by John Ward
Whatever you think of Donald Trump, the notion that there were no grounds for suspicion about the 2020 Presidential Election is preposterous
Just as ‘Build Back Better’, ‘New Normal’ and ‘The Great Reset’ have all zoomed around the world unchanged in the last year, the mainstream media have, in the last 36 hours, relentlessly pushed the same robotic approach in the shape of ‘No evidence whatsoever’ for postal ballot fraud in the Trump v Biden contest.
Well, the idiocy of this statement is beyond parody, so I must restrict myself to the obvious: there’s no evidence until you investigate. One doesn’t investigate very often on the basis of evidence; most of the time, the investigation begins because something in the order of events seems odd, abnormal or even incredible. Suspicion is more than enough for any open-minded detective.
Looking at local State judiciary reactions to Trump’s lawyers, it is hard to see any Blind Justice in play.
In Pennsylvania, the Court of common pleas rejected the case out of hand. But the more senior Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania reversed that decision, and gave Trump overseers access to the count.
Within minutes, the Democrats rushed over to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania….which took under an hour to reverse the decision.
If you had nothing to hide, why would you do that? And how could that Supreme Court know enough to reject a lower court’s decision in such short order?
In Michigan, the Court of Claims was handed a legal request to halt counting until meaningful access has been granted.
Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson told CBS news:
‘This demand does not have merit. It’s a frivolous lawsuit and it’s really an example of the type of misinformation designed to sow seeds of doubt among our voters about the integrity of our elections process”.
The inclusion of all the usual syntax smears in that statement would lead you to think Ms Benson is a left-of-centre Democrat. You’d be right: here’s a brief resumé of her career:
She founded the Women in American Political Activism conference. She took her further degree at Oxbridge, where she got a masters for conducting research into the sociological implications of white supremacy and neo-Nazism. Yes, all the tell-tale signs are there.
Was The Donald ever going to be given a fair trial trial from her sort? Doubtful.
But as the DNC’s leftist tentacles wrap around the necks of those responsible for equal treatment before the law, as a trained psephologist (and therefore more than a little sad) I do find the case of Ohio a fascinating one. This fascination lies in the exceptional nature of vote counting between postal and turnout votes.
When the postal ballots were counted is central to the air of suspicion that surrounds the Democrat resurgence in the wee small hours.
It’s not just that the DNC actively encouraged its franchise to vote by mail: equally, it’s the general 4 am nature of postal boxes being opened (or “found”)….when inspectors have gone home to catch much-needed sleep…. That, and the almost universal decision to count turnout votes first.
But that didn’t happen in Ohio. There, the postal votes were counted first…..and it turned out to be a mirror image of everywhere else – viz, Joe Biden seized an early lead among the initial count, only to see Trump eventually win by a 53-45 percentage margin.
Here’s another thing about Ohio: the pollsters listed it beforehand as too close to call. This was rubbish. I spoke yesterday with a long-standing research friend in Boston – a lifelong Democrat – and he told me, “I don’t know anyone in the profession who saw Ohio a close. It was always in the bag for Trump”.
I believe the DNC’s canvassers knew this perfectly well, and let nature take its course. The ‘dead-heat’ polls were part of a widespread attempt to position Trump as miles behind Biden across America. They were happy for the postal votes to be counted under supervision in Ohio.
If you want to convincingly fix elections, then there are two rules: first, count the genuine votes in order to assess the size of your problem – if any; and second, ensure that most folks are asleep when the stuffed envelopes get opened.
This might all sound paranoid were it not for (a) the DNC’s campaign to get their supporters to vote postally (why did they do that?) and (b) the sheer size of Biden’s advantage by that medium.
In Pennsylvania for example, Joe got 73% of all postal votes. This asks us to believe that Biden supporters are three times more likely to be scared of Covid19 versus those for The Donald. Really?
Last but not least, stuffing ballot boxes – when done extensively – can lead to unfeasibly high turnouts in total.
This US presidential election was projected to be the highest voter turnout since 1900, at around 64.5%. This highest vote in 120 years is unusual in its own right, but the actual turnout now looks closer to something closer to 67%.
If, therefore, there’s a reasonable basis for doubt about the legality of 2.5% of all votes cast – more than enough to put Biden in the White House given the closeness of this election – then the forces of Law in the US should act. They haven’t.
Tonight, the world’s media are tripping over their knickers in a rush to declare Biden the victor.
Whatever: I have no time for Trump as an individual, but he isn’t Shadow State – whereas Sleepy Joe is….and his V-P is a standard issue narcisisstic, politically correct member of that broad church.
But if Trump is denied a full inquiry into electoral fraud, then such will not represent any kind of justice I recognise.