By Bob Unruh(WND NEWSCENTER) Joe Biden on Thursday, the anniversary of the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol, unleashed a vitriolic attack on “former president” Donald Trump, but ignored the evidence that there were, in fact, issues coming out of the 2020 presidential election that should cause concern for Americans.
Those issues are that a review of the impact of the decision by leftist legacy and social media companies to suppress accurate reporting about Hunter Biden and his foreign dealings, some apparently involving Joe Biden, revealed that had those reports been carried more widely, enough people would have withheld their vote for Joe Biden to keep Trump in the White House.
Further, an analysis confirmed that the $420 million that leftist Mark Zuckerberg of Meta handed out to mostly local election officials often with instructions to recruit Democrat voters changed enough results to turn the White House over to Biden.
Biden, according to the Washington Examiner, charged, “For the first time in our history, a president had not just lost an election, he tried to prevent the peaceful transfer of power as a violent mob breached the Capitol. But they failed. They failed.”
He claimed that, “A former president of the United States has created and spread a web of lies about the 2020 election. He’s done so because he values power over principle … he can’t accept that he lost.”
And he incorrectly claimed, “Right now, in state after state, new laws are being written, not to protect the vote but to deny it. Not only to suppress the vote but to subvert it … the former president and his supporters have decided the only way for them to win is to suppress your vote and to subvert our elections. It’s wrong, it’s undemocratic, and frankly, it’s un-American.”
While GOP legislatures in states have been working on election integrity laws, Democrats in Washington are demanding that they be given authority to control all elections nationwide.
Vice President Kamala Harris, whose office has been beset in recent weeks by multiple departures of key staff members, likened the riot, for which some 700 Americans are facing mostly trespassing and vandalism charges, to the thousands of Americans killed on Dec. 7, 1941, and Sept. 11, 2001.
“I was here at the Capitol that morning, at a classified hearing with fellow members of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Hours later, the gates of the Capitol were breached,” she said.
“But my thoughts immediately turned not only to my colleagues, but to my staff, who had been forced to seek refuge in our office, converting filing cabinets into barricades.”
She said the rioters what “sought to degrade and destroy was not only a building, hallowed as it is. What they were assaulting were the institutions, the values, the ideals that generations of Americans have marched, picketed, and shed blood to establish and defend.”
She then lobbied for her party’s “voting rights” measures.
President Trump, who had scheduled, then canceled, a news conference for Thursday, issued a statement that focused on how the Democrat administration was using the riot of a year ago to divert America’s attention from multiple crises that they have allowed to develop.
He said, “Due to inept leadership that gave us open borders, COVID incompetence, loss of energy independence, a military in chaos, rampant inflation, corrupt elections, and lack of world standing, our Nation, perhaps for the first time, has lost its confidence.”
He charged Biden has been “destroying our Nation with insane policies of open Borders, corrupt Elections, disastrous energy policies, unconstitutional mandates, and devastating school closures.”
He said Biden is trying “to further divide America.”
“This political theater is all just a distraction for the fact Biden has completely and totally failed. The Democrats want to own this day of January 6th so they can stoke fears and divide America. I say, let them have it because America sees through their lies and polarizations.”
He noted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s partisan special committee to “investigate” the Jan. 6 events, which is recognized by many as a Democratic way to incorporated those circumstances into their campaigns against Republicans, and wondered why it was not investigating the full events of the 2020 race.
“It’s because they don’t have the answers or justifications for what happened. They got away with something, and it is leading to our Country’s destruction,” Trump wrote. “They want all conversation concerning the Election ‘Canceled.’ Just look at the numbers, they speak for themselves. They are not justifiable, so the complicit media just calls it the Big Lie, when in actuality the Big Lie was the Election itself.”
The Daily Mail called Biden’s address the “most searing attack on his predecessor to date.”
The report noted that once again, Biden described last year’s events as an “armed insurrection,” when the rioters were neither armed nor have they been charged with “insurrection.”
Then Biden claimed he “did not want to turn it into a contemporary political battle between me and the president. It’s way beyond that. It’s way beyond that,” the Daily Mail said.
Multiple GOP members have criticized Democrats for turning the anniversary into a “political event.”
In fact, Democrats have planned a multitude of events regarding the riot from a year ago, including a “moment of reflection” on the House floor, a “moment of silence” on the House floor, “testimonials” about what Democrats did that day, and a “bicameral prayer vigil.”
Democrats, in fact, have toyed with the idea of trying to ban President Trump – and dozens of other Republicans – from running for office again, a move that is constitutionally questionable, would be challenged in court, and undoubtedly would set a precedent for the GOP to act against Democrats when they are in the majority.
Democrats also want to have a “trial” over Jan. 6 that would be televised.
WND reported earlier when research revealed that Zuckerberg handed over a total of $419.5 million to the Center for Technology and Civil Life and the Center for Election Innovation and Research leading up to the 2020 presidential election, and the two groups used it to buy Democrat votes.
With that money, a person could purchase 137,540,983 Chick-fil-A sandwiches. Or 276,550 new Ferrari F8 Tributos, or 278 homes in San Francisco. Or one presidential election.
The warning came from William Doyle, a principal researcher at Caesar Rodney Election Research Institute in Irving, Texas, who explained his findings in a report at The Federalist.
He said Zuckerberg’s money was used “to turn out likely Democratic voters.”
Not through traditional political spending, but through a “targeted, private takeover of government election operations by nominally non-partisan – but demonstrably ideological – non-profit organizations.”
There already had been concerns expressed about Zuckerberg’s millions of dollars that were given to various mostly leftist elections officials across the country during the 2020 presidential race.
At least one state already is formally reviewing what happened, and how it impacted the election.
Doyle explained analysis work done by his team shows Zuckerbucks, as they have been derogatorily labeled by some, “significantly increased Joe Biden’s vote margin in key swing states.”
“This unprecedented merger of public election offices with private resources and personnel is an acute threat to our republic, and should be the focus of electoral reform efforts moving forward,” he warned.
“The 2020 election wasn’t stolen — it was likely bought by one of the world’s wealthiest and most powerful men pouring his money through legal loopholes.”
He explained the $419.5 million “came with strings attached. Every CTCL and CEIR grant spelled out in great detail the conditions under which the grant money was to be used.”
This resulted in the “infiltration of election offices at the city and county level by left-wing activists, and using those offices as a platform to implement preferred administrative practices, voting methods, and data-sharing agreements, and as well as to launch intensive outreach campaigns in areas heavy with Democratic voters.”
Doyle reported in Wisconsin, for example, “vote navigators” helped voters “to answer questions, assist in ballot curing … and witness absentee ballot signatures.”
“CTCL demanded the promotion of universal mail-in voting through suspending election laws, extending deadlines that favored mail-in over in-person voting, greatly expanding opportunities for ‘ballot curing,’ expensive bulk mailings, and other lavish ‘community outreach’ programs that were directed by private activists,” the report said.
Also involved were unmonitored private dropboxes and novel forms of “mail-in ballot electioneering.”
The money spent through Zuckerberg’s strategy fell only a few million short of what states and the federal government spent for “COVID-19-related” election expenses.
And the two organizations, while chartered as non-partisan non-profits, were “highly partisan,” the report found.
The report noted of 26 grants of $1 million or more that CTCL gave to cities in Arizona and six other states, “25 went to areas Biden won in 2020.”
In Wisconsin, “The CTCL funds boosted Democratic-voting Green Bay resources to $47 per voter, while most rural areas still had the same $4 per voter. Similar funding disparities occurred near Detroit, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Flint, Dallas, Houston, and other cities that received tens of millions of dollars of CTCL money.”
Doyle noted that elections have been a government function, not for private concerns, because “private organizations are not subject to the rules for public employees and institutions — they are not required to hold public hearings, cannot be monitored via open-records requests and other mechanisms of administrative and financial transparency, are not subject to the normal checks and balances of the governmental process, and are not accountable to voters if the public disapproves of their actions.”
The result of Zuckerberg’s spending was “to create a ‘shadow’ election system with a built-in structural bias that systematically favored Democratic voters over Republican voters.”
Doyle reported, “We call this the injection of structural bias into the 2020 election, and our analysis shows it likely generated enough additional votes for Biden to secure an Electoral College victory in 2020.”
WND also reported that more than one-third of voters who chose Joe Biden were not aware of the evidence linking the former vice president to corrupt financial dealings with China through his son Hunter.
Had they known, according to the survey commissioned bv the Media Research Center, President Trump would have won at least 289 Electoral College votes.
The survey found that 13% voters of the voters who said they were unaware of the scandals would not have voted for Biden had they been made aware.
That amounted to 4.6% of Biden’s total votes.
“It is an indisputable fact that the media stole the election. The American electorate was intentionally kept in the dark,” said MRC President Brent Bozell. “During the height of the scandal surrounding Hunter Biden’s foreign dealings, the media and the big tech companies did everything in their power to cover it up. Twitter and Facebook limited sharing of the New York Post’s reports, and the liberal media omitted it from their coverage or dismissed it as Russian disinformation.”
He said the media and Silicon Valley “were fully aware of this, so they actively tried to prevent it from reaching the American public.”
“The American people deserved to know the truth; now it’s too late,” he said.
An MRC analysis of the survey by McLaughlin & Associates concluded the 4.6% shift in votes would have put Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin in the Trump victory column.
Newsbusters, a division of MRC, said voters were asked: “At the time you cast your vote for President, were you aware that evidence exists in emails, texts, eyewitness testimony and banking transactions that the FBI has been investigating since last year directly linking Joe Biden to a corrupt financial arrangement between a Chinese company with connections to the Chinese communist party and Hunter Biden’s business, which may have personally benefited Joe Biden financially?’”
The poll found 27% were not aware.
During the last presidential debate, Trump confronted Biden about the millions of dollars his son Hunter Biden got from business deals in Russia, China, Ukraine and other nations while his father was vice president. The president noted new evidence from emails from an abandoned laptop now in the possession of the FBI and two former business partners indicating Joe Biden was the “big guy” who was to receive a cut of a deal with a firm linked to the Chinese Communist Party.
“I think you owe an explanation to the American people,” the president said. “Maybe you can do it now.”
Biden claimed: “I have not taken a penny from any foreign source in my life. I have not taken a single penny from any country whatsoever ever.”
Trump described the Biden family as a “vacuum cleaner,” sucking up money from nefarious overseas business deals.
Biden insisted there was nothing wrong with his son getting paid a total of $3.1 million from the Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma while the former vice president was overseeing Ukraine policy. At the time, however, State Department officials raised concern about an apparent conflict of interest because Burisma was under investigation for corruption. Joe Biden later publicly boasted that he threatened to withhold American aid to Ukraine if the president didn’t fire the country’s top prosecutor, who was investigating Burisma.
See video of Joe Biden recalling how he successfully pressured Ukrainian officials to fire the prosecutor who was targeting Burisma:
Trump also had pointed out the evidence that Hunter Biden’s firm got $3.5 million from Russian billionaire Elena Baturina, the wife of the former mayor of Moscow; that Hunter Biden also opened a joint bank account with a Chinese national linked to the communist government; and while “Joe Biden advocated for legislation favored by big banks that made it harder for struggling Americans to declare bankruptcy, Biden’s son Hunter was ‘earning’ hundreds of thousands of dollars in ‘consultant fees’ from one of those banks, MBNA.”
The campaign released a long list of additional conflict-of-interest concerns involving Biden and his family members.
“While Biden was vice president, his son Hunter joined him on Air Force Two for a trip to China. While in Beijing he arranged for his Chinese business partner to meet his father. Ten days after the trip, Hunter’s firm received an approval from the Chinese government-owned Bank of China that paved the way for more than a billion dollars in business for Hunter’s firm,” the report said.
The Washington Examiner also pointed out that Republicans, during the 2020 process, used the same procedures and precedents to challenge results that Democrats had used multiple times.
“After all, some House Democrats objected to the certification of Electoral College results in the last three presidential elections won by Republicans. In 2001, after George W. Bush had won the Florida recount, some House Democrats tried to halt the electoral vote counting. Democrats did it again in 2005, after Bush won reelection. And in 2017, after Trump’s election, a number of Democrats objected to certification. (In fact, one of the members of today’s Jan. 6 committee, Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin, was one of those who objected to certification in 2017,)” the report explained.
“In 2005, after Democrats alleged voting irregularities in Ohio, Democratic objections actually came to a vote in the House. It was no small thing; decertifying Ohio could have thrown the election to Democratic candidate John Kerry. The move failed on a 31 to 267 vote. The 31 voting to stop the electoral count were, of course, Democrats, including Rep. Bennie Thompson, now chairman of the Jan. 6 committee. Eighty-eight Democrats voted against the challenge. In an indication of what was perhaps a lack of interest in the subject, 80 Democrats did not vote. In the Senate, the vote on the Ohio challenge was 1 to 74, the one vote in favor of the challenge being California Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer.”
Perhaps of note is the fact that when President Trump was elected in 2016, Democrats as a party worked with the previous administration of Barack Obama, and their losing candidate, Hillary Clinton, to create the “Russia collusion” narrative that claimed Trump was not the legitimate president.
Some continue those arguments to this day, even though that narrative was been debunked and, in fact, now is the subject of a federal special counsel’s probe that already has produced indictments and a guilty plea.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact email@example.com.