George Rebane
[This is the addended, edited, and updated transcript of my regular KVMR commentary broadcast on 16 December 2020.]
Last Monday the Electoral College elected Joe Biden to be the 46th president of the United States. The election was heavily contested for two distinct reasons, but to no avail. Let me be clear from the start, I am a conservetarian and therefore not happy with the election’s outcome – also for two distinct reasons to which we’ll get directly.
This election is unique in our country’s history for a few significant reasons. One of them being in the number of people who decided to get off their duffs and vote. Another, and perhaps more important, is that this election was fraught with an enormous number of irregularities – procedural, legal, and criminally fraudulent. Each of these categories contained enough incidents, not only to give credibility as to their witnessed occurrences, but also of the types that should have led to annulment or at least a redo of the cited precincts’ work to correctly qualify and count the ballots. An alarming number of states violated their own laws, constitutions, and the US Constitution in the manner they conducted their elections prior to and in the aftermath of November 3rd. These violations are a matter of record, and they overwhelmingly favored one candidate over the other – always the same candidate.
Then we come to the criminally fraudulent incidents. These again were reported by witnesses putting themselves at substantial risk of committing felonies, as they filed affidavits that attested to what they saw and heard. And again, such sworn affidavits, which are accepted as evidence in all courts, numbered in the tens (hundreds?) across the land and described incidents of ballots handling that could have plausibly affected the election’s outcome had they been allowed to be corroborated by the authorities.
The bottom line here is that, in the election’s aftermath, there arose a tsunami of documented evidence that we may gently label ‘irregularities’. President Trump understandably protested these irregularities through legal channels and institutions available to him. As we now know, it was all to no avail. The arguments filed as complaints in his behalf, and more importantly, on behalf of Americans of all political colorations who had lost confidence in the legitimacy of our national elections, they were all rejected by state and federal courts at every level up to and including the Supreme Court.
Few Americans know that the basis for the rejections were all for procedural reasons. The courts did not contend the quality or verity of the presented evidence. The most common ruling handed down was substantiated with the fiat statement that the suit had no merit, or that even if the plaintiff were to prevail, that the result would not reverse the election’s outcome. Never mind that the latter argument had no bearing on the legal matter, it was only political. These rulings in and of themselves were astounding, given the impact they would have on the national polity – the choice between two distinct social and economic futures for our country. The enormous volumes of evidence presented were not even allowed to have their day in court, so that they could be dissected on their factual and legal merits. All of it was summarily dismissed.
People like me remain concerned, not only because the election’s outcome has pointed us in the direction that leads to a stable and powerful political monopoly – a known stepping stone to tyranny – but also because not resolving the election’s irregularities has created a dangerous mindset in at least half of Americans who report that they have lost confidence in the most important sacrament of a democracy – the free, fair, and transparent expression of the people’s will. If a large fraction of citizens will now believe that an unpopular outcome is the result of a tainted election process, and there is no possibility of appeal or relief through normal judicial channels, then what alternative paths of actions remain?
So, dear listener, that President Trump lost is neither the point here nor my lament, politicians win and lose all the time. What I and similarly minded people lament is that henceforth our elections can readily be corrupted with demonstrable flaws that are subsequently ignored through an established judicial precedent by which evidence-rich appeals can be summarily rejected by the state.
My name is Rebane, and I also expand on this and related themes on Rebane’s Ruminations where the addended transcript of this commentary is posted with relevant links, and where such issues are debated extensively. However, my views are not necessarily shared by KVMR. Thank you for listening.
[Addendum] The referenced ‘tsunami of evidence’ citing this November’s election irregularities are compiled by the crowdsourcing tool ‘Here is the Evidence’. It’s an impressive website with links to the source of the listed irregularities, definitely worth perusing.
More on the ongoing federal level activities regarding election integrity. Several congress critters are calling for continuing the investigations of voting and ballot handling irregularities and computer counting of votes; and the Senate hearing into all these things is ongoing. The Left’s attempt to characterize these efforts to find out what really happen and restore confidence in our election process as the desperate efforts of the remaining Trump zealots is yet another Big Lie by the Democrat leadership and their grassroots local lackies (more here, here, here, and here).
[Addendum2] Is it time to start soaking the cannons? In the comment stream below, reader Bob Hobert raises an important point that appears to have been misunderstood by readers from both sides. The Left’s misunderstanding (@1117pm) was expected, since it is of a piece of thinking witnessed here for many years – they are totalitarians and consider all hints, let alone suggestions, of violence against the state to be sedition with no need for further examination.
Mr Hobert offered a response to reader ScottO 635pm – “If Violence and savagery are never far from the door, why wait – why not start the fight now? What leader will stand up, other than Trump? The people and any groundswell require leadership. If not Trump, who? When? Just sayin' – now is a good time.”
Before diving in, let me be clear about two documented notions. First, various factions of the Left have already initiated violence in the streets against the state and its law enforcement organs. They have been quite open about their intents to abolish our Constitution and reorder the social contract between Americans and the new US government they intend to found. And in spite of Biden’s sordid win, nowhere have they promised to cease their use of violence to achieve their ideological goals of a socialist cum communist state.
Second, our Founders made sure that Americans would always have the means to resist their government, should it ever turn against them as it morphed into a tyranny. They ensconced our right to bear arms against the state in the Constitution as an unalienable right of all free peoples from whom the government draws its power. When/if the government reaches a stage where it no longer seeks its legitimacy from those governed, the people would then be able to redress their grievances with means that supersede the then abrogated institutions of judicial remedies and fair/open elections. And make no mistake, it is for the people themselves to decide when such a state of affairs has arrived; at that point they need no permission from corrupted institutions or their political opponents who continue to embrace the corruption.
The above tenets are known to all who have studied the history of our founding as a democratic republic 250 years ago. We Americans have already successfully taken up arms against a government that claimed legitimacy and practiced tyranny. Our Founders knew that the enterprise of freedom and liberty would require the risk and sacrifice of their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor. And understanding both risk and sacrifice, enough Americans were then willing to join their leaders, because they had the means at hand that promised, or at least made plausible, a successful end to the struggle they would launch against the most powerful state in the world.
In my commentary, I conclude with, “If a large fraction of citizens will now believe that an unpopular outcome is the result of a tainted election process, and there is no possibility of appeal or relief through normal judicial channels, then what alternative paths of actions remain?”
That is a serious question to which Mr Hobert provided one serious answer in order to open the discussion/debate about it and other possible answers. In response, I celebrate that we still have a country in which a free and aggrieved citizen can once more open such a discussion of alternatives. And I also shudder to read a reply from a leftwing reader, one of legions, who worship leviathan, and are ready to serve as its eyes and ears to detect and report the first vestiges of opposition.
To me and mine, any jurisdiction that prevents my departure is a prison or at least is acquiring the mantle of a prison. The ante-bellum argument by seceded states was in the same vein and led to their unsuccessful War of Southern Independence. With the North’s victory, the United States had completed its first fundamental transformation in making secession illegal, and secondarily abolishing slavery – the Union, as is, was “preserved”. Historians and political scientists are still debating the meaning and impact of such a preservation. Tyrannical governments have long prohibited the departure of their citizens, or letting them leave after forfeiting their assets to the state. Today in selected states our Left is already considering ways in which they can prevent people leaving their egregiously indebted, over-regulated and taxed jurisdictions by passing confiscatory laws to which emigrants would be subjected – essentially imposing a ransom on each citizen who contemplates their escape.
So yes, we have arrived at a state of affairs which we have long discussed under the notion of the Great Divide. Is it now time to discuss alternative means of resolving this question as we witness the final loss of faith in the elections upon which the foundation of our democratic republic has based its stability? As these pages record, in my humble opinion the time is long past to begin this national debate before some unforeseen spark will ignite another war of secession. Again, as we daily witness the affairs of state and public discourse, we are long beyond any possibility of rapprochement of the now distant public antipodes. We are already two nations forced to chafe within a common border. Let us now work together to discover a peaceful parting.
[19dec20 update] 'Redacted Information in Dominion Audit Report Shows Races Were Flipped'. The election continues to reek of fraud that demands investigation instead of summary dismissals by a cringing justice system that has lost its purpose and backbone.
rebanesruminations.com 
Leave a comment