My post last Friday on Substack and Daily Kos generated a lot of response, and more importantly, new information that deserves attention. I received several private first-person accounts where readers shared what they believe to be meaningful voting irregularities that they hoped would be further investigated. I’m not going to reprint those comments here, since they are not yet independently verified (and may never be, even if they are factually correct).
However, other new, verifiable info is noteworthy, and I feel compelled to update my thoughts by broadening them beyond Trump’s seeming admission a week ago that Elon Musk helped him win Pennsylvania (and perhaps other swing states) by messing with “vote counting computers.”
Keep in mind, there are at least two nefarious ways that the candidate with the least public support can still “win” an election. The first is systemic. The best example of this is well-known gerrymandering. When applied over time, it is to democracy the proverbial “death by a thousand cuts.” Most of it is done in plain sight, the result of right-wing elections officials and right-wing courts installed over decades, from the local levels to the now well-established corruption of SCOTUS. This sets the foundation for a long-term “minority rule” scenario — a demonstrateably key GOP objective for the past 50 years or so, now seemingly within permanent reach.
The second way for elections to be corrupted is through nefarious strategic activities, ones that are tactical, prohibited by law, and most of which are almost impossible to address once the damage has been done at the ballot box. This is especially true when the apparent winner and his cohort consider themselves above the law and no longer likely to be held accountable for any crimes, past or present.
Bold strategic moves that seek to change the results of a general election can be seen as the last gasps of individuals seeking to consolidate power and avoid prison, in league with greedy oligarchs hungry for a permanent role in the allocation of our tax dollars. Their joint willingness to risk detection is buttressed by what may be seen as a reliable systemic safety net — SCOTUS, ultimately.
There now appears to be credible evidence of meaningful irregularities in Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania and perhaps New York (meaning, irregularities that could easily have swung the election in Trump’s favor). With that in mind, below are links to very recent reports that demand be considered by those of us who are still seriously questioning how Trump could have won swing states that went all-Democrat down-ballot, but inexplicably swung to Trump for President.
Via the final link below (Thom Hartmann Report), Greg Palast sidelines the “Musk helped change votes” theory in favor of plain old voter suppression efforts, which have been around for almost as long as the GOP, and which appear particularly egregious in 2024. But that view alone does not convincingly negate the possibility that in addition to vote suppression, Trump did admit to cheating that actually did take place. It simply adds an additional layer(s) of possible election interference that was not widely reported.
Inquiring minds still want to know?
The Washington Post used to embody the proclamation in its masthead, “Democracy Dies in Darkness.” We all benefit from keeping a bright light on the most important pillar of our democracy, the right to vote, and to do our best to keep that pillar strong with integrity. Here are links to a few of the most recent articles that ask for your attention (and hopefully the attention of whoever is left, and courageous enough, to further investigate). These are not irrefutable conclusions — they point to items that need further investigation and clarification:
Democrat Calls for Investigation of Donald Trump's 'Vote Counting Computers' Remark - Newsweek, Jan. 22, 2025
Analysis of 2024 Election Results in Clark County Indicates Manipulation - ktla.com, Jan. 22, 2025
Convincing evidence of likely manipulation of 2024 Presidential votes in Nevada - Ray Lutz, Substack, Jan. 6, 2025
Drop-off Factor in Election Data Raises Questions about 2024 Election Results - press release by SMART Elections, Dec. 17, 2024
Biden-Harris cybersecurity lead issues another urgent call for forensic audit of 2024 election - The Canary, Dec. 2, 2024
(To participate in extended discussion and a vote, this article also appears on my Daily Kos page)