After 2020, you expected an honest election???

 

We’ve said many times that after all the shenanigans of the November 2020 elections, there won’t be another free and fair election under Democratic Party rule.  They’ll make sure “the fix is in”, and the result will be preordained.  This week has seen several developments that confirm it.

First, from California, ballot security is now a myth and a memory.

According to screenshots posted to Twitter, one from the California Secretary of State’s website and one from the Orange County Registrar of Voters, all California voters (not just those with disabilities or serving overseas in the military) can request a “Remote Access Vote by Mail” ballot for the California recall election, a ballot which is printed at home and then mailed or hand-delivered to the county elections official.

. . .

Throughout June there was increasing chatter that an earlier recall election date would favor Newsom, since his poll numbers were still good and it seemed that California would come roaring back after the indoor mask mandate was lifted June 15. But a few years ago California legislators had changed the recall laws to put more roadblocks to an election day in place, hoping to save Democrat Sen. Josh Newman from recall. Those roadblocks were now a problem, so on June 23, the bill was amended again.

The June 23 amendment – entered the exact same day the Secretary of State certified the recall petition, meaning it had enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot – allowed the Lt. Governor to set an earlier election date, mandated that every (alleged) registered voter receive a vote by mail ballot, set times for in-person voting centers, and expanded access to the Remote Access Vote By Mail Program to every (alleged) registered voter.

Because, apparently, having a ballot mailed to them and access to vote in person still isn’t quite enough access for these people.

Oh, and of course, these provisions are set to expire on January 1, 2022. Until the legislature inevitably decides they’re necessary for the future.

. . .

At this time we have not seen any official procedures for how RAVBM ballots received are secured or if they’re checked against other vote-by-mail ballots received or in-person ballots to ensure that the voter has only voted one time. One can imagine legions of union workers dutifully printing these ballots, with the union bosses keeping boxes of them at the ready to be delivered to LA County, San Francisco, or Oakland at 3 am if it looks like Gavin might actually lose this thing.

There’s more at the link.

If, after all that legislative and electoral jiggery-pokery, Gov. Newsom doesn’t win the recall election, it can only be because he and the Democratic Party don’t want to win it.  Their preparations for cheating are so in-your-face as to be laughable . . . and they don’t care that we know it and can see it.

Next, it emerges that the Federal Electoral Assistance Commission (EAC) has quietly (and allegedly improperly) changed long-held standards for vote counting machines.

Key elements of the first federal technology standards for voting equipment in 15 years should be scrapped because language that would have banned the devices from connecting to the internet was dropped after private meetings held with manufacturers, according to a federal lawsuit filed Tuesday.

The lawsuit against the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., claims those meetings should have been open and that changes to the draft standards should have been shared with the commission’s advisory and standards boards. The lawsuit seeks to have those changes set aside.

The standards, approved in February, did not include draft language that would have banned wireless technology from voting equipment under federal certification guidelines. Voting security experts say the machines will be vulnerable to hacking without such a ban.

While the commission’s certification guidelines are voluntary, multiple states use them to set mandatory requirements for voting equipment.

Again, more at the link.

If you’re surprised that a Federal agency would change so important a standard, consider the structure of that agency, and its staffing.  Bold, underlined text is my emphasis.

A deeper look into the certification process used for the machines, however, reveals that the main certification agency in the United States, the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC), maintains an unexpectedly small staff, and one of its chief employees is a former executive of Dominion Voting Systems.

Furthermore it appears the bulk—if not all—of the testing of the election equipment is conducted by only two companies, Pro V&V and SLI Compliance.

Electronic voting systems have become increasingly incorporated into the election process, raising concerns over their security, reliability, and accuracy in the process. Lightly-staffed federal agencies who appear to maintain overly close ties to the companies they are supposed to be monitoring raises additional questions about the thoroughness and integrity of the verification process.

More at the link, and well worth reading further.  Note that Dominion’s machines and software are at the heart of allegations of electoral fraud in November 2020, and Pro V&V certified the Georgia election results that have now been called into question by ongoing investigations in Fulton County there.

Finally, we learn that human post-election intervention in Georgia rendered many officially invalid ballots usable – despite regulations that should have prevented them from ever being counted.  Those conflicting measures are still in place, and will affect any election held there unless and until they’re removed or amended.

Scores of … ballots … had checks manually removed next to Trump’s name as well as many other candidates up and down the ticket — Libertarians, Democrats and write-ins alike — and the votes awarded instead to other candidates.

Welcome to the arcane process known as adjudication, where human judgment is substituted for machine scanning in cases where voters incorrectly filled out a paper ballot. Election officials and official observers have dealt with it for years, with everyday citizens mostly oblivious to the process.

But in 2020, adjudication played a much larger role in states like Georgia, which allowed hundreds of thousands of additional citizens to vote absentee for the first time during the COVID-19 pandemic.

. . .

The adjudication ballots alone are not enough to change a Georgia election in which Biden and Trump were separated by less than 13,000 votes. However, they reveal an imperfect system vulnerable to chaos, subjectivity, or political dirty tricks, especially in a county like Fulton where state officials documented widespread irregularities and misconduct and now want to take over election counting.

. . .

[The review] also raised another troubling question, at least in Georgia, where election regulations create two conflicting imperatives. One regulation, which is quoted on each absentee ballot, emphatically declares that a paper ballot should be deemed “spoiled” and uncountable if a voter makes any mistakes or unauthorized marks … Just the News reviewed hundreds of ballots that met the “spoiled” definition — ballots that voters had in some way altered, defaced, or corrected — that were still allowed to count after adjudication. The reason? Another Georgia regulation gives election officials broad discretion to try to determine the intent of a confused voter, and actually encourages them to find a way to make flawed ballots count.

More at the link.

Put all those reports together.  Now, would anyone care to explain to me, and to the American electorate, how we can possibly expect a free, fair and honest election in future, unless and until all such measures are overturned and legal accountability is restored to the voting process?

My recipe for electoral honesty and accountability is simple.

• One paper ballot per voter;
• To be completed on the day of the election by the voter in person, with no proxies or “assistants” or any other intervention allowed except at the voter’s request, at the polling station, to an electoral official;
• No advance ballots whatsoever without provable good reason (ill health, travel, military assignment, etc.), and unless they’re cast by the voter in question, in the presence of an electoral official, at an officially approved site.  No “ballot harvesting” or like-it-or-not “assistance” at nursing homes, etc.  If assistance is needed, see the point immediately above.
• No electronic voting, vote tabulation, or “adjudication”.  It’s all done by hand, with observers from any and all parties allowed to monitor proceedings freely and without restriction, and the results cross-checked against the ballots whenever necessary.  If the numbers of votes are so great that it’s not possible to count them all in a timely manner, then let the counting function be divided across multiple centers, so that the numbers are manageable without outside “assistance”.
• All ballots and other documentation are to be retained for a suitable period in case further checks are needed.
• Any and all electoral officials are to sign their awareness and acceptance of laws that impose severe consequences upon them for any and all electoral fraud, mismanagement or error that they commit and/or for which they are responsible.  They’ll have no excuse for getting up to shenanigans.

However, I suspect it’ll be a cold day in hell before the Deep State or the Democratic Party allows such measures.  They’ve got too much to lose.

Peter