What's new

Election Fraud


Red

Well-Known Member
The statement in the report there says there were 300 Gavin Newsome ballots in the mixed assortment stolen from the postal vehicle.

No other candidate's ballots.
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.
 
Last edited:


LogGrad98

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2020-21 Award Winner
To tell you the truth, I don’t even remember the far Right having a field day claiming it had to be mail fraud. I don’t remember at all that police released photos of just the ballot bundles. All I remember is using experience, and the stated facts at the time, to common sense the answer that was most likely. The articles I posted yesterday, blaming misleading photos of the ballot bundles and police Facebook posts, triggering the Right, I don’t recall any of that at the time.

AI-O-Meter told me it was election theft, and went on about how easy it would be to rifle through curbside mail boxes. Then babe weighed in with all the crooked postal workers that must have been involved. Which I found comical. I tried to explain the facts spoke otherwise. And I forgot all about it until those stories showed up in my feed, and I had trouble searching out the old thread that was involved. But here it is, didn’t think I was ever going to find the thread, and there’s your answer, as I promised. One that was right there all along, if one did not let the ballots trigger more nefarious schemes in one’s…….imagination!
Facts and reason cannot overcome the power of the conspiracy. Conspiracies are far more compelling than mere facts.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
No. I went by the evidence available at the time. The articles at the time stated the man was found with credit cards that were not in his name, and lots of mail. Not just those bundles of ballots. Lots of other mail as well. That pointed to mail theft in service to identity theft. Bingo! That’s exactly what it was. You need to understand I knew it was a very common type of crime and increasing in frequency. Only guess I made that was not correct was where the mail came from. Not a collection can, but from a postal vehicle. Carrier must have left his/her truck unlocked while it was unattended.

But, bottom line is that it was easy to guess what had happened, and I guessed correctly. I stated at the time the fact that he had all that mail indicated the ballots were just incidental to the theft. Should we assume he stood at the mail truck and screened everything, looking for mail pieces he thought might be useful in identity theft? Far more likely that he grabbed a postal bucket full of outgoing mail, and took off with it, including ballots that were of no use to him.

You can believe what you want. I knew exactly what it almost surely was, and said I would update this thread if and when an answer was provided. It came through my feed yesterday, so I found the thread and updated it.

I’m going with the common sense I went with at the time of the incident. You can convolute it if it pleases you, but this was easy.

Lol, babe, you said recently that nobody should ever take you seriously. You should picked sensibly the hills you want to die on man. You’re a funny dude. I like you….
Well, so I like you too. Probably almost any human in fact.

We don't come made with any kind of sensibilities except maybe Mama's love. The rest we have to make up somehow.

The idea that we know anything, ultimately, is our fondest delusion.

So I never followed this story very well. I think I did hear that there was some stolen mail in the car when it was found. Identity theft is I think lucrative enough to motivate someone, but it does take a little thought..... how to rob a postal van or truck, where you might have such an opportunity. A crowbar and a corner mail can might be easier at 2 AM, whatever.

After I wrote my bit above, I got to thinking. Can I trust a liberal rag like SF Gate? Don't they just have a lot of very bad reporters who write stuff off the top of their heads even worse than I do? Can I believe a police investigation in a fascist
State like California, with crooks like Newsome and Pelosi running everything?

No, I cannot just believe a report like this, or even the news then or now.

The reporter might have just gotten it all wrong in saying "300 Newsome ballots" were found. There might have been 600. And there might have been 300 ballots for the Larry Edwards guy. They might have had postmarks showing they were collected in Hawthorne, or some other place, there might have been no pastmarks at all, showing they were picked up somewhere and were on the way to the Post Office.

My opinion about pervasive and systematic fraud in elections derives from official data, which also could be all wrong somehow. Stuff like 80% turnout in the same area where 30% of registered voters can't be found.

Stuff like caches of ballots being found that are all for one side of the election, supposedly collected from where-ever.

You see, there is math involved in statistics. Some facts of math can prove a fraud.

In statistics, where there is a population of 90% "D" balls and 10% "R" balls, the odds of not getting any R balls in a sample set is 9/10 exp 10. It happens sometimes. About 30% of a set of ten yielding no "R" balls is the mean probability. And close to that you'll get 2 "R" balls. Rarely, 3. If you can reliably guess such results several times in a row, you might consider becomeing a gambler and facing a life of being thrown out of Casinos or carted off to jails to explain your skills. The odds of consecutively getting that result for sets of ten thirty times in a row is pretty close to 0. That is what I call statistical proof.

The numbers I saw in real time watching election results all night long in Nov 2020 are not rationally believable in statistical terms

But you are right. I would need to see that cache of mail myself, before it was stampered with, and carefully examine the ballots, to believe I knew what happened. It would be nice if police recorded events like that as they came on the scene, and we could see the facts first hand.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
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.
OK, so you miss another point here.

If this was outgoing mail, from the election officials to the voters.... "undelivered", as you say, then we need to fix our terminology. They were not "Newsome" ballots, but "Recall ballots". As I read, very sparingly, the SF Gate article, I recall they were termed "Newsome ballots", not "Edwards Ballots" or "Recall Ballots". To be "Newsome Ballots" they would need to be in favor of Newsome.

Still 300 ballots in the hands of someone in a car would allow that someone a chance to vote them all the way he wanted. Mail theft, therefore, becomes a good reason not to do mail ballots like that. Or we need absolutely to verify signatures or perhaps an even more failsafe proof the proper voter did the ballot. And how do we stop the loss of ballots by theft on the return to the election officials. We do the best we can, and then use some auditing, hopefully, to determine reliable counting of mailed in ballots.

I'll be making a response to Log on the "Conspiracy Theory" bit. I don't think that covers simple cheating or local corruption issues.

I Think you should understand that I take the rest of your comments appreciatively.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
Facts and reason cannot overcome the power of the conspiracy. Conspiracies are far more compelling than mere facts.

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. My father worked at a military supply plant where about 80 German scientists were employed. These were, more precisely, experts from the Nazi regime. They were given new names, many of them Jewish-sounding names, and taught English so they could pass as Americans. The claim that we were bringing in large numbers of former enemies and giving them our top corporate jobs was kinda sensitive. Never mind the fact that American Industrialists, pissed off with the enforcement of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act in the 1930s actually investing in German industries and build the Nazi war machine, was also kinda sensitive. To keep the rubes in the American hinterlands from getting unduly alarmed, the CIA used "Conspiracy Theory" against every true fact they needed to suppress.

When I see people throw out this cheap analysis, rather than actually look at the details in support of the claims, I have to try really hard to work up some sympathy.

A "Conspiracy" in real life invoves two or more people, who relying on secrecy to avoid any unwanted consequences, work together somehow to get something done. The basics are simple. 2+ people, a secret plan, maybe an actual effort.

You should expect the world to be full of conspiracies.

And full of people who wonder what is going on.
 

Red

Well-Known Member
Facts and reason cannot overcome the power of the conspiracy. Conspiracies are far more compelling than mere facts.
OMG, what have I done resurrecting this thread, haha. Last thing on my mind was this story, and then there it was in my news feed. “Oh, look at this, where the hell was that thread?” And it took awhile to find. I worked for this affront, lol…

babe, I know you’re there, I was just familiar with the type of crime that the original stories told me it very well could be. I felt the odds always favored it. All the relevant facts were right there from the start, if you were familiar with that type of crime. Kind of an old fashioned form of identity theft, but still works obviously.
 

Gameface

Stand With Ukraine
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
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. My father worked at a military supply plant where about 80 German scientists were employed. These were, more precisely, experts from the Nazi regime. They were given new names, many of them Jewish-sounding names, and taught English so they could pass as Americans. The claim that we were bringing in large numbers of former enemies and giving them our top corporate jobs was kinda sensitive. Never mind the fact that American Industrialists, pissed off with the enforcement of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act in the 1930s actually investing in German industries and build the Nazi war machine, was also kinda sensitive. To keep the rubes in the American hinterlands from getting unduly alarmed, the CIA used "Conspiracy Theory" against every true fact they needed to suppress.

When I see people throw out this cheap analysis, rather than actually look at the details in support of the claims, I have to try really hard to work up some sympathy.

A "Conspiracy" in real life invoves two or more people, who relying on secrecy to avoid any unwanted consequences, work together somehow to get something done. The basics are simple. 2+ people, a secret plan, maybe an actual effort.

You should expect the world to be full of conspiracies.

And full of people who wonder what is going on.
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!
 

Ron Mexico

Well-Known Member
Contributor
The use of the term "Conspiracy Theory" derives from a CIA policy of denial originated in the early 1950s to...
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.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
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

Well-Known Member
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

Well-Known Member
Contributor
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!
 
Last edited:

Red

Well-Known Member
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.
 


Top