Is the Democrats’ Election Heist ‘Too Big to Fail’?
President Trump and Fox News enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship, until, loyalty already fraying, Fox betrayed Trump on election evening by prematurely calling Arizona for Biden. Only stalwart reporters such as Mark Levin, Judge Jeanine Pirro, Lou Dobbs, and Sean Hannity remain by Trump’s side.
Republican elected officials who retained power are mostly mute. Although the predicted Blue Wave never materialized as Republicans flipped House seats and Senate control is so close it will only be decided after the results of a Georgia runoff election are known, feckless state governors and attorneys general overseeing election preparations stood idly by as Democrats set up the apparatus for the big election steal.
Republicans in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania were the exception. Resisting the illegal power grab the Democrats had implemented by a massive mail-in-ballot scheme and extending, by three days, the deadline to vote, Republican state officials appealed to the Supreme Court. Their success should have been a slam dunk -- only it wasn’t. The already tainted Chief Justice, John Roberts, who seemingly rules outside the four corners of the law, sided with the three Democrats on the case. In a four-four decision, the lower court case stood. Not only was an illegal precedent set, but the incomprehensible decision also had a chilling effect and stopped other state officials, similarly situated, from appealing to the Court as well. The foreseeable mayhem that has occurred, post-election, is far greater than imagined.
Citizens from multiple geographical locations, mainly from Democrat-controlled cities, many with a lot to lose, have bravely testified of election irregularities. The nonexclusive list of “irregularities” is mind-boggling: naked ballots (mail-in-ballots without outer security envelopes with signature and return address); return envelopes without postmarks; ballot harvesting (soliciting wads of ballots from vulnerable populations such as the elderly, non-English-speaking, and/or disabled and then filling them in; allowing only some voters to cure ballots; arbitrary ballot acceptance or rejection; removing some poll watchers or keeping them too far away to read the ballot; covering up ballot-counting room windows; transporting ballots across state lines; tabulating ballots too early or too late; dumping thousands of ballots, containing only a presidential vote, in the middle of the night; and telling people how to vote.
Equally frustrating are the Democrats’ responses to widespread cries of election fraud. Two are exceptionally galling. The first involves large ballot dumps, after midnight in multiple states, containing votes only for Biden. Incredibly, the Democrats use this example as proof of election purity. I have been a committeeperson, poll watcher and ballot counter for over twenty years. Ballots containing only one candidate vote are rare. Voters do not want to waste their votes. This type of Biden-only ballot is indicative of fraud. In-person votes for Trump were far larger than the Democrats had estimated -- they had to hustle to keep up and didn’t have time to adequately complete the ballots. Their other inane response is that the issues are too complex to resolve, because unlike Gore v Bush, multiple states are involved. Again, this is magical thinking. Rather than being too big to fail, similar irregularities at multiple state locations is indicative of conspiracy.
Contrary to the mainstream media’s ‘the end is near for Trump” reporting, each state and federal court loss for Trump brings his lawyers ever closer to their cases being combined and argued before the Supreme Court. In October pre-election, when Chief Justice Roberts sided against the Republicans, Justice Samuel Alito, joined by justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch issued a strong dissent that was mainly ignored by the press. Post-election, obviously having seen enough, Alito issued another rebuke, demanding Pennsylvania segregate all mail-in-ballots received after November 3, 2020. Again, the media did not cover his statement. Seemingly, Alito is signaling that he is watching and waiting at the Supreme Court for the opportunity to overturn the illegal decisions of the lower courts. But will enough Justices have the courage to join him?
Many cases do wind up before the Supreme Court on appeal from state or federal courts. However, not all cases are accepted; the Court hears approximately 100-150 cases annually from almost 8,000 that are appealed before it. Of course, this case is paramount and has compelling national interest. However, the justices have much to weigh. There are always concerns of political meddling and the radical left has thrown in the specter of more arson, looting, rioting, and violence if a reversal is decided due to rampant fraud, and threats of court-packing may become reality. However, it is doubtful the justices could maintain the court’s integrity if the case were not to be heard and evidence presented. The mountain of evidence of election fraud is compelling and one would think the Justices will not allow themselves to be architects of their own diminution.
As the days dwindle and the ticking of the clock signals time running out, many questions remain:
Who owns Dominion?
Who owns the software housed in Dominion machines?
Where are ballots counted and stored?
What happened to empty provisional ballots, returned by voters who hadn’t requested them and/or changed their minds and decided to vote in person?
What will be done to ensure there are no repeats of the disastrous election of 2020?
This massive corruption cannot stand. The Supreme Court must join our band of brothers.
