First of all, I will make clear something that should be evident: this is only an opinion. It is not intended to be an unquestionable truth or an act of faith to a leader. It is simply my opinion. And I make this explicit because there are those who don’t take it well to listen to different opinions on this issue.
So, why do I think there has been fraud? It convinces me for several reasons:
/ * /
1. It is coherent with the general political picture.
The first thing that made me consider plausible the fraud it is that it fits with the general picture of current politics. In which there is a struggle to wrest world political hegemony from the US, that involves at least China, France and Germany and Russia. Directly and through satellite countries and organizations such as Iran, Cuba-Venezuela, the EU (multilateralism) or the UN.
An electoral conspiracy developed in the world’s leading country, which unfolds over several states simultaneously and requires subsequent media and judicial coverage, would be implausible to me if it were only to place Biden instead of Trump. With a merely partisan or personal target. If the fraud is true, it must be for something more important, to substantially modify the direction of the country.
And I think that there are precedents for similar situations, a combination of media dominance and crime used to modify an electoral process and place a president in power who abruptly changes the political line of a country. A puppet president. For example, in Spain, in 2004. After four years of intense media campaign against the government, a brutal terrorist attack three days before election changed the result, bringing Zapatero to power. A politician who completely switched Spanish position dragging it towards anti-Americanism, subordination to France and Germany and internal promotion of civil war prejudges and self-destructive nationalisms.
I understand that the latter is a very personal vision of mine. But in any case it could be explained through some simpler and more shared hypothesis, such as the Chinese competition for world hegemony.
2. Official voting data suggests fraud.
The sequence of events during the election night, with halts in the counts and abrupt changes in the results in the resumption, do not generate confidence. But what really supports the fraud hypothesis is the temporal analysis of the results of vote count. Unexpectedly, in the first days after the elections, it was NYT, newspaper clearly opposed to Trump, who kept alive fraud suspicion with it’s results data link.
Data showed several implausible characteristics, such as vertical gaps in Biden’s results line, derived from sudden entries of hundreds of thousands of votes almost 100% in his favor, or changes in the trend when it was already stable. Those things … just don’t happen. Voting by mail can show a different proportion than presential, but its proportion must also be constant during counting, even more since voting by mail is highly mixed with respect to the time and place of emission.
And afterwards other anomalies arose, which one more shocking. Trump could lose despite winning Florida and Ohio. Data was non-compliance with Benford’s law (probability of the first digit), there was a incredibly low percentage of rejection of the mail vote…
Here there are some examples of the many articles about it that circulate these days:
Fact check: Deviation from Benford’s Law does not prove election fraud (an article focused on defending that failure to comply with Benford’s law does not prove fraud… what indirectly supports that it is a good indication of fraud)
Peter Navarro report alleging election fraud ‘more than sufficient’ to swing victory to Trump (Peter Navarro works for the Trump Administration, so it is a partial study, but it is interesting anyway)
3. Proven crimes that make fraud possible.
Another important aspect has to do with Rudi Giuliani and Sidney Powell investigations. Their cases do not show concrete decisive fraud but they do include an enormous amount of evidence and witnesses of bad practices that prevent the necessary control to avoid fraud. With the case of Fulton County, Georgia, as a paradigmatic example, having been recorded by security cameras.
Crimes enabling fraud do not prove fraud. Therefore, mass crime will not prove decisive fraud. I understand that’s why judges have rejected the cases. But that doesn’t mean those crimes are unimportant, it will be been nice that judicial investigation were started anyway. And they are undoubtedly an important support for fraud suspicion, as statistical anomalies are.
4. Doubts about the machines and applications used in voting.
The Dominion voting machines, the Smartmatic software, the Hammer and Scorecard applications … here it is difficult to differentiate between information and both sides hoaxes as long as there are no official reports or court decisions.
So, I will take advantage of one of the very few solid elements that have reached the public opinion. The lawsuit filed by an individual in Antrim County, Michigan, which has resulted in a forensic examination of the Dominion voting system. The preliminary result is cleared by the judge for release and it is devastating: Dominion was designed for fraud.
This not only opens the door to decisive electoral fraud, as there were many machines deployed (general analysis of them has already been required by Trump team). It could also support suspicion of external interference. In other words, it opens the door to consider national security issues involving other countries. Big words.
5. Finally, there is the silence and concealment.
Media silence does not match the hypothesis that there is nothing serious to hide. If media believed so they would be all day talking about it, taking the opportunity to demonize and mock Trump, as they have been doing for the last four years. When they prefer to silence it, it is because they do not see it clear that they have much to gain.
And the rejection of voting audits, revision of the signatures, analysis of the machines … all this does not help to give confidence when half of the American population already thinks that there has been fraud. And we all know it, so why is it being done? Better suspicion that proven fraud?
… Or the relentless inclusion of comments disqualifying the suspicion of fraud, as Twitter does to each Trump tweet: “This claim about election fraud is disputed”, even when Trump just links a TV cut…
… are already touching the abyss. The media cannot be so oriented to manipulation, applying censorship and displaying a supposed official truth from such a majority position that they generate an almost uniform environment. Democracy erodes when the media massively marginalizes and denies the voice of half the population. And this, whether there has been fraud or not, is already happening. And goes along with fraud suspicion.
Conclusion: I find it the most likely that the elections were won by Trump and there has been decisive fraud.
From all of the above, my conclusion is that if it makes political sense, it is statistically convincing, there was intentional and criminal breach of the rules making fraud possible, and the official winners silence the subject and block the investigations… most likely the fraud is real.
I think Trump most probably won the election and someone is robbing Americans of their decision, their ability to choose their future. Something so serious that it foretells serious consequences if it finally goes ahead.
P.S.1 (18 Oct 2021) Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, spent $419.5 million to influence local government elections offices
The main argument in favor of the possibility of a fraud in the USA 2020 elections was the amount of probabilistic data. The increase in vote for Biden at the last moment of recount, differences between states usually aligned…
The main argument against fraud was not the result of the investigations, which have not been done, but a question of plausibility. The fraud seemed to require a huge malicious coordination in the institutions of different states. Something that seems too conspiracy.
Now this could explain that coordination. So the case is still open. Now with a clue to investigate potential crimes. Because it would not be fraud then to influence the electoral offices with money. But if the influence is to commit a crime, then it is.
Some details about the destination of the money in: