A question for Democrats: If the 2020 election wasn’t stolen, then how do you explain the Democrats in Fulton County inventing a bogus “burst pipe,” using it as an excuse to send Republican poll watchers and reporters home, and Democrats then going back inside to continue counting the votes?
By Daniel Alman (aka Dan from Squirrel Hill)
April 27, 2024
A question for Democrats: If the 2020 election wasn’t stolen, then how do you explain the Democrats in Fulton County inventing a bogus “burst pipe,” using it as an excuse to send Republican poll watchers and reporters home, and Democrats then going back inside to continue counting the votes?
On the night of the election in November 2020, CBS News aired a TV report called “Pipe burst in Georgia delays vote counting.”
You can watch it here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C25DAAHZdEw
Also on the night of the election, ABC News tweeted: “The election department sent the ballot counters at the State Farm Arena in Atlanta home at 10:30 p.m., Regina Waller, the Fulton County public affairs manager for elections, tells ABC News.”
Here’s that tweet:
https://twitter.com/abcpolitics/status/1323846118208376834
However, official security video footage shows that after the Republican poll watchers and news reporters left the room where votes had been counted, a few election workers stayed behind and continued counting votes.
And there is no visible water leak in the video.
You can see that video footage here:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/rPqQKvuFk473/
I created this image that you can show people:
I posted it at Twitter:
https://twitter.com/DanielAlmanPGH/status/1784324988599762998
Judge rules that Wisconsin absentee voting van used in 2022 was illegal
Judge rules that Wisconsin absentee voting van used in 2022 was illegal
January 9, 2024
A Wisconsin judge ruled Monday that state law does not allow the use of mobile absentee voting sites, siding with Republicans who had challenged the city of Racine’s use of a voting van that traveled around the city in 2022.
Republicans opposed the use of the van, the only one of its kind in Wisconsin, saying its use was against the law, increased the chances of voter fraud and was used to bolster Democratic turnout.
Racine officials, the Democratic National Committee and the Milwaukee-based voting advocacy group Black Leaders Organizing for Communities refuted those claims and defended the legality of the van, saying there was no specific prohibition against it.
The lawsuit over the mobile voting van is one of several in battleground Wisconsin that could affect voting rules in the upcoming presidential election.
The van was first used in Racine’s municipal elections in 2022. It was purchased with grant money Racine received from the Center for Tech and Civic Life, the nonprofit created by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife. Republicans have been critical of the grants, calling the money “Zuckerbucks” that they say was used to tilt turnout in Democratic areas.
The van was used only to facilitate early in-person voting during the two weeks prior to an election, Racine City Clerk Tara McMenamin said. She said the vehicle was useful because it was becoming too cumbersome for her staff to set up their equipment in remote polling sites.
It traveled across the city to meet voters in their neighborhoods and collect early ballots.
The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, on behalf of Racine County Republican Party Chairman Ken Brown, filed a complaint the day after the August 2022 primary with the Wisconsin Elections Commission, arguing that the van was against state law. They argued that it was only sent to Democratic areas in the city in an illegal move to bolster turnout.
McMenamin disputed those accusations, saying that it shows a misunderstanding of the city’s voting wards, which traditionally lean Democratic.
The elections commission dismissed the complaint four days before the November election that year, saying that there was no probable cause shown to believe the law had been broken. That led the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty to then file its lawsuit.
Racine County Circuit Judge Eugene Gasiorkiewicz, in a ruling late Monday, overturned the elections commission’s dismissal of the complaint, saying state election laws do not allow for the use of mobile voting sites.
“Nowhere can this Court find or has been provided any authority allowing the use of a van or vehicle as an alternate absentee voting vehicle,” the judge wrote.
He rejected the argument from defendants that the use of mobile voting sites was allowable because there is no specific prohibition against them.
The judge said his ruling wasn’t a determination on whether mobile voting sites were a good idea or not. That is up to the Legislature to decide, Gasiorkiewicz said.
The Wisconsin Elections Commission and the state Department of Justice, which represented it in the lawsuit, did not return messages seeking comment on whether the decision will be appealed. McMenamin was in a meeting Tuesday and did not return a message seeking comment.
Early in-person absentee voting in Wisconsin for the municipal spring election begins Feb. 6. The presidential primary is April 2, with absentee voting allowed two weeks before it.
If appealed, the case could ultimately be decided by Wisconsin’s liberal-controlled state Supreme Court.
Lucas Vebber, deputy counsel at the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, hailed the ruling.
“Wisconsin voters should know that their elections are secure, and that election administration does not favor one political party over another,” Vebber said. “This decision does just that.”
Here are many examples of voter fraud in the 2020 U.S. Presidential election that, as far as I’m aware, have not been debunked.
By Daniel Alman (aka Dan from Squirrel Hill)
January 4, 2024
The mainstream media continues to insist that there is “no evidence” of voter fraud in the 2020 U.S. Presidential election.
They are lying.
Here are many examples of voter fraud in the 2020 U.S. Presidential election that, as far as I’m aware, have not been debunked:
Mainstream media reported that Fulton County, Georgia, “stopped” counting ballots for the night because “a water pipe has broken,” and “sent the ballot counters home.”
Video shows Republican poll watchers and media reporters leaving the building.
The same video shows a few people remain, and continue counting votes without Republican poll watchers or media reporters.
Video shows an election worker scanning the same ballots three times.
There is no visible water in these videos.
Sources:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C25DAAHZdEw
https://www.bitchute.com/video/MkqNtENpjyii/
https://twitter.com/abcpolitics/status/1323846118208376834
https://www.bitchute.com/video/rPqQKvuFk473/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/v3qUNQRKJyH5/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/fv1BUbsk1mSW/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/6Bvf8xq1CsoJ/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiREC3Zy20E
One-in-Five Mail-In Voters Admit They Cheated in 2020 Election
One-in-Five Mail-In Voters Admit They Cheated in 2020 Election
December 12, 2023
More than 20% of voters who used mail-in ballots in 2020 admit they participated in at least one form of election fraud.
A new national telephone and online survey by Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute finds that 21% of Likely U.S. voters who voted by absentee or mail-in ballot in the 2020 election say they filled out a ballot, in part or in full, on behalf of a friend or family member, such as a spouse or child, while 78% say they didn’t.
Thirty percent (30%) of those surveyed said they voted by absentee or mail-in ballot in the 2020 election. Nineteen percent (19%) of those who cast mail-in votes say a friend or family member filled out their ballot, in part or in full, on their behalf. Furthermore, 17% of mail-in voters say that in the 2020 election, they cast a ballot in a state where they were no longer a permanent resident. All of these practices are illegal, Heartland Institute officials noted.
“The results of this survey are nothing short of stunning,” said Justin Haskins, director of the Socialism Research Center at the Heartland Institute. “For the past three years, Americans have repeatedly been told that the 2020 election was the most secure in history. But if this poll’s findings are reflective of reality, the exact opposite is true. This conclusion isn’t based on conspiracy theories or suspect evidence, but rather from the responses made directly by the voters themselves.
The survey of 1,085 U.S. Likely Voters was conducted on November 30-December 6, 2023 by Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute.
The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Seventeen percent (17%) of those who cast mail-in ballots in 2020 say they signed a ballot or ballot envelope on behalf of a friend or family member, with or without their permission. Heartland Institute officials noted that “forging a signature on a ballot or ballot envelope are fraudulent activities that invalidate votes.
”Among other findings of the Rasmussen/Heartland Institute survey:– Forty-six percent (46%) of those surveyed voted for Joe Biden in 2020, while 45% voted for Donald Trump. More Biden voters (36%) than Trump voters (23%) say they voted by absentee or mail-in ballot in the 2020 election. Thirty-eight percent (38%) of Democrats voted by mail in 2020, as did 24% of Republicans and 27% of voters not affiliated with either major party.
– Among those who cast mail-in ballots in 2020, nearly equal percentages of Democrats, Republicans and unaffiliated voters admitted to fraudulent activities. For example, 19% of Republicans, 16% of Democrats and 17% of unaffiliated voters who cast 2020 mail-in ballots say they signed a ballot or ballot envelope on behalf of a friend or family member. On the question of voting in a state where they were no longer a permanent resident. more Republican mail-in voters (24%) than Democrats (17%) or unaffiliated voters (11%) admitted doing so.
– Among all voters – not just those who voted by mail – 11% say a friend, family member, co-worker, or other acquaintance has admitted to them that they filled out a ballot on behalf of another person in 2020. Ten percent (10%) have a relative or acquaintance who has admitted to you that they cast a mail-in ballot in 2020 in a state other than their state of permanent residence, and eight percent (8%) say that a friend, family member, or organization, such as a political party, offer to pay or reward them for voting in the 2020 election.
– Twenty-five percent (25%) of whites, 35% of black voters, 49% of Hispanics and 41% of other minorities say they voted by absentee or mail-in ballot in the 2020 election. Minority voters are significantly more likely than whites to say they engaged in fraudulent election activities in 2020. For example, whites (3%) are much less likely than black voters (15%), Hispanics (29%) or other minorities (8%) to say someone offered to pay them to vote in 2020.
– Forty-two percent (42%) of voters under 40 say they cast a mail-in ballot in the 2020 election, as do 22% of those ages 40-64 and 30% of voters 65 and older. Younger voters are significantly more likely to admit to engaging in fraudulent election activity. For example, 31% of voters under 40 who voted by mail in 2020 say they cast a mail-in ballot in a state where they were no longer a permanent resident, compared to 11% of those ages 40-64 and just two percent (2%) of voters 65 and older. “A democratic republic cannot survive if election laws allow voters to commit fraud easily, and that’s exactly what occurred during the 2020 election,” said Haskins of The Heartland Institute. “Although some progress has been made in more than a dozen states since the conclusion of the 2020 election, much more work is needed in most regions of the United States. If America’s election laws do not improve soon, voters and politicians will continue to question the truthfulness and fairness of all future elections.”
Less than a quarter of voters believe Congress is doing anything to make their lives better.
Less than a year before the 2024 election, voters still trust Republicans more on the key issue of taxes, although the margin has narrowed.
In an election in Louisiana, the number of illegal votes was larger than the margin of victory
https://www.ksla.com/2023/12/05/judge-makes-ruling-caddo-parish-sheriff-recount-lawsuit/
Judge makes ruling in Caddo Parish sheriff recount lawsuit; Whitehorn appeals decision
By Rachael Thomas
December 5, 2023
CADDO PARISH, La. (KSLA) – Retired Louisiana Supreme Court Justice E. Joseph Bleich has made a ruling in the election lawsuit filed by Caddo Parish sheriff candidate, John Nickelson.
That ruling came down Tuesday, Dec. 5. The judge ruled the results of the Nov. 18 runoff election, in which Henry Whitehorn defeated Nickelson by one vote, are declared void. It was further ordered a new runoff election shall be conducted. Whitehorn’s team appealed that decision Tuesday afternoon.
The ruling states “it was proven beyond any doubt that there were at least 11 illegal votes cast and counted” and that it is “legally impossible to know what the true vote should have been.”
The ruling goes on to highlight the following irregularities that affected the outcome of the runoff election:
Two people voted twice
At least five votes case by absentee/mail-in ballots which should not have been counted for failure to comply with the law
Four invalid votes cast by interdicted persons who were unqualified voters
The judge stated “this new runoff election is necessary not only for the candidates, but also to ensure the public’s right to untainted election results.”
Video from a person’s doorbell camera shows someone stealing voting ballots from their mailbox. When the homeowner went to vote in person on election day, they were told that they had already voted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trvX07puB0E
Video allegedly shows woman stealing ballots from Lawrence mailbox
By Darren Botelho
November 14, 2023
As of Tuesday afternoon, there were two reports of potential voter fraud—or stolen ballots— in Lawrence
Officials are looking into allegations of possible voter fraud in Lawrence, Massachusetts, and NBC10 Boston has obtained video footage from a man’s home that appears to show a woman removing ballots from his mailbox.
The man, who did not want to be identified, said he went to vote in person on Election Day last week and was told, according to the list, he already voted.
So, he checked his camera footage and then contacted the police.
The Essex County District Attorney’s Office and Secretary of State William Galvin are now looking into any allegations of potential voter fraud.
“We’re going to get all the ballots out of Lawrence, we’re going to get all the mail-in ballots and we’re going to review everything and all the provisionals and reconcile the list, and if further investigation contacting some of the people who allegedly voted by mail needs to be done, we will do it,” Galvin said.
As of Tuesday afternoon, there were two reports of potential voter fraud—or stolen ballots— in Lawrence.
“There may be more. It’s premature to say how many,” Galvin said.
The second police report filed was from a Lawrence woman who was still waiting for elections officials to decide whether her in-person vote will count or the mail-in vote, which she said had her signature forged.
“How come it’s not going to be counted, if I’m voting right in front of you, and I’m telling you that vote you have there is not mine,” Rosalis González said.
State elections officials are now sorting through these allegations and told NBC10 Boston the results would be delivered before the candidates begin their new terms in January.
“We’re on it. The minute we heard about it we took action,” Galvin said. “We’ve had a history of sending people to jail when they’ve committed crimes. That’s what we’ll do here.”
There may also be a federal investigation if there was mail stolen from mailboxes, as mail theft is a federal offense.
Voter fraud confirmed in Connecticut mayoral election, judge tosses results and orders new vote
https://www.yahoo.com/news/voter-fraud-confirmed-connecticut-mayoral-204851069.html
Voter fraud confirmed in Connecticut mayoral election, judge tosses results and orders new vote
By Eva Terry
November 3, 2023
Connecticut Judge William Clark nullified the Sept. 12 mayoral primary election results in Bridgeport on Wednesday due to voter fraud, according to the Connecticut Mirror.
The general election was scheduled to take place Nov. 7 but will be pushed back until a Democratic primary reelection occurs. The court ruling requires a date to be set within 10 days of Nov. 1.
The Democratic mayoral candidates were businessman John Gomes and former Mayor Joe Ganim.
Ganim served as mayor of Bridgeport from 1991 to 2003 and at the end of his fifth consecutive term served nine years in prison for 16 felony accounts, including mail fraud, racketeering, bribery, conspiracy and “filing false income tax returns,” according to a press release from the United States Attorney’s Office District of Connecticut.
Leading up to the Sept. 12 primary election, 420 people cast 1,255 absentee ballots at four drop boxes, the Deseret News reported. Under Connecticut law, absentee votes must be delivered either by relatives and caregivers or sent by mail, but surveillance footage shows a woman on Ganim’s campaign staff, allegedly Wanda Geter-Pataky, stuffing a ballot box with white envelopes.
Connecticut Superior Court Judge William Clark wrote in the Nov. 1 court ruling, “The volume of ballots so mishandled is such that it calls the result of the primary election into serious doubt and leaves the court unable to determine the legitimate result of the primary.”
“The videos are shocking to the court and should be shocking to all the parties,” he added.
Clark wrote, “To disregard the significant mishandling of ballots by partisans that were caught on video flouting the provisions of Connecticut law … endorse(s) this blatant practice of ballot harvesting.”
Geter-Pataky pleaded the Fifth multiple times in court, remaining silent when asked if she was the woman in the surveillance footage. ABC 7 NY also reported that a current city council candidate also refused to answer when asked if Geter-Pataky was the woman in the videos.
The court ruling “is a victory for the people of Bridgeport,” Gomes told The Associated Press. “Our campaign always believed that the integrity of our democratic process must be upheld and Superior Court Judge William Clark agreed.”
Connecticut Senate Minority Leader Kevin Kelly, a Republican, said in a statement, “These videos confirm our fears about how absentee ballots can be misused. Now the court has spoken.”
Paterson city council president and wife stole mail-in ballots to rig 2020 election: AG
Paterson city council president and wife stole mail-in ballots to rig 2020 election: AG
The criminal conspiracy was done to get himself elected in 2020, according to the state attorney general, who said that Mendez, his wife and two campaign supporters stole mail-in ballots from residents’ mailboxes, filled some out, and then tried to mail in fakes in an effort to win
By Jonathan Dienst and Courtney Copenhagen
October 26, 2023
What to Know
– Paterson Council Speaker Alex Mendez allegedly stole mail-in ballots along with his wife and two campaign supporters to rig the 2020 election — new allegations that are far broader and more serious than when Mendez was first charged with election fraud in 2021
– The criminal conspiracy was done to get himself elected in 2020, according to the state attorney general, who said that Mendez, his wife and two campaign supporters stole mail-in ballots from residents’ mailboxes, filled some out, and then tried to mail in fakes in an effort to win
– Investigators said that in all, hundreds of ballots were stolen, falsified or improperly delivered during the pandemic, when mail-in ballots was how votes were cast
The city council president of New Jersey’s third-largest city personally directed an election fraud scheme to help win his seat, according to the state attorney general.
Paterson Council Speaker Alex Mendez allegedly stole mail-in ballots along with his wife and two campaign supporters to rig the 2020 election — new allegations that are far broader and more serious than when Mendez was first charged with election fraud in 2021.
The criminal conspiracy was done to get himself elected in 2020, according to the state attorney general, who said that Mendez, his wife and two campaign supporters stole mail-in ballots from residents’ mailboxes, filled some out, and then tried to mail in fakes in an effort to win.
Mendez and others tried “to rig an election in their favor and to deprive the voters of Paterson of having their voices heard,” Attorney General Matthew Platkin said.
Investigators said that in all, hundreds of ballots were stolen, falsified or improperly delivered during the pandemic, when mail-in ballots was how votes were cast.
The charges include conspiracy to commit election fraud, forgery, falsifying records and witness tampering.
“In a case like this, with allegations as strong as they are, it certainly can undermine the public trust,” said former federal prosecutor David Miller, who added that some of the counts can carry up to 5 to 10 years in state prison.
NBC New York first reported in 2020 on how hundreds of Paterson ballots were discovered stuffed in a mailbox in the nearby town of Haledon.
It appears one insider in the alleged scheme flipped on Mendez. According to the complaint, the insider alleged Mendez was there as “over 300 mail-in ballots” were placed “into the Haledon postal box.”
Prosecutors said Mendez is on “an audio recording discussing a false story to tell if any person questioned him about the Haledon ballots,” and that Mendez allegedly talked about “personally completed a false voter registration.” Prosecutors also claim Mendez later directed others to “delete communications” about the voting fraud scheme.
“The courts and the prosecutors take allegations of witness tampering and obstruction very seriously,” Miller said.
Mendez has previously denied any wrongdoing and has said he plans to run for re-election in May. Another councilmember, Michael Jackson, was also previously charged with election fraud in the 2020 election. Jackson too denies wrongdoing.
Mendez and the others charged in this case won’t appear in court on the new charges until early December, with any trial still likely many months away, and with Councilmembers Mendez and Jackson staying in office as accused criminals.
Mendez’s attorney declined to comment. Mendez has previously denied any wrongdoing and indicated he planned to still seek re-election.
The mayor and the attorney general’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Drop boxes have become key to election conspiracy theories. Two Democrats just fueled those claims
Drop boxes have become key to election conspiracy theories. Two Democrats just fueled those claims
By CHRISTINA A. CASSIDY and SUSAN HAIGH
October 7, 2023
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — A woman approaches a drop box in the dark with what appears to be handfuls of ballots. At a different drop box, someone else is seen making multiple trips to insert ballots. At yet another, the same car stops on at least three separate occasions, with different people stepping out and heading to the box.
It’s not a trailer for the latest conspiracy movie about rigged elections. Instead, the video footage has become central to a real-world controversy over potential fraud involving ballot drop boxes, a favorite target of right-wing conspiracy theorists since former President Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 election.
The accusations of drop box fraud are not coming from those pushing fringe election claims or from skeptical Republicans who have long favored eliminating or severely restricting use of the boxes. They are being made by Democrats — two candidates vying for mayor in Connecticut’s largest city, in a heavily Democratic state that began allowing drop boxes to be used during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Republicans have seized on the spat, which is now headed to a legal showdown that could result in a new election, to say it validates their concerns that drop boxes are ripe for fraud.
State Rep. Doug Dubitsky, a Republican, evoked the widely debunked movie “2000 Mules” during a legislative debate over the controversy surrounding the Bridgeport mayor’s race.
“How do we know that it’s only Bridgeport?” said Dubitsky, who represents an area of the state that has grown more conservative in the Trump era. “This exact same thing could be happening in every single municipality in this state. We should get rid of these boxes completely.”
On the surface, the controversy is a local matter: Two candidates are accusing each other of fraud in a municipal election. But its ripple effects travel far beyond the city of 148,000 and could have implications for the elections next year across the country.
Trump, the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination, has been doubling down on his lies about his loss in the 2020 election as he faces criminal charges related to his attempts to overturn Democrat Joe Biden’s win. Despite mounds of evidence showing the election was fair and accurate, a solid majority of Republicans still believe it was not.
Among the many conspiracy theories that have fueled that belief on the right are those surrounding ballot drop boxes.
News of the Bridgeport videos has spread through right-wing social media platforms and on far-right media, connecting the controversy to the 2020 stolen election claims. Users have promoted the investigation as evidence for the persistent, false narratives about widespread fraud connected to ballot drop boxes.
The videos and the fact that the claims are being pushed by two Democratic candidates threaten to further inflame criticism from the right that drop boxes are vehicles for election mischief. It’s a perception that election officials have been fighting for three years.
“It risks making what is the exception the rule in some folks’ mind,” said David Levine, a former local election official in Idaho who is now a senior fellow with the German Marshall Fund’s Alliance for Securing Democracy. “It’s well established that drop boxes themselves are very safe and secure.”
The videos have trickled out in the weeks since the Sept. 12 primary in the Bridgeport mayor’s race between incumbent Joe Ganim and his challenger, John Gomes, the city’s former chief administrative officer. Gomes, who lost by 251 votes out of 8,173 cast, filed an election challenge a week later after a video appeared to show a Ganim supporter putting several envelopes into a drop box outside a city hall annex in the early morning.
Ganim, who has denied involvement, is pointing to another batch of videos posted online that appear to show Gomes’ supporters making multiple stops at other ballot drop boxes. Gomes has said he has spoken with those shown in the videos and been told they were dropping off ballots for relatives.
In Connecticut, voters using a drop box must return their completed ballot themselves or designate certain family members, police, local election officials or a caregiver to do it for them.
A judge will hear arguments in Gomes’ legal challenge this coming Thursday, with testimony expected over several days. Gomes is asking the judge to declare him the winner or order a new primary election.
The state has launched its own investigation. Some Republican lawmakers, who had raised concerns about the security of drop boxes during the pandemic, said the Bridgeport videos prove they were correct.
“No one can tell me that there are not people across this country, and certainly in this state, certainly in the last couple of weeks, that are not questioning the integrity of our elections. And I’m talking about people in both political parties,” said state Sen. Rob Sampson, the Senate’s top Republican on the General Assembly’s Government Elections and Administration Committee. “This is not isolated to President Trump saying the election was stolen in 2020.”
Drop boxes are considered by many election officials to be safe and secure and have been used to varying degrees by states across the political spectrum with few problems. A survey by The Associated Press of state election officials across the United States found no cases of fraud, vandalism or theft related to drop boxes in the 2020 presidential election that could have affected the results.
In many cases, drop boxes are placed in locations where they can be monitored by election staff or security cameras. Local election offices typically have procedures to ensure the security of the ballots from the time they are retrieved until they arrive at the election office.
Yet the conspiracy theories and efforts to get rid of them persist. Since the 2020 election, five states have moved to ban ballot drop boxes while six have moved to limit their availability, according to data collected by the Voting Rights Lab, which tracks voting-related legislation in the states and advocates for expanded voter access.
“It’s not the ballot boxes that are the problem,” said Cheri Quickmire, executive director of the voter advocacy group Common Cause in Connecticut. “In this particular case, it seems like the problem is the leadership of campaigns that permit that kind of activity, that has staff, that has campaign staff who … would put ballots in big envelopes and stuff them into the ballot box.”
Democrats, who control the Connecticut Legislature and all statewide offices, have so far been successful in pushing back against attempts to ban drop boxes while taking steps to address the controversy. They’ve also expressed shock over the videos but urged Republicans to wait for the investigations to play out.
“The one question for today, and that’s going to come up, is do you take a wrecking ball approach and ban everything for everybody else?” House Speaker Matt Ritter, a Hartford Democrat, told reporters late last month. “Or do you try to use more of a scalpel approach in dealing with a situation that we all agree is serious?”
Before the 2020 election, Michigan election workers gave the FBI forensic proof that a certain person had turned in thousands of fraudulent voter registrations. But the FBI chose not to prosecute that person.
By Daniel Alman (aka Dan from Squirrel Hill)
August 15, 2023
The Detroit News is a very highly reliable, mainstream news source. You can read about it at this link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Detroit_News
According to this article from the Detroit News, before the 2020 election, election workers in Michigan detected thousands of fraudulent voter registrations. The election workers prevented these fraudulent voter registrations from being entered into their computer system.
All of these fraudulent voter registrations had been submitted by the same person. This person was working for a company that paid people to collect voter registrations. It is thought that this fraud was done only for money, and not for political reasons.
The Michigan election workers told the FBI all about this, including the identify of the person who turned in thousands of fraudulent voter registrations.
But here’s the big deal: That person was never prosecuted.
That means that the FBI is perfectly OK with the fact that someone turned in thousands of fraudulent voter registrations.
That’s a huge crime. But the FBI never prosecuted the person who did it.
Here’s the article from the Detroit News:
Archive: https://archive.ph/ExKMG#selection-467.0-473.23
Michigan probe into fraudulent voter registrations referred to FBI
By Craig Mauger, The Detroit News
August 11, 2023
Lansing — Authorities in Michigan referred a 2020 investigation into thousands of voter registrations submitted by a person in Muskegon to the FBI, Attorney General Dana Nessel’s office confirmed this week.
Nessel’s press secretary, Danny Wimmer, said the total number of suspected fraudulent forms delivered to the Muskegon clerk by the individual was 8,000 to 10,000 ahead of the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election.
However, Wimmer said, the “attempted fraud” was caught before Election Day because Michigan’s election system worked and the applicants were not added to the state’s voter rolls.
“The city clerk in Muskegon detected the fraudulent material provided and alerted the proper authorities,” Wimmer said in a statement. “A thorough investigation was conducted by multiple agencies within the state and no successful fraud was perpetrated upon the state’s election process or qualified voter file.”
The unresolved probe, which first became public in October 2020, has garnered new attention among conservative-leaning websites in recent days after the Gateway Pundit highlighted police reports about investigators’ efforts. The conservative website, which has advanced false and unproven theories in the past about voter fraud influencing Democrat Joe Biden’s victory, wrote in its headline for the story, “Now we have proof.”
However, officials in Michigan contented in recent days, the incident was proof that election administrators are capable of catching and preventing wrongdoing when it is attempted.
On Friday, FBI Special Agent Mara Schneider declined to comment on the election investigation. Wimmer didn’t immediately respond to a question about when the referral was made to federal authorities.
But Wimmer said state officials decided to refer the matter to the FBI because of its national jurisdiction. The person who submitted the registrations to Muskegon Clerk Ann Meisch’s office was a representative of GBI Strategies, which conducts voter registration drives and is headquartered in the state of Tennessee, Wimmer said.
“Fraud was determined to have occurred at the lowest levels of the company,” Wimmer said in a statement. “The leading internal indication was that fraud was being perpetrated against GBI Strategies by its employees to fabricate work product without conducting the work expected of them and not in explicit pursuit of defrauding the election infrastructure of the state.”
GBI Strategies received about $5 million from Democratic groups and campaigns for canvassing, voter outreach and other activities during the 2019-2020 election cycle, according to federal disclosures. Biden’s presidential campaign and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee were among those that reported expenditures to GBI Strategies over the two-year period.
Attempts by The Detroit News to reach the company were unsuccessful in recent days.
In October 2020, the Michigan State Police first publicly revealed it was examining “irregularities in voter registration forms” in Muskegon.
The investigation of potential election fraud forgery included a search warrant being executed at a Southfield location of GBI Strategies in October 2020, Wimmer said.
Gateway Pundit and other conservative websites have highlighted that “bags of pre-paid gift cards, guns with silencers (and) burner phones” were found during the search.
But substantiating evidence of a crime wasn’t found during the search, Wimmer said.
“Detected in this search were pay cards, pre-pay style cell phones and voter registration forms, all determined to be normal operational devices in GBI Strategies’ line of work,” Wimmer said. “Also found during the search were several firearms, which prompted a response from federal agents of the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms.
“All detected firearms were determined by federal authorities to be legally owned and incidentally stored in the location by an employee irrelevant to the business purposes of GBI Strategies. None of the materials seized resulted in furthering evidence of voter fraud.”
Meisch didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment.
The City of Muskegon has about 38,000 residents, so 8,000 new voter registrations would equal about 21% of the population. Muskegon had about 28,000 registered voters during the 2020 presidential election, according to state records.
Even if Ruby Freeman is 100% innocent and did nothing wrong, it is still a verifiable fact that someone in Fulton County lied about a “burst water pipe” as an excuse to send Republican poll watchers and news reporters home, and that election workers continued counting the votes after they had left
By Daniel Alman (aka Dan from Squirrel Hill)
July 27, 2023
Let’s say that Ruby Freeman is 100% innocent and did nothing wrong.
That doesn’t change the following information.
On the night of the election in November 2020, CBS News aired a TV report called “Pipe burst in Georgia delays vote counting.”
You can watch it here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C25DAAHZdEw
Also on the night of the election, ABC News tweeted: “The election department sent the ballot counters at the State Farm Arena in Atlanta home at 10:30 p.m., Regina Waller, the Fulton County public affairs manager for elections, tells ABC News.”
Here’s that tweet:
https://twitter.com/abcpolitics/status/1323846118208376834
However, official security video footage shows that after the Republican poll watchers and news reporters left the room where votes had been counted, a few election workers stayed behind and continued counting votes.
And there is no visible water leak in the video.
You can see that video footage here:
Maricopa County Elections Director Reynaldo Valenzuela testified at Republican Kari Lake’s election challenge trial Wednesday that mail-in ballot reviews were done at election officials’ homes in 2020 with no observers present
Maricopa County Election Director Accidentally Drops 2020 Bombshell During Kari Lake Trial
By Randy DeSoto
May 18, 2023
Maricopa County Elections Director Reynaldo Valenzuela testified at Republican Kari Lake’s election challenge trial Wednesday that mail-in ballot reviews were done at election officials’ homes in 2020 with no observers present.
Valenzuela also confirmed officials still have the ability to do so now.
Lake is contesting Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs’ win last November by approximately 17,000 votes, or 0.7 percent of the more than 2.5 million ballots cast statewide.
In March, the Arizona Supreme Court remanded the issue of whether the mail-in ballot legally mandated signature verification process was followed in Maricopa County during the election back to the trial court.
Lake attorney Byran Blehm questioned Valenzuela regarding the places where mail-in ballot verification took place in November and whether independent observers were present.
Valenzuela said there were three locations where mail-in verification took place: Maricopa County Tabulation and Election Center, known as MCTEC in downtown Phoenix; the Maricopa County Recorder’s office, also in Phoenix; and Maricopa County’s Southeast Regional Center in Mesa.
Whistleblower Jacqueline Onigkeit, who worked as a ballot reviewer at MCTEC in November, had testified before Valenzuela that she thought it was “odd” when she and her fellow reviewers were sent home at 7 p.m. as counting continued of mail-in ballots.
“Well, because we had observers that were constantly watching what we were doing [at the designated vote-counting area]. But there was, I’m assuming, no observers there [at the recorder’s office] who was watching what they were doing,” she replied.
https://twitter.com/KariLakeWarRoom/status/1658894545864761344
In light of this testimony, Blehm questioned Valenzuela whether observers are allowed in the county recorder’s office or at the Mesa location.
Valenzuela responded that observers are allowed in “any general area,” but it’s not a legal requirement.
He went on to explain that as a “certified election officer” he and others can do signature verification in their offices with no observers present.
Blehm followed up asking, “Can signature verification be done at a Maricopa County employee’s home?”
Valenzuela answered saying, “We don’t have that currently in place,” but during 2020 with the pandemic ongoing, the county allowed reviewers to work from home.
https://twitter.com/KariLakeWarRoom/status/1658992441217908737
https://twitter.com/KariLakeWarRoom/status/1659001685027733505
Blehm continued with this line of questioning Thursday asking Valenzuela, “Is it physically possible [now] for Maricopa County employees to log in and conduct signature verification from home?”
The elections director responded, “An employee can log in and access their PC as if they were sitting in front of that PC remote, that are assigned those work stations,” but indicating that is not protocol.
https://twitter.com/KariLakeWarRoom/status/1659239014820618240
Approximately 80 percent of Arizonans vote using mail-in ballots, according to the Citizens Clean Elections Commission.
Lake’s attorney Kurt Olsen has argued that the process for verifying voters in Maricopa County is systemically flawed.
On Wednesday, he told that court that a review of data from the county showed at least 334,000 mail-in ballots were in effect not verified, which is far in excess of Hobbs’ 17,000 vote margin of victory.
This video shows multiple examples of fraudulent votes in Maricopa County, because it is super obvious that the signatures do not match
WATCH: Video Shows Fraudulent Mail-In Ballot Signatures Accepted by Maricopa County – Kari Lake Attorneys to EXPOSE Fraudulent 2022 Signatures in Trial Court
By Jordan Conradson
May 1, 2023
https://twitter.com/WethePeopleAZA1/status/1652894489432981504
Footage released by We The People AZ Alliance shows the fraudulent signature verification standards used by Maricopa County in 2020 and 2022 to steal the elections, using illegitimate mail-in ballots with no chain of custody documentation.
This is expected to be exposed in Kari Lake’s lawsuit against the fraudulent Midterm Election. Lake is currently fighting against sanctions by Maricopa County in the Supreme Court.
The Gateway Pundit recently reported that the Arizona Supreme Court sent the erroneously dismissed signature verification fraud count in Kari Lake’s lawsuit back to the trial court for further review.
Kari Lake’s lawsuit demands “An opportunity to inspect Maricopa County ballots from the 2022 general election, including ballot signature envelopes and the corresponding signatures on file with Maricopa County, prior to trial.” However, this count was previously dismissed before her lawsuit went to trial in the Maricopa County Superior Court last December.
This is perhaps the most critical count because it could reveal the enormous fraud involved in the vote-by-mail system.
As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, We The People AZ Alliance estimated that nearly 300,000 ballots were pushed through the system with no signature verification in 2022.
After determining that OVER 420,000 ballot affidavits “failed signature verification” in the 2020 Election, based on their review of roughly 25% of 1.9 million envelopes, Busch and her team extrapolated this data. They concluded that there were “a total of 290,644 failed signatures in the 2022 Election.”
This is why Maricopa County refuses to provide access to legal public records relating to mail-in ballot signatures.
We The People AZ Alliance has since filed a special action complaint to compel the Maricopa County Elections Department to produce public records relating to the inspection of all 2022 General Election Ballot Affidavit Envelopes, including mail-in, early voting, and late early ballot envelopes.
On Sunday, We The People AZ Alliance tweeted a video recap of the egregiously mismatched signatures from 2020 ballot affidavits. View We The People AZ Alliance’s full Arizona Senate presentations on election fraud here.
New Testimony Confirms Ballot Tampering in Maricopa’s 2022 Election
New Testimony Confirms Ballot Tampering in Maricopa’s 2022 Election
By Wendi Strauch Mahoney
April 3, 2023
New testimony from Bob Hughes confirms ballot tampering in Maricopa County’s 2022 election. Hughes states in his affidavit that “an intentional change was made to the printers affecting the DAY OF Election ballots” in the 2022 Maricopa County midterm election. Hughes’ affidavit in Exhibit K of a newly filed Motion to Reconsider in Mark Finchem’s dismissed 2022 election lawsuit confirms previous testimony from Clay Parikh. Parikh was one of several expert witnesses in the Kari Lake lawsuit.
Parikh testified there are “only two ways the printing of a 19-inch image on a 20-inch paper happened, and they are both intentional. He explained, “One way is by changing the printer adjustments. That would make the printer adjustments, and settings override the image file that was set. The other is from the application side or the operating system side.”
Hughes has 50 years of experience in the printing industry—16 of which have been in “printing ballots for Maricopa County Elections,” according to his affidavit. He also helped “establish the auditing criteria for the printing and paper portion of the 2020 Maricopa County ballot audit and helped select and set up the equipment used during the audit to do the ballot counting.”
On Mar. 6, 2023, he and his team reviewed the Logic and Accuracy reports (L&A) for the 2022 Maricopa County Election. Hughes and his team “physically inspected the ballots at MCTEC that were used in the testing of the election tabulators.” They also reviewed each of the Maricopa County Voting Center certification reports and the Tabulator reports that were “printed during their testing.” His affidavit clarifies explicitly that “[t]he most important and notable finding is that every machine and every voting center report show that every test was passed without any failures.”
Personalized ballots were required in the Maricopa County election because of various local elections, such as school district races. Therefore “ballot styles” are created for each precinct and “are prepared for each election at MCTEC,” not at the Voting Centers. When a voter arrives at a Voting Center, his identity is verified by the poll worker. The poll worker then uses the County’s e-poll book system to “verify they have not returned a mail-in ballot.” However, on election day, mail-in ballots were also turned in to the Voting Centers, and thus, the e-poll book may not be up-to-date on the status of a given voter’s mail-in ballot.
Contrary to what many want us to believe, Hughes testified that the equipment to carry out the voter verification process and the printing of ballots “need to be networked and online at the same time.”
Additionally, and very importantly, is that “ballot STYLES” are “stored PDFs.” They are “locked style formats that cannot be revised on the fly,” according to Hughes. They are “built ahead of each election and stored.” As such, Hughes confidently asserts that the 19-inch format seen in the 2022 Maricopa County election “was incorrectly used by mistake.” Furthermore, Hughes “was told” during his team’s review at MCTEC that “only 20-inch formats were created and no 19-inch formats were created for the 2022 election.” The use of the 19-inch ballot was NOT accidental, according to Hughes. He posits the 19-inch ballots either represent “interference…from someone at MCTEC” or “someone hacking into the MCTEC system.”
Logically, Hughes concludes that the shenanigans must have been introduced after testing because the “L&A tests showed no errors.” And, since poll workers have no access to the printer command module, the “interference had to come through the online E-poll book and then to the printers.” Many printers at multiple locations—with a “high correlation of those within Republican precincts,” leaving Hughes with the impression it was “not happenstance but an orchestrated attack on the election.”
Hughes speculates there are a number of ways ballots came to be unreadable because of the “larger margin at the top and the bottom of the page,” as captured in the screenshot below,
L & A testing is performed before election day with a test set of ballots. The tests are required to “perform at 100% accuracy rate,” according to Hughes. Hughes was told the Oct. 11 test decks were printed at MCTEC. However, Hughes concludes that “DAY OF Election test decks were printed at each voting center” because of several “clear factors.”
This assumption led Hughes to conclude that an “intentional change was made to the printers” for Election Day ballots leading to what he believed was “a perfect opportunity for interference in the election.”
New York City deliberately kept 441,083 people on the voter rolls even though they had died or moved away. A lawsuit forced them to obey the law, and remove their names.
New York City deliberately kept 441,083 people on the voter rolls even though they had died or moved away. A lawsuit forced them to obey the law, and remove their names.
Before the lawsuit, only 22 names had been removed during a period of six years.
I agree with this lawsuit. I agree with removing the names of people who died or moved away.
https://www.judicialwatch.org/jw-and-nyc-settle-lawsuit/
Judicial Watch and New York City Settle Federal Lawsuit on Voter Registration Clean-Up after City Removes 441,083 Ineligible Names from Voter Rolls
December 28, 2022
Judicial Watch announced today that it is settling a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists
Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit in July against New York City after it failed to clean voter rolls for years. The lawsuit, filed under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), pointed out that New York City removed only 22 names under the federal law over six years (Judicial Watch v Valentine et al. (No.1:22-cv-03952)).
The Judicial Watch lawsuit detailed that New York City’s “own recent data concedes that there were only 22 total” removals under this provision “during a six-year period, in a city of over 5.5 million voters. These are ludicrously small numbers of removals given the sizable populations of these counties.” Moreover, the “almost complete failure of Kings, Queens, New York, Bronx, and Richmond Counties, over a period of at least six years, to remove voters” under a key provision of federal law “means that there are untold numbers of New York City registrations for voters who are ineligible to vote at their listed address because they have changed residence or are otherwise ineligible to vote.”
Today’s announced settlement details how the city responded to Judicial Watch’s notice about its voting roll deficiencies with a massive clean-up:
[The Board of Elections] notified Judicial Watch that, in February 2022, they removed, pursuant to Section 8(d)(1)(B) of the NVRA, 82,802 registrations in Bronx County, 128,093 in Kings County, 145,891 in New York County, 66,010 in Queens County, and 18,287 in Richmond County, for a total of 441,083 registrations.
[The Board of Elections] notified Judicial Watch that going forward they intend to cancel registrations pursuant to Section 8(d)(1)(B) in each odd-numbered year in the months following a federal election.
Specifically, the city also agrees to track in detail report its voter roll maintenance efforts through 2025:
For both 2023 and 2025 … the [Board of Elections] will notify Judicial Watch … on or before March 31, by means of separate excel spreadsheets for Bronx County, Kings County, New York County, Queens County, and Richmond County, of the number of removals, including removals pursuant to … the NVRA, made during the previous two years.
The NVRA requires states to “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove” from the rolls “the names of ineligible voters” who have died or changed residence. Among other things, the law requires registrations to be cancelled when voters fail to respond to address confirmation notices and then fail to vote in the next two general federal elections. In 2018, the Supreme Court confirmed that such removals are mandatory (Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Inst. (138 S. Ct. 1833, 1841-42 (2018)).
“This historic settlement is a major victory for New York voters who will benefit from cleaner voter rolls and more honest elections. Judicial Watch is pleased that New York City officials quickly moved to remove 441,000 outdated registrations from the rolls. We look forward to working together under this federal lawsuit settlement to ensure New York City maintains cleaner rolls for future elections,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
California settled an NVRA lawsuit with Judicial Watch and began the process of removing up to 1.6 million inactive names from Los Angeles County’s voter rolls. Kentucky also began a cleanup of hundreds of thousands of old registrations last year after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, Judicial Watch settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after the North Carolina removed over 430,000 ineligible names from the voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of Judicial Watch’s challenge to Maryland’s Democratic legislature “extreme” congressional redistricting gerrymander.
In May 2022, Judicial Watch sued Illinois on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered Illinois voters to prevent state election officials from extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law.
Robert Popper, Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
Ethan Leonard, Esq. and Neal Brickman, Esq. of The Law Offices of Neal Brickman, P.C. in New York City assisted Judicial Watch in the lawsuit.
On January 6, 2023, SCOTUS will have a meeting to consider hearing a case that could overturn the 2020 U.S. Presidential election. The mainstream media has been silent on this so far.
On January 6, 2023, SCOTUS will have a meeting to consider hearing a case that could overturn the 2020 U.S. Presidential election.
The mainstream media has been silent on this so far.
The case is called Brunson v. Adams.
Sources:
https://womenimpactingthenation.org/brunson-v-adams-scotus-election-integrity-case/
AG Shapiro Announces Charges Against Philadelphia Man for Orchestrating the Forgery of Signatures on Election Nomination Petitions in Municipal Primary Races
AG Shapiro Announces Charges Against Philadelphia Man for Orchestrating the Forgery of Signatures on Election Nomination Petitions in Municipal Primary Races
November 16, 2022
Defendant is Alleged to Have Conspired to Forge Thousands of Signatures to get Candidates’ Names on the Ballot for the 2019 Democratic Primary Races in Philadelphia
PHILADELPHIA – Attorney General Josh Shapiro today announced the arrest of Rasheen Crews, a Philadelphia political consultant, for charges related to forging signatures on nomination petitions to get his clients on the ballot for the 2019 Democratic primary races in Philadelphia.
“In advance of the 2023 municipal elections, this arrest is an important reminder that interfering with the integrity of our elections is a serious crime,” said AG Shapiro. “By soliciting and organizing the wide scale forgery of signatures, the defendant undermined the democratic process and Philadelphians’ right to a free and fair election. My office is dedicated to upholding the integrity of the election process across the Commonwealth, to ensure everyone can participate in Pennsylvania’s future.”
An investigation by the Office of Attorney General found that in 2019, multiple candidates hired Crews to help them obtain the requisite amount of signatures needed for their nomination petitions for the Democratic primary races. Crews recruited individuals to help with the petition work, bringing them to a hotel room and asking them to write names, addresses, and forged signatures on multiple petitions. Crews then had these petitions notarized and filed with the Pennsylvania Department of State on behalf of his clients.
Of the petitions that were reviewed, over one thousand signatures were determined to be duplicated. Many names and addresses were found repeated on various petition pages, some pages appeared to be photocopied entirely, and some of the listed individuals claimed to have never signed the petitions in question.
Due to the questions around the petition signatures, some candidates chose to withdraw entirely from the election.
Crews was charged with Criminal Solicitation to Commit Forgery and Theft By Failure to Make Required Disposition. This matter is being prosecuted by Senior Deputy Attorney General Thomas Ost-Prisco. All charges discussed are accusations. The defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
City Officials In Flint, Michigan Disproportionately Hired Democratic Poll Watchers In Violation Of State Law
City Officials In Flint, Michigan Disproportionately Hired Democratic Poll Watchers In Violation Of State Law
By Victoria Marshall
September 6, 2022
A letter sent to the city of Flint, Michigan, on Tuesday reveals how the city disproportionately hired more Democrats than Republicans as poll watchers in violation of state statute.
According to a demand letter filed by the attorneys of Pure Integrity Michigan Elections, Michigan law requires equal representation of Republican and Democrat poll workers at polling locations. During Michigan’s August 2 primary, however, Flint hired 422 Democrats compared to just 27 Republican poll watchers. Additionally, for Flint’s Absent Voter Counting Board, only 4 Republican inspectors were hired compared to 56 Democrat election inspectors.
This is in direct violation of Michigan state statute, which stipulates that “the board of election commissioners shall appoint at least [one] election inspector from each major political party and shall appoint an equal number, as nearly as possible, of election inspectors in each election precinct from each major political party.”
Despite multiple attempts by GOP representatives urging Flint election administrators to hire qualified Republican poll watchers leading up to the August 2 primary, the city of Flint remained unresponsive to their requests.
“As you know,” the letter states, “for the last [six] months, the Republican Party has been presenting you with a list of 122 Republicans who want to serve as election inspectors to bring Flint into compliance with the legally-required party balance for election inspectors.”
The letter finishes by threatening litigation if Flint fails to balance its number of Democrat and Republican election inspectors. The city has seven days to respond to the letter and 63 days to hire 240 Republican poll watchers before the November general election.
Flint must “cease and desist spending taxpayer funds on its election inspector operations until the city comes into legal compliance,” the letter demands.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court says ballot drop boxes aren’t allowed in the state
The Wisconsin Supreme Court says ballot drop boxes aren’t allowed in the state
By Barbara Sprunt
July 8, 2022
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has ruled that most ballot drop boxes aren’t allowed in the state and that a voter can’t have someone else return — in person — their completed absentee ballot on their behalf.
The high court’s ruling Friday, which comes one month before the swing state’s primary elections, is a loss for voting rights groups and disability advocates.
The decision is the latest in a legal battle that began in January, after a Waukesha County judge sided with a conservative legal group in a lawsuit, declaring state law doesn’t allow for unstaffed ballot drop boxes and requires that voters physically return their own absentee ballots.
Although an appeals court temporarily blocked the order for contests in February, the ban was in effect for local elections in April.
“The key phrase is ‘in person’ and it must be assigned its natural meaning,” wrote Justice Rebecca Bradley for the conservative majority, referring to the state statute governing ballot returns. “‘In person’ denotes ‘bodily presence’ and the concept of doing something personally.”
Bradley wrote that absentee ballots must be delivered in person at a clerk’s office and cannot be returned by someone else. The ruling did not address whether someone must physically put their own absentee ballot in the mailbox if voting by mail.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Ann Walsh Bradley (no relation to her colleague) wrote that the court’s decision “although lamentable, is not a surprise.”
“It has seemingly taken the opportunity to make it harder to vote or to inject confusion into the process whenever it has been presented with the opportunity,” she wrote. “Without justification, [the majority] fans the flames of electoral doubt that threaten our democracy.”
In a statement Friday afternoon, the group Disability Rights Wisconsin noted the court “declined to address the question of whether an elector may receive assistance with mailing their completed absentee ballot.”
“The right for voters with disabilities to have assistance from a person of their choice is protected by federal law. Nothing in this decision changes federal protections for people with disabilities,” the organization’s Barbara Beckert said in a statement. “Voters with disabilities who need ballot delivery assistance may want to contact their municipal clerk to ask for a disability related accommodation.”
“Applying the law as written”
All eyes were on Justice Brian Hagedorn as the case made its way through the courts. Hagedorn, who sided with the high court’s conservative justices on this case, was elected with the help of the Republican Party but has sided with the court’s liberal justices on several occasions.
In a concurring opinion, Hagedorn stressed that “judicial decision-making and politics are different.”
“This case is about applying the law as written; that’s it,” he wrote.
“Significant questions remain despite our decision in this case, especially as absentee voting has become increasingly common,” he wrote, adding: “The legislature and governor may wish to consider resolving some of the open questions these statutes present.”
The majority’s ruling rebuts guidance from the Wisconsin Election Commission.
“WEC’s staff may have been trying to make voting as easy as possible during the pandemic, but whatever their motivations, WEC must follow Wisconsin statutes,” Justice Rebecca Bradley wrote. “Good intentions never override the law.”
Rick Esenberg — president of the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, which represented the plaintiffs in the original lawsuit — cheered the ruling.
“Wisconsin voters can have confidence that state law, not guidance from the Wisconsin Elections Commission, has the final word on how Wisconsin elections are conducted,” he said in a statement.
Esenberg argued before the high court that the statute governing ballot return is explicit that only voters themselves can return their absentee ballot to the local clerk.
“I think [the court] ought to read the law as it is written, and say that the law means what it says,” he said in an interview with NPR in May.
Esenberg said if people think the law is unfair, it’s up to state lawmakers to change it.
But disability rights advocates have said a strict interpretation of state law leaves many voters with disabilities who rely on ballot return assistance fearful they won’t be able to lawfully vote.
“We heard from people who were concerned, confused and, frankly, shocked by such an extreme restriction,” Beckert of Disability Rights Wisconsin told NPR after the Waukesha County judge’s ruling.
Scott Thompson of Law Forward — which represented the appellants in the case, including Disability Rights Wisconsin — told NPR the initial ruling conflicted with federal protections for voters with disabilities, like the Voting Rights Act, which in part grants voters with disabilities the right to receive voting assistance from a person of their choosing, other than that person’s employer or union representative.
The court’s decision stands to significantly affect the upcoming elections in the swing state, where about 2 million residents voted by absentee in the 2020 general election, a record number.
According to the Wisconsin Elections Commission, there were 570 absentee ballot drop boxes being used across the state by last spring.
My review of 2000 Mules
By Daniel Alman (aka Dan from Squirrel Hill)
June 30, 2022
In 1993, I graduated from the University of Pittsburgh with a bachelor’s degree in math, and a minor in computer science. Sometime during my four years at the school, I attended a speech by Dinesh D’Souza. The thing that I remember most about his speech was that he said he immigrated to the United States because he “wanted to live in a country where the poor people are fat.”
On the one hand, I did not vote for Trump. I voted for Libertarian Gary Johnson in 2016, and Libertarian Jo Jorgensen in 2020. So I’m not a Trump fan.
On the other hand, I don’t hate Trump the way so many Democrats do. I certainly don’t agree with their claim that he’s a Nazi. In fact, Trump supports the right of gun ownership by all law abiding adult citizens, whereas Hitler banned Jews from owning guns in 1938. So at least in that one regard, Trump is the exact opposite of a Nazi.
It seems to me that a lot of people are rating 2000 Mules based on whether or not they agree with its basic premise, which is that the 2020 U.S. Presidential election was stolen.
But that’s not how I’m rating this movie.
Instead, I’m rating this movie based on how good or bad it is, regardless of my own personal thoughts on its premise.
Now, in order to be transparent, I want to state that I do indeed believe the election was stolen. I first started thinking this on election night, when the mainstream media reported that election workers in Fulton County, Georgia, had “stopped counting votes for the night” due to a “burst water pipe.”
As soon as I first heard them say that, I knew they were cheating.
And here’s my proof that they were lying.
On the night of the election, CBS News aired a TV report called “Pipe burst in Georgia delays vote counting.”
You can watch it here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C25DAAHZdEw
Also on the night of the election, ABC News tweeted: “The election department sent the ballot counters at the State Farm Arena in Atlanta home at 10:30 p.m., Regina Waller, the Fulton County public affairs manager for elections, tells ABC News.”
Here’s that tweet:
https://twitter.com/abcpolitics/status/1323846118208376834
However, official security video footage shows that after the Republican poll watchers and news reporters left the room where votes had been counted, a few election workers stay behind and continue counting votes.
And there is no visible water leak in the video.
You can see that video footage here:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/rPqQKvuFk473/
There’s only one reason for the election workers to lie about a bogus “burst water pipe,” and use that as an excuse to get the Republican poll watchers and news reporters to leave, and then the election workers themselves go back inside and continue counting the votes while no one else is in the room. They were cheating.
If you want to see me presenting a lot more evidence that the election was stolen, you can read my writing about it here:
https://danfromsquirrelhill.wordpress.com/2022/06/23/stop-the-steal-6/
So, I very much believe that the election was stolen.
But guess what?
I didn’t like 2000 Mules.
My biggest criticism of the movie, is that despite its repeated claims that these 2,000 “ballot traffickers” each put mail-in ballots into many different dropboxes, the movie never actually shows video footage of even one of these people depositing ballots into more than one dropbox.
Do you realize how ridiculous it is that they never show this?
If each of these people really did deposit ballots into many different dropboxes, then the movie should show us video footage of some of these people depositing ballots into multiple dropboxes.
But the movie never shows even one person doing that.
I’d like to see video footage of at least 20 different “ballot traffickers,” each depositing ballots into at least 10 different dropboxes.
And I’d like to see their faces.
Even when the movie did show some of these people dropping ballots into a single dropbox per person, they always blurred out their face. Apparently, they were worried about getting sued for defamation. But when someone is sued for defamation, the only thing they need to do in order to prove their innocence, is to show that what they said is true. So if they are so sure that this cheating happened, then why did they blur out their faces?
And since they have video footage of their faces as well as their license plates, and they also have their cell phone location data, they should know the names of these “ballot traffickers.” But they never, ever revealed any of their names in the movie. Again, if they are so sure that this cheating actually happened, they should not be afraid to show the names of the people who cheated.
So, thumbs down for me.
On the other hand, there are some smaller things that I did like about the movie.
The fact that these people are shown wearing gloves, which they remove immediately after depositing the ballots, suggests that they did indeed cheat. So that’s a point in praise of the film.
And some of these people are shown taking pictures of them holding their ballots right before depositing them in the dropboxes, so they can get paid. That’s another point in favor of the film.
And the single biggest evidence of cheating that’s shown in this movie is the nursing home patients who are obviously too sick to either vote or request an absentee ballot, and yet their relatives claim that the official government records show that they had indeed voted.
So there are some things in this movie that do show evidence of cheating.
But those things all receive only a small amount of the movie’s overall time.
The movie’s main premise is that each of these 2,000 “ballot traffickers” deposited ballots into multiple dropboxes. But despite this claim, not once in the entire movie, do we ever see video footage of any of these people dropping off ballots into more than one dropbox.
In other words, the people who made this movie are refusing to show us any video evidence whatsoever that backs up their primary claim.
And that’s why I can’t recommend this movie.
Oh yeah – another criticism that I have is that they never give equal time to their opponents. They never interviewed any experts who believe that there was no cheating. Because of their refusal to present the opposing point of view to any substantial degree, I have to say that this movie seems more like an infomercial than a documentary. I’ve seen a lot of documentaries. And I’ve seen a lot of infomercials. And I know how to tell the difference between the two. When a bunch of people all in the same room all have the exact same opinion, that’s not a documentary – it’s an infomercial.
So, while I believe that the election was indeed stolen, I think that 2000 Mules does a very bad job of making its case, and that this movie is, overall, a failure.
-
You can buy my books at amazon
-
You can support me at PayPal
Here are many examples of voter fraud in the 2020 U.S. Presidential election that, as far as I’m aware, have not been debunked. Last updated on April 9, 2023.
By Daniel Alman (aka Dan from Squirrel Hill)
Last updated on April 9, 2023
The mainstream media continues to insist that there is “no evidence” of voter fraud in the 2020 U.S. Presidential election.
They are lying.
Here are many examples of voter fraud in the 2020 U.S. Presidential election that, as far as I’m aware, have not been debunked:
Update on April 9, 2023: This bolded part about Russell James Ramsland, Jr. has been debunked by the Washington Post. Source: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:DIeNh6OUiiIJ:https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2021/trump-election-fraud-texas-businessman-ramsland-asog/&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Russell James Ramsland, Jr. audited 22 Dominion voting machines that were used in Antrim County, Michigan.
This is his conclusion from his report on his audit:
“We conclude that the Dominion Voting System is intentionally and purposefully designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election results. The system intentionally generates an enormously high number of ballot errors. The electronic ballots are then transferred for adjudication. The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency, and no audit trail. This leads to voter or election fraud. Based on our study, we conclude that The Dominion Voting System should not be used in Michigan. We further conclude that the results of Antrim County should not have been certified.”
Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, and Michigan Judge Kevin Elsenheimer all tried to prevent the public from seeing Ramsland’s report on his audit.
Why did they try to prevent the public from seeing the audit?
What were they afraid of?
Also, after the audit was ordered, but before the audit actually took place, Benson ordered the memory in the voting machines to be erased.
Why did Benson order the memory in the machines to be erased before the audit?
What was she afraid of?
Sources:
https://g1nbc.com/howell-mi/files/2020/12/Recount-Release-of-Security-Memo-Nov-2020-General.pdf
https://www.bitchute.com/video/RMJ7vx1tyFls/
Mainstream media reported that Fulton County, Georgia, “stopped” counting ballots for the night because “a water pipe has broken,” and “sent the ballot counters home.”
Video shows Republican poll watchers and media reporters leaving the building.
The same video shows a few people remain, and continue counting votes without Republican poll watchers or media reporters.
Video shows an election worker scanning the same ballots three times.
There is no visible water in these videos.
Sources:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C25DAAHZdEw
https://www.bitchute.com/video/MkqNtENpjyii/
https://twitter.com/abcpolitics/status/1323846118208376834
https://www.bitchute.com/video/rPqQKvuFk473/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/v3qUNQRKJyH5/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/fv1BUbsk1mSW/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/6Bvf8xq1CsoJ/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiREC3Zy20E
Dan from Squirrel Hill's Blog 