No-excuse mail-in voting makes election fraud as easy as pie, invites one-party rule.

johnwk

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2008
Messages
2,729
.

Before delving into the subject, let us recall how our beloved media during Georgia’s 2020 election focused on, and ran with stories 24/7 about suitcases filled with mysterious ballots being introduced during vote counting night, and a water pipe break delaying vote counting, not to mention election workers and observers being told to leave for the night, so nefarious activities could begin with mail-in ballot counting.

Remember how those “shiny object” stories and others were continually repeated by our big media, mesmerizing the public, stirring them into a frenzy, and instigating American citizens who were skeptical at the time about the trustworthiness of Georgia’s election process, into arguing with each other? Well, never once did that same media give a whisper about the real vote stealing gimmick hiding in plain sight . . . tens of thousands of “mailed in” ballots, not one of which being counted, was, or would be, scrutinized to verify it was actually filled out, and the choices made thereon, were by a qualified voter who allegedly was issued the ballot.

And this is the Achilles' heel with mail-in ballots. As reported in the 2005 Carter-Baker bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, “absentee ballots” (i.e. mail-in ballots) remain the largest source of potential voter fraud”.

Keep in mind that corruption and vote stealing in our election process can be divided into two basic categories ___ when civilian individuals game the system and cheat, which is not that severe of a threat, and where public officials, who are directly involved in an election process, and are able to use their office of public trust to take an active role in devious activities to manipulate the outcome of an election’s results. And this is the greater threat of the two categories, and can easily undermine our systems way for peaceful change, which is our election process.

The troubling truth is, mail-in ballots, and especially no-excuse mail-in ballots ___ which outrageously throws open the door allowing universal, unrestricted mail-in voting ___ makes election fraud by nefarious folks in government, as easy as pie. And this is so because, there is no practical way when counting mailed in votes, to satisfactorily confirm that the one who filled out a mailed-in ballot and made the choices thereon and sent it in, is the qualified and legitimate voter to whom that ballot was supposedly supplied.

Currently, there are only 12 states that make an attempt, and I emphasize “attempt”, to verify a voter of a mailed-in ballot is the qualified voter of that ballot, and actually filled out that ballot and made the choices thereon. Those States are: Alabama, Alaska, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

So, with respect to a glaring inability to verify the legitimacy of a mailed-in ballot, should we not wonder why universal no-excuse mail in voting is suddenly the crave of a number of suspicious political groups, and why the allowance of no-excuse mail in voting is being forced upon the people of a number of Democrat controlled states, and without the peoples’ approval or consent?


Can the inability to verify the legitimacy of mailed-in ballots allow folks in government, especially those inclined to cheat and have various types of personal catalogued information on in-state residents at their fingertips, use that information to create illegitimate mail-in ballots which can determine the outcome of an election?

If this no-excuse mail-in voting is not stopped in its tracks, and reversed, America's way for peaceful change through free and fair elections will have been sabotaged and conquered by those types who now govern in other countries with an iron fist and the barrel of a gun, i.e., in Cuba, China, Russia, etc., where there is one-party authoritarian rule!

JWK

The troubling truth about allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in one state is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”.
 
Mail-in ballots [absentee ballots] invite election fraud and corruption.

Today’s corrupt political leaders need plenty of no-excuse mail-in ballots to count, in order to rig and win elections.

Keep in mind, there is no practical way to actually scrutinize a mailed in ballot when counted, to verify if that ballot was actually filled out, and the choices made thereon, were by a qualified voter who allegedly was issued each ballot.

That is why corrupt political leaders, and suspicious political groups, are fighting tooth and nail to have no-excuse mail-in ballots made universal, and the rule of law in every state. They know as many mail-in ballots are needed to win an election can be engineered and introduced into our election system, to win any particular election.


How many readers remember the news reports of New York’s Tammany Hall thugs, and absentee ballots?

The New York Times reported in its October 31, 1931 edition. “Colonization by absentee voters is said to be an entirely new device in political mechanics."

See: 1931: Tammany Hall, Voter Fraud, and Sullivan County - New York Almanack

Howard Beecher, the chairman of the county’s Republican Committee, was surprised by the over 1,100 absentee ballots requested in Sullivan that year, and sent a list of 620 names to the state GOP committee, asking that they be investigated for falsely filing an application to vote here. Beecher suspected that Democrats had imported persons registered in New York City to vote in Sullivan County in an attempt to ensure a victory for Whittaker, and retain a key seat in a desperate battle for control of the Assembly.


02c11271447abfec363804a5be39062d9c29aca3.jpeg


While there certainly is a legitimate need for conditional excuse-oriented mail-in ballots, broadening mail-in ballots to allow universal no-excuse mail-in voting, is to sabotage and undermine our election process and peaceful way for change, and invite Tammany Hall type elections just like the kind now held in Cuba, Russia, and China, where there is one party, authoritarian rule.

Forewarned is forearmed!

JWK

The scary truth about allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in one state is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”.
 
A fatal flaw with the security of mail-in ballots . . . no chain of custody

.

Let us keep in mind, with in-person voting and adequate ID we know the person in the booth is filling out the ballot.

With mail-in ballots, there is no practical way to know if the one who filled out a mailed-in ballot and made the choices thereon and sent it in, is the qualified and legitimate voter to whom that ballot was supposedly supplied.


Additionally, another flaw with mail-in ballots being “secure” as we are fraudulently told by our big media is, there is no chain of custody of mail-in ballots to guarantee who actually filled out and made the choices on a mailed-in ballot when counted.


See: No confidence in mail-in ballots which begins:

Given the constant references to a free and fair election, there is one fact that seems to be overlooked. The fact is that there is no chain of custody for the mail-in ballot from the time it leaves the election office, to the time it is returned to the election office and logged in.

Therefore, the election officials have no way of determining:


If the American people do not clean up their election process before the coming election, they will be inviting the kinds of elections held in China, Russia and Cuba, where there is on party rule.


JWK

“We often give enemies the means of our own destruction.” -- Aesop.
 
The French manage to do OK with single-day voting using hand-counted paper ballots. Of course, they also have proxy-voting (where you can designate someone else to vote for you); and basically all of their elections are two stages (first stage to find the top two candidates, the second to choose between those two).

Voting in France: Paper ballots, in person, hand-counted

Still, you do need to have an adequate number of polling stations. This stuff where people wait three hours in line to vote couldn't be tolerated. If you can't walk into a polling station, cast you vote, and walk out in under twenty minutes, then that polling station has too many voters assigned to it.

=== Edited to add ===
I really don't see a problem with absentee ballots though; provided you give that whole process the same protections currently afforded making deposits at ATM machines. Forget about using the USPS, and install ATM-like machines outside polling stations. Make voters use a card and a PIN to access the machine and make the deposit of the ballot.
 
Last edited:
Still, you do need to have an adequate number of polling stations. This stuff where people wait three hours in line to vote couldn't be tolerated. If you can't walk into a polling station, cast you vote, and walk out in under twenty minutes, then that polling station has too many voters assigned to it.

The average precinct size in the US is ~1100 voters. If you assume a 12-hour voting day, that's fewer than 95 voters per hour, if they all showed up. (DC has the highest density at around 2700 voters per precinct)

Now, they don't all show up and the voters don't space themselves out per hour so you get rushes. In the past, we all knew that you could avoid long line times by planning your trip. The stories about people waiting in crazy long lines are usually because there were rushes while someone at the polling site was mucking things up.

Same-day in-person voting can be done - but there's an incentive in Democratic districts to make it a pain in the ass. If their voters had an easy time voting in person, they wouldn't cause such a ruckus about needing more options (options, of course, that can be manipulated).
 
election fraud, using mail-in ballots, is an age-old art.

The average precinct size in the US is ~1100 voters. If you assume a 12-hour voting day, that's fewer than 95 voters per hour, if they all showed up. (DC has the highest density at around 2700 voters per precinct)

Now, they don't all show up and the voters don't space themselves out per hour so you get rushes. In the past, we all knew that you could avoid long line times by planning your trip. The stories about people waiting in crazy long lines are usually because there were rushes while someone at the polling site was mucking things up.

Same-day in-person voting can be done - but there's an incentive in Democratic districts to make it a pain in the ass. If their voters had an easy time voting in person, they wouldn't cause such a ruckus about needing more options (options, of course, that can be manipulated).

The unfortunate truth is, Election fraud has been going on for a very, very long time. The New York Times reported in its October 31,1931 edition. “Colonization by absentee voters is said to be an entirely new device in political mechanics". See: Tammany Hall, Voter Fraud, and Sullivan County



6e09568850500391620f553137a2f802bfbccfed.jpeg


.

Mail-in ballots invite various kinds of clever vote stealing and political party inspired election fraud and is why many countries have banned mail-in voting SOURCE

JWK

The troubling truth about allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in one state is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”.


.
 
Mail-in ballots have higher risk of integrity attacks, than in-person voting.

.
See: MAIL-IN VOTING IN 2020 INFRASTRUCTURE RISK ASSESSMENT

Under "KEY FINDINGS" we find:


Integrity attacks on voter registration data and systems represent a comparatively higher risk in a mail-in voting environment when compared to an in-person voting environment. This is because the voter is not present at the time of casting the ballot and cannot help to answer questions regarding their eligibility or identity verification.


JWK

“Until you realize how easy it is for your mind to be manipulated, you remain the puppet of someone else’s game.” ― Evita Ochel
 
If Russia had mail-in ballots for all, the Democrats and their media would have no problem condemning them as prone to fraud by their very nature, and that the Russian election results are corrupt, and clearly and provably fraudulent.
 
More evidence that the Democrat Leadership wants to rig elections.

.
See: Meet the four Dem-picked Colorado justices who kicked Trump off the ballot

Four liberal Colorado Supreme Court justices were behind the landmark ruling Monday night that former President Donald Trump would not be allowed to appear on the 2024 presidential ballot in the state.

As each day passes, the American people are witnessing the Democrat Party Leadership, and I emphatically emphasize “Leadership”, acts in a tyrannical fashion and ignores the rule of law, especially when it comes to their desire to rig elections.

Keep in mind, the Democrat controlled PA Supreme Court imposed the allowance of no-excuse mail-in voting upon the people of Pennsylvanian, in spite of the Constitution’s expressed, and conditional limitations set forth under ABSENTEE VOTING

Likewise, the Democrat Leadership in New York, in spite of a proposed constitutional amendment to allow no-excuse mail-in voting being overwhelmingly rejected by New York voters, see: New Yorkers reject expanded voting access in stunning result, went forward with legislation allowing no-excuse mail-in voting, and Tammany Hall’s new Governor, Governor Hochul, signed the un-constitutional legislation into law.

And, the same essential type crap, an imposition allowing no-excuse mail-in voting took place under the Democrat Leadership in Massachusetts.

The fact is, there is a fatal flaw with mail-in ballots which is, chain of custody is absent, and allows for vote stealing and government perpetrated election fraud, and that is why the Democrat Leadership, and nefarious political groups are behind the push for universal no-excuse mail-in ballot voting . . . they want universal democrat controlled vote rigging which leads to one party rule, as is the case in Russia, China and Cuba.

JWK

“We often give enemies the means of our own destruction.” – Aesop.
 
DE. SC strikes down government imposed no-excuse ballots, will N.Y.’s S.C. do same?

Since we were talking earlier about New York, the home of Tammany Hall type election thugs, who perfected the art of election fraud using “absentee” ballots (see: 1931: Tammany Hall, Voter Fraud, and Sullivan County), and that New Yorkers recently rejected a constitutional amendment that would have allowed no-excuse mail in voting, which the communist controlled legislature ignored by then passing legislation allowing no-excuse mail in ballots, which authoritarian Governor Hochul SIGNED INTO LAW, ignoring the N.Y. Constitution and the will of the people, and is now being challenged in court, I thought it might be interesting to know how Delaware’s Supreme Court dealt with a similar situation where its government thug legislators and Governor ignored their constitution and attempted to force the allowance of no-excuse mail-in voting and same day registration upon the people, without their approval as required by Delaware's Constitution.

See DDOE v. Higgin 342 2022 12-13

In the opinion’s conclusion found on page 68, striking both no-excuse mail in voting and same-day registration down, the Court rightfully points out:

Our decision announced two months ago and explained in this opinion is not intended to reflect the Court’s views on the relative advantages and drawbacks of universal absentee voting or a later registration deadline. The resolution of those issues is within the General Assembly’s province. The Court’s role indeed, our duty is to hold the challenged statutory enactments up to the light of our Constitution and determine whether they are consonant or discordant with it. For the reasons discussed in this opinion, we conclude that the Vote-by-Mail Statute and the Same-Day Registration Statute violate the Constitution’s relevant provisions and thus cannot stand. The changes to our election regime embodied in the challenged statutes must be effected, if at all, by constitutional amendment. Accordingly, the Court of Chancery’s judgment as to the Vote-by-Mail Statute is affirmed; as to the Same-Day Registration Statute, it is reversed.

The question now is, will New York’s Supreme Court, as did Delaware’s S.C., strike down the legislative tyranny imposed upon the good people of New York, and instruct New York’s Tammany Hall type government thugs to go pound sand, and ask the people for their consent as the N.Y. Constitution commands?

JWK

The troubling truth about allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in one state is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”
 
Progressive Brennan Center advocates universal no-excuse mail-in ballot voting.

.
.
.

The Brennan Center for Justice in New York - home of Tammany Halls historic election riggers - is connected to New York University School of Law, and is on a propaganda mission advocating universal no-excuse mail in ballots, in spite of a glaring chain of custody weakness with mail-in ballots.

In one of their propaganda pieces, The False Narrative of Vote-by-Mail Fraud, Wendy R. Weiser and Harold Ekeh assert:


"Ballot drop-off locations help maintain a secure chain of custody as the ballot goes from the voter to the local election office. And when drop boxes are put outside of government offices, one security measure is to equip them with security cameras to monitor ballot traffic and ensure that the boxes are not breached."

Keep in mind they say " . . . help maintain a secure chain of custody . . . "

But they suspiciously fail to acknowledge there is a loss of chain of custody from the time a mail-in ballot is received by a theoretically legitimate recipient of a mail-in ballot, to the time when that mailed-in ballot is counted.

Additionally, these two authors fail to mention the glaring weakness with a mailed in ballot, there is no practical way to scrutinize a mailed-in ballot when counted, to verify that it was actually filled out, and the choices made thereon, were by a qualified voter who allegedly was issued the ballot.

With in-person voting, and the use of appropriate ID before a qualified voter is allowed into the voting booth, there is an extremely high certainty that the one voting in the booth and checking the choices on the ballot, is a legitimate voter and making their choices.



The bottom line is, the lack of chain of custody with mail-in voting is a good indication that mail-in voting ought to be limited to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person.

By limiting mail-in voting to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person, the total number of mail-in ballots would be greatly reduced to a fraction of what is now the case, and in so doing, even though the opportunity for mail-in ballot vote stealing and government perpetrated election fraud would still exist, their effect on an election would be greatly reduced by the reduction in actual mail-in ballots allowed.

The glaring weakness with mail-in ballots, which is an untenable chain of custody problem and an inability to verify if a mailed in ballot was actually filled out, and the choices made there on, were by a legitimate person issued the ballot, is more than enough to want to restrict mail-in ballots to those legitimately unable to vote in person, and for those who want fair elections to say no to no-excuse mail-in ballot voting.

Is it really a good idea to allow political hacks, like the Brennan Center to run, or influence our election process?

JWK

The troubling truth about allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in one state is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”.
 
Last edited:
The glaring flaws with mail-in ballots

1. There is a loss of chain of custody from the time a mail-in ballot is received by a theoretically legitimate recipient of a mail-in ballot, to the time when that mail-in ballot is counted.

2. There is no practical way to scrutinize a mail-in ballot when counted, to verify that it was actually filled out, and the choices made thereon, were by a qualified voter who allegedly was issued the ballot.

3. With in-person voting, and the use of appropriate ID before a qualified voter is allowed into the voting booth, there is an extremely high certainty that the one voting in the booth and checking the choices on the ballot, is a legitimate voter and making their choices.

4. Any election officer with a desire to perpetrate election fraud and has access to various state data bases containing personal information on in-state residents, i.e., driver’s license, voter rolls, tax returns, etc., can easily fabricate a few thousand fraudulent mail-in ballots per urban voting district [meaning large populous district] using that information, fill them out and introduce them into the system [e.g. drop boxes or mail boxes] with a slim to no chance of these ballots ever being detected when they are counted.

There is a legitimate need for mail-in voting. But mail-in voting ought to be limited to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person, e.g., see PA’s Constitution (ARTICLE VII, ELECTIONS, § 14. Absentee Voting)

By limiting mail-in voting to those with a legitimate excuse for being unable to vote in person, the total number of mail-in ballots would be greatly reduced to a fraction of what is now the case, and in so doing, even though the opportunity for mail-in ballot vote stealing and government perpetrated election fraud would still exist, their effect on an election would be greatly reduced by the reduction in actual mail-in ballots allowed.

Check out: Voting Fraud Is a Real Concern. Just Look Around the World

If the American people do not clean up their election process before the coming election, they will be inviting the kinds of elections held in China, Russia and Cuba, where there is on party rule.
 
Last edited:
Another case of vote stealing in N.Y. involving 118 mail-in ballots

.
Well, isn't this interesting? Another case of vote stealing in New York. This one involves stealing the votes of 118 people using mail-in ballots.

See Queens man forged absentee ballots in Democratic primary as part of voter fraud scheme: DA

Abdul Rahman, 32, of 257th Street in Floral Park, could serve up to seven years in prison after a monster 140-count indictment outlined how he pulled off the voter fraud plot in an attempt to disenfranchise 118 voters.

Does this case not confirm the supposed safeguards put in place to prevent vote stealing using mail-in ballots are illusionary at best, and the example of Abdul Rahman getting caught exhibits an anomaly occurred which triggered his being caught?

The fact is it was not a safeguard preventing Abdul Rahman from fraudulently acquiring 118 ballots. He successfully got those 118 ballots, made the choices thereon and introduced them into the system. And no safeguard up to this point in time, prevented his actions. Had one of the legitimate named voters among those 118 ballots not shown up to vote, no safeguard put in place would have prevented Abdul’s clever scheme from being successful, and this shows a glaring deficiency to prevent vote stealing with mail-in ballots.

If this is not corrected before the 2024 election, we will wind up with the kinds of elections held in China, Russia and Cuba, where there is one party rule.

.
 
Last edited:
Stefanik’s lawyers overlook “irreparable harm” exacerbated by NY’s Early Voting Act​

.
.
In Stefanik’s latest court filing in ELISE STEFANIK vs. KATHY HOCHUL, Case No.: CV-23-2446 (January 26, 2024), in which New York’s Early Mail Voter Act is challenged as violating the State’s Constitution, her lawyers fail to articulate the most obvious, and irrefutable, “irreparable harm” which the Act unnecessarily exacerbates.

In view of the fact that mail-in ballots have an inherent security flaw which is, there is no practical way to scrutinize a mailed-in ballot when counted, to confirm, that the one who filled out a mailed-in ballot and made the choices thereon and sent it in, is the qualified and legitimate voter of that ballot.

While there is a need for mail-in ballot voting in cases where in-person voting is a real and significant obstacle for a voter, to expand this option and make mail-in ballot voting an option to all voters, it likewise exacerbates the fundamental flaw with mail-in ballots mentioned above, and to the point that the supposed winner of next month’s special election cannot be verified as there is no way to confirm a mail-in ballot was filled out, and the choices made thereon, was by the legitimate person to whom that ballot was issued.

By limiting mail in ballots as mentioned in NY’s Constitution, i.e., a legitimate excused based need, the total number of mail-in ballots would be reduced to a fraction of what is allowed under the New York Early Mail Voter Act, and in so doing, even though the opportunity for illegitimate cast ballots still exists, their effect on an election would be greatly reduced by the reduction in actual mail-in ballots allowed, and thereby gives significantly more credibility to the results of an election and its declared winner.

Unfortunately, allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in New York’s special election next month, exacerbates an existing problem and creates an irreparable harm in that the supposed winner will never be known because there is no practical way, when counting mailed in ballots under the Act, to scrutinize them to confirm, that the one who filled out a mailed-in ballot and made the choices thereon and sent it in, is the qualified and legitimate voter of that ballot. And this is why mail-in voting ought to be limited as intended under New York’s Constitution.

JWK

The troubling truth with allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in one state is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction “they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.” Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)”.
 
Back
Top