A big H/T to commenter BoxTop, who linked to a fascinating 20 minute interview with retired USAF General Thomas McInerney (see below--from my perspective a riveting listen).
McInerney explains how the election was stolen--but you've heard about that. He also has a theory about what he thinks is going to happen.
McInerny's theory is that the Trump team is going to go straight to the SCOTUS to seek relief. The reason is simple enough: Because the fraud that took place took place on such an enormous scale--essentially nationwide--that it's impossible to challenge the theft and aggregate the evidence state by state. Yet, what happened is so egregious and so unprecedented that there must be action taken. Only the SCOTUS can adequately address this threat to our constitutional order in a timely manner.
Off the top of my head, I think there's merit in this theory. McInerney argues that the judiciary has been corrupted and politicized, repeatedly citing Sullivan's treatment of Michael Flynn and Sidney Powell. The SCOTUS alone must act.
To that line of reasoning I would add the following.
The evidence of a politicized anti-Trump judiciary is readily apparent to the SCOTUS. While the SCOTUS may not openly acknowledge this fact, they will recognize the truth of such an argument.
The fraudulent attacks against Trump--the Russia Hoax, the Mueller Witchhunt, the Fake Impeachment--are now well documented. There are official DoJ and Legislative reports that document these anti-Trump frauds. This evidence can therefore be argued to the SCOTUS.
The nationwide evidence massive "voter" fraud--fraudulent use of absentee ballots, the evidence of impossible turnouts, etc.--provides a snapshot of a coordinated voter fraud effort. These are samples that can be supported by statistical studies.
The origin and nature of the software and hardware that was used across most of the country--it's origin in foreign election manipulation by our Deep State, it's use for that purpose in countries like Venezuela, it's deliberately insecure design, its inclusion of 'features' whose only purpose can be vote manipulation--can also be supported by statistical and data analysis that will argue for a full examination.
The fact that half the country will not accept this national election as fair and legitimate is also a strong argument for unprecedented judicially mandated relief. The national fabric is at risk.
Finally, while the electoral college deadline is less than a month away, Trump's presidential term stretches to January 20. In the event that the SCOTUS should decline to act, the Trump team can continue to dig and publicize the results of their investigation. Would the SCOTUS really dare to decline to act, realizing that the fraud could be exposed to the nation anyway? Their institutional credibility would be on the line. This would be doubly perilous if the Trump does indeed have access to the raw election data from Germany.
McInerney speculates that the SCOTUS may have already been briefed in on these issues. Strangers things have happened. Consider too: Mitch McConnell--not necessarily a Trump fan--has strongly supported Trump's challenge. The fact that McConnell met with AG Bill Barr and THEN met with CIA Director Gina Haspel (there are rumors that those servers in Germany were, in fact, controlled by the CIA) is, in the total context, highly suggestive.
McInerney also speculates--no, he does more; he ASSERTS--that we will learn that high level GOP actors were privy to this conspiracy. He says, yes, we know about the despicable "Lincoln Project" and we can presume high level Dem involvement, but he insists that there will be additional GOPers at a very high level who will be implicated. And he also believes that NSA may have the evidence.
I was earlier skeptical of NSA involvement, but the fact of Biden involvement with Ukraine, Russia, and China and with known foreign intel operatives provides the necessary foreign intel nexus. Again, if or when the SCOTUS is briefed in on this angle, can they decline to act? President Trump, says McInerney, "won in a landslide. And he has the [election] data, and he's going to show it to you."
Before we get to the interview, I'm going to insert my transcription of the last few minutes, which I found quite compelling. It's speculative in parts, and McInerney speaks in a bit of a rambling style, but you'll get the gist. You'll also see why NSA may possess devastating evidence, as well as why Durham may be holding back. First McInerney predicts a concerted effort to try to pressure Trump into conceding, including renewed riots--suggesting that the SecDef was replaced because he didn't understand the Insurrection Act. Then:
We cannot let mob rule and people who have perverted the electoral system through technology win. This will be the last free vote in the United States if this is not cleared up and see why Biden won in such a landslide--and the down (?) votes don't reflect that. So, let's put this together, but the President's got to do something, and I believe he's gonna do it through the Supreme Court because it was so widespread.
Q: What do you think of CIA Director Gina Haspel--stay or go?
Oh, she's gotta go.
Well, because that facility that was raided in Germany was a CIA facility that was moving the data from Scorecard--not from Scorecard--but from Dominion voting booths. That's why they [DoJ?] went in there. I think my conversation--I think, I'm guessing on this--on Steve Bannon on the Monday before, it was around 2 o'clock in the day--alerted to them [the Trump team] that they had to get overseas with the servers, which they [Dominion] had there as a backup. And they turned up, they [the servers] were CIA.
I was trying to think of this. And based on what Sidney said yesterday--that she [Haspel] had to go--the fact is I think they [CIA in Germany] probably called her [Haspel, on election night] and said, 'Look, we're gonna hafta use our backup.' [When they realized the election wouldn't go to Biden without emergency measures.] See, they didn't have a backup in 2016--that's why they lost, that's all I can tell you. Where they were doing all this manipulation. The fact is, I think they diverted it overseas, which then gets into the use of that Executive Order that the President put out in September, 2018. So he has the law on his side.
That's just my guess, but that's why Gina's got to go. Whether she was aware of it or not.
Q: She's got to go.
Yes. And by the way, I was the Air Attache in London. She was the Station Chief, not when I was there, a guy by the name of Cord Meyer was, but the fact is, is on the Russian Hoax the Brits--their GCHQ, GCHQ is the Government Communications Head Quarters, is like our NSA--they participated in laying in the data against President Trump, candidate Trump, about the Russian Hoax and all that. So it would come into CIA, Brennan would move it over to the FBI. That's how they politicized the Intelligence Community.
I believe that all this is gonna be put together, from start to finish, and that will be added evidence, cuz it's the same people doing it. [The evidence from start to finish will be presented to the SCOTUS]
I can't claim to be a seer, but the theory seems to be to have merit--I would even call it compelling. Desperate constitutional times call for extraordinary measures. Now, here is the interview:
UPDATE: Via TGP, Sidney Powell's explanation of the server situation. What she's saying is that she knows that "the government" attempted to seize the servers, but that she's not sure what the result of those efforts was. My take is this. Brian Trascher told us the facts--"the government" got those servers. Powell is playing it more cautiously and saying she's not sure, but if she really thought the bad guys had those servers and had sunk them to the bottom of the Rhine or the Mediterranean she should be running around like her hair was on fire. Instead she seems calm. I think those servers were recovered by the good guys:
Lou Dobbs: There has been great controversy as you know about the reports on a raid on a company SCYTL in Germany which held election data presumably… Can you tell what actually did happen there and what you do know?
Sidney Powell: Well I know that is one of the server centers. There is also one in Barcelona. So it is related to the entire Smartmatic-Dominion operation. We do not know whether the good guys got the servers or whether the bad guys got them. Being on the outside of the government we simply don’t know. I’m hoping it’s the good guys and if they have that then there should be scads of evidence of frankly an international criminal conspiracy of the worst sort.
Lou Dobbs: And the presumption then is that they had the records on those servers of all of the votes that were processed by Dominion or Smartmatic.
Sidney Powell: Yes, the way it works is either the votes can be changed on the ground as they come in. People can watch the votes stream in live. For example there was a Dominion employee, high up, at the Detroit Center on the night of the election. He could have watched the votes come in live and manipulated them in that process. It could have run an automatic algorithm against all the votes which we believe is what happened originally and then the machines had to stop and the count had to stop in multiple places because President Trump’s lead was so great at that point that they had to stop the vote counting and come in and backfill the votes they needed to change the results.
That last paragraph is a bit convoluted, but it sounds very much like McInerney. What I understand is this. Originally on election day Dominion was running an algorithm against the votes coming in, assigning them proportionally or skimming off votes from heavily Trump counties and giving them to Biden--while the Dems in the big cities were also engaging in massive fraud of a more traditional type. But then, later in the evening they realized that Trump's lead was so great that they had to junk the original algorithm and "backfill the votes they needed" to give the result to Biden.
He has posited this for a little while. I heard an an extensive interview with him on the Walter Williams radio show. At the time, extremely a short time ago, I felt it’s more of a Art Bell kind of thing, but I don’t think so anymore.ReplyDelete
So whose going to put all this together and lay it out? Team Trump or the DOJ? It sounds like the DOJ would have a more complete picture with the intel and info at their disposal. It just feels like team trump is the undercard in this fight.ReplyDelete
It could be both. Both the government and the Trump campaign have interests in a fair election and both have relevant evidence. Same as in the Flynn case.Delete
Yeah...about that Flynn case. It was fun to see the picture of Flynn side-by-side with Trump's legal team recently. Shouldn't Sullivan have ruled by now--you know, with dispatch?Delete
Sullivan’s been active on other Trump fronts as of late.Delete
As to the DOJ involvement, isn't there a Voting Rights Act aspect to this election fraud? If the VRA and its amendments were aimed at preventing minorities from having their right to vote impaired then it would seem perfectly reasonable for the FBI and DOJ to investigate and bring VRA actions in these states where the manipulation and falsification of votes was so outrageous as to effectively disenfranchise minority voters, among others. It would also be a delicious irony to have the Trump administration aggressively enforcing black voters' rights in these Democrat cities.
What is the relief SCOTUS can give the Trump campaign? If it was mentioned, I missed it. What is the remedy that addresses this blatant power grab by a democratic party that lusts for power at any cost?ReplyDelete
Rudy hasn't told me yet. Could be recounts/audit. Could be exclusion of classes of votes. Could be full redo. Could be any combination.Delete
The SCOTUS isn't a trial court. Relief or remedy sought will pertain to electoral matters. Any prosecution would be undertaken by DoJ at trial court level, i.e., district.Delete
Declare electors uncertifiable...can't certify a fraud...and throw the election into the House. The Constitution does provide that relief valve.Delete
Very informative and hopeful info presented today. I do find it interesting how a guy like Gen. McInerney is read into these things. Retired in 1994 and 83 years old I must say he would appear to be remarkably well informed. He points out when he is guessing or speculating but does he ever clarify at least in general terms the sources of his information? I am very supportive of his efforts and hope they are well founded. A much needed hopeful day!ReplyDelete
For a while McInerney was Fox’s military analyst. He was outstanding. He got sideways with them over something, as I recall, and poof! Gone!Delete
He dropped some real juicy hints about the Dems being prevented from using Hammer and Scorecard in 2016. Could be they just didn't have it lined up because they didn't think they needed it, but it sure sounds like he was saying someone interceded and prevented it. How would he know, being retired?Delete
What he says quite specifically is they weren't able to use them because they didn't have a backup in place--then adds, 'that's all i can say.' I take that to mean that they weren't technically able to jigger the 2016 numbers out of thin air--they needed a backup to work from.Delete
Well, this isn't good:ReplyDelete
I read that. Hinderaker hasn't been paying full attention.Delete
Full attention to what? Are you asserting he is incorrect in that post? I checked it for myself after I read it because I thought the Ramsland thing was so well done... sure enough, those counties are only in one place.Delete
Look, Mark, speaking as an admirer of the sight, Hinderaker hasn't been paying full attention AND the filing is messed up. In Litigation, credibility is everything and if they got the names of townships from the wrong state, that can be a problem. The MSM is already talking about that problem on Twitter because, of course, it makes their narrative tasks much easier.Delete
Full attention to the amount of evidence that is being presented. It's unreasonable to expect them to present it all at a presser.Delete
I spot-checked a couple and he's right. They're in Minnesota.Delete
It looks like para 11 of his affidavit is sunk if he doesn't revise it. I don't know how much the rest of his argument (vote tabulation exceeding machine capacity) depends on that paragraph.
Hopefully he has been alerted to this and is revising it.
For those worried about Hinderaker’s presentation of his lists, did you see the actual court filing? Did Hinderaker? He seems to be relying on something a commenter sent him.Delete
I also notice that Page 8 of the Affidavit linked in Hinderaker’s article is a duplicate of Page 7, and yet 9 pages total are noted at the top of each. The signature page looks different from the others...
Actually, as I believe Hinderaker's blog acknowledges, the inclusion of data from another state does no harm to the actual argument being presented--in fact, it's an indication of more widespread fraud. Including in MN, which I have suspected and have wondered why nobody has brought that up. Hinderaker also acknowledges that the database from which the information was drawn mistakenly used "MI" rather than "MN" for Minnesota, which makes Ramsland's mistake understandable. The Twitterati may make a deal of it, but in court it'll be different because, as I said, the inclusion of data from other states does not harm the argument.Delete
Beyond that, I thought the title--questioning whether Trump's lawyers "know what they're doing"--was simply unfair and harshly overbroad. In point of fact, Hinderaker walks back that harsh suggestion in his blog, but it remains harsh and unreasonable to run that title. A mistake such as Ramsland made is NOT proof that the lawyers don't know what they're doing.
@ Bebe, see my longer comment--I think Hinderaker was being unfairly overbroad. What he presented in the blog doesn't support the title's suggestion--that Trump's legal team "doesn't know what they're doing."Delete
Texas rejected the Dominion election equipment three times, as I recall. Here is an evaluation of Dominion voting systems and recommendation to not certify from 2019:ReplyDelete
Voting System Examination Dominion Voting Systems Democracy Suite 5.5-A
Prepared for the Secretary of State of Texas
James Sneeringer, Ph.D. Designee of the Attorney General
Apparently so did Canada, it’s home country.Delete
If the house and senate intel committees are compromised, as is the CIA and parts of the FBI then wouldn't SCOTUS be the only check left before armed combat?ReplyDelete
please clarify...Armed combat initiated by which side? Armed combat involving Conservative Civilians vs Antifa/BLM? Just how does ANY SCOTUS decision prevent or "check" violence?Delete
My opinion is that the Liberals will begin trying to stop the economy with multiple targets. POTUS will be forced to declare insurrection...
If you think Roberts is not part of that cabal, you're whistling dixie.Delete
Sadly it isnt either/or proposition. None of us should lose sight of the infamous Transition Integrity Project run by the Dems prior to the election. Under the guise of 'wargaming' (read: rehearsing) a contested election, the Democrats have already played this thing out. There are plenty of articles on it. Suffice to say, They ain't giving up no how no way. Regardless of how Trump is declared to be the winner we are witnessing the Fort Sumter of our times. 159 years later, the Democrats are again aiming to end the Union and divide the nation.Delete
I'm in PA and the PA State House of Reps had scheduled execs from Dominion to testify in a committee hearing today about their systems in PA and last night Dominion cancelled. 14 counties in PA, 1.43mm votes, used their systems.ReplyDelete
Another possible 'tell' that the good guys ended up with the servers was that SoS Pompeo comment about a week ago that Trump would get a second term, as State was reported to have initially been involved in arranging for confiscation of the servers.ReplyDelete
Here is Gen. McInerney on Charlie Kirk’s program:ReplyDelete
“Hammer and Scorecard Explained”
One commenter below the video asserts that Obama used Hammer & Scorecard in Florida in 2012.
I recall General McInerny used to be a regular on Fox so I did a search and found out he was banned from Fox for referring to John McCain as "Songbird McCain" on the air; a reference to McCain while a POW. Don't know if that is true, but it is what turned up on a search. I do know that he disappeared off of Fox a couple years ago or more.ReplyDelete
Another recollection about General McInerny was an interesting speculation he made about what could have happened to the Malaysia Air passenger jet that disappeared from radar several years back - that it was hijacked and landed in Pakistan for use as a terrorist weapon, e.g. 9-11. Seems like parts of the aircraft were later found several months later either in the sea or washed ashore.