by Don Fredrick, The Complete Obama Timeline, ©2022
(Nov. 11, 2022) — Do not be intimidated by those who call you an “election denier.” We are not election deniers; they are fraud deniers. There was monumental election fraud in 2020 and it occurred again in 2022. There has probably been fraud going back to the first election in U.S. history, if not all of human history. Everyone knows the Democrats stole the 1960 election from Richard Nixon. Everyone knows Lyndon Baines Johnson gained his U.S. Senate seat through fraud. Everyone knows there has been election fraud in Chicago for decades. In the pre-computer days, the voting machines in Chicago were mechanically operated and had levers to flip and pull to cast your ballot. The “Democrat machine” rigged the elections by simply pre-loading the actual machines with enough ballots to ensure a victory for Richard J. Daley. (By the time his son, Richard M. Daley, ran for mayor, cheating was less necessary because Chicago had turned almost as Democrat as Manhattan.)
Election fraud is obviously not unique to the United States. The September presidential election in Brazil (where all voting is done on touch-screen computers and there is no paper trail) left no candidate with 50 percent of the vote, which forced a run-off election in October. In fact, President Jair Bolsonaro roundly defeated the ex-convict Marxist candidate “Lula” da Silva by a wide margin. (An audit suggests that Bolsonaro, who is known as the “Trump of the Tropics,” won 68 percent of the September vote.) Lula then squeaked by with a victory on October 30, again relying on cheating. One cannot deny fraud when entire towns reported 100 percent vote totals for Lula, even while many of the citizens insist they voted for Bolsonaro. There are now massive street demonstrations by the people of Brazil, the blocking of roads by angry voters who know there was cheating, and strikes by disenfranchised workers—all of whom were expected to trust the results and the deep state that programmed them. Meanwhile, Lula has not been seen, and the top (crooked) judges who were supposed to be shown the evidence of fraud left the country. Despite Lula having allegedly won the election, an overwhelming number of Bolsonaro-supporting candidates who were also on the ballot defeated their opponents. Even if Lula were to be sworn in, he would face a congress that opposes him. (But that will not deter Lula. Bolsonaro supporters have already been assassinated, and at least one member of Bolsonaro’s political party who won reelection fled to the United States because she feared for her life.) Have you heard any of this on the evening news in the United States? Of course not.
No honest and reasonable person can deny that election fraud takes place. There is simply no explanation for the massive shift of tens of thousands of votes in the middle of the night in the November 2020 election in the United States. It is absurd to believe that batches of thousands of ballots would contain no votes at all for Donald Trump. It is also absurd to believe that thousands of people voted for Joe Biden and left the remainder of their ballots completely blank. What is perhaps more disturbing than the fraud is the fact that the perpetrators knew their shenanigans were likely to be noticed, and they did it anyway. Why? They knew the Democrats would support the fraud, they knew the media leftists would ignore the fraud, and they knew the warmongering deep-state Republicans-In-Name-Only were eager to be rid of Donald Trump, who threatened to overturn their profitable apple carts. (Money cannot be skimmed off the payments to corrupt Ukraine oligarchs if there are no payments to Ukraine.)
Many are familiar with this quote (sometimes attributed to Alexandr Solzhenitsyn): “They lie to us, we know they’re lying, they know we know they’re lying, but they keep lying to us, and we keep pretending to believe them.” The tactic of the election fraudsters and their supporters is simply to deny, deny again, and keep denying. That might remind some of an old movie, A Guide for the Married Man, in which Robert Morse gives Walter Matthau advice on how to cheat on his wife. In one scene, Joey Bishop is in a motel room with a scantily-clad woman. His wife, played by Ann Morgan Guilbert, walks in on them and accuses him of cheating. “With whom?” he asks. “That woman!” she yells. “What woman?” he asks. They go back and forth, with him denying her accusations while the other woman casually gets dressed and leaves. That particular scene is a great reminder of how politicians lie to the voters. “No, there is no security footage.” “No, the police bodycams were not functioning.” “No, I never called for defunding the police!” “No, I did not vote for that.” “Inflation is only transitory.” “We are not in a recession.” “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.” “You mean like, with a cloth?” “I met the man who invented insulin.” “I do not know anything about my son’s business dealings.” “It was the most honest election in history.” And the media never question the lies.
Do not let them bamboozle you. You are not an election denier. They are fraud deniers.
But how do we stop the fraud? How do we put an end to ballot dumping in the middle of the night? First, understand the process of the fraudsters. Before the election, party officials review the results of media polls and their (typically more reliable) internal polls. They know they are going to lose. Assume they expect their candidate to lose by 20,000 votes in a battleground state. In order to avoid losing the election (and the power that follows from a victory), they need to manufacture at least 20,000 votes. But they certainly do not want a tie or a result that is close enough to prompt a recount, so they decide they need 40,000 votes. What do they do? They have political operatives fill out 40,000 ballots. That does not take long if you have enough people willing to perform shady work for $15 per hour in unreported cash. The process takes even less time if only the circle for the chosen candidate is filled in and the rest of the ballot is ignored.
The next step is simply introducing those 40,000 ballots into the counting process. That can be troublesome if the counting is performed at the hundreds (or even thousands) of polling places, but the “powers that be” have increasingly shifted the counting process to large, central locations. If you try to sneak 100 ballots into the process at one individual polling place, where there are few workers, they all know each other, and some are Democrats and some are Republicans, you may get caught in the act. But ballot dumping is much easier in a huge processing center, where hundreds of people are working and few know each other. Trays of ballots are constantly coming and going, and no one will pay much attention when more trays are brought in by strangers. If you are worried about getting caught, you simply come up with a way to get most of the workers to leave the counting room. “It’s time for a coffee break.” “We have a burst water pipe and have to evacuate!” “We’re shutting down at 2 a.m. to get some sleep and will resume counting in the morning.” Does that sound like November 2020 and November 2022?
What then is the solution? How do we prevent ballot dumps? The solution lies with the ballots themselves and how they are printed and counted. This is what should be done:
The ballot should have two sections. The smaller, upper portion of the ballot is used for the name and address if the ballot is used in a mail-in process.
The larger, bottom portion of the ballot contains the names of the candidates and the circles that are filled in for recognition by scanners.
The very bottom of the ballot contains a code that denotes the voting precinct number and location. That is accompanied by a randomized alphanumeric code that is unique to that ballot, such as ADNQ42726. Those same codes are also printed on the top portion of the ballot.
For voters who request mail-in ballots, their name and address are printed on the top portion of the ballot. The name and address will appear in the window envelope used to mail the ballot (and a return envelope) to the voter. When the voter receives his mail-in ballot, he fills in the circles for the candidates of his choice. He removes the top portion of the ballot by folding it along its perforation. The voter keeps that top portion, which contains the alphanumeric code that is unique to that ballot, such as ADNQ42726.
For in-person voting, no name and address would be printed on the ballot, but the top portion, which would contain a unique alphanumeric code, would be separated by the voter. When he casts his ballot on election day, he removes the top portion of the ballot and takes it home. The code on his portion matches the code on the bottom of the ballot he submitted. For in-person voting, enough ballots would be printed to cover the number of people on the voter registration lists in that precinct, as well as an additional but limited supply for possible spoilage. Every ballot, whether mail-in or in-person, would contain a unique alphanumeric code and a code indicating the precinct number.
All mail-in ballots must be received by the counting centers on or before election day, with no exceptions. It is absurd to allow late ballots simply because they have been postmarked by a certain date. It is obviously not impossible for fraudsters to have an envelope backdated by a friend who works at the post office. Nor is it difficult to buy a rubber stamp that matches a post office stamp. (Anyone willing to commit election fraud is willing to spend a few dollars on a counterfeit rubber stamp.)
Ideally, there would be no huge counting centers in the big cities for the scanning of all area ballots. Scanning at the polling places would be more secure because there are fewer employees and therefore less of a likelihood of an unknown person strolling in with trays of ballots. Further, scanning machines would certainly not be connected to the Internet. The counts from the machines would be copied to a thumb drive, which would then be used to electronically transmit the results to the main counting facility. The ballots and the thumb drive would be retained for possible later audits.
After the ballots have been scanned and uploaded to a master database, all voters would be able to verify their vote by going online and entering the unique alphanumeric code that was on their ballot. (Type in ADNQ42726, for example, and the website will show you how you voted.) That would be the case for both in-person voters and mail-in voters. Their vote would still be secret, however. The alphanumeric code generated when the ballot is printed would not be recorded on the voter registration file. At the time of printing, the precinct code and alphanumeric code would be entered on a separate database that is used solely for verification purposes.
How would this process prevent ballot dumping at two o’clock in the morning? There would be no possibility of obtaining 40,000 usable blank ballots for fraudsters to complete. Any determined political operative who has a friend who owns a printing company could print ballots, of course, but they would not contain the precinct codes or alphanumeric ballot codes. Fake codes could be printed on the forms, but when those ballots are scanned and counted there would be no matching entry on the original database that was created when the legitimate ballots were printed. Photocopying ballots would also not work, for the same reason. ADNQ42726 and hundreds of thousands of other codes would be on the database, but codes made up by the fraudsters would not. A batch of 500 ballots that are scanned and all rejected because their codes do not have matches on the original database would be evidence of either a scanner malfunction or cheating.
All mail-in ballots would contain the codes, as would all ballots for in-person voting. If a precinct had 500 registered voters, it would be obvious to everyone that there was fraud if the vote total for that location exceeded 500. (The total would, of course, be less than 500 because there is never a 100 percent voter turnout of voters.) If 200 mail-in ballots were sent to voters in that precinct, and 250 people in that precinct voted in person, the total for that precinct would be 450. Each of those 450 votes would be accepted and counted only if the codes on the ballots have matching entries on the database that was created when the ballots were printed.
By following the process described above, it would simply be impossible for political operatives to dump thousands ballots into the system on the night of the election. There would be a potential for some fraud at the precinct level, however, because polling places always need additional ballots to cover damage or errors. If, for example, a precinct with 500 registered voters is given 550 ballots to allow for damaged ballots, after the polls close someone could conceivably take the leftover, unused ballots, fill them out, and scan them. But that would have to be done at the precinct level, where the ballots are scanned, and where such fraud would be more obvious—especially if both parties have election workers at the site. Some fraud would therefore be possible, but it could not reach the level of 2020 fraud, and it would certainly not occur at almost every polling location. Ideally, any unused ballots would be shredded on the spot at the polling places as soon as the polls close.
What else can be done to reduce election fraud? Needless to say, photo ID requirements are critical. Almost no one age 18 or older lacks a photo ID, and most states issue them free of charge to people who do not have a license to drive. If a person has lost his ID at the last minute, he can be given a provisional ballot to be counted after confirming his identity. No voters would be disenfranchised if such rules were followed.
All states should routinely match their voter registration files against the quarterly Social Security Death Master Index. That government file contains the names and Social Security numbers of all deceased former recipients of those benefits. It is easily obtained from the government (for a small fee). Anyone on that death file should be removed from the state’s voter registration list. Anyone not deceased whose name erroneously appears on that list would be given a provisional ballot that would be counted after the discrepancy has been explained.
Double voting must also be addressed. In the 2020 election, many people who voted in Nevada were still on California’s voter registration lists even though they had moved out of the state. Each state should routinely match its file against the files of other states so that a person who moves from New York to Florida will not be able to vote in both states. That was not much of a problem when most voting was in-person, because no one would fly from Florida to New York to cast a second ballot. But with the increased use of mail-in ballots, illegal double voting has been made much easier.
Double voting is a problem with both college students and “snowbirds.” A 20-year-old who lives with his parents in Chicago is registered to vote in Illinois. But if he attends college in Colorado, he can easily register to vote in that state as well. (Colorado allows voter registration on the basis of nothing more than a student ID.) Colorado and Illinois do not routinely match their lists against each other. The student can vote illegally in Colorado (in person or via mail-in ballot) and also in Illinois (via mail-in ballot). The likelihood of that vote fraud being identified is minimal. Similarly, a retired couple in New York may have a vacation home in Florida. They should not, but can, register to vote in both states and are unlikely to be caught if they do so. The retired couple casts two New York ballots and two Florida ballots. Routine state-to-state matching of voter registration files can reduce the likelihood of such fraud. (It has been reported that PBS journalist Yamiche Alcindor cast a ballot in Florida, even though she and her husband live in Washington, D.C. Her husband is registered to vote in D.C. She claims she is registered to vote in Florida. Why? Do they have two residences? If so, should they not be registered in the same place? There is no suggestion that she voted twice, but should she be allowed to vote in Florida simply because her ballot there carries more weight than a ballot in D.C., where close elections are unheard of? Did the leftist journalist cast a Florida ballot against Ron DeSantis and Marco Rubio because she could not do so in D.C.?)
Ballot harvesting should be outlawed in all states. No one should be allowed to go door-to-door to collect ballots. There should be no drop boxes where a fraudster can deposit multiple ballots. Political operatives should not be allowed in nursing homes and retirement homes to collect ballots or “assist seniors” in filling them out. Most voting should be done on election day. “Early voting,” if permitted, should last no more than a few days. Mail-in ballots should be used only if requested by the voter, and not automatically sent out to everyone (dead or alive) on the voter registration lists.
Lastly, if voting is indeed sacred, then it should be treated as such. Election laws should be changed to increase the penalties for those who break them. Existing laws are rarely enforced, and judges tend to be lenient on the issue. Instead, criminal penalties should be so severe that no one would even consider casting a fraudulent ballot. Such crimes should be Class B felonies, with jail sentences and fines that increase, based on the number of fake ballots cast. Something on the order of one year in jail and a $10,000 fine for each illegal ballot would deter even the most ardent political operatives.
Will these changes be implemented? Only if you demand them.