There Is A Reason Many Stores Throughout This Nation Are Securing Basic Consumables Behind Lock and Chains
It is just a fact and a truism that those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Such cycles are akin to the Elizabeth Kubler Ross theory of grief-death and loss-only in the case of elections and public officials the terms relate or stem more from stupidity, ignorance (lack or absence of knowledge,) buyer’s (voter’s) remorse, regret, reclamation-palpitation.
On a nation state level such predictable and often engineered ignorance is well covered in Barbara Wertheim Tuchman’s famous book The March of Folly: From Troy to Vietnam…
The picture accompanying this article is from “lying Lyndon (LBJ)” and the theft of the 1948 senate race in Texas that set a whole bunch of things in motion that we rue to this day, including the JFK assassination and the Vietnam war.
Who watches the watchers?
For those who doubt or deny this repeating history “thing,” keep an eye on New York City and Virginia as things play out over time, or consult insane goings on in Colorado, or objectively assess how California is doing these days.
We left off with my premise that many states in America can’t be entrusted to carry out elections in light of their deliberate unlawful acts violating federal and state laws and failing to perform even a modicum of due diligence on things like federal and state program funding, elections, matters of law, accountability, and immigration.
My strong belief is that a state that defies or ignores federal or state laws in any area is automatically suspect to implement an election process that has an element of subjective decision-making in the form of image ballot adjudication.
Particularly if that state has a history of not following audit processes to ensure the process can be replicated.
Much like a commander sets the culture of their military unit-where you can often tell just from walking around a unit area what type of culture-example-is being set by leaders.
A leader at any level can set the conditions in motion that undermines any and all measures and procedures intended to safeguard things like elections.
Particularly those actions the public supports and has a reasonable expectation will be followed.
We live in troubling times from this standpoint. When a leader like President Obama ostentatiously makes up lies like he did a number of times, but particularly with the Russia Collusion Hoax effort he made his own and pursued starting on 9 December 2016, touting nonsense about Russian interference in an election-abominable, provable lies that he maintains to present-it makes those lies the official US government position.
Underlings-acolytes-sycophants take action based upon those lies and then maintain that narrative which has lingered to present-some ten years later-proving what an aberrant, deceitful, ethics and morals challenged person he really is-his true colors.
The larger point being it sets in motion that tacit approval for all government officials down the line to adopt a similar laissez faire loose relationship with the truth and their oath of office.
In Colorado elections over the past years, SOS Griswold has been presented with DVS anomalous tabulation problems across the state and she has reportedly consistently just ignored these issues and insisted elections be certified “anyway” at the county level.
In my previous article I walked through how there was basically nothing stopping such a person in a position of power from turning information into blank ballots representing people who had not yet voted: which then become cast ballots.
An observer would be totally unwitting that such a thing has taken place, until the scanned ballot count does not match the cast ballot and adjudication results.
If the adjudication effort is not an actual, observable process, but rather a cloistered, private effort done by an individual instead of a team, there is almost no other way to identify and stop this process short of a true forensic audit, vice the limit audit which is like counting bills at the bank but not being able to identify a counterfeit bill.
I picked one scenario above, but I’m smaht, not like they say.
My schtick would be to have the ballots printed in some cooperative place-although nobody will be the wiser in the final analysis. Say I’m in Arizona and I send my democrat ballots to China to Harris’ place Kim’s Kinkos, and the republican ballots to Korea to Lee’s Staples or Office Depot.
The Democrat ballots are perfect, while the republican ballots have some indiscernible flaw in terms of the tests the tabulation machine verifies for a valid ballot, which might be a box size or a margin or a line or in the shape, size, alignment, etc.
The democrat pile goes through the system like you know what through a goose.
While the republican pile-total mess. Tens of thousands of image ballots flagged into the adjudication pile. Where the adjudicator will work their magic to turn them into cast ballots.
I would prefer to do them in large batches, 5k or more to save time. If the adjudicator has no concern about forensic audits and is one of the aforementioned Obama or Griswold-like ethics challenged government worker or a contractor similarly challenged, it will take mere seconds to designate the voting choice on these ballots.
In this case-since they were scanned in as image ballots-they will not flag as anomalous or present audit problems because there is or should be a one-to-one relationship from scanned ballot to adjudicated cast ballot.
Since my county/state does not allow the audit/counting of paper ballots (most don’t,) the only way this type of fraud would be discovered is if a forensic audit was conducted that looked at the paper ballot, the scanned image ballot, and the adjudicated or cast ballot within a process that was capable of identifying the reason-the error-that flagged the image ballot for adjudication.
If I’m an ethics challenged individual who couldn’t be bothered with all this procedural audit “schtuff,” I’m thinking it’s really too bad our county was not able to maintain that audit possibility, as we don’t keep copies of the scanned ballots, just the final adjudicated copy.
Which should never be allowed as a policy because an image ballot that has been subjectively modified by an adjudicator-and that is somewhat the definition of the adjudicator’s job-to make the call-but it risks an outcome that is not the same as the voter intended when filling out the ballot.
Now it could be, but in elections we want to be double-knot certain at every step of the way (don’t we?)
In the case where the only evidence is the subjectively adjudicated image ballot that has been materially changed, that ballot should be rejected for failing audit and remanded-sent back to the voter-cured-to verify and validate the voter intent.
Yes-that might take time and be problematic-trouble-but just think of all that time we saved using automatic tabulation machines!
And-yes-I know, anybody could stretch to find a crazy scenario to fit some conspiracy theory. Fulton County is not a conspiracy theory, and the election 2020 “certified results” are not theory, or crazy, but are now somewhat useless facts that we should have known about in time to fix the problem. From the piece:
Real Clear Investigations senior reporter Paul Sperry posted on X on Feb. 10, “Georgia election watchdog Garland Favorito of Atlanta-based VoterGA.org just told me that the FBI raid of Fulton County’s ballot warehouse will show that ‘Fulton certified [mostly Biden] votes for which they have no ballots. There are 17,852 certified votes for which they have no digital ballot images and likely no ballots.’ In 2020, Biden’s margin over Trump in Georgia was a narrow 11,779 votes.”
The Fulton County emerging results indicate that ethically challenged election officials adopted the ObamAlinsky rules to do whatever it takes. There are myriad ways with the DVS tabulation process that you could end up with image ballots that lack corresponding paper ballots, much like the use of the CVR mail-in ballots list I walked through above.
Or simply having the Sequel Server database kick out some parameterized names from the CVR that meet a specified criterion. For instance, the top 18K names who have not yet voted and did not vote in the last two (or three) elections.
Create the list of names, add them to the cast voter list with the candidate of choice and viola, dunzie. So what if there are no paper ballots-the risk limit audits are done with the image ballots or with a small sample of the paper ballots. Since there would be no paper ballots for the magically-viola-poof-created image ballots there is no chance that such an anomaly can be detected because those paper ballots don’t exist.
The election crew isn’t too lazy to back-create the paper ballots: it is a mere print action, child’s play. No, they intuitively know that short of a true forensic audit the malfeasance will never be caught. All they have to do is whine to the SOS when push comes to shove on certification that everything worked as it should have, but they are short 18,000 paper ballots (17,852) and they are at wits end to balance the counts.
We can do a complete audit which will take about a week or we can “fudge” the counts to get it to balance (by certifying that 17,852 paper ballots came up “missing” somehow, mystery of life, humma, humma, I do truly attest and certify that I don’t know where they are, signed Ruby….)
The counts might be off, but the SOS will override that minor inconvenience and give the democrats favorite tactic of a direct-but in this case unlawful-order to balance the counts.
And image ballots? Phffft, who is going to be able to check and audit to find that anomaly when we have some nearly 300K votes? Besides, sometimes we have problems and they simply come up missing: yep, thats the story!
I can hear the outcry and righteous indignation from the usual suspects about this topic of observers and the threat of audits.
Recall that in many county election places, people responsible for counting the votes-“voter centrals”-ended up with gas station Sushi smelling results as many shared in common the deliberate blocking, avoiding and preventing observations of the counting processes.
Or suffered strange water leaks that did not turn out to be water leaks, had late and no-notice shift adjustments, changes, venue changes, etc.
That suspiciously also-like in Fulton County-failed to ensure traceability from a scanned ballot to an image ballot to a cast ballot.
What is the problem here-both sides can and should provide observers and monitors. Why would anybody object to helping ensure free, fair, and proper elections?
Unless such steps interfere with cheating: that is the only possible answer.
I personally believe the cheating in recent years has become increasingly sophisticated over time to the point where those stealing elections don’t need voters or even ballots anymore.
So what good is voter identification going to do in a state like Colorado where under my theory nearly one million extra ballots are being mailed out that can then be used to form the basis for inside the tabulation machine shenanigans? I show ID as I vote in person, but the vast majority of Coloradans voted by mail.
Colorado voters through election referendum turned down Ranked Choice Voting (RCV.) We also overwhelmingly mandated that you must be a citizen to vote.
But we also voted against the Colorado government keeping excess taxes collected under the Tax Payer Bill of Rights or TABOR laws. Actually, nearly every year since the democrats took over the levers of power in 2018.
The democrats are so hell-bent on stealing those known and identified excess taxes that you would think it was their money, as we are once again being told that TABOR will be on the upcoming ballot: again.
Meanwhile they are howling and screaming about TABOR and budgets, while scheming new and novel ways to steal our money.
When it comes to spending taxpayer dollars and excess tax revenue, Colorado Democrats will not take no for an answer. Clowns like the Denver Mayor Mike Johnson spent their way to 240M dollars in the hole and then acted like the refund of excess taxpayer dollars under TABOR is a contributing factor to the deficit he ran up. Revenue was XXX, the budget was YYY, they spent ZZZ and want to keep excess taxes collected to fund their malfeasance.
Which is often caused by illegal alien funding, homeless funding and things like needle exchange programs that Denver ran for 3 years before telling taxpayers about the program: oopsie.
Imagine if you purchased something in a store, paid with a $20 bill, and the cashier refused to give you change because the store was struggling to keep the lights on: welcome to Colorado.
Also-and this is a bit more subtle or nuanced-but we technically already have RCV. With over 600K and counting unaffiliated voters who receive both primary ballots, we’ve already seen anomalous outcomes where somebody like Tina Peters in the Secretary of State primary race was polling at 50% or more and yet failed to win the primary.
In a case where the democrat incumbent is on the ballot and a near certain winner, there is nothing stopping those who hate certain politicians-like Peters in Colorado, Ted Cruz in Texas, Sara Palan in Alaska, etc., from squeezing them out in the primary by opting for unaffiliated and then voting republican against them.
It really is a pretty slick idea and methodology to pervert the primary. Now for the election there is only one ballot so that is a different situation, but we should be mindful that those ballots are in the system-the CVR-and in a state where the SOS takes action to keep candidates off the ballot through lawfare, rather than let the election decide a candidates fate, you lose faith in a system where the election officials are trying to make decisions on who the candidates should be, rather than letting the process play out.
This is a crew being entrusted to perform elections within the rules-and oversee subjective adjudications.
Some of these people have proven by their actions they simply can’t be entrusted to run elections fairly.
Who watches the watchers?
Do you have elected officials you would not trust to perform subjective adjudication functions to determine what you intended? Keeping in mind that in the case of our Colorado SOS, she went after Trump with lawfare to remove him from our ballots.
I wouldn’t trust most of these politicians to walk my dog.
Who on behalf of Trump and the republican party is organizing an effort to put observers into each and every problematic state where we know we can’t trust leaders to run a free and fair election? In fact, to counter the pre-election lawfare nonsense that is a democrat tactic and technique often carried out by Marc Elias and his lawfare crew.
Who thought it was a good idea to make image ballots the auditable “coin of the realm?” Vice paper ballots, which is the only true evidence of voter intent.
The problem being that a standard of paper ballot audits of mail-in ballots is like a clue-bus, unpleasant surprise when an awful lot of them don’t present fold evidence or have non-human selection markings: cause mail-in ballots have folds and humans are not machines.
Bueller? Trust but verify.
Max Dribbler
20 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