Yes, I am saying without reservation that based on every metric, the Democrats stole the election from Donald Trump. Joe Biden is a pretender who is being pushed into office due to layers upon layers of corruption.

In a free country, which the United States used to be, people would be free to express such an opinion and not face censure and censorship. On its surface, this is no less a bold claim than the social media giants who have for-Biden anyone who dare dissent on the presumption that the election was legitimate. Both claims have ultimately not been proven and this is irrefutably the pressure point dividing the two sides. The difficulty is that one side has cooked the books in their favour and self-identified as the winners without ever putting disputed ballots and counties up for scrutiny. I maintain without reservation that there is no possibility that the Harris-Biden team (and let’s be honest in yet another of their deceptions that this is the correct order) won the election. Unlike the left, I will present the receipts.

Note that many of my arguments may sound self-evident, desperate or irrelevant, but please hear me out and also consider the totality. I guarantee I am making some points and connections I’ve not heard even from the most stringent challengers of the election. I am presenting what moved me from questioning the sufficiency of the fraud to steal the election to removing all doubt.

1. The Democrats and their operatives denied and even censored anyone claiming there was election fraud. They went far beyond denying the fraud, but made sure that any questioning of the results did not see the light of day. The narrative played out like one would expect when covering for a corrupt process. They denied there was any fraud, then that there was significant fraud, then that there was widespread fraud, then that there was sufficient fraud to overturn the election results. Keep in mind that the same people who denied anything untoward happened election night are the ones who made the initial claims they were forced to recant and find the next foothold. There has been no apology for their inaccurate reporting and they made their conclusions sans any review of the evidence. Furthermore, they treated their opponents as delusional throughout the process. This alone shows that the election results were untrustworthy.
2. The left stringently blocked any effort to put the ballot counting under scrutiny. This is not the behaviour of people who believed that they won the election. When someone challenges the integrity of an election, the principled thing to do is to allow a recount. That is especially true when your candidate from 2000 became so desperate that they tried to find the infamous “hanging chads” to turn the results in favour of Al Gore. If recounts based on claims of miscounted ballots doesn’t establish the election was honestly won, there was no reason to go through such pains. The destruction of ballots, broken chains of custody, various methods to prevent the auditing of the voting machines screams “cover-up.”
3. The roughly 3,000 affidavits from poll watchers and others with direct access to the events of election night. People do not risk imprisonment for making claims that are testable and would not be speaking to Trump’s legal team to take the issue to court. If they lied, their motivations would be to hope for nothing more than sowing seeds of doubt and shrinking into the background. Courts demand proof and evidence and it would be foolhardy to pursue the process to take the stand and just utter, “Sorry. I got nothin’.” Not only that, but even in the areas where obvious chicanery took place (like counting ballots while Republicans were locked out, manipulated into leaving, windows were blocked, or watchers were kept far outside the range to scrutinize), the left could have mocked Republicans and proved their integrity by showing they carried out their duties by the book and shown they didn’t need oversight to carry out their duties. They would have solidified the win and “pantsed” their opponents at the same time. Short of this, such a violation invalidates every one of those ballots.
4. The worst abuses were discovered solely in specific counties in battleground states with heavy Democrat and Trump-hating Republicans in control. Anomalies that just happen to take place in the optimal locations to hijack an election suggests a planned coincidence. Stealing an election is thirsty work and tough to manage across a nation. The contentious states and many of the counties were known ahead of time and they happened to be the reports of electoral fraud had been reported.
5. It has been one of the worst kept secrets for as long as I have followed the American elections that Republicans needed more votes to overcome fraud. This was openly spoken of by pundits, talk show hosts, etc. since it was a known phenomenon. The left never challenged this claim nor made a similar counterclaim that suggested that conservatives acted this way.
6. Democrats never claimed to be defending voter integrity, only the election of Harris-Biden. Every variation or change to election law from the left has been to make it easy to pervert the electoral process. This includes the massive mail-in voting, removing or lowering signature verification, rejecting voter I.D., allowing those in prison to vote, extending voting deadlines, ballot harvesting, etc. Not only did laws get changed in violation of the requisite process to do so, but some laws were changed AFTER the vote. There is no honest explanation for this. Despite their farcical and even racist claims that their changes were to prevent marginalized people from voting (i.e., removing voter I.D. because blacks lack the capacity to acquire I.D. – which incidentally would disqualify them from accessing the social programs the left trumpets are so beneficial to blacks), they have never explained what protections would prevent the abuse of these accommodations.
7. Never did Democrats accuse Republicans or conservatives of cheating. Despite spending the majority of President Trump’s term trying to insist that the Russians “colluded” to rig the election and some hints that they may try again, they went strangely silent – even while Republicans did vastly better than all the mainstream polling suggested. If they wanted to claim that seats in the Senate and Congress were stolen through Russian interference and believed they were on solid footing with the Presidential votes, they would have not only validated their objections from the 2016 election, but could have acquired more seats and kept the Presidency without allowing it be under a cloud of suspicion. They made it patently obvious they wanted NO scrutiny of any ballots. The only Democrats claiming that there was election fraud were those accusing their own side.
8. Republicans sought legal recourse while the left used threats, the presumption of victory, intimidation and censorship. Everyone who asserted that there was either no evidence or insufficient deception to change the election results rendered their conclusions on claims of individuals and never on a review of the evidence. One particularly striking example was in the recorded phone call between Trump, his lawyer and Georgia Secretary of State, Brad Raffensberger. During the call, Trump and his lawyer stated that their investigations had found that roughly 5,000 votes were cast in the name of people who were dead. Raffensberger insisted that the number he had was two – not 2,000 – two. An audit would have proved who was right and would have severely damaged the reputation of one side or the other, but it was Raffensberger who refused the audit. Even such a simple step would have established whether there were substantial grounds to distrust the vote process and the integrity of the Secretary of State, but instead such attempts were quashed and ultimately silenced.
9. The suppression of negative stories about Joe Biden (such as the Hunter Biden laptop story) alone would have changed the election. Polling in the swing states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin showed that of 8 unreported or under-reported stories, 82% had no knowledge of at least one of the stories. They informed the pollsters that if they had the information, 17% would not have voted the Democrat ticket. This alone would have been more than enough to make Trump President, even if this demographic chose simply to stay home. As an aside, I’d love to understand how such corruption only persuaded 17%.
10. The mainstream “news media” worked full-time to propagandize against Trump and in favour of the Democrats throughout the 4-year term. Their reductio ad Hitlerum depiction of Trump and his supporters had been exhausted by the end of his first term and went into deeper levels of unhinged character assassination over time. Scandals made up out of whole cloth were given breathless coverage and anonymous sources were treated as beyond impeachable. A recent undercover video by Project Veritas’ James O’Keefe shed light on the bowels of how the head cheese is made. Through access to a top-level CNN conference call, O’Keefe leaked an exchange over the Hunter Biden laptop scandal. In summary, there were competing narratives explaining what had taken place – the devastating details from the New York Post and the claim that from The Wall Street Journal that there was no proof of Joe Biden’s role in the matter. Not only was Joe Biden long under investigation by the FBI over the incident, but the implications here are much worse. CNN did no investigative journalism and thus expose themselves as worse than mere news aggregators or disseminators. The fact that they merely chose what option they gave weight to was arbitrary and simple confirmation bias. They further went on to discuss how to turn the story into a black eye against the Trump administration, thus showing them to be Lina Wertmuller level propagandists of the Democrat Party. This was a window into years of shameless influence peddling for the leftist agenda while claiming to be credible sources for news. This of one of countless instances of why voices from all sides of the political spectrum must be given a platform, but they have done their best to marginalize and have applauded efforts to censor conservative news sources with a profoundly higher level of credibility all while attacking the New York Post and Fox News as residing in an echo chamber.
11. Social media giants utilized any number of methods to push users toward the Democrat party. Using algorithms, shadow banning, manipulated “fact checks,” and outright censorship – among other initiatives – these social media companies blatantly interfered with the election. When the “Russian interference” prosecution was enacted and lasted for 2½ yielding no proof while brushing aside mountains of evidence of the role of the Hillary Clinton campaign and Obama administration’s complicity, the Democrats and leftists were free to flout their fantastical claims with abandon on social media and through mainstream “news” organizations which made President Trump look bad; presenting him as illegitimate. This time around, in burying stories like the Hunter Biden laptop, blocking Donald Trump’s (and other conservative’s) tweets and postings, shutting down accounts of prominent conservatives and slapping labels on unfavourable reports as unproven. All fact checking was based on boundless skepticism of anything reported by conservatives and treating as gospel anything from the left. Post election, they contributed in forcing the shutdown of challenging the election results that – even through these unscrupulous censorship efforts – showed that roughly 45% of the entire U.S. population believed was fraudulent. This made them tools of the Democrat establishment. Their censorship of charges of election fraud was not based on a dearth of evidence, but a premise that election fraud is rare. Contrary claims were verboten. I’m sure Venezuelans, North Koreans and Chinese citizens breathed a sigh of relief over this news.

What I have presented is not only reams of evidence to support the claim that the election was stolen, but that the actions of those on the left make this undeniable. Claiming that there is either minimal or no evidence of voter fraud is ridiculous on its face and to make such assertions within days of the election and without reviewing the specific charges does nothing to say the integrity of the process was sound. Instead, it reveals the dark motives of the left. If they sincerely believe that this is a reasonable way to scrutinize the integrity of the election process, then they demonstrate why they are a danger to the Republic by allowing them to take power.

• They have no grasp of the pursuit of justice and truth. Imagine you are sitting as a judge in a court case where you have predetermined the innocence of the defendant. The evidence is presented in detail and overwhelmingly proves the guilt of the defendant including undoctored video of the person committing the crime, a confession and 3,000 eye witness accounts and your handprints on the throat of the victim. Given your bias, you override the verdict of the jury and pronounce the defendant innocent. This would be better than what did happen. Now imagine that because of your prejudiced view of the case, you state that the jury does not need to hear the evidence and the case should not even come before you, so you acquit the person and impose fines on anyone who questions your decision. That is a more apt analogy of what happened here.
• They are guilty of the charge they most love to level against Christians, but do so in the real meaning of the passage. The left perpetually accuses Christians of being hypocrites; maintaining that the Bible tells us not to judge others. In reality, the passage in context establishes that the duty of the Christian is to judge rightly and not hypocritically. We are to not to hold others to a higher standard for others than we do for ourselves. One may rightly point out that the left is not known for their devotion to biblical standards, but to this I would point out that Joe Biden and Senate Leader, Nancy Pelosi are both professing Catholics. Furthermore, a reasonable question to ask would be: Aren’t they arguing that it is noble to not judge or be hypocritical and thus a standard they should set for themselves?

A celebrated guru of the political left is Saul Alinsky who wrote the book, “Rules for Radicals.” His fourth of 12 rules reads, “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” This raises a couple of interesting observations. First, the left views us as enemies and we all know the contempt common among individuals toward their enemy – short of the duty Christ bestows on every believer. Secondly, if the objective is to merely defeat your opponent by demanding integrity only from them, then you are a manipulator interested in power not an honest broker concerned with truth and justice.

We know from the recent impeachment effort that they are lying in several ways. First, Trump only said to “peacefully march” and never advocated violence. As such, the claim he incited violence is a lie. Secondly, the charge on the capital was carried out during Trump’s speech and required that people either leave prior to the speech or while he was barely into it. Thirdly, the initiative to eradicate Parler altogether in a coordinated effort was based on claims that this platform rallied the attendees to charge on the capital; so, if it was preplanned and since Trump was not on Parler, then the only way he could have incited anything on social media would have been through Twitter. Fourthly, antifa and other bad actors were known to have been complicit in or actively led the charge on the capital and an investigation should have been carried out instead of labelling all Trump supporters as potential or active domestic terrorists. Finally, the hypocrisy in painting a broken window and damaged door on the capital as a full-blown riot while extensive rioting, burning, looting and 137 killings by BLM and antifa was a “mostly peaceful process” shows a level of hubris, hypocrisy and a contemptuous attitude from the political class that sees themselves as the aristocracy and the citizens as subjects.

What is obvious from everyone regardless of their affiliation is that the election will remain under a cloud and the division and risk of violence is through the roof because of the lack of scrutiny and not because of Republicans or Donald Trump. If the left really wanted to place the responsibility somewhere, it should be on those who signed affidavits about the fraud they saw and those making the legal case that the ballots and election process was corrupt. This means they should allow the trial they denied before silencing dissent and remove all doubt one way or the other. We know it will never happen and the reason why.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I rest my case.