Elections

Videos

Understanding the FBI, Twitter & the 2020 Election

Social Credit Scores, ESG Used To Bypass Voting, Corporations Will Control Us

Supreme Court Cancels USA Midterm Elections | 45 & Scavino Pointing us to US Military Domestic Op Oct 7, 2022

Proper Election and Selection of the President

See Lex Parliamentaria Americana for the law and procedure for dealing with a contested election.

GOVERNMENT MEANING: The people's power to vote into political office the men of their choice. The hallmark of democracy. The best way for the people to control their government.

ACTUAL MEANING: The meaningless final step in the political process where the powers in or behind central governments manipulate their own hand-picked people into positions of power.

Madison said in Federalist Paper 52 that “The Founders did not delegate any authority to any branch of government to organize, run, or count the results of elections.” Its clear this is a reserved right of the people.

When Texas sued over the 2020 election fraud. The Supreme Court sent an unsigned document back saying “We see no justiciable issue.” When you register to vote you swear under penalty of perjury that you are a U.S. citizen. U.S. citizen is the District of Columbia. These elections are District of Columbia elections. The Supreme Court is saying to Texas, ‘What does Texas have to say about District of Columbia elections? They have nothing to say about how the District of Columbia operates their elections.’ Its not a lawful, de jure election.

The election ritual is the ostensible gesture used by central governments to keep their subjects pacified — allowing them to think, erroneously, that they can exercise control over their government. The preposterous idea that people can somehow control their controllers has been subtly planted into the minds of the American public. The concept is impossible — but the people mindlessly continue to believe it nonetheless.

Political positions are created, filled, and controlled entirely by the elite super-rich, the news media, and covert powers (like the CIA). They coerce, threaten, murder, and bribe people to keep politics carefully controlled. Politicians serve their masters (bankers), not the poor voters who are permitted to vote for select banker-owned hirelings.

Voting — like the Colosseum games in old Rome where spectators were allowed to vote (thumbs up, or thumbs down) as to whether the beaten contestant lived or died — only serves to pacify a corrupt people and entice them to participate in a corrupt system. Political elections are designed to give government a veneer of legitimacy and keep it in power.

The Judicial Branch states it does not have subject matter jurisdiction over elections because that’s a political doctrine question, not a judicial question. Article IV, section 4 of the Constitution dictates the processes of government and which branches have what power.

ERIC (Election Registration/Rigging Information Center)

ERIC was initially formed in 2012 by the heavily Soros funded Pew Charitable Trust and David Becker (as head of “election initiatives”) to assist in cleaning up voter rolls of member states and also help register new voters (even though that was not how it was initially portrayed). ERIC was actually rolled out by the Obama administration as a way to counter claims of voter fraud and election integrity issues across the country. The result of this initiative over 10+ years of existence has been an abysmal failure if measuring against stated intent, but a wild success if you’re looking to add people to the voter rolls (legal or not). See articles:

Why Hidden Algorithms in State Board of Election Voter Rolls Disqualifies Certification, they are totally illegal

Those who want to diminish the importance of finding cryptographic algorithms embedded in state boards of election (SBOE) voter registration databases typically demand proof the algorithms have resulted in fraudulent votes or suggest that legitimate purposes can explain the algorithms. However, they’re focusing on the wrong things.

This article argues that cryptographic algorithms in SBOE voter registration databases may violate state and federal laws, potentially indicating improper practices or even criminal activity. Election officials who fail to investigate and address unauthorized algorithms once discovered could risk civil and possibly criminal liabilities, depending on specific circumstances and applicable laws.

Consider the following legal requirements that secretly embedded algorithms appear to violate:

The 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA) requires states to implement a computerized statewide voter registration list that is uniform and nondiscriminatory. The algorithmic structure would lack the required uniformity and may be discriminatory if used to treat certain voters differently. Specifically, Section 303(a)(4) requires that voter registration records be maintained in a uniform and nondiscriminatory manner. If the algorithm is used to tag or treat certain records differently, this could be problematic.

On September 16, 2024, attorney Thomas W. Connors of Mendenhall Law Group, Akron, reported to the Ohio SBOE about an algorithm found in the Ohio voter registration database:

Dr. Paquette’s initial review of the Ohio voter rolls, attached, shows that voter identification numbers in certain counties are assigned by an algorithm that permits a hidden means of tracking voter registrations. His work, while preliminary and not comprehensive, is consistent with his extensive review of the New York voter rolls that showed an algorithm that also permitted such tracking, which his analysis showed was tied to false registrations. This hidden tracking structure effectively functions as a third ID number in New York and appears to present a significant election system risk. It also appears to violate the requirements of the Help America Vote Act and related Ohio statute which provide that all election officials be able to obtain immediate access to the information contained in statewide voter registration lists.

The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) mandates accurate maintenance of voter registration lists. In New York, Voter ID numbers were apparently assigned to known purged records, contradicting the NVRA’s core principle of maintaining accurate eligible voter lists. The NVRA requires removing ineligible voters, not retaining them as ‘purged’ with new IDs. This practice risks accidental reactivation and compromises voter roll integrity. While not explicitly prohibited, it potentially violates Section 8’s spirit, which requires states to remove ineligible voters from official lists. Retaining purged records with new IDs, instead of removing them, undermines the Act’s goal of list accuracy and creates potential for errors.

The 2021 New York State Election Law contains several relevant sections. Section 5-614 outlines requirements for the statewide voter registration list. Section 3-103 mandates minimum standards for computerized record keeping systems, including ‘system access and security, the format and content of the data to be recorded and stored.’ A hidden algorithm structuring voter IDs might not align with these standards, particularly regarding data format and content. Moreover, the state-level implementation of this algorithm may conflict with NY Codes, Rules and Regulations Title 9, Subtitle V, §6217.1, which gives County Boards of Elections ‘sole responsibility for adding, changing, canceling, or removing’ voter records. Section 3-103 also limits the use of voter registration information to election purposes, which could be relevant if the algorithm’s purpose extends beyond election administration.

Articles

President Trump Sends Letter to Jan 6 Committee – “We Demand Answers on the Crime of the Century!”