Election Fraud

[babe]

No.

NO!

There are conspiracy theory suckers who are a threat to our society. You saying what you've said puts you firmly in that camp. You are a disease that is harmful to the United States of America and the regular people who live here just trying to get by. You are harmful! You are destructive! You are NOT a truth teller, you are the "useful idiot" that you have often decried. Wake the **** up! Wake up! You can't invent your own reality! You can't live in a fantasy of your own making! You can't just spin yarns that sound good and go with it.

There is truth! Reality is real! You are not living here. You are living in a fantasy land. Wake the **** up! Wake up!

Wake up!

Wake up!

Please, please, please... Wake up!

So rather than examine the facts, suppressors like yourself immediately go into this denial mode. Personal attacks, name-calling.

Going back in the press reports of the 1930s, there was enthusiasm at places like Yale and Harvard and Wall Street over the opportuniies emerging in a Germany that was waking up under the astonishing and effective leadership of Adolf Hitler. People like the Rockefellers, the Fords, just to touch the top tier, were investing in new companies there, even starting their own. George Bushs' family patriarch, Prescott Bush, personally served as the emissary of American Capital to help HItler get started.

After Hitler went rogue, and we had to fight the damn war, the Dulles brothers headed the effort to keep American mushroomed, the dark way. There is a lot of fully verified information about all this.

However, some beieve this truth cannot be processed by the American public.

I worked for some of the German scientists I speak of. No big deal. People with impressive, awesome talent and knowledge. No they don't just tell their stories to just anyone. But over a few years a few things slip and you start to realize.

Having friends in every sort of niche in the spectrum also helps. A true believer "Marxist" who fervently believes in the direct writings of Marx who is sfrustrated with what he terms "State Capitalism" in places like China, Cuba, the USSR (even Russia today perhaps) who complains for hours about the same set of facts his sister, a John Birch believer, works with. A few facts like TIME magazine being all agog with praise for Josef Stalin while he's genocidally starving Ukranians..... who was that reporter anyway. An American oil tycoon with a frequent flier habit for Moscow and some lucrative concessions in Communist Russia..... a zillion little facts that don't fit without realizing we are systematically mushroomed by our top tier influencers.

Trump sent former Utah governor Jon Huntsman to be the Ambassador to Russia. Obama sent him to be the Ambassador to China. My relative from Canada taking up a post in China for years as a sort of Western advisor, communicatior link, with JP Morgan roots. The whole idea of globalism is networked with people like this who can serve as influencers. Maybe controllers. While we in the hinterlands get scared into **** by the daily news.

Look, you can read UN literarture and get the same general picture as you get from ideological commies or ideological right-winger extremists.

In my opinion extremist groups left and right are Macheavelian tools for public manipulation. Don't get involved in any of them.

Take it as a sort of general context, that only the Devil can really know everything about how the world works. If you read Rules for Radicals", Alinski dedicates his book to the Devil, Lucifer, as the great revolutionary who succeeded in establishing his own Kingdom. This qualifies Alinsky as a complete nut job. Marx was also a nutjob obsessed with the God/Devil paradigm who believed he was on the Devil's side.

These are the truely useful idiots of our age. These are the creators of useful tools for public indoctrination/propaganda that can be exploited to manage the populace. The political schema is just a kind of secret "Big Lie" nobody should really believe.

A couple of good movies are out there that sorta show the point.

The first is "Eagle in a Cage" dealing with the aborted attempt to bring Napoleon back to serve as a sort of protector for the British crown. The idea being that Britain couldn't afford to squander its own small population fighting wars all over Europe, they needed someone to do it for them.

The second is the British film about the "traitors" in English aristocracy that ostensibly aided in Germany's rise in the 1930s, a tedious but interestingly characteristically British understatement of the case, "Remains of the Day".

A third very important fact is Lord Cecil Rhodes' history. As a prime mover of the Progressive era and the idea of the League of Nations/UN, living in fear of the failure of the West to manage the unwashed hordes of Asia and Africa, who saw inclusion as a sort of necessary myth for world management.

All of this underlies my view of globalism being a modern, more sophisticated version of the British Empire.

My these, in general, in dealing with all this, is a belief that the people, all kinds of people, the whole human race, is entitled to the truth, and to make their own political decisions.

And, essentially, I boil all the crap down to the one idea that the influencers, the people with large stakes, leverage, personal interests, generally will work somehow to protect their interests.

This is not "Conspiracy Theory", this is human nature.

The only way to advance the general welfare is to expose the truth.

 

[babe]

I didn't read past this. But this is completely incorrect and anyone who puts more than a quarter second into research can find this to be false.

If you take a day looking into my "claims", you can still believe they're false if you want. The vested interests have worked very hard to counter the assertions, there is lot written against these claims.

But I would take the view that such efforts do more to validate the concerns than suppress them. The effort to suppress a view is essentially an admission of that truth by the vested interests.

But, really, I know you have done more than a fraction of a second on this. You are just another committed advocate of the interests, possibly with some damn stake of your own, even if it's just a college teaching job or a gig doing personal training for athletes who are supported by "authorities". Naturally.

I'd try to tell you to just get another job, and maybe take a week or a month to hike in the Rockies or the Himalayas, whatever. You don't need to be dependent on this system.

 

[Ron Mexico]

If you take a day looking into my "claims", you can still believe they're false if you want. The vested interests have worked very hard to counter the assertions, there is lot written against these claims.

But I would take the view that such efforts do more to validate the concerns than suppress them. The effort to suppress a view is essentially an admission of that truth by the vested interests.

But, really, I know you have done more than a fraction of a second on this. You are just another committed advocate of the interests, possibly with some damn stake of your own, even if it's just a college teaching job or a gig doing personal training for athletes who are supported by "authorities". Naturally.

I'd try to tell you to just get another job, and maybe take a week or a month to hike in the Rockies or the Himalayas, whatever. You don't need to be dependent on this system.

Doubling and tripling down on being dumb good job!

 

[Red]

You have petty union operatives just grabbing fistfuls of ballot outta mail bags in local mail rooms, and passing them off to the.paid outside help for filling them out, then to the paid "ballot harvesters" with their cars or vans for stuffing into the ballot boxes in the dead of night, or to the paid help "election officials".

See, this was your original story line regarding how the ballots ended up in the car. But this IS a conspiracy, is it not? Without evidence, just “ballots in a car”= conspiracy by postal workers. No evidential connecting thread to demonstrate evidence that this is what happened.

Not for even one solitary second did you stop and realize the type of crime that took place is very well known, and increasing nationwide. The facts that were known, and which you could have made note of, were you not in the habit of first considering how the event might fit into a scenario involving many people with the plan to influence the recall election outcome, those facts supported the crime I described as the path of least resistance where those facts were concerned.

The simplest explanation is often the correct one. Don’t go beyond what the facts describe without good reason. But you just jumped headlong into a narrative not revealed by the known facts, into a narrative that is not present except in your mind.

You object to using the term “conspiracy”, as if it was some kind of label applied to people who are telling the truth, but somehow if one uses the word “conspiracy” to describe such people’s thoughts, one is able to somehow “soil” their brilliant deductions, and simply dismiss their narrative with that single “damning” word. You think crying “conspiracy” is just a rhetorical devise to hinder somebody’s right to believe in a plot that is not supported by evidence, but supports one’s belief in how the world works.

Well, the problem is not the term. The problem is you have no desire to limit speculation to what the facts present. The problem is you had already decided what happened, and would prefer to follow not where the facts lead, but where your preconceived inclinations tell you what happened. So you do not begin with the known facts. Other than possession of recall ballots. Other relevant facts fall by the wayside, and are somehow irrelevant. You begin with your theory. The culprit’s possession of drugs, possession of credit cards not in his name, and the presence of hundreds of pieces of mail other than recall ballots are irrelevant to you, your preconceived nefarious plot suits you.

And what matters is what suits you, not what the facts actually suggest. Nothing wrong with conspiracy theories. In general. Your reasoning is flawed, introduces things for which there is no evidence, and you begin with your theory. And the only fact you could cherry pick to support your evidence-free speculation was the ballots. I, on the other hand, was very familiar with the type of crime the evidence actually pointed to, and I started with those known facts. I can’t be surprised that a police investigation concluded the same.

 

[babe]

Doubling and tripling down on being dumb good job!

Your opinion here is without evidence, meritless, baseless denial in the form of a personal attack. One would wonder if you are applying Saul Alinsky strategy for a political purpose. Red at least advances facts and reason.

 

[Ron Mexico]

Your opinion here is without evidence, meritless, baseless denial in the form of a personal attack. One would wonder if you are applying Saul Alinsky strategy for a political purpose. Red at least advances facts and reason.

There is no reason or facts with you though. So what's the point? It's obvious you haven't done any research on this except be a good little parrot. Political purpose is your thing, you don't need to push that on me. It's amusing for you to call personal attack when most your posts are that including the last two to me. But if you really want some information to counter your silly statement here you go.

Let Me Google That

For all those people that find it more convenient to bother you with their question than to google it for themselves.

letmegooglethat.com

 

[babe]

There was one recall ballot, with two questions. Recall or don’t recall Newsom was the first question, answer yes or no. If one answered yes, there were other candidates to pick, the second question on the ballot. The SF article in fact states that all 300 recall ballots were UNOPENED, and NOT DELIVERED. Get it? Undelivered to the home addresses yet. (I missed that “undelivered” part at the time, but the facts still screamed mail theft in service to identity theft, and being bundled would have suggested undelivered, in hindsight). So how can you say all 300 ballots voted to recall Newsom, if those ballots were undelivered, and therefore not yet filled in at all?? It’s OK to be mistaken, babe. I’m sure I make mistakes every day. But in your rush to confirm your own conspiracy theory, you did not carefully read the SF article. That article stated, in speaking of the police dept.’s second Facebook post: “This second post, critically, did not mention the fact the 300 ballots — all unopened and not delivered — were among thousands of pieces of mail.”. Unopened and not delivered, babe, means not yet delivered to the homes of eligible voters. AI-O-Meter assumed delivered, but not yet retrieved by the homeowner from his/her curbside box. I assume that’s why he speculated that someone had rifled curbside boxes before people retrieved their daily mail.

So I went looking for the factson the Torrance CA incident. Amazingly bad reporting.

Here is the best article of the bunch:

No evidence of election fraud by man found passed out with 300 recall ballots: police

Investigators found no evidence that the California man who was found passed out in a car with hundreds of recall election ballots planned to participate in election fraud, police said Tuesday.

www.mychamplainvalley.com

It has the facts essential to the discussion of the case. The 300 recall ballots (not Newsom ballots) had just that day begun to be mailed out. So it was outgoing postal service. The 300 ballotgs were among "Thousands" of pieces of mail. All reports, even on Aug 23, list an assortment of items including credit cards in various people's names, a gun, drugs. No cash mentioned. This article describes in general that investigators looked though all his stuff including electronic crap for any sign of a plan to commit voter fraud, and found none. Some of the articles included pics of some of the sacks. I thought Mail bags used by the USPS had a USPS stamp, usually made of canvas. When did the US PS start using paper bags. But the stuff appears to organized, the pouches uniform in nature, with dividers even, so maybe they are real US PS stuff.

Another good report was The Hill:

Police: Passed-out man had 300 mail-in California recall ballots

California police are investigating a man who reportedly had more than 300 unopened mail-in ballots for the upcoming gubernatorial recall election in his possession when he was found passed ou…

thehill.com

This was the day the ballots became news. They had the facts pretty good. Unopened, untampered ballots not delievered to the voters they were mailed to. All the other crap. So "Recall ballots" not Newsom Ballots, so there is no tally of votes. The voters got replacement ballots.

So all my gibberish about statistics does not bearf any relevance.

Looks like three different units launched investigations on the case. Local police, the USPS, and a government oversight unit concerned with integrity in public officials.

The perp seems to have had no contacts with any election officials or any political connections. Ya know, stealing outgoing mail from a post office is where you'd want to go if you wanted to "harvest" some ballots, and other stuff could just be incidental. That's why the cops looked for his cell phone, ipad, laptop, etc.

What he could have done if not caught is the next issue. It's like the caches of mail/ballots found dumped by some damn lazy postal worker in a ditch or a ravine.

If you don't want ballots voted wrong somehow, you have to have a tracking system that verifies the voter, and you need a way for the voter or election auditors to check how each ballot gets verified and counted. At a polling place, you have people sitting there looking at ID offered, checking the address on the voter rolls along with the damn signature. Photo ID.

If anyone can't come to the poll, there are other secure ways to get the ballot to them and verify all that. Lotsa volunteers, everything under a camera with adverfsarial witnesses, all that.

If you don't want to cheat, you have no valid objection to checking all that.

 

[babe]

There is no reason or facts with you though. So what's the point? It's obvious you haven't done any research on this except be a good little parrot. Political purpose is your thing, you don't need to push that on me. It's amusing for you to call personal attack when most your posts are that including the last two to me. But if you really want some information to counter your silly statement here you go.

Let Me Google That

For all those people that find it more convenient to bother you with their question than to google it for themselves.

letmegooglethat.com

This is a blatant lie, a complete denial of almost everything I write. There is always some line of reason, whether valid or not, always some bit of alleged fact, whether true or not, in everything I write, even complete fantasy stuff. The parrot comment is completely off the wall. There is no one for me to parrot. My stuff is always original, different from whatever source I refer to, because I don't just copy and paste, or repeat anyone. Whatever the source, I apply my own reason, or imagination.

Once in a while, I even change my mind when discussing something with a reasoned conversant who has some facts. Or reasons. That's why I talk to people, or post crap in here. I am not an activist pushing something for anybody else, just myself pushing my own ideas.

I've done a fair amount of study and reading on election fraud in general. The case of the Torrance CA arrest of the Hawthorne man was mostly the fault of bad reporting, or bad listening on my part. I assume stuff when the facts are not explicitly stated. "Newsom Ballots" raised in my mind the idea that they were ballots voted for Newsom, not unopened "Recall Ballots" that could be voted whichever way the possessor wanted.

I am in general a disbeliever in authority, and I will keep my questions open until I see the evidence. I don't think I'd care to go to the police station and with a warrant to inspect all the evidence here. Doesn't mean I wouldn't find something wrong if I did. But hey, we all pick our battles.

I did go to your proffered link. Silly stuff there. Dictionary definitions and crap.

No help in real life. In real life, you have people who don't know much about a lot of things. Everything they could think is likely some kind of question about what the facts are that they don't have. You can just dismiss people en masse because they think something might be wrong. There is always trouble in River City, and hardly anyone could tell you all of it.

A lot of people think Democrats conspire to vote for Democrats. Maybe. Maybe not. But who cares, they have every right in the world to do that. You generally need to get to some facts to believe someone is lying, to overturn a government, or get environmental legislation passed If you start to examine many groups acting in apparent cooperation on an issue, you shouldn't be surprised to see that they talk to one another or make plans to get it done. But someone on the other side of the issue will never know it all, and it they start talking about their opponents in vague terms, that's no damn crime, and nothing to call a "conspiracy theory".

The historical fact is there, as I stated, that in the early 1950s the CIA rolled out a strategy to combat certain public concerns "Conspiracy Theories" for the purpose of influencing political discussions. It was always used to discredit actual truths by the CIA. Once set out by the CIA, other organizations picked up the cue and advanced it.

No coincidence. No fluke. It was purposeful.

 

[babe]

@Ron Mexico

Here is a sorta contemporary even liberal discussion on the origin of the "Conspiracy Theory" hate/lunatic slur:

There’s a conspiracy theory that the CIA invented the term ‘conspiracy theory’ – here’s why

John F Kennedy’s assassination was a turning point in how conspiracy theorists became viewed.

theconversation.com

I'm old enough to know this is junk, because the term goes back to the 1950s. Sure it was not so commonplace. But it was there. I'd have to do some FOIA search of my own, I suppose. But a lot of people have done this on the CIA, pro and con already.

The idea that the CIA has "always" been at the psy-op game, the public management game, for political purposes, has always been "out there" since we knew there was even a CIA. Even when is was OSS.

this is not a good prospective subject for you to dismiss.

 

[babe]

@Ron Mexico

Here is a sorta contemporary even liberal discussion on the origin of the "Conspiracy Theory" hate/lunatic slur:

There’s a conspiracy theory that the CIA invented the term ‘conspiracy theory’ – here’s why

John F Kennedy’s assassination was a turning point in how conspiracy theorists became viewed.

theconversation.com

I'm old enough to know this is junk, because the term goes back to the 1950s. Sure it was not so commonplace. But it was there. I'd have to do some FOIA search of my own, I suppose. But a lot of people have done this on the CIA, pro and con already.

The idea that the CIA has "always" been at the psy-op game, the public management game, for political purposes, has always been "out there" since we knew there was even a CIA. Even when is was OSS.

this is not a good prospective subject for you to dismiss.

Pretty damn sure it goes back at least to the British Foreign Office of the 1700s.

 

[Ron Mexico]

Pretty damn sure it goes back at least to the British Foreign Office of the 1700s.

I didn't read the rest of these posts, but I'll take this as an admission that you were wrong.

 

[babe]

I didn't read the rest of these posts, but I'll take this as an admission that you were wrong.

Wrong about what.

The way you're dealing with this would make an idiot blush, but you're no damn idiot.

(restoring a thought posted here originally and perhaps removed, though I don't rule out other explanations)

there are people with ideological or political causes who believe their cause warrants deliberate lying, propaganda, or determined purposeful actions, such as sustained personal attacks or mischaracterizations to support their cause. A person who comes to a discussion thread with such a set of tactics, and few if any actual facts or reasoned remarks, is likely motivated more by a personal agenda rather than wanting to discuss the facts of an issue.

I'm not interested in doing the damned trial on every such person. Just sayin, Ron Mexico is smart enough to contribute to this discussion in a better way if he wants. And please do so.

(screenshot()
=+don't alter my posts.

 

[babe]

questions/issues recap

Al did a post about generic "ballot harvesting in California" with a link to the Torrance CA arrest of 8/16/21, the day after vote by mail ballots were sent out. The police found "thousands of pieces of mail" with over 300 unopened recall ballots. There has been no report yet about a postal service collection box or postal vehicle being robbed. No USPS location of the theft.

The place of theft is important in analysis of the crime(s). It should have been reported.

So Al's thesis was that a criminal might have been intent on perpetrating vote fraud, out looking to harvest the mailed out ballots before they were picked up by the addressees.

The police investigators reported that they looked at the perps's personal electronics...... communications...... to see if there was any evidience related to his intentions or purposes, and found that there was none specific to an intent of commit voter fraud. It was identity theft, bank fraud, credit card fraud, that sort of thing, and drug possession. The perp was wanted on other charges before being found with the mail.

People do indeed rob private mail boxes and collect all kinds of mail, and make use of it illegally. Has happened on my street. We had to close accounts and report it to the police, who found the perp who did that to us, and got him sent to jaiol.

So finding aj perp passed out with mail should not be taken as election fraud. The first Torrance police facebook post correctly stated that there was a lot of mail, and the 300+ unopened ballots. Then there was a second post that did not include that fact, which caused a firestorm of conservative accusations of election fraud. Pics of the stolenj ballots, all that. No mention of the other mail. And looking at the sacks opened up, the ballots were in banded lots. Go look at those pics.

If this stolen mail had been gathered from hundreds of mail boxes, the ballots would not be banded together. Go figure.

A competent police report would deal with facts like that. The news, the pics, the police report apparently (I haven'[t examined the actual police report) did not address that issue.

Bad reporting by some "liberal" news sources gave me the impression, the false and somewhat assumed notinn that they were "Newsom ballots", a set voted against recalling Newsom. That got me going with my statistical reasoning, which does apply to cases where a set of ballots is homogenous, all for one side of the issue. does njot apply to unopened ballots.

But if the perp went out robbing mail boxes and sorted the mail to band the ballots together, that is proof of an intent to hand over, or sell the ballots to interested parties. that would be proof of election fraud. Intent.

A set of banded ballots handed to a perp from a postal service worker or other official, with a perp like this, would be a foolish or reckless action. Drug addicts and criminals with warrants out for their arrest would be a bad idea for that project.
So if I were uinvestigating this crime, I wouldn't be done yet. I'd have to be looking for some reason why a perp would be sorting stolen mail from many mailboxes and looking for ideas he might have had about where he could cash in on them. Probably is an idea that is "out there" in CA.

This perp just hadn't found where to go with them, yet.

So all in all, the investigation found nothing that wasn't reported in the first police facebook post, and the firestorm of allegations was just a stupid omission fromthe second police facebook post that lent to the idea that the ballots were a distributed cache of illicit ballots, in transit to a vote harvesting unit.

Nothing relevant to the existence or non-existence of voter fraud by ballot harvesting. Does not disprove Al's thesis, just his cited incident, and that particular arrest.

A real vote harvesting operatioin would likely not be using a wanted felon with a warrant out for his arrest. It would be using paid activists who could be relied on.

HR1, which Al referred to, reveals a distinct and undeniable intent by the DNC and Pelosi and other Democrat politicians to remove every conceivable barrier to voter fraud. Criminal intent.

So, Red and Ron and Game, one arrest with incidental ballots in his posession, is irrelevant to the 4lection fraud issue at large.

And yes, the police did a sort of intentional omission of a critically important observation in their report, unless the pics or other obsrvations can prove the ballots were not sorted and banded together. That is proof of an intentional coverup of the ballot harvesting problem. Nobody would sort mail like that for no reason. With or without communications proving that reason.

Authorities always do this kind of cover-up/whitewashing. They are a set of self-interested people who will work together when necessary to look "good".

 

[LogGrad98]

We had someone empty our mailbox the other day. We had a couple of packages of masks from amazon sent through the mail, showed delivered, and the mailbox was empty.

 

[Ron Mexico]

Wrong about what.

Lol, this sums up your posts very well. Thanks.

 

[Ron Mexico]

The use of the term "Conspiracy Theory" derives from a CIA policy of denial originated in the early 1950s to suppress citizens who were saying true stuff that was inconvenient to the new order

Pretty damn sure it goes back at least to the British Foreign Office of the 1700s.

 

[Keefe]

Can we just lock this ****ing thread? There was no true election fraud. Ten zillion Republican judges and others have proven so.

Jesus Christ. Trump is a con man. Get over it, losers.

 

[babe]

Lol, this sums up your posts very well. Thanks.

You had/have no damn idea of what you said, because you didn't even read anything I said and couldn't bring any information to the reply.

You still bring nothing to the table.

"

The use of the term "Conspiracy Theory" derives from a CIA policy of denial originated in the early 1950s to suppress citizens who were saying true stuff that was inconvenient to the new order

Pretty damn sure it goes back at least to the British Foreign Office of the 1700s."

and you bring nothing to this either.

The idea of using slurs like "Conspiracy Theory" or even "Bunk" to diss factual information was brought into the American 1950s political jargon by the CIA specifically for the purpose of protecting our "management team" after WWII from accusations of having helped the Nazis prior to WWII, and being outed by anyone noticing that the corporates who built Hitler's industrial power in the 1930s actually brought home their German research and corporate leaders after the war, and installed them in key positions within the US military-industrial system.

Russia got some too. And with them went puppet British/American influencers into the Russian industrial sector to set up a credible "cold war" scam.

Joe McCarthy might have been something of an ignoramus because he thought American leadership would actually react in horror at the idea of commies under our beds. But the fact of a network of operatives connecting both sides to the same management was not wrong. Just not something globalist interests wanted validated in the news in the 1950s.

The British Foreign Office has used this kind of management schema since the earliest days of imperialism.

You're no dumbass, so you choose to do this on purpose. You've earned the rare Babe Ignore Prize.

 

[Ron Mexico]

You had/have no damn idea of what you said, because you didn't even read anything I said and couldn't bring any information to the reply.

You still bring nothing to the table.

"



and you bring nothing to this either.

The idea of using slurs like "Conspiracy Theory" or even "Bunk" to diss factual information was brought into the American 1950s political jargon by the CIA specifically for the purpose of protecting our "management team" after WWII from accusations of having helped the Nazis prior to WWII, and being outed by anyone noticing that the corporates who built Hitler's industrial power in the 1930s actually brought home their German research and corporate leaders after the war, and installed them in key positions within the US military-industrial system.

Russia got some too. And with them went puppet British/American influencers into the Russian industrial sector to set up a credible "cold war" scam.

Joe McCarthy might have been something of an ignoramus because he thought American leadership would actually react in horror at the idea of commies under our beds. But the fact of a network of operatives connecting both sides to the same management was not wrong. Just not something globalist interests wanted validated in the news in the 1950s.

The British Foreign Office has used this kind of management schema since the earliest days of imperialism.

You're no dumbass, so you choose to do this on purpose. You've earned the rare Babe Ignore Prize.

Did Babe just put himself on ignore? Makes sense.

 

[LogGrad98]

Did Babe just put himself on ignore? Makes sense.

Wait, can you do that?