Yes, Sidney Powell & Rudy Giuliani are "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) as they hold a press conference to utter and publish accusations that "The Elected Ones" of the politically stratified districts under John Conyers, Jr. were rift with public corruption.
I say we investigate!
Or, have we already?
I say Sidney and Rudy should go ask Rashida if there is still political corruption of criminal activities still going on in her congressional district.
Oh, Sidney and Rudy should go ask Rashida to call for an investigation into these alleged treasonous activities of Detroit by filing, first, with the U.S. Committee on Ethics.
Drats!
I forgot, that was already done, quite a few times, if I correctly recall.
Anyway, just watch them do the legal dilatory distraction dance, because we are already in Detroit, just watching the world realize, that the heavens are falling because this is about gerrymandering, or rather, stealin' the children, land & vote.
Watch Sidney and Rudy not say his name as they speak upon Detroit and Voting Rights, while demanding due process, but not for my Sweetie.
A: Because they and their co-conspirators did not want to be uncloaked for interfering in the 2020, 2018, 2016, 2014, 2012, 2010 Electoral College, but, hey, what do I know?
Always remember, the President is elected through the Electoral College, not the Popular Vote, so be a part of this historic investigation and go vote, we need the data.
Tyler Technologies has finally decided to paid a ransom to obtain a decryption key and recover files encrypted in a recent ransomware attack.
Tyler Technologies, Inc. is the largest provider of software to the United States public sector. At the end of September, the company disclosed a ransomware attack and its customers reported finding suspicious logins and previously unseen remote access tools on their networks.
The ransomware attack took place on September 23, the threat actors breached the network of the company and deployed the malware.
Tyler notified law enforcement and hired a forensics firm to investigate the incident and determine the extent of the incident.
Immediately after the attack company representatives declared that the incident only impacted the internal network and phone systems.
Some reports circulating online speculate the company was infected with the RansomExx ransomware.
The RansomEXX is human-operated ransomware, this means that attackers manually infected the systems after gained access to the target network.
In June 2020, the same ransomware was employed in an attack on the Texas Department of Transportation, in September it infected the systems at the IPG Photonics high-performance laser developer.
According to BleepingComputer, which cited a source informed on the event, Tyler Technologies paid a ransom of an unspecified amount to receive the decryption key and recover encrypted files.
“When the ransomware encrypted Tyler Technologies’ files, they appended an extension similar to ‘.tylertech911-f1e1a2ac.'” reported BleepingComputer.
“To prove that the decryptor was valid, BleepingComputer was able to decrypt encrypted files [1, 2] uploaded to VirusTotal at the time of the ransomware attack.”
When decrypted, the Arin.txt file contained a list of IP ranges used by the company.
Experts pointed out that many school districts, court systems, and local and statement governments in the United States uses Tyler Technologies software, this means that the disclosure of data stolen during the ransomware attack could have serious consequences.
For this reason, the company decided to pay the ransom.
The FBI does not support paying a ransom in response to a ransomware attack. Paying a ransom doesn’t guarantee you or your organization will get any data back. It also encourages perpetrators to target more victims and offers an incentive for others to get involved in this type of illegal activity.
A laptop and several memory sticks used to program Philadelphia’s voting machines were stolen from a city warehouse in East Falls, officials confirmed Wednesday, setting off a scramble to investigate and to ensure the machines had not been compromised.
Though it remains unclear when the equipment was stolen, sources briefed on the investigation said the items vanished this week. The laptop belonged to an on-site employee for the company that supplies the machines. It and the USB drives were the only items believed to have been taken.
“We are confident,” said Nick Custodio, a deputy to Lisa Deeley, chair of the city commissioners, who oversee elections, “that this incident will not in any way compromise the integrity of the election.”
But behind the scenes, they fretted about how President Donald Trump and his allies might use the news to cast doubt on the integrity of the city’s elections in light of false claims and conspiracy theories he cited during Tuesday’s presidential debate.
The commissioners initially refused to confirm the theft or that an investigation had been opened. They only did so after The Inquirer informed them it would be reporting the incident based on sources who were not authorized to publicly discuss it.
Philadelphia police referred all questions to Mayor Jim Kenney’s office.
“Since being informed of the incident, I have immediately committed to making necessary police resources available to investigate this incident and find the perpetrators. I have also committed to the city commissioners additional resources to provide enhanced security at the warehouse going forward,” Kenney said in a statement. “This matter should not deter Philadelphians from voting, nor from having confidence in the security of this election.”
Trump, who trails former Vice President Joe Biden in Pennsylvania polls, has sought to cast doubt on the integrity of the election and has specifically targeted Philadelphia, falsely saying Tuesday that Republican poll watchers had been turned away by the city’s election staff.
His rhetoric has alarmed experts and voting rights advocates, who say the president is undermining public confidence in the electoral system and inappropriately politicizing the democratic process.
Many details surrounding the stolen technology in Philadelphia remained unclear Wednesday, including how the equipment was taken, whether there are any suspects, and whether any machines had been compromised.
Custodio, the deputy to Deeley, said officials ensured the stolen laptop had been disabled remotely after the theft was discovered to prevent it from being used and added that it “did not have any of our election material on it.”
His statement did not address the stolen memory sticks, which are used to program the machines in advance of an election, including setting the design of the ballots.
The flash drives are encrypted to prevent tampering, and specifically matched with individual voting machines, said a spokesperson for Election Systems & Software, the voting machine vendor, adding: “Upon programming, these encryption keys ‘marry’ the USB with the machine, and if placed in another machine, it will cause an error and the machine will not work.”
Philadelphia has 3,750 of the ExpressVote XL touchscreen voting machines, and elections staff have begun programming them so they are ready to use on Nov. 3. The flash drives are inserted into the top of the machines; some of them are used to record the electronic votes used for unofficial results on election night, but it was unclear whether those stolen served that function.
Once a machine has been set up, it’s closed with a numbered seal. That means that any voting machines that are opened after being programmed should be identifiable because they would have broken seals. The commissioners have begun checking all the seals on the machines, which are numbered to prevent them from being opened and simply replaced, Custodio said, to ensure they have not been tampered with.
Sources familiar with the investigation said late Wednesday that during the review, officials found several machines had the wrong seal numbers, but Custodio said they believe the discrepancies were due to a logging error in recording the numbers and did not indicate that the machines had been compromised.
Those machines, he said, “will be thoroughly examined, wiped, and tested just to be sure.”
Philadelphia’s voting machines are fairly new, used for the first time last November. Gov. Tom Wolf ordered every voting machine in Pennsylvania, including those in Philadelphia, be replaced in advance of the 2020 election with more-secure machines that leave a paper trail that can be audited or even individually recounted by hand.
That means there’s a paper record of every vote cast, officials said. In the event of an audit or recount, it is the text on the ballots that is counted, not the bar codes or the electronic tallies.
“All voting systems have voter-verified paper ballots, which can be audited or recounted and are the official vote of record,” Wanda Murren, spokesperson for the Pennsylvania Department of State, said in a statement. “We are confident that Philadelphia, working with the department and our many partners, will be able to conduct a secure and fair election for its voters on Nov. 3.”
The discovery of the theft came during a particularly bad week for Philadelphia’s elections officials.
On Tuesday, the city opened its first-ever satellite elections offices to allow voters to cast mail ballots in person — and the statewide voter database went down moments after the celebratory news conference. That afternoon, Trump falsely accused Philadelphia of blocking his poll watchers from the offices, and again put a target on the city by repeating the claims during the presidential debate.
Voting via mail ballots has begun in Philadelphia, including at the satellite elections offices opened Tuesday, which city and state officials do not consider to be polling locations. .
Still, Trump said falsely on Twitter and in the debate that his campaign’s poll watchers had been blocked from observing early voting, accused the city of corruption, and encouraged his supporters to monitor in-person voting.
A lawyer for the campaign sent a letter to the commissioners late Tuesday threatening legal action if they are not allowed to observe the elections offices.
City officials are urging anyone with information on the stolen laptop and voting machine memory sticks to contact the Philadelphia police at 215-686-TIPS.
Defendant G. Gordon Liddy has filed a renewed motion to transfer this case to the District of Columbia. The motion will be granted.
This case arises out of allegedly defamatory remarks that Liddy made about plaintiff Ida Maxwell Wells. Liddy has publicly articulated a theory that the Watergate burglary was prompted by a desire to obtain information about a call-girl ring being operated at the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee. According to the theory espoused by Liddy, Maureen Dean, John Dean's wife, is said to have been one of the call girls. Pictures of Maureen Dean and the other call girls allegedly were kept in Wells' desk. Dean allegedly instigated the break-in to recover the photographs.
The Deans filed an action for defamation against Liddy and others in 1992 based upon Liddy's public statements about the call-girl theory and other alleged libels against John Dean. The case was originally instituted in California but was transferred to the District of Columbia upon a motion to transfer filed by Liddy. Wells instituted the present action in 1997. Liddy moved to transfer it to the District of Columbia as well. Initially, I denied the motion. Two factors figured heavily in my decision. First, the Dean case was then dormant and had been for several years. Second, Wells asserted that she "has a very simple case" and that the "case does not depend upon any testimony from the Deans. . . ."
Circumstances have changed since I denied Liddy's original motion to transfer. Wells has now twice named Maureen Dean as a witness despite her prior representation that her case does not depend upon the testimony of the Deans. Although Wells has withdrawn Mrs. Dean's name from the witness list on both occasions, the interrelatedness between this case and at least a portion of the case instituted by the Deans in the District of Columbia has now become apparent. More importantly, the Dean case is no longer dormant. It has been reassigned to Judge Emmett Sullivan who has set a firm trial date of May 5, 2000.
Wells argues that I cannot transfer this case to the District of Columbia because it could not have been instituted there originally, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), since venue and personal jurisdiction over Liddy are lacking in the District of Columbia. This argument is unpersuasive. Liddy has substantial contacts with and engages in a persistent course of conduct in the District of Columbia. Also, the original complaint alleged acts of defamation committed over an Internet website maintained by an organization located in the District and through Liddy's nationwide radio shows. Moreover, prior to Wells bringing suit, Liddy had already purposely availed himself of the jurisdiction of the District of Columbia by initiating the transfer of the Dean litigation. In addition, the federal district judge in California found it was appropriate to transfer the Dean case to the District of Columbia.
I also note that the events underlying the Watergate burglary (in which Liddy was personally involved) occurred in the District of Columbia.
Therefore, this case can be transferred to the District of Columbia. The remaining question is whether it should be transferred. In making this determination I must consider a variety of factors, including the plaintiff's choice of forum, the convenience of counsel and the witnesses, the relative ease of access to sources of proof, and the public interest. See, e.g.,Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501, 508-09 (1947); Dickens v. United States, 862 F. Supp. 91, 92 (D. Md. 1994). The first of these factors obviously weighs against transfer; plaintiff has chosen to bring her action here in Maryland. The second and third factors weigh slightly in favor of transfer since lead counsel for both parties have their offices in the District of Columbia, many of the witnesses live in the District of Columbia area, and none of the witnesses live in the Baltimore area. However, since the District of Columbia and Baltimore are so close to one another, this factor is negligible.
I find the public interest factor dispositive. There is some overlap between this case and the Dean case, and it may be that they should be consolidated. Liddy vigorously argues that they should be; Wells argues just as strongly to the contrary. These conflicting positions essentially boil down to this: Liddy asserts that he should not be subjected to the cost of litigating (and to the risk of inconsistent results) in two different cases that arise, at least in part, from the same nucleus of facts. Wells acknowledges (as she must) that one aspect of the Deans' claims arises, as do her claims, from Liddy's public statements promoting the call-girl theory of the Watergate burglary. She points out, however, that the Deans' claims involve many other issues as well (apparently arising out of Liddy's broad assertions that John Dean committed "massive perjury.") Wells understandably does not wish her discrete claims to be eclipsed or compromised in the shadow of the larger Dean case.
Wells also expresses a concern that her costs of litigation will be much greater if she becomes embroiled in the trial of the Dean case since it is estimated to last longer than her own trial. While this may be true, a countervailing factor is that Wells' counsel is also local counsel for the Deans and will be participating in the trial of the Dean case in any event.
It would seem to be in the interest of the economic use of judicial resources for the two cases to be consolidated if they can justly be tried together. However, in transferring this action to the District of Columbia, I am expressing no view as to whether consolidation is appropriate. I have no jurisdiction over the Dean case and am not sufficiently knowledgeable about the Deans' claims to know whether Wells would be unfairly prejudiced by a single trial. It is clear to me, however, that it is in the public interest to have the case transferred so that Judge Sullivan, who has been actively presiding over the Dean case and has become fully familiar with it, can be given an opportunity to decide whether consolidation would be appropriate. If Judge Sullivan decides in favor of consolidation, the single trial can go forward in May. If, on the other hand, he decides that consolidation is inappropriate, Wells can file a motion to transfer the case back to Maryland, the forum of her original choice, on the ground that the sole reason for my transfer was to allow Judge Sullivan to rule on the consolidation issue.
Of course, it would be up to Judge Sullivan to decide a motion to re-transfer the case to Maryland. However, lest there be any uncertainty on this score, I affirmatively state that I would be fully amenable to having the case transferred back to Maryland in the event Judge Sullivan decides against consolidation. If it were not for the fact that I believe it to be in the public interest for Judge Sullivan to consider the consolidation issue, I would have respected Wells' choice of forum and ruled against the transfer. Moreover, it is against my own sense of responsibility to ask another judge to try a case that is properly before me. To that end, I will hold on my calendar the September 11, 2000 trial date I have set, so that, in the event Judge Sullivan denies consolidation and decides the case should be transferred back to Maryland, he and the parties can be assured that no unnecessary delay will occur.
A separate order effecting the ruling made in this memorandum is being entered herewith.
ORDER
For the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum, it is, this ______ day of December 1999
ORDERED
1. Defendant's renewed motion to transfer is granted; and
2. This case is transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
The last time I checked, the 2018 Special Election has yet to be certified.
Then, there is that situation with the 2016 General Election certification.
So......
Riddle me this:
If 72% of the election cycle vote count cannot be replicated in a recount, something Jill Stein experienced in Michigan, then, what was the vote tally?
See, the tally and the vote are two, separate and exclusive datasets.
Then, we are dealing with Janice Winfrey.
So, how can one certify the 2020 Primary Election, when no one knows how many people voted?
But, then again, Jocelyn Benson likes to make up stuff all the time.
About to testify at a virtual hearing before the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security titled “Protecting America's Democracy: Ensuring Every Vote Counts." Tune in to the livestream now at https://t.co/CZjoFME4Rzpic.twitter.com/AlPGVYN9jJ
Lansing — The Michigan Board of State Canvassers is requiring Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson to exercise her oversight powers this November in Detroit after widespread problems counting ballots in the city's primary and ahead of a pivotal presidential election.
But Benson, a Democrat from Detroit, said in a Monday interview that her efforts wouldn't focus on just the state's largest city. The Secretary of State's office is going to do a "deep dive" in the coming days to identify additional ways to support multiple cities across Michigan as they prepare for a surge of absentee voting this fall, she said.
"I am confident that we’re going to have record turnout this fall and the results of our elections are going to be accurate,” Benson said.
Maurice Brown, 54, of Detroit, votes in precinct \232 at Greater Emmanuel Institutional church this morning during primary voting in Detroit, Tuesday, August 4, 2020.
About 72% of the absentee voting precincts in Detroit's primary election had ballot totals that didn't match the number of ballots reported in poll books. This situation would likely mean — under state law — those precincts couldn't be recounted in a close race, which is driving concerns among officials for the general election when the eyes of the nation could be on Michigan.
President Donald Trump won the state by 10,704 votes in 2016, his smallest margin of victory nationwide. Former First Lady Michelle Obama said at last week's Democratic convention that it averaged to two votes per precinct in Michigan.
"I don’t really care what the issue is," said Julie Matuzak, a Democratic member of the Board of State Canvassers. "I care that this not happen in November.”
On Monday morning, the board of two Democrats and two Republicans unanimously certified statewide election results for the Aug. 4 primary but included language in the certification that seeks to ensure that Benson gets further involved in supervising what happens with the general election in the state's largest city.
The board approved a requirement that Benson exercise "supervisory control" over the November election in Detroit. State law already provides the secretary of state supervisory control over local election officials, and it's unclear what specific changes in the administration of the election will occur.
"I don't think we're in the position to add the detail right now," said Norm Shinkle, a Republican member of the Board of State Canvassers.
Matuzak, who previously called the situation in the primary "appalling," said she wanted regular reports on what's happening in Detroit ahead of the general election. And Shinkle said he wanted to see a list of requirements from the Secretary of State's Office for the state, Detroit Clerk Janice Winfrey and election workers in the city to meet "if Detroit's going to run their own election."
"Otherwise, the secretary of state walks in and runs it," Shinkle said.
Winfrey has connected problems in the primary to election workers who were on the job for more than 20 hours and to a record surge of absentee ballots that they couldn't begin counting until Election Day.
In the Monday interview, Benson reiterated her calls for the Republican-controlled state Legislature to allow election workers to begin processing absentee ballots — getting them ready to be counted — before Election Day to help deal with an onslaught of mail-in voting amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
While it's not the entire issue in Detroit, it's a "significant piece of the challenge that occurred," she said.
"This is in many ways a reflection of the potential for human error that overworked and stressed election workers can succumb to when you have the time crunch we've been warning about for nearly a year and a half," Benson said.
Some Republican lawmakers have opposed the proposed change because of concerns that it could lead to ballots being counted before voting is over, potentially giving one side an advantage.
Jonathan Brater, the state's elections director, said it isn't logistically possible for the state to run the election in Detroit but added that there are things that need to be done "much better" in the city.
For the primary, poll books weren't updated as absentee ballots came in, some absentee ballots were allocated to the wrong precincts and ballots were placed in incorrect containers, Brater said.
"We are going to be taking a more active role, both in the recruitment and the training of election inspectors," he added.
About 72% of the 503 absentee voting precincts in Detroit's primary elections had absentee ballot totals that didn't match the number of ballots reported in poll books.
Overall — for absentee voting and Election Day precincts — 46% of Detroit's precincts had ballot totals that were out of balance for the Aug. 4 primary without provided explanations from election workers, meaning they likely couldn't be recounted under state law. The problems spurred frustration and questions from election officials at both the county and state level.
Asked if it would be a failure if Detroit repeated the 46% mismatch rate in November, Benson said her goal is to ensure there is "complete security of the process."
"I am focused on having successful elections in November," she added. "And to me, success would be defined by an accurate count of all of the ballots that are cast."
The Wayne County Board of Canvassers approved a resolution last week, asking the Secretary of State's Office to investigate the "training and processes" used in Detroit's primary election. The resolution asked the office to provide a monitor to "supervise the training and administration" of absentee voter counting boards in Detroit for the general election.
The Wayne County Board of Canvassers approved this resolution asking the Michigan Secretary of State's office to investigate "the training and processes" used by Detroit for the 2020 primary election.
During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, a record 1.6 million people in Michigan voted by mail for the Aug. 4 primary, which itself set a new record for overall turnout of 2.5 million voters.
Winfrey noted the vast majority of the absentee voting precincts in the city with totals that didn't balance were less than three ballots off, plus or minus.
Detroit had problems with precinct count mismatches in the November 2016 election. Election officials couldn’t reconcile vote totals for 59% of precincts in the city during a countywide canvass of vote results with most of the issues involving too many votes.
Monday morning's meeting of the Board of State Canvassers was a continuation of a meeting that happened on Friday, when technological problems interrupted and forced officials to schedule a new meeting.
During the Friday meeting, all four members of the board voiced frustration with the results of Detroit's primary. Republican state board member Aaron Van Langevelde said the situation was "very troubling" and "unacceptable."
"A repeat performance is going to seriously undermine the public's confidence in the general election," he said.
Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson testified before the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security on Aug. 28.
Her testimony focused on how to protect America’s democracy and ensure that every vote counts this November, according to Benson.
During the testimony, Benson discussed the statewide primary on Aug. 4 that shattered the previous record for total absentee ballots cast.
“Between a global pandemic and what seems near constant and escalating rhetoric and misinformation, 2020 has brought historic pressures on our elections systems,” said Secretary Benson. “In Michigan our statewide primary has served as a blueprint for running safe, secure, accessible elections during the COVID-19 pandemic, while also highlighting critical needs that, if addressed, can put every state on a path towards successful November elections.”
Benson also spoke for the need for partnership and additional support from state and federal officials to replicate what she says was a successful August election in November.
She also called on the federal government to fully fund the postal service and provide another round of funding to states to shore up election preparations.
“Democracy is a team sport, and if we work together we can succeed in holding elections this fall that are secure, on schedule, and an accurate reflection of the will of the people.” said Secretary Benson. “It’s possible, it’s doable, and our voters should demand no less from their government.”
"We are the demon chasers" was the coined theme to kick off the movement.
Now, what this "commitment" is, one can only assume it has to do with John Conyers, Jr., for the simple fact that not one person mentioned his name in speaking upon Voting Rights.
Executing such a daunting task of not saying his name, may be what is the commitment.
Reverend Charles Williams III of Al Sharpton's National Action Network was the first speaker, so his silence should tell you something.
"No justice, no peace" was the mantra throughout the event as they referenced the Civil Rights leaders of yore, and mystically did not once, ever, say my Sweetie's name.
"So, let's march on in the name of our ancestors" was the call to action of Kamala Harris, even though she failed to give any attribution to the legacy of the man who championed Voting Rights.
Let us watch the process in real time, then, compare this same process with the 2018, 2016, 2014 & 2012, possibly even 2010 and 2008, but, hey, what do I know?
Each of the 83 Boards of County Canvassers in the State of Michigan is currently composed of two Republican members and two Democratic members, appointed by the County Board of Commissioners to four year terms. The Board members are responsible for canvassing the votes cast within the county they serve. The Board members certify elections for all local, countywide and district offices which are contained entirely within the county they serve. The Board members are responsible for inspecting the county's ballot containers every four years. The County Canvass Board also conducts recounts for all units of government within the county they serve.
The current members of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers are:
The board charged with certifying election results in Michigan's largest county is asking Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson's office to investigate after problems with tracking ballots in Detroit's primary, which one official described as a "perfect storm."
Counts for ballots in about 72% of Detroit's absentee voting precincts for the Aug. 4 primary election were out of balance without an explanation, according to information presented Tuesday to the Wayne County Board of Canvassers. The number of ballots tracked in precinct poll books did not match the number of ballots counted.
The election results weren't incorrect, said Jonathan Kinloch, a Democrat and one of the canvassing board's four members. But, he said, something had gone wrong in the process of tracking ballots precinct by precinct.
The Wayne County Board of Canvassers approved this resolution asking the Michigan Secretary of State's office to investigate "the training and processes" used by Detroit for the 2020 primary election.
Having balanced precincts is particularly important in Michigan because precincts whose poll books don’t match with ballots can’t be recounted, according to state law. Instead, the original election results would stand.
"It was a perfect storm," Kinloch said.
The "storm" involved a record number of absentee ballots being cast in Michigan's primary and seasoned election workers not feeling it was safe to help with administering the election because of COVID-19, he added.
The Wayne County board is asking Benson, a Detroit resident, to investigate "the training and processes used by the City of Detroit" in the primary election. The board also requested that the first-term Democrat appoint a state monitor to oversee the counting of absentee ballots in the general election.
The Board of State Canvassers is set to meet at 2 p.m. Friday to certify election results from around Michigan.
You cannot certify a state election if there are valid challenges formally grieved. That is called due process. Egads! Whatever shall they do?
The developments in Wayne County come as national attention has focused on voting by mail, which President Donald Trump has repeatedly criticized in recent weeks, and as Michigan experiences its first statewide elections with no-reason absentee voting after voter approval of a 2018 constitutional amendment.
Detroit had problems with precinct count mismatches in the November 2016 election. Election officials couldn’t reconcile vote totals for 59% of precincts in the city during a countywide canvass of vote results.
Those votes couldn't be recounted when Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein demanded a statewide recount following Donald Trump's initial 13,000-vote victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton. A recount was started but stopped by the courts when Stein was ruled ineligible for a recount request because she had no chance at victory.
Deep in my heart, I truly hope the Biden campaign selects the stealin' the children, land & vote spokestoken, Stacey Abrams, to be his Vice Presidential Candidate, just because it will spotlight her life of selling her soul for a bottomless bucket of fried chicken to bleachbit my Sweetie's legacy.
This is not about race, this is about fraud as there exists the question if these overseas territories U.S. voters are actually real people.
There have been questions raised as to the validity of existence of some of our troops.
The delegates are advocating resegregation of bringing back the Plessy ruling of "Separate, yet equal", which overturns Brown v. Board of Education, which brings back segregation into human asset management databases of corporate parental rights in ownership of their chattel.
I simply do not understand why congress holds all these chuckin' & jivin' congressional hearings and call for task forces to simply avoid discussing anything remotely relevant to the issues surrounding voting rights, like gerrymandering, or, more readily understood as stealin' the children, land & vote.
How about we start talking about those land patents.
I seem to recall lots of fake ass LLCs registered in the Virgin Islands which ended up putting their sticky hands on Detroit Land Bank Authority properties, but, hey, what do I know?
To expand Americans' access to the ballot box, reduce the influence of big money in politics, and strengthen ethics rules for public servants, and for other purposes.
NASHVILLE, TN (WSMV) - A passion for life and civil rights drove C.T Vivian.
Vivian died Friday, but his legacy won't soon be forgotten.
In 1960, he came to Nashville in the middle of the downtown sit-ins where blacks were refused service at lunch counters and even met with violence.
“We stood up to it because it was evil, I don’t mean it was bad it was evil.” Vivian said.
Vivian stood at the courthouse next to then-Nashville Mayor Ben West. One Fisk student, Diane Nash, proceeded to ask Mayor West how he could support such discrimination.
He could not!
Shortly after the restaurants opened to all, Vivian pushed intensely for equal rights for the remainder of his life.
His efforts earned him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the countries highest civilian honor, from President Obama.
The only regret Vivian had was not starting the fight sooner.
“The only thing we did wrong was stay in the wilderness a day too long," he said.
He threatened me if I was ever to leave my Sweetie.
It was cute, but he never showed up for the Ghetto Ass Funeral, nor did he reach out to me, nor did he ever stand up to advocate due process for my Sweetie when he knew the truth.
Either Noel Fransico is going to stand up and bear witness to the war crimes of gerrymandering, or rather stealin' the children, land & vote in his JonesDay stint with Kevyn Orr, as the first Emergency Manager transposable model for the Privateers to invade and conquer the United States, or he shall take his role as a co-conspiritor in the planned and coordinated attack on Michigan Government, by advocating for that fake ass Detroit Bankruptcy, where everyone who was swagging a cross around their necks got settlement for some fake ass debt against the City of Detroit by getting settlement in quiet title properties, stolen, through fake ass Rock Financial, et al, Corporate Shape Shifters through the Perkins Coie Sucks Detroit Land Bank Authority, which is was the *russian/israeli/ukrainian* election interference because they money launder through child welfare organizations to fund political campaigns.
Boo Boo Barr still does not get the fact that you cannot promulgate, on behalf of foreign operatives who wish to overthrow the United States, the privatization of our children, land and vote with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, under the guise of what these "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) are cloaking as Corporate Parental Rights, or rather the residuals of the peculiar institutions, because institutions are corporations, where, corporations are people, and, as such, demand parental rights, under another one of their fake ass laws they want to lube up with prolifer propaganda, slither into existence, for the purposes of fraudulently billing Medicaid, in furtherance of the best interests of the child, because children are chattel, legally acquired through default asset forfeiture laws for hailing from the population of "The Poors" (always said with clinched teeth) when it comes to maximizing profits through trafficking tiny humans, and their souls, through the children's trusts.
Solicitor General of the United States Noel Francisco announces his departure from the Department of Justice, effective as of July 3, 2020.
“Solicitor General Noel Francisco has represented the United States superbly before the Supreme Court for the past three Terms,” said Attorney General William P. Barr. Boo Boo Barr lies because Noel was mean to my Sweetie. “Arguing before the Court 17 times on behalf of the federal government, he has been a principled and persuasive advocate on issues ranging from the separation of powers to religious liberty to vigorous enforcement of federal immigration law. His skilled advocacy has been instrumental to historic victories on behalf of the President’s national security authority, the free speech rights of public employees, and property owners’ access to federal courts, among many other significant accomplishments. Away from the courtroom, he has been a steady and respected leader for the Office of the Solicitor General, a wise counselor to me and others in the Executive Branch, and a good friend. I am grateful for his tireless service to his country and the Department of Justice, and I wish him well in his future endeavors.”
“It has been the honor of my professional career to serve as the Solicitor General of the United States,” said Solicitor General Noel Francisco. “Representing the United States before the Supreme Court is one of the greatest jobs in the law and an opportunity for which I am deeply grateful. I am proud of the significant success the Office of Solicitor General has had in advancing the rule of law of in our great nation alongside the dedicated men and women at the Department of Justice — some of the finest lawyers I have known.”
Since his appointment in 2017, Noel Francisco has served over three Supreme Court Terms as Solicitor General and has represented the United States before the nation’s highest court in more than 150 merit cases.
Under Solicitor General Francisco’s leadership, the United States consistently and successfully advocated in support of our nation’s core Constitutional principles including religious liberty, separation of powers, first amendment freedoms and enforcement of immigration laws. Over the course of his impressive tenure as Solicitor General, Francisco argued before the Supreme Court 17 times. Significant victories include:
Trump v. Hawaii: upholding the President’s restrictions on travel from countries that present national-security risks.
Janus v. AFSCME: holding that the First Amendment prohibits requiring public employees who decline to join a union to pay union dues (overruling a 1977 decision, Abood v. Detroit Bd. of Education).
Kisor v. Wilkie: significantly limiting judicial deference to agency interpretations of their own regulations while retaining such deference in core applications.
Knick v. Township of Scott: allowing property owners to bring claims for government takings in federal court without first suing in state court (overruling a 1985 decision, Williamson County Regional Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank). Gerrymandering
Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Comm’n: concluding that Colorado violated the Free Exercise Clause in enforcing its antidiscrimination law against a baker who declined on religious grounds to create a custom cake for a same-sex wedding. Corporate Parental Rights
In overseeing federal litigation, Solicitor General Francisco made strategic use of emergency motions to defend important federal programs against improper nationwide injunctions. To that end, the government obtained relief from the Supreme Court on major immigration initiatives, including the travel proclamation, restrictions on asylum abuses, allocation of funds to build a border wall, and revisions to the definition of a public charge. As a result of these successes, some lower courts have begun to curb the erroneous use of nationwide injunctions.
The Office of the Solicitor General and entire Department of Justice thank Solicitor General Francisco’s service and leadership.
