some parts of certain states allowed ballot fixing, others did not; some parts of certain states allowed for examination of ballots, other parts of the same state did not; and in Pennsylvania alone, there were an alleged 600k ballots put in “secretly by Democrats alone.”

“All you have to do is look at statistical data and you can see that the fraud was rampant and out of control,” Giuliani said.

He also noted that, despite press reports to the contrary, his team does have plenty of evidence in the form of 100 affidavits that the media is “too lazy” to read.

John Solomon of Just the News did read them, however, and laid out some of the more compelling examples of voter fraud using some of the affidavits Giuliani mentioned, noting that “many Democrats and their allies in the traditional media argue there is no evidence of systemic voting irregularities in the Nov. 3 election, a mountain of evidence has been amassed in private lawsuits alleging there was, in fact, significant and widespread voting misconduct.”

Mail-in Ballots in Pennsylvania Were Rejected for Technical Errors at a Suspiciously Low Rate in Some Key Counties
By Shipwreckedcrew | Nov 23, 2020 8:15 PM ET

AP Photo/Julio Cortez
I have long suspected that this is the data that the Democrats wanted to keep buried long enough for some of the early lawsuits filed in Pennsylvania to burn themselves out over a lack of available evidence. That is often a problem with “election fraud” claims — most/all the evidence needed to prove the claim rests in the hands of the state officials who you are suing. Their refusal to provide data and evidence leads to the formation of conclusion that the allegations of fraud are untrue when the actual problem is that the state is keeping the evidence of fraud under wraps to protect the outcome.

This is some of the data that the Trump campaign asked for in the misguided suit brought two weeks ago in the Middle District of Pennsylvania against the Secretary of the Commonwealth and seven heavy Democrat Counties. The campaign sent interrogatories asking the following four questions and seeking a Court order that the Defendants be compelled to provide answers to the questions on an expedited basis:

County Defendants: How many mail-in ballots and absentee ballots were
counted and how many were invalidated? How many secrecy ballots were
received?
County Defendants: How many mail-in and absentee ballots lacking a signature,
lacking an inner secrecy envelope, or otherwise defective were “cured” by a
provisional ballot after you or your agents contacted a voter to inform them of the
defect in their ballot?
Secretary: When did the Secretary of State’s office become aware that the
County Election Board defendants were, prior to the election, engaged in
inspection of mail-in and/or absentee ballots and communicating to voters where
such ballots were deemed defective?
Secretary: Describe how you became aware that the County Election Board
defendants were, prior to the election, engaged in inspection of mail-in and/or
absentee ballots and communicating to voters where such ballots were deemed
defective and all steps you took to ensure that uniform procedures were being
followed throughout the State.
The spreadsheet linked is on John Solomon’s website JustTheNews. It does not state where the source data came from, and some of the numbers do not coincide with the information I’ve seen elsewhere — but I have no reason to believe one set of numbers over another.

Today, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court may have answered some of these questions, as it upheld the decision of many County Boards of Election to count mail-in ballots that had technical errors in the manner in which the voter completed the information called for on the outside of the mailing envelope. So, for example, the Trump campaign was challenging the decision of the Philadephia County Board of Elections to count 8,329 ballots with such errors, rather than reject them and not include them in the vote tally. According to Solomon’s spreadsheet, Philadelphia County rejected only 228 ballots TOTAL, while counting over 8,300 ballots with some defect. In its ruling, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court said it was acceptable for the County Boards of Election to interpret the requirements in a fashion that favored counting the votes of lawfully registered voters even if their mail-in ballots had minor deficiencies.

But these minor deficiencies are different from the failure to include the inner security sleeve, which the Supreme Court has previously ruled were required for a vote to be validly counted.

Since Philadephia County received 346,196 mailed-in ballots, and only 288 were rejected, Philadelphia County should be able to show that it has 345,968 inner sleeve security sleeves, since every valid mail-in ballot must have arrived inside an inner security sleeve.

For some reason, I suspect that Philadephia County won’t be able to do that. //

A total of 450 were rejected ballots out of about 1.3 million mailed-in ballots received in those counties. That is a rejection rate of .0003%.

Such numbers are simply ludicrous and defy belief.

The report urges election officials to use machines relying on voter-marked paper ballots and pair those with “statistically rigorous post-election audits” to verify the outcome of elections reflects the will of voters. The authors also warn that supply chain issues “continue to pose significant security risks,” including cases where machines include hardware components of foreign origin, or where election administrators deploy foreign-based software, cloud, or other remote services. The report lands as officials in several states are working to upgrade election equipment, and as lawmakers in Washington, D.C. debate federal election security legislation and funding. //

Ultimately, the report notes flaws that have been acknowledged for years.

“As disturbing as this outcome is, we note that it is at this point an unsurprising result,” the authors conclude. “However, it is notable—and especially disappointing—that many of the specific vulnerabilities reported over a decade earlier…are still present in these systems today.”

Overall, the data continues to show that Trump did better more broadly across the country, while Biden overperformed in a very small segment of people: Old, White, men. //

Either Biden was “elected” by entitled, white leftists, or there were fraudulent activities (or both). Biden’s win in every state analyzed to this point, Biden underperformed Obama in the majority of counties, sometimes not even factoring for population growth. This idea that Biden’s potential election was a mandate is hogwash. In fact, absent 70,000 votes in 10 counties in three states, Trump would have been reelected. When factored for all counties that match these giant jumps in performance for Biden, Trump not only would have won, he likely would have picked up Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Arizona.

Maria Romanetti
@WriterRomana
·
Nov 12
1) I'm getting so sick of responding to all these "no evidence" Tweets with all the statistical & other evidence I've collected up from so many of you, I'm making one big thread that U and anybody else can use as their response.

Affiants also swore to have seen suspiciously pristine, uncreased mail ballots, uniformly and perfectly filled out

Appeals Courts — including the Supreme Court — do not generally take up matters without a factual record. You don’t call witnesses and take testimony in the Appeals Court or the Supreme Court. So if you want the Supreme Court to consider what witnesses have to say about what happened in the seven Pennsylvania Counties that have been named as defendants, that needs to happen in the district court where today’s hearing took place.

The ONLY goal today was to keep this case alive long enough to have the evidentiary hearing on the preliminary injunction that was scheduled to take place later in the week. Witnesses would have testified and been cross-examined under oath. But Judge Brann canceled that hearing today — which is not a good sign.

The argument today needed to be good enough to convince Brann to let that factual record be established BEFORE he dismisses the case on standing grounds — which I’m pretty sure he is going to do. That is actually what the Trump side wants because that pushes the case quicker out of the trial court and into the appeals courts, and an effort can be made to seek SCOTUS review immediately. This would be rare, but possible given that the clock is running on the inauguration date for the next president.

But, the case going forward to those other courts needs to have a factual record established as to WHAT HAPPENED in those Pennsylvania counties with regard to illegal pre-canvassing of ballots, and the use of that information to “cure” invalid ballots. At this point, the Trump Campaign has no hard factual data on how many ballots were involved. It needs to get that information from the defendants, and it is going to need the Court’s processes — subpoenas, an evidentiary hearing, and discovery — to get that information. //

Chris2
13 hours ago
Rudy made the standing arguments very well. Brann's question to Ds was that he didn't understand how Ps don't have standing; he said he didn't understand why this wrong did NOT have a remedy (according to them). Highlight of hearing was when Rudy pointed out co-counsel was plaintiff in 3rd circuit case that held candidate had standing. Rudy was very sharp - don't trust those who did NOT hear arguments attempt to rate Rudy. //

Chris2
13 hours ago
PS Brann invited Rudy to file a response to new motion to dismiss. He also said original motion to dismiss was MOOT - which was precisely what all Ds briefs had denied. That is, Brann dismissed the Ds main argument, explicitly & implicitly. He told Ds to file a reply brief - why? Didn't they already win? Reply briefs are optional, so why did Brann want one? //

"He who hath made all men hath made the truths necessary to human happiness obvious to all.
Heaven hath trusted us with the management of things for eternity, and man denies us ability to judge of the present, or to know from our feelings the experience that which will make us happy. One day we will restore the Sovereign, to whom alone men ought to be obedient. He reigns in Heaven, and beholds with a propitious eye his children assuming that freedom of thought, and dignity of self direction which HE bestowed on them. From the rising to the setting sun, May his kingdom come. " -- Sam Adams

So that thing that wasn’t supposed to happen even once according to the left has now happened three times.

Now, a third county has found votes that failed to be tabulated previously in the election. Once again, most of them are votes for President Donald Trump. //

So it sounds similar to the cases of Floyd County and Fayette County , as we reported, who both found thousands of votes which had not been uploaded. Overall, they’ve found more than 5,000 missing votes, most for the president. That’s cut Biden’s lead down to 12,929 and continues to wave a big flag as to how everything has been conducted when you find issues like this.

The Secretary of State called the Floyd County error “human error” and “gross negligence” then said he thought the Floyd County election manager should resign. He hasn’t made such a call as to the other two counties as of yet. The Floyd County GOP chair blamed the Dominion system as we previously reported.

This shows once again the importance of having an audit of the vote and shows there’s obviously a big problem with either with the system or the failure to upload votes when you have three counties having the same issue. This is just counting the votes, imagine what mistakes there may have been in verifying signatures.

According to the Detroit News, the Wayne County Board of Canvassers deadlocked 2-2 Tuesday along party lines on whether to certify the Nov.3. election results, thereby not certifying the election results.

The reason they did so was because the absentee ballot poll books of 70% of Detroit’s absentee counting boards were discovered to be out of balance, and there was no explanation for the why.

Republicans celebrated the decision as caring about transparency and truth, Democrats flipped out claiming the objections were politics.

Chairwoman Monica Palmer, a Republican, said based on what she saw and found in the poll books, “I believe that we do not have complete and accurate information in those poll books.”

But the Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson said that the state would step in. //

Democrats like Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) blamed, what else, racism for the decision by Republicans while Republican John James said Republicans were just calling for free and fair elections that could be trusted. //

Kayla Ruble
@RubleKB
In a late night twist, the Wayne County Board of Canvassers unanimously agrees to certify the results, on the condition Secretary of State’s office conduct a comprehensive audit of the unexplained, out of balance precincts across the county. //

Now in the end, an audit may actually turn out to be better, assuming that the state does a real audit. Because they were just going to go around the Republican vote anyway and certify it anyway. This way they are actually going to have to explain the irregularities.

Ivan Pentchoukov
@IvanPentchoukov
·
Nov 18, 2020
Georgia poll manager says voting machines arrived at her precinct unsealed, unlocked, serial numbers not matching the documentation and "the green bar coded tags that are supposed to cover the door covering the memory card was broken."

Source: https://courtlistener.com/docket/18632787/6/4/wood-v-raffensperger/ //

Ivan Pentchoukov
@IvanPentchoukov
Scott Hall is 5th witness alleging the same anomaly: hundreds of mail ballots without creases and perfectly marked bubbles that appear to not have been mailed. (Mail ballots are folded in order to be placed in an envelope.)

Same witness went to a different Georgia county the next day and observed the same anomaly during the recount.

"All of these ballots had the same two characteristics: they were all for Biden and had the same perfect black bubble." //

Robin Hall is the 6th witness who saw perfectly marked mail-in ballots, with some batches 100% for Biden, which appear to have been printed rather than filled out by someone at home.

Hall shared a spreadsheet of the box numbers in questions.

this crosstab graphic shows a full two-thirds of registered voters think some voter fraud occurred in their state. //

In all, 81 percent of Trump supporters believe there was enough fraud to influence the election, with only a paltry 3 percent of Biden supporters agreeing. But, interestingly, 59 percent of Biden supporters think fraud DID occur.

Laocoon etbass
15 hours ago edited
Good precis on the EC...but division into political parties was nearly instantaneous with the birth of the Republic.

George Washington hated it but Jefferson and Hamilton didn't. Adams had a personal friendship with Jefferson and he appreciated Jefferson's brilliance as articulated in the declaration. However Adams appreciated most of Hamilton's policy. Adams instinctively preferred a strong national government along with other Federalists.

But while Adams retained a good personal appreciation of the talents of Jefferson...even as they became serious rivals...he simultaneously developed a lasting personal loathing of Hamilton. For all of Adams' support of Hamilton's policy...he also saw Hamilton as the scheming tool of moneyed NY interests. An embodiment of NYC greed which did very well under British occupation for most of the Revolution while the Army starved and other American cities like Charlestown and Philadelphia suffered the ravages of 18th century war. And Washington...seeing things as they WERE instead of how he preferred them...tolerated reality but constantly tempered passions between Hamilton's and Jefferson's factions while he was in office. From nearly the first minute of the Adams Presidency...the division into parties exploded and America has never looked back.

The "prominent men" you speak of quickly divided them into reliable Democratic-Republicans or Federalists. Almost overnite.

1
−
Avatar
Miss Magpie etbass
19 hours ago edited
thank you , for the history of it , is illuminating,
perhaps you will see more "faithless" ones this time around, if you ever get there

“[I]f the Trump campaign is premature in claiming a deceased electorate, the Biden campaign is premature in claiming Donald Trump is deceased in the race. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has referred to him in the past tense and Joe Biden as president-elect. Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney called on the president to “put his big boy pants on” and concede like Al Gore even after local officials said they were still counting votes.” //

“We are finishing only the second of four stages of the election. After the voting stage, states entered the tabulation stage. We will soon begin the canvass stage, in which local districts confirm their counts and can face challenges or recounts. Finally, there is the certification stage, for which final challenges can be raised. Trump is not deceased just yet. //

“One thing, however, is abundantly clear: This is no way for any developed nation to hold elections. After the divisive 2000 election, Washington did what it always does. It created a commission that took two years and resulted in the Help America Vote Act.” //

remember what the Democrats also told us, pre-election?

Remember the picture they painted about how Trump might lead on election night; he might very well declare victory as a result, but as mail-in ballots would continue to be counted in the days after the election, Biden would ultimately emerge the victor? Why it’s “almost” like they had it all planned out. “Almost” as if they knew what would happen.

What these provisions amount to is an effort by Elias and the DNC to “prep the battlefield.” They know the DNC is preparing to engage in widespread efforts to dramatically increase the use of absentee ballots across the country to drive up Democrat party turnout in 2020 — this was the plan before COVID-19 fell into their lap as the perfect vehicle to justify “vote-by-mail.”

The goal was to create a system that was so onerous and burdensome that it worked as a disincentive to rejecting ballots based on mismatched signatures. The goal was to neutralize the “signature matching” requirement as a brake on fraudulent mail-in balloting.

This same process may work equally well in other states, but systemic ballot fraud is quite easy in Nevada if there are election officials willing to allow it to be perpetrated.

Registering to vote in Nevada is not much different than any other state — but the registration process in Nevada requires no step that actually seeks to establish the applicant’s right to lawfully cast a ballot in Nevada. //

What Joecks reveals in his column today is that Clark County records show that 8 of the 9 ballots were accepted, and the votes were recorded after going through the automated “signature matching” process used in Clark County to verify the mailed-in ballot as legitimate.

That is an 89% failure rate of the “signature matching” safeguard that state and county election officials in Nevada — and elsewhere — have assured everyone is a basis upon which to rely on their claims that no “systemic” fraud impacted the outcome of the November 3, 2020 election.. //

Several thousand votes separate Biden and Trump in Nevada. But with a “verification” system that is meaningless, that number of votes could be produced with very little effort if there was an organized and deliberate desire to do so.

Fraud and violations of the election code are two distinct problems, yet there has been little analysis of the latter, which might be more significant. //

Violations of the election code, however, are a different matter, and unfortunately, sometimes the public views election officials’ bending of the rules as a harmless ignoring of technicalities. //

That makes technical violations constitutionally significant because Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 grants state legislatures the ultimate authority to appoint the electors who choose the president: “Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.” //

So, if the legislative branch mandates voter signatures, or verification of signatures, or internal secrecy sleeves, or counting only in the presences of poll-watchers from each party, it is no answer to say it is a technicality and not fraud at issue. The state legislatures, through the election code, define the validity of votes, and allowing state officials or courts to read those provisions out of the law raises serious questions under Article 2 of the Constitution.

Jenna Ellis
@JennaEllisEsq
·
Nov 9, 2020
Replying to @JennaEllisEsq
➡️Dems egregious conduct, evidenced by sworn statements, is misconduct including ignoring legislative mandates concerning mail-in ballots which amounted to more than 2.6M of the approx 6.75M votes in PA.
➡️PA officials also mailing second unsolicited mail-in ballots to voters
Jenna Ellis
@JennaEllisEsq
Conclusion: Pennsylvania is irredeemably compromised.

Team Trump asking for an order prohibiting certification of results. //

The discussion about what types of fraud, and how much, is important because it goes to the very heart of election integrity, and our system cannot stand without trust in the outcome. That argument, however, won’t decide the Pennsylvania case from a legal standpoint. It will come down to whether a ministerial appointee of Pennsylvania’s executive branch can work with Pennsylvania’s judicial branch to subvert the expressed will of the legislature, and hastily put in place an election process wherein citizens who chose to vote differently had their votes disparately treated. //

For conservatives, an intellectual challenge now presents itself: If you were OK with the Supreme Court stopping the Florida recount in 2000, you need to prepare yourself to be comfortable with the same court invalidating the Pennsylvania electors. Indeed, you should want them to, whether or not there was underlying direct fraud sufficient enough to affect the outcome. Alternatively, you should start working on your tortuous rationale for why, on constitutional grounds, what was legitimate in 2000 is not legitimate in 2020.

Michigan GOP lawmakers are asking the secretary of state to issue a full audit of the general election votes before the state certifies the results.

Considering these five facts about the election, it's no wonder Biden failed to achieve a landslide victory — and one might say it's curious that he'd achieve victory at all. //

No incumbent president has ever lost re-election with numbers such as these.

All of these numbers have historically contributed to a victory for an incumbent president. Considering them, it’s no surprise Biden didn’t win in a landslide, but that they did not produce a win for Trump in 2020 is almost unbelievable.

If this goes forward, all it will do is bake in the results of the shenanigans pulled by the Democrat machine in Atlanta and in Fulton County which seems to have had a helluva lot of “good luck” in handing a “win” to Joe Biden. Worse, it won’t even provide the political cover the legislature would need to right the situation by certifying its own slate of electors to offset the ill-gotten gains in this election.

At some point the people we elect need to understand that the purpose of being elected to office is to govern in a way that forwards the policy objectives of your party. Nothing is being served in allowing the Democrats to not only get away with this but providing them with an Immunity Idol in the process.