Another reason why Trump is right: No conceding a rigged election
By Selwyn Duke
"Hey, lie just like Hillary Clinton and the rest of the establishment" is the message. After Donald Trump said he'd only accept the results of the November 8 contest if they were fair, pundits and politicians disgorged a new narrative: Trump has demeaned our "democracy" and, as coward-con John Podhoretz put it, "has earned his place in the history of American ignominy." Stick a fork in Trump — he's done. Of course, it seems as if we heard that epitaph about every two weeks during the primaries.
And even making the point that Ozone Man Al Gore challenged the 2000 election doesn't deter the critics. Their not-so-clever response is that he never said before the votes were even cast that he wouldn't accept the outcome, which misses the obvious fact that Gore was never asked about the matter before the votes were cast.
No doubt, though, Gore would have said he'd accept the outcome — and then challenge it, anyway. And it has been opined that Trump should have proceeded likewise and that no one would have blamed him if he later did mount a challenge.
Translation: Trump should do things just like everyone else — play the game — just like the establishment.
You see a problem with that?
Trump's whole claim to political fame, the wind beneath his White House wings, has been that he doesn't play establishment games. Of course the establishment wants him to operate by their rules, just as other European generals wanted Napoleon to abide by the established rules of warfare (and lose). But given that Trump is the anti-establishment candidate, it is that very course of action that would be a liability.
I know I speak for many when saying I want someone who doesn't play the game, someone who's willing to fight, who stands up and serves notice: you engage in dirty tricks and try stealing this election and I'll be just as dirty. I'll throw sand in your eyes and kick your kneecaps off.
Moreover, playing the game here is to place yourself in a position no honorable man could abide: a dilemma in which you either must accept a stolen election or go back on your word. And this is called "respecting our democracy"?
As for the GOP establishment, its advice is the voice of the opportunistic leper in Braveheart, waxing romantic about "compromise." Of course, you dupes, the Left wants you to be good little gentlemen who posture about accepting the "outcome of our ‘democratic' process." This roll-over, three-monkeys attitude is what allows the Left to steal elections with impunity. And this is what they're upset about. Trump is spoiling their con.
You darn well know, you leftist snakes in the grass, that vote fraud is rampant. It was never a secret in establishment circles, but even the dimmest bulbs can view Project Veritas' "Rigging the Election" series and watch Democrat officials and operatives admit there's "a lot of vote fraud" and discuss how they're going to commit even more of it. And what should our reaction be? Gentility? If someone were plotting to steal your car and were brazen enough to not scuttle his nefarious plans even though you were onto him, you'd feel justified thwarting the theft with a tire iron to the head. What should our response be when someone intends to steal our right to self-determination?
This brings us to the notion that Trump threatens our republic (not "democracy") and to create a constitutional crisis. Here's a clue:
When our elections are being undermined there already is a threat to our republic and a constitutional crisis — and a grave one.
Shining the light of truth on this is not the disease, but the cure. Oh, it can be painful in the way nauseating cancer treatments or excising a malignant tumor can be so. But far worse is sitting by, head in the sand, as metastasis proceeds and death grows nigh.
To ignore corruption is to perpetuate it and become complicit in its spread and institutionalization; it is to descend into Third Worldism. And to sit idly by as someone steals your vote and your civilization isn't the behavior of a gentleman, but of a coward.