'The Most Secure Election in American History'

Gatestone Institute ^ | April 21, 2024 | John Eastman

[lasereye]

• What did the founders do? They committed an act of treason by signing the Declaration of Independence. They recognized at some point you have to take on the established regime when it is not only unjust, but when there is no lawful way to get it back on track. These matters frame our own nation.

• Texas had just filed its original action in the Supreme Court against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Michigan -- four swing states whose election officers had clearly violated election law in those states and with an impact that put Biden over the top in all four.

• In Georgia, the Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, signed a settlement agreement in March of 2020 in a suit that was filed by the Democratic Committee that essentially obliterated the signature verification process in Georgia. It made it virtually impossible to disqualify any ballots no matter how unlike the signature on the ballot was to the signature in the registration file. The most troubling aspect of it, to me, was that the law required that the signature match the registration signature. When Brad Raffensperger, who is not part of the legislature, unilaterally changed the rule from what the legislature had adopted by statute, that change was unconstitutional, not just illegal.

• Unilaterally, [the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Kathy Boockvar] got rid of a statute that election officials in Pennsylvania had been applying for 100 years to require signature verification. She then asked the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to approve what she had done....In other words, all of the statutory provisions that were designed to protect against fraud were obliterated in Pennsylvania. We ought not to be surprised if fraud walked through the door left open by the unconstitutional elimination of these statutes.

• To this day, there are 120,000 more votes that were cast in Pennsylvania than their records show voters who have cast votes. Think about that: 120,000 more votes than voters who cast votes. The margin in Pennsylvania was 80,000.

• Election officials in heavily Democrat counties [in Wisconsin] also set up drop boxes. They even set up what they called "human drop boxes" in Madison, which is the home of the University of Wisconsin. For two or three consecutive Saturdays before the election, they basically ran a ballot harvesting scheme at taxpayer expense with volunteers – whom I suspect were actually supporters of the Biden campaign -- working as "deputized" county clerks to go collect all these ballots, in violation of state law.

  A lot of these came in with the witness signatures, but the address not filled in. The county clerks were directed by the Secretary of State to fill the information in on their own. In other words, they were doctoring the evidence.

  They were doing Google searches to get the name, to fill in an address to validate ballots that were clearly illegal under Wisconsin law. All told, those couple of things combined, more than 200,000 ballots were affected in a state where the margin victory was just over 20,000.

• Then in Michigan, we had similar things going on. We probably all saw the video of election officials boarding up the canvassing center at TCF Center in Detroit so that people could not observe what was going on. There were hundreds of sworn affidavits about illegality in the conduct of that process in Detroit.

  The judge, without holding a hearing on a motion to dismiss, at which the allegations of the complaint are supposed to be taken as true, rejected all the sworn affidavits from all the witnesses who actually observed the illegality, and instead credited the government affidavit – without the government witness evening being subject to questioning on cross-examination.

• In those four states, and in Arizona and Nevada as well, there is no question that the illegality that occurred affected way more ballots than the certified margin of Joe Biden's victory in all of those states. It only took three of those six states -- any combination of three -- for Trump to have won the election.

• Well, first of all, that mantra....: "All the cases, all the courts ruled against Trump." First of all, that is not true. Most of the cases were rejected on very technical jurisdictional grounds, like a case brought by a voter, rather than the candidate himself.

• Individual voters do not have standing because they lack a particularized injury. Those were dismissed. There is no basis for claiming that there was anything wrong with the claims on the merits. It is just that the cases were not brought by the right people.

• There was one case where one of these illegal guidances from the Secretary of State was challenged before the election. The judge ruled that it was just a guidance, and that until we get to election day to find out if the law was actually violated, the case was not ripe -- and it got dismissed. Then the day after the election, when election officials actually violated the law, the case gets filed again, and the court says, "You can't wait until your guy loses and then bring the election challenge. It's barred by a doctrine called laches. This is the kind of stuff that the Trump legal team was dealing with in those 65 cases.

• Of the cases that actually reached the merits --there were fewer than a dozen of them, if I recall correctly -- Trump won three-fourths of them. You have never heard that in the "New York Times."

• The 65 Project was formed -- I think I've seen reported that they received a grant from a couple of George Soros-related organizations of $100 million -- to bring disbarment actions against all of the lawyers who were involved in any of those cases.

• The head of the organization gave an interview to Axios... and he said in his interview to Axios that the group's goal with respect to the Trump election lawyers is to "not only bring the grievances in the bar complaints, but shame them and make them toxic in their communities and in their firms" "in order to deter right-wing legal talent from signing on to any future GOP efforts" to challenge elections.

• Our system works, in part, because we have an adversarial system of justice that supports it. If groups like the 65 Project succeed in scaring off one side of these intense policy disputes or legal disputes, then we will not have an adversarial system of justice.

• We will not have elections that we can have any faith in, because if you do not have that kind of judicial check on illegality in the election, then bad actors will just do the illegality whenever they want, and we won't be able to do anything about

• Ultimately, we are the sovereign authority that tells the government which direction we want it to go, not the other way around.

• The issue of whether non-legislative actors in the state can alter election law consistent with the Constitution remains an open issue. It should not be an open issue. The Constitution is quite clear, but there was a news account at one point reporting that John Roberts had yelled at Alito and Thomas, who had insisted they needed to take these cases. They were just like Bush versus Gore. Roberts was reported to have said, "They're not like Bush versus Gore. If we do anything, they will burn down our cities." Which means the impact of what had gone on in the summer of 2020 in Portland and Kenosha and all these other places, had an impact on the Supreme Court declining to take these cases.

• What I have seen, and it pains me to say this, is that the level of corruption in our institutions, including our judicial institutions, is so pervasive now that it is troubling. Because many of these cases end up in the DC courts, I cannot imagine a stronger case for change of venue than those January 6th criminal defendants. It will cost a million, a million and a half to defend against those charges. The poor guy who entered a plea agreement and pleaded guilty..., one of the 19 defendants in Georgia, he is a bail bondsman for a living. If he gets a felony, he is not only in jail for a while, but he cannot do his trade, so they offer him a misdemeanor conviction and no jail time. He took it in a heartbeat. Otherwise, he is looking at a million to two million dollars in legal fees tied up in this internationally televised drama for nothing, and he was not in the position to undertake that.

• About electronic voting machines? There have been three audits. Antrim County, Michigan, and one of the leading critics of voting machines and their software is a guy named J. Alex Halderman, a professor of computer science and engineering at the University of Michigan. He testified as the expert in litigation down in Georgia in 2018 saying these machines are not secure. They sealed his testimony and it was only released in June. It just says, "These things are susceptible to fraud by all sorts of bad actors."

• One of the things we discover in that Antrim audits is that in fact, the vote logs that are supposed to be there had been deleted for 2020, not 2016, not 2012, they are still there, but 2020 had been deleted.

• They had a convention in Las Vegas, hired a bunch of geeks, computer geeks from around the country, to come to this convention and see who could hack into the machines and alter the vote codes quickest. It took people about 15 minutes. The notion that these things cannot be hacked is laughable. They have to be able to be opened if they need to be repaired. [I heard that from an MIT graduate at the time.] The question is, how to prove that they were hacked in this particular instance when they are destroying the evidence, and that is where we are.

• [W]e subsequently learned that despite [Former Attorney General William] Barr's public statement that US attorneys could investigate election illegality, anytime somebody did, he called him on the phone and order them not to.

• One of the FBI investigators who was actually getting to the bottom of this got a call that said, "Stand down."

• You have people out there saying, "Oh, we're investigating. Everything's fine," while behind the scenes ordering people not to do the investigation that would actually get to the bottom of it.

• I call it the uniparty. You can call it the deep state. You can call it the administrative state. You can call it the corrupt state, but it sees the MAGA movement as the biggest threat to its syndicators. It is going to do everything it can to destroy the people who are going to try and publicize what is going on.

• That is what we are dealing with, and we are $2 million in. One of the lawsuits that was filed against me by this guy down in North Carolina, I don't know why he picked me as the lead defendant, but other defendants are all billionaire oligarchs who are using their own wealth. That is the kind of nonsense I'm dealing with.

I would like to discuss some of the illegalities that occurred in the 2020 election and the proposed constitutional remedies that we thought we could advance.

I would also like to discuss the lawfare that is sweeping across the country and destroying not just the people that were involved in those efforts, but the very notion of our adversarial system of justice.

This fight and the dangers from it are much bigger than what I am dealing with personally, or what the hundred or so Trump lawyers who have been targeted in this new lawfare effort are dealing with. It seems that there is something similar going on here, albeit to a much less lethal degree, than what we are seeing with the October 7th attack on Israel, as that, too, was an attack on the rule of law.

The international community that will condemn Israel's just response to these unjust attacks demonstrates a bias in the application of the rule of law that is very similar to what we are dealing with here.

These are not isolated instances. They go to the root of the rejection of the rule of law. One of our greatest presidents, Abraham Lincoln, gave a speech, the Lyceum Address, in 1838 talking about the importance of the rule of law.

When there are unjust laws, you have to be careful about refusing to comply with them because what you may lose in the process – the rule of law itself -- is of greater consequence. He was not categorical about that, however, because the example he gave was of our nation's founders and their commitment to the rule of law.

But think about that for a minute. What did our founders do? They committed an act of treason by signing the Declaration of Independence. They recognized at some point you have to take on the established regime when it is not only unjust, but when there is no lawful way to get it back on track. These matters frame our own nation in our own time.

Let us start with the 2020 election. What do we see and how did I get involved in this?

When President Trump, then candidate Trump, walked down that famous escalator at Trump Tower, one of the planks in his campaign platform was that we need to fix this problem of birthright citizenship. People who are just visiting here or are here illegally ought not to be able to provide automatic citizenship to their children. People laughed at him for not understanding the Constitution.

In his next press conference, he waved a law review article, and said there is a very serious argument that our Constitution does not mandate birthright citizenship for people who are only here temporarily or who are here illegally. That happened to be my law review article on birthright citizenship.

Then, during the Mueller investigation, I appeared for an hour on Mark Levin's television show and said the whole Russia collusion story (which Trump rightly called the Russia "hoax") was illegitimate – completely made up. President Trump thought that my analysis was pretty good, and invited me to the White House for a visit.

When the major law firms were backing out of taking on any of the election challenges, President Trump called me and asked if I would be interested. Texas had just filed its original action in the Supreme Court against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Michigan -- four swing states whose election officers had clearly violated election law in those states and with an impact that put Biden over the top in all four.

Two days later, I filed the motion to intervene in the Supreme Court in that action. The Supreme Court rules require the lawyer on the brief to have their name, address, email address and phone number.

Nobody in the country at that point really knew who Trump's legal team was, but all of a sudden people had a lawyer and an email address. I became the recipient of every claim, every allegation, crazy or not, that existed anywhere in the world about what had happened in the election. It was like drinking from a fire hose.

I received communications from some of the best statisticians in the world who were working with election data and who told me there was something very wrong with the reported election results, according to multiple statistical analyses.

One group decided to do a counter-statistical analysis. They said the statisticians had misapplied Stan Young's path-breaking work. Unbeknownst to them, one of the statisticians I was relying on was Stan Young himself.

Did you ever see the movie Rodney Dangerfield's "Back to School"? He has to write an essay for English class, the essay has to be on Kurt Vonnegut's thinking, so he hires Kurt Vonnegut to write the essay for him.

The professor fails him. Not because it was not his own work – the professor hadn't figured that out -- but because, in the professor's view, the work that Dangerfield turned in was not what Kurt Vonnegut would ever say. That is what I felt like with this supposed critique of the statistical work my experts were conducting.

Those were the kinds of things we were dealing with. I became something of a focal point for all this information. The allegations of illegality were particularly significant. I'll just go through a couple of states and a couple of examples:

[Liz]

Amen.

[FreeReign]

The short answer

​​​​Official public documents from the Department of State show that 6,945,045 registered voters successfully cast a ballot in PA’s November 2020 election and that a total of 6,915,283 votes were recorded as cast in the presidential election. These two data points clearly show that there were not “more votes than voters” in the 2020 general election.​”

Did you try to debug the official response? I gave it a quick look and I see some problems with their response. I need to look through it again when I have more time later today.

[Texas Fossil]

Gatestone Institute is a very credible source. I have found them accurate over many many years.

[Texas Fossil]

John Eastman is/was one of Trumps top attorney’s. Glad to see him on Gatestone Institute.

He has recently been de-banked by The Bank of America and the USAA Bank. No explanation. I suspect that the FBI forced that. Just like what happens in England. This is a Globalist disease that we are fighting.

[FreeReign]

Looking at lasereye's American Thinker link...

(excerpt)

Let’s examine Verity Vote’s analysis in greater detail. Starting in October 2020, during the early voting period, V.V. purchased weekly updates to the SURE registration system. Those were purchased from the PA Department of State. V.V. kept buying the updates every week until February 2021, and each weekly update revealed the cumulative number of registered voters at that point in time.

When PA certified its election (November 24, 2020), Verity Vote could see that there were 202,000 fewer voters than ballots. How? It had the exact number of voters based on its analysis of the SURE weekly updates. V.V. also knew the total number of ballots that were cast, based on the reported votes, adjusted by overvotes, undervotes, and write-in votes. (Take my word for it: that is the correct procedure.)

After being challenged by Republican legislators in late December 2020, the PA Department of State issued a terse communication that acknowledged a discrepancy but dismissed its importance. The Department implied that it was a mere timing matter that would be resolved when all 67 counties finally posted voter information into the SURE system. However, this was not the case.

When the last PA counties finally posted information into the SURE registration system (at the end of January 2021), V.V. determined that there remained a voter deficit of 121,000. Using my audit experience, I extensively tested the V.V. analysis, and I found it to be logical and completely accurate. A voter deficit existed, and the election should not have been certified.

The exact amount is not entirely clear because, magically, 30,000 more voters materialized (without explanation) six months after the election. Yes, the number of voters had grown by the time PA issued its “2020 General Election Report” on May 14, 2021. That is the reason I reported a deficit of just 90,000 in my book, Debunked. Although I suspected that the 30,000 increase in voters was a “plug” entry, I generously assumed that it was some sort of legitimate error correction made by PA. Either way, however, the voter deficit exceeded Biden’s winning margin.

Now let’s examine this problem from a legal vantage point, because it appears that laws were broken in Pennsylvania.

PA Code Section 3154 (b) indicates that a precinct or voting district cannot certify its results unless the relevant county investigates any significant excess of votes over voters. When PA certified its election, however, there was a statewide voter deficit of 202,000. Therefore, there had to be several precincts with voter deficits. That simple mathematical truth tells us that Section 3154 (b) was violated.

It looks like to me JSM_Libery, that the "short answer" is that the so-call "fact check" that you posted references SURE data not from the legally required certification date (Nov. 24th, 2020), but instead it's the data from an PA Election Report citing the SURE database on May (lol) 14, 2021.

It appears to me that the PA official "fact checking" response (and the election results) are bogus and that Verity Vote is correct.

[GOPJ]

To this day, there are 120,000 more votes that were cast in Pennsylvania than their records show voters who have cast votes. Think about that: 120,000 more votes than voters who cast votes. The margin in Pennsylvania was 80,000.

Anyone notice how 'the black community' votes in massively larger percentages and yet they don't show up for rallies?

Democrat voter fraud is traditionally done in the black community because anyone who questions the numbers is called a racist. And which precincts do the fraud? Look for the ones in tight races/swing districts that hold back their ballot boxes on election night to after 11 pm. They're waiting to see how many ballots are needed for the stuff - too many and it calls attention to the fraud - too few and they lose.

[GailA]

btt

[lepton]

To this day, there are 120,000 more votes that were cast in Pennsylvania than their records show voters who have cast votes. Think about that: 120,000 more votes than voters who cast votes. The margin in Pennsylvania was 80,000.

---

Recall the response to this: That this was not real, and only appeared that way because the three largest counties had not yet reported their received ballots...in March. It might actually be true - but is completely unacceptable as it makes it impossible to tell if ballots were injected. That makes it impossible to determine whether Trump won, or not (but it also makes it impossible to tell whether Biden won either).

[little jeremiah]

I'm wondering whatever happened with this. I guess "no standing"? Did it get to SCOTUS ever? I only have the first page, saved it a long time ago from who knows where.

[lepton]

The article also leaves out a lot of shenanigans in Wisconsin about abuse of the provisions to vote by the ‘indefinitely confined’, which even the state Supreme Court recognized as a problem, including some 50,000 votes by people who had *never* presented identification, but which decided on a split decision not to do anything about it.

[lepton]

“To this day, there are 120,000 more votes that were cast in Pennsylvania than their records show voters who have cast votes. “

It would be a stronger article if they linked to the evidence for each of the claims that they are making. eg. what is the evidence for the 120,000 claim above?

---

The claim was based on the state’s website. After that came out, the state explained that it wasn’t a real discrepancy, it was just because the three largest counties had not submitted their ballot total...as of March 2021. So it undoubtedly is not specifically correct, but whether the numbers of ballots matched up or not was uncertain months after the election. There’s really no excuse for not getting that information and making it available within a week of the election.

[little jeremiah]

A couple of relevant maps. States which allow illegals to get drivers licenses

Cross reference 'blue' areas w/ illegal immigrant high pop zones.

Aaaand.... an article I posted with a lot of info in the thread about how states with illegals getting DL and mail in ballot affects election outcomes.

States with Automatic Voter Registration and Sanctuary Cities

NCSP National Conference of State Legislatures ^ | 4/14/2020 NCSP

Posted on 11/10/2020, 4:52:37 PM by little jeremiah

The purpose of this thread is to list the states with automatic voter registration, mostly by getting driver's licenses, but also through other means such as applying for social service. And combine that with sanctuary states, counties and cities. Counting ballots and making sure all voters are registered doesn't help solve the problem of illegals voting.

[reasonisfaith]

No, we’re not screwed. They are.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

I sure hope so.

[lepton]

https://www.repdiamond.com/News/18754/Latest-News/PA-Lawmakers-Numbers-Don%E2%80%99t-Add-Up,-Certification-of-Presidential-Results-Premature-and-In-Error

Here is an earlier reference to the apparent discrepancy.

BTW, thanks for the Fact-checking-PA link.

[lepton]

Wasn’t he just disbarred?

[lepton]

Just to be more clear: The discrepancy was pointed out in Late December, but as of March had not been actually reconciled.

[lasereye]

To this day, there are 120,000 more votes that were cast in Pennsylvania than their records show voters who have cast votes. Think about that: 120,000 more votes than voters who cast votes. The margin in Pennsylvania was 80,000.

Recall the response to this: That this was not real, and only appeared that way because the three largest counties had not yet reported their received ballots...in March. It might actually be true - but is completely unacceptable as it makes it impossible to tell if ballots were injected. That makes it impossible to determine whether Trump won, or not (but it also makes it impossible to tell whether Biden won either).

Immediately after the election there were 202,000 more votes cast than voters. When people pointed it out the PA election board said that they would eventually be equal. The 120,000 was after they reported all results. Actually it is now 90,000 since they made some alleged kind of suspicious adjustment that reduced that discrepancy by 30K. A 90,000 discrepancy is the final number. They will not ever be equal.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/11/pennsylvanias_2020_election_was_invalid_says_who.html

[JohnBovenmyer]

Yup. By CA. All the more reason to put him on SCOTUS! Not a requirement to be a lawyer to sit there. But he’s MUCH more faithful to the law than those who disbarred him. He’s appealing that, but a SCOTUS seat is would be a greater victory than appeals offer him.

[Silentgypsy]

Thank you, Liz.