The Immaculate Deception: Six Dimensions of Voting Irregularities

[AudeSapere]

Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy Peter Navarro published a lengthy report Thursday outlining several examples of voting irregularities that are “more than sufficient” to swing the outcome of the election in President Trump’s favor.

The 36-page report “assesses the fairness and integrity of the 2020 Presidential Election by examining six dimensions of alleged election irregularities across six key battleground states” and concludes that “patterns of election irregularities ... are so consistent across the six battleground states that they suggest a coordinated strategy to, if not steal the election, strategically game the election process in such a way as to ... unfairly tilt the playing field in favor of the Biden-Harris ticket.”

The six dimensions of voting irregularities in the report include: outright voter fraud, ballot mishandling, contestable process fouls, equal protection clause violations, voting machine irregularities, and significant statistical anomalies.

All six of those voting issues were present in at least two key states, according to the report, and a total of six battleground states experienced multiple examples of the other dimensions.

Peter Navarro releases 36-page report alleging election fraud 'more than sufficient' to swing victory to Trump

 

[skye]

I agree ^^

But, now we want a little less conversation a little more action.

That would be nice.

 

[jwoodie]

TRAITOR! (or what the Left used to call "the highest form of patriotism")

 

[Moonglow]

Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy Peter Navarro published a lengthy report Thursday outlining several examples of voting irregularities that are “more than sufficient” to swing the outcome of the election in President Trump’s favor.

The 36-page report “assesses the fairness and integrity of the 2020 Presidential Election by examining six dimensions of alleged election irregularities across six key battleground states” and concludes that “patterns of election irregularities ... are so consistent across the six battleground states that they suggest a coordinated strategy to, if not steal the election, strategically game the election process in such a way as to ... unfairly tilt the playing field in favor of the Biden-Harris ticket.”

The six dimensions of voting irregularities in the report include: outright voter fraud, ballot mishandling, contestable process fouls, equal protection clause violations, voting machine irregularities, and significant statistical anomalies.

All six of those voting issues were present in at least two key states, according to the report, and a total of six battleground states experienced multiple examples of the other dimensions.
View attachment 430449

Peter Navarro releases 36-page report alleging election fraud 'more than sufficient' to swing victory to Trump

Hmm, why did he only pick on Biden won states and not every state?

 

[Moonglow]

I agree ^^

But, now we want a little less conversation a little more action.

That would be nice.

Notice these people never bring this to a court of law and testify under oath...?

 

[justinacolmena]

I agree ^^

But, now we want a little less conversation a little more action.

That would be nice.

It's the RINOs. They aren't putting their money where their mouth is.

 

[skye]

I agree ^^

But, now we want a little less conversation a little more action.

That would be nice.

It's the RINOs. They aren't putting their money where their mouth is.

Sure, it's them, the Deep State, the traitors, the communists .... all of them.

 

[Care4all]

It seems to be the regurgitation of basically, the Texas lawsuit, which the Supreme Court shot down hearing.... along with a gazillion other courts shooting their claims as legitimate claims down... prior to the SC, on the individual unsubstantiated claims the op article is making.

rinse n repeat...the definition of insanity...!

 

[Moonglow]

I agree ^^

But, now we want a little less conversation a little more action.

That would be nice.

It's the RINOs. They aren't putting their money where their mouth is.

Sure, it's them, the Deep State, the traitors, the communists .... all of them.

Do you speak like this all the time? " Honey would you please go by the communist drycleaners and get my dress from the damn Deep State traitors, you know the Chicoms that own the business?".

 

[Agit8r]

Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy Peter Navarro published a lengthy report Thursday outlining several examples of voting irregularities that are “more than sufficient” to swing the outcome of the election in President Trump’s favor.

The 36-page report “assesses the fairness and integrity of the 2020 Presidential Election by examining six dimensions of alleged election irregularities across six key battleground states” and concludes that “patterns of election irregularities ... are so consistent across the six battleground states that they suggest a coordinated strategy to, if not steal the election, strategically game the election process in such a way as to ... unfairly tilt the playing field in favor of the Biden-Harris ticket.”

The six dimensions of voting irregularities in the report include: outright voter fraud, ballot mishandling, contestable process fouls, equal protection clause violations, voting machine irregularities, and significant statistical anomalies.

All six of those voting issues were present in at least two key states, according to the report, and a total of six battleground states experienced multiple examples of the other dimensions.
View attachment 430449

Peter Navarro releases 36-page report alleging election fraud 'more than sufficient' to swing victory to Trump

Hmm, why did he only pick on Biden won states and not every state?

Yeah. I never saw anybody recount North Carolina where trump outright told his followers to vote twice; by mail and in person.

 

[AudeSapere]

It seems to be the regurgitation of basically, the Texas lawsuit, which the Supreme Court shot down hearing.... along with a gazillion other courts shooting their claims as legitimate claims down... prior to the SC, on the individual unsubstantiated claims the op article is making.

rinse n repeat...the definition of insanity...!

No this is not the same regurgitation of the Texas lawsuit. You don't even know what you're talking about. The Texas lawsuit basically stated that the 4 States named in the lawsuit, PA, GA, MI, WI violated the US Constitution when the Executive Branches in the 4 States arbitrarily changed their election laws, when the US Constitution states in a longstanding judicially recognized principle, that Article 2;§1 of the Constitution grants plenary authority to the Legislatures of each State to determine the manner of appointing presidential electors, the time by which electors must be appointed is controlled by the federal Congress, which has enacted a statute setting the exact day the electors for President and Vice President shall be appointed.

The executive branch in each state are not supposed to change their election laws/statutes via administrative fiat and and judges are not suppose to, in effect, legislate law from bench, which is what the Pennsylvania Supreme Court did in spades when it ruled that the executive branch could through executive fiat waive signature verification, waive post mark dates and extend the acceptance of mail-in ballots 3 days past election day when they had no US of State of PA Constitutional authority to do so.

The Pennsylvania Constitution gives the legislature authority over absentee ballots
Article VII, Pennsylvania Constitution

Section 14
Text of Section 14:

Absentee Voting

(a) The Legislature shall, by general law, provide a manner in which, and the time and place at which, qualified electors who may, on the occurrence of any election, be absent from the State or county of their residence, because their duties, occupation or business require them to be elsewhere or who, on the occurrence of any election, are unable to attend at their proper polling places because of illness or physical disability or who will not attend a polling place because of the observance of a religious holiday or who cannot vote because of Election Day duties, in the case of a county employee, may vote, and for the return and canvass of their votes in the election district in which they respectively reside.

(b) For purposes of this section, "municipality" means a city, borough, incorporated town, township or any similar general purpose unit of government which may be created by the General Assembly.

This Article in the Constitution was NEVER properly amended by two votes in the State legislature and put to the people as a referendum. This is the argument that Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., and Pennsylvania GOP congressional candidate Sean Parnell argues that a 2019 state law allowing no-excuse mail-in voting is unconstitutional, which it is. The PA Constitution was never legally amended as is required to change anything in it's Constitution.

Amy Coney Barrett did not help matters when she wrongly recused herself and left a 4-4 decision on the Pennsylvania case prior to the election. Supreme Court Judges get intimidated sometimes via public opinion via the extremely biased Media.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett on Tuesday was asked to recuse herself from participating in a dispute over a mail-ballot extension in Pennsylvania, with the newly confirmed justice facing immediate political pressure on her first day on the job.
The recusal motion was filed by the Luzerne County Board of Elections, one of the parties that has asked the Supreme Court to reject efforts by Pennsylvania Republicans to roll back voting accommodations in the state.
Pennsylvania county asks Barrett to recuse herself from mail-ballot extension case

The Supreme Court, as well as the other courts, "shot down" the case(s) not because because of the MERITS of the the argument, the evidence, which was never allowed into court to be reviewed and argued, but from lame procedural problems or "lack of standing arguments". The Supreme Court was wrong in my opinion not to weigh in on this Constitutional matter and not to allow evidence to be entered into it's court for review and to argue before the bench.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy Peter Navarro published a lengthy report Thursday outlining several examples of voting irregularities that are “more than sufficient” to swing the outcome of the election in President Trump’s favor.

The 36-page report “assesses the fairness and integrity of the 2020 Presidential Election by examining six dimensions of alleged election irregularities across six key battleground states” and concludes that “patterns of election irregularities ... are so consistent across the six battleground states that they suggest a coordinated strategy to, if not steal the election, strategically game the election process in such a way as to ... unfairly tilt the playing field in favor of the Biden-Harris ticket.”

The six dimensions of voting irregularities in the report include: outright voter fraud, ballot mishandling, contestable process fouls, equal protection clause violations, voting machine irregularities, and significant statistical anomalies.

All six of those voting issues were present in at least two key states, according to the report, and a total of six battleground states experienced multiple examples of the other dimensions.
View attachment 430449

Peter Navarro releases 36-page report alleging election fraud 'more than sufficient' to swing victory to Trump

Navarro is a partisan hack, Trump flunky, and a liar.

 

[AudeSapere]

Congress Has Affirmed State Legislatures’ Unilateral Authority to Void Elections at Midnight after Election Day
THE LAW

While the United States Supreme Court – in an 8-0 decision (See Chiafolo v. Washington, 591 U.S. ___, decided July 6, 2020) – reaffirmed a longstanding judicially recognized principle, that Article 2;§1 of the Constitution grants plenary authority to the Legislatures of each State to determine the manner of appointing presidential electors, the time by which electors must be appointed is controlled by the federal Congress, which has enacted a statute setting the exact day the electors for President and Vice President shall be appointed.

The United States Constitution, also in Article 1;§2, states that “Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes…” Two separate events are mentioned; 1) the time of choosing electors; 2) the Day the Electors vote. In this context, “chusing” means appointing.

Congress has exercised this authority by enacting 3 United States Code §1-18:

§ 1. Time of appointing electors

The electors of President and Vice President shall be appointed, in each State, on the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November, in every fourth year succeeding every election of a President and Vice President.

The electors “shall be appointed, in each state” on a very specific day. This special day is known throughout the land as Election Day. The statutory language is facially, and analytically, unambiguous. The electors shall be appointed on Election Day. “Shall be appointed” is a command to the States.

The exact day prescribed by this law upon which the electors shall be appointed is also unambiguous. Now, I ask you, were any electors appointed on November 3rd in any of the aforementioned states? The answer is unequivocally negatory. No electors were appointed at the time prescribed by law.

Did Congress provide a means by which electors could be appointed if the states failed to appoint them on the day prescribed by law? Yes:

§ 2. Failure to make choice on prescribed day

Whenever any State has held an election for the purpose of choosing electors, and has failed to make a choice on the day prescribed by law, the electors may be appointed on a subsequent day in such manner as the legislature of such State may direct.

3 USC §1 requires the State to appoint the electors on Election Day, while 3 USC §2 provides an extension of time to the State should it fail to appoint the electors before expiration of Election Day, which date is prescribed by law, this year falling on November 3rd. Whereas, 3 USC §7 prescribes the day the electors shall “give their votes” in December.

3 USC §1 and §2 work in tandem to create a safety net protecting against electoral mischief. The early legislators of this nation were all too familiar with the temptations of governing power. That is a protection of §1, which sets a uniform day, “in each State”, when electors shall be appointed. If a State has enacted procedures controlling the popular vote for presidential electors, that State has until midnight on Election Day to appoint its electors.

Of course, Congress recognized that not every delay would be intentional. Innocent delays occur…sometimes. And this is where §2 comes in. Congress entrusted the State Legislatures exclusively to determine the means by which the electors shall be chosen in the event said Legislatures have held an election – and that election resulted in a failure of the State to appoint the electors before midnight on Election Day. This is exactly what happened in all of the aforesaid States on November 3rd, 2020.

The statute contemplates a previous election process in the States, whether by statute, State Constitution, Election Board, Secretary of State, and so on. All of those actors, if they were given authority to conduct an election, and to count votes thereafter, for however long it might take, derive authority to do so exclusively from their State legislatures. Therefore, 3 USC §2 recognizes the efforts which would be made to hold an election, but, regardless, Congress unambiguously chose to set the time for appointing the electors by the States to expire at midnight on Election Day.

However, §2 also gives the State Legislatures an extension of time to appoint the electors, and it reiterates the plenary authority granted by the Constitution for the Legislature to redetermine a new manner of appointing electors, after the initial attempt failed to meet the midnight deadline. If the State Legislature witnessed fraudulent conduct, or persistent irregularities by the Election Board, Secretary of State, Governor, or the State Courts, before, during, or after the election, and the State has failed to appoint the electors by midnight of Election Day, §2 reiterates the State Legislature’s authority to thereafter unilaterally discard the whole sordid mess and choose a fresh manner of appointing the electors. And this discretion is plenary under the statute, just as it is under the Constitution.

In Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 104 (2000), the Supreme Court affirmed again, the longstanding fundamental power of the State Legislatures to unilaterally take back the right to vote in any State election, even after the right has been exercised, so long as the Legislature’s action is applied equally throughout the state, so as not to violate equal protection:

“The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States unless and until the state legislature chooses a statewide election as the means to implement its power to appoint members of the electoral college. U.S. Const., Art. II, §1. This is the source for the statement in McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1, 35 (1892), that the state legislature’s power to select the manner for appointing electors is plenary; it may, if it so chooses, select the electors itself, which indeed was the manner used by state legislatures in several States for many years after the framing of our Constitution. Id., at 28-33. History has now favored the voter, and in each of the several States the citizens themselves vote for Presidential electors. When the state legislature vests the right to vote for President in its people, the right to vote as the legislature has prescribed is fundamental; and one source of its fundamental nature lies in the equal weight accorded to each vote and the equal dignity owed to each voter. The State, of course, after granting the franchise in the special context of Article II, can take back the power to appoint electors. See id., at 35 (“ ‘[T]here is no doubt of the right of the legislature to resume the power at any time, for it can neither be taken away nor abdicated’ “) (quoting S. Rep. No. 395, 43d Congress., 1st Sets., 9 (1874)).” (Emphasis added.)

This Supreme Court precedent is paramount; the State Legislature can take back the power to vote at any time, before, during, or after an election. And, as long as the State Legislatures cancel the votes of all voters, and not just some voters, it will be impossible for any voter to claim an equal protection violation.

The Constitution gives the federal Congress the authority to choose the time by which electors shall be appointed, while it gives the State legislatures absolute discretion over the manner in which the electors shall be appointed. If the State does not appoint the electors within the time prescribed by federal law, then the State would be usurping Congressional authority if it tried to appoint the electors anytime thereafter. Since the Constitution at Article 1;§2, mandates that “Each State Shall appoint” the electors, while it also grants exclusive authority to the Congress to set the time for choosing the electors, without 3 USC §2, there could be a Constitutional crisis.

Therefore, Congress, in its wisdom, statutorily extended the time for choosing electors to the State, while also reiterating the exclusive Constitutional authority of its Legislature to determine the manner in which the electors shall be appointed. This Congressional extension of time to the State contemplates that the State Legislature will determine whether the previous election was fair, and will be sufficient, in the end, to appoint the electors. Or, if the State Legislature is unhappy with the conduct witnessed throughout the previous election process, it may unilaterally appoint the electors itself, or it may order a new election, with or without new election rules, or it may choose another way to choose the electors.

Congress Has Affirmed State Legislatures’ Unilateral Authority to Void Elections at Midnight after Election Day - The Post & Email

 

[L.K.Eder]

aude sapere. lol.

parody account?

 

[AudeSapere]

aude sapere. lol.

parody account?

Ahhh...sophomoric ad hominem. You don't have a valid intellectual reply I see. Do you have the IQ of a door knob?

I realize that Sapere Aude means "dare to know" in Latin. The adjective follows the noun in Latin based languages. I decided change it around at the time. But if that's all you have, making fun of people's names, then I am moving on...

 

[AudeSapere]

Former Wisconsin Judge Troupis: Court system deeply intimidated by the [unhinged] left

 

[AudeSapere]

Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy Peter Navarro published a lengthy report Thursday outlining several examples of voting irregularities that are “more than sufficient” to swing the outcome of the election in President Trump’s favor.

The 36-page report “assesses the fairness and integrity of the 2020 Presidential Election by examining six dimensions of alleged election irregularities across six key battleground states” and concludes that “patterns of election irregularities ... are so consistent across the six battleground states that they suggest a coordinated strategy to, if not steal the election, strategically game the election process in such a way as to ... unfairly tilt the playing field in favor of the Biden-Harris ticket.”

The six dimensions of voting irregularities in the report include: outright voter fraud, ballot mishandling, contestable process fouls, equal protection clause violations, voting machine irregularities, and significant statistical anomalies.

All six of those voting issues were present in at least two key states, according to the report, and a total of six battleground states experienced multiple examples of the other dimensions.
View attachment 430449

Peter Navarro releases 36-page report alleging election fraud 'more than sufficient' to swing victory to Trump

Navarro is a partisan hack, Trump flunky, and a liar.

That was deep...and it stinks.