Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson’s Homeland Security Committee hearing on election “irregularities,” held Wednesday, promised compelling testimony and certainly brought it.

This marks the first federal hearing on allegations of election fraud. In case you didn’t get to watch, here’s the link to the entire thing.

For Sen. Johnson, this is about regaining public trust, which obviously has been shattered. “The fact that our last two presidential elections have not been accepted as legitimate by large percentages of the American people is a serious problem that threatens our republic,” he said in his opening statement.

He blamed in part “today’s climate of hyper-partisanship, which is only exacerbated by the persistent efforts to delegitimize the results of the 2016 election,” referring to the Russian collusion hoax. He also noted that the “ongoing suppression and censorship of the conservative perspective by biased media and social media adds fuel to the flames.”

Listening to this on Wednesday, I did notice that the discussion we’re having about the 2020 election has changed. Remember when election fraud was supposedly so “rare,” we hardly ever heard of any cases? Why, there was “no evidence” of it happening, and we weren’t supposed to say it ever had –- let alone that it might have changed the outcome. Now, after hearing firsthand accounts from witness after witness about what they saw, the discussion has become, “Well, sure, there’s always going to be a certain level of fraud, but the question is, was it enough to change the outcome?”

And that was the question Sen. Johnson asked in his opening statement. We’re now dickering over the LEVEL of the fraud.

It sounds as if we’re acknowledging that our country is unwell because of a very unhealthy lifestyle, and now we need to determine if continuing on this track is bad enough to kill the patient. I hope that at some point in the future, historians aren’t asking that question at the autopsy.

To continue the analogy, the patient's “tests” (polls) say it’s serious. About 70 percent of Republicans don't believe the election was “free and fair,” and even many Democrats see problems, although their level of trust in Biden’s win is going up. (That’s from watching too much CNN.) Yes, this patient is very sick and needs a huge lifestyle change, as in accountability and reform of the process.

If you count unconstitutional rule changes that made large-scale fraud and error easy, the answer to Sen. Johnson’s question would be YES –- the level was high enough. Just look at this testimony from Trump attorney Jesse Binnall about what happened in Nevada as a result of widespread mail-in voting; this is something to share with doubting friends.

The courts have had their own blasted reasons for refusing to look at the rule changes, but that doesn’t mean the election wasn’t affected by them. It simply means the judiciary didn't want to be involved and found ways not to be.

Democrats at the hearing mostly knocked the idea of being there, saying the election challenges are not good for the country. (As if steamrolling towards an outcome that so many Americans don’t trust WERE good for the country?) The ranking Democrat on the Committee, Michigan Sen. Gary Peters, said that the current legal challenges to the election results “undermine the will of the people, disenfranchise voters, and sow the seeds of mistrust.”

I would point out that ignoring the glaring problems we’ve seen will cause precisely that kind of damage.

Democrats expressed concern about mail-in ballots and Dominion voting machines when they thought these were potential problems for THEM. Now that they’ve almost managed to drag Biden over the finish line, they want to shut down any examination of these factors.

Sen. Johnson blasted Democrats for the hypocrisy of their constant charge of "disinformation": “The purveyors of Russian disinformation, Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the DNC, the Steele dossier, the ranking member Peters accusing Sen. Grassley and I of disseminating Russian disinformation --- THAT’S where the disinformation is coming [from]. This hearing today --- this is GETTING information we have to take a look at to restore confidence in our election integrity.”

Standing O for Sen. Johnson. Incidentally, that accusation against him and Sen. Grassley concerned a report they issued on the Bidens’ foreign business interests, which we all know now is true. As in, NOT “disinformation.”

Sen. Rand Paul spoke up as well, saying that “fraud happened” and the only way it’ll be fixed is by in the future reinforcing the laws.”

This report from THE EPOCH TIMES outlines some of the startling witness testimony.

As we’ve been saying, the fight is by no means over. GOP electors in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico cast alternate slates of votes for Trump on Monday, the same day the certified Democrat electors cast their votes.

Trump is being supported in his fight by a number of Republicans, notably Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley and Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks, who's planning to be the House member who lodges a challenge to the electoral vote on January 6. He needs a senator to do this with him, and we don’t know yet who will step up for this. Among several possibilities is Sen. Rand Paul, but at this writing he hasn’t announced anything.

Here’s where a number of Republican Senators and House members fall on the issue.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky is not providing leadership on this. In fact, he’s trying to discourage members of his party from challenging the vote on January 6. The same goes for Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who called the idea “a grave mistake.” He and South Carolina Sen. Lindsay Graham are waiting to see how Trump’s legal challenges play out.

Finally, Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, who was expected to release his report on foreign interference in the election this Friday, has heard from his office (the ODNI) that “the intelligence committee will not be meeting the December 18 deadline” set by Trump’s 2018 executive order (#13848). Their announcement said that “a number of agencies have not finished coordinating on the product.”

The conclusions in this report will be extremely important; details about the delay and Trump’s options under the executive order are in this must-read report from THE EPOCH TIMES.

Ratcliffe has been clear about the threat posed by China and also their desire to see Trump out of office. Former acting DNI Ric Grenell tweeted on Wednesday just prior to this announcement that Ratcliffe “is standing up for career analysts who want their views to be accurately reflected. In other words, fighting to keep intelligence from being politicized.”

According to Catherine Herridge at CBS, Ratcliffe said earlier this month that in November of 2020, we had election interference from China, Iran and Russia.

Russiagate probe expanding

December 16, 2020

It was reported yesterday that now-special counsel John Durham is expanding his Russiagate probe and “making excellent progress.”

But blogger Jeff Dunetz makes the depressing point that it might be just more talk that all leads to nothing. Durham has dragged this out so long that many voters didn’t even know about the Democrat hoax to overturn the 2016 election until after the 2020 election (which Democrats now claim that it’s insurrection to challenge.) Meanwhile, anyone paying attention (or reading this newsletter) has long known who did what and who ought to be in prison for it.

Dunetz compares these regular rumors that “indictments are coming” to Lucy continually yanking the football away from Charlie Brown. He also notes that if Biden gets in, all Durham will be able to do is submit a confidential report to a Biden-appointed Attorney General, who for all we know will be someone personally involved in Russiagate. I would not bet against that AG dropping it right into the nearest shredder. All the work Durham did, and all the years he put into it, would come to nothing. Pardon me if I’m beginning to suspect that that was the whole point of putting so many years into it.