The Editors’ Quote of the Day:

“There is a profound, unbridgeable disagreement between two factions here. One faction is not willing to prioritize authenticating the vote above all else. That faction is more willing to accept perceived social alignment and convention – not dispositive situational proof – as the basis for agreeing to the most important decisions about governance, such as who shall take office.

That set of motivations tacitly assumes that there is little meaningful consequence for accepting voting outcomes that may well have been shaped by fraud.

The other faction cannot agree to be governed by a voting outcome produced by fraud. This faction is motivated by the certainty that to accept such a thing is to be governed by lies and corruption, and cannot turn out well by any calculation. It’s worth fighting against a potentially fraudulent outcome, and not merely taking notes on it and hoping to do something about it later.” – Retired Naval Intelligence Officer J. E. Dyer


  1. Voting may or may not be worth the trouble, but ferreting out voter fraud certainly is! “Democracy” without honest vote-counters is a complete waste of time. Not much difference between that and a dictatorship.

    One of the pieces of genius in our original Constitution, is that the system placed most of the voting in small concentrations at the State and local level. Small crowds are harder to get lost in, and it is harder to manipulate a host of little elections than to manipulate one supercomputer. Especially when the elections are staggered out.

  2. Nice! Glad to see you have chosen this one. And thanks to Tunnel Rabbit for originally linking it for us. Dyer’s article was a tad bit wordy but this portion really gets to the heart of what she was saying. Two types of folks indeed.

    I had a very discouraging conversation with a family member (whom I love dearly) this week, who brought up to me a conversation she had had with a friend, and SHE was upset because her friend was upset at the election results. As gently as I POSSIBLY could, I stated that I had concerns as well, not with the specific candidates but rather with the integrity of the whole process, and wouldn’t it be better to make sure one way or another?, and it would be much better for national unity if half the country wasn’t left believing that there had been issues. I carefully allowed that, yes, there will be some folks who will never accept a given outcome no matter who certifies or analyzes what, but the current statistical troubles were simply too concerning for me with my math background to overlook. I said I didn’t remember people having such a problem in 2000 with Al Gore questioning a much smaller number of votes, and wouldn’t it be better just to make sure? She reiterated a few media talking points, pat explanations for WHY there was more than 100% turnout in some places, asked me if I knew why, didn’t want to hear anything but the Official Explanation. I very calmly offered to show her the numbers I had seen, and she said NO!, and she was sorry that she had brought it up at all, and she didn’t realize that I “was upset too!” I was very glad to have to leave on an errand just then because she seemed just so very raw about it all, and mostly I preserve our relationship by mentioning NOTHING even remotely tangential to politics.

    People just don’t even want to know. πŸ™

    1. Bear, as you said, “mostly I preserve our relationship by mentioning NOTHING even remotely tangential to politics.”

      Your compassion and value for human connection is of great value. We are called to love each other.

      John 13:34 β€œA new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.

      Carry on in grace

  3. If there is fraud in the last election, and it smells like it, it is a form of censorship of those who voted. To me stopping censorship is of prime importance. We know they can not take away our weapons in any near time-frame, but we are already being censored. And if we go down it will probably be with our weapons in our hands, and our mouths effectively silenced.

  4. I’m not sure of the exact authority to reference but since the “news” of Biden’s corruption and the election fraud is not being reported to the greater public, I hope the President would be able to require news agencies to cover the ongoing court discussions at state and federal levels. Our taxes support PBS at the least. It’s like Invasion of the Body Snatchers, half the population has flipped allegiance. We are not one country.

Comments are closed.