glimmerman70
Since Nov 8, 2020
"Glimmerman"
Look! A glowie who thinks he has an IQ over the low teens and is going to suborn violence!
Posted on 11/14/2020 9:13:06 AM PST by White Lives Matter
The country is just being introduced to Georgia Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger. We are also beginning to uncover the corrupt actions he has taken to steal the 2020 election for the Democrats. Soon the whole country will know him and his actions.
On March 6, 2020 the Georgia Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, signed off on a secret legal agreement with the Democratic Party of Georgia, the Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to alter absentee ballot procedures in Georgia. The Democrats’ attorney for this secret deal was Marc Elias from Perkins Coie, the consigliere of Hillary Clinton who has been busy managing other secretive Democratic election operations all across the country. (In Appendix A of Lin Wood filing yesterday is a copy of the agreement – See below.)
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Wood reminds me of Perry Mason. He does not lose.
Not all Pedo’s are ‘Ratz!
Nooooo. Not the Viking kitties. Lol. Asking questions to educate myself. I don’t know a lot of what’s going on here with the legal stuff. Lurked for years over DocRocks shoulder. Apparently they cheated with the computer and recount with the proper amount of observers would weed out the fraud ballots and correct the count the “glitch” caused. But we have 1 observer to 10 counters.
Erick Erickson
@EWErickson
Replying to
@EWErickson
What actually happened is that in past years ballots were rejected because (1) they lacked a signature; (2) they lacked a birthday; or (3) they lacked an address or it was in the wrong spot.
Erick Erickson
@EWErickson
Under a federal court consent decree, the Georgia Secretary of State agreed only ballots lacking a signature would be rejected. BUT — people could be given notice and had 24 hours to come sign their ballot.
Silvia Aleman
@SilviaAleman13
The Consent Decree signed by the Georgia Secretary of State, with the approval of Governor
@BrianKempGA
, at the urging of
@staceyabrams
, makes it impossible to check & match signatures on ballots and envelopes, etc. They knew they were going to cheat. Must expose real signatures!
Lin has been stating the evil people will go to jail. Him, Sydney and rest best not just be gaslighting. This election is a very serious thing.
One of my close friends is a counter in GA.
She’s sharp and an honest Republican.
She’s being overseen by a GOP observer.
So, not all counters are cheats.
Hard to sit back and wait but what we must do til all angles play out.
Then stop reading posts here from that source. So easy that a caveman can do it without having to complain.
The GA sos did the same thing the PA one did. The SOS has no authority to change election laws and do an end run around GA legislature.
The whole signature thing he agreed to is why he did a RLT instead of a real audit and canvass. It’s probably why they are rushing the recount through and telling counties to be done by 3 today. Maybe rushing them so they won’t notice discrepancies
Here is a direct link to L Lin Wood’s lawsuit: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ta0rze1m3flzk5o/2020-11-13%20Complaint%20-%20L.%20Wood%20v.%20Raffensperger%20et%20al.pdf?dl=0
Here is the “deal” SOS Raffensperger made with the democrats:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/fr5xg2jdyimrqa6/SETTLEMENT—GA.pdf?dl=0
L. Wood v. Raffensperger et al, 2020-11-13 Complaint; paragraphs 20-38.
[All emphasis as in original]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Georgia Election Code instructs those who handle absentee ballots to follow a clear procedure:
Upon receipt of each [absentee] ballot, a registrar or clerk shall write the day and hour of the receipt of the ballot on its envelope. The registrar or clerk shall then compare the identifying information on the oath with the information on file in his or her office, shall compare the signature or make on the oath with the signature or mark on the absentee elector’s voter card or the most recent update to such absentee elector’s voter registration card and application for absentee ballot or a facsimile of said signature or maker taken from said card or application, and shall, if the information and signature appear to be valid and other identifying information appears to be correct, so certify by signing or initialing his or her name below the voter’s oath. Each elector’s name so certified shall be listed by the registrar or clerk on the numbered list of absentee voters prepared for his or her precinct.
O.C.G.A. § 2l-2-386(a)(l)(B) (emphasis added).
The Georgia Legislature’s use of the word “shall” on three separate occasions indicates the clear process that must be followed by the County Officials in processing absentee ballots.
Under O.C.G.A. § 21-2-386(a)(1)(C), the Georgia Legislature also established a clear and efficient process to be used by County Officials if they determine that an elector has failed to sign the oath on the outside envelope enclosing the ballot or that the signature does not conform with the signature on file in the registrar’s or clerk’s office (a “defective absentee ballot”).
The Georgia Legislature also provided for the steps to be followed by County Officials with respect to defective absentee ballots:
If the elector has failed to sign the oath, or if the signature does not appear to be valid, or if the elector has failed to furnish required information or information so furnished does not conform with that on file in the registrar’s or clerk’s office, or if the elector is otherwise found disqualified to vote, the registrar or clerk shall write across the face of the envelope “Rejected,” giving the reason therefor. The board of registrars or absentee ballot clerk shall promptly notify the elector of such rejection, a copy of which notification shall be retained in the files of the board of registrars or absentee ballot clerk for at least one year.
O.C.G.A. § 21-2-386(a)(1)(C) (emphasis added).
The Georgia Legislature again used the word “shall” to indicate when a defective absentee ballot shall be “rejected.” The Georgia Legislature also contemplated the use of a written notification to be used by the county registrar or clerk in notifying the elector of the rejection.
III. Defendants’ Unauthorized Actions to Alter the Georgia Election Code and the Processing of Defective Absentee Ballots.
Notwithstanding the clarity of the applicable statutes and the constitutional authority for the Georgia Legislature’s actions, on March 6, 2020, the Secretary of State of the State of Georgia, Secretary Raffensperger, and the State Election Board, who administer the state elections (the “Administrators”) entered into a “Compromise and Settlement Agreement and Release” (the “Litigation Settlement”) with the Democratic Party of Georgia, Inc., the Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (collectively, the “Democrat Party Agencies”), setting forth different standards to be followed by the clerks and registrars in processing absentee ballots in the State of Georgia. A true and correct copy of the Litigation Settlement is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A.
The Litigation Settlement sets forth different standards to be followed by the clerks and registrars in processing absentee ballots in the State of Georgia than those described above.
Although Secretary Raffensperger, as the Secretary of State, is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations that are “conducive to the fair, legal, and orderly conduct of primaries and elections” but all such rules and regulations must be “consistent with law.” O.C.G.A. § 21-2-31(2).
Under the Litigation Settlement, however, the Administrators agreed to change the statutorily-prescribed manner of handling absentee ballots in a manner that was not consistent with the laws promulgated by the Georgia Legislature for elections in this state.
The Litigation Settlement provides that the Secretary of State would issue an “Official Election Bulletin” to county Administrators overriding the statutory procedures prescribed for those officials. That power, however, does not belong to the Secretary of State under the United States Constitution.
The Litigation Settlement procedure, set forth in pertinent part below, is more cumbersome, and makes it much more difficult to follow the statute with respect to defective absentee ballots.
Because of the COVID-19 pandemic and the pressures created by a larger number of absentee ballots, County Officials were under great pressure to handle an historical level of absentee voting.
Additionally, the County Officials were required to certify the speed with which they were handling absentee ballots on a daily basis, with the goal of processing absentee ballots faster than they had been processed in the past.
Under the Litigation Settlement, the following language added to the pressures and complexity of processing defective absentee ballots, making it less likely that they would be identified or, if identified, processed for rejection:
County registrars and absentee ballot clerks are required, upon receipt of each mail-in absentee ballot, to compare the signature or make of the elector on the mail-in absentee ballot envelope with the signatures or marks in eNet and on the application for the mail-in absentee ballot. If the signature does not appear to be valid, registrars and clerks are required to follow the procedure set forth in O.C.G.A. § 21- 2-386(a)(1)(C). When reviewing an elector’s signature on the mail-in absentee ballot envelope, the registrar or clerk must compare the signature on the mail-in absentee ballot envelope to each signature contained in such elector’s voter registration record in eNet and the elector’s signature on the application for the mail-in absentee ballot. If the registrar or absentee ballot clerk determines that the voter’s signature on the mail-in absentee ballot envelope does not match any of the voter’s signatures on file in eNet or on the absentee ballot application, the resistrar or absentee ballot clerk must seek review from two other resistrars, deputy resistrars, or absentee ballot clerks. A mail-in absentee ballot shall not be rejected unless a majority of the resistrars, deputy resistrars, or absentee ballot clerks reviewins the sisnature asree that the sisnature does not match any of the voter’s sisnatures on file in eNet or on the absentee ballot application. If a determination is made that the elector’s sisnature on the mail-in absentee ballot envelope does not match any of the voter’s sisnatures on file in eNet or on the absentee ballot application, the resistrar or absentee ballot clerk shall write the names of the three elections officials who conducted the sisnature review across the face of the absentee ballot envelope, which shall be in addition to writins “Rejected” and the reason for the rejection as required under O.C.G.A. § 21-2-386(a)(l)(C). Then, the registrator absentee ballot clerk shall commence the notification procedure set forth in O.C.G.A. § 21-2-386(a)(1)(C) and State Election Board Rule 183-1-14-.13.
(See Ex. A, Litigation Settlement, p. 3-4, 3, “Signature Match” (emphasis added).)
The underlined language above is not consistent with the statute adopted by the Georgia Legislature.
First, the Litigation Settlement overrides the clear statutory authorities granted to County Officials individually and forces them to form a committee of three if any one official believes that an absentee ballot is a defective absentee ballot.
Such a procedure creates a cumbersome bureaucratic procedure to be followed with each defective absentee ballot — and makes it likely that such ballots will simply not be identified by the County Officials.
Second, the Litigation Settlement allows a County Official to compare signatures in ways not permitted by the statutory structure created by the Georgia Legislature.
The Georgia Legislature prescribed procedures to ensure that any request for an absentee ballot must be accompanied by sufficient identification of the elector’s identity. See O.C.G.A. § 21-2-381 (b)(l) (providing, in pertinent part, “In order to be found eligible to vote an absentee ballot in person at the registrar’s office or absentee ballot clerk’s office, such person shall show one of the forms of identification listed in Code Section 21-2-417...”).
Yes, at 3 today watch the media declare Pennsylvania and Georgia confirmed to belong to Biden setting up the narrative that if Trump takes it to the Supreme Court he’ll be trying to steal the election.
Why?
bookmark and BUMP
Let them cry and whine and protest and burn. People who think it will lead to a war don’t seem to understand that we are already at war already. This is a Coup de Etat and can not stand.
Was not saying that they all are cheats. Guess I made it sound that way though. Most are likely honest. But you bring up a good point or idea for me. How many does it take to make up that many ballots, especially in PA. They had to have a bunch of cheating counters to make up that much ground. But I am shocked that Trump would lose GA.
p
I was over on thedonald.win and was about to post this.
I come back and you’ve beat me to it!
Thanks!
glimmerman70
Since Nov 8, 2020
"Glimmerman"
Look! A glowie who thinks he has an IQ over the low teens and is going to suborn violence!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.