Tag Archives: voting

Who’s Eligible to Vote?

Posted on by
Reply

Recall the Georgia runoff elections for two Federal Senate seats and the parallel efforts by both parties to register new voters—including encouraging folks from out of State to become citizens of the State and register to vote on that 5 Jan 21 election day.

Here’s Tracy Beanz of UncoverDC.com:

In reading the GA constitution, it appears that newly registered voters should NOT be eligible to vote in the runoff election.

Here’s the Georgia Constitution.  Here’s Section II, Paragraph II of that Constitution, which deals explicitly with runoff elections (some folks really do plan ahead):

Paragraph II. Run-off election. A run-off election shall be a continuation of the general election and only persons who were entitled to vote in the general election shall be entitled to vote therein; and only those votes cast for the persons designated for the runoffs shall be counted in the tabulation and canvass of the votes cast.

Thus, any citizen of Georgia who hadn’t registered to vote in the 3 Nov 20 election, and so wasn’t entitled to vote then, doesn’t seem entitled to vote in the continuation (runoff) election, even if he registers now.

That would seem to leave all the Johnny-Come-Latelies now entering the State to register and vote on 5 Jan still ineligible to vote on 5 Jan, although they can register to their heart’s content and vote in other, separate, elections in 2021. If they hang around and don’t leave (which latter could expose them to felony charges for violating Georgia election laws).

Who Was Audited?

Posted on by
Reply

Recall the hoo-raw over the Dominion Voting Systems machines in Georgia. Georgia’s Secretary of State  Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, authorized an audit of those machines and last month announced the audit’s results: “no evidence of the machines being tampered.”

Pro V&V, “a US Election Assistance Commission certified testing laboratory,” was the company Raffensperger hired to do the audit. The company, according to its Web site,

was founded in 2011 by individuals possessing a combined testing experience of over 30 years[]

and it was accredited by the US Election Assistance Commission in 2015.

The company doesn’t identify its founders, or how many of them there are, so it’s impossible to assess the value of those combined 30 years of experience. Two guys, averaging 15 years each, which would be serious experience?

Five guys, averaging 6 years each?

Software (and hardware) testing is what I did, as Test Director for a defense contractor, in another life. Six years of testing software isn’t all that, not when the tester needs to have a clear and extensive level of understanding of the nature of the software being tested. Software driving a fighter aircraft simulator is vastly different from software driving Windows Word™ software is vastly different from software driving your laptop’s firewall…is vastly different from software that drives voting systems computers. How qualified are these guys, really? Maybe thoroughly qualified, maybe not so much.

But here’s the thing, folks. Pro V&V has a several-years-long relationship with Dominion, which Raffensperger plainly knows, or should have known.

[Pro V&V] has for several years overseen testing of Dominion’s voting software, federal records indicate.

And

US Election Assistance Commission records show that Pro V&V has for multiple years served as the “testing lab” for Dominion’s Democracy Suite voting software. Records from 2020, 2019 2018 and 2017 all list Pro V&V as the tester for several successive iterations of Democracy Suite.

Who, indeed, was it being audited?

Hmm….

Censorship

Posted on by
Reply

Douglas Vincent Mastriano is a Pennsylvania State Senator. He’s also a retired United States Army Colonel.

Last week, he organized the State Senate’s Senate Majority Policy Committee hearing to uncover[] exactly what happened in the Keystone State regarding the just concluded Presidential and down ballot general election.  Never mind that the Committee heard testimony

from multiple witnesses who gave evidence of voter fraud in the 2020 elections….

Now State Senator Mastriano also is a Twitter Account Suspendee. After the hearing, without warning or explanation, Jack Dorsey’s Twitter suspended Mastriano’s account. His account wasn’t restored–again without explanation–until late Friday.

This is the rank censorship about which Big Tech is getting ever more blatant.

This is a prime example of why Twitter, Facebook, and Alphabet must lose their Section 230 protections.

A Thought on Brann’s Decision

Posted on by
Reply

Recall that Federal District Judge Matthew Brann dismissed the Trump campaign lawsuit that sought to reject hundreds of thousands of votes in Progressive-Democratic-run Pennsylvania counties because, the suit alleged, changes to State voting rules violated our Constitution’s equal protection requirement.

Brann ruled in part that he

has no authority to take away the right to vote of even a single person, let alone millions of citizens.

What Brann chose not to consider is that he also has no authority to see the vote of even a single person, let alone millions of citizens (more accurately, hundreds of thousands; “millions” is his cynical exaggeration), be diluted to the point of meaninglessness by illegally cast or illegally counted ballots.

The Third Circuit has agreed to hear, promptly, the campaign’s appeal. Hopefully, the appellate court will consider both sides of the matter rather than just the convenient side.

Rule By Law

Posted on by
Reply

Rather than Rule of Law, which is how we do things here.

The men and women of the government of the People’s Republic of China change the nation’s laws whenever convenient to their personal aims and whenever convenient to their personal power. This is how those men and women have acted, have preserved their power, since the beginning of the days of Chinese emperors.

Two current examples: their enactment in 2017 of an intelligence cooperation law that requires all PRC companies, whether state-owned or “private,” to cooperate with any intelligence community request for information, including about any company affiliate or customer wherever in the world that affiliate or customer might be.

There’s also the just-enacted law that permits the PRC government to remove—outside of the courts—anyone in the Hong Kong governance apparatus of whom the emperor’s men the men and women of the PRC government might decide to disapprove.

Now we come to the Progressive-Democratic men and women of the Wisconsin State government.

At a special meeting that lasted more than five hours, [Progressive-]Democrats on the state elections commission sought to change recount guidelines after the Trump 2020 Campaign filed a petition to review the state’s votes in Dane and Milwaukee counties.

Existing State law on the matter had become inconvenient to those Progressive-Democrats, so—time to change the rules. As Reince Priebus noted,

The Trump campaign sent the Wis Election Comm. $3 mil and filed its petition for a recount. Then the WEC immediately called a special meeting to change certain recount rules that deal with the issues brought up in the petition? You can’t make this up!

Here are Progressive-Democrats in action.