How to Rig an Election

The podcast host discusses the topic of rigging elections, focusing on the role of the media in shaping public opinion. He mentions the negative coverage of Donald Trump during his presidency and compares it to the Watergate scandal. The host emphasizes the power of the media to influence public perception and suggests that similar tactics were used in the 2020 presidential election. He references a book by Molly Hemingway and personal experiences to support his claims. Now, daddy didn't like trouble, but if it came along Everyone that knew him knew it's lies that he'd be on He never was a hero for the town he shined like But you could always find him standing up for what he thought was right He'd say, you've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything You've got to be your own man, not a puppet on a string Never compromise what's right and uphold your family name You've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything Welcome to One More Round Podcast, where we find the truth, no matter where the liberals try to hide it. Let's get to it. I'm your host, Keith Marshall, and let's go one more round. The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Fear itself is what? We will make America great again. If I say something and you don't want to listen, don't listen. One more round. Welcome again to One More Round Podcast. Thank you for joining me. I really enjoy doing these podcasts. I have really enjoyed some of the information I've been able to teach myself as I work through these things. Today, I think the podcast is kind of cool. We're going to go over how to rig an election. I know when you hear it, it sounds like I'm trying to come up with an idea to do something wrong, and I'm not. Actually, I considered a couple titles for this, and one of them was how to rig an election and never break a law. But truthfully, what I'm going to be talking about is not something that I have done or I would do or I think should be done. It's going to be things that have been done and things that I have learned about or witnessed in a couple different elections, primarily the presidential election between Trump and Biden in 2020. And contrary to what the way the title may lead you, I'm not going to be trying today to show that Joe Biden didn't really win the 2020 presidential election. That's not where I'm going. Now, I have my particular feelings about that, and I'm sure you do, too. But what I'm going to be talking about specifically and what I'm going to be working on is some events that happened leading up to 2020, to that election and right along and during the process up until the day of voting that really, in a way, if you want to use the word rig, I don't know if that's the best way, but they certainly can throw off the direction that the outcome of an election was heading or what would normally happen in certain situations. And we're going to talk about that. I'm really curious about these things, and I recently have been actually I was going to say I read it, but I actually listened to an audio book. It's called Rig by Molly Hemingway. And believe it or not, I listened to it through our Rafford City Public Library. If you don't know who Molly Hemingway is, I believe she's the editor of The Federalist. And I think it's a kind of online publication, but she also regularly appears on Fox News, Hannity. She does a lot of investigative reports in the election is something that she really covered extensively in that book. I would recommend that you buy it, that you rent it, listen to it online for free if you have a library card. So, hey, big thanks to the Rafford City Public Library. I've really enjoyed that. And I have learned a lot from that book and a lot of this information. I'm going to share you that that Miss Hemingway found and some things in my own, you know, my own life that I've noticed in an election that I had for mayor in twenty eighteen that I'm going to bring in. I'm going to talk about, you know, I don't know what the rest of you guys do at night. You know what? I watch a lot of football. I do a lot of things like that. But oftentimes I find myself listening to things like this. Sometimes I'm on YouTube. I believe it or not, I was last night. I was sitting in my recliner listening to Frost Nixon interviews from 1977. Now, that's probably about as boring as a person could delve into. But truthfully, to me, it's fascinating because I think we as much information as we have at our fingertips, we tend to forget about things that have happened in the past. And you can see those things kind of repeat themselves in different, you know, in different ways. And one of the things that I want to focus on about how to rig an election is how the media covers a particular person. You know, I talked about in the one of the early podcasts I did, Why Trump, about some of the things that the news media did to President Trump from the very beginning. And I talked about a lot of those issues that come up. The biggest one, of course, was Russiagate. And as I went through the book and I listened to the book, you know, I was reminded of several things that I'd forgotten. And I will try to remind you of a few things there. So truthfully, the first key component to how to rig an election, and I honestly think it's the most important. And as we go through this, the media, the newspapers, the television, they're going to be a huge component, probably the absolute number one component in how to unfairly, and I'll add that, how to unfairly rig an election. I went back also last night, again, more fun, and I went back and listened to the network broadcast. It was kind of a, you can go and do this. It's pretty easy to do on YouTube. But I went back and listened to some of the network broadcasts from election night in 2016. And if you were somebody that wasn't paying attention to anything and you only tuned in on that election night, even the average person, you would clearly draw the conclusion that the media, especially, you know, the CNNs and MSNBCs and the major networks, CBS, ABC, NBC, were not happy at all about how that election night were going. I mentioned in another episode about how, I think it was a female anchor for ABC, Martha Kravitz, I can't remember her name, I apologize, but she was actually holding back tears about the ball on election night. She was so upset. So, we kind of understand the cake was baked about how the media felt about the 45th president of the United States, Donald Trump. And obviously, the media, the citizens of the United States did not agree. But from the very beginning, from the very beginning, Trump was treated as an illegitimate president. And right off the jump, right off the jump, we began to hear the issues about this Trump and Russia and the Russia collusion and the rigging of the 2016 election and how Russia had used false information and different things to get on Facebook and had confused people and caused people to vote for Trump. And, you know, and then we just started just, I mean, it got to be daily. There was a news story that would probably talk about, hey, Trump did this or we've got this leak from these unnamed sources that Trump had a meeting with such and such or Trump had an account over here in Russia or wherever it was. And it was something every day. And truthfully, you couldn't tell a lie from the truth. And it was just constant. And it went on for years. The result of that, we saw a few people prosecuted, not for actually colluding with the Russians or doing anything that they were being accused of doing, but somehow for trying to hide something that they had never done to begin with. They didn't answer a question correctly or they, you know, they tied a non-related question into the investigation and they didn't answer that properly. And they were, you know, investigating. And we saw people being, you know, their houses raided and arrested. And there was really a strong narrative. And you were just kind of on pins and needles if you were a Republican and Trump supporter, just kind of waiting for the next shoe to drop. And that was pervasive. They really used that opportunity to try to convince the United States as a whole, hey, this guy's a crook. This guy's a really bad guy. And, you know, that's one of the reasons I was telling you that I was listening to some of the Nixon-Frost interviews, because it kind of hit me, and I'm sure I'm probably slow to the game, but it kind of hit me that's exactly what happened to Nixon. You know, and I'm not an expert on Watergate, and, you know, I was alive then, but, you know, I was three years old. So I didn't exactly live through that. Now, I try to study history and I try to learn, but basically you had a small-time burglary of the Republican Party. Some of the campaign or operatives within the Republican Party were involved. And what got Nixon in trouble was not the burglary, which he apparently had nothing, no knowledge of or anything to do with. What got him in trouble was the cover-up. When all the investigations started and it turned out some people were involved that shouldn't have been, and maybe he knew all along. I don't know. He claims that he didn't. But the cover-up was what got him. And the same thing, as I go back and look, it was the same pattern. You had a pattern of someone in the, you know, the deep state leaking information. They actually called him Deep Throat during that time. It turned out to be a well-connected person within the government, I believe in the FBI. But they were leaking information to the press and they were putting this information out. And it was a drip, drip, drip. And it had a design to it. The purpose of it was to wear down the Nixon administration, to cause people to, you know, sell out other people and to tell on other people to save themselves with the ultimate goal of taking down the actual president of the United States. And it was a goal that succeeded. It was a time that probably when the news media realized how much power they really had, what they could really accomplish by putting out these stories and this drip, drip, drip. It didn't matter that, you know, 80% of the stories were completely made up. And it was kind of like this. And we've learned a lot from this Russiagate. You would have, let's say, the FBI. They would plant a story with their favorite news media guy, whether he's with CNN or ABC or wherever he was. The story didn't necessarily have to be true at all. So they would plant that little story, okay? And then the reporter would go and say, I have a private source or I have an unnamed credible source that let me know that XYZ has happened. And they would print it in the paper. Well, then the FBI, in turn, they had made this up. Now, let's go back to the beginning. They had made this up. They would, in turn, take that newspaper article and say, we're going to launch an investigation to see if what this newspaper article said or this TV report said is actually true. And they'd launch an investigation. And the people that they would be questioning would have to lawyer up, and they would drain them of money and scare them to death. And it was just a, it's a horrific practice. It's a practice that belongs somewhere in communist China, not in the United States of America. But it's not anything that was new. Because the same thing, like I mentioned, happened in the Nixon administration. I actually listened to Nixon talking about that, and he was being questioned by Frost. And Frost was kind of questioning him. He was saying, it seems to me that you think that here you being the president of the United States, the highest office in the world, basically, the leader of the free world, and you seem to be saying that you don't have as much power as the news media. Like, for example, it sounds like you're saying if you were president of NBC News, you would have more power than president. And you know Nixon agreed with him. This is a man who had been the most powerful man in the world. And he said, he had no reason to lie, but he said, you know what? The news media has far more power, far more power than anyone in government. They have the ability to shape and to do things, and they are unchecked. They have the ability to do all these things. And he actually had a fearful tone as he described the power that the news media has. So, I want you to know, the number one component in rigging election is a corrupt media. It's a corrupt media. And we watched that. We watched that beginning in 2016 all the way up to the election in 2020 as they used anything and everything as a way to demean and to break the support and the opinion of people towards Donald J. Trump as president. Now, in Trump's case, like I said, it started in 2016, and it never stopped. I mean, it was scandal after scandal after scandal. And even after the Russiagate was blew up. And by the way, for those of you that don't know, and I don't assume that everyone knows or listening or paying attention to some of the things that I'm listening to, that was debunked. I mean, there was hundreds of millions of dollars spent on it, a Mueller investigation, special investigation into that, and it turned out to be bogus. It was actually a dossier that was created by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party. They created it. They leaked it. They made it look like it was an official investigation. They got it to the FBI. You had a few never-Trump Republicans that participated in that as well, like John McCain. And he actually, for his part, made sure that the FBI had a copy of the dossier, even though I think it had already been to them. But, you know, they leaked those things. They got them out. They did it under false pretenses. And the FBI knew it was bogus. Like I said, they used that as a way, I believe, to intimidate Trump. I believe their ultimate goal was to get him to resign. That was the goal. They were Richard Nixon-ing him. That's what they were planning to do. But Trump, or at least the people around him in conjunction with Trump, at least had the ability to look back in time. They remembered the history of Richard Nixon and how it was done, and they were much more careful, much more careful than they were. So they had the ability to look back and see this game that had been played before. And it got a few people, Michael Flynn it got, and it got a few other really low-level guys, Carter Page and some others and some bogus information. But they were able to look back. But truthfully, I mean, here's the thing that's really true. Donald Trump was unshakable. I mean, he was a man's man in there, and he wouldn't back down and he wouldn't quit. And he eventually weathered his way through it, and it was debunked. But they didn't stop there. I mean, there was one thing after the other. You know, they accused him of abusing his hotels to profit. At one point they accused him of trying to stop mail-in balloting by some adjustments that was being done to the post office. I mean, that was a bunch of garbage. But there was incident after incident after incident. Everything that he said, everything that he did was all designed to get rid of this guy. We're going to try first to get him resigned. That didn't work. We're going to try to make a phony impeachment charges against him, accuse him of doing things that Joe Biden actually did and his family did. But we're going to impeach him, and none of that worked. So ultimately it come down to 2020, and they had to defeat him at the ballot box. So the number one thing, and, of course, the media is pervasive through every part of this, but the number one thing, the number one thing that was used to rig the 2020 election was the media. And, you know, I have some experience with that myself. When I ran for mayor in 2018, the Roanoke Times put out an article. It actually come out February 10th, 2018, right in the middle of the election. And I'll just say right now, it was purposeful. It was done to create a false narrative. It was done to help one candidate over the other. You know, after the 2016 election, it was a kind of push around the country for, it was kind of like a call to arms for media organizations all over the country to make sure to defeat Trump in every way that you can. And any conservative candidate, no matter what office they were running for, kind of fell under that umbrella of attack that was going on from the news media. And, obviously, I'm not trying to raise the importance of myself for a little mayor's race in Little Radford, Virginia. But I think I would be neglectful to not mention some of the things that I saw and some of the things that I endured and went through during that election because they're going to happen again in 2024. We have an election coming up with a couple of council seats. Roanoke Times has been totally uninvolved with anything that's happened in the last four or five years other than when they are given a call and asked to come report on something that the mayor wants them to report on. And they dutifully show up and bow their head and do that. But they haven't been involved in anything since then. And just as a point to mention, they were not involved. They did not come to meetings. They did not cover anything, for the most part, in the entire eight years that I had been on council. The good, the bad, the ugly, nothing. They didn't cover anything. They didn't show up. But all of a sudden, during this 2018 election, they got really interested in the city of Radford for some reason. And there was a reporter. I don't think he's with them now. I think he stayed through this election and then was gone somewhere else, which is kind of suspect to me. It kind of seems odd. But his name was Dominic Mastrangiello, a little spivey fellow that showed up and bounced around the city. And he put out an article. And it was kind of a shock. And I do think that there were some people within the Radford city government that was involved and that kind of fed this also as well. But he put out an article, and it came out in the Roanoke Times Property. It was called Turning Point. In face of budget constraints, Radford grapples with city's future. Now, Radford City was doing pretty good then. Now, we had some down years during the Great Recession, during the Obama years. And we'd held our own. We had some really good years where we piled up money in reserves and were able to do some things and build up reserves. And then we had some slow years. Real estate values had not skyrocketed like they had in recent years. But we had some years where it was slow. And we dipped into some of the reserve funds. But we were still strong. We still had plenty of money in reserves. We had over $6 million, I think, in the electric fund reserves. We had a couple million in the general fund reserves. And we were working on a budget at the time that would end up being completely level and would actually increase reserves. So we were in pretty decent shape. Not as good as anybody would always want to be, but pretty good shape. But they put out this article. It was a shock to me. I don't think it was a shock to my opponent, nor do I think it was a shock. Well, I know it wasn't a shock to my opponent because he was quoted in it. He was given the last quote in the article. So that's kind of a telltale sign about how it's working. But anyway, it was a shock to me when it came out. And it was really negative towards the city. Actually, the picture that they put on the front of it was a picture of broken glass with tape on it. I mean, they really played this thing up. And they went through all these things about spinning up reserve funds, worrying that the city would remain an independent city. It talked about the only thing we had left was Radford University. And it's really in contrast to what we've seen now. I've really been amazed because they haven't showed up to do anything. Everything that they said in this article has actually happened now. They have actually spent up all the reserve funds. They've actually run the city out of money. If you listened to my previous article, my previous episode, Will Radford Remain an Independent City? You're going to learn they borrowed $4 million just to make payroll. Compared to what they are now, we were in tremendous shape. But you notice that Mastrangelo, he's not showing up to do an article on the disaster of a mess that's been perpetrated on the citizens of Radford for the last four or five years by the present administration. They're not showing up for that. They're not doing articles on the fact that the 10,000 students that existed at Radford University then is down to about 4,500 or 5,000 students. They're not talking about that. They're not talking about the fact that we had $10.5 million in COVID money that just is gone, that they spent it all. In this article, they made a big deal over the fact that there's been some buyouts. It's kind of a normal thing in any business. When you have extra people, you have buyouts. We've issued some buyouts. But you know what? They've been doing buyouts in Radford for employees again. But there's no mention of that now, like was illustrated in this article. And just to show you how the news media can use things like this, and I'll just tell you right now, this is my personal opinion, and I think you can trust it, because I was on the campaign trail, I was knocking the doors, and I was talking to people. But this article here, this false and kind of, and there were several things in it that were just garbage. And by the way, I did write a rebuttal to that. The Roanoke Times refused to print it. They said I would have to cut it in half, which, you know, my article is half the size of what they'd written. And so I ended up having to put it on my Facebook page and hand it out door to door when people asked. But this article here in the Roanoke Times, if I had to put one thing down that turned the election or that cost me an election, it was this article. It was false. It was written unfairly. But it was written very well and very intently. And the Roanoke Times, in spite of what people say, has a large audience in Radford City. There's people that don't necessarily trust it, but they read it, and things like this bother them. And to the point I had to actually carry my rebuttal with me when I was knocking doors, because people would ask me about it, and I could hand them and say, here's the truth. But, you know, they went beyond putting this in the paper. You know, it wasn't just a few weeks later or so, they had it in The Current, and they mailed it out to all the houses in the city. It was in The Current. And then they reprinted it in The Current a third time. And I was reminded of this because of a recent Roanoke Times the other day where they doubled or tripled the font of the headline on the front page. Well, they did that in The Current. They, like, tripled the size of the font, and it was huge black letters, Turning Point, Radford, you know. So they had a huge effect on that election. So, you know, it's important going forward for Republicans, for conservatives, for anybody that's running for office, there needs to be a fair representation, you know, in the media to try to counteract some of these things. I always give advice, when I give advice to people that want to get something done or Republicans that want to give money, you know, signs and everything are important. But truthfully, being able to get these kind of headlines out or to refute these kind of headlines are as big as anything else. So we saw in the 2020 election that the news media used their power. They used the newspapers and TV, just like in 2018 and mine, to affect how people felt about a candidate or felt about the country that they lived in or, in our case, the city of Radford. It was dirty. But, you know, it's a way to rig an election and it's not illegal. You know, our press has tremendous power. Tremendous trust is placed on them. But we are to a point now, we are to a point now where we just have competing news services. I want to teach you something because I think this is important. I think it's important for you to understand. I was looking at some polls just about how America is broken down. And, you know, of course, different polling organizations say different things, but I think this one kind of covers it. It said in the United States of America, and I think this poll was done in 2021, 2022, I can't remember, but it's fairly recent. And it kind of holds to the, the numbers are pretty close. But right now in the United States of America, about 35% of us voters identify as Democrats. About 33% of us identify as Republicans. The remaining 37%, they identify as independents. And 66% of the total eligible voters overall vote on average. So we have a lot of people that are either independent or don't vote at all. And then you have the categories of Republicans and Dems. And when I see the categories of Republicans and Democrats, I'm going to assume, hey, just like in their category, the majority are going to vote Democrat or Republican. The independents, though, are toss-up. And one of the things I've learned is, and I know I'm not probably not talking about you because, you know, you're listening to a podcast that's very political. You're probably following things and paying attention. But everybody is not like you and I. They don't listen to, you know, different news networks and read papers and follow history and do things to try to learn, you know, more about a candidate and more about what is going on. That 30% that are independents, I believe a strong number, a strong majority of those are ruled by sound bites, by headlines that they don't even read the article of, by things they hear on the radio during news breaks between songs. I really believe that they control, if you have the ability to control those things, you can control the minds, and Rush used to call them, I believe it was Rush, low information voters. And that's what they are. Many are. Now, I know there's a lot of people that are independents that are really Republicans or really Democrats. It just sounds better to say you're an independent. It sounds better to say that, oh, no, I vote for the person, not the party. But here's the truth. If you voted in the last five elections for a Democrat, guess what? You're a Democrat. And the same thing for a Republican. And maybe you can change your mind. Maybe there's some exceptions. But for the most part, that's what you are. But there's a large number of people that are not following. And, you know, here's another thing that I think people think. They say this. Okay, Fox News, that's the crazy conservatives. And CNN and MSNBC, that's the crazy liberals. I'm in the middle. I listen to ABC, CBS, NBC. Well, let me give you a news flash there. Those guys are not in the middle. They may not be quite as radical as MSNBC or CNN. But don't mistake this. They are liberal. And through the whole presidency of Donald J. Trump, they were right in the middle of the Russiagate. They reported the same garbage over and over. They gave little time. That's going to be the next little segment of the news media. They didn't cover a lot of the issues that should have been covered about Joe Biden. They didn't even talk about him. So my point is you have a large swath of people that are tuning in to sound bites, to just whatever it is that they can learn. And as you hear these news breaks and as you hear these little segments on CBS and you see these headlines in the Roanoke Times or Washington Post or whatever paper that you're reading in Radford or around the country, you're going to predominantly see negative things about Donald Trump and the Republican Party as a whole, but especially about Donald Trump. And over those four years, that process and that work they did to demean Donald Trump, just as this article in the Roanoke Times did, to demean the way the city was being run and me being on council, obviously that was laid on my shoulders even though I was just a single council person, not the mayor or not even in the majority. They laid that in order to create a narrative and to create a false impression in people's minds to make them think the way they wanted them to think. In Trump's case, it was a long and slow brainwashing. And in my case, it was a quick scare you to death. And that's how they do it. That's how they do things. But there's another way that the media are pervasive and rigged the 2020 election in particular. They didn't talk about things that were important to know about Joe Biden. Now, there was a lot of things about Joe Biden. I mean, Joe Biden was the guy that was sniffing all over young girls and women. And there was a case of a forcible rape that he was accused of committing that was downplayed by the media and not talked about, that should have been talked about. Those things they kept quiet. But one of the biggest things that happened happened in October. It kind of would have been like the September-October surprise right before the election. And that was the whole Hunter Biden laptop scandal. Before I go a little more into that scandal, let me tell you a couple things about Hunter Biden, Joe Biden's son, which I think are, you know, I like to think, and this is not always true and it's not always a fair assumption because kids can go their own way no matter how good a job you do as a parent. They can disappoint you sometimes. I understand that. But I like to think as a general rule that the way we raise our kids and the way we teach them and instruct them and the things they see from us have a lot of impact on how they live their life and how they act as adults. And if that's true in any way, if Hunter Biden is any, just a small reflection on Joe Biden as a father, Joe Biden was a horrible dad and a horrible parent and a horrible example to his kids because this kid, Hunter Biden, is a disaster. I didn't know this. I learned this. Actually, I learned it through this book. But Hunter Biden joined the military, the Navy Reserves, when he was 43 years old. Well, in case you didn't know, that's too old to join the service. You can't join at 43 years old. But he was given a deferment because his dad was vice president. He was given a deferment in order to be able to join at that age. Now, I don't know the purpose of joining at that age. I'm assuming they were trying to create some sort of political career for him and that was a way to jumpstart it. He was given a second deferment, though, because he had some drug problems in his past as a kid. I don't know if it was an arrest or an issue or something that came up that would have disqualified him. But he was given a second deferment because his dad was vice president. Well, it wasn't long, he hadn't been in there hardly any time, until he failed a military drug test. They found cocaine in his system. And he claimed, the bogus claim, that he'd bummed a cigarette off of somebody at a bar and it must have been laced with cocaine. Well, here's the truth. The cocaine was going up his nose. He was a problem kid and a disaster. But the judgment of the vice president of the United States, Joe Biden, at the time, knowing what kind of kid he was, knowing what he was into, to put him in the United States military just for his own personal benefit, and then the disaster and the embarrassment that happened, tells you a whole lot about Joe Biden. But that is Hunter Biden. And also at this time, just getting back to this laptop, he was, you know, there's multiple stories, and here's the truth. They're all true. You know, I know the news media's tried to act like, oh, Joe just loves his son, and he had a few problems. He didn't have a few problems. He had a lot of problems. This guy was throwing million dollars and hundreds of thousands of dollars around like it was candy. He was spending it on hookers, on drugs, on gambling, everything you can think of. And in one of his hazed-out, cracked stupors, he dropped off one of his laptops at a local repair shop. And there was a rule at the repair shop. If you didn't claim whatever you dropped off by a certain amount of time, it becomes the repair shop. Well, the repair shop tried repeatedly to contact him, and they have receipts of that and the proof of that, and they tried repeatedly to contact. Finally, he didn't call back. And when the repairman went through the laptop, he found all kinds of criminal things on that laptop. He turned the laptop over to the FBI, the Federal Bureau of Investigations, but not before making a copy of what he turned over to them so he could prove what he had found and what was there. Pretty smart guy because guess what? The FBI just sat on it. They never talked about it. They knew what was on that laptop. They knew the crimes that had been committed on that laptop. There was all kinds of things, and I won't even talk about some of the photos and pictures that were on that laptop, but there were e-mails from foreign people. There was obvious tax evasion. There was all kinds of criminal activity that linked to Joe Biden on that laptop. And this man from the repair shop, he gave a copy of this material. I believe he gave it to Rudy Giuliani or one of the operatives with the Republican Party. And so everybody found out about it. So what did the press do? They did several things. Number one, they wouldn't cover it. Number two, when they talked about it, they called it a Russian disinformation campaign. Before they knew anything about it, they were already providing cover. They were providing cover for Joe Biden. So a second way that the press can rig an election is by not covering the activity of one of the candidates that they're trying to protect or trying to get elected. And just to say they didn't cover it doesn't do it justice. They went far and beyond to try to continue this garbage Russian hoax thing by saying, oh, this is just Russian disinformation. Russia has clearly planted this information to try to hurt the Biden campaign because of Trump's close relationship with Vladimir Putin. I mean, it's just, you know, guys, just garbage. But they did it. And, you know, after the election was over, there was a poll taken, and they surveyed over 1,750 people in seven of the swing states. Forty-five percent of those polled said they knew nothing about the Hunter Biden laptop. And one in six of those said that had they known, had they known, they would have not have voted for Joe Biden. Well, you've got to understand, Joe Biden won Georgia by like 13,000 votes. Arizona by around 11,000 votes. I think Wisconsin, I can't remember, 30,000. It wasn't many. I mean, this was enough on its own to sway the election. So there's two areas that the media has and does rig elections. And one is by, again, just piling up the negative, sometimes often untrue information on one candidate while ignoring the negative on the other. Huge impact on the 2020 election, and personally a huge impact on the 2018 election that I was in. Now, what's another area? We've talked about the news media. I want to talk about the tech giants in social media, often just called big tech. Big tech, you know, the Googles, the Facebooks, the Twitters. And, of course, that's the Twitter that wasn't owned by Musk. It was owned in other hands then. So just stay on this laptop issue. The New York Post, one of the longest, if not the longest, continuous news organization in the United States, they got the information from this laptop, and they did a monster story on it. Well, guess what? Every single one of these tech giants shut it down. Twitter would not allow you to even share. First of all, they took the New York Post off of Twitter. They blocked their account. They wouldn't allow you to share or link the article. Facebook throttled it down to where it would only show up in like a minute small percentage of boxes. They did so while they checked the veracity of the story. Now, get this. They had just spent years on a phony Russiagate scandal, and it turned out almost none of it was true. None of the major issues of that scandal were true at all. And they breathlessly reported it. They allowed it to go everywhere on social media. And this particular scandal that was, we have now learned, and actually they knew then that it was true. But we've now learned that it was 1,000% true. It was worse than was even reported then. So they used their power, they used their position to make sure that this information, this true information about Joe Biden was not getting out. They rigged the election on Biden's behalf. Remember what I said? 45% didn't even know it was true. They hadn't even heard about it. Now, those independents that I talked about, the 30-some percent, the ones that I'm telling you that they don't listen to Fox News, they may not listen to CNN, they listen to these stations in the middle that they think are in the middle, CBS, ABC. They're not hearing this information. They're hearing all the negative things about Trump. They're just not hearing any of the negative, what turned out to be truthfully negative things about Joe Biden. They created this phony group of intelligence officials, I don't know, 50 of them or something, that signed some letter saying that they believed this was Russian disinformation. And they reported that like crazy. So the story in these major networks where Biden's son revealed through his laptop all these illegal and under-the-table deals with foreign governments and tax evasions and money to the big guy and all those things, they didn't report that. The story that they made was how Trump tried again to create Russian disinformation on a phony story about Joe Biden. I'm not going to tell you what the story is because it's bogus, but we're just going to tell you that they tried the Russia thing again. Amazing, amazing. They rigged the 2020 election by not allowing the truth to be told and by allowing lies and falses to be permeated through society about Donald Trump. Huge, huge, big deal. And there was a lot of other issues. Remember, we were going through COVID then and they allowed, you know, here's a major one. This one isn't one of the big tech necessarily. But, you know, one of the things that Donald Trump worked on from the beginning of COVID, and he made a big deal in his administration, was the vaccine. Now, I'm not a proponent of the vaccine, so don't get that wrong, but the jury's out in my mind about the greatness, goodness. I'm sure it helped some people, some other people, it didn't. I'm not getting into that. That's a crazy subject that I don't know the truth on, so I'll just take care of myself and my family and you do the same. But that was an issue that was a big deal. Did you know that it come out, the vaccine come available like a week after the election? Actually, the people within Pfizer and some of the people within the, you know, the health establishment made sure that the announcement for that was not made. It actually could have been made and could have been out in September of October of 2020, which, you know, could have been a huge, a huge draw to people during the election time that the vaccine was out and available. They made sure it didn't come out until after the election. Again, they used their position. They used our health, if you believe in the, you know, the quality of the vaccine. They used our health or at least took a risk on using our health in order to rig an election, and that was certainly one of the things that they did. Now, I have some other things that I want to bring to you about how to rig an election and what happened in 2020 that I think are really neat, and I'm still staying on the subject of big tech, and I probably shouldn't use the word neat because it's not neat. It's actually my personal opinion. I believe this should be, if it's not really, it should be criminal because I'm going to focus on something that happened through Facebook and Zuckerberg, the owner of Facebook, something that was called Zuck Bucks, and in this particular case, what Zuckerberg did, and actually also his wife, Priscilla Chan, they gave over $419 million. Now, this money wasn't a donation, although it should have been called a donation, and that's where I think the legal part come in. They gave this money, and supposedly the purpose of giving this money were to help election officials to deal with this huge election coming up during a COVID outbreak in 2020. They were supposed, you know, it was kind of billed as, hey, this money is going to be given, and it's going to provide protective equipment for, you know, polling places and poll workers and for them to try to handle this huge election that's coming up. Here's the truth, though. Of that $419 million, only a little over 1% of it was used for, you know, materials, PPE, whatever you call it, masks, gloves, screens, whatever they needed to use, only about 1% of it. So what was it used for? The vast majority of this money was used to put out drop boxes throughout communities. It was used to buy vehicles. It was used to bring in staff, consultants from different organizations that were approved through the Zuckerberg money, and they were used. Here's the truth of what they were used for. They were used to infiltrate, and I ain't going to say it happened everywhere, but in the major swing states, it was used to infiltrate and to bring into their people and their organizations to be directly involved in the elections in these precincts and in these registrar's offices throughout the states, especially in the swing states, like, you know, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and Georgia and Arizona and some others. And they used this money as a grab. It was a lot of money. They used it as a tool to grab their way into these polling places and into these election offices to get their people in. They were basically running, and by doing so, and by bringing these, these were left-wing, by the way, these organizations that they brought in to quote-unquote help and to quote-unquote get them through this tough time and through this COVID outbreak time, these organizations were far-left, liberal, Democrat organizations run by Democratic operatives, former campaign chairs for different political campaigns within the Democratic Party. I mean, it was a planned attempt, and in order to get this money, they had to meet a lot of these criteria. So they gave these millions of dollars, and it was billed as a nonpartisan grant to help everywhere, except that's not how it was done. That's not what really happened. So in addition to the fact that they used these personnel that they were allowed, you know, they would give them money, and that money would be used to bring in and hire personnel, they were providing many of these personnel that were coming in and actually counting ballots, participating in curing ballots. They were running, they were running a political operation from right inside of the polling places and registrar's offices and election offices throughout these swing states. In addition to doing that, they were making decisions on how this money would be distributed throughout the state that they were targeting or that they were giving the money to. So on one side of their mouth, they were saying, hey, this is nonpartisan. We are providing this money, and we're putting these drop boxes out, and we're doing this in all areas, not just Democratic areas. We're doing it in Republican areas. Well, that was kind of true, but not really true. So, for example, in Georgia, a state that Biden won by, quote, you know, 13,000 votes, they were, yeah, they were spending money in conservative counties and in liberal counties or Democratic counties, but not proportionately the same. For example, in Georgia, like I mentioned, in the different counties, in the counties that had went for Joe Biden in the past, they were spending around $7.13 per voter. For each voter in that county, it averaged out to about $7.13 per voters. But flip that over to the conservative counties. It was $1.91 per voter in the conservative counties, four times, four times more in the traditionally Democrat voting counties, four times more than the traditionally Republican voting counties. That's amazing. Now, did it make a difference? Well, it did make a difference. You do realize that Trump in 2016 won Georgia by 5%. He lost it in 2020 by three-tenths of a percent. It made a difference. In fact, in the money in the counties there where the Zuckerbucks were used to put the drop boxes and to use their personnel and get out the vote efforts, and when I say get out the vote efforts, I mean they were checking to see who hadn't voted yet. So you think about it. You've got a county, and you've got all these extra personnel because they've spent $7.13 per voter versus another county where they spent a dollar or something. So you've got all this extra money and this extra personnel, and they're looking at the ballots, and these are predominantly mail-in ballots, the ballots that are coming in, and they're looking, and they know. Here they're not even personnel. They're not even election officials, but they've brought these people in, and they get to know who's voted and who hasn't. They've got a whole team, and on the clock, they're getting to go out and recruit and say, hey, you haven't voted yet. We know you usually vote. We know most people here are very Democratic. You know, they didn't say that. They just knew it. But they were doing get out the vote efforts in those counties, and did it make a difference? Yeah, it made a difference because three-fourths of the counties in Georgia that had those Zuckerbucks money spent of those Democratic counties, three-fourths of them saw a significant increase in Biden votes in the 2020 election. Like I said, it went from 5% Trump win to a three-tenths loss in just four years. Just four years. You know, they did it some in Florida, too, and they saw the same exact things. They just didn't put as much money there and didn't focus in on there. Or actually, Trump performed really, really, really well in Florida in the 2020 election. But in the counties that they used it in, they saw almost a 2% increase in each location that they invested those Zuckerbucks in the Democratic counties. So it was a big deal. It really made a huge impact in the election. Now, you say, well, I had this discussion with somebody just kind of talking this episode out. And you say, well, you know, they're spending money to get people to vote. They're putting more lockboxes out there. They're getting more out to vote. What's bad about that? It's just getting more people to vote. And you hear that all the time. You hear that all the time. Well, let's go back to those figures that we were talking about. What was it? 35% Democrat, 33% Republican, 37% Independent. There's only 66% of eligible people vote, which means you have another 34% that are eligible to vote that are not showing up to vote. So let's just do the math. If you concentrate money in any county, Republican county, Democrat county, somewhere in between, if you concentrate in those areas and you spend money in those areas and put a great deal of time and effort and money into getting the people that normally vote to come out and vote or more people to come out and vote, just common sense will say you're going to see a higher percentage of people come out and vote if you do all that work. If you put a drop box next to someone's house or in a neighborhood where they live in and maybe they don't drive or maybe they've lost their license because they should have lost their license. They have no business driving. Whatever it is. All they got to do is walk down the street and drop their ballot in the box. Or you've got all these extra personnel that are showing up, you know, knocking on the door and saying, hey, have you voted yet, Mrs. Johnson? No, I don't usually vote. Well, I tell you what, I've got a ballot right here. Why don't we just go ahead and fill it out and get that taken care of? If you're willing to take the time and you're willing to do that house after house after house after house, you're going to see an increase in the number of people that vote. I don't care if it's a Republican county or Democratic county or 50-50 split county. You're going to see that. You're going to see that increase. Well, if you take this money, okay, and you use it in a way where you're putting four times as much money into Democratic-leaning counties and districts and areas versus, you know, the little paltry. Remember I said it was $7 for the Democrats, $1 for the Republicans. If you do that, you're going to vastly increase the number of Democrats or Democratic votes that are going to come out because you are targeting Democrat areas. So, I mean, look at it this way. Let me give you an analogy. And I think you probably get this, but just in case you don't, let me go a little deeper. Let's say the whole city of Radford comes down with a deadly disease, okay? The whole city of Radford comes down with a deadly disease, and they create an antidote to it. We've got to take a shot, one shot. You get that shot, you're going to live, okay? And if you come out and you say, there's 15,000 people that live in Radford, and I've only got so many shots, but I'm going to try to, it's going to be, I'm going to evenly divide it up, okay? But you don't do that. You only go to East End. And you take those limited number, and you give, you know, 70% of those shots in East End. And the other 30%, you spread out through the rest of the city of Radford. Well, who's going to have the greatest percentage of people live? East End, right? Because 70% of those vaccines, 70% of those antidotes, you put in one area. Those people are going to live. The people in the other areas, they're going to die, right? And that's maybe a drastic example, but that's what happens. If you spend millions of dollars in a certain area for get-out-the-vote efforts, to put lockboxes out, to do balloting initiatives, you know, to have people riding around in cars, providing vehicles and all those things, you're going to see a drastic increase where you spend the money. That's why campaigns target different areas. They use it as a campaign tactic. What Zuckerberg did in the 2020 election was make a $400 million investment, or a $400 million campaign contribution into Joe Biden's campaign for get-out-the-vote efforts for him, and he gave a few nickels over here to the other areas so he could call it bipartisan. That is a way that big tech, first we talked about the news media, that is a huge way that big tech put their thumb on the scale and rigged the 2020 election, big time. Big time. By the way, this wasn't just done in Georgia. It was done also, I mentioned, in Florida. It was done in Pennsylvania. It was done in Wisconsin and other areas. It had a huge effect on this election, a huge effect. And the bigger the place, the more the number of votes, the more the effect that it had in the 2020 election. It was definitely a thumb, a foot, and a leg on the scale, no doubt. And just as a quick addendum, talking about some of these big techs, Google, in their search engine, also there's a couple studies that was done after the election, both 2016 and 2020 elections. After 2016, I mean, these guys laid the law down amongst their peers and said, we're not going to let Trump win again. They literally had meetings and task force groups and worked to make sure they could do everything they could to hurt Trump for the 2020 election. And just Google, in particular, were using their site and they were pushing conservative and things that were put out, you know, pro-Trump and pro-Republican. They were pushing them five, six, seven pages down to make sure that the first thing you were going to see would be negative stuff about Trump. Go today and type in Google something about Donald Trump. I guarantee you the first 20 stories are going to be negative for the most part. I mean, that's the way that they've got it set up. There's no mechanical neutrality there. It's purposeful what they're doing. And there is estimates that it cost between 2.6 million and 6 million votes across the country just by what Google did alone. I mean, we're a society. The lifeblood of our society now is the Internet. I mean, it's a shame it shouldn't be that way, but it is, particularly with young people. Okay? They're not watching Fox News. My kids hate it when I cut Fox News off. They don't want to watch that stuff. But they'll listen to TikTok videos, I hate to say. They'll look at stuff on Facebook. They'll catch headlines. They'll hear things in their car, you know, things like that. If you can control the flow of that information, you can rig an election. You can definitely rig what people are allowed to see and what they're allowed to hear. And over and over, just like those news articles, and just like, you know, the traditional way that a lot of us get our news from television or newspapers, just like you can rig that, you can use these high-tech, these big-tech organizations, Twitter and Google and Facebook and Instagram, all this, they can rig an election by controlling what information can come out and what information cannot. And one of those big-tech organizations that I didn't mention, YouTube, is obviously a huge one as well. And that platform, I think it's owned by Google, isn't it? But either way, that platform was used in a big way to disallow certain information that turned out to be true and allow whatever propaganda that come out from the Biden administration, excuse me, the Biden campaign, they allowed that to come out. Hey, so I'm getting a little long here, so I've got at least three more points that I want to go over. And I'm going to have to do those in another episode because I think this is important. We're starting 2024. The election has begun. We're already seeing a whole new category of ways that the Biden administration now and the news media and big-tech are rigging the 2024 election by, quote, unquote, not breaking any laws. And, of course, you know, that's debatable. And we may talk about that a little in the next episode, but there's three other areas that I want to go over. And I'll give you a hint about what three they are. One of them, and I may change the name of them or tweak these a little bit as I go, but one of them is manipulating the uninformed. And we're going to talk about that. And we have hit on it a little bit, but I'm going to talk about it a little bit about what happened in Radford in 2018. I think you're going to want to hear that. It also happened in the recent election in Blacksburg with some voters in Blacksburg that affected some of their races in Montgomery County. We're going to talk about that a little bit. Also, the second category is subversion of the people. We're going to talk about how the laws that were existing in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, some other areas were thrown out the window, and individuals made decisions on behalf of their state that were not legal in the way things were done there. And then there's another issue, and it may actually go with what I just mentioned, and that's inconsistent vote counting, where votes were counted different in one county versus the other. Those things are some things we need to discuss. I also want to mention some of the things that went on in Radford City in 2018 that happened again here recently in Blacksburg that I think is important. Now, there is something that I would suggest that you take your time, a couple things that you take your time to watch. These will kind of, you know, kind of spell out more of the ideas that I was talking about today in some of the topics. One of them is that book I was telling you about, A Rig by Molly Hemingway. It's not a, if you think it's a nut conspiracy kind of book, you're wrong. It's really not. It's common sense, and when you hear it, you're going to remember a lot of the things that went on over the past few years, particularly from 2016 to 2020 and during the election. It'll remind you of a few things, and it'll better explain some of these issues that I've brought up. The other one is a little different. You actually can find this on YouTube. If you just look under YouTube, it's called The Virginia 12th. Now, that's kind of a long, it's a documentary. The documentary is about the 2017 election of Chris Hurst when he was running against Joseph Yost, and it talks a lot about the city of Radford and some things that were done to help Hurst win that election and what the central focus of his campaign was. And guess what? It was the city of Radford. It's pretty important, pretty cool information. I think you should watch it. It'll give some context to what I want to talk about in the next episode following up. Now, I don't know if I'm going to do a part two on this next Thursday or I'll do something else and come back to it. We'll see how it goes. But I do want to get back and cover this some more because I think it's a huge topic for Radford City going forward, but also for the nation, for the 2024 presidential elections that are coming up, you know, and crazy stuff going out there. I can't imagine what 2024 is going to be like. But it's good to have a base of knowledge for you to know as you do it. Okay. Just like every podcast, I'm going to end this with our theme verse, and it's found in Ecclesiastes chapter 12, and it's verses 13 and 14. And God's Word says this. Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter. Fear God and keep his commands. For this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment with every secret thing, whether it be good or whether it be evil. Hey, I'm really happy that you joined me today. Thanks for listening to my podcast. Don't forget my email address, onemoreroundpodcastkm at gmail.com. Thank you for those that have been reaching out to me. I appreciate the kind words and instructive criticisms and everything involved. So don't hesitate to give me a shout with a topic idea, a question, whatever you want to ask. I read them and I keep them all, of course, confidential. I sure hope that you're having a great year so far. It's cold outside, isn't it? But, hey, it is January. It's kind of supposed to be that way. Looking for big snow heading this way. I don't know if I'm happy about that or not, but it's coming, whether Marshall's happy about it or not. So Happy New Year. I hope you and your family are doing great. I hope God blesses you greatly. And thank you for joining me here in the rain. We'll see you soon. .