Boosting the signal…

From Tom Kratman, LTC retired, USA and a practicing lawyer and author…

He raises some interesting questions and points out some things I think a lot of people missed. And yes, people will say this is ‘conspiracy theory’… So be it…

Tom Kratman sends:

Widest possible sharing authorized and encouraged; share via copy and paste. Be sure to include my name, so the left can understand I am not afraid of them and perfectly willing, on my own ticket, to fight:

So why, after all this, do so many of us still believe the election was stolen?

In the first place, there are two things we mean by “the election was stolen.” They’re mutually reinforcing, yes, but they’re not the same. The first of these is via the influence of media and social media. It was not illegal for them to have been Biden’s campaign, but they were Biden’s campaign. What that means, in practice, is that they used their privileges under the first amendment to violate the intent of the first amendment. I say “privileges,” by the way, rather than “rights” because by their conduct they have undermined the first amendment to the point we can calmly consider killing it, as regards the media, as so many lefties want it to be killed for the common citizenry. It no longer serves its purpose.

The second factor is our belief that actual spurious ballots were introduced into the system by both mailing in and other means. And the numbers were not even that large; Trump “lost” by about twelve thousand in Georgia, eighty thousand in Pennsylvania, and under twenty-one thousand in Wisconsin. Let’s not pretend that those were particularly difficult numbers to have illegally come up with.
But there’s not a shred of evidence…the courts…

Look, friends, we live in the age of MiniTru and Comrade Ogilvy. We have precisely zero sources of reliable direct information. Don’t believe me?

Answer these questions:

  1. What was on Hunter Biden’s laptop?
  2. What party and philosophy ruled the states that drove United States’ Covid stats into the stratosphere?
  3. Who took the blame?
  4. How much evidence did there turn out to be of Russian interference with the 2016 election?
    And, conversely:
  5. How many Arab states has Israel recently signed peace treaties with?
  6. Who got NAFTA replaced with a treaty that more carefully guards US workers’ interests?
  7. Who hasn’t gotten us into any new wars?
  8. Under which presidency did the United States regain energy independence, so we DON’T get into any new wars?
  9. Why are illegal immigrants largely going or staying home?
  10. And how much do we hear about this: USPS worker charged with dumping ballots, as mail carriers perform extra trips before Election Day | Fox News

And, if you don’t know the answers to these, ask yourself why you don’t?

Moreover, why did Facebook and other social media suppress any notion of election fraud? One doesn’t need to suppress a lie; “a lie will not stand.” There’s only benefit in suppressing “inconvenient truths” (to steal another fraudulent Democrat meme).

Of course, when you control the media, a lie most certainly WILL stand…if it’s your lie.

Instead, we are thrown back on secondary increments of data, because the left isn’t clever enough – well, not YET, anyway – to have doctored those. (“Call for Comrade Ogilvy from Democratic Party Headquarters! Comrade Ogilvy please pick up the red phone in the lobby…”)

Among the secondary sources of information are:

The railroading of secession through various Democrat-run southern states by careful selection of those who would be allowed into the secession conventions.
Tammany Hall.
“Vote often and early for James Michael Curley.”
The Battle of Athens and the E. H. Crump (Democratic Party) political machine.
Cook Country, which is to say, Chicago, 1960.
Princess Nudelman, the dead goldfish (yes, I know the fish didn’t cast a vote. What’s important is that someone TRIED).
Look at the heritage.org election fraud map.

In short, election fraud is so completely a part of the Democratic Party and the left, more generally, and has been for so long, that it would only be remarkable if there were a close election where there wasn’t any. We expect it. If we can’t easily see it, we expect it to be only because it’s a little better hidden than usual.

The Democratic Party is and always has been a party of corruption, heavy on power, short of or bereft of principle. The only difference between it and any given sub-Saharan African kleptocracy is in the shade of skin.

But what about the courts?

No, wait; you didn’t know that the legal profession is up there – or down there – with college sociology departments for its tendency to lean left? You didn’t know that coming up with direct evidence is often quite difficult? Investigations take years to uncover single instances of discrete bank fraud; we’re expected to find evidence of massive voter fraud quickly? See below.

Then, too, one might well wonder just which John Roberts it was that visited Epstein’s pedophile island. Epstein didn’t waste his efforts on nobodies, you know; oh, no, he turned over the use of his harem of barely post-pubescent teens to the already powerful and the up and – you should pardon the expression – comers.

I don’t know that it was him. I will not insist it was him. I want to see an honest investigation into whether or not it was him.

Of course, to be more fair than he probably deserves, Roberts probably does think he’s heading off a civil war. He’s wrong, of course, as Roger Taney was before him; he is bringing the war closer and ensuring it will be worse.

Difficult to come up with evidence? Enter the mail-in ballot, a positive Godsend for would be election fraudsters. Just think about what’s required to prove effective fraud on that scale. It’s not the mere one hundred and thirteen thousand vote that allegedly swung things in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia.

We’re not talking here about railroading Jefferson Washington Lincoln III, the small-time dope dealer and occasional fence. Oh, no; this is a much more – an infinitely more – difficult problem.

For one thing, the investigators would have to scrub the voting rolls themselves. Then they’d also have to scrub the obituary columns and social security death register for the last century or so…or three. Add in the birth and naturalization records. They’d have to match not just the one hundred and thirteen thousand votes in question, but every mail in ballot AND every other ballot too. (No, the mere likelihood of most of the fraud coming via mail does not rule out more traditional methods.) And they’d have to do all this in a country that has an automatic revulsion against keeping and consolidating those very kinds of records, and often where the government in charge of the states in question will interpose every possible obstacle. And all of that with MiniTru ensuring that no adverse information ever sees the light of day.

Has anyone put that kind of effort into the investigation? No, they have not. Hence, with the best will in the world, the courts had not enough to work with. Hence, none of the investigations can be said to be valid. No, none of them. Neither can any of the court decisions, even where legally sound – and they were not all legally sound; Roberts, you swine, I’m looking at you – are dispositive, either.
So forget it; the information coming from the media is doctored and dishonest, with anything contrary studiously suppressed. The investigations were trash. The court’s refusal to hear cases prejudiced where not just outright unconstitutional.

Now some ignorant toad is going to scream, “Conspiracy loons! Conspiracy theory!”

Not on your life. People are not competent to conspire at this level, while Biden, cowering in his basement, certainly wasn’t. No, no; this is not a conspiracy but a consensus or, rather, several of them. A consensus exists when similar people, with similar values, backgrounds, and educations, see similar issues and problems, similarly, and come up with similar programs and solutions. A consensus doesn’t rule out conspiracy (“Adam, should we introduce spurious bit of bullshit X as people’s exhibit A, for the impeachment trial?”) but doesn’t depend on it either. It was sufficient in this case for enough middle and lower party workers and sundry activists, plus the media and the vile and filthy denationalized rich to a) believe that the only legitimate directions for the United States to go were further left, more globalist, less nationalist, more feminist, less nativist, etc., b) to recognize the promise of mail-in ballots, c) to deny for themselves that any principle is more important that continuing to move in those directions, and d) a resolve to do it, each in his or her or s/h/its individual capacity. No, Facebook did not conspire with Twitter; there was no need. No, X judge didn’t conspire with the Democratic Party; there was no need. No, Buffet and Bezos and Billzebub Gates didn’t conspire with Soros; there was no need. There was no need because they share a consensus.

And, so, no; we do not have any faith in the election results. Nor will we have, especially since we are quite certain that election fraud is now the way of the future. Soon to be President Harris (does anyone, anyone at all, have any illusions about that? Did anyone, ever? I have no more doubt of it than I have that she gives the best blowjob in the world, if the payoff is right) will never be considered legitimate. And she, and we, can expect everything from civil disobedience to nullification to riot to resistance in arms until the war commences. (Bet you didn’t know that the South was not the only region the states of which engaged in nullification.)

 


Comments

Boosting the signal… — 19 Comments

  1. In this particular crime there is no shortage of evidence. There is VIDEO of people hauling BOXES AND BOXES of “ballots” into a room to be counted AFTER the “counting hours” were officially closed. There have been FB and Twitter posts from leftist apparatchiks BRAGGING about how they “made sure Trump wasn’t going to win”. MULTIPLE computer experts have examined Dominion machines and pronounced them WOEFULLY COMPROMISED….one such machine was hacked into in a matter of minutes by a GRADE SCHOOLER while another was hacked into in 15 minutes LIVE during a court hearing on the machines accuracy. No….in this case there is NO QUESTION whatsoever that the cheating existed and existed on an epic industrial scale. The left really didn’t even TRY to cover up
    their crimes. Because they KNEW that they OWNED every single entity tasked with bringing them to justice and stopping the steal.

      • He didn’t denigrate the existing evidence. What he said was that the evidence we have now isn’t enough to sway the leftist legal system. There is a difference.

        Like in a murder trial. Video evidence exists. DNA evidence exists. Witness evidence exists. But if the defense can suppress the evidence from being seen, then ‘poof’ legally the evidence doesn’t exist. It doesn’t matter that the murderer tried 48 separate times to kill the victim as murderer’s criminal record isn’t admissible. See how this works?

        We have the evidence enough to start an investigation. But the Legal Powers-That-Be refuse to review the existing evidence to greenlight further investigation.

        Just remember, except for the Obama-era Justice Department, you need proof that something hinky is going on in order to get a warrant. Which takes time to develop. And needs to be reviewed before warrants and further investigation continues.

        All the judges throwing out any challenges before reviewing the basic evidence? That’s the legal version of sticking one’s fingers in one’s ears and going “Lalalalalalalalalalalalala I can’t hear you Lalalalalalalallalala.”

  2. Ed, I don’t know that he denigrated so much as pointed out the flaws. None of these investigations have delved into the details in the way that would have to happen to really prove anything. I didn’t see any suggestion that the people attempting to investigate weren’t trying hard, but that you can’t find this kind of evidence in a month or so with resistance from those who hold the data.

  3. PS Ed, interesting article and I agree with much of it. There is, however, one small flaw in the plan. Twitter, Google, Youtube, Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, etc; the social media conglomerate, will not allow one word of this to leak out to the average voter and will attack any attempts that are made to read the average voter as racist and anti-Democratic. The mainstream news will not cover it unless a low level IT worker in the program is accused of having molested a 9 year old. When he was eight. We are seeing this already in my Western state. A R legislator has proposed eliminating all mail balloting due to the potential for fraud. He was immediately attacked as racist and his proposal as an effort to disenfranchise minorities. Neither he nor his proposal will be given any serious consideration. Meanwhile the left wing governor who has kept us under lockdown for the past nine months and shows no signs of letting up, won 61% of the vote in his re-election campaign.

  4. I find it interesting that no one has commented on the fact that we have now had our Reichstag fire. The Biden machine has already stated that the “attack” on the Capitol was perpetrated by the conservative faction and that they will ensure that this evil rioting faction will never be able to gather enough people to do anything like this again. They have already established that their brownshirts are prepared and practiced in punishing any location that fails to enthusiastically join in the liberal chorus.

    • Oh, the Reichstag fire has been mentioned by a LOT of people. Not to mention comparisons of Biden with von Hindenburg (though the latter lasted much longer than anybody expects Slow Joe to last).

      My one consolation at this moment is that Kamala Harris is far too stupid and incompetent to be Literally Hitler. This is history repeating itself as farce.

  5. It doesn’t matter how preponderous the evidence is if the Courts won’t even review it.

    That’s the real issue. So far every judge has looked at the briefs and gone, “Nah, not touching this.” Even the Supremes.

  6. As I keeps saying, I don’t know if the media is/are a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Dem Party, or it’s the other way round, but it’s OBVIOUS that they’re in CAHOOTS. Also, I despise, detest, and totally distrust the media, especially the NYT, the WaPoo, and the TV network “news”.

  7. All- Thanks for the comments, and the latest is AMS threatening to deplatform Parler, after Google and Apple pulled their phone apps. No question there is an effort to shut down conservative commentary. I’m just waiting for the blogs to start getting hit.

    Posted from my iPhone.

  8. We know that we are in a full tyrannical onslaught from the Globalist Left. The major social media outlets are removing conservative thought. Old NFO, as you said Amazon Web Services will cut off Parler as of today, Sunday 10 January (at least that is the date I have heard). Eventually it will come down to blogs such as this and others being deplatformed from their current services. I am sure that Blogger will be the first to do the cleanse the blogs.

    What follows will be that Conservatives will set up server farms, if they can even get an external network connection. If they are set up, then they will be eventually blocked by removing their DNS (name like oldnfo.org to IP address). Even if the IP addresses can be gotten out, the Left will get their ISP to cut them off. The final step will be to block the IP addresses. This all comes straight out of the People’s Democratic Republic of China’s playbook. The Chinese Communist Party will be proud of their new protege, the Democratic Party of the United States.

    The other thing from the CCP’s playbook is to do social credit scoring. I saw an article during the campaign that Slo Joe was going to institute social scoring for an individuals credit score. I think he just scrambled the words as he is prone to do. I think when (and not if) the Democrat Government institutes this, it will apply to every aspect of life including Internet access. Without he proper Social Credit Score, one will not be able to even access the Internet, even for common business use.

    • Went to Parler after posting this. They will be cut off on Amazon Web Services at 11:59 PM, 10 January. They have back-up plans and should be up and running within a week.

  9. Data mining by various social media companies is why I do not comment when I have to sign in, especially Alphabet-products (hint: Big-G). Anonymous where possible, though my moniker is traceable.
    Censorship by any means is still censorship, false pretenses or not. Trump has proven that Social Media, as a whole, are not acting as open platforms for free communications, but with the consent and mutual support of various agencies and agendas. Hence the push to change Section 230. First Amendment only applies to Government, but where Government and non-Government agencies collaborate by direction or mutual support, that becomes exactly what Democrats, Socialists, etc. accuse other parties of being. Fill in the blanks, I’m not going to use the politically-charged words. Think – psychiatric projection and Godwin’s Law.
    So much history being hidden, rewritten, and now deniable – you will be accused of being crazy if your memories do not match the narrative.
    PM sent regarding other matters…

  10. I think that all this pontificating about civil was is mistaken. All the outspoken ones will probably fade away. The real trouble will start when the everyday Joe gets fed up and says “What have I got to lose?”
    Who was that sniper that shot up the District from the trunk of a car? You have any idea how many cars are available, and how many “common folk” have tools with which to spread mayhem, panic, and death?
    Methinks that it may not happen tomorrow, but when it does, the left and all their sycophants will deeply regret it.

  11. The reply by Beans is a classic description of what America has…
    a LEGAL system, NOT a JUSTICE system. Concerned only with twisting and contorting the myriad arcane and conflicting rules in order to achieve a desired outcome INSTEAD of finding truth and serving the cause of justice and honesty.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.