Election Fraud Happens – In Addition to Widespread Election Rigging

In a recent discussion we had with friends, the integrity of our election process was the topic.

Some believe that fraud did not take place and that our elections are honest and fair.  This increasingly is a minority view.

Some believe that fraud is rare, but they will admit that the government and large corporations have manipulated the system.  They are more likely to say that the election was “rigged” as opposed to “stolen.”

Evidence for this rigging is now ubiquitous.  Just recently Congressional investigators discovered emails from the White House to Amazon, requesting, and then getting; the suppression of books negative about the government’s response to Covid.  Individuals were “shadow banned”, and outright banned, from major social media outlets.  Twitter, before Elon Musk, was one of the worst offenders, even staffing itself with former government agents. Sounds like something out of Communist China. Former intelligence officials said that the Hunter Biden laptop was “Russian disinformation”, while recently the FBI admitted the laptop and its contents were real. The whole “Russia gate” scandal, was made up and paid for by Democratic Party operatives and Hilary Clinton. Mark Zuckerberg gave almost half a billion dollars to pay off local election officials.  The J6 Committee hearings we now know were orchestrated by a former executive for ABC News and evidence on many important issues (such as to what extent Federal agents were involved in manipulating the crowd) have been suppressed.

The argument for rigging is no longer in doubt.  All of this rigging did influence the election outcome, although the degree of impact is hard to quantify.  Clearly, the perpetrators believe it does or they would not engage in it.

We think it is pretty clear now, that our elections are not “fair”, and that government itself uses taxpayer money, and the influence it has with pet corporations, to tilt the game in favor of Democrats.

Besides the involvement of government agencies directly, politicians have learned to curry favor with large business interests, who then kick back some of their ill-gotten spoils in the form of campaign contributions.  Green-friendly businesses are only the latest permutation of this practice.  Still, at base, you have the direction of taxpayer money into campaigns, effectively “laundered” through private companies.

The evidence for outright fraud has been more difficult because the courts have been reluctant to get involved, and thus evidence convincing to the public has not been widely spread. It is somewhat amusing that those most resistant to the idea of fraudulent behavior are precisely the ones who want to hang Donald Trump for election interference in Georgia and elsewhere. So, they do believe it can exist, sort of.

And we would admit, the separation between rigging and fraud is a fine line.  Wasn’t the suppression of Hunter’s laptop “fraudulent” in a sense, especially since polling indicates it made a difference to about 15% of voters? It denied important information about a Presidential candidate to voters that officials knew to be true. It is especially serious since this action was conducted by law enforcement agencies that knew better and could surmise the damage this would have on public trust if discovered.

But fraud seems to mean hands-on vote tampering. Introducing bogus ballots, miscounting ballots, allowing illegal aliens to vote with thin documentation such as a power bill, throwing out valid ballots, and allowing noncitizens to vote.  And of course, we have local officials changing rules suddenly before elections, even though such law changes are the job of the legislature.

Some independent think tanks like the Heartland Institute are doing a good job and are uncovering various types and incidences of fraud. 

Heartland also recently conducted a poll and one in five mail-in ballot voters admitted to fraud. But slowly it seems,  evidence from legal proceedings is emerging that shows substantial fraud, at least at the local level.  The Heritage Foundation has been keeping track of local cases that you likely have not heard about.  They even have a database just on Arizona fraud activities.

It seems that if you mention fraud, people want concrete examples, perhaps even more rigorous than the evidence for rigging. That’s fair we think. No one should accept opinions without both evidence and a sound argument.  As the convictions mount, does that not count as evidence?

Besides the aforementioned mentions and links, which we hope you open and study, the following video is also instructive: