Is Jonathan Turley maybe the only person in DC who actually wants to find this stuff out? To conclusively prove or disprove just about anything to do with the "election"? To do him justice, Turley recognizes that something is broken and he thinks it should be fixed. Something like government of the people, by the people, and for the people, instead of of, by, and for "a small number of ambitious elite factions and coteries." That alone is at least a bit refreshing, given the amount of twaddle being propagated about our "sacred" capitol and blah, blah, blah.
To restore faith, we must review how mail voting worked, analyze problems like uncounted votes, and conclusively prove or disprove fraud allegations.
I have always hated federal commissions. Federal commissions are Washington’s way of managing scandals. They work like placebos for political fevers, convincing voters that answers and change are on the way. That is why it is so difficult for me to utter these words: We need a federal election commission. Not the one proposed by some Senate Republicans. And not like past placebo commissions. An honest-to-God, no-holds-barred federal commission to look into the 2020 presidential election.
Turley goes through a lot of history about the 1877 commission and commissions in general, which you may find interesting. However, given that Turley openly states that he does not personally believe the election was rigged or stolen, he says some things that reads like a pointed rebuke--specifically to Mitch McConnell's remarkable disingenuous speech last night but also to all the other usual suspect pontificators. He offers three reasons why an election commission is needed, but here's the key paragraph. I'll break it down into specific points, each of which give the lie to the narrative presented by McConnell and other RINOs. Indeed, these points actually call into question Turley's own assertion that the election was neither rigged nor stolen:
- Roughly 40% of [the] electorate have lingering doubts about whether their votes actually matter.
- Most of the cases challenging the election were not decided on the merits.
- Indeed, it seems they haven't even been allowed for discovery.
- Instead, they were largely dismissed on jurisdictional or standing [grounds] or under the “laches” doctrine that they were brought too late.
- Those allegations need to be conclusively proven or disproven in the interests of the country.
This sounds a bit like Turley listened to Tucker Carlson last night. However, as I said, this type of transparency is probably the last thing that anyone in the ruling elite is interested in. The name of the game now is to suppress all dissenting voices--starting with Trump's. To censor even references to election fraud as statements to dangerous--to our rulers--to be spoken in the public square. Our rulers are off to a bad start if they really care about elections as traditionally understood.
UPDATE: Paul Sperry warns against facile optimism /irony:
If u think vote fraud cant get worse, think again. Now that Dems won Senate, theyll pass "HR1" bill to make vote fraud radically easier across the nation rather than just in Dem-controlled counties like Fulton. Dems will also pass the Voting Rts Advancement Act, forcing states to submit to Biden admin AG's approval before making any changes to voting procedures, including ending "no-excuse" absentee voting, removing drop boxes, requiring voter ID & stopping voting beyond Election Day
After the COVID hysteria, we're left with a Rube Goldberg-style voting system that has so many layers & is so complicated, w/ disparate deadlines & methods of voting in different battleground states, that nat'l results are effectively unauditable & unverifiable. To restore trust in the integrity of elections, the voting systems must be streamlined, but who dares reform them when Stacey Abrams & other voting-rights activists will scream "racism!" and "disenfranchisement!"? Can anyone really put the mail-in vote genie back into the bottle?