|
There's an expression,
regarding movies, called "suspension of disbelief."
Similarly, no one on
planet Earth really believes that a guy with no following, no actual
accomplishments, no likeable characteristics, a history of creepy
behavior toward women and children, substantial evidence of selling
his influence to foreign interests, who campaigned from his basement
and, of course, showing strong signs of onset dementia, actually
pulled 80+ million votes—the most in U.S. history.
Yet we have otherwise
bright people who will jump at the opportunity to declare this odd
chap a legitimate Prez, all the while hurling insults at any who see
it for what it is. IT CAN BE EXPLAINED
Of course, they will
tell you the reason their bloke won is because his opponent—a
successful businessman with a 10-year hit TV show who draws crowds
upwards of 30 to 40 thousand wherever he appears, who closed the
Southern border to illegal entry, who improved the economy, made
America energy independent, stopped other nations from taking
financial advantage of us, created record job growth, (especially
among minorities), lowered the welfare rolls, brokered four peace
agreements in the Middle East and told the World Economic Council
with its "Great Reset" plan where to get off—they tell us
this person is universally HATED by people who vote and that's why
the other dude won. Okay. Good. That explains it. We might as well also ignore the fact that this hated guy, in 2020, and that other Prez, Barack Obama, in 2012, both captured 18 out of 19 of the bell weather states, while the fair-haired boy from Delaware captured just 1 of the 19 in 2020. Odd... but what the hey! And while we're at it let's ignore the fact that Obama in 2012 won 873 counties, Trump in 2020 won 2,497 counties and the guy running against Trump in 2020 won just 477 counties. So the universally despised guy won over 2,000 more counties than the guy who can't draw flies, and also won over 1,600 more counties than the esteemed President Obama, but somehow the basement dweller got 80+ million nods in the main event.
Oh, right. He was just
lucky enough to win in the seven or eight counties that make the
difference in the battleground states. Uh oh, what's this? The guy who wins Florida, Ohio and Iowa nearly always wins for Prez but this time the winner LOST Florida, Ohio and Iowa?
The next thing they'll
try to tell us is that, whereas Obama and Trump WON House seats for
their party in their second go-round for Prez and Mr. Nobody managed to
LOSE 15 House seats for his party, he still managed to rack up 80+
million big ones for Prez. I guess the "coat tails" rule is hereby
cancelled. So there ya go. Miracles happen every day in the wonderful land of make believe. Just watch out for traffic at that next intersection. Those cars whizzing past are real. WHAT? THERE'S MORE?
In most media and
social media circles, we are strictly
forbidden to mention perceived problems in select counties in states
known as "battleground states."
With other states
across the country performing according to form, if one can affect
the outcome in these battleground states, one can win the big prize.
And one just has to affect the outcome in a few select populous
counties WITHIN these states to capture the whole state. Obviously, somebody knew. On the night of the main voting event, around 11 pm, with Candidate T well ahead, the counting was supposedly stopped in these key counties and the world dozed off.
Next morning, when the
world woke up, Candidate B had surged ahead in all of these
battleground states and the snooze media had no hesitation in
calling a victory for Candidate B. OUR SECRET Don't tell anybody, but I'm going to describe exactly how this was accomplished, right under our noses. Imagine, if you will, a political Party that considers itself so important and beneficial in its beliefs, that it would be a CRIME for them to not be in power. Under this dictate, anyone who OPPOSES them is automatically considered a criminal, a domestic terrorist. It's now just a matter of imagining all of the crimes that these opponents MUST be committing, and then broadcast loudly and widely, these imagined crimes. How do they know with such certainty what these crimes of their opponents might be? Good question. They just go through THEIR catalog of crimes that THEY regularly commit and, voila, they have an endless selection of crimes to attempt to pin on the opposition. EXAMPLES
#1. In 2015, Hillary
C. contracts with foreign operatives to produce a "Russian dossier"
containing embarrassing things that her opponent has supposedly
done. This is actual "collusion" with Russia. Nothing in the dossier
turns out to be true, but that doesn't matter. It serves as fodder
for her partisan media and loyal following to chew on. Based on this, it's now easy to accuse her opponent of the crime of "colluding with Russia" and a Special Counsel is appointed to investigate and provide evidence of this collusion.
In two years of
searching by the very best cut-throat lawyers in the business, zero,
nada, zilch can be found of an indictable criminal nature, but that
does not disturb the imagined "fact" of it's having occurred, if you're
suspending your disbelief.
#2. It's discovered
that a certain Vice-president in his own words on video, has
threatened a foreign government to withhold a billion in U.S. aid if
they don't fire a certain prosecutor investigating illegal
activities of a company the VP's son happens to be on the Board of.
The prosecutor is subsequently fired and the money delivered. It's
called "quid pro quo." You do for me and I'll do for you. Based on this real occurrence, the Prez from the other Party is then IMPEACHED by a partisan House for asking the head of said foreign government to take a look at this company and the possibility of corruption, and THAT is called a quid pro quo. What is an obvious crime of corruption by the D Party candidate is then transferred over to the R Party candidate, who did NOT commit such a crime. More tasty munchies for the partisan press. Brilliant! WARNING! PROHIBITED SPEECH
We now know how the
Dems think up the opponents' crimes. But how do they technically
swipe the votes needed to "win" the contest? And what is the
significance of "dead voters" and other such? 1. Imagine a vote tabulating machine company whose tabulators allow Internet connections (despite laws forbidding it). The purchasing government entity can be guaranteed to win every election. What a great selling point! 2. Next, imagine a satellite network that can a) upload content from the ground, via the Internet, b) download the content to a server or servers elsewhere on the globe, c) alter the content, d) upload it back to the satellite and e) download the altered content back to its original location.
3. You stack up an
enormous quantity of "registered voters." This adds up to large reserve tank of "registered voters" who are not expected to vote.
4. On election day,
tabulations are constantly updated so the world can
see—state-by-state and even by counties and precincts—minute-by-minute, via the media,
who's ahead and by how much. The people who run this creative enterprise see where extra votes are needed and order the extra votes delivered via the satellite internet connections described in 2 above.
So these extra votes
are not just appearing out of thin air. Names are grabbed from the
vast reservoir of extra "registered voters," precinct-by-precinct. This
way the dead people don't actually have to get up and vote. The
computer algorithm grabs their names and votes for them so they may
continue to rest in peace. WHAT COULD GO WRONG? As long as the chosen loser doesn't overload the system with unpredicted numbers of votes and as long as the results are not carefully audited after the contest, this routine is flawless. UNFORTUNATELY the universally loathed and detested chosen loser DID overload the system with MILLIONS more votes than were expected, throwing a monkey wrench into the works.
"Quick! Stop the
count! EVERYBODY go home for the night—except you and you and you.
Are the observers all gone? Good! Keep counting. We've got some
extra 'mail-in' votes that were just delivered by van. And tell
those satellite guys to TURN UP THE SPIGOT. Wow! Had us worried
there for a minute. Now, as long as there are no comprehensive
AUDITS, we're home free." GETTING TECHNICAL Data moves around the Internet in "packets." Each data packet contains the IP (computer) address where it originated, what's in the packet, the route travelled, the time, the IP (computer) address where it lands and what happens to it at that point. There's more to it but you get the idea. It's possible to capture an ongoing, real time record of these packets in transit and store them for future examination. And it's impossible to alter any aspect of these packets, after the fact. They are what they are, a precise record of an action in a moment in time. THE STING Speaking of movies, imagine, if you will, a savvy group of individuals who are tired of vote contests being manipulated to favor a particular party. Imagine these savvy folks, based on prior knowledge of how these things work, deciding to catch the cheaters red-handed.
Imagine these highly
technologically-trained individuals capturing ALL of the data
packets from a particular contest, irrefutable evidence of what
transpired—what vote was changed, from where, at what time, in
what precinct, with what result, in every one of the 50 States. Imagine these fellows lurking quietly in the shadows, waiting for the right moment to pounce. Imagine the pulse-pounding terror of the perpetrators, knowing the jig is up and it's just a matter of time before they're completely found out. Desperate measures are in order, which will expose them, even more fully, as the lying, cheating, destructive skunks they are. This "movie" is actually in live production as we speak. QUESTIONS Why is the idea of AUDITS being attacked by the "winner's" party? If it's so certain that Mr. Cuecards won with 80+ million votes, wouldn't a comprehensive audit be welcomed to prove it as fact, end of story?
Why is it that the
most popular candidate in Prez contest history continually gets more
thumbs-down than thumbs-up, by wide margins, whenever he shows up on
TV or the Internet. AT SOME POINT THE MOVIE ENDS For some, the lights come on. They cease suspending their disbelief and become part of the "Walkaway" movement. Others remain emotionally attached to the imagined ending to a made up scenario and, like lemmings, they dutifully follow their leaders off the cliff, suspending their disbelief to the end. Perhaps Lord Tennyson said it best in his CHARGE OF THE LIGHT BRIGADE.
Theirs not to reason
why, |
