What Democrats and mainstream media are not denying should send a chill down the spine of every American, and every voting citizen living in what they believe to be a free and open democracy.

This is what even the most vicious opponents of Trump’s efforts to investigate election fraud (Democrats, Big Tech, Big Business and Mainstream Media) are not denying.

The media is not denying:

The Voting Machines Used in the 2020 Election are, or were until very, very recently, foreign owned and it cannot be disputed that they contain software code developed by countries hostile to the USA

• Dominion Voting Systems is, or was until very recently, foreign owned and headquartered in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

• It cannot be disputed that Dominion Voting Systems contains code originally developed by a country[s] hostile to the USA, specifically Venezuela. The Associated Press, while surrounding their below admission with some flailing textual denials based on the opinion of a journalist(s), conceded this on November 17, 2020:

“Election security experts say it’s difficult to know for certain whether…software code …from a company [called Smartmatic which had partnered with … Venezuela’s [Communist] government …may be used in Dominion’s software because of the industry’s limited transparency.

The Dominion Voting Systems’ hardware and software used in the 2020 election are susceptible to fraud. Texas rejected the use of Dominion Voting Systems in their elections.

What does Dominion Voting Systems Have to Say So Far?

Nov 20, 2020: Dominion Voting Systems very abruptly backed out of attending a meeting with Pennsylvania legislators to answer questions about their system. As reported by American Greatness media, the State Govt Committee Chair Seth Grove said Dominion Systems was:

“retreating into the darkness,” rather than appearing at the hearing with “honesty and integrity.” The committee chair said he wanted to know why a company with nothing to hide would back out.

“Why would a vender of public goods fear discussing their product sold to the public for the public good? If Dominion’s products were successful and operated as they were supposed to, why wouldn’t Dominion take the opportunity to publicly review its success?” Grove demanded. “How hard is it to say, ‘our ballot machines worked exactly as promised and they’re 100 percent accurate’?”

Nov 21, 2020: Michael Steel, Managing Director of Hamilton Place Strategies (HPS) is now the, or a, spokesperson for Dominion Voting Systems. He has been interviewed in the media making absolute claims about the technical security of Dominion Voting Systems, and stating the allegations are conspiracy with no basis in fact. Steele’s absolute statements, such as it is not possible for the DVS to be manipulated, are being widely condemned as flatly incorrect since the code for computers are written by humans who can write it to have the computer do whatever they want it to do, including leaving a “back door” open.

While he has the appearance of a computer expert, and he does have what is called a “Master of Science”, it is from Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism, a review of the courses are effectively journalism courses. It would appear then, that Michael Steel is not speaking as a technical expert, but rather in the limited capacity of a spokesperson, and he is repeating what the technical people at Dominion Voting Systems have advised him are the technical specifications of the equipment.

The Dominion Systems ballot counting and other machines are easily hacked.

Accredited experts describe and online video demonstrations by accredited sources show how easily the Dominion Voting machines can be hacked by anyone with a high school computer course.

.

Ballots were electronically moved out of the USA to be counted overseas.

.

This election, individual Democrat swing state election officials decided Republican ballot observers had to be 20-100′ or so from the ballot counting (perhaps relying on Covid considerations). This precluded Republicans from observing any fraud with the mail-in ballots, for example, if a signature was present, if the same signature was appearing on multiple ballots, etc.

Note that while the rules vary by state, this “Policy for Election Observers” by The National Conference for State Legislatures indicates that at least this much is standard across states: “observers” are different from “auditors”. Observers are meant to observe the election process (in my words) with a landscape wide angle view of the goings on, while auditors who are brought in, in a contested election, look at individual ballots with a macro lens.

In the 2020 election, the overwhelming number of mail-in ballots (overwhelmingly for Biden) have created a whole new circumstance in which observers, meaningfully observing at a landscape level, need to at least see if ballot counters are checking to see if the mail-in ballot was even signed, and if the signature matched the signature on file for that voter. Republican observers say that at a distance of 20-100 feet or more, a Republican observer would not be able to observe if the mail-in ballots even had signatures.

Republicans were threatened, sometimes with arrest, if they tried to get close enough to observe the ballots being counted.

Affidavits are legal evidence in court and there are 1,000s citing election fraud.

Thousands of election workers and data systems people working with the election data have signed affidavits, under penalty of prosecution for making a false statement, stating that there was election fraud. Many of those affidavits are publicly available for reporters to see for themselves.

.

Republicans seeking investigations into election fraud are being threatened by Democrats, along with their families.

Republican election officials in Michigan signed affidavits testifying of the threats towards them and their families when they refused to certify elections results until significant irregularities were investigated. The videos of Democrats threatening Republicans are online because they were made in a zoom call.

The Pro-Biden Democrats and the Anti-Trump Republican Mainstream Media

With rare exception, mainstream media is not denying the above facts, but rather trying to distract us with their straight faced legal opinions based on a newly minted B.A. in journalism. Turn them off. Tucker Carlson, NewsMax and OAN are three of the media sources providing researched, impartial facts.

A CNBC article, written prior to the election on Nov 1, 2020 titled “Here’s when key states will start counting election 2020 ballots”, forecasted the following:

The prospect of mail-in votes being added to states’ totals well after Election Day [which is exactly what happened when the ballot counters in Democrat run swing states simply stopped counting saying they would resume later] could prompt objections from elected officials, possibly including Trump, if the changes are significant.

The mainstream media (actually lets just say it: the Democrat’s media arm aka mainstream media) are now claiming the Trump campaign doing what would be reasonably expected in this circumstance is protesting vigorously (“too much?”) the position that it is a travesty for the country that Trump question the ballot counting.