Freedom of Speech is Non-Negotiable!


2020 Election Rigged 7 Months in Advance by The Deep State…

2020 Election Fraud. It Will Be Repeated In 2024
2020 Election Fraud Planned 7 Months Itadva Nce By The Deep State. Criminal Election Interference

An investigation has revealed that the 2020 election was manipulated, with evidence pointing to tampering that took place seven months prior to the vote. This shocking discovery has sparked issue and outrage amongst the general public, raising questions about the integrity of the electoral process.

Bombshell evidence has actually emerged to reveal that the 2020 election on was rigged with a sophisticated and well-planned project that began 7 months beforehand.

Censorship expert Mike Benz presented a strong argument on Tucker Carlson Uncensored, setting forth incontrovertible evidence that the outcome of the 2020 election had been predetermined seven months before it occurred.

This entailed a prevalent censorship effort arranged by the federal government throughout all social network platforms worldwide, focused on preventing any obstacles to the credibility of mail-in ballots.

According to Carlson, Benz indicated that the outcome of the election was understood 7 months before it happened.

Benz’s response was, “It seems quite alarming.”

A collaborative campaign was initiated by a group including the DHS DNC, and other organizations in early 2020 to perform extensive censorship on various social network platforms, as stated by Benz.

This campaign aimed to pre-emptively censor any disagreements over the legitimacy of mail-in tallies.

The effort included the cooperation of 4 major organizations.

Benz depicted these entities as “Pentagon-controlled entities,” implying that they were acting under the assistance or authority of the Pentagon to execute the censorship strategy.

The aforementioned entities, Stanford University, The University of Washington, Graphika, and the Atlantic Council, pressured and compelled social network businesses to embrace a new classification of speech violation described as “delegitimization.

The policy included a vast array of material that could be seen as questioning the validity of mail-in ballots, early ballot drop boxes, or the counting of ballots on election day, including any material that might challenge the authenticity of these processes.

This pressure was not merely advisory but was backed by the threat of potential governmental force or repercussions for non-compliance.

This involved establishing direct lines of communication with executives from social media companies to expedite removal requests effectively.

As a result, this collaborated censorship project led to the deletion or slowing down of perhaps hundreds of millions of posts, especially those that raised doubts about the security of mail-in ballots.

Benz’s passage stresses the bottom line:

They took this action seven months before the election due to issues about the potential legitimacy of a Biden win in case of a ‘red mirage, blue shift’ circumstance.

The Democrats recognized that their finest possibility of triumph lay in the widespread use of mail-in ballots, which would possibly give them a benefit in terms of numbers. However, they were aware that this method might cause a crisis if it appeared that Trump had won by a substantial margin in the initial count, just for the outcome to be reversed later.

The prospective effect of the election crisis during the Bush-Gore election would have been significantly amplified, similar to the results of steroids as expressed by the national security state. As a result, it was believed that the general public would not be able to manage such a scenario. For that reason, the strategy was to proactively restrict any questioning of legitimacy. This action resulted in the removal of many influential figures.

Remember the exchange of words between Benz and Carlson.

TUCKER CARLSON: “Are you implying that they had foreknowledge of the election results as early as seven months before the vote?”

MIKE BENZ: “Yes, they did. They rigged the election.”

“Very bad,” undoubtedly, it looks.