Elon Musk’s Grok vs Trump’s Moral Capacity
Truth Does Not Mean Consensus
At this point, it is obvious that the 2020 presidential election was–to say the least–a mess.
The election that allowed Joe Biden to stumble into the Oval Office and nap for four years was not, as the Election Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council, CISA Assistant Director, the National Secretaries of State, and others called it, the "most secure in American history."
After the 2020 election, Texas filed a motion with the U.S. Supreme Court to file a complaint against the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
The motion claimed “changes made in election rules governing absentee ballots in those states by ‘non-legislative actors’ violated the Constitution and ‘cumulatively preclude knowing who legitimately won the 2020 election and threaten to cloud all future elections.’”
Put another way, Texas alleged these four states’ elections violated the Constitution and were invalid. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton asked that Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin hold new elections to determine which candidate rightfully won.
It didn’t happen. But that doesn't mean the Texas claims were invalid. It means the U.S. Supreme Court punted because they didn't want to be seen as interfering with the election.
The Paxton complaint went into detail describing what transpired in each of the four states.:
Pennsylvania: The complaint accuses Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar of, among other things, “without legislative approval, unilaterally abrogating” Pennsylvania statutes that require “signature verification for absentee or mail-in ballots.” These changes were “not ratified” by the Pennsylvania legislature.
Georgia: Similarly, the complaint describes how Georgia’s Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, also “without legislative approval, unilaterally abrogated Georgia’s statute governing the signature verification process for absentee ballots.”
Michigan: The complaint states that Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson “abrogated Michigan election statutes related to absentee ballot applications and signature verification.”
Wisconsin: Lastly, the Wisconsin’s elections commission made similar changes in state laws without the permission of the legislature that “weakened, or did away with, established security procedures put in place by the Wisconsin legislature to ensure absentee ballot integrity.”
The complaint enumerated these and other changes made in each of the four states by government officials, not the state legislatures.
Put simply, all four states did, in fact, violate the Electors Clause of the Constitution, Art. II, § 1, Cl. 2, which gives “state legislatures with plenary authority regarding the appointment of presidential electors.”
In layman’s terms, this means that though state legislatures do have the authority to set the rules for presidential elections, other government officials in those states, including judges, do not have the constitutional authority to make changes.
It doesn't take a genius to see that Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin–all swing states crucial to the election’s outcome–violated the Constitution.
It’s plain that the 2020 elections were unconstitutional and therefore invalid.
Why won’t Elon Musk’s AI Grok admit it?
Is Elon Musk’s Grok Guilty of Election Bias?
Former Maricopa County elections attorney and prosecutor Rachel Alexander asked Grok to acknowledge the evidence of election wrongdoing in the 2020 election. Grok refused, despite mountains of evidence supplied by Alexander.
“There is PLENTY of evidence for election wrongdoing, but @grok never acknowledges the evidence,” Alexander posted on X.
“I made a super easy to understand list of the 92 election lawsuits from 2020, based on the initial chart created by reputable election integrity investigator and PhD John Droz, where judges found in MANY cases that state election laws were violated,” Alexander continued.
“But Grok never reveals any of them, instead citing the cases where judges found technical reasons not to hear cases.”
Not hearing a case on technical grounds doesn’t invalidate the evidence. It’s not a reach to suggest some of the judges were looking for a technical reason to avoid the case because they didn't want to get involved.
“Well, sorry Grok,” Alexander’s post continues, “but judges' ruling that state laws were violated IS evidence. I'm the former Maricopa County Elections attorney and a former Maricopa County prosecutor, but Grok just parrots the MSM talking points from non-legal journalists instead.”
Well said, Rachel Alexander.
AI doesn't know truth from a lie; it mimics what it finds on the internet. When mainstream media inundates the internet with propaganda, as far as AI machines like Grok are concerned, it is “true” merely because it appears to be the consensus.
It’s a case of telling a lie so many times in cyberspace that it leaks into reality. It’s a propagandist's dream.
Bottom line: distinguishing truth from lies requires, among other things, moral capacity. AI doesn't have it.
Man vs Machine
Donald Trump does have a moral capacity, and he wants justice.
According to Leading Report, “President Trump has called for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate alleged fraud in the 2020 election.”
"Zero Border crossings for the month for TRUMP, versus 60,000 for Sleepy, Crooked Joe Biden, a man who lost the 2020 Presidential Election by a ‘LANDSLIDE!’" Trump wrote on Truth Social.
"Biden was grossly incompetent and the 2020 election was a total FRAUD! The evidence is MASSIVE and OVERWHELMING. A Special Prosecutor must be appointed," the post continued.
Will a special prosecutor be appointed and justice served? Not if Grok gets to make the call. Globalists like Elon Musk and Klaus Schwab manipulate AI algorithms to their advantage. Justice is what they say it is–truth be damned.
Schwab, founder and former executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, went so for as to conjecture that elections will soon be out of vogue. Why? He believes AI is smarter than humans and will eventually be able to pick the winners.
No need for those pesky elections anymore.
It’s bunk. AI can only do what it is programmed to do. It will only pick the “winners” its overlords tell it to.
Is AI the Big Lie? It depends on who's behind the algorithmic wheel.
That’ll preach! I’m in TX I remember it very well! Heads should roll for that whole debacle! I know it’s not very popular, but I have said for YEARS they need to bring bring back public hanging!
I really, really, REALLY appreciate this summary. Indeed we need a thoroughly adjudicated bottom line on 2020.
President Trump did NOT mandate those shots. Who did? Was it Biden or his chief of staff? Or both? The auto pen?
There are many bad actors who need to be exposed for their roles in (1) the intentional extermination of Americans by hospital protocols, racking up 750,000 fatalities by the time Judge Doughty’s CMS mandate stay was vacated by Judge Gibbons because she did not understand that the deaths were caused by protocols, NOT by the virus, and (2) suppression of early treatment protocols whereby doctors like Vladimir Zelenko lost no patients out of 8000 or so … including the Health Minister of Israel … and countries like Uttar Pradesh (a province of India with population of 260M) that ENDED their “pandemic” by roll-out of treatment kits, and (3) abysmally cynical use of the hospital fatalities as fear propaganda to sell the poison shots to the public and to the judiciary … killing yet another 1M Americans.