RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-squad-faces-a-freedom-force-11607108025?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

A quarter-century apart in age, Nicole Malliotakis and Michelle Steel are classmates. They’re both freshmen, Republicans who’ve won election to the House of Representatives for the first time. Each ousted an incumbent Democrat in a resolutely blue state—New York and California, respectively—where Joe Biden romped home in November. And each woman has a scathing view of the politics of the other’s state as well as of her own. They’re ready to scorn Govs. Andrew Cuomo and Gavin Newsom. As for Mayor Bill de Blasio, Ms. Malliotakis, a state assemblywoman from New York City, practically combusts at the mention of his name.

“I think our leaderships are competing with each other to be the most radical. They keep getting bad ideas from each other,” says Ms. Malliotakis, 40, who will represent New York’s 11th Congressional District, comprised of the borough of Staten Island and parts of Brooklyn.

“The leadership is trying to make these states into Third World countries,” Ms. Steel, 65, responds. She is a member of the Orange County Board of Supervisors, a local legislative body, and representative-elect from California’s 48th District, a beachy slice of the county. In Washington for a freshman orientation, including a lottery for office space, the two talk to me by Zoom from their hotel rooms near the Capitol.

Both are robust proponents of low taxes and limited government. “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” Ms. Malliotakis says: “The government should provide an environment for that—and then get out of the way.” Ms. Steel—who was born in South Korea and came to the U.S. at 19—confesses to drawing her earliest political beliefs from her mother’s experience as a clothing-store owner in Los Angeles. “I saw that my mom was harassed—really harassed—by a tax agency, the State Board of Equalization,” she says. “And you know what? I decided that the Republican Party’s ideology is much better for small-business owners. They need less regulation and smaller taxes.” Her first foray into elective politics was a successful run for the Board of Equalization in 2007.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/12/04/the-prima-facie-case-for-fraud/

Over the past month, thousands of detailed voter fraud claims have stemmed from the contested November 3 presidential election.

Americans are discussing the intricacies of software algorithms used by the now-infamous Dominion Voting Systems. There has been scrutiny of the insecure chain of custody of mail-in ballots and the signature verification process for those ballots. In several cases, the poll-watching that normally regulates vote tallying appears to have excluded Republicans. There’s plenty of evidence that Joe Biden secured the reliably Democratic necromancers’ union vote, and that unregistered voters and felons voted illegally. Postal workers have come forward claiming they were told to backdate ballots if ballots were postmarked after Election Day.

But while many complex pieces of evidence outlined in sworn affidavits and presented by lawyers are certainly necessary for the court battles that lie ahead, the court of public opinion is perhaps a more important battleground.

If the public at large thinks that Republican claims of voter fraud are, in the parlance of our times, malarkey, the courts will be less likely to hear Republicans’ cases or rule in Republicans’ favor. Bucking the public sentiment is not easy, even for judges who have sworn to remain impartial and rule in a manner consistent with facts. 

President Trump senses this. It’s why he described the need for a “brave judge, or justice” to hear his cases.

So instead of getting lost in the minutia, it might work in Republicans’ favor, especially in the court of public opinion, to harp on the prima facie case for voter fraud.

On that front, the obvious place to start is with Joe Biden’s vote total—supposedly a whopping 80 million. It’s a staggering number and one that could be called “unbelievable,” in the true sense of that word.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/12/democrats_defense_of_georgia_election_fraud_video_doesnt_hold_water.html

Immediately after the story broke about the video showing workers at the State Farm Arena in Atlanta counting ballots after poll observers had apparently been asked to leave, a purported news site sprang into action to “fact check” the report. While the “fact check” gave room to Democrat operatives to cover their derrieres, the counter-narrative was ludicrous. Additionally, new evidence about vote spikes and two of the vote counters behaving suspiciously gave even more credence to Republicans’ take on the surveillance video.

The video that galvanized so many people showed a large room in which poll observers were completely cordoned off from any meaningful observation. Shortly before 10:00 p.m., one of the poll workers – a black woman with eye-catching long, blond braids, approached the observers and, not long after that, with apparent reluctance, the observers filed away, vacating the room a little before 11 p.m.

At 11:00, with the room ostensibly shut down and the observers gone, the remaining poll workers suddenly sprang into action, dragging rolling suitcases out from under a table. They took ballots out of those suitcases and spent the next two hours scanning them, at a rate of about 3,000 ballots per hour per scanner.

If you go here, you can see several sharpened photographs showing what was going on.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/12/does_a_surveillance_video_prove_georgia_election_fraud.html

Georgia’s Fulton County, the most populous in the state, claimed that it needed to stop absentee ballot overnight on November 3–4 because of a burst pipe.  That was a lie.  There was no burst pipe, and the counting didn’t stop.  At a hearing on Thursday, surveillance footage emerged showing that the ballots being secretly counted came from suitcases hidden under a table.

Here’s what seems to have happened: in Fulton County, Georgia, the people who planned to add fake ballots to Biden’s vote count on election night had an overall good plan.  First, announce that a burst pipe required everybody to vacate the building until morning, and, second, count fake votes.

The planners missed two details.  First, they forgot to make sure the government’s documents supported the “burst pipe” narrative.  Text messages emerged showing that nothing had burst.  Instead, there was a quickly contained slow leak that didn’t even generate a work order.

Second, they forgot that the State Farm Arena, where the counting took place, has surveillance cameras all over.  On Wednesday, intrepid volunteers obtained the videos from the surveillance cameras in the room in which the count took place and, by doing so, may have discovered the election fraud smoking gun.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/12/im_a_legislator_in_pennsylvania_and_im_suing_the_governor_for_election_fraud.html

Actions by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and secretary of state in the 2020 general election were so fraught with inconsistencies, documented irregularities, and improprieties (see filing below) that the election results for the office of president of the United States cannot be determined.  The actions were so flagrant and egregious that I am a plaintiff in a case in the Commonwealth Court against Gov. Tom Wolf, et al. to seek relief.

The flawed processes associated with mail-in balloting, pre-canvassing, and canvassing have so undermined the election that only the in-person Election Day results have any semblance of validity.  Because the mail-in process was so fatally flawed, the results cannot be audited, which may have been the governor’s objective when he acted unilaterally to replace voting machines last year and demanded certain election reforms.

In any business or organization, internal controls are designed to deter wrongdoing.  Likewise, elections require reasonable controls to ensure that the results accurately reflect the will of the voters.  The system of controls over voting in Pennsylvania’s 2020 General Election were so deficient as to render the results of the mail-in ballot process incapable of being relied upon.  Therefore, the Legislature, of which I am a member, introduced a resolution declaring the results of statewide electoral contests in the 2020 general election in dispute.

Several actions led up to this.  In September, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court overreached by extending the deadline for mail-in ballots to be received and mandating that ballots mailed without a postmark would be presumed to be received on time and could be accepted without a verified voter signature.

On Oct. 23, less than two weeks before the Nov. 3 general election, and at the request of the secretary of the commonwealth, the state Supreme Court ruled that signatures for mail-in ballots need not be authenticated, thereby treating in-person and mail-in voters dissimilarly and eliminating a critical safeguard against election crime.  In the same order, the court authorized the use of drop boxes for the collection of ballots, leaving them vulnerable to ballot-harvesting.