National Election Fraud: Evidence of National Chicanery During America’s 2020 Presidential Election
By: Sam Jacobs
Regardless of where one falls politically, the sanctity of the vote is a bedrock of a functioning representative democracy. Voters have to believe their vote matters. And that the vote is free, fair, and accurate.
The basic facts of the 2020 American Presidential election are concerning because mounting evidence indicates there’s been a concerted effort by state Democratic Parties to flip the election from President Donald Trump to former Vice President Joe Biden in a number of key swing states with the help of notoriously corrupt Democratic Party machines in at least five American cities — Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Pittsburg, and Atlanta.
Here are the basic facts of the case: On Election Night when America went to bed, President Trump had a commanding lead in virtually every swing state, as well as Virginia, which no one expected him to win. However, when America woke up the next day, we found that he’d lost these leads, largely on the basis of mail-in ballots found in the middle of the night and out from under the watchful eye of legal election monitors.
What’s more, these massive caches of votes – almost all of which were for former Vice President Biden – came via large dumps primarily from the five aforementioned cities in states predominantly run by Democratic governors.
When one looks at the statistical likelihood of the reported turnout, the numbers are so improbable they’re more at home in a one-party state like Saddam Hussein’s Iraq or North Korea.
What’s more, Biden’s victory does not square with the results of the Republican Party nationally: Republicans won 28 of 29 competitive House seats and Democrats were unable to flip a single state legislature. Joe Biden secured a scant three of the so-called “Bellwether Districts” that almost always choose the winner, one of which was in Delaware. Judicial Watch found 353 counties in 29 different states who had higher than 100 percent turnout.
Anecdotally, swing states tend to follow Florida in terms of swinging left or right. This is particularly true in Michigan, which has voted in lockstep with Florida since 1968. Nearly three dozen states had counting machines connected to the Internet during the election, which is inherently insecure. Joe Biden’s lead among mail-in ballots was massive in two states — Michigan and Pennsylvania — while it was in the single digits in most states.
Evidence of chicanery, irregularities, and outright manipulation have poured in from a variety of states — Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Texas, New Jersey, Nevada, and Arizona. This evidence could easily be dismissed as simply weird if one is being generous or naive.
While much of this took place at the state level, there are also irregularities that are occurring across state lines and these are worthy of consideration. It’s not evidence per se, but there was a massive spike in the number of Google searches for “election fraud punishment” in swing states in the 30 days leading up to the election.
Below we explore the details and the data of what happened across the nation on Election Day, with flagrant and often sloppy irregularities occurring from coast to coast. Elsewhere we explore similar efforts in the key swing states of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Georgia.
All of the posts in this series will be updated as more credible information is uncovered.
The General Landscape of American Election Fraud
The media is trying to weave a narrative with ever-shifting goalposts. They began by saying that not only did voter fraud not happen, but that it’s impossible. Now, they have shifted their story to saying that there is always minor fraud, but that it never really matters much.
The Heritage Foundation has identified 1,200 elections where voter fraud made the difference in recent decades, long after the era of Jim Crow when election theft was de rigueur. Of these, fully 15 were thrown out specifically because of cheating by mail-in ballot.
Another narrative in the controlled media is that illegal aliens and other non-citizens don’t vote. This is patently untrue. In fact, they vote at alarmingly high rates. A 2019 study found that approximately 2.2 percent of respondents admitted to voting illegally, which implies a little under a million ballots cast by non-citizens every year.
The counterargument is that respondents are either lying or misunderstood the question, but this is simply not true — those who conducted the study verified their votes.
So we can see that electoral fraud is not only impossible, it is common. It is not negligible, it has determined elections in living memory. With this as our backdrop, we will now investigate voter irregularities throughout the nation during the 2020 Presidential election.
What Constitutes Evidence of Electoral Fraud?
Before going further, it is worth discussing what constitutes evidence for electoral fraud. Well, the Carter Center has a set of standards that they use to determine whether or not there has been electoral fraud somewhere.
These are the standards used by globalists to determine whether or not elections they disapprove of have been conducted fraudulently. Several of them are present in the contested states:
- Counting procedures should be verifiable.
- Votes should be presented for independent review.
- Elections should be subject to recounts.
Additionally, the Carter Center states that it is the right of dissidents to challenge and question the results of an election that they believe to be fraudulent. Harassing dissidents is considered evidence of chicanery in and of itself.
“Effective redress” is the term they use and it is considered by the Carter Center to be vital for establishing an election as legitimate. The resistance of the Democratic Party to recounts and audits should be a red flag in and of itself.
There are also mathematical anomalies that are worth looking into because, regardless of turnout and outcome, elections will follow certain patterns. One of these is that, because of mail sorting, mail-in ballots will consistently show the same ratio of support for each candidate. We did not see that, however — there is a significant spike in support for Biden and fall off in support for President Trump as Election Night dragged on.
Indeed, in Wisconsin, this anomaly became massive around 4 a.m., the same time that the massive ballot drops without supervision began. The same phenomenon occurred in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Georgia, all four of these states with copious amounts of electoral chicanery and irregularity. Virginia was another state with similar mathematical irregularities.
Benford’s Law is another area where we see mathematical irregularities. Put simply: When we have large datasets of numbers, there is a pattern we can find with regard to the final and penultimate digit of each number in this data set.
Benford’s Law analysis is one of the first things run by forensic accountants looking for financial malfeasance or tax cheating.
Many of the electoral tallies in disputed states violate Benford’s Law — but only for Joe Biden, whose distribution more closely resembles the curve when people type “random” numbers in. President Trump, Jo Jorgensen, Howie Hawkins, and Kanye West’s numbers do not violate this law, but former Vice President Biden’s do in disputed areas.
The Glitch From Coast to Coast
One recurring theme throughout the 2020 election is the glitch. There have been a number of glitches, many detailed in our series on irregularities in different states. This, in and of itself might not be cause for concern — however, in every case, these so-called “software glitches” favor former Vice President Biden at the expense of President Donald Trump.
Again, we have detailed these in our state series article, but we will mention some here just to give you a general idea of what has been going on with these “glitches.”
One in Michigan sent 6,000 votes to Biden that were meant for Donald Trump. Another in Wisconsin, robbed Donald Trump of 19,500 votes. Another similar glitch in Georgia saw an unspecified number of votes go to Biden that were, once again, meant for the President.
There appears to be a pattern here. Were these all bona fide mistakes, we would likely find votes that were meant to go for Joe Biden going to Donald Trump before the situation was corrected. But we are unaware of any such error in favor of the President.
The common denominator? The voting software used to calculate the vote made by a company with deep connections to the DNC.
The Turnout That Wasn’t
The DNC’s victory in the 2020 Presidential election relies heavily upon a massively increased turnout, again centered around a handful of large cities controlled by the Democratic Party. One example of this is 90 percent turnout in the entire State of Wisconsin, which would not only be the highest level of turnout in American history, but also comes close to the 92 percent average in Australia where voting is mandatory. In the city of Milwaukee alone, the turnout was 84 percent.
Compare this turnout to Cleveland, a culturally comparable city not in a swing state, which had a comparatively scant 51 percent turnout. This is an important city to draw a contrast with because, while it is a Democratic stronghold, as are most large cities, and it has a similar minority population, it was not in a state that was considered in play this election. Democrats attempted to steal the election by fabricating astronomical turnout in urban areas they control in swing states.
The turnout gambit becomes even more laughable when one considers that Biden is one of the least invigorating Democratic candidates since John Kerry or Mike Dukakis. Yet somehow this candidate was able to increase his vote above what Barack Obama enjoyed, with some districts in Milwaukee putting up more votes than there are registered voters in the area.
A broad study conducted by Judicial Watch found that 353 counties across 29 states had turnout exceeding 100 percent of registered voters. Eight of these had turnout exceeding 100 percent across the entire state: Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
Perhaps more damning, the study was limited to 37 states publishing their voter registration data. This means that, of the 37 states that Judicial Watch had access to, 78 percent of them had turnout exceeding 100 percent.
Vetting of Mail-In Ballots
The American public was warned for months in advance that mail-in balloting, illegal throughout most of Europe, is inherently insecure and lends itself to the kind of mass voter fraud that we are seeing in action right now.
But the mail-in ballots that we are seeing in this election are not just nonspecifically “suspect.” They are rife with irregularities and a lack of accountability that should cause them to be closely investigated, audited and, where appropriate, thrown out entirely.
Mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania are particularly questionable. This is a state where Biden enjoyed a 60.5 percent lead in mail-in voting. More damning is the fact that many of these ballots seem to have arrived before they were even sent, arrived the same day or arrived within one day of being sent. This is an abnormal amount of processing time, especially when we consider the surge in mail due to the election.
James O’Keefe found two whistleblowers at USPS, one of whom was willing to come forward, who told of backdating ballots. This whistleblower was intimidated by the feds and it was falsely reported that he recanted his report.
Vetting of mail-in ballots is particularly important because they are widely open to electoral fraud, as we have discussed above. So it is troubling that we have multiple reports, including in the form of sworn affidavits presented before the court, of poll watchers being thrown out, mocked, intimidated and even physically assaulted during the course of counting mail-in ballots.
Of special note is the strong resistance to poll workers in swing states to allow anyone to watch them. In Pennsylvania, poll workers were caught on video expelling poll watchers despite knowledge of a court order preventing them from doing so. Reports of expelled poll watchers were part of the lawsuit filed in Michigan and there were similar reports out of Georgia. This raises the obvious question — why don’t they want anyone watching them?
Biden Outperformed Obama
Biden’s turnout when compared with Barack Obama is another area warranting special investigation. It is worth noting that Biden was generally viewed as a less-than-ideal candidate in no small part because he generated very little enthusiasm among Democratic Party voters. In contrast, Obama was a rock star candidate who had just defeated the party’s presumptive nominee in a hard-fought primary. Biden, on the other hand, was largely foisted on the party through back room deals in an attempt to prevent Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders from obtaining the nomination for President.
Biden also barely campaigned throughout the primary season. Most of the campaign was characterized by the candidate calling “lids,” a term meaning that he was home for the day and would be doing no more press, with the occasional teleconference. Not only did he start with an unethusiastic base who would have preferred nearly anyone else, he did little to motivate his base throughout the course of the election.
Yet somehow, he outperformed Hillary Clinton who won a hard-fought primary against Senator Sanders and kept pace with numbers from Barack Obama’s 2008 and 2012 campaigns, being able to boast that he has received more votes than any other candidate for President in American history. In some cases — tellingly in areas crucial for winning the election — Biden was able to outperform Barack Obama.
For example, in Chester, Cumberland, and Montgomery Counties in Pennsylvania, he outperformed Obama by approximately 25 percent. In Montgomery County, he was able to double Barack Obama’s margin of victory. He increased the raw vote total there by fully 80,000 votes. The population of this county only increased by 22,000 in the years between Obama’s victory and Biden’s alleged one.
Not only should we be skeptical of the numbers, we should be skeptical of them because of where they came in from. Such dubious numbers were not coming in from places that we could assume were Democratic Party strongholds like New York, Chicago and Miami where Biden actually saw a decrease in voters relative to Hillary Clinton. So why is he putting up these high totals only in a handful of cities (Atlanta, Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia) controlled by Democrats in swing states?
Another area of suspicion are the Biden-only ballots. Tens or hundreds of thousands of voters marked their ballots only for Joe Biden, with presumably no interest in down ballot races. While it’s not unusual for people to take an outsized interest in the Presidential election, it is unusual for 450,000 people to have no interest in down ballot races and for this to be concentrated in a handful of swing states.
The strange dichotomy here is that people were far more likely to do this in alleged swing states with competitive Senate races like Georgia, while deep red states like Wyoming did not see a massive number of Biden-only ballots. In Georgia, there was only a difference of 818 votes between Trump and down ticket Senate races. Biden, on the other hand, received over 95,000 more votes than either Senate candidate on the ballot in Georgia. In Wyoming there were a mere 725 more votes for Biden than the Democratic Senate candidate in the state.
Raheem Kassam reports on five states with anomalous Biden-only voting, all of which keep coming up with various irregularities: Pennsylvania (98,000), Georgia (80-90,000), Arizona (42,000), Michigan (69-115,000) and Wisconsin (62,836).
All told, Republicans won 28 out of 29 competitive House races as of November 8 and flipped three state legislatures, but were somehow unable to deliver the White House to the President. So we are expected to believe that not only did Joe Biden receive more votes than Barack Obama and that these came largely on the back of massive inner-city turnout, but that this massive turnout for Joe Biden was unable to flip a single state legislature.
Biden-only ballots are a recurring theme in all of the states in question. While they are by no means a smoking gun, they do point toward significant irregularities that need to be investigated before Joe Biden can begin claiming victory.
Who Counts the Votes? Irregularities In Counting Systems
There is a quote often attributed to Joseph Stalin, but is probably apocryphal: It doesn’t who votes, it matters who counts the votes. It doesn’t really matter who, if anyone, actually said this. The point is that it doesn’t matter what votes actually say if the votes are ignored or altered by the person doing the counting.
In the 21st Century most of our vote counting is done by machines which use proprietary software. Most states used systems supplied by Dominion Voting Systems. What’s more, the irregularities in vote counting, in particular the “glitches” that universally favor Joe Biden, come from these voting systems.
First, we should note that there were 92 donations made by Dominion employees over the last year according to the FEC. Of these, 80 went to Democratic super PAC ActBlue, seven went to Senator Bernie Sanders, four to the Trump campaign and one went to the DNC. What’s more, Dominion Voting Systems has a partnership with the Clinton Global Initiative as well as former employees of the Clinton Growth Initiative on staff, according to One America News Network.
Rudy Giuliani claims that the legal campaign to protect the election has whistleblowers from Dominion ready to go on record.
A bit in the weeds, but worth mentioning, is the allegation that intelligence software was used to change vote counts. There is a video on this subject here. As we say, this is a bit in the weeds, but worth mentioning for those who wish to go down that rabbit hole.
NOQ Report has been kind enough to do a deep dive on the topic of Dominion’s role in the 2020 Presidential election. They found significant vote switching in Georgia (17,407, where Biden leads with 14,148 votes) and Pennsylvania (with over one million votes switched in favor of Joe Biden). The article is mostly just a list of switched votes and lost votes, but it bears reading because it sheds light on just how massive a role vote switching played in the 2020 election, further cementing the theory that Dominion played a role in the theft.
Fight Back to Save America
Don’t let any of this get you down, because the fight is far from over. Both President Trump and Congressional Republicans are working hard, both in the public sphere and in the courts to make sure that the 2020 election is fair and transparent.
So what can you do to join in the fight?
First, you should call your elected representatives. That means calling your state rep, your state senator, your House Rep and your U.S. Senator. You should do this be they friend or foe — either way, they need to know that you insist on having all legal votes counted. Insist on concrete steps to ensure the integrity of the vote. Do not settle for stock answers about the importance of democracy. A Twitter account has made what is actually a very good script for you to follow when you call in. Be firm, but polite.
If you want to take to the streets, there are opportunities. Stop The Steal is the movement dedicated to putting bodies in the streets of our nation’s state capitals to let our elected officials know that we are not going to stand for seeing our elections stolen in a manner befitting Zimbabwe. There are almost daily rallies at the state capitol building and the TFC Center in Detroit. What’s more, a nationwide rally in DC called the Million MAGA March is scheduled for November 14. The Democratic government of Washington, DC has responded with new COVID restrictions designed to cripple the march.
What can you do? Quite a lot. Nothing less than the future of the country is at stake. If they can steal this election, don’t expect another one to be free and fair. But do expect a lot of gun grabs and speech laws.
Read more articles by Sam Jacobs
About the Author: Sam Jacobs grew up in Southern New England, probably the part of the country with the weakest gun culture. However, from a young age he believed firmly in the right of self defense and the right to keep and bear arms. This, coupled with 12 years of education in public schools and an argumentative nature, meant that he was frequently getting into debates with his teachers about the virtue of the Second Amendment. A precocious student of history and the Constitution, Jacobs became interested in both the practice of armed self defense throughout history as well as the philosophical underpinnings of the Second Amendment.
Jacobs has an affinity for the individual and the common man against centralized forms of power and elites, whether they be in the government or the private sector. In particular, he is interested in the ways in which private companies work to subvert the legislative process and to undermine American freedoms outside of normal legal channels. He considers the resolution of how corporate power can hem in Constitutional freedoms to be the most pressing political question of our age.
The private sector and the public sector are increasingly indistinguishable from one another, both because of behind-the-scenes corporate chicanery that undermines the legislative process and because private companies are rapidly becoming far more powerful than the federal government. Thus, it is more important than ever to both fight the incursion of private companies into our government and to become independent and self-reliant enough to make it difficult for private companies to hem in your rights.
So Sam believes.
Jacobs is the lead writer and chief historian with Ammo.com, and is the driving intellectual force behind the content in the Resistance Library. He is proud to see his work name-checked in places like Bloomberg, USA Today and National Review, but he is far more proud to see his work republished on websites like ZeroHedge, Lew Rockwell and Sons of Liberty Media.
How many firearms does Sam own and what’s his everyday carry? That’s between him and the NSA.
The above article (National Election Fraud: Evidence of National Chicanery During America’s 2020 Presidential Election) was originally created and published by LIBERTAS BELLA and is republished here by contribution with attribution to author and website libertasbella.com.
Stay tuned to …
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.