Thread: Georgia Elections Officials vote to keep vital tool used in ballot harvesting

.
See: NEW: Georgia Elections Officials Extend Use of Ballot Drop Boxes For January Twin Senate Runoff

“What could possibly go wrong?

Georgia elections officials on Monday voted to extend the use of ballot drop boxes for the January 5 twin Senate runoff where the Republican majority in the Senate is on the line.

The use of ballot drop boxes, which opens the door for illegal ballot harvesting, was set to expire in December, but the 5-member Georgia State Election Board voted to extend the use of drop boxes.

Georgia is already struggling with how to deal with residency concerns after Democrats have called on people to temporarily move to Georgia to vote in the Senate runoff.

GOP incumbent Senators David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler are fighting to keep their seats.”

Let us not forget, during the 2020 presidential election, an activist group Stacey Abrams founded, “Fair Fight Action”, convinced Georgia’s Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, to ignore current voting practices, and to place hundreds of unregulated, unsupervised, ballot drop boxes throughout the State.

This approval last week, to extend the use of ballot drop boxes during the coming Senate runoff election, provides the needed tool used by illegal third parties who harvest ballots, to introduce illegally harvested ballots into the Senate runoff race.

Keep in mind it only takes a few hundred activists to collect hundreds of thousands of harvested ballots from, nursing homes, homeless shelters, food banks, etc., in a short period of time, who then use the drop boxes to introduce these harvested ballots into the system. And this is what Stacey Abrams, and apparently Georgia's Election Officials, have planned for Georgia’s Senate runoff race.
Stacey Abrams has recently boasted that over 750,000 mail in ballots have already been requested.

24-hour accessible mail in ballot drop boxes are located in various locations throughout Georgia, including, parking lots, driveways and walkways, and are an important tool used in ballot harvesting.


Fulton County, Georgia, ballot drop box

The fix is already in!

JWK


The unavoidable truth is, our socialist revolutionaries, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, have a plan for “free” college tuition, and cancelling student loan debt. The problem is, it will be paid for by taxing millions of college graduates who worked for and paid their own way through college and are now trying to finance their own economic needs.

Mail-in voting invites voter fraud, even Jimmy Carter acknowledged this fact!


Aside from that see: Texas Charges Social Worker With 134 Felony Counts Involving Election Fraud

Nov 6, 2020


kelly reagan brunner


“Attorney General Ken Paxton today announced that his Election Fraud Unit assisted the Limestone County Sheriff and District Attorney in charging Kelly Reagan Brunner, a social worker in the Mexia State Supported Living Center (SSLC), with 134 felony counts of purportedly acting as an agent and of election fraud,” the state said in a statement. “State Supported Living Centers serve people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Brunner submitted voter registration applications for 67 residents without their signature or effective consent, while purporting to act as their agent.”

Also see: Massive voter fraud uncovered in Harris County, Texas

“They harvest ballots by mail from nursing homes, homeless centers, door to door in poor neighborhoods, often dressed as Census workers. Also, they offer $50 gift cards in front of stores asking people to take ballots by mail, acquired from the above, to sign and mail at a local post office. They hold ballots by mail in several locations where people forge signatures on the collected ballots by mail.”

JWK

Our socialist revolutionaries, which now control the Democrat Party Leadership, are known for accusing others of what they themselves are guilty of.

See State Lawmakers Introduce Resolution Disputing 2020 General Election Results

Nov 27, 2020

HARRISBURG, Pa. (WHTM) — A group of Pennsylvania lawmakers introduced a resolution Friday, disputing the 2020 General Election Statewide Contest calling it ‘absolutely imperative.’

“A number of compromises of Pennsylvania’s election laws took place during the 2020 General Election,” the statement said. “The documented irregularities and improprieties associated with mail-in balloting, pre-canvassing, and canvassing have undermined our elector process and as a result we can not accept certification of the results in statewide races.”

“It is absolutely imperative that we take these steps if we are to ensure public trust in our electoral system. Faith in government begins with faith in the elections which select that government.”

JWK

Our socialist revolutionaries, which now control the Democrat Party Leadership, are known for accusing others of what they themselves are guilty of.

See: Pennsylvania Judge Backs Trump Claims Over Mail-In Ballots, Says 'Unlikely Constitutional'

11/28/2020

"After a Pennsylvania Judge blocked the state from 'taking any further steps' to complete the certification of the presidential race on Wednesday - she dropped a detailed opinion on Friday justifying her decision, which concludes that the state's changes to mail-in balloting procedures were likely illegal.

The order is currently delayed while the state Supreme Court considers the case on an expedited basis, which was filed by a group of Republicans who argued that the state's changes to mail-in voting, Act 77, violated the commonwealth's constitution."



Also see: Memorandum Opinion Filed in Pennsylvania by Judge McCullough – Election Likely Unconstitutional

Additionally, Petitioners appear to have established alikelihood to succeed on the merits because Petitioners have asserted theConstitution does not provide a mechanism for the legislature to allow for expansionof absentee voting without a constitutional amendment. Petitioners appear to havea viable claim that the mail-in ballot procedures set forth in Act 77 contravene Pa. Const. Article VII Section 14 as the plain language of that constitutional provisionis at odds with the mail-in provisions of Act 77. Since this presents an issue of lawwhich has already been thoroughly briefed by the parties, this Court can state thatPetitioners have a likelihood of success on the merits of its PennsylvaniaConstitutional claim.

. . .


The Court agrees it would be untenable for the legislature to appoint the electors where an election has already occurred, if the majority of voters who did not vote by mail entered their votes in accord with a constitutionally recognized method, as such action would result in the disenfranchisement of every voter in the Commonwealth who voted in this election – not only those whose ballots are being challenged due to the constitutionality of Act 77. However, this is not the only equitable remedy available in a matter which hinges upon upholding a most basic constitutional right of the people to a fair and free election. Hence, Respondents have not established that greater harm will result in providing emergency relief, than the harm suffered by the public due to the results of a purportedly unconstitutional election. 5

5 The U.S. Supreme Court has addressed various circumstances concerning disenfranchisement of votes. For instance, it has held the right to vote is foundational to our Republic and this fundamental right “can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizen’s vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise.” Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 555 (1964). Reynolds, which established the “one person, one vote” doctrine, is the seminal case on voter dilution. Under this concept, a mail-in voting process that would exceed the limits of absentee voting prescribed in Pa. Const. Article VII sec 14 could be construed as violating the “one person one vote.” In that event, the sheer magnitude of the number of mail-in ballots would not be a basis to disregard not only this provision of the Pennsylvania Constitution but also the “one person, one vote” doctrine established by Reynolds, one of the bedrock decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court

For all of the above reasons, the Court respectfully submits that the emergency preliminary injunction was properly issued and should be upheld pending an expedited emergency evidentiary hearing s/ Patricia A. McCullough PATRICIA A. McCULLOUGH, Judge