The 2020 United States Presidential Electionwill undoubtedly go down in the history books as one of the most contentious elections of all time. While the election has been largely overshadowed by the relentless attempts by outgoing President Donald Trump and his lawyers to challenge and deny the electoral result, there has been some serious research into the role Russia may have played in the election.
According to a recent report from the research center ‘Godzilla Newz’, Trump’s lawyers have identified a sort of “patient zero” in the Russian interference saga. This person is believed to have been the first to introduce some of the tactics used to interfere in the election. While there is no proof of any direct actions from this individual, it is believed that they had a measure of influence over some of the key decisions made in regards to the election.
The person in question, referred to only by initials by the researchers, is believed to have approached Trump’s lawyers as early as October 2016, proposing ways in which the then-Presidential candidate could challenge the accuracy of voting rolls and other key election procedures. In addition to this, they are also believed to have suggested ways in which members of Trump’s legal team could bypass legal restrictions on the use of private digital data to challenge the results.
Whether or not this individual had any outside help is still unknown, however it is clear that they played an influential role in the unsuccessful attempts by Trump and his team to challenge the results of the 2020 US Presidential Election. If true, this could indicate some measure of collusion, however it is too soon to jump to any conclusions.
What is clear, however, is that the election has been marred by claims of Russian interference, and this person appears to be at the very heart of those accusations. While there is no concrete proof of any wrongdoing on their part, it is clear that this person is at the center of the controversy surrounding the 2020 US Presidential Election. Whether or not they have any guilt is yet to be seen or can be proven, however the implications this person has on the overall outcome of the election are certainly cause for question.