News
Featured Image
Mark Zuckerberg.Graeme Jennings - Pool / Getty Images

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news. Subscribe now.

(LifeSiteNews) – Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg “bought” the 2020 election with hundreds of millions dollars in funding that likely handed the White House to Joe Biden last year, according to a new analysis.

In a report published this week by The Federalist, researcher William Doyle of the Caesar Rodney Election Research Institute (CRERI) said new research from CRERI shows that election funding funneled by Zuckerberg and his wife through two non-profits “significantly increased Joe Biden’s vote margin in key swing states.”

“The Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL) and The Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR) passed a staggering $419.5 million of Zuckerberg’s money into local government elections offices,” wrote Doyle, a former chair in the Department of Economics at the University of Dallas.

“The massive influx of funds essentially created a high-powered, concierge-like get-out-the-vote effort for Biden that took place inside the election system, rather than attempting to influence it from the outside,” Doyle said. “We call this the injection of structural bias into the 2020 election, and our analysis shows it likely generated enough additional votes for Biden to secure an Electoral College victory in 2020.”

Using a machine-learning algorithm, CRERI estimated that the Facebook founder’s spending increased Biden’s vote total by about 200,000 votes in Texas alone. Though the difference wasn’t enough to flip the state blue last year, grant money from CTCL and CEIR may have pushed Biden over the top in other swing states, Doyle said.

“Our preliminary results in Georgia and Wisconsin suggest a similar impact on Biden’s vote margin from CTCL spending,” he said. “And spending in those states was likely large enough and targeted enough to have shifted them into Biden’s column.”

Joe Biden was certified the winner of the Georgia presidential election by just 11,000 votes and of Wisconsin’s election by around 20,000 votes.

“We have good reason to anticipate that the results of our work will show that CTCL and CEIR involvement in the 2020 election gave rise to an election that, while free, was not fair.”

‘Shadow’ election system

According to Doyles report, the “Zuckerbucks” fueled a ‘“shadow’ election system with a built-in structural bias that systematically favored Democratic voters over Republican voters.”

Grants from Zuckerberg’s favored non-profits rivaled federal and state COVID-related election expenses, Doyle explained, with CTCL and CEIR together accounting “for an 85 percent increase in total additional election funding — and that largess was concentrated in a relatively small number of heavily Democratic municipalities.”

Both organizations were founded by left-wing activists with ties to top progressive advocacy groups.

“Although CTCL and CEIR are chartered as non-partisan 501(c)(3) corporations, our research suggests the $419.5 million of CTCL and CEIR spending that took place in 2020 was highly partisan in its distribution and its effects,” Doyle said.

Nearly 99 percent of CTCL grants of $1 million or more in the battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Virginia went to cities and counties which Biden was certified as having won, for example.

In some places, the funds gave Democrat-leaning areas a more than 10-1 advantage in election resources. A grant program for five Wisconsin cities “allowed these Democrat strongholds to spend roughly $47 per voter, compared to $4 to $7 per voter in traditionally Republican areas of the state,” the Amistad Project, an election watchdog, revealed in December. Analyses by other groups, like Influence Watch and the Foundation for Government Accountability found similar discrepancies.

“Big CTCL and CEIR money had nothing to do with traditional campaign finance,” Doyles report added. “It had to do with financing the infiltration of election offices at the city and county level by left-wing activists, and using those offices as a platform to implement preferred administrative practices, voting methods, and data-sharing agreements, as well as to launch intensive outreach campaigns in areas heavy with Democratic voters.”

In Wisconsin, an investigation earlier this year uncovered that a left-wing activist connected to CTCL gained access to ballot rooms in Green Bay and helped determine how to handle ballots. CTCL agents in Georgia paid ballot counters and trained poll watchers.

In Philadelphia, CTCL pushed the city to deploy ballot drop boxes, allowed for ballot “curing” unavailable to Republican counties, and even paid election judges, according to a December report from the Amistad Project.

“These irregularities existed wherever Zuckerberg’s money was granted to local election officials,” the watchdog said.

‘Are our elections for sale?’

CRERI’s findings have sparked outrage among top Republicans and at least one former election official.

“My reaction is that this was a carefully orchestrated attempt to convert official government election offices into get-out-the-vote operations for one political party and to insert political operatives into election offices in order to influence and manipulate the outcome of the election,” said Hans von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Election Commission.

“All states should ban private funding of government election offices no matter the source,” Spakovsky urged. He added that Zuckerberg’s election process funding “violated fundamental principles of equal treatment of voters since it may have led to unequal opportunities to vote in different areas of a state.”

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis also slammed the unprecedented infusion of private money into America’s elections in a news conference this week, calling the tactics of CTCL and CEIR “totally unacceptable.”

“So, Zuckerberg, he spent over $400 million through these, quote, non-profits to, quote, help with election administration,” DeSantis said. “But what they would do is they would require certain things to be done like mass mail balloting, ballot harvesting, and they would focus on partisan voter turnout, basically. That was totally unacceptable.”

In a statement to the New York Post, Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson said that he doubts “whether Mark Zuckerberg’s highly partisan 2020 election spending was even legal.”

“While we still don’t know all that happened, public reporting on his influence over the 2020 elections in Green Bay and other Democrat strongholds raises enough suspicion,” the U.S. senator said.

“Are our elections for sale?” Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky wrote on Twitter Wednesday, retweeting news about an investigation by the Wisconsin legislature into Mark Zuckerberg’s election influence. “Did Mark Zuckerberg purchase the Wisconsin Presidential Election?” he asked.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.