The Big Lie About the Big Lie

Leftists want us all to know that the 2020 election was completely fair, and that it was the most secure election in the history of elections. Google the phrase “2020 election most secure” and you will find hundreds of links from news sites, “fact-check” sites, and government sources repeating this claim. Before the election was even held, FBI Director Chris Wray and CISA Director Chris Krebs produced a video that assured the American electorate that the 2020 election was completely secure, and there was no valid reason to question the outcome.

Likewise, if you Google the phrase “2020 election voter fraud,” you will find multiple media outlets reporting that there was “no evidence of systemic fraud” in the 2020 election. A recently-completed months-long review by the Associated Press found that there were fewer than 475 suspected cases of voting fraud across the six swing states won by Biden. Also recently, a Conservative group in Wisconsin completed its investigation of voter fraud and found no widespread evidence for it in the state.

Case closed, right? Well…no.

The left likes to play around with words, so let’s be clear about this. “Secure” simply means that no hacking or tampering of the election by foreign or domestic powers occurred during the election. “Fraud” refers to illegal votes that were deliberately cast. The 2020 election was, in fact, secure. And there was, in fact, no evidence of widespread voter fraud. This does not mean, however, that the election was fair and legitimate.

MAIL-IN VOTING

There is one – and only one – way in which to be 100-percent certain that a vote was cast legally and legitimately. If you show up, in person, to your designated polling place, present your ID, have your name cross-referenced against the official registry to verify your eligibility to vote, cast your ballot in private, and drop it into a secured and monitored dropbox, then there can be no question that your vote is legitimate and legal.

Any other method of voting raises the possibility and potential for fraud. Mail-in voting, in particular, opens the door for widespread fraud. Even the peanut farmer himself, Jimmy Carter, understood the potential dangers related to mail-in voting. The 2005 Commission on Federal Election Reform, which Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker co-chaired, concluded: “Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.”

Similarly, a 2001 study conducted jointly between students at Cal Tech and MIT concluded that “the greatest fraud problems may lie in absentee balloting.” They recommended that states drastically restrict the number of mail-in votes. Interestingly enough, they discovered that, in general, loosening the requirements for mail-in voting does not increase voter turnout with one exception: when the mail-in voting laws are loose and ambiguous enough to allow partisan forces to exploit them and boost the turnout of their party’s voters.

The inherent potential for fraud and abuse associated with mail-in voting is why the United States limited mail-in voting for over a century. It is why almost all Western nations forbid mail-in voting with few exceptions. Up until 2020, mail-in voting in the US was limited to soldiers serving overseas, disabled people unable to leave their homes, and other eligible voters with a legitimate excuse as to why voting in-person was not an option. Even in those limited cases, the absentee voter was required to request a ballot, provide an excuse, and provide some sort of identification. The ballot had to be mailed before a certain deadline. Once it was received, there were strict procedures in place to ensure the vote was properly and legally cast, and the entire process was overseen by representatives from both parties.

Nearly all of those standards were thrown out the window in 2020. The Democratic Party seized a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to exploit the pandemic to its fullest extent. Despite the fact that no outbreak occurred during any of the primary votes held in the spring and early summer of 2020, the Democrats claimed that in-person voting was “too dangerous” and pushed hard for expanded mail-in voting.

When President Trump raised the red flag and warned the country what would happen if the Democrats got their way, Leftists howled in protest. “Trump is Pushing a False Argument on Vote-by-Mail Fraud,” a New York Times headline blared. As with many things Trump said, which the media claimed were “false arguments,” Trump was proven to be 100-percent correct.

Over 155 million Americans voted in the 2020 election – by far, a record number. A whopping 108 million (69%) of those votes were cast by mail – 30 million more than 2016.

THE WELL-FUNDED CABAL OF POWERFUL PEOPLE

Three months after the election, Time Magazine published an absolutely breathtaking article, which described in detail all of the ways in which a “well-funded cabal of powerful people” (their words) rigged the 2020 election. This article is so breathtaking because of its brutal honesty. Leftists at Time were not only admitting what they did, but were openly bragging about it! Instead of accurately labeling what this cabal did as “rigging” or “stealing” the election, the writer, Molly Ball, claimed that this cabal “saved the election.”

Ball describes a “conspiracy” that took place behind the scenes at the beginning of the year, involving CEO’s from several major corporations, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, BLM organizers, Women’s March organizers, and the head of the country’s largest labor union, working hand-in-hand to ensure that President Trump did not win re-election. This unholy union of extremely powerful and wealthy individuals lobbied key swing states to change their voting systems and laws, secured hundreds of millions in funding for their efforts, and recruited an “army” (again, Ball’s word) of election workers who went door-to-door in specific key swing districts, registering Democrat voters and convincing them to vote by mail for the first time.

Their plan was simple: get a mail-in ballot into the hands of every Democrat voter in specific key swing states. They couldn’t very well bus them all to the polling place, but they could certainly manage a massive vote-by-mail scheme. All they needed was funding.

ENTER THE ZUCK BUCKS

Not surprisingly, the most powerful and wealthiest person to participate in this “conspiracy” was billionaire Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg. He provided well over $400 million (pocket change for Zuck) of his own money toward this effort. This was hardly the first time Zuckerberg inserted himself into a political campaign. Back in 2012, the Obama campaign openly admitted that they had access to all of Facebook’s data, which they used to great effect in their campaign. Carol Davidson, the analytics director for the Obama campaign, openly admitted, “[Facebook] allowed us to do things they wouldn’t have allowed someone else to do because they were on our side.”

Zuckerberg’s millions were funneled through an organization called the Center for Tech and Civic Life, which was led by lifelong Democrat activists. Millions more were given to the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR), which was headed by the former attorney for the ultra-left People for the American Way. More “Zuck bucks” went to government entities like the state of Georgia, which received the highest amount ($31 million) of Zuck bucks out of all the states. Of course, the counties that voted for Trump received the fewest Zuck bucks ($1.91 per voter), whereas the Biden counties received $7.13 per voter.

All throughout the country, Zuck bucks were funneled primarily to Biden-friendly counties in several states. CEIR claimed that they contacted all fifty states and invited them to apply for grants. They claimed the money was distributed with a “fairly even partisan and geographic balance.” Records show, however, that 88.4% of CEIR’s funding went to states that voted for Biden, with an average of $3.5 million per state – over three times greater than the amount received by Trump-voting states. Four of those states – Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania – switched from Trump states in 2016 to Biden states in 2020.

Nearly one year later, Hans von Spakovsky, a former Federal Election Commission member, stated that Zuckerberg’s donations “violated fundamental principles of equal treatment of voters, since it may have led to unequal opportunities to vote in different areas of the state.”

Mark Zuckerberg carefully and deliberately converted official government election offices in several states into get-out-the-vote operations on behalf of the Democratic Party and Joe Biden, inserted political operatives into official election positions, and directly influenced the outcome of the 2020 election. And not a damn thing has been – or ever will be – done about it.

Legislation to prohibit outside funding of elections has now been introduced in seventeen states this year, but of course, this is too little, too late. Predictably, Democrats have vehemently opposed any such legislation, as they now appreciate how easy it is to steal an election. While Arizona governor Doug Ducey (a Republican) and Florida governor Ron DeSantis (also a Republican) signed legislation earlier this year that would ban outside funding from private individuals and organizations, Democrat governor Tony Evers of Wisconsin vetoed such a proposal, laughably claiming that private grants like Zuck’s helped local officials “conduct safe elections.”

LEFTIST MEDIA ALLIES

While the “cabal” was busy rigging the election through the state legislatures and courts, the Leftist media shifted into overdrive to protect and promote their candidate using every means available. When the New York Post broke the story of Hunter Biden’s laptop scandal in October of 2020, the Leftist media immediately labeled it “Russian disinformation.” Twitter went so far as to ban the Post, one of the nation’s oldest newspapers, from their platform entirely. Twitter users were prevented from sharing links to the Post article, and the story was buried throughout the mainstream media.

Of course, after Election Day, the Biden campaign admitted that Hunter had been the target of an ongoing Justice Department investigation, and the FBI stepped forward and admitted that they had possession of Hunter’s laptops, which proved their authenticity. In fact, no one from the Biden campaign ever denied their authenticity. But again, it was too little, too late.

In a post-election poll conducted by the Media Research Center, 1,750 Biden voters in seven swing states were asked if they were aware of the laptop scandal. 45% of them were not. Of those who were not, one out of six said they would have changed their vote to Trump had they known. 36% of the respondents said they were also not aware of Joe Biden’s connections to his son’s financial dealings with China. 13% of those people said they would have changed their vote had they known. Trump lost Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin by only 43,000 votes combined. In other words, the media’s refusal to report the stories of corruption within the Biden family, alone, could have swung the election toward Biden.

LEGAL SHENANIGANS

Throughout the summer and fall of 2020, Democrat governors and legislatures worked feverishly to change (or simply ignore) election laws in the days and weeks leading up to, and even including, Election Day. In total, thirty-nine states changed their election laws prior to the election. In many cases, laws were changed not by state legislatures (which is the only Constitutional way to do so), but by courts, governors, or election officials. Over 500 lawsuits were filed as a result of these unconstitutional acts, with nearly half of them involving the expansion of mail-in voting. Almost all of these suits were dismissed or were refused to be heard by the courts.

In several key states, mail-in voting was expanded to the point where ballots were simply mailed to all registered voters regardless of whether or not they requested one (and whether or not the voter was still alive and living at the address where the ballot was delivered.) Deadlines for receiving these mail-in ballots were extended again and again, even beyond Election Day. Evidence of ballot-harvesting, illegal in almost every state, was discovered and dismissed by election officials. A vote-buying scheme in Nevada, involving thousands of Native Americans, was also dismissed by the courts.

State election laws requiring ballots to be properly declared, signed, and dated were ignored in Pennsylvania. When that case was brought to the state Supreme Court, the court overturned the ruling of the Commonwealth Court, and allowed the ballots to be counted. That same PA Supreme Court, just weeks before Election Day, arbitrarily decided to legalize the extension of the deadline for mail-in ballots, the inclusion of unmanned drop boxes throughout the state, and the removal of the Green Party candidate from the presidential ballot – all of which greatly benefited the Democratic Party.

The examples of post-election shenanigans are well-known and well-documented. Republican observers were barred from the rooms where votes were counted. Vote-counting suddenly stopped in the middle of the night, and then proceeded after the observers left the room. Videos surfaced of vote-counters hauling boxes of ballots previously hidden under tables. (“Totally normal!” they explained.) The nation went to bed with Trump holding a commanding lead in nearly every swing state, and woke up the following morning to learn that Biden had miraculously surged ahead thanks to mail-in votes.

THAT MAGICAL REJECTION RATE

Historically, a significant number of mail-in ballots are rejected for various reasons. Normally, this figure is anywhere from 3-to-6 percent. In Georgia, for example, 6.4% of all mail-in ballots were rejected in 2016. In the 2018 election, 3.6% of mail-in votes were rejected. In 2020, that figure mysteriously fell to just 0.4%. In Wisconsin, the rejection rate was 2.5% in 2016, and 1.8% during the primary in April. In November’s election, the rejection rate was just 0.2%. In 20 out of the 23 states studied by FiveThirtyEight’s Nathan Rakich, the rejection rate decreased from 2016.

History also tells us that first-time mail-in voters are up to three times more likely than experienced mail-in voters to submit a rejected ballot. This makes logical sense. In 2020, 30 million people voted by mail for the first time. Yet, we are supposed to believe that these first-time mail-in voters were somehow able to cast their ballots without any issue, at a rate ten times greater than past absentee voters. This is magical thinking, to say the least.

There are only two possibilities to explain this strange phenomenon: either the first-time mail-in voters had help, or ballots that should have been rejected were counted. Or, perhaps both. Audits in Maricopa County and elsewhere have identified tens of thousands of ballots that should not have been counted. Democrats in Pennsylvania were openly advertising on Facebook and Twitter, in the weeks prior to the election, that they had jobs for “curing” ballots. “Curing” is the process where people who submit mail-in ballots with issues that would lead to rejection are given a chance to correct their mistakes. The only question is: how would a person know if there were any issue with his ballot?

Pennsylvania law requires all mail-in ballots to be sealed and locked in secured containers until Election Day. How, then, could these Democrats cure mail-in votes prior to the election? Voters in Pennsylvania reported being contacted via social media by election officials who informed them that their ballots were not filled out properly. Coincidentally enough, voters registered as Republicans were not given the same opportunity to cure their ballots. Clearly, some election officials had access to these ballots, in violation of state law. Yet, when lawsuits were filed over this violation, no judge would take the case.

THE BIG LIE ABOUT THE BIG LIE

Leftists are fond of repeating the phrase “The Big Lie” as it refers to the 2020 election. They like to believe that Trump followers are all conspiracy theorists for questioning the integrity of the election. They confuse voting fraud with the fraudulent behavior explained above, mostly because President Trump confused these things as well. He and his bumbling legal team of Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani barked up the wrong trees. Instead of claiming widespread fraud in the form of rigged voting machines, they should have been arguing in court about private funding of election infrastructure, unconstitutional changes to election laws, unequal funding of state elections, and other real, actual, examples of fraudulent behavior related to the election.

The Leftist media focused entirely on Trump’s most outrageous claims, and on the clownish behavior of Powell and Giuliani, ignoring the very real and legitimate issues with the election. Giuliani’s embarrassing press conference at the Four Seasons Total Landscaping company, and Powell’s repeated promises that she would “unleash the Kraken” earned well-deserved mockery from the left.

Trump’s repeated claims that he lost the election because of widespread voting fraud, and that the election results will eventually be overturned in some way, are The Big Lie. But the media’s claim that the Big Lie is the only reason to doubt the integrity of the election is, itself, a Big Lie.