AN EXCELLENT AND INFORMATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE ‘STOP THE STEAL’ CLAIMS
[NOTE: page numbers below refer to the 303-page hardcover edition.]
Authors Mark Bowden and Matthew Teague wrote in the first chapter of this 2022 book, “The truth is that ardent Trumpists … were outsiders, even with the local Republican Party. [The local] GOP organization viewed them the way mainstream churches viewed evangelicals. They shared the same religion but not the same zeal. Trump rallies filled [supporters] with exhilarating passion. At them, [they] felt engulfed in fellowship, immersed in a rising, egalitarian, class- and color-blind tide of those who believed America was pretty near perfect exactly as it was and had been. Trump had beaten the staid old republican guard, who had failed to grasp the urgency of the moment.” (Pg. 9)
They explain, “in recent years, more sophisticated technologies have allowed election officials to sift mountains of data to search for patterns of illegal votes across entire populations. These safeguards so thoroughly snuffed out illicit voting that in the weeks after the 2016 election, when the Washington Post combed legal records searching for confirmed cases of fraudulent presidential votes, the paper found exactly three; a woman in Iowa voted twice for Donald Trump, a man in Texas voted twice for Trump, and a woman in Illinois tried to vote for Trump on behalf of her dead husband… None of these votes were counted. Others almost certainly went undetected, and authorities may have discovered straggling cases later, but the report made Trump’s claims---ballot boxes stuffed with millions of illegal votes---a farce.” (Pg. 21)
They suggest, “President Trump had discouraged his supporters from voting by mail and may have cost himself reelection because of it. He had warned, falsely, that mail ballots were particularly vulnerable to fraud. But voting by mail was easier and involved no risk of COVID exposure. In the end, far fewer Republicans mailed in their votes than Democrats… Because of this, a ‘blue shift,’ a leap in Biden’s favor following Election Day, had been widely foreseen. To Trumpists, this would look exactly like what their candidate had predicted, a win snatched away by the vote-counting process---the STEAL.” (Pg. 28-29) Later, they add, “When the president had suddenly inveighed against [voting by mail], it came as a surprise to the state’s Republican leaders. Not long before, they had mailed pamphlets to every GOP voter in the state encouraging it, with a picture of Donald Trump on the front giving two thumbs up.” (Pg. 37)
They state, “Democracy depends on a modicum of trust. After each election, the winning party is empowered to govern until the next vote, which it is empowered to manage… There were built-in safeguards to prevent the party in power from subverting the next contest… Judges settled disputes. To reject this time-honored process was, at heart, a rejection of democracy itself… democracy must settle for majority rule, which requires… this modicum of trust.” (Pg. 51)
They recount, “In Michigan, private citizens called poll challengers observe the vote count and can object to the validity of a mail-in ballot and its handling. At the TCF Center, each party was allowed 134 challengers. A full complement of Republicans had already entered the building… The call proliferated across social media, and soon a crowd gathered outside the TCF Center. They arrived convinced that... ‘The steal is on!’ … inside election officials realized they had a problem. Tension among vote counters and poll challengers had mounted throughout the day as the tally for Biden rose. That tension was exacerbated by subtexts old and new in Detroit. Strife had long simmered between the majority-black city and Michigan’s white Republicans… And the center grew overcrowded… officials had allowed TOO MANY poll challengers, about two hundred from each party… they needed to reduce that number to 134. So they locked the center’s doors, and as excess poll challengers left during the afternoon, new ones weren’t allowed in for either party. The crowd outside interpreted this as confirmation Republicans were being excluded, and the atmosphere grew volatile. Protesters … shouted slogans like ‘Stop the count,’ and made videos of the counters inside… Rumors spread of subversion and sabotage, of fake ballots smuggled in by a hand-pulled wagon and later by industrial van.” (Pg. 60-61)
They add, “Hoopes had shown him a picture … [of] the county’s voting machine warehouse supervisor, arriving with a clear bag filled with USB drives… What was he doing if not delivering more false Biden votes?... Each voting machine … contained a USB drive… election procedure called for these drives to be removed… and delivered to the counting center packaged with the actual paper ballots… It seemed that [some] machine operators had failed to remove the scanning machines on election night. So some bags of paper ballots had arrived without them. [The official] retrieved them. It happens every election… There was more, for those with eyes to see. A group of no-doubt progressive student volunteers were observed … actually FILLING IN ballots by hand. A craftily edited video of this was uploaded to social media, presented as proof that Democrats were filling in false ballots… Of course, for this there was also a benign explanation. Ballots rejected by the scanning machines were… being hand-copied so that they could be entered and counted…” (Pg. 76-77)
They note, “Anybody who followed Arizona politics closely… could see plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons why Trump had lost. Many in … [the] Hispanic population resented his base characterization of Latino immigrants. His ugly tweets and impolitic behavior had also alienated many of the state’s mainstream Republicans… Many Arizonians had been disgusted by Trump’s ad hominem attacks on the state’s beloved late senator and war hero John McCain…. The Mormon Church, a growing factor in state politics, had urged its followers not to support him.” (Pg. 86-87)
They point out, “Significant fraud, even in a single district, would … show dramatically… signaling the need for a recount or an investigation. For instance, if a precinct in Philadelphia… had ten thousand more Biden votes than registered voters, those numbers would stand out and could be checked. If a precinct … 80 percent Republican, had suddenly cast 80 percent Democratic votes, this too, would stand out.” (Pg. 103)
They report, “Neither [Trump nor Fox anchor Maria] Bartiromo paused to drill down on a specific claim. Nor did Guiliani or other high-profile Trumpists. Proof was of secondary importance. It was quantity that mattered. So many. It was why they seized on every pretense, no matter how minor, speculative, contradictory, or preposterous… it mattered little whether you could prove this one or that one. They had cumulative force… Despite its failures in court, where evidence actually mattered, The Steal movement gathered steam through the holidays.” (Pg. 148)
They state, “[Trump] wanted the Justice Department to lend its authority to these conjectures. He called [acting Attorney General Jeffrey] Rosen nearly every day… [He] told the president that the Justice Department could not and would not ‘snap its fingers and change the outcome.’ Trump said he understood, but he wanted the agency to … ‘just say the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R. congressmen.’ … In politics, just the announcement of an investigation could be damaging. In both cases, the goal was not the truth but to raise doubts… about the integrity of the 2020 election.” (Pg. 194)
They note, “There were many legitimate reasons for names and addresses to show up twice in the voter rolls… If ballots had been mailed to John Smith Sr., John Smith Jr., and John Smith III, all at the same address, [a Trump supporter] counted all three as one person… Some women received ballots mailed to both their maiden name and their married name. [The Trump supporter] concluded that such women voted twice, although there is no evidence that any of them did… [There were many] safeguards in place to prevent double voting. [Trump supporter’s] central [claim] was the assumption that because a voter may have had the OPPORTUNITY to vote twice, she had.” (Pg. 196-197)
The report, “The flailing president then adopted a fringe legal view penned by John Eastman, one of his lawyers, that Vice President Mike Pence… could reject the Electoral College results… and simply proclaim Trump the victor. This is surely the most seditious document to emerge from the White House in American history… Pence, despite years of loyal servitude… told the president he did not have the power to do it. This left Trump only one avenue. He could still lead people into the streets… Pence could still halt Congress from certifying the Electoral College results. If the vice president wouldn’t to it, maybe Trump’s army, ‘the people,’ could. Trump summoned his eighty-nine million Twitter followers to the capital… tweeting, ‘JANUARY SIXTH, SEE YOU IN DC!’” (Pg. 198-199)
On January 2, Trump called Georgia’s Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger: “He accused one individual in particular of stealing [votes]. ‘We had at least eighteen thousand… voters having to do with Ruby Freeman… She’s a vote scammer, a professional … hustler, Ruby Freeman.’… A video circulated of her working at the election center, where hauling ballots was part of the task, and claimed to show her and her daughter … stealing Trump votes. Some people apparently believed it simply because the two women were black…” (Pg. 200-201)
They recount, “as Trump faced impeachment for instigating all this, his supporters rallied to defend the indefensible. Many argued that those who broke into and sacked the US Capitol has not been real Trump supporters but agents of the omnipresent Antifa disguised. Or, the rioters had not been rioters but ordinary tourists who had grown rambunctious. But no serious person felt the need to rebut such nonsense. The story was told plainly enough in the video recordings, photos, and boasts posted by the rioters themselves… Many have been charged with crimes, and some already convicted and sentenced to prison.” (Pg. 208)
They conclude, “And yet, the belief persists. To question it is heresy… Distrust. If there was anything like genius in Donald Trump’s methods, this was it. Democracy depends on that modicum of trust it takes to bring competing parties together after an election to govern. Without it, there can be no majority rule. With the vote itself discredited, the will of the people is sacrificed to a mob of self-styled ‘patriots' who have decided that they and only they speak for everyone---the opposite of democracy… [Trump] mobilized that distrust to try to stay in power. This failed, stopped by the integrity of hundreds of obscure Americans from every walk of life… Many of them were Republicans, some were Trump supporters… they refused to betray their sworn duty to their office and their country. They were the true patriots. They saw The Steal for what it was: a fraud on the United States of America.” (Pg. 210-211)
Of the ‘audit’ of Arizona, they note, “the partisan ‘audit’ failed to produce the desired result… While the recount showed once more that Trump had lost Maricopa County … by a slightly larger margin than officially reported, it nevertheless concluded that the election results were … possibly flawed… the results were ‘very close to the margin of error.’ … For the elected officials who had certified the results, it was a clear vindication. If a group created and funded by Trumpists, with the stated intent of finding Biden’s victory fraudulent, had failed so plainly, who could continue to believe it was so? Trump, for one…” (Pg. 217)
This marvelous book will be ‘must reading’ for anyone seriously studying the 2020 election.