Fraudulent voting schemes, or the abuse of normal voting methods, has become an effective trademark of the DNC, but more, a formal election strategy.
Read more Media oddly hell-bent on protecting criminals
It worked once, so their confidence is high that it will work repeatedly, especially if the fraud is normalized and processed within recognized voting methods like mail ballots.
The White House is trying to stop it, and the SCOTUS needs to recognize what is really at stake.
U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer stated before the Court recently that this involves “a particularly pernicious species of fraud that dilutes the votes of lawful voters, prevents election results from reflecting the will of the American people, and undermines public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process.”
Such susceptibility to fraud creates an immediate, obvious problem in election law, but the real problem is bigger.
While mail ballots have a limited traditional purpose under narrow circumstances, the Democrats have tried to greatly expand and institutionalize it, and by doing so, they are using a “swarm” technique in elections. It resembles drone warfare: fraudulent ballots are “unmanned” (no actual person is attached), and are “remotely” controlled by unaccountable operators (the DNC).
In drone warfare, the ratio of “attack and defense” is also altered such that the traditional means of ensuring safety, stability, and security, is overwhelmed by exploiting defense system porosity.
Elections are exactly the same: they create a society’s constitutional defense system by maintaining constitutional security and stability — but in a system that is vulnerable to attack, especially if the attack is able to penetrate the gaps in its voting “system.”
That is what fraudulent mail ballots do: they exploit holes in constitutional election defenses.
Moreover, an election system is passive: it has no “early warning” feature if an attack is launched; there is no “election radar” that detects an approaching assault, and there are no “counter-measures.”
Except one: proof of voter eligibility.
And that is why the President’s demands on the SCOTUS are constitutionally inviolable.
By denying real voter identification, or state voter verifications that the White House is demanding, a successful fraudulent voting assault can be accomplished because it creates a “stealth” voter who cannot be detected. The Court would be leaving the U.S. open to attack.
Real voters see that threat, and realize that they are being subjected to something other than constitutional elections: they are in an effective election “war game,” and the game is not only rigged, it is dangerous. It is a subtle “election psychological terror,” because it preys, like the drone does, on the psychological confidence of citizens. When that happens, election apathy and avoidance can replace election enthusiasm and participation. Voters psychologically “take shelter” more than they will seek battle: that is a normal human instinct. Non-voters are already the biggest political “party,” and it may get worse.
Read more The AI threat to our Republic
By turning an American tradition that has generally enjoyed public confidence, into an otherwise partisan political operation, then the real voters who count — those who are actually qualified and officially recognized — will participate even less, and many, not at all. Voter fraud lowers real voter turnout, while raising illegal voter participation, and biasing votes. That may be part of the DNC’s calculation, but it represents a larger devolvement in constitutional order.
If a U.S. citizen feels that his one legitimate vote will be overwhelmed by a hundred fraudulent or unverified ones, his belief in the “one person, one vote” principle under the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, becomes “one voter versus a hundred persons.”
It turns casting a ballot in good faith to create representation and consent, into a contest and battle against illegal voters: it makes legal voting a form of constitutional law enforcement.
The left has psychologically pitted qualified voters against the unqualified, and by doing so, it undermines the actual “policy and interest” basis of voting, and makes the government divorced from its source of legitimacy and consent.
In the infamous 2000 Bush v. Gore election controversy involving a razor-thin margin, then-incumbent Bill Clinton remarked that Americans learned the value and importance of a single vote. Perhaps they did, but unfortunately, they have now learned the value of one legal vote.
The voter fraud problem goes further in a fascinating way, however, through the mechanism of “total persons” used for districting and redistricting.
In the 2016 Roberts court ruling of Evenwel v. Abbott, the SCOTUS held that the Fourteenth Amendment’s “one person, one vote” principle allows states to draw legislative districts based on total population rather than the total voting-eligible population. The plaintiff, who lost in a ruling written by Justice Ruth Ginsburg, argued that “urban districts with high numbers of non-voters including non-citizens, required fewer actual voters to achieve equal total population, giving those voters more relative influence.”
The question before the Court was: “Whether the ‘one-person, one-vote’ principle of the Fourteenth Amendment creates a judicially enforceable right ensuring that the districting process does not deny voters an equal vote” (italics mine).
What is fascinating about Evenwel is that the plaintiff’s argument that districts drawn based on total population, dilute their vote compared to those in certain other districts, is exactly the problem created when legal voters are diluted by illegal voters. We now have two voter “districts:” legal and illegal, and the DNC wants to merge them, making the plaintiff argument in Evenwel constructively moot by making voter dilution absolute.
What has been pursued through combined illegal immigration and voter fraud, is the effective merging of districting rules with election rules: that is, “total population” is being pursued by the DNC as the basis of “total voters,” whether legal or not. District representation math is a singularity with ballot math. This includes the continued effort by the DNC to collapse the electoral college, which further obstructs their goal of total population voting, concentrated in high density states.
The SCOTUS must intervene in mail ballot fraud as a first step in preempting a true constitutional crisis stemming from the republican basis of the nation’s sovereignty: legal voters participating in legal elections.
Matthew G. Andersson is a former CEO and law and policy author. He has testified before the U.S. Senate and is a graduate of the University of Texas at Austin where he worked with White House national security advisor W.W. Rostow at the LBJ School of Public Affairs.
Read more 25 years after 9/11, the Saudi questions won’t go away
Image: X screenshot, common internet meme