Obama Lies to Sway an Election

More proof that there is no reason to believe anything that Obama says

Another example of asymmetrical election theft?

As I have recently pointed out, there is more than one way to steal an election. In Stealing an Election as We Watch I gave several examples of new ways that unscrupulous actors are trying to unfairly rig elections. “Rig?” Let’s call it what it is: “Steal.” One such example of new election stealing techniques was the now-infamous Letter by the Corrupt 51 that likely tilted the 2020 presidential election to Joe Biden. See more discussion on that in Foor for Thought During the Debate — How Do You Rig an Election?

So, what is a fair characterization when a former President with the voice and power of that office goes on TV or other media and flat-out misrepresents lies about an election in order to sway that and other elections? It is nothing short of another effort to “rig” or “steal” an election.

Stealing an Election as We Watch showed how Phony Moderate Governor Spanberger and her cohorts in the Virginia assembly are attempting to put one over on Virginia voters in connection with an ongoing special election that is intended to authorize an unprecedented amendment to the Virginia Constitution.

If you haven’t read Stealing an Election as We Watch (or want a refresher), please read it now and then come back here.

One of the tricks by which the fraudsters hope to unfairly rig the election results is by putting misleading language on the special election ballot, which says that the amendment will “restore fairness in the upcoming elections.” Who could oppose restoring fairness? In fact, it’s effect will be the opposite.

If successful, the constitutional amendment would accelerate Virginia’s headlong rush to replace Californian as the worst governed state in the Union. It attempts to override current law which provides that congressional districts are to be drawn by a 10-member Redistricting Commission that by law must be split 50-50 between Democrats and Republicans. Instead, the proposed amendment requires Virginia’s congressional districts to be designed by one party only — Virginia’s overwhelmingly Democratic General Assembly. It also would add to Virginia’s California simulation by redrawing and gerrymandering Virginia’s eleven congressional districts so that the current 6-5 margin favoring Democrats would be converted to a lopsided 10-1 ratio.

So why do I say this is a fraud and a steal? Because the Democrat-designed ballot language represents that the amendment will “restore fairness,” when what it really will do is require take away the power to redraw district maps from the bipartisan commission mandated by current Virginia law, and give it instead to the highly partisan Democratic legislature, under the tutelage of Ms. Phony Moderate Governor. And the district maps are already pre-drawn with the specific intent to deprive roughly half of Virginia’s electorate of their right to meaningful congressional representation of their choosing.

So along comes Obama

While enjoying longish walks with my dog, I often listen to audio books, including many that are on YouTube (just finished Jack London’s The Sea Wolf; currently working on Antony Beevor’s Stalingrad). But the price for those relaxing escapes is periodic interruptions for commercials of every sort. Now, while trying to comprehend the horror that was Stalingrad in 1942 - 43, with its estimated 2 million casualties, I have been bombarded with pitches by former President Obama to vote “Yes” in the ongoing special election.

Obama’s ads are so misleading that rather than persuade me to vote to change Virginia’s Constitution, they remind me of the adage, Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. More on that below.

Like the misleading official Explanation published by the Commonwealth and the language on the ballot itself, Obama’s election pitches are false and intended to rig the election to unfairly deprive almost half of Virginia’s voters of effective congressional representation of their choice.

Here one of his ads, which is just over a minute long:

Let’s take a closer look:

Free and fair elections are the cornerstone of our democracy. But right now they are under threat.

That is true but not in the way that Obama wants you to believe. Going from a 6-5 ratio favoring Dems to an 11-1 ratio, in a purple state that went for Trump in the last presidential election and that remains roughly evenly divided surely can be described as a “threat.”

Over the past year several have taken the unprecedented steps of redrawing their congressional maps in the middle of the decade.

Joseph Goebbels said something to the effect of, “When you lie, lie big.” Obama went to school on that.

Mid-decade redistricting is neither “unprecedented” nor an exclusively Republican phenomenon. In fact, both parties have engaged in or attempted mid-decade redistricting since the 1800’s. A UNC Chapel Hill professor authored a study confirming that one state engaged in congressional redistricting every year for 24 years, in the late 1800s. And Ohio did so seven times in the 14-year period between 1878 and 1892.

So ‘constitutional law professor’ Obama’s representation that such mid-decade redistricting is “unprecedented” is a BIG LIE. The truth is that there is a long history and ample precedent for such redistricting. But his lie that we are facing an “unprecedented” crisis is necessary to justify the extraordinary measure of a constitutional amendment.

Obama is a little more slippery when he says that it is “Republican controlled states” that have engaged in this “unprecedented” practice. He doesn’t say that only Republican controlled states did this, but he implies that by omitting any reference to Democrat redistricting, especially in the context of his lie that it is “unprecedented.” Probably the most successful mid-cycle redistricting in recent years was by California Democrats just last year. California’s gerrymandering resulted in a net increase of five Democrat seats. California’s redistricting was in response to the prior Texas redistricting which resulted in an additional five Republican seats. So, these two 2025 redistricting efforts were a wash. What, no gain for either party, you say? We can’t have that. Virginia to the rescue!

And they’ve done it for a simple reason. To give themselves an unfair advantage in the midterms this fall.

The Dems, including Obama are not even pretending that this so-called “temporary” measure is anything other than an effort to “give themselves an unfair advantage” in the Virginia midterms this fall. They just justify this unfairness in Virginia by blaming it on “what Republicans are doing in other states.” And as we have seen, in Texas the GOP picked up 5 districts which was offset by the 5 districts that the Dems then gained in California. So, the Virginia Constitution therefore must be amended. Our Democracy depends upon it!

And speaking of fairness, if successful, Virginia would be the only state in the country of its size that has only one or zero GOP representatives. There are eleven states that have zero or one representatives. All have smaller populations than Virginia. The closest is deep blue Massachusetts which has over 1 1/2 less million people than does Virginia. Those stats alone show how out-of-the-norm this attempted grab is.

This amendment gives you the power to level the playing field in the midterms this fall. And voters will have the final say over what the maps look like.

And going from a 6-5 advantage to a 10-1 margin will “level the playing field”? Here is a graph of the Democrats’ proposed playing field:

Dems’ proposed playing field for Virginia congressional districts

Does that line look like a “level playing field” to you?

Obama also did a shorter second version of his spiel. There is not much to add from that 30-second version, but it is here if anyone wants to see it. The only thing notable about it is Obama’s opening:

Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to rig the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years.

So, it is Republicans who want to “steal enough seats in Congress to rig the next election” by locking them in at a 10-1 disadvantage? That makes no sense. But Dr. Goebbels would be proud.

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

As I have previously pointed out, trial judges across the country regularly tell juries that in assessing the credibility of a witness, they can apply the legal maxim, “Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.” They put this in plain English by instructing that “if you decide that a witness has deliberately testified untruthfully about something important, you may choose not to believe anything that witness said.”

And so it is with politicians, as well as with ordinary citizens giving courtroom testimony. Indeed, if it applies to lay witnesses at trial, it applies to politicians a fortiori, as the judges like to say.

I once heard one of the best judges before whom I ever practiced, the late Honorable D. Dortch Warriner of the Eastern District of Virginia, say at the sentencing hearing for a man who had just been convicted of crimes, “Of those to whom much is given, much is expected.” Judge Warriner then lowered the boom. His comments at that sentencing could as well be directed to former President Obama. More should be expected of our former presidents than to engage in such duplicitous, mendacious, partisan lying in an effort to “steal seats” and “rig an election” to use Obama’s terminology.

Obama has shown that he is not worthy of belief. Not now, not on this, not on anything.