Global Selection for Stealing Elections with Electronic Voting Machines

by Patriots Staff



We’ve all heard the scuttlebutt for the last year and a half how the 2020 election was stolen but where is the evidence? It’s about time the public learns that there is an active attempt to hide evidence the election was stolen. Look at this: Erroneous Code Present On Tennessee Dominion Election System Software After EAC Certified It !  The best example of machine fraud yet but it is denied that fraud swung the 2020 election. It is just cited as another error. How many times will we swallow that line?

There is further evidence contained in a court ordered forensic analysis of Dominion voting machines in the 2020 Antrim county lawsuit available here:  https://www.depernolaw.com/bailey-june-2021.html. One of the analysis reports listed there indicates that the Dominion machine was connected to both Germany and Taiwan during the election. Dominion has claimed their machines are not connected to the internet but they have to be to report the tabulated results.

How about the US CISA warning:  Dominion voting machines used in 16 states have ‘substantial vulnerabilities. “ An excerpt from the article states: ”The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency, or CISA, said there is no evidence the flaws in the Dominion Voting Systems’ equipment have been exploited to alter election results.” Really?  How is it then that there could be contradicting evidence of fraud, not just another random error ?  Look at Georgia where a woman didn’t even receive her own vote. This happened in real time in an election; the only reason it was caught is because the candidate complained.

Update:VoterGA Continues to Cite Dominion Election Problems as Woman Who Wasn't On the Ballot Wins and Dem Primary Candidate Receives Zero Votes in Several Counties

So how does a democratic candidate get ZERO votes in her own county in which she and her husband voted without ACTIVE machine intervention?  Obviously, here is real evidence that an unknown software routine was actively working against her election but failed to provide a minimum vote. This is just a small example of what the Dominion machine really can do. It only took two elections to take down Venezuela using Dominion and globalists only need one more here to do the same. 

It’s about time the public learned that there is a coming global government, referred to as the Great Reset as expounded by Klaus Schwab, founder of the world economic forum. World government is also discussed in the book of Genesis with its first leader, Nimrod.  And you can see the various forms this government will assume in the book of Daniel through various stages of history and how it continues to develop into its final form predicted in Revelations.

Dominion has solved the problem of how to limit who can serve in the coming world government by providing the methodology for eliminating other than key personnel not interested in the world’s people or their problems. Machine tabulation is the perfect means to institute selection rather than election where a combination of machine algorithms select the candidate rather than the electorate.

Some Counties are beginning to get the message and document the fraud as was done in Mesa County, Colorado after Dominion performed a ‘trusted build'. Dominion obliterated all fraudulent evidence in the Tina Peters case in Mesas county, Colorado.  Tina had a forensic image of the Dominion machine taken before and after the dominion trusted build. Changing and eliminating election data along with wiping out system LOGs are a violation of federal law that requires election data to be saved for 22 months and renders any machine in-auditable when ever voting problems are identified.  

There are far too many Dominion election data anomalies found around the country to be mere coincidence. The anomalies support what The Daily Beast reports on computer science Professor Alex Halderman and his study on Dominion findings but his report is currently under court seal. Are we all so gullible as to believe the insipid statements that dominion vulnerabilities have not been taken advantage of? But more importantly how is it that a federal judge muzzles information concerning election vulnerabilities in a free society?

Do we really need an election system managed by Dominion personnel where the machines cannot be inspected and election results are tabulated through remote centers simply accepting their word that no fraud has occured? The French continue to vote with only paper ballots and hand counts as they have for generations. Why can’t we?

Otero County, New Mexico is convinced there was fraud by refusing to certify the 2022 primary election results but were compelled to do so by the state Supreme Court. Nowhere to be found is anyone even willing to acknowledge the possibility fraud may be involved. Instead those with concerns are character attacked with statements like being fired for non-compliance with COVID-19 prevention measures,(unwillingness to wear a mask) or citing Griffin, who was convicted last month of trespassing resulting from his prayerful rallying of rioters at the Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021 coup attempt. Jan 6th was a staged federal insurrection to take focus off of election integrity and the canvassing of registered voters as a “vigilante” effort that could further undermine public faith in elections. Voter confidence in elections is already undermined and getting worse. It's this attempted character assasination driving it. People in a free society have the right to choose other than electronic voting for any reason. People recognize this as a concerted effort to cover up electronic fraud concerns with no real attempt to addess the concerns.

Apparently Otero County cannot abandon the Dominion voting machine and that alone tells you something is very wrong with the system.. Hopefully, more counties will step up because we can never have another stolen election and preserve our American Republic.

Joe Biden and his nasty kid have given every one a taste of what any global government could be like with electronic voting the way to axhieve it. Why continue to use a system that can be taken advantage of and likely has already especially in critical races?

If electronic voting is NOT abandoned by the states by November of 2022, the American Republic will be finished.











Judge recommends 'insurrection' claim against Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene be dropped

by Bob Unruh


Marjorie Taylor Greene video screenshot

                        Marjorie Taylor Greene (video screenshot)

Democrats once again have failed in their attempt to use a Civil War-era provision that those who took part in the Confederacy could not later return to Congress against a sitting member of Congress.

The Washington Examiner explained that Judge Charles Beaudrot, from Georgia's office of State Administrative Hearings, has recommended to Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger that a claim of "insurrection" against Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green, R-Ga., be dropped. [I find it ironic that Raffensberger [Ratburger) is attacking Marjorie when there have been so many allegations of voting fraud in GA many involving Dominion machines: https://www.sos.ga.gov/news/election-fraud-cases-sent-prosecution-dominion-refutes-disinformation  Now watch 2000 mules for a competing analysis. This attack against Marjorie is 'lawfare' ained at preventing her from running for office. - ED]

Raffensperger will make the final decision regarding Greene, who is very popular in her conservative northwest Georgia district, and is just as unpopular in Washington for her blunt, brash and direct way of calling out hypocrisy there.

Democrats wanted her removed from the ballot because she repeatedly has raised questions about the validity and accuracy of the 2020 election, which also was the focus of many who took part in the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.

Democrats already have filed multiple lawsuits against Republicans claiming that they are barred from the ballot because they took part in an "insurrection."

However, the claim of "insurrection" comes only for their own talking points, and legal experts say for the provision to apply there would have to be an adjudication of "insurrectionist," which is far from likely.

group of Democrats from Greene's district claimed that she was involved in the riot, so therefore she is an "insurrectionist," so therefore she cannot run for office again, under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.





Harris County, TX DA’s Office Blasts Judge Lina Hidalgo, Tells Her to Stop Criticizing Grand Jury That Just Indicted Her Staffers in $11 Million Vaccine Contract Probe

by Cristina Laila

The Harris County District Attorney’s Office blasted far-left judge Lina Hidalgo and told her to stop criticizing the grand jury that just indicted her top staffers.

Three of Judge Lina Hidalgo’s staffers were indicted last week after prosecutors expanded the investigation into an $11 million ‘vaccine outreach contract’ awarded to one of the judge’s political cronies.

Texas Rangers last month raided the office of Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo and executed a search warrant related to an $11 million ‘vaccine outreach contract’ awarded to one of the judge’s friends.

While Hidalgo was threatening to jail and fine people for violating her Covid rules, she was secretly trying to award one of her political cronies an $11 million ‘vaccine outreach’ contract.

Three of her staffers were indicted last week after Texas Rangers obtained a new search warrant and requested the Google accounts of Lina Hidalgo and 6 of her senior staffers.

Hidalgo lashed out at county prosecutors during an interview with ABC 13 last Wednesday, calling the charges ‘partisan politics.’

“At best, this is going forward with a fundamental misunderstanding of the facts and at worst, it is the weaponization of the criminal justice system for political purposes so I’m not going to play into that,” Hidalgo whined to ABC13. “My staffers are hardworking people. They work day and night for the people of Harris County and we’ve got work to do, like this catalytic converter issue or like childhood education, homelessness, huge wins.”

The Harris County DA’s office this week told Hidalgo to shut up and stop criticizing the grand jury.

ABC 13 reported:

The Harris County District Attorney’s Office responded Monday to an attack last week by Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo, who characterized an indictment against three of her staffers as weaponizing the system with a “flimsy” case.

Following Hidalgo’s comments, the Harris County DA’s office is now defending the grand jury, which is made up of 12 community residents.

“Grand jurors give up countless hours of personal and professional time to serve and their service should never be disparaged or dismissed,” Dane Schiller, a spokesperson for the Harris County DA’s Office, said in a statement. “We want to thank the grand jurors in these public corruption cases for their hard work over a five-month period in which they reviewed voluminous documents and heard from numerous witnesses. Our work continues.”

Hidalgo’s campaign spokesperson, Toni Harrison responded Monday afternoon, saying, “No one is disparaging the grand jury – that’s a red herring to deflect attention from recent media reports raising important questions about this investigation. The fact is, we’ll never know what the District Attorney’s Office presented to the grand jurors because the process is secret. As we’ve said since the search warrant affidavits were made public, this investigation appears to have proceeded on a fundamental misunderstanding of the facts. We’re confident now that the legal process has moved into public view, the truth will come out and the staffers who have been wrongly accused will be cleared.”

“Project 65” Seeks to Kill All the Trump Lawyers — By Canceling Them: The Progressive Left’s Latest Move to Destroy America

by Jeffrey Clark, Former Assistant Attorney General at the U.S. Justice Department


As Shakespeare famously wrote in Henry VI Part II: “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”

Even for me as a lawyer, it’s hard not to sympathize with that sentiment. Lawyers are a drag. But in reflective moments, I’m more partial to Sir Thomas More’s line from Robert Bolt’s A Man for All Seasons: “And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ‘round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s!”

The evenhanded application of the law is a principle that must be defended. Everywhere, balance and perspective are under attack. Whatever the costs of America’s process-heavy adversarial contests, that feature of our polity is a key bulwark of liberty. Due process is not something to be trifled with, deconstructed, or thrown away based on the passions of the political moment.

Yet that is happening, right now. The Left has set the lines of battle: Any lawyers who worked for President Trump with verve and ingenuity, along with any lawyers he retained to mount his various 2020 election contests, must be crushed, must have their noses rubbed into the dirt, must if possible lose their jobs and even their right to practice law. It’s not right, just as it would not have been right to demonize the lawyers who mounted Al Gore’s challenges to the 2000 presidential election in Florida.

On the Left, the constant rallying cry is “Remember January 6!” It’s like a woke version of “Remember the Alamo!”, designed to divide and conquer instead of unite the nation in the spirit of apple-pie American patriotism. For those who know me, I’m a lot more partial to traditional patriotism than to false and cynical attempts by MSNBC and its ilk to use the aberration of January 6 as some kind of Rosetta Stone to American politics. As James O’Keefe has recently brought to light, even Matthew Rosenberg of the New York Times secretly knows I’m right.

Project 65 and Its Despicable Aims

When the Left wants something, you can be sure that limitless streams of money will soon pour forth to fund their destructive crusade. Recently, Axios profiled something significant you might have missed: “Project 65,” a new initiative funded by millions in “dark money” to destroy as many Trump-affiliated lawyers as possible.

At the retail level, Project 65’s purpose is to file bar complaints against 111 lawyers wherever they are licensed. At the wholesale level, it seeks to amend state bar rules, so that no lawyers with a sense of self-preservation will ever again want to bring election-related contests on behalf of President Trump, or any other populist conservative candidate. According to Project 65, everyone secretly knows that elections in Atlanta, Chicago, or Philadelphia (my home town) are entirely aboveboard, so any legal challenges to them must be in bad faith. My Mom’s stories from decades of poll watching in Philadelphia must have been hallucinated, and a slew of election fraud cases in Philadelphia must have magically disappeared from the annals of the law. The Chicago corruption of Mayor Daley in the 1960 presidential election is an old wives’ tale. Election fraud in America simply doesn’t exist. Of course, some exceptions exist—for Democrat complaints of voter fraud, of course. Don’t expect Project 65 to file a bar complaint any time soon against losing candidate Stacey Abrams over her frequent claims to be the legitimate governor of Georgia.

Project 65 is led by David Brock, the founder of Media Matters for America and the super PAC American Bridge 21st Century. Brock is still on his life-long quest to expiate his decades-old “sin” of writing The Real Anita Hill, a book attacking the credibility of Clarence Thomas’s harassment accuser. Brock will be joined by an advisory board that includes former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle, Clinton affiliate Melissa Moss, and “Republican” Paul Rosenzweig.

(Here I pause to ask, Paul, what’s happened to you? We both served in the Bush 43 Administration, me at Justice and you at Homeland Security. President Trump actually achieved many of the goals President Bush advocated, yet rarely did much to accomplish. Talking a good game is not the same thing as running a good game. Best to judge by fruits and not by braggadocious tweets, I think. Never Trumpism seems to be a fever that makes calmly comparing records impossible.)

Here’s what Brock describes as the mission of his project: “[Project 65] will not only bring the grievances in the bar complaints but shame them and make them toxic in their communities.” According to Axios, Brock’s plan is nothing less than a war of the strong against the weak: “I think the littler fish are probably more vulnerable to what we’re doing… You’re threatening their livelihoods. And you know, they’ve got reputations in their local communities.”

Give Brock points for honesty, at least. Not everyone has the guts to gloat about being pure evil. Project 65 is torn right from the playbook of Saul Alinsky (“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it”): Shame lawyers, plague them with hefty legal bills, and especially pick off ones who are less famous and backed by fewer resources. Given all that, it’s better to call Project 65 Project Shame, Project Fear, or the Project of Personal Destruction. And wait, why is it even called Project 65? Because (groan) that’s the number of lawsuits filed to support the “Big Lie,” of course.

Monopolies are never good, whether one is talking about cornering the market for silver, for banking services, for rare earth minerals (hello CCP), or for social media. Lawyers are indispensable to promoting any abstract cause or to any concrete enterprise that must enter the court system to present grievances. Trying to shame, outlaw, and destroy the personal reputations of any category of lawyers, on the Right or on the Left, must be resisted with maximum effort. And make no mistake, as Axios recognizes after talking to Brock himself (and others at Project 65 clinging to anonymity), the goal of the effort is to chill market forces: “The 65 Project is focused on starving any future efforts of legal talent as well as focusing on 2020.”

Professor Alan Dershowitz sees the game afoot. He told Breitbart that he will “defend any lawyer targeted by [the] McCarthyist ‘65 Project.’” Good for him. He immediately recognizes that Project 65 flunks any test of Kantian evenhandedness and ethics:

It was only 22 years ago when lawyers like me sought to block the election of President George W. Bush, believing as we did that Al Gore actually received more votes than Bush in Florida and was the rightful winner. We lost in court. But back then no one suggested going after the hundreds of lawyers who tried to prevent Bush’s certification. A dangerous weapon, like the 65 Project, unleashed by Democrats will surely be used by Republicans at some future time. [Breitbart]

Bingo. It’s the Golden Rule. If progressives can try to starve Republicans of legal talent, turnabout will become fair play. And it should not be allowed to become fair play—by either side. Weaponizing bar rules to endlessly relitigate contests about the 2020 presidential election (or any election) is not what the rules of legal ethics and professional conduct exist to accomplish. It is blatant lawfare, designed to impose ruinous costs on lawyers of an enemy political faction. It’s a Pandora’s box that should remain closed.

The Three Categories of Lawyers Project 65 Seeks to “Freeze” in Alinsky Terms

Project 65 plans to target three categories of lawyers: (1) Trump’s inner circle of lawyers, e.g., Jenna Ellis and Boris Epsteyn, (2) lawyers who signed on to be alternate presidential electors; and (3) attorneys who participated in the attack on the Capitol or were simply present at the events of January 6.

Let’s take each of these categories in turn. For category 1, the Project reasons that being close to Trump is its own unpardonable sin, a form of guilt by association. That’s as un-American as it gets. Next, as to alternate electors: In the 1960 presidential election between Nixon and Kennedy, there were alternate Democratic Hawaii electors for Senator Kennedy who eventually became the actual electors, so lining up alternative electors to be ready for such an opportunity can’t be inherently illegal or unethical. And finally, while a lawyer who participated in violence at the Capitol on January 6 is clearly a proper subject of a bar investigation and stern discipline, the idea that a lawyer’s mere presence at the January 6 protest is unethical is the stuff of a banana republic. Is every left-leaning lawyer who protested George Floyd’s death to be rounded up and disbarred because Antifa members assaulted a courthouse in Portland or burned down a police station in Minneapolis?

Is at Least One Other Entity Cooperating With Project 65?

The public announcement of Project 65’s kickoff was followed just a few weeks ago by a public announcement that the Texas Bar was considering allegations of unethical conduct filed against the Lone Star State’s Attorney General, Ken Paxton.