It is by now well known to those who have paid attention to the news that the 2020 election was fraudulent. It is also no great secret that there have been numerous suspicious primaries. For instance, New York Citizen’s Audit (NYCA) fielded numerous complaints in the 2021 primary from voters who couldn’t vote in their party primary because their affiliation in the voter rolls had mysteriously been changed from Republican to Independent. Now we have the mid-term “election” of 2022, and another avalanche of news regarding what are now called “irregularities.”
In the old days, it was called cheating.
The media claims everything is fine and social media interfere with any attempt to discover otherwise. The information is out there to find if you know where to look. If you don’t, you may be forgiven for having no idea what is going on. The mere fact that it is so difficult to find information published only hours earlier is evidence that something fishy is going on. Add to that clear admissions by leaders among the largest social media companies that they are suppressing what they describe as “election misinformation,” should tell us all we need to know. They are cheating.
There were some Republican candidates who didn’t want to talk about election fraud before the midterm election. They thought they had a good chance of winning and didn’t want claims of election fraud before the election to interfere with their victory if they won. That is the wrong way to look at it. Election fraud isn’t just a problem if you lose. It is a problem regardless of the outcome. Any politician who participates in a fraudulent election is part of that fraud. By participating, they provide the appearance of legitimacy to an illegitimate enterprise. What these candidates may as well have said is that they are willing to participate in a rigged election provided they win. Surely that standard is less than what the American people deserve from a qualified candidate.
Let us for the sake of argument accept that our elections are fraudulent. That includes the recent 2022 midterm, the primaries, last year’s elections, the 2020 election, and for all we know, many years before that. If that is the case, then we aren’t holding elections. They are instead events designed to look like elections, to placate those who would otherwise object if people were installed into positions of power without an election. That is, however, exactly what appears to be happening. If the outcome of an election is not dependent on votes cast by qualified voters, then there never was an election no matter how much it might resemble one. They are simulations at best.
The question is, what can we do about it? If we can’t vote people out of office because there are no genuine elections to cast a vote in, what is left? The next resort is law enforcement. The problem there is that we have already seen judges throw out election-related cases, the DOJ and FBI refuse to investigate (or persecute those who want an investigation), and other members of law enforcement unwilling to do their duty.
This doesn’t mean that every member of law enforcement isn’t doing their job but that many won’t. Finding the right person to report election fraud to is a daunting challenge on its own. NYCA reported thousands of examples of election fraud to a number of sheriffs in New York. To their knowledge, only two started an investigation, one of which ended as soon as it started, on the basis of a superficial (and incorrect) denial by an elections official.
A serious impediment to law enforcement-based solutions is that law enforcement is dependent on prosecutors and judges. If they don’t uphold their share of the workload by honestly prosecuting cases of election fraud, then nothing is resolved despite good faith efforts on the part of local sheriffs.
One such sheriff complained to me that election fraud is a difficult sell to prosecutors because of higher priority crimes. He provided the example of Dwayne Pulliam, a man granted parole in December of 2020 after serving 24 years for murder. According to the sheriff, Pulliam violated his lifetime parole by selling crack cocaine no later than January of 2022. Two months after that, in March of 2022, a press release from the US Attorney’s office of the Southern District of New York alleges that Pulliam murdered again. “With cases like this to deal with, imagine the difficulty of getting a prosecutor’s interest in an election fraud case.”
In another example, 30 year-old Keaira Bennefield was shot to death by her estranged husband after he was released without bail for a domestic abuse charge. According to the murder victim’s mother, NY governor Hochul is as responsible for the murder as the murderer himself because she signed into law bail reform measures that release dangerous criminals after arrest.
Without election fraud, it is possible that both murders, and others besides, could have been prevented. In the first example, the murderer may not have been free to commit the second murder because he wouldn’t have been granted parole. In the second, the murderer would have remained in jail after his domestic abuse arrest provided that lawfully elected government officials did not pass bail reform laws favoring criminals.
In the current environment, our legal system is in some ways worse than the days of the wild west. Back then, the counter to inconsistent law enforcement was that individuals could defend themselves against criminal injury. Today, that isn’t always true. Remember that Rudy Giuliani’s law license was suspended simply because he tried to get election fraud investigated. Now, we’re not even allowed to ask about election fraud, or so it seems. The Constitution certainly gives us that right and it is the law of the land. However, politicians and other officials who may have been foisted on us by years of fraudulent elections, are pretending that right doesn’t exist. They violate the law themselves by persecuting those who, like Rudy Giuliani, insist on defending citizen rights.
The Constitution requires elections so that we can enjoy the benefits of a representative government. If we do not have a representative government because we don’t have genuine elections, then American citizens are constitutionally bound to hold those elections. What would that look like? Perhaps a citizen-led effort could design and organize fully transparent open elections held without any involvement of government officials. They could make their own ballots, include the names of every candidate, count them openly by hand at the end of the day, and announce the results when done.
It would be surprising if corrupt officials and their sympathizer agitators failed to interfere with any effort to hold a true election but maybe it has to be tried anyway. At least then we would have some idea how much fraud is taking place in the “official” election. A first step might be to conduct a “poll” that requires respondents to appear in person, prove their identity and residence, fill out a paper ballot, and then count all of the ballots in front of witnesses on the day of the “poll.” At the very least, an exercise like that would look more like a real election than what we have now.