Honest Government Ad | 2022 Election

Honest Government Ad | 2022 Election

thejuicemedia – May 1, 2022

The Australien Government has made a final ad before the 2022 federal election and it’s surprisingly honest and informative.

Ways you can support us to keep making videos:

Become a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/thejuicemedia

Tip us on PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/thejuicemedia

Other options: https://www.thejuicemedia.com/support

SourceSouth Australian Gov Criminal Organisation

If You Don’t Care About Election Integrity, You’re A Bad American

Recent polls confirm the majority of Americans care about election integrity. And history proves that if you don’t, you’re a bad American.

The 2020 general election revealed this reality—and not because Joe Biden prevailed or because the election was stolen from Donald Trump, but because our constitutional republic cannot survive without election integrity. That is not just the judgment of the MAGA crowd, or even conservatives or the political right—or at least it didn’t use to be.

Less than two decades ago Americans so universally believed that election integrity mattered that when the bipartisan Commission on Election Reform issued its 100-plus page report, “Building Confidence in U.S. Elections,” the twin goals of election integrity and voting access received equal treatment. While Co-Chairs Democrat Jimmy Carter and Republican Jim Baker explained that not all members of the Commission “necessarily support every word or recommendation,” all members, they stressed, “endorsed the judgments and general policy thrust of the report in its entirety.”

The bipartisan-endorsed fundamentals underlying the report included two unanimously accepted judgments related to election integrity. First, “elections are the heart of democracy” and “if elections are defective, the entire democratic system is at risk.” Second, and a corollary to the first: confidence in elections matters equally, and in fact “is central to our nation’s democracy.”

On this latter principle, the commission elaborated: “Democracy is endangered when people believe that their votes do not matter or are not counted correctly.” “Little can undermine democracy more than a widespread belief among the people that elections are neither fair nor legitimate,” the report stressed.

That same bipartisan report also recognized that while the losing side may be “unhappy with the results,” there is something “new and dangerous” taking place in the United States: “Supporters of the losing side are beginning to believe that the process is unfair. And this is true of both parties.”

Yet, while the Carter Commission declared that having a fair electoral process “transcends any individual partisan interest,” today, Democrats have not just abandoned any care over election integrity, they have declared such concerns racist, and that is with voting access never higher.

In light of the left’s attempt to castigate election integrity, every citizen should revisit the bipartisan judgments and policy pronouncements that formed the foundation for the “Building Confidence in U.S. Elections” report, which hold even more true today than in 2005. That report proves vital to exposing both the current lack of election integrity in America and the danger our nation faces absent a quick correction.

Further, because the Carter Commission’s report came when Democrats held a heightened concern over election integrity because of Al Gore’s loss in 2000, and because the analysis spoke to Americans without the shadow of Trump obscuring the danger, the lengthy report’s discussion of election integrity reveals the reality of the situation facing our country today that partisans seem unable to see.

Specifically, the 2005 report reveals that every concern the commission identified as threatening the legitimacy of elections played out in November 2020, notwithstanding the bipartisan commission’s declaration more than 15 years ago that the need for “election reform” was urgent. Likewise, the aftermath of the 2020 election reveals that the problems and concerns that the Carter Commission proclaimed more than 20 years ago that needed immediate redress have instead multiplied and mutated.

While the anti-Trump contingency blame the former president for prompting distrust in the 2020 election results, the Carter Commission recognized that a fair electoral process was vital to “assure[] the winning candidates the authority to legitimately assume office,” and that the losing candidate can accept the decision “as the will of the voters.” If you juxtapose what happened in 2020 with the defects in our electoral system of which the commission warned, the reality becomes clear: Trump was not the problem—systemic defects in our electoral system were.

Bloated and inaccurate voter rolls, nonexistent or faulty voter-identification procedures, and a lack of private voting—all issues the bipartisan commission warned threatened elections and our democracy—tainted the last election. Misconduct by partisan election officials, the use of inconsistent procedures in different precincts, and an overall lack of transparency added to the problems in 2020.

Again, these are issues the Carter Commission stressed threatened our democracy. The 2005 report also warned that absentee and mail-in voting come with the risk of fraud which, without limitations and adequate protections, would undermine the faith in our elections.

The widespread and chaotic use of mail-in and absentee voting in 2020 proved the bipartisan commission prescient. And while today’s Democrats blame Trump, less than two decades ago both sides of the aisle saw “the ultimate test of an election system is its ability to withstand intensive public scrutiny during a very close election.”

Our current electoral system fails that test, and every citizen who loves this great country should demand reform. If you don’t, you are a bad American.


Margot Cleveland is The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Source

If You Don’t Care About Election Integrity, You’re A Bad American

If You Don’t Care About Election Integrity, You’re A Bad American

Recent polls confirm the majority of Americans care about election integrity. And history proves that if you don’t, you’re a bad American.

The 2020 general election revealed this reality—and not because Joe Biden prevailed or because the election was stolen from Donald Trump, but because our constitutional republic cannot survive without election integrity. That is not just the judgment of the MAGA crowd, or even conservatives or the political right—or at least it didn’t use to be.

Less than two decades ago Americans so universally believed that election integrity mattered that when the bipartisan Commission on Election Reform issued its 100-plus page report, “Building Confidence in U.S. Elections,” the twin goals of election integrity and voting access received equal treatment. While Co-Chairs Democrat Jimmy Carter and Republican Jim Baker explained that not all members of the Commission “necessarily support every word or recommendation,” all members, they stressed, “endorsed the judgments and general policy thrust of the report in its entirety.”

The bipartisan-endorsed fundamentals underlying the report included two unanimously accepted judgments related to election integrity. First, “elections are the heart of democracy” and “if elections are defective, the entire democratic system is at risk.” Second, and a corollary to the first: confidence in elections matters equally, and in fact “is central to our nation’s democracy.”

On this latter principle, the commission elaborated: “Democracy is endangered when people believe that their votes do not matter or are not counted correctly.” “Little can undermine democracy more than a widespread belief among the people that elections are neither fair nor legitimate,” the report stressed.

That same bipartisan report also recognized that while the losing side may be “unhappy with the results,” there is something “new and dangerous” taking place in the United States: “Supporters of the losing side are beginning to believe that the process is unfair. And this is true of both parties.”

Yet, while the Carter Commission declared that having a fair electoral process “transcends any individual partisan interest,” today, Democrats have not just abandoned any care over election integrity, they have declared such concerns racist, and that is with voting access never higher.

In light of the left’s attempt to castigate election integrity, every citizen should revisit the bipartisan judgments and policy pronouncements that formed the foundation for the “Building Confidence in U.S. Elections” report, which hold even more true today than in 2005. That report proves vital to exposing both the current lack of election integrity in America and the danger our nation faces absent a quick correction.

Further, because the Carter Commission’s report came when Democrats held a heightened concern over election integrity because of Al Gore’s loss in 2000, and because the analysis spoke to Americans without the shadow of Trump obscuring the danger, the lengthy report’s discussion of election integrity reveals the reality of the situation facing our country today that partisans seem unable to see.

Specifically, the 2005 report reveals that every concern the commission identified as threatening the legitimacy of elections played out in November 2020, notwithstanding the bipartisan commission’s declaration more than 15 years ago that the need for “election reform” was urgent. Likewise, the aftermath of the 2020 election reveals that the problems and concerns that the Carter Commission proclaimed more than 20 years ago that needed immediate redress have instead multiplied and mutated.

While the anti-Trump contingency blame the former president for prompting distrust in the 2020 election results, the Carter Commission recognized that a fair electoral process was vital to “assure[] the winning candidates the authority to legitimately assume office,” and that the losing candidate can accept the decision “as the will of the voters.” If you juxtapose what happened in 2020 with the defects in our electoral system of which the commission warned, the reality becomes clear: Trump was not the problem—systemic defects in our electoral system were.

Bloated and inaccurate voter rolls, nonexistent or faulty voter-identification procedures, and a lack of private voting—all issues the bipartisan commission warned threatened elections and our democracy—tainted the last election. Misconduct by partisan election officials, the use of inconsistent procedures in different precincts, and an overall lack of transparency added to the problems in 2020.

Again, these are issues the Carter Commission stressed threatened our democracy. The 2005 report also warned that absentee and mail-in voting come with the risk of fraud which, without limitations and adequate protections, would undermine the faith in our elections.

The widespread and chaotic use of mail-in and absentee voting in 2020 proved the bipartisan commission prescient. And while today’s Democrats blame Trump, less than two decades ago both sides of the aisle saw “the ultimate test of an election system is its ability to withstand intensive public scrutiny during a very close election.”

Our current electoral system fails that test, and every citizen who loves this great country should demand reform. If you don’t, you are a bad American.


Margot Cleveland is The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Source

NEW and improved How To Vote using Marbles!

NEW and improved How To Vote using Marbles!

TopherField – Apr 20, 2022

New and Improved! Now with Authorisation Statement! And more cowbell*!

*This video may or may not actually contain cowbell.

You’ve been asking where my marbles videos have gone, and the answer is I was forced to delete them by the government’s absurd rules around elections.

I made those videos BEFORE I decided to run for politics, but surprise surprise once I announced I was running for the Senate in Tasmania, all of a sudden I was getting in trouble for educational videos I uploaded BEFORE I even decided if I was going to do it!

Anyway, long story short, I’ve made a whole new video, combining both the Senate and House of Representatives, and yes there’s an Authorisation Statement at the end!

Watch it and share it! Let’s teach the major parties the meaning of the phrase ‘Streisand Effect’!

SourceSouth Australian Gov Criminal Organisation

Voter fraud will decide the outcome of the May 21 election

IS AUSTRALIA’S VOTING SYSTEM HONEST?

DO VOTE FRAUDS OCCUR?

GetUp has $30m in the bank and is the largest, organised voting manipulator in Australia

by Lex Stewart, former Chairman of Australians for Honest Elections

To the two questions above in the heading, our Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) would say “Yes and No”.

But my answers are the opposite – based on having scrutineered at every federal and state election since 1985, and having done paid work for six MPs (3 Canberra, 3 NSW) and voluntary work in various political Parties.

The AEC Electoral Commissioner is retired Army officer Tom Rogers, who worked for defence contractor Raytheon after leaving the military.

I worked as staffer for an MP who lost his seat in 1993 by 164 votes, and then we discovered 300 false enrolments on the Electoral Roll, plus other issues, including that Jehovah’s Witnesses did not receive their customary letter after the election because they did not vote.

A few years ago I arranged some meetings in Australia for UK Election Commissioner Richard Mawrey QC, who had jailed people from both sides of politics for Vote Frauds. 

Very few people have ever been prosecuted or even challenged in Australia, and our Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) operates a faulty system with numerous loopholes, and scant attention from Ministers, other MPs and journalists.

Richard Mawrey was aghast at what he saw of Australia’s voting systems and Electoral Agencies.  He said, “Due to the incentives, if vote fraud CAN occur due to loopholes, then it WILL occur.  And especially Australia’s postal vote system is a recipe for fraud.

There is substantial incentive for Vote Frauds because the rewards are so huge – power, prestige, getting control of expenditure of taxpayers’ moneys, appointing your mates to various Boards and diplomatic postings etc.

To improve elections:-

  • vote in the Senate by numbering every square rather than one to six
  • do scrutineering – this means getting an AEC Form signed by a candidate. Do it after 6pm on election night, and if needed during subsequent days of re-counting.
  • Because over the years very few MPs have taken an interest in Vote Frauds (except Fred Nile and Pauline Hanson) then after this election heckle your MP that you want Voter ID introduced, so as to prevent Multiple Voting (AEC data show more than 36,686 in the 2016 election) and to prevent Voter Impersonation.

Bearing in mind that it is often difficult to gather enough evidence to prove Vote Frauds (granted that the AEC, Aust Federal Police are asleep), I could give numerous examples of Vote Frauds, but it would make this article too long.

A convenient one-page list of 17 cases of Vote Frauds was page two of a brief Submission by eminent Sydney lawyer James Bell to the parliamentary committee reviewing the 2019 federal election.  When his Submission appeared on the parliamentary website as number 53, the list on page two had been “redacted” i.e. blacked out!  In order to overcome this censorship, James’s list is presented below.

Some cases of Vote Frauds have been exposed by rare court cases or very rare government inquiries, e.g. the Shepherdson Inquiry, which led to the jailing of Karen Ehrman who said she was only a small bit player among many others involved in the ALP’s schemes.

ccc.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-01/The-Shepherdson-Inquiry-Report-2001.pdf

The AEC has not operated the Electoral Roll with integrity, as shown by the five reports done by the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO).

The Howard government asked the ANAO to do an audit of the AEC, and the report of 18 April 2002 titled “The Integrity of the Electoral Roll” raised serious concerns.

The ANAO report of 6 April 2004:- “progress by the AEC on implementing the recommendations has been slow…

Their report of 6 April 2010 wrote, “The most significant long-term problem for the AEC remains the poor state of the Electoral Roll”.

Their 8 May 2014 report stated, “… the state of the Roll was the most significant long-term issue … and the AEC’s approaches … have become less effective , as well as … more costly

Their fifth report on 4 November 2015 had some alarming things to say in its Overall Conclusion:-   “The actions taken by the AEC … have not adequately and effectively addressed the matters that led to the ANAO’s recommendations being made … The findings of this audit .. are in contrast to the advice provided by the AEC to the 2014 parliamentary committee that all recommendations … had been completed

IN OTHER WORDS THE AEC TOLD LIES TO THE PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEE!

And no Minister or MP or journalist bothered or cared to expose this AEC juggernaut, which is in practical effect unaccountable and renegade, operating a system full of loopholes.

Here is the list of cases of Vote Frauds in James Bell’s Submission to the parliamentary committee.  It includes cases where Vote Frauds were PROVEN to have occurred, but James (and I) are not claiming that the frauds were necessarily of sufficient magnitude to have affected the outcome.

  1.   Joan Chambers lost Ballarat South in 1988 by 104 votes, but many more than 104 fraudulent votes were subsequently found by the Electoral Authority
  2.   Bribie Island 1989 -Bob Bottom found underwater enrolments along a beachside street
  3.   Alasdair Webster MP lost Macquarie in 1993 by 164 votes
  4.   1993 Frank Tanti lost Mundingburra by 16 votes but won the court-ordered by-election
  5.   MP Larry Anthony lost Richmond in 2004 by 301 votes
  6.   Multiple voting in 2005 Werriwa by-election
  7.   Wollondilly in the March 2007 NSW State election – several Statutory Declarations described a busload going to vote at several polling booths, but the Electoral Commissioner refused to investigate
  8.   200 House of Reps ballot papers vanished in Epping West booth in Bennelong in 2007
  9.   BK photographed a suspicious man who voted three times in Coogee ~2007
  10.  VicB found 500 false enrolments in Kingsford Smith early 2013
  11.  Circa year 2000 BK, VB, PB found many false enrolments in Parramatta, perhaps 5,000
  12.  S Mirabella lost Indi in 2013 by 500 (1,000 ballots appeared)
  13.  1,370 ballot papers vanished in the WA senate election
  14.  MP Charles Casuscelli narrowly lost Strathfield in 2015 NSW
  15.  MP Chris Holstein narrowly lost Gosford in 2015 NSW
  16.  MP Louise Markus narrowly lost Macquarie in 2016, with Lex Stewart detecting a new method of Vote Fraud, plus observing an old method being used.
  17. Election 2016: Labor’s Cathy O’Toole wins Herbert by 37 votes …

Editor: It should be noted that this scribe has been writing about electoral fraud since 1987 when the Unions were able to get enough false names onto the roll to change the election result.. The AEC electronic roll was in its infancy and it had the original RAMNS system which was sub-standard at least, allowing many thousands of false names to stay on the roll unchecked. Indeed a staffer for former Senator Len Harris in 2004 was told by the then Electoral Commissioner that there were more than 400,000 names on the roll whose identity had not been checked.

In 1987 the incumbent Australian Labor Party, led by Prime Minister Bob Hawke, defeated the opposition Liberal Party of Australia, led by John Howard and the National Party of Australia led by Ian Sinclair. This was the first, and to date only, time the Labor Party won a third consecutive election.

Postal voting integrity is the biggest worry of the 2022 election.

Tom Rogers biography:

https://www.aspi.org.au/bio/tom-rogers

Source

UAP says it will keep the majors off their how to vote cards

UAP says it will keep the majors off their how to vote cards

by Alison Ryan

Clive Palmer, a former federal MP, is seeking a return to Canberra running for the Senate.

Addressing the National Press Club on Thursday, he said the UAP would not list the Coalition, Labor or the Greens on their how-to-vote cards in the Senate at all and would instead suggest supporters back other parties in the upper house.

Clive Palmer has no time for the LNP/ALP/Greens triumvirate

In the House of Representatives, where voters have to number every candidate in order of preference, Palmer said the UAP would put the three major parties “at the bottom of that ticket”.

He said there was no “clearcut” decision on which party would be at the very bottom of the preference list, but suggested there could be exceptions for MPs who had supported UAP MP Craig Kelly’s pet issues – such as opposing Covid vaccine mandates and lockdowns.

More: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/apr/07/clive-palmer-says-uap-will-preference-major-parties-last-in-election

About Editor, cairnsnews

One of the few patriots left who understands the system and how it has been totally subverted under every citizen’s nose. If we can help to turn it around we will, otherwise our children will have nothing. Our investigations show there is no ‘government’ of the people for the people of Australia. The removal of the Crown from Australian Parliaments, followed by the incorporation of Parliaments aided by the Australia Act 1987 has left us with corporate government with policies not laws, that apply only to members of political parties and the public service. There is no law, other than the Common Law. This fact will be borne out in the near future as numerous legal challenges in place now, come to a head soon.

Source

Macron could be out unless the French have Dominion voting machines

Macron could be out unless the French have Dominion voting machines

by Alison Ryan

The Globalists use their money, power, projects and the controlled media to take control of the world. But the Nationalists win the hearts of the people.

European Markets Freak Out As Odds Of Le Pen Victory In French Presidential Elections Jump – Saturday, Apr 09, 2022

Unless there is huge voter fraud by using Dominion voting machines or Scytl electronic voting, Marine Le Pen, like the recent win of President Orban of Hungary, is set to oust Macron

“Ahead of last weekend’s Hungarian parliamentary election, the pollsters were predicting a landslide loss for the loathed by the western/EU establishment current prime minister, the pro-Putin Viktor Orban. Well, there was a landslide, just not in the direction the so-called experts predicted and in the latest humiliation for Brussels, Orban was re-reelected in a huge victory, steamrolling the opposition alliance.

“So with all eyes on this weekend’s French elections which pit Davos crowd pet and former Rothschild banker Emanuel Macron against outspoken nationalist Marine Le Pen. Here too, fears are growing that what until recently was seen by the always wrong pollsters as a “done deal” and blowout victory for Macron, suddenly is looking very shaky.

“With French voters taking to the polls on Sunday, the race is suddenly wide open because while Macron’s lead over Le Pen had been narrowing in recent weeks, a shock poll released yesterday by Atlas Politico showed that Le Pen (50.5%) now has a slight advantage over Macron (49.5%).

“Unlike the caviar-slurping Davos jet-setter, Le Pen realized long ago on that voters already struggling with high energy and food prices were more likely to care about purchasing power or lack thereof. And so, what was a 12 point gap between her and Macron has narrowed dramatically as she toured towns and villages, casting herself as the defender of the “little ones” against Macron’s reputation as the “president of the rich.” She pledged to slash gasoline prices and tax big energy companies.

“To be sure, a Le Pen victory over Macron, the self-styled successor of Angela Merkel, and defender of the European project, would be a shock for the European Union on a par with Donald Trump’s U.S. election victory and the Brexit vote in 2016. Armed with a veto on most EU initiatives, she could bring the bloc to an abrupt halt and could effectively spell the end of the EU, one of the core Western alliances in a thunderous win for Putin.”

“Everything is possible,” Le Pen told supporters on Thursday, while earlier in the week Macron warned his followers not to discount a Le Pen win.

“Look at what happened with Brexit, and so many other elections: what looked improbable actually happened,” he said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/macron-faces-tough-fight-france-votes-sunday-2022-04-10/

Source

Court: Pennsylvania Must Release Records On Non-Citizens Voting In Elections

Court: Pennsylvania Must Release Records On Non-Citizens Voting In Elections

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania must release records pertaining to a “glitch” within its Department of Transportation that allowed non-citizens to register to vote in the state for decades, according to a new ruling from a U.S. district court.

In a March 31 opinion authored by Judge Christopher Conner, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania ruled that under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) is entitled access to documents detailing the prevalence of the issue and actions taken by the commonwealth to address the errors in the state’s voting files.

“The expansive obligation under NVRA to disclose voting registration records gives rise to legitimate privacy concerns. Nonetheless, we agree with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ observation that the balance between privacy and transparency must be struck by the legislature, not the courts,” Conner wrote. “Congress struck such a balance when it enacted NVRA, deciding transparency in how states determine voter eligibility—the vital bedrock of our electoral system—is generally paramount.”

In 2017, authorities discovered an error within the computer system of the state’s Department of Transportation that allowed “non-United States citizens applying for or renewing a driver’s license to register to vote in the Commonwealth.” As a result, the government undertook a series of analyses to ascertain the extent to which the glitch allowed noncitizens onto the Commonwealth’s voter registration lists,” which included a “noncitizen matching analysis” conducted by an outside expert.

Although Pennsylvania had previously disclosed to PILF a list of “1,160 purported noncitizens who requested to be removed from the voter registration lists,” the state attempted to hide the voting histories of registrants by redacting the list. As a result of the court ruling, however, the commonwealth will now be required to turn over such information to PILF.

“The Commonwealth must disclose the voting histories of the 1,160 noncitizens who requested cancellation,” the court stated.

Among the records sought by PILF include all documents related to “registrants who the Commonwealth identified as potentially not satisfying the citizenship requirements for registration since January 1, 2006,” and “noncitizens who requested removal from voter registration lists since January 1, 2006.”

Additional information requested by the watchdog group are records “provided by jury-selection officials to the Commonwealth referencing individuals who attempted to avoid jury duty by claiming to be noncitizens,” as well as those “relating to any communication between the Commonwealth and law enforcement concerning alleged noncitizen voting or voter registration.”

While the ruling affirms that Pennsylvania must turn over the majority of such documents to PILF, the court did stipulate that the state had “met its burden” of providing records related to the “noncitizen matching analysis.”

“The Commonwealth has met its burden of showing the records in question are protected by the work-product doctrine because all relevant evidence supports the Commonwealth’s assertion that the expert conducted the noncitizen matching analysis in preparation of possible litigation,” the opinion reads.

A previous lawsuit from PILF seeking similar documents filed in 2019 was struck down by the same district court, with Conner arguing that while “PILF falls within NVRA’s ‘zone of interests’ and had standing,” the organization “failed to comply with the statute’s notice requirements.”

Following the court’s March 31 ruling, PILF President J. Christian Adams applauded the decision, saying that it is a “monumental victory for election integrity.”

“Americans have a right to documents exposing government malfeasance and non-citizens being registered and even voting,” he said. “Pennsylvania spent four years fighting transparency and trying to hide their mistakes. It is sad that transparency in Pennsylvania elections had to be enforced by a court.”


Shawn Fleetwood is an intern at The Federalist and a senior at the University of Mary Washington. He also serves as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)