At 2 a.m. Eastern time, the morning after Election Night, President Trump had a solid lead in Wisconsin. Less than four hours later, that lead evaporated. Joe Biden would have you believe that Wisconsin has a legitimate record of about 89% turnout. That’s not credible.
From my home in California, starting just after midnight Eastern time, I check the election results for the various counties in Wisconsin, which can be found on various websites. My family has been involved in grassroots politics since the 1960s, and as a former chairman of the California Republican Party, this isn’t the first time I’ve looked at available voter turnout and turnout to guess at how many additional votes might have been cast. I did the same analysis for the Michigan data.
I then went on Newsmax TV and expressed this view to host Rob Schmitt, to whom I was speaking. Based on the turnout at the time, and the fact that President Trump had been holding a steady and growing lead, I said that the remaining votes in Wisconsin were not enough to overcome President Trump’s 110,000+ lead.
Yes, Milwaukee has additional ballots to be counted. But there are also ballots across the state that need to be counted that, at least on the surface, could offset the votes Biden received from Milwaukee.
At 3 a.m. Eastern time, I took a short nap after saying the same thing on a radio show on the Times. However, some people in Wisconsin did not rest. We now know that just a few hours later, Trump’s lead evaporated, just as his lead of more than 300,000 in Michigan evaporated.
So, what’s going on? The current story is that there is a data error that must be corrected, and that Biden received 138,000 votes, while Trump received zero. While the truth remains elusive at this point, and absolutely requires a careful investigation and recount by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), one thing is clear.
Turnout in Wisconsin was 89%. There is no doubt that this is unreasonable. We Americans will not have that kind of turnout.
There was a time when we had a higher turnout than we do now. In my book, The Divided Era, I write about the Gilded Age, when the national turnout was 82% in 1876, and remember, only men voted then.
Part of the reason turnout was so high then was that “elections usually had real effects in the 19th century, such as during the Civil War and our Gilded Age of Secession, and voters and parties knew it. Voting produced clear, direct, and indirect results. Just ask the South after Lincoln’s election.”
Also, voter fraud was rampant in those days. In The Age of Secession, I note, “There was also ballot stuffing, including the use of ballots as thin as ’tissue paper’ so that a folded piece of paper would contain a dozen more ballots.” (Mark Wahlgren Summers, Party Games: Getting, Keeping, and Using Power in Gilded Age Politics) So rampant was the practice of ballot stuffing that in the 1888 presidential election, West Virginia had 12,000 more ballots cast than eligible voters.
Since then, however, our voter turnout has been significantly lower. In fact, our presidential election turnout was essentially stagnant in the mid-1950s, although it sometimes dropped to the highs of the 1940s and occasionally to the lows of the 1960s. For example, in 2016 (with no incumbent president running), turnout was 59.2 percent. in 2012 it was 54.9 percent (a reelection year) and in 2008 it was 57.1 percent (with no incumbent president running).
So how do you explain Wisconsin’s 89% turnout? Especially since Wisconsin’s turnout was 66% in 2016? The answer is not entirely clear, but what we do know is this.
First, the data is wrong. This sudden change of 138,000 votes is at the heart of the problem. This cannot be simply glossed over.
Two, mail-in ballots. Mail-in ballots may increase voter participation in the voting process. But are all these voters legitimate?
We must remember this report: “Biden’s Texas Political Director Accused of Collecting Illegal Ballots”. A deposition supporting the report said, “Ballot collectors collected absentee ballots from the mailboxes of elderly, homeless and unsuspecting residents of nursing homes. Ballot collectors then fill in their preferred candidates and forge ‘voter’ signatures.”
In addition, Tyler James, an employee of Commissioner Ellis (TX), allegedly boasted that he could guarantee the collection of 700,000 illegal ballots through Operation Harvest Illegal Ballots, with the aid of mailing large numbers of ballots.
All of this takes us back to Wisconsin and, most likely, Michigan. As a result of the use of mail-in ballots, ballots from these states were mailed to thousands of people. Just like in Texas, this provides an opportunity to “harvest” the ballots.
Importantly, in Wisconsin, “if you drop off a completed, sealed and witnessed ballot at a municipal office, drop box, polling center or central counting station, you do not need a photo ID.” So, you can collect and submit harvested ballots in Wisconsin, despite Wisconsin’s Voter ID law.
How much of this has happened in Wisconsin this year? We don’t know. What we do know is that the vote harvesters there have motive and opportunity, and that some precincts have more votes than registered voters. It will take a serious investigation to find out the truth. There is evidence all over the country that rules were tampered with, dead people voted, and ballots were still accepted past the deadline.
I have no doubt the same thing happened in Wisconsin, plus the harvesting of votes to reach the supposed 89% turnout and giving the state to Biden instead of the President.
Of all the things that will be on the ballot in 2020, the authenticity of the ballot is the most important. This may be the worst election robbery since the Chicago Mafia helped the Kennedys in the 1960 presidential election, and it is not alarmist to suggest that our United States of America will be in danger if we turn a blind eye to this.
Recent Comments