3 Whisky Happy HourThe Ricochet PodcastGLoP CultureBeyond the Polls with Henry OlsenGray MattersDaily SignalThe Erick Erickson ShowGiving VenturesMom Wars3 Martini LunchChicks on The RightParsing Immigration PolicyFederalist Radio HourWhat the Hell Is Going OnFreedom to LearnThe Learning CurveThe Conservative Woman’s GuideHeritage ExplainsNot Dead YetWho Funds that?The Radio Free Hillsdale HourThe Glenn ShowFirst Things PodcastCall Me Back - with Dan SenorHillsdale DialoguesLaw Talk with Epstein, Yoo & CookeThe LibertarianThe Report Card with Nat MalkusThe Kevin Roberts Show with Larry O’ConnorThe American IdeaMadison’s NotesConservative Crossroads with Henry OlsenThe Back of the BookMartini ShotThe Dave Carter ShowThe Powerline ShowIn DissentHeard at HeritageSmart Girl PoliticsJames Lileks’ The DinerCase in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and CultureJobMakersOne on One with Robert DoarHomeschooling Journeys with Curious MikeHubwonk

Get the Ricochet app

Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

  1. Podcasts/
  2. 3 Whisky Happy Hour/
  3. The Three Whisky Happy Hour: Mulish Voting Edition
May 13, 2022
May 13, 2022Ricochet

The Three Whisky Happy Hour: Mulish Voting Edition

Subscribe to 3 Whisky Happy HourSubscribe

There are so many things that seem . . . wrong about the 2020 election, and now comes the new documentary film "2000 Mules" offering some visually compelling circumstantial evidence, along with a few examples of direct testimony of voting misbehavior in nursing homes and other locales. A lot of readers and listeners have been asking about the film, so Lucretia and both took it in this week, and try to give an overview what conclusions are possible and which suspicions lack a solid foundation.

Before examining the evidence presented in the film we review the "macro" indicators that the 2020 presidential election is a distinct outlier in many ways that would make any reasonable person suspicious that it was a normal election. And right there is the nub of the problem: so many states changed their election laws under the cover of COVID—often illegally, but the judiciary was either in on the fix (at the state level) or refused to review the matter (on the federal level). Thus it makes it difficult or impossible to prove that the ballots seen being deposited in scattered drop boxes were necessarily illegal ballots, or that they were enough to account for Biden's margin of victory (at least in Pennsylvania). Even if every ballot cast was narrowly speaking legal, our election laws need to be tightened up, as indeed is happening in many states. (I'll suggest we emulate France, which has no early voting, no vote-by-mail, and absentee voting under very strict and limited conditions. Funny how Francophile liberals never charge France with "vote suppression.)

Steve's theory is that Democrats skillfully used the liberalized rules and a highly-funded and well-organized astroturf effort to squeeze every possible vote out of urban strongholds where Democrats have been leaving a lot of votes on the sideline (as seen especially in municipal elections in big blue cities where turnout is nowadays below 20 percent, compared to nearly 70 percent back in the 1980s and 1990s). That's one reason why Biden's vote was so concentrated in urban areas, and why he had negative coattails—the first president in more than a century whose party lost House seats in the president's initial election.

Of course, if we didn't have such a mulish mainstream media that refuses to shine their investigative spotlight on the matter, voters might be less suspicious of the result. Aside from Molly Hemingway, John Fund, and Hans Von Spakovsky, there has been only the sound of crickets in the newsrooms of America.

Host:
•Steve Hayward
Guest:
•"Lucretia"

Discussion (9)

Sign in to commentSign in
  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Saint Augustine@SaintAugustine·4y

    Where even to begin?

    Thank you, Steve and Lucretia, for seriously considering the situation.

    I have yet to come to look carefully at the True the Vote material.

    (But see next comment a few hours later!)

    Tentatively, it looks like pretty decent evidence for me--superb evidence for an insecure election, very good evidence for a lot of illegality, and pretty good evidence for some level of fraud.

    It's not the only one way we know about those things happening in swing states. But I'm glad to add it to the collection!

    Even the courts have confirmed that some tens of thousands of votes in WI and a couple million in PA were cast or counted in violation of the state's statutes (WI) or Constitution (PA). Five-minute intro to one of those things at this Ricochet post.

    And there is a good deal more on the PA thing, and various election sins in WI, in Chapter 14 of my big Ricochet post here (or, for off-Ricochet, here).

  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Saint Augustine@SaintAugustine·4y

    In "Keeping Track of Election Fraud Allegations" (off-Ricochet link here), I have a new chapter analyzing various claims surrounding 2,000 Mules:

    Chapter 16: True the Vote

    Looks like pretty good evidence to me.

  • Banned Member@BryanGStephens·4y

    Y'all should look at

    Saint Augustine's work.

  • CHARTER MEMBER

    To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    mildlyo@mildlyo·4y

    Steve's Sergeant Schultz act was a low point for this podcast.

    I would respect him more for admitting he doesn't want it to be true and so will make no effort.

  • To read this bio, please join Ricochet.

    Boney Cole@BoneyCole·4y

    At a bare minimum, 2000 Mules is a reason for redoubled efforts to make sure we Republicans change laws when we can and take advantage of all the facets of existing laws to fight the obvious illegality of Democratic vote harvesting. One factor in the Youngkin victory was the massive turnout of Republicans for voting observers. I would like to see an interview of someone from Virginia on this subject. About 10:00 on the night of Trump’s defeat in Virginia, he was way ahead, and Terry McAuliff tweeted not to worry, we have 400,000 mail in votes to count. He was obviously knowledgeable about who those votes were for. But the Democratic vote system was somehow thwarted for Youngkins election. So there is hope.

Scroll for later comments
+4 more comments
Join the conversation

You're seeing five of nine comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.

Trending

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

Join Ricochet

Get the Ricochet app

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play
  • •
  • •