(Article by Gil Sanders republished from ThomisticThinker.com)
Preliminaries
First, it is important we begin with a clear and precise thesis:
We will be using BBC's criteria to make the minimal claim that we have good reason to suspect that there is targeted fraud in some key battleground states (PA, WI, MI, GA, and AZ). Their results do not pass the "sniff: test. We are not claiming there is decisive evidence of targeted fraud (yet), that there is nation-wide voter fraud in every state, that every Democrat and news outlet is conspiring together, or that there is massive fraud in the millions. Rather, we are making the more limited and the far more modest claim that we tentatively have good reason to suspect that targeted fraud exists in some of the key states, that several powerful figures are behind this, and that this fraud is significant enough to flip the election in Trump's favor even if that is by a small margin.
We are taking a minimal approach here because it is intellectually honest, easier to prove, and more persuasive. If instead we started with a claim like "There are millions of fraudulent ballots! Everyone is in on this!" then not only would it clearly be false, a skeptic would dismiss our case entirely and believe that there is nothing to it whatsoever. Now if you believe the evidence justifies a stronger thesis, that's perfectly compatible with this thesis. I am not saying that the minimal, and only the minimal thesis is true. I am simply arguing that at least the minimal thesis is true.
Second, we should make a distinction between radical conspiracies and normal conspiracies. Radical conspiracies are like faked moon landings, lizard people ruling the earth from the underground, and all of that crazy stuff. Normal conspiracies are just normal human beings with normal motives conspiring to do bad things. This happens all of the time. North Korea's leaders conspire to oppress their people, Nazi Germany conspired to murder Jews, Japan conspired to bomb Pearl Harbor, thieves conspire to rob banks, and you get the point. The idea that voter fraud took place in this election is a normal conspiracy. All this conspiracy requires in order to work is a few people with the means, motive, and opportunity in some key areas. That's why I call it targeted fraud rather than massive fraud.
Don't let anyone get away with conflating targeted fraud with radical conspiracies. If they do, make this point: These same people accepted baseless conspiracy theories like the Russian Collusion hoax despite the fact that Leftists journalists like Matt Taibbi and Greenwald showed it was baseless. They also immediately rejected the Hunter-Biden emails as Russian disinformation without any evidence whatsoever. They're not in any position to ridicule us. To better understand why this is not a radical conspiracy, I would highly recommend Edward Feser's article against conspiracies.
Now, my job is to provide evidence of targeted fraud. But before I do, I need to lay the foundation because that will help support our evidence. Four things will comprise our foundation: historical precedent, means, motive, and opportunity. As I was writing this, Edward Feser posted an article with a similar structure here. You should read that as well.
Historical precedent
Has voter fraud happened before? Yes!
-
- Heritage records 1,298 proven instances of voter fraud.
- 20 state elections have been overturned due to fraud.
- Abraham Lincoln faced the most elaborate election fraud scheme in America's history with mail-in ballots.
- In 1994 the Democrats enforced a "massive scheme" to steal the PA's Senate election.
- A great plot to sway Montenegro's election was uncovered.
- Significant voter fraud seems to have occurred in Bolivia.
- Both Joe Biden and Jimmy Carter were concerned about voter fraud.
- More recently, NJ had rampant voter fraud.
- The DNC conspired against Bernie Sanders in the election process.
- Non-partisan experts discovered very extensive evidence of suspicious discrepancies in 2016's election that "were overwhelmingly to Clinton's benefit."
- Venezuela's election had 1 million fake votes.
- There's evidence that Al Franken won through voter fraud.
- A historian thinks Nixon may have been cheated out by 100,000-200,000 votes.
- Rod Blagojevich, a former governer of Illinois who was convicted of selling a Senate seat and other corrupt activities, claims voter fraud occurs on a regular basis.
- Most countries ban mail-in voting because of significant fraud problems.
- Steve Baker says "there is widespread abuse of postal votes…"
- A 2007 report by Teresa James and Michael Slater found that "Vote by mail is more susceptible to corruption than voting at polling places."
- 15 elections were thrown out because of fraudulent mail-in ballots.
- In 2012 the NY Times said mail in ballots are "more likely to be compromised."
- NPR reports thousands of mail in ballots were rejected, admitting that it is "fraught with potential problems."
- Republican Steve Watkins was charged with voter fraud.
- In 2016, NYC wrongfully purged 200,000 voters.
- Former election official pleads guilty to stuffing ballot box for Democrats.
- Some "fact checkers" use the Brennan Center Report to dismiss voter fraud. John Glibbs provides a good response.
- Georgia official admits 1,000 people voted twice in the primaries.
- For more evidence of mall-in ballot fraud, see here, here, and here.
- Just Facts estimates that probably 1 million non-citizens have voted in the past. Briggs refutes the fact checkers on this.
Means
Do the Democrats have the ability to commit targeted fraud? You bet.
-
- Tech experts were able to hack an election in seven minutes.
- Russians were purportedly able to hack our 2016 election.
- The Guardian criticized Dominion for acting like "they are above the law."
- A federal judge "expressed serious concerns' about Dominion's system in Georgia.
- An academic paper claims Dominon's systems "cannot assure the will of the voters."
- 96% of Dominon's donations go to Democrats. They admit as much.
- The Brennan Center for Justice claimed that election vendors are prime targets that require oversight.
- Voting machine firms reportedly added lobbyists.
- Elizabeth Warren and others filed a formal complaint over the machines switching votes.
- AP questioned the reliability of these new voting machines.
- A whistleblower on the NY post explains how voter fraud works.
- An extensive study by Public Interest Legal Foundation suggests that there are 300,000+ dead people on voter rolls.
- One million dead people got stimulus checks.
- There are 1.8 million possible ghost voters.
- One study shows that there are 353 U.S. counties with registration rates exceeding 100% of eligible voters.
All it takes is one hacker to affect this entire election. Just one. It's also clear that politicians have the arsenal (dead people, ghost voters, illegal voters) and questionable voting systems to do damage. I am not saying that the full arsenal is being used – especially since some errors are gradually being corrected – but it leaves open the real possibility of targeted fraud.
Motive & Opportunity
Democrats have the king of all motives and plenty of opportunity.
-
- Trump and his supporters are the embodiment of all that is wrong with America.
- They are white supremacists, sexists, anti-Muslim, anti-LGBTQ, despicable fascists, sycophants, hateful liars, neo-nazis, and anti-rights.
- Some even claim that Trump is more dangerous than Hitler!
- Nancy Pelosi herself showed nothing but unprecedented contempt when she tore up Trump's State of Union address.
- After Biden's alleged win, the Left celebrated like crazy and shouted all kinds of profanities against Trump.
- If given the opportunity, why wouldn't Democrats remove Trump (aka Hitler) illegally?
- Voter fraud already occurs often enough at a smaller scale, and it has happened (although less commonly) at a larger scale. The opportunity exists.
As you can perhaps see now, there is some basis or evidence for our suspicion based on the data presented above. But that data and reason by itself is not sufficient to show we have good reason for thinking that targeted voter fraud took place in 2020. We need to look at the specific events that occurred in 2020 in order to justify our thesis.
The Evidence
In 2016 BBC provided a very helpful set of criteria (or signs) of a rigged election. Elizabeth Blunt is an experienced BBC journalist who has witnessed many elections in Africa, some of which were proven to be rigged. There is no better source to use because she has no political axe to grind. Recall, however, that this article is not claiming to provide decisive evidence. Just as a fire alarm going off, screaming, and smoke is evidence of fire, so too are these signs evidence of fraud. But these signs could obviously be wrong. The fire alarm going off, the screaming, and the smoke might be explained by a broken alarm, a loud horror movie, and a bachelor overcooking his food.
It's possible then to provide reasonable explanations of these signs but that shouldn't be our first instinct. We should take it at face value, especially because of what's at stake. We'd be perfectly justified in our belief that there is a fire until proven otherwise. Same applies here. When we take these signs together, it provides a good cumulative case for targeted fraud, which calls for further investigation. So without further, let's go through a few of the signs and show how it parallels what is happening in this election.
Delay in announcing results
It is an undeniable fact that results got delayed. As BBC says, however, this by itself is not "necessarily a sign of rigging" but it "is certainly dangerous." No doubt these delays can primarily be explained by COVID-19 and by the unprecedented amount of mail-in ballots that require additional verification. But explaining why delay has occurred does not magically remove the fact that it greatly increases the risk of fraud and should be viewed with suspicion. Especially when tensions are as high as they are in the U.S. this year, it is simply disgraceful and dangerous that our country "has no ability to perform the simple task of counting votes in a minimally efficient or confidence-inspiring manner." As Greenwald further points out, Brazil with a population of 210 million "holds seamless, quick vote counts about which very few people harbor doubts" despite being "much poorer and less technologically advanced country than the U.S." New York was so embarrassed by their slow processs that they admit it would be a "national scandal" if they were a swing state.
We not only had serious delays, which makes the process vulnerable, we had other suspicious events surround it. Key states (MI, WI, and PA) suddenly flipped from Trump to Biden overnight after some ballot dumps. PA stopped counting mail in ballots at 9:30 PM. Poll Watchers were prohibited or obscured from doing their job. We saw sudden spikes for Biden. A Leftist source reports a now famous spike in Wisconsin for Biden. Another PA reported a ballot dump with a 92-8 margin, while another ballot dump of 23,277 was for Biden. Michigan's vote dump had 138,339 Biden votes, that was said to be an error. Another glitch in Miichigan gave 6,000 votes to Biden. Antrim County flipped blue because of a glitch. Another error in Georgia was found that reduced Biden's lead from 7,000 to 4,000. 20,000 votes all came for Biden while 1,000 Trump votes disappeared. 2,600 uncounted votes, mostly for Trump, were found on a memory card. A third Georgia county found the same. Interesting how almost all of these "errors" and "spikes" favored Biden.
A mathematician, in a sworn statement, flagged 100,000 ballots in PA. Voter Integrity provides the definitive statistical analysis of anomalies thus far. More data analysis of fraud can be found here, here, and here. These irregularities are so problematic, Michigan's Supreme Court believes the evidence substantiates voter fraud.
Too Many Voters
As BBC notes, even in areas where voting is obligatory, "turnout only reaches 90-95%." If we see these numbers in our counties, it's a red flag. Minnesota had a 90% turnout and Wisconsin had a 89% turnout. These are highly abnormal turnouts, especially when we compare them to nearby or similar states like Florida and Iowa that had 10% less turnout. Olmstead saw a 90% voter turnout. Milwaukee had close to 100% turnout. The officials of Milwaukee scrambled to correct the numbers, which the fact checkers make use of, but it's still problematic.
High Turnout in Specific Areas
A study shows that in PA "Biden soared in three predominately R counties, by 1.24 to 1.43 times greater than either Obama run or Hillary" which seems to be quite a suspicious turnout. It is also odd that PA and MI had massive mail-in ballot numbers compared to the rest of the country. Another confirms that mail in ballots in PA and MI dwarfed other swing states. We also had an abnormally high number of Biden-only ballots in the key states: 98,000 in PA, 80,000 in GA, 90,000~ in MI, and 62,000 in WI. Biden's absentee lead does not match up with other states. Another person observed that Joe Biden votes greatly exceeds the votes that Senate candidates received in swing states, whereas those cast for Trump and GOP senators are much closer. This is suspicious because the overwhelming vast majority of people said they'd vote a straight party ticket, and the great dissimilarity just doesn't make sense.
Large Numbers of Invalid Votes
This data is still forthcoming, but according to NPR, we already have 550,000 primary absentee ballots rejected that far outpaces 2016. NY Times says that nearly 100,000 invalid absentee ballots were sent. There's a lawsuit, backed by eyewitness testimony with signed affidavits, claiming that 40,000 ballots in Detroit are invalid. Kayleigh claims to have 230 pages of signed affidavits of questionable practices by various officials, some of which mention discarded votes.
Miscellaneous Evidence
Other crumbs that raise concerns over our election's reliability
- More than 200,000 ballots in Nevada got sent to the wrong address
- Interestingly, Trump has been warning about voter fraud since 2012. This challenges the narrative that Trump screams fraud only for self-interest.
- This year 80,000 ballots were disqualified in NYC. 35,000 in Florida.
- CNN says 160,000 ballots were not delivered in Maryland.
- California rejected 100,000 mail in ballots this year.
- Wisconsin rejected 23,000 ballots because of a small error (Trump's prior 2016 margins), which can make the difference between winning or losing.
- 28 million ballots have been missing in the last four elections!
- 72% of Detroit's absentee ballot counts were off.
- PA rejects 372,000 ballots because of duplicates, causing "mistrust in already-anxious voters." They caught it this time, but what else is falling through the cracks?
- First hand account of election workers kicking out GOP observers.
- Secretary of PA Improperly Changed Deadline 2 Days Before Election Day.
- Some Dominion Systems are connected to the internet when they shouldn't be.
- PA count late ballots without postmarks as if they were received on Election Day
- Russell Ramsland of Allied Security Operations filed an affidavit, stating that our systems have large vulnerabilities and the election has significant anomalies.
- Twitter user gives an interesting analysis of the election data.
- Jennifer Cohn presents Dominion's suspicious history.
- Benford's law might have use for detecting fraud, but proceed with caution.
Objections
"If there is fraud, how do you explain the Democrats losing the Senate?"
The answer is quite simple. A good thief focuses on the crown jewel; taking other jewels in the process radically increases the risk. A good thief cannot get too greedy. Trump is that crown jewel. If they tried to take over the House and Senate, it would not only be monstrously harder (requiring massive fraud as opposed to targeted fraud), it would infuriate the GOP and unite them under Trump. This objection makes as little sense as saying a man cannot be guilty of robbery because he didn't rob all of the money. Lastly, it's worth pointing out that just because the Democrats lost the Senate does not mean that they didn't succeed in stealing some seats. We just don't know yet.
"But fact checkers say x irregularity is not evidence of voter fraud!"
First off, most fact checkers agree that these glitches, irregularities, and events occurred. They just deny it is evidence of fraud because they examine each irregularity or event in isolation. They're right. No single irregularity by itself is evidence of fraud, but when we combine them with other irregularities and events, it obviously becomes evidence in the same way a fire alarm, screaming, and smoke is evidence of a fire. Second, we must be wary of fact checkers because they've made significant errors, are biased, and are not trained in critical thought. I have seen fact checkers quote representatives of Dominion Systems to show that voter fraud did not occur, which is as ridiculous as asking an alleged robber if they robbed a bank. Of course they're going to deny it. Now I'm not saying do not use fact checkers whatsoever. I used them to weed through a lot of false information about voter fraud. But you should always read them critically.
"If your evidence is so great, why don't you give it to the courts?"
I am a philosopher, not a lawyer. My goal is to persuade the American people that at the very least we have good reason to be skeptical of this election's integrity. I am not claiming to have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that there is fraud. So if the courts require proof beyond a reasonable doubt, then this article obviously fails to meet that standard – which is not a refutation because that was not my goal in the first place. This is equivalent to telling a soccer player he lost because he wasn't playing basketball. Furthermore, not everything that is true can be proved in the courts. You can be justified in believing that John was lying to you even if you couldn't prove it in court. I suspect, however, that in court we do not need proof of voter fraud because reasonable doubt over this election's integrity may suffice to call for a serious investigation or recall. If that's the case then this article may serve to help that cause after all, but again, I am not a lawyer so who knows.
Summary
I will be quoting someone from a private email exchange (the links are my additions) because he sums this up very well: "Going into midnight on Election Day, President Trump was leading by historic margins in Florida, Ohio, and a dozen bell-weather counties which have been accurate in 90% of past elections. He was up across all voter demographics including African Americans and Hispanics. Still, Fox and others refused to call key states in his favor (even Alaska!). Everywhere you looked, Trump was outperforming. Then swing states with Democratic governors stopped counting with no explanation. Later, at 4 AM, massive dumps of unobserved ballots ostensibly tipped the key races in Biden's favor." What are the odds that almost all of these irregularities, high turnouts, and ballot dumps in key states consistently favor Biden? These are serious errors. What are the odds that Florida and other counties failed to predict this election's outcome ? It'd be absurd to deny it's improbable! Attach this improbability to the foundation we built earlier and we have a good case for targeted voter fraud.
What amazes me is how dismissive and arrogant people get over this issue. Imagine someone saw signs of a fire next door but kept mocking, "No decisive evidence you idiots!" instead of calling 911 or investigating it. It'd be absolutely unacceptable, if not downright immoral. That's happening right now. No good person could possibly claim to champion people's rights while dismissing their concerns of possible fraud. The integrity of our vote and our elective system is at stake here. Now it may turn out that these signs, while normally reliable, are best explained by something other than fraud. I am perfectly open to being wrong. However, as of now we have good reason for believing this. Our view can be falsified if the DOJ, FBI, courts, and other independent agencies properly investigate and say otherwise. Time will tell. In the meantime, I would recommend further research using the articles below. I do not accept every claim made in these articles, but they remain helpful and interesting.
Further Reading
-
- Mark Chatham's article shows that our 2020 election would be considered fraudulent if held in a foreign country. A must read.
- Daniel Horowitz gives a similar, carefully argued case for voter fraud.
- ZeroHedge offers a good analysis of fraud in PA.
- Libertas Bella has an extensive take on the evidence.
- Every Legal Vote has a lengthy article explaining why this election is suspect.
- Michael Anton warned of a coming coup here and here.
- Here Is The Evidence records irregularities and anomalies.
Read more at: ThomisticThinker.com
Please contact us for more information.
