Connect with us

Published

on

One must wonder how seriously the Georgia secretary of state takes its fraud investigation if its staffer frames those who violate state law as merely ‘trying to exercise their right to vote.’

As the Georgia secretary of state’s office continues to investigate evidence that indicates more than 10,300 Georgians may have illegally voted in the November 2020 election, on Friday the office’s chief operating officer reportedly defended voters for violating state election law.
“The reality is these are normal, everyday Georgians who are just trying to exercise their right to vote in a very weird year,” Chief Operating Officer Gabriel Sterling reportedly told Atlanta’s WSB-TV, when confronted with an admission from one voter that he had moved more than 30 days before the general election but cast his vote in the county in which he no longer lived.

As The Federalist reported last week, before Georgia certified its election results, President Trump challenged the state’s tally that showed Joe Biden winning the general election by 11,779 votes out of nearly five million votes cast. One of the more than 30 arguments Trump presented in his lawsuit challenging the election charged that nearly 40,000 Georgians illegally voted in a county in which they did not reside.


Trump’s challenge relied on Section 21-2-218 of the state’s election code, which unequivocally provides that residents must vote in the county in which they reside unless they had changed their residence within 30 days of the election. So clear is Georgia’s in-county voting mandate that on Friday “FactCheck” confirmed the accuracy of this reading of the law by quoting the Georgia secretary of state’s voter registration webpage:

Enough Illegal Votes to Exceed Margin of Victory

At the time of Trump’s election challenge, in alleging widespread violations of Section 21-2-218, the president relied on information from the Secretary of State’s Office and the U.S. Postal Service National Change of Address (NCOA) database, the latter of which identified more than 100,000 individuals who had indicated a move to a new county before October 1, 2020.

Mark Davis, an expert on residency issues and voter data analytics, compared the NCOA data to official data from the Secretary of State’s Office and determined that approximately 35,000 of those Georgians cast a ballot in the county from which they had moved more than 30 days before the election. While a percentage of those voters may have moved only temporarily, perhaps because they were students or in the military—circumstances that do not affect a voter’s residency—with less than 12,000 votes separating Biden and Trump, this bucket of potentially illegal votes could have resulted in a state court tossing the election results.


Nonetheless, because Georgia courts delayed Trump’s election-challenge case, setting a trial on the matter only after Congress’ certification of Biden as the victor, evidence of illegal voting was never heard.


Since then, however, as The Federalist first reported a little more than a week ago, growing evidence indicates enough illegal out-of-county votes will eventually be revealed to exceed Biden’s margin of victory. Specifically, Davis re-ran the data in May and found that more than 10,300 of the approximately 35,000 individuals who moved to a new county have since confirmed their move was permanent by updating their voter registration to the same address they had previously provided the USPS.

What the Voters Said

The Secretary of State’s Office told The Federalist in a nearly hour-long interview last week that its investigation into these voters is ongoing, but the lead investigator Frances Watson refused to provide any specifics concerning the investigatory steps being taken.

However, last week, after obtaining a list of the 10,000-plus voters who had updated their registrations since the general election, pursuant to a Georgia open records request, WSB TV investigative reporter Justin Gray launched his own probe, knocking on doors to ask voters about their moves.
In a Friday article, Gray reported on his conversations with two voters.

According to Gray, one voter, identified as Jon Stout, “admits he did vote in the wrong county after moving just a few houses down the street but crossing the DeKalb County line.” Stout claimed he did so because he was not “able to update his driver’s license during the pandemic.” Stout, however, also did not update his voter registration, which he could have done online with the Secretary of State’s Office.


A second voter, identified as Mark Buerkle, told Gray that “he did move from Gwinnett County to Fulton but turned in his Fulton ballot at a Fulton dropbox.” “The fact is I live here, I voted here, I voted in this county. It should be legit and there shouldn’t be any questions,” Buerkle told WSB TV.


When asked about this reporting, Davis stressed that he doesn’t like talking about specific voters, especially because it is possible the voter may not have even realized he was actually casting a Gwinnett County ballot. “It is up to our elections officials and law enforcement to determine who may or may not have violated the law,” Davis told me, “which is why they are conducting an investigation, and why I gave them the data from my analysis.”

“Equally as important,” though, Davis added, “I also want our elected officials to understand these are systemic irregularities that must be addressed.”

‘The Story the Data Is Telling Me’

“With respect to Mr. Buerkle, I am sorry Channel 2 put him on the spot the way they did,” Davis told me. “I have deliberately refrained from publishing the data from my analysis,” Davis noted, adding that “I had an understanding with the Secretary of State’s Office that it would not be subject to an open records request until the conclusion of their investigation, yet here we are.” (Davis also required me to sign a non-disclosure agreement before providing access to the data for review.)
“That said, when it comes to his residency in particular, I only know the story the data is telling me,” Davis stated, and “the November 2020, NCOA data shows an individual change of address was filed last year, with a move effective date in August of 2020, which indicated a move from an address in Gwinnett County to a new address in Fulton County.”
Further, “the absentee voter data shows this individual was still registered in Gwinnett County when he appears to have requested an absentee ballot be mailed to his Fulton County address in September of 2020.” Also, while this voter told WSB-TV he had placed that ballot in a Fulton County drop box two blocks from his house, “both the absentee data and the vote history data indicate the vote was cast in Gwinnett County,” Davis explained, adding that, if handled properly, Fulton County election officials would transfer the ballot to Gwinnett County.
None of this is to say Buerkle or Stout committed voter fraud. Stout apparently thought nothing of voting in a county in which he no longer lived, and Buerkle seems to not even realize that, according to the secretary of state records, he cast a Gwinnett County absentee ballot.

Laws Don’t Matter If They Aren’t Enforced

The public might also pooh-pooh these admissions as insignificant, but as Davis told me, state election law requires voters to cast a ballot in their county of residence for a reason: Each county has unique issues facing residents, whether it be taxes or which local or state officials will represent them. For instance, “When Mr. Buerkle lived in Gwinnett County, he would have voted in the Seventh Congressional District, but his new residence in Fulton County is in the Fifth Congressional District,” Davis told me.


But even if the public shrugs at the significance of these revelations, Georgia’s Secretary of State’s Office, in the person of its chief operating officer, shouldn’t spin the casting of illegal votes as people “just trying to exercise their right to vote.” To the contrary, every illegal vote cast disenfranchised a legal voter who followed the law, including those who moved and undertook “the normal burden” of voting by lawfully updating their voting registration.


Then there were the Georgia voters who moved and, like the voters featured in WSB TV’s article, failed to update their voter registration—as legally required—in time to cast a ballot in the general election. The overwhelming majority of those 100,000-plus citizens followed the law and did not vote in a county in which they no longer lived.
So, what we have then, is the Secretary of State’s Office defending the counting of the ballots of those who broke the law and even excusing those violations, while those who followed the law remained unable to cast ballots at all. One must wonder too how seriously the Secretary of State’s Office takes the investigation into the 10,000-plus residents if its COO frames those who violate Section 21-2-218 as merely “trying to exercise their right to vote.”

Lack of Enforcement Undermines Public Trust

After WSB TV broke the story late last week, I sought comment from Sterling and asked Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s communications manager for voter education, Walter Jones, for a statement. Did Raffensperger agree with Sterling’s assessment? And if not, would the secretary issue a comment condemning violations of election law and Sterling’s disregard for election integrity? Both media requests were ignored.
This approach is disconcerting. The public needs to have confidence that the Secretary of State’s Office will undertake a full and transparent investigation of election irregularities, and Sterling’s statements to the press last week ferment distrust.

Sterling’s recent comments prove even more troubling when considered in tandem with statements a Georgia secretary of state spokesperson made to “FactCheck” late last week concerning the newly revealed evidence of the 10,300-plus likely illegal votes cast in the November 2020 election. Jones reportedly told FactCheck that “establishing a person’s residency is complicated and involves a number of variables, including where a person claims a homestead exemption, and even a person’s ‘intent.’”


That is all true, but it ignores the reality that the more than 10,300 voters specifically at issue all made clear their intent to change residencies when they updated their voter registration records—albeit too late to legally vote in the November 2020 election in their new counties. Further, while there may be a few people on the fringes, it is extremely likely that nearly all of the voters who informed the secretary of state that they had permanently moved to a new county did so on or about the date they told the USPS they were moving—which was more than 30 days before the November 2020 election.

Even More Disconcerting Details

Ironically, Jones also stressed to FactCheck that 86 percent of the voters Davis identified in person “showed up in the polling location where they were registered,” implying some connection to their old residence existed. But as WSB-TV reported, for one voter that meant just walking a few blocks to his old precinct in another county. Jones’s statement would also suggest that many of the voters on the list deliberately traveled a considerable distance to their old county of residence to vote.

Considered in context with Sterling’s comments, however, the worst spin came when Jones stressed to FactCheck that “federal law requires ‘individualized inquiry’ into each voter’s situation,” and that “calling these voter’s ‘illegal voters’ without doing that individualized inquiry is a disservice.”


But then when confronted by an Atlanta investigative reporter who undertook that “individualized inquiry”—and went two-for-two with voters who admitted they had moved more than 30 days before the election—the secretary of state’s COO derided the discovery. That was the real disservice!

Further, while Sterling was spinning this confirmation of illegal votes as just “normal, everyday Georgians who are just trying to exercise their right to vote,” the secretary of state’s press person pushed the conflicting talking point that in-person voters “signed an oath that they resided where they are registered,” and absentee voters signed an application “saying that they still resided where they were registered.”


So which is it, Raffensperger? Are the 10,300-plus—and potentially up to 35,000—voters who may have cast ballots illegally in a county in which they didn’t live “just trying to exercise their right to vote”? Or did many of them deceive election workers by falsely signing an oath affirming they still reside in their old county?

Advertisement

Big Tech

Darrell Issa Just Made His First Official Move Against Big Tech For Interfering in The 2020 Election

Published

on

Darrell Issa is on a mission.

He finally got the memo that Republican voters are pissed off about the 2020 election and the interference from Big Tech, and is actually taking steps right now, to hold them accountable.

He just made a bold move that put Big Tech on notice.

The Free Beacon reported that Rep. Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) asked Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal on Thursday to preserve all internal records related to the companies’ suppression of news coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop in 2020, according to copies of the congressional preservation letters obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The congressman is asking Zuckerberg, Agrawal, Facebook communications director Andy Stone, and former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to “Immediately initiate document preservation for all materials relating to questions, inquiry, conversation, strategy, and response to the media reporting of the Hunter Biden laptop and/or its contents that first appeared in the New York Post on October 14, 2020,” and to notify employees, consultants, and subcontractors who might have access to relevant materials.

MORE NEWS:

Issa said his office is investigating efforts by social media outlets and Democratic operatives to stifle the New York Post bombshell story about Hunter Biden’s corrupt foreign business dealings, which was based on emails found on Hunter’s abandoned laptop.

“This is the scandal that Big Tech and the Democrat industrial complex wish would go away,” Issa told the Free Beacon. “They know what they did, and of course they think they’ve gotten away with it. That’s why it’s critical that we not squander the opportunity for accountability.”

Issa also sent preservation requests to top Biden 2020 campaign aides—including now-White House press secretary Jen Psaki and chief of staff Ron Klain—as well as a group of Biden-supporting former U.S. intelligence officials who claimed the laptop appeared to be part of a “Russian information operation.”

The preservation requests don’t have the legal power of a congressional subpoena, but companies could take a political risk if they refuse to comply—particularly if Republicans gain the House majority next year, giving them control of investigative committees and subpoena authority.

Although there was no evidence in 2020 that the Post’s reporting was inaccurate—and even Hunter Biden didn’t deny that the emails were real—Democrats decried the story as Russian “misinformation,” and Facebook and Twitter took unprecedented steps to prevent users from viewing or sharing it weeks before the election.

This looks to be step one of what Republicans have planned for Big Tech when they take over Congress.

But we can’t allow this to become a “Trey Gowdy” dog and pony show, all talk and no action… we must make sure that they actually hold Big Tech accountable and regulate them.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Donald Trump

President Trump Sues HUGE LIST of Dirty Individuals Over Coordinated Steele Dossier-Russian Collusion Lie

Published

on

By the time it was discovered that the Steele dossier was filled with lies intended to ruin an innocent man and outsider, who dared to run as a Republican for President of the United States, it was too late—the damage had been done.

When it was finally revealed that the Steele dossier was funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC, the media downplayed the significance of their role and instead continued to push the phony scandal.

The Washington Examiner reports – The dossier’s biggest claim was that there was a “well-developed conspiracy of co-operation” between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation “did not establish” any such criminal collusion. DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz said Russian-born lawyer Igor Danchenko “contradicted the allegations” of a well-developed conspiracy in Steele’s dossier.

Igor Danchenko

Horowitz concluded that Steele’s dossier played a “central and essential” role in the FBI’s effort to obtain wiretap orders against Trump campaign associate Carter Page, and the DOJ watchdog criticized the bureau for at least 17 “significant errors and omissions,” including some related to the FBI’s reliance on Steele’s dossier.

James Comey, James Clapper, and John Brennan

Earlier this month, Steele said the dossier “was initially produced for a law firm that was connected with the Clinton campaign” and that “it was subsequently shared with the FBI and our own security services.” Clinton campaign general counsel Marc Elias hired Fusion GPS, which hired Steele, and Steele began to push dossier claims to the FBI in the summer of 2016.

According to court documents, Christopher Steele, the author of the infamous anti-Trump dossier, disclosed information from his Trump-Russia investigation to a longtime Clinton crony because of his position on a State Department advisory board.

Now, President Trump has filed a federal lawsuit in Florida, where he is going after Hillary Clinton, Christopher Steele, James Comey, the DNC, Perkins Coie, LLC, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Marc Elias, Andrew McCabe, Nellie, and John Ohr, John Podesta, Fusion GPS, Jake Sullivan, Glenn Simpson, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, and several other far-left hack activists posing as professionals.

According to the Epoch Times, President Trump says Clinton and ex-British spy Christopher Steele, along with around 30 others, carried out a plot to “weave a false narrative” that Trump was colluding with Russian actors.

“The actions taken in furtherance of their scheme—falsifying evidence, deceiving law enforcement, and exploiting access to highly-sensitive data sources—are so outrageous, subversive, and incendiary that even the events of Watergate pale in comparison,” the 108-page suit states.

“Under the guise of ‘opposition research,’ ‘data analytics,’ and other political stratagems, the Defendants nefariously sought to sway the public’s trust,” it added. “They worked together with a single, self-serving purpose: to vilify Donald J. Trump. Indeed, their far-reaching conspiracy was designed to cripple Trump’s bid for presidency by fabricating a scandal that would be used to trigger an unfounded, federal investigation and ignite a media frenzy.”

Steele compiled a dossier based on what he claimed were sources inside Russia. His main source was revealed in 2020 to be Igor Danchenko, who has been investigated by federal agents for possibly being a Russian spy.

“News” articles filled with misinformation that have been debunked are still available with minor corrections in publications like this 2017 Yahoo News article by Natasha Bertrand, “The timeline of Trump’s ties with Russia lines up with allegations of conspiracy and misconduct.”

In her article is an Editor’s note: This article was updated after Nov. 3, 2021, federal indictment accused Igor Danchenko, a Russia expert who contributed to the so-called Steele dossier, of lying to investigators about receiving information from Sergei Millian. Millian repeatedly denied he was a source for any material in the dossier.

The article is filled with misinformation yet remains published and available to the public to read. Here is a small portion of the article:

The dossier alleges serious misconduct and conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia’s government. The White House has dismissed the dossier as fiction, and some of the facts and assertions it includes have indeed been proven wrong.

Other allegations in the dossier, however, are still being investigated. According to a recent CNN report, moreover, US intelligence officials have now corroborated some of the dossier’s material. And this corroboration has reportedly led US intelligence officials to regard other information in the dossier as more credible.

Let’s hope President Donald J. Trump’s subsequent lawsuit should be directed at publications like Buzzfeed, who was first to publish the unverified dossier, followed by a slew of dishonest corporate media publications who take their marching orders from the DNC.

This horrific lie about Donald J. Trump that was funded by Democrats, implemented by dirty intelligence agents and high-level officials, defended by dishonest Democrat and RINO lawmakers, and promoted by the dirty corporate media, will go down in history as one of the dirtiest coordinated events in modern political history.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

BREAKING: After Test-Firing ICBM With Up To 15,000 Kilometer Range, N. Korea Says It Is “Fully Ready For A Long-Standing Confrontation With The U.S.”

Published

on

After a thaw in US-North Korea relations facilitated in large part by President Trump, North Korea made a provocative move today and test launched an ICBM with a 15,000 Kilometer range.  After the launch, the North Korean government said it is “fully ready for a long standing-standing with the United States’.

The New York Times Reports

“North Korea on Thursday launched its first intercontinental ballistic missile since 2017, dramatically escalating tensions with the Biden administration at a moment when the world has been gripped by the devastation in Ukraine.

The launch involved what appeared to be North Korea’s most powerful ICBM to date, and marked the end of a self-imposed moratorium on nuclear and ICBM tests that the country’s leader, Kim Jong-un, announced before embarking on diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump in 2018.

While the new missile did not go far from the coast, its altitude of 3,852 miles — far higher than past tests — appeared to be meant to demonstrate to a weary world that North Korea could flatten the weapon’s trajectory and hit the continental United States with ease.”

Many considered the timing of the launch to be intentional as there is a meeting of some of the top military powers in the world today at the NATO headquarters to discuss the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending

Trending

Back