If ever one of my postings needed to be shared very widely, this is it! Please follow this to the end.
Sometimes it is difficult to see the truth, especially when the situation is vastly complex – and even more so when, additionally, a bias, a fiction, has been engendered by the media and one segment of society.
Without a shadow of a doubt what is going on in the US right now is a horror. A tragedy. Terrifying because of what it suggests regarding America now and in the future.
There is reason to ask if America is on the way to becoming a banana republic.
Congress gathered yesterday, January 6, to certify the presidential electors, sent by each state according to that state’s election results.
There was, however, a group of Republicans in the House and in the Senate prepared to challenge the electors sent by a small number of the states because of serious allegations that fraud had been perpetrated in their elections. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) had spoken to these 12 senators and 40 representatives, who agreed to participate; Cruz was to lead the challenge.
In a joint statement, the group charged that the 2020 election featured “unprecedented allegations of voter fraud, violations, and lax enforcement of election law, and other voting irregularities.”
What they sought was an Electoral Commission, appointed by Congress, which would have “full investigatory and fact-finding authority to conduct an emergency 10-day audit of election returns in disputed states.” Once completed, the states would evaluate the commission’s findings and convene a special legislative session to certify a change in their vote, if needed.
Stated the group, “Accordingly, we intend to vote on January 6 to reject the electors from disputed states as not ‘regularly given’ and ‘lawfully certified’ (the statutory requisite), unless and until that emergency 10-day audit is completed.”
Would this group have been successful in effecting a change in electors in states where fraud had been charged? That is not at all clear, but the attempt was serious and born of considerable concern about the illegitimacy of the vote in certain states – which resulted in a miscarriage of justice. We are not speaking about frivolous individuals here and the readiness to act represented both courage and integrity.
There were to be debates, held separately in the House and Senate, considering this demand. At the very least, the Trump team hoped this would expose the public to pertinent information of which many remained ignorant.
And here I want to pause for a moment to make a statement with regard to the charge of electoral fraud.
There is in my mind no question but that such fraud occurred in several instances.
As I have written several times already, the evidence is simply too convincing for it to be otherwise. The thousands of sworn affidavits, subject to imprisonment for perjury; the videos of large containers brought into a facility where ballots were being counted in the middle of the night when observers were not present, after which the tally for Biden suddenly shut up enormously; or, for that matter, observers who were prevented from observing.
I believe it was commentator Martin Sherman who posed this question, weeks ago. What is more credible:
The Republican claim that there was tampering with election results in certain states.
Or the Democratic claim that Biden – who hid in the basement most of the time; attracted only a handful of participants to his infrequent speaking engagements as compared to the literally tens of thousands who flocked to hear Trump; and who sometimes was incoherent or confused when he did speak – was elected with a greater margin of victory than Barack Obama achieved at the height of his popularity.
But if the logic of the argument for fraud is so very strong, why is it that there are people who do not believe there was any fraud?
The primary factor, I believe, is the mainstream media, which have been thoroughly biased against Trump from the time he began to run for office in 2016. They simply did not carry stories about fraud or possible fraud, the sort of stories to which I and many others who rely upon alternative sources of information had access. Simply put, many people did not know.
To the mainstream media I would add the corporate social media platforms such as Facebook, which dropped people precipitously, and Twitter, which selectively added comments in red suggesting lack of credibility to Tweets from people on the right.
But there is more. There is the predilection of people on the left to not believe it, to remain secure in their conviction that Biden was a real winner.
And beyond this, something else that must be approached with honesty: There were people who were turned off by Trump’s rough personality, his antics, his occasional crudeness. Some of these people had become “anti-Trumpers” so adamantly and irrationally hostile that they were not receptive to his charges.
All this is by way of relevant background. The point here is that Trump was at a disadvantage in many respects, not dealing on a level playing field.
Then the question: If the Trump legal team had information about fraud, why weren’t they in the end successful in making their case in the relevant forums and securing a turn-around in the election?
This is a corollary to the first question, but it is one I have struggled with. It might be that the approach of the legal team was inadequate, but what I saw was something else:
It’s a scary thing to stand up and say an election is not legitimate. It’s huge, and many did not have the stomach for it. Especially was this so when strong-arming was taking place, and threats were being leveled. I myself documented such a situation, when a woman who had the task of signing off on the election in her district declined to do so because she was concerned about irregularities. Her child was threatened in a Facebook message. I saw it, I shared it. She ultimately reversed her position.
Such occurrences took place again and again, I have no doubt.
With regard to public officials including local judges, there was also pressure brought to bear as well as threats being made, perhaps with regard to future positions, etc.
As to the refusal of the Supreme Court to take this on, what I perceived was this: Three of the justices, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, pictured below, had been nominated for the court by Trump.
I believe they feared the appearance of supporting Trump because they “owed him.” Easier to pass on the whole matter. They never said there was no evidence (which is what some people erroneously thought). They said the matter did not fall within the jurisdiction of the court (the plaintiffs had no standing), something with which two other justices took issue.
I lost enormous respect for these members of the court in light of this, and can hardly imagine how it felt to Trump and his team, who were seeking justice.
But in the end it seemed no justice was to be had.
The court of last resort, so to speak, was the Congress. And so the plan to challenge electors was developed.
Trump encouraged his supporters to come to Washington on January 6. His intention, as I perceived it, was to let those inside of Congress understand very clearly that many people supported them in an action regarding election fraud.
They came, by the tens, by the hundreds of thousands.
Trump is charged now with having incited the crowd. While he was “energetic” in his charge to them, I don’t believe he intended it so. He told them, “We’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Ave…and we’re going to the Capitol. We’re going to try and give our Republicans — the weak ones because the strong ones don’t need any of our help — we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”
And here I pause once more for comment. I have encountered opinions now saying that it is bad for a democracy when the electorate loses faith in the electoral process. What is suggested is that Trump’s declarations of election fraud were bad for the country. In other words, he should have let it go if he couldn’t make his case quickly, even if he was convinced he was right. Even if the electorate has, in essence, been disenfranchised by the fraud.
But I find this both disturbing and offensive. If it falls to the party that has been wronged to step back so that the electorate can continue to believe in the system, although it may be thoroughly corrupt, then something is very wrong indeed. Trump said many times that it was important for the country to know the truth about the election: The elusive truth.
If the final goal is maintaining a trusting, peaceful electorate, no matter the truth, then democratic process has been corrupted, perhaps irredeemably.
Everyone knows what happened next, or everyone thinks he knows. A violent mob broke into the Capitol.
Ultimately, in the chaos that ensued, shots were fired and four people were killed.
News went quickly round the world declaring that this violence was perpetrated by Trump supporters. And this is where the reported news diverged from the truth, which had not yet been clearly exposed:
There were provocateurs! Antifa, to be exact, posing as Trump supporters.
See a video documenting this here:
While Paul Sperry, @paulsperry, posted this last night:
BREAKING: Former FBI agent on the ground at U.S. Capitol just texted me and confirmed that at least 1 “bus load” of Antifa thugs infiltrated peaceful Trump demonstrators as part of a false Trump flag ops
And Andrew Bostom @andrewbostom posted this “from the Antifa playbook”: Antifa instructing members to disguise themselves as Trump supporters.
This is the information that must be made known broadly. We are not done yet, I’m sure more will follow either from investigative journalists and/or official agencies.
What I note here is that it had been the goal of the far left to destroy Trump over the course of 2020. I cited a BLM leader who stated overtly that their goal was precisely that. And how does the left pursue that goal? With violence.
It has not escaped the attention of Trump supporters now that when Antifa and BLM rampaged in the cities, starting fires, looting and killing people, the Democrats did not criticize them. The “demonstrations” were referred to in the media as “peaceful.” Peaceful except for when they were not.
It is horrendous that people lost their lives in the course of this violent melee, but there was other damage wrought as well:
The decision on whether to hold a debate regarding the need for an audit of election returns was tabled when the violence in the Capitol began. Once people were killed, all impetus for this halted and the electors were certified: Joe Biden will be sworn in as president on January 20.
President Trump’s response to the violence was to tell his people to “go home, we want peace.” And he subsequently declared that there will be a peaceful transition to the next administration. The fight was gone, it was over.
Not only will there be no justice for Donald Trump, the American people will be deprived of an opportunity to learn the truth about the election. None of this advances democracy, it just advances the position of the left.
And this is precisely as the radical left would wish it to be.
There are serious thinkers who question whether there will ever be an honest election in America again. If this is not a prospect, then America is truly gone.
Whether this will be the case will depend on the determination of courageous people on the right.
As it is, Democrats won both run-off senatorial elections in Georgia, and it will forever be a question as to whether those elections were honestly secured. But what this means is a tie in the Senate: when a tie vote occurs, it will be broken by the far left, deceitful Kamala Harris as vice president. The stuff of nightmares.
The prospect of a Biden-Kamala administration is all together worrisome. It promises to be bad for America, bad for Israel, and bad for much of the world. But this is for other postings going forward.
© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by independent journalist Arlene Kushner. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution.