China Stole America? Americans Can Take It Back, ‘Absolutely’

China Stole America? Americans Can Take It Back, ‘Absolutely’

Evidence of fraud in the 2020 elections continues to mount, and Mike Lindell’s latest film Absolutely 9-0 captures in a 26-minute presentation one of the most cogent summaries of the evidence that electronic vote manipulation changed the outcome of the election.  This film focuses rather conclusively on communist China as the engineer of the 2020 election result.

While election fraud deniers continue to spew blanket dismissals of all such evidence with “[whoever is raising the issues] is crazy, just ignore him,” messages, evidence matters.  At some point it is just not enough for deniers to play the mockery card. They must stop opposing genuine investigation, and they must respond in substance to the evidence.

Anyone with reasonable cyber expertise knows about data packets, and understands that a ‘recording’ of data packet flows—or packet capture/’pcaps’— involving US voting machines on and around November 3rd, 2020 could be a ‘smoking gun’ level of proof of election fraud.

Patrick Byrne, no slouch in the understanding of the cyber world, has now examined a five swing-state presentation of data indicating flipped votes tied directly to cyber actions and instructions issued from China to US voting machines, and is not pulling punches.  He has stated publicly:  “I vouch for that data”.  The five swing-state presentation of data indicating flipped votes that Lindell presents in the 26-minute Absolutely 9-0 video, is the data that Byrne is vouching for.

We can’t claim Byrne-level technical expertise to provide a detailed assessment of the substance or ‘smoking-gun’ level of the evidence that has been assembled, and so can only go so far as to say it looks a lot like irrefutable proof.


The cacophony of ‘shoot the messenger’ insults that accompany the mention of Lindell’s name has become so rote as to be boring; but the strength of his message is becoming clearer.  Byrne gets some of the same shoot the messenger treatment, but his libertarian bent, the fact that he openly states that he didn’t vote for Trump, and his acknowledged brilliance in cyber/data analysis, tend to make the insults go flat.

And recent events are moving credibility in their direction.  Specifically, it’s interesting to note that even the typing of the URL to Lindell’s video on a draft Facebook post triggers an automatic warning that Facebook’s infamous “fact-checkers” dispute Lindell’s evidence and that Facebook will therefore suppress traffic to any Facebook page that includes such a URL.

Once upon a time, such a warning from Big Tech would be enough to stop circulation of the offending URL and scare off innocent posters.  But the Wuhan lab leak story once received essentially the same ‘fact-checker’ treatment from Facebook, and millions of FB users (billions?) now know that the suppression of that story was a strong-armed tactic of deceit in favor of a political viewpoint.  The alleged ‘science’ behind suppressing the lab leak story was based at least in part on a letter from 27 ‘scientists’ who denounced the story—a letter now known to have been hastily assembled by Fauci allies (notably, Peter Daszak) determined to block the truth because of a clear conflict of interest against disclosing the truth (or as Dinesh D’Souza calls it, a hoax.)

So how reliable are the FB fact-checkers that want to suppress Lindell’s video on election fraud?  It’s essentially beyond question that they hate Trump, so their ability to look objectively at evidence is already suspect.  But what are they saying are the substantive reasons to doubt the evidence in the video?

Well, it’s obviously true that the ‘white hat’ hacker didn’t want his name and face showing in the public video.  But given that doing so in today’s environment would likely get him and his family death threats and severed pig’s heads on his front porch, who can really blame him?  So long as he eventually signs his name and shares his credentials and detailed findings under oath in court, the blocked-out appearance on the video should not be discrediting.

The summary data packet findings themselves will have to be explained and backed up in greater detail in a court filing, with more than is currently conveyed in the 26-minute video.  But that, too, does not discredit what is presented in the video; it simply justifies demand for back up.  Mr. Byrne says he has seen the backup; he points to “Exhibit 12” in Lindell’s lawsuit against the voting machine manufacturer as ‘the money shot’ containing the data for which he vouches.


The larger reality in 2021 is that Americans are watching their country in the middle of a train wreck—i.e., they are living through a real-time complete collapse of trust in government integrity and in government ‘experts,’ and in a media willing to abandon genuine journalistic investigation and just go with the ruling class story line.

The practical effect of the Wuhan lab leak story is that the burden of proof is shifting within the American body politic—i.e., enough information is out there so that Americans no longer think that the burden of proof lies with the people who believe the virus came from the Wuhan lab; they are now expecting the deniers of the lab leak story to explain, disprove, or discredit the information that supports the lab leak…and its many implications.

Similarly, Americans no longer expect Lindell, Byrne or others who question the election to continue to produce more and more evidence, or to nail down each and every detail for each and every flipped vote in each and every precinct on November 3rd, 2020; they are now expecting those who assert the integrity of the 2020 election results to disprove Lindell’s assembled evidence, along with that of others who question the outcome.

That shift in the burden of proof in the hearts and minds of Americans is a big deal, because it is happening naturally and cannot be stopped via executive order or law.  The American people smell rats, everywhere.  Nobody can make Americans un-smell them.


Lindell’s evidence is also ringing true in the larger context of what is happening in the world.  Communist China has already been shown to be willing to attack America and the world with the Wuhan virus (whether the origin was a lab or a bat—the Chinese follow up actions to spread the virus were intentional).  It is not hard to believe communist China would add election interference to their war on America; in fact, with the motive and means to do it, it is hard to believe they wouldn’t.

The situation in fact meets the standard crime investigation formula:  motive, means and opportunity.  Communist China possess the first two in spades; and the obviously rich opportunity was a US presidential election that could be hacked and controlled.

Perhaps even more accurate—the November 3rd, 2020 election interference ‘crime’ can be analogized to a cyber Pearl Harbor; where China was the lead attacker, and the sabotage of an American presidential election in favor of a candidate and his family who are compromised by China was the intended result.

If Lindell’s summarized video evidence can be backed up as he and Byrne say that it can, and the sovereign, criminal theft of the election by a foreign government is clear, there will be only one honest, righteous response to the crime, and that is to take away the spoils—i.e., to reverse or overturn the 2020 election result. Unprecedented and far-fetched as that may sound, it would be the only just result.

The American people deserve to know the entire truth of the 2020 election, and they want to preserve their country as a place where truth matters and ultimately governs.

So stand by for an ‘interesting’ summer.


Is it possible that everything Lindell and Byrne are talking about is completely but innocently inaccurate, or even itself intentionally fraudulent—simply made up out of whole cloth?  Anything may be possible, but Lindell and Byrne are the unlikeliest of fraudsters, and further and formal investigation will reveal the veracity or lack thereof of all they are claiming.

Lindell has everything to lose—and sometimes appears in fact to be in danger of losing his MyPillow company—by pressing the issue.   He is a Trump supporter, but he came around to supporting Trump very late and only for the most impersonal and non-ideological of reasons—Lindell just started to understand how corrupt and swampy the existing ruling class has been and is, and Trump was the only alternative.  His obvious passion in his videos makes it pretty clear:  he’s not doing this for Trump per se; he’s doing it out of love for America.

Byrne also does not appear to be politically ambitious or otherwise to have anything to gain by pressing the issue.  His libertarian philosophy is clearly the product of much thought, and his apparent lifelong refusal to vote for either a Democrat or Republican for President suggests his motive to expose election fraud really is apolitical—he simply wants to preserve America and its foundational requirement that government reflect the consent of the governed.


Lindell’s evidence—fully backed by Byrne and presumably other cyber experts—will be presented to the Supreme Court if they will take the case, and it will put that court to the test.  Because the case that will be presented isn’t about Trump’s personality, and it will not be about a hodge-podge of garden-variety voter fraud.  It’s ultimately about a real sovereign attack on America that has imposed a radical, freedom-crushing agenda that the American people did not choose, and which may be deadlier (in a different way) to American civilization and culture than were the bombs dropped at Pearl Harbor.

If China–more specifically, the CCP–orchestrated a fraudulent victory installing the China-friendly, Marxist-leaning current US government in opposition to the wishes of the majority of American voters who wanted to continue the resurgence of America and to support America First policies, the CCP truly has stolen America, at least temporarily. And the American people would absolutely be on the right side of history to take it back.

IF the justices’ reverence for their institution is at least equal to their reverence to the nation they serve and for the Constitution they are sworn to uphold, and IF the summary information contained in Lindell’s Absolutely 9-0 is backed up with the detail he and Byrne claim to have, there just might be nine justices who step up and say NO, an obviously fraudulent election result cannot be allowed to stand.