U.S. Supreme Court has lost Legitimacy

The U.S. Supreme Court sidestepped the most important public issue in this country – election integrity. On December 11, 2020, the court denied 19 states request to require the States of Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania to “conform to State election statutes, requiring legislative ratification of any change prior to the election… Texas asks this Court to recognize the obvious fact that Defendant States’ maladministration of the 2020 election makes it impossible to know which candidate garnered the majority of lawful votes.” The court’s cowardly inaction solidified its lack of legitimacy, not only with subversive liberals, but with the rest of America.

Election Fraud 2020 - Nothing New For Pennsylvania

On May 16, 2020, a former Pennsylvania Judge of Elections pleaded guilty for his role in accepting bribes to cast fraudulent ballots and for certifying false voting results during the 2014, 2015, and 2016 primary elections in Philadelphia.

“This defendant abused his office by engaging in election fraud for profit,” said Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “Today’s conviction makes it clear that the Department of Justice will do all in its power to protect the integrity of elections and maintain public confidence in all levels of elected government.”

“Demuro fraudulently stuffed the ballot box by literally standing in a voting booth and voting over and over, as fast as he could, while he thought the coast was clear. This is utterly reprehensible conduct. The charges announced today do not erase what he did, but they do ensure that he is held to account for those actions,” said U.S. Attorney William M. McSwain of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. “Voting is the cornerstone of our democracy. If even one vote is fraudulently rung up, the integrity of that election is compromised. I want the public to know that this investigation is active and ongoing, and my Office is taking every possible step that we can to ensure the integrity of the upcoming primary and general elections in the nine counties of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.”

On November 7, 1995, a newly installed computerized voting system in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania "produced a bleeping mess", soon after the polls opened. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, "What was lauded as a forward-thinking move that would push the election process into the 21st century, ended in a flurry of finger-pointing, missing voter cartridges, and calls for an investigation into the integrity of the tabulation". Sound familiar? In 1995 the Snohomish County, Washington (Just North of Seattle), auditor's office created a similar mess by jumping into the computerized voting arena head-first.

Election Fraud 1995 – Digital Election Equipment [Dominion] Begins Debut

On December 22, 1995, Snohomish County, Washington Superior Court Judge John Wynne found County Auditor Bob Terwilliger in violation of state election law and ordered the Lake Stevens Mayoral election to be re-certified. The 1995 Snohomish County, November general election was plagued with numerous “mistakes” caused by new digital election equipment, and election officials. So many “mistakes” that two judges required re-certification and new absentee ballots sent in two local races that year. The auditors’ office set the blame squarely on the new voting system acquired just prior to the September primary. Responding to questions directed at the high number of incorrect absentee ballots sent out in the general election, auditor Terwilliger stated "It was a QC (quality control) problem of the printer" unfortunately the printer just happened to be the same organization that provided the new voting system.

Snohomish County’s 1995 election equipment was the The Optech IV model 400, now known as the Sequoia (Dominion) Optech 400C.

Vote fraud has occurred since the idea (of voting) was conceived. In 1995 the Snohomish County auditors’ office purchased over 400,000 ballots (at a cost of $139,000) for 275,000 registered voters, of which 134,000 voted in the 1995 November general election? In order for criminal election officials to create the appearance of the accuracy of digital vote tabulating equipment, and election propriety, criminal election officials need to have extra ballots to match the [false] ballot tabulations.