Discover more from News from Underground by Mark Crispin Miller
What do Bob Saget, Taylor Hawkins, Hank Aaron, Ray Liotta, Coolio and Queen Elizabeth all have in common? They'll all vote Democratic on Election Day.
Just like the Republicans back in the Nineties (and beyond), the Democrats today CAN'T win elections honestly—because they're pushing an agenda that repels most voters. What, then, must we do?
By way of preface to this post, here’s a video I did a few weeks prior to Election Day, 2016, in hopes of making clear that Donald Trump (whom I did not support—and never will, as he’s still pushing “vaccination”) was well within his rights to warn that that election might be stolen, and that he would not concede if, having “lost,” he had compelling evidence of theft:
(If I were doing a new version of this video today, I would leave out that aside about climate change, which I now see differently.)
News from Underground by Mark Crispin Miller is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
For those who may be wondering where I’m coming from, and what might justify my holding forth about election theft: Starting in 2000, and for the next ten years or so, I was very active in the election integrity (EI) movement, doing all I could, along with some few others, to reform America’s disgraceful voting system. To that end, I wrote Fooled Again: The Case for Real Electoral Reform (Basic Books, 2005), about the theft of the 2004 election, and edited Lose Take All: Election Fraud and the Subversion of Democracy, 2000-2008 (IG Publishing, 2008), a collection of essays by others in the movement. I also lectured far and wide about the problem; gave interviews throughout the media (including an appearance on Bill Moyers’ show); popped up as a talking head in several documentaries; testified in Congress; helped either to get other EI experts published, or to publicize their work; republished Votescam: The Stealing of America (an essential exposé by James M. Collier and Kenneth F. Collier, self-published in 1992) by including it in the Forbidden Bookshelf series; and did whatever else I could, with those few others, to kick-start a national discussion of the urgent need for radical reform (which would actually be quite a simple matter) of our—again—disgraceful voting system, so that the outcome of elections in America might actually reflect the will of the electorate.
I did all that work, moreover, not as a Democrat: I hadn’t voted Democratic since 1992 (and wouldn’t have done that if I’d known better)—and that disinclination only hardened as the years went on, and it became increasingly apparent that the Democrats had just as little interest in reforming our elections as their nominal opponents, even though the Democrats themselves kept illegitimately “losing,” through that “one-two punch” of vote suppression and computerized election fraud.
The Democrats seemed, weirdly, not to care that they were losing, even though they knew they hadn’t really lost. John Kerry made this clear to me in 2005. I met him at a fundraising get-together in Manhattan, which, through someone close to him, I managed to attend so I could hand him a fresh copy of my book on how he’d been “defeated” by Bush/Cheney; and when I opened our exchange by telling him, dramatically, that “you were robbed, senator,” he blew my mind by heatedly agreeing. “I know, I know,” he said, and launched into an agitated riff on “the machines”—how they were rigged, and how his fellow-Democrats were “in denial” about it. When I handed him the book, he seized it gratefully, promising to read it right away (and sent me on my way with a chummy smile and go-get-’em sock on the arm).
I hadn’t been prepared for such a warm reception—which I described a few days later, when my book tour started with an appearance on “Democracy Now!” There I was joined, and challenged, by Mark Hertsgaard (who had just pooh-poohed the book in Mother Jones). If that race had been stolen, Hertsgaard asked rhetorically, why hadn’t Kerry said anything about it? Well, now he had, I answered, and paraphrased what Kerry said to me; Hertsgaard deemed it major news, and the show’s producers blasted out a press release.
Then, a few hours later, Kerry’s office sent out its own press release, asserting loftily that he and I had never had that conversation—even though “Professor Miller” had handed the good senator a copy of his book (implying that I’d scurried off without a word, like a process server).
That experience with Kerry was, unfortunately, typical, and not just for me. I had a long and fruitless chat with Jerry Nadler, and others in the movement tried to get somewhere with Hillary Clinton. (I can’t remember now if anyone reached out to Bernie Sanders, but it too would have been a total waste of time, as we now know from how staunchly he said nothing after either time that Hillary Clinton “beat” him in the race to be his party’s presidential nominee.) In my experience, the only Democrats who ever seemed to care about that issue were Rep. John Conyers (who had me testify before the House Judiciary Committee); Alabama governor Don Siegelman, who went public with the evidence (detailed in Loser Take All) that Karl Rove’s local minions had arranged the seeming failure of his re-election bid in 2002; and Cynthia McKinney, whose pesky voice in Congress was eventually silenced by election fraud (though she still doggedly speaks out about the issue). (After he went public, Siegelman was charged, on very slender grounds, with “bribery,” for which he ended up in federal prison, and spent some ten years fighting to go free, with no help from Obama, Holder, Pelosi or any other leading member of his party.)
Disheartening as they were, all those (seemingly) bizarre rebuffs by Democrats eventually taught me an essential lesson—a lesson amply reconfirmed by how consistently the New York Times, and all the other “liberal media,” kept laughing off all accusations of election theft, along with all supporting evidence, as “conspiracy theory.” (In this they were impossible to tell apart from the Republicans.) By connecting all those dots (and also reading Votescam), I finally came to understand that the results of “our” elections really aren’t determined by the dirty operatives of either party, but are ordained at a much higher level, in furtherance of propaganda narratives to come. That (as Votescam notes, convincingly) would be the CIA—whose dirty operatives have been successfully engaging in “election work” since World War II throughout the world; so why not here as well? (Those interested in such covert “election work” abroad may read about it in the Pike Report—if they can find a copy, since the House immediately classified it once the Pike Committee finished it in 1976. It is available in the UK.)
So much for my, and some few other activists’, quixotic efforts to get We the People focused on the urgent need for free and fair elections—efforts culminating in the video above. After some ten years, with no success, I finally had to give it up, as I was just burned out. But I now feel compelled to get back into it, because, as we approach this next election, and its more-than-likely-illegitimate results—and then God only knows what’s coming after that—we really need to hear some truth that maybe no one wants to hear, because it doesn’t suit the propaganda purposes of either side, but only the establishment (at last) of real electoral democracy in this torn, ravaged country.
Here’s a truth that’s certain to infuriate a lot of people reading this:
The evidence that Biden/Harris really lost in 2020 is at least as copious and solid as the evidence that Bush/Cheney really lost in both 2000 and 2004 (and, beyond those two demonstrably fake “wins,” many other, lesser “victories” natiionwide).
Let’s start with that first clause, which must, of course, enrage most Democrats—including (sadly) most of my old allies in the EI movement, who so hate Trump, and what they feverishly condemn as “the far right,” that they’re apparently incapable of calmly and impartially examining a single claim among the multitude of claims made by the critics of that last election. They somehow take it as their duty to dismiss all such claims out of hand—claims the likes of which they readily, and rightly, studied twenty years ago, pushing (rightly) for some rigorous investigation; while their default position now is that no claim made by The Enemy should ever be investigated, since, you know, Trump’s a Nazi, and he lies.
That stance is fine—indeed, obligatory—if you’re working as a propagandist for the Democratic Party (or whomever runs it), but not appropriate for anyone pretending to disinterested concern about the honesty and fairness of elections in America; yet that rabid stance is all we get from (and I am pained to have to name such former allies as) Greg Palast, Steve Rosenfeld, Jonathan Simon (author of Code Red, the best book out there on computerized election fraud, written back when the perps were all Republicans), and—especially—Brad Friedman (who, like Jonathan, has a first-rate essay in my Lose Take All). The credibility of Brad’s pronouncements on election matters may be gauged by his ferocious one-eyed stands on, say, “Russia-gate,” “January 6,” Critical Race Theory, COVID, climate change and—far worse—those “vaccines,” which he has avidly promoted on his “BradCast,” such as here:
So anyone who wants some truth about the Democrats’ election thievery should stay away from those apologists, and stick to independent journalists like Emerald Robinson, who often posts acutely on that subject (among others) here on Substack, so I urge you to subscribe. (On August 26, she did a first-rate piece about the Bay of Pigs fiasco.)
What prompted Emerald’s piece—and what’s also prompted me to post this piece (and others soon to come)—is (of course) the high likelihood of still more anti-democratic trickery to “re-elect” Joe Biden (or “elect” whomever takes his place, if his fifth “vaccination” does for him what Queen Elizabeth’s three shots finally did for her). Why else would so many Democratic propagandists now be bellowing, projectively, that Trump is (somehow) planning some big steal, next month (or whenever)? That’s the propaganda line that we’re all getting, inescapably, from “our free press” (“TRUMP IS ACTIVELY PLOTTING TO STEAL THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS (AND THE NEXT PRESIDENTIAL ONE),” screams Vanity Fair, based on some fake exposé in Rolling Stone), tireless party animals like Robert Reich (“Republicans Won’t Commit to Honoring Vote Results This Fall. That’s Troubling”) and Hillary Clinton (“Right-wing extremists already have a plan to literally steal the next presidential election—and they're not making a secret of it!” she shrills in a new fundraising video), and, of course, the chorus of pro-Democratic “activists” around Brad Friedman (recently a conduit for “new documentary evidence detailing Donald Trump’s long-premeditated plot to steal the 2020 election,” and blah blah blah blah blah).
Such alarmist screeching is preposterous on its face, when Trump is seven points ahead of Biden (according to the latest poll from Emerson College), and (according to a poll from NBC) 71% of the American people think that the US is headed in “the wrong direction” (a rate of disaffection reconfirmed in several other recent polls). So why exactly would Trump—or DeSantis—have to steal a race, or races, that the Democrats could never win? The only purpose of those warnings is to play the ancient propaganda trick of ascribing to your enemy the very plan you’re making now, so that, when you do it, it won’t be visible to all those whom you’ve hypnotized into believing that you’d never do a horrid thing like that. Only they would ever do that sort of thing; so we must always keep a wary eye on them (and no one else).
Meanwhile, it’s the Democrats who’ve been pushing universal mail-in ballots with no way to verify them (a “COVID measure” that was just made permanent for no good reason), gradual enfranchisement of illegal immigrants (to compensate, eventually, for the defection of key voting blocs historically committed to the Democratic Party), and other means of stealing votes—there now being no other way for Democrats to stay in power, or, rather, to be kept in power, to go on trying to force the globalist agenda on a large and ever-growing majority that clearly does not want it.
And that’s what this is really all about. As with the coup in Dallas nearly sixty years ago, the crucial question isn’t so much how they pulled it off, or plan to pull it off again, but why. In this case, the answer to that question is as simple as it is taboo: Parties (note the plural) give up trying to win elections the old-fashioned way, and turn to (variously) stealing votes instead of earning them, because their program is attractive only to a mad minority. That’s the way it was with the Republicans, from 1992 up through Bush/Cheney’s two “surprising late-night victories”—outright thefts necessitated by the party’s largely Christianist appeal (as also was the case with many other, lesser stolen races nationwide). And that’s the way it is now with the Democrats, whose program is so patently grotesque that even just describing it is painful, while living under it would be impossible.
For it was the Democrats (along with all too many warped Republicans) who pushed for lockdowns, and universal masking—and the necessity of “vaccination,” which they still zealously support (as Trump does), even as the “mandates” have, at long last, started crumbling. Otherwise, the Democratic Party has itself morphed, weirdly, into a “woke” version of the “far right” circa 1960—thundering for war with Russia (even past the point of using nukes), in sanctimonious alliance with the Nazis (!) in Ukraine; fiercely pushing segregation (both of the “unvaccinated,” and, via Critical Race Theory, of African-American college students); screaming for total censorship (and worse) of all who disagree (as the “far right” successfully demanded through the Red Scares in 1919 and the 1950’s); cheering the assault on women’s rights by the commandos of “trans activism,” demanding that biological males be permitted to compete in girls’ and women’s sports, and to be housed in women’s shelters, and women’s prisons (against the wishes of the inmates and the guards); and taking homophobia much farther even than the least forgiving Christianists, whose torturous “conversion therapy,” although certainly traumatic, can be undone by capable psychologists—unlike the permanently ruinous effects of “gender-affirming health care” on the minds and bodies of gay children (and any other children), who, according to the Democrats, should be “free” to start “transitioning” without parental consent (just as they should be “free” to get “vaccinated”). And any parents who object to such denial of their rights, and interference in their families—or who only protest the sexualization of their children’s grade school classes—should, according to these Democrats, be hounded by the FBI, just as the “far right” once thought liberals ought to be.
And there’s still more to say about the Democrats’ authoritarian derangement, and its unpopularity outside the nation’s bluest areas (and, more and more, inside them). Just as they’ve been abject celebrants of all the topdown “COVID measures,” willing to see everybody else pay dearly “to keep Grandma safe,” so are the Democrats intent on seeing the daily lives of most Americans made miserable again—our travel limited, our driving blocked, our meals inedible, our homes ill-lit and cold—to “save the planet” from the scourge of climate change (with no debate allowed about the iffy “science” of that theory). That grim prospect has as much appeal, for most Americans, as giving up their guns, defunding their police, and/or living in the sort of filthy anarchy in which so many Democratic mayors and governors have somehow plunged the places under their control, from Minneapolis, New York City, Portland and Chicago to (it seems) all of California.
Thus it’s the Democrats who—this time (like last time)—need to steal their “victories” at the polls, and, therefore, need also to perpetuate the propaganda myth that the Republicans are “fascists,” “insurrectionists,” “seditious,” “white supremacists,” “treasonously” bent on yet another “coup,” like “January 6”—a clumsy made-for-TV farce strategically misrepresented as an armed attempt by (unarmed) grass-roots Brownshirts to (somehow) “seize the government,” by running up some stairs, pounding on some doors, and hollering in a deserted room. As must be clear to anyone who knows a little history, those acting like the Nazis in that episode (and since) certainly were not the clueless tools and crafty agents making all that futile racket, but the Democrats et al. decrying them as having posed an existential danger to “democracy” and “national security”—exactly as the Nazis used the Reichstag Fire (which they themselves had set) in 1933, to justify dissolving parliament, disbanding all the other parties, and cracking down (forever) on dissent.
And while the DoJ used “January 6” as an excuse to sweep up some 600 of our fellow-citizens, and throw them into federal prison (much as the Nazis did with thousands of their targets throughout Germany), the more enduring consequence—or, for the auteurs of “January 6,” the benefit—of that charade has been a strategic reconception of (what we might call) election heresy. Twenty years ago, those questioning the outcome of American elections were blown off, by “our free press” (and the Republicans), as laughable, like all proponents of “conspiracy theory” (as the CIA weaponized that phrase in 1967). Since “January 6,” however, those questioning the outcome of American elections—or, to be more precise, those questioning the outcome of elections “won” by Democrats—have been reviled, by “our free press,” the US government, the Democrats and most Republicans, as dangerous, their very doubts “seditious,” their evidence “misinformation,” which it’s now practically a capital offense to circulate—exactly as it’s now effectively taboo to contradict the “vaccine” propaganda; and as the truth about those “vaccines” can and does save lives, so must the truth about our many rigged elections save American democracy (or what’s left of it). It is therefore exquisitely perverse that those who tell such (let us call them) anti-Nazi truths should be defamed as Nazis by the “liberal” propagandists who helped start this second Holocaust, and are now struggling to maintain it, along with iron single-party rule.
Thus those who don’t believe that Biden/Harris really won two years ago, and that the Democrats are set to steal as many further races as they can, are called “election deniers”—an epithet that seems as stupid as it is projective, since it is not (of course) the last election (or any race to come) that those heretics “deny,” but its outcome as asserted by the government-and-media, based on the mere say-so of the private companies that run “our” voting system. Although stupid on its face, however, that phrase is, psychologically, a clever stroke, deftly casting any reasonable doubt about which party actually prevailed in some election as a variant of Holocaust denial, so as to make it reprehensible not just to share such doubts, but to believe that those who hold them should be free to voice them, and defend them—a freedom that the far-right “liberals” of today believe in only for themselves; and they will finally get their way, if we don’t reassert our First Amendment rights, and forcefully demand our right to vote (and have it count).
That last imperative has never been an easy one; and it will be impossible, as long as those ostensibly committed to the fight for fair elections are really only shilling for their party. That, as we have seen, is what most of my old allies are now doing—a catastrophic failure on their part, since Biden/Harris’ highly doubtful “victory” created an unprecedented opportunity to make the EI movement big enough to press successfully for changes in our voting system. If, instead of snorting in contempt at every single charge of vote suppression and/or electronic fraud, and every single post-election affidavit (there are hundreds) by aggrieved poll workers (including Democrats), my old allies had resisted their own tribal impulse, and given those “wingnuts” (as Brad Friedman likes to call them) a respectful hearing, we might now finally have a movement big and various enough to call for those great changes that could easily be made, if We the People roared for them: e.g., a ban on electronic voting and vote-counting, and on private companies’ involvement in elections; the exclusive use of paper ballots, hand-counted in the open; automatic voter registration on one’s 18th birthday; making Election Day a federal holiday (and thereby do away with early voting, which enables further fraud); and other simple steps that all sincere believers in electoral democracy would readily support:
And just as my old allies let that opportunity go by, certain that no electronic fraud or vote suppression was committed by the Democrats two years ago, so are the Republicans aroused by Biden/Harris’ unlikely “win” (with Biden pulling even more votes than Obama) no less certain that election theft has always been a Democratic thing—a notion, or delusion, that makes their critiques of 2020, and their warnings of what may be coming next, seem either hypocritical, or as tendentious as my former allies keep asserting. Such blindness, or amnesia, is clear throughout Dinesh D’Souza’s one-note documentary 2,000 Mules, which, while saying not a word about the key role of the computerized machinery in Biden’s “win” two years ago, also features a round-table discussion of how Democrats have always done that sort of thing—a conversation clearly based on no historical research, but only on some GOP talking points.
Likewise, Mollie Hemingway’s Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats Seized Our Elections, though it contains much valid information on what happened in the last election, is so severely warped by partisan hostility as to demand great patience from disinterested readers. For instance, the book starts by bitterly recalling how Bush/Cheney’s two great victories at the polls were nastily, and groundlessly, denied both by the Democrats and “many on the left”—a triple whopper, since Bush/Cheney’s serial election theft (including the Supreme Court’s intervention in 2000) has been copiously documented; the Democrats (as we have seen) were silent on that ripoff (even pressing Al Gore to concede ASAP); and, from 2000 on, almost no one on “the left” would touch that subject with a ten-foot pole. Those of us who tried to get the left on board, either through our writings or by organizing speakers’ panels at the Left Forum and other venues, found ourselves thwarted time and time again, encountering the same resistance faced by those intent on studying JFK/Dallas, 9/11 or any other topic deemed “conspiracy theory” by the CIA.
Whichever side it’s fighting for, such one-eyed agitation isn’t going to get us anywhere, if we’re inclined to get beyond the partisan contention that itself, all too clearly, matters more than anything to both Dinesh D’Souza and Brad Friedman, and all their respective droogs. Inasmuch as they believe that “fair elections” are the ones in which their side came out on top, they really don’t believe in fair elections; any more than those supporting free speech only for themselves believe in that key democratic principle. As we approach this next election, those of us who actually believe in both free speech and the right to vote (and have all our votes duly counted) must consider making common cause with one another, jumping party lines; and not just for the sake of our democracy, but for our survival—which will be at grave risk as long as we continue to divide ourselves into “Republicans” and “Democrats,” or “red” and “blue,” or “left” and “right,” or black and white, while our real enemies continue to destroy us.
News from Underground by Mark Crispin Miller is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.