The media big lie about election fraud in 2020

 Red States:


The Continuing Democrat-Media Narrative That There Is “No Evidence of Election Fraud” Is a Bald-Faced Lie

...

...  [Yes, the Democrats in Big Tech are key partners in spreading that false narrative, too.] Note how the ABC News headline proves the point of that Times article above: “Sen. Rand Paul continues making false claims of 2020 election fraud.”

The reality is that that ABC headline is the false claim, and that fact needs to be repeated endlessly along with the overwhelming proof that there is documented evidence of massive election fraud in the 2020 election. The evidence that has come about election fraud since Election Day is astounding: sworn depositions from many witnesses in state hearings, independent technical data analyses performed by statistical experts, many written depositions in several lawsuit affidavits sworn under threat of perjury, and many videos that captured election fraud criminality in real time.

I myself was privileged to report on independent analyses of election fraud on behalf of a team led by physicist and Mensa John Droz, Jr., whose purpose was to conduct a statistical analysis of certain voter data in key states in order to determine whether there were any significant anomalies evident. Here is the link to their analysis of massive anomalies in several Pennsylvania counties, with an excerpt from the article:

Biden’s vote totals in the four counties were 1.24 to 1.43 times greater than the totals for Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama (both elections). This is an absurd result, especially in the three Republican-leaning counties, given that Republican support for President Trump has hovered at 95% over the past year-plus. What is the probability that more Pennsylvanians in these counties voted for a thoroughly compromised candidate who did not even campaign down the stretch than voted for either Barack Hussein Obama or Hillary Clinton?

And here is a link to an article that summarizes the team’s discoveries in Michigan, along with a concluding excerpt from their report:

This is very strong evidence that the absentee voting counts in some counties in Michigan have likely been manipulated by a computer algorithm. The comparison of the 2020 results to the normal 2016 election data is dramatic. If no other plausible explanation can be made for these unexpected findings, it appears that this computer software was installed sometime after the 2016 Presidential election. On the surface, it would seem that the tabulating equipment in infected precincts has been programmed to shift a percentage of absentee votes from Trump to Biden.

The above articles (among many others written and posted in independent and conservative media) are written off by the Democrats and legacy media as “anecdotes” that don’t prove evidence of “sufficient fraud to have swung the election.” That is a variation on their theme of “most secure election in history.” But we are just getting started. One of the first comprehensive compilations of election fraud evidence was published on the FrontPage Mag blogsite on 23 December. That article contained convincing summary arguments that the election was in fact stolen that were supported by 93 linked sources provided as footnotes.

In parallel, Dr. Peter Navarro, Assistant to President Trump and Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy, produced three separate report volumes that detailed election fraud:

...

There is more.

The insistence of the mainstream media on lying about the vote fraud is tied to their attempt to create legitimacy for the Biden administration despite his obvious problems at the polls in swing states.  Rather than look at the evidence they have decided to push the big lie.  Big Tech is a coconspirator in pushing the big lie and suppressing the evidence of fraud.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Is the F-35 obsolete?