Flashback: Biden’s DOJ Did NOT Want a Signature Audit in Maricopa County, AZ

Tweet🐥 Robert Barnes
Source 😎 Adam Carter @TheWashingtonPundit

Learn more🔦🧵 AZ Thread

@LibertyOverwatchChannel

Flashback: Sample of Arizona's Mail-In Ballots Found 11% of Signatures Did Not Match According to the Democrats' Own Expert

In December 2020, AZ Superior Court Judge Randall Warner ordered “that counsel and their forensic document examiners could review 100 randomly selected envelope/ affidavits [in Maricopa County] to do a signature comparison,” for the Ward v. Jackson case.

Approximately 11% of the ballots reviewed by team Biden had signatures that were deemed “inconclusive,” meaning the expert could “not testify that the signature on the envelope/ affidavit matched the signature on file.”

Another 100 ballots examined by the plaintiff’s expert, the Trump team, found 6% of the signatures were “inconclusive.”

Were this error rate to hold across 1.7M mail-in ballots in Maricopa County, it would represent roughly 100K - 190K votes or 10x - 20x Biden’s alleged statewide margin.

Read🗞 Evidence 2020
Source 😎 Adam Carter @TheWashingtonPundit

More🔦🧵 AZ Thread

@LibertyOverwatchChannel
—

Dr. Shiva Is Conducting a Signature Verification Analysis of Maricopa County Ballot Envelopes

Toward the end of his ballet image audit results video, Dr. Shiva announced that he is also conducting a signature verification analysis to determine how many Maricopa County ballot envelopes had non-matching signatures.

Obama used signature verification to disqualify his 1996 Senate opponents, and a signature check is arguably one of the first steps the $9M AZ audit should have taken. As Robert Barnes explained, when it comes to absentee voting, a signature match is “the only method of checking to make sure that the person who cast their ballot [did so] in a constitutionally conforming manner.”

Dr. Shiva noted that he is performing the signature review “on his own time,” and expects to release his findings shortly.

Watch 📺 Dr. Shiva Ballot Image Audit
Hat tip🤠 @WILFMoseder
Related🔎 How Obama Won His Senate Seat, Barnes on the Importance of Signature Verification

More🔦🧵 AZ Thread

@LibertyOverwatchChannel

#BLM are #terrorists
Treat them accordingly. ⬇️

BLM has always been this way. Some of y’all are just now noticing

JUST IN - FBI to form national cryptocurrency unit, focusing on seizure of virtual assets like #Bitcoin and blockchain analysis, the DOJ announced.

@disclosetv

"The illusion of freedom will continue as long as as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater."

~ Frank Zappa

This is going to be denied.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21226673-220217-sussmann-motion-to-dismiss?s=09

Sussmann files a motion to dismiss.

I second this. Hat 🎩 tip @realjudasgoat

That’s not going to work.

Michael Sussmann has filed a motion to dismiss the false statement charges.

Argument: His lies weren't material.

Read the full motion here:

https://scribd.com/document/559565757/Sussmann-Motion-to-Dismiss

🎩TIP Jeff Carlson 🧵 .@themarketswork

Meanwhile, Baker was asked if this type of interaction with an outside counsel had ever occurred before. In response, Baker admitted that his interaction with Sussmann was singularly unique:

Mr. Baker: I that that’s correct. Sitting here today, that’s the only one I can remember

Sussmann was never interviewed by the FBI, which Baker also found surprising, noting:

“It is logical to me that we [the FBI] would go back and interview [Sussmann].”

Sussmann WAS interviewed by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on Dec. 18, 2017.

Meadows to Baker:

“Everything about this investigation seems to have been done in an abnormal way, the way that you have gotten the information, the way that Strzok got information, the way that Ohr was used, the way that Perkins Coie actually came in and gave you information.”

Baker's Response:

“I had a jaundiced eye about everything, yes. I had skepticism about all this stuff. I was concerned about all of this. This whole situation was horrible, and it was novel and we were trying to figure out what to do, and it was highly unusual.”

Sussmann also pressured the FBI, later telling Baker he was speaking w/NYT.

Mr. Baker: He was the source—he told me the New York Times was aware of this. We, the FBI, went to the New York Times and then started a series of conversations with them to try to get them to slow down.

Sussmann used his personal relationship w/Baker to ensure that his information would receive immediate attention.

You’re the FBI’s general counsel, if you’re getting information from an outside source and passing it on, that means something.”

Baker: “I suppose so, Congressman.” https://twitter.com/themarketswork/status/1494362451193651208?s=20&t=U3sjUnAj3dwkQXt1YFeIew