Detecting language using up to the first 30 seconds. Use `--language` to specify the language Detected language: English [00:00.000 --> 00:07.400] Welcome to the Vodcast. I'm recording this on Monday, November 7th, 2022, the day before [00:07.400 --> 00:11.920] the midterm election. I wanted to get a thought on the record before the election results [00:11.920 --> 00:17.520] are announced. Perhaps I'm right. Perhaps I'm wrong. We'll find out over the days and [00:17.520 --> 00:24.440] weeks after the election. [00:24.440 --> 00:35.760] The Dr. Reality Vodcast with Dave Champion. [00:35.760 --> 00:40.720] Let's start with this. I am thrilled that the election is upon us. I am sick of the [00:40.720 --> 00:45.480] political ads, endless partisan social media posts and media pundits attempting to tell [00:45.480 --> 00:50.560] us things that are readily apparent to everyone with a brain. I'm grateful we'll have a week [00:50.640 --> 00:55.920] or two without those things before the media and social media starts the same crap all [00:55.920 --> 01:02.560] over again concerning the 2024 election. As you may have seen, Roger Stone and Steve Bannon, [01:02.560 --> 01:07.680] both of whom are close advisors to Trump, recorded well in advance of the 2020 election [01:07.680 --> 01:12.680] saying the plan was for Trump to say he'd won the election even if he lost. In other [01:12.680 --> 01:16.960] words, the narrative that was to come from Trump and Republican personalities in the [01:16.960 --> 01:25.520] media was put in place before any votes were cast. We also know that roughly 60 post 2020 [01:25.520 --> 01:30.480] election lawsuits brought by Trump or surrogates alleging Trump lost due to election fraud [01:30.480 --> 01:37.480] were dismissed for lack of evidence. By lack of evidence, I mean no evidence at all was [01:37.480 --> 01:42.200] submitted to the courts. I recently saw a video of Sidney Powell speaking shortly after [01:42.200 --> 01:47.240] the 2020 election saying how she couldn't wait, that's a quote, couldn't wait to get [01:47.240 --> 01:52.920] evidence of election fraud before the courts. Apparently she didn't think any of those 60 [01:52.920 --> 01:57.360] court cases were the right place to present her evidence. Powell was sued for defamation [01:57.360 --> 02:03.280] 22 months ago by Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic Voting Systems. She is literally [02:03.280 --> 02:10.400] being sued for billions of dollars in those suits. An absolute defense against those defamation [02:10.400 --> 02:15.720] claims would be to submit evidence to the court showing the basis for her remarks was reasonable [02:15.720 --> 02:21.920] and therefore did not constitute actual malice, which is the legal standard for defamation in the [02:21.920 --> 02:26.960] United States. Instead of providing the court with her alleged evidence and having the suits [02:26.960 --> 02:33.040] dismissed on the spot, in March 2021, Powell argued in a court filing that the Dominion suit [02:33.040 --> 02:39.440] should be dismissed because, quote, no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were [02:39.520 --> 02:45.600] truly statements of fact, close quote. In other words, Powell is saying anyone who believed her [02:45.600 --> 02:51.920] statements about Dominion was not a reasonable person. If you're one of the people who believed [02:51.920 --> 02:58.480] her, how does that make you feel? Trump's private attorney Rudy Giuliani said in a deposition for [02:58.480 --> 03:04.320] the billion dollar defamation suit against him by Dominion that he had not researched the election [03:04.320 --> 03:09.680] fraud claims he made against Dominion in front of the national media. Under oath, he said he'd [03:09.680 --> 03:15.760] heard it somewhere and then simply repeated it when he got in front of the cameras without [03:15.760 --> 03:21.680] knowledge whether the claims had any basis in fact. Just a few days ago, former Navy Seal and [03:21.680 --> 03:26.240] current U.S. Congressman Dan Crenshaw, speaking of Trump's claim that he won the election but [03:26.240 --> 03:32.320] it was stolen from him by election fraud, said, quote, it was a lie. The whole thing was always [03:32.320 --> 03:39.520] a lie and it was a lie meant to rile people up, close quote. He also said that behind closed doors, [03:39.520 --> 03:45.520] congressional Republicans and GOP personalities in the media acknowledge it's a lie. Why do I bring [03:45.520 --> 03:52.640] up these 2020 election issues the day before the 2022 election? Because Donald Trump has been holding [03:52.640 --> 03:58.480] meetings for several weeks now focusing on asserting election fraud in any race where a MAGA [03:58.480 --> 04:05.840] candidate loses. Is there election fraud when a MAGA candidate wins or only when they lose? [04:06.400 --> 04:11.440] I think it's important to note that the plans to claim election fraud are being made before [04:11.440 --> 04:17.440] a single vote is cast. In other words, this is a planned, intentional repeat of the tactic [04:17.440 --> 04:21.680] articulated by Stone and Bannon before any votes were cast in the 2020 election. [04:22.320 --> 04:26.240] The truly important thing to keep in mind when these election fraud allegations are made in [04:26.240 --> 04:31.680] races MAGA candidates lose is that because the plan to make such claims was created before a [04:31.680 --> 04:37.120] single vote was cast, you can be confident there is no evidence associated with those claims. [04:37.120 --> 04:43.440] Or perhaps I should say it this way, there will be no more evidence those MAGA candidates [04:43.440 --> 04:50.480] lost due to election fraud than is possessed by Sidney Powell, Rudy Giuliani or Trump concerning [04:50.480 --> 04:58.480] the 2020 election, which is zero. A quick word about 2000 meals, only because I know someone [04:58.480 --> 05:03.440] will comment that it shows evidence of election fraud. I struggled with whether to address this [05:03.440 --> 05:08.640] issue or to what extent. I decided I'd say the following and no more at least for today. [05:09.280 --> 05:15.200] The claims in the movie are incredibly easy to debunk and have been thoroughly debunked time [05:15.200 --> 05:22.240] and again. People who believe what they saw in that movie have chosen to accept what was presented [05:22.240 --> 05:27.520] rather than research it because they want to believe the election fraud narrative. [05:27.520 --> 05:34.000] Now leave it there for today. There is likely a trivial amount of voter fraud in every election, [05:34.000 --> 05:37.760] but a few people doing something illegal doesn't change the outcome of an election. [05:37.760 --> 05:44.560] Let me offer some illustrative numbers. Let's say candidate A wins an election by 8600 votes, [05:44.560 --> 05:49.920] but in that election officials identified 32 instances of voter fraud. For the sake of this [05:49.920 --> 05:56.640] illustration, we'll say that 60% of that fraud was in favor of the winner's opponent. Would 19 [05:56.640 --> 06:01.360] illegal votes for the victor's opponent change the outcome of the election? I wanted to share [06:01.360 --> 06:06.400] that illustration to make the point that trivial run-of-the-mill voter fraud doesn't alter election [06:06.400 --> 06:12.800] outcomes. My view is that when a perpetrator's intent can be shown in a criminal case for voter [06:12.800 --> 06:17.840] fraud, the penalty should be considerably harsher than those currently on the books. [06:18.560 --> 06:24.560] However, in every case of such allegation, whether it be in a criminal trial or an attempt to [06:24.560 --> 06:31.920] influence public opinion at a press conference, evidence is absolutely essential. Trump's election [06:31.920 --> 06:37.200] fraud claims concerning the 2020 election were and continue to be completely evidence free. [06:37.840 --> 06:42.160] The same will be true with the pre-planned election fraud claims that will be made in [06:42.160 --> 06:46.160] contests where the MAGA candidate loses. I shouldn't have to say the following, [06:46.160 --> 06:53.360] but experience tells me I do. A public claim made by the loser is not evidence. A naked assertion [06:53.360 --> 06:59.360] made at a press conference is not evidence. A Republican media personality saying there was [06:59.360 --> 07:06.080] election fraud is not evidence. Donald Trump saying it is not evidence. Evidence is hard facts, [07:06.080 --> 07:11.680] not people saying things in front of cameras. When people make such allegations without evidence, [07:11.680 --> 07:18.160] it is nothing more than propaganda. The reason I wanted to record this the day before the election [07:18.160 --> 07:25.040] is twofold. First, to prepare you for what is coming. And second, to share with you now to predict [07:25.040 --> 07:31.440] that all such claims concerning MAGA candidates who lose will be evidence free. Everyone knows [07:31.520 --> 07:36.880] we're at a level of divisiveness never before seen in America. People may have various thoughts [07:36.880 --> 07:43.040] about how to diminish that divisiveness. My answer is for each and every American to commit [07:43.040 --> 07:49.600] to making decisions only from facts, data, and evidence. Not what some guy or gal says, no matter [07:49.600 --> 07:55.200] who the guy or gal may be. The last people Americans should ever believe without a boatload [07:55.200 --> 08:00.800] of evidence is politicians. After the last three years, public health officials are probably in [08:00.800 --> 08:08.720] second place. With all that said, where do you stand on evidence versus evidence free claims? [08:08.720 --> 08:14.080] I ask because there are two subjects concerning which the government has engaged in massive, [08:14.080 --> 08:20.400] decades-long disinformation campaigns, and both are abominations. The first is the government's [08:20.400 --> 08:26.000] utterly false narrative concerning who owes income tax, in which the United States government is [08:26.000 --> 08:32.880] committing the largest financial crime in history, and the victims are the American people. [08:33.520 --> 08:38.480] The other is the government's false narrative about things like eating healthy, what causes weight [08:38.480 --> 08:44.160] gain and weight loss, and how to live a long and healthy life, in which the government is responsible [08:44.160 --> 08:49.920] for the American people being the most chronically ill society in all of human history, being sick, [08:49.920 --> 08:57.040] miserable, and dying years, sometimes decades, earlier than if they rejected the government's [08:57.040 --> 09:02.480] false narrative. If you're a fact and truth person who doesn't like being bullshitted by the [09:02.480 --> 09:07.040] government, and you'd like to see the government's disinformation and propaganda and compare it [09:07.040 --> 09:13.760] against the facts, law, and science, all laid out in a way everyone can understand and put into [09:13.760 --> 09:22.320] action if you so choose, go to drreality.news and grab a copy of Income Tax Shattering the Mist, [09:22.880 --> 09:29.440] Body Science, or both. If you choose both, you get a 20% discount, which is reflected in the price of [09:29.440 --> 09:33.600] the two-book bundle. I'll put the link to the two-book bundle in the notes. There are some other [09:33.600 --> 09:39.200] publications there as well you may find intriguing, and the more materials you purchase, the deeper [09:39.200 --> 09:44.160] the discounts go. By purchasing any of my writings, you help me to continue to be here for you with [09:44.160 --> 09:56.720] these fact-based presentations. Thanks for being here. Take care.