Why Skepticism Over 2020’s Election Results Remains Justified

I cannot believe that it has been six months since I wrote my article on voter fraud. Since then it has received over 100,000+ views, was shared on Revolver.news, American Thinker, and even got shared by Sydney Powell and Michael Flynn on Twitter within a collection of links. Some of my readers may be wondering if I still believe the election’s results were fraudulent and if so, how I could possibly believe this given all that has happened. If there really was evidence, why has that evidence not come out? As my critics love to point out, the courts have “laughed” at every single of one of Trump’s court cases. Not a single piece of credible evidence has been provided. Experts deny that fraud occurred. All we have are loonies like Mike Lindell, Sydney Powell, and Lin Wood making baseless conspiratorial claims. Surely if I was reasonable, I would be ashamed of my previous stance. Unless…. unless I am cuckoo for Trump.

Not so Fast…

Times released a bombshell article that openly admits there was a shadow campaign that conspired against Trump. Under the guise of “protecting our election,” corporate titans and left wing activists worked together to curtail protests, change voting laws, control media coverage, and control the flow of information. The level of coordination and resources required to do this is immense, and the motivation must have likewise been intense. Everything I said about them having the means, the opportunity, and the motive to conspire against Trump turned out to be absolutely true.

Here’s what these elites have done: preempt the enemy (Trump) by telling the public that he is delusional for believing there’s a conspiracy against him, all the while committing a conspiracy against him because he’s delusional. All of this in the name of “protecting” our nation. Against what? This shadow campaign represents such a tour de force, you’d think these elites were fighting someone as cunning as Satan here. Is Trump some kind of mad genius, or is he stupid as they claim? Which one is it? Do we really trust these elites to have our best interests at heart rather than their own? Why is it that suddenly the Left has become such good buddies with corporate titans? I thought Democrats were for us “little guys”!

Is it not more plausible to think that Trump pissed off these elites? Trump made some very interesting remarks back in August 6th that seems to confirm this: “And the money goes back to the people purchasing the drugs. So I have a lot of enemies out there. This may be the last time you see me for a while. A lot of very, very rich enemies…” (see here). Looking back, this is quite eerie. It’s as if Trump knew that he would “lose” and have to hide for a while.

This all sounds like informational or psychological warfare, in addition to gaslighting. You can preempt your enemy by announcing to the public what you will do in order to normalize it. But the problem with such warfare is that both sides can accuse each other of this, thereby leaving you with nothing but confusion. Imagine a clone and the original said, “I am the original!” Without objective expertise and serious investigation, you would not know who is right. This comes down then to who do you trust more? These elites who want to be your Big Brother, or a man who has fought against these elites his entire presidency?

Different Types of ‘Rigging’

It would look as if we are at an impasse on this matter. Neither side can convince the other without introducing an entire host of background information and ideology. But a perceptive critic could pushback and say: “Let’s assume you’re right. They did conspire against Trump. They may have “rigged” it by changing the laws, suppressing information, or whatever, but none of this proves that the ballots themselves were changed or forged. That’s Rigging with an upper-case R. You’re equivocating between the two.”

This is correct, but this is why I said that this confirms one aspect of my post (means, opportunity, and motive). I did not say that this is the same as forging ballots. However, it is not far off from that whatsoever. If the elites exert such massive wealth and influence to manipulate the media, the laws, and whatever else to meet their agenda, it is not a stretch to suppose that they can use this to also commit voter fraud. Now it would not prove voter fraud, but it should leave you at least skeptical of this election’s results. You don’t have to be confident (or have a positive belief) that voter fraud did in fact occur, you just need reason to doubt the election.

These elites want you to think there’s absolutely no room for reasonable doubt. They’ll endlessly claim “This is the most secure election ever!” But this is just false as I explained in my previous post. Those reasons still stand. How is it that almost all of the glitches and anomalies happen to favor Biden? How is it that all of this happened in the middle of the night? How is it that some poll watchers were blocked? How is it that winning key counties and states that determine the winner with 95% accuracy be so wrong this time around? How is it that those who predicted the Trumps win in 2016 with stunning accuracy be so wrong in 2020? How is it that Biden won with such a pathetic campaign turnout? How is it that Trump outperformed his previous 2016 by 20% and still lost? No President has gained more votes than before and still manage to lose his second run; it’s unprecedented. How is it that he gained more support from minorities than any Republican President since the 1960s but lost?

Let’s Investigate

Now none of these questions are unanswerable because it was not impossible for Trump to lose. I am perfectly willing to accept that he lost because I already accept that our country (or at least significant parts of it) has lost its mind. Nevertheless, the questions taken altogether make it initially improbable. We did, however, live in the abnormal year of COVID-19, and that came with all sorts of abnormal events. So you can chalk it all up to an abnormal year, but that’s put into question when you know that the elites are behind the scenes pulling the strings. Corruption works best under the thick of night, in the chaos, and under abnormal circumstances in the name of some “good cause.” If anything, this should cause us to want to do a full out investigation to alleviate the doubt of millions of Americans. Our ability to trust in the election process is fundamental.

But God forbid we give these “conspiracy theorists” credibility by launching an investigation. Only stupid people are skeptical of this election. Smart people just know there is no fraud because the DOJ and the courts have not seen any evidence for it. Let’s ignore the fact that it took the Democrats 2+ years of investigation into the Russian Collusion conspiracy. A lot of it hinged on that Steele dossier, which we know was BS now. You see, it’s okay for them to launch a full out investigation on the basis of very little evidence, but voter fraud is different. The evidence should already come flying out of the air all pre-packaged in a box with all the blood samples, fingerprints, videotapes, and arguments. And this all has to happen in two months time, not two years. As Amanpour of CNN states, journalists only investigate a matter if it has already been confirmed to be true. How convenient!

Let’s be real here. If it took 2 years to complete the Russian Collusion investigation, the least we can do is give that much time to settle this election fraud charges once and for all. Unfortunately, it seems like the Left is more interested in stopping investigations than launching them. Arizona is doing a massive audit of their own, but instead of welcoming this, the Democrats have attempted to sue in order to cease their audit. How does that make any sense?! It doesn’t unless you got something to hide. This audit serves to benefit everyone. If nothing is found then, as long as it’s done fairly and properly, that’s good evidence against the voter fraud thesis (with the caveat that I’d want the same type of audits to take place in several other key states). As you can see, this view can be falsified.

But What About the Courts?

No matter what I say, however, inevitably someone will continue to mock and dismiss because 50+ lawsuits were filed by Trump’s team (or his supporters) and every single one of them was laughed out of the court. This is itself a laughable claim. Only the naive believe that the lawsuits and the response of the courts was largely monolithic. Different types of lawsuits were filed. Many of them were about audits, certification, constitutional issues, foul play, and more. Each had different functions. Some were intended to buy more time, others were meant to acquire access to devices or sensitive information, some were for the sake of making an issue known to the public, and others were intended to push for further investigation. Which means that these cases were rejected for a myriad of reasons, including procedural reasons, a lack of standing, a lack of judicial precedent, mootness, time constraints, and the like.

Let’s recall the situation that Trump’s team faced. All 50 states had to certify their results by December 8th. And on December 14th the Electoral College had to elect the president. This is a very short timeframe to gather evidence of fraud, file the lawsuits, and then argue it out in the courts. Their team had to challenge multiple states to overturn the results. They hoped to take it to SCOTUS, but ever since that highly controversial Bush-Gore case, SCOTUS has been highly reluctant to get involved. Imagine working under that time constraint with limited financial resources, along with lots of hate from the media and constant pushback. You’re bound to make errors, as Trump’s team did, and you’re going to be extremely stressed. Their team was spread thin like butter on a large piece of bread. So just grant for a second that there was fraud. Do you seriously think this is enough time to show it? Of course not, but the dishonest or the uninformed who use the courts to dismiss fraud like to act as if it was.

Closer Look

As if these two points were not enough to defeat their argument, let’s take a closer look at the court cases themselves. NBC provided a list of 57 election lawsuits. The majority of the lawsuits were about constitutional issues, mail in ballot deadlines, insufficient poll observers, and the like. Only 13 of them directly had anything to do with voter fraud. Let’s go through each one. The most important of the fraud lawsuits was Texas v Pennsylvania (1). But as we all know, that got rejected due to a lack of standing. If the most promising case was not evaluated on its merits but on its standing, then appealing to the courts is worthless. Pirkle v. Wolf (2) withdrew their lawsuit because the law firm did not want to get involved any further. Metcalfe v. Wolf (3) was denied because the deadline to file a Class ll lawsuit had passed. Bally v. Whitmer (4) was withdrawn after Judge Timothy Kenny denied a request for an independent audit.

King vs. Whitmer (5) was denied because it was too late and the “ship has sailed.” Langenhorst v. Pecore (6) the plaintiffs willingly withdrew the case minutes before the scheduled hearing. Feehan v. Wisconsin (7) was denied due to a lack of standing. Trump v. Hobbs (8) was moot and dropped because Arizona finished counting their votes. Bowyer v. Ducey (9) was rejected due to a lack of standing. Stevenson v. Ducey (10) voluntarily withdrew their case. Burk v. Ducey (11) was dismissed “lack of standing and the failure to file a timely verified election contest.” Pearson v. Kemp (12), which attempted to provide significant evidence, was dismissed as moot because the court lacked jurisdiction. Wood v. Raffensberger (13) was denied for a lack of standing and because it was filed too late.

Unless I have missed a case, which is entirely possible, you’ll notice that none of these cases were rejected on merits. Now you’ll of course find judges who voiced negative opinions on the evidence, many of whom were Leftists (like this hostile judge), but none of the cases were ruled as false or without merit. Besides, not every case a loss for Trump. President v Boockvar was won by Trump. The Wisconsin case was interesting because it was quite close to winning (3-4 ruling). For further reading, you may want to look at a more comprehensive list (total of 87 cases) evaluating each of the cases here.

Conclusion

The key point in all of this is that the issue is far from settled, and the reasons that people have for treating it as if it were are immensely poor. Legally proving fraud is a very rigorous, time-consuming process that requires substantial investigation. Time and time again audits were denied, investigations delayed, and hearings were dismissed. Besides re-reading my own post on fraud, I would encourage reading three volumes of the Navarro Report to see what anomalies require explanation. Here is the Evidence also has a great collection of evidence.

I am eagerly following the Arizona audit in hopes that it’ll get us closer to the truth. In the end we may be proven wrong, but at least we did our due diligence. There are still many unanswered questions. Nothing is ever “absolutely secure” in this world, and things are not always what we’re told. Some of the greatest minds have defied the “wisdom” of their age and were proven right. We have to be willing to look the fool for the sake of truth. Go wherever the evidence leads, no matter what anyone says. Be willing to be proven wrong, and you’ll always be better off than someone who was right but never questioned. Those who relish in your error only prove themselves to not be interested in truth but in being right.

1 thought on “Why Skepticism Over 2020’s Election Results Remains Justified”

  1. WORK OF ART article, Gil! Especially, all those points which one must stop to reflect. We can’t ignore the possibility that right could be wrong, and visa-versa!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *