Wednesday, February 3, 2021

What You Aren't Hearing about Election Fraud [UPDATED: Now They Are Openly Bragging]

What would you say is the prevailing opinion in the media about fraud in the 2020 presidential election? 

Is it that many lawsuits were brought, in all the disputed States, and none showed any evidence of fraud?

Or is it that while fraud may have occurred, it was on a local and very small scale?

Or is it just that all claims of election fraud have been debunked?

That is what the mainstream media have wanted you to believe -- because they will never aid in circulating any news to the contrary. But now, three months after the election, a different picture is emerging -- just not in the major media.

Here is a well-sourced and very detailed summary of the abundant evidence of result-changing fraud in all the various key States that showed anomalous results. In turn, it links to other compilations, such as this definitive list of the outcome of all 79 cases to have been brought in the various courts challenging local and State tallies as reported. The article links to another at the same Website, which has still more links to mathematical evidence of widespread fraud, as well as to this comprehensive survey of the evidence.

As the compilation shows, only 19 of the 79 cases brought to date were decided on their merits, i.e., based on a review of the actual evidence offered. Another 37 cases were disposed of on technical grounds that allowed the courts to avoid reviewing any evidence -- such as deciding that challenges brought before Election Day were "premature", so that the plaintiffs "lacked standing" because "no injury had yet occurred." 

Or, for those suits brought after Election Day, the evading courts found that the complaints were "too late", and the plaintiffs were guilty of "laches" (prejudicial delay) by waiting too long to challenge the rules by which the election was conducted. Thus did many courts play "Catch-22" with the various challengers.

But of the 19 cases that went to trial on the merits, the compilation linked above shows that the Trump team (or his allies, as plaintiffs) has won twelve of them, i.e., almost two thirds of the cases brought resulted in findings of improper procedures or illegality in voting.

And there are still are another 23 active cases yet to be decided. 

So how do those documented facts tally with the memes circulated in the media? Answer: Hardly at all.

According to the media's talking points, Trump (or his supporters) lost all of his challenges, and failed to prove any of his claims of election fraud. But twelve cases already decided prove that claim wrong, and another twenty-three cases await a final decision. 

Your Curmudgeon holds that many out there are like him in suspecting that all was not right with the tallies in the 2020 presidential election. The din of the media panning that idea has to date drowned out the dissenting voices.

But perhaps that will not be the case for much longer. May the truth emerge -- as eventually it can do no other.

[UPDATED 02/05/2021: Truer words than my last paragraph above were never written. Now we have it from the horse's mouth: the Left is openly bragging about how they carried off the biggest election fraud of all time.  No doubt the Department of Justice, under their new leadership, will postpone all prior recreations in pursuing the Capitol rioters on RICO charges to launch new RICO proceedings against those who have brazenly admitted participation in this unparalleled theft and scandal against democracy.]


  1. The truth will out, but the track record on that mattering is spotty. "A two bit burglary" was largely ignored in 1972, but eventually it brought down a president. On the other hand, the truth about the motivations and actions of many of the highly visible leaders of the "antiwar movement" has over literally half a century become unmistakable. In most cases in their own words decades after the fact. The truth is known, but as a practical matter it does not exist due to the consensus which was created by the media and universities of the day. I have every confidence that today's media and universities will be up to the challenge.

  2. I posted a link to this on Facebook and they did this: The photo and link are covered with a warning that it “may show violent or graphic content”! I guess it goes against the narrative that the fraud claims have been debunked.

    1. "Violent or graphic content"? On this Website? (True, I bill myself as a "curmudgeon", so that must have triggered their algorithms.) And that is just one reason why I am no longer on FB.

  3. Our beloved Curmudgeon banned on FB? I am shocked, shocked I tell you. Where is the graphic content?

  4. That Time article is most assuredly calling Evil "Good". Stuck in their thumb and pulled out a plum.

  5. Are you sure that’s what the Time article is actually saying Alan? The bragging, if there is any at all, is about how a cross party coalition ensured that no one was able to steal the election. Maybe have another read of it?

  6. Yes, Paul -- a "cross-party coalition" that was between the Democrats and the Never-Trumpers/RINOs: not exactly a neutral group that decided to come together to influence the election.

  7. I asked my senator who is on the Judiciary Committee to ask Garland whether he will begin RICO or other investigations of those individuals and organizations documented in the Time article. We shall see.

  8. There has apparently been so much talk about about foreign governments trying to influence our elections that some people seem to have gotten the idea that influencing elections is a bad thing per se.

    So I should perhaps reiterate that Americans acting to influence an American election is just what we're supposed to do. It's what the free press is for. It's the heart of American political freedom. So, yeah, it's bad for Vladmir Putin to be influencing an American election. But not for us to be influencing our own.

    I have a niece who took a leave of absence from her job, sold her house, and worked unpaid for nine months in Georgia last year helping people who had been purged from voter roles, going door to door, and getting people mail-in ballots. I actually think she and those she worked with influenced the election. But no cause for a RICO investigation