Forwarded from Steve Bannon's War Room Pandemic
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
LISTEN: Bombshell Audio Reveals Lindsey Graham Claiming Nation Will Unify Around Biden After Jan. 6, Saying He’s ‘Maybe the Best Person to Have, Right?’
Forwarded from Ibrahim Reyes (Ibrahim Reyes • Trial Law)
If you call yourself pro choice but advocate for mandatory vaccines and masks and opposes the Second Amendment, you’re not pro choice, you’re a leftist sheep. 🐑
Forwarded from LadyDraza
The last 2 posts are linked. We HAVE to get the American people to understand that the machines are the optimizers. The machines are what allow the system to produce the 50.2% to 49.7% wins for the guy/gal you KNOW should have lost. If we do not address the dirty voter rolls and the MAIL-IN voting (still paper, right?), then they will not be able to optimize, but will just stuff the ballot box harder to ensure the win. Thus, Macron got 58.2%. Investigation of real person voters will reveal that there are a LOT of votes not from real people that pushed him to that point. We all are aware of that. The cheat requires all 3:
1) Exploded, inflated voter rolls
2) Mail-in voting to use the fake or identity theft voters
3) Machines to make it look plausible
Oh - and there is a 4th...Vote aggregation groups like Edison and Scytl to show you data that is fake but probable on the news in real-time so you don't question the results.
1) Exploded, inflated voter rolls
2) Mail-in voting to use the fake or identity theft voters
3) Machines to make it look plausible
Oh - and there is a 4th...Vote aggregation groups like Edison and Scytl to show you data that is fake but probable on the news in real-time so you don't question the results.
What happened in Surry County on Monday night was another disappointment for patriots. Like many, I tend to blame public officials for lacking the courage to do their jobs with regard to fixing 2020, but not this time. This time the Surry County commissioners were interested in hearing what the presenters had to say, but one could not have expected the County commissioners to ignore state law. We should know better, especially if we’re lawyers, than to accuse anyone of cowardice for following the law.
On Monday night the problem came not from the politicians, but from the presenters who failed to empower the county commissioners with the appropriate legal knowledge. To empower county commissioners in North Carolina, we need to do more than reference a particular statutory provision and insist that it somehow grants authority. Worse, the former professor and prosecutor potentially mischaracterized the law.
Former Law Professor David Clements stated that “as someone who has been an award-winning law professor and an award winning prosecutor, this isn’t about black letter law. This is about courage. That’s all this is about.”
I beg to differ. The effort to get rid of the electronic voting systems in Surry County failed 100% because of the failure to articulate how the commissioners could do so under the applicable black letter law, and we have to get that right going forward. There are two applicable statutory provisions under North Carolina law that county commissioners must take into account, only one of which the professor mentioned.
The first is N.C. Gen. Stat. § 163-165.7, which reads:
“(a) Only voting systems that have been certified by the State Board of Elections in accordance with the procedures set forth by the State Board of Elections and subject to the standards set forth in this section and that have not been subsequently decertified shall be permitted for use in elections in this State…”
The extent of the former law professor’s legal argument reads as follows: “This is really the issue before you all is one: do you have the lawful authority? You do under 163-165.8.” His statement directly contradicts that statutory provision that he referenced. The language of the statute reads:
“The board of county commissioners, with the approval of the county board of elections, may adopt and acquire only a voting system of a type, make, and model certified by the State Board of Elections for use in some or all voting places in the county at some or all elections.
The board of county commissioners may decline to adopt and acquire any voting system recommended by the county board of elections but may not adopt and acquire any voting system that has not been approved by the county board of elections…” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 163-165.8.
It is my understanding that there is currently no existing certified alternative to the electronic voting systems. As explained by one of my colleagues in a voicechat I hosted with one of the other presenters several weeks prior to the Surry County meeting, what should be tried at future presentations to county commissioner boards is this:
1. Citizens in a given county need to request that their local county board of commissioners make a formal request to local and state boards of elections for “non-electronic voting system options.” USE THOSE SPECIFIC WORDS.
2. After making the county commissioners make such a request, the county commissioners then need to issue a press release mentioning said request so that their county constituents know that they have taken lawful action.
We cannot accuse county commissioners of cowardice for refusing to follow a request to violate state law. We must first empower them with the knowledge to make the needed changes within the law. Of all people, the former professor and prosecutor turned self-proclaimed “travelling audit salesman” should know that.
On Monday night the problem came not from the politicians, but from the presenters who failed to empower the county commissioners with the appropriate legal knowledge. To empower county commissioners in North Carolina, we need to do more than reference a particular statutory provision and insist that it somehow grants authority. Worse, the former professor and prosecutor potentially mischaracterized the law.
Former Law Professor David Clements stated that “as someone who has been an award-winning law professor and an award winning prosecutor, this isn’t about black letter law. This is about courage. That’s all this is about.”
I beg to differ. The effort to get rid of the electronic voting systems in Surry County failed 100% because of the failure to articulate how the commissioners could do so under the applicable black letter law, and we have to get that right going forward. There are two applicable statutory provisions under North Carolina law that county commissioners must take into account, only one of which the professor mentioned.
The first is N.C. Gen. Stat. § 163-165.7, which reads:
“(a) Only voting systems that have been certified by the State Board of Elections in accordance with the procedures set forth by the State Board of Elections and subject to the standards set forth in this section and that have not been subsequently decertified shall be permitted for use in elections in this State…”
The extent of the former law professor’s legal argument reads as follows: “This is really the issue before you all is one: do you have the lawful authority? You do under 163-165.8.” His statement directly contradicts that statutory provision that he referenced. The language of the statute reads:
“The board of county commissioners, with the approval of the county board of elections, may adopt and acquire only a voting system of a type, make, and model certified by the State Board of Elections for use in some or all voting places in the county at some or all elections.
The board of county commissioners may decline to adopt and acquire any voting system recommended by the county board of elections but may not adopt and acquire any voting system that has not been approved by the county board of elections…” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 163-165.8.
It is my understanding that there is currently no existing certified alternative to the electronic voting systems. As explained by one of my colleagues in a voicechat I hosted with one of the other presenters several weeks prior to the Surry County meeting, what should be tried at future presentations to county commissioner boards is this:
1. Citizens in a given county need to request that their local county board of commissioners make a formal request to local and state boards of elections for “non-electronic voting system options.” USE THOSE SPECIFIC WORDS.
2. After making the county commissioners make such a request, the county commissioners then need to issue a press release mentioning said request so that their county constituents know that they have taken lawful action.
We cannot accuse county commissioners of cowardice for refusing to follow a request to violate state law. We must first empower them with the knowledge to make the needed changes within the law. Of all people, the former professor and prosecutor turned self-proclaimed “travelling audit salesman” should know that.
Complete Transcript of TG with Stuart Guthrie.pdf
428.8 KB
Sidebar question: Since when does a professed man of God and man of the cloth ignore the cries of help from members or followers of his church?
Why did Pastor Guthrie ignore my request that he be willing to vouch for my religious beliefs, if asked by the school, so that I could have my religious exemption from the COVID vaccine?
Needless to say, I found a new church not long after that.
P.S. 100% of my communication with Stuart following our meeting in late April of 2021 was via Telegram direct messaging.
Why did Pastor Guthrie ignore my request that he be willing to vouch for my religious beliefs, if asked by the school, so that I could have my religious exemption from the COVID vaccine?
Needless to say, I found a new church not long after that.
P.S. 100% of my communication with Stuart following our meeting in late April of 2021 was via Telegram direct messaging.
👏2😁1
I didn’t care to debate David Clements last night. However, I would like to thank him once again for his resounding support of my becoming a member of the board of FightBack Foundation at a time when he knew I had been making efforts to fix 2020 in North Carolina, despite the fact that I was physically residing in Georgia while finishing my last year of law school.
My video from the other night was one that raised questions about David’s work history. I believe David can put the issue to bed by answering those questions. He said that when necessary, he can post the “receipts” – I think that’s a great idea. It would be helpful to see actual court documents such as pleadings, briefs, or transcripts, etc. with his name on them to prove that the LexisNexus legal database is indeed an incomplete universe.
On my end some people have posted links to what appear to be New Mexio court databases. I have not looked at them yet, but I will. I say that even though the burden of proof is on him to prove my falsity, and not on me to prove my truth. Again – if after reading those leads and (hopefully) his “receipts” I determine that there is in fact a reasonable explanation for the questions I had raised the other night, I will say so. I will do so on my own terms and at a time of my choosing. I will not be strong-armed or browbeaten into livestream debates on short notice.
My video from the other night was one that raised questions about David’s work history. I believe David can put the issue to bed by answering those questions. He said that when necessary, he can post the “receipts” – I think that’s a great idea. It would be helpful to see actual court documents such as pleadings, briefs, or transcripts, etc. with his name on them to prove that the LexisNexus legal database is indeed an incomplete universe.
On my end some people have posted links to what appear to be New Mexio court databases. I have not looked at them yet, but I will. I say that even though the burden of proof is on him to prove my falsity, and not on me to prove my truth. Again – if after reading those leads and (hopefully) his “receipts” I determine that there is in fact a reasonable explanation for the questions I had raised the other night, I will say so. I will do so on my own terms and at a time of my choosing. I will not be strong-armed or browbeaten into livestream debates on short notice.
👍1
I have retracted my post with the video showing David Clements’s name not popping up in LexisNexis.
This afternoon I confirmed that the New Mexico Court system at the trial level is NOT part of the LexisNexis database. I had no reason, in my view, to anticipate that. I had operated on the assumption that because LEXIS-NEXIS had all 50 states in the database that it had all court levels in its database. In law school I hardly ever researched anything at the trial level. I was always looking for black letter law at the appellate level.
Be that as it may, that explains why my results for David Clements as an attorney in New Mexico came up empty. I suppose I would in part chalk my oversight up to a heat of the battle type of moment, following his presentation in North Carolina, which had irritated me. My irritation prompted me to look into him, and see what he had done as a trial lawyer. I was shocked at what I thought I’d found.
I was completely transparent in how I had conducted my research for the video. Flawed as it was, I did what I did in good faith. I did not explicitly accuse David of wrongdoing, but others have made potentially made false inferences about his work history on the basis of my screen recording.
I promised I would stand for truth, no matter what the truth turned out to be – even if the truth reveals me to have been mistaken. The truth here is that I did have some oversights in my research process.
While my actions were in good faith, I do apologize to David – and to all who read what I had posted – for any pain and confusion I might have caused.
This afternoon I confirmed that the New Mexico Court system at the trial level is NOT part of the LexisNexis database. I had no reason, in my view, to anticipate that. I had operated on the assumption that because LEXIS-NEXIS had all 50 states in the database that it had all court levels in its database. In law school I hardly ever researched anything at the trial level. I was always looking for black letter law at the appellate level.
Be that as it may, that explains why my results for David Clements as an attorney in New Mexico came up empty. I suppose I would in part chalk my oversight up to a heat of the battle type of moment, following his presentation in North Carolina, which had irritated me. My irritation prompted me to look into him, and see what he had done as a trial lawyer. I was shocked at what I thought I’d found.
I was completely transparent in how I had conducted my research for the video. Flawed as it was, I did what I did in good faith. I did not explicitly accuse David of wrongdoing, but others have made potentially made false inferences about his work history on the basis of my screen recording.
I promised I would stand for truth, no matter what the truth turned out to be – even if the truth reveals me to have been mistaken. The truth here is that I did have some oversights in my research process.
While my actions were in good faith, I do apologize to David – and to all who read what I had posted – for any pain and confusion I might have caused.
👍4
Forwarded from Lin Wood (L. Lin Wood)
I have always acknowledged that as a REAL Patriot, I was trying to help Sidney Powell but I did not draft, sign, or file any of her 4 election complaints based on fraud.
After November 3, 2020, I started receiving information by email and on Twitter containing evidence of election wrongdoing.
I passed that information to Sidney as she had told me she was looking into fraud.
At the time of this email, I was preparing MY own lawsuit based on the Georgia election being illegal because the changes in the election procedures had not been approved by the Georgia legislature.
At the time of this email, I hoped that legal action would not be necessary as the wrongdoing seemed so obvious. But I did not want to disincentive the public from sending evidence of election wrongdoing.
I filed my lawsuit on November 13, 2020.
I never pursued any election lawsuit based on fraud because I knew from my experience that a fraud case would take years in court to prove.
On the other hand, the legal theory of my case was one based solely on law, not facts. I felt that it was the only legal case that could resolve the election controversy before the Electoral College voted in December.
Stay with me for a couple of more comments if you wish.
Lin 🙏❤️🇺🇸
www.FightBack.law
After November 3, 2020, I started receiving information by email and on Twitter containing evidence of election wrongdoing.
I passed that information to Sidney as she had told me she was looking into fraud.
At the time of this email, I was preparing MY own lawsuit based on the Georgia election being illegal because the changes in the election procedures had not been approved by the Georgia legislature.
At the time of this email, I hoped that legal action would not be necessary as the wrongdoing seemed so obvious. But I did not want to disincentive the public from sending evidence of election wrongdoing.
I filed my lawsuit on November 13, 2020.
I never pursued any election lawsuit based on fraud because I knew from my experience that a fraud case would take years in court to prove.
On the other hand, the legal theory of my case was one based solely on law, not facts. I felt that it was the only legal case that could resolve the election controversy before the Electoral College voted in December.
Stay with me for a couple of more comments if you wish.
Lin 🙏❤️🇺🇸
www.FightBack.law
👍2
Forwarded from Nick Moseder (Nick Moseder)
BREAKING: A hand count of the May 24th primary results in Dekalb County GA’s District 2 county commission race reveals MASSIVE, outcome changing discrepancies between the Dominion machine totals and hand counted totals.
The hand count published June 1st revealed:
Alexander- gained 355 votes
Orson- lost 1298 votes
Spears- gained 3620 votes
Broussard- gained 133 votes
2,810 more votes were cast than were initially reported.
No explanation was given.
BAN THE MACHINES!!!
@WILFmoseder
The hand count published June 1st revealed:
Alexander- gained 355 votes
Orson- lost 1298 votes
Spears- gained 3620 votes
Broussard- gained 133 votes
2,810 more votes were cast than were initially reported.
No explanation was given.
BAN THE MACHINES!!!
@WILFmoseder
It must have been tough to be George O’Leary.
It must have been tough to lose that dream job at Notre Dame after word got out that he’d fictionalized his resume…
I guess when a man lies about his past, his past can catch up with him.
Just sayin’ …
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/notre-dame-coach-resigns-in-disgrace/
It must have been tough to lose that dream job at Notre Dame after word got out that he’d fictionalized his resume…
I guess when a man lies about his past, his past can catch up with him.
Just sayin’ …
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/notre-dame-coach-resigns-in-disgrace/
Cbsnews
Notre Dame Coach Resigns In Disgrace
New Football Coach Lied About Academic, Athletic Background
👍2