Maybe We Should Be A Little More Suspicious Of Donald Trump Wanting “HIS” Voters To USE VOTING MACHINES

Donald Trump keeps giving away the game and STILL we refuse to listen to him. Just as Trump’s been telling us his presidency’s illegitimate, he keeps telling us HOW he thought he would stay in the White House — via the VOTING MACHINES. Even Trump’s not dim enough to think he could “ride to victory” on the strength of a red wave. That’s the jingly keys here. Trump wanted HIS voters to skip voting by mail and vote by machine because the machines are where the fix was set up and ready to roll. Right now, everyone’s asking aloud “how could ALL the pollsters be sooooo wrong again?” They weren’t wrong. Stop looking in the wrong place for the answer to the question.

It’s only a “conspiracy theory” if it has no receipts and the connected dots are sketchily connected at best. Put this in the “Stone Cold Fact” column: most of the voting machine makers are owned by card-carrying Republicans. Their business is almost completely unregulated. The Republican owners are significant donors to Republican politicians and Republican politicians sit on the boards of the voting machine making companies. Conflicts of interest abound — unregulated.

Also add to the “Stone Cold Fact” column: hacking a voting machine doesn’t even amount to “a piece of cake” it’s so easy.

Also add: any voting machine that connects to the internet in any way, shape or form is vulnerable.

Also add: every last voting machine made by these companies has at least one back door available to the company.

Also: to cheat in an election using a voting machine would NOT require any sort of “grand conspiracy” whatsoever. It could be accomplished with, at most, a handful of people. Hell, if properly organized, one could steal a presidency (or a few Senatorial elections) with three. One — at the ownership level — to provide a back door, another — technically competent and able to access that back door at the appropriate time (so the ownership level can claim plausible deniability) so as to drop in the code — and, then the third (the political side) guiding the whole pirate ship with subtle hints and clues. Three people could pull this off and no one would ever know. Plausible deniability uber alles.

These are all facts. Demonstrably true. These machines are vulnerable to criminal behavior intent on changing the outcome of the elections they’re tallying.

The most blatant way to steal an election via computer code in a voting machine would be to overtly steal or flip votes. We KNOW FOR A FACT that that happens! It’s been documented! But that’s too easily caught; it CAN be caught if the voter is vigilant. If too much of that happens (putting myself in the criminal’s expensive loafers), it’s apt to raise questions or, worse, alarm. There needs to be a better, subtler, more nuanced way to win via code.

Padding. That’s the ticket.

The code would go something like this: “for every tenth vote for the Republican candidate, add one vote”. Thus, ten votes becomes eleven votes, twenty becomes twenty-two votes, thirty becomes thirty-three votes and on and on. We’ve just added ten percent to the vote total with very little way to check it out — since the computer code that gave the instruction can either be removed or written so as to “remove itself” after having executed its instructions. This is coding that near-amateurs could probably write.

In 2016, the chattering class was quick to jump on Hillary Clinton and the Democrats for botching the election. For sure, the campaign had its flaws. But look at what it was swimming upstream against: RUSSIA and a full-on cyber war attack with the full-on participation of the entire Republican Party. How typical for the boys to gang up on one girl. The false narrative the news media invented to explain how “the polling could be so wrong!” (it wasn’t) was the “secret Trump voter” who lied to the pollsters out of shame but proudly voted for Trump when the time came.

I’m trying to recall if the news media ever stuck a microphone under the nose of any such voter… They should try now — to find a similar voter who voted for Joe Biden (and everything he stood for) but also for the vulnerable Republican Senate candidate — and everything Trumpian he or she stood for. That sounds… no, it SMELLS like bullshit. It stinks of bad analysis that refuses to look at ALL the possible explanations. Instead, it invents a character it can’t produce so as to interview and VERIFY their story.

Very few people in this election “split their vote”. This was tribal — top to bottom.

It might not be possible anymore to forensic evidence from the voting machines. I don’t know. But the Democrats should be all over that like a Republican on an illegal campaign donation.

Can We Please, PLEASE Agree: “Cheating To Win” Does NOT Equal “Winning”

This shouldn’t need to be stated: Cheating to win is NOT “winning”. It’s “CHEATING”. The moment we make cheating one “way” to win, we’ve made cheating the ONLY way to win because only an idiot would play by rules while his opponent laughs at the rules — and wins every election. It’d be like playing Monopoly by the rules while the other guy starts the game with all the bank’s money and all the good properties already “hoteled up”. Free and fair elections demand genuinely level playing fields. If the playing field isn’t level because someone is cheating, we need to stop the game right there and at the very least call a red card foul.

For the record (or the scoresheet to beat the analogy to death), we’re not talking about the offenses to our sensibilities. Trump’s presidential bid should have ended at “Mexicans are rapists”. It should NEVER have made it as far as “pussy grabbing”. The onus is on us — on our news media since they’re the ones with the megaphone — for letting Trump get away with such egregiously unacceptable behavior from ANYONE in public life never mind a presidential candidate. All terrible, terrible behavior, but none of it criminal.

No, I’m talking about actual Class A Felonies. Geez, you’d think a few of the lawyers-turned-journalists would glom onto that and refuse to let go, visions of Pulitzers in their heads. I’ll reference here for what might have happened had our news media done the same due diligence on Donald Trump that Fusion GPS (founded by former Wall Street Journal reporters) did when they first got hired by the Republican-owned, Jeb-Bush-backing Washington Free Beacon to do oppo research. Fusion found so much evidence of Trump laundering money through his bankrupt Atlantic City casinos IN PUBLICLY AVAILABLE MATERIAL that they hired Chris Steele (former head of MI6’s vaunted Russia Desk) to check it all out.

As I’ve also screamed and shouted here, alas — if the American news media could aggregate the Donald Trump story, it would have ended eons ago. The starting point for their daily reporting would be (worst case scenario): “Hey, news audience, guess what the corrupt-to-his-gills traitor and his corrupt-to-its-gills political party did and said today”. We’d have busted a cap in “both sides do it” journalism and stopped equating bullshit with truth.

Let’s go back to the sports analogy. Let’s stop equating scoring a legitimate goal with literally — with your hands — throwing the ball into the net and calling it a goal (a game-winning goal no less!) It’s not. It never was.

Offside is offside (we even have the VAR now to nail it by a shoelace). A hand ball is a hand ball (that bloody VAR again!) It’s all painful when it goes against you but it’s proof that the rule was violated. Putting emotions aside, we follow the rule. In the end, it will serve everyone better that way. If we want to adjust the rule, fine tune it and its application — that’s always open to us. But, if we had been following the rules — the ones that dictate how we play and don’t play this “game” — how this game played out would have been different.

Donald Trump buying Stormy Daniels’ silence, for instance. That, right there, was a red card foul that should have been whistled. Michael Cohen went to prison for his role in that bit of blatant criminality. Donald Trump inviting Russia’s assistance — OPENLY — was a red card foul that should have been whistled. “Hey, Russia, if you’re listening…” was an act of open TREASON. Especially when you consider what Russia literally did next: they DID SOMETHING. Russia ACTED ON Trump’s invitation — and Trump, rather than being appalled by Russia’s reaction, USED IT as part of his campaign.

Russia, mind you, was actively engaged in a CYBER WAR against us. Cyber. War.

Treason is treason is treason.

Cheating that’s also treasonous? We’d be insane to accept that in place of the results we actually voted for. I, for one, do not accept it. But then, I don’t accept cheating to win as winning — and neither should any other American.

Cheating to win is un-American. It’s immoral. It’s not winning.

The moment We The People make THAT our reaction to Trump’s cheating — to the entire Republican Party’s blatant abuse of the rules and the law — that anything accomplished via provable cheating will not stand — we will END the Republican Party’s reliance on cheating to win as their only means to win. Either they’ll adapt — and try selling their ideas instead — or they’ll die. Actually, if they adapt and try selling their ideas, they’ll die anyway — which they know — which is WHY they cheat.

Let’s stop indulging them. Let’s stop allowing their fatal flaw to be OUR fatal flaw. When they claim “We won!” the correct answer isn’t “Oh well, I guess they ‘won’ since they say they did”, it’s “NO, you didn’t”. And that’s it. The rules are quite clear. No, they did not win.

In our system of government, the authority to govern flows from US, We The People. If We The People know for a fact that our authority — it’s baked into our vote — has been not only questioned but attacked — then We The People have every right to respond accordingly (though within the law of course). Good thing the rule of law backs us here: demonstrable cheating to win is not winning.

All we have to do therefore is FOLLOW the rule of law and ENFORCE IT EQUALLY like we’re supposed to.

For starters, we’ll automatically be far healthier as a society because we’ll actually be living up to our ideals (or trying to a lot harder to anyway). Restoring justice to its rightful place — that will help a lot, too. But then the rule of law will demand that we deal with the criminality that drove us to the brink of authoritarianism — against the majority’s will. The rule of law will demand that we address every last nuance of criminality — and every last criminal. Got the stank on ya, Republicans? There’ll be no getting it off.

Gonna be a lot of old, rich, Christian white guys shouting “Out, out, damned spot!”

Maybe it’s time for a new “Scarlet Letter”. Let’s put aside the “A” for Adultery that Hester Prynne was forced to wear and, instead, repurpose those stupid red hats Trump’s sold all his dumber-than-a-rube-on-angel-dust followers by sticking a giant Gold “C” on them. That’s “C” for Cheater. By then, it should be understood that the “C” is interchangeable with a “T” — for “Trump”.

And for “Treason”.

Maybe it’s not a coincidence that the word “CHEAT” begins with a “C” for cheating — but ends in a “T” for “TRUMP”.

Indeed — let’s make it “end” in a “T” for Trump. Better still, let’s make it all end in a sentence.