Categories
Clarence Thomas Constitution Ginni Thomas Intelwars Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Opponents attack wife of Clarence Thomas over his dissent bashing decision to not hear critical election case

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas issued a searing dissenting opinion after the Supreme Court refused to hear a pivotal case involving a controversial Pennsylvania electoral directive that allowed the counting of ballots received up to three days after Election Day.

Now, Thomas’ opponents are using his opinion to attack his wife.

What did Thomas say?

Thomas believes the court’s refusal to hear the case opens the door for more election controversies in the future.

The central concern, according to Thomas, is whether state executives have the power to usurp their state legislatures in determining election laws, despite the U.S. Constitution explicitly assigning that power to legislators.

“[Pennsylvania’s] decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future,” Thomas wrote. “These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable.”

Thomas later added:

One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear
rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future
elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath
a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite
further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us. I respectfully dissent.

Justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito joined Thomas in dissent.

Why did opponents attack his wife?

Thomas’ wife, Ginni Thomas, has been outspoken about her political beliefs and support for Donald Trump.

Despite the fact that Thomas raised serious constitutional concerns with the Pennsylvania case, Democrats implied his wife’s politics drove his dissent — and even demanded that she be investigated to determine what role, if any, she played in the deadly violence at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

Christine Pelosi, daughter of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, “I’m concerned that #SCOTUS Justice Thomas dissented—we will have to learn more about the role his wife Gini Thomas played in raising money for Trump’s deadly #Jan6 ‘Insurrection Day.'”

Duty to Warn, an “association of mental health professionals warning Trump is psychologically unfit,” attacked Thomas for not disavowing his wife’s politics.

“Today, SCOTUS refused to hear an appeal from the PA GOP about extending mail-in voting deadlines. Clarence Thomas wrote a dissent. His wife Ginni endorsed the 1/6 protest, demanded an overturn of the election, and sent ‘LOVE’ to demonstrators. He’s not dissented to any of that,” the organization tweeted.

“Justice Thomas by the very fact that Ginni Thomas participated in 1/6 attack needs to recuse himself,” another critic said.

“For the sake of the integrity of the highest court in the United States of America, Justice Thomas must resign. Ginni Thomas must be investigated for her role in the January 6 insurrection. He and his wife are clearly radicalized,” another person said.

There is no evidence that Ginni Thomas played any role in the deadly violence at the Capitol.

Anything else?

Ginni Thomas apologized to Thomas’ staff earlier this month in emails obtained by the Washington Post.

“I owe you all an apology. I have likely imposed on you my lifetime passions,” Ginni Thomas wrote. “My passions and beliefs are likely shared with the bulk of you, but certainly not all. And sometimes the smallest matters can divide loved ones for too long. Let’s pledge to not let politics divide THIS family, and learn to speak more gently and knowingly across the divide.”

Share
Categories
14-year-old Claire miller Intelwars Murder Parent Pennsylvania sister wheelchair

14-year-old girl charged in stabbing death of wheelchair-bound sister as their parents slept

A 14-year-old Pennsylvania girl has been charged with killing her 19-year-old wheelchair-bound sister in their family home, allegedly stabbing her older sibling as their parents slept and calling 911 herself to confess the crime.

What are the details?

The Lancaster County District Attorney’s Office said in a press release that 14-year-old Claire Miller has been charged with homicide, is being held in prison without eligibility for bail, and will be tried as an adult in the killing of her older sister, Helen Miller. They noted that “homicide is not considered a delinquent act in Pennsylvania.”

WHTM-TV reported that according to court documents, Claire called 911 at around 1:00 a.m. on Monday in hysterics, telling authorities “she killed her sister.” According to The Daily Mail, when officers arrived they found Claire outside the residence “covered in blood and trying to wash her hands in the snow.” She reportedly said repeatedly, “I stabbed my sister.”

When police went inside the family home they found Helen in her room, lying on her back with a blood-stained pillow over her face and a knife still lodged in her neck. Emergency responders were unable to revive her.

Manheim Township Police Chief Tom Rudzinski told WHTM that the murder occurred while the girls’ parents were asleep in the same home. No motive has yet been determined.

“When I heard about this I was almost instantly upset about it myself over the details that had been related to me,” Rudzinski said. He added, “I don’t know that I have ever been a part of something that is quite as sad as this.”

WPMT-TV reported that Claire is in the ninth grade at Lancaster Country Day School. Steve Lisk, head of the school, issued a statement saying, “We are surprised by the news of this incident and we’re grieving ourselves even as we look to support the family and ensure support for all our students and families within our tight-knit school community.”

Sarah Delia, a neighbor of the family, told the outlet in reaction to the tragedy, “It’s not the kind of thing we would expect in our neighborhood. It’s very quiet and peaceful.”

Share
Categories
Assistant secretary of health Intelwars Joe Biden LGBTQ Pennsylvania Rachel levine Transgender

Joe Biden chooses transgender Rachel Levine for assistant secretary of health

Democratic President-elect Joe Biden chose transgender Pennsylvania Health Secretary Rachel Levine as his assistant secretary of health, the Associated Press reported, noting Levine would be the first openly transgender federal official to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

What did Biden have to say?

“Dr. Rachel Levine will bring the steady leadership and essential expertise we need to get people through this pandemic — no matter their zip code, race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability — and meet the public health needs of our country in this critical moment and beyond,” Biden said in a statement, according to the AP. “She is a historic and deeply qualified choice to help lead our administration’s health efforts.”

Vice President-elect Kamala Harris called Levine “a remarkable public servant with the knowledge and experience to help us contain this pandemic and protect and improve the health and well-being of the American people,” the AP said.

But not everyone agrees

Despite the glowing reviews from Biden and Harris, Levine last year was part of controversy over how Pennsylvania handled the coronavirus — specifically the state’s policy of placing elderly COVID-19 patients into nursing homes in order to keep hospital beds free. Last June, the AP noted in a separate story that nursing homes and personal care facilities had accounted for almost 70% of the state’s COVID-19 fatalities.

“This decision likely contributed to the thousands of elderly deaths in Pennsylvania,” Republican Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana and other Republican leaders wrote in a June 15 letter to Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf, according to WITF-TV.

But Levine said the assertion wasn’t true and defended the policy, the station noted: “There is no evidence that that policy itself contributed to that many deaths,” Levine said, adding that the coronavirus typically enters nursing homes through workers who don’t have symptoms.

And another thing

Also, Levine moved her 95-year-old mother out of a personal care facility due to the pandemic — and then fell under scrutiny for the decision, PennLive reported last May.

Levine said her mother was in a personal care home, not a nursing home, PennLive added, noting the facility was under the jurisdiction of the state Department of Human Services, not the state Department of Health.

Anything else?

Wolf appointed Levine — a pediatrician — as Pennsylvania’s health secretary in 2017, the AP reported.

Levine was one of the few transgender individuals serving in elected or appointed positions nationwide, the AP added, noting Levine won past confirmation by the Republican-majority Pennsylvania Senate and “has emerged as the public face of the state’s response to the coronavirus pandemic.”

Prior to the pandemic, Levine raised some eyebrows in 2019 for approving a recommendation to add anxiety disorders and Tourette syndrome to the list of qualifying conditions to obtain certifications to use medical marijuana.

Once the coronavirus hit, Levine’s name began popping up in the news a bit more:

Share
Categories
chaos democrat Intelwars Pennsylvania refuse SEAT state senate

‘Chaos’ in Pennsylvania state Senate as GOP refuses to seat Dem declared winner in contested race

Republicans in Pennsylvania’s GOP-controlled state Senate refused to seat a Democratic senator-elect on Tuesday and even moved to have the Democratic lieutenant governor booted from the chamber in a scene local outlet KDKA-TV described as “chaos.”

What are the details?

Democrat Jim Brewster has been certified by the state as the winner of a narrow Senate race against Republican candidate Nicole Ziccarelli. But when it was time for Brewster to be sworn in along with other incoming senators in the state, Republicans intervened and refused to allow him to take the oath of office.

At the time, Lt. Gov. John Fetterman (D) was presiding over the chamber and protested against the GOP’s move while continuing to try to move forward with Brewster’s swearing in. Republicans reacted by passing a motion to remove Fetterman from the chair, but when the lieutenant governor refused to leave, Republicans simply spoke over him and took over leadership from another part of the chamber.

KDKA reported that eventually Brewster withdrew.

“I wanted the rest of the senators with their families there, and in some cases their children there, to be sworn in,” the Democrat told the outlet.

“I was disappointed and flabbergasted that they removed the lieutenant governor,” Brewster said. “I think that is a move that went too far.”

What else?

Fox News reported:

Reflecting a nationwide trend, Republicans in the state sought to invalidate ballots that omitted a handwritten date. Brewster’s Republican challenger Nicole Ziccarelli lost by 69 votes in state-certified results. Zicarelli has argued that without 311 contested mail-in ballots, she would win by 24 votes.

Law & Crime pointed out that “the Pennsylvania Supreme Court previously rejected Ziccarelli’s attempts to contest the election results.”

Ziccarelli, meanwhile, insists she has won the race “after all legally cast ballots have been counted.”

Share
Categories
Arizona Chip roy Donald Trump election fraud Georgia Intelwars Michigan Nevada Pennsylvania Wisconsin

Republican Chip Roy explains why he objected to seating House members from states Trump claims were tainted by election fraud

Republican Rep. Chip Roy (Texas) surprised his congressional colleagues on Sunday when he challenged the seating of representatives from six states.

Roy did not choose six states at random. He objected to the seating of representatives from Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin — six states that President Donald Trump and the president’s congressional supporters claim were tainted by election fraud.

What did Roy say?

Roy explained that if the legitimacy of the presidential results are questionable in those states, then so are those for down-ballot elections, including Congress.

“Such allegations [of election fraud] — if true — raise significant doubts about the elections of at least some of the members of the United States House of Representatives that, if not formally addressed, could cast a dark cloud of suspicion over the validity of this body for the duration of the 117th Congress,” Roy said in a statement.

“After all, those representatives were elected through the very same systems — with the same ballot procedures, with the same signature validations, with the same broadly applied decisions of executive and judicial branch officials — as were the electors chosen for the President of the United States under the laws of those states,” the Texas Republican added.

In an effort to be “consistent,” Roy proposed that the House vote on the certification of members from the six states in question “to ensure the integrity of the House of Representatives is guarded from all suspicion of illegitimacy.”

“Anything less would strip the current efforts of their legitimacy and make it look like a political stunt, rather than a good-faith effort to restore confidence in our electoral process,” Roy explained.

What happened after the objection?

Roy’s objection, made just before the 117th Congress was sworn in, overwhelmingly failed; only Reps. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) and Andy Harris (R-Md.) supported Roy.

What’s the background?

Roy’s objection came as a growing number of Republican lawmakers have said they will object to the certification of the Electoral College results when Congress meets during a joint session on Jan. 6.

Two House Republicans told CNN last Thursday that at least 140 House Republicans will object to certifying the Electoral College results.

Meanwhile, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) is leading a coalition of 11 Senate Republicans who will object to the certification unless Congress establishes a commission to conduct an “emergency audit” of the election results over allegations.

“Voter fraud has posed a persistent challenge in our elections, although its breadth and scope are disputed. By any measure, the allegations of fraud and irregularities in the 2020 election exceed any in our lifetimes,” the Republicans said in a joint statement.

Their effort is separate from that being undertaken by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who announced last week that he would object to the Electoral College certification. Hawley, however, is objecting on grounds that Pennsylvania and other states did not follow their election laws in the 2020 election.

Share
Categories
Georgia Intelwars Michigan Pennsylvania Texas attorney general ken paxton Texas sues battleground states Wisconsin

‘Everyone should be VERY focused on this’: Glenn Beck reacts to Texas lawsuit over election rules

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit against four key states — Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania — directly in the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday. The case alleges the states unconstitutionally changed election rules, in part by bypassing state legislatures. Some locations were also accused of violating the equal protection clause.

On the radio program Tuesday, Glenn Beck broke down the details of the lawsuit and stressed the importance of restoring confidence in our election system.

“These [legal actions] may not change the outcome of the election at all, but everyone should be very focused on this,” Glenn said. “Because … once you corrupt the system, it’s over. We have to have confidence in our system.”

Watch the video below for more details:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Subscribe to BlazeTV today with our BEST DEAL EVER for $30 off with promo code GLENN.

Share
Categories
Georgia Intelwars Michigan Pennsylvania Texas attorney general ken paxton Texas sues battleground states Wisconsin

‘Everyone should be VERY focused on this’: Glenn Beck reacts to Texas lawsuit over election rules

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit against four key states — Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania — directly in the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday. The case alleges the states unconstitutionally changed election rules, in part by bypassing state legislatures. Some locations were also accused of violating the equal protection clause.

On the radio program Tuesday, Glenn Beck broke down the details of the lawsuit and stressed the importance of restoring confidence in our election system.

“These [legal actions] may not change the outcome of the election at all, but everyone should be very focused on this,” Glenn said. “Because … once you corrupt the system, it’s over. We have to have confidence in our system.”

Watch the video below for more details:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Subscribe to BlazeTV today with our BEST DEAL EVER for $30 off with promo code GLENN.

Share
Categories
Election 2020 Intelwars Pennsylvania Supreme Court Ted Cruz

Ted Cruz says he’ll argue Pennsylvania election case if SCOTUS decides to hear it

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz says if the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear a case filed by fellow Republicans challenging Pennsylvania’s election results, he will be the one to deliver the petitioners’ argument before the high court.

What are the details?

Last month, a group of individuals led by Pennsylvania Rep. Mike Kelly (R) and GOP congressional candidate Sean Parnell filed a lawsuit arguing that universal mail-in voting is unconstitutional in the state. According to USA Today, the petitioners seek to “invalidate more than 2.5 million mail-in ballots that Pennsylvanians used to vote in the Nov. 3 election.”

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court unanimously threw out the case, so Kelly and his co-petitioners filed an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Sen. Cruz then promptly issued a statement urging the U.S. Supreme Court to take up Kelly’s and Parnell’s appeal, saying that the case “raises serious legal issues” and arguing that “hearing this case now — on an emergency expedited basis — would be an important step in helping rebuild confidence in the integrity of our democratic system.”

Now, Cruz says he will personally argue the case if the Supreme Court agrees to hear it.

“Because of the importance of the legal issues presented, I’ve publicly urged #SCOTUS to hear the case brought by Congressman Mike Kelly, congressional candidate Sean Parnell & state rep. candidate Wanda Logan challenging the constitutionality of the POTUS election results in PA,” the senator tweeted Monday.

Repeating a statement he first delivered to Fox News, Cruz explained, “Petitioners’ legal team has asked me whether I would be willing to argue the case before #SCOTUS, if the Court grants certiorari. I have agreed, and told them that, if the Court takes the appeal, I will stand ready to present the oral argument.”

He added, “As I said last week, the bitter division and acrimony we see across the Nation needs resolution. I believe #SCOTUS has a responsibility to the American People to ensure, within its powers, that we are following the law and following the Constitution.”

Anything else?

Several state courts have seen election challenges filed in the wake of the general election. Dozens have been filed by attorneys representing President Donald Trump and his campaign, who allege that widespread voter fraud and irregularities are behind Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s projected win.

Neither President Trump nor his campaign are listed as petitioners in Kelly and Parnell’s case.

Over the weekend, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito moved up the deadline for the high court to respond to the plaintiffs from Wednesday to Tuesday morning at 9 a.m. ET.

Share
Categories
election Intelwars Pennsylvania Supreme Court Ted Cruz trump

Ted Cruz urges US Supreme Court to take up Pennsylvania election challenge

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) issued a statement Tuesday urging the United States Supreme Court to hear an emergency appeal challenging the election results in the state of Pennsylvania, which was filed by fellow Republicans.

What are the details?

Last month, Pennsylvania Rep. Mike Kelly (R) and GOP congressional candidate Sean Parnell filed a lawsuit in their home state that declared “universal mail-in voting unconstitutional in the state,” according to KDKA-TV, who reported that the suit, if successful, would have resulted in throwing out “the votes of the majority of Pennsylvanians who voted by mail in the Nov. 3 election.”

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court unanimously threw out the order, so Kelly and Parnell filed an emergency appeal to the U.S. high court. Sen. Cruz says case has merit.

“This appeal raises serious legal issues, and I believe the Court should hear the case on an expedited basis,” the senator wrote, noting that “the Pennsylvania Constitution requires in-person voting, except in narrow and defined circumstances,” and that “late last year, the Pennsylvania Legislature passed a law that purported to allow universal mail-in voting, notwithstanding the Pennsylvania Constitution’s express prohibition.”

Cruz, a litigator who has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court, also pointed out that “just over a month ago, Justice Alito, along with Justice Thomas and Justice Gorsuch, wrote — correctly, I believe — concerning the Pennsylvania court’s previous decision to count ballots received after Election Day, that ‘there is a strong likelihood that the State Supreme Court decision violates the Federal Constitution.'”

He argued that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court put the plaintiffs “in a Catch-22” by telling them, in short, that “before the election, they lacked standing; after the election, they’ve delayed too long.”

Cruz went on to acknowledge that the U.S. Supreme Court would typically not take up election cases dealing with state law, but that “these are not ordinary times.”

The Republican from Texas concluded:

As of today, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling, 39 percent of Americans believe that “the election was rigged.” That is not healthy for our democracy. The bitter division and acrimony we see across the nation needs resolution. And I believe the U.S. Supreme Court has a responsibility to the American people to ensure that we are following the law and following the Constitution. Hearing this case-now, on an emergency expedited basis-would be an important step in helping rebuild confidence in the integrity of our democratic system.

Share
Categories
Arizona Commentary Georgia Intelwars Michigan Pennsylvania Politics Wisconsin

Strange “Coincidences” That Should Deeply Bother All Of Us As We Try To Put The Puzzle Pieces Together

Whether you are a Republican, a Democrat or someone that doesn’t identify with either major party, you should care deeply about the integrity of our elections.  Because if we don’t have elections that are free and fair, our system of government simply will not work.  If we come out of the 2020 elections with about half the country believing that the race for president was rigged, that is a major problem.  Once faith in our elections is gone, it will be nearly impossible to restore, and that is why it is absolutely imperative that we try to figure out how this election went so haywire.

In recent days, I have seen so many people point out some of the numbers from the election that should be deeply bothering all of us.  In this article, I am going to try to summarize some of the most important points.

In 2012, Barack Obama cruised to re-election even though he received 3.5 million less votes than he got in 2008.

In 2020, President Trump was supposedly soundly defeated even though he received 11 million more votes than he did in 2016.

They are telling us that Trump was defeated because of a historic turnout by Biden voters.  But the number of counties that Biden actually won was a record low for a “winning candidate” by a very wide margin.  It is being reported that Trump won 83 percent of all U.S. counties, and Biden only won 17 percent

We are told that Biden won more votes nationally than any presidential candidate in history. But he won a record low of 17 percent of counties; he only won 524 counties, as opposed to the 873 counties Obama won in 2008. Yet, Biden somehow outdid Obama in total votes.

How in the world can you win the presidency by losing more than 80 percent of the counties in the entire country?

Yes, I understand that the major population centers are where the votes are.  But when Obama won his two elections, at least he was victorious in more than 20 percent of all U.S. counties both times…

Former President Obama ushered in the previous low in 2012, winning re-election with just 689 counties, or 22 percent – breaking his own record set in 2008, where he won with 875 counties, or 28 percent.

Biden underperformed Obama almost everywhere except in the urban population centers that were absolutely critical to Biden’s victory.

In those urban population centers, Biden supposedly piled up obscene vote totals that are very difficult to believe.

And it just so happens that those heavily blue urban population centers all seemed to stop counting votes at about the same time on the night of the election.  All of a sudden, voting came to a standstill in Milwaukee, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Atlanta.

As many have pointed out, if you stop and wait to see how all of the other areas of your state have voted, you can figure out exactly how many votes you need to put your candidate over the top.

When counting finally resumed, there were four massive vote dumps in the middle of the night which proved decisive in some of the most critical swing states…

  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

In the end, Biden won Wisconsin by less than one percent, he won Pennsylvania by just over one percent, he won Georgia by less than one percent and he won Arizona by less than one percent.

If you reverse the results in those four states, President Trump would be the winner of the race.

The voting behavior in the key midwestern states was particularly suspicious.  The following comes from Patrick Basham

Midwestern states Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin always swing in the same direction as Ohio and Iowa, their regional peers. Ohio likewise swings with Florida. Current tallies show that, outside of a few cities, the Rust Belt swung in Trump’s direction. Yet, Biden leads in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin because of an apparent avalanche of black votes in Detroit, Philadelphia, and Milwaukee. Biden’s ‘winning’ margin was derived almost entirely from such voters in these cities, as coincidentally his black vote spiked only in exactly the locations necessary to secure victory. He did not receive comparable levels of support among comparable demographic groups in comparable states, which is highly unusual for the presidential victor.

There are countless people that have been looking into how vote totals in the most critical swing states may have been manipulated, but the big tech companies have been doing their best to keep such information from spreading widely.

In fact, it is being reported that Facebook applied an “emergency change” to its news feed algorithm right after the election…

In the aftermath of the contentious presidential election, Facebook reportedly made an “emergency change” to its algorithm, which resulted in the suppression of content from “hyperpartisan” outlets.

Employees at Facebook are now asking if the “nicer news feed” can stay in place long term, according to a Tuesday report from The New York Times.

This “nicer news feed” greatly favors mainstream news outlets such as CNN, the Washington Post and the New York Times.

The big tech companies are absolutely determined to shape how we think, and the power that they now possess is colossal.

They will determine what “truth” is allowed to be told in the years ahead, and they will continue to push our culture down a dystopian path that only leads to complete oblivion.

This election was a major turning point, and those that directed events behind the scenes are on the verge of totally getting away with it.

But this isn’t just a loss for the Republican Party.  This is a loss for all Americans, because our entire system of government is crumbling right in front of our eyes.

***Michael’s new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.***

About the Author: My name is Michael Snyder and my brand new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available on Amazon.com.  In addition to my new book, I have written four others that are available on Amazon.com including The Beginning Of The EndGet Prepared Now, and Living A Life That Really Matters. (#CommissionsEarned)  By purchasing the books you help to support the work that my wife and I are doing, and by giving it to others you help to multiply the impact that we are having on people all over the globe.  I have published thousands of articles on The Economic Collapse BlogEnd Of The American Dream and The Most Important News, and the articles that I publish on those sites are republished on dozens of other prominent websites all over the globe.  I always freely and happily allow others to republish my articles on their own websites, but I also ask that they include this “About the Author” section with each article.  The material contained in this article is for general information purposes only, and readers should consult licensed professionals before making any legal, business, financial or health decisions.  I encourage you to follow me on social media on FacebookTwitter and Parler, and any way that you can share these articles with others is a great help.  During these very challenging times, people will need hope more than ever before, and it is our goal to share the gospel of Jesus Christ with as many people as we possibly can.

Share
Categories
absentee ballots Campaign 2020 Intelwars Mail-in ballots Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejects GOP challenge after judge said it had ‘likelihood to succeed’

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court struck down a lawsuit late Saturday that challenged the legality of a new state law that allowed voters to obtain an absentee ballot for any reason.

What’s the background?

As TheBlaze reported, Commonwealth Judge Patricia McCullough issued an injunction last Wednesday after Republicans made an emergency request to stop the certification of Pennsylvania’s election results.

The central claim of the lawsuit was that Act 77, a law passed in Oct. 2019, violated the state constitution by allowing voters to obtain absentee ballots for any reason. The state constitution, on the other hand, specifies only a limited number of reasons for which an absentee ballot may be cast.

McCullough later issued an opinion on Friday explaining that the petitioners would likely win on the merits of their case.

Petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed on the merits because Petitioners have asserted the Constitution does not provide a mechanism for the legislature to allow for expansion of absentee voting without a constitutional amendment. Petitioners appear to have a viable claim that the mail-in ballot procedures set forth in Act 77 contravene Pa. Const. Article VII Section 14 as the plain language of that constitutional provision is at odds with the mail-in provisions of Act 77. Since this presents an issue of law which has already been thoroughly briefed by the parties, this Court can state that Petitioners have a likelihood of success on the merits of its Pennsylvania Constitutional claim.

What did the state Supreme Court say?

The Pennsylvania high court — which is controlled by a 5-2 Democratic majority — unanimously dismissed the lawsuit, ruling the challenge came too late for a reasonable legal remedy.

The lawsuit had asked for the absentee ballots cast as a result of Act 77 to be invalidated.

“Upon consideration of the parties’ filings in Commonwealth Court, we hereby dismiss the petition for review with prejudice based upon Petitioners’ failure to file their facial constitutional challenge in a timely manner,” the Pennsylvania Supreme Court wrote in a three-page opinion.

In fact, the court said the lawsuit violated the “doctrine of laches” because of the petitioners’ “complete failure to act with due diligence in commencing their facial constitutional challenge, which was ascertainable upon Act 77’s enactment.”

The court explained:

The want of due diligence demonstrated in this matter is unmistakable. Petitioners
filed this facial challenge to the mail-in voting statutory provisions more than one year
after the enactment of Act 77. At the time this action was filed on November 21, 2020,
millions of Pennsylvania voters had already expressed their will in both the June 2020
Primary Election and the November 2020 General Election and the final ballots in the
2020 General Election were being tallied, with the results becoming seemingly apparent.
Nevertheless, Petitioners waited to commence this litigation until days before the county
boards of election were required to certify the election results to the Secretary of the
Commonwealth. Thus, it is beyond cavil that Petitioners failed to act with due diligence
in presenting the instant claim. Equally clear is the substantial prejudice arising from
Petitioners’ failure to institute promptly a facial challenge to the mail-in voting statutory
scheme, as such inaction would result in the disenfranchisement of millions of
Pennsylvania voters.

Meanwhile, Chief Justice Thomas Saylor and Justice Sallie Mundy filed a concurring and dissenting opinion suggesting that the constitutional merits of the case — that Act 77 may violate the state constitution — could be considered by a lower court at a different time. They agreed, though, that the current petitioners acted far too late.

Saylor and Mundy are the court’s two Republican justices.

Share
Categories
absentee ballots GOP Intelwars Lawsuit Mail-in ballots Patricia mccullough Pennsylvania republican party

Pennsylvania judge rules GOP lawsuit challenging new absentee ballot law has ‘likelihood to succeed’

The Pennsylvania judge who temporarily halted the certification of election results in the Keystone State issued an opinion Friday explaining that the Republican plaintiffs in her case will likely win on the merits of their lawsuit.

What’s the background?

As TheBlaze reported, Commonwealth Judge Patricia McCullough issued an injunction Wednesday after Republican lawmakers made an emergency request to stop certification of the state’s election results over concerns about Act 77, a new law that allowed Pennsylvania voters to obtain an absentee ballot for the election for any reason.

From Sinclair Broadcasting Group:

The plaintiffs argue Act 77, which was signed into law in October 2019, wrongfully overrides the stipulations for absentee balloting established by the state’s constitution. The Pennsylvania Constitution states absentee ballots can be cast by those who cannot go to polling locations due to a work obligation, sickness, religious holiday, or “election day duties.”

As a result, the suit asks the court to prevent the certification of election tallies that include mail-in ballots resulting from the expanded rules of Act 77, and further moves to have the Pennsylvania General Assembly assign the state’s electors.

What is the judge saying now?

McCullough explained in a 13-page opinion that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed in their lawsuit because Act 77 appears to violate the Pennsylvania state constitution.

“Petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed on the merits because Petitioners have asserted the Constitution does not provide a mechanism for the legislature to allow for expansion of absentee voting without a constitutional amendment,” McCullough wrote.

“Petitioners appear to have a viable claim that the mail-in ballot procedures set forth in Act 77 contravene Pa. Const. Article VII Section 14 as the plain language of that constitutional provision is at odds with the mail-in provisions of Act 77,” she continued.

“Since this presents an issue of law which has already been thoroughly briefed by the parties, this Court can state that Petitioners have a likelihood of success on the merits of its Pennsylvania Constitutional claim,” McCullough said.

Anything else?

According to WESA-FM, Gov. Tom Wolf (D) and Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar have appealed to the state Supreme Court to intervene. Democrats currently hold a 5-2 majority on the Pennsylvania high court.

Meanwhile, Ed Morrissey noted at Hot Air that the “laches” doctrine could apply in this case, thereby hurting the plaintiffs’ argument, because they did not raise objections before or after Pennsylvania’s June 2 primary, which used the same absentee system as the general.

“Having raised no objection before the election, the plaintiffs have participated in the alleged violation, which would impact their standing to demand relief,” Morrissey explained.

Share
Categories
absentee ballots Intelwars Mail in voting fraud Pennsylvania Rand Paul Voter fraud allegations Voter integrity project

Rand Paul says the ‘vast majority’ of voting must be in person to mitigate potential for fraud

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said that the “vast majority” of voting needs to be in person to limit the potential for voter fraud in an interview Monday evening, citing a study about absentee ballots in Pennsylvania that has been flagged by statistical experts as flawed.

Appearing on “The Story” with host Martha MacCallum, Paul said the 2020 presidential election was “unprecedented” due to the high volume of mail-in votes cast because of the coronavirus pandemic. These mail-in votes, Paul claimed, are difficult to “validate.”

“This was an unprecedented election,” Paul said. “Normally, 99% show up in person and we can kind of police that the right people showed up because you don’t have the same people showing up again and again. They sign in, they show an ID, and it’s pretty easy to validate the vote.”

“But now we have an election where maybe a third to a half mailed in their ballots,” he added. “This has never ever happened in our history, so we have to validate, were they the right people?”

Paul cited a statistical analysis from a Williams College professor that purportedly shows more than 89,000 absentee ballots requested by Republican voters in Pennsylvania were not counted or were requested by someone other than a registered Republican. The analysis is part of a sworn affidavit from professor Steven Miller, a Yale- and Princeton-trained math expert, who used data provided by former Trump campaign data chief Matt Braynard. Braynard leads the “Voter Integrity Fund,” a group led by former Trump campaign staffers and government employees that is analyzing voter data in key battle ground states looking for evidence of fraud and investigating irregularities.

Pennsylvania on Tuesday certified the results of the presidential election, which former Vice President Joe Biden won by more than 80,000 votes. Paul suggested that if the Trump campaign takes Miller’s statistical analysis to court, a judge may be persuaded to order a review of absentee ballots in Pennsylvania.

“I would think that if we took this to a court, the court would then mandate that you have to look at all of the absentee votes one at a time, not count them, but verify whether or not the person who you say voted, you actually call them and ask them, ‘did you vote’ and ‘who did you vote for’ to verify the vote,” Paul said.

However, the analysis cited by Paul has drawn criticism from statisticians for failing to meet basic standards of statistical analysis and been called “irresponsible” and “naive” by academic peers reviewing the study. Critics who spoke to the Berkshire Eagle say the study was wrong to separate basic mathematical analysis from questions about the validity of the data.

The Eagle reported that Miller’s analysis used phone survey results from several thousand voters to draw conclusions about absentee votes in Pennsylvania:

Braynard collected the data by contracting call centers to get in touch with Republican voters across six swing states, in an apparent attempt to root out election fraud, according to reporting from several outlets. He told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that his operators were asking voters three questions: “Did a person with your name vote? Did you request a mail-in ballot? Did you return a mail-in ballot?”

In his analysis, Miller wrote that the group called 20,000 Republican voters in Pennsylvania who, according to state records, had requested but not returned ballots. In all, 2,684 agreed to answer questions, he said. Of the respondents, 463 reported that they actually had mailed in a ballot and 556 reported that they had not requested a ballot in the first place, according to the report.

Miller extrapolated from those numbers that between 44,892 and 48,522 Republican voters on the state’s list of “requested but not returned” mail-in ballots had, in fact, returned their ballot, only to see it excluded from the state’s final vote count. He also estimated that another 40,875 to 53,909 ballots were requested in the name of a registered Republican by another person.

Miller’s colleagues have challenged the data collected by the Voter Integrity Project as “completely without merit” and criticized Miller for publishing his analysis without addressing concerns about the data.

“To apply naïve statistical formulas to biased data and publish this is both irresponsible and unethical,” said Richard De Veaux, vice president of the American Statistical Association and a colleague of Miller’s in the Williams College Department of Mathematics and Statistics. “It is the statistician’s responsibility to verify the data, or to provide disclaimers if that can’t be done.”

Carina Curto, a professor of mathematics at Pennsylvania State University, said Miller’s analysis is “almost surely wrong” because it assumes that the people who answered the phone were a representative sample of Pennsylvania Republican voters who requested but did not return a ballot.

“This small sample from the phone survey almost surely has large sampling biases and systematic errors,” said Curto. “There is absolutely no reason to believe it is representative of the larger population.”

“There’s no guarantee that the people they talked to were the actual people they meant to call,” added Lior Pachter, a computational biologist at the California Institute of Technology. He said the Voter Integrity Project should have also contacted Democratic voters as a control group.

“What happened here is somebody had a question, to which they had an answer they had decided on ahead of time,” he said. “At a minimum, if they actually wanted to figure out if there was election fraud, they would have also polled Democrats.”

Miller responded to his critics, apologizing for a “lack of clarity and due diligence” in his analysis.

“Especially as the consequences are so important, I should have made a greater effort to go deeply into and share how the data was collected and not treat this solely as an independent calculation,” he told the Berkshire Eagle in a statement.

He defended the decision to do the analysis.

“I am not concluding fraud happened, or that state outcomes should be changed,” Miller said. “What I said was, assuming the accuracy of these numbers, then we have a large number of people who had a ballot requested in their name but say they did not request it, and we have a large number of people who said they mailed their ballot back but it was not counted.”

HIs results “should encourage more analysis of this important problem so we can see how well things worked and, if there are issues, how we can do better in future elections.”

Regarding future elections, Sen. Paul told Fox News that voting in person is “the easiest way to validate an election is to vote in person.”

“I’m not against voting early or having early voting, but the majority of the vote, the vast majority, needs to be in person because there are so many checkpoints,” he added.

“In the future we have to go back to in-person voting. We can’t just say oh, here’s a ballot, we’re going to mail it to anyone. I think it’s ripe for fraud.”

Share
Categories
Alcohol sales Bars Coronavirus restrictions Gov. tom wolf Intelwars Pennsylvania Restaurants Thanksgiving

Now Pennsylvania alcohol sales to stop at 5 p.m. day before Thanksgiving in bars, restaurants — and many are fed up with ‘stripping of rights’

On top of Pennsylvania officials already mandating strict COVID-19 restrictions applying to Thanksgiving such as required wearing of masks when multiple families gather in private homes, the powers that be in the state added more to the merriment Monday.

Such as?

For starters, Pennsylvania restaurants and bars are ordered to suspend alcohol sales at 5 p.m. Wednesday — the day before Thanksgiving — until 8 a.m. Thanksgiving morning, KDKA-TV reported.

The very early last call likely won’t make for very festive happy hours around the Keystone State once work lets out.

Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf said the Wednesday before Thanksgiving is the “biggest day for drinking” and acknowledged bars and restaurants have been hit hard by the pandemic — but that this one-night ban is necessary, the station reported.

“The thing that we can’t do is ignore reality and say, ‘Yeah, you folks, for no fault of your own, have been hit hardest by this virus.’ But the virus is what’s doing this. It’s not me. It’s not the administration. It’s not the government,” Wolf said in regard to the 5 p.m. alcohol sales cutoff time, KDKA noted.

Wolf also said police will step up enforcement efforts and “issue citations and fines, and possibly undertake regulatory actions for repeat offenders.”

Health Secretary Dr. Rachel Levine said other mitigation measures are “targeted protections for businesses and gatherings,” an advisory for Pennsylvanians to stay at home, and enforcements on public health orders like the recently strengthened mask mandate, the station reported.

How are folks reacting?

It appeared that while some Twitter commenters were in favor of the new restrictions, quite a few others seemed fed up with it all:

  • “I don’t even drink and this is wrong,” one user wrote. “What’s the science behind this?”
  • “Seriously what is your f***ing problem? You are a f***ing a**hole! This will destroy a huge night for business!” another user noted.
  • “Why?!?! This s**t is getting crazy,” another commenter said. “What’s the SCIENCE with this stripping of rights???”
  • “Maybe the liquor stores could just self-identify all their stock as Root Beer,” another user quipped.
  • “Will there be a special stimulus for all the service employees who were counting on a big night like Thanksgiving Eve to make up a bit for all the losses they’ve already taken?” another commenter asked.
  • “The raw and arbitrary exercise of power is an intoxicant,” another user declared.
  • “How people continue to vote for Democrats is beyond me,” another commenter wrote.
Share
Categories
Donald Trump Intelwars Lawsuit Matthew brann Pennsylvania

Federal judge dismisses Trump lawsuit in Pennsylvania, blasts campaign in scathing opinion

A federal judge tossed out another lawsuit from the Trump campaign late Saturday, rebuking the campaign in a scathing opinion, and allowing the state to move forward with the certification of its election results.

In response, Republican Sen. Pat Toomey (Pa.) congratulated Joe Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris for winning the election.

What did the judge say?

The Trump campaign filed a lawsuit to invalidate millions of votes in Pennsylvania and block the certification of the state’s election results, which is set for Monday.

But granting the Trump campaign’s demands would have been tantamount to violating the Constitution, U.S. Middle District Judge Matthew Brann ruled.

“[T]hey ask the Court to violate the rights of over 6.8 million Americans,” Brann wrote in a 37-page opinion. “It is not in the power of this Court to violate the Constitution.”

In fact, Brann explained that Trump’s legal team did not come to court armed with evidence to prove why Pennsylvania votes should be invalidated.

“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption,” Brann explained. “That has not happened.”

“Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence,” Brann continued. “In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more.”

Brann, although he was appointed by former President Barack Obama in 2012, was a longtime Republican official, and was active both in the National Rifle Association and Federalist Society.

What did Toomey say?

Toomey recognized Biden and Harris as the election winners because he said Trump has exhausted his legal remedies in the Keystone State.

“With today’s decision by Judge Matthew Brann, a longtime conservative Republican whom I know to be a fair and unbiased jurist, to dismiss the Trump campaign’s lawsuit, President Trump has exhausted all plausible legal options to challenge the result of the presidential race in Pennsylvania,” Toomey said in a statement.

“I congratulate President-elect Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris on their victory,” Toomey added.

Toomey went on to say that he is “disappointed” that Trump lost, but urged the president to “accept the outcome of the election and facilitate the presidential transition process.”

How did Trump respond?

Trump’s campaign said they welcomed Brann’s decision because it expedites their plan to go to the Supreme Court.

“Today’s decision turns out to help us in our strategy to get expeditiously to the U.S. Supreme Court. Although we fully disagree with this opinion, we’re thankful to the Obama-appointed judge for making this anticipated decision quickly, rather than simply trying to run out the clock,” Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani and campaign legal adviser Jenna Ellis said in a statement, according to Politico.

It should be noted that Brann dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice, meaning Trump’s team cannot file another lawsuit on the same grounds as the one he dismissed. That, however, does not stop the appeal process.

Share
Categories
Coronavirus restrictions COVID-19 Dr. rachel levine Gov. tom wolf Homes Intelwars Mask mandates Pennsylvania watch

Masks now required inside Pennsylvania homes when members of different households gather

A new Pennsylvania COVID-19 mandate requires the wearing of masks in homes when members of different households gather, the Associated Press reported.

What are the details?

Dr. Rachel Levine, the state health secretary, said Tuesday the order applies even if people are physically distant, the AP noted. But Levine acknowledged that officials are relying on voluntary compliance rather than on enforcement, the outlet added.

The order applies to every indoor facility, in addition to private homes, the AP said.

More from the outlet:

A separate order mandates that people who are traveling to Pennsylvania from another state, as well as Pennsylvania residents who are returning home from out of state, must test negative for the virus within 72 hours prior to arrival. The order does not apply to people traveling back and forth for work or medical treatment. People who refuse to be tested will be required to quarantine for 14 days, Levine said.

Again, the state has no plans to enforce that measure, but is asking for voluntary compliance.

The AP said health officials blamed the spread of the virus in part to small indoor gatherings, and Levine noted that how Pennsylvania does in the coming weeks and months will depend largely on the public’s willingness to wear masks and practice social distancing.

“In the end, people will have the consequences of their actions as well as their families and their communities, and if they do not wear masks, if they do not social distance, then those communities are going to see even more spread of COVID-19,” Levine added, according to the outlet.

The numbers

The state is reporting more than 5,000 new infections per day, up more than 115% in just two weeks, the AP said, adding that more than 2,700 people are now hospitalized in Pennsylvania with COVID-19 — not far from the state record of about 3,000 in early May.

The AP said Pennsylvania will run out of Intensive Care Unit beds next month at the present admission rate, according to models from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.

And the rate of positive COVID-19 test results, as well as deaths, have been rising, the outlet added.

While Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf imposed a state-at-home order and closed “non-life-sustaining” businesses early in the pandemic, the AP reported that Wolf and Levine have consistently said they don’t intend to implement another broad-based shutdown.

But Levine on Tuesday did not rule out more mitigation measures, the outlet said.

“Whether we have to do anything else really depends upon you. It depends upon the public, each one of us taking our responsibility for the common good of everyone in Pennsylvania,” Levine said, according to the AP. “And if we all do our part, and we stand united, then we might not need any further mitigation measures.”


Penn. bolsters mask, COVID test rules amid surge

youtu.be

Share
Categories
ballots contested election division Donald Trump Election 2020 Election law Evidence experts Headline News Intelwars invalidating votes Joe Biden Lawyers left vs. right paradigm lie Lou Dobbs parties Pennsylvania rudy giuliani Tom Wolf voters Voting

Trump’s Lawyer Rudy Giuliani Says Roughly 650,000 Unlawful Ballots Were Cast In PA

Rudy Giuliani, one of President Donald Trump’s personal lawyers, alleged on November 11 that roughly 650,000 unlawful ballots were cast in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Giuliani told Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo on Sunday that the lawsuits being filed by Trump’s reelection campaign might show that as many as 900,000 invalid ballots were cast in the battleground state.

Speaking with Fox Business’ Lou Dobbs, Giuliani claimed that “almost none” of the hundreds of thousands of ballots were observed by Republican poll watchers. State election law requires the presence of poll watchers from all parties, according to a report by ZeroHedge.

“What’s being said in the mass media, that we have no evidence, is a complete, absolute lie, just like they’ve been lying for years,” Guiliani said. 

On Monday, Governor Tom Wolf’s office said in a statement that ballot watchers from all parties have had observers throughout the process and that “any insinuation otherwise is a lie.” A few days earlier, Giuliani said that the Trump campaign may have sufficient evidence to change the election results in the state of Pennsylvania.

According to an unofficial vote count from the Pennsylvania Department of State, Biden has received 3.35 million votes to Trump’s 3.31 million votes. Percentage-wise, Biden has 49.7 percent, compared to Trump’s 49.1 percent.

Pennsylvania is going to fight every single attempt to disenfranchise voters,” the governor’s office added. “We will protect this election and the democratic process. Pennsylvania will count every vote, and we will protect the count of every vote.”

Giuliani said during a Fox News interview on Sunday that the lawsuits being filed by the Trump campaign might reveal up to 900,000 invalid ballots cast across the entire state of Pennsylvania. He didn’t make clear on Wednesday whether that statewide figure would be affected by the count he mentioned for Philadelphia and Pittsburgh by themselves.

The Associated Press (mainstream media) declared former Vice President Joe Biden the victor of the presidential election on Saturday. The Trump campaign insists that the call has been premature. –Washington Examiner

Real Clear Politics: “The Media Should NOT Have Called This Election!”

 

The post Trump’s Lawyer Rudy Giuliani Says Roughly 650,000 Unlawful Ballots Were Cast In PA first appeared on SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don't Say We Didn't Warn You.

Share
Categories
2020 Election election Intelwars Joe Biden Kathy boockvar Pennsylvania Pennsylvania ballots Pennsylvania election Pennsylvania votes President Trump

Pennsylvania judge rules for Trump campaign, says secretary of state lacked authority to change ID deadline days before election

A Pennsylvania judge ruled in favor of the Trump campaign on Thursday, ordering that the state may not count ballots where voters did not provide proof of identification before Nov. 9.

Existing Pennsylvania law states that voters have up to six days after the election to cure issues with a ballot, such as a lack of identification. Election Day was Nov. 3 this year, meaning that voters had until Nov. 9 to correct their ballots.

In September, Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court ruled that mail-in ballots could be accepted three days after Election Day. The issue went to the U.S. Supreme Court, and following a 4-4 tie, Pennsylvania was permitted to accept ballots three days after Election Day.

Two days before Election Day, Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar (D), who oversees elections in the state, issued a guidance that proof of ID could be provided up until Nov. 12 to cure ballots.

President Trump’s legal team argued that Boockvar had no power to change the date. The ballots received from Nov. 10 through Nov. 12 were segregated until there was a ruling to determine if they would be counted or not.

On Thursday, Pennsylvania Judge Mary Hannah Leavitt ruled that Boockvar “lacked statutory authority” to enable an extension period to cure ballots.

“[T]he Court concludes that Respondent Kathy Boockvar, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Commonwealth, lacked statutory authority to issue the November 1, 2020, guidance to Respondents County Boards of Elections insofar as that guidance purported to change the deadline … for certain electors to verify proof of identification,” Leavitt said in a court order.

“Accordingly, the court hereby orders the respondents County Board of Elections are enjoined from counting any ballots that have been segregated pursuant to Paragraph 1 of this court’s order dated November 5, 2020, granting a special injunction,” Leavitt wrote.

“None of the votes affected by the ruling had yet been included in the state’s official tally,” according to the Philadelphia Inquirer. No indication was given on how many ballots were affected by Judge Leavitt’s ruling.

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden currently holds a 54,325-vote lead over President Trump in Pennsylvania.

Share
Categories
allegations chaos confusion distrust election election fraud election outcome electorate Headline News Intelwars Joe Biden LIES Mail-in ballots Mainstream media news Pennsylvania postal worker propaganda public perception recant Richard Hopkins STORY United States usps

Election Fraud USPS Whistleblower Stands Against MSM Saying He “Recanted”

In a video posted Tuesday evening, Richard Hopkins, a United States Postal Service worker in Pennsylvania who said voter fraud was rampant denied taking back his statements when speaking to authorities. “I’m here to say I did not recant my statements. That did not happen,” said Richard Hopkins, standing against the mainstream media’s allegations.

The plan to say Hopkins recanted is backfiring, but it was probably one last-ditch effort by Democrats to maintain control of public perception about the outcome of the election, which should not have been called according to Real Clear Politics.

According to The New York Post, congressional Democrats and a major US newspaper claimed had recanted his allegations of mail-in-ballot tampering is denying that he walked back his words.

Hopkins is standing against the lying and propagating mainstream media.

Hopkins’ allegations — first reported by conservative activist group Project Veritas — were included in a federal lawsuit filed Monday by Trump’s campaign.

The suit alleges that Keystone State officials created “an illegal ‘two-tiered’ voting system” that unfairly favors mail-in ballots and “encourages ballot fraud or tampering.”

“It has been reported by Project Veritas, in a release on November 5, 2020, that carriers were told to collect, separate and deliver all mail-in ballots directly to the supervisor,” the suit says. –The New York Post

This situation seems strange.

“It has been reported by Project Veritas, in a release on November 5, 2020, that carriers were told to collect, separate and deliver all mail-in ballots directly to the supervisor,” the suit says.

After news of Hopkins recanting was initially reported, Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh weighed in as well, arguing that Hopkins “filed a very detailed affidavit. He named names. He described explicitly what it is that he experienced.”

Murtaugh also suggested that Hopkins’ recantation may not have been entirely voluntary.

“Earlier today, we saw our own attorney, in some cases, doxxed on Twitter and public invitations to harass attorneys who have been involved in pursuing the president’s lawful avenues through the courts and also connected to what we will eventually pursue in recounts,” he said. -NY Post

Real Clear Politics: “The Media Should NOT Have Called This Election!”

The post Election Fraud USPS Whistleblower Stands Against MSM Saying He “Recanted” first appeared on SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don't Say We Didn't Warn You.

Share
Categories
allegations chaos confusion distrust election election fraud election outcome electorate Headline News Intelwars Joe Biden LIES Mail-in ballots Mainstream media news Pennsylvania postal worker propaganda public perception recant Richard Hopkins STORY United States usps

Election Fraud USPS Whistleblower Stands Against MSM Saying He “Recanted”

In a video posted Tuesday evening, Richard Hopkins, a United States Postal Service worker in Pennsylvania who said voter fraud was rampant denied taking back his statements when speaking to authorities. “I’m here to say I did not recant my statements. That did not happen,” said Richard Hopkins, standing against the mainstream media’s allegations.

The plan to say Hopkins recanted is backfiring, but it was probably one last-ditch effort by Democrats to maintain control of public perception about the outcome of the election, which should not have been called according to Real Clear Politics.

According to The New York Post, congressional Democrats and a major US newspaper claimed had recanted his allegations of mail-in-ballot tampering is denying that he walked back his words.

Hopkins is standing against the lying and propagating mainstream media.

Hopkins’ allegations — first reported by conservative activist group Project Veritas — were included in a federal lawsuit filed Monday by Trump’s campaign.

The suit alleges that Keystone State officials created “an illegal ‘two-tiered’ voting system” that unfairly favors mail-in ballots and “encourages ballot fraud or tampering.”

“It has been reported by Project Veritas, in a release on November 5, 2020, that carriers were told to collect, separate and deliver all mail-in ballots directly to the supervisor,” the suit says. –The New York Post

This situation seems strange.

“It has been reported by Project Veritas, in a release on November 5, 2020, that carriers were told to collect, separate and deliver all mail-in ballots directly to the supervisor,” the suit says.

After news of Hopkins recanting was initially reported, Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh weighed in as well, arguing that Hopkins “filed a very detailed affidavit. He named names. He described explicitly what it is that he experienced.”

Murtaugh also suggested that Hopkins’ recantation may not have been entirely voluntary.

“Earlier today, we saw our own attorney, in some cases, doxxed on Twitter and public invitations to harass attorneys who have been involved in pursuing the president’s lawful avenues through the courts and also connected to what we will eventually pursue in recounts,” he said. -NY Post

Real Clear Politics: “The Media Should NOT Have Called This Election!”

The post Election Fraud USPS Whistleblower Stands Against MSM Saying He “Recanted” first appeared on SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don't Say We Didn't Warn You.

Share
Categories
2020 Election 2020 presidential election Intelwars Pennsylvania Pennsylvania ballots usps

Chaos erupts after Dems claim that USPS whistleblower recanted his testimony, whistleblower denies recanting

The bizarre case of the Erie, Pennsylvania, U.S. Postal Service whistleblower who claims that he overheard his supervisors discussing backdating the postmarks on absentee ballots took another twist Tuesday when Democrats on the House Oversight Committee claimed that the whistleblower recanted, only to have the whistleblower release a video denying that he recanted.

The whistleblower, who has been identified as Richard Hopkins, claimed in an affidavit that he overheard his supervisor telling another postal employee that he had backdated a group of mail-in ballots that were collected on Nov. 4 to make it appear that they had in fact been mailed on Nov. 3. Under a ruling from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, ballots that were mailed by Nov. 3 will still be counted (pending a legal challenge to this ruling) even if they were received after Election Day.

It is important to note that, even if the whistleblower’s allegations are true, none of the ballots received after Nov. 3 have yet been counted or added to either candidate’s total. Thus, the whistleblower’s allegations do not directly pertain to Biden’s current lead in the state. The state has revealed that about 10,000 votes total were received in the mail between Nov. 3 and Friday, but those ballots have remained sequestered and uncounted pending the Trump campaign’s legal challenge to their inclusion. Presumably, if the Trump campaign’s challenge fails, those ballots will only serve to increase Biden’s current lead in the Keystone State.

Nevertheless, the whistleblower’s affidavit has become a flash point of controversy as it represents one of the few concrete allegations of voter fraud that have been brought forth by the campaign. The affidavit appears to have been the reason for remarks by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) over the weekend promising a Senate Judiciary Committee investigation into voting irregularities.

The controversy intensified Tuesday afternoon when Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released a statement claiming that the whistleblower had “recanted” his testimony, a claim that was magnified by many in the media.

Project Veritas, which publicized Hopkins’ story, did not waste time refuting this characterization, releasing a video of Hopkins saying that he did not recant his testimony.

In a subsequent tweet, O’Keefe claims that federal investigators “intimidated” Hopkins and complains that he was interviewed for four hours without legal counsel. He further promised a full release of the transcript of that interview.

Although Hopkins has denied “recanting,” it is not yet clear what he did say to federal agents during their interview or whether he may have revised some details that he claimed in his affidavit.

Hopkins was also praised by President Donald Trump on Twitter, who stated, “A brave patriot. More & more people are stepping forward to expose this Rigged Election!”

Share
Categories
chaos Conspiracy Fact and Theory CORRUPTION Donald Trump election chaos election crimes chief elitists Emergency Preparedness Headline News Intelwars investigate voter fraud Joe Biden left vs right paradigm LIES modeling new policy Pennsylvania Prepare Probe resigns Richard Pilger ruling class substantial allegations William Barr

AG Barr Approves Probe Into Election Fraud & Almost Immediately DOJ Election Crimes Chief RESIGNES

Almost immediately upon the announcement that attorney general William Barr approves an investigative probe into election and voter fraud, the acting Department of Justice Election Crimes Chief resigns.  It shouldn’t matter what side you are on, that’s telling.

Most readers understand I no longer participate or believe in the left vs. right paradigm, and therefore, have no dog in this fight, so to speak.  However, this election isn’t over just yet, and we should have known that this one would be contested. After all, the elitists modeled this exact scenario:

Another Secret Model: A Contested 2020 Election

As we’ve mentioned before, do not be surprised if this thing goes one way (which it appears to have gone to Joe Biden) only to turn around and go back the other way (Donald Trump.) This would cause huge societal upheaval. But is looking more likely by the day.

Barr authorized federal prosecutors to pursue “substantial allegations” of irregularities in the 2020 presidential election, the head of the DOJ’s Election Crimes Branch has decided to resign. “Having familiarized myself with the new policy and its ramifications, Richard Pilger wrote in an email to his colleagues, obtained on Monday by the New York Times, “I must regretfully resign from my role as director of the Election Crimes Branch.” 

Pilger reportedly said he would move to a different role at the DOJ, working on corruption prosecutions.

The policy change mentioned by Pilger was outlined by Barr in a memo on Monday, in which the AG argues that it is imperative that the American people can trust that our elections were conducted in such a way that the outcomes accurately reflect the will of the voters.” Previously, the Electoral Crimes Branch would not take overt investigative steps until the election was over, its results certified and all recounts and other contests concluded, Barr wrote, but such a passive and delayed enforcement approach can result in situations in which election misconduct cannot realistically be rectified.”

Barr’s new policy authorizes inquiries and reviews if there are “clear and apparently credible allegations” of irregularities that, “if true, could potentially impact the outcome of a federal election in an individual state.” The mainstream media is continuing to cast doubt on the possibility of election fraud saying these claims are “unfounded.”

While Democrat Joe Biden declared victory on Saturday after mainstream media reported that he has more than the 270 electoral votes needed, President Donald Trump has challenged that in court. None of the states have yet certified their election results, and Trump’s lawsuits seek an audit of the vote in multiple states where his early lead was wiped out by mail-in votes counted long after Election Day. RT

Stay alert to what’s happening. If this election swings back to Donald Trump, the left is going to lose their minds and we could see chaos like never before on the streets. Perhaps that was the plan all along…

Secret Models of “The Darkest Winter”

More Preplanned Election Chaos: Trump Says The Supreme Court Will “Sort Out” The Election

 

The post AG Barr Approves Probe Into Election Fraud & Almost Immediately DOJ Election Crimes Chief RESIGNES first appeared on SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don't Say We Didn't Warn You.

Share
Categories
2020 Election 2020 presidential election Alaska Arizona Arizona vote count Georgia Georgia ballots Intelwars Nevada North Carolina Pennsylvania Pennsylvania ballots

Saturday morning and still no victor declared in presidential race. Here’s where things stand now.

It’s Saturday, four days after the what has been called by many “the biggest election of our lifetimes.” As of right now, the race between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden is still too close to call. Here’s where things stand at the moment in the six states yet to be called.

Pennsylvania — 20 electoral votes

? Biden leads by 29,000 votes.

? There are about 89,000 ballots left to count statewide according to the state’s voting website, votespa.com. Allegheny County in Pennsylvania has about 30,000 ballots remaining to be counted, and Philadelphia has about 20,000, the state’s site reported. Those results are expected to be posted by Saturday afternoon. County Executive Rich Fitzgerald told CNN that there are another 17,000 provisional ballots that will be counted by next week.

Supreme Court Justice on Friday evening issued an order that ballots received after 8 p.m. ET on Election Day be segregated, Fox News reported. The segregation was already supposed to be happening statewide per an agreement state officials had made previously. Alito’s order was to ensure that “all boards are complying” with the statewide guidance on vote segregation.

Georgia — 16 electoral votes

? Biden leads by 7,000 votes.

? As of Friday night, Georgia was reporting 8,400 outstanding military ballots that could be received by the end of the day to be counted, as long as the were postmarked by Nov. 4. This does not mean there are 8,400 military ballots to be counted — just that there could be up to that many if hey were all sent in by Friday night and had the correct postmark.

The state also said it had 14,200 provisional ballots outstanding as of Friday night.

With as close things are in the Peach State now, the Georgia secretary of state said Friday that there will be a statewide recount.

Nevada — 6 electoral votes

? Biden leads by 23,000 votes.

? State officials told CNN the the Silver State still had 124,500 outstanding ballots and that there are approximately 60,000 provisional ballots. According to officials, 90% of the ballots remaining to be counted are from Clark County, the home of Las Vegas where Democrats have performed well.

The state is expecting to release more vote counts Saturday afternoon.

Many observers are asking what’s taking so long in Nevada. But according to KABC-TV, “government officials say they are emphasizing accuracy over speed in a year when processing an unprecedented flood of mail-in ballots under extended deadlines is taking more time.”

Secretary of State spokeswoman Jennifer A. Russell said in an email to KABC, “We told everyone early on that results would take at least ten days.”

Arizona — 11 electoral votes

? Biden leads by 30,000 votes

? Trump ate into Biden’s lead when the state updated its totals Friday evening. There are still 173,000 ballots remaining to be counted, including 47,000 provisional ballots.

Officials expect to put out another batch of vote counts by 11 a.m. ET.

North Carolina — 15 electoral votes

? Trump leads by 76,000 votes.

? Though it seems unlikely that Biden can overtake Trump’s significant lead in North Carolina, the state remains too close to call because, according to WSOC-TV, the state is still receiving ballots. In fact, the state has said it will process and count votes delivered by mail through Nov. 12, as long as they were postmarked by Nov. 4.

Counties have until Nov. 13 to finish counting.

Alaska — 3 electoral votes

? Trump leads by 54,000

? Here’s another state where it seems unlikely Biden can make up the difference. But so far, only about 47% of the vote has been counted. The state’s system does not allow officials to begin counting absentee ballots or in-person early votes until Nov. 10, Forbes said. The makes Alaska the last state in the union to county absentee ballots.

According to Forbes, “Mail-in ballots in Alaska must be postmarked by Election Day, but must be received by Nov. 13 for voters within the U.S., or by Nov. 18 for voters outside the U.S., and the vote count must be completed by Nov. 18.”

Share
Categories
ballots Filling Intelwars Pennsylvania Poll workers Videos

Pennsylvania county responds after viral videos show poll workers filling out ballots

Viral videos circulating on the internet purport to show poll workers in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, filling out blank ballots as the state continues to count votes critical to determining the winner of the presidential race between President Donald Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.

But the county has provided an explanation for what is going, and
Reuters, PolitiFact, and USA Today have all found the allegations of fraud to be false.

What are the details?

One video shows a male poll worker in a black shirt appearing to fill out ballots and stamp them while he is sitting across from a female worker who is wearing a grey sweater. Two other female workers can be seen sitting next to the pair at a nearby separate table.

A second video shows one of the women at the second table filling out ballots.

Delaware County responded in a
press release, confirming that the footage was recorded on its official live stream while saying that the viral footage had been “altered” and that “some residents” are “making false accusations” about what the video shows. The county did not specify which video was allegedly altered, but it did point out:

The actual video shows the election worker at a table with other coworkers in a room full of people with bipartisan observers a few feet away at each end of the table, closely observing the worker from approximately 6 feet away. This arrangement was agreed upon between the Election Bureau and the former Republican Chairman of Delaware County Council, acting in his capacity as counsel for the Delaware County Republican Party.

The county shared a screenshot showing the same workers, and the observers monitoring the process.


Image source: Delaware County Pennsylvania government website

The county explains:

During the processing of ballots, a machine extractor opens the ballots. Some ballots were damaged by the extractor during this process in such a way that the ballots could not be scanned successfully. According to the scanner manufacturer, Hart, the best practice to deal with damaged ballots that cannot be scanned is to transcribe the votes on each ballot to a clean ballot and scan the clean ballot. In accordance with that guidance, the Chief Clerk of the Delaware County Bureau of Elections instructed elections staff to manually transcribe the damaged ballots. As ballots were being transcribed, the original damaged ballots were directly beside the new ballots and bipartisan observers witnessed the process at close range. Damaged ballots have been preserved.

A third video also taken from Delaware County’s live stream shows an overhead view of a different female poll worker filling out ballots while sitting directly across from a male worker wearing a long-sleeved plaid shirt.

The woman can clearly be seen filling out several ballots and stamping them, as a man narrating (while viewing on a computer) can be heard saying, “This lady is marking the ballots. I filmed her a half hour ago doing six, and she’s still working at it.”

A uniformed law enforcement officer can be seen walking by at one point, and the narrator says, “And there’s a security guard right there who’s watching her. The cops are in on it! Disgusting.”

But it does appear that the male poll worker in the video is reading off one (presumably damaged) ballot to the female worker who is filling out the blank ballots. TheBlaze has called and emailed Delaware County for further clarity on the process.


Poll workers in PA Filling Out Ballots

www.youtube.com

TheBlaze has not yet been able to determine who is narrating the video, but it does show the Delaware County live stream web address, and its multiple cameras.

Anything else?

President Trump has alleged that fraud is occurring in Pennsylvania and other states, as he has seen his lead eaten away in a number of states as election workers continue to conduct vote counts.

TheBlaze asked the Trump Campaign to confirm that its observers were, in fact, watching this process and that the people shown in the picture provided by the county were, in fact, Trump campaign observerse. The campaign has not yet commented specifically on the videos from Delaware County, and has not yet responded to TheBlaze’s request for comment.

Share