Hillary may not have won the popular vote if election fraud can be proved

The attack on the Electoral College comes up in every election and has to be answered in every election.  We have the Electoral College because America is composed of separate sovereign states and this is a way to protect their sovereignty.  If we didn't have it the big cities could easily dominate the vast geography of the country and obliterate the separate states.  Most people will have seen the map that shows the election results by counties rather than states, how red it is from sea to shining sea, with little tiny islands of blue mostly where the big cities are.  It's all that red that the anti-Electoral College argument seeks to disenfranchise.  The idea that the popular vote should trump geography sounds sensible but it's only an argument to disenfranchise the rural areas.  I heard Jesse Ventura on Infowars a few days ago calling for a change from the Electoral College to the popular vote and all I could think was how utterly ignorant he is. 

Here's one of the inevitable necessary defenses of the Electoral College that comes up every election:  Fox News on The current Democrat plot to get Electors to defy the people's will.  This is the plot based on the idea that Hillary won the popular vote though Trump won the Electoral Vote, so they want to reflect the popular vote over the Electoral Vote, but the plan seems to be to talk (or threaten) electors into changing their vote for Hillary no matter what the popular vote in that state was.  The Electoral Vote reflects the popular vote for each state, but the actual numbers can vary enough so that for the nation overall there can be more popular votes than the Electoral votes reflect.   Watch the video on the right hand side.   It starts out with the argument that elections would be very different if they were determined by the popular vote.  Right now candidates aim for the electoral votes in each state, they direct their attention to each state according to it's electoral votes.  If elections were determined by the popular vote they would have an entirely different strategy.  In other words, for this particular election it would be utterly unfair to try to change the results on the basis of the popular vote.

HOWEVER, it seems to me that there is enough evidence to show that if illegal votes are taken into account, Hillary did NOT win the popular vote anyway.  Alex Jones said on a recent show that he intends eventually to cover the evidence for this claim. (As of today, the 24th, he's rerun his interview with Bev Harris about how huge fraud is possible, but possible isn't the same thing as proven in a particular election).  I've posted some information below about how the vote could easily have been manipulated, through central computer control of the voting machines, along with the statement by the investigator that the manipulation would favor Hillary, but also through using ineligible people to vote, illegal aliens or dead people, and again, evidence of intention by Democrats to manipulate the vote for Hillary.   One fraud watcher, Gregg Phillips claimed in a tweet that he counted over three million noncitizen voters on the rolls in this election.  The tweet is there but I haven't been able to find the original source of that number.   There are claims that there are millions of dead people registered to vote as well.  If these claims are true, and I hope Alex Jones can come up with the evidence, Hillary most definitely did NOT win the popular vote, so the argument about the Electoral College in this case would be irrelevant anyway.

Here are some links to allegations of election fraud:

Gateway Pundit

The Federalist

Breitbart