Today, we sit down with Ali Alexander, the national organizer of “Stop the Steal,” to discuss how the movement came about and what it hopes to achieve. “Stop the Steal” will gather in Washington and also hold protests across U.S. state capitols on Saturday.
This is American Thought Leaders 🇺🇸, and I’m Jan Jekielek.
Jan Jekielek: Ali Alexander, so great to have you back on American Thought Leaders.
Ali Alexander: Thanks for having me back.
Mr. Jekielek: So Ali, you’ve been a conservative and Republican political consultant for years. You were active in the past in the Tea Party movement. Now you’re the national organizer for Stop the Steal. People are wondering, what is this actually all about? Tell me.
Mr. Alexander: Stop the Steal is a protest movement. We’re petitioning our government for fair elections and transparent counting. There are a lot of Americans—you look at the polling—47 percent of Americans are willing to tell pollsters that they believe that something is funny about this election. That includes 30 percent of Democrats and 70 percent of Republicans.
This movement represents that. We’re demanding of our bureaucrats, “Hey, we want to see how you’re counting, how you’re adjudicating our ballots. We’re demanding to know why all these rules changed between June and November.” So protests are taking place in all 50 state capitals Saturday at noon. We’re in our fifth, I believe, week of consecutive protests. This has never happened in the American right-wing body of politics. We also put 300,000 or so bodies in Washington, D.C. just weeks ago, and we’re going to do it again this Saturday.
Mr. Jekielek: That’s very interesting. You’re a national organizer, but this isn’t, as I understand it, this very strict, top-down hierarchical organizational structure. How does this all work?
Mr. Alexander: Well, because I work professionally in this business, that’s when I’m a consultant. But right now, I have my activist hat on because I’m not making money from this. I’m deeply concerned that we are veering into a banana republic. Whether that’s true or whether it has the perception of true, it stands to delegitimize a country that I love. A country that I’ve been born in and raised in and hope to one day raise kids in. What I would say is, that Black Lives Matter, for example—just getting into academically studying these movements—it’s a very centralized movement. It was started by three black, queer women. They have a manifesto, an agenda. There are other divergent groups to the Black Lives Matter kind of banner. But the edicts mainly come from three women.
In much the same way in Stop the Steal, we have a national coordination team with about 15 of us, but we’re working with about 150 different groups, popular activists, etc. This was born of a tweet of mine. This is an idea we had based off of the Stop the Steal operations I did in Florida 2018. For example, I don’t want any permits for our First Amendment movement. I don’t want any grand agendas or staging at any of our things. This needs to feel very organic because it is organic.
I don’t want candidates. I don’t want the party involved in what we’re doing. So we’re not taking any big funding. Not to say that we don’t welcome it. But we’ve not approached these giant GOP mega-donors, because it’s about putting bodies in the street. And thank God, we had the foresight to do that, because Trump’s campaign fell apart and had to put itself back together. If we did not fill the gap, I’m convinced that Trump would have already conceded. It’s not just about his candidacy, it’s about our votes, the integrity of the election, and getting to the root of some of these problems, so that future elections are made more secure.
Mr. Jekielek: What gap do you feel that the Stop the Steal movement is actually filling and how many people are involved across 50 states?
Mr. Alexander: The gap that Stop the Steal fills is a couple—with media. The media is not representing that 47 percent of Americans, again, who are willing to tell pollsters that they believe that the election was rigged or has irregularities inside of it. And so Stop the Steal physically represents that frustration and those concerns of the American people. And so when other Americans who are more passive in their news consumption pass by, they’re like, “Oh, the election’s still going on.”
And whether you love Stop the Steal or hate the Stop the Steal, you have to say the election is still going on. You still see the Trump banners, the American flags, rallies. We’ve kept that going on. And that wasn’t the campaign, that wasn’t the White House. I didn’t get some secret memorandum. It is the people.
And then we’re also filling a political gap. In a republic—in any form of government, really—the people have to be active. And so politicians then become reactive, bureaucrats become reactive. A lot of people don’t believe that judges are at all political. [But] they’re some of the most political creatures in the body of politics.
So what you’re finding out is that we’re chalking up successes. There would be none of these hearings, for example, without Stop the Steal. So that information would not disseminate to the American public without Stop the Steal. We’ve put thousands of bodies outside of these hearings each time. And that’s emboldened these men.
It’s made others think about their political futures and whether they’re going to get primaried or not, so what you found out is you may have one or two brave state representatives or state senators in one of these states, then nine or 10 of their colleagues will join them and stand with them. But then 20 or 30 are willing to sign a letter. So really happy about that.
We’ve seen executive actions reluctantly taken by Republican statewide officials, and we want to see more. We’ve seen the president’s morale—that’s important to us—be boosted and emboldened by what we’re doing. This is an organic movement. And so I think that we’re filling a political gap. I think that we’re filling a gap that media is misrepresenting the events, the comings and the goings of the American psyche. And I think that this is engaging Americans in self-government. If we’re trying to protect self-government, we’re doing that by self-governing and getting out in the streets and petitioning our government.
So the day after the election, Scott Presler, a famous activist here who does a lot of voter registration and cleanup of some very dirty cities, he texted me and he said, “Ali, I’m not giving up. I have airline miles. I just need some direction.” And I read that text message, and I got chills because I had already sworn off doing Stop the Steal again. I was like, I did it in 2018. It nearly cost me my life and my career. I’m not going to do it in 2020, in seven different states at the time.
I was like, I just can’t do it. And so I ignored the text message, and I went to brunch. And we were at brunch with about 10 or 12 people. And two of them were gentlemen in their 20s that I mentor, and they just were like, “You got to start it again. You got to start again,” because they’re watching my phone just buzz buzz buzz. And they were like, “So what’s the campaign doing?” I said, “It’s falling apart.” And he said, “So what are we doing legally?” I said, “They’re about to file something in the next couple of hours. It should have been filed 12 hours ago.” I was like, “It’s done.” I said, “In 72 hours, it’s done.” And they said, “Ali, if you could change the world, or save the world, and you had that opportunity to do it, why wouldn’t you?” And I felt this rush of conviction.
You know, because I’m a Christian, I felt this rush of conviction. And it was, “Dang it. I got to do something.” So I said, “All right. Let’s call around, but I’m not pulling teeth this time.” And we went back to my house. I put everybody to work. We got started on the website, all of the technical infrastructure that we need to collect information and disseminate it out, started calling activists in these various states, start calling parties, the lawyers, getting everybody on the same page. And everyone just marched to the same beat.
I was amazed at the people who put aside their own organizations, ego, reputation. It was just like, always “send me.” And so what we had was very famous social media influencers who don’t know enough about politics. They’re activists, but they’re mainly digital activists saying, “Okay Ali, if you want me to go somewhere, I’ll go there. We’ll advertise and do an event and we’ll do a protest.”
And then you had the party faithful, who had not gotten orders from the Republican National Committee yet and they wanted to get their base excited. And then conservative activists, people with FreedomWorks, AFP, Moms for America, all these organizations, whether they’re national, regional, or local, that were looking to put some of their bodies in the streets, and I just was able to weave them all together.
And we were in—the first night, Wednesday night, so the day after the election—we were in three states with about 250 or so people. On Thursday, we had about 500 people in five states. On Friday, I believe we were about 1500 in five or six states. And on Saturday, we were in all 50 state capitals at noon, their local time with 30,250 people. That’s what our after action report estimates are.
So we’re a lot more sophisticated. Even though this is a very organic movement and people are looking at these pictures with people with ladders and bull horns and no permits, we are running a very sophisticated operation behind the scenes. And so for me, I’m able to couple my professional experience and then also my activist experience.
Mr. Jekielek: Fascinating. What made you so sure, early on, immediately after the election, that there was some big problem?
Mr. Alexander: As a political operative, I know that if you change the structure of the election, you change the turnout of the election. When you move to mail-in ballots, you fundamentally give an advantage to the Democrats, because they have union workers who have paid time off and other people on the institutional left that can essentially go collect those ballots or target people to use those ballots. Republicans don’t do that. Our absentee ballots, which are mailed in, are from the elderly, and so the elderly Americans support Republicans.
If you have every traditional Democrat voter, every worker who is on a list—an affinity group—you have some lists that the Democrat Party has access to—if you can get all of those votes, then the Democrats, during the last three months of the election, can play for the middle. That’s never been done before. That’s never been done. Fundamentally, when you change the medium of the election, you’re changing the message of the election. And that tight in the race, people can’t forget how far ahead Donald Trump was from about February to May. Donald Trump was losing some of his advantage because he was losing Republicans.
Meanwhile, Democrats were getting the earliest of votes through mail-in voting and other schemes. When I noticed that they were targeting, namely, seven or eight swing states in a Trump election, it was just glaringly obvious that we wouldn’t be able to adjudicate the election irregularities, even the normal ones, if there was no nefarious activity. And so we have a capacity problem. We were always going to have a capacity problem. We have changed the incentives. We have hidden any systems of accountability. Then again, it was obvious because of the states that they targeted for these universal mail-in ballots. They rigged, fundamentally, the election to change the turnout model.
Mr. Jekielek: This is very interesting. You’re giving us a kind of political analysis here. There’s a lot of discussion about the way the polls were announcing a very, very strong Biden win. There were things like the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story, both by corporate media and by social media, even though it’s coming out as we speak. And it even seems worse in some ways than what we heard. What was the effect of these types of things on the election in your mind?
Mr. Alexander: Well, I think there was a poll that the President tweeted out yesterday—and I don’t want to misquote it, but I probably will because I only glance at his tweets every once in a while. I believe that it was 10 percent of American voters said that they would have changed their vote had they realized the Hunter Biden news. I was doing a Google Trends analysis, and it showed me that the Hunter Biden laptop scandal was two or three times bigger than queried through Google, bigger than the Hillary Clinton email scandal of 2016.
But what dwarfs both of them by several times over is Trump’s taxes. What’s really interesting is that the left is blind to how large the Hunter Biden story was, but our institutions weren’t—which is why they suppressed it. But the right is probably as equally blind to the effect that The New York Times and The Washington Post had with Trump’s taxes and that dastardly talking point that he only paid 700 and something dollars in taxes, which is completely not true. But the American public kind of bit onto that.
I’m not a part of some conspiracy to say that Donald Trump is the most popular person ever and that he won in a popular vote landslide. But I do know that Joe Biden is not more popular than Barack Obama. I do know that there are not, structurally, 81 million votes available to Joe Biden. I do know that that defies science.
If we are to believe that political science is a thing, then Joe Biden cannot get 81 million votes. You cannot have an incumbent president expand his vote, reach into the Hispanic community, the black community, into the larger gap between men and women that keeps burgeoning every year, have him not lose a senior vote and then have Joe Biden gain five points with white men. It would defy science. It literally would defy everything we know about behavioral science, political science, and statistics. I believe in science.
Mr. Jekielek: Your contention, just to go back to what you said earlier, is that one of the biggest things that you’re seeing that shifted this election was the way it was conducted.
Mr. Alexander: Yes, and that’s the genius discipline of this, that you’re not actually fighting a fight over persuasion or rhetoric or issues. You just have to change the way the game is played. Scott Adams, my friend, calls it framing. They just change the frame. Fundamentally, the picture changed within the frame. There’s no doubt about that. It’s really interesting to me that if you change mail-in ballots, if you lock everyone down, if you close down small businesses, if you demoralize the Republican base with the Republican president, and you still have to suppress the Hunter Biden story, how bad was he losing? How bad was he losing? How bad did Joe Biden actually lose?
Progressives are not at all excited about the corporatist Biden-Harris ticket at all. Black men fled from that Democratic ticket. Hispanics chose Trump. Where did they get these votes? There’s not an unlimited pool of American voters to pull from. What’s interesting is, as I was joking, is that this was the first—this is really inside baseball—but it’s the first election where Republicans were praying for good weather and high turnout. And so, the media is always saying, “Oh, the Republicans are trying to suppress the vote.” There’s a lot of times where Republicans just want very educated people to vote because we don’t have any of the institutions.
It’s not that, “Oh, we don’t want this person to vote or that person to vote.” It’s that the media, through repetition, puts partisan talking points in the public’s head, so the more the public is voting with less information and more on meaning, that does hurt the party that purports truth or facts or something that’s just not in the interest of some of these giant corporations that prop up media. It’s really interesting. It’s just really interesting that the Democrats had to do all of that.
Still, this was an election where the polls were not correct. If you believe the polls and you believe Joe Biden won, you have to say that the polls were still incorrect, that Joe Biden did not win from seven to 14 points. It’s really fascinating. I can’t imagine being on the other side. What do you believe about science, demographics, and behavioral science? What do you believe about regional statistics? We won Ohio and Florida. We didn’t lose the senior vote. How did we do so well with Hispanics everywhere else, just not Arizona? It’s something strange. It’s something untrue—let me actually say that—it’s something untrue.
Mr. Jekielek: It’s really interesting. You bring a very interesting perspective to this that I don’t often hear. For starters, how did you even get interested in being a political organizer? Where did this all start?
Mr. Alexander: Well, there’s that quote, “All that’s necessary for evil to prevail is good men to do nothing.” I think very early as a child, I sought power. I sought power and influence because I do want the world to be remade in the virtues that I believe in, or rediscover some of those virtues. As a child, you read about something and you’ll say, “Well, why don’t we still do it that way? Maybe I’m a little bit archaic, with some of my values that have worked for hundreds of thousands of years, or tens of thousands of years, depending on what you believe. But I want to rediscover those values.
I knew if I wasn’t an active participant in this grand play—we’re all actors, and I want to direct and act— if I’m not directing and I’m not acting, then some other element is. It might not be a nefarious element or an element I oppose, but it may have an element that has a different point of view than I do. Why not throw my chips in there. My mother’s a lawyer, I grew up phone banking for judges. I built websites for politicians when I was in high school. I did debate. It was only natural. I was going to be a congressman or I was going to be a U.S. Senator. That was the plan. Then I got into trouble and got a nasty mugshot.
I said, “Okay, I’m going to drop out of college, start my business in politics, and then prove it to myself that I can’t make it so that I’ll go do something else.” Then I just fell upwards. I helped really kick off the second wave of the digital aspect of the Republican Party. Republicans had lost really big in 2006. In 2007, there were about 20 of us that were building websites doing email marketing, social media, creating profiles, and interfacing with that. Now there’s like 4000 of us. I don’t really do digital anymore, but I helped pioneer that field. Immediately after that, we were creating the Tea Party in 2009 and 2010, and we have a huge electoral win.
So I get kind of swept up from doing my industry work to becoming this figure who can broker deals between the establishment and the grassroots. Years later, we have Donald Trump. A lot of my friends are in the White House. What’s interesting is that I’ve just been on this wave of influence and power.
The reason I’m able to build something like the Stop the Steal movement is I know everybody in this country. If I walk into the Republican National Convention, I know 10,000 to 15,000 people there. I’ve worked in 30-something states. I’ve been to 40-something states. I know the moms and the pops, and I know the former congressmen and the current congressmen that are working alongside my values. I’m always trying to get out, but some fight brings me back in. And so Stop the Steal has brought me back in, and I intend to remake this party for good because it’s a total waste.
Mr. Jekielek: Tell me a little bit about this dynamic. You were saying that by activating the grassroots through these different organizations in these states, you help embolden politicians that might not necessarily feel emboldened.
Mr. Alexander: Yes.
Mr. Jekielek: How does that work, exactly? Are there a lot of people who see there was a big issue, but aren’t going to say anything? And then there is the grassroots ethic. How does that whole dynamic work? Explain it to me.
Mr. Alexander: The first rule in politics and on campaigns is “do no harm.” You don’t want to do anything where you don’t build a new constituency or you raise money, period. And when you think about it, that’s actually how politics should work. A lot of people in the grassroots, they bemoan popularity, and I’m like, “Well, if we live in a republic, we should want to do things that are popular.”
The type of basically occult magic that occurs with media and mainstream media, corporate media, is that the media purports to the politician that something’s popular when it’s not. [This is] to get them to influence policy, which then the public goes along with, believing that it too is popular. And so these very fringe, very anti-American values and policies are by hook or by crook.
On the gun issue, you’ll see it created when they can’t get through the politicians to rig the public into believing it’s popular. They’ll have groups like Moms Demand, and then they’ll use that against the politician. And so there is an evil or a people who understand that if the people don’t, in the hive mind, believe something, then you need to lobby them through their politicians or their media, and then pin those against each other until they agree. And like I said, this is black magic to me.
For me, using that same occult knowledge—not in a negative context, but secret knowledge—is that politicians are reactive to the public. So we just need to verbalize our demands. If we don’t have the media as a distribution channel, then we need to take to the streets. It’s actually just that simple, but it’s also that complicated and that difficult, because what do you see? You saw Twitter originally banned our link—stopthesteal.us—so it has this giant gateway where you have to click continue but you don’t really know the continue button is there, and I used my relationships with Twitter to get that reversed.
If you go on Instagram or Facebook, you still cannot search the hashtag #stopthesteal. Mailchimp kicked us off, Eventbrite kicked us off. They’re trying to eliminate our ability to petition our government. And in doing so, they are emboldening our activists with knowing that we are walking in the truth, we are walking in the light, we are walking and standing against a darkness that if this is the system, 1776 wouldn’t have occurred. But not just 1776, the civil rights movement wouldn’t have occurred. And so we are in a power struggle right now, and bodies in the streets demonstrate popularity.
If Donald Trump, let’s say you only believe that Donald Trump got 74 million votes. That’s a lot of votes. That’s more votes than Barack Obama, that’s more votes than Hillary, that’s more votes than Donald Trump had the first time. That’s a lot of people. I happen to believe that Donald Trump probably had closer to 80 million, but I understand that that’s speculative.
Seventy four million is a lot of people, and putting hundreds of bodies in the streets and knowing that each one of those people represents 1000, 2000, 3000 people, that’s what the American oligarchs fear. And I think that that’s why Stop the Steal has been met with hit pieces and smears. But we’ve survived all of it. And we’re going to continue to thrive, actually, in all of it because now people are realizing this isn’t just a political fight.
I said this—this is a phrase that I like to say, but I said it on your show, on [American] Thought Leaders in 2019—how do you know what you know? And that’s a very philosophical question. It’s like, back to the garden. It’s back to the apple. What is this knowledge and how do I know it? Well, the serpent told me to bite this apple to disobey God. And then I knew my nakedness, and then that produced all these other problems.
So how do we know that Joe Biden is the president-elect? Well, we don’t. The electoral college hasn’t met. How do we know that these votes in Oakland County, Michigan, [are right}? A tabulation machine can only process so many ballots at once. We know that the number that was inserted in the computer defies how many times a human being can do this. How do we know that? Who told us that?
And so fundamentally, Stop the Steal is not just a political movement. It’s not even a Trump movement. It happens to be pro-Trump, but it’s not a Trump movement. It is, how do we know our votes are secure? How can we audit our votes? How can we gain confidence in the system? And who is lying to us? So fundamentally, this is an anti-media movement, but this is an anti-lying media movement.
And there’s an accountability, a tidal wave coming for any institution that lies to the American public. It’s very populist, and it is very politically dangerous—it’s not physically dangerous, it’s very politically dangerous—for all institutions that oppose the people wanting to audit their own votes.
Mr. Jekielek: Okay, that’s very fascinating. And I was just thinking, you mentioned earlier that you just kind of got pulled into it, right?
Mr. Alexander: Yes.
Mr. Jekielek: People said, “Ali, you got to.” You also have said, though, it’s really captured you because I think you said something like, “I’m ready to give my life for this.”
Mr. Alexander: Yes.
Mr. Jekielek: I think there was a tweet like this. That’s a pretty high level of commitment. What does that mean? There’s been a lot of speculation about what you actually meant by that.
Mr. Alexander: Well, this is what I find fascinating. To each their own. Who cares what that tweet meant. It’s fascinating to me that I tweeted out, I said, “I’m willing to give my life for this fight.” And the Arizona Republican Party quote retweeted that and said, “He is. Are you?” I actually didn’t consider that controversial.
I woke up to 100 death threats—they would become 500 death threats—numerous false reports submitted to the FBI, and media that was trying to get me de-platformed and wiped off of Twitter. And Twitter came out and said, “This doesn’t violate the Twitter Terms of Service.” And I have now media journalists lobbying Twitter to say, “No, it does. Can’t you read this way?” And it’s like, so who knows what Ali means?
To me, I don’t know how to better explain that. I believe in self-government. I believe in Christian liberty. I believe in me. I believe in my neighbor and you. I’m willing to die for the idea of self-government, period. I didn’t say I was willing to kill anybody or hurt anybody or smear anybody. I didn’t say I wish the world ill. I didn’t say I was going to go Joker mode. I didn’t say I became an accelerationist.
I simply said that if someone does harm to me, that’s not going to deter me from this fight. And I mean that. And if we are to believe that the nurses and the doctors are heroes in what I believe is a true epidemic—I don’t think it’s a pandemic, but I do think that there’s a real epidemic, a real virus happening—and that these brave people are willing to give their lives to help their neighbors, like they are in anything—Ebola, you name it.
If I believe that men and women, our military men and women, overseas or here, are willing to give their lives because a politician said this policy helping these people, furthers the American dream. And they’re willing to give their lives. The inner city school teacher. The first responder. If these people are all willing to give their life in their own way for their values and what they believe, why can’t I tweet that?
It’s the most bizarre thing in the world. And I saw what they were trying to do, right, though. It’s like, “What does Ali mean?” I didn’t say anything immoral. I didn’t say anything that incited anything except for waking up the American spirit and saying, “If they tell us that we can’t see how our votes are counted, if they tell us elections are fair without proving it to us scientifically, then we ought to politically oppose that government. But if we’re not allowed to depose our government politically, then we ought to depose it some other way.”
This is the same mantra of the civil rights movement. This is the same mantra of the American Revolution. And I do not believe in chaos or confusion. I do not believe in unmitigated, feral violence. I do believe in morality, and do believe that God gave man sovereignty, and I do believe that tyrants ought to be deposed. And I do believe that we ought to oppose evil things on this planet with our all, including our lives, if they come for us.
Mr. Jekielek: As you’re describing this, I’m thinking actually back to something that Scott Adams has talked about in the past, which is this idea of mind reading. Something very simple like this, exactly. People will read in all sorts of things instead of just saying, “Hey, Ali, what did you actually mean by that?” So I think perhaps we know now.
Mr. Alexander: Yes. I want to just clarify, “What does this fight mean?” This fight is the sovereignty over the individual. And what does die mean? I mean that if I’ve received—I have to walk around with security. It’s my most, I’ve spent over $40,000 on security in the past four or five weeks. I can’t afford that bill. Thank God for the generosity of random strangers. I also don’t really shill and ask for money. I need to be a better leader and ask for money.
But it’s been a strange thing. I’ve been a public figure for 12 years of my 14 years or so career. It’s a strange thing, though, that people want to do me such harm right now. And I want to let those people know that if you come for me, I still won’t stop. There’s no note, there’s no threat against me or anyone I know that would make me stop fighting for fair elections and transparent counting because that is how we know everything else. How do we know what we know? Elections.
Mr. Jekielek: So what do you think would satisfy you and perhaps others who are more let’s say deeply in the know in terms of really understanding what actually happened with this election?
Mr. Alexander: I don’t know that we can do that. If you’re looking at the forensics of a crime scene, or let’s just say a scene of confusion, there is enough fraud to discover, but the origin, that fraud, how it happened, who did it, those are questions we’re actually never going to know. We can’t know. It’s been wiped. It’s been BleachBit [deleted].
So I would say that what I want are legal remedies from the courts. And then I want popular political remedies from the state legislatures. So for example, a court, the Supreme Court can’t say, “Donald Trump is the winner of this state or that state.” And there’s a lot of people on the right who think that the court has that authority. They don’t.
What they can do is say that this election was unlawfully conducted, “We’re throwing out the election.” They can order a new election, but they really can’t. That’s not a legal remedy available to the courts right now. So that’s why we have state legislators to reflect the will of the people and decide to send a mixed slate of electors, or to send only Trump electors, electors that reflect the state legislative body or the state legislative majority, or none at all.
But those are questions and this is the beauty of our system is that the governor can’t choose, the judges can’t choose, and the state legislators really can’t choose without a discovery through the court system that something did go wrong. And so we’re watching the system work and try to correct itself.
If a popular system, which is scheduled with very frequent deadlines, if something is to go wrong, if fraud is to enter that system, you need a failsafe, and our state legislators are that failsafe, which is why Stop the Steal has pushed for special sessions. We created that. We created that.
After our D.C. march, I went to Atlanta, Georgia, and that was me. We said, “We need special sessions everywhere.” And there wasn’t a state legislator in sight in any of the states that stood with us. And now we have movement in all of, well, five of the six contested states for special sessions to answer these questions about, “Well, what should we actually do with this election of our electors and pre-court determination or post-court determination?”
So what would satisfy me? What would satisfy me is that the elections that look opaque either be made transparent, or if they can’t be made transparent, be thrown out, and then the will of our deliberative bodies, the state legislators, they should decide who goes to the Electoral College.
Mr. Jekielek: Any final thoughts before we finish up?
Mr. Alexander: I would say that Stop the Steal is committed to this fight every step of the way. It’s after the Safe Harbor day, which is where electors are kind of credentialed. And so on December 14, they actually vote. That vote, I would like it to go to Trump or I’d like for neither candidate to reach 270.
But even if they don’t, we believe that this election is rife with fraud, and we will encourage members of the House to protest the House certification. Congressman Mo Brooks out of Alabama, out of Huntsville, has already said that he plans to do that. We will work very hard and lobby very hard to find one Republican senator at least to stand with him.
If they don’t, we will implode the Republican Party and we will encourage Vice President Mike Pence to take up any credential fights through any challenges that would be presented over to him because he’s presiding over the House certification of the Electoral College, so I want people to know this does not stop. This does not stop.
And I don’t think that Joe Biden can be made a legitimate American president. It’s just never going to happen. What we have to decide is, do we have the resolve? Do we believe the courage of our convictions or is it some talking point? Is it some fundraising line for the Republicans? Or do we believe that our election was compromised? I believe our election was compromised. So I’ve committed my life to this.
Mr. Jekielek: Ali Alexander, such a pleasure to have you on.
Mr. Alexander: Thank you.
This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.