Molly Ball in Time Magazine put out a story at the end of last week, The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign that Saved the 2020 Election, and a lot of people seized upon the story to continue to perpetuate outrage over a stolen election and claiming this was the proof.
The Democrats were just more organized. My 18 year old son received a handwritten postcard from someone from Missouri urging him to "Turn Georgia Blue".
If Mr. Lindell ever tells us where he got his numbers, please let me know as I have to admit that I didn't watch the whole thing. That sort of matters. One's source is such a critical piece of information that anyone who actually knows how to prove something will generally tell you that right off the bat.
I didn't watch past Lindell's first interview with the guy claiming that votes were switched by computer, which makes no sense. You see, TRUMP'S OWN PEOPLE said, “All of the states with close results in the 2020 presidential race have paper records of each vote, allowing the ability to go back and count each ballot if necessary.” Here's my source (Do you see how I tell you where I got my information?):
Now take Georgia, for example, with its Republican Governor, Republican Secretary of State, and a whole slew of other Republican election officials. After recounting the vote three times, any significant discrepancy between the machine totals and those reflected in the paper ballots would have made it incredibly easy for Trump to find some Republican judge (this is Georgia, after all) who would say precisely that. Trump's OWN ATTORNEY GENERAL Bill Barr could not possibly have missed something so easy to prove. I mean, the machines give one total but the paper ballots show another . . . . Doing the math is pretty simple. Barr never found any such thing.
Giving Lindell the benefit of the doubt, we'll know if he was telling the truth after the lawsuit. (The only reason I can think of for why he hasn't already been sued is that the election machine lawyers thought he might give them a video if they waited.) Anyway, after using the symbol of his purported saviour's horribly brutal death to sell pillows all these years, I'm happy to see that he left the big guy out of it for the moment.
I recommend that you start watching the video at 1:36:00. That’s where he shows exactly where the numbers come from. I would be interested in your reaction.
First, thank you for taking the time and effort to try and answer my question. However, the numbers I was referring to were those that he cited at the very outset of the video, which numbers he seemed to be pulling out of thin air.
As for what I saw from the point at 1:36:00, first I would note that the lady being interviewed refers to "cybersecurity experts" without naming them. Hence I might pose the same question (that is, who is the source?), but it is unnecessary in regard to her allegations related to cyberfraud. Let me tell you how this would have played out in court - that is, if Trump's lawyers even tried to use this stuff as evidence of fraud:
LAWYER: So there you have evidence of cyber fraud.
JUDGE: Comparing the hand recount of the paper ballots against the machine count that you say was changed by this cyber fraud, was there a big enough difference between the two to have potentially altered the result?
If the answer was no . . . end of proceedings. The existence of paper ballots against which to compare the machine results is the hurdle that Trump's lawyers could never get over and with them know that, it is why this stuff was probably never even presented in court. That is, if the machine count and the hand recount of paper ballots jibed with one another, even if there was cyber interference, it had no effect on the outcome.
You see, as Erick has previously stated, there are irregularities in almost every election. If the mere existence of some irregularity is a justification for setting aside an election's result, we might as well stop having elections because each and every single one will be subject to the same objection.
Coming at this in another way, let's assume that there was in fact foreign cyber interference in the 2020 election, just as Lindell claims. You might recall, however, that the Democrats said the same thing about the 2016 election, and their claims were supported by the FBI, CIA, and every other U.S. intelligence agency in sight. So taking Russian interference in 2016 as a given, should Trump's election have been thrown out on those grounds; that is, without any proof that it was that interference that put him over the top?
You will have to forgive me for being too lazy to watch the whole thing, but I would be willing to bet that Lindell and his guests offer extensive proof of cyber interference, but absolutely no proof that it was so extensive as to change the outcome. (If I am wrong, I'd be happy to eat those words.)
Something wasn't done right in 2008 . . . . That's good enough for me. What do you say we throw out each and every one of the 2.3 million votes that were cast in Oregon 12 years later?
I mean, what's your point? The article you cite pertains to Barack Obama's Justice Department. The Justice Department this time around was headed by Bill Barr - Trump's very own guy - who found no evidence of wide spread fraud.
In 2008 George Bush's Attorney General Michael Mukasey was in charge. But, since the report was not turned in until after Obama was sworn in no one had data to question anything about the 2008 election at the time. That's why it became an Obama administration issue.
I believe Erick knows a lot about elections and I trust his knowledge and his judgment. I also find the evidence of voting fraud shown in the Lindell video to be convincing. I wish Erick would watch the video and then comment on it. Erick, will you do that for us?
Let me tell you how this would have played out in court - that is, if Trump's lawyers even tried to use this stuff as evidence of fraud:
LAWYER: So there you have evidence of cyber fraud.
JUDGE: Comparing the hand recount of the paper ballots against the machine count that you say was changed by this cyber fraud, was there a big enough difference between the two to have potentially altered the result?
If the answer was no . . . end of proceedings. The existence of paper ballots against which to compare the machine results (https://www.vox.com/2020/11/13/21563825/2020-elections-most-secure-dhs-cisa-krebs) is the hurdle that Trump's lawyers could never get over and with them knowing that, it is why this stuff was probably never even presented in court. That is, if the machine count and the hand recount of paper ballots jibed with one another, even if there was cyber interference, it had no effect on the outcome.
You see, as Erick has previously stated, there are irregularities in almost every election. If the mere existence of some irregularity is a justification for setting aside an election's result, we might as well stop having elections because each and every single one will be subject to the same objection.
Coming at this in another way, let's assume that there was in fact foreign cyber interference in the 2020 election, just as Lindell claims. You might recall, however, that the Democrats said the same thing about the 2016 election, and their claims were supported by the FBI, CIA, and every other U.S. intelligence agency in sight. Should Trump's election have been thrown out on those grounds; that is, without any proof that it was that interference that put him over the top?
You will have to forgive me for being too lazy to watch the whole thing, but I would be willing to bet that Lindell and his guests offer extensive proof of cyber interference, but absolutely no proof that it was so extensive as to change the outcome. (If I am wrong, I'd be happy to eat those words.)
Too bad that the people that need to understand this will automatically discount it because it doesn't fit their narrative. I'm finding it harder and hard to consider myself a Republican. Trump supporters love to throw out the RINO term to anyone that's not 100% for Trump, but they are the ones that would leave the party in a heartbeat if he asked them to. Can I hang in the party until they are gone or will they drive me out?
George Bush drove me out, although I still agree philosophically with conservatism and cannot vote for the the Progressive Democrats for many reasons. Perdue and Loeffler lost the Senate races because someone 🤔 convinced Republican voters that the election would be stolen. Would you like to guess who?
I am a manager a very adversarial job. There is a phrase I tell my people all of the time; the enemy gets a vote.
The GOP has seemed content to assume their narrative would be the prevailing story. The GOP was so ready to complain about the insult de jeure and never ready to dig in and do the hard work of winning votes.
I agree that the GOP was incompetent, they have been for the past 12 years. No surprise there. What is a surprise is that Erick Erickson, who tries to give the impression that he is a conservative, seems to believe that the past election is no big deal. So what if the progressives have all the power in the US? Give them credit for doing a good job he says. He gives the impression that "we can get them next time". I have news for you Mr. Erickson, now that the left has power in the US, there ain't going to be any "next time". Or are you, Mr. Erickson, just that ignorant of history?
Since you are such a political genius (GOP will win a squeaker in GA), don't spend time writing praising the Progressives, tell us what to do now that conservatives are in the political wilderness.
Great comment Mark. I agree somewhat with what you’re saying. We aren’t forever lost as a conservatives party though. This new regime is just going to make the return to normalcy tougher. We must get a super majority in Congress to fix things more permanently. Executive orders and Supreme Court rulings have ruined Congress. Bureaucrats have ruined Washington DC and those positions should be term limited too. Congressman Dan Crenshaw once pointed out that if Congress has term limits then the lifetime bureaucrats would rule the roost so to speak. What Erick and people like Neil don’t understand is how the Information Age has changed things. Facebook & Twitter double standards along with our media not being held accountable. As many people have seen the FB clips of Sam Donaldson and other news media holding Joe Biden accountable when he made racist comments, when he plagiarized his speeches multiple times. Today they do not do their job and therefore we have an uphill battle. Democrats have the money to run huge campaigns and smear anyone. This is unfortunate but does not make our goal unattainable. Everyone’s vote counts the same so with or without money it really comes down to how conservatives can get the vote out with all the lies and democrat improprieties that go unreported or covered. As bad as I hate doing it. I think it comes down to knocking on everyone’s door who’s on your side. Conservatives have the votes, we just got to get them to the polls.
"[N]ow that the left has power in the US . . . ."? You do of course realize that Democratic control of both Congress and the Executive branch has happened before. Why exactly would this election be any different than 2009-2011, or 1993-95 for that matter (except for the pedophilia, I mean)?
Every four years, we have these things called elections. The deal is that if we lose, we trust the other side not to screw things up too badly until the next time we vote. Usually, the other side (be it Democratic or Republican) does screw things up to the point that the American people wrest some part of federal executive and legislative power from them and give it to the other party. And you know what happens all along? America kicks ass and takes names. Now the asses and names may not be exactly the ones you or I might want. But as a general proposition, America does just fine.
And for crying out loud, have you noticed that there IS a difference between Biden and Bernie Sanders. As far as a Democratic President goes, we got one of the more moderate ones. Anyway, read the article below, stop your whining and just win the election next time: it's the American way.
Actually I'm very aware of history. In 2008 and 2012 the GOP said if we didn't stop the left, we'd never win again. I was part of that. I'm mindful I was wrong. In 2024 there'll be another election too. In 2022, the GOP will do quite well. That you believe its over is more about you and your mental state than it is about reality.
So many people still trying to claim "theft" are not digging into this at all. And the crowd screaming most about "theft" are simply covering their own failures in the election.
Im seeing all these comments on facebook about the Time story: this just proves the election was stolen. These people are not just sore losers, they were sore losers in advance, sulking about the absentee voting instead of getting stuck in and fighting their corner. They wanted to lose just to prove how mean the world is
The Democrats were just more organized. My 18 year old son received a handwritten postcard from someone from Missouri urging him to "Turn Georgia Blue".
The left does a great job of foreshadowing what they plan/want to do by complaining someone else is doing it.
Erick has stated there fraud in every election, just not enough to change the outcome.
Ok.
Fraud or not, the way the left tamped down the ability to monitor, or review sure gave an impression of issues.
This was pretty convincing for me. https://centipedenation.com/transmissions/mike-lindells-documentary-absolute-proof/
If Mr. Lindell ever tells us where he got his numbers, please let me know as I have to admit that I didn't watch the whole thing. That sort of matters. One's source is such a critical piece of information that anyone who actually knows how to prove something will generally tell you that right off the bat.
I didn't watch past Lindell's first interview with the guy claiming that votes were switched by computer, which makes no sense. You see, TRUMP'S OWN PEOPLE said, “All of the states with close results in the 2020 presidential race have paper records of each vote, allowing the ability to go back and count each ballot if necessary.” Here's my source (Do you see how I tell you where I got my information?):
https://www.vox.com/2020/11/13/21563825/2020-elections-most-secure-dhs-cisa-krebs
Now take Georgia, for example, with its Republican Governor, Republican Secretary of State, and a whole slew of other Republican election officials. After recounting the vote three times, any significant discrepancy between the machine totals and those reflected in the paper ballots would have made it incredibly easy for Trump to find some Republican judge (this is Georgia, after all) who would say precisely that. Trump's OWN ATTORNEY GENERAL Bill Barr could not possibly have missed something so easy to prove. I mean, the machines give one total but the paper ballots show another . . . . Doing the math is pretty simple. Barr never found any such thing.
Giving Lindell the benefit of the doubt, we'll know if he was telling the truth after the lawsuit. (The only reason I can think of for why he hasn't already been sued is that the election machine lawyers thought he might give them a video if they waited.) Anyway, after using the symbol of his purported saviour's horribly brutal death to sell pillows all these years, I'm happy to see that he left the big guy out of it for the moment.
I recommend that you start watching the video at 1:36:00. That’s where he shows exactly where the numbers come from. I would be interested in your reaction.
First, thank you for taking the time and effort to try and answer my question. However, the numbers I was referring to were those that he cited at the very outset of the video, which numbers he seemed to be pulling out of thin air.
As for what I saw from the point at 1:36:00, first I would note that the lady being interviewed refers to "cybersecurity experts" without naming them. Hence I might pose the same question (that is, who is the source?), but it is unnecessary in regard to her allegations related to cyberfraud. Let me tell you how this would have played out in court - that is, if Trump's lawyers even tried to use this stuff as evidence of fraud:
LAWYER: So there you have evidence of cyber fraud.
JUDGE: Comparing the hand recount of the paper ballots against the machine count that you say was changed by this cyber fraud, was there a big enough difference between the two to have potentially altered the result?
If the answer was no . . . end of proceedings. The existence of paper ballots against which to compare the machine results is the hurdle that Trump's lawyers could never get over and with them know that, it is why this stuff was probably never even presented in court. That is, if the machine count and the hand recount of paper ballots jibed with one another, even if there was cyber interference, it had no effect on the outcome.
You see, as Erick has previously stated, there are irregularities in almost every election. If the mere existence of some irregularity is a justification for setting aside an election's result, we might as well stop having elections because each and every single one will be subject to the same objection.
Coming at this in another way, let's assume that there was in fact foreign cyber interference in the 2020 election, just as Lindell claims. You might recall, however, that the Democrats said the same thing about the 2016 election, and their claims were supported by the FBI, CIA, and every other U.S. intelligence agency in sight. So taking Russian interference in 2016 as a given, should Trump's election have been thrown out on those grounds; that is, without any proof that it was that interference that put him over the top?
You will have to forgive me for being too lazy to watch the whole thing, but I would be willing to bet that Lindell and his guests offer extensive proof of cyber interference, but absolutely no proof that it was so extensive as to change the outcome. (If I am wrong, I'd be happy to eat those words.)
On a report required by federal law my state, Oregon, reported no voters removed because of death from its voting rolls from 2006 to 2008.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/there-really-something-rotten-justice-department-hans-von-spakovsky/
Incompetence? Corruption? Does it matter?
Something wasn't done right in 2008 . . . . That's good enough for me. What do you say we throw out each and every one of the 2.3 million votes that were cast in Oregon 12 years later?
I mean, what's your point? The article you cite pertains to Barack Obama's Justice Department. The Justice Department this time around was headed by Bill Barr - Trump's very own guy - who found no evidence of wide spread fraud.
In 2008 George Bush's Attorney General Michael Mukasey was in charge. But, since the report was not turned in until after Obama was sworn in no one had data to question anything about the 2008 election at the time. That's why it became an Obama administration issue.
I believe Erick knows a lot about elections and I trust his knowledge and his judgment. I also find the evidence of voting fraud shown in the Lindell video to be convincing. I wish Erick would watch the video and then comment on it. Erick, will you do that for us?
Let me tell you how this would have played out in court - that is, if Trump's lawyers even tried to use this stuff as evidence of fraud:
LAWYER: So there you have evidence of cyber fraud.
JUDGE: Comparing the hand recount of the paper ballots against the machine count that you say was changed by this cyber fraud, was there a big enough difference between the two to have potentially altered the result?
If the answer was no . . . end of proceedings. The existence of paper ballots against which to compare the machine results (https://www.vox.com/2020/11/13/21563825/2020-elections-most-secure-dhs-cisa-krebs) is the hurdle that Trump's lawyers could never get over and with them knowing that, it is why this stuff was probably never even presented in court. That is, if the machine count and the hand recount of paper ballots jibed with one another, even if there was cyber interference, it had no effect on the outcome.
You see, as Erick has previously stated, there are irregularities in almost every election. If the mere existence of some irregularity is a justification for setting aside an election's result, we might as well stop having elections because each and every single one will be subject to the same objection.
Coming at this in another way, let's assume that there was in fact foreign cyber interference in the 2020 election, just as Lindell claims. You might recall, however, that the Democrats said the same thing about the 2016 election, and their claims were supported by the FBI, CIA, and every other U.S. intelligence agency in sight. Should Trump's election have been thrown out on those grounds; that is, without any proof that it was that interference that put him over the top?
You will have to forgive me for being too lazy to watch the whole thing, but I would be willing to bet that Lindell and his guests offer extensive proof of cyber interference, but absolutely no proof that it was so extensive as to change the outcome. (If I am wrong, I'd be happy to eat those words.)
Too bad that the people that need to understand this will automatically discount it because it doesn't fit their narrative. I'm finding it harder and hard to consider myself a Republican. Trump supporters love to throw out the RINO term to anyone that's not 100% for Trump, but they are the ones that would leave the party in a heartbeat if he asked them to. Can I hang in the party until they are gone or will they drive me out?
George Bush drove me out, although I still agree philosophically with conservatism and cannot vote for the the Progressive Democrats for many reasons. Perdue and Loeffler lost the Senate races because someone 🤔 convinced Republican voters that the election would be stolen. Would you like to guess who?
I am a manager a very adversarial job. There is a phrase I tell my people all of the time; the enemy gets a vote.
The GOP has seemed content to assume their narrative would be the prevailing story. The GOP was so ready to complain about the insult de jeure and never ready to dig in and do the hard work of winning votes.
I agree that the GOP was incompetent, they have been for the past 12 years. No surprise there. What is a surprise is that Erick Erickson, who tries to give the impression that he is a conservative, seems to believe that the past election is no big deal. So what if the progressives have all the power in the US? Give them credit for doing a good job he says. He gives the impression that "we can get them next time". I have news for you Mr. Erickson, now that the left has power in the US, there ain't going to be any "next time". Or are you, Mr. Erickson, just that ignorant of history?
Since you are such a political genius (GOP will win a squeaker in GA), don't spend time writing praising the Progressives, tell us what to do now that conservatives are in the political wilderness.
Great comment Mark. I agree somewhat with what you’re saying. We aren’t forever lost as a conservatives party though. This new regime is just going to make the return to normalcy tougher. We must get a super majority in Congress to fix things more permanently. Executive orders and Supreme Court rulings have ruined Congress. Bureaucrats have ruined Washington DC and those positions should be term limited too. Congressman Dan Crenshaw once pointed out that if Congress has term limits then the lifetime bureaucrats would rule the roost so to speak. What Erick and people like Neil don’t understand is how the Information Age has changed things. Facebook & Twitter double standards along with our media not being held accountable. As many people have seen the FB clips of Sam Donaldson and other news media holding Joe Biden accountable when he made racist comments, when he plagiarized his speeches multiple times. Today they do not do their job and therefore we have an uphill battle. Democrats have the money to run huge campaigns and smear anyone. This is unfortunate but does not make our goal unattainable. Everyone’s vote counts the same so with or without money it really comes down to how conservatives can get the vote out with all the lies and democrat improprieties that go unreported or covered. As bad as I hate doing it. I think it comes down to knocking on everyone’s door who’s on your side. Conservatives have the votes, we just got to get them to the polls.
"[N]ow that the left has power in the US . . . ."? You do of course realize that Democratic control of both Congress and the Executive branch has happened before. Why exactly would this election be any different than 2009-2011, or 1993-95 for that matter (except for the pedophilia, I mean)?
Every four years, we have these things called elections. The deal is that if we lose, we trust the other side not to screw things up too badly until the next time we vote. Usually, the other side (be it Democratic or Republican) does screw things up to the point that the American people wrest some part of federal executive and legislative power from them and give it to the other party. And you know what happens all along? America kicks ass and takes names. Now the asses and names may not be exactly the ones you or I might want. But as a general proposition, America does just fine.
And for crying out loud, have you noticed that there IS a difference between Biden and Bernie Sanders. As far as a Democratic President goes, we got one of the more moderate ones. Anyway, read the article below, stop your whining and just win the election next time: it's the American way.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/02/10/donald-trump-may-not-have-hurt-gop-much-some-might-think/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=wp_opinions
Actually I'm very aware of history. In 2008 and 2012 the GOP said if we didn't stop the left, we'd never win again. I was part of that. I'm mindful I was wrong. In 2024 there'll be another election too. In 2022, the GOP will do quite well. That you believe its over is more about you and your mental state than it is about reality.
So many people still trying to claim "theft" are not digging into this at all. And the crowd screaming most about "theft" are simply covering their own failures in the election.
YEP!
Im seeing all these comments on facebook about the Time story: this just proves the election was stolen. These people are not just sore losers, they were sore losers in advance, sulking about the absentee voting instead of getting stuck in and fighting their corner. They wanted to lose just to prove how mean the world is