is presumptively going to cheat and violate the law in any way that they can. So we should assume that they take advantage of any opportunities to cheat in elections, especially via the weaknesses in or lack of election security measures that they are so hellbent on making sure survive.
16. One political party supports basic election integrity, the other party opposes it with maximum prejudice
Gee, I wonder why?
Put it this way: If an alien would come and see this, it would just assume that the party that opposes election security substantially benefits from election fraud.
17. The Trump election anomalies
I don’t intend to litigate the specific issue of the various anomalies of the 2020 election here, but suffice it to say that the presence of “anomalies” typically indicates something ‘anomalous’ going on. Anomalies prominently included election night counting ‘pauses’, late night ballot dumps, sophisticated statistical aberrations, and electoral turnout characteristics of 3rd world communist countries in some places, among many others. These are also in addition to the illegal violations of state election laws in many states.
And who can forget the epic Time Magazine piece about “fortifying” the 2020 elections, that practically admitted openly to what essentially amounted to a massive organized conspiracy of sorts to rig the election? The piece was literally titled “The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election.” A ‘shadow campaign’ influencing elections is by definition election interference at minimum.
The following are not direct indications of fraud per se, rather they are indicative that the fraud beneficiaries are the sort of people who would absolutely jump at the opportunity to commit election fraud:
18. The fraud beneficiaries are pathological liars on practically every other issue
No explanation necessary, nobody trusts a liar.
19. For the fraud beneficiaries, the ends always justifies the means
The Democrats (and many Republicans too) are consistently willing to destroy every institution and norm in society in pursuit of their various agendas.
To give a succinct example, people who think widespread uncontrolled rioting is acceptable (and even desirable) are people who are willing to even break a few chickens to make their omelets. Anyone who supports rioting to get their way by definition is perfectly willing to engage in election fraud to get their way.
20. Fraud beneficiaries do not have the slightest respect for the actual Democratic process that is the essence of a Democracy
Fraud beneficiaries are also the same folks who routinely use the courts and administrative state to overrule the will of the people as expressed through their democratically elected representatives. They do not care one bit about the integrity of elections or the democratic process more generally, rather they fancy themselves as a modern day aristocracy ruling the dirty peasants. Someone lacking a sense of sanctity and a sense of loyalty to the principles of democratic governance is someone who will have no problem violating every single democratic precept and institution. The fact that the fraud beneficiaries in true Orwellian fashion are fond of brazenly usurping the language of “defending democracy” in order to thwart the will of the citizens underscores the absolute contempt and scorn they feel for these democratic principles.