All
U.S. citizens need to understand what conservatives mean when they say
that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from President Trump and
the American People.
The claim of theft has never been disproven because of the
extraordinary circumstances of what happened and didn’t happen in 2020.
The election was not “stolen” in the typical fashion. In 2020, it was
not the counting of the votes that is in dispute, but who counted the
votes, which votes were counted, and who looked away and why.
How the 2020 campaign was stolen comes down to two indisputable facts
How the 2020 campaign was stolen comes
down to two indisputable facts: the election rules were changed in the
middle of the campaign and there was no systemic, exhaustive
investigation by federal authorities or the courts to disprove that it
wasn’t “stolen.”
Consider, for example, that Robert Mueller investigated allegations
Into Russian interference into the 2016 presidential election, but no
special counsel was appointed to investigate the 2020 election, which
was marked by credible accusations of irregularities. Why was there no
attempt to determine whether Democrat Party officials had conducted
operations to undermine the integrity of the election? Because the Deep
State favors the first type of investigation to maintain its power, and
not the latter which wants to break it.
The Mueller Report did not find sufficient evidence that the Trump
campaign “coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its
election-interference activities.” Absent a similar investigation into
the 2020 campaign, election fraud has been suggested, but never
thoroughly disproved, either by an investigation by the Department of
Justice or by the Supreme court which cravenly decided not to hear
numerous appeals by the Trump administration.
The Media and Leftist politicians have continually claimed that
allegations of voter and election fraud are “baseless” and/or
“unfounded.” Anybody who holds the belief that the 2020 election was
illegitimate has been branded a “Far Right” extremist, akin to those who
oppose the federal government mandating vaccinations, i.e., making the
health care choices for Americans. Forcing medical care on unwilling
adult Americans is a clear violation of the right to privacy in the
Constitution and which cannot be abridged. Mandating the infliction of
health care on Americans is the definition of government tyranny.
There is only one issue before the country that can save the United States from ruin: Election Integrity.
We need a new national law that voting must be done in person, on
Election Day, and people must present a valid ID, and absentee ballots
can only be “requested” by individuals because the threat of voter fraud
from “mailed out” ballots is so pronounced that it cannot be allowed
anywhere. Without Election integrity in every state, the Constitutional
principle of One Person, One Vote is violated. Voter fraud in
Philadelphia deprives constitutional liberties to individuals in Iowa.
The vote “harvesting” that Democrats test drove in 2018 in southern California was expanded to include all the United States
The 2020 Election was stolen because the
rules of the election were changed in midstream due to the alleged
Covid-19 pandemic. Extra-legal election edicts occurred in several
states with Democratic governors and secretaries of state, in
Pennsylvania, dramatically, expanding suffrage and complicit lower court
judges immediately approving their voting rules. According to the
website, factcheck.org, Biden won 76% of the mail-in vote in Pennsylvania, and 65 percent in Georgia.
The vote “harvesting” that Democrats test drove in 2018 in southern
California was expanded to include all the United States. This is a
reasonable accusation because the number of absentee ballots counted
which had held steady in the 2008, 2012, and 2016 presidential elections
at around 30 million, exploded by more than 130 percent to 70 million
votes recorded in 2020. Never had there been allegations that whole
trays of absentee ballots were dropped in collection boxes in Democrat
cities, when theoretically only one absentee ballot is allowed to be
cast at a time.
Incredibly, the number of accepted ballots rose from 98.4 percent and
99 percent in the 2018 and 2016 elections, respectfully, to a 99.4
percent acceptance rate in 2020, indicating that nearly all the absentee
ballots had been “cured” by Democrat officials to make them countable
votes.
As recently as 2012, even the New York Times agreed that voting in
person is more reliable, particularly since election administrators made
improvements to voting equipment after the 2000 presidential election.
Nevertheless, Democrats created new voting rules in 2020 that propelled
Joe Biden to victory. The main suspicion: Biden support in Phoenix,
Philadelphia, Milwaukee, and Atlanta was outsized to similar
constituencies in other parts of the United States. Again, no
significant forensic investigation was undertaken by the federal
government to approve or disprove this assertion.
Biden votes created from thin air
Biden votes created from thin air is
even more likely considering he ran nearly no campaign whatsoever but
received more than 81 million votes, the most ever, more even than
President Obama did. Biden’s tally of votes seems suspect given that
eight months into his presidency in his extremely low approval ratings.
But again, no substantive investigation has taken place to prove or
disprove anything, hence the obvious justification to the claim that the
election was stolen, and it could only be considered “not stolen” had a
real investigation occurred or the Supreme Court had heard all the
legal challenges and made its own ruling.
This predicament has created the untenable situation in which two
thirds of Republicans tell pollsters they believe the election was
stolen. That means 50 million Americans do not have faith in our
supposed “free and fair” elections. This in effect, creates a
constitutional crisis and a dire threat to the stability of the country.
Election Integrity is the civil rights issue of our time, because once a
significant portion of the public loses faith in the democratic
process, anarchy cannot help but be around the corner.
So, yes, Virginia, the 2020 president election was stolen because
perception is reality, and there is no substantive investigation or
court case to prove that it wasn’t.
What is wrong with Democrats?
Well, how much time do you have? The key issue is Dem’s lawless and
manic decisions, threatening America in the name of their own petty
goals. Leftism proposes that radical politicians can also represent
everyday Americans. But the average American wants a stable and
well-paying job, low inflation, cheap energy, police protection, and
strong resistance to foreign enemies. But leftists will sacrifice any
and all of the above to maneuver America into a weakened posture to
therefore pursue their dream—an international utopian superstate. For
example, how does allowing 2.5 million unvetted illegals immediate entry
directly help the USA?
Liberals Don’t Believe in Laws
The belief there are no rules for human
behavior is called Nihilism (nile-ism). Nietszche described nihilism as
the state where “everything is permitted.” The fact American Democrats
are nihilists is deducted by simple observation of their actions. For
example, no one can claim legalizing 60 million murders of unborn humans
is ethical or moral, let alone a “human right.” Stanley Rosen, in Nihilism,
beautifully sums up the dilemma by stating in nihilism, each human
becomes a god, declaring their own truths, but is unable to prove their
beliefs are actually true. Therefore, nihilism implies the only antidote
to lawlessness is God.
How to Fight Dems?
So what can be done regarding the countless transparently harmful
actions Democrats engage in now? First, Americans must learn US history,
the Constitution and Rights, and everyday logic. Concurrently,
Republicans and Patriots must call out these actions and explain exactly
why what Democrats are doing is unconstitutional and how exactly it is
harmful. These must be detailed briefly and succinctly. We must contact
our representatives and senators, file complaints, and take the
government to court. Most of all we must become better educated on our
history and government to win every debate. For the fight we are engaged
in will decide the future of our country.
Dem’s Propaganda:
Dems don’t explain why they engage in extreme destructiveness, outside
offering infuriating excuses, such as “loving foreign immigrants,” or
“fighting global warming.” So the President states he’s “running out of
patience” for Americans to get vaccinated while he concurrently sends
millions of untested, unvaccinated, Covid sick illegals across the US
this year. One reason Democrats operate this way is because their
motivations are wholly objectionable, being un-American and illiterate
policies leading to disaster. But another reason is as follows. Leftists
believe in the idea of “failing upwards,” where every US mistake is
beneficial to socialists dreaming that humanity is destined for a
utopian world social-state. Sadly, Democrats believe their dreams can
only be achieved by an American collapse.
Using Real Evil to Destroy Fake Disasters:
Democrats offer as their greatest evils dramatic, unprovable “facts”
like “Global Warming” destroying the earth, or desperately battling
contrived catastrophes like “racial injustice.” Gen Milley’s anecdotal
war on “White Privilege” explains why he botched our Afghanistan exit
but defended phoning China to warn about Trump. In fact, since Democrats
don’t believe truth exists, they constantly concoct one lie after
another to mislead America. But recall Dostoyevski’s warning that if God doesn’t exist everything is possible.
As Democrats are America’s worst threat, we must stand against them
while planning for a society that offers genuine justice without
propagandizing our brothers into a war against each other in their
crazed battle for Utopia. In the midst of national catastrophes, only a
good God can save a lost America, as we’ve known and experienced since
our beginning at Plymouth Rock.
“According to Powell, on the very day of January 6, there was one
last-ditch legal effort that might have stopped the certification of
disputed electoral slates by the Congress: A legal challenge to the
Electoral Count Act, a 130-year-old law that governs the actual
electoral college process,” Peters explained. “This law gives both the
House and Senate explicit roles in evaluating electoral slates, even
though the 12th Amendment to the Constitution only gives the House a
role in choosing the President. The Senate is only involved in choosing a
vice president.”
“So Powell brought a lawsuit to overturn that law but only filed
it the afternoon of January 6, while a bunch of people was trampling
through the capitol,” he added. “That riot might have played to her
advantage by delaying the final resolution of the election, but then
Nancy Pelosi one-upped her by reconvening Congress and finishing the
tally in the middle of the night. The next day, Supreme Court Justice
[Samuel] Alito dismissed the case, but it might have been different
according to Powell if the election wasn’t already over.”
“We were filing a 12th amendment constitutional challenge to the
process that the Congress was about to use under the electoral act,
provisions that simply don’t jive with the 12th Amendment to the United
States Constitution,” she stated. “And Justice Alito was our circuit
justice for that, Louie Gohmert was the plaintiff in our lawsuit, and we
were suing the vice president to follow the 12th Amendment as opposed
to the… Electoral College Act.”
a
“So
that was the main point, and Nancy Pelosi had finagled to file an
amicus brief in it there have been inside goings-on in Congress, whereby
I believe it was Steve Scalise and [Kevin] McCarthy kept her from being
an actual party,” Powell explained. “She wanted to work her way into
the case of the party, but somehow politically, that didn’t happen. So
she got noticed when we made our filing because she wanted to file an
amicus brief, or had filed an amicus brief, and then, you know,
everything broke loose, and she had to really speed up reconvening
Congress to get the vote going before Justice Alito might have issued an
injunction to stop at all, which is what should have happened.”
Peters responded to this by saying, “you wouldn’t still be
fighting for this if you didn’t see that there was a light at the end of
the tunnel, the tunnel for accountability to happen here in this
country. And you have to believe that that’s going to happen, or you
wouldn’t still be fighting, is that right?”
“It must happen, or we’re gone as a country,” she replied. “I
mean, for me, this isn’t about the person that was in the office of the
presidency. It’s about the republic itself. It’s about the truth that
the American people are entitled to. They were robbed of their choice.
The American people were cheated of their choice as President,
regardless of what his name was, they were flat out cheated of their
choice as President.”
“And
it’s about the rule of law, the truth and the very essence of our
Republic, because without a transparent voting system, which we haven’t
had, frankly, since 2004, if not before, in fact, we’ve uncovered
evidence that there was a fraud way back in 2000, with the paper ballots
to try to push everyone into the computerized systems, which only made
it worse and made it harder to detect,” Powell continued. “We must go
back to paper ballots. We must go back to real citizen identification
and simply hand counting the ballots. It’s less time-consuming, it’s
less expensive, and it’s far more accurate than what we’ve just
experienced.”
“And we have to have some kind of certified ballot system like we
used to have also, none of this prints your own ballot, whenever you
want to and stuff 50 album in a box or whatever, whether it’s
computerized or a box put out by Mr. Zuckerberg and company,” she
concluded. “One of the very troubling things is that the media is so
much in cahoots with Dominion and everyone that’s behind this voting
scam. I think it goes much broader and much deeper than I originally
realized, including aspects of the government. Because they have known
about this since at least 2004 and failed to stop it if not absolutely
augmented it themselves.”
This is just the beginning. Democrats won’t get away with this.
As we all prepare to vote in the District 51 school board race it is
time to really dig in to who these candidates are. Ballots should be
arriving in the mail any day. Parents and other citizens need to know
that they can vote for all three of the district seats that need to be
filled. What I have found after looking into the different school board
candidates is that three of them Trish Marhe, Nick Allen, and David
Combs, are being endorsed and funded by the teachers union and may be
hiding something.
We have seen quite a few times how candidates
in Mesa County run their campaigns. They say conservative sounding pat
answers that seem like they may care about the issues the way the
majority does in Mesa county. Many residents fall for it because they
see their nice websites, ads, and endorsements from some moderate people
around town. On top of that, the main news paper in town The Daily
Sentinel is biased. It gives far more positive coverage of certain
candidates over others. When you dig into their past you see that they
have either deleted many of their social media posts and that they work
for political organizations. The paper trail is there but the average
Mesa County resident is not taking the time to look. We have found that
to be true about these candidates. Nick Allen, for example, deleted all
of his posts about supporting the Black Lives Matter organization
before running.
Even when hiding their real positions from the public it is difficult
for a Democrat/left leaning individual to get elected in Mesa County,
but that is not true with the school board. The school board has been
dominated by the teachers union, and a left leaning school board for
years. With the school board many times in the past these candidates ran
completely unopposed. That is not true any more. There are now 4
candidates challenging the teachers unions 3 left leaning candidates.
I
know that school board races generally are not supposed to be partisan.
Candidates don’t even display their political affiliation as they are
running. Unfortunately, national politics has spilled into our schools
even at the lowest levels. Kids are being taught to be social justice
warriors and given hyper-sexual assignments by their left leaning
teachers at younger and younger ages. We recently had one of these
events in district 51 that turned into a viral social media post and a parental protest.
During the 2020 election cycle, my son described to me how there was a
group of 1st grade kids at one elementary school walking around verbally
attacking and getting into physical altercations with kids that they
had deemed “Trump supporters.” Yes you heard that right, 1st grade. I’m
sure that went both ways across the district.
Before I go any
further I would like to point out that I am not in any way criticizing
the teachers that are part of the district for being in the teachers
union. Most of them just want to teach kids and actually hate that
politics is getting into the school system at the level that it is. As a
side note I think the teachers need to paid more and given smaller
class sizes at this point so they can successfully do their jobs. I also
believe that kids and teachers could benefit from teachers being paid
more based on performance rather then just tenure, but that is another
discussion. Something that must be pointed out though, is that all
three candidates that the teachers union endorses, and will give funding
to, are friends and are left leaning politically. The teachers union
did not fund or endorse a single conservative candidate. It is
extremely unfortunate that the teachers are somewhat sandwiched in
between this epic battle of powerful left leaning tax funded unions and
bureaucrats vs the parents who’s kids they are effecting. The MVEA
is our local District 51 teachers union. The MVEA is the same teachers
union that has funded school board campaigns for years in Mesa County.
They then turn around and go to the table to negotiate with those same
board members for their contract. That board also selects a pro union
superintendent. I personally see all of that as major conflict of
interest. Even if there were no political implications, there are
financial implications to that relationship. The teachers union gets our
tax dollars in Mesa county and then sends some of that money up to the
NEA (It’s national affiliate) The NEA is one of the national teachers unions promoting Critical Race Theory and the 1619 project in our schools.
They use our our tax payer dollars to push radical ideologies and
curriculum that we do not want for our kids. Most people don’t think
about how this happens. Even some of the school board members seem to
think they were funded and elected “just for the kids.” They don’t seem
to realize that they are part of this circle of bureaucracy that has
taken our countries schools down the wrong path. Our tax dollars are
used to lobby on the unions behalf, fund local pro union campaigns, and
mostly fund Democrat National campaigns.
You can imagine how living in a largely conservative community and
watching your hard earned money go to politicians you do not support
could be frustrating. Especially when it comes back down through federal
policy that effects your job/business, your rights, and your children’s
schooling. It was also the NEA that Lobbied the CDC
to change its rules to include more masking during school reopening
this fall. Essentially the NEA teachers union used our money to get the
CDC to change their “scientific” recommendations for our kids just like
the ATF did earlier this year.
It is important for parents and citizens to know that the teachers
union funded candidates are also endorsed by just about every left
leaning group in Mesa County and the other 4 candidates are not. They
have recently been endorsed by The Atheist and Free Thinkers Society
proponent Ann Landman who brought Atheist and satanic literature into District 51 a few years back.
This is obviously a big red flag for most parents in Mesa County.
If Mesa Counties far left leaning organizations are endorsing them then
what else is going on that the public isn’t aware about? What are their
real goals? I think the citizens of Mesa County should seriously
consider asking those questions before they vote.
Proposes to permanently reduce the statewide property tax assessment
rate for several classes of property. The ultimate impact of the
measure hinges on whether 2021 legislation, passed by the state
legislature after the ballot initiative was submitted, will remain law.
The differing outcomes are more than $972M apart in the long run, or the
difference between a potential $1.1B revenue cut to a potential $151M
revenue cut in 2024.
If 2021 state legislation SB21-293 remains, then under Proposition 120 only residential property owners classified as multi-family will see a permanent drop in their assessment rate from 7.15% to 6.5%. Similarly, only commercial property owners classified as lodging will see a permanent drop in their commercial assessment rate from 29% to 26.4%.
If Proposition 120 is passed and the SB21-293 is ultimately overturned, then the lower rates would apply to all residential and commercial properties
As Proposition 120 only changes the statewide assessment rates, the
final revenue impacts will vary based on how individual taxing districts
adjust their mill levies.
In 2022, the first year of implementation of the lower assessment
rates, total property tax revenue would grow by an estimated $302M, or
2.5% above 2021 levels if Proposition 120 passes and SB21-293 remains.
If Proposition 120 passes and SB21-293 is struck down, local
property tax revenue would decrease an estimated $435.3M, or -3.7%,
between 2021 and 2022 levels. Colorado local government entities that
collect property tax revenue, including counties, municipalities and
school districts, have been awarded more than $4.5B in COVID relief aid
from the federal government, surpassing any projected revenue declines
in the short-term.
Overview: The Gallagher Amendment and Proposition 120
Last year, Colorado voters approved Amendment B, which abolished the
formula for determining property assessment rates established in 1982 by
the Gallagher Amendment. This, the repeal of the Gallagher Amendment,
left a void in Colorado’s property tax policy which legislators and
interest groups have begun trying to fill since then—the static
assessment rates enshrined by Amendment B in the absence of Gallagher’s
formula were never intended to hold permanently, as the removal of its
strict policy mechanism left property taxation subject to grow at the
same rate of the growth in property values. This leaves taxpayers more
vulnerable to sudden market disruptions like the recent spike in home
prices.
This year, two major efforts to change Colorado’s property tax policy
have come to prominence: Proposition 120, which aims to permanently
reduce assessment rates for almost all types of property, and SB21-293,
drafted and passed in response to Proposition 120, which, pending likely
litigation, tempers the potential impact of the proposition and
temporarily reduces some residential and commercial assessment rates.
The Two Scenarios of Proposition 120’s Passage
As it was proposed and approved for circulation, Proposition 120
would, if passed, reduce assessment rates on residential property from
7.15% to 6.5% and on all other property types, besides mining and
oil-and-gas drilling, from 29% to 26.4%. Now, due to the passage of
SB21-293, which reclassified property types, Proposition 120’s two rate
reductions would apply only to multi-family and commercial lodging
property, respectively. The proposition’s ballot language was set
inalterably before SB21-293’s passage, so the question which will appear
on the 2021 ballot incorrectly references the original rate reductions.
Whether the intentional disruption caused by SB21-293 will ultimately
apply to the implementation of Proposition 120, if it is passed, is
still unclear. The measure’s sponsors have stated publicly that they are
poised to bring litigation against the legislature which would restore
its original effects, i.e., the broad assessment rate cuts indicated in the ballot language.[i]
In this report, both of Proposition 120’s possible outcomes upon
passage are represented as scenarios and form the bases of the impact
projections:
Scenario #1: SB21-293 remains effective and Proposition 120 only lowers multi-family and commercial lodging assessment rates.
Scenario #2: SB21-293 is overruled and Proposition 120 lowers all
assessment rates except those for oil-and-gas and mining property as was
originally intended.
The tables directly below show the impacts that SB21-293 and
Proposition 120 will have on assessment rates depending upon its outcome
under scenario #1 or #2.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Impacts
Overall Revenue Projections
The fiscal impact of Proposition 120 is to directly reduce property
tax revenue to counties and districts by reducing the total assessed
value of property below baseline projections. Some counties may raise
their mill levies to offset the revenue reductions caused by lower
assessment rates, but neither CSI’s modeling nor the state’s fiscal
impact analysis includes any adjustments to mill levies necessary to
raise additionally the revenue that counties would otherwise lose. In
2024, according to CSI’s calculations, the direct revenue impact of this
proposition’s passage would be either -$150 million, under scenario #1,
or -$1,118 million, under scenario #2. SB21-293 would not change the
direction of the revenue impacts under either scenario, but it would
reduce the magnitude of the original projected impact by 86.6%. If
SB21-293’s effect upon Proposition 120 is overturned, the total property
tax revenue to Colorado counties will decrease from 2021 to 2022 by
over $435 million; if it is not, revenue will continue to grow each year
regardless of Proposition 120’s passage. The graph below shows a
baseline revenue projection alongside projections of Proposition 120’s
presumptive impact before and after the signing of SB21-293.
Figure 3
Property Class Growth Impacts
The primary difference between the impacts under the two scenarios
besides magnitude, is their distributions across property classes.
Whereas the measure under Scenario #1, with the effects of SB21-293,
would only apply to one type of property within both the commercial and
residential classes, under Scenario #2, it would apply to nearly every
property type. As a result, there is a wider range of detailed potential
revenue effects even than the total numbers suggest. The table below
summarizes the revenue impacts to the state by property class in 2022,
by scenario, compared to 2021 collections. The table details the
components of the continued revenue growth of Scenario #1 and the
first-year revenue cut of Scenario #2.
Figure 4
County Revenue Impacts
Colorado’s counties are, largely, not in dire financial straits at
the moment—federal relief aid packages approved in the last year have
sent about $2 billion to Colorado localities[ii] and another $2.5 billion to school districts and the Colorado Department of Education.[iii]
Proposition 120 would impact no county severely enough to overwhelm the
effects of this federal aid, but its passage would still decrease the
amounts of money that counties and districts can budget for future
years.
Several Colorado counties have authority to allow their property
mills to increase in response to a revenue reduction. Even in counties
other than the six which have floating county mills, nearly every school
district, together covering 99.9% of Colorado’s population, can
increase its mill levy on the basis of lowered assessment rates.
Recently, HB21-1164 repealed a schedule of property tax credits issued
by school districts which decreased the effective number of mills
charged to property within those school districts. These are not
reflected in CSI’s modeling, but will nonetheless severely temper any
revenue shortfalls which Proposition 120 would cause.
Not every county would experience the effects of Proposition 120
similarly under either passage scenario. The lost property tax revenues
would be distributed amongst Colorado’s counties unequally—if the effect
of SB21-293 endures, counties with large shares of multi-family and
lodging property will be impacted most severely by the assessment rate
reductions. Densely populated urban counties, like Denver, Boulder, and
Broomfield, and counties which rely heavily upon tourism, like Pitkin
and Eagle, would experience the greatest revenue reductions per capita;
agricultural and manufacturing counties would, likewise, be least
impacted. If the measure passes and the sponsors’ lawsuit succeeds,
conversely, the counties most impacted will be those with large
agricultural and manufacturing sectors. The table below displays these
revenue impacts in detail with respect to both outcomes; scenario #1
represents the proposition’s impacts under current law and scenario #2’s
values correspond to the impacts of Proposition 120 as written.
Figure 5
Methodology
The property tax revenue projections presented in this report are
based upon the assessed values of property by class and county published
in the Colorado Division of Local Affairs’ 2020 property tax annual
report. These values, converted into actual property values by dividing
them by the 2020 assessment rates, form the year-0 baseline and are
grown to project future years’ property values by national inflation
projections, county population growth projections, and outlier-excluding
averages of the prior 10 years’ growth rates. These projections of
total property values are multiplied by the relevant assessment rates,
multiplied by their corresponding counties’ average mill rates, and
summarized at the state and county levels for each projection year. The
projections, consistent with pre-2021 law and revenue trajectories, used
in this report only for comparative purposes, were developed from the
contemporary projections by adjusting mill levy parameters according to
the magnitude of each year’s static revenue decrease.
Maricopa County Forensic Audit Report/Arizona 9/24/2021/graphic:LollyDaskal
Arizona’s Maricopa County forensic audit report presentation
began at 4:00 EST Friday in the State Senate showing over 57,000 votes
are in question. The Maricopa audit is just one county in Arizona but it
is the fourth largest county in terms of population in the U.S. The
full report with Senate President Fann’s letter to AG Brnovich can be
found here.
Fann Letter to Brnovich/9/24/21
The independent audit team
presented their findings with Senate President Karen Fann presiding.
The Senate Republicans chose an audit team led by Cyber Ninjas CEO, Doug
Logan and Ben Cotton of CyFIR.
Data analyst and inventor, Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai also presented his
analysis of several facets of the audit, including findings on duplicate
ballots and ballot envelope images.
Senate liaisons Randy Pullen and Ken Bennett both presented. Bennett
reviewed pertinent election laws and statutes toward the end of the
presentation that could force compliance by the county to adjust the
number of votes.
Senator Peterson, also present for the hearing, spoke at the end. He
mentioned the constant obstruction to the audit, ostensibly spending, he
said, “hundreds of thousands of dollars” to fight the process
of an independent audit that was by and large supported by the citizens
of Arizona. Peterson identified many critical issues that need to be
addressed, some of which are criminal offenses:
The obstruction of the audit.
The numbers do not reconcile.
“It appears they broke the law with the duplicate ballots.”
We need to hold people accountable for the mistakes.
There are significant chain of custody issues.
Failure to preserve data files.
Cyber security weaknesses.
Signatures missing on the envelopes.
The Finding Summary Table below provides a quick overview, showing
over 57,000 illegal votes, almost 6x the margin of 10,457 votes tallied
on Nov. 3 for Biden.
Summary Finding Report/Maricopa Audit/9-24-2021
According to Patrick Byrne with the America Project:
“This audit has been the most
comprehensive and complex election audit ever conducted. It involved the
hand count of approximately 2.1 million ballots with a forensic paper
inspection and a forensic review of the voting machines. Most
important—an in-depth analysis of the voter roll and the 2020 general
election final file.”
“57,000 votes and 734 pallets with
serious issues were identified in the audit including improper voter
registration and improper voter discrepancies—this is a conservative
estimate.”
Dr. Shiva was responsible for the analysis of the ballot images which
were handed over only recently due to resistance on the part of the
County. Shiva discussed the duplicate ballots, many of which were
approved erroneously. There were 2-copy, 3- copy and 4-copy duplicate
ballots in the mix. Shiva found that there were ballots that had 2,580
“scribbles” for signatures and 1,919 with no signature at all. He then
moved to signature analysis of the EVBs (Early Voter Ballots).
Shiva Duplicates
A total of 17,126 voters sent in two or more ballots as duplicates, according to Shiva.
Duplicate Ballots Going to Signature verification/Maricopa
In many cases, blank signature duplicates came in and one of the
blank signature ballots was approved as a valid vote. Others came in
with the same address, same name, and phone number but two different voter IDs on the Early Voter Ballot EVB return envelopes.
Same name, address,phone number/different ids/Shiva
Shiva emphasized the importance of the EVBs return envelopes and the signature verification element of the process.
EVB Return Envelopes/Maricopa/Dr. Shiva
Shiva concludes that the signature verification process used in the Maricopa County Audit is unverifiable.
Dr. Shiva/Signature Process Unverifiable/Maricopa Audit
Dr. Shiva’s team found a sudden surge in duplicate ballots between
11-04-2020 and 11-09-2020. There was no mention of duplicates in the
Maricopa Canvass Report. 17,126 voters sent in two or more ballots
(duplicates). Jovan Hutton said in a post-hearing analysis:
“People were lurking in the system to
understand the counts. At any moment in time, they could adjust….they
took your legal ballots, fraudulent ballots and counterfeit ballots and
the legal ballots voted illegally. They jammed it into the system.”
Surge in Duplicate Ballots/Shiva
Doug Logan began his analysis at around 5 p.m. EST. He reviewed the
measures he and his team used to ensure that the audit was comprehensive
and secure from top to bottom. Many of the counters were local
volunteers performing their inspections to favor accuracy over speed—one
of the reasons the audit took several months.
The volunteers examined the paper at a granular level, with
microscopes to identify paper fibers, indicating the type of paper used.
Over 140 terabytes of data for the paper examination alone.
Paper Examination/Audit
Logan said that the current completed information included in the
report includes hand counts, image capture, review and analysis of voter
rolls. Not included today are the Splunk Logs and data from the
routers. Additionally, paper analysis needs to be completed. He said the
record-keeping for the audit was poor.
Current Status of Audit Report/Logan
“There were more duplicates than there were original ballots,”
said Logan, and there were numerous concerns with the duplicate ballots
in general. Missing or incorrect serial numbers, duplicate ballots
co-mingled with originals, etc.
Logan confirmed that the count alone still showed that Biden had the
most votes. A proper canvass would be needed to reconcile the multiple
irregularities that indicate the ballots counted do not reflect what
actually happened in the election. Logan also confirmed Shiva’s finding
that the EV32 files did not match the EV33 files—meaning the early voter
ballots sent (EV32s) should match the early voter ballots received
(EV33).
Duplicate Ballots/MC Audit/Ninjas
Ben Cotton/CyFIR handled the cyber security aspects of the report.
His findings were significant. His team captured over 114 terabytes of
information, mostly in the form of images of the system.
Cotton said there was “no accountability in the security measures” for the 2020 election. “It only takes one person with admin access to provide external voting access to that voting system.” The system was “neither accountable nor was it secure,” said Cotton.
Among the findings from Cotton’s team are:
Found security patches have never been updated since the Aug. 6, 2019 installation of the software.
They failed to update anti-virus definitions and failed to preserve
security logs. No malware was found on the Election Management System
(EMS).
Credential management portion of the investigation showed the county
allowed shared accounts and common, more easily hackable passwords.
Devices on the network were shown to have connected to the internet, contrary to what the county and Dominion maintained. Some of the internet activity “correlated with a purge of data on the day before the audit.”
Anonymous logins that wiped out buffers.
Someone logged in as an administrator and deleted a lot of data.
They caught on video whoever went in and did the file deletion. This is criminal and will be referred to AG Brnovich.
Cotton said the credential management in Maricopa County was
“offensive”—meaning the County showed little effort toward
accountability of the account holders who had access to the systems.
“I will tell you,” Cotton said,
“that in Maricopa County, they failed to provide or perform basic
operating system and patch management functions. All major security
vendors update their antivirus at least on a weekly basis.”
He was not allowed to look at the poll worker laptops or any ICX devices
(for handicapped people). He also stated his team was not allowed to
see credentials that would help validate the configuration settings or
the admin settings.
Security Issue/CyFIR
There were hardware configuration issues, meaning there were two hard
drives on the adjudication endpoint—not an approved configuration—a
significant finding. The previous audits done by Maricopa County did not
discover this dual-drive configuration.
“This means you can boot from a hard
drive that is not part of the election configuration and have access to
the election network. Very important. It’s clearly not part of the
[approved] election configuration and allows access to the election
network. There appeared to be non-Maricopa accounting data on one of the
bootable hard drives. There were Domininion databases and data that
appeared to have originated from Washington State and South Carolina,” said Cotton.
Hardware Configuration Issues/Dual Drives/CyFIR
Cotton also said there were thousands of file deletions from the
(EMS). Files were deleted in several time frames between the end of
October and March of 2021.
File Deletions/CyFIRFile Deletions/CyFIR
“One hundred percent of the paper is fake,” says Patrick
Byrne in a post-hearing video conference attended by Patrick Byrne, Joe
Flynn, Phil Waldron, Steve Montenegro, Seth Keshel and Jovan Hutton
Pulitzer. This was confirmed by Jovan Hutton Pulitzer in the same
discussion broadcast on The America Project.
The American Project has helped foot the cost of the audit with the
help of Patrick Byrne and donations from Americans. Byrne declared:
“The election should never have been
certified. This is not about Trump or Biden. They deleted a great deal
of data and tried to cover up election fraud. It is time for indictments
and de-certification.”
The paper issue was not covered with granularity during the hearing
but Byrne confirmed the finding regarding the paper stock used is in the
full report. Pulitzer says that proper security paper was not used—a
significant issue, if true. VoteSecure stock paper should have been used
to help avert fraud and bleed-through of voter ballot markings.
Notably, while the report was comprehensive with the information that
was made available to the Senate and the auditors, a County-run canvass
has not been performed and the auditors have yet to see routers and
Splunk logs, passwords, and hardware keys because of resistance from the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. That agreement has been reached
and the findings are forthcoming—no deadline has been mentioned by Fann
for the completion of that investigation. The Routers could provide
important data that will help paint a more accurate picture of what
happened in the County’s November 2020 election.
A canvass was originally requested by the Senate Republicans and proposed in the original contract but significant pushback
from the federal government, the Democrats, and Secretary of State
Hobbs forced Fann and the Republicans to back off from doing a canvass. A
letter
in May from Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Pamela Karlan
claimed, “potential intimidation of voters” if a canvass were to be
performed. A citizen-run canvass, led by Liz Harris and over 1000
volunteers who went door-to-door, found 173,104 “lost votes” and
“96,389” ghost votes.
Important to remember is the earlier preliminary hearing in July that
revealed multiple anomalies and raised many questions. The audit team
reported their painstaking and exacting process to deliver an accurate
accounting of the 2020 vote. They revealed in the hearing significant
issues with mail-in ballots, signature verification, thousands of
duplicate ballots with no matching serial numbers, issues with insecure
passwords, and alleged unauthorized security breaches.
UncoverDC reported in July:
There were 74,243 more ballots received than sent out—with no records attached.
11,326 people didn’t show up in election files on November 7 but
suddenly appeared on December 4, and it was recorded that they had
voted in the 2020 election.
3,981 voters were registered after October 15 who voted. It was decided in court that voters registered after that date would not be able to vote.
18,000 voters who voted were shown to have been removed right
after the election. Documentation is needed on those voters and
canvassing would help, according to Logan.
The Executive Summary shows a number of recommendations related to various facets of an election:
Recommendations from the Audit/Cyber Ninjas/9/24/2021
Rep. Mark Finchem, who held the first full hearing
on Nov. 30 regarding the Nov. Election, is now calling for an audit in
Pima County where he lives. He wants to decertify the election and hold
accountable those who committed election fraud. Finchem is also a strong
proponent for new ballots for the state with his Ballot Integrity Project, a project that could help protect the votes for Arizonans.
Finchem joined legislators from across the U.S. with a letter to the
American people about the 2020 election, asking to restore the trust of
the American people with a renewed commitment to election integrity.
Chair of the Maricopa Board of Supervisors, Jack Sellers issued this letter late this afternoon. An excerpt states:
“Once again, these ‘auditors’ threw
out wild, damaging, false claims in the middle of their audit and Senate
leadership provided them the platform to present their opinions,
suspicions, and faulty conclusions unquestioned and unchallenged.
Today’s hearing was irresponsible and dangerous.”
Governor Ducey also made a statement on Twitter. He says “There will be no de-certification of the 2020 Election.” Thread below:
Monday, September 27, 2021
Anyone Who Would Take The Jab After Seeing This Is Not Worth Saving!
This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat
false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our
partnership with Facebook.)
It is true that ivermectin was approved by the Food and Drug
Administration that year — but not to treat the coronavirus. The drug
was approved for strongyloidiasis, a disease caused by a roundworm, and
onchocerciasis, or river blindness, which is caused by a parasitic worm.
ad
The
drug was approved for humans under the brand name Stromectol, National
Geographic reported, and since then it’s been recognized as a safe
treatment for several tropical diseases caused by parasites. In 2015,
two scientists even won a Nobel Prize for their discovery of ivermectin
and its use to treat diseases caused by parasites.
But unlike, say, river blindness, COVID-19 is caused by a
coronavirus, not by parasites. And as PolitiFact recently reported in a
story exploring ivermectin, there’s no conclusive evidence that
ivermectin is effective against COVID-19.
WIVB Channel 4 News has more:
After a recent resurgence in several states, health officials are
warning residents to be aware of a dangerous of an unauthorized
“treatment” for COVID-19 — often being taken with dangerous
consequences.
It’s called ivermectin and it’s used to treat and prevent
parasites in animals, the Food and Drug Administration explains. The
tablets are not FDA approved for treatment of COVID-19 in humans and
isn’t even an anti-viral drug — meaning it has no impact on the
coronavirus. And because the large-concentration tablets are intended
for large animals, these can be treacherous for humans.
In addition to not being authorized for treatment, there’s no evidence ivermectin treats COVID-19.
ad
“There’s
a lot of misinformation around, and you may have heard that it’s okay
to take large doses of ivermectin. That is wrong.”
FDA
The FDA and several state officials say they’ve seen an uptick in
calamitous use of the drugs, particularly tablets used to treat
parasitic worms in horses. While ivermectin is approved for humans to
treat certain skin conditions (rosacea) and certain external parasites
like head lice, the FDA warns this ivermectin is different than the one
used in animals.
On Friday, the Mississippi Department of Health was forced to
send out a warning to residents about the dangers of the drug after
several poisonings.
The Mississippi Poison Control Center said at least 70%
of recent ivermectin-related calls are tied to people taking livestock
or animal formulations they bought a livestock supply stores or through
online markets.
This coin is a symbol of President Trump's victory and
success. This item sells for $39.95 on Amazon. Today's special promotion
is offering a massive discount on this item. President Trump 2020 Coin
(Gold & Silver Plated) - Claim 1 Free OR Claim a Discount + Free
Shipping Get Your Coin HERE Or Click on the image below.
Eighty-five percent of callers had mild symptoms — these include rash, nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain — but one person needed evaluation because of how much they’d taken.
More severe dangers of ivermectin ingestion include neurologic disorders, seizures, coma and death.
Use of ivermectin should only be taken if prescribed by a doctor
for an FDA-approved use. Regardless of the usage and prescription, the
FDA warns ivermectin overdose is still possible. Possible interaction
with other medications is also a possibility.
ad
We have a solution for those who already got the jab. Check out this video on Rumble. America’s Frontline Doctors have a solution, too.
REASONS TO
DECERTIFY AZ – THE LIST: 70,000 Duplicated, Fraudulent, Illegal or Ghost
Ballots (7 Times Biden’s Margin of Victory), Devices Missing, Data
Deleted, Criminal Acts Referred to Authorities
By Joe Hoft
Published September 25, 2021 at 12:10pm
The result of yesterday’s presentation of the audit results
from the audit of the 2020 Election results in Maricopa County is clear
– the 2020 Election results in Maricopa County should never have been
certified with Joe Biden as the winner.
When you step back and look at the results of the audit of Maricopa
County in Arizona regarding the 2020 Election, the answer is clear.
The current results should never have been certified – period.
Advertisement - story continues below
The audit presentation yesterday started off with Dr. Shiva, a
brilliant man with a resume that is one of the best in the country. Dr.
Shiva uncovered more than 17,000 duplicated ballots (via a ballot
envelope review) included in the certified election results in Arizona.
These duplicate ballots were greater than the 10,000 ballot margin of
victory given to Biden in the state.
Next was Cyber Ninja’s Doug Logan. He shared much of what was released in a leak the night before.
His team identified more than 57,000 ballots with issues that
never should have been included in the state’s certified results, but
they were.
Advertisement - story continues below
Below is a draft of the report provided before the audit presentation. This report shows:
In the 2020 presidential election, the margin of victory was only 10,457 votes, a small fraction of the 57,734 ballots with known issues.
Again, this is almost 6 times the margin of victory in the Presidential
race and is multiples of the margin of victory in other races. Based on
these factual findings, the election should not be certified, and the
reported results are not reliable.
Here is the page from the summary report — 57,734 votes with known issues and should not have been counted and should have been addressed.
Advertisement - story continues below
(Note that in the final report
provided after the presentation, it excludes the above statement
although it appears to include the same total number of issues.)
Here is a copy of the full report obtained before the presenation.
Combined, between the duplicates identified by Dr. Shiva and
the issues identified by Mr. Logan, there were more than 70,000 ballots
with issues included in Arizona’s certified results. This is seven
times the margin of victory certified for Joe Biden.
The third presenter was the best. Ben Cotton discussed IT and
Cybersecurity issues. He noted numerous items have still not been
provided to his team despite subpoenas being provided to the County
months ago.
Cotton also identified numerous items that were deleted or missing
from the information provided to his team. The highlight of the
presentations was when Cotton noted that his team identified the
individuals who deleted items requested and that he has provided their
names to authorities in the state. The audience cheered when he said
this.
Advertisement - story continues below
Overall there was justification for the audit and support
for the fact the current results in Arizona should never have been
certified. It is clear President Trump carried the state no matter what
the corrupt media says.
