« Our memories of 9/11 | Main | HARPER: SAUDIS SHAKEN BY 911 COURT RULING »

11 September 2020


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


By way of Biden's Mister Rogers act:

Funny PL, I have been going on and on (seriously joking) about Mister Rogers as an agent of Moriarty [Moriartnik] and his having been one of the most baleful and insidiously subversive influences in American culture in the 20th C. People think I am just being outrageous....again.

I think it was the Portland mayor wally who triggered that particular epiphany.



I get your point and agree that delegitimization of the election result would be chaotic.

Yes, we’ve seen the movie before with hanging chads. And yes, Hillary has advised Biden to not concede and Trump too is fanning the flames with his tweets and statements on mail-in ballot fraud.

It seems inevitable that the losing side is not gonna accept the results and we’ll see a lot of litigation. Of course in 2016 the response was to continue the Manchurian Candidate framing and the use of law enforcement. This time the Democrats will likely intensify their street violence by mobs campaign. Curious what the Trumpistas will do if he loses?

Chuck Light

Colonel: You asked this question above:

"So, how many hundreds of thousands of votes will be harvested that way?"

Since I am not sure what you mean by "that way," I hesitate to offer an answer to your question. If you can explain what you mean by "that way," I will do my best.

But with regard to ballot harvesting, which is what I assume you mean by "harvested," I can offer an estimate. There will be the possibility that ballots will be harvested in the same numbers as there are people who allow their ballots to be taken by someone else for the purpose of voting them. Whether a voter votes by mail, or by dropping the ballot in an Election Dropbox, or by taking their ballot to a voting precinct and casting the ballot in person, if a voter handles the entire process him/herself, then there will be no harvesting.

Am I correct that you are assuming that ballot harvesting is a way that Democrats cheat? If so, then I guess I will have to look more into it, and especially into the states which permit the process. I can assure you, however, that my ballot has never been harvested.

Chuck Light

For those who have an interest in the extent of voter fraud in the United States, at least over the past 30 years or so, the Heritage Foundation has done extensive research on the question, and has compiled a database of various types of voter fraud and the number of cases of each type which it found in each state.

The Heritage Foundation correctly points out that its database is not complete. It cannot include, for instance, cases of voter fraud which are not reported, investigated, or prosecuted to a result. Neither does it include as a separate category of voter fraud the practice of ballot harvesting fraud. But the Heritage Foundation does publish this database, and it is fair to assume that it is as authoritative as the Foundation can make it.

It includes cases of Ballot Petition fraud, False Representations fraud, Fraudulent Use of Absentee Ballot fraud, Ineligible Voting fraud, Duplicate Voting Fraud, Buying Votes fraud, and a couple of other categories.

The current database reflects a total of 1,296 cases of vote fraud that the Foundation has discovered since +/- 1980. It lists 47 cases in California since 1993; 21 cases in New York since 1983; 86 cases in Texas since 1985; 37 cases in Florida since 1992; 45 cases in Illinois since 1982; and 23 cases in Pennsylvania since 1988.

All of the cases listed resulted in some kind of official conclusion, including criminal conviction, civil penalties, diversion program, judicial finding, and official finding.

The database has a map where you can click on a state and search the database for type of cases, type of result, and other categories (which is where I obtained the state information I listed above).

As I said above, the Heritage Foundation does not claim this database is exhaustive. But it is apparent that they have spent substantial time searching for voter fraud cases to include in this database, and it would be fair, I think, to say that excluding unreported and univestigated cases, it has a pretty complete picture of voter fraud throughout the US at least since the early 1980s.

Following is a link to the database:


Snopes.com, a left leaning website, has done an article on the database, and the recent assertions (primarily by those opposed to vote by mail) of significant voter fraud in the US.



Chuck Light

Juvenile "cuteness" is not appreciated here. you know exactly what I meant.


Eric if it wasn't Photoshop it looks like a venous blood draw using a butterfly needle. You can read into it all that you want however it is a very common procedure when a large amount of blood is not needed.

Chuck Light

With all due respect, Colonel, I did not know exactly what you meant. With no humor intended, I am not a juvenile (I am six years younger than you) and I am most definitely not cute. If I had known what you meant, I would have responded to your question. I will respond with as much ability as I can muster if your clarification is forthcoming.

In presidential elections, once is a fluke; twice is a pattern. I struggle to imagine how, beyond utter shock, millions of Democrats will process a Trump victory. A loss for Biden, after having been the clear favorite all summer, would provoke mass disillusion with electoral politics as a means of change—at a time when disillusion is already dangerously high. If Democrats can’t beat a candidate as unpopular as Trump during a devastating pandemic and a massive economic contraction, then are they even capable of winning presidential elections anymore? Democracy, after all, is supposed to self-correct after mistakes, particularly mistakes as egregious as electing Donald Trump—whose unfitness for the nation’s highest office makes itself apparent with almost every passing day.


This article goes to show how people in a bubble don’t get the reality of the American electorate.

So @realDonaldTrump agreed to a four hour long debate with @JoeBiden with @joerogan moderating. Will Joe accept or is he too afraid of sitting down for 4 hours and having to compare his record with Trump’s record? I think he’s too scared to do it.


There you go! The Democrats and the media are afraid that the American voter see direct contrasts relative to their scripted game plan.


Chuck Light

Mine was a rhetorical question. I will rephrase the point for you. IMO the Democrat army of young enthusiasts will go forth to gather up all those lovely phony but real ballots and will cast them for Biden. I don't care in the least what past studies on voting fraud say. IMO the Democrats are desperate and will do anything, anything to win. Anything.

Chuck Light

Colonel: Thank you for the clarification. In that regard, I can agree with you wholeheartedly, with the proviso that my view is of the Republican party's desperation to hold onto power through voter suppression, and your view appears to be of a band of young Democrats willing to commit crimes for the desperate purpose of regaining power.

We do disagree on the historical (and current) data on voting fraud, and I must say, given your incredibly varied life, that you can reject data, whichever political or ideological view the data supports.

Thank you again for clarifying what you meant, even though I disagree with your view of the subject.

blue peacock

"IMO the Democrats are desperate and will do anything, anything to win. Anything."

Col. Lang,

What has changed that the Democrats will do anything? They lived through 8 years of Reagan and George Bush. But....for some reason they have gone batshit crazy with Trump. I just don't get it.

He's done nothing to cause the K Street clientele's gravy train to end or end the DC groupthink on many matters. He's hired nearly all his top picks from the DC pool and even his Supreme Court picks are all from the same endorsed groups. He's got the federal debt running on steroids and even the Fed is printing at a rate that would have been unbelievable just a few years ago. The media is also thriving with their constant clickbait apoplexy.


Chuck Light

There IS NO "vote suppression" unless you mean requiring people to properly identify themselves before voting or exercise a modicum of effort in going to the proper polling district. "Blacks don't have access to envelopes?" How condescending can you be? As for the data in any report, anyone can fabricate anything that suits their views. I learned that in my long and scattered life. A great instance of it was watching (but not participating in) the construction of national estimates that justified immense expenditure for arms against the USSR. that was really fun for the feeble minded. Done by more enthusiasts, they caused the USSR to destroy itself economically. If only that had been the intention.

Chuck Light


I guess you and I can agree to disagree. As far as the quote in your last post, I don't know where you found it, and insofar as you attribute it to me as evidence of my "condescension," I humbly object. There are many people, some say a majority of Americans, who actually do believe that voter suppression exists, and is a tool used with great skill and effectiveness by the Republican party.

I could provide examples, but I think that they would be dismissed, so I will simply restate that we can, and probably should, just agree to disagree.


chuck light

"who actually do believe that voter suppression exists." They are wrong as are you. you are just making an excuse for what I hope will be your defeat in November. You can provide all the "examples" that you like. It is easy to fabricate them. What you should be worried about is the reaction of people like me if you steal the election.


blue peacock

IMO the US movement for world globalist revolution has matured since the times you mention. It matured in the schools and is now firmly ensconced. Obama/Holder were thinly camouflaged revolutionaries of this tendency. Their handling of the Ferguson matter was revealing and a turning point. Even after the DoJ and FBI cleared the cop, Obama/Holder insisted on forcing the city government to its knees through threat of unending litigation by the Civil Rights Division of DoJ. This resulted in a "consent" decree that gave Holder control of the city. This pattern was repeated all over the country and used to attempt to crush the local culture. The revolutionary left hates trump because he is leading a counter-revolution of us Deplorables. Remember BLM started in Ferguson.


My observations is elections always run 50/50 until they finally break on election day. I think voters are saying to the candidates - no early front runners, you still have to earn my vote.

I also have watched prior reces shift from front-runner to underdog and back again, because America does love the underdog and the come back kid story. What is going on right now is political theater. Election day is the only time the rubber finally hits the road.

Candidates even benefit being the underdog on election day. Look what front runner arrogance did to Clinton - why did she cancel her victory fireworks two days before Election Day - what did her internal polling tell her - the poling her own office did?

However, the potential for Cloward Pivens and real electoral mischief cannot also be ignored. Switching suddenly to universal vote by mail, in jurisdictions that do not have a smooth system for this is fraught with every concern presented. Calif if a total disaster for vote fraud and partisan machinations but it will go Democrat anyway regardless, so it gains nothing ,except more control of the House.

The path to the WhiteHouse no longer goes through California, but the path to continued malfeasance and dysfunction internally in this state, due to voter fraud, is also a given. How can they do worse than their current super-majority of all elected offices in Sacramento?

I have seen elections where enough people thought they were just "throwing away their vote because XYZ can't win, and enough of them added up so XYZ did win. They thought they were casting just a protest vote- and then had to live with the unintended consequences afterall.

blue peacock

Col. Lang

Thank you!

In your opinion is the purpose of the "world globalist revolution" ideological or is it about plain naked control to benefit the few at the expense of the many?


blue peacock

Both as in all socialist police states.


RedState explores what has happened to the US military since Obama with a stroke of his pen replaced 200 top officers with his cadre of "politically correct" ranks.

Also explores why just maybe the rumors of a "military coup" are not as crazy as they first sound: Since defiance of the C-i-C is now business as usual in today's upper ranks of the military: https://www.redstate.com/stu-in-sd/2020/09/15/the-adverse-effects-of-obama’s-eo-13583-and-fogo-purge-are-now-obvious/

More Beltway mystery that appear confusing to those of us outside the DC bubble.

Account Deleted

A recent MIT study observed that of the 250 million ballots mailed nationally in the past 20 years, there were only 143 cases of criminal fraud. The conservative Heritage Foundation came to the same conclusion; the fraud rate was roughly 0.00006 percent..
Perhaps Trump is really more worried about participation rates than fraud. His campaign may fear that a large portion of the mailed ballots will come from groups that didn’t vote before and are more sympathetic to the Democrats (students, minorities, people living in low-income neighborhoods). The implied larger turnout would tip the table in the Democrats’ favor. A recent Stanford University study showed that such a fear would be unfounded.

(The Washington Post) https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/08/19/mail-ballots-dead-voters/

Which begs the question: Why do you all seem so concerned?


I am far left and I just dont get the current left in the USA.

1: Rioting will likely result in a Trump landslide.

2: As a leftist, I would be highly sceptical of the idea that, from a strictly machiavellian perspective, civil war is an "easier" way to power then simply winning elections. Dont go to war with people who have more guns then you but who accept defeats at the ballot box. It is both against Just War theory, and it is stupid, and it will probably get you killed. The entire point of democracy is that elections are bloodless simulations of political struggles, so that you dont actually have civil wars all the time to clarify who is on top. If you no longer accept the results of these simulations, civil war will be result. It is by no means perfect, but it beats the randomness of dynastic succession (hmm, our new Emperor is indistinguishable from his chair) and the general shittiness of civil wars. Bloodless transfers of power are good mkay?

3: With their unylieding hatred of Trump, the US left completely threw away any opportunity of turning Trump into a traitor to his Oligarch class, while throwing its lot with pretty toxic forces whoese economic interests are diametrically opposed.
Actually cooperating with him on Infrastructure/tarrifs/reapproachment with Russia (traditionally speaking, Trump is having fairly leftwing opinions here).

4: Critical race theory looks like a doctrine tailor made to blow up heterogenous empires. As such, it could be a fairly potent propaganda/soft power tool if utilized against US rivals. Applying it to the US is simply idiotic.
Look at China, they invested a couple of centuries spreading highly pacifistic variants of Buddhism (which, as an ideology and also an artisitc inspiration, has far more to recommend for itself then Critical race theory does) to at that time highly warlike Tibet. They never seriously considered adopting pacificm on their own. Far too pragmatic for it.



First - You are not an American. Second - Would the leftists give up power if they lost the election? their immediate reaction to losing in 2016 was "the resistance," not acceptance. Third - The great majority of gun owners in the US are potentially violent but held in check by their faith in the electoral process. IMO they will lose that inhibition if they think the Democrats have used the "mail in ballots" trick to "win" the election.

Eric Newhill

"A recent MIT study observed that of the 250 million ballots mailed nationally in the past 20 years, there were only 143 cases of criminal fraud."

That is a useless and, frankly, silly factoid to use. How many cases of fraud does it take to rig an election? Maybe just a handful of key districts in swing states.

Also, just because something didn't happen in a big way in the past, doesn't mean it won't ever happen.

Weak propaganda memes. No one buys that unless they are already to the far left. You will have to do better.

As a tangent, how many people under 65 have died of covid, yet the lefties keep stoking panic about wearing masks because maybe...….


More Than 349,000 Dead Registrants Remain on Voter Rolls, Report Finds


Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad