The Post-election Deception

Still the land of the free…for now

As explained by the U.S. Department of Defense, psychological operations, frequently referred to as PSYOP, are a means of communication used to “convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.”

In other words, PSYOP are used to relay certain information to governments, groups, and/or the public in order to elicit a desired predetermined response.

Although the “Year of the Pandemic” is about to come to a close, there are few, if any, who would be able to claim that they have escaped the PSYOP reach.

Still, while “selected information” was being taken in by a trusting public, other information, particularly that which may have posed a challenge to the prevailing narrative, was being attacked, dismissed, marginalized, suppressed, or even censored altogether.

Of course, use of this approach to manipulate members of a society is more akin to the thought processes and practices of totalitarian regimes than it is to the United States of America.

Countries ruled by autocrats routinely use PSYOP on their own people. The public is looked upon as if it were a military enemy. In these instances, the media, as well as the internet, are held in a vice grip so that a sparse degree of information is actually able to reach the public at large.

The list of players that have engaged in the PSYOP deception is quite long. It includes the establishment media, entrenched politicians, multinational corporations, Big Tech, and the Hollywood Left.

The above described PSYOP model actually appears to have been broadly implemented in the United States over the last ten months or more, with the target group being anyone who happened to be living here.

The manner in which facts surrounding the 2020 presidential election have been treated serves as a prime example.

The conveyors of information have denied the existence of a mountain of evidence that includes irregularities, incongruities, and outright fraud surrounding the election.

There has been a concerted effort to perpetuate two falsehoods: first, the claim that no such evidence of election fraud exists; the second, the repeated mantra that the election is “over” and everyone needs to “move on.”

The first falsehood supports the fallacious premise that the 2020 presidential election was conducted in a legitimate manner. It was not. Even former Attorney General William Barr, among others, admitted that there was fraud.

The second falsehood seeks to sweep the rigged election under the rug. The nation cannot. The Republic ceases to exist without free and fair elections.

At the present, approximately half of the country believes that the election was conducted in an illegitimate manner. These are the folks who are not just distrustful of the way the election was conducted. They are the folks who have lost trust in their government; lost trust in their elected officials; lost trust in the complicit news media; lost trust in the social media; lost trust in the tech companies; and on and on.

No doubt, the use of PSYOP on an unsuspecting public played a major role in the vanquishing of their trust.

However, this type of undermining typically leads to cynicism, which can be unhealthy for an individual and fatal to a society.

One thing is for certain, though. Approximately half of the country has absolutely no trust in the fake would-be president.

On the other hand, they have all the trust in the world for the real one.

A Hollywood Christmas to Forget

Like a lot of you, I look upon 2020 in my life as one of the strangest years on record. Thankfully, the end is in sight.

As convoluted as it has been, there’s a bright spot coming up that never fails to warm the heart. Christmas is near.

In Hollywood, though, it appears that Christmas time is just another opportunity to try and taint a holiday that most folks treasure.

Members of the reflexively left-wing entertainment community are in an unusually buoyant mood about a potential Biden presidency. They’re happy, too, about the media’s coronation of their compromised candidate of choice.

Still, there are things that are putting a wrinkle in their sequenced shorts.

One such thing is a recent decision by Warner Bros. to place new releases on HBO Max and in theaters at the same time.

Another is the lockdown of the once-Golden State’s small businesses, which comes at the hands of some of the most draconian government leaders the nation has ever seen.

There’s no stopping elites in Tinseltown from lobbying officials for more of the preferential treatment they have grown accustomed to, though.

According to a report by the Intercept, veteran Democrat operative Jason Kinney recently lobbied to have his client Netflix be allowed to continue its productions during the latest lockdowns, despite the fact that most small businesses across the state have been shuttered.

Turns out the entire entertainment industry ended up getting preferential treatment, when the state declared television and movie productions “critical infrastructure.” Yes, Hollywood studio filming has been exempted from the lockdown orders that were imposed on so many others.

And you were probably just as stunned as I was by the hypocrisy heard round the world, when California Governor Gavin Newsom was caught violating his own policies. Surrounded by friends of privilege, who simultaneously threw social distancing to the wind, an unmasked Newsom munched on gourmet goodies at the “open for elitists only” French Laundry restaurant.

Ironically, the event was being held to celebrate the birthday of Newsom’s good buddy, the aforementioned Kinney.

Then there is celebrity and fashion merchandiser Kylie Jenner, who reportedly during the lockdown was able to arrange a private shopping spree in Beverly Hills.

Kylie had an unexpected encounter of the radically environmental kind. According to TMZ, she was leaving a Rodeo Drive store that carries attire with non-faux fur lining and was accosted by animal rights protestors. The throng held signs and yelled “shame on you,” “you’re a monster,” and other assorted insults. The enviro fashion police also attempted to block Kylie’s car as she tried to escape.

Moving on to the intersection of politics and Hollywood. Feeling their oats over the biggest election steal in history, Hollywood celebrities are obsessing over the upcoming Georgia Senate runoffs, which will ostensibly conclude on January 5, 2021. The idea that any Republican would have a trace of power left is abhorrent to many in the pampered class.

“The Big Sick”’s Kumail Nanjiani and “One Tree Hill”’s Sophia Bush are among the co-founders of a group called “Win Both Seats,” an organization supporting Democrats who are running for the U.S. Senate in The Peach State.

Actors George Clooney, Will Smith, Leonardo DiCaprio, Mark Ruffalo, and Joaquin Phoenix have shelled out money for the radical Dem candidate, Reverend Raphael Warnock, who faces incumbent Sen. Kelly Loeffler.

Jason Bateman, Mandy Moore, Patricia Arquette, and Bradley Whitford have all funneled cash to ultra-left-wing Dem candidate Jon Ossoff, who takes on incumbent Sen. David Perdue.

Two days after Christmas, actors from the long-running USA Network series “Suits” will be holding a fundraiser. One of the cast members of the show, Patrick J. Adams, announced the event, which is set for December 27. He encouraged fans to help put an end to the “GOP’s chokehold on Congress.”

Meghan Markle is the most high-profile person associated with “Suits.” The Duchess of Sussex once had a supporting role in the series before she mesmerized Prince Harry. Markle is not listed among the participants in the fundraiser.

In an attempt to counter the celebrity stack up and possibly tweak the left a bit, Sen. Loeffler appeared at a runoff rally and concert that featured country music star Travis Tritt. The event was held in Smyrna, Georgia, right outside the Adventure Outdoors guns and sporting goods store.

One more example of Hollywood’s pre-holiday preoccupation. Clooney recently expressed his very own Christmas gift wish, penning an article for Variety in which he calls upon taxpayers to help out Hollywood by forking over some cash.

“We should be giving federal aid to the theaters. The movie industry, Hollywood …, the actor wrote.

How out of touch can you be to suggest a bailout of Hollywood?

The Wayward Seven

To the heartbreak of millions of Americans who were hoping that the Supreme Court would give justice a fighting chance in the current fog of electoral war, seven of the nine members of the High Court simply slunk away last Friday without even lending an ear.

Just about a week ago, shortly before midnight, the state of Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court. In the suit, Texas challenged the election procedures that had taken place in the states of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

The seven members of the High Court, who took the position that Texas and the other co-plaintiff states would not be allowed to have their case heard, committed a fundamental error.

The justices may have been influenced by a slew of legal prognosticators, some of whom had taken to the Democrat dominated media to ridicule the Texas attorney general for having initiated the action in the first place.

Others spread a message that conveyed an overly simplistic analysis, claiming that the process of selecting electors to send to the Electoral College is a matter that is handled by individual states, and therefore if a federal court, in this case the Supreme Court, were to hear it, the court would be intruding on state sovereignty.

The fact of the matter is the U.S. Constitution uniquely prescribes the manner in which presidential elections are to be implemented, and exactly where the authority for such implementation resides.

The authority is granted exclusively to the state legislatures of each respective state. The High Court has referred to this power to select electors as a “plenary” one, i.e., all encompassing.

The statehouses are given an exclusive grant of authority to determine the manner in which the states’ presidential electors are chosen. This is a distinct and explicit constitutional mandate, a federal matter, appropriately decided in the federal court system and, if necessary, the court of last resort, the Supreme Court.

The textual constitutional language in this regard is specific and unambiguous, setting forth a singular authority that precludes state officials, state executives, and even state courts from altering or contradicting statehouses, when it comes to the selection of electors for the purposes of choosing the President of the United States.

The Constitution also specifies that the Supreme Court will have original jurisdiction over “disputes among the states,” meaning that when Texas needs to adjudicate a matter involving a disagreement with another state (or states), the Supreme Court is the only place to go in order to seek resolution or remedies in law or equity.

Texas and its fellow co-plaintiff states were not questioning the election laws of the defendant states, but rather they were claiming that “non-legislative actors,” i.e., governors, secretaries of state, election officials, and state courts, unconstitutionally altered and overrode the election laws that had been duly passed by state legislatures.

The threshold issue that was before the Supreme Court was whether the constitutional prescription for the selection of electors had been violated by non-legislative actors. This was, and will always remain, central to the functioning of our republic, and it is a premise that is vitally important for all of the justices to recognize.

Seven simply did not. These wayward seven failed to allow the case to move forward.

How were their decisions justified?

They avoided hearing the case on the merits, claiming that the prospective plaintiffs in the case lacked “standing.”

Standing is the principle that limits the hearing of cases to those individuals or entities that demonstrate specific harm has been suffered or that a particular legal interest has been detrimentally affected.

The harm in this case is quite obvious — unconstitutional behavior that results in illegal voting in one state damages legitimate voting in other states.

In this case, electors in Texas were canceled out by electors in states where illegitimate votes were produced by unconstitutional processes.

A huge segment of the American population believes that the 2020 presidential election was illegitimate, due to widespread and multifaceted fraud. This huge segment yearns for, and is entitled to, a judicial review of the mounting evidence.

Thus far, no determination with regard to the merits of the case has been made.

Similar, if not identical claims from other plaintiffs, ones that possess a stronger argument on the issue of standing, will arrive at the Supreme Court soon.

The seven members of the High Court get another shot at justice.

Lies, Dem Lies, and Statistics

Think of it as a bank heist, one in which armed robbers crash through the front doors and hightail it to different sections of the building. One approaches a teller and shoves a gun in his face. One sneaks over to the main computer and hacks away. Another goes into the vault and locks it behind him, so he can swap out real hundies with counterfeit ones when no one is looking.

That pretty much sums up what the Democrats did, election-style.

The 2020 presidential election was stolen out from under the American people. And the crooks used a number of means to bring their devious plan to fruition.

Evidence of fraud is there for anyone to see, but the corporate media seem to be engaging in one of three strategies: stating that none exists; ignoring it altogether; or subjecting it to a “fact-checking” process.

The evidence this election-go-round is massive. Additionally, the evidence is credible enough to warrant an overturn of the results in the battleground states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada.

The above statements are accurate, even when the staggering amount of statistical evidence and the mounting data involving Dominion tabulation machines and Smartmatic software are not taken into account.

Contrary to what has been reported, this election did not produce the largest vote tally in American history. Rather, it produced the largest ballot tally in American history.

Shockingly, there were ballots that were deliberately destroyed and others that were intentionally separated from their counterpart envelopes.

Then there were those ballots that were scanned multiple times, “cured” prior to the date they were set to be opened, lost in predominantly Trump precincts, and even received before having been sent out.

While those tasked with the job of observing were prevented from carrying out their viewing responsibilities, others were busy voting multiple times. Even dead people got into the act, evidently casting ballots from the world beyond.

There are now hundreds of affidavits, videos, and statements that set forth various forms of wrongful behavior that took place in the election tabulation process.

Numerous election workers and postal employees have come forward to sign sworn statements under penalty of perjury that they were specifically instructed to backdate otherwise ineligible ballots.

In several states, observers signed sworn statements under penalty of perjury that they were blocked from seeing the vote counting.

Individuals in multiple states have also signed sworn statements under penalty of perjury regarding signatures that failed to match, optical scanners that were set to accept unverified ballots, and voter ID laws that were circumvented.

As America looked on with mouths agape, battleground states announced that the counting had been put to a halt. Then, despite what had been said, in the wee hours of the morning when most people were asleep, dumps of hundreds of thousands of ballots took place, with most producing a disproportionate count for the Democratic presidential candidate.

In a simultaneous occurrence, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia each pretended to stop ballot counting. But secretly they continued to count.

In Georgia, officials put a stop to the election night counting under the guise that the premises had to be cleared out due to a water pipe burst. This turned out to be a lie. A surveillance video shows election workers actually dismissing observers. After all observers had left the premises, four cases of ballots were pulled out from underneath a table, and large piles of ballots began to be tallied.

Sharyl Attikisson, one of the few journalist professionals that still exists, reported that President Trump was leading in Georgia by more than 100,000 votes on election eve. But after 16 vote dumps that took place over a six-hour period, his Democrat opponent was able to take the lead in a “statistically improbable” manner.

President Trump was comfortably in the lead in Wisconsin on election night until a gigantic dump of ballots took place. Five percent of the state’s total, i.e., 170,000 votes, came in all at once. In the blink of an eye, the Democrat contender took a small lead.

Similar statistically impossible numbers of late-arriving ballots came in to other swing states after a fake stoppage of the counting. These also brought in just the right number of votes to give the Democrat challenger a slim lead.

In President Trump’s Georgia lawsuit, allegations document illegal votes from more than 66,000 underage residents, almost 9,000 deceased people, close to 5,000 out-of-state registrants, over 2,600 late-arriving absentee voters, more than 2,500 felons, over 2,400 unregistered voters, and almost 400 people who voted in two states.

In yet another Peach State incredulity, 900 out of 900 military ballots that came in went to the Democrat nominee.

Other glaring swing state improprieties include the following:

–In Michigan, election workers were directed to backdate about 100,000 absentee ballots. Ballots for the Democrat nominee were scanned up to ten times over. And fake birthdates of non-registered voters were manually entered as a means of overriding the system and allowing their votes.

–In Pennsylvania, a subcontractor for the U.S. Postal Service stated that he was towing a trailer with 288,000 ballots (44 pallets) that were being shipped from New York to Pennsylvania. After the subcontractor had completed his delivery, the trailer mysteriously disappeared from its parked location. Additionally, more than 100,000 absentee ballots were returned a day after they were mailed out, on the day they were mailed out, or on the day prior to the day they were mailed out.

–In Wisconsin, officials improperly fixed more than 238,000 ballots that had no voter certification or witness address. A subcontractor for the U.S. Postal Service stated that he was told the postal service planned to backdate tens of thousands of ballots.

–In Nevada, 40,000 people voted twice, and more than 8,000 voters did not meet legal residency requirements.

–In Arizona, 1.9 million mail-in signatures were not properly verified, and election workers were instructed to allow unregistered voters to vote.

When it comes to the courts, the Trump legal team has one of the lowest burdens of proof that exists in the law.

Unlike in a criminal case, the evidence in civil lawsuits such as these does not need to convince the court “beyond a reasonable doubt” that there were election improprieties. Rather, a “preponderance of the evidence” will suffice as proof.

This evidentiary level is sometimes described as that sufficient to show it was “more likely than not” that the fraud had taken place.

Will the courts and/or the state legislatures make the right decisions to have justice prevail?

America prays that they do.

Eric Clapton Targeted by Outrage Mob for Anti-lockdown Song

Legendary recording artist Eric Clapton is a bona fide member of music royalty.

He just happens to be a three-time inductee to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, and over the course of his career he has been the recipient of 18 Grammy Awards.

Something a lot of folks may not know is that Clapton was a member of a number of awe-inspiring rock and blues ensembles, including The Yardbirds, Cream, John Mayall & the Bluesbreakers, Blind Faith, Delaney & Bonnie and Friends, and Derek and the Dominos.

One particular endeavor of Clapton that holds personal significance for me is his nurturing and archiving of America’s musical treasure, The Blues.

His style of playing and choice of material reflects his own influences: famed artists Muddy Waters, B.B. King, Freddie King, Albert King, and Buddy Guy, among others.

Clapton collaborated on an album with B.B. King and released CDs that featured the work of Delta Blues master Robert Johnson.

After a long and illustrious career, Clapton is now having to endure the unimaginable—an onslaught of digital venom from the cancel culture.

The outrage mob that lurks in the shadows of social media slander circles currently has its sights set on destroying a heretofore sterling career and reputation of the iconic singer, songwriter, record producer, and guitarist.

What did Clapton do to deserve the onslaught of Internet hate?

He and fellow musical artist Van Morrison recently announced that the two of them would be releasing a protest song that related to government lockdowns, which have been imposed on people around the globe, all in the name of public health.

The tune is titled “Stand and Deliver.” Morrison, who wrote the song, is a musical legend in his own right, having been the front man for the seminal rock group, Them. He also skyrocketed to stardom as a solo artist with a distinctive soul brand all his own.

In a statement to Variety, Clapton characterized the lack of live music due to lockdowns as “deeply upsetting.”

“There are many of us who support Van and his endeavors to save live music; he is an inspiration,” Clapton said. “We must stand up and be counted because we need to find a way out of this mess.”

Morrison praised Clapton for having participated in the tune, saying, “Eric’s recording is fantastic and will clearly resonate with the many who share our frustrations.”

In addition to “Stand and Deliver,” Morrison is set this week to release three other protest-themed songs: “No More Lockdown,” “As I Walked Out,” and “Born to Be Free.”

The songs portray the coronavirus lockdowns as “fascist” and also hit Hollywood celebs for “telling us what we’re supposed to feel.”

Proceeds from the recordings go to Morrison’s initiative for musicians who are struggling as a fallout of the lockdowns.

Using music as a protest vehicle is a time honored tradition that dates back to the singer-songwriters of the 1960s. However, in today’s left-of-center’s warped selective embrace of censorship, musical expressions that contradict the agenda of the elitist class must be stricken from the public square.

As a result of the recording of the song and the public announcement of its release, Clapton has suffered a barrage of social media vitriol, including a sizable amount from members of the outrage mob, who dragged out statements of Clapton from more than 40 years ago.

This was an unfortunate time for the musical artist, a period in his life when he was in addiction’s dreadful grip. His remarks, which were made back in 1976, were featured on the Twitter account of singer-songwriter Deren Ney, who wrote that “all of [Clapton’s] racism wouldn’t fit in one screenshot.”

A band called The Mountain Goats, which had released a song about the pandemic, attacked both Clapton and Morrison in a tweet, and threw a number of expletives in for supposed effect. Numerous other tweets were posted on the web, accusing Clapton of being a racist.

The Vulture website joined in with the digital assault, and also threw in some politics in its citing of the “climb in COVID-19 cases.”

In another politicized piece, The Los Angeles Times noted that “Twitter is not amused” by Clapton’s taking a position against lockdowns in song. The publication then wagged its accusatory racist finger.

Despite failed models, questionable data, and nonsensical demands from government, millions of protesters have taken to the streets in the U.S., European countries, and international communities.

It could be that the politicization of the coronavirus has reached its zenith, thanks in part to Clapton and Morrison.

Music has that magical effect. It can reach into our souls and drown out all the unwelcome noise.

Dark Night of the Soul for America

The phrase “The Dark Night of the Soul” originally came from 16th century Spanish poet and mystic St. John of the Cross.

These words capture and convey the spiritual experience that a soul undergoes as it strives to reach union with the Almighty, despite temporal discouragements.

The now-popularized expression has been referenced over the years by a diverse array of authors and artists, including poet T.S. Eliot, writer F. Scott Fitzgerald, and singer-songwriter Van Morrison.

There is an additional application of the phrase that has been adopted by the entertainment industry.

In his best-selling book, titled “Save the Cat,” author Blake Snyder divides the pacing of storytelling into structural components that take place over time. Snyder even pinpoints the specific page of a film script at which the appropriate dark night moment should take form.

The cinematic moment should materialize at the end of the second act of a story, the point of desperation at which the protagonist is in a hopeless situation and all appears to be lost.

I contend that at this present moment in time—those of us who have held fast to our founding documents, to the virtues and ideals that are embodied therein, and to the knowledge that we are entrusted with the responsibility to preserve for our families, friends, and loved ones the treasure we have been given in our beloved America—we are at the end of the second act of one of the most intense dramas our country has ever endured, and the stakes are monumental.

In the scenes that preceded this critical point, powerful interests worked in unison to engage in a wide variety of illicit activities, both in the lead-up to Election Day and in the days that would follow.

The chairman and CEO of a Big Tech company donated hundreds of millions of dollars to a non-profit organization, which represented that the money was intended to assist with the voter turnout effort.

However, activities of the entity appear to have favored the encouragement of the voter turnout of one party in particular, the Democratic Party. This entity appears to have also encroached upon the constitutional powers of state lawmakers, and may have used money to manipulate certain aspects of state elections, including the counting of ballots.

Additionally, some state officials appear to have changed ballot security rules on their own, discarding the notion that the power to do so is in the specific purview of state legislatures.

When it came to the content that was published and/or distributed in the lead-up to the election, Big Media and Big Tech at times distorted and at other times lied outright. Highly relevant news stories were never investigated, were completely ignored, or were censored altogether.

The polling industry, too, disgraced itself with exaggerated polls that were specifically designed to suppress voter participation of those with opposing ideas.

In essence, half the population is now being told to reject what they have seen with their own eyes, heard with their own ears, and know in their own hearts; that on election night, the vote counting of several states was halted, with no explanation given. When it once again commenced, suddenly there were massive quantities of votes that came in for the Democratic presidential candidate.

In congressional, state, and local races, voters turned away from Democratic candidates, yet they still managed to vote for the Democratic candidate for president.

In record numbers, African-Americans chose the Republican candidate. Nevertheless, the Democratic presidential candidate somehow received 11 million more votes than former President Barack Obama did in 2008.

Then there were observers who were not allowed to watch mail-in ballots being opened and counted. There were those who were dead but who came back to life to vote. And there were those who were outside their various jurisdictions but who were allowed to cast ballots anyway.

While feebly calling for unity, the Democratic candidate also established a sham entity that his campaign called “the office of president-elect.” And the same people who spread false information about Russia-gate and Ukraine-gate are now urging folks to move on, claiming that there is nothing to investigate and that the American people should graciously accept their candidate of choice.

That all of this might make the almost 74 million voters and supporters of President Donald Trump feel less than hopeful is an understatement.

But my admonition is simple. This is not the time to give up or even grow weak. Rather, it is the time to take heart.

In the “Save the Cat” pacing of storytelling, “The Dark Night of the Soul” leads to a conclusion that makes for an epic saga. What follows the lowest of low points is an unexpected breakthrough that enables the protagonist to overcome seemingly impossible odds and secure victory.

I like to think of it as “The Bright Light of the Spirit.”

The Ultimate Remedy for Countering Presidential Election Fraud

“Confirm thy soul…”
Proceeds to Tunnel to Towers Foundation
Available on iTunes, Google Play, and Amazon

Despite repetitive denials emanating from a multitude of Democrat and media sources, it is clear that there has been unprecedented and widespread voter fraud as it relates to the all-important 2020 presidential election.

Although several lawsuits have been filed and are in the process of being adjudicated, the ultimate antidote for the toxin that has infected our electoral system does not rest in a state or federal judiciary. Instead it rests in the state legislature.

Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution contains clear and precise language. It spells out the following:

“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.”

One key constitutional text in this passage is “…in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.”

This wording grants enormous discretionary power to state lawmakers. It specifies that the members of the state legislatures are the ones responsible for making the final decision regarding the persons who will become the appointed members of the electoral college for the respective states.

Not the governor, not election officials, not even the courts, but only members of the state legislatures are to perform this function.

The founders of our nation placed the power to resolve unprecedented problems in a presidential election (much like the ones we now face) in the statehouses.

Of course, the judiciary has its role, as has been exhibited in local races, and most notably in the 2000 presidential election, when the Supreme Court intervened in Bush v. Gore.However, the Constitution explicitly places the duty and capacity to determine the makeup of the Electoral College in the hands of the members of the legislatures of the respective states.

Interestingly, in Bush v. Gore the Supreme Court made reference to this unique constitutional role possessed by state legislatures, when the Court underscored the ability of state legislatures to “take back the power to appoint electors.”

When the reported results of an election are clouded with suspicion and tainted by credible evidence that fraud has occurred, the Constitution points to the state legislature, and its duty to take action. The body is charged to use its constitutional powers to rectify the sullied election results, i.e., to fix things, when necessary.

At the present time, the GOP is in control of both legislative chambers of the currently contested battleground states: Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, and Georgia.

As evidence continues to mount, indicating that numerous forms of malfeasance took place prior to and during the tabulation of ballots, the state legislators are the bodies empowered to perform a solemn constitutional duty. As part of this duty, the bodies are positioned to cleanse the results of fraud.

At the same time, statehouses are empowered to mitigate and/or eliminate the disenfranchisement of legitimate voters, which may have occurred if and when illegitimate ballots were improperly counted.

Notwithstanding any determination by the judiciary (which includes the Supreme Court), a Republican legislature of a state that has experienced issues relating to fraud has the authority to select a slate of delegates to the Electoral College; a slate that is committed to vote for President Donald Trump.

It is in this way that the electoral vote count can essentially be purged of illicit ballots.

Presentations of evidence of fraud and irregularities could presumably be submitted to the legislatures of the states to prove that the elections in the respective states were corrupted.

Decisions of the state legislatures to cleanse the vote counts of illicit ballots and appoint appropriate electors would survive any and all legal challenges, because the explicit text of the Constitution is so compelling.

Dick Morris, who served as an advisor to former President Bill Clinton, told Newsmax TV host Grant Stinchfield, “We have to move the fight from the executive branch of the states to the legislative branch of the states. The U.S. Constitution does not say that the states shall decide the procedure for electoral votes. They [words of the Constitution] say the legislature should decide. Not the governors, the legislature.”

Morris specifically referred to “the evidence of missing votes, suddenly discovered votes, unexplained delays, not granting access to poll watchers,” items that indicate “corruption of this process.”

In a recent appearance on Fox News, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis urged legislators to use their constitutional abilities.

Gov. DeSantis pointed out that the Constitution requires electors to be chosen by legislators that determine the procedural framework for that process. The governor also indicated that if the law is being ignored, then the legislature “can provide remedies as well.”

The Constitution sets the first Monday after the second Wednesday of December as a deadline for the state legislatures to act. This year the date falls on December 14.

The Constitution also provides that, if for some reason the Electoral College is unable to elect a president by December 14, the U.S. House of Representatives is the governmental body responsible for determining who will be the next president and vice president; this according to the 12th Amendment.

In this situation, the manner in which the vote is to be taken is uniquely mandated. Individual members of the House do not cast votes as individuals. Rather, votes would be taken by state delegations, making it effectively one vote per state.

As it currently stands with the present makeup of the House, the majority of delegations are in the hands of the GOP. If such a vote were to take place, it is highly likely that it would result in a win for the Republican presidential candidate.

President Trump’s supporters need to keep the faith—in the Constitution, in the Truth, and in him.