Category Archives: Election Issues, Fraud

The Bipartisan Moral Rot of America’s Institutions

Well, what do you know? The first I have heard the WSJ at least open to the concept that some political shenanigans may have had an influence on the 2020 Presidential election. mrossol

WSJ  11/5/2021

In politics, in business, in the cultural discourse that plays out on a never-ending doom loop on our screens and in our heads, the year has been marked by the triumph of cynical expediency, the relentless pursuit of self-interest dressed up as public-spirited principle.

Political leaders, business chiefs and the media and entertainment figures they ventriloquize have grasped their opportunities in this tempestuous year to advance their own causes. A pandemic, urban violence, the machinery of electoral democracy—all carefully repurposed and packaged in a gauzy wrapping of useful lies to ensure above all else their gain.

 

Some of the nation’s biggest and most powerful companies exploited an unprecedented human crisis to grow bigger and more powerful, making sure to shed crocodile tears for the losers. Progressive politicians at the local and national levels cynically seized on repeated crises to promote their ideological objectives. Most of the nation’s celebrated newsrooms abandoned the last pretense of objectivity and revealed their selective use and manipulation of facts as little more than propaganda.

There are exceptions, but depressingly few to celebrate. The most notable last holdouts to this encroaching empire of dishonesty are the millions of decent and honorable Americans who have suffered unprecedented human and economic damage this year, even as their comfortably distanced, self-aggrandizing superiors lecture them on their ignorance and inadequacy. Lions led by donkeys.

Two episodes last week stand as fitting codas to this spectacle, timely examples of the moral corruption eating away at American institutions.

The first was the sudden discovery by the media, a month after the votes were safely cast, of the news that Hunter Biden has a serious problem stemming from his penchant to sell himself to foreigners with potential business before his father.

The New York Post broke the most explosive element of this story before the election. But back then it was deemed a “distraction” by one of our leading news organizations and a menace to democratic health by the technology companies that control the flow of much of our information. And it was more or less completely ignored or rubbished by most of the U.S. and world media.

We’ll never know what effect the story might have had on the election if it had been given the airing it deserved. The electoral margin in three states—Georgia, Wisconsin and Arizona—that combined to give Joe Biden 37 electoral votes, and the presidency, was a little under 43,000 votes, a vanishingly small sliver of the two men’s 155.5 million total nationwide votes.

But it’s less its potential electoral impact that stinks and more the cynical way in which the Biden-supporting press shouldered the story aside, in the process defaming fellow journalists as traitors peddling Kremlin propaganda. Who would have thought that 2020 would be the year Joe McCarthy and John Birch finally got the recognition from the American media they deserved?

The other episode was the spectacle of a large part of the Republican party selling its soul for the tainted penny of an embittered president’s approval in a political stunt that was irresponsible, futile and deeply undermining of the principles for which the party is supposed to stand.

There’s a case to be made that the presidential election was conducted in a way that casts doubt on the official outcome. The changing of the electoral rules in midcampaign in many states, enabling an avalanche of postal voting—with its notably greater susceptibility to fraud and manipulation—had political consequences that may well have influenced the result.

But there’s a difference between challenging those results and completely abandoning constitutional propriety and political principle to do so.

That’s what the state of Texas, joined by more than a dozen other Republican-controlled states and more than half the House Republican caucus, did in signing on to a Supreme Court case that took the justices—three of them appointed by President Trump—about four minutes to dismiss.

Again, the object of our scorn should be not the argument itself, but the chosen means for pursuing it: the idea that conservatives should embrace a political mechanism to produce a remedy that explicitly demands the subjugation of states’ constitutionally protected rights.

What are they going to argue the next time some activist federal judge seeks to impose California-style environmental regulations on Texas?

At a stroke, these conservatives were ready to jettison two of the foundational principles of conservative jurisprudence, federalism and judicial restraint, for a short-term political advantage in furtherance of a highly controversial objective of overturning an election.

The truly depressing aspect to these cynical assaults on the nation’s honor is that they act like a ratchet. With every new breach in the political or cultural proprieties that hold a nation together, a new norm is established. The already low dishonesty of our institutions becomes a ceiling, not a floor.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-bipartisan-moral-rot-of-americas-institutions-11607969301?cx_testId=3&cx_testVariant=cx_4&cx_artPos=3&mod=WTRN#cxrecs_s

Share

Arizona 2020 Vote Audit Finds Potentially Election-Shifting Numbers Of Illegal Ballots

Arizona 2020 Vote Audit Finds Potentially Election-Shifting Numbers Of Illegal Ballots

While the reports made several significant findings supporting former President Trump’s complaints about the 2020 election, the corporate media ignored those aspects of the audit.

On Friday, the Arizona State Senate released the final reports on the results of the Maricopa County Forensic Election Audit. While the reports made several significant findings supporting former President Trump’s complaints about the 2020 election, the corporate media ignored those aspects of the audit to focus instead only on the results of the hand recount.

As broadly reported, the audit established “there were no substantial differences between the hand count of the ballots provided and the official canvass results for the County.” Maricopa County, which represents Arizona’s most populous county thanks to its county seat of Phoenix, had provided Biden a 45,000-vote advantage in the state, propelling Biden to a victory by 10,457 votes. So the media presented the recount as confirming Biden’s victory in the state.

Left unmentioned, however, were the numerous findings of problems with the election and, most significantly, evidence indicating tens of thousands of ballots were illegally cast or counted. A report entitled “Compliance with Election Laws and Procedures,” issued by Senate Audit Liaison Ken Bennett, highlighted several issues, of which two were particularly significant because of the number of votes involved.

First, Bennett excerpted the Arizona statutory provisions governing early ballots. Those provisions require early ballots to be accompanied by a signed affidavit in which the voter declares he is registered in the appropriate county and has not already voted. The statute further mandates that a voter “make and sign the affidavit,” and directs the early election board to check the voter’s affidavit.

Significantly, “if the affidavit is insufficient, the vote shall not be allowed.” The secretary of state’s Election Procedures Manual reinforces this point, stating: “If the early ballot affidavit is not signed, the County Recorder shall not count the ballot.”

In his report, Bennett noted that “while the Audit scope of work did not include comparing signatures with voter registration records for each voter, it did identify a number of missing signatures on ballot envelop affidavits, which to the extent the ballots in such envelopes were tallied, would violate the above statutes and procedures.”

Although Bennett did not elaborate on the issues related to affidavit signatures or the numbers of affected ballots, in a 99-page report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology engineer Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai detailed numerous anomalies.

First, Ayyadurai analyzed the early voting ballot return envelopes, on which voters were required to sign an affidavit within a signature block. That review revealed more than 17,000 duplicate images of the return envelopes. When the duplicates were eliminated from the review, Ayyadurai’s company, EchoMail, concluded that Maricopa County had recorded more than 6,545 early voting return envelopes than EchoMail determined existed. EchoMail also concluded that another approximately 500 of the envelopes’ affidavits were left blank.

Ayyadurai also highlighted several implausible statistics, such as that while there was a 52.6 percent increase from 2016 to 2020 in the number of early voting ballots, Maricopa County reported a decrease in signature mismatches of 59.7 percent. “This inverse relationship requires explanation,” the report noted, and then recommended a full audit of the signatures.

Bennett’s report on election law compliance highlighted several additional issues, but of particular note, in light of the audit report, was his reference to Arizona’s statutory requirements for individuals to be considered eligible voters, as delineated in Articles 1, 1.1, and 2 of the Arizona election code.

“The Audit identified numerous questions regarding possible ineligible voters,” Bennett noted, while adding that because “these determinations were made from comparisons between the County’s final voted information and private data sources,” the cooperation of Maricopa County and further investigation would be necessary to “determine whether ineligible persons actually were allowed to vote in the 2020 election.”

The referenced articles of the election code discuss voter registration requirements and the requirement for individuals to be registered to vote at their address of residence, although individuals moving within 29 days of the election remain properly registered to vote in the county in which they previously resided. However, students, members of the military, and others temporarily living at another address remain properly registered at their permanent home address.

Also of significance is the Arizona secretary of state’s Election Procedures Manual, which according to the audit provides that “ballot-by-mail must be mailed to voters by first-class, nonforwardable mail.”

These statutory provisions and procedures prove significant because the audit revealed that 15,035 mail-in votes in Maricopa County were from voters who had moved prior to the registration deadline, another 6,591 mail-in-votes came from voters who had moved out of Arizona prior to the registration deadline, and 1,718 mail-in votes came from voters who moved within Arizona but out of Maricopa prior to the registration deadline.

One of three scenarios seems possible here: First, the mail-in ballot was delivered to the old address and then provided to the named voter, who had only temporarily relocated. Such votes would be legal and entirely proper.

Second, the mail-in ballot was delivered to the old address and then provided to the named voter, who had permanently moved, but failed to timely update his registration record yet signed an affidavit attesting to a false address of residence. Such votes would be illegal.

Or third, the mail-in ballot was delivered to the old address, and then someone other than the named voter cast the vote. Such votes would be both illegal and fraudulent.

Neither Maricopa County nor the state of Arizona knows how many of these 23,000-plus votes fall within each of these three scenarios. And that’s a problem.

As I wrote when similar problems, albeit with more conclusive evidence, were unearthed in Georgia, “Elections are too tight and the populace too divided for ‘close enough for government work’ to cut it anymore. The American voting system must be reformed to ensure security, transparency, replicability, and election officials’ uniform compliance with state election law.”

Sixteen years ago, both Democrats and Republicans would have agreed on these goals, as the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform’s report “Building Confidence in U.S. Elections” confirms. That commission, co-chaired by Democrat Jimmy Carter and Republican James Baker III, spoke of “the administration of elections as a continuing challenge, which requires the highest priority of our citizens and our government.”

Unfortunately, rather than acknowledge the problems the Maricopa County audit revealed and rise to the challenge of ensuring they are not repeated, while also investigating areas of potential fraud and illegal voting, Democrats and some Republicans pretend the hand recount’s confirmation of the official vote tally ends the matter.

The corrupt press likewise pushes this narrative: The audit confirms Trump lost, and that is all there is to the matter.

But this isn’t about Trump, just as the 2005 report on building confidence in American elections wasn’t about Al Gore. This is about election integrity and our democracy because, as the commission wrote not even 20 years ago:

The vigor of American democracy rests on the vote of each citizen. Only when citizens can freely and privately exercise their right to vote and have their vote recorded correctly can they hold their leaders accountable. Democracy is endangered when people believe that their votes do not matter or are not counted correctly.

The Arizona audit ended nothing including, sadly, the view held by half of our country that their votes do not matter and are not counted correctly—and that many politicians and members of the press don’t care.

Share

The Arizona Audit Findings the Media Doesn’t Want You to See – American Faith

The Arizona Audit Findings the Media Doesn’t Want You to See

Last week, initial leaks from the Arizona audit, which happened in Maricopa County, began to circulate. As RedState reported, the raw tally of ballots found over 300 more votes for Joe Biden than the original count. But as I said at the time, while that may have been somewhat surprising, you could bet that number was being presented out of context and that there’d be more to come.

While I find it unlikely these initially reported results will be shown to be outright false, anytime anything is leaked to the Post, it’s almost always out of context. So you can expect the real report to offer more than what’s being said here. If the Post has the report, which they claim to do, why are they saying so little about it? We’ll have to wait and see what else is in the multiple-page document.

So did the trend of The Washington Post publishing convenient leaks as an effort to abscond from further revelations hold? Yes, it did, and the report included some serious caveats about the ballots that were inspected. The Post, as suspected, chose to not publish them in its write-up despite claiming to have the entire document.

For example, take this passage from The Federalist’swrite-up on the audit. Also, credit to Margot Cleveland, who has always been great when we’ve interacted, for laying this stuff out in an easy-to-understand way. I say that because confusion is one of the tools used to muddy the waters.

These statutory provisions and procedures prove significant because the audit revealed that 15,035 mail-in votes in Maricopa County were from voters who had moved prior to the registration deadline, another 6,591 mail-in-votes came from voters who had moved out of Arizona prior to the registration deadline, and 1,718 mail-in votes came from voters who moved within Arizona but out of Maricopa prior to the registration deadline.

When you sign the affidavit that comes with the ballot, you are legally attesting to living at the address that exists on the registration. Is it really plausible that all those mail-in votes came from people who had only temporarily re-located? I find that suggestion to be absurd. It’s obvious that many, if not most of the votes in question here were cast illegally. Whether that was malicious or people just not realizing that they can’t move without updating their address we’ll never know.

And while that doesn’t provide evidence of a mass, singular conspiracy to cast illegal votes, what it does show is that Maricopa County was extremely lax, to the point of probable illegality, in enforcing existing voting laws. That’s a theme we saw all over the country, including in Georgia as well.

That suggestion is further bolstered by facts like these.

Ayyadurai also highlighted several implausible statistics, such as that while there was a 52.6 percent increase from 2016 to 2020 in the number of early voting ballots, Maricopa County reported a decrease in signature mismatches of 59.7 percent. “This inverse relationship requires explanation,” the report noted, and then recommended a full audit of the signatures.

Again, it’s just not plausible that early votes went up over 50% but that signature mismatches went down almost 60%. That fact again points to clearly insufficient enforcement of existing election law. Other issues included finding ballots where the affidavit had not been signed at all. Per the state’s election procedure manual, those votes are invalid and are not to be counted.

Now, what are the caveats? There are a few, and I want to try to give all the angles here. For example, while there appear to have been obvious issues with the enforcement of election law regarding registrations, we do not know who those voters cast their ballot for. And because we don’t know that, things remain murky enough for some to claim that it didn’t change the outcome of the race in Arizona.

Also, in regards to the small number of signatures missing from affidavits (which makes those votes invalid), while that points to a possibly larger, systemic issue, it is not conclusive because the audit didn’t actually go through and compare signatures for the rest of the ballots to see if the problem was larger.

That leaves us pretty much where we’ve been the entire year. It’s almost certain, to the point where it becomes absurd to claim otherwise, that a significant number of illegal votes were cast in Arizona. Yet, because of the realities of what the audit covered and didn’t cover, it did not deliver a conclusive finding that the illegal votes favored Biden enough to change the outcome.

But what the audit did do is outline the problems to the point of showing exactly what has to be fixed. This is why red states passing voting integrity bills is so important. The biggest fraud of 2020 was not dead people voting or some mass multi-state conspiracy to cast illegal votes. Rather, it was state after state and county after county ignoring voting laws or changing them without proper procedure under the guise of a COVID “emergency.” In Maricopa County, election officials seemingly ignored (though, they’d probably claim incompetence) safeguards when it came to early voting, a period which already heavily favors Democrats.

We can’t change the 2020 election, but we can secure upcoming elections, at least in the states Republicans control. Do that and drive turnout, and enough power can be regained to hopefully prevent what happened in 2020 from ever happening again.

Share

How Pro-CCP Communists Are Working to Flip North Carolina

If this doesn’t get you thinking, you are not awake. Its coming to a State near you, or one in which you live. mrossol

The Epoch Times – Counter Punch Aug 25, 2021

In this episode of Counterpunch, Trevor Loudon talks about how pro-Chinese Communist Party (CCP) communists have set up voter registration networks in minority communities across North Carolina. Trevor says they are working feverishly to flip North Carolina into a Democrat-run state—knowing that this turn will ensure Democratic presidential victories for decades to come.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/how-pro-ccp-communists-are-working-to-flip-north-carolina_3964830.html?&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Epochtv&utm_campaign=2021-08-28&utm_term=counterpunch&utm_content=trend1

Share