Conspiracy and fraud in the US
Conspiracy and fraud in the US
De facto global struggle and possibility of Donald Trump coming back
November 27, 2021.
Here it is shown that the United States, with the presidential electoral fraud of the year 2020, has been contaminated with Rentism, a deadly variant of the Venezuelan virus of the Curse of Abundance. The disease is in its initial stage and it will not be easy to stop a process of convergence towards the contamination of the entire nation. It is characterized by being highly contagious and is already spreading around the world like a deadly pandemic. Once fraud is proven using Economic Theory tools, some key questions about the plausibility of the conspiracy theory are addressed, as well as the possible replacement of a democratic republic in the United States by a regime without the rule of law in which a cartel of international mafias, pulls the strings of politics and the economy. Such a cartel, which we can call the Deep State, consists of an alliance between China and the large transnational companies. The current next gen war is described, including the key use of global cultural weapons of mind control and citizen manipulation. Given the high combat morale of citizens such as Michael Lindell and Sidney Powell and the remaining patriots, politicians and honest institutions, it is shown that there is a significant probability, after heavy battles in various combat scenarios, of a reversal of the effects of the exogenous adverse shock experienced with the electoral fraud and the return of Donald Trump.
Introduction. Thesis and results
This is a revised version of this essay:
Here I improve the arguments in general, in particular the ones related with Signaling Games, and the de facto game of Hawk and Chicken, for which I produced a technical companion paper:
I also focus here on the issue of demonstrating that both, the electoral system, and the judicial system have so far failed the citizens and the democratic system. And make a more clear prediction regarding the possible outcome of the de facto confrontation the US is now in. Taking all that into account, I present proof of conspiracy and fraud in the US 2020 presidential election. In the same vein there is empirical research, such as that of Michael Lindell and Maricopa County. And theoretical research like that of Dr. Douglas Frank, based on Statistics. Our proof is based on standard economic theory applied to the case in question, using public empirical evidence. It has the utility of reaching robust conclusions about conspiracy and fraud even if detailed empirical evidence on vote counting is unsuccessful due to political and judicial obstacles.
The reason is that situations like this of asymmetric information between citizens and politicians on variables such as electoral fraud occur every day in economics and business, for example in the relationship between a company and someone looking for work in it, and there are methods to make inferences about unobservable variables like these using observable variables as proxies of them, such as the public behavior of politicians suspected of corruption. While empirical fraud research seeks to examine the variables of vote counting and vote quality itself, our research is based on the public and notorious behavior of politicians on transparency in this matter. If they hide something, the suspicion about them is justified, as in the case of Biden and Dominion.
The verification of fraud, given its nature, its magnitude, its geopolitical importance, makes us explore, first of all, the hypothesis of a change in the political system in the United States. By means of a new generation coup D'Etat (without taking a single shot), the US would be going from a democratic republican system, in which the rule of law governs, towards a rentistic one. It is a variation of the disease of the curse of abundance, suffered by countries like Venezuela. In this system, a cartel of rent-seeking mafias capture the institutions of the state, through politicians and paid puppet officials. Rentistic populism is key in this type of regime, in which deceptive gifts to disadvantaged sectors complement the mechanisms of systematic electoral fraud. The symptoms that we see in this process confirm the hypothesis, noting that it is only the beginning of the contagion of the disease, and that there are still antibodies fighting the virus, which may very well, as we predict based on a de facto Hawk vs Chicken game, reverse evil and rescue the republic.
Given the magnitude and geopolitical importance of the conspiracy, we put forward the hypothesis that the cartel of rent-seeking mafias is not only national, but international, and involves China, Iran, Venezuela and large private financial corporations, media, pharmaceutical companies, the military industrial apparatus, and large technology companies. Our analysis confirms this hypothesis, likewise, and characterizes the attempt to initiate a geopolitical, economic and cultural takeover of the entire world by what we could call the Deep Worldwide State, DWS, an extension of the corresponding expression used in other contexts, and applicable here as well.
On the weapons of this coup, we identify the cultural, media, technological and spiritual ones. This hypothesis is also confirmed by our analysis, to the point that we identify mechanisms of mental enslavement of citizens by the DWS, whose first ministry is the Ministry of Truth, announced and promoted by Bill Gates, from Microsoft. The defense mechanisms against the virus, therefore, imply the fight for truth and freedom of expression, mental and spiritual, and we identify that combat morale is decisive in this factual confrontation. It is a struggle between good and evil, in times that we can very well identify as apocalyptic, given the implications for the human race, in danger of extinction, as the Christian prophets themselves have been warning. We predict in the end, using game theory, that good will triumph over evil, although the war will be global and very bloody, with possible deaths of billions of people, which by the way is one of the objectives of the DWS, for alleged ecological reasons.
Although rigorous conclusions are reached from the theoretical point of view on these matters, a plain language is used, with understandable examples for the common citizen, for which basic concepts are explained in an extensive and detailed way and from different angles. The explanation to experts would be more direct and simple, but our objective is to clarify the panorama for those citizens and provide a useful tool of political struggle for those who seek to rescue their republic, having made an adequate diagnosis that gives them certainty about the theory of conspiracy and fraud, on the one hand, about the factual, not only legal and political-electoral nature of the struggle, on the other hand, and formulating an adequate strategy with its tactics and weapons that would allow the war to be won, not just the battles raised at this time.
It is natural for the leaders of a political conspiracy and many of their supporters to not admit their faults in public and demand that the American people hold them innocent until proven otherwise in court. They even attack people, not just their ideas, who dare to question this. Here I demonstrate why, if we follow the scientific method applied to business administration and politics, political agents accused of conspirators in our case study are guilty of fraud even without a court sentence: they are guilty until proven innocent by themselves. This may seem outrageous to many people, particularly the majority of Democratic Party voters and even many Republicans. But, as I recall here, it is the main foundation of a representative democracy.
Of course, the principle of the presumption of innocence applies to all citizens and private organizations. But politicians, public institutions and private companies such as Dominion who participate in political elections and judicial decisions on fraud, are completely different subjects in a political trial, which is different, although related, to a legal one. What is strange, and symptomatic for us in terms of the weakness of democratic institutions and culture at this time, is that we believe otherwise due to the influence of the media and other cultural mechanisms, and that we have accepted it as fair, the politically correct, when it comes from a doctrine that harms the citizens, is unfair and inefficient, and benefits its enemies: the rent-seekers and their political puppets.
As an example of the above, the crux of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, freedom of speech, is actually based on the fact that all politicians and public institutions are guilty until proven innocent. This is consistent with the optimal, as we will show, which places the burden of proof about their innocence on politicians and public institutions, not on citizens. In other words, the Constitution and the foundations of the scientific method allow a citizen to criticize a politician or public institution and label them corrupt, for example, even without judicial evidence.
This allows us to conclude that what a judge did to accept the opening of a defamation suit, requested by Dominion against Michael Lindell, Sidney Powell and Rudy Guiliani, is unconstitutional. It represents a terrible precedent for an attack on the most fundamental political rights of citizens in a democracy. Placing the burden of proof on the shoulders of a citizen contradicts the very foundation of that political system.
Dominion, even though it is a private firm, is being tried by people for its actions in the public realm and for that, it is also guilty until it proves its innocence, as we will show here. It has the burden of proof for the matters of his performance in electoral matters, as will be clear from our argument. And with more reason if we consider it is its obligation to consumers as a private company in a market that works, in which there is competition and no market power. This typical practice of a monopoly is also noticeable in this case, which also makes us suspect a collusion, illegal as well as inefficient for society, between a private company with certain political groups.
The ruling of this judge, therefore, grants even more power to the powerful and deprives citizens of the defense that public institutions should make of their rights, since they are in a weaker position due to the operation of the representative democracy system. The judge with this deprives the citizens of the property rights over the republic.
As we will see in this paper, that is what happens in countries infected by Rentism, a variation of the deadly virus of the Curse of Abundance that has killed democracies in countries like Venezuela. In those countries, a cartel of rent seekers captures, through mafia practices, not only the executive branch of the government, using their representatives as puppets, but also the other public powers, the justice system and the legislative bodies. That cartel also manipulates the elections, captures the media and many other public and private institutions, also using rentistic populism to induce people, especially the homeless, the disadvantaged, the discriminated, such as the black population, poor, women, homosexuals, the unemployed and workers, the elderly, etc, to vote for their candidates.
An interesting inference from our analysis in this essay, based on Signaling Games, is that the willingness of Michael Lindell and Sidney Powell to present evidence for their fraud claims shows that they are heroes of the people. Given that rentism implies a de facto struggle in which the one who wins is the one who has more relative strength, we will show that this heroic combat morality, fueled by religious beliefs and/or patriotic feelings, is what could prevent the Deep State from taking over the entire nation. And the entire world too, since, as we will see, rentism does not stop with the presidency in one country, but wants all the cake and all the cakes; all public and even private institutions, and the servitude and even slavery of the great majority of the population, using more and more their conquered spaces.
As will be clear in some detail, the thesis that the alleged conspirators maintain regarding the lack of evidence of fraud in the United States and the false inference that this clears the suspicion against them is based on the use of the fallacy of ignorance: "Since the fraud has not been proven to be true, it is false." We will show that this argument is wrong and that its objective is to pass the burden of proof to its opponents, the American people, while, on the other hand, they use their gangster resources in parallel to prevent that people from producing the evidence. They base their presumed innocence, for example, on the fact that Attorney General William Bar and some courts have said they found no significant evidence on fraud.
Contrary to that, what is very clear by now is that virtually all attempts to prove fraud in court were not made by the public institutions that are supposed to do so, such as the Department of Justice itself and the FBI. Some of these attempts were rejected on procedural grounds, for example at the level of the national Supreme Court of Justice. That is why the courts have so far not been able to really examine the evidence, since the burden of proof was not assumed by the entities prepared for it given their logistical and professional capacity and their role.
As I will argue here, the justice system has failed the country, and some private citizens, notably Sidney Powell and Michael Lindell, have tried to fill that void. Forensic audits that began in Maricopa County are making great progress in the process of establishing the truth throughout the territory, and that is predicted to continue in a developing hand-to-hand war, in which the de facto component has equal or more important than de jure one in this initial stage of the disease of rentism. If that system manages to control the entire nation, the relevant struggles will only be de facto, and democracy, with its rule of law, will have been lost.
At this time, the vast majority of the media have said that in the Maricopa audit it was verified that Biden was the winner of the election, because they make you believe that the important thing is the total vote count. But they have concealed that that audit showed that a large number of votes determining Biden's triumph have fundamental flaws, which invalidates the result, since it establishes a reasonable doubt in the face of the public. So, importantly, the question is no longer just about Biden, as a politician, but about the electoral system.
In fact, normally if the electoral system is reliable, the politician does not have to prove that there was no fraud. But in this case that system is under great suspicion. The same as the judicial system, which is thus added to the list of corruption suspects, who have the burden of proof to prove their innocence in front of the citizens. One thing, related to this institutional failure, is that this article shows that the fight is not between left and right, for example, but between corruption and honesty in politics, so it is not strange that a Republican, or a public official of the Donald Trump administration, such as William Bar, among others, is captured by the rent-seeking mafia cartel. Much more if they are people from the Democratic party already involved in the conspiracy from the aforementioned institutions. This reinforces the presumption of guilt of the electoral system and the judicial system.
On the other hand, as the fraud in Maricopa has been verified, I argue that there are incentives for a spiral to occur in forensic audits, since the evidence is quite similar everywhere, as we will detail with respect to a common pattern observed in the lower echelons of the alleged pyramid conspiracy. In this way, we will conclude that it is false, then, that the fraud allegation was found to be false, even in the presence of some negative results in the courts of law. What is certain is that fraud has a very high probability of being real, and we are in a war between truth and falsehood in this matter. Here we will use in a crucial way to identify which side the politicians take, whether of transparency to reveal the truth, or of the obstruction of the investigation in this regard. That will give us the political verdict, while the empirical evidence is finished verifying, on whether they are guilty or not, and whether there was fraud or not.
Another important issue that needs to be addressed in depth is that many US citizens involved in seeking evidence of fraud claim that there was a conspiracy to "cancel" the truth on this matter. That cancellation, according to them, as in the case of Michael Lindell, consisted of hiding the truth from media exposure and the Internet, on the one hand, and also to attack the prestige and interests of citizens, complainants and leaders who oppose the outcome of the electoral process. According to those citizens, this way of proceeding by canceling the truth has also involved the FBI (which harassed the whistleblowers instead of investigating the allegations), the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security, as well as many state and county officials, both Republicans, like Democrats. That claim is consistent with the theory we present here, which illustrates that the situation is essentially the same as a murder case carried out by a drug cartel: they want to erase incriminating evidence and silence witnesses, buying in the process some key officials from government, police, national and local congresses and the judicial system.
Our exercise can be taken as a theoretical simulation that guides us for political and judicial action, giving us a correct interpretation of reality, since an adequate remedy, an adequate political strategy, is based on an adequate diagnosis. My prediction about the outcome of this fierce and crucial war is that the truth will prevail, as American citizens will adopt the correct strategy, outlined here, and there is enough force to achieve the result, although that force crucially includes the issue of combat morale. I will try to contribute here both with the issue of diagnosis and the appropriate remedy in the efforts of citizens who fight for democracy and against the Deep State, using my abilities: economic theory and political experience in Venezuela. That experience, related to this topic, can be seen here:
The people’s political trial and the scientific method.
Can we condemn the conspirators for fraud without a court trial? In the next two sections I perform a simulated citizens political trial using two economics tools that allow us to prove fraud without looking at the evidence of the votes: the Principal-Agent theory, and Signaling Games. It requires an explanatory introduction to lay the foundations of the method used: the scientific one and its application to politics.
The economic profession has developed powerful methods to make inferences based on observed variables when people have to make decisions about non observable or purposefully hidden variables, such as incapacity or corruption. Those tools are applied in business administration, where similar situations are an everyday occurrence, and they are intimately related to the methodology natural and social sciences use in order to look for practical truth. For that matter, even in natural sciences you never claim to have the whole truth, but to count on the best theory available so far about reality. The falsificationist method allows humans to produce better theories when the current one, taken as the status quo of knowledge, is found to have trouble explaining new evidence. Absolute proof is really not observable, but you can learn more and more about it using that method. For this, an alternative hypothesis to the "null hypothesis" is formulated to test it, when we want to explain new evidence with which that hypothesis, until now the status quo, is not consistent.
In fact, that method is used in court trials too to decide if an accused person is guilty or innocent. The null hypothesis is that of innocence. If there are indications, presented by the accusers, to doubt it, the court, following the legal procedures, admits to opening a trial in which an exhaustive search of the possible evidence is encouraged. If in the process of evaluating that evidence, the judge and/or the jury find that it is convincing, also looking at the defense arguments, they adopt the alternative theory as the new status quo of society: the person is guilty.
But, as even in science, there is always the possibility of errors in that decision, which are of two kinds: The "type I" error occurs when the court convicts an innocent person (the alternative hypothesis is accepted when the null one was really true), while the “type II” error occurs when a criminal is acquitted (the null hypothesis is accepted when the alternative was really true). To minimize the likelihood of such errors, the court is mandated to examine the evidence very carefully to make the final decision, and sides with the status quo if it is not convincing enough. What is sought with this is to minimize the probability of error I, to accept the evidence only when there is sufficient conviction to admit the alternative hypothesis of guilt. It is clear that if the court puts too many obstacles to admitting evidence about the guilt of the accused, the risk of falling into a type II error increases: that of acquitting a guilty party. The court must weigh the evidence in order to decide, but knowing that they will side with the innocence initial assumption if the evidence against the accused is not convincing enough.
This is why the party to the conflict that proposes the alternative hypothesis, the accuser, naturally has the burden of proof, just as the scientist who challenges the status quo has to prove his claim with sufficient evidence to match his alternative theory. It has to be compelling enough to make the court renounce the status quo theory. The same is true in business administration. It should also happen in politics, but too often, as in our case, it does not, as we will see here, which in itself is a sign of something very important: this is not normal, much less optimal.
And now comes the surprise: as we will show, the null hypothesis in politics is that both Biden and Trump, as well as any politician and public institution or private companies that perform public work, such as Dominion, are guilty unless proven innocent. And they all bear the burden of proof. If Joe Biden, our lead case in this trial, doesn't provide enough evidence that there was no fraud, people should continue to suspect that he is guilty. The same goes for Dominion and similar companies that participated in the elections.
Now let's think about the issue of minimizing type I error, but with the null hypothesis changed from innocent to guilty. The first type of error in this case is to acquit a suspicious politician. Type II error consists in convicting an innocent politician. With this in mind, to apply to our case study, a significant number of the jury in our impeachment case, American citizens, find it unconvincing that Biden won this election. More than 50%, according to some surveys, think there was fraud. In the natural and social sciences, a type I error greater than 10% is generally not acceptable. The usual number is 5% or even less.
These numbers indicate that Biden, Dominion, the electoral system and the judiciary have not proven to the majority of the jury their innocence regarding the fraud. Citizens do not want to fall into the error of absolving, neither Biden nor the system that has validated his proclamation so far, of their presumption of guilt over this alleged fraud. And if those citizens examine the rest of the article, they are going to consolidate that suspicion of fraud and also will want to take action to reverse the injustice, because Donald Trump is acquitted in this trial, as we will see, and people do not want to fall into the type II error in this case: convicting an innocent politician of wrongdoing in this election.
Since Joe Biden took office, virtually no court has admitted cases for fraud, either because of procedural decisions, or because the party claiming fraud was not sufficiently prepared to prove the case. Now, it may seem strange, again, to many people, but based on what we have said, those who should have started the case against the fraud charge are Biden and his side, since both the judicial system, as well as the electoral system, are in doubt. Recall what was said in the introduction about forensic audit evidence in Maricopa County.
This is probably seen by many as extreme, but, as Dominion's case will illustrate using the market example, it is the practice that should be common and healthy if a democratic system works, as that guarantees that it remains as such, and although what has happened seems normal to many, perhaps because it has been the case for some time, this reinforces the idea that we will discuss in more detail that democracy is not working in the US.
In any case, and in the face of doubt about the justice system and about the innocence of Biden and his field about electoral fraud, we then appeal to the people for a direct simulated political trial that will allow us to demonstrate fraud in the sense that the suspicion has a solid foundation, and should be taken as the truth about the matter as the only guarantee that the democratic system works and stays healthy. For that we will use the mentioned economic tools that allow inferences even in the worst possible scenario: if the actual evidence of fraud is not used directly in the final verdict. As observable variables we will take the public and notorious performances of politicians, countries and institutions being judged by the people. Even though, again, there is evidence that clearly reveals fraud and conspiracy and we will use them to strengthen our main conclusions, here we will go to the extreme to prove our points assuming that that evidence has not been revealed, since we will take those real corruption variables as unobservable.
The democratic party followers, in order to accept our arguments, only have to realize that, in general, there is a clear correlation between corruption and public attempts to hide it, on the one hand. On the other, there is a clear correlation between innocence and observable willingness to be transparent. Those correlations are a required condition in scientific practices in order to be able to replicate and be able to establish as the new standard a new theory proposed to overturn the status quo one, and in business administration and economics in general for an agreement, called a contract, when asymmetric information is present between the players involved. In politics under democracy, that is what a social contract requires, a Constitution. Otherwise, we face a situation where the use of force, and not mutual agreement, is what rules. That establishes the rule of law vs rule of force for matters of justice and human interaction in a society. So, even in the case that there are North American citizens who do not accept these correlations, we will use them in our conclusions, since they are a fact established with complete robustness in the economic theories used and the private administrative practices and in functioning democracies.
The two economics models that I find to be useful in this situation to be applied in this section are, again, the Agency Problem and Signaling Games. The first one to show what the null hypothesis is, which will reveal who has the burden of proof here. The second model will show, using theoretical and political inference, that Biden turns out to be guilty of conspiracy and fraud, and is the loser of this election, while Trump turns out to be innocent and the winner of the presidency.
The Principal, the people; the Agents, the politicians.
Regarding the first issue, citizens and politicians are placed on opposite sides of the principal vs agent contradiction. What separates those players is the presence of asymmetric information they have about the topic at hand. A dentist, for example, knows more than the client about the true problem present in the teeth of the patient; a CEO knows more about his work effort than the company owners; an applicant for a job knows more about what his abilities are than an employer. And so on. In our case, the politician knows more than the citizens about what his true intentions are and about the kind of management he makes in private about the public matter. That is why, if they are in the process of deciding whether to hire their services or not, the patient, the company owners and the employer (the principals) want to see good references, based on performance, in order to hire the dentist, the CEO and a job applicant, respectively (the agents).
This implies that, like the dentist, the CEO and the job applicant have to demonstrate, by their actual performance, that they are well trained, the politicians have the burden of proof in a political trial made by the people. So, the null hypothesis in our cases is the guilty presumption for dentists, job applicants, CEOs and politicians, since it does not make sense for their principals to start assuming that they are capable without knowing them beforehand. And to know them they must have information about them, not only by their words, but by real empirical evidence: reliable references and performance observable by their principals.
If someone claims that he has a better alternative than the current standard, the null hypothesis, he has to prove that that status quo is false (in our cases, Biden has to prove that there was no fraud, and Trump that he is not bluffing), and provide then the alternative (that Biden is innocent and Trump is not lying) as plausible, given the available evidence presented by them. And that is why the saying that "Caesar's wife should appear honest, not just be" applies to politicians: she must be above suspicion, shown by her public behavior, for the citizens (the principals in political issues, assuming there is democracy) to trust her.
So, what should really be outrageous, if democracy worked in the country, is what most US citizens, even some pro-Trump voters, believe: that the people have to produce proof of fraud in these elections in order to demonstrate that Joe Biden is guilty, when he is the one that has to demonstrate his innocence, given that both the electoral system and the justice system are also under suspicion. If he wants to rid his name of suspicion, he must prove that he is innocent. Not the other way around.
In Trump's case, he has publicly given clear signals that he is willing to show, given the opportunity, that he is not lying, through submitting to the verdict of forensic audits in each county, for example, or through Cyber forensic audits. On the side of Biden, Trump's attitude might seem costless. But in this case the result could mortally harm him as a politician, especially since he has not acknowledged his defeat and has not conceded to Biden’s victory.
In fact, most of the media are already calling him a liar and a dictator; of not accepting democratic rules; of not accepting the verdict of a vote. They have advanced the theory that he is knowingly lying, just to maintain his popularity with the Republican people heading into the next election. But this theory is unsupported if he is willing to see himself as a liar if there are forensic audits and, if it is true that he is lying knowingly, the consequences for a politician should be devastating if a democratic system works, as we will see more clearly in the signaling games section. The reason is that even republican people would not elect a liar, even if he is republican. In a primary, for example, that would be devastating for him.
Coming back to the Joe Biden’s case, his attitude transgresses the basic principle normal in sales, hiring, etc that should be natural too in a representative democracy, as we have seen: An applicant for a job can not pretend that it is the firm’s owners who have to show that he is capable and then hire him. In that tenor, the Biden’s camp go to the extreme of using the fallacy of ignorance: since fraud has not been proven to be true, we have to conclude that it is false. In other words, since the job applicant has not been proven incapable, we have to conclude that he is capable, so that the employer has to hire him or her. Isn’t it outrageous? But that is exactly what is going on here, to the surprise of many people: something is wrong with their minds, then, and we will talk about that too when we address the cultural aspects of this political conflict.
To finish clarifying what has been said in relation to the fallacy of ignorance, in strictly logical terms, this fallacy is always false. If something has not been proven true, it is not necessarily false: It might be that the proof has not appeared yet. But in science and in a trial, be it in court or from the people, the argument is false, but only up to a requirement related to who has the burden of proof. The social and scientific convention is that, for the null hypothesis, it is true unless it is proven false. In the case of a court trial, a citizen is innocent unless proven guilty, since the accuser has the burden of proof.
What we have shown is that for a politician, it is natural, and optimal, for the people to assume that they are corrupt unless the politician in question shows, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he is or she is honest. In our electoral case, it must be assumed that there was fraud unless Biden's side proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that there was not. The reason is that Biden must bear the burden of proof, as we have shown. If the electoral and justice system worked, that wouldn't be necessary, really. But in this case, and as I have said, the doubt remains for many of the jury, the people, who for that reason should side, and in fact do, as expected, with the null hypothesis, of the guilty verdict. That is why we want to analyze now and take a closer look at the signs that the justice system and the electoral system are failing the people.
The institutions that decide about fraud
To introduce the subject, the clearest demonstration so far that the electoral system has failed in the 2020 elections is the behavior of the Elections Commission of Maricopa County, Arizona. The forensic audit, carried out by the respective Senate, not only did not include the collaboration of that Commission. Rather, it had to deal with constant obstruction from it. And not only that: that commission incurred in criminal actions, both local and federal. This was clearly verified in the hearing that the State Senate held to that Commission after the audit. But in order to have a final verdict on that matter, the case is in the hands of Attorney General Mark Brnovich to bring legal charges against those involved.
It should be noted that this audit occurred not only because some senators, deputies, and political leaders wanted it, but also because the public pressed at all times for it to happen. On the other hand, non-political citizens, such as Michael Lindell and Sidney Powell, have investigated fraud themselves, spending large amounts of their own resources and citizens in the process. The conclusions they have reached about massive fraud have been similar to those of the Maricopa audit, but for the entire country.
In this document we are making a great effort to dispense with the empirical evidence on fraud found in practice. As we have said, we concentrate on the theoretical signs of fraud that come from the behavior of the players involved in the political game, using the two models referred to, Agency Theory, and Signals Games. But these indications and actual processes cited, as we shall see, help us to make strictly theoretical inferences about the electoral and judicial systems, the subject of this section. Also, if our theoretical conclusion is true, it applies to the entire nation, not just a county. And, as we demonstrated, economic logic allows you to infer that the methods used in all counties have the same strategic planning logic, although the plan's tactic is naturally tailored to the specific county. This is also consistent with what Michael Lindell has found for the entire country.
Going back to the theoretical, then, it is important to note that the political trial now, after the election, is about suspected fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud, not the competition between Biden and Trump as to who is the best alternative to be elected as agent of the people in the Presidency of the United States. At this point, the citizen trial in which people compare both candidates and decide is over, since the verdict of the people, the jury in that political trial to elect the president, has already been issued by votes. The matter now is whether those votes were counted well. Candidates who want to comply with the result, whatever it may be, are well regarded by that jury. If not, they are frowned upon, as they would disrespect their verdict, and obedience is owed to them.
In effect, people now judge each candidate, who is a suspect for the same reasons mentioned above, separately, not in the same election or trial event. This is not an easy matter, as many people tend to lean in favor of one or the other when judging on voter fraud. For example, if a citizen supporting Trump publicly maintains that there was fraud, while he does not believe that statement to be true, he is failing against himself, because he is acting against the republic. That person has to respect the will of the people. If the majority elected Biden, he should be the president, and everyone should recognize that. Ditto for Biden's supporters in the event that Trump really was the chosen one. Otherwise, they will act against themselves as well, since if there is no democracy with the rule of law, all citizens, Democrats or Republicans, are harmed.
We must focus on possible electoral fraud. But now the matter involves the electoral and judicial systems, since the result and its review depend not only on Biden and Trump, but on who counted the votes and who is willing or not to review them in the face of alleged fraudulent manipulations in their realization or counting. For that, let's go back to our economic examples, which shed light on the heart of the matter, and what role each player plays.
Choosing a president is like choosing a CEO in a company. The electoral system is like a committee appointed to count the votes of shareholders. If there is suspicion of fraud among the owners, not only is the suspect agent candidate involved. The electoral system as well, since for some reason it could favor one of the candidates over the other. In a developed company there is a disciplinary committee, related to Human Resources, which rules on the performance, in particular the possible failures, of the electoral committee. In the country, the electoral committee is the Electoral System. The disciplinary court is the Justice System.
Before analyzing each of the institutions in charge of evaluating possible fraud, it must be established that if there are doubts of the people about the election of the President of a nation, both the Electoral System and the Justice System must be interpreted as representing the interests of the the people in this matter, if there is democracy, since the people are the owner, like the shareholders in the company, and they want justice to prevail in terms of their willingness to choose their political agent. Therefore, the same applies to such systems as it does to politicians: they are under suspicion as an initial hypothesis. And therefore, they bear the burden of proof in relation to the suspicions that hang over them. They must be the first to show a conducive attitude and actions to make it clear to citizens that they are innocent of complicity in a possible fraud.
The judicial system
When in a company there are serious doubts about the election of the General Manager, it is the Human Resources department, which must have independence in relation to the elected manager, obviously, which is responsible for opening a preliminary investigation on the activity of the Electoral Committee. In the same sense, it corresponds to the Judicial System of a country, which is an independent power of the executive branch, to carry out investigations on the Electoral System if there are doubts about the scrutiny. And the American Judicial System, like the Human Resources department, must initiate its own investigations, on its own initiative, without even waiting for complaints of alleged fraud.
The evidence that has emerged and that we commented on Maricopa and that collected by Michael Lindell clearly indicates that the Department of Justice and the FBI have failed in their functions. In particular with the large percentages of questioning about electoral fraud by the great majority of Republicans, a significant part of independents, and a not negligible percentage of Democrats, which in total add up to more than 50% of all the voters. It is as if a very important part of the shareholders of the company, more than half, believed that there was fraud when choosing their CEO. Furthermore, that a group of them, of their own accord, has factual evidence of widespread fraud, and the Human Resources Department has not only failed to make a formal investigation into it, but has refused to do so.
It is good to mention that the judicial system is equipped with expert professionals and a budget, not only to carry out investigations on the Electoral System, but on itself, when it is suspected that there are members of the organization failing in their functions. They are the internal investigation bodies. Meanwhile, private citizens do not have the logistics nor are they expert professionals to do that. Taxpayers pay the justice system to do so, and the fact that private citizens did it with their own resources is a troubling sign of a failure of the justice system. Once the elections have taken place, then, they have the obligation, in the new political trial, to see if the suspicion about the Electoral System, including private companies that carry out public work, such as Dominion, is founded, and the result did not reflect the will of the owners. And the suspicion is pretty great, again, judging by the polls on it.
The Electoral System, and Joe Biden's group.
With this framework in mind, we are now able to more accurately address the issues of technical procedures and the admission of evidence mentioned above. When there is a conflict between two actors in court, it is natural for the defendant to avoid admitting incriminating evidence at trial, and to take pains to detect procedural flaws in the accuser to dismiss the case. The accuser, on the other hand, would press for evidence to be admitted and to avoid procedural errors.
Now, as we have established, the accuser, being the party with the burden of proof, is Biden himself. But as we have shown in this section, there is another accuser, who should also bear the burden of proof in his specific and related case: the electoral system, including companies like Dominion, in probable collusion with Joe Biden and, as has emerged, the Judicial system itself. Both Biden's group, as well as the Electoral System and also the Judicial System itself are the parties that should have requested that the case be opened in the judicial system (in the case of the latter, activate the internal investigation bodies ) to prove your innocence beyond a reasonable doubt.
So, what is completely strange from the point of view of economic, political and justice principles is that those are precisely the parties involved in preventing the evidence from being admitted for trial, and putting obstacle after obstacle in the way of the proceedings initiated by citizens who have undertaken, with their own resources, the trial attempts. Dominion goes to the extreme of bringing charges in court against the likes of Michael Lindell and Sidney Powell, for trying to shed light on election procedures and results.
As a job applicant, in our economic example, Biden has to face every possible blemish on the resume that appears before his potential employers as he wants to clear his name. His enemy is the presumption, even suspicion, of guilt, in people's minds: his alter ego is the one under suspicion, as in the case of a job applicant. The same goes for Dominion, the private company that he would like to have, if things were working as they should, in a normal market, a pristine image to his customers. But they are acting completely against this way of proceeding, which immediately raises suspicions. And condemnation of the people, as we will continue to demonstrate.
As we said, the parties within the justice system that represent the interests of the people in these matters should include the Department of Justice, the FBI. But the CIA too, since it deals with international intelligence matters. Also the courts themselves, since the electoral system is also under suspicion. If Joe Biden, DOJ, FBI, CIA, and the courts are avoiding evidence, setting up procedural roadblocks, and avoiding opening the case, they are setting themselves squarely against the people: as their enemy and the usurper of their power.
Joe Biden and his direct and indirect supporters are acting as a job seeker who, instead of trying to clear the minds of employers of doubts and suspicions, hires himself, through his allies in Human Resources, against their will. This indicates, as is clear from this analysis, that Biden certainly has support within the firm against the owners, since this is not a transaction based on the will of the merchants, the applicant and the company, but on the brute force of one of them. In our case, the support comes from the conspirators described below, and based on the arguments presented here, the public institutions mentioned; and private companies such as Dominion are under suspicion of being part of it. Directly or indirectly; knowingly or unknowingly.
Let's suppose for a moment that the Justice System is not a conscious part of the conspiracy. What we have seen allows us to conclude then that, in addition to the bad political opinions about Joe Biden from a significant part of the population, the justice system is not prepared to deal with situations like this to the point of allowing an enemy of the people to use it for himself and against the people.
The United States Supreme Court of Justice
That is why the responsibility of the SCOTUS is crucial here, since this type of situation, which is extraordinary, deserves to invoke the constitutional principle of “necessitas”. This principle applies when an authority does not fulfill its duty to a degree of subverting the peace guaranteed by the social contract that is supposed to be in force, and the people have the right to rebel against it, and it is perfectly predictable by the theory. That principle applies when the rule of law is not upheld. So what we have described is a worrying sign that the democratic system in the United States is failing and is unprepared to deal with out-of-the-ordinary situations like this that endanger the very nature of the democratic republic. The current rebellion attempts that we see in some people, or the secession proposals of some states that we observe, are understandable.
Given that the SCOTUS case is emblematic, I want to emphasize, using economic theory, that what it has done so far turns out to be incorrect from the point of view of the justice of the nation as a whole. The court argued that Pennsylvania and the other accused states had autonomy with respect to the electoral process. But in economics we know the implications of "negative externalities", which show that autonomy in this case does not make sense. If a neighbor blows the trumpet too loud, you have the right to ask the authorities to force him to behave. The principle of autonomy with respect to what he does at home is annulled if those decisions negatively affect other households around him. The authorities may doubt your motives when you report the trumpeter, but if not only you, but other neighbors complain about the unpleasant noise, they have an obligation to look at the evidence; to open the case and investigate who is right. The right thing to do for the Supreme Court was to think “outside the box” (for situations out of the ordinary), as this is a novel and crucial historical situation in US history, open the case and, if applicable necessary, produce new jurisprudence, based on the national constitution, given the national implications in question. A timely action by the Supreme Court, in the new case to be introduced by Michael Lindell, could avoid incalculable evils for that country.
The conclusion of this section is that, if only citizens and politicians without adequate resources and the support of other public institutions to investigate have the burden of proof, not much can be done to administer justice in the country, particularly when the The powerful have many resources used to defend themselves against the people, and even to attack their people and their prestige, using public institutions and the law in a crooked way, as the mafias do. The justice system is seriously failing the people and the nation. As we say below, this could change, as there are still patriots and institutions in America fighting back.
Signaling Games and fraud
We are now prepared for the final step of direct political trial by the people, exercising their right of opinion in a democracy and of action if there is a de facto regime. For the final theoretical argument we use the second economic model, the Signals Games. The game, and the conclusions here, are explained in a companion paper "Biden Has Abandoned Democracy":
Joe Biden and Donald Trump
As we can see rigorously in this more technical article, the key is that the conspirators are unable to bear the costs of being transparent, but the Trump camp can. On the other hand, the Trump camp cannot present evidence of fraud if it is not true. In fact, also in this framework of Signaling Games, if Joe Biden's camp were really not guilty, instead of attacking Trump supporters and putting them on the defensive, they, as a convincing signal to the people, would have been the most active promoters of the evidence review as we saw using the previous model.
More precisely in this model, the only way for Biden's side to avoid significant shadows of doubt that tarnish the results and his credibility and also his mandate, was to risk having his fraud proven in court as a "costly signal", for the vast majority of American citizens, as it is called in the Signaling Games. That's the one thing that would clearly separate Biden's side from the alleged liar, Donald Trump. The rationale for that "separating equilibrium" in this signaling game is simple: Trump cannot, even if he wants to, provide evidence of fraud if it does not exist, as we said, and the reason is that it would be too expensive to manufacture such evidence: It is basically impossible to buy, cheat or violently force everyone involved, etc.
To summarize the Biden case simulating the two models, even before the electoral results, he is guilty, as a politician, in the eyes of the people, and that is the hypothesis to be tested by his actions. Secondly, the persistent, coordinated and adamant attempts by Biden, the democratic party, the MSM, Big Tech companies, Dominion and the conspirators at the political sector, including some republicans, to “cancel” not only the pursuit for truth, but the whistleblowers, from the US people, confirm that the initial hypothesis is true.
Notice that it is so not only in the minds of the republican people. Also in the minds of Biden grassroots followers when they realize the implications at hand. There are polls now that say between 35% and 40% of democrats believe the election was rigged. The simple claim that Joe Biden is innocent is what is called in those theories a ``cheap talk” signal, and what it does is the opposite to the intended purpose: it is taken in the political trial as a performance that confirms the initial guilty hypothesis. If the patriots are able to reach for the fooled US citizens, an early end of the honeymoon with the grassroots democrats is to be expected given those signals by Joe Biden, on top of the many disappointments they have experienced already, like Afghanistan, the economy and border issues.
The same kind of argument applies to China's participation. On this matter, and taking into account the information provided by Michael Lindell, Biden's supporters could claim that it is very difficult to detect the real IP address of a computer, since it could use a VPN to mask it. But the fact that patriotic hackers in the US claim they have detected all other elements of the fraud, including the detailed number of voters changed, and are willing to submit affidavits on the matter, lays the foundation for the people to open the political trial against that foreign country. Particularly because that country has huge incentives to get involved in this matter in such a way: for them it is a matter of billions of dollars that they save if Biden, and not Trump, is in charge. In conclusion, Joe Biden and his team bear the burden of proof here as well.
Donald Trump: is he bluffing?
Now, Trump, as a politician, is also subject to suspicion in a democracy using the same commented Caesar's wife principle, and might be confirmed guilty because his claim of fraud might be a bluff. But the fact that he was willing to present the evidence in court and to face the verdict, even if it would be against him, is in itself a costly signal in our second model, which clearly separates him from Joe Biden.
Sidney Powell and Michael Lindell
For the same kinds of reasons, even if they support Trump, the attitude of Michael Lindell and Sidney Powell will have the sympathy of the people, who are the final judges in a popular political trial, at least if American democracy continues to function. They are not politicians, but simple citizens and defenders of the rights of the people, who strive to reveal the truth at enormous personal cost, and to request trials about it, even when, as we explained, they do not really have the burden of proof. They play, along with many other volunteers, the role of a suitable volunteer committee chosen by the owners of the company who suspect the complicity of the electoral committee in verifying the election of the CEO candidates. That greatly favors Trump in what will come if the patriots triumph, to which I give a high probability of occurrence, in the war that is in full swing at this very moment.
There has been a brutal attack by MSM against Sidney Powell and Michael Lindell due to their actions in this regard. In particular, Dominion has charged them in court with alleged defamation. As the attorneys for Ms. Powell and Mr. Lindell have said in their legal language, they, as citizens, have the right to freedom of expression: the right to hold personal impeachment against politicians, public institutions, and the electoral system. In particular, Dominion, which is part of that system. And they do not have the burden of proof, as I have shown. Their enemies try to use the fallacy of ignorance: since the Dominion fraud has not been proven to be true, it is false, and whoever says otherwise is smearing them. Outrageous. Dominion is the one who, like the electoral system, along with Joe Biden, have to face the courts and prove that they are innocent, if the courts were doing their job, because it is they who have the burden of proof, not Sidney Powell or Michael Lindell.
As an example of the legal battle, let's take a look at the phrase that represents the main argument of Sidney Powell's lawyers, used by the MSM to accuse her of being a liar: “Reasonable people would not accept such statements as fact but view them only as claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process”. By our reasoning above it is false that this means she is a liar. It should be clear the difference between her being the accused party from being the accuser one. If she loses being accused, the negative economic impact for her is huge. On the other hand, if she loses being the accuser, she only has minor costs in comparison, while Dominion has to pay the price of a huge crime.
That should explain to some people the strategy of Ms. Powell's team in this legal process in which her lawyers issued that plea, based on simple principles of martial arts to dodge the blow of an enemy and use it against him. The latter has been verified, in a certain sense, since the MSM took the bait and their lies are backfiring, at least in the public who are aware of these things. But the greatest support for it comes from a question of democratic, ethical and justice principles. In that regard, the correct translation, given the correct interpretation framework that we have demonstrated, is as follows:
“Reasonable citizens would know that those statements are political opinions, to which Ms Powell has the right based on the Constitutional freedom of speech principle. In order to be proven as facts they have to be brought to a court of law in which both sides of the conflict would have the opportunity to present their cases, so that the truth about them will come out. Ms Powell’s opinion is that they are true, and she would be defending that side in such a legal trial, even though she does not have the burden of proof”.
It is crucial here that in the Dominion accusation in court, that company has the burden of proof. With our interpretation, they do not have a case, and the main reason is the right of free speech. Now, if any court accepted the several motions to that end made by Ms Powell and Mr. Lindell, they, as the accusers, would have the burden of proof. No problem. As we have said, that job should have been exercised by the Department of Justice. But since that institution has failed the people, Ms Powell and Mr Lindell are willing to assume that role, even with the possible bad consequences. This is the costly signal that we mentioned before, which separates them from the conspirators, the cheaters.
Regarding Mike Lindell, he has given an additional and important and specific costly signal during his Cyber Symposium: if anybody demonstrated that his allegations of Cyber fraud were false, would get $5 million. A couple of saboteurs showed up and tried to find the weak points of the forensic Cyber analysis. But the most they were able to do was to collude with the MSM to lie about the event and about the proof. That is the case of Josh Merritt, who infiltrated the “red team” of Cyber people. Of course the MSM puts Merritt as a person linked to Lindell who finds that everything is wrong. But the link is false, and he provides no proof, and did not win the prize for that reason, as other Cyber experts, not related to Lindell, have testified publicly. Therefore, that additional costly signal establishes another separating equilibrium in which Lindell appears as the truth-teller, and Dominion, the Electoral System, the field of Good, come up as the liars and criminals.
The separating equilibrium in this signaling game demonstrates then that Sidney Powell, and Michael Lindell are not, as the MSM has tried to portray them, liars, but heroes. Heroes of the United States of America and its people. The MSM, if they served the people, should be applauding their courage, not attacking them. Another indication that the MSM have committed treason against the US citizens and their nation, since they have turned against their interests and serve the enemies of their republic. And they are acting as cowards too, since they are colluding to bully simple citizens. A clear indication that the rentistic system virus is taking hold of the US here: the powerful, without being right, use all their power and influence to impose their will, acting as bullies, on the defenseless patriotic citizens, and threatening those who dare to confront them. This should shame not only the MSM, but the justice system, allowing such injustices to take place just across their faces.
Dominion, the politicians, the judges and the MSM
As we said, Dominion is bringing Mike Lindell, Sidney Powell, Rudy Guilliani, and others to court, in particular some media outlets. The argument is defamation. What we have said about politicians and public institutions applies to this private firm too. The reason is that it performed public duty, which is sacred in a democracy, on top of that. The judge, admitting the trial, has incurred a grave transgression against free speech, established in the US constitution, and in politics in general, as we have argued, since it is the base of any representative democracy.
It is worth noting the exact coincidence in time between the judge's decision and the Cyber Symposium organized by Mike Lindell. Given that Economics studies incentives, this fact points to an additional mafia practice in that sense: it has incentives to intimidate people who dare to confront them and use it as a general example. It also indicates a reason to investigate the motives, the incentives, of the judge in question.
But there is more. Dominion is also transgressing the most basic norms of private firms' behavior in the marketplace. Assume, for example, that Tesla faces criticism from the consumers regarding the brakes of a car model in a given year. It might be that the criticism is false or it is true. In the first case, the firm goes to the public and demonstrates that it is false, proving it with a technical public demonstration. If it is true, it immediately recalls all the defective cars and replaces the breaks. In the first case, Tesla takes it as a good thing the opportunity to be able to show the public the high quality of its products. In the second case, it reflects on itself, apologizes, and compensates the customers who were hurt, trying to reestablish its prestige.
The purchase guarantee market instrument also works that way: in the presence of asymmetric information in which the firm knows more about its products than the consumers, It looks for the confidence of the customers by allowing complete transparency, which eliminates, in practice, the asymmetry of information.
Dominion, instead of satisfying the consumers of its products, has avoided transparency. In fact, it has systematically sued the ones who complain of possible fraud, and has not complied with the subpoenas to appear before the public audits of Maricopa. To justify this sort of action, Dominion claims that their clients are the politicians who contracted them, and that they are a private, not a public organization. But in a democracy, a public organization can delegate to a private firm a public action, like in this case: it is the electoral authorities which hire Dominion to process and count the votes. On the other hand, the politicians who hired Dominion represent the people. When they allow the firm to act this way against the sovereign, they are two times guilty of treason against those who elected them. Now, the fact that Dominion acts this way also demonstrates that the US has fallen into rentism, where the rule of law in a democratic nation is not respected. The powerful, in this case private firms, bully the people in political matters without consequences for their crimes: not in court, not in the media, which is also guilty of treason, as we imply by our arguments.
All of this points to the guilty verdict in the citizens' court for Dominion. And all those politicians, judges and media outlets who act this way, allowing Dominion not to be transparent and to attack the citizens, are then guilty too. On at least two accounts.
On the mechanics, the scope and the existence of conspiracy
It is clear that, using the information given by the Time article https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_term=politics_2020-election&linkId=110717147
there was a wide ranging conspiracy, not necessarily criminal, to defeat Donald Trump, even though they do not use the term with the depth and full scope we propose. It is a very relevant base of our theory, if you connect the dots, as it will be explained in this section. The group of US conspirators, according to Time, included the most important US labor union network, the most important private firms chamber, the democratic party leadership, many republican party leaders, the MSM, the Big Tech companies and many other social and political organizations.
On the other hand, if the claims put forward by Michael Lindell, beginning with its video, “Absolute Proof” (https://michaeljlindell.com/ Transcription: https://twitter.com/Sabiens/status/1361713386262781960?s=20) and closing with his Cyber Symposium are true, it would also be clear that China and other countries like Iran have used many resources, including their Cyber war capabilities, to implement a criminal conspiracy to depose Donald Trump and to favor Joe Biden. Those criminally oriented conspirators would use that domestic conspiracy alliance in order to affect the US elections in their strategic geopolitical favor. Many of those domestic leaders did not have to know they were being used by the international conspiracy collusion against the interests of their nation in terms of systemic damage to their institutions. If some of them knew it, they would be direct traitors. But the other ones would only be instrumental agents. They would not be criminals with intent to kill their democracy. But if true, it would be a fact that they have participated in their country's slaughter. Our analysis above concludes that Lindell’s claims are true, because of his “costly signal” talked about before. But that is confirmed by several independent practical-theoretical analyses that show statistical impossibilities, like the one used by Dr. Douglas Frank, based on the match between the graph of the number of ballots received and the graph of registered voters and census data.
Now, even if an important number of the conspiracy actors were unaware of the true scope and consequences of what they were doing and of their actions, on one hand, and there was a clear leadership for the whole process, on the other, what is perfectly possible for this kind of situations is a sort of self-achieved criticality mechanism activated. In appearance to get rid of Donald Trump. But the objective, in reality, was much bigger: to start the demise of the US as the world leader in all aspects of life, including the economic, financial, monetary and military fields, on the one hand, and to mark the beginning of a new era in which the new alternative powers, the “deep state” leading the conspiracy, take control of the whole world, on the other.
The theory of a sunspot coordinated equilibrium explains the mechanics of the self-achieved criticality process and completes the picture, with the help of the Time article, of what actually happened in this election: not everybody had to be coordinated from the top down in order for the conspiracy theory to make sense. Only a public event (a sun spot, observable with special glasses by the people previously selected), signaled by trusted leaders, was enough to activate a chain reaction of directly or indirectly connected links. As is usual in actual wars, not all the circles in the pyramidal hierarchy of the organized part of the process know about what the others do.
When you initiate a self organized process, you also expect and allow creativity, or even apparent anarchy especially at the lower steps of the pyramid, as it clearly happened in this case. The important element for the coordination in the plan is to focus the alignment of the forces towards the common objective. The MSM did that job at the middle and lower links of the chain well in advance (even before Trump was in office four years earlier) and with enough coverage using all sorts of tricks, like straw man logical fallacies --focusing on Trump's problems related to his character, and his supposed racism, for example--. The propaganda slogan was “let’s all go against Donald Trump, our personal, group and national enemy”. In such a war process with compartmentalization, if a platoon falls in the hands of the enemy, they are not able to blame the others, even if they want to: they take the fall for their part themselves, since they do not have information about the rest of the conspiracy agents. That way, the whole process is not compromised.
Even though China and the rest of the conspirators won this battle, the two “miracles” that Michael Lindell mentions mark two crucial errors that reveal the full scale of the conspiracy. One, the common pattern at the lower steps of the pyramid, with frequent mistakes that did not allow the conspirators to hide the fraudulent programmed practices (like dead people voting, double counting, adjudication bucket size), that revealed the smoking gun. The other miracle happened because there was an error at the very top of the pyramid too. At this level big mistakes were made because, even though key elements of the internal US intelligence community, like the CIA, FBI, DOJ, DHS were guaranteed to be part of the conspiracy somewhere in the chain, independent patriotic hackers were able to detect the intrusion activities of the Cyber pirates hired by the conspiracy operating directly from China’s territory and from the rest of the places related to the same network.
Rentism and the culture battlefield
We have concluded that in a simulated political trial conspiracy and fraud are proven to be true, with some apparent complexities plausibly explained. But why does it matter here what the US people think; what common sense is; the economic logic; and true justice? If you thought that way when we reached the conclusion, be it because you favor Biden and do not care for democracy, principles, justice, logic, rule of law; or because you are a patriot but have lost hope; then you are going in both cases, to the heart of the issue here: what is at stake is the US democratic republic.
From the simplest perspective, a political system has, on the one hand a structure, related to the institutions, like the constitution, laws, the public powers. On the other it has a culture, related to knowledge, beliefs, information, technology, artistic expressions and communication organizations. In relation to culture, notice our remark before about what people believe regarding their political rights and their responsibilities vis a vis those of the politicians. The MSM and some politicians have tried to impose a culture of wrong principles regarding presumption of innocence, and that indicates a clear symptom of rentism, which in itself is a sociopolitical system, alternative to the US democratic republic.
In any country there are rent-seekers: private organizations that hunt for a benefit through a relationship with the State. Rentism occurs when a group of those organizations go to the extreme of capturing the institutions of the State, which become their servants, not the servants of the people, through their puppets there. The lobbyists the rent-seekers used before rentism become now the representatives of their interests in those institutions. This type of benefit, which does not come from economic productivity, is called “rent” in economics, and from that comes the name of the political illness.
Within the context of a given country, if citizens, and not politicians, have the burden of proof, and they believe so, a case of political corruption will be practically impossible to demonstrate, because in itself, that arrangement reflects that the country has been infected with the virus of rentism. And in that political system, crooks have control over the institutions, which are part of the structure of the system. What in fact would happen is the opposite: any citizen, whistleblower, who accuses a politician of corruption and tries to bring the case to court, will be proven there to be guilty, being innocent, while the accused would be declared innocent, being guilty. It is the mechanism used by those who capture the State in those countries to discourage criticism and to stop any initiative to change the status quo in order to restore, or establish, a democracy: while the law is used to perpetuate the system, the victim becomes the criminal.
That mafia kind of behavior has already happened in a big way, even before this election, at the Department of Justice, many courts and the FBI, among others, as explained by Sydney Powell in this conference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTV1Y_QuZOM Those institutions, already in great peril were, no doubt because what we said, used for the capture of the executive branch of the national government, and with that, the nation started a path of no return to full fledged rentism, unless some strong shock brings the country back, as we will comment below.
But our point here is that the new gen war we described includes, then, the issue of cultural values, morals and beliefs and its combination with the institutional array of the system. The real dictators in those countries are the ones who don't want to be judged by the people but to impose themselves upon the people, not only judging them, but condemning them if they complain. And they accuse people like Donald Trump of being a dictator, because he opposed them like no president before dared to oppose the mass media and the technological companies like Twitter, Facebook and Google, instruments heavily used in this war by the cartel of rent seekers to capture the US through this important step of the presidential election.
To some of the readers, especially honest democrats, that might not be enough to convince them. They should take a look at this very well documented article on the matter:
There you can see that the Big Tech companies are able, based on their knowledge of every person, to induce, at a determinant degree, not only what he or she buys, but also who that person votes for. They are even able to affect your ideology, as explained in the example of Facebook. You can see then from that that a lot of US citizens did not vote in this election. It was the Big Tech and MSM who voted for them while possessing, like demons, their minds and their wills. Besides the already demonstrated fraud, this is also a deeper kind of fraud that, if tolerated in a society, it ceases to be a democracy, in which citizens are supposed to be respected by the Big Tech and media outlets as well as by all institutions and all politicians: their minds and wills are supposed to be sacred based on the principles of freedom and political personal rights.
But they won’t stop here, as I will explain later: They are so brazen that they are announcing publicly the first ministry of the Deep State, the Ministry of Truth: https://news.microsoft.com/2021/02/22/technology-and-media-entities-join-forces-to-create-standards-group-aimed-at-building-trust-in-online-content/ Which is exactly the same as Chávez and Maduro did in Venezuela, besides imposing the “Law of Hate” to control what the citizens say against their totalitarian regime.
From all of this we conclude that the battle in the culture, morals, information, technology, communications and even spiritual fields is at the forefront within this new gen and worldwide war, at which the traditional weaponry and the physical territorial scenarios are relegated to less important roles. The territory for the deep state is now the mind and the spirit, and at that level reaches the slavery of the delinquent victors. As we have seen, the US has been defeated without a single shot being heard. In this war, the patriots, independently of their ideology, and its international allies, are at the other side, fighting to rescue the power for the people: to restore the US democratic republic.
The political black hole of Rentism
All of this confirms the conspiracy theory I wrote in December as an experienced Venezuelan with Economics training. It was a warning to all US citizens independent of their party affiliation or political preference:
As I say there, the proclamation of Joe Biden means nothing less than the capture of the executive branch of the US national government by a mafia cartel of national and international rent-seeking agents. It means the beginning of the fall of the democratic republic of the US, and the start of a new kind of political system characterized as a variation of the Venezuelan Curse of Abundance rentistic political system described in that article: the illness of rentism already mentioned here.
The organizations that capture the country's institutions are an oligarchy of mafias set up for that purpose. Even though they are not always in complete collusion, and usually compete with each other, they act in practice as a mafia cartel which uses de facto power struggles and not the law to settle their differences, since they are not subject to the rule of law. A cartel implies collusion, like when a group of oligopolistic firms agree to form a monopoly, but I use the term because, even though the component mafias might not be completely coordinated, and the internal fights might be considerable, they act as a unity when facing the common enemy and/or slave: the people. The same styles, the same practices, the same network of contacts to help each other if necessary: at the media level, at the judiciary system level, at the citizens level (infiltrating and buying people, for example), at the electoral level and at the institutional level, capturing more and more agents there. For those who do not know, a dynamic system is stable if it has a fixed point to which it converges if it is close to it. If it is at that point, it does not leave it (that is why it is called a fixed point). And if, due to some exogenous disturbance, it comes out of it slightly, it returns to it in time.
Those kinds of reasons explain what is observed as facts in countries with rentism: the system works like a black political hole, a stable dynamic equilibrium that completely captures, through a converging process over time, the entire nation and all its public institutions. The US has taken, with this election result, a fundamental step to shift from a democracy to a next gen de facto regime. Paradoxically for many, as we see, the dictator was not Donald Trump, but the mafia cartel acting through a set of puppets, including Joe Biden.
The mafia cartel uses all sorts of non-democratic methods to advance their purposes of completely capturing the country while in the converging process. From billions of dollars to buy consciences of key players, to propaganda to enslave the citizens' wills, to extortion, kidnapping, cancellation (firing, obstruction of communication capacity), jailing and even killing of political opponents. It is part of its nature to enter an all encompassing de facto war once given this step of capturing the executive branch of national power, in order to get all the pie, since they will be not content with only part of it.
When you get to the long run equilibrium of that system, the fixed point, you lose the rule of law completely, since the elections you get, the base of democracy, are marred with all sorts of tricks, which compared to the ones you have had during the 2020 election, and described above, are quite timid by comparison, and the elections from then on are used to perpetuate and reproduce the de facto regime that guarantees all the power to the mafia cartel, and completely expropriates it from citizens, who become from owners to servants. More than servants, slaves, in this case of the Deep State, for what we have described of mental and spiritual domination.
To better understand this, let us take a look at the symptoms of the systemic illness, clearly observed in Venezuela in the political aspects of it: endemic corruption, administrative inefficiency, private market inefficiency and economic underdevelopment, control of the media, rentistic populism, institutional centralism, territorial centralism, militarism, rigged elections and rentistic populism.
Militarism means, basically, that the military and intelligence institutions become the agents of defense of the mafia cartel. With institucional centralism, he judiciary and Congress lose their independence. With territorial centralism, federalism is liquidated. Public sector inefficiency is due to the monopolization of the political and economic scenarios, and the extraction of income from taxes for the enrichment of the mafias, not for public management. Market inefficiency and underdevelopment happens because market failures, like monopolization, inside information of financial institutions, dependent media, etc, are widespread, without adequate regulation. Rigged elections guarantee that the cartel stays in power through puppets in charge at all levels and places, independent of party affiliation or ideology, since ideological fights lose their meaning. Rentistic populism is related to rigged elections, since the cartel captures, through electoral gifts, the middle class, and the most vulnerable and discriminated sectors of society, such as women, gays, blacks, foreigners, unemployed, elderly, poor, implanting the rentistic culture at the citizen level, including viewing corruption in politics as ok, and the assumption that politicians are innocent until proven otherwise.
Those are the kind of reasons why, if there is not a strong force that stops the cartel, like the US people uniting to act now, rather than later (in four years, for example) to try to recover the rule of law, the hope of re-establishing the republic that the US founding fathers intended will be extremely difficult.
On the assault on the US Congress
Blaming the victim is normal for criminals, and here we have partially analyzed that matter. In this regard, I will comment on the issue of the assault on Congress in the United States and the parallels with the assault on the National Assembly in Venezuela. Totally different and incomparable things. In Venezuela it was true. But it is that the governments of Chávez and Maduro were in power and the National Assembly was the victim. In the United States, the opposite happened: there was massive fraud, as we have shown, and the people felt powerless, robbed of their power as sovereign of their nation.
Trump did not call for a violent raid, as even the FBI found out now, but for a legitimate and peaceful demonstration, and there was infiltration of the conspirators to blame him: they had everything planned to take the picture and blame them. Anyone who knows about basic politics and propaganda can infer that without a special course in strategic games, and also know that such an event would turn against Trump, so it is clear that he had no incentives to do so. When you analyze a crime, the most basic thing is to look for the motivation. And this does not exist here because of what has been said, which should make it clear to any judge, and to the people themselves, who is the culprit here, and who is the victim.
But even if the violence had been by Trump supporters, the verdict is very different: the perpetrators were the conspirators who committed fraud and those who supported them. The reason is that you cannot blame a stabbing victim if he calls the assassin “mother fucker” while being killed. The murderer is not justified to make a fuss if the victim behaves in a "disrespectful" manner while being assassinated. This is what the leaders of the murder of the American nation did here: They blamed those who complained for having taken their country, their lives, from them.The deaths of that incident and the disrespect for the institutions are to be charged on the electoral criminals.
The aggressors also blame another victim, Donald Trump, who has acted as a formidable warrior and ally defending the US nation and the citizens, in public events, like wrongly motivated impeachments, and smear campaigns. It is usual for the criminals to blame the victim, then, in this case in order to hide the real conflict and its current result, and to try to neutralize possible future revivals of their enemy so as to win the war, not only this battle. And to win the whole world from now on.
Global alliance of corporate capitalism and communism
In fact, as we know, the rule of law really does not exist worldwide. In particular the UN has very little power to control that cartel of mafias, that have awarded themselves the luxury of pretending to build, themselves, a world state, which we have agreed to call, as other authors do, "Deep State." The first publicly known ministry is the one described: that of "truth".
If the US falls into this black hole, all the world will eventually, sooner than later, do so too, given the scope of what is going on, and the speed of the convergence dynamics of such a system and, as it is easy to infer, the illness of rentism is completely contagious. While Venezuela will continue to be used as a base platform for the advancement of the mafia cartel at the Latin American level, the US itself would be used as a base platform to take over the whole world.
We can clearly see, from the nature of the main puppeteers in the mafia cartel, that this is an alliance between a cartel of global private corporations (a collusion of global oligopolies) with socialist-communist-islamic states, like China and Iran, wanting to create a global panoptic society, where the slaves are the world citizens, and the all encompassing powerful bosses are the members of that mafia cartel. A mixed system of corporate (not competitive) capitalism, with a sophisticated communism kind of rule at the “state” level (the mafia cartel ruling the world).
We can easily infer that there has been a full-scale next gen battle in the Presidential elections. China and the corporations won this crucial battle in the worldwide war and the US has been defeated in that battle, and it is quite possible that the nation will lose the war, if a shock to counteract it does not happen. The country has been humiliated to such a big extent that not a single shot was used for the defeat and most of the US citizens do not know it; half of the population is celebrating their country defeat without realizing that they have been used as instruments of its demise and for a new kind of slavery, been fooled to think this is good for them.
Who will win? Conclusions
The conclusion of the political trials is that Biden and all his camp are guilty of conspiracy and electoral fraud, and Trump and his camp were not bluffing. The claim was proven in the first section according to economic logic, common sense, and to the US people. That theory is subject to the two kinds of errors commented before in each case judged in this simulation: There is a probability that Biden is innocent and that Trump is a liar. As in all scientific theory, as the one presented here purports to be, new evidence may make us doubt our conclusion. Now, although you always have to be open to changing your mind, what we are seeing about the new evidence that is coming out, with new states requesting forensic audits, the thing is the opposite: that theory is being confirmed more and more, and I expect it will continue that trend.
In any case, It is crucial, given that this is a political trial, what the population thinks of those conclusions, and what the probability of each of those errors are. I think my analysis clears the minds of many US citizens, including patriot democrats, and puts them to think of the real framework to judge what is going on, especially regarding what it means, as we saw in the next sections: it is not a matter of Biden vs Trump alone, but about the political-institutional character of the US nation. And also regarding what is going on, since the war is only at the beginning, and the narrative of the MSM and Big Tech continues to avoid those issues and to focus on race, culture, Covid, the real or made up flaws of some of Trump supporters, etc, to engage everybody on something different from the main issue, and to continue to divide the people. It is part of the new gen war at full speed.
The converging process to the rentistic system can only be stopped if a strong enough shock, exogenous to the rentistic system, reverses course and establishes back the democratic republic as the new stable fixed-point dynamic political system to converge to, from the disturbed situation.
There are incentives for many US and worldwide relevant players to try to oppose the rentistic system and reverse the situation, and it is still possible to produce a shock of the required magnitude. In particular in the face of the facts of the deterioration of the American economy, national and personal security (including Afghanistan), borders, etc. The citizens are the greatest victims in this state of affairs, especially in the future, and this includes the citizens of the entire world, due to what has been said about the global consequences of new generation slavery that the hegemony of the deep state would imply.
Indeed, as in a market, economic theory predicts the action of those players with incentives, as when consumers come together as a single alliance and boycott a poisonous product, for example. It is to be expected, then, that American citizens will unite in a coalition, a kind of "Pact of All Patriots" both in the United States and in the world, regardless of their political and social orientation, and act now with all the forces they have left at this time to regain their nation. That force includes the institutions not completely captured by the mafia cartel, such as the Supreme Court of the Nation, the majority of active and retired military personnel, the honest part of the political leaders, the majority of the union leaders and the private sector, many agents of the intelligence community, many grassroots organizations and allies and foreign citizens, like the majority of Venezuelans, my country of nationality.
Given that there is a significant opportunity for citizens, and their grassroots organizations, to realize what has happened and what is happening, it is to be hoped, given those incentives, that they will come together and fight the battle in each county, in every city and state, in every court, at every moment, electing a new leadership in every party, making purchases at patriotic businesses and local markets, boycotting agents perceived as traitors, creating citizen-owned non-profit social networks , or wealthy patriots, the emergence of new private media that compete to tell the truth that the mainstream media hide, etc.
Such an alliance would be justified because it is not a question of right versus left, Republican or Democrat, but right or wrong; the issue is the democratic republic of the founding fathers or a rentistic system with foreign domination. They won't have to wait, as Michael Lindell did, for Donald Trump to act alone, or wait four years. The war has fully started and it is to be expected that more and more people will take action now, without leaving until tomorrow what they can do today. Our theory, as it is confirmed, will be useful in those battles, already in full swing.
And about that, a word about citizens who voted for Joe Biden. Most of them were duped. To convince them, many Christian leaders, like Lindell and others, are acting patiently and understandingly with them. Now, non-Christians also have an incentive to use the most basic principle of business administration for good salespeople: the customer is "always right." They are "selling" a product, which is definitely good for them. Even if customers don't realize it. That is why the seller has to go with infinite patience to win them over to the common political effort. Good salespeople never attack the prospect. They could attack your ideas, but the ad hominem fallacy should be strictly prohibited in such an All-Pact. They could attack the leaders there in Biden's camp, those perceived as traitors, since that is a right of citizens in a democracy. But not the people who were deceived and are on that side only by mistake. The members of the pact are not asking you to like Donald Trump. Just that they like their nation nation and act accordingly. It is even very possible that if some instrumental leaders of the conspiracy realize at this moment what really happened, for example businessmen and chambers of commerce, as well as labor unions, associations of blacks, Latinos, women, the elderly, etc., take steps to reconquer your country with the rest of the United States that are members of the pact without giving up your will. social and political points of view.
Given the international context I talked about, the US can then become the world leader of a new era: the recovery of citizens power all over the world, and the restoration, on new and more efficient and democratic bases. In the companion article
I talk in the final part about who wins a de facto game like this: it is the player who has more relative strength. Without a doubt, China and the large transnational corporations have more factual strength than the Trump camp, due to their financial, media advantages, etc., invested in a big dirty business that renders enormous benefits.
Even in this matter, all is not lost, as there are still many honest politicians, businessmen and workers who want to fight, as do the majority of the military. But, according to the argument, the main ingredient in the final result is going to be moral and the spiritual, in addition to the truth about the conspiracy and fraud. And in these matters, the patriot camp, driven by Judeo-Christian values, has much superiority over Islamic fanaticism, the communist, and the profit motive. The possibility of a return of Trump, before 2024, is quite high: David would win over Goliath, due to his superior combat morale and intelligence.
Spiritual annex: The Christian weapon
So far my analysis is based on scientific foundations, which I submit to rigorous falsification to whoever is encouraged, which I will gladly answer. This section is separate, only for believers, which does not contradict the rest, but the other way around: it reaffirms it. It comes from my personal spiritual convictions, since I am convinced that, contrary to what the communist-liberal consensus says, without spiritual laws we do not understand natural and social laws, in particular politics and economics. I wrote my warning to American citizens on December 28, when we remember Herod's slaughter of the innocent babies of Bethlehem with the intention of killing the baby Jesus. Despite the fact that all those babies died, the movement failed to kill Jesus thanks to the three wise men who came from abroad to see him and thanks to Saint Joseph, who listened to God's message to prevent the death of the child God. Jesus triumphed not only against Herod, but against death itself and brought the first seed of salvation to mankind. The first coming of the Messiah.
This war movement that we have described from China, Iran and the international gangster cartel of corporations will produce many deaths, literally. It is what the Deep State really wants, with its unspoken "ecological" purposes given the overpopulation of the planet and the imbalance with nature. But, based on what we see in terms of human, political, economic and ecological degeneration, confirmed by a fairly large consensus among Christian prophets, we are at the end of times, where Satan is on the loose and there is a great possibility of human extinction. As we believers know, in the Apocalypse comes the Second Coming of Christ. Good people will definitely defeat evil, guided by God Himself, who will come as King of the Universe, not as a defenseless baby, listening to His call and empowering themselves with an invincible, material and spiritual combat morale, to win this definitive war.
“The truth will set you free”. Jesus of Nazareth.