Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Book Review: ‘2000 Mules’
Dinesh D’Souza released a documentary last year about the 2020 election. Last November, a book on the same topic was released. This includes a lot of material that did not make it into the film and responses to some of the criticisms of it.
Of particular interest to me is his material about Attorney General Bill Barr. Barr said that the Justice Department found no evidence of fraud which would have changed the election results. One wonders how extensive the investigation was. Was there an investigation?
One irritating aspect of the book is Barr’s name does not appear in the index, but there is an extensive treatment of his criticisms starting on page 157.
Barr said he was “unimpressed” with the geotracking evidence in the film, explaining himself this way: “If you take 2 million cell phones and figure out where they are physically in a big city like Atlanta or whatever, just by definition, you’re going to find any hundreds of them have passed by and spend time in the vicinity of these boxes. The premise that if you go by a box, five boxes or whatever it was, you that that’s a mule is just indefensible.”
One wonders if Barr had watched the film or was getting his information secondhand. As D’Souza points out on pg. 160:
True the Vote used the very high bar of requiring that mules for to ten or more drop boxes and five or more left-wing nonprofits. What reason is there to be within thirty feet of ten or more drop boxes and multiple vote stash-houses? Let’s remember that mail-in drop boxes exist for the sole reason of putting in ballots. These are not U.S. Post Office mailboxes where you might go multiple times to drop off bills and mail letters. There is only one reason to go to a mail-in drop box, and that is to insert (or, if you are an election worker, remove) ballots.
D’Souza then comments that True the Vote studied the patterns of the mules outside of the election period before and after it to see if they visited the same locations. They didn’t. Barr needs to watch the movie before criticizing it. Better, he should take up True the Vote’s founder Catherine Engelbrecht’s offer to spend a day with him to explain in detail their methodology.
This book is extremely important. As my wife found out when she worked on investigating voter fraud for the Illinois GOP in 2006, the Republicans in general don’t take this seriously. John Fund has written about it for decades and the media yawns. But the fraud we’ve seen recently is on an industrial scale and threatens our Republic. That’s an insurrection the Biden InJustice Department will never investigate.
I recommend that the Ricochet Podcast interview D’Souza and Engelbrecht. This book is essential reading.
Published in Elections
Yeah, like THEY care.
Second.
It’s almost like GOP elected officials, the consultants, and the pundits don’t want anyone to question the Electoral systems in the US. Almost like they prefer them being mystical processes that have few co tools and less transparency. One wonders why.
The Bush-Republican wing of the GOP was pleased with the result of the 2020 election. It got rid of the Bad Orange Man. They assumed it was a one-off and then things would go back to normal. So naive. So stupid. In their fervor to get rid of BOM, they handed the Democrats a permanent and insurmountable advantage in junk-mail ballot harvesting.
The last thing William Barr wants, regarding voter fraud at least, is to become undeniably aware of it.
The last gasp of their dying wing of the GOP.
It was a great folly on the part of conservative’s to hand things over to them after Reagan. Perhaps they don’t realize that we have accepted the truth of our folly and now wish to be rid of them.
And, this is naive of them? The ‘stabs are more comfortable in the minority, as long as the Uniparty rules.
Dinesh D’Souza knows that election law isn’t adjudicated in movies and books, but in courts of law. It was in those courts of law, both state courts and federal courts, where Trump and his allies repeatedly lost.
Even Donald Trump’s hand picked Attorney General has said that these election fraud claims are bogus.
Even Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity were saying privately to each other that these election claims were bogus as they tried to keep their rating high by going along with the Trump fiction.
Let’s start with something simple. Let’s see if you’ve at least learned as much as Gary Robbins has learned.
Was Teigen v. Wisconsin Elections Commission rightly decided, and, if so, roughly how many votes illegally counted does that involve?
What, if anything, does this have to do with the bona fides of 2000 Mules?
I guess I’ll toss this in again
And that doesn’t even count that in few if any of those “lost” court cases, was evidence even considered.
And while we’re tossing things in again, the Powers That Be in Georgia didn’t even try to punish any of the 50k lawbreakers Mark Davis noticed.
Nothing I suppose, but it shows that Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, and Sean Hannity were also tricked.
That perhaps, and the fact that “these election claims” referenced above have nothing to do with the film or the book. Instead of blowing smoke, perhaps we could hear if he disputes that.
FIFY
If the interviewed D’Souza on this, they would lose access to interviews like they had with Barr. Those are more important to the people who run this place than journalism.
To be fair, the Hemingway book got some interview time.
Remember 2 things.
There is no question but that the courts are not legitimate opiners on election fraud.
The case in Arizona is so open and shut that it is mind boggling. That a heavily Republican county would be the venue of massive voting machine malfunctions ON ELECTION DAY ONLY, when everyone also knew that Republicans didn’t trust mail in balloting, and were going to turn out en masse on election day; and then they were given bogus instructions, and etc, and etc. The fraud is so blatant that it is undeniable. And the courts demanded a standard that was preposterous, and allowed no time at all for the case to be made. Pure chicanery by the court. Utter nonsense. The courts have never, NEVER, EVER treated claims of voter fraud with any seriousness whatsoever. And Pennsylvania? An utter joke. Anyone who argues that Trump lost in court is being completely disingenuous and deceitful. The argument that they failed in court is no evidence of anything except that voter fraud is the easiest thing in the US to commit. D’Souza has an open and shut case. The fact that Barr would pooh=pooh it is validation of D’Souza’s effort in proving fraud. Georgia (I live in Georgia) is congenitally incapable of running an election that is not fraudulent. Everyone in Georgia knows that Fulton County always perpetrates voter fraud. Consider the Senate run off in December: A judge inFulton County overturned Georgia election law (by ruling that since this was a runoff, and not a primary or general election, that Georgia election law did not apply!!!!!!!!) that Fulton County could have an extra Saturday of early voting, the Saturday before the election. Fulton County was all ready to do this. Marc Elias got the judgement the prior Friday. Kemp made a pro forma effort to appeal and lost. And the heaviest Democrat stronghold got more days of early voting than most all of the other counties in the State. There were a couple of Democrat counties (Doublas for one) that were in there and ready to go with Fulton County. It was clear the fix was in. Kemp and Raffesperger were awol on the issue. Raffesperger could have announced that votes on that Saturday wouldn’t be counted, and thus forestalled the election theft. He did nothing. An utter joke. Those arguing here about the courts (and the consent decree Raffesperger signed before the 2020 election foregoing signature verification was court mandated voter fraud) are insane.
It’s not adjudicated if it isn’t heard. But you knew that.
Because Trump named Barr doesn’t make Barr correct. It doesn’t make him anything.
But don’t worry, don’t fret too much. Everything’s fine. There’s no massive inflation. No huge layoffs. No surge of illegals entering the US. No threats of war in Russia or Korea or Japan. No culture wars that are seemingly making it almost a crime to be anything other than someone of color/gender. No videos of Jan 6 that run counter to the kangaroo commission that ignored the murder of a veteran by Capitol Police.
Everything’s sweet now, because Trump is out, and Republicans in congress can get to the real work of the American people via genuflection at the Altar of The Liberal Agenda.
Historically there have been only two legitimate opiners on election fraud. The first, and by far the most common, has been the winner. When you “win” the election, even if it is by cheating, you then control the machinery that investigates the fraud in the first place. Over time, this has morphed into the bureaucracy being the ones in control of the investigation such that even if Bill Barr knew there was voter fraud and wanted to expose it, his Justice Department would have never found any fraud because the bureaucracy is invested in the left’s victory. The bureaucracy wants the party of bigger and bigger gov’t to maintain as much control as possible. Thus, they cannot be trusted to play fairly because they are not fair, and haven’t been for a long time.
The other example of when someone other than the winner had a valid opinion on election fraud was in the city of Athens, TN in 1946 when GIs, returning from WWII, fought an armed conflict with the local machine that was stealing elections. The local deputies took the ballot boxes to the jail to be counted (and the local machine would win) and somewhere between a few hundred to over 2,000 GIs armed themselves (some with weapons taken from the National Guard Armory) and besieged the jail. After dynamiting the door to the jail, the deputies surrendered and the votes were counted publically and showed that the opponents of the machine had won the election.
That is essentially what needs to happen with our current elections. The ballots need to be counted openly and in public so that there is no doubt as to who won. Since that isn’t going to happen anytime soon, or ever TBH, this resentment will continue to simmer until it either dissipates or boils over.
I should add that Abe Fortas represented Johnson in his electoral fraud. Johnson later rewarded him with a seat on the Supreme Court. Then Johnson tried to make him Chief Justice, whereupon his past caught up with him, and his dirty dealings were brought to light, and he had to resign from the Supreme Court. So much for the courts being appropriate adjudicators of election fraud.
This explains how the 1948 Democratic Senatorial primary was stolen in Texas.
https://www.nytimes.com/1977/07/31/archives/exofficial-says-he-stole-1948-election-for-johnson-most-involved.html
My Mom always said that no Hispanic could be a Republican, Mr. Salas would have fit her mold perfectly. If she were still alive, I’d ask her who she voted for in that primary, but I suspect it was LBJ.
Some people will say they voted for whoever won, even if they really didnt. To seem wise.
What does it say that from my first Presidential election (88) until now, I have gone 3-6 in voting for the winner? My only wins were Clinton in 92 and Bush in 2000 and 04. Every other election I voted for the loser (Dukakis, Dole, Palin, Romney, McMullin, and Trump).
Looking at it as I wrote those…what a weird group of people that I voted for.