The Gemma Press Conf About Voter Fraud: Questions that Doubters Must Answer
Yes, it’s true, it appears that Anthony Gemma missed his intended target at his press conference on Wednesday. No evidence was presented that David Cicilline himself participated in carrying out voter fraud (though there is also no doubt that it was his election bid that would have benefited from these alleged efforts).
But in the process, a larger – and far more alarming – revelation emerged: wholly credible testimony of serious, systemic voter fraud in not one but several elections.
Some honest, otherwise smart people have completely missed this point – the dishonest, smart people are simply ignoring it – by allowing themselves to be distracted by the unprofessional aspects of the press conference, the overblown hype that constituted its preview and the fact that the “shooter” did not score a bulls-eye on his stated target. (Matt Allen, we specifically include you in this category of Smart Doubters!)
Let’s disregard for a moment the … intriguing video that the Providence Journal posted on its website yesterday and review only what was offered at Wednesday’s press conference.
– A candidate for Congress reading the witness statement, presumably signed under pains and penalties of perjury, of someone describing the extensive voter fraud he or she had witnessed first hand in at least one prior election.
– Three people asserting in the first person that they had witnessed voter fraud in prior elections.
– Other witness statements asserting voter fraud.[Note to the Gemma camp: Why did you release only a few copies of those witness statements? Are you aware of the invention of a device called the mimeograph machine that could be used by reporters to duplicate and then share those documents, thereby thwarting your inexplicable purpose for making them scarce? Please be aware that while we are whole-heartedly behind your efforts to expose voter fraud and are on the edge of our seats waiting for the next development, the credibility of this effort has been unnecessarily damaged by a list of avoidable missteps to which this mishandling of the witness statements has been added.]
Where were we? Oh yes. Without further ado, here are some of the questions that honest doubters must answer in order to continue clinging to their doubts:
> Are the three witnesses at the press conference lying?
> Is Anthony Gemma a pathological liar willing to sacrifice his not inconsequential reputation in the state by financing and staging an elaborate charade?
> Is the witness statement read by Anthony Gemma a work of fiction? What about the others that he tendered?
Obviously, the point is that all of these would have to be answered “yes” – and if that is your answer, please say so! I promise I’ll try not to jump down your throat – for an observer to continue to be skeptical about the information that was presented Wednesday and not to see that there is very good reason to be alarmed about the integrity of our elections, past and current.