Cheaters Gonna Cheat, RINOS Gonna Whine: But Who Will Step Up To Stop The Cheating?
Being Army, I’m a big advocate of the bottom line up front (BLUF) principle. Which-despite fervently believing in it as a general rule-I offered up in many articles that with age comes verbosity, the drip (Dribbler) lip, the “everything reminds me of a story” syndrome, grandpa tendency that may be a sign of age, senility, call it what you will.
I’ve seen myself on TV in commercials being “helpful” in situations where it is not welcome…My wife loves that about me in public…We are both at that stage and age where if a thought comes into your head, it must be expressed, else it drift away like fog in the noon day sun…
There is one BLUF to tout and also a remedy. The BLUF is there is stronger than reasonable doubt that many state officials across this nation can be entrusted to conduct elections in accordance with federal or even state laws and requirements and they therefore must be monitored to verify and ensure-compel-compliance with election laws.
It is a sad commentary on society in general that it has come down to this…
In an America where federal and state level elected officials across our nation blithely pick and choose which laws and regulations they implement and follow, often violating with blatant disregard standing laws intended to protect American citizens and the expenditure of tax dollars, through actions like declarations of sanctuary policy, or winky, winky implementation of benefit certifications, which are frequently done with seeming contempt for established legal precedents, deliberate action must be taken at the federal level to safeguard elections.
The BLUF leads to the remedy. Throughout America in states-counties-cities known to disregard federal laws in general such as immigration law and the like mentioned above, the federal government-in collaboration with state governments-must undertake steps to monitor the conduct of elections and to enforce best practice documentation procedures.
And to provide oversight-observations of elections-with the veiled or looming threat of state and federal forensic audits conducted by an independent, appointed, official, DHS, DOJ or FBI manned forensics team when anomalies arise.
It is the only way American voters can be sure that their votes truly count in an election.
There is a need to treat state and county election-central venues as if they were banks or babies in ICU or other secure areas like potential crime scenes under 24×7, day-night (all weather) monitoring that can at a moment’s notice be secured like crime scenes to preserve evidence and to sequester witnesses.
And-yes-it has come down to this. And-no-this is not over the top, knee jerk, hysterical or radical thought.
As I often hear from one of my favorite video characters, “I said what I said.” It is a sad but true fact that many of our biggest cities, counties and states in America are being led by elected officials who thumb their nose at federal and even their own state laws and therefore have volunteered to be observed and monitored to ensure they abide by the law. In this case, federal and state election laws.
To be clear, states run elections. States also have the resources-criminal investigation bureaus, law enforcement, attorneys general, etc., to investigate and fix things that are broken. Also clear is the fact that many of these elected officials have proven that they can’t be entrusted with the responsibility to conduct true and fair elections.
In many states the officials responsible for the fair, efficient and legal conduct of elections have undertaken efforts to disenfranchise voters by eliminating qualified candidates from elections-for instance, Donald J. Trump and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to name a few recent ones.
Hell, in many counties the election staff does not follow their own procedures and fail to maintain records necessary to perform their ultimate job of certifying the counts-the election-which is their sole taxpayer funded job and obligation and mission in life.
Which is a different circumstance than anomalies that occur because of the “ghost within the machine.”
In many of these instances state officials like the Secretary of State (SOS)-documented by witnesses, actions, emails and affiants-in Colorado, Georgia, Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, etc., overrode the inability of responsible election officials to complete their due diligence by declaring they must certify in accordance with a timeline, rather than as a result that is the outcome of following procedures.
In many of the states who have shown blatant disregard in recent years for the election process and procedures that borders on, if not plunges into criminal behavior, they have waved it in our faces-paraded their behavior in plain sight in front of us with veritable immunity from consequences.
Even when such behavior led to-in the final analysis-an inability to conduct elections in accordance with state and federal laws that include due diligence and the principle of doing the right thing.
These failures did not result in leaders of such states stepping in to fix problems-to do the right thing-to righteously guard their constituents votes and honor the process and do the right thing.
In just about each and every case the public took the kick in the pants without a whimper, with the LSMBTGA backing up the civil violations with fanfare and donkey dung cover ups and hide the sausage tactics that covered for these criminals and the results they engineered.
What was not so difficult to find or understand, even at the time-election malfeasance-whether deliberate criminal behavior, or inadvertent through incompetence, ignorance (of process or lack of expertise on the tabulation machine) or just good ole plain stupidity borne of inbred political shenanigans-with each passing year more and more has been revealed about the nonsense and criminal behavior and scheming that happened during past elections but especially the 2020 election.
Each year-as the truth has trickled out like molasses on a frosty winter morn-it becomes more apparent and blatant that President Trump was cheated out of a second term. While the democrat apparatchiks in many blue states have been exposed in their successful efforts in which they conspired to cheat-commit election fraud-to elect one of the worst presidents in US history.
While the hate Trump LSMBTGA papered it over and helped cover it up. And the do-nothing RINO Trump haters and generally passive-aggressive political class did and said virtually nothing, taking a back seat, hiding from the spotlight, and refusing to mobilize for a noble cause that is called doing the right thing for fear of slings and arrows and political expediency.
If you are thinking this is only about Trump-get real-many of us are suffering in states like Colorado where the “blue democracy monster” somehow reared its insane head through questionable elections and has committed to crazy town policy on citizens.
We welcome the latest recipient and member of that club, Virginia.
Many of these states have taken suspicious steps and passed laws that hamstring election integrity measures that reek of the Saul Alinsky Rules For Radicals counter version to the Carter-Baker Commission report description of worst practices for the running of elections. Including lack of voter identification, extensive or total use of mail-in ballots, failure to document election processes in order to conduct proper audits, etc. From the report:
In response to these concerns, former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James A. Baker, III, agreed to co-chair a bipartisan commission, housed at Washington D.C.’s American University, to examine these and other outstanding election reform issues. The final report, titled “Building Confidence in U.S. Elections,” stressed the important role of elections in the nation’s democracy and made a series of
recommendations, including:
- A national system to connect state and local voter registration lists
- Voter identification based on a universally available REAL ID card
- Policies to improve voter access for all communities, as well as innovations like vote centers and voter information lookup sites
- Stronger efforts to combat fraud, especially in absentee voting
- Auditable paper backups for all voting technology
This was as true 21 years ago as it is today and will be tomorrow.
Many states don’t allow the counting of paper ballots anymore, which is the sole-only-evidence of voter intent. While the preferred evidence has become the scanned image ballot, which can be manipulated and is changed if rejected and forwarded for adjudication by the adjudicator: who will then be the sole arbiter of voter intent.
Most of the states that were unable to certify elections without manipulation did not maintain audit trace from a scanned paper ballot to a rejected-adjudicated ballot-to adjudicator subjective decision on voter intent.
The paper ballot therefore is truly the blinding flash of the obvious only true representation of the voter’s intent.
While the tabulation machine scan of the paper ballot is an image copy-and not necessarily a true copy-as images can be manipulated and changed and modified to reflect the subjective judgement of an adjudicator who is anointed in those circumstances where the scanned ballot passed into the adjudication file for whatever reason, to then determine what that voter intended.
While feeling no compunction-in too many counties-to follow procedures to ensure that those subjective actions comply with state and federal law.
The evidence in such a case consists of the paper ballot, the image ballot, and-in cases where a rejection and adjudication took place-the adjudicated or cast ballot image.
Proper accountability demands an auditable trace of each of these steps, as well as the final result reflecting what is in effect-and actuality-three ballots: a paper ballot, a scanned image ballot, and a cast ballot (that can be traced through scanning and adjudication.)
We have to be sober and real about the capability of modern tabulation systems like the DVS to be used and abused in the wrong hands.
You may be bobbing along in happy place river thinking this makes total sense. If a ballot is not filled out properly then the system must have the capability to identify the problem and initiate action-implement the process-necessary to resolve the issue.
You are likely thinking the voter intention is somehow not clear, or there are confusing stray marks, or maybe the voter checked two boxes, or whatever.
In tribute to my favorite movie saying, the capability of the modern tabulation system is arson-like. As Mickey Rourke observed in Body Heat, “Counselor, don’t do arson. If you are a genius, you can think of 100 ways things can go wrong. There are actually a thousand: and you ain’t no genius.”
The tabulation process ingests and scans a paper election ballot to produce an image ballot which is then (a) error checked and validated as a cast ballot or (b) fails error check and is rejected for whatever reason and forwarded to the adjudication file (c) to be subjectively decisioned by the adjudicator to determine voter intent.
Keep in mind that with the scale of modern elections and the power of tabulation machines, a scanned paper ballot that becomes an image ballot processed by the system will likely not be seen by a human unless rejected into adjudication. The error check step upon scanning can fail or flag for myriad reasons, many of which may have nothing to do with the voter selection marks.
There might not even be an actual ballot involved. Such as the case where the SOS has been sending out vote reminders throughout the election window, decrementing the Consolidated/Central Vote Register (CVR) as mail-in ballots come in, eventually ending up with a list of those who have not voted yet.
Within the software of the tabulation system, it is child’s play to turn those CVR vote mail reminders into candidate ballot placeholders in the adjudication file, “just in case those voters vote late,”-I guess-so we would be ready with their ballots staged.
These image ballots would be blank (no candidate selections) and would fail error check-had that occurred, although since these were electronically created within the tabulation system there are no paper ballots-nothing was scanned-and these would not show up in the scanned or submitted ballot totals.
The ballots technically upon creation in software space went straight into the adjudication file where all should be discarded as none of them contains candidate selections (right?)
Many don’t believe such actions are possible or credible. But many aren’t aware that these tabulation systems have a modeling and simulation capability to train staff. Most of that training takes place in virtual space.
Max Dribbler
19 February 2026
LSMBTGA: Lamestream media echo chamber (LMEC-L) social media (SM) big tech tyrants (BT,) government (G) and academia (A)
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Substack: American Free News Network Substack
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA