Conspiracy and fraud in the US elections

Conspiracy and fraud in the US elections. What is next? (1.8 Version)

Felipe Pérez-Martí


Michael Lindell: “What do you think the future has for us?”. Russ Ramsland: “We are approaching Venezuela”. 


The purpose of this essay is to show that what Russ Ramsland said about the US approaching Venezuela is true; that it is not easy to stop that converging process; and what the alternatives are. I start by answering some key questions regarding the plausibility of the conspiracy theory and that of electoral fraud being committed. I then prove my claim of conspiracy and fraud using powerful economics tools that allow us to make inferences about unobserved variables (fraud, conspiracy) using observed variables (public performance by Joe Biden and Donald Trump). Then I address the issue of a change of system in the US: from a democratic republic, in which there is rule of law, to a rentistic country, a de facto regime with an international mafia cartel moving the threads of politics and public institutions. I stress the fact that in this new gen war and new gen dictatorial regimes, the cultural tools of mind control and manipulation of the  people  are the most determinant weapons. 

Is the conspiracy theory false? What is its real scope?

It is clear that, using the information given by the Time article there was a wide ranging conspiracy to defeat Donald Trump. The group of US conspirators 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 we use the information provided in Lindell's video, “Absolute Proof” ( Transcription:,  it is also clear that China and other countries like Iran have used many resources, including their Cyber war capabilities to promote and to use that domestic conspiracy alliance in order to affect the US elections in their favor. Many of those domestic leaders did not know they were part of an international conspiracy collusion against the interests of their nation in terms of systemic damage to their institutions. Some of them knew it, and are direct traitors. But the other ones are only instrumental agents. They are not criminals with intent to kill their democracy. But it is a fact that they have participated in their country's slaughter. It is quite possible that at this time they realize what happened and adopt measures to take back their country with the rest of US patriots without renouncing their social and political points of view. 

Even though all of the actors were not completely aware of what they were doing, and there was a clear leadership for the whole process, what happened was 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 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), signaled by trusted leaders, was enough to activate a chain reaction of directly or indirectly connected links. As is usual in this kind of 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 creativity, or even apparent anarchy especially at the lower steps of the pyramid, as it 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 and with enough coverage using all sorts of tricks, like straw man logical fallacies --focusing on Trump's problem on 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. 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 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, 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. 

Can we condemn the conspirators for fraud without a court trial?

In this section I show a simulated citizens political trial using powerful economics tools: the Principal-Agent theory, and Signaling Games.

1. The option of a people’s political trial and the scientific method.

It is natural that the leaders of a conspiracy and many of their followers would not admit their fault in public, and to require that the US people take them as innocent until proven otherwise in court. They even attack the people who dare to put this in doubt. In fact, they claim that there is no evidence of fraud, and that is what clears them from suspicion in the political arena. They base their arguments on the fact that the Attorney General William Bar, and  60 courts, did not find significant proofs. 

Contrary to that, what it is clear is that almost all attempts to prove fraud in court  were pushed for dismissal on procedural grounds, even at the national Supreme Court level. That is why the courts were not able to look at the evidence. It turns out that there are two court cases and a State Senate case going on where the evidence is being examined, with positive prospects to declare fraud. And that evidence is quite similar all over the place, as we said about the common patterns observed at the lower echelons of the claimed pyramidal conspiracy. That explains the result. It is false, then, that the fraud claim was found to be wrong. Both, in a court of law, and, as we will argue, in the people's court as well, where we will show them to be guilty.   

Since the case of SCOTUS is emblematic, I will highlight that it turns out to be wrong from the point of view of national justice.  The court argued that Pennsylvania and the other accused States had autonomy regarding 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 plays the trumpet too loudly, you have the right to ask the authorities to make him behave. The principle that he has autonomy regarding what he does at home is overridden if those decisions affect negatively other homes around him. The authorities might doubt your motives, but if not only you, but other neighbors complain about the unpleasant noise, they have the obligation to look at the evidence; to open the case and investigate who is right. The proper thing to do for SCOTUS was to think out of the box, since this a novel and crucially historic situation, not only for the US, but but for the whole world too, open the case, and if necessary, produce new jurisprudence, based on the national constitution, given the national implications at hand. 

Michael Lindell and the people he interviews in his video claim that there was a conspiracy to “cancel” the truth on the matter of evidence, which consisted in hiding it from mediatic and Internet exposure, and to attack the prestige and interests of the citizens, whistleblowers and leaders objecting to the election process. That involved the FBI (who harassed whistleblowers instead of investigating the allegations), the Department of Justice, and the Homeland Security Department, besides many State and County level officials of both parties. In particular, the FBI and the DOJ misled Mr. Bar, an honest person according to Lindell, on the matter. That claim is consistent with our theory, which we present in this and the next sections.

In fact, I have claimed in the previous section that the conspirators are guilty of fraud, even without a court ruling. They say, again, that since they have not been condemned in court, we should hold them to be innocent. But here I provide a demonstration that the truth is the opposite: they are guilty until proven innocent,  which is what I have stated. Even with no court trial. This might seem outrageous to many people, in particular to the democratic party and even to many republicans. But it is one of the main foundations of a representative democracy. Of course the presumption of innocence principle applies to all citizens and private organizations. But politicians, and even institutions, are completely different subjects in a political trial, which is different, although related to a legal one as we will show, which is what we are talking about here to make a theoretical simulation that guides us for political and legal action. 

It turns out that 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, like corruption. Those tools are applied in business administration, where those situations are an everyday occurrence, and they are intimately related to science methodology while looking for the 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 always allows humans  to have an even better theory when the current one, taken as the status quo 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 that you formulate an alternative to the “null hypothesis”, the theory accepted as the status quo, when you want to explain reality not available before. 

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 that, the court, following legal procedures, admits to having a trial, in which a thorough search for the possible evidence is encouraged. If in the  process of evaluating that evidence, the judge and/or the jury finds that it is convincing, also looking at the arguments of the defense, it adopts the new theory as the status quo of society: the person is guilty. 

But, as even in science, there are always the possibility of errors in that decision, which are of two kinds: The “type I” error happens when the court condemns 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 one was really true). To minimize the probability of those errors, the court has the mandate to examine very carefully the evidence in order to make the final decision, and sides with the status quo if it is not convincing enough, meaning that the probability of error I is too high to admit the alternative hypothesis of guilt. That is why the party of the conflict which proposes the alternative hypothesis, the accuser, has the burden of proof in a natural way, the same as the scientist who challenges the status quo has to prove his claim with enough evidence that matches his new theory. It has to be convincing enough to give up on the status quo theory.   

The same happens in business administration. It should happen in politics too, but too often, as in our case, it does not occur, as we will see here. And here comes the surprise: as we will show, the null hypothesis in politics is that both, Biden and Trump, are guilty unless proven innocent. And they both have the burden of proof. If Joe Biden, our main case in this essay, does not provide enough evidence that there was no fraud, the people should continue to suspect that he is guilty.  

Since he was inaugurated as President given that most of the courts have not admitted the cases for a trial based on procedural decisions, we then appeal to the people for a simulated  political trial, using powerful economics tools that allow inferences even in the worst possible scenario: if the actual evidence of fraud is not used directly in the final verdict.  The observed variables are the public performances of the politicians being judged by the people. Even though, again, there is evidence that clearly signals fraud and conspiracy, we will go to the extreme to prove our points and take those variables as actual corruption as unobservable. The democrat party followers, in order to accept our arguments, only have to accept the clear correlation between corruption and attempts to hide it, and between innocence and the attempts to be transparent about signs of corruption. 

For that I will use two Economics models that I find to be useful in this situation: the “Agency Problem” and “Signaling Games”. The first one to show what the null hypothesis is, which will reveal who has the burden of the 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.

2. 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 of 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 studies are than the employer. And so on. That is why the patient and company owners (the principals) want to see a good reference, based on performance, in order to hire the dentist, the CEO and a job applicant, respectively (the agents). And that is why the saying that "Caesar's wife should appear honest, not just be" applies to politics: she must be above suspicion for the citizens (the principals in political issues, assuming there is democracy) to trust her.   

This implies that, like the dentist, the CEO and the job applicant have to prove that they are capable by their performance, the politicians have the burden of proof in a political trial made by the people. It is like in science and business administration in order to increase knowledge or efficiency, respectively: you start with a status quo theory, the “null hypothesis”, in our case guilty presumption  for dentists, job applicants, CEO and politicians, since it does not make sense for their principals to start assuming that they are capable without knowing them, not by mere word, but by actual empirical evidence: trusted references, and performance facing the principals. 

If someone claims that he has a better alternative than the null hypothesis, a new theory that improves upon the actual standard, he has to prove that that status quo is false (in our case 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.  

So, what is really outrageous is what most US citizens, even 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. In the case of Trump, he is willing to prove, if given the opportunity, that he is not bluffing. Biden’s attitude transgresses that basic principle  and justice logic in a representative democracy, and in sales, hiring, etc: 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, it is false. In other words, since the applicant has not been proven incapable, 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.  

In strictly logical terms, the fallacy of ignorance 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 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, he is corrupt unless he proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he is innocent. In this election case, there was fraud unless the Biden camp proves, beyond reasonable doubt, that there was not. The reason is that Biden has the burden of proof, as we have demonstrated.

3. Is the justice system in the US failing the people?

It is important to state that the political trial now, after the election, is about the suspicion of fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud, not about the competition between Biden and Trump about who is chosen to be the agent of the people in the US Presidency. The trial in which people compare both candidates and decide is over, since the votes, the judgment of the people, the jury in that political trial, to choose the agent, are already casted. So, the people now judge each suspect separately, not in the same election event. 

In fact, the political election is like the election of a CEO  in a company. The electoral system is like a committee named to count the votes of the shareholders. If there is suspicion of fraud among the owners, not only the suspect candidate for agent is involved. The electoral system is too, since for some motive it might favor one of the candidates against the other.  

In this sense, It is to notice that the whole justice system should itself be thought of as representing the interests of the people, if there is democracy, since the people are the owners, the shareholders here, and want justice to prevail, and the courts are supposed to pursue and to and to be equipped to guarantee that for them. Once elections have occurred, they have the obligation, in the new case, to take a look if the electoral committee failed to reflect the will of the  owners. 

With this framework in mind we can now address the issues of technical procedures and the admission of evidence mentioned before. When there is a conflict between two players in court, it is natural for the defendant to avoid incriminating evidence to be admitted in the trial, and to go to extremes to detect procedural failures in the accuser in order to dismiss the case. The accuser, on the  other hand,  would push for evidence to be admitted, and to avoid procedural errors. 

But if we think carefully, the accuser being the party that has the burden of proof, is Biden himself and the electoral system, in probable collusion with him too. It is completely odd from the economic, political and justice points of view, that they are the parties involved in avoiding the evidence to be admitted for the trial, and to put obstacles regarding procedures. Like an applicant for a job, Biden has to face every single possible stain in his curriculum that comes out before the employers, since he wants to clear his name. His enemy is the presumption, even the suspicion, of guilt, in the minds of the people; his alter self who is under suspicion, like in the case of a job applicant. 

The parties representing the people should be the DOJ, FBI and CIA too, since matters of international intelligence are involved. And the court themselves, since the electoral system is also under suspicion. If Joe Biden, DOJ, FBI, CIA, and the courts are avoiding the evidence, placing procedural obstacles, and avoiding opening the case, they are placing themselves directly against the people: as their enemy, and the usurper of their power. Like a job applicant who, instead of attempting to clear the minds of the employers from doubts and suspicion, hires himself against their  will. This indicates, by the way, that he has support inside the firm against the owners, since this is not a transaction based on the will of the traders, but on the brute force of one of them.  In our case, the support comes from the conspirators described above. 

On top of this, the fact that the Joe Biden camp insists that the issue is who is better, Biden or Trump, and not if there was fraud or not, is an additional indication  that they do not want to face the people and try to win in their favor, and that tactic is a diversion tactic in this war, which is now clearly seen as a de facto fight, instead of a de jury one. 

What we have seen then, besides the bad political opinions about Joe Biden of an important part of the population, is that the justice system is not prepared to deal with situations like this to the extent of allowing an enemy of the people to use it in its favor and against the people. That is why the responsibility of the SCOTUS is crucial here, since this kind of situation, which is extraordinary, merits invoking the constitutional principle of “necessitas”.  This principle applies when an authority fails to perform its duty to a degree of subverting the peace guaranteed by the social contract supposed to be in place, and the people have the right of rebellion against it. So what we have described is a worrying signal that the democratic system in the US is failing, and it is not prepared to deal with out of the ordinary situations like this that put in peril the very nature of the democratic republic.

4. The signals confirm that Biden is guilty and Trump is innocent. Trump is the legitimate President.

We are prepared now for a direct political trial by the people, since they have the right of opinion in a democracy. In theory, the owners of a firm have more power than their CEO, and of a committee named by them to examine directly a crucial issue that affects the future of the organization. In the US, the citizens have, at least, the right of opinion, which is what we simulate here.  For that we use the second economic model, signaling games. 

Using that model, if Joe Biden and his supporters really were not guilty, then, instead of attacking Trump’s supporters and putting them into the defensive, they, as a convincing signal to the people, would have been the most active promoters of the revision of the evidence as we saw using the previous model. More precisely now, the only way for Biden's side to avoid significant shades of doubt that stain the results and their credibility, and his tenure as well, was to  assume the risk of being proven wrong in court as a “costly signal” to the significant majority of the US citizens, as it is called in signaling games. That is the only thing  which would clearly separate the Biden camp from the alleged liar, Donald Trump. The reason for that “separating equilibrium” in this signaling game is simple: Trump is not able, even if he wants to, to provide proof of fraud if it does not exist, since it would be too costly to “produce it” (buy, fool or violently force everybody 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, 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 not so only in the minds of the republican people. Also in the minds of Biden grassroots followers when they realize the implications at hand. 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 democrats, 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.

5. The case of China: is it guilty of conspiracy and fraud in the US elections?

The same kind of arguments goes for the China involvement. On this matter, and taking into account the information given by Michael Lindell’s video, Biden’s supporters might claim that it is very difficult to detect the real IP address of a computer, since you might use a VPN to mask it. But the fact that the US patriotic hackers claim that they have detected all the other elements of the fraud, including the detailed amount of voters changed, and are willing to produce sworn affidavits on the matter, sets the case for the people to “open the political case” against that foreign country. In particular since it has huge incentives to be involved in this matter in that way: for them it is a matter of billions of dollars they save if Biden, and not Trump, is in charge. So, Joe Biden and his team have the burden on the  proof here too. 

6. The case of Donald Trump: is he bluffing regarding the claim of fraud?

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”, which clearly separates him from Biden.

7. Sidney Powell and Michael Lindell are not liars but heroes.

For the same kind of reasons, even though they support Trump, the attitude of Michael Lindell, Sidney Powell will have the sympathy of the people, who are the final judges in a political trial, at least if the US democracy still works. They are not politicians, but simple citizens and advocates of the people's rights, making an effort to reveal the truth at a huge personal cost, and to ask for court trials on the matter, even when they, as we explained, have not really the burden of proof. They play the role of a proper volunteer committee chosen by the owners of the firm in order to check for the CEO candidates. That greatly favors Trump in what is to come if the patriots are not defeated completely in the war that is in full development at this very moment.

There has been a vicious attack performed by the MSM on Sidney Powell and Michael Lindell because of their actions in this regard. In particular Dominion has accused Ms. and Powell and Mr. Lindell in court regarding alleged defamation. As the lawyers of Ms. Powell lawyers have stated in their legal language, she, as a citizen, has the right of free speech: the right to perform a personal political trial on politicians, public institutions, and the electoral system. In particular, Dominion. And she does not have the burden of proof, as I have demonstrated. They pretend to use, again, the fallacy of ignorance: since fraud by Dominion has not been proven to be true, it is false, and whoever says the contrary, is defaming them. Outrageous. Dominion is the one, as the electoral system and Joe Biden, who have to face the courts and prove that they are innocent, if the courts were doing their jobs. They have the burden of proof, not Sidney Powell.

The phrase that represents the main argument of Sidney Powell's lawyers, used by the GMC to accuse Sidney Powell of a liar, is the following: “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”. It is inferred by our reasoning that it is false that this means that she is a liar. It should be clear the difference if she is the accused party or if she is the accuser. If loses being accused, the negative economic impact for her is huge. 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 could 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 avoid the blow of an enemy. But the greatest support for it comes from a question of democratic, ethical and fair 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 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”.

It is crucial here that in the Dominion accusation in court, they have 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 a court accepted the several motions to that end made by Ms Powell, she, as the accuser, 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 to the people, Ms Powell is willing to assume that role, even with the possible bad consequences. This is what is called in game theory a “costly signal”, that we mentioned before, which separates her from the conspirators, the cheaters.

The “separating equilibrium” in this signaling game demonstrates then that that Sidney Powell, and Michael Lindell are not not, as the MSM has tried to portray them, a liars, but heroes. Heroes of the United States of America and its people. The MSM, if they served the people, should be applauding her courage, not attacking her. Another indication that the MSM are traitors of 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 a couple of citizens, including a woman. A clear indication that the rentistic system virus is taking hold of the US here: the powerful, without being right, trying to impose their will, acting as bullies, on the defenseless patriotic citizens, and discourage those who dare to confront them.

8. Summary of the political trial, caveats and the importance of it.

The summary of the two political trials is that Biden is guilty of fraud, and Trump was not bluffing. So what I claimed in the first section is true, according to economic logic, common sense,  and to the US people. Those conclusions are subject to the two kinds of errors commented before in each case judged in this simulation: There is a probability that Biden is innocent of fraud, and Trump is a liar. 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, and puts them to think of the real framework to judge what is going on, especially regarding what it means, as we will see in the next section: it is not a matter of Biden vs Trump alone. But the war goes on, and the narrative of the MSM and Big Tech continues to avoid those issues and to focus on race, culture, to engage everybody on them and to continue to divide the people. It is part of the new gen war at full speed. 

Is the US still a democratic republic? Rentism and the battles in the culture field.


But why does it matter here what the US people think, what is common sense, economic logic, or 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 to the heart of the issue here: what is at stake is the US democratic republic. 

From the simplest perspective, a political  system has a structure and a culture. In relation to  culture, notice our remark before about what people believe about 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 relationship with the State. Rentism occurs when a group of these organizations goes to the extreme of capturing the institutions of the State, which become their servers, not the servers of the people, through their puppets there. The lobbyists the rent-seekers used before rentism become now the representatives of those 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 rentistic 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, since in the political system crooks would have control of 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. It is the mechanism used by those who capture the state in those countries to discourage criticism and to stop any revolutionary initiative: 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 at the Department of Justice, many courts and the FBI, among others, as explained by Sydney Powell in this conference:   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 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. 

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 document 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: based on the principles of freedom and political personal rights, their minds and wills are supposed to be sacred. 

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: 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 is relegated to less important roles. 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 black hole and its characterization: a new generation de facto regime for the US

All of this confirms the conspiracy theory I wrote in December as an experienced Venezuelan with Economics training. It was a warning message 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 defined above. 

The organizations that capture the country 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 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.  In fact, that rule of law does not exist worldwide, as the UN has very little power to control them. And they have 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 people do not 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, taking into account that the new 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, you lose the rule of law completely, since the elections you get, the base of democracy, are marred with all sorts of tricks, in which the ones you have had at this moment are quite timid by comparison, and those elections are used  to perpetuate and reproduce the de facto rule. 

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, rentistic populism, institutional centralization, territorial centralization, militarism -the military and intelligence institutions become the agents of defense of the mafia cartel-, economic underdevelopment, control of the electoral process to place puppets in charge at all levels and places -independent of party affiliation or ideology; and rentistic culture at the citizen level. 

Worldwide consequences: Corporate capitalism with sophisticated communism.

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. 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). 

There has been a full scale next gen war here. China and the corporations won this crucial battle and the US has been defeated. It has been humiliated to such a big extent that 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 new kind of slavery, been  fooled to think this is good for them. The aggressors get to the extreme of blaming the victim, symbolized by Donald Trump, a great warrior (not perfect, of course) and ally defending the US and the citizens, in a public event, the impeachment. It is usual for the criminals to blame the victim, in this case in order to hide the real conflict and its current result, and to try to neutralize future revivals of their enemy so as to win the war, not only this battle. And to win the whole world from now on. 

What 's next?: citizens power!

The citizens' hope is that all US active patriots unite in a single all encompassing alliance, like an “All Patriots Pact”,  independently of their political and social orientation, and act right now using all their strength left at this moment in order to get back their nation. That strength includes the institutions not completely captured by the mafia cartel, like the SCOTUS,  most of the active and retired  military personnel, the honest part of the political leaders, most private sector and labor union leaders, many intelligence community agents, many grassroots organizations and foreign allies and citizens, like most Venezuelans. 

Since there is a great opportunity for the citizens, and their grass roots organizations, to realize what has happened, it is to be expected that they unite and fight the battle at every county, every city and State, every court, every moment, electing a new leadership in every party, buying from patriotic companies and local markets, boycotting traitors, creating non profit citizens owned social media and so on. That kind of move is predicted by the same Agency Theory, since in a market, the consumers play the role of the principal and the producers play the role of agents. So, citizens, as consumers, play a double role in this confrontation, and it is usual that they unite to boycott a product they believe to be poisonous, for example. 

The great alliance would be justified because this is not an issue of right vs left, republican vs democrat, but right vs wrong; the democratic republic of the founding fathers vs a rentistic system with  foreign domination. They will not have to wait, as Mike Lindell did, for Donald Trump to act alone, or wait four years. The war is fully on, and it is to be expected that more and more people will start to act now, not leaving for tomorrow what they can do today.  

A word is required regarding the citizens who voted for Joe Biden. Most of them were fooled. In order to convince them you have to act with love. If you are not christian, you should use the most basic principle of business administration for good sellers: the customer is always right. You are “selling” a product, which is good, no doubt, for them. Even if they do not realize it. So you have to go with infinite patience to win them to the common effort. And you have to have this as a norm: never attack the person. You might attack their ideas, but the ad hominem fallacy should be strictly prohibited from the pact. You might attack the leaders there, the traitors, since that is a right of the citizens in a democracy. But not the people who were fooled and are on that side only by error. You are not asking them to like Donald Trump. Only to like your nation, and act accordingly. 

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, of the Judeo-Christian civilization with a spiritual inspiration and scientific foundations, establishing the broken harmony between humans and nature.  

The killing of the innocent and the truth: my christian inspiration.

Finally: I wrote my warning to the US citizens on the 28th of December, the day of the innocents, when we remember the killing, by Herod, of the babies of Bethlehem intending to kill the baby Jesus. Even though all those babies died, the move failed to kill Jesus thanks to the three wise men who came from abroad to see him, and He succeeded not only against Herod, but against death itself, and brought us salvation. This war move by China, Iran and the international mafia cartel of corporations will produce many deaths, literally and politically. In particular, of US and  worldwide innocent citizens. But the truth will not be canceled, thanks to many wise people in the US and  all over the world. It will prevail over death and save us. I expect that to start pretty soon, in spite of the odds. In fact, the miracles are already happening, as Lindell said in the excellent video we are commenting on. 

“The truth will set you free”. Jesus of Nazareth.