Presidentsverkiezingen VS #82 =

quote:

Arizona state Rep. Mark Finchem read a letter from a whistleblower who claims Democrat operatives added 35,000 votes to Democrat candidates during Pima County’s election integrity hearing held this week.
Election integrity advocate Mark Finchem read from an email previously “included in some of the testimony and evidence” from the famous election integrity hearing held on November 30 of last year. According to Finchem, this email “sets the stage” for election integrity efforts.

Finchem says the letter was dated November 10, 2020, and “is addressed to the criminal division at the U.S. Department of Justice.”

A transcript of the letter read by Finchem during his speech is below:

‘This is anonymous reporting and I do not want to be included in this investigation. Thank you.

Please be advised the Pima County Recorder, located at 240 N. Stone Avenue in Tucson, Arizona, 85701 in Pima County, Arizona, and the Democrat Party added fraud votes. In the initial count of the vote by mail (VBM) totals released at 8 pm on November 3, 2020, There are approximately 35,000 fraud votes added to each Democrat candidates’ vote totals. Candidates impacted include County, State, and Federal Election candidates. Through the utilization of the automated ballot count machines in Pima County Elections, My understanding is that 35,000 was embedded into each Democrat candidates’ total votes. Below are the meeting notes.

In a meeting I was invited to by the Democrat party in Pima County, Arizona on September 10, 2020, no phones or recording devices were allowed. A presentation was given including detailed plans to embed 35,000 votes in a spread configured distribution to each Democrat candidate’s vote totals.

When I asked, “How in the world would 35,000 votes be kept hidden, or from being discovered?” It was stated that spread distribution will be embedded across the total registered vote range and will not exceed the registered voter count. And the 35,000 was determined allowable for Pima County based on our county registered voter count.

It was also stated total voter turnout versus total registered voters determined how many votes we can embed. The embedding will also adjust based on voter turnout. Because the embedded votes are distributed sporadically, all embedded votes will not be found if audited because embeds are in groups of approximately 1,000. This is so the County Recorder can declare an oversight issue or error, as a group of 1,000 is a normal and acceptable error.

Maricopa County’s embed totals will be substantially larger than Pima, due to embeds being calculated based on the total number of registered voters. When I asked, “Has this ever been tested, and how do we know it works?” the response was, yes, this has been tested and has shown significant success in Arizona judicial retention elections, since 2014. Even undetectable in post audits because no candidate will spend the kind of funds needed to audit and contact voters to verify votes and the full potential of the total registered voters, which is more than 500,000 registered voters. This year our Secretary of State has removed precinct level detail from election night releases, so candidates can’t see precinct over-votes.

This is what I have from this meeting. Just thought I’d report this. Not sure if you can do anything since I was unable to have a recording device at this meeting. Thank You.’

Finchem also told Pima County that his team was able to verify that the IP address matching the computer used to send the email is in Tucson, Arizona, but noted that he has been unable to verify the identity of the whistleblower. National File has not been able to independently verify the whistleblower’s claims.

On her website, Arizona state Sen. Wendy Rogers compiled a series of bullet points from the hearing.

Among other findings noted by Rogers, it was alleged that “Every voting machine violated Arizona Code § 16-442(B), which states that voting machines “may only be certified for use in [Arizona] if they comply with the Help America Vote Act of 2002 and…have been tested and approved by a laboratory that is accredited pursuant to the Help America Vote Act of 2002.” Additionally, “None of the required documents or items were submitted, e.g. bonds. This represents work being done without a contract.”

Finchem has called for Pima County to be audited in a fashion similar to Maricopa County, and is acquiring petitions to pressure legislators into reexamining the 2020 election in another county.

The Maricopa County, Arizona audit revealed multiple anomalies that vastly outsize the number of votes attributed to Joe Biden’s win in the state, leading to more claims that the 2020 election was not credible.

Multiple Arizona Republicans, including Rogers, Finchem, and Arizona Republican Party Chair Kelli Ward, have called for the state’s 2020 election results to be decertified. In October, Ward also joined the call for Pima County’s 2020 election results to be audited.

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, who is now running for U.S. Senate, has been criticized by 45th President Donald Trump for not acting on the findings of the Maricopa County audit.

quote:

Op woensdag 15 december 2021 09:29 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
Dus een anonieme whistleblower claimt dat er illegaal stemmen zijn opgeteld bij de Democratische kandidaten? Hij of zij levert geen bewijs voor de bewering, maar schrijft 'it is my understanding that'.

Nee, goed verhaal.

quote:

Op woensdag 15 december 2021 09:29 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
Dus een anonieme whistleblower claimt dat er illegaal stemmen zijn opgeteld bij de Democratische kandidaten? Hij of zij levert geen bewijs voor de bewering, maar schrijft 'it is my understanding that'.

Nee, goed verhaal.

quote:

Op woensdag 15 december 2021 09:29 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
Dus een anonieme whistleblower claimt dat er illegaal stemmen zijn opgeteld bij de Democratische kandidaten? Hij of zij levert geen bewijs voor de bewering, maar schrijft 'it is my understanding that'.

Nee, goed verhaal.

quote:

Op woensdag 15 december 2021 08:45 schreef QuidProJoe het volgende:
[ twitter ]

ARIZONA: Whistleblower Claims 35,000 Votes Were Added To Democrat Totals In Pima County's 2020 Election
[..]

quote:

Op woensdag 15 december 2021 09:29 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
Dus een anonieme whistleblower claimt dat er illegaal stemmen zijn opgeteld bij de Democratische kandidaten? Hij of zij levert geen bewijs voor de bewering, maar schrijft 'it is my understanding that'.

Nee, goed verhaal.

quote:

Op woensdag 15 december 2021 09:41 schreef Barbusse het volgende:

[..]
Site die het plaatst is ook al zo super betrouwbaar

quote:

Op woensdag 15 december 2021 15:58 schreef OMG het volgende:
Grappig voor iemand die zo kritisch is je dan weer niks te zeggen hebt over deze "bron". .

quote:

Oops, he did it again. After leaking fake Donald Trump, Jr. emails, fabricating the transcript of a 2019 phone call between former President Donald Trump and Ukraine’s president, and lying about his interactions with the so-called whistleblower behind House Democrats’ first impeachment of Trump, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is now running the same con against a fellow lawmaker. During a hearing Monday night on the riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, Adam Schiff claimed to have proof that a member of Congress texted former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to instruct former Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.

Not only did Schiff misrepresent the substance of the text message and its source, he even doctored original text messages, which were obtained and reviewed by The Federalist in their entirety.

“I want to display just a few of the message[s] he received from people in Congress,” Schiff said, referring to Meadows. “The committee is not naming these lawmakers at this time as our investigation is ongoing. If we could cue the first graphic.”

The following graphic, purportedly of the text message between a member of Congress and Meadows, then appeared on screen at Schiff’s direction:

“This one reads, ‘On January 6, 2021, Vice President Mike Pence, as President of the Senate, should call out all electoral votes that he believes are unconstitutional as no electoral votes at all,’” Schiff continued. “You can see why this is so critical to ask Mr. Meadows about. About a lawmaker suggesting that the former vice president simply throw out votes that he unilaterally deems unconstitutional in order to overturn a presidential election and subvert the will of the American people.”

Not only did Schiff lie about the substance of the text message and its source, he even doctored the message and graphic that he displayed on screen during his statement. The full text message, which was forwarded to Meadows from Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on the evening of Monday, Jan. 5, was significantly longer than what Schiff read and put on screen, but Schiff erased significant portions of the text and added punctuation where there was none to give the impression that Jordan himself was tersely directing Meadows to give orders to Pence on how to handle the electoral vote certification.

The original text was written by Washington attorney and former Department of Defense Inspector General Joseph Schmitz and included an attachment of a four-page draft Word document drafted by Schmitz that detailed Schmitz’s legal reasoning for suggesting that Pence had the constitutional authority to object to the certification of electoral votes submitted by a handful of states. The piece that Schmitz had sent to Jordan was published at the website everylegal.vote the next day and even included the same “DISCUSSION DRAFT” heading and timestamp on the document that Schmitz sent to Jordan.

“Good luck tomorrow!” Schmitz texted Jordan on the evening of Jan. 5, including the Word document as an attachment. Schmitz then texted to Jordan a three-paragraph summary of his Word document, which Schiff sliced and diced and then attributed to Jordan:

“On January 6, 2021, Vice President Mike Pence, as President of the Senate, should call out all the electoral votes that he believes are unconstitutional as no electoral votes at all — in accordance with guidance from founding father Alexander Hamilton and judicial precedence,” Schmitz texted. In his graphic, Schiff erased the final clause and the em dash preceding it and added a period to the first clause without disclosing that he or his staff had chopped up the text and created a fake graphic misrepresenting the actual contents of the text message.

Schmitz continued: “‘No legislative act,’ wrote Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No. 78, ‘contrary to the Constitution, can be valid.’ The court in Hubbard v. Lowe reinforced this truth: ‘That an unconstitutional statute is not a law at all is a proposition no longer open to discussion.’ 226 F. 135, 137 (SDNY 1915), appeal dismissed, 242 U.S. 654 (1916).”

“Following this rationale, an unconstitutionally appointed elector, like an unconstitutionally enacted statute, is no elector at all,” Schmitz wrote.

In his statement and on-screen graphic, Schiff erased the final two paragraphs and the final clause of the first paragraph of the text message before inserting punctuation that was never there, all without disclosing what he was doing. The graphic displayed by Schiff, which was doctored to look like an exact screenshot, was similarly doctored, as it contained content that was never in the original message and eliminated content that was.

“Is anyone surprised that Adam Schiff is again rifling through private text messages and cherry-picking information to fit his partisan narrative and sow misinformation?” asked Jordan spokesman Russell Dye.

According to a source familiar with the matter, Schiff never approached Jordan to discuss the text messages prior to chopping them up and misrepresenting them during Monday night’s hearing. Had he done so or bothered asking Jordan about the text message, Schiff would have known that Jordan was merely relaying to Meadows, without comment, an attorney’s summary of that attorney’s own legal argument as to what Pence should or shouldn’t do.

Multiple sources who regularly communicate with Jordan also scoffed at the idea that Jordan, who’s known for writing only brief, one- or two-word texts, if at all, would sit down and type out a multi-paragraph narrative with precise, legal citations akin to a lengthy court brief.

“The idea that Jordan would sit down and punch out a long-winded legal argument via text is absurd,” one individual who regularly talks to Jordan told The Federalist. “That’s just not how he works.”

One Republican colleague of Jordan laughed out loud when asked by The Federalist if Jordan was known for sending lengthy texts.

“If he texts at all, it’s usually something like ‘yes’ or ‘call me,’” that colleague said.

Another GOP lawmaker echoed those sentiments about Jordan’s tech habits.

“That’s just not Jim’s style,” one lawmaker close to Jordan told The Federalist. “Long, nerdy paragraphs might be my style, but that’s not Jim’s style at all.”

“Plus, you have to remember what was going on at that time,” the lawmaker noted. “People were sending around these law review articles and debates left and right because we had an interest in learning the facts and getting them right. And if it’s somehow seditious in this country to debate or share a law review article on Alexander Hamilton’s view on things, that’s not really a country I want to be a part of anymore.”

Schiff and his team have a long history of doctoring and fabricating evidence to show their political enemies in the worst possible light. While Trump, Jr. was testifying during a 2017 congressional hearing on the Russian collusion hoax, Schiff’s committee leaked to CNN and NBC emails purportedly from Trump, Jr. that showed he had communicated with someone about hacked WikiLeaks documents prior to their public release.

In reality, despite each network claiming that it had verified the claims about the emails (CNN even falsely claimed that Trump, Jr.’s own attorney had “verified” the network’s reporting), each network botched the dates on the document. Rather than prove that the president’s oldest son had been privately colluding with WikiLeaks about documents the organization had illegally obtained, the real emails — not those doctored by Schiff or his committee — showed only that a random person with no connection to Trump, Jr. had found his email address and sent the information to him after the documents were already publicly available.

During 2019 impeachment hearings against Trump, Schiff went back to that same playbook and doctored a transcript of a telephone call between Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky. After getting skewered for fabricating the transcript of a phone conversation between two world leaders, Schiff later claimed, without evidence, that his version of the call was only meant to be a parody, rather than a verbatim account of the phone call.

Schiff also lied about his interactions with the so-called whistleblower whose leak of the phone call between Trump and Zelensky was used by House Democrats as a pretext for impeaching Trump and overturning the 2016 election results.

Coincidentally, Schiff’s lie came in response to a question during a November 2019 hearing from Jordan about interactions between Schiff and his staff and the so-called whistleblower.

“First, as the gentleman knows,” Schiff lectured, “that’s a false statement. I do not know the identity of the whistleblower.” However, according to a report from The New York Times, the so-called whistleblower personally contacted Schiff’s office before the so-called whistleblower ever even filed his complaint against Trump with the inspector general that is supposed to oversee the country’s federal spy agencies.

“Schiff, House Intel Chairman, Got Early Account of Whistle-Blower’s Accusations,” The New York Times headline noted.

Schiff’s office did not respond to multiple requests for comment about the doctored text messages from Jordan.

quote:

Op woensdag 15 december 2021 18:12 schreef Ulx het volgende:
De conservatieve National Review zoekt ook dekking. Daar zien ze de bui ook al hangen.

[ twitter ]

quote:

Op woensdag 15 december 2021 18:24 schreef Ulx het volgende:
[ twitter ]

quote:

Op woensdag 15 december 2021 19:58 schreef QuidProJoe het volgende:
[ twitter ]

Hihi. Bij Brandon en de Democraten zit de paniek er goed in dat het tellen van de stemmen niet meer een practisch exclusief feestje van de Democraten is. Paniek die trouwens ook merkbaar is op dit forum. Lang leve de Grote Ontwaking.

quote:

Op woensdag 15 december 2021 20:01 schreef Barbusse het volgende:

[..]
Echt volkomen van het padje af ben je zeg