DEMOCRATS STOLE THE ELECTION
Episode Stats
Harmful content
Misogyny
2
sentences flagged
Toxicity
4
sentences flagged
Hate speech
1
sentences flagged
Summary
In this episode, we continue our series on election fraud in California, and we have more hard evidence of alleged election fraud. The question is, is this evidence enough to prove that the election was stolen from Donald Trump in 2020?
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hey Ontario, come on down to BetMGM Casino and see what our newest exclusive, The Price is Right Fortune Pick, has to offer.
00:00:07.620
Don't miss out. Play exciting casino games based on the iconic game show only at BetMGM.
00:00:13.120
Check out how we've reimagined three of the show's iconic games like Plinko, Cliffhanger, and the Big Wheel into fun casino game features.
00:00:21.320
Don't forget to download the BetMGM Casino app for exclusive access and excitement on The Price is Right Fortune Pick.
00:00:27.540
Pull up a seat and experience the Price is Right fortune pick.
00:00:33.540
BetMGM and GameSense remind you to play responsibly.
00:00:40.200
If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you,
00:00:43.480
please contact Connects Ontario at 1-866-531-2600
00:00:51.340
BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario.
00:00:57.540
election fraud in California. But the issue with the question of election fraud always comes down
00:01:04.220
to whether or not the results of that fraud could have changed the outcome of the election.
00:01:10.280
In 2020, many people argued that the election had been stolen from Donald Trump.
00:01:14.460
They argued that there was fraud. In fact, courts did find fraud. The problem? In many of these
00:01:21.300
instances, they'd say, listen, there's 300 to 400 votes that are either wrongly dated,
00:01:26.460
should not have been counted, or for some reason are disqualified. But individually,
00:01:31.200
in this case, those ballots will not change the results. So it's moot. The question then becomes
00:01:38.340
how many instances of disqualified, unofficial, or fraudulent ballots are popping up all over the
00:01:45.340
place where each individual instance would not change the results. But together, you would get
00:01:53.100
a very different result. Right now, the question in California, how did Nithya Raman in Los Angeles
00:02:00.300
beat Karen Bass? Spencer Pratt aside, the question is, how did Nithya Raman, a third place
00:02:07.700
councilwoman in late ballots, trounce Karen Bass? Because the argument tends to be from Democrats
00:02:14.300
and from liberals that Democrats vote early and vote by mail. But in this instance, Nithya Raman
00:02:20.060
voters did and Karen Bass's voters didn't. Obviously, with these ballot dumps, Karen Bass
00:02:26.560
did get votes. But what makes this different? The question, my friends, that we have been pursuing
0.61
00:02:32.040
over the past week, past two weeks, it's a question of what constitutes cheating. And we have two hard
00:02:38.640
examples now, and there's more, but I'm going to highlight these two, of actual illegal activity.
00:02:45.500
But then, of course, the question is, is this illegal activity enough to prove the election
00:02:49.840
was stolen. Dare I say, of course it isn't. And Bert Weinstein makes a great point on the
00:02:55.700
Dark Horse podcast where he says there will never be enough proof to bring together because it is
00:03:03.060
such a massive state, a massive city. How would you possibly investigate all of these instances
00:03:07.500
to try and find the evidence anyway? It is the system itself that is cheating.
00:03:12.440
Now, I know liberals will respond with, oh, that's a cop out. You'll blame this.
00:03:16.020
Well, indeed, my friends, I've gotten more evidence for you today.
00:03:19.440
Aside from the fact that the DSA in California explicitly instructs people to collect ballots,
00:03:24.980
to go and fill out ballots with people, which should be electioneering,
00:03:30.340
because it used to be that if you went to a polling location to do that, you were committing a crime.
00:03:34.640
When they created universal mail-in voting, they did not create sister laws for electioneering
00:03:39.380
to stop you from going to someone's home and saying, fill out the ballot, I'll help you do it.
00:03:50.720
Now, you may be saying, yeah, well, what's stopping Spencer Pratt from doing the same thing?
00:03:57.660
According to California state law, you don't even need a postmark on a ballot.
00:04:04.260
Indeed, ballots can be hand dated and they count.
00:04:09.940
So let me just make sure all of you understand the structure of California's elections.
00:04:14.080
If a ballot is received four days after the election, and it could be up to seven, let's just say four days, there is no postmark on it, but there is a handwritten date.
00:04:26.380
So long as that date is election day, that baby counts.
00:04:31.300
Now, as for the signature, you could put a smiley face, a star or any other kind of symbol without verification.
00:04:38.420
In this instance of evidence from James O'Keefe, we can see individuals collecting petitions, registering people to vote is the allegation, I believe, in exchange for money.
00:04:56.220
We have another big story to tackle as well from The New York Post.
00:04:59.900
California election worker caught an alleged cheating scandal as their secret illegal activities are exposed.
00:05:07.340
These aren't the only examples, but I'm starting off today's show by highlighting actual illegal activity to make the point.
00:05:14.540
How do you track down every single individual out of thousands who have cheated or who have committed these crimes?
00:05:23.380
The problem we are facing, particularly with California, starts with the structure of their elections.
00:05:28.460
But after that, we do have a problem nationwide.
00:05:30.660
if one individual cheats by securing 500 illicit ballots, each instance is not enough to change
00:05:40.300
the outcome of an election. Thus, the courts consider it moot. They would say, even if we
00:05:45.900
remedy this, what would change? You would have to actually track down every single granular instance
00:05:52.640
of someone pulling in illicit ballots and prove it, which is just not possible.
00:06:00.160
And therein lies the problem we are facing today.
00:06:04.000
Democrats and liberals aren't even asking these questions, and they are claiming that
00:06:10.400
Rolling Stone, for instance, put out a story saying all they have left is to claim fraud.
00:06:17.160
I'm here to show how the structure of California's elections are legalized fraud.
00:06:26.720
You're allowed to fill out a ballot, backdate it by hand, and submit it with a smiley face
00:06:40.020
Well, let's jump into these first two stories before we get into the nitty gritty.
00:06:42.840
Before we get started, of course, guys, you got to go to TimCast.com and click join us
00:06:48.660
We got tens of thousands of people in our Discord server hanging out.
00:06:53.000
They make their own shows in the morning, afternoon.
00:06:55.400
they got pre-shows, they got after shows. We have the members only green room, 630 Monday through
00:07:02.420
Thursday. Plus, we're now doing Josie's members only interviews Friday nights. You don't want to
00:07:08.040
miss it. Community is everything. We live for the human experience. This is what gives us
00:07:13.040
fulfillment. If you are looking for purpose, if you have talents or you seek to improve yourself,
00:07:18.860
you need to find that network of individuals that you can live for, help and be helped by.
00:07:25.020
Now, I'm not going to say that we're perfect or that we're the best, but we are building
00:07:29.000
this because we know it can help and it will help and we must build a strong community.
00:07:35.240
Otherwise, if not for each other, what are we really here for?
00:07:38.900
I don't think we have very many members based on the ideology of you guys in the show that
00:07:44.480
are hedonistic loners that want to lock themselves away in virtual reality.
00:07:55.100
Of course, hit that like button, subscribe to this channel right now, and share this
00:07:58.640
video on every platform if you do want to help out.
00:08:00.840
If every single person who watched this posted this video to Insta, Facebook, or even made
00:08:05.660
clips and posted them on other social media, we'd be the biggest news show ever, and that
00:08:12.960
California election worker caught an alleged cheating scandal as their secret illegal
00:08:18.580
I do appreciate the New York Post saying alleged cheating scandal, but then as a statement of fact, call it secret illegal activities like I don't know if you guys get that one cleared by legal or a California election worker has allegedly been caught breaking into a locked ballot cabinet making copies.
00:08:35.260
His questions continue over the legitimacy of the state's elections.
00:08:38.000
The staffer was not been named as under investigation over the count in over the count in Shasta County, north of Sacramento.
00:08:46.500
Officials said the case involved a small number of extra ballots
00:08:49.320
that may have been sent out before Election Day
00:08:51.460
and that it had been reported to the Secretary of State's office.
00:08:57.920
which is a standard process following an election,
00:09:01.740
suggesting that a small number of additional ballots
00:09:03.820
may have been handed out to voters prior to Election Day by one employee.
00:09:08.720
The disclosure stems from an incident that occurred June 4th
00:09:10.880
at Shasta County Elections Department in Reading.
00:09:13.300
Election workers uncovered irregularities while conducting a routine reconciliation
00:09:17.140
of early voting records following the election, according to the county.
00:09:23.680
They said that there was a homeless shelter which had received a $600,000 grant from Nithya
00:09:28.360
This homeless shelter had 185 homeless individuals who did not live there registered to that
00:09:35.960
One of the leading theories as to how the Democrats muster up extra votes and statistically
00:09:41.760
improbable outcomes, is that they just go to homeless people and say, I'll vote for you.
00:09:47.420
Now, here's the real question. With universal mail-in voting, is it possible? I'm kind of
00:09:54.860
looking at the camera, making a look. Is it possible if 185 mail-in votes are mailed out
00:10:02.680
to one homeless shelter and you don't need a signature, a smiley face would suffice.
00:10:08.000
Is it possible people are just filling out these ballots and sending them in because they get paid to do it or because they're ideologically motivated?
00:10:15.760
Guys, I think the answer is, how are you going to prove it?
00:10:19.460
If a vote comes in with no signature, it's a smiley face that originates from a homeless shelter.
00:10:24.960
And you say, where's this person in question so I can confirm if they voted or not?
00:10:32.320
There's no way to actually track the person down.
00:10:36.900
Now, James O'Keefe has a smashing mini documentary I recommend you guys check out.
00:10:46.080
Fraudulent petitioners on Skid Row are now paying the homeless to forge names,
00:10:51.000
forge addresses, and forge signatures of registered voters.
00:11:12.500
No, I'm going to give you the address to the right.
00:11:17.520
Quickly becoming a widespread scheme that can be found on almost every street corner in downtown Los Angeles.
00:11:26.440
Now, I believe what James O'Keefe uncovered is paid petitioning.
00:11:30.560
Petitions are used for a variety of issues pertaining to referendums and ballot initiatives, things like this.
00:11:36.160
you need signatures for candidates to get on the ballot. So if you want to get somebody to be
00:11:40.500
on a ballot, you need signatures. They are forging all of this. Now, I believe James O'Keefe
00:11:45.320
in the in the larger show, actually, it gets into overt voter fraud, as he's described it.
00:11:50.480
He calls it California election fraud for cash. I give you this from The Washington Times.
00:11:56.280
Let's break down the statistics of the California election just as some context.
00:12:00.960
But then I'm going to show you the mechanism by which, yeah, they're cheating.
00:12:03.520
the statistical impossibility of L.A.'s mayor race. It's an opinion piece that writes,
00:12:10.320
JGPT could not find one example in American history of a third place candidate surging
00:12:14.580
days after an election to overtake second place. Yet that is what we are seeing in the L.A.
00:12:18.920
mayoral race with Democratic socialist Nithya Rahman besting reality TV star Spencer Pratt
00:12:23.360
over the weekend, possibly edging out of the runoff. I want to pause real quick and just say
00:12:27.780
fact check false. I asked, I don't know if I have it pulled up, actually. I think I do.
00:12:34.320
Let me let me let me let me just pull this in, because I was able to get to show several
00:12:38.840
instances, in fact, in California's top two in twenty eighteen. Gil Cisneros was not projected.
00:12:45.320
He was behind. But afterwards, he advanced. I mean, it's actually fairly common that things
00:12:48.840
like this happen. Now, that being said, even outside of outside of California, it has happened
00:12:54.740
in New York, for instance. They tend to be in Democrat districts. I think this is a silly thing
00:13:00.200
to lead with because you can find examples. This has happened in recent history. The question,
00:13:04.300
however, that is interesting that I think may be a challenge, maybe this is what he failed to
00:13:08.520
explain properly, is that when you take a look at the proportion of votes, something doesn't make
00:13:13.200
sense. Now, we've covered this for the past few weeks, but for context, here it is. For mail-in
00:13:16.820
ballots arriving before the election. Karen Bass received 38 percent, Pratt 28 and Rahman 20 percent
00:13:24.780
voter turnout for Mr. Rahman on June 2nd, the day of election was so tepid she gave a concession
00:13:30.120
speech. Well, she did not give a concession speech. She cried and implied we lost like
00:13:37.020
she didn't say, right, I concede, I resign, we've lost. But she cried about how hard they worked.
00:13:42.220
The general idea was we didn't make it. Then something miraculous happened. A surge in Mr.
00:13:49.420
Mount's popularity that was not observable before or on June 2nd. She collected 37% of the mail-in
00:13:58.160
ballots that arrived afterwards, a 17% surge, besting Mrs. Bass's 35, a 3% drop. Just to be
00:14:06.700
clear, mail-in ballots that arrived after June 2nd dropped for everyone except for the person
00:14:12.140
Democrats needed to defeat Mr. Pratt. Interesting question that I would ask all of you. How?
00:14:20.200
How did Karen Bass not perform as well? I mean, this is the anomaly. I will tell you my theory
00:14:26.260
first ballot harvesting before based on the DSA's operations. They got the youth. They don't like
00:14:31.520
Karen Bass. That could make sense. It could be as simple as that. We can argue illicit activity
00:14:37.000
in that if they backdated ballots and they would be counted, they knew on election night how many
00:14:44.920
votes they needed. They then could have potentially gone out, collected loose ballots,
00:14:50.580
filled them out with fake signatures and turned them in. And as I argued last week,
00:14:55.960
when you were in a rush to knock out the sole Republican, you don't have time to balance
00:15:01.320
ballot percentages to make it look plausible. Thus, Nithya Rahman sees a surge for seemingly
00:15:08.920
no reason, despite the fact, get this, she lost her own council district. So where her name ID
00:15:15.920
is biggest, she lost. Yet somehow after the election, you know, when everyone knows how
00:15:22.780
many votes you'd need to pull ahead, she wins. Well, let's take a look at the structures of
00:15:28.280
the elections. I give you this. This is Secretary of State California dot gov to one nine nine one
00:15:35.240
standards for valid and invalid votes votes by ballot. A vote by mail ballot shall be subject
00:15:41.400
to the standards provided in the approved use procedures for the system on which it is processed
00:15:45.000
and the provisions election code, et cetera, et cetera. A voters ballot shall be considered
00:15:48.520
a valid ballot if the one voters signature on the return vote by mail identification envelope
00:15:54.260
compares with the signature in the voter registration card to damage, torn or otherwise
00:15:59.320
non-processable ballot can be duplicated to exactly reflect the voters choices and thereby
00:16:04.520
enable the ballot to be processed on the system provided for that purpose. I'm going to pause
00:16:09.120
there. We're going to scroll down to where it matters, and that is Section 8. Vote by mail
00:16:15.240
ballot identification envelope has no dated postmark. The postmark is illegible and there
00:16:21.620
is no date stamp for receipt from a bona fide private mail delivery service. But the voter
00:16:28.120
has dated the vote by mail ballot identification envelope or the envelope otherwise indicates
00:16:33.640
that the ballot was executed on or before Election Day and the ballot was received by
00:16:38.600
the elections official in accordance with elections code section 3020. And I have that
00:16:43.520
pulled up for you as well. I would like to stress this to you, my friends. California state law says
00:16:50.300
that if the voter themself writes a date on or before election day, it is an eligible ballot.
00:16:59.800
That's legal. Now, I would say that's cheating because you just write anything you want down.
00:17:08.760
Imagine that standard of evidence in like a criminal case. You know, the cops go,
00:17:13.980
hey, we didn't find a murder weapon at the scene, but here's a knife. And you're like,
00:17:18.920
Where'd that knife come from? I found it. Where? A week later, outside the scene. Uh-huh. And it's
00:17:26.340
got a tag on it that says Walmart. Yeah, must have bought it from Walmart. And you're going
00:17:30.580
to be like, what? Or how about, he just literally writes on it, found at scene. Well, it says right
00:17:35.820
on it. What I love about this is that after the ICE shooting, there were bullet casings found that
00:17:42.000
had engravings on them or riding with pen, like F ICE or whatever. And liberals said, there's no
00:17:47.400
way that's real. So they understand the concept of anybody writing down whatever they want. That's
00:17:52.740
right. Cash Patel found, I don't know if cashed it, but the FBI, they found casings and it said
00:17:57.540
like F ice on it. And the liberals in the left mocked the idea saying you could just write that
00:18:04.000
and then claim the left did it. I agree with that. I just think it's more likely that the guy who
00:18:09.160
literally shot at an ice facility was motivated by anti-ice rhetoric. And I would also agree that
00:18:14.660
with the idea of you can write whatever you want. So it strains the credibility.
00:18:19.120
If you can just put any date you want. Now, I do. I do want to make sure we have section 3020 up.
00:18:25.640
It actually says that the ballot has no postmark, a postmark with no date or an
00:18:29.320
or an illegible postmark and no other information is available from the U.S. Postal Service or the
00:18:34.860
Bonafide Private Mail Delivery Company to indicate the date in the ballot was mailed.
00:18:38.500
The vote by mail ballot identification envelope is date stamped by the elections officials upon
00:18:45.440
Post Service or bona fide blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and is signed and dated pursuant
00:18:56.460
All vote by mail ballots cast into this division shall be received by election officials from
00:19:00.160
whom they were obtained or by the precinct board no later than the close of polls on
00:19:07.480
Any vote by mail ballot cast into this division shall be timely cast if it is received by
00:19:11.520
the voters election official via the United States Post Service or bona fide private mail delivery
00:19:14.760
company no later than seven days after the election day. And either of the following is
00:19:21.320
satisfied. To clarify, these are commas indicating it says if there's no stamp on it, the vote by
00:19:30.600
mail ballot identification envelope is date stamped. It could be. So they make this so verbose
00:19:38.260
intentionally. If the ballot is no postmark, no date, or is illegible, and no other information
00:19:43.560
is available from the United States Post Service or the mail delivery company to indicate the date,
00:19:47.880
the vote-by-mail ballot identification envelope is date-stamped by the elections official upon
00:19:50.840
receipt of the vote-by-mail ballot from the United States Post Service and is signed,
00:19:54.720
dated, pursued to Section 3011 before Election Day. That's largely a meaningless statement.
00:19:58.460
It's basically saying they just get it. It says the ballot is postmarked honor before Election
00:20:01.980
Day or is time-stamped or date-stamped by a bona fide private mail delivery company,
00:20:05.440
or it is otherwise indicated by the U.S. Post Service or bona fide private mail delivery company
00:20:08.800
that the ballot was mailed on or before election day. For the purpose of the section,
00:20:12.940
bona fide private mail delivery means blah, blah, blah. This section largely just pertains to if it
00:20:17.500
were to be received in accordance with Section 230. Again, the clarification that the envelope
00:20:24.560
must indicate it was the voter has dated the ballot identification themselves or otherwise
00:20:31.300
indicated under section 3020. Okay, to try and wrap up the legalese, understanding the commas
00:20:38.040
and clauses. Section 3020 that I pulled up intentionally shows you how it outlines being
00:20:45.160
received and date and stamped. I believe it's intentionally confusing as if to imply they must
00:20:50.800
be received and stamped that way. This is important clarification because it is not correct.
00:20:54.600
They say the voter has dated the vote by mail ballot identification envelope or the envelope otherwise indicates.
00:21:03.280
The important point is right here. If the voter dated the mail in ballot envelope themselves, it counts.
00:21:14.020
You ready for this one? This one's my favorite.
00:21:20.240
Identifiable similarities. Pictures or symbols can be used as valid signatures.
00:21:24.600
indeed. Can we just, you know, what's funny is, um, these liberals just, it's remarkable and they
00:21:31.040
lie guys. I am not saying we have proof of widespread fraud. In fact, I said the same
00:21:36.780
thing in 2020. I don't think there's widespread fraud. It's codified. Is it, is it, let me,
00:21:42.880
let me, let me put it this way. Let's do a man in the street. You know what I really want to do
00:21:46.920
when I want to do a man in the street interview with people. Should you be allowed to draw a
00:21:51.220
picture of Kirby Star from Nintendo as your signature on an election on a ballot? What do
00:21:57.720
you think people are going to say? They're like, what? Kirby Star? Yeah, a little puffball guy.
00:22:02.880
And he sucks the air and he eats people, eats people. Listen, can I draw Mickey Mouse? Does
0.96
00:22:08.620
that count as a signature? Some people might say yes, because they're going to be like, well,
00:22:12.180
some people are illiterate. Yeah. Most people are going to say no, you can't draw a picture.
00:22:16.980
Now, here's the best part. Because Kirby Star is like this is the funniest thing.
00:22:24.880
I would also put it this way, like we know it's Kirby Star because literally in this document,
00:22:29.000
they actually write out Kirby Star. That's just nuts. OK, in the doodle of Kirby,
00:22:36.600
they actually say this counts. If the voter signature on file is a doodle of Kirby
00:22:41.480
and the signature they later use is a different doodle of Kirby so long as it's identifiable as
00:22:48.280
a doodle of Kirby. And this is insane, isn't it? It counts. That is to say, let's make it a little
00:22:53.000
bit more understandable. If for my registration, I draw a picture of Mickey Mouse spinning plates
00:22:59.260
on his fingertips with one foot in the air. And then for my signature on my ballot, I draw Mickey
00:23:05.020
Mouse riding a bike, flipping the bird. They'd say, well, it's Mickey Mouse. Welcome to California
00:23:10.960
elections. I want to throw it to our good friend, Brett Weinstein here, who lays this out
00:23:15.900
in a very academic way. We're going to have an endless battle in which those of us who see
00:23:23.060
what we believe is clear evidence of some kind of election rigging or fraud are faced with
00:23:31.560
indignation from a vast array of people portraying themselves as more rigorous and careful who say,
00:23:39.660
where is your evidence? Where exactly is your evidence that there was something wrong with
00:23:45.580
this election? And we are going to be caught in the following predicament.
00:23:50.380
No piece of evidence is sufficient to establish that case. And the sum total of all of the
00:23:57.620
evidence contains true things and false things. So it is also no good. So the question is,
00:24:04.800
can you logically deduce that something has gone wrong? I believe you can, easily.
00:24:10.720
Can you prove it? No. And not being able to prove it means that the election will proceed. It will
00:24:18.220
be validated by all of the structures, including the courts. And that means that those who take on
00:24:25.800
the power that derives from these elections will be the result of whatever process we just went
00:24:31.080
through, whether it was an election that happened to be anomalous through organic means or it was
00:24:37.280
the result of some kind of fraud or election rigging. That is not an accident. That is not
00:24:44.640
an accident. And the point that I want to make primarily is the primary evidence against
00:24:52.300
elections that look like this being organic is not actually in the trickle of evidence that we
00:25:00.400
are actually able to see, you know, the, you know, moment by moment vote count that does something
00:25:05.800
strange during the night when some large tranche of ballots is suddenly counted or something like
00:25:11.340
that. The evidence is in the structure of how the elections are actually carried out. These elections
00:25:19.040
are designed to allow fraud that cannot be detected and will not be prosecuted. And that's
00:25:26.720
really the thing that we must focus on. I agree with Brett and would add a here's how I'd frame
00:25:34.480
it. He's 100 percent correct. I'd shave off about 10 percent in framing and then add a little bit
00:25:39.840
of my own and say this. The the conundrum we face that I've been highlighting is that let's say it's
00:25:46.480
the day after the election took place and they can see Nithyrman's crying her eyes out. They can see
00:25:51.860
Spencer Pratt is won by 40,000 votes. They then say there's an estimated million votes still to
00:25:56.300
be counted. At this point, they can say, guys, we need 40,000 votes for Nithya Raman. What they
00:26:02.500
can actually do is more interesting than that. Likely what I think happens is they say, here's
00:26:07.900
the proportion of votes as they came in. We will likely see the same proportion in mail-in votes.
00:26:14.020
So we need to skew the proportions that Nithya overtakes Spencer, which means we need to produce
00:26:19.660
100,000 ballots in which. 10,000 are Spencer Pratt, 60,000 are for Nithya and 30,000 are for
0.68
00:26:28.980
Karen Bass. So it looks like Democrats just win. Now, that may be the case, but I actually think
00:26:36.100
the greater mechanism is just about harvesting before the election in the first place.
00:26:39.920
This may all change with Watson v. RNC. I've been harping about this nonstop,
00:26:44.200
and I think it is going to change. I believe the Democrats are done.
00:26:47.660
You know, I saw Bill Maher said they got it in the bag.
00:26:53.940
Maybe, you know, I'm not a big fan of doing the real time thing because you don't get
00:26:58.160
And the problem with Club Random is they don't like talking politics like it's supposed to
00:27:02.060
But I'd love to get an end of the conversation on this one.
00:27:04.880
If the Supreme Court strikes down mail in voting.
0.90
00:27:11.940
If the argument is Democrats tend to vote by mail just flatly, that's all it is.
00:27:15.980
well, then they'll be curtailed by this. But let me put it this way.
00:27:20.440
Supreme Court can rule narrowly or broadly. A narrow ruling on Watson v. RNC is that
00:27:25.500
midnight election day, you can't count any more votes. That's it. If you didn't count,
00:27:30.800
it's over. Theoretically, what this means is that Spencer Pratt would have taken second place
00:27:34.980
and they would then argue, but we got a million votes. We didn't count the Supreme Court. Oh,
00:27:38.480
it's not fair. Yeah, well, too bad. That's a narrow interpretation. The argument is that
00:27:43.140
Congress prescribes a single day for voting. So you cannot have counting after the fact,
00:27:49.320
but they may rule more broadly and say the mechanism of universal mail-in voting itself
00:27:56.040
creates an extended voting period beyond election day void. All votes must be cast.
00:28:02.580
All belts must be received on election day with limited exception for like military.
00:28:08.560
This would mean Democrats would be hard pressed.
00:28:11.640
This would mean that in order to vote, you got to go to a polling location.
00:28:21.940
Now, the Supreme Court could go even further than this.
00:28:30.140
The 1945 law states there is a single day for the election.
00:28:33.820
And that is, I think, second Tuesday in November or second Thursday or whatever.
00:28:37.920
However, the purpose of this law is that our elections be held on single days for federal
00:28:44.520
elections that is defined in November for primary elections.
00:28:49.100
They must be held in the same accordance as federal elections if they are to have an impact
00:28:56.400
or result in a federal candidate to be elected.
00:29:02.080
If the Supreme Court only rules in the broad sense that you can't do universal mail in
00:29:06.080
voting and you can't count after election day. The Democrats then go, OK, but we can do all of
00:29:13.260
that in a jungle primary. That is ain't no Republican is ever going to get to a general
00:29:18.400
in the first place. And if this is only about the 1945 law, we can have mail in voting for
00:29:24.660
primaries because those are state elections and some of them are private, like the Democratic
00:29:28.200
Party. And then when we remove any Republican from the general, your rules on federal elections
00:29:34.960
do not matter. Hence, the reason why they did the jungle primary in the first place.
00:29:40.440
California does not allow Republicans to run for election in November. They don't.
00:29:45.760
They say we had a prime. We had to hold the primary of every possible party and the top
00:29:50.940
to advance to the general. That way, moving into November, the general election will be
00:29:56.660
two Democrats. Supreme Court says all elections must be held in standard accordance with how
00:30:03.200
federal elections were prescribed. State elections and local elections can be held on any day
00:30:07.940
that the jurisdiction warrants, but they must be held in accordance with the federal law
00:30:14.040
pertaining to elections. That is the way we do a federal election single day. You can do your
00:30:19.600
elections whenever you want, but it must be the same single day. You choose when you choose why,
00:30:24.340
but not the how. And that would be a nuclear bomb. Then, my friends, Democrats truly never
00:30:32.440
win again. So let me wrap it up by saying to Brett, I don't know that we need the argument
00:30:40.080
on proven fraud. I certainly don't bother making it. My argument, you know, this is like, guys,
00:30:45.780
I'm gonna say something to you. Republicans frame everything poorly. Conservatives frame
00:30:50.100
everything poorly. I saw this debate where they were like, you know, who's more responsible for
00:30:54.960
violence left or the right? And the left is citing they're like, look at the ADL. They said
00:30:59.040
this and I'm like, I don't care. The ADL says black ethno-nationalism is left-wing. Well,
00:31:04.560
what's left-wing about identitarianism? It's neither left nor right as far as anything
00:31:09.160
meaningful. And therein lies the problem. I see these conservatives arguing that the right is
00:31:14.600
more violent and say, well, yeah, but not anymore. And I'm like, listen, the framing is wrong.
00:31:21.080
liberal. The left has falsified the framing. Let me put it this way. I don't argue fraud in
00:31:29.520
elections because it is meaningless. It is meaningless. I argue the structure. The question
00:31:35.060
is this. Is it an election if people can turn it ballots after election day with a smiley face
00:31:41.900
instead of a signature? No, it's not. You can call that fair and legal. And either way,
00:31:47.200
a reasonable person that says that's not a real election. So why bother arguing the fraud question
00:31:51.760
because they're going to say prove fraud and you're going to say it's impossible to prove
00:31:54.580
fraud. They're going to say you're a sore loser. In fact, that's literally what they're doing.
0.99
00:31:58.780
Johnson says California election fraud is so bad it can't be proven because conservatives suck at
0.98
00:32:03.840
making arguments. If I was in a press gaggle and they said, do you think the election was stolen?
00:32:08.200
I'd respond with this is important public service announcement. California allows ballots to be
00:32:14.040
dated by hand, not by a postal service, to be delivered seven days, up to seven days after
00:32:19.080
the election took place. And the signature requirement could be a picture of a cartoon
00:32:22.880
character. This is not a joke. This is actually true. Now, do you believe the American people,
00:32:30.940
do you believe it's a real election if people are turning in hand dated ballots up to a week
00:32:38.440
after the election with Mickey Mouse on it? I don't think that's real. Is it fraud? No,
00:32:44.120
because it's codified it's legal in Virginia. I would also argue, however, that is not an election
00:32:49.740
or at the very least, it's some kind of election, but it ain't democracy.
00:32:54.680
Conservatives need to learn how to frame these things. The ADL and Cato Institute saying the
00:32:59.400
right's more violent. Bro, Cato Institute claimed a white supremacist who punched his wife is right
00:33:03.360
wing political violence. It's not meaningful to how I vote. So when we talk about it,
00:33:08.440
it's actually simple. Of the manifestos of either party, which party contributes the most to
00:33:15.000
violence? And it is clearly the Democratic Party. When far leftists go out and fight with cops or
00:33:20.420
riot, Democrat politicians don't come out and cheer on the violence for the most part, sometimes,
00:33:25.720
but they do put out statements or file lawsuits towards the goals of these extremists, notably
00:33:31.140
in Newark. Rioters came out, fought with cops, obstructed ICE. And then Raj Baraka came out,
00:33:37.280
Raj Baraka, came out and said, shut down the ICE facility, using the legal structure to agree with
00:33:43.880
those that are engaged in violence. My favorite, Mayor Tom Wheeler in Portland, who joined the
00:33:47.980
extremists' firebombing a federal building. So come on, is it meaningful to say the right is
00:33:53.440
more violent because a white supremacist punched his wife? The Republican Party denounces white
0.95
00:33:57.720
supremacy. So who are you really voting for? Or I guess in this story, are you voting? I'm going
00:34:04.740
to leave it there, my friend. Smash that like button. Share the show with everyone you've ever
00:34:07.980
met in your life. Thanks for hanging out. We'll see you all in the next segment.