Help America and Joe Biden: Investigate

Help America and Joe Biden: Investigate

Shut up!, he explained” has never been a constructive answer to anyone, whether to the 3-year-old asking about 3-year-old things, or the adult asking questions that relate to the future of the free world.

Character assassination of those asking questions is also by definition not an answer at all, much less a constructive one.

And when the government and complicit social media platforms marshal all of their power to insist that no questions shall even be asked, no discussion may occur, well, then you’re into totalitarian tyranny, and the future of the free world has been decided, and it is over.

Questions persist among millions of Americans about the integrity of the 2020 election, and so far only the three approaches described above have been employed to address them.  As should be expected, they are having no success in assuaging doubts and concerns about the integrity of the 2020 election, and Biden’s inauguration won’t change that fact.

Shut up, character assassination and totalitarian thought and communication-control are exacerbating concerns and stoking fear and anger throughout America.  America is suffering as a result and Joe Biden’s presidency will be suffering from it.

There is a way out.

There is simple logic that calls for a formal investigation of these questions to get to real answers, particularly as they relate to questions regarding the electronic manipulation of voting machines.

Let’s be clear at the outset that car manufacturers are not responsible for the speeding violations of those who drive them.  The fact that the car’s speedometer covers a range up to and often above 100 mph does not mean the carmaker caused speeding.  The driver is the responsible party.

Similarly, makers of voting machines are not responsible for those who hack them.  They may or may not be legally responsible for design or operational flaws that allowed hacking to take place—almost anything man-made is man-hackable—but they are not responsible for the hacking.  The hackers are.

So calling for an investigation of possible electronic manipulation of voting machines is not and should not necessarily be viewed as an indictment of voting machine manufacturers.  It is a determination to get to the truth.  Truth has no agenda; it’s just the truth.

The logic that calls for a formal investigation centers around these core questions:

  1. Is it the conclusion of federal law enforcement that electronic voting machines cannot be penetrated by hackers via the internet?
  2. Or is it that they could be penetrated but weren’t?
  3. Or is it that they could be penetrated and were penetrated but nothing happened?
  4. Or is it that they could be penetrated and were penetrated and some votes were switched but not enough to make a difference?


There is no statement from federal law enforcement to date that suggests that any electronic voting machines were impounded and forensically analyzed by the feds.   By force of logic, that means the only answer or conclusion that federal law enforcement can endorse as of now is #1 above:  the machines cannot be penetrated.  Every other question can only be answered after investigation.


Yet as to question #1, in his live appearance at the Georgia state Senate hearings in the lead up to the January 5 Senate runoff election,  Jovan Pulitzer testified that hackers on his team had in real time penetrated via the internet the voting machines being used in Georgia.  Character assassination of Pulitzer is irrelevant; his testimony was either true or false.  An investigation should determine at minimum whether what he said was true or false. Similar investigation should take place of other credible claims that election machines were hacked.


But more broadly, if the current law enforcement answer to #1 is no longer viable—i.e., forensic evidence proves the machines can be penetrated online—questions 2, 3, and 4 simply can’t be answered without formal investigation.


A formal investigation ought to be welcomed and even encouraged by the Biden administration.  If in fact he was the most popular Presidential candidate in American history, there is not only nothing to fear from an investigation of the machines—there is a tremendous amount of credibility to be added to his presidency if the result of real investigation by qualified people with no political agenda fills out a good answer to the core questions.


Political strategists on both sides would claim that no such investigation would ever be authorized under a Biden administration. Cynics would laugh at the assumption that America’s federal government as presently constituted is capable of a no-agenda investigation.


Call on the government to act above political maneuvering. Prove the cynics wrong.  Demand an investigation. Restore trust in the institutions.


Conduct a formal federal investigation of election fraud.  Use the Mueller team model for investigation of a serious national security matter.  Put a 6-9 month time fuse on it; report results to the public.


“America supporters” from all points of the political spectrum should support an investigation of election fraud in the 2020 election.  Americans ought to wonder why the government is not already voluntarily undertaking this investigation, for the purpose of restoring the faith of the American people in their elections.