UPDATE: In the Supreme Court of the United States L. Lin Wood, Jr., Petitioner v. Brad Raffensperger, Georgia Secretary of State, et al. & Timothy King, et al., Petitioners v. Gretchen Whitmer, Governor of Michigan, et al. & In Re Coreco Ja'Qan Pearson, et al., Petitioners

 

In the Supreme Court of the United States L. Lin Wood, Jr., Petitioner v. Brad Raffensperger, Georgia Secretary of State, et al.

Supreme Court of the United States

No. 20-799

DATE                         PROCEEDINGS AND ORDERS

Dec 30 2020	Amicus brief of Todd C. Bank submitted. Main Document Proof of Service Certificate of Word Count

 

In the Supreme Court of the United States Timothy King, et al., Petitioners v. Gretchen Whitmer, Governor of Michigan, et al.

Supreme Court of the United States

No. 20-815

DATE                         PROCEEDINGS AND ORDERS

Dec 28 2020	Response of Gretchen Whitmer, Governor; Jocelyn Benson, Secretary of State; and the Michigan Board of State Canvassers to motion submitted. Main Document Proof of Service
Dec 30 2020	Letter to Clerk of Timothy King submitted. Main Document

In the Supreme Court of the United States In Re Coreco Ja'Qan Pearson, et al., Petitioners

Supreme Court of the United States

No.. 20-816

DATE                         PROCEEDINGS AND ORDERS

Dec 30 2020	Letter to Clerk of Coreco Ja'Qan Pearson, et al. submitted. Main Document

UPDATE: WISCONSIN VOTERS ALLIANCE v. PENCE (1:20-cv-03791) District Court, District of Columbia

Dec 22, 2020
COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ADCDC-7990281) filed by JEFF L MURSAU, BARON BENHAM, WARREN PETERSON, PENNSYLVANIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, WISCONSIN VOTERS ALLIANCE, MATTHEW MADDOCK, SONNY BORRELLI, DAVID STEFFEN, DEBBIE JACQUES, MATTHEW DADICH, LEAH HOOPES, WILLIAM T LIGON, BRANDON BEACH, RICHARD W KUCKSDORF, LYNIE STONE, GEORGIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, BRENDA SAVAGE, RON HEUER, JOHN WOOD, DEBI HAAS, ELECTION INTEGRITY FUND, DAIRE RENDON, ARIZONA VOTER INTEGRITY ALLIANCE. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summons)(Kaardal, Erick) (Entered: 12/22/2020)
Main Doc­ument Complaint

Attach­ment 1 Civil Cover Sheet


Dec 22, 2020
MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by ARIZONA VOTER INTEGRITY ALLIANCE, BRANDON BEACH, BARON BENHAM, SONNY BORRELLI, MATTHEW DADICH, ELECTION INTEGRITY FUND, GEORGIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, DEBI HAAS, RON HEUER, LEAH HOOPES, DEBBIE JACQUES, RICHARD W KUCKSDORF, WILLIAM T LIGON, MATTHEW MADDOCK, JEFF L MURSAU, PENNSYLVANIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, WARREN PETERSON, DAIRE RENDON, BRENDA SAVAGE, DAVID STEFFEN, LYNIE STONE, WISCONSIN VOTERS ALLIANCE, JOHN WOOD (Kaardal, Erick) (Entered: 12/22/2020)
Main Doc­ument Motion for Preliminary Injunction


Dec 22, 2020
NOTICE OF HEARING by ARIZONA VOTER INTEGRITY ALLIANCE, BRANDON BEACH, BARON BENHAM, SONNY BORRELLI, MATTHEW DADICH, ELECTION INTEGRITY FUND, GEORGIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, DEBI HAAS, RON HEUER, LEAH HOOPES, DEBBIE JACQUES, RICHARD W KUCKSDORF, WILLIAM T LIGON, MATTHEW MADDOCK, JEFF L MURSAU, PENNSYLVANIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, WARREN PETERSON, DAIRE RENDON, BRENDA SAVAGE, DAVID STEFFEN, LYNIE STONE, WISCONSIN VOTERS ALLIANCE, JOHN WOOD re 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Kaardal, Erick) (Entered: 12/22/2020)
Main Doc­ument Notice (Other)


Dec 22, 2020
MEMORANDUM re 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by WISCONSIN VOTERS ALLIANCE, SONNY BORRELLI, RICHARD W KUCKSDORF, DEBBIE JACQUES, ARIZONA VOTER INTEGRITY ALLIANCE, WARREN PETERSON, DAIRE RENDON, MATTHEW DADICH, BRENDA SAVAGE, JOHN WOOD, JEFF L MURSAU, GEORGIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, BARON BENHAM, PENNSYLVANIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, LEAH HOOPES, MATTHEW MADDOCK, LYNIE STONE, WILLIAM T LIGON, RON HEUER, DEBI HAAS, BRANDON BEACH, ELECTION INTEGRITY FUND, DAVID STEFFEN by ARIZONA VOTER INTEGRITY ALLIANCE, BRANDON BEACH, BARON BENHAM, SONNY BORRELLI, MATTHEW DADICH, ELECTION INTEGRITY FUND, GEORGIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, DEBI HAAS, RON HEUER, LEAH HOOPES, DEBBIE JACQUES, RICHARD W KUCKSDORF, WILLIAM T LIGON, MATTHEW MADDOCK, JEFF L MURSAU, PENNSYLVANIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, WARREN PETERSON, DAIRE RENDON, BRENDA SAVAGE, DAVID STEFFEN, LYNIE STONE, WISCONSIN VOTERS ALLIANCE, JOHN WOOD. (Kaardal, Erick) (Entered: 12/22/2020)
Main Doc­ument Memorandum


Dec 22, 2020
AFFIDAVIT re 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Declaration of Erick Kaardal by ARIZONA VOTER INTEGRITY ALLIANCE, BRANDON BEACH, BARON BENHAM, SONNY BORRELLI, MATTHEW DADICH, ELECTION INTEGRITY FUND, GEORGIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, DEBI HAAS, RON HEUER, LEAH HOOPES, DEBBIE JACQUES, RICHARD W KUCKSDORF, WILLIAM T LIGON, MATTHEW MADDOCK, JEFF L MURSAU, PENNSYLVANIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, WARREN PETERSON, DAIRE RENDON, BRENDA SAVAGE, DAVID STEFFEN, LYNIE STONE, WISCONSIN VOTERS ALLIANCE, JOHN WOOD. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix part 1, # 2 Appendix part 2, # 3 Appendix part 3, # 4 Appendix part 4, # 5 Appendix part 5, # 6 Appendix part 6, # 7 Appendix part 7, # 8 Appendix part 8, # 9 Appendix part 9, # 10 Appendix part 10, # 11 Appendix part 11, # 12 Appendix part 12)(Kaardal, Erick) (Attachment 6 replaced on 12/23/2020) (ztnr). (Entered: 12/22/2020)
Main Doc­ument Affidavit

Amistad Project 2020 Presidential Election Super-Appendix Table of Contents

5-1 Appx1

5-2 Appx2

5-3 Appx3

5-4 Appx4

5-5 Appx5

5-6 Appx6

5-7 Appx7

5-8 Appx8

5-9 Appx9

5-10 Appx10

5-11 Appx11

5-12 Appx12


Dec 22, 2020
NOTICE of Proposed Order for Preliminary Injunction by ARIZONA VOTER INTEGRITY ALLIANCE, BRANDON BEACH, BARON BENHAM, SONNY BORRELLI, MATTHEW DADICH, ELECTION INTEGRITY FUND, GEORGIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, DEBI HAAS, RON HEUER, LEAH HOOPES, DEBBIE JACQUES, RICHARD W KUCKSDORF, WILLIAM T LIGON, MATTHEW MADDOCK, JEFF L MURSAU, PENNSYLVANIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, WARREN PETERSON, DAIRE RENDON, BRENDA SAVAGE, DAVID STEFFEN, LYNIE STONE, WISCONSIN VOTERS ALLIANCE, JOHN WOOD re 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Kaardal, Erick) (Entered: 12/22/2020)
Main Doc­ument Notice of Proposed Order


Dec 22, 2020
Case Assigned to Judge James E. Boasberg. (adh, )


Dec 22, 2020
SUMMONS (19) Issued Electronically as to RUSSELL BOWERS, BRYAN CARTER, LEE CHATFIELD, JAKE CORMAN, DOUG DUCEY, ELECTORAL COLLEGE, THE, TONY EVERS, RICK GRAY, BRIAN KEMP, HOWARD MARKLEIN, BUTCH MILLER, MICHAEL RICHARD PENCE, DAVID RALSTON, MIKE SHIRKEY, U.S HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. SENATE, ROBIN VOS, GRETCHEN WHITMER, TOM WOLF. (Attachment: # 1 Notice and Consent)(adh, ) (Entered: 12/22/2020)
Main Doc­ument Summons Issued Electronically


Dec 22, 2020
AFFIDAVIT re 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Second Declaration of Erick G. Kaardal by ARIZONA VOTER INTEGRITY ALLIANCE, BRANDON BEACH, BARON BENHAM, SONNY BORRELLI, MATTHEW DADICH, ELECTION INTEGRITY FUND, GEORGIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, DEBI HAAS, RON HEUER, LEAH HOOPES, DEBBIE JACQUES, RICHARD W KUCKSDORF, WILLIAM T LIGON, MATTHEW MADDOCK, JEFF L MURSAU, PENNSYLVANIA VOTERS ALLIANCE, WARREN PETERSON, DAIRE RENDON, BRENDA SAVAGE, DAVID STEFFEN, LYNIE STONE, WISCONSIN VOTERS ALLIANCE, JOHN WOOD. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix)(Kaardal, Erick) (Entered: 12/22/2020)
Main Doc­ument Affidavit


Dec 23, 2020
MINUTE ORDER: The Court ORDERS that, as soon as Plaintiffs file proofs of service on all Defendants, a briefing schedule and hearing shall be set. So ORDERED by Judge James E. Boasberg on 12/23/2020. (lcjeb3)


REFERENCE:
Court Listener
WISCONSIN VOTERS ALLIANCE v. PENCE (1:20-cv-03791)
District Court, District of Columbia

UPDATE: Gohmert v. Pence (6:20-cv-00660) District Court, E.D. Texas

Dec 27, 2020
COMPLAINT EMERGENCY COMPLAINT FOR EXPEDITED DECLARATORY AND EMERGENCY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF against Michael R. Pence ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0540-8169550.), filed by Louie Gohmert. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit EX A Arizona Joint Resolution, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Sessions, William) (Entered: 12/27/2020)
Main Doc­ument Complaint

Attach­ment 1 Exhibit EX A Arizona Joint Resolution

Dec 28, 2020
District Judge Jeremy D. Kernodle added. (mll, )

Dec 28, 2020
Emergency MOTION for Preliminary Injunction AND EXPEDITED DECLARATORY JUDGMENT by Tyler Bowyer, Nancy Cottle, Louie Gohmert, Jake Hoffman, Anthony Kern, James R. Lamon, Robert Montgomery, Sam Moorhead, Loraine Pellegrino, Greg Safsten, Kelli Ward, Michael Ward. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Sessions, William) (Entered: 12/28/2020)
Main Doc­ument Motion for Preliminary Injunction

Attach­ment 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order

Dec 28, 2020
Summons Issued as to Michael R. Pence, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General, and emailed to plaintiff for service. (Attachments: # 1 Summons(es) US Attorney, # 2 Summons(es) US Attorney General)(mll, ) (Entered: 12/28/2020)
Main Doc­ument Summons Issued as to USA

Attach­ment 1 Summons(es) US Attorney

Attach­ment 2 Summons(es) US Attorney General

Dec 29, 2020
AFFIDAVIT of Service for Summons and Proof of Service served on Stephen J. Cox on 12/29/20, filed by Tyler Bowyer, Nancy Cottle, Louie Gohmert, Jake Hoffman, Anthony Kern, James R. Lamon, Robert Montgomery, Sam Moorhead, Loraine Pellegrino, Greg Safsten, Kelli Ward, Michael Ward. (Sessions, William) (Entered: 12/29/2020)
Main Doc­ument Affidavit of Service

Dec 29, 2020
MOTION to Expedite Shorten Time for Response to Plaintiffs' Emergency Motion for Expedited Declaratory Judgment and Emergency Injunctive Relief and Request for Expedited Scheduling Order by Tyler Bowyer, Nancy Cottle, Louie Gohmert, Jake Hoffman, Anthony Kern, James R. Lamon, Robert Montgomery, Sam Moorhead, Loraine Pellegrino, Greg Safsten, Kelli Ward, Michael Ward. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order Granting Motion to Shorten Time)(Sessions, William) (Entered: 12/29/2020)
Main Doc­ument Motion to Expedite

Dec 29, 2020
SUMMONS Returned Executed by James R. Lamon, Kelli Ward, Nancy Cottle, Sam Moorhead, Loraine Pellegrino, Timothy P Dowling, Michael Ward, Tyler Bowyer, Robert Montgomery, Louie Gohmert, Jake Hoffman, Greg Safsten, Anthony Kern. Michael R. Pence served on 12/29/2020, answer due 2/27/2021. (Joseph, Lawrence) (Entered: 12/29/2020)
Main Doc­ument Summons Returned Executed as to USA

Dec 29, 2020
SUMMONS Returned Executed by James R. Lamon, Kelli Ward, Nancy Cottle, Sam Moorhead, Loraine Pellegrino, Timothy P Dowling, Michael Ward, Tyler Bowyer, Robert Montgomery, Louie Gohmert, Jake Hoffman, Greg Safsten, Anthony Kern. All Defendants. (Joseph, Lawrence) (Entered: 12/29/2020)
Main Doc­ument Summons Returned Executed

Dec 29, 2020
ORDER for Expedited Briefing on 2 Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Expedited Declaratory Judgment - Granting In Part 7 Motion to Expedite. Signed by District Judge Jeremy D. Kernodle on 12/29/2020. (jdk1) (Entered: 12/29/2020)
Main Doc­ument Order on Motion to Expedite

Dec 30, 2020
MOTION for Leave to File an Amicus Brief by John S. Campbell, Amicus Curiae. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Envelope(s))(ksd ) (Entered: 12/30/2020)
Main Doc­ument Leave to File Document

Attach­ment 1 Text of Proposed Order

REFERENCE:
Court Listener
Gohmert v. Pence (6:20-cv-00660)
District Court, E.D. Texas   

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING, January 4, 2021

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1swYZ2AHtqJWbtOoOQ4Q2b_8xgxLs1MoP/view?usp=sharing 

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA 

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING 

Monday, January 4, 2021

ELEVEN NOTEWORTHY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEMS, January 5, 2021

ABSTRACT: Eleven Noteworthy City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Items, January 5, 2021, including PUBLIC APPEARANCES, ANNOUNCEMENTS; CONSENT AGENDA including December 3, 2020 Special Meeting Minutes, December 7, 2020 Special Meeting Minutes, December 8, 2020 Meeting Minutes, and December 15, 2020 Special Meeting Minutes, Monthly Reports for November: 1) City Administrator Contract Log; 2) Community Planning and Building Department Reports; 3) Police, Fire, and Ambulance Reports; 4) Public Records Act Requests, and 5) Public Works Department Repor, November 2020 Check Register Summary, Resolution 2021-003 authorizing the City Administrator to execute Amendment No. 2 to the mail service agreement with Peninsula Messenger Service and approve a budget amendment to the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Adopted Budget, Ordinance 2020-007 adding chapter 2.04.170 to the Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code relating to electronic and paperless filing of Fair Political Practices Commission Campaign Disclosure Statements and Ordinance 2020-009 amending and restating Chapter 12.46 (Sidewalk Vending Program) of the Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code; ORDERS OF BUSINESS including Resolution 2021-005 receiving the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2020 and Direction to staff regarding whether or not to pursue intermittent closures of Scenic Road for recreational purposes; PUBLIC HEARINGS including Sidewalk Vending Program Application Fees. The CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, January 5, 2021 and Staff Report document copies are embedded.

 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aOw5lAqP-2ozSr04ZIOL_46ktyK3O8MX/view?usp=sharing

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, January 5, 2021

Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N-29-20 has allowed local legislative bodies to hold public meetings via teleconference and to make public meetings accessible telephonically or otherwise electronically to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the local legislative body. Also, see the Order by the Monterey County Public Health Officer issued March 17, 2020. The health and well-being of our residents is the top priority for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea. To that end, this meeting will be held via teleconference and web-streamed on the City’s website ONLY. 

To attend via Teleconference; 1-662-639-4222 PIN: 325 786 990# 

The public can also email comments to cityclerk@ci.carmel.ca.us. Comments must be received 2 hours before the meeting in order to be provided to the legislative body. Comments received after that time and up to the beginning of the meeting will be added to the agenda and made part of the record. 

OPEN SESSION 

4:30 PM

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 

Mayor Dave Potter, Council Members Jeff Baron, Karen Ferlito, Bobby Richards, and Carrie Theis 

PUBLIC APPEARANCES
Members of the Public are invited to speak on any item that does not appear on the Agenda and that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council. The exception is a Closed Session agenda, where speakers may address the Council on those items before the Closed Session begins. Speakers are usually given three (3) minutes to speak on any item; the time limit is in the discretion of the Chair of the meeting and may be limited when appropriate. Applicants and appellants in land use matters are usually given more time to speak. If an individual wishes to submit written information, he or she may give it to the City Clerk. Speakers and any other members of the public will not approach the dais at any time without prior consent from the Chair of the meeting.

ANNOUNCEMENTS
A. City Administrator Announcements
B. City Attorney Announcements
C. Councilmember Announcements

CONSENT AGENDA
Items on the consent agenda are routine in nature and do not require discussion or independent action. Members of the Council, Board or Commission or the public may ask that any items be considered individually for purposes of Council, Board or Commission discussion and/ or for public comment. Unless that is done, one motion may be used to adopt all recommended actions.

1. December 3, 2020 Special Meeting Minutes, December 7, 2020 Special Meeting Minutes, December 8, 2020 Meeting Minutes, and December 15, 2020 Special Meeting Minutes

  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AupqiRN9pTotXxfMl3emrNODSZazb2n0/view?usp=sharin

December 3, 2020 Special Meeting Minutes, December 7, 2020 Special Meeting Minutes, December 8, 2020 Meeting Minutes, and December 15, 2020 Special Meeting Minutes 

2. Monthly Reports for November: 1) City Administrator Contract Log; 2) Community Planning and Building Department Reports; 3) Police, Fire, and Ambulance Reports; 4) Public Records Act Requests, and 5) Public Works Department Report https://drive.google.com/file/d/15TpY7lu1PAImG660Corq5MeZwggPP5Yq/view?usp=sharin

Monthly Reports for November: 1) City Administrator Contract Log; 2) Community Planning and Building Department Reports; 3) Police, Fire, and Ambulance Reports; 4) Public Records Act Requests, and 5) Public Works Department Report 

3. November 2020 Check Register Summary https://drive.google.com/file/d/14kKfHlBuRYte_SCJWqQQ3O6BypZVshoK/view?usp=sharin

November 2020 Check Register Summary 

6. Resolution 2021-003 authorizing the City Administrator to execute Amendment No. 2 to the mail service agreement with Peninsula Messenger Service and approve a budget amendment to the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Adopted Budget https://drive.google.com/file/d/1K9SvBgAjfVgQwGcFz3oxJsT6_SaWc1Tz/view?usp=sharin

Resolution 2021-003 authorizing the City Administrator to execute Amendment No. 2 to the mail service agreement with Peninsula Messenger Service and approve a budget amendment to the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Adopted Budget 

8. Ordinance 2020-007 adding chapter 2.04.170 to the Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code relating to electronic and paperless filing of Fair Political Practices Commission Campaign Disclosure Statements https://drive.google.com/file/d/1S-2J4Da3nWFj-eTG39uWMWxxF7gvGa6b/view?usp=sharin

Ordinance 2020-007 adding chapter 2.04.170 to the Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code relating to electronic and paperless filing of Fair Political Practices Commission Campaign Disclosure Statements 

9. Ordinance 2020-009 amending and restating Chapter 12.46 (Sidewalk Vending Program) of the Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1S17ipGIzIHIM5adXnFm-e50xNMARrXQM/view?usp=sharin

Ordinance 2020-009 amending and restating Chapter 12.46 (Sidewalk Vending Program) of the Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code. 

ORDERS OF BUSINESS
Orders of Business are agenda items that require City Council, Board or Commission discussion, debate, direction to staff, and/or action.

10. Resolution 2021-005 receiving the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2020 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cBfI-6lPJtPMhWJqCQDXvbHeMEkQSfbn/view?usp=sharin

Resolution 2021-005 receiving the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2020 

11. Direction to staff regarding whether or not to pursue intermittent closures of Scenic Road for recreational purposes https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FGmfF2rDUe3BsyTE_t3DQc8S5DkLCnnH/view?usp=sharin

Direction to staff regarding whether or not to pursue intermittent closures of Scenic Road for recreational purposes 

PUBLIC HEARINGS 

12. Sidewalk Vending Program Application Fees https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aC_zZjYqDvwEd7pk-mFeIDo9dJAzQKOp/view?usp=sharin

Sidewalk Vending Program Application Fees 

ADJOURNMENT

LIVE: Georgia Senate subcommittee holds hearing on election issues (Dec. 30)

LIVE: Georgia Senate subcommittee holds hearing on election issues (Dec. 30) | NTD

*The Evidence Collection*

Thread reader

Kanekoa

*The Evidence Collection*

1/ Navarro Report: The Immaculate Deception - Six Key Dimensions of Election Irregularities - 12/18/20🔻
bannonswarroom.com/wp-content/upl…

2/ Analysis of 3,000 U.S. counties shows Joe Biden received 5.6 % more votes in counties using Dominion Voting Systems (Video) - 12/17/20

3/ Antrim Michigan Dominion Voting Systems Forensics Report - 12/13/20

4/ Evidence Grows: ’20 Election Was Rigged - 11/24/20
deepcapture.com/2020/11/electi…

5/ Georgia Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman's Summary of Testimony from the December 3, 2020 Hearing - 12/17/20

6/ Five States and the Election Irregularities and Issues - 12/8/20
files.constantcontact.com/2438cc3e001/c2…

7/ Voter Integrity Project: Findings and Conclusions (Video) - 11/24/20

8/ The Legitimacy and Effect of Private Funding in Federal and State Electoral Processes - 12/16/20

9/ Anomalies in Vote Counts and Their Effects on Election 2020 - 11/24/20

10/ Explosive: New Data From Rigorous Statistical Analysis Points to Voter Fraud in Montgomery County, PA - 11/21/20

11/ 2020 Election: An analysis of voting data from Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin - 11/26/20

12/ Sidney Powell's Team Binder - 12/26/20
wpcdn.zenger.news/wp-content/upl…

13/ Election Night Errors - How did that happen? (Video) - 12/12/20

14/ A Close Look at the Data - Arizona (Video) - 12/17/20

15/ Georgia - A Close Look at the Data and Events - Chapter 1 (Video) - 12/25/20

16/ r/DonaldTrump's Report on Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic - 12/24/20
reddit.com/r/donaldtrump/…

17/ A (Fairly) Complete List of the Most Significant Claims of 2020 Election Miscounts, Errors, or Fraud - 12/20/20

18/ Skeptical of Voter Fraud in 2020? Here’s Your Evidence - 11/20/20

19/ 2020 Election Investigation: Who is Stealing America? (Video) - 12/14/20

20/ A Crowdsourcing Tool Aggregating Publicly Available Items of Evidence

21/ Joe Cheated: Here's Proof

22/ A List of Video Evidence, Evidence Hearings, Court Cases, and Additional Resources

23/ A Video Collection of 2020 Election Fraud - 11/6/20

24/ 5 More Ways Joe Biden Magically Outperformed Election Norms - 11/23/20

25/ The Plot to Steal America (Video) - 12/7/20


REFERENCE:
CITIZEN FREE PRESS

A Simple Test for the extent of Vote Fraud with Absentee Ballots in the 2020 Presidential Election: Georgia and Pennsylvania Data John R. Lott, Jr., Ph.D.* Revised December 21, 2020

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1duQWGZ4radMPLF7zTOEOfDbB7sJWfd5x/view?usp=sharing 

A Simple Test for the extent of Vote Fraud with Absentee Ballots in the 2020 Presidential Election: Georgia and Pennsylvania Data 

John R. Lott, Jr., Ph.D. 

* Revised December 21, 2020 

Summary 

This study provides measures of vote fraud in the 2020 presidential election. It first compares Fulton county’s precincts that are adjacent to similar precincts in neighboring counties that had no allegations of fraud to isolate the impact of Fulton county’s vote-counting process (including potential fraud). In measuring the difference in President Trump’s vote share of the absentee ballots for these adjacent precincts, we account for the difference in his vote share of the inperson voting and the difference in registered voters’ demographics. The best estimate shows an unusual 7.81% drop in Trump’s percentage of the absentee ballots for Fulton County alone of 11,350 votes, or over 80% of Biden’s vote lead in Georgia. The same approach is applied to Allegheny County in Pennsylvania for both absentee and provisional ballots. The estimated number of fraudulent votes from those two sources is about 55,270 votes. 

Second, vote fraud can increase voter turnout rate. Increased fraud can take many forms: higher rates of filling out absentee ballots for people who hadn’t voted, dead people voting, ineligible people voting, or even payments to legally registered people for their votes. However, the increase might not be as large as the fraud if votes for opposing candidates are either lost, destroyed, or replaced with ballots filled out for the other candidate. The estimates here indicate that there were 70,000 to 79,000 “excess” votes in Georgia and Pennsylvania. Adding Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin, the total increases to up to 289,000 excess votes. 

Conclusion 

The precinct level estimates for Georgia and Pennsylvania indicate that vote fraud may account for Biden’s win in both states. The voter turnout rate data also indicates that there are significant excess votes in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin as well. While the problems shown here are large, there are two reasons to believe that they are underestimates: 1) the estimates using precinct level data assume that there is no fraud occurring with inperson voting and 2) the voter turnout estimates do not account for ballots for the opposing candidate that are lost, destroyed, or replaced with ballots filled out for the other candidate

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI & MOTION FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION OF THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND EXPEDITED MERITS BRIEFING AND ORAL ARGUMENT IN THE EVENT THAT THE COURT GRANTS THE PETITION IN THE Supreme Court of the United States DONALD J. TRUMP, ET AL., Petitioners, v. JOSEPH R. BIDEN, ET AL., Respondents. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1asoBqy8GbEIMr2ikY6AXudZmKzxSwiVn/view?usp=sharing 

IN THE 

Supreme Court of the United States

DONALD J. TRUMP, ET AL., Petitioners, 

v. 

JOSEPH R. BIDEN, ET AL., Respondents. 

ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI 

December 29, 2020 

CONCLUSION 

During the election crisis of 1876-77, President Grant observed that “either Party can afford to be disappointed in the result, but the country cannot afford to have the result tainted by suspicion of illegal or false returns.” Rehnquist, supra note 19, at 101. That remains true. Twenty years ago this Court emphasized that state courts have a duty to act in a manner “well calculated to sustain the confidence that all citizens must have in the outcome of elections.” Bush II, 531 U.S. at 109. The majority below shirked that duty, refusing to rule on the merits. The result, as Justice Ziegler observed, is to feed doubts that are already widespread among Americans concerning the integrity of the November 2020 election. See p. 22 & note 14, supra. This Court is likely the only institution of our government capable of credibly resolving the controversy over this election. It is now this Court’s “unsought responsibility to resolve the federal and constitutional issues the judicial system has been forced to confront.” Bush II, 531 U.S. at 111. 

For all the reasons stated, this Court should grant certiorari; it should hear this petition (and any related petitions it deems worthy of review) on an expedited basis; and it should rule on the merits that under the plain language of the Wisconsin statutes, Article II prohibits counting the 50,125 absentee ballots, and that the election in Wisconsin failed to make a choice of electors within the meaning of 3 U.S.C. § 2, thus permitting the Wisconsin Legislature to now make a choice of electors. December 29, 2020

  https://drive.google.com/file/d/12p1LNGACYMyAecYtDdl-bYk7sfmG-a8B/view?usp=sharing 

In the 

Supreme Court of the United States

Donald J. Trump, et al., PETITIONERS, 

V. 

oseph R. Biden, et al., RESPONDENTS. 

on petition for a writ of certiorari to the supreme court of wisconsin 

MOTION FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION OF THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND EXPEDITED MERITS BRIEFING AND ORAL ARGUMENT IN THE EVENT THAT THE COURT GRANTS THE PETITION 

December 29, 2020

COMPLAINT FOR EXPEDITED DECLARATORY AND EMERGENCY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (Election Matter) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION LOUIE GOHMERT, TYLER BOWYER, NANCY COTTLE, JAKE HOFFMAN, ANTHONY KERN, JAMES R. LAMON, SAM MOORHEAD, ROBERT MONTGOMERY, LORAINE PELLEGRINO, GREG SAFSTEN, KELLI WARD and MICHAEL WARD, Plaintiffs, v. THE HONORABLE MICHAEL R. PENCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, in his official capacity. Defendant

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lsqnN3Nz6x16mL6ouc9rn4bP4J5WqvOY/view?usp=sharing 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TYLER DIVISION 

LOUIE GOHMERT, TYLER BOWYER, NANCY COTTLE, JAKE HOFFMAN, ANTHONY KERN, JAMES R. LAMON, SAM MOORHEAD, ROBERT MONTGOMERY, LORAINE PELLEGRINO, GREG SAFSTEN, KELLI WARD and MICHAEL WARD, Plaintiffs, 

v. 

THE HONORABLE MICHAEL R. PENCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, in his official capacity. Defendant 

COMPLAINT FOR EXPEDITED DECLARATORY AND EMERGENCY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (Election Matter) 

December 27, 2020 

  COUNT I 

DEFENDANT WILL NECESSARILY VIOLATE THE TWELFTH AMENDMENT AND THE ELECTORS CLAUSE OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION IF HE FOLLOWS THE ELECTORAL COUNT ACT. PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

73. Accordingly, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court issue a judgment that: 

A. Declares that Section 15 of the Electoral Count Act, 3 U.S.C. §§5 and 15, is unconstitutional because it violates the Twelfth Amendment on its face, Amend. XII, Constitution; 

B. Declares that Section 15 of the Electoral Count Act, 3 U.S.C. §§5 and 15, is unconstitutional because it violates the Electors Clause. U.S. CONST. art. II, § 1, cl. 1; 

C. Declares that Vice-President Pence, in his capacity as President of Senate and Presiding Officer of the January 6, 2021 Joint Session of Congress, is subject solely to the requirements of the Twelfth Amendment and may exercise the exclusive authority and sole discretion in determining which electoral votes to count for a given State; 

D. Enjoins reliance on any provisions of the Electoral Count Act that would limit Defendant’s exclusive authority and his sole discretion to determine which of two or more competing slates of electors’ votes are to be counted for President; 

E. Declares that, with respect to competing slates of electors from the State of Arizona or other Contested States, or with respect to objection to any single slate of electors, the Twelfth Amendment contains the exclusive dispute resolution mechanisms, namely, that (i) Vice-President Pence determines which slate of electors’ votes shall be counted, or if none be counted, for that State and (ii) if no person has a majority, then the House of Representatives (and only the House of Representatives) shall choose the President where “the votes [in the House of Representatives] shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote,” U.S. CONST. amend. XII; 

F. Declares that, also with respect to competing slates of electors, the alternative dispute resolution procedure or priority rule in 3 U.S.C. § 15, is null and void insofar as it contradicts and replaces the Twelfth Amendment rules above by with an entirely different procedure in which the House and Senate each separately “decide” which slate is to be counted, and in the event of a disagreement, then only “the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State … shall be counted,” 3 U.S.C. § 15; 

G. Enjoins the Defendant from executing his duties on January 6th during the Joint Session of Congress in any manner that is insistent with the declaratory relief set forth herein, and 

H. Issue any other declaratory judgments or findings or injunctions necessary to support or effectuate the foregoing declaratory judgment. 

74. Plaintiffs have concurrently submitted a motion for a speedy summary proceeding under FRCP Rule 57 to grant the relief requested herein as soon as practicable, and for emergency injunctive relief under FRCP Rule 65 thereof consistent with the declaratory judgment requested herein on that same date. 

Dated: December 27, 2020

UPDATE: In the Supreme Court of the United States Mike Kelly, United States Congressman, et al., Petitioners v. Pennsylvania, et al

Supreme Court of the United States

No.. 20-810

Title: Mike Kelly, United States Congressman, et al., Petitioners v. Pennsylvania, et al
Docketed: December 15, 2020
Linked with 20A98
Lower Ct.: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Middle District
Case Numbers: (68 MAP 2020)
Decision Date: November 28, 2020

DATE                           PROCEEDINGS AND ORDERS 

Dec 23 2020

Motion of Amici Curiae 28 Current Members of the House of Representatives for leave to file amicus brief submitted. Main Document Proof of Service

 NAME                                                  ADDRESS                             PHONE

Other Michael Francis Smith Counsel of Record Party name: Amici Curiae 28 Current Members of the House of Representatives

The Smith Appellate Law Firm 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. Suite 1025 Washington, DC 20006 smith@smithpllc.com

2024542860

SIDNEY POWELL BINDER OF ELECTION FRAUD EVIDENCE

Table of Contents

1) CISA-FBI Alerts on Iranian Election Interference: Iranian Advanced Persistent Threat Actor Identified Obtaining Voter Reg'stration Data (AA20-304A)

2) CISA~FBI Alerts on Iranian Election Interference: Iranian Advanced Persistent Threat Actors Threaten Election-Related Systems (AA20-296B)

 3) DHS Designation of Election Systems as Critical Infrastructure

a. APT Actors Chaining Vulnerabilities Against SLTT, Critical lnfrastmcture, Elections Organizations

4) Treasury Statement on Fraudulent Election Interference by Maduro Regime

5) Report of the Select Committee on Intel1igcnce United States Senate on Russian Active Measures Campaigns and Interference in the 2016 U.S. Election, Volume 3: U.S. Government Response to Russian Activities

6) Allied Security Operations Group: Antrim Michigan Forensics Report

7) Redacted Affidavit/Declaration 1

8) Redacted Affidavit/Declaration 2

9) Venezuela Statement

10) Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election, Scptember 12, 2018

11) 50 USC 1702 Presidential Authorities

12) Senator Warren, Klobuchar, Wyden, Pocan Letters to H.I.G.

13) Swiss and Aussies Find a Critical Flaw in Scyti Software that the US Ignores

14) The Immaculate Deception, Peter Navarro

REFERENCES:

SIDNEY POWELL BINDER OF ELECTION FRAUD EVIDENCE 

READ IT: SIDNEYPOWELL PUBLISHES BINDER OF ELECTION FRAUD EVIDENCE

Sidney Powell’s Legal Team Has Binder of Documents She Says Establish the 2020 Election was a Fraud

BREAKING: Technology Expert Can Determine If Ballots are Legitimate or Fake in Seconds

 

BREAKING: Technology Expert Can Determine If Ballots are Legitimate or Fake in Seconds 

Dec 11, 2020 20:58 

REFERENCE: 

Bill Barr Did Not See Fraud Because He Refused To Look 

By Larry Johnson 

Published December 26, 2020 at 7:34pm

Enough Votes to Turn the Election! Voting Machine Secrets Revealed | SPECIAL

 

Enough Votes to Turn the Election! Voting Machine Secrets Revealed | SPECIAL 

Economic War Room 

Description 

Breaking news from Economic War Room: Data analyst reveals enormous voting machine manipulation and even negative votes. It’s a purposely complicated system built for voter data manipulation. Kevin Freeman and Rod Martin have a data analyst show how the votes are really tabulated, combined through fractional voting, and then reported. Prepare to be shocked! The evidence of fraud is there, and the data is available to see. Some votes only count for a half a vote, while others count as two votes. Find out what you need to do next and why the 2020 election is not decided.

Published 2020-11-25

MERRY CHRISTMAS EVE 2020!

Scenic Road, North of 12th Avenue

Scenic Road, North of 12th Avenue

10th Avenue, West of Camino Real St.

11th Avenue, East of San Carlos Street

11th Avenue, East of San Carlos Street

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:20-cv-03791 Erick G. Kaardal (WI0031) Special Counsel for Amistad Project of Thomas More Society Mohrman, Kaardal & Erickson, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/127XHQFwzkpBzInWqeOOXFY51RMbaLs9x/view?usp=sharing 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

WISCONSIN VOTERS ALLIANCE E3530 Townline Road Kewaunee, Wisconsin 54216; PENNSYLVANIA VOTERS ALLIANCE 1621 Huddel Avenue Lower Chichester, Pennsylvania, 19061; 

GEORGIA VOTERS ALLIANCE 151 Main Street Senior, Georgia 30276; 

ELECTION INTEGRITY FUND 1715 Northumberland Drive Rochester Hills, Michigan 48309; ARIZONA VOTER INTEGRITY ALLIANCE 8019 East Tuckey Lane Scottsdale, Arizona 85250; LYNIE STONE 10410 East Prince Road Tucson, Arizona 85749; 

BARON BENHAM 8019 East Tuckey Lane Scottsdale, Arizona 85250; 

DEBI HAAS 5530 Rivers Edge Drive Commerce, Michigan 48382; 

BRENDA SAVAGE 1715 Northumberland Drive Rochester Hills, Michigan 48309; 

MATTHEW DADICH 1621 Huddel Avenue Lower Chichester, Pennsylvania 19061; 

LEAH HOOPES 241 Sulky Way Chadds Ford, Pennsylvania 19317; 

RON HEUER E3530 Townline Road Kewaunee, Wisconsin 54216; 

RICHARD W. KUCKSDORF W2289 Church Drive Bonduel, Wisconsin 54107; 

DEBBIE JACQUES 1839 South Oneida Street Green Bay, Wisconsin 54304; 

JOHN WOOD 151 Main Street Senior, Georgia 30276; 

SENATOR SONNY BORRELLI 2650 Diablo Dr Lake Havasu City AZ 86406 

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN PETERSON 2085 E Avenida del Valle Ct Gilbert AZ 85298 REPRESENTATIVE MATTHEW MADDOCK 1150 South Milford Road Milford, Michigan 48381; REPRESENTATIVE DAIRE RENDON, 4833 River Wood Road Lake City, Michigan 49651; REPRESENTATIVE DAVID STEFFEN 715 Olive Tree Court Green Bay, Wisconsin 54313; REPRESENTATIVE JEFF L. MURSAU 4 Oak Street Crivitz, Wisconsin 54114; 

SENATOR WILLIAM T. LIGON 90 Bluff Road South White Oak, Georgia 31568; and 

SENATOR BRANDON BEACH 3100 Brierfield Road Alpharetta, GA 30004 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

VICE PRESIDENT MICHAEL RICHARD PENCE, in his official capacity as President of the United States Senate, Office of the Vice President 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20500; U.S HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. Capitol First St SE Washington, DC 20004; 

U.S. SENATE, U.S. Capitol First St SE Washington, DC 20004; ELECTORAL COLLEGE, 

U.S. Capitol First St SE Washington, DC 20004; 

GOVERNOR TOM WOLF OF PENNSYLVANIA, in his official capacity, 508 Main Capitol Building Harrisburg, PA 17120; 

SPEAKER BRYAN CARTER OF THE PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, in his official capacity, 139 Main Capitol Building PO Box 202100 Harrisburg, PA 17120-2100; 

SENATE MAJORITY LEADER JAKE CORMAN OF THE PENNSYLVANIA SENATE, in his official capacity, Senate Box 203034 Harrisburg, PA 17120-3034; 

GOVERNOR GRETCHEN WHITMER OF MICHIGAN, in her official capacity, 111 S Capitol Avenue Lansing, Michigan 48933; 

SPEAKER LEE CHATFIELD OF THE MICHIGAN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, in his official capacity, 124 N Capitol Avenue Lansing, Michigan 48933; 

SENATE MAJORITY LEADER MIKE SHIRKEY OF THE MICHIGAN SENATE, in his official capacity, S-102 Capitol Building Lansing, Michigan 48933; 

GOVERNOR TONY EVERS OF WISCONSIN, in his official capacity, P.O. Box 7863 Madison, Wisconsin 53707; 

SPEAKER ROBIN VOS OF THE WISCONSIN STATE ASSEMBLY, in his official capacity, 960 Rock Ridge Road Burlington, Wisconsin 53105; 

SENATE MAJORITY LEADER HOWARD MARKLEIN OF THE WISCONSIN SENATE, in his official capacity, PO Box 7882 Madison, Wisconsin 53707; 

GOVERNOR BRIAN KEMP OF GEORGIA, in his original capacity, 111 State Capitol Atlanta, Georgia 30334; 

SPEAKER DAVID RALSTON OF THE GEORGIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, in his official capacity, 332 State Capitol Atlanta, Georgia 30334; 

PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE BUTCH MILLER OF THE GEORGIA SENATE, in his official capacity, 321 State Capitol Atlanta, Georgia 30334; 

GOVERNOR DOUG DUCEY OF ARIZONA, in his official capacity, 1700 W. Washington Street Phoenix, Arizona 85007; 

SPEAKER RUSSELL BOWERS OF THE ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, in his official capacity, 1700 West Washington Room 223 Phoenix, Arizona 85007; and 

SENATE MAJORITY LEADER RICK GRAY OF THE ARIZONA SENATE, in his official capacity, 1700 West Washington Room 301 Phoenix, Arizona 85007, 

Defendants. 

  PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court issue the following relief for the 2020 and future Presidential elections: 

A. Issue a declaratory judgment, applying to the current and future elections, declaring that 3 U.S.C. §§ 5, 6 and 15 were and are unconstitutional deprivations of the state legislatures’ constitutional prerogative to post-election certification of the Presidential electors; 

B. Issue a declaratory judgment, applying to current and future elections, declaring that Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 16-212 (B), Ga. Code Ann. § 21-2-499 (B), Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 168.46, Wis. Stat. § 7.70 (5) (b), 25 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3166 and similar state laws are unconstitutional delegations by the respective states of post-election Presidential election certification duties to their respective executive branch officers when Article II requires such certifications to be made by the respective state legislatures; 

C. Issue a declaratory judgment, applying to current and future elections, that the Plaintiff-voters’ constitutionally-protected voting rights in Presidential elections are being violated by Defendants; 

D. Issue a declaratory judgment, applying to current and future elections, that the Plaintiffs’ voting rights were violated under Article II, the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause; 

E. Enjoin the Vice President and U.S. Congress, in the current and future elections, from counting Presidential elector votes from states unless their respective state legislatures vote affirmatively in a post-election vote to certify their Presidential electors; 

F. Alternatively, enjoin, in the current and future elections, the State Defendants’ state legislatures to meet in their respective States to consider post-election certification of their respective Presidential electors; 

G. Award attorney’s fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 to Plaintiffs against State Defendants; and 

H. Grant such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. 

DATED: December 22, 2020

REFERENCE:

PRESS RELEASE:Amistad Project Files Federal Lawsuit Demanding State Legislatures in Contested States Be Allowed to Certify Electors Prior to Congressional Count

LIVE: Georgia House committee holds new election hearing, Secretary of State Raffensperger testifies

 

LIVE: Georgia House committee holds new election hearing, Secretary of State Raffensperger testifies

THE CHAIRMAN’S REPORT OF THE ELECTION LAW STUDY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE STANDING SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SUMMARY OF TESTIMONY FROM DECEMBER 3, 2020 HEARING

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sBv5j-uDDikIuq5Yxdb6xBFwtbqrlDyO/view?usp=sharing 

THE CHAIRMAN’S REPORT OF THE ELECTION LAW STUDY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE STANDING SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 

SUMMARY OF TESTIMONY FROM DECEMBER 3, 2020 HEARING 

Honorable William T. Ligon, Chairman Senator, District 3 

Honorable John Kennedy Senator, District 18 

Honorable Bill Heath Senator, District 31 

Honorable Blake Tillery Senator, District 19 

Honorable Michael Rhett Senator, District 33 

Honorable Elena Parent Senator, District 42 

December 17, 2020 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The November 3, 2020 General Election (the “Election”) was chaotic and any reported results must be viewed as untrustworthy. The Subcommittee took evidence from witnesses and received affidavits sworn under oath. The Subcommittee heard evidence that proper protocols were not used to ensure chain of custody of the ballots throughout the Election, after the opening of ballots prior to the Election, and during the recounts. The Subcommittee heard testimony that it was possible or even likely that large numbers of fraudulent ballots were introduced into the pool of ballots that were counted as voted; there is no way of tracing the ballots after they have been separated from the point of origin. The Subcommittee heard testimony of pristine ballots whose origin looked suspicious or which could not be verified and the inability of poll workers to distinguish between test ballots and absentee ballots. Signatures were not consistently verified according to law in the absentee balloting process. 

Poll watchers on Election Night testified that they had noted that ballots were not secured, that seals and security tags were not used, and the chain of custody was often lax or non-existent. During the recount process, the monitors observed similar patterns of unsecured ballots that had broken seals and open cases of ballots laying around for hours or overnight in unsecured locations. There was a lack of enforcement of the law, sloppy handling of the ballots by those counting, deliberate covering-up of voting numbers by workers, lack of following the process during the recount, unsafe handling of military ballots, and insecure data such as on laptops and flash drives. According to submitted testimony, there were also many equipment failures when ballots would not go through the machines and other times when ballots were counted more than once. 

A great deal of testimony supported evidence of a coordinated effort to prevent a transparent process of observing the counting of ballots during the absentee ballot opening period and on Election Night. Witnesses testified to hostility to Republican poll workers during the recount – directional signage was unavailable, doors were locked, and Republican poll watchers were sent home early or given menial assignments. 

Monitors throughout the state were often kept at an unreasonably long distance – some social distancing was understandable, but monitors were blocked from having the visual ability to see what was written on the ballots or to have any meaningful way to check the counting or to double-check that what was counted was actually assigned to the right candidate. They also could not observe what was entered into the ARLO system, nor could they be told the count that was being entered into ARLO. Instead, they were told that those numbers would be totaled and come back from the Secretary of State’s Office. They were also told not to take pictures, film, or have other means of acquiring proof of the process that they were experiencing based on a rule from the State Elections Board. That rule contravenes the spirit and purpose of the election law. 

The Secretary of State’s Office was unresponsive to its hotline. It has been unresponsive to many who wonder if their vote ever really counted. The office has turned a blind eye to fraud to the point that it ought to be considered gross negligence. 

The Subcommittee did not have time to investigate the numerous publicly reported issues with the Dominion voting machines. The Subcommittee takes notice of the various publicly reported functions of the machines and heard evidence that the machines can duplicate fraudulent ballots to the point that not even trained personnel can tell the difference between a test ballot and a real ballot. Testimony also suggested that the system responds wirelessly to being reset from an unknown location as happened with the poll books. The Subcommittee also heard that Dominion machines can be programmed with algorithms that reallocate votes between candidates. In addition, the Dominion machines are programmed to count votes using percentages of whole numbers rather than actual votes, which is a feature incompatible with the actual voting process. The Subcommittee learned that the history and control of the company that owns the Dominion voting system is unclear and provides serious implications of foreign interference in the U.S. election. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

 

A. Absentee Ballots 

In addition to following the law as already written by the legislature, such as not opening absentee ballots until Election Day, additional steps should be taken to ensure that only legal absentee votes are counted. 

At a minimum, these recommendations include requiring photo identification, following signature match procedures faithfully, allowing absentee ballots to be used only upon demonstration of need, mailing absentee ballots out only upon the request of the registered voter, and although already illegal, expressly prohibiting drop boxes. 

B. Secure Chain of Custody and Additional Security Measures 

Procedures should be established to ensure proper chain of custody for all ballots, whether they are test ballots, new unused ballots, spoiled ballots, cast BMD-generated ballots, absentee ballots, and even the specialty paper that is used to print the ballots. 

Penalties should be clearly known and enforced for any violations. 

There should be complete security when workers go on the job, with sign-in of their names and a time stamp, when they go in and when they go out. 

Cameras should also be on-site to monitor the process at all times, as well as all the entrances to the buildings where ballots and the ballot paper are stored. 

 C. Meaningful Access for Poll Watchers and Monitors 

 Citizens who are seeking to ensure the integrity of the vote need to be able to truly see the process. They should be able to ensure that people are reading their ballots before they are cast. They should be able to inspect the signature match process when ballots are opened. They should be able to write down seal information so they can ensure proper custody is in place. They should be close enough to see the names on the ballots during any recounts, the counts written on recount report sheets, the counts going into the ARLO system, the counts written on ballot containers, the process of the seals being broken as the ballots are entering the process, and so forth. 

More poll watchers and monitors should be allowed to participate since the ratio needs to be improved. Objections by monitors should be addressed immediately on-site to ensure access and transparency. 

Hostile actions by election workers toward volunteers should be immediately addressed and should be cause for dismissal. 

D. No Unconstitutional Gag Orders 

There is no reason to ban cameras when tabulation is taking place or when recounts and audits are taking place. 

Furthermore, there is no reason to ban cameras at the polling booth as long as voters have privacy while voting. 

The State Board of Elections should not ban cameras and recording equipment. They must fulfill their duty to ensure a transparent election process. Furthermore, citizens have a right to share those photos, recordings, and thoughts about what they observe. 

E. Unqualified Voters Should Be Purged from the System 

No underage voters should be in the system to allow their votes. No felons should be in the system to allow their votes. 

Other categories of voters, such as the deceased and those who have moved out of state, should also be examined as to their continued presence on the voter rolls. 

F. Violations of State Election Laws Must Be Prosecuted 

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation (“GBI”) and the Attorney General should aggressively investigate and prosecute those who violate election laws, including those conspiring to place fraudulent ballots into the system and the 1,000 persons identified by the Secretary of State who voted twice in the 2020 primaries. If prosecutions do not happen, violations will recur. 

The GBI should establish an independent office for the investigation of all claims of voter fraud. That office should report regularly to the Judiciary Committee and, except in the case of investigations involving the Secretary of State or its personnel, the office of the Secretary of State. 

The GBI should investigate the cases where many affidavits already exist regarding election fraud in the 2020 General Election. 

G. Forensic Audits of Ballots and Machines 

The Legislature must determine if ballot marking devices (BMDs) have been manipulated to provide a fraudulent result and without regard to whether the forensic audits can actually identify the manipulation of votes and the authenticity of the ballots that are in the ballot boxes, either generated by the BMDs or those that are absentee ballots. 

Independent third-party auditors should review the fiducials on all ballots types (absentee, military, machine generated), audit the absentee ballot results from the last election, confirm the number of external envelopes in each county, and the number of ballots for each county. 

Such audits should help ensure that phantom ballots and other fraudulent ballots are not counted in election results, and that legal votes are the only votes counted. 

H. For Rectifying the 2020 General Election Results 

The Legislature should carefully consider its obligations under the U.S. Constitution. If a majority of the General Assembly concurs with the findings of this report, the certification of the Election should be rescinded and the General Assembly should act to determine the proper Electors to be certified to the Electoral College in the 2020 presidential race. Since time is of the essence, the Chairman and Senators who concur with this report recommend that the leadership of the General Assembly and the Governor immediately convene to allow further consideration by the entire General Assembly. 

Respectfully submitted this the 17th day of December 2020.

Merry Christmas Tree (Forest Theatre)

2019

Tribute Tree
No. 113
"Friendship"
In Honor of George and Leah Leppert
Forest Theatre

In the Supreme Court of the United States DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC., Petitioner v. Kathy Boockvar, Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania , et al., Respondents. On Petition for Writs of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI & MOTION FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_A_Ux7O3YJosqEH_sBfSteWh-z05QpkR/view?usp=sharing 

IN THE
Supreme Court of the United States

DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC., Petitioner 

v. 

Kathy Boockvar, Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania , et al., Respondents. 

On Petition for Writs of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania 

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI 

 QUESTIONS PRESENTED 

Article II of the Constitution provides that “Each State shall appoint [electors for President and Vice President] in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.” U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 2 (emphasis added). That power is “plenary,” and the statutory provisions enacted by the legislature in the furtherance of that constitutionally-assigned duty may not be ignored by state election officials or changed by state courts. Bush v. Gore (“Bush II”), 531 U.S. 98, 104-05 (2000). 

Yet, during the 2020 presidential election, that is what the Pennsylvania Supreme Court did in four cases – three at issue in this Petition, and one already before the Court. Statutory requirements were eliminated regarding signature verification, the right of campaigns to challenge invalid mail ballots, mandates that mail voters fill in, date, and sign mail ballot declarations, and even the right of campaigns to observe the mail ballot canvassing process in a meaningful way. 

Collectively, these three decisions resulted in counting approximately 2.6 million mail ballots in violation of the law as enacted by the Pennsylvania Legislature. According to public reports, without these protections, the resulting disqualification rate of invalid ballots was anemic—meaning over 110,000 invalid ballots were illegally counted—more than enough to have affected the outcome of the election, where the margin between the two principal candidates for President currently stands at 80,558. The questions presented are therefore: 

1. Whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s alteration or suspension of state election law through its three decisions before and after the November 2020 general election usurped the Pennsylvania Legislature’s plenary authority to “direct [the] Manner” for appointing electors for President and Vice-President, in violation of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution? 

2. Whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s three decisions usurping the Pennsylvania Legislature’s plenary authority to “direct [the] Manner” for appointing presidential electors, by changing the law, including eviscerating protections against mail ballot fraud, violated the Due Process Clause of the Constitution, and whether Pennsylvania applying the new rules promulgated by the Court during the election in only select counties where mail ballots heavily favored one candidate over the other violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution? 

3. Whether this Court has the power to provide a meaningful remedy to Petitioner in advance of the January 6, 2021 Joint Session of Congress, at which electoral votes will be opened and counted, or before the January 20, 2021 inauguration date specified by the Constitution? 

REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT 

I. By Eviscerating Election Law Enacted By the Pennsylvania Legislature Pursuant to Authority Derived from Article II of the Federal Constitution, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Has Decided an Important Federal Question in a Way that Conflicts with Decisions of this Court 

A. The Three Decisions Violated Article II By Changing the Law During the Election. 

B. This Court Should Independently Examine Pennsylvania’s Election Laws, Which The Pennsylvania Supreme Court Erroneously and Dramatically Changed During the Presidential Election 

II. This Court Should Re-Affirm That Federal Courts Have The Power To Remedy Violations of Article II. 

III. The Pennsylvania Court Decisions Create a Mail Ballot Statutory Scheme That Is So Porous That It Gave Rise To Due Process and Equal Protection Violations That Should Be Reviewed by this Court. 

A. Due Process Was Violated By The Three Pennsylvania Supreme Court Decisions 

B. The Equal Protection Clause Was Violated By Different Voting Standards Being Used In Different Counties 

IV. The Court’s Intercession Is Necessary To Uphold The Rule of Law And To Put the Country at Ease, To The Extent Possible in these Tumultuous Times 

V. The Issues Addressed by this Petition Are Not Moot 

  CONCLUSION 

In October 2019, the Legislature of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania allowed for no-excuse mail voting for every eligible voter in the state, but it kept in place long-standing validation and observer requirements to protect against fraud in the casting and canvassing of mail ballots, which are “the largest source of potential voter fraud.” Carter-Baker Report, supra. Pennsylvania election officials, in conjunction with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, altered or dispensed with those significant “meaningful safeguards” in the recent General Election. Because that election included the choice of presidential electors, the alterations to statutory requirements contravened Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, which assesses plenary power to the Legislature to determine the manner of choosing electors. 

The effect of these illegal and unconstitutional changes to state election law affected enough ballots to alter the results of the election. Certiorari is warranted so that this Court can reaffirm its prior Article II holdings that only the Legislature of a state can alter election laws utilized in the choice of presidential electors, and to provide redress for the breaches of that constitutional requirement that occurred in these cases.  

   https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XQqUrKSasuswRaRguJHPJrlZ_6StCZpB/view?usp=sharing

MOTION FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION 

December 20, 2020 

MOTION FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION OF ТНЕ PETITION FOR А WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND EXPEDITED MERITS BRIEFING AND ORAL ARGUMENT IN ТНЕ EVENT ТНАТ ТНЕ COURT GRANTS ТНЕ PETITION 

Petitioner Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., the re-election campaign for President Trump, respectfully requests, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 21, that this Court expedite its consideration of the petition for а writ of certiorari filed today. Petitioner further requests, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 25.4, that if the petition is granted, the Court expedite the schedule for briefing and oral argument, if the Court deems such helpful. Such expedited review would allow an orderly and timely resolution of the important questions presented under the U.S. Constitution and federal law. It is in the best interests of the parties, as well as the Nation, that this Court have as much time as possible to consider the relative merits of the parties’ positions and to issue its decision sufficiently in advance of impending deadlines. 

REFERENCE: 

December 20, 2020 

TRUMP CAMPAIGN TAKING CONSTITUTIONAL FIGHT TO SUPREME COURT 

President Trump’s campaign today issued the following statement: 

“Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., President Trump’s campaign committee, today filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the US. Supreme Court to reverse a trio of Pennsylvania Supreme Court cases which illegally changed Pennsylvania’s mail balloting law immediately before and after the 2020 presidential election in violation of Article II of the United States Constitution and Bush v. Gore. This represents the Campaign’s first independent U.S. Supreme Court filing and seeks relief based on the same Constitutional arguments successfully raised in Bush v. Gore. 

“This petition follows a related Pennsylvania case where Justice Alito and two other justices observed ‘the constitutionality of the [Pennsylvania] Supreme Court’s decision [extending the statutory deadline for receipt of mail ballots from 8 pm on election day to 5 pm three days later] … has national importance, and there is a strong likelihood that the State Supreme Court decision violates the Federal Constitution.’ 

“The Campaign’s petition seeks to reverse three decisions which eviscerated the Pennsylvania Legislature’s protections against mail ballot fraud, including (a) prohibiting election officials checking whether signatures on mail ballots are genuine during canvassing on Election Day, (b) eliminating the right of campaigns to challenge mail ballots during canvassing for forged signatures and other irregularities, (c) holding that the rights of campaigns to observe the canvassing of mail ballots only meant that they only were allowed to be ‘in the room’ - in this case, the Philadelphia Convention Center – the size of several football fields, and (d) eliminating the statutory requirements that voters properly sign, address, and date mail ballots. 

“The petition seeks all appropriate remedies, including vacating the appointment of electors committed to Joseph Biden and allowing the Pennsylvania General Assembly to select their replacements. The Campaign also moved for expedited consideration, asking the Supreme Court to order responses by December 23 and a reply by December 24 to allow the U.S. Supreme Court to rule before Congress meets on January 6 to consider the votes of the electoral college.” 

 - Rudy Giuliani, attorney for President Trump 

 Why Team Trump’s first SCOTUS filing is much bigger than anyone realizes 

This was not just an attempt to correct the election. It's a shot across the bow as well as a pathway through which future rulings can decide the election properly. 

by JD Rucker December 20, 2020 

NOQ Report