Maine state Rep. James White (R-Guilford) has filed an objection to the selection of Troy Jackson by party delegates to replace Graham Platner on the ballot. The basis of the challenge is that Jackson previously lost in the primary and, under Maine law, cannot appear twice in the same election. It will be a tough case to make, but he would seemingly be making it to the perfect Secretary of State: Shenna Bellows.
Bellows, who was herself a candidate for the spot, previously adopted a wildly unfounded interpretation to try to block President Donald Trump from appearing on the ballot. In comparison, this demand is modest. Yet, the expectation is that Bellows will go from an unrestrained impressionist to a narrow textualist in this ballot controversy.
I was highly critical of Bellows when she moved to remove Trump from the ballot as an absurd interpretation used to pander to the perpetually irate. A judge in Maine quickly stopped her. The Supreme Court later effectively downsized insurrection claims to a matter of trespass.
Ultimately, all of these challenges, including the ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court, were rejected unanimously by the Supreme Court.
Bellows then ran for governor and later the Senate after Platner’s implosion by parading her unconstitutional action as a qualification. Presumably, Bellows will recuse herself given her effort to get the nod from the party to replace Platner.
Rep. White is arguing that, while Maine does not have a “sore loser” provision barring successive appearances on ballots after losing a primary, the state law implicitly created such a barrier for Jackson.
In the letter below, White argues that “The vacancy process exists to fill an unexpected vacancy, not to provide a second opportunity for a candidate who already sought and lost another office during the same election process.”
He is relying on Title 21-A, which bars a person from filing as a candidate for more than one office at any election. Since another provision limits the party committee to filing a vacancy with a “qualified person,” he is arguing that the law constructively bars Jackson.
It is unlikely that White will prevail in the challenge, but Bellows will have to adopt a distinctly more narrow approach to such challenges than she did to bar Trump from the ballot.
In the earlier controversy, Bellows bases her unprecedented action on the conclusion that the riot on January 6th was an actual “insurrection.” Even after losing repeatedly in that interpretation, she continued to maintain the fiction.
The effort to remove Jackson would seem almost trivial in comparison to Bellows’ earlier effort to remove Trump.
Here is the letter:
The legal theory seems to be that political parties are required to stick with the candidate who has dropped out of a primary, which in turn allows the party to pick whomever they want votes for the drop-out to be given to, as long as the replacement does not appear twice on the ballot. Time to re-examine whether a primary is actually an “election” as opposed to a private political party event improperly established by government.
It’s a good question. When did Harris run for VP? Was she an appointment by Biden? When was she elected as a candidate for president? The entire system is haywire. Break the law then that becomes the law.
OT
As I said in an earlier post, some judges–particularly Autopen judges–are do infected with hubris they think they can act as the executive and legislature and even as mini Supreme Courts. Here’s one who seems to think Supreme Court decisions have no impact on him.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-judge-blocking-ethiopian-deportations-despite-scotus-ruling-clashed-ice
When Leftist Democrats were against war, advocated peace, love, and swooned to John Lennon’s song, “Imagine”.
Leftist Democrats today are all about destruction, violence and war in the streets where ever their blue state politics dominate.
Edwin Starr singing the song originally written by MoTown producers for “The Temptations” but was never made into a single because their conservative fans wanted war.
🎶 Ooh, war
Is an enemy to all mankind
The thought of war blows my mind
War has caused unrest
Within the younger generation
Induction, then destruction
Who wants to die?
Ooh war, Good God (h’uh) y’all!
(What is it good for?)
Absolutely (nothin’) 🎶
“but was never made into a single because their conservative fans wanted war”?? IT WAS A SINGLE AND I HAVE A COPY. QUIT LYING!!!!!!!
YOU NEED A PICTURE OF THE SINGLE ??? IN MY 45 COLLECTION!!!! 100% FACT!!! JUST PLAYED IT LAST WEEK.
…but was never made into a single because their conservative fans wanted war”
English is a fine language but it requires you know grammar. Typing all words in CAPS only makes you look like an unhinged lonely old man.
The word “their” is a pronoun that is used as an indefinite singular antecedent in place of the proper noun to which is refers, such as in this case the music group, “The Temptations”. Hence a single was never made by the Temptations.
Pro-tip: watch the video for the link I provided. It shows a 45 RPM single record of Edwin Starr’s version, not the Temptations.
this is why our culture has collapsed. It’s not because of the Muslims, the immigrants, the Left or the trans fruitcakes. Rather it is because of every day Americans becoming satiated gluttonous, slothful, prideful, wrathful cretins who aren’t removed from the gene pool fast enough, a flaw within evolution.
“English is a fine language but it requires you know grammar. “
That sentence is incorrect. It requires a comma before ‘but’ and the addition of ‘to’, so it reads: ‘requires you to know.
“When Leftist Democrats were against war, advocated peace, love, and swooned to John Lennon’s song, “Imagine”.
Even Estovir’s first sentence is not a complete sentence.
Estovir, “their” as used by you (“their conservative fans”), is NOT a possessive pronoun. It is a possessive adjective, or in today’s teaching, a possessive determiner.
Here is an example of possessive pronoun: “the conservative fans were theirs.”
What does God say about correcting others when you yourself are wrong?
Seek help, soon! You are dripping with hatred for “everyday Americans.” Are you an “everyday American,” or are you a special American?
They remain in a gene pool elsewhere, Estovir. Bad genes are errors cased by damage.
Neat song. I liked it when it came out. As a song. But sometimes war is the lesser evil and the better choice.
History has many examples, but the current problem with Iran serves well enough. Iran under the mullahs must never have a nuclear weapon. Never.
That is the American goal. But I prefer the Israeli goal of total eradication of any regime or its proxy that could commit and gloat over the October 7 atrocities.
Sometimes evil is so rank that it cannot be allowed to exist. Prayer or strongly worded letters won’t work as well as bullets and bombs.
Although as to prayer, the IDF and the US military may be the means chosen to answer our prayers. God bless and protect them.
Mentally ill Estovir, a special American, would have fought for the British in that time.
“…a wildly unfounded interpretation….”
– Professor Turley
_____________________
That is precisely what the Supreme Court typically issues, “a wildly unfounded interpretation.”
Back to the beginning of the communization of America and “Crazy Abe” Lincoln, who arbitrarily decided the following:
“Because secession is not prohibited, secession is prohibited.”
Lincoln’s utterly incorrect, illicit, and unconstitutional decision was subsequently upheld a “reasonable time” later (i.e. 8 years) in Texas v. White, proving the political nature of the Supreme Court case; it took place on April 12, the date the Civil War began.
Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase undertook “a wildly unfounded interpretation” and claimed the United States of America was an “indissoluble union”—ask your wife if your union is indissoluble.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
AI Overview
An objective legal and historical assessment reveals that Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase’s decision in Texas v. White (1869) was a politically motivated exercise in legal fiction designed to retroactively justify the outcome of the Civil War. Rather than an objective reading of the Constitution’s text or original intent, the ruling used circular logic to claim that an entity made of separate parts could never be separated.
________________________________________________
Now let’s move on to “a wildly unfounded interpretation” of the right to private property or the phrase “…no person shall…be deprived of …property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
How in the world are rent controls, wage controls, price controls, hiring, firing, paying and directing employees, disposition, the power to “claim and exercise dominion,” etc., imposed on American property owners everywhere?
The inverse of private property is communism proven by Karl Marx’s statement, “The theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.”
_____________
5th Amendment
No person shall be…deprived of…property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
And so on, and so on, and so on.
American history is chock full of cases of the preposterous imposition of “a wildly unfounded interpretation,” including that Social Security and Medicare are taxed for as “general Welfare” when they serve only 18.7% of the population—nowhere near the “general” requirement—and the balance of the unconstitutional communist American welfare state.
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.
Abe Lincoln again??? ha ha ha ha ha ha
Do you have a citation for this quote:you used? “Because secession is not prohibited, secession is prohibited.”
Anon, “Back to the beginning of the communization of America and “Crazy Abe” Lincoln, who arbitrarily decided the following: “Because secession is not prohibited, secession is prohibited.”
I haven’t spent much time on this issue but I think the rationale was more like a mutual Will in that the parties that entered the agreement must mutually agree to exit the arrangement.
Maybe we will see how Canada handles secession. But I think that their legal founding was different from ours so it may not be the same legal issue.
Precisely, reprehensible slavery notwithstanding, the CSA did everything correctly. Secession was stated evidently in multiple state constitutional ratification documents.
Anon, Thanks. I didn’t know that. It is worth looking into. Might make a difference.
As to slavery, I have had enough of whining about it. For about six thousand years of civilization it was accepted without objection until the West began to question it and take it apart. It still exists in Africa and other parts of the world and still gets a big yawn. Robert E Lee didn’t like slavery, expected it to fade but thought that they were still better off in America than Africa which Keith Richburg, a black journalist, seems to think as well, saying something like “I know slavery is bad and all that, but thank god my ancestors were brought to America.” As for the work many of the slaves did on plantations, it was much less dangerous and much less threatening to health than most of the jobs men performed where I grew up. Sudden death [including in my own family] was not uncommon and slower death by work related illness [ditto] was also common. By comparison, picking cotton or tobacco, or doing repairs on the farm is easy and safe. They need to stop whining about it and especially stop using it as an excuse for criminal behavior.
Saving democracy by keeping people you don’t like off the ballot one election at a time.
Germany is goose stepping to that approach by trying to keep AfD candidates off the ballot because they might win.
Why will White’s objection to Jackson be “a tough case to make”? I’m not taking a position on this, I’m just curious. White’s reasoning is presented and seems reasonable, at least on a first reading. What is the other side of the argument?
In the U.S., there is a tension in politics between the desire to have only two candidates competing in the general election (to maximize the chances of one of them receiving a majority of the votes) and leaving too much of the decision in the hands of two dominant political parties. Voters consistently complain about having to hold their nose when they vote. Unfortunately, all the implemented and proposed alternatives to our de facto two-party system also have their flaws. When you throw in all-mail voting, where 20% of the ballots are filled out by someone other than the less-motivated voter they were sent to, my confidence in US elections is close to zero. I see little point in voting anymore, to be honest.
This column brings to mind the statement of Sunny Huston a few weeks ago that the American flag makes her feel “uncomfortable”. What a cultural gap exists between ordinary patriotism of J T and fashionable self-aggrandizing victimology.
contributions from china go a long way to justify her sort of ‘mindset’.
The Maine people I have known are socially liberal, yes, but fit certain New England stereotypes. They reduce, reuse, recycle. Not because it’s a trend but because that’s what their parents and grandparents and great grandparents did. it’s bred in the bone. Maine probably invented reduce, reuse, and recycle. There are “get out of my face” and “I’ll do it myself” aspects to the culture. The waste, extravagance, and slobishness that national Democrats have displayed in the state strike me as un-Maine-y. I think Democrat voters may even just stay home on Election Day, not wanting to endorse the Democrats’ wasteful, showy incompetence but also not wanting to vote Republican. Collins should work Republican voter turnout hard.
Patriotism ought to reflect one point of view as to what’s good for the nation as opposed to what’s good for the party. If supporting a Republican Slate dooms Democrat socialism It’s a plus for the nation and the future of their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren, rather than giving it over to ‘Big Brother.
Maine had rank choice voting. Platner won. He dropped out. Why would they not go to the 2nd place winner? What is rank choice voting? Why have it? What is it used for? Why do they need to appoint someone if there was a 2nd place winner?
Ranked choice voting is used to decide the winner of an election. The winner of that election WAS decided; that election is now OVER. The winner subsequently dropped out.
The Democrats now have to select a new candidate. The party gets to decide how to do that (up to a point) and they can arbitrarily select any legally qualified person as their candidate – so they could choose the person who had the 2nd most votes (if that data is available), but they don’t have to. With the great amount of flexiblity at their disposal they’ll decide in a way that they THINK positions them best to win the general election.
Frankly, I’m not sure the public should be subsidizing primary elections anyway. Each party should be able to choose their members and candidates however they like (on their own dime) and be able to disallow people outside their party from having a say in that selection. So long as the party selects a legally qualified candidate let them pick whomever they want.
Amen
He asked about the purpose of ranked elections. Voting for one candidate also yields a ranking. If someone wanted a spare take the candidate and a spare. Jeez
How does that sort of standard and common-sensical election rule make it easier for the democrat elite to appoint who they want over the possible objections of ‘the poors’?
It’s a good point. Why have ranked voting at all. Apparently for no purpose.
I think the legal question here is whether a party primary election for governor is part of a single election for governor that culminates in the general election in November, or whether the party primary is a separate election that, once over, frees losing candidates to run for other offices before the general election for governor takes place. That Maine does not have a “sore loser” law may argue that once the primary is over, the losers may seek other offices if that is still possible.
The letter cites a Supreme Court case in support of the single election theory, but it likely related to a different question. I haven’t yet reviewed it.
Duh,,,,, isn’t that what Turley and White pointed out?
Really: the mainstream dems don’t need the dsa to be tyrannical psychos; in fact, the notion is hilarious and pathetic, and thankfully most of us have functional memories and see through it.
The entire party is a disingenuous train wreck. Tin foil hat me almost thinks the internal conflict has been manufactured to make ‘mainstream’ dems with the same ideas seem righteous to ignorant people. Perhaps not, but either way, tyranny is tyranny. 🤷🏽♂️
“functional memories and see through it….” You sure of that? Look at the comments below.
“I was highly critical of Bellows when she moved to remove Trump from the ballot as an absurd interpretation used to pander to the perpetually irate. A judge in Maine quickly stopped her. The Supreme Court later effectively downsized insurrection claims to a matter of trespass.”
Thought those should be highlighted. 🙂
You thought wrong. As usual. Lack of education will do that.
Oh! Look! Annony is having another one of his mental meltdowns! Cannot even understand what or why I highlighted what I did. Then again, this is the same annony who cannot comprehend simple word problems. 🙂
@Anonymous
OK, accepting your premise: to you, ‘education’ is accepting what other people tell you is the truth, rather than using your own brain to parse events and concepts, and drawing your own conclusions, and you paid for the privilege? Who is the fool, or at least the parents of the fool? If we followed your logic you would not have a free country in which to spout your revelations for we, the unwashed masses. Your parents actually know this; why they failed to instill it in you should p*ss you off at them, not us. At best, in confidence, they will say, ‘Yeah, I love my kid, but they are soft.’.
in what world are your views more important than those of the US supreme court ?
UF did not think wrong – he is correct as a matter of fact
Pi$$ poor education has demaged your ability to reason
JS, the Supreme Court appears to rule the nation rightly or not. The most powerful branch seems to be judiciary. Reality is executive? Idk
President Trump was never charged with insurrection or trespassing. Your post.is nonsense.
Turley’s article fails to mention the reason Bellows tried to remove Trump.
Bellows argued that Donald Trump was constitutionally disqualified from appearing on Maine’s presidential ballot because:
1. Section 3 bars anyone who engaged in insurrection from holding office
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment prohibits individuals from serving as president if they:
previously took an oath to support the Constitution, and
then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the United States, or
“gave aid or comfort” to those who did.
Bellows concluded that Trump’s conduct surrounding January 6 met this threshold.
Even if you believed Trump did nothing to instigate what happened on January 6th. Were he to run again, he would be ineligible for having given aid or comfort to those who did participate. A blanket pardon, including those who assaulted Capitol police officers certainly qualifies as aid or comfort.
I wouldn’t have attempted to remove Trump myself, but the rationale isn’t nearly as absurd as Turley would have you believe.
No Jan 6 rioter was charged with insurrection. Therefore it IS absurd to accuse Trump of supporting insurrectionists. You may not like that but what any of us believe or like isnt the basis of law or constitutionality in this country.
The reasons for disqualification are insurrection or rebellion. Here are tge things defendants were charged with:
Across the 1,575 federal cases tracked by NPR and documented in DOJ filings, charges included:
obstruction of an official proceeding
assault on law enforcement
seditious conspiracy (for Proud Boys and Oath Keepers leaders)
conspiracy
property destruction
unlawful entry
civil disorder
weapons offenses
You may think none of those things count as insurrection or rebellion but I disagree. Insurrection and rebellion have different legal definitions but the activities the defendants engaged in certainly qualify, whether or not prosecutors used that particular word.
The Legal Definitions
1. Federal Statute: 18 U.S.C. § 2383 — “Rebellion or Insurrection”
This is the actual federal crime of insurrection.
It defines insurrection as:
“Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof…”
Key elements:
An uprising against U.S. authority
Active participation, assistance, or incitement
Intent to oppose or overthrow lawful authority
Penalties include:
Up to 10 years in prison
Disqualification from holding federal office
This is the statute people often think DOJ used for January 6 — but DOJ did not charge anyone under §2383.
2. Constitutional Definition: Section 3 of the 14th Amendment
This is the definition used in ballot‑disqualification cases (Maine, Colorado).
Section 3 bars from office anyone who:
“engaged in insurrection or rebellion”
after taking an oath to support the Constitution.
The Constitution does not define the terms directly, but 19th‑century legal practice treated:
Insurrection = violent resistance to U.S. authority
Rebellion = sustained, organized resistance (e.g., the Confederacy)
Courts historically treated “insurrection” as the smaller, “rebellion” as the larger.
3. Supreme Court Usage (historical, not modern)
The Supreme Court has referenced insurrection in Civil War–era cases, defining it as:
“a movement accompanied by acts of violence”
“with the intent to overthrow lawful authority”
These cases are old (1860s–1870s), but they shape how modern courts interpret Section 3.
4. Military Law (Uniform Code of Military Justice)
The UCMJ doesn’t use the word “insurrection,” but it defines related offenses like:
mutiny
sedition
subversion
These involve collective violence or resistance against lawful command authority.
Long list of nonsense
ALL obstruction charges were tossed by SCOTUS
Likely most other charges would eventually have been tossed.
No one cares that a politically biased DOJ engaged in the most egregious lawfare in US history.
While most of us understood that Jack Smith was an incompetently boob from the start – as we are increasingly learning he as also a criminal.
He illegally issued subpoenas with the complicity of Judge Boasberg and then lied to congress about them repeatedly.
And Smith was supposed to be the A team.
The DC J6 protestors were the B team – or more accurately F Troop.
We know they engaged in massive brady violations – the most obvious of which is they lied to the courts and the public about the FBI involvement. They denied most J6 defendants access to the Video of J6 – which was not made public until AFTER democrats lost the house in 2022 – and nearly all the J6ers had been convicted. But it would not have mattered if DOJ had done their jobs properly – defendants faced the most biased judges and juries in the country.
eb – You do not understand how much YOUR egregious lawfare has damaged YOU.
People wer shocked to find you had been spying on churches.
That you were prosecuting the parents of children who had been raped for demanding answers from the schools where they daughters were raped.
That you SWATTED prolife protestors AFTER cases against them had been tossed by multiple courts.
That you repeatedly lied to complicit courts to get warrants and subpeonas.
That you censored the crap out of millions of people over views on subjects that those censored ulitimately proved correct.
We now have left wing nut Mikie Shirely in NJ admitting that 6,600 illegal immigrants were registered to vote and more than 400 actualy voted While DOJ data indicates the numbers for NJ are closer to 38,000
Through the US in ONLY the states that complied with DOJs lawful request for voter registration data – hundreds of thousands of illegals were found registered to vote.
In GA Fulton country has ADMITTED that 381K illegal ballots were counted.
We also know that in 3 separate recount/recanvases that GA got three different results – with the counts off by 30,000 between each recanvass.
Recently Smartmatic Dropped their lawsuit against Mike Lindell – because more recent revelations were going to lead to devastating discovery. Fox screwed up by settling.
Regardless the final word on Left Wing nut lawfare was delivered by the voters in Nov 2024 – and you LOST
You can spray rap about the Biden DOJ and DC courts forever.
You LOST – people do not beleive you
This is because you or those you beleive – Lie over and over and abuse power.
No one cares what corrupt prosecutors and courts and juries claimed.
Just as we did not care about Soviet show trials
Which of us is spreading lies?
What Georgia’s official audits actually found
1. Fulton County’s real ballot totals were ~525,000 — not 381,000 “illegal ballots”
Georgia’s official machine count, statewide hand audit, and machine recount all produced consistent totals:
Initial count: ~524,659 ballots
Hand audit: ~525,293 ballots
Recount: similar totals
Differences were in the hundreds, not hundreds of thousands.
🧭 2. Errors found were small and procedural — not fraudulent ballots
Investigators documented:
duplicate tally entries
transcription mistakes
some ballots scanned twice during the audit/recount process
These were human errors, not illegal ballots, and amounted to thousands, not hundreds of thousands.
State investigators estimated about 3,000 double‑scanned absentee ballots in audit paperwork — not 381,000.
🧭 3. No audit, recount, investigation, or court review found widespread fraud
Multiple layers of review — including:
statewide hand audit
machine recount
state investigations
independent analyses
media reviews
all concluded that Fulton County’s errors did not change the outcome and did not involve illegal ballots.
✔️ Bottom line
Georgia did not find 381,000 illegal ballots in Fulton County.
The number has no basis in any official audit, recount, investigation, or court ruling.
Actual discrepancies were small, procedural, and in the low thousands — not hundreds of thousands.
If you want, I can also break down where the 381,000 claim originated and how it spread.
The 381,000‑ballot claim did not come from any audit, recount, investigation, or court finding.
It originated from a misinterpreted question asked at a Georgia Election Board meeting, then mutated online into a viral falsehood.
Below is the full, sourced chain of how the claim began and how it spread — exactly the kind of annotated timeline you like for editorial work.
🧭 Where the 381,000 claim actually came from
1. Origin: A single question at a Georgia Election Board meeting (May 7, 2024)
Board member Janice Johnston asked why 380,761 ballot images were “not available” in Fulton County.
This was not a finding — it was a question.
Georgia election officials immediately corrected her:
Fulton County had provided 518,000 ballot images,
which is 99% of the ~525,000 ballots cast.
The number Johnston referenced was not missing ballots — it was a misunderstanding of how ballot‑image retention worked in 2020.
🧭 How the claim mutated
2. Step 1: Instagram video misrepresented the question as a “discovery”
A May 12 Instagram video clipped Johnston’s question and added text claiming:
“Over 380,000 ballot images missing in Fulton County.”
This turned a question into a false assertion.
3. Step 2: Social media amplified it as “illegal ballots counted”
Within days, versions of the claim spread on:
Instagram
Facebook
X (Twitter)
The framing shifted from “missing images” to “illegal ballots counted,” even though:
ballot images are not votes,
missing images (if any) do not affect counts,
original ballots were retained and recounted multiple times.
4. Step 3: Election denier accounts reframed it as “fraud”
Election‑denial influencers began citing the 380k figure as:
“illegal ballots,”
“fraudulent ballots,”
“ballots counted twice,”
“proof the election was stolen.”
None of these claims appear in any official audit or recount.
Georgia officials repeatedly stated:
“There is no evidence that any mass quantity of ballot images are missing.”
🧭 What official reviews actually found
Georgia’s hand audit: ~525,000 ballots
Ballot images received: ~518,000 (≈99%)
Confirmed by recounts: Results accurate
No audit, recount, or investigation ever found:
381,000 illegal ballots
381,000 missing ballots
381,000 fraudulent ballots
or anything remotely close.
The number exists only in social‑media distortion.
“Which of us is spreading lies?”
You
“What Georgia’s official audits actually found”
You are busy trying to obfuscate.
FC did not “find” they admitted 381K ballots without any chain of custody
Those are ILLEGAL BALLOTS
A ballot without complete chain of custody BY LAW can not be counted.
FC election commissioners CAN NOT certify those ballots.
The only way that any of those ballots can be counted is if a COURT holds a hearing collects evidence and after examining what records exist including testimony concludes that some of those ballots can be counted.
The counting of those 281K ballots was ILLEGAL
This is not a misinterpretation of soe public remarks – the FC election commission chair testiied under oath atleast twice that
381K ballots did not have chain of custody.
They absence of chain of custody can mean many many things – some of which MIGHT be innocent errors.
But many of which are FRAUD.
ONE of the many purposes of chain of custody records is to prevent anyone from inserting additional ballots from the time the ballots are collected from ballots boxes until they are counted.
One of the simplest ways to rig an election is just to add filled out ballots.
Election officials everywhere in the US are required to keep records of the number of ballots every single time ballots are moved.
Properly done this means that anyone attempting to inject ballots will be caught. Though that is not the only type of fraud or error that chain of custody records check.
Left wing nuts like you pretend that conducting a trustworthy election is easy. It is NOT.
It is RELATIVELY easy if people vote only on election day and ballots are counted immediately
I say relatively because you still have to have chain of custody after the count to address recanvases and recounts and it is STILL possible to inject ballots – which is why we also count the number of PEOPLE who voted – because the number of ballots must match the number of people.
Still that is the SIMPLEST and by FAR the safest means of conducting elections that are difficulty (but not impossible) to rig.
In the Wisconsin Senate race in 2008 it took 9 month for the courts to sort out about 5500 ballots that had chain of custody problems. in 2020 in GA ballots without chain of custody were just counted, nothing was done to verify them, No one was required to explain why they had failed to sign off on them. Chain of custody documents are LEGAL documents – thy are sworn statements,
You go to jail if you sign off on an invalid chain of custody. Th FC election commissioners do not have the legal authority to accept ballots without chain of custody. Just as in Wisconsin – where there are chain of custody issues – the courts must determine after gathering evidence under oath and examining records – which must be addmitted by testimony under oath which ballots may be counted. Until that occur NO BALLOT WITHOUT CHAIN OF CUSTODY may be counted.
GA is not the only place where ballots without chain of custody were counted in very large numbers – that happened with certainty in PA also But PA illegally destroyed election records shortly after the election and left wing nut PA courts just ignored election challenges. BEFORE the election the PA SCOTUS completely rewrote Act 77 – the PA election law that was the result of a bipartisan compromise to settle decades of political disputes over elections in PA. Technically Act 77 violated the PA constitution – which like 38 other states requires secret ballot elections – and mailin voting does not and can not ever meet the legal requirements of secret ballots – GA also has a secret ballot provision in its constition – so all mailin ballots in VA and any of the 38 states with secret ballot state constitutional provisions are illegal.
The legal requirements for secret ballots – the state constitutional amendments were the result of MASSIVE election fraud in the 19th century.
These state constitutional requirements are
1) an official ballot being printed at public expense,
2) on which the names of the nominated candidates of all parties and all proposals appear,
3) being distributed only at the polling place and
4) being marked in secret.
Mailin ballots can never meet the critical 3rd and 4th requirements,
ALL of these requiements exist as the means to prevent th various types of fraud that were commonplace in the 19th century
in 2020 Every US state except California made ballot harvesting illegal – again to prevent the forms of fraud that were common place in the 19th century.
FC did not “find” they admitted 381K ballots without any chain of custody
John, this is just not true. There were no ballots counted without a chain of custody. You are referring to 315,000 (not 381,000) ballots for which the poll workers failed to sign the tabulator tapes. They should have signed them, and their failure to do so was bad, and the county has promised to tighten up its procedures in future, but it has nothing to do with the ballots.
The ballots were counted three times, including once by hand, and they always came to the same total, which means they were counted correctly. There was no fraud in the counting, no double counting, Giuliani’s insane ranting about those two women was false and they were correct to sue him.
This doesn’t mean there was no fraud, just that any fraud was not in the counting. All ballots were counted correctly and honestly, but how many of those ballots were fraudulent? We have no answer for that, and no reason to suppose they were all genuine and valid. Once a fraudulent ballot is inserted into the system, an honest count will include it every time!
You list two totals from FC – yet GA did 3 separate recount/recanvases.
That is the entire state not FC
You also stupidly conflate completely different findings.
the 381K ballot without chain of custody were in FC alone.
There were by LAW illegal as they had no chain of custody – the FC election commission did not have the legal authority to count them – yet they were counted.
Was the lack of chain of custody the result of fraud ? Human error ?
Contra your claim – there was NO INVSTIGATION – not until the GA legislature granted the GA State election commission more MANADATORY power to investigate, GA State EC investigations found these illegally counted ballots, Separate testimony undr oath in the GA senate onfirmed that these ballots had been illegally counted.
Again there are many possible explanations for the lack of hain of custody – some as you say “human error”.
NONE are actually innocent – illegal ballots were counted without the authorization of courts, and that is a crime, so none of this is innocent.
I would further note that once chain of custody laws are violated it is not possible to ever know the correct outcome of the election.
One of the reasons for the requirement that voting occur at a polling place and that ballots never leave the custody or direct supervision of election officials is because in a secret ballot election once the filled out ballot is counted it is impossible to correct the count if fraud is later discovered. If you find someone illegally voted you can not after the election remove their ballot, because when a ballot is handed to election officials to be counted, that is the last instant that you can tie a ballot to a person.
After that you can prove a million people voted illegally – you can not tell which ballots belong to those who voted illegally.
Again this is why you vote at the polls, it is why we have chain of custody, it is why ballots are counted immediately – when they are handed to election officials if possible, On election night if not. The more ballots move the greater the time between the ballot being cast and the ballot being counted – the less scrupulous the records of the custody of the ballot from the moment they are cast until they are counted – the more oportunities for fraud and error.
And contra left wing nuts like you – if you conduct an election in a way where those who commit fraud can not be identified, you will get large scale fraud.
We can debate how much actual fraud there was in 2020. There is absolutely no debate that if we continue the lawless and insecure elections we have – we will get large scale fraud.
In the recent revelations in NJ – while we actually KNOW there were much larger issues than Mikie Sherill admits – DOJ found 38K voter registrations where the identifying information matched that of illegal aliens – not Sherills admission of APPROX 6600.
Sherill also admits that over 400 illegals voted. But we are told this is not a big deal. Yet atleast ten subsequent elections in NJ were decided by under 10 votes and on election as decided by 1 vote.
Further it is possible – even probable that the DOJ data and the Sherill admitted data are consistent.
DOJ reviewed the entire NJ voter rolls. Gov. Sherrill reported the number of illegals registered to vote in a single year.
Most voters register only once. Once a registration is recorded – though federal and state law requires purging the voter rolls of dead people, people ineligable to vote, non existant people, inactive voters, and people who have moved, we KNOW that rarey occurs. Every state has people registered to vote who neer existed. Every state has people who are long dead.
the 381K ballot without chain of custody were in FC alone.
There were by LAW illegal as they had no chain of custody – the FC election commission did not have the legal authority to count them – yet they were counted.
This is not true. There were no ballots without a chain of custody. All fraudulent ballots were introduced into the system at a point before chains of custody begin.
“You list two totals from FC – yet GA did 3 separate recount/recanvases.
That is the entire state not FC”
You brought up Fulton County so I addressed Fulton County. I bring up one issue and you respond with a dozen or more. It must me hard being you, keeping up with and spreading so many lies, then flooding the zone so nobody ever has the time or energy to discuss anything. I’m writing you off as a waste of my time.
Enigma–
You can make a better case for Obama being unqualified than for Trump.
Given the revelations coming out lately perhaps a good case could be made for his being in prison. And I wonder if he was the hand holding the hand that held the Autopen?
Interesting that he seems to have cheated even black contractors and businesses that built his ugly shrine in Chicago.
Michelle reportedly said she was glad she didn’t have boys because they would have turned out like Obama. Great ‘endorsement’ that is from his wife and she knows him better than we do.
There were no firearms, no frozen water bottles, no lasers, no fireworks, no palets of bricks delivered to the site hours before,
No vans handing out balitsic armor and face sheilds.
ALL things present at nearly all left wing nut “peaceful protests”.
There was no insurection.
What we actually had was something closer to the boston masacre where the CP fired tear gass on a lawful and peaceful assembly and caused the chaos that ensured.
That is not within a million miles of an insurrection
It is not even and intentionally violent protest.
John: “not even an intentionally violent protest.”
Not by the Trump and America supporters.
The case may be different when it comes to the feds, the police and Antifa.
Didn’t you think it strange that Antifa showed up to cause trouble at nearly every other event but weren’t visible on Jan 6?
I think they were there, and lots of undercover feds.
Young, I don’t remember if ANTIFA showed up or not, dressed in their typical gear, but there were numerous statements made by other protesters that ANTIFA was there but not in a fashion to notice. You point out something very interesting. It is strange enough that it needs to be explored.
S. Meyer– Thank you! I thought it very strange that Antifa wasn’t visibly there. But they were unlikely to miss an event like this. I briefly wondered if I should go and then dismissed the thought because I was reasonably sure Antifa would cause trouble and I didn’t want any part of it. I remembered San Jose where peaceful Trump supporters leaving the venue were channeled by the police straight into a violent Antifa mob.
That was the first I heard of Harmeet Dhillon who was suing the city for its abuse in this case. After watching her interview I thought she was wonderful. I am pleased Trump chose her for this administration. But that event left me with the expectation that Antifa thugs would show up and cause harm at any event supporting Ttump or America itself. They hate us and they hate America.
On J6 I think they did show up pretending to be Trump supporters to create the fiction of an insurrection. The fact that the Democrats and media embraced the idea so quickly, even editing Trump’s comments to imply he was encouraging violence, makes me wonder if some of them were in on it before the event. I don’t know, but some of the behavior like refusing the National Guard when Trump requested it is consistent with their wanting chaos.
Antifa looks like the Brownshirts of the Democrat party.
I had dinner with my daughter this evening and she recalled attending a lecture by Elie Wiesel who warned what to watch for, what signs indicate a drift or return to the Nazi evils. She recognizes many of those signs now in universities and the Democrat party. We aren’t there yet but neither of us thought it could ever get this far in America and that is alarming.
” I remembered San Jose where peaceful Trump supporters leaving the venue were channeled by the police straight into a violent Antifa mob.”
I remember that as well, along with the detailed description by one of the young women there. She was channeled back and forth repeatedly facing violence, so leaving was a major problem. When I was younger, I marched against the War in Vietnam (I carried a flag), and the only violence I saw came from the left who tried to incite violence. In fact, I marched in the first Mother’s Day march in D.C. It was hot, but many of the men were wearing suits and hats, marching peacefully. The NYT chose to picture on the front page several Maoists who ran to the monument. That was when I realized the NYT lied.
You were correct about Antifa. I feel certain they were there doing at least some of the violence, which was pinned on peaceful marchers. Framing by the left and media like the NYT changes opinions.
eb when you spray the forum with obvious nonsense – you defame yourself.
There was no russian collusion – except by Hillary.
The hunter biden laptop is real
Covid came from the WIV
Masks are ineffective
……
And there was no insurrection.
Please adjust your tinfoil
Enigma, even if all your other lies were actually true, your claim fails on this big lie right at the beginning:
“Section 3 of the 14th Amendment prohibits individuals from serving as president if they:”
No, it does not. It prohibits certain people from being “a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State”. Note what’s missing from that list: President and vice president. Once the 14th amendment was ratified, Alexander Stephens was barred from Congress, and from all appointed offices; but he was NOT barred from the presidency or vice presidency. There was nothing preventing him from being elected president, if he had the public support.
“Bellows concluded that Trump’s conduct surrounding January 6 met this threshold.”
Where does 14A give a state-level politician the authority to determine that Trump (or anyone else) is guilty of insurrection?
Only a state level JUDGE can determine if a politician meets the eligibility threshold. Would you have someone if the federal government making choices for the states? There were two criteria, in addition to insurrection there was rebellion including supporting either. The pardon of all participants without regard to what they were convicted of including sedition, certainly counts as support.
Yet another example of not thinking things through – just like the Virginia gerrymander. But if she ignores the state legislator’s request, there seems to be no mechanism to force the issue to be decided. Who has standing to bring a case? Susan Collins? It would look bad for her if she brought a lawsuit, so she would not do that.
The argument is about the Maine Law and the objectivity of it and of those who interpret it.
The Professor is right to be pessimistic about the. outcome of the Legal action and explains exactly what he sees it that way.
As it is the Democrats, and the exact same person who herself did the same thing despite the many Court Rulings that provide Legal Precedent, we know the outcome of that effort by the Republican Candidate to address the issue head on despite the odds being very highly stacked against him.
Of course the Democrat Propaganda arm, the American Media, shall take its usual single sided view of the matter and run interference for the Democrat Candidate and the the Democrat Party.
Welcome to America Today folks!
To the Democrats today the Law means nothing if it goes against their agenda….we have to accept that as proven fact.
This shall be no different.
Each election is always the most important one in a century….this one approaching in November is no different but is far more an important bench mark as we shall unfortunately see it as being the single most important owing to the rapid growth in the level of control the Socialist/Communist Wing has over the Democrat Party.
Unless and until that subversion of the American political, legal, education, and government is ended permanently then sadly the end result of failing is clear and shall be a disaster for the Republic and our Children’s future.
The “domestic enemy” is in clear view of us all. How we protect against it is what determines the future.
What shall it be? What are you doing to prevent such a takeover?
You can start by voting, turning out the vote, and assisting those who stand against the evil being injected into our way of life.
It is best we succeed at the Ballot Box as the other paths to peace and tranquility offers neither until we resolve this threat to our Union and Society.
Ralph C This is particularly true in midterm and off year elections which are barely reported on and have scant turnout. The DSA is very strategic in their planning to gain control of the Dem party taking advantage of their leadership vacuum and their poor bench of candidates. Once they gain power, they will move to secure it permanently which ironically is the Dem party’s plan as well. Our fellow citizens can vote away our freedom, security and prosperity if we let them.
Many of We the People don’t have faith in our elections, and many have stopped bothering to vote. Can anyone remember a presidential election, when Senators and Members of Congress did not file formal objections in the Electoral College to challenge the election results?
When most of We the People don’t have faith, most will stop bothering to vote. Is that the goal?
SBB
While there is good reason to doubt our elections – and we must fix that, it has become significantly harder to cheat – atleast at scale.
Not unfortunately because we have fixed lawless elections, but because between courts that are SLOWLY grasping that we have a problem with election fraud and have been slowly reversing the bad decision of 2020, and better Republican scrutiny of elections, and significantly greater willingness on the part of the electorate to accept claims of election fraud,
It is orders of magnitude more dangerous for Democrats to engage in the kind of election fraud they did in 2020.
There is no lack of people in both parties willing to do anything to win. But even the worst political scumbags are not going to go to jail or worse destroy their party if the risk of fraud being caught increases.
What happens in 2026 or 2028 if Democrats try the same things they pulled in 2020 ?
They are about 10 times as likely to get caught.
When caught people are far more likely to beleive allegations of fraud,
The courts are far more likely to take seriously claims of fraud.
That is what is saving us from large scale fraud right now.
That is buying us time to fix our election laws.
The factors I listed that make fraud at scale unlikely right now – will fade over time – unless we actually fix the problems with the process that make fraud easy.
Come On Man! Maine has become the ANYTHING GOES state – hey how about a new State Motto? Bah haha – gotta hand it to the Dems as they will do ANYTHING to win! Screw the damn law as it is optional when Dems are running that Outhouse!
“Now it looks like Maine is reading f the California playbook and trying to emulate it”
I think that it might be more accurate to claim that they are becoming a subsidiary of Massachusetts, but the symptoms are nearly identical.
Isn’t Bellows conflicted? She was also a loser in the primary for governor and a candidate in the process to replace Platner, before she withdrew.
I was born in Bangor. Still got family up there, and yeah, most of them lean pretty liberal. But this isn’t really about which way Maine votes. It’s about whether the people voting are actually paying attention. Bellows tried to knock Trump off the ballot with a legal theory the Supreme Court shot down unanimously, then turned around and ran for governor using that same failed stunt as a selling point. That only works if voters have stopped tracking what their own officials actually do. Doesn’t matter how small the political bench is or which party’s running it. If the people watching stay sharp, that kind of move costs you. If they don’t, it becomes a résumé line instead.
“That only works if voters have stopped tracking what their own officials actually do.”
Sadly, that would seem to apply to something approaching a simple majority of voters (those who actually cast ballots) nationwide.
Don, good point. One more thing. A weak candidate slipping through a primary just means one party’s own voters weren’t paying attention. That’s narrow. But when that candidate wins the full statewide race against the other party’s pick, that’s not a party problem anymore. Neither side caught it. That’s the whole floor talking. Ceiling of government competence, floor of citizen capacity. Same rule, just playing out in real time.
Here we go again…. “voters weren’t paying attention.” Ever dawn on you that they know their local politics better than you do (and the pundits who proclaim superior knowledge and insight) who does not live in Maine or New England. You sue do write a heap of hogwash old man.
This is why they are called the “Insincere Left”.
They lose on rationality, fairness, democracy, individual rights (the only kind!).
These Jerry Springer audience types just care about the hair pulling not any of that other stuff.
“actually paying attention.” Now what is that supposed to mean, that they’re stupid and you ain’t? It isn’t as if Trump hasn’t pulled outrageous stunts huh?
Born in Bangor… says it all.
“Now what is that supposed to mean, that they’re stupid… Born in Bangor… says it all.”
So, even if your ridiculous contention about Olly implying that Maine voters was correct (it is not), your tag line does absolutely imply that. Why is that acceptable for you, but for no one else?. You are a shallow, vicious, ridiculous buffoon. Perhaps you should consider finishing your stash of fentanyl all at once,and get over your problems once and for all?
You mean Californians should’ve stopped voting for Newsom after he told the S.F. city-county clerk to issue ersatz marriage licenses in 2004.
What has happened to Maine, a land of independent-thinking individuals, home of Civil War hero Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, an American college professor and politician, and the majestic moose? With the exception of practical but careful Senator Susan Collins, this state has begun considering any wild-eyed thinking as serious. Now, the Democrats are duking it out as though the political rutting season has become permanent, women included in the rut.
Makes me wonder too. I am a descendant of a father and son who fought in the Revolution as members of the Maine Militia. Now it looks like Maine is reading f the California playbook and trying to emulate it.
No one gives a hoot about your ancestry RToberts. Stop braaging and stick to the facts.
But Robert won’t mention their names. More geriatric meanderings.
Those are great roots Robert. I appreciate you sharing it. And I echo your concern.
RobertS,
Well said and thank you for sharing about your family history.
Well said? Are you stupid or sumptin. He obviously made up a lie. And, what exactly did he share? He offered no facts. He lied. Like all of you old farts here.
Oh! No! Poor, poor annony! Having another one of his mental meltdowns! Cannot add anything constructive, so he has to lash out at us for being ever so more thoughtful, intelligent and productive while he languishes in mommy and daddy’s basement. Nearly dependent on them for everything. Such a sad, sad life to be such a failure to launch.
How marvelous!
“What has happened to Maine”
Donald Trump received approximately 41.5% of the total popular vote across the six New England states in the 2024 presidential election. Trump improved his performance compared to 2020, securing one electoral vote from Maine’s 2nd Congressional District. The region’s sole Republican member of Congress is Susan Collins of Maine.
In the northeast, there is a fierce competition among leftys for lefty votes and Maine was way behind the southern NE states on ‘capturing’ these coveted lefty voters (migration primarily driven by significantly lower housing costs in ME compared to southern NE.) so the left went way left (all the way to Nationalsozialists). Just to block that 40% of freedom loving Americans living in the heart of the American Revolution. The smaller the state, the easier to gerrymander, conspire, cheat, disenfranchise, etc.
Wait until this thinking is the norm. These are weird elections. Elections happen once every 4 years on election for all states. The house rotates out a portion.
A true joke.