[Democratic Party operatives clearly believed they could steal the 2016 Presidential Election for Hillary Clinton, just as they had done for her in the Democratic Primary. This is suggested, for example, in House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s November 8 remarks on PBS’s NewsHour, where she exhibited strong confidence in a Clinton victory. This no doubt is the type of hubris that drove much of the electorate to vote against the incumbent party. Further, Dems chose an embodiment of establishment incompetence, insincerity and corruption who remarkably failed to even inspire her own purported base to turn out the vote, CNN observes. Still, as this brief article below suggests, the public will likely never know the Republican candidate’s true margin of victory, -Ed.]
As luck would have it Hillary Clinton’s landslide loss was so big that massive election fraud by Democratic Party operatives in various cities could not overcome her deficit.
The “shock” by insiders of having lost obviously reflects their earlier certainty of prevailing, which hints at the extent of their vote rigging schemes. The unverifiable system of voting in America is so flawed that foreign observers are now being blocked from monitoring US elections. The topic of fraud can no longer be swept under the rug.
This post may be the most important post you’ll read on not just the 2016 election, but the entire electoral system that legitimates the U.S. republic of representative democracy. The post is long, with multiple sections, so pace yourself accordingly. I suggest you bookmark this webpage so that you can return to read or re-read.
Jim Stone first posted about this two days ago on Nov. 1, 2016.
Unsure about Stone, who calls himself an “independent journalist” (based in Japan) and who writes in a less-than-clear or reader-friendly manner, I refrained from writing about his post.
Then InfoWars picked this issue up a day later on November 2.
This week political cartoonist Ben Garrison returns to the program to discuss the revival of his political visual commentary in the midst of the most tumultuous presidential campaign in recent history. Garrison also discusses his struggle with online trolls over the past several years, the broader war on free speech and political dissent, and how such phenomena are illustrated in the defamatory campaign against Canadian Professor Anthony Hall in October 2016 that led to the academic’s suspension from his university earlier this month.
In a sea of homogeneity Ben Garrison’s trailblazing work offers a truly unique perspective on political and economic concerns. A longtime professional painter and freelance graphic artist, his first cartoons appeared in The San Angelo Standard Times in the early 1980s. Garrison has since been a graphic artist at the The San Antonio Express News and The Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
Dallas elections officials say allegations “likely false or instances of user error”
Over the past few weeks corporate news media have interpreted Donald Trump’s repeated claims of a “rigged” election as exaggerated. The Republican presidential candidate’s response in the third presidential debate of perhaps not accepting the election result was met with similar bluster by the major punditocracy.
The experience of voters in Texas and other states may be bearing out Trump’s warning as multiple reports are surfacing of electronic voting machines changing virtual ballots from Republican to Democratic presidential candidates. Because Texas law prohibits videos and photos in polling places many voters in that state explain the apparent polling shenanigans on social media.
[A] number of voters in Texas are reporting that the voting machines switched their votes from Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton. The odd thing is that none of the other choices were affected when these individuals attempted to vote for a straight Republican ticket. If Hillary Clinton is declared the winner of the state of Texas on election night, a full investigation of these voting machines should be conducted, because there is no way that Donald Trump should lose that state. I have said that it will be the greatest miracle in U.S. political history if Donald Trump wins this election, but without the state of Texas Donald Trump has exactly zero chance of winning. So those living down in Texas need to keep reporting anything unusual that they see or hear when they go to vote.
Here are several social media posts from the Dallas Morning News article at the I Am A Texan blog.
Because the US executive and legislature have been largely controlled by transnational interests since the Woodrow Wilson administration that’s a gross understatement. Recently-released FBI documents now actually reference a “shadow government” overseeing affairs at the US State Department.
Tonight the third and final US Presidential Debate is scheduled. Corporate-controlled media that stand to profit most from the status quo (and that also looked the other way when the Bush/Cheney ticket stole the 2000 and 2004 elections) persist in feigning astonishment at the Republican candidate’s repeated assertion that “the system is rigged.”
One in four young Americans state they would rather experience a global apocalypse than see either major party candidate elected. As Reuters observes today,
There was an interesting segment on CNN last week where CNN anchor Chris Cuomo reminds viewers for it is illegal for them to “possess” Wikileaks material and that, as a result, they will have to rely on the media to tell them what is in these documents. The legal assertion is dubious, but the political implications are even more concerning. Polls show that many voters view the media as biased and this is a particularly strong view among supporters of Donald Trump who view CNN and other networks openly supporting Clinton or attacking Trump.
More importantly, the mainstream media has reported relatively little from the Wikileaks material and has not delved deeply into their implications, including embarrassing emails showing reporters coordinating with the Clinton campaign and supposedly “neutral” media figures like Donna Brazile, formerly with CNN, allegedly slipping advance question material to Hillary Clinton. The credibility of the media is at an all-time low and most voters hardly feel comfortable with this material being reported second-hand or interpreted by the mainstream media. So is it really illegal for voters to have this material?
Hillary Clinton has been revealed to have a very cozy relationship with the US media, which has been found to work closely with Clinton’s campaign to present her in a favorable, transparent light – even planting stories, new email leaks suggest.
These facts are laid bare in the latest cache of classified Clinton campaign emails seen by The Intercept, which in turn received them from Guccifer 2.0 – the hacker who’s reportedly behind several high-profile intrusions.
The cache of emails includes campaign strategies aimed at keeping the public perception of Clinton favorable, focusing particularly on her transparency, especially in light of the FBI investigation into her use of a private email server. The strategies sometimes reveal the campaign presiding over stylistic points and emphasizing what is to be described as “on the record.”