More probable voter fraud, this time in California


We’ve read many allegations coming out of Arizona, Georgia and Michigan concerning what may be massive voter fraud in those states during the November 2020 elections.  Now comes this report out of Santa Barbara, California, where it looks like a bureaucratic cover-up may be in progress.

Thomas Cole of Analytics 805, which monitors elections, uncovered the Goleta precinct’s voting irregularities during the course of his routine analysis … Mr. Cole’s subsequent complaint, filed with the Sheriff’s Office, alleges that:

  • Someone in charge of the mail at the [student residence] illegally filled out those ballots for the students and sent all those ballots directly back to the election board, which is a felony.
  • Someone in charge of or with access to the ballots and signature machines simply ignored the phony signatures on the ballots returned from the Torres Building, which is a felony.
  • Or officials turned off the signature inspection machine.
  • Or officials lowered the threshold of the machine inspection on the Torres Building precinct ballots, thus allowing the approximate 3,000 fraudulent ballots to be counted, a felony.

Only a student actually residing in the Torres Building during October-November 2020 could have received a ballot to vote. And since the building was closed and locked down, that is impossible. 

Thus, the 3,000 votes counted from the Torres Building are illegal.

. . .

Mr. Cole told The Investigator that, nearly three months since sounding the alarm, he has lost faith in the ability of local law enforcement to investigate voter fraud. He now intends to file his complaint with the FBI. 

Perhaps the Bureau will also investigate why law enforcement in Santa Barbara is sluggishly reluctant to investigate and enforce its own voting irregularities.

There’s more at the link.

The drumroll of reports of election irregularities continues to resound – yet the mainstream media continue to decry, deride and ignore all such reports, dismissing them as “partisan” or “politically motivated”.

Instapundit has often said, “Just think of the media as Democratic Party operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense”.  One can see their point.



  1. Never mind, of course, that "the gubmeyent" here in the Wild, Wild West has no problems with illegal aliens voting either…

  2. Re "Just think of the media as Democratic Party operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense".

    Long before Professor Reynolds came Robert Conquest. His third law of politics fits the behavior of our overgrown, ever present Fourth Estate.

    "The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies."

    Media that once honored reporters for exposés now pay news readers to obliterate independents who do.

    I'm inclined to sponsor a contest for the best screen capture of one of those overpaid attack dogs looking similar to the iconic image of Donald Sutherland's acting in Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

  3. As I keep saying, I don't KNOW if the media is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party, or it it's the other way round, but it's OBVIOUS that they are in CAHOOTS. Sleeping in the same beds, too.

  4. We got mail in ballots in Ca

    And the Ca state Gop has done little to fix this. They could do initiative if they cared about fixing election issues. My understanding is they are headed by a never Trumper. The local gop seems happy to be perpetual losers.

    I’m still shocked by the lack of action / pushback on the Trump supporters attacked in San Jose. It’s embarrassing.

    And the Soros backed DA’s in LA’s election is sketchy…

    The election irregularities keeps increasing. And public opinion / Overton window is shifting . Note Trumps laser focus on the election fraud.

  5. Since election fraud jeopardizes the polity, it should be counted as treason even if it involves just one vote, and dealt with by piano-wire neckties à la The Third Reich, to be effected before the next sunrise or sunset (whichever is earlier), failing which the person responsible for effecting the correction should be administered the same corrective before the next sunrise or sunset.

Leave a comment

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