By Dr. Rich Swier
Patriotic Americans are asked to shut off
their television sets, radios, cell phones, computers, social media, and
streaming devices from 12:00 noon until 1:00 p.m. EST
As a protest to the fraudulent and corrupt election of
November 2020 and to show the news media our contempt for the way that they
slandered and defamed the outgoing administration of President Donald J. Trump
you are asked to join this boycott.
We must keep praying for our country and Donald J. Trump
and his family!
New Axios/Ipsos poll:
among Trump supporters, 92% want him to be the 2024 nominee. Reflects other
similar polling showing over 90% would vote for him again right now. The GOP
transforms into an America First workers’ movement.
EDITOR’S NOTE: The exception we recommend would be to listen to the Rush
Limbaugh Show that starts at 12:00 Noon each day and can be live streamed on
your computer at: https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/
MESSAGE FROM FIRST LADY MELANIA TRUMP
DID THE DEMOCRATS STEAL THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION?
Democrats are making extraordinary efforts to suppress
all discussion of whether Joe Biden actually won the 2020 presidential
election. In fact, they go even farther: they want to suppress all discussion
of the extent to which voter fraud occurred. That naturally makes me want to
write about voter fraud, and who really won the election.
First, this question: why are the Democrats so hysterical
in their insistence that fraud not be mentioned? One reason is obvious. Joe
Biden will take office under a cloud, since close to half of all Americans
doubt that he really won the election. The Democrats want to stamp out such
doubts to preserve Biden’s authority as president.
But there is a second reason that may be more important.
The Democrats want the lax voting procedures that prevailed in 2020 to continue
in the future. They know that efforts will be made in many states to improve
ballot integrity, and they want those efforts to fail. By rendering all
discussion of voter fraud out of bounds, they hope to forestall reforms that
would make it harder for them to cheat, or enable cheating, in the future.
So, did the Democrats steal the presidential election, or
not? I don’t know the answer to that question. No one does. A number of
statistical analyses have been done, which on their face suggest large
irregularities. I wrote about one such analysis, by John Lott, here.
Beyond that, major questions remain unanswered. In several
key swing states, there were midnight dumps of 100,000 or more votes, virtually
all of which were for Joe Biden, something that can’t normally happen. Those
dumps may have made the difference in the election. I have seen no attempt by
any Democrat to explain or justify them. Maybe I’ve missed it, and maybe they
somehow reflected actual ballots cast, but the burden of proof is on those who
seek to justify such anomalies.
Even greater doubts about the election arise from the
deliberately loose procedures that governed voting. Something like 69 million
mail-in votes were cast, and until two months ago, everyone agreed that mail-in
voting is highly susceptible to fraud. But the laxity in 2020 went far beyond
the risks inherent in mail-in votes. I put it this way: I don’t know
whether the Democrats stole the 2020 election, but I do know that they tried
hard to steal it.
In a number of states, including my home state of
Minnesota, the Democrats pursued a coordinated strategy of collusive litigation
to eliminate electoral safeguards. In Minnesota–and the same thing occurred in
a number of other states–the Democratic Party recruited plaintiffs to sue the
Democratic Secretary of State, asking that the statutory requirement of witness
signatures on mail-in ballots be eliminated. The requirement of a witness
signature is, as a practical matter, the only speed bump on the way to fraud in
mail-in voting, so the Democrats wanted to get rid of it.
Of course Secretaries of State have no power to change
election laws, hence the need for collusive litigation, which is one of the
most sinister forms of corruption in today’s world. In Minnesota and other
states, the Democratic Secretaries of State immediately “settled” the lawsuits
brought “against” them by their fellow Democrats. The “settlements” simply
agreed to what the Democrats wanted–no safeguards to prevent fraud in mail-in
The Democrats knew how corrupt, and therefore likely to
fail, this tactic was, so in my state they made sure they had two bites at the
apple. They recruited two sets of plaintiffs, one in federal court and another
in state court, thereby dodging res judicata if they lost the
first case. The key to collusive litigation is that the “settlement” conspired
at by the supposedly adverse parties is ratified by a court. In Minnesota, the
federal court refused to approve the Democrats’ fraudulent “settlement,”
finding no showing to justify it. But a loyal state court judge went along with
the Democrats’ charade. As a result, mail-in ballots in Minnesota, as in a
number of other states following similarly corrupt litigation, bore no witness
signatures, in plain violation of state law. The door to fraud was wide open,
as the Democrats intended.
One of the problems in assessing the 2020 election is
that the same lax procedures that enable fraud in the first place also make it
more or less impossible to prove after the fact. Sixty-nine million mail-in
votes were cast; how many were fakes, and which ones? There is really no way to
tell. Once those votes have been counted (sometimes in the absence of
Republican poll-watchers, illegally excluded by Democrats from the rooms where
counting was going on), there is no way to identify which ones were illegal and
pull them out of the vote totals.
So at this point, neither I nor anyone else knows whether
the Democrats stole the 2020 election, and we may never know. But, given the
lengths to which the Democrats went in order to facilitate voter fraud, there
is no reason to cut them slack in judging whether their efforts influenced the
No doubt, a number of people are currently investigating
the election, either nationally or in particular states. (Not “journalists,”
who don’t investigate anything; certainly not anything that could harm the
Democratic Party.) Over the next two years, such researchers will publish books
on the election. Some will argue that voter fraud swung the election to Joe
Biden, while others will argue that he legitimately won, even if his vote
totals were swelled by fraud. Books in the former category will have a hard
time finding publishers, but someone will publish them, and lots of Americans
will read them and discuss their findings. The Democrats’ efforts to suppress
discussion of election integrity will fail.
What is most important is what happens next. Rightly or
wrongly, Joe Biden will be our next president. We can’t change that. But, by
pressing the issue of election integrity in the states, we potentially can
ensure that in 2022 and succeeding elections, Americans have confidence that
the candidate who got the most legal votes is the winner. To accomplish that,
we will have to overcome entrenched opposition not only from the above-ground
Democratic Party, but from its press auxiliary, which tries to ban any
suggestion that voter fraud is a problem. We all know better, and we can’t give
in to the Democrats’ crude efforts at intimidation. Election integrity must be
a priority for the next two years, and in the future.