The following is a transcript from the Pro America Report.
Welcome. Welcome, welcome! Ed Martin here on the Pro America Report. We’ve got some work to do today. We’ve got some work to do today.
I am going to have on a little bit later in the program, a guest. And his specialty is understanding how messed up the payor system is for our health care system. His name is Paul Seegert. He’s been on the show before. He’s really good. I was talking to him off the air, preparing for the interview. It’s complicated. It’s a strange situation. It’s not strange. It’s lots of overlapping things that are going on, private payors, Medicare, Medicaid. Anyway, we’ll talk about that because it’s a disaster.
Then we’ll also get an update from Kimberly Herman. She’s the general counsel of the Southeastern Legal Foundation, which is based down in Hotlanta, in Atlanta. We’ll talk with her about what is happening with Title IX. Title IX is a mess. The federal law that’s supposed to make everything better for women and is really a mess. And transgenders are abusing it, the whole movement. And so we’ll find out why and we’ll talk to her.
But first, remember last year when you were told you were not allowed to object to the elections? You were told that you cannot say that the 2020 election was anything other than perfect. That was the rules, the rules by which you were forced to play. You had to believe that the elections were perfect. If you said they weren’t perfect, you were a conspiracy theorist because lots of cases had gone into the courts and none had found the smoking gun.
Now, I ran an election board and I can tell you there’s always problems. But be that as it may, that’s what we were told we had to do.
And then Molly Ball, a journalist, wrote an article for Time magazine in which she described the network, the web of interlocking organizations and activists who quote fortify the election. And what they meant when they said fortify the election is they had to beat Trump and therefore they had to go out and they had to file lawsuits in courts that were friendly. They had to change the laws where they could, they had to coordinate, where possible, restrictions, like for Covid, all kinds of things. And they maintained that everything they did was always legal. And to be honest, no one has come forward and proven that anything was illegal.
So, oh, another aspect of fortifying the election was hundreds of millions of dollars. Zuckerbucks is the one you know of, but lots of other places and lots of other ways that people and groups helped to try to get out the vote, to try to influence who was voting, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So comes now another example of fortifying the election.
At a certain point, it has to be said that the fortifying the election looks and feels a lot like interfering in the election, meaning for example, the Hunter Biden laptop, which we now know was real and is real and has lots on it. It has been shown by testimony, by public testimony, that the intelligence community, meaning in one specific case, the FBI, but the intelligence community was actively saying, be prepared, social media giants Facebook and others, there will be Russian disinformation.
And here comes the Hunter Biden laptop just a month before the election, and 50 plus, I think it was 51 former members of the intelligence community, including Clapper and Brennan, and everybody said, oh, yeah, Russian disinformation. And they signed a letter saying that.
And so because they signed a letter saying that and the pump had been primed by the FBI and others for a big tech to hear that, what did they do?
They didn’t report. They stifled the coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop, which showed evidence of Ukrainian dealings, as well as Chinese dealings, as well as other stuff. Forget, by the way, about how crazy the guy’s personal life was. That’s bad enough. This was all about what they saw there.
So we now know this fortification of the election included tons of outside spending, tons of efforts to change the law, tons of efforts to influence the coverage, both of the media, mainstream media, as well as the big tech. All of that happened.
Now, there’s yet another example of the actual election system, the election offices using Bloomberg’s money in this case. I guess it’s kind of like the Zuckerbucks. I guess it’s not that different. It’s Mike Bloomberg, a billionaire, saying, I’ll give you millions of dollars, and the election officials in Philadelphia saying yes. Now, remember my point on this. Again, I’m not saying I have a smoking gun, yet, to say that anybody cheated, but it is amazing.
And Margot Cleveland, who is a retired federal law clerk who worked in the legal system as well as a professor, I think, at Notre Dame, and she was tweeting about this, and she said, what’s striking is, in the middle of this essay, there are emails that have been released that are being quoted.
And one of the emails is from a Stanford professor who claims to be this great election expert, an election fraud expert, et cetera, on an election integrity. And he’s basically saying, yeah, go ahead, get the money. That’s coming from a left winger. Clearly coming from a left winger. That’s who Bloomberg is.
And this election official is saying, oh, good, you know, you got that? His name is let’s see, what is it? How do you say it personally? Nate Persily, it’s probably pronounced, getting this money. And her point, Margot Cleveland’s observation was, pretty crazy that this professor just thinks it’s totally okay to be getting money from this left winger to do get out the vote in ways that will help one side over the other.
Now, is it illegal? Maybe not. Maybe not. Oh, yeah, he heads up, this Professor Persily. Well, he’s very left leaning, it looks like, but he runs the Stanford MIT Healthy Elections Project. So the point here is, we now know it was a concerted effort to beat Trump and it was focused on certain parts of the country, certain handful of places that were really close, and that turned out surprisingly different than the rest of the country. And they admit that they are obsessed with doing anything they can. And they admit that there was this injection of lots of money and they admit, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
At a certain point you say to yourselves, oh, and this last one is very important.
There is also the admission that the intelligence community, formally, the FBI, in the case that we know of, that I’m thinking of, contacting Zuckerberg and Facebook and informally, the intelligence community, 50 plus professionals who signed a letter that it was Russian, that the Hunter Biden laptop is Russian disinformation.
What you need to know is they were either lying or they were idiots. They’re not idiots, so they were lying.
And so we have the intelligence community, active and retired, working to control the election, along with hundreds of millions of dollars and lawyers and a legal system that’s all doing things to “fortify” the election.
Do you see it? You see the problem? Do you get the problem yet?
There’s a point where fortifying an election is not benign. It’s not simply competing. It’s utilizing something akin to the deep state. I mean, whether you call it the deep state or you call it something else, a coordinated effort that utilizes the intelligence community and big tech, those are really powerful together. And big media also powerful, and local election systems, very powerful, and local legal system, very powerful. Over time, you see, the fix was in. Whether it was illegal or not is a different question. But the fix was in against Trump.
And you may say, well, that’s just the way the game goes. I don’t think so. I don’t think so. I think we have a pattern that goes all the way back to the last days of the Obama administration when, as I said, was reading to you the other day, Susan Rice says, and sends an email to herself talking about how they did everything by the book and in the room when they were making big decisions on how to effectively engineer the Mueller investigation. Comey. Biden. Susan Rice. Obama. Sally Yates. I don’t know. Was Brennan or Clapper in there? I can’t remember. I’ll have to go back and look for sure.
But the simple fact is this is something very, very, there’s something very wrong with this. Really wrong.
Deeply problematic. Deeply problematic. And whether we get to the bottom of it ever, maybe it doesn’t matter because the admissions that are coming out make it clear what happened.
And the only question is why won’t it happen again? What has changed that makes some of the things regarding COVID and restrictions, maybe they can’t happen right now, but the rest of the stuff certainly seems to be possible, if not probable. And I’ll say it again, once they get away with it, why wouldn’t they do it again? What you need to know is once political actors get away with it, in fact are rewarded with jobs in the White House and the Justice Department and everything else, they had to be out for four years.
Now they’re back in power. Why wouldn’t they do it again? And if either you are so cynical and you just use power, or it could be both, you think the other side is truly evil and therefore has to be stopped. Either one of those probably put together, probably some mix, makes it almost impossible to imagine that they won’t do it again, that they won’t fortify the election, that guys like Bloomberg won’t spend tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions on influencing the elections and how they do it. Why would they stop?
Why would they stop?
That’s what you need to know. I will take a break. We’ll come back.
We’ve got some great guests today and we’ll cover that. Don’t forget to visit Proamericareport.com. Proamericareport.com. Sign up there for the daily emails and all the rest. Some of the people were texting me about the interviews from yesterday. I think it was. All that stuff is over at proamericareport.com. It kicks through to PhyllisSchlafly.com, so you get it all there. If you need to do a search in the search bar and you’ll find anyone that you’re seeking the interviews.
We’ll take a break. We’ll be right back. It’s Ed Martin here on the Pro America Report. Back in a moment.
