Pulitzer was joined by former CEO of Overstock Patrick Byrne.
YouTube banned Pulitzer’s channel during the live-stream, citing “severe or repeated violations of [YouTube’s] Community Guidelines.”
YouTube did not specify exactly what Pulitzer or Byrne said or what content appeared on the live stream that deserved removal of Pulitzer’s channel.
WHAT YOUTUBE SAID:
“We have permanently removed your channel from YouTube,” the big tech platform said in an email to Pulitzer.
“Going forward, you won’t be able to access, possess, or create any other YouTube channels.”
WHAT PULITZER SAID:
“When you look at how YouTube decides what to ban, it’s all keyword-driven,” Pulitzer explained in a call with American Faith.
“I simply included the keyphrase ‘with Patrick Byrne’ in the YouTube video title, and that’s what killed me last night,” he said.
“Once that keyword was flagged by YouTube, they probably had one of their trolls watch my feed in real time, and, when they saw how many millions of people were consuming my content, they shut me down.”
Pulitzer went on to explain how YouTube will shut down channels for simply “mentioning election fraud,” even if that’s not central to the content.
“One you get on YouTube’s radar, they encode your stream, and there’s no way to get around it.”
ABOUT JOVAN PULITZER:
Pulitzer’s patents are licensed to billions of mobile phone devices through more than 330 companies, “ranging from early-stage firms to Fortune 100 Industry Leaders such as Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Verizon, T-Mobile, eBay, IBM, AOL, Cisco, Google, Walgreen Co, TiVo Brocade Communications Systems, Inc.,” and more.
Pulitzer is a Board Member at Gold Institute For International Strategy, a nonprofit organization focusing on developing national security strategies that aim to “promote the freedom, prosperity and security of our nations” with their “team of experienced political and military practitioners.”
He’s been described as “the man who will save America” for his work presenting forensic audit data before the Georgia State Senate after his in-depth analysis of the 2020 U.S. presidential election results. (See below.)
It’s an oft-quoted saying: “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.”
A fact is something done, an action performed or an event or circumstance that actually occurred. Essentially, facts are indisputable truths about people, places and events.
The one seminal event that continues to fester like a boil on the American psyche is this past Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election. Why does it continue to fester? It festers because people of all stripes and backgrounds believe there were elements of election fraud, misrepresentations of the truth, dishonesty due to lawfare and, in certain cases, severe obstruction by politicians at all levels of government. Advertisement – story continues below
In the days following the presidential election, there were vast claims of a “conspiracy theory” that the election was somehow stolen in the middle of the night. In fact, many people believe the “theft” actually occurred during the days prior and subsequent to Election Day. According to some accounts, the theft occurred as a result of machine configurations and settings, misappropriated and fraudulent mail-in ballots, false or fake paper used for ballots, multiple scans of the same ballot, ballots in excess of the number of registered voters and much more.
The claims of fraud in this election seemed never-ending. These “conspiracy theory” claims continue to be challenged and debated across the United States without any serious examination of the facts surrounding the election itself.
What are the facts of the 2020 election? Are there any that we the people can sink our teeth into? Do any facts exist that offer a sense of honesty and truth?
Preliminary findings of the July 15, 2021, Arizona state Senate hearing allege that blatant fraud occurred in at least one county (Maricopa) in one state (Arizona). As one Arizona state senator exclaimed in an interview: “It was a s*** show!” Advertisement – story continues below
What I want to offer for both believers and non-believers are some facts. These facts and the data behind them come from research and analysis of information gathered directly from federal, state and county websites. These facts compare past elections to November 2020, and all that is required to understand them is simple common sense.
I will offer some analysis and thoughts at the end, but as we continue to move forward in our country, we the people need to be fact-driven and knowledgeable about what occurred. While there is great debate being pursued in the courts, a place not designed to determine the outcome of elections, I believe people need to understand that our nation experienced an unprecedented attack on the very fabric and sacrosanct component of our liberties; our “one person, one vote” privilege was severely violated.
What follows are the true facts surrounding the Nov. 3, 2020, United States presidential election.
1. Bellwether counties: In 2020, former President Donald J. Trump carried 18 of 19 “bellwether” counties (losing only Clallam County, Washington state). The term “bellwether” in the political arena refers to a county or state that aligns itself with the ultimate winner of an election.
Political realignments (gerrymandering of districts for instance) can cause some counties or states to lose “bellwether” status over time. From 1980 to 2016, 19 counties, most of them industrial counties in the northern and midwestern United States, voted for the winner of all 10 presidential elections. Additionally, since 1936, a key bellwether county, Luzerne County of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, has gone to the winner of Pennsylvania, regardless of party. Advertisement – story continues below
In 2016 and 2020, Trump won that county handily. Any Republican winning Luzerne County in that time frame (since 1936) has also never failed to carry the state of Michigan.
2. Bellwether states: In 2020, Trump carried four vital bellwether states (Ohio, Iowa, North Carolina and Florida). These states represent a strong base consisting of urban, suburban, rural, union and ethnic minority voters. Additionally, these states have been won by the same candidate 13 times since 1896, and every single time, that candidate won either the presidency or their re-election.
Bellwether states also come in and out of existence with demographic realignments. For instance, in 2000, George W. Bush became the first Republican to win the presidency without carrying Vermont or Illinois. On all but two occasions since 1896, Ohio’s electoral votes went to the ultimate winner of the presidency. Trump overwhelmingly won Ohio in 2020.
3. Share of primary votes: Share of primary votes during the primary elections is a way to judge outcomes of presidential elections.
Since presidential primaries began in 1912, only four incumbents have lost re-election, all garnering 72.8 percent of the primary vote or less. Herbert Hoover lost in 1932 after earning 36.0 percent in the Republican primaries, Gerald Ford lost in 1976 after earning 53.3 percent, Jimmy Carter (a Democratic incumbent) lost in 1980 after earning 51.1 percent, and George H.W. Bush lost in 1992 after earning 72.8 percent.
The most dominant Republican landslide re-elections in this time frame were won by Dwight Eisenhower (1956, 85.9 percent primary share), Richard Nixon (1972, 86.9 percent) and Ronald Reagan (1984, 98.8 percent). Trump won 94.0 percent in 2020.
In contrast, Joe Biden was trounced in the 2020 Democratic primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada — the traditional indicators of general election viability. His running mate, Kamala Harris, dropped out before primary voting even began.
4. Incumbents who gain votes win: Incumbent vote gain is another key indicator of presidential race outcomes. Since 1892, and as the expansion of the United States slowed, only six presidents have lost re-election. All six had fewer total votes in their re-election campaigns than in their initial campaigns. All incumbents who gained votes won re-election.
In 2020, Trump gained a record 11 million votes. For perspective, former President Barack Obama lost 4 million votes nationally in 2012 and still won re-election.
5. Voter registration by party: Voter registration by party is touted as one of the most accurate predictors of determining presidential election outcomes. Not all states register voters by party, but for those that do, the evidence is plain to see.
As far back as records are publicly available, three of the key states in the 2020 election — Pennsylvania, Florida and North Carolina — have moved in favor of the same party that made overall registration gains since 2000. In Pennsylvania, from 2012 to 2016, 60 of 67 counties trended more Republican in registration, suggesting a major GOP gain in the state — consequently, Pennsylvania flipped for Trump in 2016.
A legitimate Trump loss in Pennsylvania would show a registration lead expansion for Democrats. However, from 2016 to 2020, 60 of 67 counties became more Republican in registration once again, with the GOP registering roughly 242,000 net new voters, compared to just 12,000 for Democrats.
This number suggests that the margin of victory for Trump should have substantially increased.
6. Down-ballot voting: House of Representatives down-ballot voting is an indicator of success for the top of the ticket.
When Obama won a landslide victory in 2008, the Democrats took 14 U.S. House seats away from Republican incumbents, while losing only five seats. When Reagan was elected in 1980, the Republicans gained a net of 34 seats. When Reagan was re-elected, Republicans clawed back a net of 16 House seats from the 26 lost in the 1982 midterms.
In 2020, with Trump at the top of the ticket, Republicans knocked out 13 incumbent Democratic seats, while not losing a single Republican-held seat. Common sense suggests a Biden electoral landslide would have taken at least a single Republican seat with it.
7. Florida as a key trend indicator: Why is Florida such an important indicator of presidential election success? Since 1932, Florida’s trajectory has correlated perfectly with the trajectory of Michigan and Pennsylvania as a reflection of working-class political sentiment.
In every single election since then, if Florida became more Republican from the previous election, Michigan and Pennsylvania did exactly the same. These three states also largely move together to the left when Democratic nominees make gains.
In 2020, Trump won Florida by a margin greater than 2 percentage points higher than he did in 2016. Despite a massive Republican registration advantage in Pennsylvania, both Pennsylvania and Michigan charted a separate direction from Florida for the first time in nearly a century.
8. Gaining everywhere but losing everything: Despite historic strength and gains of Trump in battleground states and battleground counties, Trump “lost.”
Maricopa County, Arizona, which casts nearly two-thirds of all votes in Arizona, has not voted for the Democratic nominee since it supported Harry Truman in 1948. In 1996, Bob Dole became the first Republican in nearly 50 years to lose Arizona, but he still won Maricopa County.
Trump carried the county by 3 percentage points in 2016 while receiving fewer votes than Mitt Romney had in the county in 2012. In 2020, Trump set a Republican record for net additional votes in Maricopa County by adding roughly 248,000 from his 2016 performance, only to become the first Republican nominee (and incumbent president) to lose the county in 72 years.
That was accomplished by Biden’s gain of nearly 338,000 net “new votes” from 2016, which is nearly three times higher than the all-time previous high Democratic vote gain in the county by John Kerry in 2004. Similar record high vote totals and increases for Trump were also eclipsed in 2020 in the states of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Nevada and Minnesota, in “losing efforts.”
Trump netted more than one-quarter of the non-white vote in his re-election campaign, achieving a level of minority support seen just one time since Nixon’s 1960 campaign. His progress was evident in urban areas in the Midwest, such as Wayne County, Michigan; southern Texas, where Trump won counties that had been in the Democratic column for decades; and perhaps most notably, in Miami-Dade County, Florida.
Trump’s vote increases in long-held Republican suburban counties, and in working-class counties like Mahoning County, Ohio (which he flipped for the first time since 1972), indicate that his white support did not collapse as reported by the mainstream media. The absence of millions of core Democratic base minority voters raises considerable questions as to how Biden was able to surpass Obama’s popular vote record by 12 million.
10. 2020 was “the most secure presidential election in U.S. history”: Post-election behavior by politicians on both sides and their mainstream media and Big Tech allies is beyond contemptible.
In 2016, with narrow margins in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, Trump’s camp had no concern over recounts or potential audits in any of those three states that decided the election. Biden’s certified margins in Pennsylvania and Michigan are much larger than the margins in those states in 2016, but opposition to full forensic audits either statewide or in suspect counties has turned into an all-out legal and ideological war in 2021 (sometimes referred to as “lawfare”).
If Biden’s team was 100 percent confident they won the election fair and square, then they should feel there is nothing to hide. Audits confirming his certified totals would certainly solidify his administration and simultaneously deal an embarrassing defeat to election skeptics.
Instead, the establishment media insists that, despite thousands of affidavits and personal accounts describing fraud along with the recent Arizona state Senate hearing on Maricopa County’s audit, the 2020 election was “the most secure in U.S. history.”
Democratic secretaries of state are running cover as well. In one example of many, the Colorado secretary of state recently acted outside of her authority, effectively banning audits in the state. The single biggest question to ask all states’ legislatures is this: If your candidate won hands-down and there is nothing to hide, why not conduct a full forensic audit of several of your states’ counties?
A sacrosanct element within our constitutional republic is the privilege, the right and the act of voting for our elected leaders. The American people have taken many of our rights and responsibilities for granted far too long, and this past presidential election clearly woke us up to that fact.
Maybe what is needed now in America is for us all to stop taking our freedoms for granted.
What might be the eventual outcome of the 2020 election, only God knows. I can say, as one who is paying very close attention to it from the very outset, that the confusion, the complexity and the deception by many in the media and within our very own government doesn’t offer the citizenry of our great republic any sense of confidence.
Analysis of the facts:
So what happens if the results of the audit(s) show 2020 election fraud, and that Trump won? What are the potential outcomes?
My sense is that there are three outcomes, along with a set of wildcard possibilities. Outcome one is that Biden and Harris resign — I see the probability of this as zero, and readers can make their own judgments as to why.
Outcome two is where states present recounted electoral votes to SCOTUS (our illustrious U.S. Supreme Court justices). What happens then?
There are four scenarios. In scenario one, SCOTUS declares the 2020 election invalid and suggests Congress reconvene and recount electoral votes — Biden and Harris are then replaced. In scenario two, SCOTUS declares the 2020 election invalid but says the president and vice president remain in office with limited powers to be specified (e.g., no executive orders, no veto power, only perfunctory roles, past executive orders are declared invalid and all are rescinded, and the vice president is not the presidential successor). In scenario three, SCOTUS declares the 2020 election invalid but the Biden administration remains in office (no loss of powers or authorities). In scenario four, SCOTUS completely sidesteps the states’ request and does nothing.
If scenario four plays out and SCOTUS sidesteps and avoids their responsibilities to examine the constitutionality of our election systems and processes, then enters outcome three. An outcome three decision has responsibility landing square on “states rights” found in the U.S. Constitution.
If this occurs, states have a set of options. They can reallocate their electoral votes based on the new audit results and replace those within their respective states who were illegitimately elected in 2020, including governors, state legislators and other state officers, as well as replace congressional members at the federal level (members of the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate). And a states convention may be immediately held to decide on the presidency and vice presidency.
If the decision is to replace these top two positions, that would be unprecedented in U.S. history.
Bottom line, we have not been here before and yes, there remain many unclear constitutional issues in play. If new audits indicate fraudulent election outcomes in other states, we the people, through our states’ legislators, have somber and serious obligations to consider, if not for us then for future generations of American citizens.
Regardless of outcomes, the people of the United States have some very serious internal decisions to process. Do we choose a monopolistic state-controlled oligarchy, where the few control the many, or do we choose to remain a competitive free enterprise system under a republic form of government, where the many control the few?
I’ll leave you with this because I believe readers know where I stand regarding the future of our republic. However, I also firmly believe that the United States of America has lost sight of our creator, and we are now facing the truest of all tests.
I sense that we no longer have a just government that rules in fear of God. In fact, God has been ripped out of the womb that is Mother America. During the past several decades, America has thrown the law of God out the window. There has been a systematic, intentional effort by the state, by academia and by a select group of wealthy oligarchs to set aside God’s law so that it is not the rule of law in America.
If this is true and the piety reflected by many in our religious leadership ranks keep congregations asleep in their pews, we will lose our country as we know it, forever. As a Founding Father, John Adams, stated in 1798, our Constitution is designed “for a moral and religious people.”
If the essence of liberty is a limited government, then the positive actions and involvement of its free citizens will forever sustain our cause for freedom.
Therefore, get involved, citizen. Your actions at the local level can and will have a national impact. May God bless and protect the United States of America!
This is a high-level summary of research Dr Epstein has been doing for close to 10 year [maybe more?]. He outlines how he believes the data show that manipulation of search results can significantly influence how voters vote. It is being done today; mostly by Google. mrossol
The New York City Board of Elections said Tuesday that 135,000 test ballots were accidentally included in a preliminary tally of votes cast in the city’s mayoral primary election, leading to the count being voided and drawing the ire of candidates.
New York City’s first attempt at ranked-choice voting (RCV) descended into confusion after the elections board abruptly removed updated vote totals from its website hours after posting them, citing a “discrepancy” in the numbers.
“We are aware there is a discrepancy in the unofficial RCV round by round elimination report,” the board said in a statement, adding that it was working with technical staff to identify the discrepancy and asking “candidates to have patience.”
Later, the board posted another statement saying it had inadvertently failed to remove sample ballots it had used to test its software.
“When the cast vote records were extracted for the first pull of RCV results, it included both test and election night results, producing approximately 135,000 additional records,” the board said, apologizing for the error and vowing “to ensure the most accurate up to date results are reported.”
“The cast vote record will be re-generated and the RCV rounds will be re-tabulated,” the board said.
New York City’s primary election was held a week ago, when preliminary results showed Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, with a 10-point lead, which appeared to shrink to two points on Tuesday when voters’ second, third, fourth, and fifth choices were factored in under the ranked-choice voting system being used for the first time in a mayoral contest.
But after the votes were released, reporters and campaign staffers noticed there were around 135,000 more votes counted than had been reported on election night, with Adams releasing a statement calling on the Board of Elections “to explain such a massive increase,” which he said raised “serious questions.”
After the board acknowledged the mistake, Adams issued another statement calling the error “unfortunate” and saying that “it is critical that New Yorkers are confident in their electoral system.”
By Tuesday evening, the Board of Elections had taken down the vote totals and replaced them by a note saying the results would be available on Wednesday.
The since-voided results appeared to show the race narrowing, with Kathryn Garcia, the city’s former sanitation chief who ran as a technocrat, moving up to a close second and Maya Wiley, a former MSNBC analyst and civil rights lawyer, falling from second to third.
Wiley, who on election night finished second to Adams in first-rank votes, bemoaned the board’s mistake.
“This error by the Board of Elections is not just failure to count votes properly today, it is the result of generations of failures that have gone unaddressed,” she said in a statement. “Sadly it is impossible to be surprised.”
Garcia, too, expressed criticism in a statement, saying the board’s release of incorrect ranked-choice vote tallies “is deeply troubling and requires a much more transparent and complete explanation,” saying all absentee and ranked-choice votes “must be counted accurately so that all New Yorkers have faith in our democracy and our government.”
The discrepancy also drew a critical comment from former President Donald Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., who suggested New York City’s vote discrepancy illustrates the need to ask hard questions about election integrity.
“Let me get this straight? You can be off by 135,000 votes in a New York City mayoral primary alone but if someone loses the White House by less than 45,000 across multiple states in a presidential election you can’t have any questions,” Trump Jr. wrote in a Twitter post. “Seems legit… if you live in China.”
The final results of the mayoral primary are expected to be announced sometime in July.