Essay #11: A Vote for Trump

If I had to vote for one of the major party candidates, I would vote for Trump. My justification would not include his qualifications or that I thought he might do a good job. My vote comes from situations like the current Hunter Biden scandal in the news right now.

For those unaware, Hunter Biden allegedly left his laptop at a laptop repair shop and then forgot about it. The laptop repair shop owner found some questionable emails on the computer and contacted Rudy Giuliani who then held on to the information until what was determined to be the opportune moment in the presidential election cycle. Rudy Giuliani made the information available to the New York Post (as well as a few other outlets that decided not to publish, including FOX) who then published the story.

For those who do not know, Rudy Giuliani should not be considered an honest actor (2008 NY Times article on some of his dubious behavior) and any information he brings forth should be verified extensively. There is not much indication that the New York Post did this.

I don’t really care what is in the emails. I know it has something to do with the alleged collusion between the Biden family and Ukraine. I do not care about that part of the story. It is bad for Biden if true, but this election is so muddy the idea that “a little more corruption” would move the needle is preposterous. The part of the story I care about is the tandem reaction to this story from a majority of media outlets and the overt censorship by Twitter and Facebook.

Media outlets are currently reporting primarily on the sketchy nature of the origin of this information, and they have a point. In my opinion, it does not sound believable. A laptop repair shop owner who knows who Hunter Biden is and has the political knowledge to understand that the emails on the laptop were of political importance? Also, Hunter Biden leaving a laptop with incriminating information at a laptop repair shop and forgetting about it? I heavily doubt that the story of its origin is true. However, regardless of where information originated, the first question is “Are the emails real or not?” and they are not asking that. In neglecting to do so they expose themselves as more interested in protecting Joe Biden than they are in journalism. Many of these same journalists had no reservations reporting on the Steele Dossier. For those unfamiliar, the Steele Dossier was a document of findings from an investigation into Trump’s presidential campaign and its alleged collusion with Russia. The investigation was in part paid for by the Clinton Presidential campaign ($12.4mn). This dossier is a great segue into big tech censorship.

It is difficult to prove that the big tech platforms are censoring nefariously, and I do not know of many media outlets that are being properly inquisitive. There is Project Veritas which is an independent investigative journalism outlet that has some SERIOUSLY sketchy reporting history, and most media outlets report on stories put out by them in the same way that they are reporting on the Hunter Biden story. However, when it comes to tech platform censorship, there is plenty of smoke, which means there may be a fire somewhere. I can show you a quick example pertaining to the Steele Dossier. The dossier is a very embarrassing story because Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, in order to find proof of collusion between Russia and Trump’s campaign, COLLUDED WITH RUSSIA (the British MI6 intelligence office hired to investigate Trump campaign got some of his information from Russian/Russia-affiliated sources). There is an extensive Wikipedia article with 449 different sources on it. You would think that Google would know about it.


Wow, “steel doors” must be very popular if Google is suggesting them first. Perhaps I should keep typing so Google will have more information to guess what I am typing…


Google is literally pretending that it cannot hear me. I have to type in the full name and then hit enter so it cannot pretend anymore and then it says “OOOOOH the Steele Dossier, I thought you were asking about steel doors. Most people ask me about steel doors.” (Feel free to repeat this experiment yourself as I am curious to know if it is the same for others). I only discovered this example while researching for this essay, and it is hardly damning evidence.

These small examples of possible covert censorship have been happening for years, but when the Hunter Biden story was published by the NY Post, Twitter decided it was time to exercise overt censorship. Twitter blocked users’ ability to share the URL or images of the article via Tweet or DM and they disabled the account of the NY Post. They cited their policy about “hacked” materials. They failed to explain why they took no action on the NY Times publishing of Trump’s hacked tax returns just weeks prior. They failed to explain how their policy would interact with some of the most important exposés in American history: WikiLeaks, Edward Snowden’s hacked NSA data, Watergate, the Pentagon Papers. Twitter, along with Facebook, is now overtly acting as a censor of public discourse on its platform.

The mainstream media is not concerned with giving citizens the information they need to form opinions and make decisions and are instead trying to weave a narrative. The tech platforms are not concerned with maintaining open public platforms that promote the First Amendment and are willing to censor information that is embarrassing to a political candidate of a certain leaning. All of these entities are betraying their duty to the American people to prevent a Trump presidency, and for that reason I would vote for Trump.

However, I often admonish reactionary stances. Just because I do not like or trust someone/something, does not mean I should automatically take the stance opposite of them/it. I do not think that Trump has been or will be a good president. Therefore, I will be voting for a third party, instead of Trump. I hope my vote will tell the duopoly, “I made the effort to go out and vote to NOT vote for either of you. My vote is not automatically allocated to either of you.”

P.S. I want to repeat the part I said about Hillary Clinton’s campaign funding the Steele Dossier. Since some of the information was gathered from foreign sources, that could be interpreted as a presidential campaign colluding with foreign entities. If you would recall from only January of 2020, Donald Trump was impeached by the House for petitioning Ukraine to provide compromising information on Joe Biden. Is it just me or is that absolute hypocrisy?

P.P.S. Next week my essay will be published on the morning of Election Day. I, along with the Seattle police department at least, believe that there may be significant civil unrest in the days that follow. In New York I would expect rioting and looting if Donald Trump wins, and I would expect this reaction to dwarf the reaction to the death of George Floyd. If you can, take this week to stock up on essentials just in case it is dangerous to go outside. It may not happen in the way I predict, and Donald Trump certainly may not win, but I don’t think it would hurt to be prepared.

Latest Essays

Follow My Blog

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.