Thanks for another enlightening article, Joe. At this point, the problem is how to overcome the Great Disinformation Machine that we call the mainstream media, which keeps repeating the lie that there was not enough fraud and cheating to change the outcome of the election.
I'm glad to see that you have gotten some attention on various talk shows, but as I said before I think you need to reach a much bigger audience.
Before Tucker Carlson was fired, I said that his online show "Tucker Carlson Today" of Fox Nation was a perfect venue for you. Now that he is no longer with Fox News, he still commands a huge audience, and perhaps you should reach out to his staff and try to get on his show.
You might also reach out to Joe Rogan. I personally don't listen to him much, but he has a huge audience, and I think he would be receptive to your message.
Thanks for the compliment, Russ. I sometimes say to my wife that, if we had an honest national media for just 1 week, the entire nation would become more conservative. As for getting attention, the publisher of Debunked is trying to make another publicity effort. We feel that the time is right.
Like hundreds of thousands of people who watched the 2020 election, I have never wavered in my believe that their was massive fraud. After reading this article, I am more convinced then ever! This is the first time I have seen so many irregularities put together in a single report. This country NEEDS to hear these facts put out for everyone to see. I agree that Tucker Carlson & Twitter could be the biggest impact. Thank you for what you are doing!
Thank you for the comment, Veva. There are even more irregularities than the ones shown here, but I think I made my point that Jack Smith will have a hard time showing there was no fraud.
What gets me is even if Trump didn't really believe that the election was stolen or had significant fraud, this is still a matter of free speech. His state of mind should not be discussed or be part of any DoJ prosecution like this -- who cares? (This is the defect in "hate crime" too--as if thought should have a special additional punishment to a real crime.)
Additionally, what Trump wanted to do re the electors is no different than what Democrats did in the past; the riot at the Capitol was no different (in fact, was much less violent/destructive) as the BLM riots. Trump did not incite a riot, which is why he has not been criminally charged (impeachment is kangaroo court, not criminal court; second impeachment was for inciting an "insurrection," which was false and not proven in a criminal court of law).
It's concerning that too many civil libertarians and the like who are concerned about this Jack Smith move, are hanging their hat on Trump's true state of mind, while giving short shrift to the implications of prosecuting someone based on state of mind.
Cat, you make a very interesting point. I agree with you. Here is another point. People forget that Trump was still president on January 6th and for the next two weeks. If he were really determined to overturn the election, he would have resorted to force. I am sure there were military men who would have supported him in that effort.
Wondering if you saw the article on Gateway Pundit today about the discovery of a Cellular Network connecting election systems. If true, Govt has a centralized collection database for monitoring and manipulating election results! Very interesting.
Thanks for another enlightening article, Joe. At this point, the problem is how to overcome the Great Disinformation Machine that we call the mainstream media, which keeps repeating the lie that there was not enough fraud and cheating to change the outcome of the election.
I'm glad to see that you have gotten some attention on various talk shows, but as I said before I think you need to reach a much bigger audience.
Before Tucker Carlson was fired, I said that his online show "Tucker Carlson Today" of Fox Nation was a perfect venue for you. Now that he is no longer with Fox News, he still commands a huge audience, and perhaps you should reach out to his staff and try to get on his show.
You might also reach out to Joe Rogan. I personally don't listen to him much, but he has a huge audience, and I think he would be receptive to your message.
Thanks for the compliment, Russ. I sometimes say to my wife that, if we had an honest national media for just 1 week, the entire nation would become more conservative. As for getting attention, the publisher of Debunked is trying to make another publicity effort. We feel that the time is right.
Like hundreds of thousands of people who watched the 2020 election, I have never wavered in my believe that their was massive fraud. After reading this article, I am more convinced then ever! This is the first time I have seen so many irregularities put together in a single report. This country NEEDS to hear these facts put out for everyone to see. I agree that Tucker Carlson & Twitter could be the biggest impact. Thank you for what you are doing!
Thank you for the comment, Veva. There are even more irregularities than the ones shown here, but I think I made my point that Jack Smith will have a hard time showing there was no fraud.
What gets me is even if Trump didn't really believe that the election was stolen or had significant fraud, this is still a matter of free speech. His state of mind should not be discussed or be part of any DoJ prosecution like this -- who cares? (This is the defect in "hate crime" too--as if thought should have a special additional punishment to a real crime.)
Additionally, what Trump wanted to do re the electors is no different than what Democrats did in the past; the riot at the Capitol was no different (in fact, was much less violent/destructive) as the BLM riots. Trump did not incite a riot, which is why he has not been criminally charged (impeachment is kangaroo court, not criminal court; second impeachment was for inciting an "insurrection," which was false and not proven in a criminal court of law).
It's concerning that too many civil libertarians and the like who are concerned about this Jack Smith move, are hanging their hat on Trump's true state of mind, while giving short shrift to the implications of prosecuting someone based on state of mind.
Cat, you make a very interesting point. I agree with you. Here is another point. People forget that Trump was still president on January 6th and for the next two weeks. If he were really determined to overturn the election, he would have resorted to force. I am sure there were military men who would have supported him in that effort.
Yep, we are on the same page.
Wondering if you saw the article on Gateway Pundit today about the discovery of a Cellular Network connecting election systems. If true, Govt has a centralized collection database for monitoring and manipulating election results! Very interesting.
Hi Veva, I haven't seen it yet, but will definitely check it out as soon as I can. Thanks for the tip.