The electoral process continues, and the courts will now have their say


I’m sure we’re all tired of the elections and almost everything to do with them.  Things drag on and on and on, with no resolution in sight.  Nevertheless, we need to keep our eye on the ball.  If, as appears likely, there was massive electoral fraud, we have to stop it in its tracks right now – because if we don’t, those behind it will make sure that we never have another free and fair election again.  That’s the way they work.

That’s illustrated by this account of how Smartmatic software (similar to that used in the US general election) was specially adapted to allow vote counts to be modified and overwritten.  The consolidated thread below was provided by Threadreaderapp.

1/n “The circumstances & events are eerily reminiscent of what happened with #Smartmatic software electronically changing votes in the 2013 presidential election in Venezuela.”

—Whistleblower documented in sworn affidavit obtained by @SidneyPowell1, on why he came forward. 

2/n “I am alarmed because of what is occurring in plain sight during this #2020election for President of the United States… What happened in the United States was that the vote counting was abruptly stopped in five states using Dominion software.” 

3/n “I want to point out that the software and fundamental design of the electronic electoral system and software of #Dominion and other election tabulating companies relies upon software that is a descendant of the #Smartmatic Electoral Management System.” 

4/n “Importantly, I was a direct witness to the creation and operation of an electronic voting system in a conspiracy between a company known as Smartmatic and the leaders of conspiracy with the Venezuelan government.” 

5/n “Chavez was most insistent that Smartmatic design the system in a way that the system could change the vote of each voter without being detected… Smartmatic agreed to create such a system & produced the software & hardware that accomplished that result for President Chavez.” 

6/n “After the Smartmatic Electoral Management System was put in place, I closely observed several elections where the results were manipulated using #Smartmatic software. One such election was in December 2006… [another was] On April 14, 2013,” 

7/n “In that election, Nicolás Maduro ran against Capriles Radonsky… Inside that location was a control room in which there were multiple digital display screens – TV screens – for results of voting in each state in Venezuela. The actual voting results were fed into that room…” 

8/n “and onto the displays over an internet feed, which was connected to a sophisticated computer system created by Smartmatic. People in that room were able to see in “real time” whether the vote that came through the electronic voting system was in their favor or against them.” 

9/n “By two o’clock in the afternoon on that election day Capriles Radonsky was ahead of Nicolás Maduro by two million votes. When Maduro and his supporters realized the size of Radonsky’s lead they were worried that they were in a crisis mode and would lose the election.” 

10/n “So, the decision was made to reset the entire system. Maduro’s and his supporters ordered the network controllers to take the internet itself offline in practically all parts in Venezuela and to change the results.” 

11/n “It took the voting system operators approximately two hours to make the adjustments in the vote from Radonsky to Maduro… By the time the system operators finish, they had achieved a convincing, but narrow victory of 200,000 votes for Maduro.” 

12/n “I saw first-hand that the manipulation and changing of votes can be done in real-time at the secret counting center which existed in Caracas, Venezuela. For me it was something very surprising and disturbing.” 

13/n “But later, in 2017 when there were elections where Maduro was running and elections for legislators in Venezuela, [REDACTED] and Smartmatic broke their secrecy pact with the government of Venezuela.” 

14/n “So I think that’s the greatest proof that the fraud can be carried out and will be denied by the software company that [REDACTED] admitted publicly that Smartmatic had created, used and still uses vote counting software that can be manipulated or altered.” 

15/n My comments: These are obviously some incredibly serious allegations given in sworn testimony, ones that warrant further investigation assuming they check out. They are not all in the same order as in the affidavit—I just wanted to offer a rough sense. Related article next: 

16/end @charlottecuthbo’s article:  Trump campaign lawyer @SidneyPowell1 released an explosive affidavit on Nov. 16, from a whistleblower who purports to have witnessed how election software secretly manipulates votes without leaving a trace.

That’s pretty damning, isn’t it?

The evidence for electoral fraud becomes stronger by the day.  Here are just a few articles and reports from the past day or two that re-emphasize that.

  • The Federalist notes that “The media, Democrats, and many establishment Republicans have reflexively repeated that “no evidence” of fraud existed. Yet evidence does exist. The stories coming out of major vote-counting centers are shocking, and only add to the distrust.”  Follow the link for a long, detailed look at what we know so far.
  • In a video interview, lawyer Sidney Powell provides insight into election irregularities, potential illegal actions and more.  Her contribution begins at about the 50 second mark.
  • The American Spectator observes that “to believe Biden won, we must accept a perfect storm of implausible anomalies and brazen irregularities”.  It concludes:  “Joe Biden may be inaugurated in January, but he certainly wasn’t elected president.”
  • Off Guardian identifies “6 Factors Which Point to a Rigged Election“, and notes:  “The mainstream media are quick to call the claim “baseless”, but there’s plenty of evidence for anyone willing to see it.”
  • Doug Ross headlines his analysis, “DNA-LEVEL” STATISTICAL PROOF: “Smartmatic” Vote-Counting System Was Manipulated in PA and GA to Overturn Trump’s Victory.

All I can say is, let’s be patient.  The matter is now in the hands of the courts.  It’s going to be a tough job producing sufficient evidence to prove all the irregularities we’ve examined over the past couple of weeks, as we discussed a couple of days ago.  Let the lawyers do their thing.  If that works, great.  If it doesn’t, then there will be only two options open to us.  Either we accept this monstrous fraud . . . or we move to the next level of opposition.  There will probably be little chance of a peaceful resolution if that happens.



  1. Conservatives tend to be law followers. It will take more than a rigged election with plausible deniability to get them into the streets.

  2. I'm going to assume Biden will be the next president, the republicans will crawl back into their holes and only token, if that, calls for election security reform will be heard. Hope I'm wrong, but I wont be.

  3. Everybody better pray to whatever god they believe in that this is resolved by the lawyers. If the lawyers and judge cuck on this one, we no longer have a legitimate federal government. I think all of you in here are fully aware of the implications of that reality.

    BTW, I'm reading that "SHTF" book written by that Balkan guy. I am familiar with the early 90's war (having met people from all three sides of it). This is not something anyone right in the head would want here in the U.S.

  4. So Peter are you saying that if the courts don't find that the allegations of fraud are proof positive that it occurred, you'll both ignore their findings and incite violence?
    Have you considered that if the courts in multiple jurisdictions are throwing these cases out, that all the allegations of fraud were simply that, and without any real basis?
    It seems to me that in following this line of argument, you're willing to ditch one of the three pillars of democracy, namely the judicial system, in pursuit of an outcome in another pillar that fits the increasingly baseless allegations made by other blogs, media articles and partisan individuals.

  5. The lower courts are in on the fix. I for one will be hard put to obey many if any laws if Biden is sworn in. This is not the USA.

  6. Unpopular opinion here.

    I get that many Americans on the right side of the political spectrum are beyond angry. I'm angry, too.

    Armed conflict, however, will have only one outcome in my opinion. The new administration will brutally put down an insurgency by patriots. They have the tanks, machine guns, artillery.

    I think we're headed towards some form of oppressive regime that will last for decades. And not just in the U.S., in Europe and many other places also.

    Resistance can take many forms. In the Warsaw Pact countries, many dissidents survived with their honor intact. They did not take up arms against the government. They built networks of trust and solidarity — in Poland, their movement was called Solidarity.

    It may behoove us to study what the refuseniks did right and how they managed to keep the flame of freedom alive during their Dark Age.

  7. @Mark:

    1. Courts can only rule on the basis of admissible evidence. By definition, those behind the undoubted electoral fraud we've witnessed in this election have made it as difficult as possible to obtain such evidence. What's more, state courts are often much more partisan than federal courts, with elected judges who stand as members of (and representing) a political party. Their rulings are thus a lot less reliable from an objective standpoint than federal courts.

    2. To say that "allegations of fraud were simply that, and without any real basis" defies belief. Have you read the articles to which I've linked over the past two weeks, and in this blog post in particular? The reality of electoral fraud is as plain as the nose on my face. There is literally no possibility whatsoever that the results of this election in the "swing states" could have been obtained honestly and objectively. Anyone denying that must give reason to question their sanity. The fact that it may not be provable in court, due to rules of evidence and a major cover-up campaign, can't obscure the statistical and mathematical reality of the situation.

    3. Millions of Americans, including yours truly, are fully aware of the reality of the situation. We will not, under any circumstances, accept the results of such electoral fraud, and we will not recognize the occupant of any office held as a result of such fraud. That's flat, and that's final. I'm far from alone in saying it, as you'll probably have noted on many Web sites in recent days.

    4. I think the progressive left has decided they can get away with this electoral fraud, and don't need to fear any backlash. They're gravely mistaken.

    I won't be marching out of my front door carrying a rifle. I'm too old and too broken (in terms of permanent partial disability) to do that. However, that doesn't mean I won't support their cause.

    The quotation from Thomas Jefferson that I used yesterday sums it up: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." In the absence of any relief from the courts, that time will probably have come around again.

  8. @froginblender,

    Those Europeans mostly died under communism, or only managed to outlive it by doing nothing for 45 years except bow down and kiss its @$$.

    Sam Adams had some words that are germane to that plan.

    Oh, and that…"They have the tanks, machine guns, artillery."?
    Go ahead: use that artillery.
    That will win 100 recruits to the insurgency for every insurgent it kills.
    Ditto the machineguns.
    And they'll be a handy re-supply point when they're changing belts.

    That guy in the tank?
    He's going to have to come out and take a p*ss sometime.

    Afghanistan has only 36M people, and less than 10M of them are military-age males. A mere fraction of them fought the British Empire, the Soviet Union, and the United States, each of them at the peak of their military power, to a standstill, and the losing side left a blood trail out of town that can be felt to this day, in each case.

    There are more licensed deer hunters in one state, Pennsylvania, than there ever were Taliban fighters in Afghanistan. The largest army in the world is called American civilians, which outnumber all the soldiers in all the armies of every nation, including their own, combined.

    And 5 minutes after hostilities open, 50% of the US military stands down on locked bases, and the other half defects to the insurgency.
    With their arms and equipment.

    In an insurgency of the people against the Fedgov, FedGov runs out of all combatants after the second volley, on Tuesday, at 8AM of Day Two.
    (And I'm being extremely generous in giving them that long.)

    After that, it's mainly scaffold construction, and running the guilty through in batches.

    A civil war will be far bloodier than that, but only because it will pit one half of the citizenry against the other half. The police and the military won't even be a factor in that, to a mathematical certainty. Because any commander that orders his men to fire on civilians has to know that a certain percentage of his men will turn around and open fire on their commanders, and that lemon is never worth the squeeze to anyone with even half his wits.

    If Macarthur's troops had faced a Bonus Army made up of armed veterans instead of unarmed unemployed hobos with women and children in tow, the slaughter would have been epic: of military troops. The military and police were outnumbered over 13 to 1. The last guy to roll the dice against those odds was Custer. We know how that turned out.

    We don't have an army of peasant conscripts that will pull off another Tiananmen Square Massacre blithely.

    But better than even odds the first president to try and turn the military on the populace would find the White House ringed with tanks.

    With the turrets facing inward, towards the building.

    The first idiot who forgets that lesson or fails the pop quiz on citizenship, on the day, is going to find out just how hot gasoline and dish soap burns on the hull of his tank, just before he disappears in an epic fireball.

  9. @Mark,

    The courts can only ever do either of two things:
    the right thing;
    or the wrong thing.

    Either way, there will be violence.

    One way utterly negates any rule of law, which in turn begets a nationwide civil war to re-establish the country into which most of us were born, which will be "Bosnia x Rwanda", minimum, and necessarily.
    (And if stealing a presidential election outright and wholesale isn't worth fighting such a war over, we stopped being a republic of any type, except "banana", long since now. That requires another set of considerations, none of them pleasant.)

    The other way requires stamping out a tiny fringe of hardcore communist activists and agitators in order to re-assert the rule of law.

    The courts doing the wrong thing, btw, invalidates the entire social contract, and dissolves the existence of the Republic.
    And once that happens, "How many divisions has the judicial system?"

    If there's going to be political violence in this country, there's two things people on our side ought to remember:
    We'll never be stronger than we are right now.
    They'll never be weaker than they are right now.

    Factor that reality into any discussion on what happens after the courts rule, and get back to us.

    Our side, for the most part, wanted a small government that would leave us alone.
    When Whitey riots, and the Saxon begins to hate, continents tremble, and the Gods Of the Copybook Headings will be the only court in session.

    Sorry if that twists anyone's panties too tight.
    I advise anyone so inconvenienced to get over it, and in haste.

    As Farah Aden warned Baroness von Blixen, "God is coming for you."

Leave a comment

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