A team of researchers just proposed that alternate universes exist and influence each other, and this just may be true.
Because the media appear to exist in one of them and, unfortunately, influence our universe.
Just consider the latest media contortion. When President-elect Donald Trump claims he would have won the popular vote had it not been for illegal voting, he’s not only branded a loon and a liar, but the media also insist there’s no “documented proof” of widespead electoral fraud. When Hillary Clinton joins in the Jill Stein inspired recount in Wisconsin — even though her campaign and the Obama administration state there’s no evidence of vote tampering and that the effort won’t change the result — it’s called justifiable.
Never mind that when the Left was sure they’d win the Nov. 8 contest, they warned that Trump’s threat to possibly not accept the outcome could “lead to violence.”
Then after Trump won, leftists who wouldn’t accept the outcome rioted.
Never mind that Clinton had called Trump’s pre-election statement “appalling,” “horrifying,” and a move that undermined “the pillar of our democracy.”
Now she apparently feels that an admittedly futile but divisive recount is just democracy at work.
And never mind that the Left also warned that not accepting the Election Day outcome could undermine “the legitimacy of the president.”
Now it has embarked upon electoral and media propaganda campaigns designed to do exactly that to President-elect Trump.
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
Let’s examine the claims at issue here. While the recount effort certainly raises Green Party nominee Stein’s profile and may fill her party’s coffers, she claims she embarked upon it because she was concerned about an alleged vote-count disparity between Wisconsin areas that used paper ballots and those using electronic voting; Stein’s idea ostensibly is, reports Raw Story, that “Russian hacking” might have cooked the vote. Of course, with Clinton’s and Obama’s admission that there’s no evidence of electronic hacking, little need be said. Nonetheless, it should be noted that Wisconsin’s electronic machines could not be “hacked” via the Web because they weren’t connected to the Internet. Each device would have to be tampered with individually. Moreover, as FiveThirtyEight pointed out last week, it is demographics, not hacking, that explain the election results.
Trump’s claim, however, is far more troubling — not because it lacks substance but because the substance is scary.
As for style, the president-elect was characteristically brash, stating in a November 27 tweet, “In addition to winning the electoral college [sic] in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.” The media have been quick to jump on this, with CNN calling his allegation “unprecedented” and “without evidence.” And the Washington Post, which seems intent on winning the race to the bottom of the birdcage, called Trump’s claim “unsubstantiated,” “bogus,” and a “Twitter-born conspiracy theory.” Yet these claims themselves are unsubstantiated.
Simple analogizing illustrates the reality here: Can you tell me how many cases of speeding occurred in the United States last year? Not how many speeding tickets were issued, but how many such incidents occurred. Criminal activity is secret by nature, and when enforcement mechanisms are poor and the victims aren’t directly harmed (as in assault), what’s uncovered will be only the iceberg’s tip.
As for vote fraud, a man may run to the police station and complain his wallet was stolen, but who even knows when his vote was stolen (by someone illegally voting in a way negating it)? This brings us to IBTimes.com, which stated “Donald Trump Falsely Claims ‘Millions’ Voted Illegally” and that “there has not been any evidence of any widespread voter fraud on either side.”
This is, frankly, a lie.
Project Veritas caught one Democrat election commissioner on hidden camera (two videos below) admitting that “there is a lot of voter fraud.” Then there’s the Democrat operative who stated “We’ve been bussing people [illegal voters] in to deal with you f*****g a******s for 50 years and we’re not going to stop now,” in the midst of explaining how to commit vote fraud.
(Article continues below.)
Note that two of the Democrat operatives exposed by Project Veritas lost their jobs for conspiring to do what there’s “no evidence of.”
The Washington Post also makes a startling admission. Attempting to debunk Trump’s claim of millions voting illegally, the paper writes, “Even the researcher who produced the data [in question] said Trump was taking his findings out of context: ‘Our results suggest that almost all elections in the U.S. are not determined by non-citizen participation, with occasional and very rare potential exceptions.’”
So nothing to see here, move along? Is it not alarming that even a few elections could be swayed by interloping foreigners, and shouldn’t this be a red flag spurring us to action?
The Post devotes much ink attempting to debunk VoteStand.com founder Gregg Philips’ claim that three million illegal aliens voted this election cycle. And his number could be way off. But, again, it’s hard to know the extent of criminality — especially when little attempt is made to thwart it. The obvious solution, which would end this whole debate, is to institute voter ID. You know, that method for ensuring electoral integrity the Democrats and media fight tooth and nail. Never mind that ID is required for everything from receiving government benefits to entering many buildings (e.g., the White House) to boarding an airplane. The Left claims it would suppress the minority vote.
And it certainly would.
The illegal vote is (still) a minority vote, after all.
Here’s what we do know: 12 states and D.C. allow illegals to get driver’s licenses. And as Clinton campaign manager John Podesta wrote in a WikiLeaks email, “[I]f you show up on Election Day with a drivers [sic] license with a picture, attest that you are a citizen, you have a right to vote in Federal elections.” In other words, it’s an honor system.
Moreover, note that Trump did not say the issue was illegals voting, but illegal voting — of all kinds. As to this, I reported on vote fraud in 2005 after being contacted by a local Washington, D.C., community leader who had, as he put it, “done some computer work for several candidates over the years in DC.” Outlining how the transiency in inner-city neighborhoods enabled Democrat electoral criminality, he explained that local Democrat operatives known as “block captains” know who has moved out of their area and, with ID unnecessary, simply claim to be those people and vote in their stead.
Mind you, just recently I spoke to a Yonkers, N.Y., policeman who attested to this, saying he talked to poll workers who saw a man vote, leave, and then come back in a different shirt and try to vote again.
There’s much opportunity for such shenanigans, too. As this 2012 Pew study shows, approximately “24 million — one of every eight — voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate. More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters. [And] [a]pproximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.”
Of course, most telling is that the same media that before the election were calling vote fraud “virtually nonexistent” now apparently believe this non-existence justifies disruptive recounts. Why, a cynic might suspect that they know there’s vote fraud and that it benefits their chosen party — and that recounts provide yet another opportunity to engage in it.
