Oh, I forgot to add that this person tried to contact a judge who was overseeing my child custody case after a divorce. I've never met this person. Ever. But they decided to try and impersonate me to get to the judge and piss her off trying to make me look like I was contacting the Judge ex parte, which is illegal.

The judge saw thru it immediately, as she is familiar with my family and never even looked at the thing that was faxed. Didn't care. That's not how court cases work and now everyone in that county is aware of someone trying to impersonate me in a court of law. Federal charges coming after the next thing that happens.

So guys, we agree that exposing fed informants is key to preserving our right to privacy and our right to discuss how to address issues with our runaway government.

When the feds aren't friends with people it's easy to be ruthless and call them out. But what do you do when it is your own associate who gets exposed for harming the movement so often? When it is your associate or employee who has been harassing single mothers like me who work two jobs, build my own companies and also report on election issues - and who does this to MANY women in the movement - can you be as ruthless as you prescribed against the feds who do the same type of damage?

Can you rip off a bandaid or do you enjoy torturing yourself? I'd have ripped it off long ago and let the damage scar over.

🔥❤🔥
🙏🙏🙏

Daniel 5:17

Here is the first edition of the TBTX Glossary of Terms. Share this with anyone interested in learning more, or who wants to be able to keep up with the rhetoric and vernacular being used in this fight for transparent and secure elections.

Hope this helps those who feel like they can't follow along with the debates, let alone participate in them.

Or just reference this anytime you come across a term you dont recognize right away.

Also, I'm still working on this and we accept suggestions for any new entries

If you find any typos/ strange grammar, please lmk... lol I didn't ask anyone to proofread it.

Not an attack on DeSantis or anything but 👀❤️‍🔥

Here is my declaration in the Alabama case, which will be of interest for other ES&S counties such as Pima County AZ.

TX Counties using ES&S

Hi, patriots!

Please see the letter below for supporting a bill (HB5180) for election data transparency in Texas. This bill is intent to clarify the preserved period on election ballots and related data is not for confidential purpose. We would not wait for 22 months to inspect ballots if this bill passed. 

If you agree, please share with your friends and send the letter below and add your name /address to the following GOP House Election Committee members if you want to make the change:

Reggie.Smith@house.texas.gov
Dustin.Burrows@house.texas.gov
Valoree.Swanson@house.texas.gov
Giovanni.Capriglione@house.texas.gov
Mano.DeAyala@house.texas.gov

*************

Dear House Election Committee Members: 

This letter is regarding to support HB 5180 – Clarify the 22-month preserved period of election ballots and cast vote records is not for confidential purpose.
Election ballots or cast vote records shall be available for public inspection to ensure transparency, accountability, and accuracy. Citizens requesting such information have been rejected by the election authority mainly based on:
Election Code sec. 66.058 - CHAPTER 66. DISPOSITION OF RECORDS AND SUPPLIES AFTER ELECTION Sec. 66.058.  PRESERVATION OF PRECINCT ELECTION RECORDS – the authority shall withhold the ballots or cast vote records in the sealed boxes until the 22-month preservation period expired.
 
The election ballots, cast vote records and other election records are owned by the public. These documents should be kept from destruction or damage and available for the public to review. HB 5180 is adding an amendment on Election code Sec. 66.058 to clarify the 22-month preserved period is not for confidential purpose. 
I respectfully ask you to support this bill for our election’s transparency, accuracy and accountability.
 
Sincerely,

[Your Name]

Thank you to Mei for sending this out today!

Hi, patriots!

Please see the letter below for supporting a bill (SB1338) to limit voting by mail in Texas. We all know mail-in ballot is a warm bed of fraud. Many friends want to eliminate it. However there are legit voters need it for executing their rights. This bill will reduce fraud risk by limiting the voting by mail. 

Please send the letter and add your name /address to the Senate State Affairs Committee if you want to make the change. The Committee will distribute our message to senators.

Senate State Committee: scstate.affairs@senate.texas.gov


Thanks and God bless!

Mei

Mei sent both of the above emails recently. PLEASE FOLLOW THRU AND HELP SAVE TEXAS ELECTIONS!

Mei's clarification of previous typo, SB 1338 is the one limiting mail in voting.p

I apologize, it was a typo - the bil is actually SB 1338

https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=88R&Bill=SB1338

I created http://www.voterfbi.org as a request of project veritas /James O Keffe after I worked with them to get the woman arrested for voter fraud in Texas that made national news. I’m
Betting on James…. More to come! #jamesokeefe #westonworksforyou #hairometer

Hi, patriots!

Please see the letter below for supporting a bill (SB1338) to limit voting by mail in Texas. We all know mail-in ballot is a warm bed of fraud. Many friends want to eliminate it. However there are legit voters need it for executing their rights. This bill will reduce fraud risk by limiting the voting by mail. 

Please send the letter and add your name /address to the Senate State Affairs Committee if you want to make the change. The Committee will distribute our message to senators.

Senate State Committee: scstate.affairs@senate.texas.gov


Thanks and God bless!

Mei

https://youtube.com/shorts/ESgUqeexZ0U?feature=share

Be both. The loudest aren't always the most capable.

From Tom Glass:

Just became aware of bi-partisan attack on office of Sheriff in Texas Legislature in the form of a bill that greatly increases the credentials and experience needed to be a Texas Sheriff.

The bill has been introduced in both Senate and House by Republican Senator Phil King (SB 1124) and Democrat Representative Victoria Neave-Criado (HB 3477).

SB 1124 will be heard in the Senate Local Government Committee tomorrow morning, Monday, March 27 starting.  The hearing starts at 11 am in E1.028.

https://capitol.texas.gov/.../html/C5562023032711001.HTM

Bill text:  https://capitol.texas.gov/.../88R/billtext/html/SB01124I.htm

From: CSPOA <cspoa2011@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2023 10:20 PM
To: T Benson <cspoa2011@gmail.com>
Subject: ALERT: Texas State Senate Bill 1124
 
SB 1124: Relating to qualifications of a Texas sheriff or a candidate for sheriff

Dear Sheriffs and Law Enforcement friends,

We only learned about this proposed legislation this afternoon. In the event you are not aware of this bill, we want to alert you to the fact of
this effort to change the eligibility qualifications and requirements to be sheriff in Texas. The public hearing is Monday morning, March 27.

Article 5, section 23 or the Texas Constitution says:
 “There shall be elected by the qualified voters of each county a Sheriff, who shall hold his office for the term of four years, whose duties, qualifications, prerequisites, and fees of office, shall be prescribed by the Legislature, and vacancies in whose office shall be filled.

Here is the link to the text of Senate Bill 1124: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/billtext/pdf/SB01124I.pdf#navpanes=0

SB 1124 will re-define qualifications to require, under Article 2.12,(b),Code of Criminal Procedure, that a sheriff or candidate must have a minimum of:
(A) 5 years experience as a full-time, paid peace officer or federal special investigator; or 
(B) 10 years combined active duty or national guard service experience, and is a military veteran; and 
(4) holds an intermediate, advanced, or master proficiency certificate under Section 1701.402, Occupations Code. 
(c) A person is not eligible to be a candidate for the office of sheriff unless the person meets the qualifications prescribed by Subsection (b) - (which is what you just read). 
We have several concerns about this proposed change. First, what is the reason for this Bill? What is the origin of why the author is proposing these new requirements?
As it currently stands, if a person is eligible to get a peace officer license, then they are eligible to run for sheriff. By re-defining this eligibility requirement, it will likely eliminate many good and qualified candidates for sheriff. Why do we to do that? This is a way to eliminate competition.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Isn't this just more government control? As well, even if you are sheriff now, if you do not meet the new eligibility requirements, then you will not be eligible to run for sheriff in 2024. This should be left to the voters and for the people to decide. This is not something the government needs to regulate.

The author of the Bill is Senator King, Texas Senate District 10.
His contact is (512) 463-0110.

CSPOA does not support this Bill.

Sincerely,
Sheriff Richard Mack
Founder and President of CSPOA
Tonya Benson
National Director of Administration
830-456-1414
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association
cspoa.org

Tom Glass is AWESOME as well as the CSPOA!!!


Thank you Vicki for sending this out!

My latest video is now posted at
https://tinyurl.com/Why-Voting-Machines-Must-Go. Please share and forward.