Should We Boycott the 2024 Election?
Maybe until the FBI stops directing our political process.
Republicans, no longer pretending to be the opposition party, just helped get the FBI a $600 million budget increase after the censorship bombshells conclusively demonstrated extensive bureau meddling in election-related speech. Every member of Congress now serving has won at least one election in the present era of FBI election manipulation. Some are probably beneficiaries. Should we be surprised that there are so few voices calling for it to end?
But maybe if we vote harder! Maybe the economic conditions, the memory of the riots of 2020, and dissatisfaction with the regime’s pandemic policy will lead the American electorate to wake up and vote smarter? If the FBI could stop a Democratic rout in 2022, why should 2024 be any different? Candidate quality? Don’t insult our intelligence. So Republicans need to run more candidates like John Fetterman?
But suspicions are one thing. We can say with certainty that our government interferes with election-related speech to the benefit of one party and to the detriment of the other. The FBI’s interference in election speech, in (and) of itself, is sufficient to make the elections noncompliant with international election standards. That is the first and most important reform that must be made or our elections cannot be deemed fair.
So why participate in an election that’s being manipulated by the FBI and other government agencies? In sham democracies, when the government refuses to adhere to international standards of fairness and transparency, the opposition parties have simply boycotted the elections.
The FBI censorship scandal is just the latest in a string of questionable actions by the Justice Department that have impacted our elections.
We can all recall that three months before the 2022 election, stories about the FBI raiding Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago compound dovetailed with the January 6 committee’s effort to convince midterm voters that President Trump planned or directed the Capitol incursion. Just before the 2020 election, the FBI made news in the swing state of Michigan by claiming to have broken up a “plot” to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer, the Democratic governor. Revelations in the subsequent criminal cases exposed the caper as a false flag or entrapment operation, as it turned out that the FBI planned and financed the whole thing. The FBI exercised full control over the timing of the pre-election announcements.
It was, as Julie Kelly reported, “flagrant election interference.” One can remember Robert Mueller’s ridiculous probe, which used leaks to publicly harass the president through the 2018 midterms. In 2016, the FBI famously meddled by exonerating Hillary Clinton of a scandal involving the Clinton family foundation taking money from people seeking favors from the State Deparment when she was secretary of state. The FBI went on to launch a spying operation against candidate Trump’s campaign figures, including Carter Page, and shared classified details of that spying with candidate Clinton’s subcontractor Christopher Steele. (Yes, that happened. See pages 114-115 of the inspector general’s report.) The FBI’s election interference has had real historic consequences. Obamacare would not have been possible, for example, if the FBI had not unseated Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) by framing him for taking a bribe.
Somebody should ask Joe Biden whether he’s willing to sign an executive order banning government involvement in moderation of election-related speech. The next time a hostile reporter tries to slam a dissident politician, maybe someone should retort with a question asking whether that reporter or her employer accepts money from the government. The practice of the FBI sharing information and coordinating with social media is totally destructive of its crucial independence from the government—especially when the FBI uses taxpayer money to pay for the requested censorship.
Sorry, no. Just…NO. None of us should be “asking Joe Biden” and the rest of his sleazy posse of fellow Swamp rats a gott-damned thing. Instead, we should be telling him, and them, a great many things—in terms strong and specific enough to leave no margin whatsoever for error, interpretation, or misunderstanding on anybody’s part.
We can prove government-directed censorship of election-related speech. Now that the FBI said it plans to continue or even expand these efforts, we have a choice to make. Do we legitimize the sham by trying really really really hard to overcome the rigged political forum? Or do we just boycott these sham elections until the FBI stops directing our political process?
I have a much better idea, in two parts which dovetail quite nicely and can be worked simultaneously without impinging on one another at all: 1) we go right on boycotting our ludicrously corrupt elections en masse, thus denying them even the flimsiest scrim of illusory legitimacy, trust, or value via our non-participation, while 2) we systematically dismantle the FBI and DoJ root, branch, and bough—until, as a great man once said, not one stone is left standing on another.
Yep, works for me.
Update! George Carlin says it for me, so I don’t have to.
What can one say but, Heh. Duly swiped from WRSA.