Here we are today, stuck in between two elections with election results never before being so critical. Just take a look at exactly what’s happening now in Ukraine. Do you understand that the 2018 and 2020 election results have direct bearing on what is happening in Putin’s invasion of Russia. How so? Simply because of who won in each election and therefore controls the very parts of our government that are determining the complete status of the nation of Ukraine and the 43 million Ukrainians who live there.
Those two election results also impact whether or not we would have even seen this invasion happen. Remember this: Putin has wanted to take Ukraine and make it his for decades. And he had previous experience with U.S. presidents in Ukraine.
Putin took Georgia in 2008 without ANY response at all from former President George W. Bush. It is unclear the thinking of Bush 43 that benignly allowed Putin to take the former Soviet nation. But it happened.
Putin felt pretty good about Crimea in 2014. Why? He was certain Obama and Biden would not lift a finger. There is much speculation as to why the U.S. President/Vice President sat quietly watching Russia’s annexation of Crimea. His test of U.S. commitment to Eastern Europe had worked well in 2008 when Bush was POTUS. Russia’s president was certain that Obama and Biden had no stomach to take him in over a European nation (which was not a member of NATO). He proved to have assessed our leadership perfectly.
Millions of Americans felt that Putin was intimidated by Trump and would not try to enlarge Russia the same way he took Georgia and Crimea. Whether or not that was true, that discussion disappeared in the craziness that surrounded the vote-counting process of our 2020 election that pegged Biden as the winner. And until the past few months, the Russia pending problem was relegated to pages deep inside newspapers. The alleged “voter fraud” in the 2020 midterms dominated our headlines when COVID-19 and subsequent pandemic were not.
2020 Election: D-Day
From the outset, the Democratic talking point about the 2020 presidential election has been that there is “no evidence” of widespread fraud, and that election fraud is in any event extremely rare. At the same time, Democrats have done everything in their power to obstruct and undermine any attempts to investigate whether fraud occurred, and if so how extensive it may have been. This is the kind of contradiction that strongly increases my curiosity.
Let me first say that I think that efforts to overturn the 2020 election by former President Trump only hurt himself with his obsession over how the election was stolen. Thankfully, the former President and Republicans are far better off now focusing on the future. And anyway, the stunningly incompetent Biden Administration and the radical Democratic Congress are probably the best things that could have happened for the long-term prospects of the conservative and libertarian movements.
But not wanting to re-litigate the prior election is not the same thing as not wanting investigations of credible allegations of systematic fraud. Absolutely, such investigations should be done and done thoroughly, not the least for purposes of identifying election procedures that are so vulnerable to fraudsters that they must be prohibited legislatively. The 2020 election was rife with new and risky election processes in many jurisdictions, particularly to reduce limitations and controls on absentee and mail-in voting. Did these procedures open up the system to widespread fraud, or not? The citizenry deserves to know.
March 1st on “TNN Live!” we told you about a major report out of Wisconsin with the long title “Office of the Special Counsel, Second Interim Investigative Report On the Apparatus & Procedures of the Wisconsin Elections System.” The report’s main author is Michael Gableman, a retired Justice of Wisconsin’s Supreme Court, who was appointed Special Counsel by Wisconsin’s legislature. A good summary of the report can also be found by Margot Cleveland at the Federalist on March 3 here. Although the report (as indicated in its title) is still “interim,” it has definitely struck pay dirt on several items of what are clear systematic frauds.
The single biggest area of fraud identified in the report is exactly where I would have expected it to be found, which is in a very different place from the most highly publicized allegations that have been leveled by Trump’s lawyers. Trump’s lawyers have spent vast efforts on a theory that new voting machines in key jurisdictions were subject to software manipulation or hacking that altered vote totals. There IS evidence that leads to that conclusion, but that should NOT be sufficient to reach a conclusion of certain election fraud in Wisconsin. Why? Because as long as a paper trail exists vote totals can be double-checked and verified by a hand count. If you were a fraudster looking to swing 20,000 or 50,000 votes to change the result in a swing state, you would be very unlikely to choose this route as your preferred method of fraud.
The likely route of major vote fraud would most likely be through nursing homes, elder care facilities, assisted living facilities, homes for the mentally incompetent, and so forth. Many of the residents of such facilities would be incompetent to vote or otherwise uninterested in voting. Fraudsters working with insiders could track who had not voted and then arrange to get favorable votes in the names of those people, either by “helping” them fill out a ballot or by just forging the ballot entirely.
Gableman’s Report has eleven different sections, but as to outright fraud the heart of it is Section 7, with the title “The Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC) Unlawfully Directed Clerks to Violate Rules Protecting Nursing Home Residents, Resulting in a 100% Voting Rate in Many Nursing Homes in 2020, Including Many Ineligible Voters.” Here’s the gist:
Rampant fraud and abuse occurred statewide at Wisconsin’s nursing homes and other residential care facilities in relation to absentee voting at these facilities. This fraud and abuse was the ultimate result of unlawful acts by WEC’s [Wisconsin Election Commission] members and its staff. . . .
It seems that the Wisconsin statutes contain very specific procedures with respect to absentee voting by nursing home residents. In a procedure that appears specifically designed to prevent staff or political operatives from putting undue pressure on vulnerable nursing home residents, the Wisconsin statutes state that absentee ballots from such residents must be filled out in the presence of trained state representatives known as Special Voting Deputies, or “SVDs.” In 2020, the Wisconsin Election Commission purported to waive those procedures (supposedly in light of Covid) and indeed instructed nursing homes simply to mail the ballots in. Suddenly, dozens of nursing homes known to have large numbers of mentally disabled people recorded voting rates of 100%. Here is a chart from page 90 of the Report:
The Special Counsel conducted numerous interviews investigating the circumstances of these suspiciously high voting rates. I’ll give you only some brief excerpts:
-
In Brown County Facility 1, 20 absentee ballots were cast. A study of the Absentee Ballot Envelopes obtained through open records request revealed all 20 of the envelopes were witnessed by the same person. At this facility, “Resident A” voted, and “Resident A’s” family provided copies of that resident’s signature against the signature on the absentee envelope, and they do not match. Further, “Resident A” does not have the mental capacity to vote as is evinced in a video interview.
-
At the same facility, “Resident B,” according to WisVote data, voted twice, both by absentee ballot.
-
In Brown County Facility 2, “Resident C” voted in 2020. According to family, “Resident C” was not of sound mind for over 10 years. This is documented in a video interview;
-
In Brown County Facility 3, “Resident D” was taken from the facility to vote by family and guardian to “Resident D’s” assigned polling location. “Resident D” had registered to vote at this location on Oct 29th as well. When “Resident D” presented herself to vote on election day, “Resident D” was told that “Resident D” had already voted. After questioning from family, “Resident D” recollected that someone at the nursing home had come around talking about voting at the nursing home, however, “Resident D” denied voting at the home. WisVote shows her voting absentee.
It goes on and on from there. Clearly, this is how you would do it if you wanted to swing a swing state by election fraud.
According to the report, there are about 90,000 residents in Wisconsin nursing homes. Biden won the state by about 20,000 votes.
Other sections of the report deal with many other sorts of voting irregularities and systematic violations of Wisconsin election statutes. Several deal with activities of a Mark Zuckerberg-funded entity known as the Center for Tech and Civic Life, which provided funding to governmental entities in heavily-Democratic counties to assist in selective get-out-the-vote efforts. The report alleges that this funding violated Wisconsin bribery statutes.
If you are wondering whether the New York Times has even covered the subject of this rather explosive report, the answer would be yes. They had an article on March 2 that appeared on page A16, wildly spinning under this headline: “Wisconsin Republicans’ Election Report Endorses Debunked Legal Theories.” The article incorrectly claims that the report is an attempt to “decertify” the 2020 election result in Wisconsin (to be fair, there are some members of the Wisconsin legislature who would like to see that result). As to the specific evidence of fraud that is laid out, the Times says:
The document is the latest, but not the final, word on Wisconsin’s ongoing Republican-authorized investigation into false claims of fraud and irregularities in the 2020 election.
Exactly how are the allegations of fraud “false?” They don’t tell us. Are they troubled by apparent 100% voting rates in facilities with large numbers of mentally incompetent people? Not that they mention.
Gableman has referred charges to several district attorneys for potential prosecution, and apparently several are considering charges, including against members of the WEC who specifically facilitated violations of the election statutes.
Summary
So was there 2020 election voter fraud? To be honest, the fact that anyone today who actually asks that question is tagged as a “MAGA Nut” or a “White Supremacist” by the Left seems too coordinated to be just happenstance. That itself feeds to suspicions of those millions who feel the 2020 election was “manipulated.”
This writer feels we are far from certainty of any fraud. But what we already know from two massive election audits (or “examinations”) of election results in Wisconsin and Arizona there WAS if not “fraud,” election “irregularities.” Add to that unconnected court cases in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia are pointing to additional “irregularities” that in part evidence “certain” voter irregularity.
With Wisconsin’s and Arizona’s widely publicized “examinations,” it is applicable to conclude there was at least voting “irregularities” in 2020 and, therefore, could very well have existed in far more voting localities than those covered in those two examinations. How much more and its impacts may never be known.
But here’s a thought for all Americans to consider when pondering our voting system: How much voter fraud is acceptable? How many votes counted that represented votes cast and accepted that were NOT cast by the voters they supposedly represented is OK with you? The fact that with this cloud of uncertainty about election security Democrat Party Leadership would not demand a massive nationwide voter integrity investigation should give every voter pause.
Whether or not there were sufficient votes fraudulently cast and counted in 2020 to change the final election outcomes should NOT be an acceptable excuse for not investigating. Every voter and every vote cast legally in each election must be demanded. And any measures necessary to achieve that objective MUST be taken to ensure that.
Here we are facing another election in just a few months with the future of our nation at stake from the outcomes and we STILL don’t know if there was 2020 election voting fraud.
We owe it to our kids, our grandkids, and to each other to KNOW our election results are 100% legal and representative of voters. If we cannot commit that to our people, we do NOT have a true representative government as structured Constitutionally.
We CAN assure that, and we should: no questions asked.
