Let's say this hypothetical scenario unfolded:
- Before the election, Donald Trump made a Freudian slip during an online interview: "We've assembled the most massive voter fraud system in the history of elections." Eyebrows were raised.
- Also just before the election, a significant Republican congresswoman was caught red handed in a major ballot harvesting operation-- and where her race was allowed to just go on anyway, no investigation whatsoever-- along with undercover reporting exposing widespread Republican ballot harvesting in other states as well.
- Cameltoe had commanding leads in all of the battleground states, and was cruising to victory. Then, suddenly in the middle of the night, the ballot counting was "frozen", followed by a seemingly random "unfreeze", followed by Donald Trump immediately having picked up literally 100% of hundreds of thousands of fresh ballots, in several of those states, all at once.
- One of these instances was explained away as a "data ingestion" problem, which was immediately "fixed"-- which means that some IT guy, rather than an election official, was tinkering with flat files, maybe manually creating deltas, and who knows what else. Was his work audited? Who was observing? What controls were in place?
- It's observed that only in the battleground states, there were significant, material differences between the numbers who voted for Donald Trump and the Republican senatorial candidate-- but not between Cameltoe and the Democratic senatorial candidate.
- Generally speaking, Donald Trump did worse than Bush in essentially every metro area, other than Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta, and Philadelphia, where he somehow did better than Reagan during re-election, adjusted for population size.
- Following these scenarios and observations, reports started flowing out of Arizona that masses of Cameltoe supporters were instructed to vote with instruments which the poll administrators knew couldn't be registered by the machine.
- Right in the thick of the action, Michigan officials boarded up the windows, so poll watchers could no longer observe what was going on. Simultaneously, official poll watchers in Philadelphia were literally chased away from the tables, not allowed within thirty feet.
- Whistleblowers from several USPS offices around the country leaked that their bosses gave them these instructions: "A big batch of ballots is going to arrive soon-- they will be dated November 5th and 6th; stamp them as having arrived on the 3rd, and send them through express."
- Another USPS worker was caught on camera explaining that there were tons of "return-to-sender" or otherwise unfilled ballots floating around the system-- he said he'd be happy to swipe a stack of them, and hand them over for illegal purposes. How widespread was this?
Can you imagine the outrage from Democrats? They would be saying-- as Hitlery actually did before the election-- that the Democrats should "not accept the results no matter what". And if the above scenario happened, you know who would be right there beside them? Me.
This isn't a partisan issue to me: I'd be just as bemused if the shoe were on the other foot.
This "election" is Epstein all over again: maybe he really did strangle himself with toilet paper while the guards somehow fell asleep at the same time, the cameras magically malfunctioned right at that instant, just after he was taken off of suicide watch and his cellmate was removed.
While there's no smoking gun, "c'mon man!"-- all of this stretches credulity beyond its breaking point.
If I were Donald Trump-- and I'd be saying the same thing to Cameltoe in the reverse-- I would file lawsuits for every single one of these instances, and would not concede until every last one of them had a rational explanation. If the lawsuits got the same crooked treatment as the election itself, I would start a secessionary movement, and try to get the military on my side, while kicking off the drafting of a Constitution for the new government.