Leftist Brennan Center advocates universal no-excuse mail-in ballot voting.

johnwk

Gold Member
May 24, 2009
4,172
1,998
200
.
.

The Brennan Center for Justice in New York - home of Tammany Halls historic election riggers - is connected to New York University School of Law, and is on a propaganda mission advocating universal no-excuse mail in ballots, in spite of a glaring chain of custody weakness with mail-in ballots.

In one of their propaganda pieces, The False Narrative of Vote-by-Mail Fraud, Wendy R. Weiser and Harold Ekeh assert:


"Ballot drop-off locations help maintain a secure chain of custody as the ballot goes from the voter to the local election office. And when drop boxes are put outside of government offices, one security measure is to equip them with security cameras to monitor ballot traffic and ensure that the boxes are not breached."

Keep in mind they say " . . . help maintain a secure chain of custody . . . "

But they suspiciously fail to acknowledge there is a loss of chain of custody from the time a mail-in ballot is received by a theoretically legitimate recipient of a mail-in ballot, to the time when that mailed-in ballot is counted.

Additionally, these two authors fail to mention the glaring weakness with a mailed in ballot, there is no practical way to scrutinize a mailed-in ballot when counted, to verify that it was actually filled out, and the choices made thereon, were by a qualified voter who allegedly was issued the ballot.

With in-person voting, and the use of appropriate ID before a qualified voter is allowed into the voting booth, there is an extremely high certainty that the one voting in the booth and checking the choices on the ballot, is a legitimate voter and making their choices.

Finally, the Brennan Center is headed by former Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan, who seems to have lied under oath about the so called “Steele dossier”, and the manufactured Russia Hoax involving former President Trump. See: Did John Brennan Perjure Himself Over Steele Dossier?

Brennan is also on the list of 51 Intel Officials Who lied About the Hunter Biden Laptop Emails.

The bottom line is, the lack of chain of custody with mail-in voting is a good indication that mail-in voting ought to be limited to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person.

By limiting mail-in voting to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person, the total number of mail-in ballots would be greatly reduced to a fraction of what is now the case, and in so doing, even though the opportunity for mail-in ballot vote stealing and government perpetrated election fraud would still exist, their effect on an election would be greatly reduced by the reduction in actual mail-in ballots allowed.

The glaring weakness with mail-in ballots, which is an untenable chain of custody problem and an inability to verify if a mailed in ballot was actually filled out, and the choices made there on, were by a legitimate person issued the ballot, is more than enough to want to restrict mail-in ballots to those legitimately unable to vote in person, and for those who want fair elections to say no to no-excuse mail-in ballot voting.

Is it really a good idea to allow political hacks, like John Brennan, run, or influence our election process?

JWK

The troubling truth about allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in one state is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”.
 
.
.

The Brennan Center for Justice in New York - home of Tammany Halls historic election riggers - is connected to New York University School of Law, and is on a propaganda mission advocating universal no-excuse mail in ballots, in spite of a glaring chain of custody weakness with mail-in ballots.

In one of their propaganda pieces, The False Narrative of Vote-by-Mail Fraud, Wendy R. Weiser and Harold Ekeh assert:




Keep in mind they say " . . . help maintain a secure chain of custody . . . "

But they suspiciously fail to acknowledge there is a loss of chain of custody from the time a mail-in ballot is received by a theoretically legitimate recipient of a mail-in ballot, to the time when that mailed-in ballot is counted.

Additionally, these two authors fail to mention the glaring weakness with a mailed in ballot, there is no practical way to scrutinize a mailed-in ballot when counted, to verify that it was actually filled out, and the choices made thereon, were by a qualified voter who allegedly was issued the ballot.

With in-person voting, and the use of appropriate ID before a qualified voter is allowed into the voting booth, there is an extremely high certainty that the one voting in the booth and checking the choices on the ballot, is a legitimate voter and making their choices.

Finally, the Brennan Center is headed by former Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan, who seems to have lied under oath about the so called “Steele dossier”, and the manufactured Russia Hoax involving former President Trump. See: Did John Brennan Perjure Himself Over Steele Dossier?

Brennan is also on the list of 51 Intel Officials Who lied About the Hunter Biden Laptop Emails.

The bottom line is, the lack of chain of custody with mail-in voting is a good indication that mail-in voting ought to be limited to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person.

By limiting mail-in voting to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person, the total number of mail-in ballots would be greatly reduced to a fraction of what is now the case, and in so doing, even though the opportunity for mail-in ballot vote stealing and government perpetrated election fraud would still exist, their effect on an election would be greatly reduced by the reduction in actual mail-in ballots allowed.

The glaring weakness with mail-in ballots, which is an untenable chain of custody problem and an inability to verify if a mailed in ballot was actually filled out, and the choices made there on, were by a legitimate person issued the ballot, is more than enough to want to restrict mail-in ballots to those legitimately unable to vote in person, and for those who want fair elections to say no to no-excuse mail-in ballot voting.

Is it really a good idea to allow political hacks, like John Brennan, run, or influence our election process?

JWK

The troubling truth about allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in one state is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”.
As it should be. Any eligible voter deserves to have their vote counted. No matter if they have to work on election day, have to stand in impossibly long lines, are disabled, homebound, or work or serve overseas. Those votes also need to be received, counted, and verified by election day. Every state. See Florida and Texas as examples of how that should work. See the swing states with just and righteous Republican legislatures for what NOT to do. :)

States have been using mail in voting for decades with no issues...until, the Great Orange Roughy lost his re-election bid. Why do you think that is?
 
.
.

The Brennan Center for Justice in New York - home of Tammany Halls historic election riggers - is connected to New York University School of Law, and is on a propaganda mission advocating universal no-excuse mail in ballots, in spite of a glaring chain of custody weakness with mail-in ballots.

In one of their propaganda pieces, The False Narrative of Vote-by-Mail Fraud, Wendy R. Weiser and Harold Ekeh assert:




Keep in mind they say " . . . help maintain a secure chain of custody . . . "

But they suspiciously fail to acknowledge there is a loss of chain of custody from the time a mail-in ballot is received by a theoretically legitimate recipient of a mail-in ballot, to the time when that mailed-in ballot is counted.

Additionally, these two authors fail to mention the glaring weakness with a mailed in ballot, there is no practical way to scrutinize a mailed-in ballot when counted, to verify that it was actually filled out, and the choices made thereon, were by a qualified voter who allegedly was issued the ballot.

With in-person voting, and the use of appropriate ID before a qualified voter is allowed into the voting booth, there is an extremely high certainty that the one voting in the booth and checking the choices on the ballot, is a legitimate voter and making their choices.

Finally, the Brennan Center is headed by former Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan, who seems to have lied under oath about the so called “Steele dossier”, and the manufactured Russia Hoax involving former President Trump. See: Did John Brennan Perjure Himself Over Steele Dossier?

Brennan is also on the list of 51 Intel Officials Who lied About the Hunter Biden Laptop Emails.

The bottom line is, the lack of chain of custody with mail-in voting is a good indication that mail-in voting ought to be limited to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person.

By limiting mail-in voting to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person, the total number of mail-in ballots would be greatly reduced to a fraction of what is now the case, and in so doing, even though the opportunity for mail-in ballot vote stealing and government perpetrated election fraud would still exist, their effect on an election would be greatly reduced by the reduction in actual mail-in ballots allowed.

The glaring weakness with mail-in ballots, which is an untenable chain of custody problem and an inability to verify if a mailed in ballot was actually filled out, and the choices made there on, were by a legitimate person issued the ballot, is more than enough to want to restrict mail-in ballots to those legitimately unable to vote in person, and for those who want fair elections to say no to no-excuse mail-in ballot voting.

Is it really a good idea to allow political hacks, like John Brennan, run, or influence our election process?

JWK

The troubling truth about allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in one state is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”.
Still pushing (on multiple forums) that our deployed military be disenfranchised?
 
Because they know that mail-ins work for cheaters and democrats are most often the cheaters.
Please note, I just found out John Brennan, former Central Intelligence Agency Director, is not connected with the Brennan Center, but as noted by AI:



Former CIA Director John Brennan has expressed support for no-excuse mail-in ballot voting. In a report by the Brennan Center for Justice, it was highlighted that Covid-19 should be considered a legitimate excuse to vote by mail.
 
Last edited:
No sane country allows massive mail-in voting. In Europe , in Japan, elsewhere, it is extremely rare and quite properly so.
 
For example, Japan and Poland have limited mail-in voting for those who have special certificates verifying that they are disabled. France has made an exception this year to its ban on mail-in ballots to those who are sick or at particular risk during the coronavirus pandemic. Poland will allow mail-in ballots for everyone for this year only.​
Brazil and Russia satisfy the economic standards of the OECD, but are excluded for various political reasons. Both countries completely ban mail-in voting and require photo IDs for in-person voting.​
Among the 27 countries in the European Union, 63 percent ban mail-in voting unless living abroad and another 22 percent require a photo ID to obtain a mail-in ballot. Twenty-two percent ban the practice even for those who live abroad.
There are 16 countries in the rest of Europe, and they are even more restrictive. Every single one bans mail-in voting for those living in the country or require a photo ID to obtain a mail-in ballot. Sixty-three percent don't allow mail-in ballots even for citizens living outside of the country.

 
Last edited:
1. There is a loss of chain of custody from the time a mail-in ballot is received by a theoretically legitimate recipient of a mail-in ballot, to the time when that mail-in ballot is counted.

2. There is no practical way to scrutinize a mail-in ballot when counted, to verify that it was actually filled out, and the choices made thereon, were by a qualified voter who allegedly was issued the ballot.

3. With in-person voting, and the use of appropriate ID before a qualified voter is allowed into the voting booth, there is an extremely high certainty that the one voting in the booth and checking the choices on the ballot, is a legitimate voter and making their choices.

4. Any election officer with a desire to perpetrate election fraud and has access to various state data bases containing personal information on in-state residents, i.e., driver’s license, voter rolls, tax returns, etc., can easily manufacture a few thousand fraudulent mail-in ballots per urban voting district [meaning large populous district] using that information, fill them out and introduce them into the system [e.g. drop boxes or mail boxes] with a slim to no chance of these ballots ever being detected when they are counted.


Check out: Voting Fraud Is a Real Concern. Just Look Around the World

If the American people do not clean up their election process before the coming election, they will be inviting the kinds of elections held in China, Russia and Cuba, where there is on party rule.
 
Last edited:
They might as well let the Democrats dig up all the dead bodies and bus the corpses to the voting centers.
 
.
.

The Brennan Center for Justice in New York - home of Tammany Halls historic election riggers - is connected to New York University School of Law, and is on a propaganda mission advocating universal no-excuse mail in ballots, in spite of a glaring chain of custody weakness with mail-in ballots.

In one of their propaganda pieces, The False Narrative of Vote-by-Mail Fraud, Wendy R. Weiser and Harold Ekeh assert:




Keep in mind they say " . . . help maintain a secure chain of custody . . . "

But they suspiciously fail to acknowledge there is a loss of chain of custody from the time a mail-in ballot is received by a theoretically legitimate recipient of a mail-in ballot, to the time when that mailed-in ballot is counted.

Additionally, these two authors fail to mention the glaring weakness with a mailed in ballot, there is no practical way to scrutinize a mailed-in ballot when counted, to verify that it was actually filled out, and the choices made thereon, were by a qualified voter who allegedly was issued the ballot.

With in-person voting, and the use of appropriate ID before a qualified voter is allowed into the voting booth, there is an extremely high certainty that the one voting in the booth and checking the choices on the ballot, is a legitimate voter and making their choices.

Finally, the Brennan Center is headed by former Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan, who seems to have lied under oath about the so called “Steele dossier”, and the manufactured Russia Hoax involving former President Trump. See: Did John Brennan Perjure Himself Over Steele Dossier?

Brennan is also on the list of 51 Intel Officials Who lied About the Hunter Biden Laptop Emails.

The bottom line is, the lack of chain of custody with mail-in voting is a good indication that mail-in voting ought to be limited to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person.

By limiting mail-in voting to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person, the total number of mail-in ballots would be greatly reduced to a fraction of what is now the case, and in so doing, even though the opportunity for mail-in ballot vote stealing and government perpetrated election fraud would still exist, their effect on an election would be greatly reduced by the reduction in actual mail-in ballots allowed.

The glaring weakness with mail-in ballots, which is an untenable chain of custody problem and an inability to verify if a mailed in ballot was actually filled out, and the choices made there on, were by a legitimate person issued the ballot, is more than enough to want to restrict mail-in ballots to those legitimately unable to vote in person, and for those who want fair elections to say no to no-excuse mail-in ballot voting.

Is it really a good idea to allow political hacks, like John Brennan, run, or influence our election process?

JWK

The troubling truth about allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in one state is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”.
The right’s war on democracy continues.
 
Please note, I just found out John Brennan, former Central Intelligence Agency Director, is not connected with the Brennan Center, but as noted by AI:



Former CIA Director John Brennan has expressed support for no-excuse mail-in ballot voting. In a report by the Brennan Center for Justice, it was highlighted that Covid-19 should be considered a legitimate excuse to vote by mail.
The Brennen Center is correct, it is a false narrative:

“Trump’s claims are wrong, and if used to prevent states from taking the steps needed to ensure public safety during November’s election, they will be deadly wrong. Mail ballot fraud is incredibly rare, and legitimate security concerns can be easily addressed.” ibid

The right’s unwarranted opposition to voting by mail is solely motivated to disenfranchising minority voters, voters of color, and voters in urban areas where Republican state lawmakers have eliminated voting venues and early/expanded voting.

Again, the right’s war on democracy continues.
 
As it should be. Any eligible voter deserves to have their vote counted. No matter if they have to work on election day, have to stand in impossibly long lines, are disabled, homebound, or work or serve overseas. Those votes also need to be received, counted, and verified by election day. Every state. See Florida and Texas as examples of how that should work. See the swing states with just and righteous Republican legislatures for what NOT to do. :)

States have been using mail in voting for decades with no issues...until, the Great Orange Roughy lost his re-election bid. Why do you think that is?
Every concern you sited regarding mail-in voting can be resolved by Absentee Voting where the voter requests the ballot and mails in the ballot. Your argument that “states have been using mail in voting for decades with no issues” is not sufficient in light of the chain of custody vulnerability identified.

Based on your logic, bridges and infrastructure need not be fixed despite vulnerabilities discovered because they have been operating for decades without issues.
 
.
.

The Brennan Center for Justice in New York - home of Tammany Halls historic election riggers - is connected to New York University School of Law, and is on a propaganda mission advocating universal no-excuse mail in ballots, in spite of a glaring chain of custody weakness with mail-in ballots.

In one of their propaganda pieces, The False Narrative of Vote-by-Mail Fraud, Wendy R. Weiser and Harold Ekeh assert:




Keep in mind they say " . . . help maintain a secure chain of custody . . . "

But they suspiciously fail to acknowledge there is a loss of chain of custody from the time a mail-in ballot is received by a theoretically legitimate recipient of a mail-in ballot, to the time when that mailed-in ballot is counted.

Additionally, these two authors fail to mention the glaring weakness with a mailed in ballot, there is no practical way to scrutinize a mailed-in ballot when counted, to verify that it was actually filled out, and the choices made thereon, were by a qualified voter who allegedly was issued the ballot.

With in-person voting, and the use of appropriate ID before a qualified voter is allowed into the voting booth, there is an extremely high certainty that the one voting in the booth and checking the choices on the ballot, is a legitimate voter and making their choices.

Finally, the Brennan Center is headed by former Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan, who seems to have lied under oath about the so called “Steele dossier”, and the manufactured Russia Hoax involving former President Trump. See: Did John Brennan Perjure Himself Over Steele Dossier?

Brennan is also on the list of 51 Intel Officials Who lied About the Hunter Biden Laptop Emails.

The bottom line is, the lack of chain of custody with mail-in voting is a good indication that mail-in voting ought to be limited to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person.

By limiting mail-in voting to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person, the total number of mail-in ballots would be greatly reduced to a fraction of what is now the case, and in so doing, even though the opportunity for mail-in ballot vote stealing and government perpetrated election fraud would still exist, their effect on an election would be greatly reduced by the reduction in actual mail-in ballots allowed.

The glaring weakness with mail-in ballots, which is an untenable chain of custody problem and an inability to verify if a mailed in ballot was actually filled out, and the choices made there on, were by a legitimate person issued the ballot, is more than enough to want to restrict mail-in ballots to those legitimately unable to vote in person, and for those who want fair elections to say no to no-excuse mail-in ballot voting.

Is it really a good idea to allow political hacks, like John Brennan, run, or influence our election process?

JWK

The troubling truth about allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in one state is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”.
paper ballots.....one week early voting.. voter id....mail in with a verified legitimate reason and photo id
 
No sane country allows massive mail-in voting. In Europe , in Japan, elsewhere, it is extremely rare and quite properly so.
we just need to flood with mail ins...all republican

we have to cheat like hell for fair elections
 

Forum List

Back
Top