Arizona woman pleads guilty to ballot harvesting in 2020 election
- Thread starter ResidentAlien
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The guys who did the Two Thousand Mules movie, which documented the ballot box stuffing clearly proved that illegal voting took place. However, they also stated that, in the end, they did not believe that if all the fake ballots were taken away it would have changed the outcome of the election.
If you have not seen the movie, you need to. It is "eye opening' as to the illegal activities of the Liberal Politial Party.
If you have not seen the movie, you need to. It is "eye opening' as to the illegal activities of the Liberal Politial Party.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
I am not sure why the sad face on my post. The U.S. is in decline. Our Goverment has turned its back on the american people they openly say that they are working toward a one world order. The list could go on and on nd run out o carictors. The goverment is going to wipe out a large numer of troops from new recrutes to people with 19+ years because they will not get the shoot. They closed our churches during covid. So tell me why it is wrong.
C
As I understand it, the two elderly ladies got a bit over enthusiastic in making sure everyone they knew cast a properly filled out vote, so they foolishly helped them fill out their votes and collected them from the voters.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there were only a handful of votes involved. The prosecutors accepted the ladies claims that they had no malicious intent to pervert the electoral system. The incident doesn't seem to paint a picture of widespread fraud!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there were only a handful of votes involved. The prosecutors accepted the ladies claims that they had no malicious intent to pervert the electoral system. The incident doesn't seem to paint a picture of widespread fraud!
You cannot believe any official account of election fraud, since the idea is to either dismiss it as a fantasy, or minimize what is a major crime, so that it looks like prank.
To say that there was no malicious intent is simply naive, since everyone knows it is illegal to harvest ballots. People should be in prison for such things, and fraud is a crime as much as murder.
Also let's keep in mind that the corrupted justice system and the Leftist DA's are making sure that criminals prosper while law-abiding citizens suffer. The huge swindle of the 2020 election has been steadily and regularly dismissed by almost everyone, since to recognize it would mean prison time for all the top Democrats including Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer, etc. It would also mean a brand new election with paper ballots, proper citizenship ID, and extremely strict monitoring.
Hence the sham "January 6 Committee" meant to deflect attention from the real crime and create a gulag for conservatives and patriots who committed no crimes. It was the capitol police who were the actual criminals. And this was a false flag operation from the get-go.
To say that there was no malicious intent is simply naive, since everyone knows it is illegal to harvest ballots. People should be in prison for such things, and fraud is a crime as much as murder.
Also let's keep in mind that the corrupted justice system and the Leftist DA's are making sure that criminals prosper while law-abiding citizens suffer. The huge swindle of the 2020 election has been steadily and regularly dismissed by almost everyone, since to recognize it would mean prison time for all the top Democrats including Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer, etc. It would also mean a brand new election with paper ballots, proper citizenship ID, and extremely strict monitoring.
Hence the sham "January 6 Committee" meant to deflect attention from the real crime and create a gulag for conservatives and patriots who committed no crimes. It was the capitol police who were the actual criminals. And this was a false flag operation from the get-go.
-
1
- Show all
C
I thought the authorities and judiciary looked at everything, and even though they found irregularities (they'd be evident in most elections conducted throughout the world I suspect), they found no evidence of widespread fraud. As I understand it, the investigations and subsequent findings were conducted by people from both sides of the political divide, and came up with the same conclusion. The election was well run and nearly all the votes were correctly analysed and counted!
I've been watching the Jan 6 hearings, and even though it's been run a bit like a reality TV show, the depositions are given under oath. Nobody in their right mind would give false evidence in such a forum. I realise there's a bit of he says, she says, he heard, she heard here, and there's no cross examination of statements, but there's enough to suggest that there was collusion happening by the GOP to overturn what seems to have been a fair decision.
I've been watching the Jan 6 hearings, and even though it's been run a bit like a reality TV show, the depositions are given under oath. Nobody in their right mind would give false evidence in such a forum. I realise there's a bit of he says, she says, he heard, she heard here, and there's no cross examination of statements, but there's enough to suggest that there was collusion happening by the GOP to overturn what seems to have been a fair decision.
-
1
- Show all
I'm sorry for laughing but this post is very, very funny. You obviously have not seen the movie 2,000 Mules, or Rigged. or Absolute Proof. If you saw those then you certainly would not have come to this conclusion. If you did not see them I cannot see how you can claim you watched evidence from both sides.
So let's break it down.
1. The word "widespread" is used by them in the event they get prosecuted. For example, let's suppose there were ten states that were swing states where they focused their fraud. that is only 20% of states, so if they didn't do fraud in the other 80% of states does that mean it wasn't widespread? Then in a swing state the election will be decided by about 1% of the vote. If you switch 1% of the ballots from one candidate to the other that will swing the election. 1% of the vote in 20% of the states equals 0.2% of the vote. You can argue that 99% of the vote was legit and hence "no widespread voter fraud".
2. Here are the questions that should be asked and answered
Do we have evidence, irrefutable evidence of voter fraud? Yes.
Do we have evidence of enough voter fraud to flip the results in a state? Yes
Do we have evidence of enough voter fraud in enough states to overturn the election results? Yes
3. Once you have answered those three questions you need to then ask the following questions:
What kind of evidence do we have, will it hold up in court?
A. We have over 2,000 sworn affidavits of election fraud
B. We have bank records and evidence of $400 million spent in violation of election laws.
C. We have videotape evidence of 2,000 people stuffing ballots into ballot boxes along with geotracking evidence from their phones that show they did this at least 10 times and on average 20 times.
D. We have whistle blowers explaining how the operation worked, how much they were paid, etc.
E. And we have captured data showing that the election results from the Dominion machines were sent overseas where they were switched and then sent back to the US.
F. We also have videotape evidence of election workers running ballots through multiple times to be counted repeatedly.
G. We also have statistical anomalies in the voting that is evidence of fraud.
H. We also have the common sense evidence that none of the down ballots candidates profited from Joe Biden's supposed record smashing votes totals. Common sense that says 100% of Detroit did not vote. Common sense that says all of the counties that historically call elections except for 1 went for Trump.
So let's break it down.
1. The word "widespread" is used by them in the event they get prosecuted. For example, let's suppose there were ten states that were swing states where they focused their fraud. that is only 20% of states, so if they didn't do fraud in the other 80% of states does that mean it wasn't widespread? Then in a swing state the election will be decided by about 1% of the vote. If you switch 1% of the ballots from one candidate to the other that will swing the election. 1% of the vote in 20% of the states equals 0.2% of the vote. You can argue that 99% of the vote was legit and hence "no widespread voter fraud".
2. Here are the questions that should be asked and answered
Do we have evidence, irrefutable evidence of voter fraud? Yes.
Do we have evidence of enough voter fraud to flip the results in a state? Yes
Do we have evidence of enough voter fraud in enough states to overturn the election results? Yes
3. Once you have answered those three questions you need to then ask the following questions:
What kind of evidence do we have, will it hold up in court?
A. We have over 2,000 sworn affidavits of election fraud
B. We have bank records and evidence of $400 million spent in violation of election laws.
C. We have videotape evidence of 2,000 people stuffing ballots into ballot boxes along with geotracking evidence from their phones that show they did this at least 10 times and on average 20 times.
D. We have whistle blowers explaining how the operation worked, how much they were paid, etc.
E. And we have captured data showing that the election results from the Dominion machines were sent overseas where they were switched and then sent back to the US.
F. We also have videotape evidence of election workers running ballots through multiple times to be counted repeatedly.
G. We also have statistical anomalies in the voting that is evidence of fraud.
H. We also have the common sense evidence that none of the down ballots candidates profited from Joe Biden's supposed record smashing votes totals. Common sense that says 100% of Detroit did not vote. Common sense that says all of the counties that historically call elections except for 1 went for Trump.
-
1
- Show all
C
I don't mind if you laugh. I realise you and others must be very disappointed. But the courts are open. If there's evidence of criminal activity I assume there would be avenues available to lodge complaints, and to let the legal system do its thing.
I haven't claimed that I've heard evidence from both sides. I don't take much credibility from movies, and what they might suggest is fact. I'm not saying that the movies were full of lies, but they can portray fiction as fact, and usually have a bias. If the evidence is there, it should be brought before the courts. I would think there would be a duty to society to do that.
I haven't claimed that I've heard evidence from both sides. I don't take much credibility from movies, and what they might suggest is fact. I'm not saying that the movies were full of lies, but they can portray fiction as fact, and usually have a bias. If the evidence is there, it should be brought before the courts. I would think there would be a duty to society to do that.
So far no court has heard the evidence. Cases have been dismissed based on other issues before the evidence can be heard. That said the court system is open and the wheels of justice move slowly. You can wait for the evidence to be presented in court and for the election to be decertified. This will happen. My brother would only view NY Times as the "paper of record" and as a result he learned that Hunter Biden's laptop was legitimate 17 months after the rest of us knew that.
How many trillions of dollars can they steal in 17 months? How much damage can be done to the US military and US economy in 17 months? I heard the press secretary for Biden say that while he was president the US had the strongest economy in history. That was true on day 1, but not today. People need to give credit to Biden, who could have thought he could have wrought such devastation in just 17 months.
How many trillions of dollars can they steal in 17 months? How much damage can be done to the US military and US economy in 17 months? I heard the press secretary for Biden say that while he was president the US had the strongest economy in history. That was true on day 1, but not today. People need to give credit to Biden, who could have thought he could have wrought such devastation in just 17 months.
hmm your link doesn't reflect the title of your thread.
but i found the actual case -- two women turned in 4 ballots, legally cast legitimate votes, for people they were not related to and didn't live with.
this used to be common practice that both parties used - until a 2016 Arizona law forbid anyone but the person who cast the vote, a family member, or someone who provides care for them to deliver the ballot.
it wasn't fraud, and it wasn't 'stuffing fake ballots into boxes' -- it was collecting legal votes from people and bringing them to a ballot box.
it is the only case of this brought to court in Arizona.
the women were charged with several other conspiratorial 'ballot stuffing/fraud' type charges, and all of those charges were dismissed, there being no convincing evidence of any of them.
https://www.azcentral.com/story/new...-sentenced-ballot-harvesting-case/7830502001/
but i found the actual case -- two women turned in 4 ballots, legally cast legitimate votes, for people they were not related to and didn't live with.
this used to be common practice that both parties used - until a 2016 Arizona law forbid anyone but the person who cast the vote, a family member, or someone who provides care for them to deliver the ballot.
it wasn't fraud, and it wasn't 'stuffing fake ballots into boxes' -- it was collecting legal votes from people and bringing them to a ballot box.
it is the only case of this brought to court in Arizona.
the women were charged with several other conspiratorial 'ballot stuffing/fraud' type charges, and all of those charges were dismissed, there being no convincing evidence of any of them.
https://www.azcentral.com/story/new...-sentenced-ballot-harvesting-case/7830502001/
-
1
- Show all
C
Somewhere behind the trees is the forest.
If there's evidence of fraud or misdemeanour, it should be put before the courts.
I'm careful not to let rhetoric make up my mind for me, particularly when it's to do with politics. Politicians are the masters of spin IMO.... at least that seems to be the status quo in my country.
If there's evidence of fraud or misdemeanour, it should be put before the courts.
I'm careful not to let rhetoric make up my mind for me, particularly when it's to do with politics. Politicians are the masters of spin IMO.... at least that seems to be the status quo in my country.
C
Fortunately, (or unfortunately depending on where you stand), there's usually another election not too far away which might help to right a listing ship. But I'm wondering, now that there seems to be doubt cast over the integrity of the US federal electoral system, every future election is likely to end up producing the same doubts and conflicts.
BIG ARIZONA FRAUD UPDATE: Law Enforcement Raids Nonprofits In ‘2000 Mules’ Ballot Trafficking Investigation – “Like Tweety Birds, They Sang”
https://www.citizensjournal.us/big-...ng-investigation-like-tweety-birds-they-sang/
As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, The Yuma County Sheriff and Yuma County Recorder opened a new investigation into cases of impersonation fraud, false registrations, duplicate voting, and fraudulent use of absentee ballots.
The fake news media is already trying to deny everything. In a report titled, “The Yuma sheriff isn’t investigating election fraud because of ‘2000 Mules’”, The far-left dark money nonprofit Arizona Mirror reported,Guard.Io
The film alleges that by using geolocation data purchased by the filmmakers they were able to track “ballot mules” to drop boxes where they falsely allege the “mules” were paid to stuff the boxes with completed ballots. The practice, pejoratively referred to as ballot harvesting, is illegal in Arizona and many other states.
Wilmot announced last week that his office and the county recorder’s office are investigating voting fraud cases from 2020, but there is no indication that any of the cases involve the movie’s claims. Instead, YCSO said the cases include impersonation fraud, false registrations, duplicate voting and fraudulent use of absentee ballots.
In fact — All four of these voter fraud cases appear to be related to the evidence presented in the film.
https://www.citizensjournal.us/big-...ng-investigation-like-tweety-birds-they-sang/
As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, The Yuma County Sheriff and Yuma County Recorder opened a new investigation into cases of impersonation fraud, false registrations, duplicate voting, and fraudulent use of absentee ballots.
The fake news media is already trying to deny everything. In a report titled, “The Yuma sheriff isn’t investigating election fraud because of ‘2000 Mules’”, The far-left dark money nonprofit Arizona Mirror reported,Guard.Io
The film alleges that by using geolocation data purchased by the filmmakers they were able to track “ballot mules” to drop boxes where they falsely allege the “mules” were paid to stuff the boxes with completed ballots. The practice, pejoratively referred to as ballot harvesting, is illegal in Arizona and many other states.
Wilmot announced last week that his office and the county recorder’s office are investigating voting fraud cases from 2020, but there is no indication that any of the cases involve the movie’s claims. Instead, YCSO said the cases include impersonation fraud, false registrations, duplicate voting and fraudulent use of absentee ballots.
In fact — All four of these voter fraud cases appear to be related to the evidence presented in the film.
This is why it is essential to respond to these allegations and do a complete audit that the entire country can trust. At this point 50% of the country thinks the elections are fraudulent. That is catastrophic for a democracy. If they do not deal with this in a transparent, trustworthy and credible way the country will be split in two.
It is an outrage that they ignore, belittle, and insult 50% of this country the way they have for the last 17 months.
I was a teacher, our school was audited every 2-3 years. It is absurd that we can send tens of billions of dollars to Ukraine but we can't do an audit of our election.
It is an outrage that they ignore, belittle, and insult 50% of this country the way they have for the last 17 months.
I was a teacher, our school was audited every 2-3 years. It is absurd that we can send tens of billions of dollars to Ukraine but we can't do an audit of our election.
C
That's how I read it.
Maybe there was more give or take offered behind closed doors than has been said, but it seemed to be a case of a couple of zealous older ladies wanting to make sure the spirit behind the electoral system, ie everyone's right to cast a vote, was being upheld.
If they were aware of that law, that it was a no no, then that was very clumsy of them and they deserved to be reprimanded. Otherwise, given the small number of votes involved, you would send them off from court with a caution. Irrespective, you wouldn't want to put the incident up as evidence to support a claim of widespread fraud, that would be laughable and weaken the strength of your argument overall IMO.
Maybe there was more give or take offered behind closed doors than has been said, but it seemed to be a case of a couple of zealous older ladies wanting to make sure the spirit behind the electoral system, ie everyone's right to cast a vote, was being upheld.
If they were aware of that law, that it was a no no, then that was very clumsy of them and they deserved to be reprimanded. Otherwise, given the small number of votes involved, you would send them off from court with a caution. Irrespective, you wouldn't want to put the incident up as evidence to support a claim of widespread fraud, that would be laughable and weaken the strength of your argument overall IMO.
-
1
- Show all