Many Democrats are neurotically obsessed with wresting ostensible agreement from the other side that the election was “free and fair,” although it clearly was not. From Michael Anton at amgreatness.com:
The purpose of voting today is to give a democratic veneer to an undemocratic regime—not to give the people a say in the direction of their government.
Recently, I appeared as a guest on Andrew Sullivan’s podcast. Sullivan is vociferously anti-Trump, so I expected us to disagree—which, naturally, we did. But I was surprised by the extent to which he insisted I assent to his assertion that the 2020 election was totally on the level. That is to say, I wasn’t surprised that Sullivan thinks it was; I was surprised by his evident yearning to hear me say so, too.
Which I could not do.
Sullivan badgered me on this at length before finally accusing me of being fixated on the topic, to which I responded, truthfully, that I was only talking about it because he asked. As far as I’m concerned, the 2020 election is well and truly over. I have, I said, “moved on.”
So I thought. Then I received two emails from a friendly acquaintance who is a recognized Republican expert on elections that suggested he, too, is troubled by my lack of belief. Then came two other data points, which I noticed only after the first draft this essay had been completed. Ramesh Ponnuru snarked (snark seems to be the go-to, indeed the only, device his in literary quiver) that one of the anomalies I cited in my most recent article
in the Claremont Review of Books
had been “debunked” by the partisan left-wing FactCheck.org. While I appreciate the insight into the sources from which National Review
editors get their “facts” these days, the quote provided admits that the statistic I cited is, well, accurate. Ponurru naturally ignores all of the other points raised in my earlier article.
So much for Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett; looks like they’ve gone full Establishment. From Matthew Vadum at theepochtimes.com:
The Supreme Court in Washington, on Nov. 4, 2020. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
The Supreme Court threw out a series of legal challenges on Feb. 22 to voting processes and results in several states left over from the recent presidential election cycle.
The high court didn’t explain why it refused to hear the cases, but three justices dissented from the decision not to hear one of the cases from Pennsylvania.
On Jan. 11, with Inauguration Day just over a week away, the high court denied requests from the litigants–President Donald Trump, Republicans, and Trump supporters—to expedite several of the lawsuits, which concerned the presidential elections held in the battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The court, as is its custom, didn’t explain why it dismissed the emergency applications seeking to fast-track the lawsuits.
President Joe Biden, a Democrat, was inaugurated on Jan. 20, alongside Vice President Kamala Harris after Congress voted Jan. 7 to reject objections by senators and representatives challenging Electoral College votes from disputed states won narrowly by Biden. That vote took place after a breach of the U.S. Capitol by hundreds of protesters delayed the certification process for hours.
Some of the lawsuits challenged the election results on the basis of allegedly unconstitutional changes made to state election procedures. Article II of the U.S. Constitution states that “Each State shall appoint [electors for president and vice president] in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.” Litigants point out that the legislative power here is “plenary,” meaning unqualified and absolute.
Any questions or criticisms of the election have been suppressed or ignored, not addressed or answered. From Vasko Kohlmayer at lewrockwell.com:
A struggle session is the infliction by totalitarians of public humiliation and torment on those who harbor wrong thinking or misguided ideas. The purpose of a struggle session is to compel the targeted individuals to confess their wrongdoing and repent of their error.
Struggle sessions are conducted ostensibly for the benefit of their victims so that they can be purged of their unwholesome ideas and psychological tendencies.
The most dangerous of these tendencies is the desire to know and say the truth. To totalitarians truth is as the cross is to the devil. Like that fallen angel, totalitarians are masters of reality inversion. They force their victims to give up that which true and accept as true that which is false.
Even as we speak, the American people are being put through a great struggle session. This struggle session is being run and conducted by America’s left.
The top agenda item in this struggle session is last year’s election.
Nobody who calls the idea that the 2020 election was stolen cites even a shred of actual evidence. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:
The official narrative that there was no election theft is likely the largest lie ever perpetrated on the world. The lie is so vast and so fragile that everyone who disagrees with the official narrative is suppressed, deplatformed, kicked off social media, ostracized, and fired from their job in order to protect the lie from examination and exposure. In Michigan the state attorney general is attempting to debar attorneys who represented cases of electoral theft. Massive effort was made—including an orchestrated “storming of the Capitol”—to insure that the evidence would not be presented and that the majority of the population would never encounter the evidence. The presstitutes from the first instance declared continuously with one voice “there was no vote fraud,” “baseless claims of vote fraud,” and the old standby “conspiracy theory.”
Obviously, if there was no fraud, there would have been no danger in examining “baseless claims.” Their baselessness could simply have been demonstrated. If the claims of electoral fraud are baseless, there was no need to spilt the country and to cause half of the voting population to distrust the public institutions that are supposed to uphold election integrity.
Even without hard evidence of a stolen election, it is obvious that Trump did not lose to Biden who inspired no enthusiasm and whose campaign events had to be halted due to non-attendance. How did Trump lose the election when on December 29, after two months of his heightened demonization following the November 2020 election, he won the annual Gallup survey as America’s most admired person, ending Obama’s 12-year run. According to the official vote count, Trump received 11 million more votes in 2020 than the number he won in 2016 and three times the black support. In 2020 Trump received 8 million more votes than Obama received in 2012 and Hillary received in 2016. It is not possible that this extraordinary performance is a losing one. And this is his official vote count, not his suppressed actual vote.
2020 saw a massive globalist campaign meant to subvert and take over America. From Cherie Zaslawsky at renewamerica.com:
We’re now learning why our Founders placed freedom of the press and freedom of speech—among other key rights—in the First Amendment in our Bill of Rights. For it is the chicanery, sabotage and subversive propaganda of the American media that has landed us where we are today.
To prove this point, let me illustrate what our mainstream press—say the New York Times—should have been trumpeting as soon as the theft of our election became evident:
Headline: WORLD WAR III RAGING! AMERICA IN THE CROSSHAIRS!
Subtitle: THE INTERNATIONAL GLOBALIST CABAL, AIDED BY THE DEMOCRAT PARTY, SELL-OUT POLITICIANS AND OFFICIALS, AND THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY, NOW IN OPEN ASSAULT ON AMERICA
First paragraph: President Trump has been proven right—the 2020 election was stolen in a flagrant act of treason by both Democrats and their globalist allies. This coup d’état to take over America was part of a Soros-funded “Color Revolution” revolving around a contested election, with the aim of turning America over to Communist China under the Davos elites’ plan for One World Government.
Anyone see that headline in the Paper of Record? In any of our mainstream press? On MSNBC? How differently do you think your friends and family members who are loyal, unquestioning Democrats would be viewing world events and our present crisis if the Gray Lady had vouchsafed articles like that?
But perhaps you’ll find that headline hyperbolic, so let me explain why I believe it expresses the very real situation in the last weeks of Trump’s presidency.
Posted in Civil Liberties, Collapse, Crime, Cronyism, Government, Law, Media, Medicine, Politics, Propaganda
Tagged 2020 election fraud, Covid-19 totalitarianism, Trump
At least we know what we’re up against. From Angelo Codevilla at amgreatness.com:
The United States of America is now a classic oligarchy. The clarity that it has brought to our situation by recognizing this fact is its only virtue.
“Either the Constitution matters and must be followed . . . or it is simply a piece of parchment on display at the National Archives.”
— Texas v. Pennsylvania et al.
Texas v. Pennsylvania et al. did not deny setting rules for the 2020 election contrary to the Constitution. On December 10, 2020, the Supreme Court discounted that. By refusing to interfere as America’s ruling oligarchy serves itself, the court archived what remained of the American republic’s system of equal justice. That much is clear.
In 2021, the laws, customs, and habits of the heart that had defined the American republic since the 18th century are things of the past. Americans’ movements and interactions are under strictures for which no one ever voted. Government disarticulated society by penalizing ordinary social intercourse and precluding the rise of spontaneous opinion therefrom. Together with corporate America, it smothers minds through the mass and social media with relentless, pervasive, identical, and ever-evolving directives. In that way, these oligarchs have proclaimed themselves the arbiters of truth, entitled and obliged to censor whoever disagrees with them as systemically racist, adepts of conspiracy theories.
Corporations, and the government itself, require employees to attend meetings personally to acknowledge their guilt. They solicit mutual accusations. While violent felons are released from prison, anyone may be fired or otherwise have his life wrecked for questioning government/corporate sentiment. Today’s rulers don’t try to convince. They demand obedience, and they punish.
Posted in Civil Liberties, Collapse, Crime, Cronyism, Government, Law, Media, Politics, Propaganda, race relations
Tagged 2020 election fraud, Biden administration, Oligarchy, The Corruptocracy
It was not just enough to rig an election to get rid of Trump. He and his supporters had to be tarnished and discredited. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.com:
In this important column I provide you with evidence that there was no assault on the Capitol, and I provide you with so much evidence that there was massive electoral fraud that it will take you all weekend to go through the evidence.
Think intelligently. The rally for Trump on January 6 was massive, which is why the presstitutes did not show it to you. No other politician anywhere in the Western World could produce such a turnout of support. For the rest of the politicians in the West, such a turnout would be in opposition like the long-lived “yellow vest” protest in France and the massive protests in Germany against the Covid restrictions.
Here was the situation on January 6, 2021. Members have applied rules that require the House and Senate to listen to the evidence of election fraud. As Lew Rockwell points out, this means the public would also hear the evidence for the first time. https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/01/lew-rockwell/the-truth-about-january-6-and-where-we-should-go-from-here/
The evidence will show enormous fraud in the swing states where the election was stolen. Regardless of the evidence, everyone suspects Biden is going to be found the winner, because that is what the Establishment demands and has the means to enforce with media, Antifa, and BLM as threats to be unleashed and campaign contributions to cut off`. Large majorities of both parties would prefer not to see the evidence than to have to vote against the evidence.
The situation is pregnant with glory for Trump. Congress is putting him out of office in the face of a massive demonstration from 50 states in support of Trump.
If Red State America wants any future at all, it’s going to have to secede. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:
The opening salvo against red state America is the article of impeachment against President Trump introduced on January 11 by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democrat Representatives David Cicilline, Ted Lieu, and Jamie Raskin. So much for Biden’s promise to “unify the country.”
What is the intent of this article of impeachment? It cannot possibly be to remove Trump from office. Trump will have left office before the Senate could vote on impeachment. There is no such thing as impeaching a person who is not in office. Clearly impeachment has nothing to do with getting Trump out of office.
How does it unify the country to follow up an election believed by half of the US voting population to have been stolen with impeaching the president who is regarded as the victim of a stolen election? Adding insult to injury will only further enrage 75 million or more Trump voters, and many honest Democrats, who regard the election as stolen. If the Establishment and its Democrat, Republican, and media allies truly believe the election not to have been stolen, why wasn’t the evidence permitted to be examined so that the controversy could be settled instead of ignored? Ignoring the evidence deepens the suspicion as does labeling those who challenged the election “enemies of democracy.” Democrats are now trying to censure Republican members of the House and Senate who supported having the evidence presented to Congress. Why censure someone who wants evidence to be examined?