The highly controversial US 2020 presidential election, which was supposed to be over on November 3rd, is far from a done deal. President Donald Trump refused to concede defeat to Joe Biden after revealing that the election was rigged against the incumbent, while nearly all mainstream media, including those generally seen as pro-Trump, hailed the “President-elect”.
Still, for months, the eye of the global media was fixed on Navalny, their favored “transparency” and “anti-corruption” activist. His false allegations about being poisoned are presented in the press as undisputed fact, and Russia is denounced as “undemocratic”. Navalny struts through Berlin with a police escort, being widely pointed to as smoking gun proof that Russia’s leadership is somehow illegitimate.
On November 3rd, the forces that rally around Navalny almost unanimously revealed themselves to be complete and utter hypocrites. These “democracy” activists piled no condemnation on the United States as it convened a Presidential election, despite a number of disturbing irregularities. But what is so controversial about this election? What makes it worse than any election before?
Firstly, it is the sheer magnitude of the hypocrisy of the Deep State-controlled media. When President Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election, the mainstream media went into a frenzy. “The Russians chose him! They hacked the election! Evil KGB thug, baby-eating dictator, Vladimir Putin is Donald Trump’s puppet master!”, they cried.
It should be noted that the entire Russiagate conspiracy theory was launched months before the 2016 election, raising questions as to why the US intelligence services didn’t prevent the mythical hacking, given the fact that they had “strong evidence that Putin will do it”, as well as months to prepare for it.
How is it possible that all the US intelligence services, with a combined budget of over $60 billion, which is roughly 10 times more than what Russia spends on its intelligence services, could not prevent “the evil dictator” from electing Trump? Is the entire US intelligence run by absolute idiots or was there something else at hand?
Yet, for nearly 4 years, Trump had to defend against constant attacks from the establishment and the mainstream media, even after Mueller’s report gave zero evidence on the supposed “Russian collusion”. Still, even today, the Deep State-controlled media continue to push the hoax.
This is when we get to the 2020 election and why the Russiagate hoax matters now more than ever before. This is because this conspiracy theory serves as a litmus test of the mainstream media’s extreme bias. Despite the number of “small irregularities”, not a single major news channel reported truthfully on any of those, while the tech giants such as Twitter or Facebook simply banned any mention of it.
In 18 different US states, monitors from the OSCE were denied access. The conservative organization known as Judicial Watch reported that 353 (mostly urban) counties in more than 30 states across the US had voter registration rates above 100%, meaning that there were more people registered to vote than eligible voting residents.
It should be noted that the DNC is mostly popular in urban counties, many of which decided the outcome of their respective state’s electoral votes. That’s why you can see so many “red counties” in states like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Georgia and even New York. And yet, all of these states are “blue”. Is it a coincidence that these states have the majority of reported irregularities?
Even the CIA announced that Trump will not accept defeat. This was before the election took place. These are hardly “small irregularities”. One will recall how 4 cases of a single person attempting to vote twice in Russia’s constitutional referendum became the source of media outcry just a few months earlier.
There’s also the phenomenon of dead people voting (i.e. fraudster voting in the place of the recently deceased). It has been a widely highlighted form of voting irregularity in the US for many decades, so much so that comedians regularly bring it up as a punch line. According to the New York Post, the 2020 elections did not pass without a few individuals being arrested for attempting this in New York City.
However, in North Dakota, the country saw a new twist on this cliché vote-rigging maneuver. In North Dakota, a dead man named David Andahl won the election for the State House of Representatives. Despite the fact that Andahl died a month before, his name was on the ballot and he received the most votes.
The day before the election, the State Governor attempted to name Andahl’s replacement, but was blocked from doing so by the courts. North Dakota’s Attorney General said the governor has no right to select who should serve in Andahl’s place, so at the moment the seat is completely vacant, despite the results being certified.
The residents of North Dakota who voted for David Andahl still do not know who it is they were casting their ballots for, and who will represent them in the State Legislature as a result of their voting. The incident is almost farcical, and if such an occurrence took place in Russia the condemnation and outrage would be deafening.
Donald Trump has continued to raise concerns about the fact that the mail-in ballots which were counted late seemed to overwhelmingly favor the Democratic Party. Republicans and Trump supporters are accusing the Democrats of “ballot dumping” because in many cases the batches of mail-in ballots seemed unrealistically disproportioned for the Democrats.
Similar concerns can be raised about the results in many of the aforementioned urban areas in the United States. In San Francisco, Joe Biden won 86% of the vote. In the Metropolitan area of Washington DC, Biden won 92.6% of the vote. There were even instances of Biden winning over 130,000 mail-in ballots, with Trump getting literally zero votes.
These results are similarly found in urban centers throughout the United States and may very well be legitimate, reflecting the deepening divide between rural and suburban Americans and those who live in densely populated urban areas and megalopolises, especially coastal ones.
But let’s not forget that the “independent observers” who criticize Russia’s elections continue to raise concerns about districts in the Russian Caucasus where candidates receive 80% to 90% of the vote. In these cases, the results alone are considered to be “suspicious” and treated as almost proof of fraud. No such concerns seem to arise regarding the US election results.
The atmosphere surrounding the US elections is also worth noting. With COVID-19 restrictions still in effect, the media continued to play up the fear of rioting in response to the results. Across the country, National Guard units were called up, and a heavy police presence was very visible on Nov. 3rd when the public went to vote, if they had not voted early or through the mail.
Gun sales skyrocketed, and it was clear that the public was whipped up into a state of terrified anticipation. Residents were led to believe that terrorist attacks from right-wing militias, violent protests by leftists, targeted attacks by ANTIFA, or other bloodshed was nearly inevitable in the election’s aftermath. Imagine if such an atmosphere had been created in the lead up to a contested Russian vote?
The United States continues to hold its national elections on a working Tuesday, with no national holiday. Many states deny those convicted of felonious crimes the right to vote for the remainder of their entire lives. The influence of social media companies over the US public and their decision to suppress news stories critical of certain candidates is also being highlighted and became a major source of outrage in the weeks before the vote.
If the Russiagate promoters and Russophobes who constantly condemn Russia’s political system and leaders were really nothing other than human rights activists, their voices would be speaking up louder than ever about recent events in the United States. However, they remain silent, indicating that their motives are in fact geopolitical rather than principled.