Election fraud in America: the evidence

Once you open your eyes to the possibility that the systems you trust aren't as trustable as you were led to believe, you start to see things that you could never before consider possible.

A US Senator suggested I view “SELECTION CODE: The Movie.” It’s excellent. I recommend everyone reading this take an hour to watch it, especially the last 15 minutes. Please promote it on social media after you view the film.

It seems to have escaped notice by all the mainstream media. Are you surprised?

The movie reminded me of the current battle to expose the truth about vaccine fraud. Election fraud is arguably the more important issue, and I hope once the corruption is exposed on the vaccine, it will open people’s minds to the possibility that they’ve been fooled about election security as well. This movie tells a very compelling story.

The hero of this movie is Tina Peters, County Clerk and Recorder in Mesa County, Colorado and an outspoken advocate for free and fair elections.

Here is Tina’s Wikipedia profile. Keep in mind, Wikipedia is heavily biased to make her look bad. Very bad.

Tina is the heroine of the movie and she has a piece of ironclad evidence: disk image dumps of the election machines before and after the manufacturer tampered with it. Anyone who has looked at this evidence is impressed.

What happens is that “they” spin it around and make it look to the public (and law enforcement) like she’s the evildoer. This distracts attention from the disk image evidence.

How can you tell who is telling you the truth?

It’s easy. In almost all cases, it’s the people who are not camera shy.

Consider the following:

1. The Colorado Secretary of State refused to go on camera to answer any questions for the filmmakers

2. Tina Peters fully cooperated with the filmmakers

3. Tina Peters doesn’t have a horse in this race: she has never been involved in politics before her election.

4. The filmmakers do not have a horse in this race (they are focused on other issues) and are known for exposing truth

5. The evidence speaks for itself. Experts who have looked at the before/after hard disk images call it a “smoking gun.”

6. Tina lacks the technical skills to have pulled this off. Those who accuse her of modifying the records have yet to show who did the work.

7. Nobody seems to be able to explain how the corruption of the records happened if the manufacturer was honest.

8. The State doesn’t seem to want to pursue finding the individual responsible for modifying the election records.

It’s a tough one, isn’t it?