California is being used to justify handing the crown to Hillary despite the fact she conceded claiming she has 2 million more votes for her. But California is where her margin was 3.7 million over Trump. That means Trump beat Hillary even in the popular vote in the rest of the nation excluding California by 1.7 million. This notion that the “American people” voted for Hillary is not exactly on point.

The allegations of large scale voter fraud in California to keep Bernie down for Hillary are widespread. There was even a recent study by Stanford University that established Hillary Clinton‘s campaign pre-rigged the system to steal the nomination from Bernie Sanders.(stanford-university-confirms-democratic-election-fraud-your-news-wire) Then there were the DNC emails showing the conspiracy within the Democratic Party to steal the nomination from Bernie. This was never more apparent than in California where Bernie Sanders voters were likely robbed of a legitimate candidate—and they know how it happened and who is to blame. So is California justification to Hand Hillary the crown?

This claim that Hillary won the popular vote is interesting. If we exclude California’s 3.7 million margin for Hillary over Trump, that means Trump got 1.7 million more votes than Hillary in the whole country eliminating California. She is claiming perhaps the votes were hacked in Michighan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. What about California? If it was rigged for her against Bernie, can it be trusted at all? California is the most left-leaning state in the union. They tax the highest as if you lived in Germany. If you live in California, stay away from dividend stocks and get out of the state if you plan to retire. In California, the top rate is 13.3%. Hawaii comes in not far behind at 11%. And California is in an endless cycle of raising taxes because it is incapable of managing its affairs. The worse states to retire in are the Blue (Democratic States) with New York the WORST and California in the top 10. You work hard your whole life and then they still demand more even when you no longer work. So much for caring for the average working person.

The likelihood of voter fraud with individuals voting twice or deal people magically voting is really quite low. The AP citied a study of Loyola Law School that found just “31 instances involving allegations of voter impersonation out of 1 billion votes cast in U.S. elections between 2000 and 2014.” In yet another study by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School, they reported that they “found many reports of people voting twice or ballots being cast on behalf of dead people were largely the result of clerical errors that suggested wrongdoing when none had occurred.” They added: “Voter fraud is so incredibly rare that it has no impact on the integrity of our elections…You are more likely to be struck by lightning, more likely to see a UFO, than to be a victim of voter fraud.” So a recount is rather absurd from this perspective. The only way to challenge such a vote is to claim rigging by those counting. That is, after all, what Stalin said: elections are determined by those who count, not those who vote.

The entire election cycle seems to reflect Karl Marx’s view that supported his theory of a totalitarian state:

The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them.—Karl Marx

The Washington Post was once respected for this is where Woodward & Berstein broke the story of Watergate that took down Richard Nixon. But their endorsement of Hillary was way over the top: “The Democratic nominee is not the lesser of two evils. She is a choice Americans can be proud of.” (Adriana Usero, Julio Negron/The Washington Post). The Washington Post took a complete about face with Hillary compared to Nixon. This calls into question their impartiality and exposes the paper as just a propaganda one-sided reporter with Marxist roots. Nixon just so happened to be a Republican. Had he been a Democrat, they would no doubt have still endorsed Nixon and ignored any wrongdoing as they have done with Hillary.

The Washington Post is actually blaming Putin for Hillary’s loss. The logic is stunning. They blame Putin for hacking the DNC and handing the docs to Wikileaks to defeat Hillary. They assign no blame to the shenanigans of the Democrats and they do not address the content of the emails, which demonstrate that the Democrats conspired with the media to raise Trump as the Republican candidate and then continue to tear him down in hopes of crowning Hillary as America’s first family once again. The say Putin hacking the DNC was the most “alarming story” during the election. In other words, this is like blaming the guards who caught the intruders that turned out to be Watergate. After all, if they had been drinking coffee and eating donuts or just sleeping as they should have been doing, then Watergate would never have been exposed.

The Washington Post is the mouthpiece of the “Democratic establishment” conspiring against the truth and the people of the United States simply to further a Marxist agenda. They published Larry Summer’s calling for the end of the $100 bill. They would endorse the surrender of all liberty to further the Marxist agenda of the left. This is a very said day for journalism that has become propaganda.

We are entering a very dark phase in this battle to retain our liberty. A proposal now being whispered behind the curtain in Europe is to impose a tax on withdrawing your own money from an ATM. The banks support this measure as a whole because they see this as preventing bank runs.

Nobody will look at the direction we are headed. I am deeply concerned that these type of proposals will send the West in a real revolution not much different from that of Russia in 1917. The divide between left and right is getting much deeper and the left is hell bent on stripping those who produce of their liberty and assets. This type of confrontation is in line with our War Cycle, which we will update in 2017.

This is the most dangerous period we are heading into for governments will respond only in their own self-interest to survive. The socialists hate those who produce. That is just the bottom line. Nobody should have wealth more than they and this is the same human emotion that has cost tens of millions of lives in civil conflicts through out the centuries. Proof this is a persistyent problem is the fact taht even the Ten Commandments state clearly that socialism is wrong: “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house … or anything that belongs to your neighbor” (Exodus 20:17).  Nevertheless, this is repuidiated by socialists who say it’s not fair that anyone has something more than they do. This material jealousy has been the source of so much death throughout the centuries because it has been exploited by the ruling class to justify their theivery.

We will review all our models and update this after the U.S. inauguration since the socialists are trying to figure out how to steal the election from Trump. There is no way to overturn Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania without fraud and they need all three overturned to claim victory. This will not end nicely. The divide will only get bigger. The future is anything but stable and safe.

The war on cash is in full swing. The whispers behind the curtain are starting to get louder. The headlines in Australia demonstrate how the press is already conspiring against the people. The new slogan rising is Cash is for Criminals. ABC of Australia ran the story:

Cash is for criminals: Why we should scrap big notes

Hillary’s people have come out joining Stein as long as she puts up the wasted money. “Now that a recount is underway, we believe we have an obligation to the more than 64 million Americans who cast ballots for Hillary Clinton to participate in ongoing proceedings to ensure that an accurate vote count will be reported,”  Marc Erik Elias said on behalf of her campaign.

Here is the real bottom-line. They would need to overturn Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin to change the outcome. Anything less than that would not alter the outcome. While Trump won in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, he holds a slim lead in Michigan, where a Republican presidential candidate hadn’t won since 1988, has a lead of 10,704 votes. That is far more than any recount has ever been enacted or changed the outcome. More than ten thousand is probably enough of a cushion to prevail. Trump has 290 votes to Clinton’s 232, and even if Michigan went to Clinton she still would trail, 290-248. Pennsylvania and Florida, require the vote difference between the two candidates to be less than one-half of 1 percentage point. Wisconsin and Pennsylvania conduct post-election audits, Michigan and many other states do not. In Michigan, a recount is triggered automatically if the margin is less than 2,000 votes. None of those states qualify for a recount on the numbers. There is nothing but Stein raising money claiming she will make a petition that would not change the outcome without all three states being overturned.

Clinton now leads Trump with 2 million votes in the popular count, but a close look reveals that this is made up of just California where she had 3.7 million more votes than Trump. This is a key factor for California is typically a left-wing state with the highest level of taxation in the country. Many top celebrities have residents outside of California to beat taxes while espousing they would leave the USA if Trump won.

Trump leads by little more than 22,000 votes in Wisconsin and 70,638 votes in Pennsylvania. Any recount must be completed by the Dec. 13 federal deadline. With this much of a lead in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, there is no chance of overturning the election. This calls into question if Stein is simply doing this to raise money. Clinton is not chipping in and just getting a free-ride. She obviously looked at the numbers and can see this is a joke especially when Wisconsin and Pennsylvania automatically conduct post-election audits. Asking for a recount is more fraud than anything else.

I warned that this election was not over that easily. The press will continue to attack Trump for anything and everything. They are hell-bent upon destroying the fabric of the nation and will not let this go. They will be responsible for the civil unrest and ultimately the breakup of the United States. The divide is simply too great this time around. California should separate and take their socialists with them – please.

There is a statute that governs the appointment of electoral college “electors” that will come into play if anyone tries to upset the election. While the College is to vote on December 19th, 2016, the actual deadline is 6 days prior or December 13th, 2016. Moreover, if there were an attempt to vote for Hillary despite the fact that the election is based upon state rights since this is the “UNITED STATES” and not one sovereign federal state, this becomes very critical. Even if Hillary won the popular vote, that cannot legally manner.

Let’s say 25 million aliens became citizens in New York City and they all voted for one candidate. To allow that to decide the election and not state by state, destroys the very fabric of what the “united states” was all about converting it to a single federal state. The popular vote cannot be allowed to overrule the states or you will find that the less populous states can be subjugated by the majority. They would no longer have any voice in a democratic process. Therefore, this would violate equal protection of the law right to the very heart of the design of the USA. If the electoral college anointed Hillary, this would be grounds for separatist movements and I would have to support that because it would be a fundamental restructuring on the nation ending the “united” states and federalizing the nation.

The statue that will come into play makes this six day rule very clear. If this is not complied with, we will see this in the Supreme Court.

3 U.S. Code § 5 – Determination of controversy as to appointment of electors

If any State shall have provided, by laws enacted prior to the day fixed for the appointment of the electors, for its final determination of any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State, by judicial or other methods or procedures, and such determination shall have been made at least six days before the time fixed for the meeting of the electors, such determination made pursuant to such law so existing on said day, and made at least six days prior to said time of meeting of the electors, shall be conclusive, and shall govern in the counting of the electoral votes as provided in the Constitution, and as hereinafter regulated, so far as the ascertainment of the electors appointed by such State is concerned.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 644, 62 Stat. 673.)