Hillary & Dems’ Tactics of Projecting Ballot Fraud & Refusal to Concede (and Treason) Onto Trump & Republicans
According to an NBC News article (8-26-20), the noble, inimitable Hillary Clinton opined:
Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances, because I think this is going to drag out, and eventually I do believe he will win if we don’t give an inch, and if we are as focused and relentless as the other side is . . .
[Republicans will try to] mess up absentee balloting . . .
[Trump can only win] by either suppressing or stopping voting, or outright intimidating people into feeling that they have to go with the strong guy to stand up against all these threats that Trump is going to gin up to scare people.
This is simply Hillary projecting — as usual — onto Trump & Republicans, things that are increasingly evident among the Democrat camp:
Minnesota police investigating alleged ballot harvesting by Ilhan Omar supporters (Zachary Halaschak, Washington Examiner, 9-28-20)
Trump says NYC mail-in ballot fiasco confirms his voter fraud fears (Steven Nelson, New York Post, 9-30-20)
In this article, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo utilized Hillary’s time-honored tactic of cynical projection:
[Trump is] talking about ballot fraud [because] he’s going to say there was fraud in the election and therefore he won’t accept the results and therefore he’s not stepping down. And he’s going to create a Constitutional crisis. There is no way a person discredits an election if they believe they’re going to win. Freudian principles 101.
A Sampling of Recent Election Fraud Cases from Across the United States (The Heritage Foundation)
Texas official and 3 others indicted on 134 felonies in mail-in ballot fraud case (ABC13 Eyewitness News, 9-24-20)
Long before Trump, bipartisan group of elder statesmen flagged mail ballot fraud risks (John Solomon, Just the News, 9-3-20)
Guest Column: Mail in ballot fraud worse than admitted (Harold Please, Mountain Democrat, 8-5-20)
‘It’s a mess’: Paterson voter fraud just a taste of mail-in ballot issues plaguing New Jersey (Terrence T. McDonald, New Jersey Herald, 6-30-20)
Georgia’s Top Elections Official Claims 1,000 People Committed Voter Fraud In Primary (Tommy Beer, Forbes, 9-8-20)
One may quibble about the extent and danger to the presidential election of such fraud, but that some exists is undeniable.
I had an exchange with my friend Jon Curry about this “sore loser” business:
You’re obviously very devoted to your prediction that Trump will win, and it seems so strong that I believe that if it turns out he loses you’ll deny it and say it was stolen. That way you can never be proven wrong. What do you think? If Biden wins will you tell us he stole it even though Trump and Republicans are basically running the country? Are you going to say Democrats stole it when Trump has more power to run things and cheat?
I reported that on election night, Hillary Clinton had a meltdown. That is why she never showed up to thank her supporters who were milling around New York City’s Javits Center all night. Few others in the media reported it. Yet now I have more evidence — provided by Clinton herself.
I wrote on Nov. 23: “She reverted to the form that all of us who have covered her for years have been reporting. She screamed, shouted some very unladylike epithets, threw some objects at her servitors’ heads and availed herself to more adult beverages than was prudent.” . . .
It is all in her latest book, “What Happened,” which appeared last week. I found the book oddly affecting. She is angry. She is blaming everyone for her defeat but herself. . . .
Unfortunately, the book turned out to be just another Clintonian fraud. It is full of obvious plagiarisms. Its publisher, Abingdon Press, has recently had to recall it from bookstores and pulp the returned books. Referring to [Hillary’s pastor] Shillady’s work, the president of the publishing house said, “Abingdon Press has zero tolerance for plagiarism.” Embarrassing.
At any rate, Clinton’s reaction to her defeat in “What Happened” corroborated much of what I wrote last November. “I yelled at the television,” she writes. “I nearly threw the remote control at the wall.” And she introduces the subject of medication, saying: “Friends advised me on the power of Xanax and raved about their amazing therapists. Doctors told me they’d never prescribed so many antidepressants in their lives. But that wasn’t for me.” How about a mild sedative accompanied by alcohol, Hillary? That is was what I was hearing in the days after the election. . . .
I had written back in November: “Secret Service officers told at least one source that she began yelling, screaming obscenities, and pounding furniture. She picked up objects and threw them at attendants and staff. She was in an uncontrollable rage.” Yet the chapter reveals only that she was “numb,” and that when she sat down with her speechwriters to write her concession, “the draft was too combative,” so “a spirited discussion ensued.” Oh, come on, Hillary. It has been reported at least since The American Spectator’s “Troopergate” stories in the early 1990s that your bad temper is volcanic, your foul mouth is shocking and your throwing arm is at least minor league.
Bombshell Allegation: Hillary Orchestrated Collusion Hoax to Distract From Her Emails, According to Russian Intel (Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review, 9-29-20):
Ratcliffe’s letter concedes that the U.S. intelligence community “does not know the accuracy” of the allegation that Mrs. Clinton personally orchestrated the collusion scandal; nor can our agencies say whether the Russian intelligence analysis in question is disinformation. Nevertheless, this allegation about Clinton’s role was obviously known to the Obama administration at the time. Ratcliffe elaborates that handwritten notes from former CIA director John Brennan show that Brennan
briefed President Obama and other senior national security officials” about the intelligence, including the “alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.
Thereafter, on September 7, 2016, U.S. intelligence officials are said to have forwarded to FBI director Comey and agent Peter Strzok (then the bureau’s deputy assistant director of counterintelligence) an investigative referral regarding:
U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server.
I would note that it was around this time in September that FBI headquarters took notice of the Steele dossier, parts of which had been in the bureau’s possession since early July. The dossier was used by the bureau to seek (and obtain) FISA surveillance warrants against Page on the theory that the Trump campaign was engaged in an espionage conspiracy with Russia that involved hacking DNC emails and leaking them to the media in order to harm Clinton and swing the 2016 election to Trump.
BREAKING: Russia Believed Clinton Was Planning Anti-Trump Collusion Campaign In 2016, And U.S. Officials Knew It (Sean Davis and Mollie Hemingway, The Federalist, 9-29-20):
On September 7, 2016, U.S. intelligence authorities “forwarded an investigative referral to FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok regarding ‘U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server,’” Ratcliffe noted.
Brennan personally briefed President Barack Obama and other top U.S. national security officials about Clinton’s campaign plan and Russian knowledge of it. Just five days after the date on which the Russians believed Clinton had personally authorized the collusion smear against Trump, the FBI formally opened its anti-Trump collusion investigation, codenamed “Crossfire Hurricane.”
That investigation relied heavily on a dossier of anti-Trump allegations compiled by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence agent. Steele was hired by Fusion GPS, a Democrat opposition research firm that had been hired by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to manufacture and spread claims that Trump was secretly working on behalf of Putin.
At the time, both Steele and Fusion GPS were simultaneously working on behalf of Oleg Deripaska, a sanctioned Russian oligarch with close ties to Putin. In his infamous dossier, which has been thoroughly discredited and debunked since it was published in early 2017, Steele relied heavily on a single source for the most salacious and explosive allegations against Trump. . . .
Clinton personally pushed the Russia collusion claims on multiple occasions. Following her surprising defeat, she immediately pivoted to a campaign of blaming Russia for election meddling with Trump’s assistance. Within the last few weeks, Clinton has repeated her claim that Trump stole the election from her with Russia’s help.
Even The New York Times verified (way back on 10-24-17) that the Clinton campaign paid $12.4 million: essentially to attain and further promote the lying, scurrilous, infamous “Steele dossier”: which is now known to be a complete fabrication.
Game, set, match. Hillary Clinton is an inveterate liar. Like this comes as a surprise to anyone who has followed her shenanigans through the years?
She’s the very last person to accuse Donald Trump of being unwilling to concede an election that hasn’t taken place yet, simply because he has perfectly legitimate concerns about ballot fraud.
Lastly, not only is there all this slop, as part of the never-ending smear campaign against Satan-Trump: the most evil creature in the history of creation; there is also the nonsense that he will have to be removed by the military if he loses, or that he won’t concede under any circumstances. Engaging in the most ludicrous, embarrassingly absurd Clintonian projection imaginable, Barton Gellman wrote in The Atlantic, in September:
A lot of people, including Joe Biden, the Democratic Party nominee, have misconceived the nature of the threat. They frame it as a concern, unthinkable for presidents past, that Trump might refuse to vacate the Oval Office if he loses. They generally conclude, as Biden has, that in that event the proper authorities “will escort him from the White House with great dispatch.”
The worst case, however, is not that Trump rejects the election outcome. The worst case is that he uses his power to prevent a decisive outcome against him. . . .
Let us not hedge about one thing. Donald Trump may win or lose, but he will never concede. Not under any circumstance. Not during the Interregnum and not afterward. If compelled in the end to vacate his office, Trump will insist from exile, as long as he draws breath, that the contest was rigged.
Trump’s invincible commitment to this stance will be the most important fact about the coming Interregnum. It will deform the proceedings from beginning to end. We have not experienced anything like it before. . . .
Trump’s behavior and declared intent leave no room to suppose that he will accept the public’s verdict if the vote is going against him. He lies prodigiously—to manipulate events, to secure advantage, to dodge accountability, and to ward off injury to his pride. An election produces the perfect distillate of all those motives. . . .
Trump does not want Black people to vote. . . . He does not want young people or poor people to vote. He believes, with reason, that he is less likely to win reelection if turnout is high at the polls.
The beautiful thing about this ridiculous tin foil hat conspiratorial article is that it can be decisively refuted as the filthy collection of desperate stinking lies that it is: if Biden wins and Trump concedes defeat, since the article claims: “he will never concede. Not under any circumstance.” It’s always unwise to proclaim a universal negative, because you set yourself up to be an abject, self-deluded fool if you are wrong.
If Trump wins, on the other hand, then it’ll be a moot point (and we’ll see how Biden and Democrats take defeat. It won’t be pretty: I’ll guarantee that). But note, again, the projection going on here. It has become a prime Democratic strategy and tactic. All of this imaginary BS fictional scenario is invented about what Trump would supposedly do if he loses the election. He’s the one who supposedly won’t concede, whereas (as I documented at the top), it’s Hillary who has already advised Joe Biden to “not concede under any circumstances.”
Do the Democrats think the American public is so stupid as to not be able to observe all this blatantly hypocritical and self-serving lying nonsense? They may be right, if Biden manages to win. But I continue to assert, in any event, that Trump will win, and that the American people — or at least a majority of them, or enough to win the electoral college — are not that stupid.