Adding fraudulent votes to voting machines is common enough that there’s a name for it: “ringing up” votes.
The bribed officials would “add fraudulent votes on the voting machine – also known as ‘ringing up’ votes” for … preferred candidates.” During Election Day, the elections officials would tell Myers how many votes were needed in order to create a win for the preferred candidate, and the officials would add these fraudulent votes to the totals. Then, they would later falsely certify that the voting machine results were accurate.
Beren would advise actual in-person voters to support Myers’ candidates and also cast fraudulent votes in support of Myers’ preferred candidates on behalf of voters she knew would not or did not physically appear at the polls.
During Election Day itself, Myers conferred with Beren via cell phone while she was at the polling station about the number of votes cast for his preferred candidates. Beren would report to Myers how many “legit votes,” meaning actual voters, had appeared at the polls and cast ballots. If actual voter turnout was high, Beren would add fewer fraudulent votes in support of Myers’ preferred candidates.
Today, surprisingly few Americans, 37%, say they believe the 2024 elections will be both honest and open to rightful voters. Forty-three percent (43%) say they have serious doubts about election honesty, openness, or both. Just 64% say they are confident their votes will be counted accurately the 2024 national races.
The most suspicious thing about the 2020 election is the powerful interests forbidding people from being suspicious about the 2020 election. And now the unresolved suspicions cast a shadow as we move toward November 5.
A fair election welcomes scrutiny.
An honest election invites the chance to address questions.
A trustworthy election embraces transparency.
People have questioned and cheated in elections throughout our history. To name a sampling of incidents captured in these final days before the 2024 election:
1,600 self-identified foreigners were registered to vote in Virginia, and the Biden administration went to court to try to allow them to illegally remain on the rolls.
A mysterious and ill-timed flaw has reportedly been discovered in widely used voting machines.
Pennsylvania illegally cut off early voting, turning away residents hours before the deadline.
Ballots were burned at drop boxes in Portland, Oregon, and Vancouver, Washington, destroying potentially hundreds of ballots. Officials said they believe the incidents are linked.
One Pennsylvania county busted a batch of 2,500 voter registration forms with large numbers of allegedly fraudulent forms.
Detroit, Michigan destroyed ballot dropbox video that was supposed to be preserved in a voter integrity investigation.
A “database error” in Arizona miscategorized more than 218,000 voters who had not proven their US citizenship.
Read on for details.
In 2020, the shutdown of rational questions about the most irregular election of our time fed mistrust, created instability, and gave the appearance there was something to hide. We now have the benefit of hindsight to see the pattern established by media, politicians, pundits, and analysts. In other controversies, logical questions were censored, and declared closed. Explorations of facts were labelled conspiracy theories. For example:
We were told not to suspect that Covid might have originated at the Chinese lab in the city where Covid was first identified, and where US scientists had partnered with the communist Chinese to create a bat coronavirus that’s infectious in people.
We were admonished for noticing that after Covid vaccine promoters proclaimed the vaccine was 100% effective at preventing Covid, it doesn’t.
We were instructed to think that anyone was crazy if they thought that the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the FBI (along with the Department of Justice and other Intel agencies) would fabricate a false Russia collusion narrative against Donald Trump.
We were directed to believe that the existence of shocking material on Hunter Biden’s laptop was a Russian disinformation campaign.
In each instance, those doing the misleading and censoring include high ranking current and ex-government officials, national media outlets, and “fact check” groups. They unwittingly taught us that there is often truth or value in the censored information. Their actions ultimately contributed to lingering doubts about our election integrity.
Hard Lessons From 2020
The pattern was the same after the 2020 election. Don’t even ask about the wild anomalies, we were warned.
To be sure, those who supported Joe Biden were delighted about his overnight come-from-behind victory. And those who supported Trump were shocked and disappointed. But either way, anyone who didn’t notice that things were differentand worthy of questions, was kidding himself. The more the powers-that-be controversialized and censored the questions, the more doubt it sowed.
A lot remains unknown. But the 2020 election revealed one important reality that should be of concern to all: If cheating were to impact the outcome of a presidential election in the future, there’s no established process for the allegedly cheated candidate to remedy it when it’s his enemies calling the shots.
First, the allegedly cheated candidate has no power to collect evidence in the time frame required. In 2020, the media and courts required Trump to present “proof” of cheating within days. This was an impossible bar to meet, of course, since Trump had no immediate authority to collect evidence, access voting data and ballots, issue subpoenas, or force depositions of witnesses with information. Additionally, the allegedly cheated candidate has no investigative infrastructure funded and in place to mount a comprehensive election challenge.
Second, although prosecutors do have investigative authority, there is no remedy if those prosecutors are politically conflicted or simply oppose the candidate making the claim of cheating. They may conduct a biased investigation or none at all. There’s no independent body for the candidate to appeal to for a fair inquiry.
Third, even assuming a fair investigation were to be launched, the undertaking would be a massive endeavor, encompassing a number of precincts, cities and states. Evidence could include surveillance video, precinct data, ballots, voting machines and software, witness interviews, cell phone data, and chain of custody documents. Election fraud investigations take at least months, and often years. By the time fraud is unearthed and proven in a national election, it would be far too late to change the course of history.
The Media’s Role
The dynamic is further complicated by the media.
Although the news media plays no legal or constitutional role in determining the winner of a state or election, many people seem to adopt the notion that when particular news outlets “call” a race, or declare the election to be settled— then it is. And that until they call it— it is not settled.
This creates an untenable situation during an election contested by a candidate whom the media opposes, such as Donald Trump. From the moment the New York Times announced it was suspending its normal ethical guidelines to cover Trump in the 2016 campaign (because the newspaper claimed he was uniquely dangerous), the media at large ceased to become a credible reporter of facts regarding Trump. Likewise, the media cannot be seen as a fair authority in litigating an election dispute involving Trump or another candidate it opposes.
It’s not just the calling of races that’s unfairly impacted by the media. In 2020, we saw reporters, anchors, commentators, and analysts who had no access to evidence and had not personally conducted firsthand investigations nonetheless proclaim there had been no cheating. Ironically, their claims were made “without evidence,” even as they claimed Trump and his supporters had no evidence for their own claims.
Those reporting on the 2020 election questions failed to note that no independent body with the authority to obtain evidence had even made a genuine, public attempt to collect thorough evidence. Additionally, just because evidence of something hasn’t been produced or collected doesn’t mean the suspected thing is proven false. Yet that fallacy was repeated day after day by people who should have known better.
Attorney General William Barr’s Role
On Tuesday, December 1, 2022, President Trump’s Attorney General William Barr— no fan of Trump, as we now know—did a strange thing, indeed. In an interview that went viral, Barr told the Associated Press (AP), that the Justice Department had not uncovered evidence of widespread voter fraud, and had seen nothing that would change the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.
What’s even more interesting, perhaps, is that Barr’s comment wasn’t an impromptu answer to a question spontaneously asked by AP. According to my sources, Barr actually requested that AP do the interview with him, during which Barr dropped the bombshell.
Of course, the question is—why did Barr want to make this premature announcement, which he knew would be used to kill Trump’s efforts to investigate the fairness of the election in some states?
“Disputing President Donald Trump’s persistent, baseless claims, Attorney General William Barr declared Tuesday the U.S. Justice Department has uncovered no evidence of widespread voter fraud that could change the outcome of the 2020 election,” reported left-leaning Axios.
The elephant in the room is one question—How could the Justice Department have uncovered widespread voter fraud, if it existed? First of all, there had been no earnest, transparent effort to find it. Secondly, this is the same Justice Department that got caught repeatedly conspiring against Trump, including the FBI’s felony manufacturing of evidence to try to frame Trump in a false Russian collusion conspiracy.
Reporters should have wondered, What was motivating Barr to claim to prematurely know something undeniably unknowable? Had there really been some type of thorough national investigation to get to the bottom of the record number of mail-in votes, lack of chain of custody, signature and date verification, and unusual drop boxes? Had Barr’s investigators reviewed all of the surveillance video? Thoroughly investigated the cases of flash drives with votes that mysteriously went uncounted on election night? Dug into the instances of vote-counting stopped overnight? The cases of Trump votes being mistakenly assigned to Biden by voting machines? Had they researched the inexplicably long delays in reporting results? Of course not. Many lapses hadn’t even been discovered yet.
But reporters were so blinded by their bias, and so thrilled to hear Barr make his unsupported statement, that they turned off their critical thinking skills. They promptly declared Trump’s election claims to be debunked. Any further questions were called conspiracy theories.
Meaningless Recounts
Meantime, it’s meaningless to have the same people who cheated in an election certify that election or oversee recounts. After all, election officials are sometimes the crooked people in the equation.Yet the media repeatedly pretended not to understand this, blindly declaring that recounts constituted “proof” there was no fraud.
In 2022, a former US Congressman in the swing state of Pennsylvania was sentenced to prison in a multi-year election fraud ring. Michael “Ozzie” Myers bribed multiple Judges of Elections in Philadelphia to illegally add votes for certain Democrats in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018.
The bribed officials would “add fraudulent votes on the voting machine – also known as ‘ringing up’ votes” for Myers’ clients and preferred candidates.” During Election Day, the elections officials would tell Myers how many votes were needed in order to create a win for the preferred candidate, and the officials would add these fraudulent votes to the totals. Then, the same elections officials would later falsely certify that the voting machine results were accurate.
By the time this fraud was caught and prosecuted, numerous impacted candidates had been elected and had served. There’s no way to belatedly remedy the impact of the fraud.
In Michigan, there was another case of an elections official accused of violations. The state’s nonpartisan auditor found that the secretary of state who oversaw the 2020 election, a Democrat, broke the law by failing to properly maintain voter rolls, heightening the risk that ineligible people voted.
And in San Luis, Arizona, there was a shocking case where several locals said they knew firsthand about longstanding voter fraud organized and committed by Democrat town officials. But they said neither political party was interested in rooting it out. In 2020, they proved their claims by capturing a slice of the fraud on video.
But there was only what seemed like a reluctant and limited investigation and punishment of the guilty officials, including the ex-mayor, with seemingly no effort to get at the broader players and larger ring that had allegedly operated for years.
Fraud Matters—Even if not ‘Widespread’
Relatively small segments of the national vote in key precincts can determine the outcome of a presidential election.
“[Biden’s] victory really was stitched together with narrow margins in a handful of states,” proclaimed NPR on December 2, 2020.
“The tight races in the trio of states had a big electoral impact…just 44,000 votes in Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin separated Biden and Trump from a tie in the Electoral College.” The article noted, “Of course, Trump is no stranger to narrow victories. He won the 2016 election thanks to just under 80,000 combined votes in three of those six key states.”
Here is just a small sampling of a few key issues that were documented.
In GEORGIA where Biden won by 12,670
Issue: A major error in one county’s hand recount.
Number of ballots impacted: 9,626
A recount monitor caught 9,626-vote error in the hand recount in DeKalb County. That’s according to the chairman of the Georgia Republican Party, who filed a declaration. One batch had reported 10,707 votes for Biden and 13 for Trump. But the true count was 1,081 for Biden and 13 for Trump. Two official counters had signed off on the miscounted batch.
Issue: Uncounted memory cards in three counties.
Number of ballots impacted: 5,863
In three counties, post-election audits and recounts discovered memory cards with thousands of uncounted ballots, most of them for Trump, two weeks after the election:
508 in Walton County
2,600 in Floyd County
2,755 in Fayette County
The discovery cut Biden’s lead in the state by more than 1,400 votes.
Issue: Tabulation error.
Number of ballots impacted: 37
In Ware County, a “small tabulation error” is faulted for taking 37 votes away from Trump on election day.
Issue: The mysterious water leak that never happened.
Number of ballots impacted: Unknown
This is the one of the easiest cases for authorities to get to the bottom of and publicly explain, had they wanted to. But they didn’t.
On election night, Georgia election officials at a major precinct suddenly suspended the vote count, citing a water leak in a master pipe. After Republican observers left, vote counting resumed without them. When people inquired about details of the water leak, it turned out nothing had flooded or even gotten wet, and there was no work order for any leak. Nobody ever explained who fabricated the excuse and no one was held accountable.
Issue: False voter registration applications
Number of false applications submitted: 70
An activist from Coalition for the People’s Agenda allegedly got caught submitting 70 false voter registration applications and was referred for prosecution.
In MICHIGAN where Biden won by 154,188
Issue: Mistakenly-added votes for Biden.
Number of votes impacted: 100,000
In Shiawassee County, 100,000 votes for Biden that he didn’t actually get were reportedly added on Election Night. Observers flagged the error and the tally was corrected.
Issue: Strange voting machine errors for Biden.
Number of ballots impacted: 3,200
Antrim County falsely reported that Biden beat Trump by 3,000 votes, unlikely in the Republican stronghold. Persistent challenges eventually revealed that Trump actually defeated Biden with 56% of the vote. Though an investigation revealed a shocking breakdown of layers of protections on multiple levels, including “mistakes by county and township staff while operating the election technology, procedural missteps while processing ballots in some localities, and the failure of the county canvassers to detect lingering discrepancies,” it was all chalked up to innocent mistakes.
Issue: Unloaded votes on memory sticks.
Number of ballots impacted: 3,300
In one Michigan county, 3,300 votes were “found” after the election on memory sticks that had not been loaded into the central vote tally system. Additionally, observers claimed there are no procedures to ensure the security of the USB drives reporting vote tallies.
Issue: Backdated absentee votes.
Number of ballots impacted: estimated at 100,000
A Detroit election worker filed a declaration stating that she and others were ordered to backdate about 10,000 ballots per day, or about 100,000 total, to make them appear legal even though they were not in the Qualified Voter File and had not arrived by the legal deadline. She also testified that leading up to Election Day, Detroit poll workers skipped required voter ID checks.
InWISCONSINwhere Biden won by 20,682
Issue: Illegally approved drop boxes; voter ID requirements not followed.
Number of ballots impacted: 200,000
Absentee ballot drop boxes used in 2020 were illegally approved by the elections commission, according to the state supreme court. Had that ruling come before the election, it could have had a major impact: 200,000 drop box ballots skipped the normal voter ID requirements.
Issue: Operation to illegally collect ballots at nursing homes.
Number of ballots impacted: Unknown
An audit uncovered an operation to allegedly collect ballots illegally at nursing homes in the 2020 election. The nonpartisan Legislative Audit Bureau determined that the elections commission broke the law with nursing home oversight.
Miscelleneous:
In Florida, a Democrat blew the whistle on what she says is an illegal vote scheme that’s operated for years in the Orlando area, with paid brokers coercing voters in black communities to hand over their ballots.
In Texas, a social worker was charged with 134 felony counts of election fraud. She allegedly registered people with intellectual and developmental disabilities to vote in 2020 without their knowledge or consent. She pleaded guilty to election fraud.
And in California, two men were charged in an alleged scheme to submit more than 8,000 fraudulent voter registration applications for homeless people leading up to the 2020 election. There was no publicly released follow up to announce who they were working for and whether this was a broader scheme; and how long it had operated, and where.
Lax Penalties, Little Follow Up
In the instances where fraud is flagged and prosecuted, the penalties (by most objective standards) are surprisingly lax, and the curiosity to follow up sorely lacking, particularly considering that some of the cases involve longstanding rings. This is true whether Democrats or Republican are in charge of the investigations.
The lost-and-found memory cards in Georgia that contained mostly Trump votes? “Blunders” — not corruption, said officials.
The California pair caught submitting 8,000 fraudulent voter registration applications? One got two years in prison, the other 60 days in county jail.
The Texas social worker charged with 134 felonies? She got 13 days in jail.
We may never get to the bottom of what happened in 2020. In the end, maybe there is nothing of real significance to get to the bottom of. But too little was done to give many Americans confidence in the system. The fact that the questions were so roundly shut down served to undermines voter confidence as we move into the final days of what promises to be another contentious and potentially contested election.
The media’s persistent demands for a candidate to pledge to “accept the results” in advance, before we know anything about the type of election it is, are not only premature, they’re also contrary to logic and reason.
Emmy-Award Winning Nonpartisan Investigative Journalist, New York Times Bestselling Author, Host of Sinclair's Full Measure. I follow the facts, not the crowd.
Check out our deep discounts in our Christmas Sale at The Sharyl Attkisson Store. Unique items for independent thinkers. Proceeds support independent journalism causes like Project Censored, the Sharyl Attkisson…
The following information is from Children’s Health Defense. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has updated its 2025 immunization schedule, recommending a new Hepatitis B (Hep B) vaccine for…
I’d like to know, but I don’t believe that we will ever know unless somebody starts singing like a canary. One has to ask why haven’t the Republicans been pushing to change the laws so that it would be easier to implement an investigation as well as change the rules and laws to make such an investigation viable and have strong degree of punishment in order to persuade people to cooperate with an investigation as well as make a conviction onerous to make their punishment stringent enough to make them think once, twice, nay, thrice before committing that crime.
Keep repeating a lie and soon folks begin to think it is fact. The article wraps up the findings in a simple sentence. “In the end, maybe there is nothing of real significance to get to the bottom of.”
But there are those who will keep repeating the lie and with great emotion until folks accept it as fact.
Just a feeling that your side lost and so there had to be cheating. In reality, the one screaming there was cheating was probably the one cheating…but obviously not enough to change the outcome in their favor.
Thank you for this exhaustive presentation that shows, specifically, how the results of the 2020 election included plenty of avenues for fraudulent vote counting.
Sorry Phil but there were several caveat sentences in that paragraph you pulled one sentence from. Just like the leftist media you take one section and make it the basis for your entire premise. Ms Attkisson cited multiple cases of fraud in the entire article that were not lies but facts. Those alone make election integrity extremely suspect and the 2020 election left wide open for discussion, even though it cannot be change at this point in time.
It is possible that correcting all the fraudulent voting would not have provided a different outcome unless fraud is eliminated to a much greater extent than what occured in 2020, voters on either side should question the results.
You are quite free to close your eyes to the facts, since you got the outcome you desired.
So what then can be done after a presidencial race has been stolen ? Nothing MAGA just shut up and get used to living in a communist 3rd world country ! Be sure to tell the brown shirts you were just pretending to be a Trump supporter when they knock on your door with orders for reeducation camp transfer !
You forgot to mention that Bill Barr ordered no investigations to be conducted in PA in 2020. Approximately 75 affidavits of voting anomalies were filed. Many testified in front of the PA legislature to no avail. Barr sent FBI agents to two filers not to investigate but to get them to recant their stories.
Also in AZ, the recount was just to count all ballots (legal or not) and not for a forensic audit of ballots. A forensic audit would have identified copied ballots, legitimate paper, machine filled ballots, unfolded mail in ballots, etc. Not surprisingly, the locked ballot room was broken into during the audit without anyone identified as the culprit or what was stolen or inserted.
There is only one sensible answer to election cheating—The ‘Press’ allows it and, if needed, will cover up for the crooks.
It has been, and is being, proven.
“Reporters” have to be curious, smart and fearless to be effective. Only a very few qualify, in my opinion.
Great article! For it clearly shows (as if we needed another example) that SA is hardly the “nonpartisan” journalist that she claims to be. She has her agenda, and she’s sticking to it.
The agenda this time is keeping the story of the stolen 2020 election alive. And how is she going to do that? Certainly not by providing any real evidence. It’s by throwing out some random events that COULD show voter fraud. And claiming that they weren’t really investigated. And by ignoring all of the other investigations that were done. And by “just asking questions”.
In past newsletters, SA has complained that, unlike in the past, reporters are now putting their opinions into their news reports. Well, I can remember when reporters also required multiple sources for their stories. How many sources are quoted in this piece. Zero as far as I can tell.
Here’s just a sampling of the weaknesses in this article:
1) “The most suspicious thing about the 2020 election is the powerful interests forbidding people from being suspicious about the 2020 election.” This unfounded statement immediately follows the paragraph stating that 43% of voters have concerns about the integrity of the election. Apparently, these people haven’t been “forbidden” from speaking their minds.
2) “A fair election welcomes scrutiny.” The 2020 election has been investigated far, far more than any in my lifetime. Multiple investigations and recounts have been done. So I’d say that election officials have been more than welcoming of scrutiny. Or at least I’d ask what legitimate allegations haven’t been investigated.
3) “1,600 self-identified foreigners were registered to vote in Virginia, and the Biden administration went to court to try to allow them to illegally remain on the rolls.” Highly misleading. These folks were indeed foreigners, but the issue was whether they were citizens or not (foreign-born naturalized citizens can legally vote as I’m sure SA knows). The issue was that they had checked the “non-citizen” box on their MVD registration. The counter argument was that these folks might have simply checked the wrong box or they might have become citizens since their MVD registration. The Biden administration DID NOT argue that non-citizens should be allowed to vote. Their argument was that the law doesn’t allow large-scale changes to the voter database less than 90 days before an election.
4) “A “database error” in Arizona miscategorized more than 218,000 voters who had not proven their US citizenship”. I’m not sure of putting “database error” in quotes was intended to imply some skullduggery, but the true story is that the folks caught in this “database error” had registered to vote before proof of citizenship became required under Arizona law. The “error” occurred when they renewed their driver’s license after the proof of citizenship requirement became law and the voting registration database was updated with the later date, thereby indicating that they had provided proof of citizenship. There was no intent to defraud anyone or to allow noncitizens to vote. The affected people had lived in Arizona since at least 1996 and had voted in every election since then. There is zero indication that any of these folks are not citizens. Another highly misleading data point
5) “Their actions ultimately contributed to lingering doubts about our election integrity.” This was in reference to instances in which stories were originally “censored” or at least downplayed that turned out to be true. But my belief is that this had nothing to do with belief in the stolen election. That came from Trump.
6) “there’s no established process for the allegedly cheated candidate to remedy it when it’s his enemies calling the shots”. This conveniently overlooks the fact that the alleged cheating occurred while Trump was President. Are we supposed to believe that all of those in the Trump DOJ were really Trump’s enemies? Seems rather doubtful. And it also overlooks the fact that the DOJ did in fact investigate all kinds of allegations.
7) “In 2020, the media and courts required Trump to present “proof” of cheating within days”. First of all, the “media” didn’t “require” anything. And I have no idea why “proof” is in quotes. Isn’t that the way it always works. Courts require “proof” to sustain some allegation. Are the courts now supposed to take some allegation seriously just because someone “thinks” something happened? And what does this statement say about the myriad lawsuits that were filed during this period that claimed to have evidence of fraud? Did they make up that evidence?
8) “Although the news media plays no legal or constitutional role in determining the winner of a state or election, many people seem to adopt the notion that when particular news outlets “call” a race, or declare the election to be settled— then it is. And that until they call it— it is not settled”. Who are the “many people” that believe the media determines who wins? They clearly don’t understand how our elections work and, if they really believe that is the media’s role, why would anyone pay attention to their views?
9) “It’s not just the calling of races that’s unfairly impacted by the media.” The previous paragraph just said that the media plays no role in determining election winners. So how could the media’s calls be considered “unfair” (they could be wrong, but not unfair)
10) “just because evidence of something hasn’t been produced or collected doesn’t mean the suspected thing is proven false”. This is, of course, true. But it’s also pretty silly. For to prove something like this false would require proving a negative something which can’t be done (no matter how many investigations are done, all anyone has to do is say that the investigations were flawed or come up with something else to investigate). That’s why courts require proof beyond a “reasonable doubt”, not beyond “all doubt”. If you make some allegation, you are supposed to provide evidence that it is true. It’s not up to me to provide evidence that it’s false.
11) Barr’s Role: First of all, the date of Barr’s interview is wrong. It was 2020, not 2022. And Barr has publicly explained why he did that interview. It was intended to tamp down the rampant conspiracy theorizing about the stolen election. You know you’re getting desperate when you have to resort to implying that Barr would have falsified something because he’s “no fan” of Trump. This was the guy who wrote such a misleading summary of the Mueller report that even Mueller went public with his disagreements. And he’s publicly stated that he’s voting for Trump this year.
SA – what specifically are you accusing Barr of doing? Doing a shoddy investigation? Was that deliberate because he’s “not a fan” of Trump? Please explain.
12) “Meaningless Recounts”: I always thought that the hand recounts were the gold standard for checking the proper working of the voting machines since they take the machines completely out of the picture. But it seems that I haven’t been thorough enough in my conspiratorial thinking since it now appears that the recounts were “meaningless” because they were conducted by the same election officials that conducted the election itself. So let’s cut to the chase:
SA – what exactly are you accusing the election officials of doing? Were they incompetent because they couldn’t spot the fraud? Or were they aiding and abetting the fraud? Please be specific in your answer. And what evidence do you have that substantiates your charges?
I can’t speak to the other states, but this argument is not true for Arizona. The recount there was done by the Cyber Ninjas. Election officials weren’t part of the activity.
13) “Fraud Matters—Even if not ‘Widespread’”: SA provides a list of odd things that happened during the election. But, to her credit, she admits that most of the things that went wrong were corrected. So what are we to make of this? Some (temporary) mistakes were made. They were corrected. There isn’t any indication that any of these mistakes affected the outcome. In a sane world, finding (and fixing) these kinds of problems should actually enhance people’s belief in the sanctity of the election. And isn’t it reasonable to believe that (temporary) mistakes were made in past elections? No one claimed that Trump didn’t win in 2016.
14) SA has made the case that there is not sufficient time to investigate possible fraud charges in the weeks between Election Day and the certification of the election by the various states. But she is ignoring the fact that at least two states (Arizona and Georgia) did additional investigations after the certifications were completed. And they found a few cases of fraud, but nothing of any consequence.
This is clearly not a comment on everything in this article. I only commented on the things that I have knowledge of through other readings. My point is not that my takes are necessarily correct. It’s that there are clearly other relevant facts that for some reason SA has chosen not to include. I can’t say for sure why this is, but I suspect it’s because they get in the way of her narrative.
As a general comment, I would say that if I thought that this was an honest attempt to get honest answers about the correctness of the election, I would be all for it. But SA has simply asked a lot of questions and (apparently) impugned the integrity and competence of every election official in every swing state. In my opinion, she doesn’t really care if any additional investigations are carried out. She won’t believe the results anyway (unless they do show outcome-determinative fraud). And there will always be more questions. That’s what happens when you ride the Trump train.
So tell me where I’m wrong. Tell me where I have claimed something that’s not true. Tell me where I have left out important information. Then explain to me how it is that such a conspiracy can be hatched across multiple states involving multiple sets of election officials and tens of thousands of votes and not leave a trace of evidence behind. Occam and his razor would be interested.
“The elephant in the room is one question—How could the
Justice Department have uncovered widespread voter fraud,
if it existed? “
“If it DIDN’T exist,”—-I think you meant to write.
RIGHT ?
Just sayin’—as you’ve
left this scribbler
confused with
your last paragraph.
In any case, you may not have heard of Libertine Leftists’
Marxian “Noble Lie” principle—nor of their now-applied
“Noble Cheat” rule, for advancing that SICK Utopi-
Psychotic movement of Socialism/Communism in
America
—across
the West.
Finally, in 2019, Mr. Trump had had tens-of-thousand of
citizens attracted to his rallies, while Biden & Company
could not attract 60 people to a parking lot, which is
why his handlers shoved him into his basement, from
which to mumble/stumble/grumble until he was
INSTALLED by the Deep State. And recall that White
House event, held outside on the lawn, shortly after
his INSTALLATION—an event N-O-B-O-D-Y came to
enjoy/to participate ! So it was quietly cancelled.
MARXISTS’ Lesson :
CHEAT L-A-R-G-E enough, and you’ll succeed, which
is what had happened in 2020—by Marxian Media
and Marxian Hollywood and Marxian Music Industry
Democrats (( SNL’s help, given to Harris, had bordered
on CRIMINALITY / VULGARITY, just a few days before
in-person votes were cast ! )).
By the way, courts rejected judicial that remedy on the
false principle that plaintiffs “Didn’t Have Standing,” so
plaintiffs’ evidence of FRAUD could not be presented/
examined.
The Deep State FIX was in—the moment Mr. Trump
descended on that escalator !
Best post election fraud article I have read. Especially the part where you explain that there is no mechanism or procedure for a candidate, even one who is an incumbent, to follow after a national election to gather evidence with subpoena powers etc… that can prove election fraud. We have to rely on the department of justice, state prosecutors, secretaries of state and other government agents who are sworn to uphold the law but have been proven in many cases to be highly partisan.
God bless you Sharyl. I have been using the info you discovered since 2020 to say exactly what you said. I wish you could get on mainstream tv to reach a broader audience. Republicans are stupid to not combat the lies that you alone expose, and they don’t realize what a big deal it is that Republicans have no coverage in network news. You have to pay to get Fox or Newsmax. They have no voice. You are the ONLY ONE who ever compiles and verbalizes the truth. Sadly Trump fumbles in articulating the truth. You or I could answer questions better than he and Vance do even though they are in the trenches. I have and will support you financially. Please keep on doing the good work of rooting out the liars.
I wanted to add one last point. Sheryl. You say near the end, “We may never get to the bottom of what happened in 2020. In the end, maybe there is nothing of real significance to get to the bottom of.”
With the evidence you have provided and the volumes of evidence you have not commented on that other researchers have uncovered, such as algorithms demonstrated across counties in voting by age groups, the statistical anomalies and the numerous cases brought to court but thrown out on standing where evidence could have been presented, there is no doubt what happened in 2020. You should have said no definitive collection of all the evidence will ever by undertaken at this point but the evidence state by state certainly demonstrates that there was sufficient fraud going on to have changed the result in 2020.
“It’s not just the calling of races that’s unfairly impacted by the media.”
As an example of this, in 2020, at approximately 8 pm, with only 10% of the AZ vote counted, Fox News called AZ for Biden. How on earth could that be possible? The dang polls were still open! That was the day I turned off Fox News and have never watched again.
Rick
I am confused by your comment since my post didn’t say what you claimed. There is nothing in my post referring to the “elephant in the room”.
As far as the claim that Trump won simply based on the attendees at his rallies… I have never understood that reasoning. If you added up all of the people who attended a Trump rally before the 2020 election, it would only be a small fraction of the 74M votes that Trump got. I agree that it does show tremendous enthusiasm for Trump. I don’t think anyone would argue that a lot more people were a lot more enthusiastic about Trump than were enthusiastic about Biden. But enthusiastic votes don’t count any more than non-enthusiastic ones. This seems like just another example of Trump supporters simply parroting what he says without thinking too much about it (you know, like the claim of a stolen election).
“By the way, courts rejected judicial that remedy on the false principle that plaintiffs “Didn’t Have Standing,” so plaintiffs’ evidence of FRAUD could not be presented/examined.” Two comments on this:
1) I don’t understand the “false principal” statement. What is false about the principle of standing (that is used all of the time in all kinds of cases in all kinds of courts)?
2) While it is true that lack of standing meant that many of Trump’s election fraud cases weren’t heard on their merits, at least ten of them were. And none of those cases won. Here is part of the ruling from a judge in Pennsylvania who heard one of the cases:
“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more.”
Is this judge a member of the Deep State (by all accounts masquerading as a conservative Republican all these years)?
One aspect of this that has never made sense to me is: if the Deep State is so good at stealing elections and not leaving behind any evidence, why didn’t they cheat in 2016 (if, as you claim, the “fix was in” then)? Why did they limit their cheating to the Presidential race (if Georgia didn’t have the runoff rules they have, Republicans would control the Senate)? Why did they let the House be recaptured by the Republicans in 2022?
Where there’s irregularities theres the possibility of fraud. I think the biggest mistake ever was to introduce electronic voting machines that may be disconnected from the internet but are connected when polls close. In part the media is to blame for “quick counting”. They want results fast, they are in competition to “be the first” to predict a winner.
Only honesty with elections is……you must register, you vote on election day only,
NO EARLY VOTING, NO FRIGGIN DROP BOXES. Do it the old fashion way. Vote in person.
Total cast votes must be equal to registrations or less. If more, you have cheating and or fraud. The process isn’t that difficult to understand.
Courageous synopsis. I despair that 2024 will be an honest election and there goes the republic. Stay safe Sharyl–you already know that the government will stop at nothing to silence and discredit.
This is how I also stated a theft could and is taking place. Democrat workers fill out ballots per the voter data base on the people who normally did not vote. This is why so many were turned away to vote as was stated they had already voted YET NEVER LOOKED INTO AS FRAUD. Each state had a way to add in votes as to not allow just one way a theft would take place.
The issue of election integrity is a critical topic in the lead-up to the 2024 U.S. presidential election, and Sharyl Attkisson’s coverage of potential cheating and irregularities raises important concerns. With past controversies surrounding voting systems, it’s essential to ensure transparency and fairness in every aspect of the election process. Allegations of fraud, whether in terms of mail-in ballots, voter registration, or the influence of outside parties, undermine public confidence and the legitimacy of the results. As we approach 2024, attention to secure voting systems, strict adherence to rules, and the elimination of vulnerabilities in the process is necessary. While it’s important to investigate any credible accusations, it’s equally essential to avoid spreading misinformation that could further erode trust. As citizens, we must continue to advocate for a fair, transparent election process that reflects the true will of the people while safeguarding against manipulation or exploitation.
Great article. Seems likely the 2020 election was a fraud. That said, I wonder if we will ever know for certain.
I’d like to know, but I don’t believe that we will ever know unless somebody starts singing like a canary. One has to ask why haven’t the Republicans been pushing to change the laws so that it would be easier to implement an investigation as well as change the rules and laws to make such an investigation viable and have strong degree of punishment in order to persuade people to cooperate with an investigation as well as make a conviction onerous to make their punishment stringent enough to make them think once, twice, nay, thrice before committing that crime.
Thank you for the excellent summary.
Keep repeating a lie and soon folks begin to think it is fact. The article wraps up the findings in a simple sentence. “In the end, maybe there is nothing of real significance to get to the bottom of.”
But there are those who will keep repeating the lie and with great emotion until folks accept it as fact.
Just a feeling that your side lost and so there had to be cheating. In reality, the one screaming there was cheating was probably the one cheating…but obviously not enough to change the outcome in their favor.
Thank you for this exhaustive presentation that shows, specifically, how the results of the 2020 election included plenty of avenues for fraudulent vote counting.
Sorry Phil but there were several caveat sentences in that paragraph you pulled one sentence from. Just like the leftist media you take one section and make it the basis for your entire premise. Ms Attkisson cited multiple cases of fraud in the entire article that were not lies but facts. Those alone make election integrity extremely suspect and the 2020 election left wide open for discussion, even though it cannot be change at this point in time.
It is possible that correcting all the fraudulent voting would not have provided a different outcome unless fraud is eliminated to a much greater extent than what occured in 2020, voters on either side should question the results.
You are quite free to close your eyes to the facts, since you got the outcome you desired.
So what then can be done after a presidencial race has been stolen ? Nothing MAGA just shut up and get used to living in a communist 3rd world country ! Be sure to tell the brown shirts you were just pretending to be a Trump supporter when they knock on your door with orders for reeducation camp transfer !
When all the “errors” and events slant in one direction, it doesn’t take a genius to know what is going on.
You forgot to mention that Bill Barr ordered no investigations to be conducted in PA in 2020. Approximately 75 affidavits of voting anomalies were filed. Many testified in front of the PA legislature to no avail. Barr sent FBI agents to two filers not to investigate but to get them to recant their stories.
Also in AZ, the recount was just to count all ballots (legal or not) and not for a forensic audit of ballots. A forensic audit would have identified copied ballots, legitimate paper, machine filled ballots, unfolded mail in ballots, etc. Not surprisingly, the locked ballot room was broken into during the audit without anyone identified as the culprit or what was stolen or inserted.
There is only one sensible answer to election cheating—The ‘Press’ allows it and, if needed, will cover up for the crooks.
It has been, and is being, proven.
“Reporters” have to be curious, smart and fearless to be effective. Only a very few qualify, in my opinion.
Spot on analysis! Thank you Sharyl.
Great article! For it clearly shows (as if we needed another example) that SA is hardly the “nonpartisan” journalist that she claims to be. She has her agenda, and she’s sticking to it.
The agenda this time is keeping the story of the stolen 2020 election alive. And how is she going to do that? Certainly not by providing any real evidence. It’s by throwing out some random events that COULD show voter fraud. And claiming that they weren’t really investigated. And by ignoring all of the other investigations that were done. And by “just asking questions”.
In past newsletters, SA has complained that, unlike in the past, reporters are now putting their opinions into their news reports. Well, I can remember when reporters also required multiple sources for their stories. How many sources are quoted in this piece. Zero as far as I can tell.
Here’s just a sampling of the weaknesses in this article:
1) “The most suspicious thing about the 2020 election is the powerful interests forbidding people from being suspicious about the 2020 election.” This unfounded statement immediately follows the paragraph stating that 43% of voters have concerns about the integrity of the election. Apparently, these people haven’t been “forbidden” from speaking their minds.
2) “A fair election welcomes scrutiny.” The 2020 election has been investigated far, far more than any in my lifetime. Multiple investigations and recounts have been done. So I’d say that election officials have been more than welcoming of scrutiny. Or at least I’d ask what legitimate allegations haven’t been investigated.
3) “1,600 self-identified foreigners were registered to vote in Virginia, and the Biden administration went to court to try to allow them to illegally remain on the rolls.” Highly misleading. These folks were indeed foreigners, but the issue was whether they were citizens or not (foreign-born naturalized citizens can legally vote as I’m sure SA knows). The issue was that they had checked the “non-citizen” box on their MVD registration. The counter argument was that these folks might have simply checked the wrong box or they might have become citizens since their MVD registration. The Biden administration DID NOT argue that non-citizens should be allowed to vote. Their argument was that the law doesn’t allow large-scale changes to the voter database less than 90 days before an election.
4) “A “database error” in Arizona miscategorized more than 218,000 voters who had not proven their US citizenship”. I’m not sure of putting “database error” in quotes was intended to imply some skullduggery, but the true story is that the folks caught in this “database error” had registered to vote before proof of citizenship became required under Arizona law. The “error” occurred when they renewed their driver’s license after the proof of citizenship requirement became law and the voting registration database was updated with the later date, thereby indicating that they had provided proof of citizenship. There was no intent to defraud anyone or to allow noncitizens to vote. The affected people had lived in Arizona since at least 1996 and had voted in every election since then. There is zero indication that any of these folks are not citizens. Another highly misleading data point
5) “Their actions ultimately contributed to lingering doubts about our election integrity.” This was in reference to instances in which stories were originally “censored” or at least downplayed that turned out to be true. But my belief is that this had nothing to do with belief in the stolen election. That came from Trump.
6) “there’s no established process for the allegedly cheated candidate to remedy it when it’s his enemies calling the shots”. This conveniently overlooks the fact that the alleged cheating occurred while Trump was President. Are we supposed to believe that all of those in the Trump DOJ were really Trump’s enemies? Seems rather doubtful. And it also overlooks the fact that the DOJ did in fact investigate all kinds of allegations.
7) “In 2020, the media and courts required Trump to present “proof” of cheating within days”. First of all, the “media” didn’t “require” anything. And I have no idea why “proof” is in quotes. Isn’t that the way it always works. Courts require “proof” to sustain some allegation. Are the courts now supposed to take some allegation seriously just because someone “thinks” something happened? And what does this statement say about the myriad lawsuits that were filed during this period that claimed to have evidence of fraud? Did they make up that evidence?
8) “Although the news media plays no legal or constitutional role in determining the winner of a state or election, many people seem to adopt the notion that when particular news outlets “call” a race, or declare the election to be settled— then it is. And that until they call it— it is not settled”. Who are the “many people” that believe the media determines who wins? They clearly don’t understand how our elections work and, if they really believe that is the media’s role, why would anyone pay attention to their views?
9) “It’s not just the calling of races that’s unfairly impacted by the media.” The previous paragraph just said that the media plays no role in determining election winners. So how could the media’s calls be considered “unfair” (they could be wrong, but not unfair)
10) “just because evidence of something hasn’t been produced or collected doesn’t mean the suspected thing is proven false”. This is, of course, true. But it’s also pretty silly. For to prove something like this false would require proving a negative something which can’t be done (no matter how many investigations are done, all anyone has to do is say that the investigations were flawed or come up with something else to investigate). That’s why courts require proof beyond a “reasonable doubt”, not beyond “all doubt”. If you make some allegation, you are supposed to provide evidence that it is true. It’s not up to me to provide evidence that it’s false.
11) Barr’s Role: First of all, the date of Barr’s interview is wrong. It was 2020, not 2022. And Barr has publicly explained why he did that interview. It was intended to tamp down the rampant conspiracy theorizing about the stolen election. You know you’re getting desperate when you have to resort to implying that Barr would have falsified something because he’s “no fan” of Trump. This was the guy who wrote such a misleading summary of the Mueller report that even Mueller went public with his disagreements. And he’s publicly stated that he’s voting for Trump this year.
SA – what specifically are you accusing Barr of doing? Doing a shoddy investigation? Was that deliberate because he’s “not a fan” of Trump? Please explain.
12) “Meaningless Recounts”: I always thought that the hand recounts were the gold standard for checking the proper working of the voting machines since they take the machines completely out of the picture. But it seems that I haven’t been thorough enough in my conspiratorial thinking since it now appears that the recounts were “meaningless” because they were conducted by the same election officials that conducted the election itself. So let’s cut to the chase:
SA – what exactly are you accusing the election officials of doing? Were they incompetent because they couldn’t spot the fraud? Or were they aiding and abetting the fraud? Please be specific in your answer. And what evidence do you have that substantiates your charges?
I can’t speak to the other states, but this argument is not true for Arizona. The recount there was done by the Cyber Ninjas. Election officials weren’t part of the activity.
13) “Fraud Matters—Even if not ‘Widespread’”: SA provides a list of odd things that happened during the election. But, to her credit, she admits that most of the things that went wrong were corrected. So what are we to make of this? Some (temporary) mistakes were made. They were corrected. There isn’t any indication that any of these mistakes affected the outcome. In a sane world, finding (and fixing) these kinds of problems should actually enhance people’s belief in the sanctity of the election. And isn’t it reasonable to believe that (temporary) mistakes were made in past elections? No one claimed that Trump didn’t win in 2016.
14) SA has made the case that there is not sufficient time to investigate possible fraud charges in the weeks between Election Day and the certification of the election by the various states. But she is ignoring the fact that at least two states (Arizona and Georgia) did additional investigations after the certifications were completed. And they found a few cases of fraud, but nothing of any consequence.
This is clearly not a comment on everything in this article. I only commented on the things that I have knowledge of through other readings. My point is not that my takes are necessarily correct. It’s that there are clearly other relevant facts that for some reason SA has chosen not to include. I can’t say for sure why this is, but I suspect it’s because they get in the way of her narrative.
As a general comment, I would say that if I thought that this was an honest attempt to get honest answers about the correctness of the election, I would be all for it. But SA has simply asked a lot of questions and (apparently) impugned the integrity and competence of every election official in every swing state. In my opinion, she doesn’t really care if any additional investigations are carried out. She won’t believe the results anyway (unless they do show outcome-determinative fraud). And there will always be more questions. That’s what happens when you ride the Trump train.
So tell me where I’m wrong. Tell me where I have claimed something that’s not true. Tell me where I have left out important information. Then explain to me how it is that such a conspiracy can be hatched across multiple states involving multiple sets of election officials and tens of thousands of votes and not leave a trace of evidence behind. Occam and his razor would be interested.
PDL,
You opine :
“The elephant in the room is one question—How could the
Justice Department have uncovered widespread voter fraud,
if it existed? “
“If it DIDN’T exist,”—-I think you meant to write.
RIGHT ?
Just sayin’—as you’ve
left this scribbler
confused with
your last paragraph.
In any case, you may not have heard of Libertine Leftists’
Marxian “Noble Lie” principle—nor of their now-applied
“Noble Cheat” rule, for advancing that SICK Utopi-
Psychotic movement of Socialism/Communism in
America
—across
the West.
Finally, in 2019, Mr. Trump had had tens-of-thousand of
citizens attracted to his rallies, while Biden & Company
could not attract 60 people to a parking lot, which is
why his handlers shoved him into his basement, from
which to mumble/stumble/grumble until he was
INSTALLED by the Deep State. And recall that White
House event, held outside on the lawn, shortly after
his INSTALLATION—an event N-O-B-O-D-Y came to
enjoy/to participate ! So it was quietly cancelled.
MARXISTS’ Lesson :
CHEAT L-A-R-G-E enough, and you’ll succeed, which
is what had happened in 2020—by Marxian Media
and Marxian Hollywood and Marxian Music Industry
Democrats (( SNL’s help, given to Harris, had bordered
on CRIMINALITY / VULGARITY, just a few days before
in-person votes were cast ! )).
By the way, courts rejected judicial that remedy on the
false principle that plaintiffs “Didn’t Have Standing,” so
plaintiffs’ evidence of FRAUD could not be presented/
examined.
The Deep State FIX was in—the moment Mr. Trump
descended on that escalator !
-Rick
P.S.
ALL about Kamala Harris,
by Helena Glass :
ELECTION 2024; Polls Are Not Polls & Kamala is An Illusion
https://helenaglass.net/2024/11/03/election-2024-polls-are-surveys-and-kamala-is-an-illusion/
Best post election fraud article I have read. Especially the part where you explain that there is no mechanism or procedure for a candidate, even one who is an incumbent, to follow after a national election to gather evidence with subpoena powers etc… that can prove election fraud. We have to rely on the department of justice, state prosecutors, secretaries of state and other government agents who are sworn to uphold the law but have been proven in many cases to be highly partisan.
God bless you Sharyl. I have been using the info you discovered since 2020 to say exactly what you said. I wish you could get on mainstream tv to reach a broader audience. Republicans are stupid to not combat the lies that you alone expose, and they don’t realize what a big deal it is that Republicans have no coverage in network news. You have to pay to get Fox or Newsmax. They have no voice. You are the ONLY ONE who ever compiles and verbalizes the truth. Sadly Trump fumbles in articulating the truth. You or I could answer questions better than he and Vance do even though they are in the trenches. I have and will support you financially. Please keep on doing the good work of rooting out the liars.
I wanted to add one last point. Sheryl. You say near the end, “We may never get to the bottom of what happened in 2020. In the end, maybe there is nothing of real significance to get to the bottom of.”
With the evidence you have provided and the volumes of evidence you have not commented on that other researchers have uncovered, such as algorithms demonstrated across counties in voting by age groups, the statistical anomalies and the numerous cases brought to court but thrown out on standing where evidence could have been presented, there is no doubt what happened in 2020. You should have said no definitive collection of all the evidence will ever by undertaken at this point but the evidence state by state certainly demonstrates that there was sufficient fraud going on to have changed the result in 2020.
“It’s not just the calling of races that’s unfairly impacted by the media.”
As an example of this, in 2020, at approximately 8 pm, with only 10% of the AZ vote counted, Fox News called AZ for Biden. How on earth could that be possible? The dang polls were still open! That was the day I turned off Fox News and have never watched again.
Rick
I am confused by your comment since my post didn’t say what you claimed. There is nothing in my post referring to the “elephant in the room”.
As far as the claim that Trump won simply based on the attendees at his rallies… I have never understood that reasoning. If you added up all of the people who attended a Trump rally before the 2020 election, it would only be a small fraction of the 74M votes that Trump got. I agree that it does show tremendous enthusiasm for Trump. I don’t think anyone would argue that a lot more people were a lot more enthusiastic about Trump than were enthusiastic about Biden. But enthusiastic votes don’t count any more than non-enthusiastic ones. This seems like just another example of Trump supporters simply parroting what he says without thinking too much about it (you know, like the claim of a stolen election).
“By the way, courts rejected judicial that remedy on the false principle that plaintiffs “Didn’t Have Standing,” so plaintiffs’ evidence of FRAUD could not be presented/examined.” Two comments on this:
1) I don’t understand the “false principal” statement. What is false about the principle of standing (that is used all of the time in all kinds of cases in all kinds of courts)?
2) While it is true that lack of standing meant that many of Trump’s election fraud cases weren’t heard on their merits, at least ten of them were. And none of those cases won. Here is part of the ruling from a judge in Pennsylvania who heard one of the cases:
“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more.”
Is this judge a member of the Deep State (by all accounts masquerading as a conservative Republican all these years)?
One aspect of this that has never made sense to me is: if the Deep State is so good at stealing elections and not leaving behind any evidence, why didn’t they cheat in 2016 (if, as you claim, the “fix was in” then)? Why did they limit their cheating to the Presidential race (if Georgia didn’t have the runoff rules they have, Republicans would control the Senate)? Why did they let the House be recaptured by the Republicans in 2022?
Where there’s irregularities theres the possibility of fraud. I think the biggest mistake ever was to introduce electronic voting machines that may be disconnected from the internet but are connected when polls close. In part the media is to blame for “quick counting”. They want results fast, they are in competition to “be the first” to predict a winner.
Only honesty with elections is……you must register, you vote on election day only,
NO EARLY VOTING, NO FRIGGIN DROP BOXES. Do it the old fashion way. Vote in person.
Total cast votes must be equal to registrations or less. If more, you have cheating and or fraud. The process isn’t that difficult to understand.
Courageous synopsis. I despair that 2024 will be an honest election and there goes the republic. Stay safe Sharyl–you already know that the government will stop at nothing to silence and discredit.
This is how I also stated a theft could and is taking place. Democrat workers fill out ballots per the voter data base on the people who normally did not vote. This is why so many were turned away to vote as was stated they had already voted YET NEVER LOOKED INTO AS FRAUD. Each state had a way to add in votes as to not allow just one way a theft would take place.
The issue of election integrity is a critical topic in the lead-up to the 2024 U.S. presidential election, and Sharyl Attkisson’s coverage of potential cheating and irregularities raises important concerns. With past controversies surrounding voting systems, it’s essential to ensure transparency and fairness in every aspect of the election process. Allegations of fraud, whether in terms of mail-in ballots, voter registration, or the influence of outside parties, undermine public confidence and the legitimacy of the results. As we approach 2024, attention to secure voting systems, strict adherence to rules, and the elimination of vulnerabilities in the process is necessary. While it’s important to investigate any credible accusations, it’s equally essential to avoid spreading misinformation that could further erode trust. As citizens, we must continue to advocate for a fair, transparent election process that reflects the true will of the people while safeguarding against manipulation or exploitation.