SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Great 2020 Election Heist -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)11/17/2020 5:22:28 AM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Hawkmoon
Thomas M.

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1193
 



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)11/18/2020 10:20:14 PM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Bill
Hawkmoon

  Respond to of 1193
 
REMEMBER THIS? GREAT ADVICE FROM THE CROOKED ONE!

Hillary Clinton says Biden should not concede the election 'under any circumstances'

nbcnews.com



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)11/20/2020 10:18:18 AM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Hawkmoon

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1193
 
Alan Dershowitz says Trump will win if it goes to SCOTUS or House




To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)11/27/2020 4:12:56 AM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Hawkmoon
Thomas M.

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1193
 

Election Findings Could 'Easily' Overturn 3 States, Data Analyst Concludes

By Charlotte Cuthbertson

theepochtimes.com


WASHINGTON—The former data and strategy director for President Donald Trump’s 2016 election campaign says he has found enough evidence to suggest the election results could be “easily” turned to favor the current president.

“I have no confidence that Joe Biden is the deserved winner of this election, based on our findings,” Matt Braynard said in a Nov. 25 video. “He may have won, he may not have won. Trump may have lost, Trump may have been reelected.

“We just can’t know because of how bad this election system has operated.”

Braynard assembled a team just days after the election to look for inconsistencies in six contested states: Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Nevada.

The group initially identified 1.25 million voter issues and followed up on them through phone calls and by cross-checking data against other databases.

The team ran several major analyses including of voters who had moved out of state but still voted in the state they had left; voters who registered to vote using a post office box number rather than a residential address as required; voters who requested a mail-in ballot and sent it in, only for it not to be counted; voters who didn’t request a mail-in ballot and didn’t receive one, but discovered a vote had been cast in their name; as well as research on people who voted more than once and on those who are listed in the death index.

Change of Address One of Braynard’s biggest findings involved voters who had submitted a National Change of Address form to the post office, indicating they had moved out of state, yet appeared to have voted in 2020 in the state they moved from.

In Georgia, the team found 138,221 such people, which represents a much larger number than the state’s current vote differential (12,670) in the presidential race.

In Michigan, there were 51,302 such people; Wisconsin had 26,673, Nevada had 27,271, Arizona had 19,997, and Pennsylvania had 13,671.

Braynard said the numbers are high enough that they could “easily” overturn current election projections.

“The number of questionable ballots surpasses the vote margin in at least three states right now—Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin,” Braynard told The Epoch Times on Nov. 25. Those three states have a combined total of 37 electoral votes.

“This isn’t speculative. This is just what the data shows.”

A screenshot of a summary of findings regarding the 2020 election and low activity voters, as well as those who moved out of state, but are tagged as voting in the original state, according to data from Matt Braynard and team. (Screenshot/The Epoch Times) The current vote count difference between the two main presidential candidates and the electoral votes involved are as follows:

Arizona: 10,457 votes (11 electoral votes)

Georgia: 12,670 votes (16 electoral votes)

Nevada: 33,596 votes (6 electoral votes)

Michigan: 154,188 votes (16 electoral votes)

Pennsylvania: 80,555 votes (20 electoral votes)

Wisconsin: 20,608 votes (10 electoral votes)

Braynard said the team also found people who had voted more than once. However, he suggested the numbers his team found are likely much lower than the actual numbers, as he was unable to run the data against the numbers of in-person, Election Day voters.

The number of early and absentee double voters in Nevada and Pennsylvania was roughly 750 people, while in the other four contested states, it ranged from 150 to 400 people.

Braynard said the analyses his team conducted don’t require any leap of faith or trust in some “magical mathematical formula.”

“I can give you the list of the people who voted in this election, who filed National Change of Address cards in Georgia, moving themselves to another state,” Braynard told The Epoch Times.

“And I can also show you the subsequent state voter registrations of these individuals in other states, who then cast early or absentee ballots back in Georgia. I can show you the names of the people and the records of them having voted in multiple states and the raw data that the states make available.”

Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar’s office previously said it has found no evidence of voter fraud or mass irregularities in Pennsylvania, while secretaries of state in Arizona, Georgia, and Michigan have said the same.

Early last week, the Department of Homeland Security’s cybersecurity division said the Nov. 3 election was the “most secure” in U.S. history, saying there is “no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”

Trump’s legal team, however, has said it found enough evidence to potentially overturn the election.

Braynard said he has signed declarations to go with his work, which is being used in court filings in five states.

Using Braynard’s findings, a legal group on Nov. 25 filed a lawsuit in Georgia alleging that more than 150,000 illegal votes were counted. The suit also alleges that 43,688 legal votes weren’t counted.

A screenshot of a summary of findings regarding the 2020 election and the residency status of voters, as well as those who are tagged as voting twice, according to data from Matt Braynard and team. (Screenshot/The Epoch Times) Post Office Boxes Again in Georgia, Braynard found a further 1,000 people who registered to vote by using a post office box number, but attempted to disguise the box number as an apartment or suite number.

When registering to vote, by law, individuals must use their actual residential address as their residence. A P.O. box number can only be used as a mailing address. Homeless people can list a shelter, a soup kitchen, or even a parking lot as their residence.

“So rather than saying, ‘P.O. Box 123,’ the address is listed as ‘Apartment 123,'” Braynard said, “and that’s a major red flag.” In Pennsylvania, the group found 1,400 such voters.

He said almost all of those people voted early or absentee, rather than in person—at a rate far higher than the overall average.

“So that really raises a red flag because they’re illegally registered,” he said. “It sounds like a good problem for the FBI to solve.”

Braynard said he intends to share his findings with state law enforcement and the FBI.

A screenshot of Matt Braynard speaking on a YouTube video on Nov. 8, 2020. (Screenshot/The Epoch Times) Mail-In Ballot Issues The 2020 election saw an astronomical increase in mail-in balloting, which has been deemed as the ripest for fraud.

Nine states and the District of Columbia sent ballots to everyone on their voter rolls, whether they requested them or not.

Five of the six contested states that Braynard looked at required a voter to request a mail-in ballot, while Nevada mailed out ballots to everyone on its voter registration rolls.

In the five states that required a requested ballot, Braynard’s team found a significant number of people whom the state marked as having requested a ballot but not having returned it. Upon contacting those people, Braynard said many of them told his call team that they hadn’t requested a ballot at all. Others said they had requested and returned the ballot, but it hadn’t been marked as received or counted.

In Arizona, 44 percent of the people reached by phone said they hadn’t requested a mail-in ballot, despite the state receiving a completed ballot in their name.

In Michigan, that number was 24 percent; in Pennsylvania, 32 percent; and in Wisconsin and Georgia, 18 percent.

“Those are pretty startling numbers, because the question is, how? How did that ballot get requested? Who did that? Is it possible that people we talked to maybe lied to us or maybe did it and forgot about it? Was there a clerical error that could be this substantial?” said Braynard.

“Once they stripped those ballots out of those absentee envelopes, it becomes very difficult to come up with a real remedy.”

Within the group of people who did request a mail-in ballot, but the ballot was flagged as unreturned, between 15 percent and 33 percent of the people reached said they had actually returned their ballot.

In Pennsylvania, more than 160,000 uncounted mail-in ballots were requested by or in the name of registered Republicans.

A screenshot of a summary of findings regarding the 2020 election and the issues with mail-in/absentee ballots, according to data from Matt Braynard and team. (Screenshot/The Epoch Times) Braynard said he hopes his findings will help bring greater scrutiny to the election process, in particular the verification process of mail-in ballots (he suggests fingerprints instead of signatures), clean voter rolls, and the availability of open-source voting machine data.

“It’s unfortunate, but short of a judge ordering a do-over, another election … short of that, I really don’t see how you fix this,” Braynard said.

“This election, it appears to me, has been decided by ballots that are highly questionable. They’re anomalous.

“I cannot say with confidence who won this election. I don’t think anybody can.”



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)11/27/2020 4:27:32 AM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Hawkmoon

  Respond to of 1193
 
2020 Election: Could Trump’s claims have merit? An analysis of voting data from Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
Data Source: New York Times and Edison Research

11/26/2020, 11:06:50 PM
Thread Reader ^ | 11/26/2020 | Elliott Anderson

threadreaderapp.com

thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543841217540096" dir="auto"> 1/ (THREAD)

??2020 Election: Could Trump’s claims have merit???

An analysis of voting data from Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Data Source: New York Times and Edison Research.
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543844308934656" dir="auto"> 2/ METHODS??

Before diving in to the specific data, I wanted to provide samples of the graphs I have put together to show examples of states with clear victories for each of the candidates. These graphs make it easier to notice anomalies in other states.
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543848788250625" dir="auto"> 3/ BIDEN WIN??

Let’s start with Minnesota.

Votes after election day should be randomly sampled votes received by mail and the percentage of votes for a specific candidate should stay roughly constant. Here you can see Biden received roughly 54% of all votes after election day.
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543853414653953" dir="auto"> 4/ TRUMP WIN??

Here is Florida.

Here there is a gradual slant where Biden goes from receiving around 50% of the votes to receiving around 48%, but there is no gap in reporting and it stays consistent until the counting is complete.
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543857432711168" dir="auto"> 5/ SWING STATES IN QUESTION??

For this analysis I am going to be focusing specifically on four states: Wisconsin, Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. All four of these states have some things in common.
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543861908119553" dir="auto"> 6/ WISCONSIN??

I have highlighted one of the Bubbles orange and added an orange arrow to illustrate how abnormal this batch is. This batch contained nearly 170,000 votes and 85% of them went to Biden, but Biden's largest margins were 75.5% in Dane county and 70% in Milwaukee.
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543866471485442" dir="auto"> 7/ WISCONSIN??

When you chart the percentage of votes counted as the x axis you can get an idea of how many votes were already counted at this point. The answer is 96.6%. Why did counting stop around 97% and then two hours later this massive influx of new Biden votes came in?
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543871332642822" dir="auto"> 8/ MICHIGAN??

Similar to Wisconsin, vote counting stopped during the night, and then a huge batch of votes came in. 96% of the votes went to Biden and he netted around 141,000 votes. A 96% batch of votes seems improbable because Biden's top county in Michigan was won by 72%.
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543875828932609" dir="auto"> 9/ MICHIGAN??

From this point on, the percentage of votes coming in for Biden shifted too (see the orange arrow). Also, like Wisconsin, this batch came in after most of the votes had already been counted (85% in this case).
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543881222881280" dir="auto"> 10/ GEORGIA??

Similarly in Georgia, a huge batch came in in the middle of the night mostly for Biden (the vertical blue spike around 1AM corresponding to the orange bubble). Another oddity, after election night every batch of votes favored Biden (no bubbles bottom of chart).
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543886000164865" dir="auto"> 11/ GEORGIA??

At 1 AM on election night, 93% of the votes were already counted, and then the big Biden spike of votes came in. Over the next 2 days, the percentage of votes in each batch skewed more and more towards Biden for the final 5% of votes.
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543890936819712" dir="auto"> 12/ PENNSYLVANIA??

Pennsylvania also had a stop in counting along with a big batch of votes going to Biden in the middle of the night and then a gradual shift of the returned votes towards Biden until 3 days later when he was declared the winner.
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543895726784512" dir="auto"> 13/ PENNSYLVANIA??

It is certainly interesting that as soon as Pennsylvania stopped counting (at around 78% of the votes), the remaining votes shifted progressively in Biden’s favor similar to Georgia. From 45% to 50.5%. I am not sure how this can be explained naturally.
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543897890967554" dir="auto"> 14/ ALL FOUR STATES??

??Stopped counting votes on the night of the election
??Had vote surges for Biden in the middle of the night
??Had shifts in the percentage of votes being counted towards Biden after the election and after 90% or more of the votes had already been counted
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543900545970176" dir="auto"> 15/ MAIL-IN BALLOTS??

If the mail-in ballots counted post-election were mostly for Biden he would have received over 50% of counted votes in these batches, but that was not the case until *after* the counting was stopped. This is suspicious to me.
thread#showTweet" data-screenname="KanekoaTheGreat" data-tweet="1329543901946937344" dir="auto"> 16/ CONCLUSION??

The odds of all four states exhibiting similar strange behaviors and shifts in how many votes were counted for Biden over time seem improbable if this was not somehow coordinated.

Source:





2020 Election: Could Trump’s claims have merit? An analysis of voting data from Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin

fsociety.substack.com




To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/1/2020 10:35:28 AM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Hawkmoon

  Respond to of 1193
 
Georgia Secretary Of State Opens 250 Investigations Into ‘Credible Claims Of Illegal Voting’

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, announced on Monday that the state of Georgia has opened 250 investigations into “credible claims of illegal voting and violation of state election law.”



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/1/2020 2:43:46 PM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Hawkmoon

  Respond to of 1193
 
PRESS CONFERENCE: ELECTION WHISTLE BLOWERS COME FORWARD Reveal details of alleged fraud affecting hundreds of thousands of ballots. PA postal truck driver shipped estimated 144,000 to 288,000 completed ballots across three state lines in October.




To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/1/2020 3:57:50 PM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Hawkmoon

  Respond to of 1193
 



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/1/2020 3:58:39 PM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Hawkmoon
Thomas M.

  Respond to of 1193
 



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/2/2020 3:49:09 AM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Hawkmoon
Thomas M.

  Respond to of 1193
 
Pennsylvania Bombshell: Biden 99.4% v. Trump 0.6%


Stunning testimony that the media has dutifully ignored.




There are landslides and then there are landslides. There are lopsided votes and then there are lopsided votes. There are egregious examples of vote manipulation and then there are really egregious examples of vote manipulation. What surfaced during hearings in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, on November 25, 2020, may set the standard for electoral outrageousness. An expert testifying to the Pennsylvania Senate flagged a batch of ballots that recorded some 570,000 votes for Joe Biden and only 3,200 for Donald Trump.

Yes, you read that correctly. That would equate to Joe Biden bagging 99.4 percent of that enormous chunk of votes. That one batch alone would have flipped the state to Biden.

This bombshell was dropped last Wednesday at the Wyndham Hotel in Gettysburg. The November 25 hearings, which began at 12:30 p.m. and ran for nearly four hours, were convened at the request of Sen. Doug Mastriano (R-Adams, Cumberland, Franklin, and York counties). It was sponsored by the Senate Majority Policy Committee, chaired by Sen. David Argall (R-Berks/Schuylkill). Mastriano has called what happened “unacceptable,” and has called for the resignation of Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar.

This particular gem was provided by Ret. Col. Phil Waldren, a former combat officer with a background in Army information and electronic warfare. Waldren, who testified along with Rudy Giuliani’s team, brought to the hearing his considerable expertise in analysis of election-data fraud. After Waldren presented his material, the chair opened the floor for questions. Rudy Giuliani went first, asking Waldren to clarify what his analytics team means when they talk about “spike anomalies” in voting patterns. These, as Waldren defines them, are “events where a numerical amount of votes are processed in a time period that is not feasible or mechanically possible under normal circumstances.” Waldren showed a chart with a shocking example of an apparent massive dump of votes for Joe Biden. Giuliani pressed Waldren for clarification regarding this unbelievable “Biden injection of votes.” Here’s the exchange:

Waldren: At the very beginning of the chart, where there’s a circle that says “On Election Day,” what that indicates is there’s a spike in loaded votes. 337,000-plus-or-minus-some votes that were added in there in one big batch. So that was an anomaly in the reporting. Normally you would expect to see a smooth curve going up, not any big spikes, that’s kind of what Greg was talking about, the anomalies of loading and uploading those votes. So that big spike that occurs there is a prime indicator of fraudulent voting.

Giuliani: And that’s [a total of] 604,000 votes in 90 minutes, is that right?

Waldren: Correct, this is [shows chart] 337,000 votes in that period of time.

Giuliani: And when you look at this entire curve, with all these spikes, can you calculate how much of a vote that accounted for for Biden, and how much for Trump?

Waldren: Close to 600,000. I think our figures were about 570-some-odd-thousand that all those spikes represent overtime.

Giuliani: For Biden?

Waldren: Correct.

Giuliani: And how much for Trump?

Waldren: I think it was a little over 3,200.

That’s roughly 570,000 votes for Biden and 3,200 for Trump. Biden scooped up this enormous batch by 99.4 percent. Incredible. Impossible. Scandalous.

When Waldren said this, the audience in the room gasped in shock. (To watch the exchange, and the entire hearing, click here. This exchange begins at 1:28:00.)

If what Waldren alleges here is true, then this would constitute one of the most insidious examples of documented voter fraud in the history of American presidential politics. This one spike alone would have erased Donald Trump’s 600,000-vote lead over Joe Biden late Tuesday night, November 3. Biden has reportedly won Pennsylvania by about 70,000 votes. This one swing would have done it. If this is true, then this episode alone might well constitute a smoking gun affirming a fraudulent election in Pennsylvania.

And yet, this electoral bombshell has been completely ignored by the mainstream press. The only national sources that I could find reporting it were RealClearPolitics, Breitbart, and Greg Kelly of Newsmax TV. The video link that I’ve provided is courtesy of Right Side Broadcasting Network, a conservative source, filling a gap vacated by shameless mainstream “news” sources, which avoided the hearing like the plague.

I ask: Is this accurate? What happened here? Who or what could have flipped votes like this? Who was responsible? How does this occur? Is this real? Does this not have the potential to remove Pennsylvania from Joe Biden’s column? At the least, should it make the Pennsylvania vote uncertifiable for either Biden or Trump?

Trump’s critics will want to dismiss the hearings as a partisan spectacle hosted by Pennsylvania Republican legislators. You can’t do that. A real journalist would see enough here to at least merit making some phone calls or sending a few emails. It’s not rocket science, press boys and girls. Do your jobs!

For the record, likewise egregious voter spikes have reportedly occurred in Michigan, Georgia, and Wisconsin. One analysis has targeted these four incidents of “voter updates”:

1. An update in Michigan listed as of 6:31AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 141,258 votes for Joe Biden and 5,968 votes for Donald Trump

2. An update in Wisconsin listed as 3:42AM Central Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 143,379 votes for Joe Biden and 25,163 votes for Donald Trump

3. A vote update in Georgia listed at 1:34AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 136,155 votes for Joe Biden and 29,115 votes for Donald Trump

4. An update in Michigan listed as of 3:50AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 54,497 votes for Joe Biden and 4,718 votes for Donald Trump

Likewise, these incidents could have flipped the respective state into Joe Biden’s win column. I could go on and on. See the affidavit of Russell Ramsland of Allied Security Systems detailing the numerous instances of “physical improbabilities” in the voting tabulations (and election results) in Michigan. If your mind and heart is open, you can’t but be shocked by this.

But back to Pennsylvania, which is my focus here.

Could some reporter at some mainstream media outlet — one with a modicum of journalistic integrity and decency — pause to take some time to try to determine if these claims are accurate? Could just one “journalist” with access to Joe Biden ask for his reaction? How long would it take for Donald Trump to be grilled by a pack of ravenous reporters if Joe Biden had been potentially victimized like this?

And given that the media will not give these claims a hearing, could the U.S. Senate give them a hearing? There’s enough here that demands investigation.

Whether you like Donald Trump or not, whether you voted for him or not, this should concern every American. If this were Joe Biden being victimized, I would likewise protest. The media sure as heck would. This is not right.

UPDATE 12/1/2020: A paragraph has been removed that detailed Waldren’s allegations of a 766,000-vote discrepancy in mail-in ballots. That data has since been corrected, and the apparent discrepancy explained.




To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/2/2020 5:31:11 AM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Hawkmoon
Jack Jackson

  Respond to of 1193
 
Why Cyber Experts Are Checking Fraud in These Six Counties

deepcapture.com




To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/3/2020 4:12:50 PM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Hawkmoon
pheilman_

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1193
 



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/3/2020 6:15:04 PM
From: FJB3 Recommendations

Recommended By
Hawkmoon
pheilman_
SirWalterRalegh

  Respond to of 1193
 
ELECTION FRAUD ON AN INDUSTRIAL SCALE



This looks like election fraud on a mass scale.



Fulton officials throw everyone out of the room and start counting ballots in secret.


For 2 hours. 3,000 ballots per hour per machine.


Multiple machines.


The margin in Georgia is 12,000. You do the math,




To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/3/2020 6:21:58 PM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Hawkmoon
pheilman_

  Respond to of 1193
 
Sean Davis Retweeted




To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/4/2020 9:56:38 PM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Hawkmoon

  Respond to of 1193
 
INCREDIBLE VIDEO...




To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/5/2020 2:20:58 PM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Hawkmoon

  Respond to of 1193
 

Amistad Project argues in new report that Electoral College deadlines are not set in stone

By Just the News staff

The Amistad Project of the non-partisan Thomas More Society released a white paper on Friday making the case that current Electoral College deadlines are arbitrary and not set in stone, contrary to what most news outlets have reported.

The white paper says that these deadlines — Dec. 8 for disputes to be resolved and Electors to be determined, and Dec. 14 for the Electoral College to meet in person and vote in their respective states — are a "direct impediment to states' obligations to investigate disputed elections."

According to the Amistad Project press release, the paper examines the history of Electoral College deadlines, which "are not only elements of a 72-year old federal statute with zero Constitutional basis, but are also actively preventing the states from fulfilling their constitutional — and ethical — obligation to hold free and fair elections. Experts believe that the primary basis for these dates was to provide enough time to affect the presidential transition of power, a concern which is fully obsolete in the age of internet and air travel."

Phill Kline, the director of the Amistad Project, argues in this paper that the Dec. 8 "safe harbor" deadline does not apply when there have been "flagrant violations of state election laws" that have "affected the outcome of the popular vote."

The Amistad Project has filed litigation in several of the swing states, where they argue that "more than 1.2 million potentially fraudulent ballots" were the result of illegal conduct by state and local officials. They say that in each of the disputed swing states "the number of potentially fraudulent ballots far exceeds the margin separating the leading presidential candidate."

According to the white paper, the only date in the election process set by the Constitution is "the assumption of office by the President on January 20."

"Because the U.S. Constitution places ultimate authority for designating presidential Electors in the hands of state legislatures," the paper argues, "it is the responsibility of the people's elected representatives to judge the relevant facts and appoint an appropriate slate of Electors, subject only to the sole deadline set forth in the U.S. Constitution — 12:00 noon on January 20, 2021."



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/6/2020 9:38:24 PM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Hawkmoon
SirWalterRalegh

  Respond to of 1193
 
Mark Levin: SCOTUS should rule that what Pennsylvania did is unconstitutional

Mark Levin: Pennsylvania's electors are tainted



Mark Levin on how left-wing Pennsylvania leaders CHEATED and FIXED the system to help Democrats



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/7/2020 11:34:00 AM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Hawkmoon

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1193
 
thefederalist.com

The Georgia Vote-Counting Video Was Not 'Debunked.' Not Even Close
Mollie Hemingway

A Big Tech-backed “fact” “checking” outfit claimed to debunk explosive evidence in support of Republicans’ claims of significant election problems at a Thursday Georgia Senate hearing. It didn’t. Not even close.

Newly discovered security footage from Georgia’s State Farm Arena showed dozens of ballot counters, media, and Republican observers leaving en masse at the same time from the ballot-counting area for Fulton County. After they left, a small remnant of about four workers began pulling trunks containing thousands of ballots from underneath a table with a long tablecloth and running them through machines.

The footage supported claims from Republicans that they were told counting had stopped for the night, only to find out hours later that it had kept going on. You can and should watch the 12-minute portion of the testimony from Jacki Pick here.

On Friday morning, a group called Lead Stories published a “hoax alert” falsely claiming to have debunked the security video. The Washington Post, Newsweek, and other outlets followed along, criticizing non-leftist journalists for giving the video traction. In fact, none of the claims made by the Republicans were debunked.

Lead Stories’ “fact” “check” says government officials told them everything was fine with the counting, that the ballots were in “containers — not suitcases,” and that “party observers were never told to leave because counting was over for the night.”

Leaving aside whether relying solely and uncritically on government officials’ claims constitutes anything close to a “fact” “check,” let’s look at the claim that party observers were never told that counting was over for the night. In Lead Stories’ regurgitation of the government officials’ claims, only the people who cut open the absentee ballot envelopes were sent home, while ballot counters and scanners were retained and kept working — and no one told the press or other observers they were done counting.


Were Republican Poll Watchers and the Media Told Counting Had Stopped For The Night?

Georgia Republican Party Chairman David Shafer has consistently said that’s what happened at State Farm Arena, beginning hours after the election:



That claim, which he has repeated consistently, is backed by sworn affidavits from two Republican observers, who further allege they were kept an unreasonable distance from the ballots even while they were at State Farm Arena, making it completely impossible to meaningfully do their jobs. (The video, which shows the room from four different angles, fully supports the claim that poll watchers were kept away from meaningful observation of ballot handling.)

The observers say that they arrived for their observation jobs around 8 p.m. They say in the first half of the 10 o’clock hour, a woman with blonde braids who appeared to be a supervisor “yelled out” to those present in the room that they would stop working for the night and would resume in the morning. The Republican poll watchers said they asked Fulton County Elections Spokesperson Regina Waller questions about the status of the ballot count multiples times but that she refused to answer.

Lead Stories, however, says, “There was never an announcement made to the media and other observers about the counting being over for the night and them needing to leave, according to [Frances Watson, chief investigator for the Georgia Secretary of State], who was provided information by the media liaison, who was present.” While Lead Stories doesn’t name the media liaison, the media liaison who was present that night, according to the affidavits, was Regina Waller, the Fulton County public affairs manager for elections.

OK, so on the one hand you have sworn affidavits from observers saying that supervisors told ballot counters to go home for the evening shortly after 10 p.m. and a video showing everyone leaving en masse at that time. And on the other hand, you have two government officials promising that no one was told that counting was over. Is there any other evidence to consider?

Well, on election night, ABC News reported that ballot counters were sent home at the time that the Republican observers said everyone was told counting had stopped. Their source? Regina Waller:




The Republican poll watchers’ story matches this election night reporting perfectly. And it wasn’t just ABC that reported counting was being delayed. Many media outlets reported on counting delays. See, for example, “ Fulton County stopped counting absentee ballots for the night.”

Local NBC journalists on site that night independently confirmed “ they were told counting was done for the night” and given no indication it would continue before the next morning. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution even reported of a “plan” to stop scanning ballots at the same time the poll watchers said things were shut down:

They planned to stop scanning absentee ballots at 10:30 p.m. and pick it up back in the morning. No official could explain before press time why Fulton was stopping its count of absentee ballots at that time, only saying that was the procedure.

‘As planned, Fulton County will continue to tabulate the remainder of absentee ballots over the next two days. Absentee ballot processing requires that each ballot is opened, signatures verified, and ballots scanned. This is a labor-intensive process that takes longer to tabulate than other forms of voting. Fulton County did not anticipate having all absentee ballots processed on Election Day,’ the county spokeswoman wrote in a statement.

Some debunking there, guys. The video supports the claim from the affiants.

Incidentally, most of the linked stories include mention of a major election day story of a burst pipe delaying vote counting. Some even said it was reportedly a water main.

In a new affidavit, the aforementioned Watson swore, “Our investigation revealed that the incident initially reported as a water leak late in the evening on November 3rd was actually a urinal that had overflowed early in the morning of November 3rd.”

She also said that her investigation shows that the press and observers “simply left on their own,” although she later said workers put ballots underneath the table because they thought that counting was stopping for the evening. “This was done because employees thought that they were done for the night and were closing up and ready to leave,” she claimed.



Was a State Election Board Monitor Present While Partisan Observers Were Gone?


A Newsweek story quoted someone saying that Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office claimed that a designated election observer was “ at that spot all night, the entire time.” Lead Stories emphasizes that while partisan observers may not have been present, an “unnamed state election board monitor” was present:

A state election board monitor, who asked for his name not to be used due to safety concerns, told Lead Stories on the phone on December 3, 2020, that he was present at the vote counting location beginning at 11:52 p.m., after leaving briefly at earlier in the evening. He then stayed until about 12:45 a.m., when the work that night was completed.

The deputy chief investigator for the secretary of state’s office was present beginning at 12:15 a.m. November 4, he said.

The monitor only claims to have been present in the processing room from 11:52 p.m. on election night to 12:45 a.m., the following morning, or less than an hour. That means there were neither partisan monitors nor the state election board monitor for more than an hour after ballots began being scanned at 10:35 p.m.

What the “fact” “check” shows, then, is the monitor admitting he wasn’t present for much of the time in question, contrary to claims made by the Secretary of State’s office. For whatever it’s worth, the same monitor is the subject of an affidavit from another witness, devoted exclusively to concerns about the monitor’s conduct prior to the late hours on election day, according to a member of the Trump team. The claims include that he was sleeping on the job and staring at his phone.

Incidentally, Fulton County had such massive problems managing elections earlier this year that they were fined and forced into a settlement agreement that included a requirement that they be independently monitored, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

To avoid the fine, Fulton must maintain verifiable levels of operational competence by properly processing absentee ballots; keeping a force of 2,200 properly trained poll workers; providing at least 24 early voting sites; striving to process 100 voters per hour at any site; having a technical support staff member at every site; and creating a post-election audit.

The consent order also requires Fulton to regularly update the Board on its pool of poll workers.

The issue in the consent order requiring the most negotiation was over an independent elections monitor.

They agreed on Carter Jones, who spent time in Africa helping countries improve their elections…

The U.S. Department of Justice also sent an election monitor to Fulton County.

Contrary to the media impression that a state monitor is sufficient oversight, the press and partisan observers are just as if not more important. The false public claims about a pause in counting led to the departure of the press and Republican observers.

As for the deputy chief investigator who arrived at 12:15 on Nov. 4, when the ballot-scanning activities were nearly completed, the video shows the person entering the large room, glancing around, and talking on his phone. At no point have the “fact” “checkers” or other media figures asked what prompted an investigator to be dispatched to the State Farm Arena at that time.

The Trump legal team, for its part, said the Fulton County situation violated Georgia laws that require election tabulation to be open to public view. The witness affidavits say the denial of meaningful access to the counting process kept Republican observers from being able to actually observe what happened. The Republican observers, the press, and the public were kept to a roped-off area too far from the ballot activity to matter, which doesn’t comply with Georgia law, they say.



There Are Much Bigger Georgia Claims


While conspiracy theories about election fraud abound — ranging from The New York Times’ claim that there was no election fraud anywhere in the entire country to dramatic claims of a global conspiracy involving voting machines, the Trump campaign’s official claims are sober and serious. State Republican Chairman David Shafer and President Donald Trump filed a criminal complaint in state court on Friday regarding tens of thousands of votes that they say were fraudulent.

Trump and Shafer allege, for example, that votes came from:

  • 2,560 felons,
  • 66,247 underage registrants,
  • 2,423 people who were not on the state’s voter rolls,
  • 4,926 voters who had registered in another state after they registered in Georgia, making them ineligible,
  • 395 people who cast votes in another state for the same election,
  • 15,700 voters who had filed national change of address forms without re-registering,
  • 40,279 people who had moved counties without re-registering,
  • 1,043 people who claimed the physical impossibility of a P.O. Box as their address,
  • 98 people who registered after the deadline, and, among others,
  • 10,315 people who were deceased on election day (8,718 of whom had been registered as dead before their votes were accepted).
    The lawsuit further alleges that mail-in ballots received nearly no scrutiny as standards for contesting questionable ballots were made unreasonably difficult.



    A Note On Lead Stories


    The “fact” “check” was originally written by Alan Duke and Hallie Golden, although Golden’s name was removed from later versions of the story. Golden is a freelance writer whose work regularly appears in The Guardian, a left-wing publication. Duke, a CNN entertainment reporter, retired from the left-wing outlet after 26 years.

    Earlier versions of the story included a mathematical error about whether the votes that were counted after observers left State Farm Arena could have affected the outcome of the election. The authors falsely wrote that they couldn’t have, when they could have.

    Lead Stories claims it is funded by Facebook, Google, and ByteDance. The latter is the Beijing-based and China Communist Party-linked company known for TikTok. Facebook and Google have suppressed journalism deemed harmful to Trump’s 2020 election opponent Joe



    To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/8/2020 6:17:58 AM
    From: FJB2 Recommendations

    Recommended By
    Hawkmoon
    Stock Puppy

      Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1193
     
    GOD BLESS TEXAS.

    Texas Sues Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin at Supreme Court over Election Rules


    The State of Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court shortly before midnight on Monday challenging the election procedures in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin on the grounds that they violate the Constitution.



    SNIP:
    Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were “voting irregularities” in these states as a result of the above.

    Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors.




    To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)12/8/2020 2:29:50 PM
    From: FJB1 Recommendation

    Recommended By
    Hawkmoon

      Respond to of 1193
     
    YES THEY DID. AND I AM NOT EVEN A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE...


    This case presents a question of law: Did the Defendant States violate the Electors Clause by taking non-legislative actions to change the election rules that would govern the appointment of presidential electors? These non-legislative changes to the Defendant States’ election laws facilitated the casting and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution. By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but their actions have also debased the votes of citizens in Plaintiff State and other States that remained loyal to the Constitution.


    Texas approached the Supreme Court directly because Article III provides that it is the court of first impression on subjects where it has original jurisdiction, such as disputes between two or more states.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/12/07/texas-sues-georgia-michigan-pennsylvania-and-wisconsin-at-supreme-court-election-rules/



    To: Hawkmoon who wrote (58)2/24/2021 6:48:57 PM
    From: FJB2 Recommendations

    Recommended By
    Hawkmoon
    Stock Puppy

      Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1193
     
    HUGE DEVELOPMENT: Georgia GOP Senate Passes Bill Requiring ID for Absentee Voting