I wasn't sure how to send you a message but I was reading this article today which details the history of how our gov got to where it is today. While reading Part 1, I came across a part of the article where he talks about how Devolution was implemented by some EO's written by Clinton (and it ani't a good thing). It is about 1/3 down into the article. Attaching the link here for you to read, if you are interested.
There are groups in every state fighting for election integrity. Fraud is occurring in every conceivable manner. Among other things, we've learned that we must eliminate all election machines:
(1) our election machines accessible by the internet and are actively being manipulated using cruise control algorithms to achieve the planned outcome, regardless of actual votes. (See fingerprintsoffraud.com for multi-state analysis of cast vote records).
(2) The election returns reported by the media (via Edison/Scytl) are computer simulations, disconnected from the actual votes.
(3) Machines creating ballot images are capable of altering or inserting votes.
(4) Voter rolls (poll books) are manipulated to create many 'phantom voters' that are used to stuff ballots.
(5) Every country in Europe has thrown out the election machines because it is impossible to prove that they are not cheating.
Yes, I understand your concern. It is mine and probably millions of other Americans as well. This is why I mention that it is crucially important to research election laws within your area, county law local law any laws it has to do with machine voting do you want to Check out understand study because they will use those laws as a rebuttal of some sort. What’s more concerning is the federal laws being very vague such as, the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002, specifically in Title III, Section 301(a)(2) which states:
"The voting system shall be accessible for individuals with disabilities, including nonvisual accessibility for the blind and visually impaired, in a manner that provides the same opportunity for access and participation (including privacy and independence) as for other voters."
While this section does not explicitly mention internet accessibility, it does emphasize the importance of accessibility for all voters, including those with disabilities. This could potentially be interpreted to include internet accessibility, although that would likely be a matter for the courts to decide. And I’m still looking, but I haven’t had any luck trying to find a federal law that specifically says that these machines cannot have access to the Internet. However, there’s one law I think has teeth and you may want to consider,
According to the United States Code, Title 52, §21081(a)(2), voting systems used in federal elections must meet specific requirements. One of these requirements is that the system must be designed in a way that maintains the privacy of the vote. This means that no unauthorized person can access the vote cast by any individual, and no voter can be coerced into revealing their vote.
If anyone or any entity, even if it’s a program that did it or a but, for example, that violates your privacy, this is the only law that I found that I think would have any teeth.
Certainly voter privacy is key issue, especially today when Big Data knows everything about us.
Per the US constitution, state legislatures have sole authority on election laws in their respective states. My state (NC) forbids voting machines from connecting to the internet. But in fact almost all counties in the US are connected.
These machines are validated through a "logic and accuracy" test, which appears to originate from the days of programmable logic boards. These tests are in no way adequate to ensure integrity of a modern computer system. For example, since small batches are run in these tests, programmed logic could simply start rigging the results after after 1000 votes.
Also of concern is citizens visibility into the vote count. NC's constitution's bill of rights says that we have the right observe the counting of the ballots. No one can do this in real time today. The closest we have is an after the fact report call a 'cast vote record'. The NC board of elections has ruled that these cannot be shared with the public because it could reveal how an individual voted. This point is false, but provides cover to hide the fraud.
So I guess my question is, has anyone challenged this in court? So if if North Carolina for bids connecting to the Internet, has anyone capture proof, I know I’ve seen it. Democrats have admitted that they can connect to the Internet. I’ve seen college kids in conferences do it so how can NC get away with still doing it? Has anyone ever challenged this in court? this is what is puzzling to me and yes, you’re right about the constitution given states all the power with elections. Because the only laws I found federally are directly related to federal elections but even then they are it’s very limited. But I think what you said about the bill of rights that is a big one, because if you can demonstrate that our rights are being absolutely violated because our vote doesn’t count mean, basically, if some one is cheating your vote doesn’t count you know?
"The 6th article of the constitution of the United States declares, that the laws made in pursuance of it, 'shall be the supreme law of the land, anything in the constitution, or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.' By this declaration, the states are prohibited from passing any acts which shall be repugnant to a law of the United States." McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U. S. 316, 361 (1819)."
Bottom-line:
"For the very idea that one man may be compelled to hold his life, or the means of living, or any material right essential to the enjoyment of life, at the mere will of another, seems to be intolerable in any country where freedom prevails, as being the essence of slavery itself." . . ."This principle of interpretation has been sanctioned by this court in Henderson v. Mayor of New York, 92 U. S. 259; Chy Luny v. Freeman, 92 U. S. 275; Ex parte Virginia, 100 U. S. 339; Neal v. Delaware, 103 U.S. 370; and Soon Hing v. Crowley, 113 U. S. 703; S. C. 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 730." Yick Wo v. Hopkins, Sheriff, etc, 118 U.S. 356, 6 S.Ct. 1064, 30 L.Ed. 220.
Why is the above stated, true?
"It is obviously correct that no one acquires a vested or protected right in violation of the Constitution by long use, even when that span of time covers our entire national existence and indeed predates it." Walz v. Tax Commission of New York Justice, 397 U.S. 664 at 678 (1970)...
"One's right to life, liberty and property ... And other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections." West Virginia Bd. Of Ed. V. Barnett, 319 US 624, 638 (1943)..
What are constitutional landmarks?
Consider....., Why, these landmarks existed contractually..:
“The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One’s right to life, liberty and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.”—West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette – 319 U.S. 623, 624, 638 (1943).
By way of example:
The Michigan Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of the United State concurred and made it perfectly clear that the term "person" does not include the "Sovereign" (emphasis - unless you as sovereign chose in action to register to VOTE!!!!, as a person NAMED) and that for a Sovereign to be bound by statute the Sovereign must be "specifically named." Will v. Michigan state Police, 105 L.Ed. 2nd 45 (1938) "Since in common usage, the term "person" does not include the Sovereign. Statutes employing the phrase are ordinarily construed to exclude it." United States v. Fox, 94 US 315.
Why do American Nationals not know these truths, rests with those who either are beguiled or purposely seek to deceive and enslave both you and by continuing public education, your Little Ones, forever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For instance:
"The words "sovereign state" are cabalistic words, not understood by the disciple of liberty, who has been instructed in our constitutional schools. It is our appropriate phrase when applied to an absolute despotism. The idea of sovereign power in the government of a republic is incompatible with the existence and foundation of civil liberty and the rights of property. Gaines v. Buford, 31 Ky. (1 Dana) 481, 501.
Consider:
“The practice of law can not be licensed by any state/State. Schware v. Board of Examiners, United States Reports 353 U.S. pgs. 238, 239. In Sims v. Aherns, 271 S.W. 720 (1925), “The practice of law is an occupation of common right.” A bar card is not a license, it's a dues card and/or membership card. A Bar Association is what it is, a club...an association is not a license, it has a certificate issued though the State, the two (a license and a membership card in an association) are not the same..." (PERIOD).
Chose in action wisely & Normal Law will reign both by Golden Rule & Castle Rule and in thy day of testing all things by divine providence and goodly spirit of wisdom, honor is thy crown of living, eternal forevermore.
Whatever you will it shall be "Living with Honor" or DEATH by DISHONOR!!! Be wise, safe and blessed...., while your coin of time remains to rightly chose in action, service in honor for honor above all else, eternally forevermore. Arthur
I wasn't sure how to send you a message but I was reading this article today which details the history of how our gov got to where it is today. While reading Part 1, I came across a part of the article where he talks about how Devolution was implemented by some EO's written by Clinton (and it ani't a good thing). It is about 1/3 down into the article. Attaching the link here for you to read, if you are interested.
https://wethepeoplealaska.substack.com/p/carbon-fascism-where-it-came-from?utm_source=cross-post&publication_id=1646624&post_id=134801597&isFreemail=true&utm_campaign=712558&utm_medium=email
There are groups in every state fighting for election integrity. Fraud is occurring in every conceivable manner. Among other things, we've learned that we must eliminate all election machines:
(1) our election machines accessible by the internet and are actively being manipulated using cruise control algorithms to achieve the planned outcome, regardless of actual votes. (See fingerprintsoffraud.com for multi-state analysis of cast vote records).
(2) The election returns reported by the media (via Edison/Scytl) are computer simulations, disconnected from the actual votes.
(3) Machines creating ballot images are capable of altering or inserting votes.
(4) Voter rolls (poll books) are manipulated to create many 'phantom voters' that are used to stuff ballots.
(5) Every country in Europe has thrown out the election machines because it is impossible to prove that they are not cheating.
Yes, I understand your concern. It is mine and probably millions of other Americans as well. This is why I mention that it is crucially important to research election laws within your area, county law local law any laws it has to do with machine voting do you want to Check out understand study because they will use those laws as a rebuttal of some sort. What’s more concerning is the federal laws being very vague such as, the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002, specifically in Title III, Section 301(a)(2) which states:
"The voting system shall be accessible for individuals with disabilities, including nonvisual accessibility for the blind and visually impaired, in a manner that provides the same opportunity for access and participation (including privacy and independence) as for other voters."
While this section does not explicitly mention internet accessibility, it does emphasize the importance of accessibility for all voters, including those with disabilities. This could potentially be interpreted to include internet accessibility, although that would likely be a matter for the courts to decide. And I’m still looking, but I haven’t had any luck trying to find a federal law that specifically says that these machines cannot have access to the Internet. However, there’s one law I think has teeth and you may want to consider,
According to the United States Code, Title 52, §21081(a)(2), voting systems used in federal elections must meet specific requirements. One of these requirements is that the system must be designed in a way that maintains the privacy of the vote. This means that no unauthorized person can access the vote cast by any individual, and no voter can be coerced into revealing their vote.
If anyone or any entity, even if it’s a program that did it or a but, for example, that violates your privacy, this is the only law that I found that I think would have any teeth.
Certainly voter privacy is key issue, especially today when Big Data knows everything about us.
Per the US constitution, state legislatures have sole authority on election laws in their respective states. My state (NC) forbids voting machines from connecting to the internet. But in fact almost all counties in the US are connected.
These machines are validated through a "logic and accuracy" test, which appears to originate from the days of programmable logic boards. These tests are in no way adequate to ensure integrity of a modern computer system. For example, since small batches are run in these tests, programmed logic could simply start rigging the results after after 1000 votes.
Also of concern is citizens visibility into the vote count. NC's constitution's bill of rights says that we have the right observe the counting of the ballots. No one can do this in real time today. The closest we have is an after the fact report call a 'cast vote record'. The NC board of elections has ruled that these cannot be shared with the public because it could reveal how an individual voted. This point is false, but provides cover to hide the fraud.
So I guess my question is, has anyone challenged this in court? So if if North Carolina for bids connecting to the Internet, has anyone capture proof, I know I’ve seen it. Democrats have admitted that they can connect to the Internet. I’ve seen college kids in conferences do it so how can NC get away with still doing it? Has anyone ever challenged this in court? this is what is puzzling to me and yes, you’re right about the constitution given states all the power with elections. Because the only laws I found federally are directly related to federal elections but even then they are it’s very limited. But I think what you said about the bill of rights that is a big one, because if you can demonstrate that our rights are being absolutely violated because our vote doesn’t count mean, basically, if some one is cheating your vote doesn’t count you know?
People, People, People:
AGAIN...................................................!!!
"The 6th article of the constitution of the United States declares, that the laws made in pursuance of it, 'shall be the supreme law of the land, anything in the constitution, or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.' By this declaration, the states are prohibited from passing any acts which shall be repugnant to a law of the United States." McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U. S. 316, 361 (1819)."
Bottom-line:
"For the very idea that one man may be compelled to hold his life, or the means of living, or any material right essential to the enjoyment of life, at the mere will of another, seems to be intolerable in any country where freedom prevails, as being the essence of slavery itself." . . ."This principle of interpretation has been sanctioned by this court in Henderson v. Mayor of New York, 92 U. S. 259; Chy Luny v. Freeman, 92 U. S. 275; Ex parte Virginia, 100 U. S. 339; Neal v. Delaware, 103 U.S. 370; and Soon Hing v. Crowley, 113 U. S. 703; S. C. 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 730." Yick Wo v. Hopkins, Sheriff, etc, 118 U.S. 356, 6 S.Ct. 1064, 30 L.Ed. 220.
Why is the above stated, true?
"It is obviously correct that no one acquires a vested or protected right in violation of the Constitution by long use, even when that span of time covers our entire national existence and indeed predates it." Walz v. Tax Commission of New York Justice, 397 U.S. 664 at 678 (1970)...
"One's right to life, liberty and property ... And other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections." West Virginia Bd. Of Ed. V. Barnett, 319 US 624, 638 (1943)..
What are constitutional landmarks?
Consider....., Why, these landmarks existed contractually..:
“The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One’s right to life, liberty and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.”—West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette – 319 U.S. 623, 624, 638 (1943).
By way of example:
The Michigan Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of the United State concurred and made it perfectly clear that the term "person" does not include the "Sovereign" (emphasis - unless you as sovereign chose in action to register to VOTE!!!!, as a person NAMED) and that for a Sovereign to be bound by statute the Sovereign must be "specifically named." Will v. Michigan state Police, 105 L.Ed. 2nd 45 (1938) "Since in common usage, the term "person" does not include the Sovereign. Statutes employing the phrase are ordinarily construed to exclude it." United States v. Fox, 94 US 315.
Why do American Nationals not know these truths, rests with those who either are beguiled or purposely seek to deceive and enslave both you and by continuing public education, your Little Ones, forever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For instance:
"The words "sovereign state" are cabalistic words, not understood by the disciple of liberty, who has been instructed in our constitutional schools. It is our appropriate phrase when applied to an absolute despotism. The idea of sovereign power in the government of a republic is incompatible with the existence and foundation of civil liberty and the rights of property. Gaines v. Buford, 31 Ky. (1 Dana) 481, 501.
Consider:
“The practice of law can not be licensed by any state/State. Schware v. Board of Examiners, United States Reports 353 U.S. pgs. 238, 239. In Sims v. Aherns, 271 S.W. 720 (1925), “The practice of law is an occupation of common right.” A bar card is not a license, it's a dues card and/or membership card. A Bar Association is what it is, a club...an association is not a license, it has a certificate issued though the State, the two (a license and a membership card in an association) are not the same..." (PERIOD).
Chose in action wisely & Normal Law will reign both by Golden Rule & Castle Rule and in thy day of testing all things by divine providence and goodly spirit of wisdom, honor is thy crown of living, eternal forevermore.
Whatever you will it shall be "Living with Honor" or DEATH by DISHONOR!!! Be wise, safe and blessed...., while your coin of time remains to rightly chose in action, service in honor for honor above all else, eternally forevermore. Arthur