Connect with us

Americas

Seeking the Truth Behind the 2020 US Presidential Elections

Published

on

Steadfast democracies throughout the world often call out the integrity of a national election when in question whether it be a Venezuelan-type dictatorship, a one-party communist regime, or a banana republic. United States often leads the charge as the standard bearer of fair elections in representing the free world and defender of the values founded in The Constitution. Along comes the 2020 presidential election, and the weight of fraudulent evidence and patterns of election irregularities has suddenly been whitewashed by the courts, politicians of all stripes across the spectrum, and fair-minded journalists.

Has America, the bastion of freedom known to have drawn a line in the sand against the advancement of communism across the planet, finally imploded and succumbed to the ideals it fought to preserve with its own blood and sacrifice?

Prior to heading to the polls, election officials and courts in certain battleground states known for their past election shenanigans, were erratically making changes to mail-in voting processes that left the door wide open to ballot mishandling, contestable process fouls, outright fraud, and significant statistical anomalies. Changes to receiving mail-in ballots in a timely manner continued to expand outside the legal requirements of state legislators. President Donald Trump had the clear foresight months prior to the election when he stated that massive mail-in voting would be fraught with opportunity to turn the election and remove him from office.

Going back to November 3rd as the evening was closing out, Trump was rolling toward a second term win with the battleground states of Ohio and Florida now locked in. There has never been a Republican president elected who did not take Ohio, and very rare for a Democrat to win without Florida; a state that seen a huge swing in the Latino vote for Trump.

Concurrently, the President had what was considered an overwhelming advantage in four other battlegrounds that had him trotting to a clear 294 to 244 victory in the Electoral College. Soon after most Americans turned in for the night, the tide quickly turned for Joe Biden with many Americans now tuned out.

By the end of election day, President Trump was ahead by more than 290,000 votes in Michigan, over 110,000 votes in Wisconsin, he extended his lead in Georgia by 357,000, and his advantage in Pennsylvania was well over a half million votes. In the following days, well beyond historically expanded voting timelines for even the least advanced countries conducting an election, mail-ins arrived through a broken chain of ballot custody and unauthorized ballot handling that disproportionately favoured Biden. The electoral college map depicting these four battleground states in shades of red were erased into razor thin leads for Biden whereas many other states were solidly locked up in either Republican red or Democrat blue. What just happened?

There are scores of instances of potential ballot manufacturing that has sufficient grounds to be investigated. One case was a truck driver who alleged in a sworn affidavit, that he delivered crates of ballots from New York to Pennsylvania. This may align with lawmakers in Pennsylvania referencing the State wide Uniform Registry of Electors records indicating that there were 205,000 more ballots counted than the actual number of voters who voted; potential forged ballots to swing the election to Biden in the Keystone State.

One of the most overt examples of potential ballot manufacturing on behalf Biden took place at the State Farm Arena in Atlanta, Georgia when poll watchers and observers were asked to leave in the middle of the night, and once cleared, election officials were caught on surveillance footage pulling large totes of ballots from underneath draped tables. They then ensued to tabulate a large quantity of ballots estimated to be in the ranges of tens of thousands resulting in a huge surge in Biden votes that could have easily swung the state from Trump to Biden. Interesting enough, an update at 1:34 AM on November 4thin the Peach State showed an unusual vote surge of 136,155 additional ballots for Biden and only 29,115 cast for Trump.

In a key development in Wisconsin, an election law was circumvented where clerks allegedly encouraged ‘indefinitely confinement’ where voters are unable to vote in person due to old age or a disability and thus had their ballots returned from unsanctioned drop off locations to be counted without having to show a far more rigorous voter identification photo. The number of indefinitely confinement votes that could have been harvested for a price, seen a surge from 70,000 in 2019 to over 200,000 in 2020. The 130,000 increment is more than five times the margin of victory for Biden in Wisconsin. Further to abnormal statistical and historical patterns in the Badger State, an updated tally in the wee hours of 3:42 AM on November 4th showed 143,379 additional ballots cast for Biden and only 25,163 votes going to Trump.

Counting ballots multiple times can occur when batches of ballots are repeatedly scanned and re-tabulated in electronic voting machines. There was evidence of this kind of ballot stuffing in Wayne County, Michigan where Republican poll watchers allegedly observed canvassers re-scanning batches through tabulation machines up to 3 to 4 times. Not to be outdone in the Wolverine State, an update at3:50 AM on November 4th seen an anomaly of 54,497 votes for Biden come in with a mere 4,718 cast for Trump.

There was an extraordinary number of other infractions across these four battleground states that are well documented from poll workers using unsecured USB flash drives to dump unusually large caches of votes, an unusual high number of out of state ‘Ghost’ voters, massive signature match abuses, countless broken chains of ballot custody through the post office and other courier methods, and ballots without postmarks and alleged backdating.

There was also a tremendous amount of poll watcher abuse that included positioning observers to stand at unreasonable lengthy distances from the ballot counters and placing poster boards on the windows where ballots were being processed. The egregious actions against these watchdogs is a most acute matter in sidelining frontline defenders of a democratic election – something we are akin to seeing under a one-party rule government hiding behind the election process.

There is not a single ‘smoking gun’ event that one can point to that would overturn the 2020 election results but rather many small calibre silver bullets across four battleground states that comprised of similar and perhaps concerted irregularities across these states unlike any past election or seen in other states during this election.

The country endured three years investigating Russian collusion into the legitimacy of Trump’s 2016 presidential win with senate and congressional impeachment hearings, biased hatchet men in the FBI and CIA skirting the law, a frenzied media that never let up on Trump’s guilt, and a special counsel comprised of Clinton partisans that turned over every leaf that eventually found the nearly crucified Trump to be innocent of the false charges, yet zero concern or questions of a fair election by the same crowd. Go wonder?

Anyone who raises concerns over the fairness of the 2020 elections is quickly discredited or denounced as a poor loser or worst, a felon alongside a disgruntled strongman resisting the peaceful transition of power. While it is not surprising that a biased media in bed with Biden does not dig into the validity of the election or the powerful social media giants persistently censoring anyone who ventures to call the results of the election into question, it is however, a greater dismay to see Republicans at all levels cowering under intimidation to stand with the man who has stood with them during their election campaigns.

Do we not want to know the truth surrounding the election that may have been stolen or are we willing to let democracy slip away to satisfy one’s aversion in removing a president that is despised, and perhaps one day look back in history to this moment where America self inflicted a lasting oppression in the once land of the free and home of the brave?

While the Russian collusion narrative may well have been the biggest political scandal in American history, the eventual known truth of an illegitimate elected president in 2020 may very well avert the biggest threat to the greatest democracy mankind ever founded.

Rich Berdan is a freelance writer out of Detroit, Michigan. Rich often provides perspectives that are unique and thought provoking.

Continue Reading
Comments

Americas

The hegemony of knowledge and the new world order: U.S. and the rest of the world

Published

on

In today’s world, knowledge and technological advantages determine – to a large extent – differences in the management of international policy. The increase in a country’s intellectual power directly defines an increase in its economic power, thus changing its position in the international competition for dominance.

The power policy, first in the agricultural age and later in the industrial age, was characterised by military and then economic hegemony, while the power policy in the information age gradually reveals the characteristics of knowledge hegemony at both the scientific and intelligence levels.

The hegemony of knowledge in contemporary international relations manifests itself specifically as unequal exchange in international trade, exploitation of high-value information and various conditions related to technological production. Hence, we see the transfer of polluting industries from privileged to poor countries: energy-consuming and high-intensity activities.

Western culture and values are disseminated vigorously, through the so-called soft power in information and mass media, and take on obsessive and oppressively hypnopedic forms.

Developed countries have patents in the use of outer space, as well as in the development of deep sea resources and in the production of environmental resources that pollute, while developing countries can only sigh as they look at other’s oceans and satellites, which fly around, do reconnaissance activities and monitor them.

The resources of the great and deep seas – which should be shared by mankind as they belong to everybody like the air, the moon and the sun – are instead exploited by the developed countries. On the contrary, they freely and ‘democratically’ share with the wretched ones only the evil consequences of environmental pollution.

With specific reference to sanctions and armed interference in international relations, the technique of violent and conscious bullying is adopted: whoever is militarily stronger imposes the validity of their interests, also at legal level.

The root cause for generating knowledge hegemony lies in the polarisation of the intellectual status of the nation-State. Western developed countries have already crossed the threshold of an information society, while developing countries are still struggling to climb towards industrial civilisation from the most primitive and closed state of existence. Although developing countries hold most of the world’s natural and human resources (just think of Africa), they are far behind in science and technology. Just look at the continental histogram of the 207 Nobel Prizes in Physics from 1901 to 2017 (winners are counted by country of birth except for the Algerian Nobel Prize winner Claude Cohen-Tannoudji [1997], who was born when Algeria was a French territory):

Source: Nadua Antonelli <<Africana>> XXIII (2017) page 12

If they have no means to study, even the greatest and most brilliant brains cannot make discoveries or file patents, looking only at the sky and the earth.

About 80 per cent of science and technology staff and their achievements are concentrated in developed countries. The knowledge advantage gives developed countries the right to set the rules of the game and of communication for all global knowledge production and dissemination. In particular, the developed countries’ knowledge advantages in the military and high-tech media enable them to expand their influence on the civil and military fronts and achieve their strategic objectives.

Developing countries wander between traditional society, modern industrial civilisation and post-industrial civilisation, and are often challenged and oppressed by the third party’s hegemony of knowledge.

The new economy created by the information revolution is still a ‘rich-country phenomenon’, the core of what is called ‘advantage creation’, under the cover of ‘competitive advantage’, or rather: competitive towards those who cannot compete.

The country leading the information revolution is the United States, which is the biggest beneficiary of these achievements. The digital divide highlights the status of the US information superpower. In the global information sector, in 2000 the central processing unit production in the United States accounted for 92%, and software production for 86%.

IT (Information & Technology) investment in the United States was 41.5% of global investment, Microsoft’s Windows system accounted for 95% of global platform applications, while the US Internet users accounted for more than half of global Internet users, and 58% of all e-mail goes through US servers.

E-commerce is worth 75% of the global total and US commercial websites account for 90% of the planet.

Currently, there are almost three thousand large-scale databases in the world, 70% of which are in the United States. There are 13 top-level domain name servers in the world and 10 of them are located in the United States.

The above figures far exceed the share of US GDP, which is 28% of the world total. The United States is far ahead of all countries in the world, including the other developed countries. The leading position in information technology allows the United States to control the basics in the field of information with its strong economic and talent advantages, as well as to master the actual rights, and to set standards and formulate rules and regulations.

The status as cradle of the information revolution has brought enormous wealth and development benefits to the United States. Since the 1990s, the development of information technology and the rise of the related industry have become an accelerator of further economic advancement in the United States.

In the growth of US GDP – from 1994 (the beginning of the Internet) to 2000 – the share of the information industry in the value of the country’s total output has caused the economy to rise from 6.3% to 8.3%, and the contribution provided by the information industry development to the actual US economic growth is estimated at 30%.

At the beginning of the 21st century, the United States – with its strong national-global power and the relative hegemony of knowledge/information – was already ready to build a new world order.

Knowledge is also the soul of military hegemony. Since the 1990s the United States (after the USSR’s demise) has taken advantage of its absolute leadership in information technology to vigorously promote a new military revolution and equip its armed forces with a large number of modern sophisticated weapons, especially cyber weapons: an overwhelming advantage in the conventional field, clearly overtaking the Third World, as well as its Western allies.

The US superiority in equipment ranges from one to two generations (i.e. from 15 to 30 years) over developing countries and from 0.5 to one generation over allies. All this has established the hegemonic status of the United States as the world’s number one military power.

Gulf Wars II (1991) and III (2003) (the first was the Iran-Iraq War in 1980-88), the Kosovo War (1999), the Afghanistan War (2001- still ongoing), and the Iraq War (2003-2011) were four localised wars that the United States fought to establish a new world order after the Cold War. During those events, the US hegemony was strengthened on an unprecedented scale and its attempt to establish a new order made substantial progress.

Moreover, backed by strong military advantages (scattering the planet with its own bases and outposts), as well as economic and technological advantages, those events ensured that the United States had and still has a leading position in the world, thus making the White House a planner and defender of the new world order. (1. continued)

Continue Reading

Americas

Hardened US and Iranian positions question efficacy of parties’ negotiating tactics

Published

on

The United States and Iran seem to be hardening their positions in advance of a resumption of negotiations to revive a 2015 international nuclear agreement once Iranian President-elect Ebrahim Raisi takes office in early August.

Concern among supporters of the agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear program which former US President Donald J. Trump abandoned in 2018 may be premature but do raise questions about the efficacy of the negotiating tactics of both parties.

These tactics include the Biden administration’s framing of the negotiations exclusively in terms of the concerns of the West and its Middle Eastern allies rather than also as they relate to Iranian fears, a failure by both the United States and Iran to acknowledge that lifting sanctions is a complex process that needs to be taken into account in negotiations, and an Iranian refusal to clarify on what terms the Islamic republic may be willing to discuss non-nuclear issues once the nuclear agreement has been revived.

The differences in the negotiations between the United States and Iran are likely to be accentuated if and when the talks resume, particularly concerning the mechanics of lifting sanctions.

“The challenges facing the JCPOA negotiations are a really important example of how a failed experience of sanctions relief, as we had in Iran between the Obama and Trump admins, can cast a shadow over diplomacy for years to come, making it harder to secure US interests,” said Iran analyst Esfandyar Batmanghelidj referring to the nuclear accord, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, by its initials.

The Biden administration may be heeding Mr. Batmangheldij’s notion that crafting sanctions needs to take into account the fact that lifting them can be as difficult as imposing them as it considers more targeted additional punitive measures against Iran. Those measures would aim to hamper Iran’s evolving capabilities for precision strikes using drones and guided missiles by focusing on the providers of parts for those weapon systems, particularly engines and microelectronics.

To be sure, there is no discernable appetite in either Washington or Tehran to adjust negotiation tactics and amend their underlying assumptions. It would constitute a gargantuan, if not impossible challenge given the political environment in both capitals. That was reflected in recent days in Iranian and US statements.

Iranian Spiritual Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei suggested that agreement on the revival of the nuclear accord was stumbling over a US demand that it goes beyond the terms of the original accord by linking it to an Iranian willingness to discuss its ballistic missiles program and support for Arab proxies.

In a speech to the cabinet of outgoing President Hassan Rouhani, he asserted that the West “will try to hit us everywhere they can and if they don’t hit us in some place, it’s because they can’t… On paper and in their promises, they say they’ll remove sanctions. But they haven’t lifted them and won’t lift them. They impose conditions…to say in future Iran violated the agreement and there is no agreement” if Iran refuses to discuss regional issues or ballistic missiles.

Iranian officials insist that nothing can be discussed at this stage but a return by both countries to the nuclear accord as is. Officials, distrustful of US intentions, have hinted that an unconditional and verified return to the status quo ante may help open the door to talks on missiles and proxies provided this would involve not only Iranian actions and programs but also those of America’s allies.

Mr. Khamenei’s remarks seemed to bolster suggestions that once in office Mr. Raisi would seek to turn the table on the Biden administration by insisting on stricter verification and US implementation of its part of a revived agreement.

To achieve this, Iran is expected to demand the lifting of all rather than some sanctions imposed or extended by the Trump administration; verification of the lifting;  guarantees that the lifting of sanctions is irreversible, possibly by making any future American withdrawal from the deal contingent on approval by the United Nations Security Council; and iron-clad provisions to ensure that obstacles to Iranian trade are removed, including the country’s unfettered access to the international financial system and the country’s overseas accounts.

Mr. Khamenei’s remarks and Mr. Raisi’s anticipated harder line was echoed in warnings by US officials that the ascendancy of the new president would not get Iran a better deal. The officials cautioned further that there could be a point soon at which it would no longer be worth returning to because Iran’s nuclear program would have advanced to the point where the limitations imposed by the agreement wouldn’t produce the intended minimum one year ‘breakout time’ to produce enough enriched uranium for a bomb.

“We are committed to diplomacy, but this process cannot go on indefinitely. At some point, the gains achieved by the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) cannot be fully recovered by a return to the JCPOA if Iran continues the activities that it’s undertaken with regard to its nuclear program…The ball remains in Iran’s court, and we will see if they’re prepared to make the decisions necessary to come back into compliance,” US Secretary Antony Blinken said this week on a visit to Kuwait.

Another US official suggested that the United States and Iran could descend into a tug-of-war on who has the longer breath and who blinks first. It’s a war that so far has not produced expected results for the United States and in which Iran has paid a heavy price for standing its ground.

The official said that a breakdown in talks could “look a lot like the dual-track strategy of the past—sanctions pressure, other forms of pressure, and a persistent offer of negotiations. It will be a question of how long it takes the Iranians to come to the idea they will not wait us out.”

Continue Reading

Americas

Wendy Sherman’s China visit takes a terrible for the US turn

Published

on

Photo: Miller Center/ flickr

US Deputy Secretary of State, Wendy Sherman, had high hopes for the meeting in China. At first, the Chinese side did not agree to hold the meeting at all. The reaction had obvious reasons: Antony Blinken’s fiasco in Alaska left the Chinese disrespected and visibly irritated. This is not why they travelled all the way.

So then the State Department had the idea of sending Wendy Sherman instead. The US government actually needs China more than China needs the US. Sherman was in China to actually prepare the ground for Biden and a meeting between the two presidents, expecting a red carpet roll for Biden as if it’s still the 2000s — the time when it didn’t matter how the US behaved. Things did not go as expected.

Instead of red carpet talk, Sherman heard Dua Lipa’s “I got new rules”. 

That’s right — the Chinese side outlined three bottom lines warning the US to respect its system, development and sovereignty and territorial integrity. In other words, China wants to be left alone.

The bottom lines were not phrased as red lines. This was not a military conflict warning. This was China’s message that if any future dialogue was to take place, China needs to be left alone. China accused the US of creating an “imaginary enemy”. I have written about it before — the US is looking for a new Cold War but it doesn’t know how to start and the problem is that the other side actually holds all the cards

That’s why the US relies on good old militarism with an expansion into the Indo-Pacific, while aligning everyone against China but expecting the red carpet and wanting all else in the financial and economic domains to stay the same. The problem is that the US can no longer sell this because there are no buyers. Europeans also don’t want to play along.

The headlines on the meeting in the US press are less flattering than usual. If the US is serious about China policy it has to be prepared to listen to much more of that in the future. And perhaps to, yes, sit down and be humble.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

South Asia12 mins ago

Turkey’s role in Afghanistan

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) on Thursday launched a training program in Turkey for Afghan military personnel. This is the...

Eastern Europe3 hours ago

Ukraine’s Chance for Rational Behaviour

From the point of view of international politics, the most important thing in the recently-published article by the President of...

South Asia5 hours ago

North-East India Towards Peace and Prosperity: Bangladesh Paves the Way

Bangladesh has always been one of the brightest examples of religious harmony and peace. “secularism” is not only a word...

Defense7 hours ago

Russia in Libya and the Mediterranean

There are several myths about Soviet/Russian involvement in Libya in particular and the Mediterranean in general. Unfortunately, such “political stories”...

African Renaissance9 hours ago

Truth and the third wave of the pandemic: To be vaccinated or not to be vaccinated

I have endured the worst possible case scenario. Being locked up in a mental institution for six months while in...

Economy13 hours ago

GCC Countries Back on Path to Economic Growth after Contraction Due to the Pandemic

Following a year of economic distress, Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) economies are expected to return to an aggregate growth of...

Middle East19 hours ago

To the Beat of its Own Drum: On Internal Logic of Events in Tunisia

Once every five years or so, Tunisia finds itself in the headlines around the world. Last time, in 2015, it...

Trending