This editorial is brought to you by a staff writer for Law Enforcement Today.
WASHINGTON DC – At noon, November 19, President Trump’s legal team presided over a press conference.
It may be remembered as one of the most important press conferences of our time. Trump’s attorneys, Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, and Jenna Ellis, laid out a case that the 2020 election results were the product of a “centrally-organized” fraud.
Their case was compelling.
They provided evidence. They told reporters how they could obtain copies of the public evidence, such as reading the complaints filed in various courts. If their conclusions are correct, the fraud would be arguably more important than all other stories published since the Civil War.
The reason for that is that other “big” stories, like the World Trade Center attacks or the bombing of Pearl Harbor, concern information that was public to begin with. No investigation was required to learn what had happened.
Available witnesses came forward and the media eagerly wrote about what they had to say. Previously unknown details came out over time, such as the 9/11 hijackers’ identities, but no serious effort was made to prevent public disclosure of that information.
Those stories, and all other stories written between the Civil War and today, did not reveal an equally serious threat to the sovereignty of our nation. What the President’s team alleged today, threatens the core of our government.
The press does not want to cover that story. The actors involved include many of the most admired figures in Progressive politics. This story not only doesn’t want to be found, the media outlets have done everything they can to hide or discredit it.
Here is a sample of some of the allegations made during the press conference:
- [at 17:58] “This is not a singular voter fraud in one state. This pattern repeats itself in a number of states. Almost exactly the same pattern. Which to any experienced investigator, prosecutor, would suggest that there was a plan from a centralized place to execute these various acts of voter fraud. Specifically focused on big cities. And specifically focused on, as you would imagine, big cities controlled by Democrats.”
- [at 19:45] Invalid ballots are not legitimate votes. There are enough invalid votes to change the outcome of the election.
- [at 20:00] Unsupervised vote counting disqualifies all votes counted that way. Enough unsupervised votes were counted to change the outcome of the election.
- [at 25:00] Unequal treatment of voters depending on location created discrepancies favoring Biden.
- [at 26:30] There are at least 15,000 provisional ballots used to cast fraudulent votes for Biden in Pittsburgh.
- [at 29:45] Poll watchers were not allowed to inspect ballots in key locations. They were present but were prevented from executing their assigned task.
- [at 32:21] Poll worker supervisor(s) instructed poll workers to commit various acts of election fraud.
There is more. Much more. But you get the idea. The allegations Giuliani brought up are just the beginning. After his initial presentation, Sidney Powell approaches the podium and releases “the Kraken” as she famously said last Sunday on the Lou Dobbs program.
According to Powell, the majority of the fraud took place in vote tabulation software. The fraud described by Giuliani was ancillary to or supportive of what was going on in the SmartMatic ballot tabulation software. The software, Powell states, was designed for the purpose of voter fraud.
It was used to stage-manage election results in Venezuela, Argentina, and other countries. Election officials in this country are suspected of receiving bribes in return for using the machines in this election. Their goal was to seize the presidency.
There is a lot of evidence and a lot of detail. The fraud was simple at its heart but complex in its execution. This is why there are so many witnesses, hundreds of whom have already filed affidavits attesting to the fraud(s) they witnessed.
The Giuliani team expressed curiosity how so many disparate but related elements could have happened without central organization. The idea is preposterous on its face, as Giuliani clearly says.
Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters? Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you. Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories. Click to check it out.
The next question to be asked is how did such a large-scale fraud designed to benefit Biden happen without the knowledge and complicity of the Biden campaign. The implication is that they did know and may have organized it themselves. It is the logical inference given the evidence.
The reason the number of fraudulent votes cast were enough to change the election outcome is that they were cast for the purpose of changing the outcome by people who knew how many votes were needed. The software allowed real-time access to current vote totals and the means to adjust the results.
When liberal reporters engage in slanderous speculation about President Trump, such as when reporting on the Steele dossier, they like to preface their wild speculation (later proved false) with the words, “if true’. For instance, “Michael Cohen’s testimony, if true, confirms Trump’s crimes”.
In that example, Cohen’s testimony is suspect but, more importantly, it is not a crime to be a victim of extortion. If Cohen’s testimony was true, it would have meant that Stormy Daniels and her attorney, Michael Avenatti, committed the crime of extortion.
It would not implicate Trump in any crime. In that context, it is useful to know that Avenatti was subsequently found guilty of extortion in an unrelated case involving the Nike company.
The difference between the “if true” Steele dossier allegations presented by the press and the material presented by Giuliani is that there are no signed witness statements in the Steele dossier. Everything is anonymous. When the sources were found and interviewed, they refuted the information in the dossier.
Giuliani’s team has hundreds of affiants who have sworn under penalty of perjury that their statements are true. They also have supplementary information in the form of photographs, videos, and other materials.
For a sample of publicly available evidence of voter and election fraud, check out this list.
The President’s lawyers have taken care to read directly from affidavits when appropriate, to ensure their meaning is not altered. In this situation, the appropriate construction is not, “these allegations, if true,” but, “unless every one of these witnesses have perjured themselves and every photo, video, and other document has an innocent explanation.”
The evidence points to a wide-ranging conspiracy to take control of the American government by force. Not force of arms, but information warfare techniques designed to force a desired outcome.
As alleged by Sidney Powell, some of the people involved are connected to the Venezuelan government and George Soros.
Without saying it directly, Giuliani’s team provided enough information to conclude that the Biden/Harris campaign, the DNC, and possibly the candidates themselves, conspired with foreign actors to overthrow the lawful government of the United States. In other words, they’ve committed treason.
These are serious allegations. They are backed with evidence; the kind of evidence that often leads to convictions in a court of law. The picture they paint is of a government rife with destructive corruption.
The media hasn’t been any help. They have been a hindrance. They have done their best to promote the false narrative that no evidence exists, that the election results are known, Biden won the election, and is now President-elect.
They claim that Giuliani, Powell, and other lawyers connected to this investigation are a group of crackpots spinning fanciful conspiracy theories. They say the President is fighting tooth and nail to “overturn the election.”
Giuliani, Powell, and Ellis each had some words for reporters who attended the press conference. They didn’t hold back.
Giuliani: “The coverage of this has been almost as dishonest as the scheme itself.”
The expectation was that reporters who covered the event would dishonestly report what they heard and saw, focus on trivialities, and ignore the substantive allegations. The hope was that some of the information would get out through honest news sources, though few in number.
They weren’t wrong.
The coverage, for the few press organizations that deigned to cover it, was antagonistic, misleading, and supercilious.
NY Times: “Giuliani makes accusations of fraud that the Trump team has failed to support in court.”
Washington Post: “Rudy Giuliani’s post-election meltdown starts to become literal” (a reference to Giuliani sweating during the press conference. This caused a streak from hair dye on the side of his head.)
As of 10:06 EST, ABC and CBS news have no stories on the press conference. They do have anti-Trump stories.
“Trump’s election suits plagued by elementary errors.”
“GOP senators blast Trump’s firing of election security official: ‘ A terrible mistake.'”
“Race to authorize drilling in Alaska refuge.” [with photo of Trump]
“Biden considers filling top Cabinet spots”
MSNBC gets the prize for least serious headline:
“Chuck Todd: ‘Bonkers’ Rudy Giuliani press conference ‘an SNL skit of sorts’.”
CNN’s anti-Trump article of the day (or one of them) summarized well the story promulgated by the media.
“Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani held a 90-minute news conference Thursday where he and his team laid out dubious legal claims, aired debunked conspiracy theories and brought no specific, credible evidence of voter fraud.”
The claims made in that sentence depend on the definition of “specific, credible evidence of voter fraud.” The definition used by CNN and other media outlets must be different from that used by Giuliani and his legal team, all of whom are seasoned prosecutors.
Giuliani did present evidence at the press conference. He told reporters that they cannot say there is “no evidence”, so they came up with the “specific, credible” qualifiers. The meaning of those terms is vague as used by CNN and others. Giuliani definitely held up “specific” affidavits sworn to by specific witnesses. “Credibility” is normally reserved for a court to determine, not the press.
That said, some of the normally accepted indicia of credibility are:
The witness had an opportunity to see or hear the events described, the ability to recall those events correctly, the testimony was plausible, the testimony is consistent with testimony from other witnesses, and the witness did not have a motive to lie.
On that basis, the only reasonable complaint the media could make, though only with evidence they don’t have, is that some witnesses may have supported President Trump in the election. It is known, however, that some witnesses are Democrats.
A serious flaw to any argument based on bias or motive is the consistency of testimony across counties and states. For that level of consistency, those witnesses would have had to arrive at the same story without knowing each other, but manufacture the corroborating evidence and situations required to make their testimony credible.
On the subject of bias, one of Powell’s claims is that the Canadian company Dominion made polling machines that used SmartMatic software for the purpose of forcing a Biden victory. Other claims regarding the location of Dominion servers, nationality of owners, and their political affiliations were also made. The press says this has been proven false, on the basis of denials made by Dominion. Dominion is a classic example of a biased witness. If Powell’s allegations are accurate, Dominion is in a lot of trouble. Of course they will be in denial.
According to the press, witness affidavits aren’t “specific or credible” but Dominion’s denials of their complicity in crime are accepted without question.
All of the stories written and published for the purpose of denigrating the President’s attempt to preserve the integrity of our election depend on one thing: the assumption that election results for the presidential election have been certified. As this is written, no state has certified their results. Their assumption is false. They do not mention this often, and when they do, breeze by it as a formality.
Instead, they distract consumers with vague and inaccurate claims about Giuliani’s credibility, as if that poisons the credibility of hundreds of separate affiants, and without explaining why Giuliani lacks credibility. Unless in their world, a streak of hair dye in the wrong place is enough to disqualify testimony.
What they are saying, in effect, is that they, the media, have certified the election.
If this is the way things are done these days, awarding elections based on projections, why not do it everywhere? Forget about holding the Olympics, hand the prizes out to the athletes you expect will win. Forget about costly trials, just decide the verdict in advance.
In the end, we had the news equivalent of a nuclear explosion, reported as an unsightly drip of hair dye.
If Christian bakers can be forced to bake cakes that violate their principles, can reporters be forced to honestly report the news? Please?
And by the way, don’t forget about what Trump’s legal team had to say in that press conference. It is important. The press may not take it seriously but everyone else needs to. Unless all of the witnesses have committed perjury and all the documentary evidence is flawed, a serious, vile, and very dangerous threat to our country has been exposed.
Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.
Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!