by Roger L. Simon
In the aftermath of this month’s CNN town hall event with former President Donald Trump—largely viewed, even by the beleaguered network, as a fiasco—it may be time to again examine whether the 2020 presidential election was legitimate.
Why? Haven’t we had enough of this?
Well, yes, I understand. Time to move on and all that. You can’t fix the past, etc.
But it was CNN, those tribunes of the left, who actually brought it up at the town hall, thinking that Trump would take the bait, start complaining about 2020, and alienate everyone.
But that didn’t happen; the reverse occurred. The audience, largely students, enthusiastically sided with the former president, even when he discussed 2020, and disdained the “nasty person” appointed by CNN whom the network wrongly thought would make a fool of him.
But I’m not here to beat a dead horse. I’m here to place blame on why the 2020 presidential election remains a festering wound in our country, with millions of our citizens convinced it was a fraud.
Many people and places are obviously involved but one person more than any other must be cited for shutting down any serious governmental investigation of that election—then-Attorney General of the United States William Pelham Barr.
On Dec. 1, 2020, less than a month after Election Day, Bill Barr declared, in an interview with The Associated Press, “To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election.”
This statement went around the world and was never revised by Barr, who later repeated it, in essence, many times.
But one must ask, how could he have come to that conclusion so quickly in a country of roughly 330 million residing in 50 states, many of which had different election laws of their own choosing as stipulated in the U.S. Constitution?
Barr provided an answer in the same AP interview—that U.S. attorneys and FBI agents had been working on it, following up on complaints and other information.
Whoa. Looking back (and even then), Barr just gave away the store.
U.S. attorneys and FBI agents? Which ones, one might ask? Can we get access through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to their emails, text messages, and documents? (Good luck.)
You would have to be living under the proverbial rock not to realize—do I need to go over things such as the Steele dossier and the false FISA statements again—not to realize that these two groups skew somewhere between 90 and 95 percent to the left?
What would you predict they would have said about these various “complaints”?
Barr is far from an idiot and would have known the bias inherent in their reports even better than we do.
What he actually did is make Jan. 6, 2021—despite all the debates about what happened and all the endless propaganda surrounding it—basically irrelevant before it occurred.
Given Barr’s position as attorney general, and a Republican one no less, he had effectively already closed the door on Election 2020 on Dec. 1 of that year.
That he did this with the AP was well-planned because he knew the news service, having gone left years before, would eat up what he was saying and ask no questions.
Why did he do it?
It’s pretty obvious. He had come to dislike Trump to a level approaching Trump Derangement Syndrome. Even though a moderate conservative, Barr was a longtime member of the deep (administrative) state’s Bush division. Despite recognizing that Trump had some good policies, he came to see him as a threat.
He also disliked him personally, complaining that Trump was treating him as his personal attorney. While that may have had some validity, is Trump to be blamed for following in the footsteps of virtually every other president? This was particularly true of his predecessor, Barack Obama. Very few complained (and certainly no one in the MSM) when his attorney general, Eric Holder, publicly described himself as “Obama’s wingman.”
And no one is a greater “wingman” than current Attorney General Merrick Garland is for Joe Biden.
Where has the Garland Justice Department (DOJ) been all these years on the bank records showing $10 million in payments (for no discernible goods or services) to the Biden family from China that were revealed by the House Oversight Committee?
Any DOJ could have gotten those same records in a matter of hours, although the current one obviously had no interest in them.
Since the Chinese Communist Party was involved, this is a coverup that makes Watergate seem like cheating in Parcheesi.
This unspeakable corruption, probably the greatest in our history, can be read as Barr’s gift to America in his slamming the door on any true investigation of 2020. Look what came in.
Does this mean I think Trump won?
It’s certainly possible, but in all honesty, I don’t know. Certainly, there was hanky-panky. We have seen a considerable amount in Dinesh D’Souza’s documentary “2000 Mules” and elsewhere.
But was that enough to turn an election? How could we know? Research into the matter has been blocked at every turn, by the DOJ and by the courts. Our friends in the media tell us it’s been “debunked,” a once rarely used word that has become extremely popular of late as shorthand to shut down discussion. It’s rarely accompanied by evidence.
Barr’s story is emblematic of the problem of the deep state in general. Many Republicans will only go so far, in fact not very far, to defeat it since they drink at the same trough.
Barr was, as my grandmother would say, “to the manor born,” his father a onetime headmaster of Manhattan’s prestigious Dalton School. That was the same time, as it happens, a certain Jeffrey Epstein was teaching there without a college degree. No one knows how that was possible.
Bill Barr was the one who assured us, also after a very short time, that Epstein died by suicide in a New York prison. This was due to, he said, a “perfect storm of screw-ups.” We are now learning of the “financier’s” myriad supposed connections with our intelligence services. In the current presidential campaign, both Trump and Vivek Ramaswamy have spoken of abolishing the CIA.
Does this all fit together or is it happenstance?
Perhaps another candidate, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., could shed some light on this. Time will tell.
First published in the Epoch Times.