Americans: Why is it that election "errors" and voter fraud ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS benefits Democrat candidates? Why is it that We The People clearly see that fraud, potential fraud, errors and mistakes are taking place, but federal & Blue State bureaucrats, who live off OUR tax dollars, refuse to even look at the evidence? Just fork over your taxes and shut up, you peon! Diane -
Adding fraudulent votes to voting machines is common enough that there’s a name for it: “ringing up” votes.
The bribed officials would “add fraudulent votes on the voting machine – also known as ‘ringing up’ votes” for … preferred candidates.” During Election Day, the elections officials would tell Myers how many votes were needed in order to create a win for the preferred candidate, and the officials would add these fraudulent votes to the totals. Then, they would later falsely certify that the voting machine results were accurate.
Beren would advise actual in-person voters to support Myers’ candidates and also cast fraudulent votes in support of Myers’ preferred candidates on behalf of voters she knew would not or did not physically appear at the polls.
During Election Day itself, Myers conferred with Beren via cell phone while she was at the polling station about the number of votes cast for his preferred candidates. Beren would report to Myers how many “legit votes,” meaning actual voters, had appeared at the polls and cast ballots. If actual voter turnout was high, Beren would add fewer fraudulent votes in support of Myers’ preferred candidates.
Today, surprisingly few Americans, 37%, say they believe the 2024 elections will be both honest and open to rightful voters. Forty-three percent (43%) say they have serious doubts about election honesty, openness, or both. Just 64% say they are confident their votes will be counted accurately the 2024 national races.
The most suspicious thing about the 2020 election is the powerful interests forbidding people from being suspicious about the 2020 election. And now the unresolved suspicions cast a shadow as we move toward November 5.
A fair election welcomes scrutiny.
An honest election invites the chance to address questions.
A trustworthy election embraces transparency.
People have questioned and cheated in elections throughout our history. To name a sampling of incidents captured in these final days before the 2024 election:
1,600 self-identified foreigners were registered to vote in Virginia, and the Biden administration went to court to try to allow them to illegally remain on the rolls.
A mysterious and ill-timed flaw has reportedly been discovered in widely used voting machines.
Pennsylvania illegally cut off early voting, turning away residents hours before the deadline.
Ballots were burned at drop boxes in Portland, Oregon, and Vancouver, Washington, destroying potentially hundreds of ballots. Officials said they believe the incidents are linked.
One Pennsylvania county busted a batch of 2,500 voter registration forms with large numbers of allegedly fraudulent forms.
Detroit, Michigan destroyed ballot dropbox video that was supposed to be preserved in a voter integrity investigation.
A “database error” in Arizona miscategorized more than 218,000 voters who had not proven their US citizenship.
Read on for details.
In 2020, the shutdown of rational questions about the most irregular election of our time fed mistrust, created instability, and gave the appearance there was something to hide. We now have the benefit of hindsight to see the pattern established by media, politicians, pundits, and analysts. In other controversies, logical questions were censored, and declared closed. Explorations of facts were labelled conspiracy theories. For example:
We were told not to suspect that Covid might have originated at the Chinese lab in the city where Covid was first identified, and where US scientists had partnered with the communist Chinese to create a bat coronavirus that’s infectious in people.
We were admonished for noticing that after Covid vaccine promoters proclaimed the vaccine was 100% effective at preventing Covid, it doesn’t.
We were instructed to think that anyone was crazy if they thought that the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the FBI (along with the Department of Justice and other Intel agencies) would fabricate a false Russia collusion narrative against Donald Trump.
We were directed to believe that the existence of shocking material on Hunter Biden’s laptop was a Russian disinformation campaign.
In each instance, those doing the misleading and censoring include high ranking current and ex-government officials, national media outlets, and “fact check” groups. They unwittingly taught us that there is often truth or value in the censored information. Their actions ultimately contributed to lingering doubts about our election integrity.
Hard Lessons From 2020
The pattern was the same after the 2020 election. Don’t even ask about the wild anomalies, we were warned.
To be sure, those who supported Joe Biden were delighted about his overnight come-from-behind victory. And those who supported Trump were shocked and disappointed. But either way, anyone who didn’t notice that things were differentand worthy of questions, was kidding himself. The more the powers-that-be controversialized and censored the questions, the more doubt it sowed.
A lot remains unknown. But the 2020 election revealed one important reality that should be of concern to all: If cheating were to impact the outcome of a presidential election in the future, there’s no established process for the allegedly cheated candidate to remedy it when it’s his enemies calling the shots.
First, the allegedly cheated candidate has no power to collect evidence in the time frame required. In 2020, the media and courts required Trump to present “proof” of cheating within days. This was an impossible bar to meet, of course, since Trump had no immediate authority to collect evidence, access voting data and ballots, issue subpoenas, or force depositions of witnesses with information. Additionally, the allegedly cheated candidate has no investigative infrastructure funded and in place to mount a comprehensive election challenge.
Second, although prosecutors do have investigative authority, there is no remedy if those prosecutors are politically conflicted or simply oppose the candidate making the claim of cheating. They may conduct a biased investigation or none at all. There’s no independent body for the candidate to appeal to for a fair inquiry.
Third, even assuming a fair investigation were to be launched, the undertaking would be a massive endeavor, encompassing a number of precincts, cities and states. Evidence could include surveillance video, precinct data, ballots, voting machines and software, witness interviews, cell phone data, and chain of custody documents. Election fraud investigations take at least months, and often years. By the time fraud is unearthed and proven in a national election, it would be far too late to change the course of history.
The Media’s Role
The dynamic is further complicated by the media.
Although the news media plays no legal or constitutional role in determining the winner of a state or election, many people seem to adopt the notion that when particular news outlets “call” a race, or declare the election to be settled— then it is. And that until they call it— it is not settled.
This creates an untenable situation during an election contested by a candidate whom the media opposes, such as Donald Trump. From the moment the New York Times announced it was suspending its normal ethical guidelines to cover Trump in the 2016 campaign (because the newspaper claimed he was uniquely dangerous), the media at large ceased to become a credible reporter of facts regarding Trump. Likewise, the media cannot be seen as a fair authority in litigating an election dispute involving Trump or another candidate it opposes.
It’s not just the calling of races that’s unfairly impacted by the media. In 2020, we saw reporters, anchors, commentators, and analysts who had no access to evidence and had not personally conducted firsthand investigations nonetheless proclaim there had been no cheating. Ironically, their claims were made “without evidence,” even as they claimed Trump and his supporters had no evidence for their own claims.
Those reporting on the 2020 election questions failed to note that no independent body with the authority to obtain evidence had even made a genuine, public attempt to collect thorough evidence. Additionally, just because evidence of something hasn’t been produced or collected doesn’t mean the suspected thing is proven false. Yet that fallacy was repeated day after day by people who should have known better.
Attorney General William Barr’s Role
On Tuesday, December 1, 2020, President Trump’s Attorney General William Barr— no fan of Trump, as we now know—did a strange thing, indeed. In an interview that went viral, Barr told the Associated Press (AP), that the Justice Department had not uncovered evidence of widespread voter fraud, and had seen nothing that would change the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.
What’s even more interesting, perhaps, is that Barr’s comment wasn’t an impromptu answer to a question spontaneously asked by AP. According to my sources, Barr actually requested that AP do the interview with him, during which Barr dropped the bombshell.
Of course, the question is—why did Barr want to make this premature announcement, which he knew would be used to kill Trump’s efforts to investigate the fairness of the election in some states?
“Disputing President Donald Trump’s persistent, baseless claims, Attorney General William Barr declared Tuesday the U.S. Justice Department has uncovered no evidence of widespread voter fraud that could change the outcome of the 2020 election,” reported left-leaning Axios.
The elephant in the room is one question—How could the Justice Department have uncovered widespread voter fraud, if it existed? First of all, there had been no earnest, transparent effort to find it. Secondly, this is the same Justice Department that got caught repeatedly conspiring against Trump, including the FBI’s felony manufacturing of evidence to try to frame Trump in a false Russian collusion conspiracy.
Reporters should have wondered, What was motivating Barr to claim to prematurely know something undeniably unknowable? Had there really been some type of thorough national investigation to get to the bottom of the record number of mail-in votes, lack of chain of custody, signature and date verification, and unusual drop boxes? Had Barr’s investigators reviewed all of the surveillance video? Thoroughly investigated the cases of flash drives with votes that mysteriously went uncounted on election night? Dug into the instances of vote-counting stopped overnight? The cases of Trump votes being mistakenly assigned to Biden by voting machines? Had they researched the inexplicably long delays in reporting results? Of course not. Many lapses hadn’t even been discovered yet.
But reporters were so blinded by their bias, and so thrilled to hear Barr make his unsupported statement, that they turned off their critical thinking skills. They promptly declared Trump’s election claims to be debunked. Any further questions were called conspiracy theories.
Meaningless Recounts
Meantime, it’s meaningless to have the same people who cheated in an election certify that election or oversee recounts. After all, election officials are sometimes the crooked people in the equation.Yet the media repeatedly pretended not to understand this, blindly declaring that recounts constituted “proof” there was no fraud.
In 2022, a former US Congressman in the swing state of Pennsylvania was sentenced to prison in a multi-year election fraud ring. Michael “Ozzie” Myers bribed multiple Judges of Elections in Philadelphia to illegally add votes for certain Democrats in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018.
The bribed officials would “add fraudulent votes on the voting machine – also known as ‘ringing up’ votes” for Myers’ clients and preferred candidates.” During Election Day, the elections officials would tell Myers how many votes were needed in order to create a win for the preferred candidate, and the officials would add these fraudulent votes to the totals. Then, the same elections officials would later falsely certify that the voting machine results were accurate.
By the time this fraud was caught and prosecuted, numerous impacted candidates had been elected and had served. There’s no way to belatedly remedy the impact of the fraud.
In Michigan, there was another case of an elections official accused of violations. The state’s nonpartisan auditor found that the secretary of state who oversaw the 2020 election, a Democrat, broke the law by failing to properly maintain voter rolls, heightening the risk that ineligible people voted.
And in San Luis, Arizona, there was a shocking case where several locals said they knew firsthand about longstanding voter fraud organized and committed by Democrat town officials. But they said neither political party was interested in rooting it out. In 2020, they proved their claims by capturing a slice of the fraud on video.
But there was only what seemed like a reluctant and limited investigation and punishment of the guilty officials, including the ex-mayor, with seemingly no effort to get at the broader players and larger ring that had allegedly operated for years.
Fraud Matters—Even if not ‘Widespread’
Relatively small segments of the national vote in key precincts can determine the outcome of a presidential election.
“[Biden’s] victory really was stitched together with narrow margins in a handful of states,” proclaimed NPR on December 2, 2020.
“The tight races in the trio of states had a big electoral impact…just 44,000 votes in Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin separated Biden and Trump from a tie in the Electoral College.” The article noted, “Of course, Trump is no stranger to narrow victories. He won the 2016 election thanks to just under 80,000 combined votes in three of those six key states.”
Here is just a small sampling of a few key issues that were documented.
In GEORGIA where Biden won by 12,670
Issue: A major error in one county’s hand recount.
Number of ballots impacted: 9,626
A recount monitor caught 9,626-vote error in the hand recount in DeKalb County. That’s according to the chairman of the Georgia Republican Party, who filed a declaration. One batch had reported 10,707 votes for Biden and 13 for Trump. But the true count was 1,081 for Biden and 13 for Trump. Two official counters had signed off on the miscounted batch.
Issue: Uncounted memory cards in three counties.
Number of ballots impacted: 5,863
In three counties, post-election audits and recounts discovered memory cards with thousands of uncounted ballots, most of them for Trump, two weeks after the election:
508 in Walton County
2,600 in Floyd County
2,755 in Fayette County
The discovery cut Biden’s lead in the state by more than 1,400 votes.
Issue: Tabulation error.
Number of ballots impacted: 37
In Ware County, a “small tabulation error” is faulted for taking 37 votes away from Trump on election day.
Issue: The mysterious water leak that never happened.
Number of ballots impacted: Unknown
This is the one of the easiest cases for authorities to get to the bottom of and publicly explain, had they wanted to. But they didn’t.
On election night, Georgia election officials at a major precinct suddenly suspended the vote count, citing a water leak in a master pipe. After Republican observers left, vote counting resumed without them. When people inquired about details of the water leak, it turned out nothing had flooded or even gotten wet, and there was no work order for any leak. Nobody ever explained who fabricated the excuse and no one was held accountable.
Issue: False voter registration applications
Number of false applications submitted: 70
An activist from Coalition for the People’s Agenda allegedly got caught submitting 70 false voter registration applications and was referred for prosecution.
In MICHIGAN where Biden won by 154,188
Issue: Mistakenly-added votes for Biden.
Number of votes impacted: 100,000
In Shiawassee County, 100,000 votes for Biden that he didn’t actually get were reportedly added on Election Night. Observers flagged the error and the tally was corrected.
Issue: Strange voting machine errors for Biden.
Number of ballots impacted: 3,200
Antrim County falsely reported that Biden beat Trump by 3,000 votes, unlikely in the Republican stronghold. Persistent challenges eventually revealed that Trump actually defeated Biden with 56% of the vote. Though an investigation revealed a shocking breakdown of layers of protections on multiple levels, including “mistakes by county and township staff while operating the election technology, procedural missteps while processing ballots in some localities, and the failure of the county canvassers to detect lingering discrepancies,” it was all chalked up to innocent mistakes.
Issue: Unloaded votes on memory sticks.
Number of ballots impacted: 3,300
In one Michigan county, 3,300 votes were “found” after the election on memory sticks that had not been loaded into the central vote tally system. Additionally, observers claimed there are no procedures to ensure the security of the USB drives reporting vote tallies.
Issue: Backdated absentee votes.
Number of ballots impacted: estimated at 100,000
A Detroit election worker filed a declaration stating that she and others were ordered to backdate about 10,000 ballots per day, or about 100,000 total, to make them appear legal even though they were not in the Qualified Voter File and had not arrived by the legal deadline. She also testified that leading up to Election Day, Detroit poll workers skipped required voter ID checks.
InWISCONSINwhere Biden won by 20,682
Issue: Illegally approved drop boxes; voter ID requirements not followed.
Number of ballots impacted: 200,000
Absentee ballot drop boxes used in 2020 were illegally approved by the elections commission, according to the state supreme court. Had that ruling come before the election, it could have had a major impact: 200,000 drop box ballots skipped the normal voter ID requirements.
Issue: Operation to illegally collect ballots at nursing homes.
Number of ballots impacted: Unknown
An audit uncovered an operation to allegedly collect ballots illegally at nursing homes in the 2020 election. The nonpartisan Legislative Audit Bureau determined that the elections commission broke the law with nursing home oversight.
Miscelleneous:
In Florida, a Democrat blew the whistle on what she says is an illegal vote scheme that’s operated for years in the Orlando area, with paid brokers coercing voters in black communities to hand over their ballots.
In Texas, a social worker was charged with 134 felony counts of election fraud. She allegedly registered people with intellectual and developmental disabilities to vote in 2020 without their knowledge or consent. She pleaded guilty to election fraud.
And in California, two men were charged in an alleged scheme to submit more than 8,000 fraudulent voter registration applications for homeless people leading up to the 2020 election. There was no publicly released follow up to announce who they were working for and whether this was a broader scheme; and how long it had operated, and where.
Lax Penalties, Little Follow Up
In the instances where fraud is flagged and prosecuted, the penalties (by most objective standards) are surprisingly lax, and the curiosity to follow up sorely lacking, particularly considering that some of the cases involve longstanding rings. This is true whether Democrats or Republican are in charge of the investigations.
The lost-and-found memory cards in Georgia that contained mostly Trump votes? "Blunders" — not corruption, said officials.
The California pair caught submitting 8,000 fraudulent voter registration applications? One got two years in prison, the other 60 days in county jail.
The Texas social worker charged with 134 felonies? She got 13 days in jail.
We may never get to the bottom of what happened in 2020. In the end, maybe there is nothing of real significance to get to the bottom of. But too little was done to give many Americans confidence in the system. The fact that the questions were so roundly shut down served to undermine voter confidence as we move into the final days of what promises to be another contentious and potentially contested election.
The media’s persistent demands for a candidate to pledge to “accept the results” in advance, before we know anything about the type of election it is, are not only premature, they’re also contrary to logic and reason.
Sharyl’s Substack is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
